"What i would not argue against is Islamist extremism, which is entirely different, and as reprehensible as Zionist extremism, or even Christian extremism, and I would equally vociferously condemn them all equally."
Can't take issue with that remark, Andy.
But "equally" reprehensible" is not necessarily the same thing as equally threatening (as in being a real and present danger to you and me here in the UK).
With your actuary's hat on can you rank these four extremisms in order of the risk they present:
Islamist
Zionist
Christian
Britain First/BNP/EDL etc.-ism
Or do you think it's too close to call?