Any explanation of including "Siraj Ul Haq" in the list of extremists and terrorists?

Anyways this discussion has gone astray. My real point was to underscore the importance of analyzing two extremes in our society. And for those who think religious extremism is the only hurdle in the progress of our country need to restudy the political and economic history of Pakistan since 1947.

"Khair, If someone flaunts his/her extremist views in front of me and I label him jahil or a bigot, I can’t be called an extremist by any definition"

I agree to this extent, but you can't be called as a tolerant person either. This attitude of labeling rather than engaging in a healthy debate is what stimulates extremism. I cannot say anything about you, as I said in the article, I have seen many, many, many people making scornful remarks and even making fun of the deaths of their children (the drone attack incident I quoted). This is a hard to digest fact that the ones who call them human rights activist, free liberals and sympathizers of the whole humanity have not only double standards but they justify counter oppression. Very few have open hearts to listen to an extremist point of view. Then again, instead of coming up with a counter narrative, one simply shuts the doors of one's ears and mind, puts a label of Jahil, Terrorist, Pagal, Fanatic, Child Rapist Molvi and flees away thinking that the job is nicely done. This is extremism in my point of view.