Cameron's Draconian "Tebos" Aim to Curtail "Extremists" Who "Misinterpret" Islam

In Cameron's U.K., "real" Islam is entirely benign and freedom's just another word for "shut the eff up." (Here's hoping this doesn't give Canadian anti-"hate" speech control freaks any ideas):

In its initial report to be detailed to Parliament today, the task force will also propose new internet filters to block extremist websites and extended powers for watchdogs to shut down charities suspected of being fronts for extremist groups.

 

‘I want to see an end to hate preaching in Britain,’ the Prime Minister said. 

As well as new civil orders against extremists – dubbed ‘Tebos’, or terror and extremism behaviour orders – the Government is to consider the case for another new type of order to ban groups which ‘seek to undermine democracy or use hate speech, when necessary to protect the public or prevent crime and disorder’. 

Controversially, both types of order are to be based on a new definition of extremism which specifically includes a ‘distorted interpretation of Islam’...

Here's the Cameronites' new definition:

Clearly, the distorted interpretation of Islam (the one which interprets it as being cuddly and non-threatening and rejecting divinely-decreed sharia and supremacism ) is Cameron's. Meanwhile, free speech, the freedom on which a free society depends, is being been snuffed out for the sake of maintaining a fiction about the "real," the "true," Islam. Ironically, that dovetails quite nicely with the Islamist agenda of ending all criticism of Islam (and infidels' free speech/"blasphemy"), an essential plank of totalitarian sharia law.

Update: Andrew C. McCarthy skewers the Cameron interpretation (the italics are McCarthy's):

Putting aside intra-Islamic debates over the tactic of terrorism—which tend to be situational rather than over the propriety of mass-murder attacks in principle—the ideology that fuels violent jihad is not confined to terrorists. It is the mainstream Islam of the Middle East, which teaches the imperative of establishing the reign of Allah’s law, the repressive sharia system. Globally renowned and revered scholars reaffirm this command with numbing regularity and identify the United States as Ummah Enemy Number One. Nevertheless, the United States government is not merely resistant to acknowledging this ideology and its prevalence; it menaces any attempt to edify Americans about it. Instead, top officials instruct their minions to avoid giving offense, to obsess over what we must have done to inspire such contempt. They indulge the fantasies that sharia totalitarianism can coexist with democracy, that the responsibilities of governance will tame radicals, and that “partnering” with movements like the Muslim Brotherhood—which openly profess a desire to conquer the West—is the best way to achieve security. 

It is delusional, and yet we are currently betting our lives on it. Indeed, the fastest route to ostracism from respectable society is to question the consensus or have the audacity to point out that our enemies actually are, well, enemies. They want to destroy us and make little secret about it, at least when speaking among themselves. How did we arrive at such a lunatic place where mortal enemies are perceived as friends? How did we lose our capacity to reason and judge?...

In the short term, the delusion is comforting. In the longer term, it is suicidal.