Matthew Parris

Was 'Je Suis Charlie' just an example of people venting their hatred towards Muslims?

21 March 2015

9:00 AM

21 March 2015

9:00 AM

Something dangerous is brewing beneath the surface in our country, and it worries me that warning lights are not flashing in the minds of many of those I respect most. After the discrediting of anti-Semitism, after the discrediting of discrimination against black people, after the discrediting of prejudice towards the Irish, I hadn’t expected to live to see a powerful generalised antipathy against any race or religion gather popular force here without stirring at least the more liberal of my fellow citizens into resistance. I expected a sense of alarm. There is none.

Last Saturday my Times colleague Janice Turner used her weekly column to sound a note of anxiety about what she called a new shrillness in attitudes towards British Muslims, and a ‘lumping together’ of all Muslims as though all were extremists. Indeed, she said, we are starting to do the extremists’ work for them. She concluded: ‘In our poisonous, polarising age, it is time to stop seeking difference and ask how we are the same.’

Now Janice is hardly a bleeding-heart multi-culturalist. She’s been a consistent secularist and has spoken up sharply and repeatedly against sharia, against Islamic attitudes to women, and against the wearing of the full veil in court. So have I. I join her in self-identifying as no fan of important parts of Islamic teaching. Speaking for myself, I’d say (and have) that as world religions go, Islam is not one I much like.

But the response to Janice’s column shocked me. Among some 500 online posts (a lot, for the subscription-only Times) I’d say that at least 90 per cent were hostile to her argument, and many of them biliously so. I got the same response last summer after writing in the same vein: if you read your online responses (and I do) you can emerge from this feeling you’ve been spending time somewhere pretty unpleasant.


What’s so notable is not that lots of people may disagree with a column — I’m used to that and often expect it — but the hateful way the views are expressed: hateful towards Muslims, all Muslims, and hateful towards those of us who don’t share the antipathy. We are immediately damned as sympathising with extremists, despising our country, ‘living in a bubble’, not understanding how ‘most people’ feel, and being ignorant of what’s happening. As a matter of fact I live during the working week in London borough of Tower Hamlets, one of the most Islamic localities in Britain. I shop in the (overwhelmingly Bengali) Whitechapel Road and Stepney markets, I travel almost exclusively by bus, tube and train, and I see the same country my critics do. It follows that I know that Muslims, like Christians, come in all shapes and sizes and with a very wide range of opinions of matters religious and secular, and that millions of British Muslims are worried about extremism, some of them worried sick.

I’m afraid there’s a disinclination to hear this. ‘Moderate’ Muslims are attacked as ‘failing to speak up’ — and to my dismay I read my friend and fellow campaigner for free speech, David Aaronovitch, writing that ‘Muslims have a problem: they don’t believe in free speech.’ Actually very few people believe in free speech, but I do — yet I admit I had and have my doubts about some of the ‘Je suis Charlie Hebdo’ stuff. There are passengers joining this bandwagon whose love of free expression strikes me as having rather a lot to do with dislike of Muslims, and whom I struggle to imagine (for instance) joining a march in defence of the rights of Muslims to publish cartoons of Jesus as a terrorist or Mary as a whore.

Of course I defend people’s right to mock religion. Of course I was appalled at the Paris murders. I’ve myself written that mockery — even insult — is an important weapon against oppressive piety. But I could not agree with another good friend, Daniel Finkelstein, in arguing last month that not only must we defend people’s right to publish mocking images of the Prophet Mohammed, we must assert their wisdom in doing so. I don’t believe that in the present atmosphere it’s wise to publish images calculated to wound and offend not only fundamentalist Muslims, but middle-of-the-road Muslims too. There are questions of timing and judgment here. When sensitivities are inflamed it is possible to go too far.

These, I believe, are such times. A few weeks ago, someone sent me (and, I suppose, other journalists) at my newspaper’s office at Westminster a noxious little booklet called ‘Islam Surveyed’. It had over a hundred pages culled from media websites across the spectrum (Guardian, Daily Mail, Telegraph, Huffington Post): a selection exclusively of hostile comments posted underneath articles that had mentioned Islam or Muslims. The anonymous authors of ‘Islam Surveyed’ implicitly claimed that these universally highly ‘recommended’ or ‘liked’ anti-Muslim/Islam comments showed that the vast majority of the British public shared their own antipathies. Readers were to conclude that mass public opinion was overwhelmingly hostile — and (I suppose) to infer that the hostility must therefore be right.

That use of the word ‘surveyed’ was nasty — as though through some systematic and scientific method something about Muslims themselves and their religion had been established. Imagine receiving a booklet ‘Judaism Surveyed’ which was just an uncritical collection of examples of popular anti-Semitism. My response would be ‘However many people are anti-Semitic, I’m not.’ The online poison-spreaders’ argument — that hostility to Muslims is very widespread so we’d better get wise — should meet the same response. I’m unable to shake off the suspicion that beneath the furious assertions that almost everybody agrees with a point of view, lies the implication that my sort had better wise up. ‘You just don’t get it, do you?’ they say.

Well I do get it. But I don’t agree with it. The passionate intensity that Yeats said the worst were full of now seems to grip the centre. Anti-zealots are becoming zealous in their anti-zealotry, and I’m unsettled by the mood.

You might disagree with half of it, but you’ll enjoy reading all of it. Try your first 10 weeks for just $10


Show comments
  • Rather worried

    Mr Parris, I don’t think you have the slightest clue about this subject. Perhaps you should look at what is happening to secularists/not-very-conformist Muslims in Muslim countries and in the UK. You also don’t seem to grasp that since the 7th century Jihadis have used fictional or exaggerated grievances, resentment, and insults as excuses for attacking and eradicating their opponents–and that includes those in their own societies who want to liberate themselves of ‘Holy Law.’
    You don’t seem to understand the meaning of the words you are using. Presumably when you say you are not ‘anti-Islamist’ you really mean you are not against anything Islamic as such.
    I agree that the ignorant phobic outbursts of many posts after articles like this is unhelpful and deplorable not least since they could drive some Muslim readers towards extremism and because they ignore the existence of secularised Muslims whom we should be welcoming and encouraging. But you really should uphold some sort of standard of secular freedom and tolerance and regard it as universal. Presumably you have seen the pictures of gays being thrown off rooftops in Syria and Iraq and then shot (or hanged from cranes in Iran)–or Douglas Murray’s pictures of churches being desecrated in Mosul. Or the bulldozing of Nineveh and Nimrod. You should be trying to explain to young Muslims in the UK why these things represent a catastrophic route, why humanity and humane values are the right ones. As it is, by writing this opinionated, muddled, and poorly informed stuff, you are simply giving the fanatics useful ammunition to use agains the world you live in and depend on.

    • Fred Collier

      It’s strange how you implore him to hold up some sort of standard of secular freedom and tolerance and then mention the rooftop ‘gay-chucking’ in Iraq etc…I am sure he has seen pics of KKK lynchings too but does not imagine all white christians are like that. It’s a good point that we shouldn’t tar all with the same brush; therein lies the tolerance and way forward.

      • Patently E(uropean)

        I would be worried if western civilisation hadn’t moved on from lynching and they were caucasians today defending lynching of blacks and blaming it on some foreign policy.

        Civilisation is process of gradual improvement. You can’t absolve a rapist of responsibility just because the cavemen raped all the time.

        Nobody is indulging in labeling Muslims the consistently worst people throughout human history. That’s a strawman argument.

        What people are saying is that in a multi-cultural interdependent open and inclusive world, maybe it’s high time Muslims reconsider certain aspects of Islam that is are causing real problem. Blaming the true cause on US foreign policy or the Russian space program is incredibly ridiculous and does not lead to solution.

        • Fred Collier

          You don’t think US foreign policy is in anyway to blame? I thought, judging from what I have read here, that many people are indulging in precisely what you claim they are not.You don’t even need to go as far back as the KKK to find other comparisons. I don’t remember any of the Catholics in my Dorset village being asked to distance themselves from the actions of the IRA in the 70’s/80’s.

          • Damaris Tighe

            That’s because the 1) the IRA wasn’t an explicitly universalist RC supremicist movement & 2) it didn’t command the sympathy of of millions of people across the globe.

            You’re grasping at straws here – although I do have sympathy with the distinction between Islam as a system of ideas & each & every nominal muslim.

          • Fred Collier

            I’m sorry, but 1) I wasn’t suggesting it was, 2) I don’t think it does. 3) I am only making the distinction between the individual and the group, nothing more. People seem to think I am some kind of Muslim apologist, nothing could be further from the truth. I would not have let the buggers in in the first place. Now they are here, however, I feel we ought to try and deal with them in a slightly more realistic manner. Lumping them all together is not the solution.

          • Damaris Tighe

            Agree with your points. I’ve been bashed for the same reason, even though I’ve also posted highly critical comments about Islam. However, a small percentage of x billion does run into millions, I’m afraid.

          • … but they lump us (the kaffirs) together though.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Or lumping them all together might be the only way in the end.
            It depends how this all plays out.

          • Ian

            I trust Fred you are a UKIP supporter, given that they are the only party that “would not have let the buggers in”. ???

            Yeah, didn’t think so.

            The UK and Western Europe’s slow demise due to Islamification is going to be incredibly difficult to watch over the next 30yrs. Here in Oz we sit at 2% muslim population, the 5-10% of England, Belgian, Holland, France, Austria, Switzerland, Germany, Sweden is instructive and is driving Australians to fear going down the same path as you. We certainly do though have a mirror image to your BBC with our public broadcaster the ABC, the appeasement, apologist, obfuscation for Islam is pathetic.

          • Fred Collier

            Not a UKIP supporter, took more positive action by leaving the country entirely.

          • Patently E(uropean)

            You seem to be very confused about the point of Jihadi violence. You think western policy in Syria & Libya which largely favoured the Jihadis has won the West any brownie points? Breathing space: yes; brownie points: no.

            There is documentary by Press TV available on youtube (Iran funded station, not the evil western media) where they interview an Al-Nusra front fighter (a sunni Syrian jihadi) who smuggled himself into Israel for treatment when he got seriously injured. (By the way, he is not the only one seeking treating in Israel, but the only one willing to speak to the media). All those hateful conspiracies about Jews and Israelis many Muslims cite, guess what, they don’t actually believe in themselve. The hatred on the other hand is real and it comes from the scriptures.

          • Fred Collier

            There’s lots of hatred to be found in scriptures, my advice would be to stay away from them. I suffer from no confusion, but thank you for your concern. I am rather worried by the inability of the majority to distinguish between the individuals they live with, and what they see on their televisions or read here.

          • Patently E(uropean)

            Nobody is confusing all muslims to be terrorist. Just walk out on the streets in any western country and you’ll see Muslims, both western born & new arrivals going about their business unhindered. A few have made themselves visibly Muslim in garb and appearance when previously in the 1980s and 90’s they felt no need to, even in Islamic countries. You really think Muslims would make themselves visibly identifiable if there was this seething hatred of the Muslims.

            There is growing concern given what many young Muslims are doing. But this concern is shared by other Muslims too. These fears may be exaggerated somewhat, but it is certainly not leading to Muslims fearing for their lives and safety.

          • Fred Collier

            You are wrong from the first line, and then long-winded after that. So, to sum up, yes they are, look around on this comments page and you will see a great deal who have confused all muslims with terrorists. (Try to be briefer, I have a job)

          • mohdanga

            Being that 99% of the world’s terrorist attacks are committed by Muslims certainly has a bearing on what people think.

          • Fred Collier

            Well, that just depends on your definition of terror. I don’t think the average Iraqi, Somalian or Afghan cares very much who exactly has come along to bomb his house and fuck up his country only to be replaced by yet another set of lunatics…it probably matters less to him whether they are in government issued uniform or black rags, but if he thought about it he would probably realise that behind the uniform lies a complicit electorate. And if you don’t get the implications of that, then I shall not bless you with further insight.

          • Dan

            Territorial disputes or a politically and socially mistreated section of society often cause terrorism. Eg-ETA/Basque separatist movement in Spain/France, Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka, Khalistan Movement in India, FARC in Colombia etc so groups like the PKK, Boko Haram and the Taliban emerging and having strength is no surprise and nothing exclusive to Muslims.

          • mohdanga

            Again, compare the number of Muslim terrorist attacks to all the others. When was the last Basque terrorist attack? Tamil Tigers have been eradicated from Sri Lanka. And yes, those poor ‘politically and socially mistreated’ Taliban and Boko Haram. Please.

          • Dan

            Plenty are treating all Muslims terrorists; you only have to visit EDL Facebook pages and blogs to see that. Plenty are also trying to erase any positive history of Muslims or really divulge into the history of different Muslim communities worldwide in their effort to simplify the situation. The idea that Muslim hatred isn’t present is absurd, as absurd as the idea that in the 1940s in the US all ethnicities were “separate but equal”. Not to say that the situation of Muslims in Britain is the same as Black Americans in the 40s but it just highlights that even when prejudice and its resulting discrimination is rife there are always many who claim “it doesn’t exist”. It exists, often from the same people who in the 50s-early 2000s were generally racist to Blacks and Asians in the UK, but then started shifting over to being Anti-Muslim.
            About Muslims making themselves visible showing that there is no problem with anti-Muslim hatred in Britain: why do you think Sikhs make themselves so visible? The implementation of the Five Ks originally comes from the Mughal ruler Aurengzeb (who is generally accepted as the least tolerant of the Mughal rulers) persecuting the Sikhs during the late 1600s. Sikh leaders of the time wanted to make sure all Sikhs were easily visible in public. In the same way that Sikhs see it as their duty not to hide their faith many Muslims see it as wrong to hide their faith.
            Secondly some just wear clothes pertaining to their ethnic descent for other reasons. If you have been on those streets that you claim to know in “any Western country” you’ll know that plenty of Hindus in the UK also wear saris etc, so it’s not always about trying to show themselves as Muslim but just to show themselves as South Asian/Punjabi/Bengali/Gujarati etc.

          • Cyril Sneer

            There was a Guardian article (of all things) about a year or two ago on Al Nusra fighters receiving medical treatment in Turkish hospitals close to the Syrian border.

            And it’s the Turkish border that they’ve been crossing since the war began. Contrast this to the difficulty Kurdish volunteers had when attempting to cross the border to help the defenders of Kobane.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            No.
            Islamofascism has been around much longer than the USA has.
            The troubles was not a dispute on religious grounds it was political and nationalistic in nature. The IRA was not a religious movement. They just happened to be from the Catholic south.

          • omgamuslim

            Islamofascism? Even though the Muslims kept the Jewry alive while others were bent on cooking their goose?

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Oh yes of course. As long as the jizya was paid.
            Hardly free society.

          • Jack

            To compare requisitioning taxes to genocide is pretty weak, isn’t it? Please respond without doing the pathetic thing of assuming beliefs I have not expressed, such is your clearly limited and partisan method of argument.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Where the fcuk have I responded to you in this thread. Pull your head in sunshine. Unless you are changing your name for each post.
            To what genocide have I referred?

          • Jack

            He said they kept Jews alive when others were killing them, and you suggested that is nothing to boast about because they charged them taxes. I think that is absurd.

            Do I have to wait until you reply to me to engage you? That’s not how these threads work, obviously. Why are you getting upset? Is this too much for you, this internet mediated, slow paced debate? Don’t you think that makes you a very weak person? Do you not want to change, to get better?

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Oh please! You are obviously far superior to the rest of is, judging by your tone.
            Point I was trying to make is that have had a great many genocidal attempts on the jewry in their history themselves.

          • Jack

            Is feeling superior to someone you think betrays all the signs of not being able to understand their position in the world really a crime? Does it in any way invalidate what I’m saying? No.

            Yes they have…..and that isn’t the point you were trying to make, because you said “Oh yeah in exchange for non-Muslim taxes”, or words to that effect. But, yes, they have. Do go on….tell me your point. Surely that isn’t too taxing.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            So now you speak for me as well. An impressive human being You are.
            You think they requested protection or do you think it was given to them as an ultimatum?

          • Jack

            “Oh yes of course. As long as the jizya was paid.” – Is that better? That is the essence of what I claimed you said. In what way was I speaking for you?

            I think it was given as an ultimatum the same way taxes are in this country. Of course, that isn’t the case in the Islamic State today, but all historiography points to Medina then being a very different place to Raqqa today, to the Muslim empire a few years later even. Things, ideologies, faiths, they change.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Not exactly equality in society eh?

          • omgamuslim

            You clearly don’t understand what Jizya is. It is a tax that enabled the Jews to demand protection from the ‘state’. Jews are/were not exempt from paying taxes anywhere in the world. But that is beside the point. Point is that they were able to go about in safety and prosper.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Jizya is an additional tax for protection from the state, forced on non muslims. What happened to those who refused to pay?
            And why did they need protection? Protection from who. Muslims by any chance?

          • Jack

            From bandits, Muslims, pagans, have you had absolutely no education about the history of the Arabian peninsula in the 7th Century? I despair.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Did christianity raise additional taxes for Protection or any other religion?
            By the way. If you want to engage in reasonable debate maybe you should alter your tone slightly. You come across as a bit of a tw@t.

          • Jack

            “Where the fcuk have I responded to you in this thread. Pull your head in sunshine. ” – So do you.

            No, they taxed everyone. Muslims couldn’t tax Muslims, and when the population struggled to sustain itself, they realised that they needed taxes. The only taxable population were the Jews who lived at Medina. This is basic stuff. Why don’t you read up on it? What are you scared of? Changing your mind?

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Not at all. I’m quite aware of the practice of protectionism within the ummah. As well as extorting from non muslims

          • Jack

            Why then do you speak as if in total ignorance?

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            How so?

          • omgamuslim

            Jizya is not an additional tax.
            Protection from the vicissitudes and vagaries of life such as unjust impositions from other Jews or even Christians, which they tended to be in great need of, for instance. The same reason you pay taxes , for the state to be able to extend protection to you.

          • LOL

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Did the Muslims pay tax?

          • omgamuslim

            Yes. Under several headings.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Go on then!

          • omgamuslim

            Sadaqah, Zakat, …. . Is that where you wanted me to go?

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Yeah, you’re getting there. Do non muslims benefit from these? Or are these for islamic communities only?

          • sebastian2

            “Protection” was never extended to dhimmis (payers of jizya). They were merely spared attack. Allowed to live so they could pay more jizya. Even so, they were routinely badly treated and subordinated. This treatment reminded them of their inferior status and hinted, too, at what worse would follow should they fail to cough up. Jizya was a racket. Income for the imperial treasure chest and extorted from victims.

          • Exactly.

            It’s amazing to read silly apologists claiming “oh Arab Muslims were so tolerant, not only did they not kill the Christians and Jews they also didn’t demand or even encourage their conversion to Islam”.

            As if that had any other reason than their wish to keep their extortion racket running.

            ” The Qur’an also affirms that the collection of jizya is is the ideal relationship between Muslims and non-Muslims. The verse mandating this (9:5) occurs much later than the verse stating that there is “no compulsion in religion” (2:256), meaning that it takes precedence and abrogates the earlier verse. This is why Islamic purists such as Hamas and the Taliban wish to reinstate the jizya. One of the first orders of the self-declared caliphate formed by the ISIL in 2014 was to imposed the jizyaby force on Christians who refused to embrace Islam.”

            “Tolerance in Islam isn’t free. The jizya is money paid by non-Muslims so that they can keep practicing their religion. Under Islamic law, if the money is not paid, the people are to be killed or enslaved.”

            http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Quran/004-jizya.htm

          • omgamuslim

            You will not find an echo of your sentiments in any reputable historian.

          • SocratesWept

            BS. Jizya was extorted from non-muslims on pain of death. What happened if you refused to pay?

          • omgamuslim

            You want to wise up. everybody has to pay taxes. There is nothing special about non-Muslims. What happens if you do not pay income tax?

          • ” It is a tax that enabled the Jews to demand protection from the ‘state’.”

            LOL. Yeah, they “demanded”.

          • Tom Allalone

            Oh Christ, not this again. My family is part Irish and I’m old enough to remember everything from when Northern Ireland blew up in 69. There was, I recall, sympathy for a lot of Ulster Catholics because they had been treated very badly and, unlike, Muslims genuinely discriminated against. There was none for the IRA, atrocities were denounced by the Catholic Hierarchy, the Irish Government and Nationalist Politicians. There were also the Peace People who marched against the IRA. The denunciations were unequivocal, IRA members could be excommunicated (and had been in the past). The Hierarchy were, in fact, being over scrupulous as the struggle in Northern Ireland was nationalist in origin, which is why there were Protestants in the Republican movement. Compare and contrast with Muslim reaction – Charlie Hebdo happens and the only public demonstration we get from Muslims demands further suppression of free speech. I feel genuinely sorry for secular liberal Muslims but the steady drip drip of attacks on our institutions and our way of life, the perpetual cry of ‘victim’, the grooming gangs and the sharia patrols and, above all, the attempts by liberals to force us to love and respect this barbaric nonsense have run us clean out of patience. Less tolerant nations would have snapped a long time ago. There’s no anti-Sikh, anti-Hindu or anti-Buddhist prejudice, the people to blame for anti-Muslim antipathy (prejudice is not based on reason) are…roll of drums…Muslims. And we’re sick of being told by gutless liberals like Matthew (who was so terrifically brave insulting the WWC in Clacton) that it’s us not them. It isn’t. People know it and they’re no longer afraid to say it.

          • Fred Collier

            I couldn’t give a monkeys if you were a leprechaun…I wasn’t really seeking to draw a straight comparison between the IRA, nor the KKK nor even the BBC. I was simply, perhaps in more ways than one, illustrating the all too quickly overlooked point that many have been guilty of awful things, and we should not try to equate the remainder of people with similar characteristics (religion, skin colour, bad teeth) with them. That was the point of the original article which I agree with to a greater extent. I will say this to you and anyone else I have communicated with today: Instead of having a go at me and my views, why don’t you tell me your solution to the ‘Muslim issue’ as it stands today, bearing in mind the current population in the UK. Don’t waste time with bollocks about what has gone wrong…just what should be done as of now. I wonder how many of them, logically followed through, would end up in the kind of camps that don’t have tents.

          • Simon Morgan

            The starting point to solving any problem is to recognize it as such. If the Left (gays and feminists included) would generally begin to see Islam as a threat to democracy, rather than all Muslims as victims – well, that would be a wonderful reformation. We could then move forward to decide what to do about it, rather than constantly arguing about victimhood. I include gays here because of the recent mardi gras in Sydney, where gays ‘bravely’ sought an end to homophobia in sports! Not one float mentioned gays being thrown off tall buildings and stoned. Talk about missing the elephant in the room!

          • MG

            What’s your point, you keep bringing up all these religious nutcases and religiously driven atrocities, yet you try to use these as defense for the Islamic extremism? Seriously, why can’t you all just admit the damn truth, Religion has no place in a modern society, in our modern world. There is no need to indoctrinate children into believing in sky fairies whom demand their utter subservience and ultimately subservience to their ‘favoured’ aka priests/imams/rabbis. Seriously, when we start making the world more secular, and start removing religion from the public sectors, and even going as far as to start an anti-indoctrination principle, those whom indoctrinate children should be fined and imprisoned, people should be left to make up their own minds, not force fed ancient mythos that only serves to cause division, bigotry and outright denial of science, logic and rationale.

          • Rather worried

            This is idiotic. There was no need to ask them because their conversation, political attitudes, and general outlook made it absolutely clear that they did not. And by the way, the IRA is an organisation condemned by the Catholic Church with membership bringing excommunication. What sort of ignorant nutter are you? (Though I have to admit that a New York Cardinal recently made a similar mistake to your. Shame on him.)

          • Fred Collier

            I would suggest that it is exactly the same with the Muslim friends that I have, were I to ask them. It would be like suddenly asking someone to renounce the holocaust. When you say the Catholic Church, do you mean that paedophile-sheltering, tax avoiding, third-world AIDS death condemning, lie-profligating organisation in Rome? Or something closer to home (and I appeal to other readers to draw the comparisons with the behaviour of other religions, for I fear it will be lost on you)? Ignorant I am not, nor nutter neither.

          • turriseburnea

            No, just hate-filled.

          • Rather worried

            If you were either of those things, you wouldn’t know, would you? Not exactly in the Socratic tradition, I fear.

          • MG

            Would you cut it out with this strawman argument? Seriously, no one’s trying to say all muslims are evil, terrorists or anything like that. What is being said, and is the DAMN truth, is that Religions, and specifically ISLAM, are VIOLENT, and DANGEROUS. We need to make this part of the global discussion, we need to let muslims know we don’t appreciate their religion, maybe then they can change it, or cast it off. If not, then we will do our best to resist their encroachment on our western world.

          • “US foreign policy”

            What sort of “US foreign policy” led to Salman Rushdie being sentenced to death for free speech in 1980s? Or Charlie Hebdo murders of journalists and Jews, was that about any foreign policy or about enforcing Islamic blasphemy codes in the Western world?

            You can deny all you want that the problem is Islam itself, the facts won’t go away.

          • Fred Collier

            Are you kidding with the first question? : see my other comments before I continue, I am not here to educate the thick. Try typing ‘Shah’ and ‘US’ into google, have a read and then come back. As for Charlie ‘ebdo…poke a nest of vipers with a stick, see if they attack. Totally unrelated. You can spin the facts all you want, but it will still just be your spin.

          • ” I am not here to educate the thick”

            How fortunate for the thick, because you are woefully uneducated, and would only dumb them down to your level.

            Objections to the so-called “insults” against the so-called prophet and the ragingly violent responses to them predate any possible “Western intervention”, because Muhammad *himself* murdered people over them *during his life*.

          • mohdanga

            “Try typing ‘Shah’ and ‘US’ into google, have a read and then come back.” Thirty six years since the Shah’s death and the takeover of Iran by Islamic nutbars….you would have thought that the Muslims would have been happy about this. “We want the Great Satan out of Iran!!” “Already been done.” “Oh, but let’s use this excuse anyway!”

            “As for Charlie ‘ebdo…poke a nest of vipers with a stick, see if they attack.” Good to see you standing up for freedom of expression. Don’t know of any other religion that has rioted and killed innocent people over cartoons. Please enlighten us. Talk about thick.

          • ReefKnot

            Because the actions of the IRA were not in any way based on the teachings of Catholicism. The IRA murdered and maimed countless people because they wanted to overrule the wishes of the majority in Northern Ireland. Nothing to do with Catholicism, which is why Catholics were not asked to distance themselves from the IRA in Dorset.

          • colinintokyo

            Straw man – the IRA were not fighting in the name of religion.

          • rj

            Actually my Mother and her siblings was picked on at school for being Catholic. That’s another story (Birmingham in the 60s), but as P.E. points out, we thankfully live in an increasingly self-aware society.

          • rj

            Oh , and I should add… I’m quite happy to condemn all IRA bombings and the guilty who planned and carried the atrocities and I am not particularly sensitive or offended about being asked to clarify my position.

          • Neil Saunders

            Again, this is where the debate becomes hopelessly polarised, because it is quite possible to see the grievous problems with Islam (and the folly of appeasing it) while at the same time not endorsing current or recent US foreign policy.

        • Neil Saunders

          You say some good things, but then go off the rails at the point where you refer to “a multicultural, interdependent, open and inclusive world”; this represents an aspiration (which, incidentally, not all of us – including non-Muslims in the West – endorse) rather than an existing (or even likely) state of affairs.

      • Rather worried

        Didn’t know KKK lynchings (I haven’t seen one but I will take your word that they are still going on) were Christian in motivation and that KKK members believed that they were following the New Testament in their lynchings. I thought that their motivation was racist. Nor did I know that the KKK attracted followers from all across the world who saw it as the purest form of Christianity and a return to the days of the Apostles and so go to fight for it.
        You seem to be tarring all religions and cultures with the same brush by assuming they are equivalently prone to misdemeanors. Relativism gets us nowhere.

        • Fred Collier

          Relativism, as you call it, brings us tolerance, something notably absent from most comments here. I am glad to have brought to your attention the fact that the Klan were to a large extent formed of, by and for protestants, with some figures giving as many as two-thirds of its active recruiters as being protestant ministers. Racism was indeed their most striking historical feature, their hatred of Catholics and Jews not now so well-remembered. Of course the KKK did not attract a world-wide band of followers, as many countries had their own similar organisations, who were nevertheless linked (one might make the comparison with IS and Al Quaeda). Anyway, glad to have been of some help on that. Now perhaps you would do me the service of pointing out which religions and cultures are not prone to the same ‘misdemeanors’.

          • vieuxceps2

            Perhaps Mr. Collier you could reply in relation to Islam an not any other religions. That is what’s under discussion. To bring in the KKK and similar group serves only as obfuscation of our present problems. But perhaps that is your intention?

          • Fred Collier

            I think I shall comment as I see fit, and if you have something to add, then please feel as free as I did to do. Comparisons are necessary as they help us to see our own folly.

          • Patently E(uropean)

            So according to you, our folly is that we have covered up and minimised the crimes of the KKK, protested that it has nothing to do with Christianity, dismissed them as something we had no lessons to learn from and proclaimed ourselves to be perfect with scope for improvement.

            The problem with your theory is that we (western world) did exactly what you say we didn’t, and by an overwhelming measure. There are detractors but we have built western society to keep this under check while still allowing individual freedom. Your argument merely denies the muslim world the same opportunity, without which violent instincts can only be curtailed by repressive government.

            If you are not yourself Muslim, your attitude betrays a very racist approach. You are happy to cite (regardless of relevance) the KKK and the IRA and what not because you think white anglo-saxon people can deal with criticism. But the feeble minded muslim will shattered and fall apart if non-muslims express an honest view of Islam.

          • Fred Collier

            Honest maybe, balanced not. And I said nothing of the sort in answer to your rather unlettered first paragraph. The Muslim world is changing, and progressing in some forms throughout Europe. You are too blinded by what you watch on youtube to see it. I have no problems with criticising Muslims, as I have none in criticising white-supremacists.

          • mohdanga

            “The Muslim world is changing, and progressing in some forms throughout Europe.”
            Prize for the idiotic comment of the day!! Yes, I’m sure the French see it as ‘progressive’ to have thousands of cars torched by ‘minority youths’, the Swedes are thrilled about the enriching qualities of Muslims torching their streets, the thousands of Muslims from Europe joining ISIS, Lee Rigby, Rotherham, Leeds, Bradford and all the other cities enriched by Muslim grooming gangs. And on and on.

          • Alexsandr

            new report in west midlands. Its endemic there too.

          • omgamuslim

            Problem is not with an honest view of Islam but with a wilfully perverted view of Islam.

          • Patently E(uropean)

            Nobody has perverted Islam. It is what it is. You can pretend that a 7th century warrior came up with a happy clappy belief system that can be practiced in it’s true form in the 21st century, but don’t expect any rational person to believe it.

            When a year or so ago Douglas Murray said that the Islamic punishment for homosexuality was being thrown off a cliff, many muslims argued he was inciting Islamophobia and misrepresenting Islam. We know now that Murray was neither exaggerating nor scaremongering.

          • Jack

            Yes, you’re right. A very complex ideology, some quietist, some political, always changing like every other faith, with a 1400 year history spanning 3 continents is well within your comprehension after what I can reasonably assume to be meagre investigation. Do you not wish you had amounted to more than this?

          • omgamuslim

            Punishment for homosexuals has tended to be quite draconian whether at the hands of the officialdom or the vigilantes. Remember Turing?

          • Jack

            That isn’t the point. Please do not retire into ‘whataboutery’. Just because I have stolen in my life does not mean I cannot reprimand others for stealing now. He is criticising the ideology, and the treatment of gays is a legitimate locus of enquiry.

          • Patently E(uropean)

            It is called civilisation. Gradually understanding what is wrong and changing it.

            Is that possible with the final word of allah and the tradition of the perfect human-being all muslims must aim to emulate?

            It is possible if Muslims at some level realise that Islam is a religion and like all religions a made up set of rules which become increasingly irrelevant with time. In fact Muslims did get this until the revival of puritanical Islam in the past few decades. Just look at how the majority of urban muslim women even in Islamic countries dressed in the 60s and 70s and compare it with how they dressed now. Do you think they found the scriptures about the hijab/burka only recently?

          • omgamuslim

            I rather fear that you may not understand what is going on. However I suspect you are a democrat and a champion of freedom of choice. Why would you object to people choosing to wear hijab/burqa?

          • Patently E(uropean)

            Nobody is. It’s all in your mind. I don’t mind people having a swastika tattooed on their face. It’s what it represents.

            People might wear the hijab for a variety of reasons including saying an eff-you to western society which they are perfectly entitled to. But the increasing observance is merely a symptom that Muslims everywhere are becoming more and more observant. Another symptom is the almost unanimous antipathy towards Israel – quite admirable on the face of it given Israeli war crimes and breaches of International law. But is that really the reason for muslim antipathy when they have no problem with other Arab states who have meted out worse treatment towards Muslims? Why is there is no BDS movement against Saudi Arabia? Why the horror at removing the regime of a sadist like Saddam Hussein. Could it possibly be because middle-east politics is merely a pretext for religiously sanctioned hatred and violence? No matter what policy the west adopts regarding the ME, the Islamist find it an excuse for a terrorist attack on the west.

          • Jack

            It is the nature of that choice that is important. Does the child ‘choose’ to run away with her much older teacher? Not in any meaningful sense. Does the battered wife really ‘want’ to stay with the husband? You can’t cast every instance of wearing the hijab, being as it is so obviously oppressive to women and their sexuality, as being about the sanctity of choice.

          • Dogsnob

            On the same grounds as objections might be made to a woman entering a mosque in a bikini.

          • omgamuslim

            The mosque is hardly a place where you exercise your freedom of choice. It is there for you to exercise the freedom of religion if you are a Muslim.

          • Dogsnob

            How about a woman in a bikini, walking down the high street?

          • Dogsnob

            Don’t recall Turing being thrown from the highest building in town and then stoned by the baying crowd below?

          • Nonsense. There is only one Islam, the Quranic version – the way both your so-called prophet practiced it in the 7th century and Islamic State is building it now, one butchered innocent at a time.

            Here is a helpful comparison:

            https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B7Q9qQ8CQAAFEtT.jpg

          • Jack

            I suppose Catholicism isn’t a religion at all then? You’d fit in well with ISIS, proudly declaring who is or who isn’t a Muslim. What a moron. You’re lucky the Council of Trent aren’t still around, or they’d be after you for your heresy!

          • Calm down dear, you’ll pop a vein.

          • Jack

            Do! Exclamation! Marks! Frighten! You? Because they don’t actually mean I’m shouting or upset. So unable to defend your beliefs, so weak. Euh. Do you not wish you’d amounted to more than this? Is it not disappointing?

          • “So unable to defend your beliefs”

            Um, silly, I pointed out to you – and even linked to a clear, easy-to-grasp chart, tailored to single-digit-IQ reading-comprehension-challenged people, the group you apparently belong to – that Islamic State is engaged in building the only Islam there is, the Quranic version invented by their murderous mental-case of a so-called prophet all the way back in the 7th century, and that they are following Quran and Hadith *to the letter*. Every single atrocity that they perpetrated has a justification in Quran. It’s not “my belief”. It’s an undeniable fact, and all your dumb, laughable attempts at whataboutery can’t make that fact go away.

          • Jack

            Calm dow….just joking, I am quite a lot better than clichéd, boring “responses”. It isn’t whataboutery; it is an attempt to show the folly in always assuming literalism is the one and only TRUE religion by appealing to familiar history. Whataboutery is when someone criticises you so you point out that they do the same thing, thus defending nobody and condemning you both. I posited examples of people who, like you, pathetically declared to know who is and who isn’t a follower of a religion. Please answer these two questions honestly, and we will proceed from there.

            Do you think that Protestantism is the only form of Christianity, or do Catholicism/Baptism etc have a shout?

            Is it possible to be a Christian and not take the Bible literally?

            I look forward to your inability to answer like a big boy.

          • ” Whataboutery is when someone criticises you so you point out that they do the same thing, thus defending nobody and condemning you both.”

            No, that would be pointing out the hypocrisy of one’s opponent, you woefully uneducated person. Whataboutery is when someone like you – faced with a clear proof of just how silly your claim that Quranic Islam is somehow distinguishable from what Islamic State is building – gives a laughable non-answer in the form of “yes but what about Christianity” or some other x y or z.

            And it would be a useless pursuit anyway. You are obviously too dumb to realize that whatever the final conclusion about the Christianity question, the fact that there is only one Islam remains. Islam’s own distinctive features are relevant, not Christianity’s features, whatever they are. They don’t enter into it one way or the other.

            And as for whataboutery and your poor attempts at it, go read and learn from the masters of the form – Seumas Milne, Mehdi Hasan, Glenn Greenwald. They’re quite good at what they try to peddle. Compared to them, you’re a pre-schooler.

          • Jack

            “faced with a clear proof of just how silly your claim that Quranic Islam is somehow distinguishable from what Islamic State is building” – Where have I claimed this? I’m saying precisely that what ISIS practice is Islam, as is what moderate Muslims practice, as is all the forms it takes throughout the world. It’s like you can’t read. I’m saying NOBODY can say someone isn’t a Muslim, whether because they take the texts literally or otherwise. That includes you, me, ISIS, or those who want to say ISIS somehow isn’t Muslim. Start reading the comment before you reply you absolute imbecile.

          • Jack

            Just for some good extra reading, here is Tom Holland explaining why Mehdi Hassan is wrong to say that ISIS aren’t Islamic. Nowhere does he say that the branch of Islam that ISIS practice is the ONLY Islam, as you claim. You should read and learn:

            http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/03/tom-holland-we-must-not-deny-relgious-roots-islamic-state

            I also just knew you couldn’t answer my questions. It would reveal how ludicrously binary your view of the world is, just like ISIS’s.

          • luna

            The POTUS can decide who is and who isn’t Muslim.

          • Vengeful Fruitcake

            Relativism also brings tolerance of evil.

          • Fred Collier

            So does marijuana, you’re point?

          • Vengeful Fruitcake

            My point is obvious. The sort of tolerance that relativism brings does not conduce to a better world.

          • Dogsnob

            ‘Your’ actually.
            Glad to have been of help.

          • Fred Collier

            Lol 🙂

          • Fred Collier

            It was an oversight, rather than a general problem, but glad to see you are around to pick the crumbs from my table.

          • LuciousVanWinkle

            “Relativism, as you call it, brings us tolerance” lmfao.. The evidence and statistics do not support that claim my friend… far from it. Relativism (multiculturalism) is responsible for tens of thousands of white children getting gang-raped. Go tell them about how tolerant their rapists are.. Joker.

          • Fred, the existence of bank fraudsters does not negate the benefits of banking. KKK were going AGAINST the teachings of the Bible, where Jesus said, as the second most important commandment, that you will love your neighbour as yourself. The koran TEACHES muslims, as an ongoing commandment, to kill Jews and put others to the sword if they don’t submit to allah snackbar. ISIS is merely putting into action what the koran commands these savages to do. Bringing up the KKK is a red herring.

          • mohdanga

            “Relativism, as you call it, brings us tolerance”. Uhh, no, cultural relativism has brought disaster. Lefties claim that all cultures and societies have equal worth, something that is patently false. If all cultures are equal then why do all the 3rd worlders rush to the West?

          • Fred Collier

            I agree with your point on the lefties. I didn’t mention cultural relativism in my earlier post so I think you are putting your own spin on that and will leave it unchallenged. Finally, If the UK culture is so great, why do so many people leave it?

          • mohdanga

            They leave because they are being pushed out by 3rd world immigrants and have lost the confidence in their elected leaders to actually stand up for British culture!!

          • MG

            The issue here is religion, Islam, Christianity, Judaism, they’re all terrible. This idea that they are somehow off the table for discussion, off limits from criticism HAS TO END. Religion is a cancer upon the human race.

          • SocratesWept

            That’s a bit like saying ebola, flu, measles are all bad. There are degrees of badness.

          • Neil Saunders

            Few professional philosophers are relativists, in any of its 57 varieties (moral, cultural, epistemic, etc.).

            Indeed, it has such a poor reputation among most of them that its success and apparent respectability in the wider world (at least in developed nations) is surprising as well as disappointing.

          • Dogsnob

            “…was…was…was…”
            All of it in the past tense in your own précis.
            And who/what were said ‘similar organisations’ to the KKK? In what way were they linked? Were they jointly subscribed to a creed that was bent on the unceasing fight to subjugate every land on the globe until their way was accepted by all?

          • Fred Collier

            yes

        • Noddy

          Fred Collier – have a read of this by Raymond Ibrahim:

          http://www.meforum.org/2159/are-judaism-and-christianity-as-violent-as-islam

          He’s of Egyptian Coptic origin so clearly comes at it from one side of the argument, and you can cry ‘selective quotation’ all day long, but this is the crux of the issue as seen by the residents of the Middle East. Why else do you think the Druze, Christians, Syrian Kurds etc all support the otherwise despicable Assad regime? It’s because it has historically suppressed extremist factions who adhere to this doctrine. It is all extremely distateful and against western liberal sensibilities, but until we recognise that religious and cultural differences can and do drive conflict, then we will not understand what’s going on in the world. Ask yourself what happened to Zoroastrianism if you still don’t get it.

          • Fred Collier

            Yes, residents of the middle east: this is about the experience in the UK…do try and keep up.

          • Ahobz

            So the events in the ME have no ffect on the perception of Muslims in the UK?

          • Noddy

            Islamic doctrine is the same in the UK as it is in the Middle East. Do try and keep up.

          • Dogsnob

            Lee Rigby? 7/7? The dozens of grooming gangs? etc?
            Are we keeping up with you?

      • global city

        What an incredibly stupid post! The cranes are organised by the local authorities, after being demanded by the judiciary, they are not incidents of mob rule.

        • Fred Collier

          No, they are incidence of satisfying the mob. I am surprised that needs to be explained. Have a think.

          • Flashman

            No sir, they are satisfying the demands of Sharia.

          • Rather worried

            Completely correct. If they were mob violence, then the police would be after them.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            And who are the mob?

          • Fred Collier

            erm, people like you?

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Ha ha. Really? A mob of one. Are you trying to equate my anti Islamism with death judgements passed down in islamic jurisprudence?
            Believe me the mobs we will initially see in this country won’t be white non muslims. In fact we already saw an example at the cenotaph a few weeks ago.
            What was it for? To curb freedom of speech. You couldn’t make it up.

            [edit] I’ll add. And when the Muslim mobs do come flying out of the mosques into the streets You will wonder where on earth they got all their armaments from.

            They are getting tooled up for the inevitable. You know it as well as I.

            http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2002/feb/17/terrorism.religion

            Trained and armed. How will we be able to deal with it?

      • Tom

        I think your comparison with the KKK is well made in so much that Islam has many of the same beliefs and ideologies. Innate sense of superiority of one group of people over another and violence and prejudice towards those that are different. Rational debate and the rule of law has, to a great extent, ended the KKK. Let’s hope the same can be said of religion in a few years time.

        • Fred Collier

          I agree entirely.

        • mohdanga

          Yet if there was a KKK incident in the US, President Bumbler would be all over it but he can’t bring himself to even think that Muslim terrorists are in fact, Muslims. Nice try.

          • Fred Collier

            erm, Police shootings in Ican’tbebovveredtolookitupsville? (Ferdinand?) Look it up for me, and have a rethink.

          • mohdanga

            I’m assuming you are referring to police shootings of the ‘child’ Michael Brown by a white police officer. If so, yes, Obumbler and his race baiting henchman, Eric Holder, have done a great job of trying to pin the actions of an officer defending himself on ‘racism’. The grand jury, which had 3 blacks on it, came to the conclusion there was no evidence to charge the officer. Oblumbler doesn’t seem to have a problem with black on white crime though….nary a peep. But what this has to do with President Selfie not calling Muslim terrorists “Muslim terrorists” escapes me.

      • Cyril Sneer

        It’s tiresome when the debate fails to go beyond ‘don’t tar all with the same brush’… so in other words, don’t criticise Islam as that’s tarring them all with the same brush and so it can’t be Islam that’s at fault. Well no, it is Islam that is the problem as history has proven time and time again, as the vanishing minority populations in the ME continue to prove. When you have a large number of muslims that sympathise with the Hebdo muderers, want Sharia law, demonstrate in every possible way that they are Muslim first and British last then you know you have a growing 5th column and real chance of civil disorder in the not so distant future which will be right after the latest muslim atrocity against European civilians in their own cities.

        20 years ago we had a much much smaller muslim population and no where near the issues we have now.

        20 years ago I was not subjected to this wretched death cult every day. I’m truly sick of living in a world and in a country where this cult features and where its followers live. I’m sick of hearing its latest daily atrocity conducted by its cavemen followers and their grotesque ignorance and stupidity.

        • Fred Collier

          I cut and paste from above: I wasn’t really seeking to draw a straight comparison between the IRA, nor the KKK nor even the BBC (and I am not talking about the middle east, I am talking abouth the UK). I was simply, perhaps in more ways than one, illustrating the all too quickly overlooked point that many have been guilty of awful things, and we should not try to equate the remainder of people with similar characteristics (religion, skin colour, bad teeth) with them. That was the point of the original article which I agree with to a greater extent. I will say this to you and anyone else I have communicated with today: Instead of having a go at me and my views, why don’t you tell me your solution to the ‘Muslim issue’ as it stands today, bearing in mind the current population in the UK. Don’t waste time with bollocks about what has gone wrong…just what should be done as of now. I wonder how many of them, logically followed through, would end up in the kind of camps that don’t have tents.

          • Cyril Sneer

            My solution, deportations – zero tolerance for Islamism, prevent the influence of external forces aka Saudi Arabia etc in the financing of mosques and other institutions. We have to control immigration, large scale reduction of immigration of muslims, a change in benefit policy and what this country offers immigrants, not just muslims. We can accept muslims already here who are British, yes British, I should not have elaborate on this point.

            There are genuine peaceful muslims of course, there are westernised muslims, there are muslims who just want to be left alone and quietly raise a family…. fine fine, I truly have nothing against these people. But. The problem is population, birth rate and an awful lot of disparity in values and outlook between westerners and muslims. This is something that will only become more apparent as their population grows.

            In addition:

            Common Purpose – this has to be destroyed, stamped into the ground and never spoken of again. It needs to die. It needs to be ripped out of every institution it has poisoned.

            Progressive Liberalism – same as above.

            The media – a total gutting and enforcement of acceptable standards of reporting aka accuracy, impartiality, particularly political impartiality.

            Our foreign policy, and western foreign policy in general. An utter shambles. A return to non-intervention if we ever had that. A cooling of our relationship with the US.

            Finally, a PM who isn’t a jellyfish.

          • MG

            Zero Tolerance for Islam, get the religion out of the public sector, ban indoctrination of all religions. Start secularizing the country. It’s the best and safest route. No one should take issue with individuals, attacking muslims is the wrong idea, attack them at the source of the problem, ISLAM ITSELF.

      • Patrick Roy

        Yes the world can be horrible, it doesn’t mean we should tolerate it on a day to day basis in our midst.

      • Dogsnob

        KKK lynchings you equate with ISIS? Space cadet or what?

    • mohdanga

      “I agree that the ignorant phobic outbursts of many posts after articles like this are unhelpful and deplorable, not least since they could drive some Muslim readers towards extremism and because they ignore the existence of secularised Muslims whom we should be welcoming and encouraging.”
      I’m wondering whether non-Muslims living in Muslim countries are ever ‘driven towards extremism’ after hearing what is said about Christianity in these Muslim countries? Never happens.

      • Rather worried

        Yes, which is why they leave or form separatism nationalism when they are strong enough to do so. Look at the history of the last two hundred years.

      • ‘ere we go

        Islamic extremism is driving anti Islam feeling. How can one compare a Christians experience in Muslim countries with a Muslims living in the UK? The Christian religion is about loving your neighbour, and forgiving, not about dreadful punishment.

      • Patrick Roy

        Islam is a stain on God’s intelligence; and a sin against women everywhere.

        • kham khan

          You terrprists illegal occupy our nations agnst wishes of ppl.you kafers kill our ppl as per yr desires,and say Muslims terrorists.u occupier of plstn,iraq,libiya,siria afganistan and breaker of sudsn ,indonesia.as long as your occupation does not end and your support for gulf monarchies how can u b safe.

          • Rollingstone

            I take it then you believe in hate speech..

          • K. Bekei

            Try writing in clear English.

          • Sarah Rahman Ahmed

            Umm, his language is not English,obviously. Can you write even a word in his language? No? Then shut up

      • Craig

        Strangely enough the Muslim world happened to accommodate very large minorities of Christians and Jews (many descending from those expelled from europe) who sadly suffered after the founding of Israel. I think it would do a great deal of good to remember on what continent and by what people the Holocaust was perpetrated, and more recently the genocide of the yugoslav wars before they start pointing the finger about which people is more barbarous. As a final point, I think perhaps you should consider the lebanese civil war when you question whether any christian extremism exists in the middle east, and perhaps research the maronite militias in existence there. Furthermore, it might do good to consider certain elements within Israel too, who, were they of another Creed, would well be called out as extremists.

    • Tahir Khan

      “You also don’t seem to grasp that since the 7th century Jihadis have used fictional or exaggerated grievances, resentment, and insults as excuses for attacking and eradicating their opponents–and that includes those in their own societies who want to liberate themselves of ‘Holy Law.'”

      There is no such thing as a Jihadi, its a term made up by the western media. The word Jihad in Arabic means to strive and struggle and can be applied to both combat and non combat situations. The word in Arabic for holy war is found no where in the Islamic texts its a western concept dating back to the crusades.

      If we look at history from the 7th century until the present day it is Europe which has the bloodiest history spanning across Europe, the Middle East, Asia and Africa. On the other hand Muslim rule in Europe was both tolerant and progressive. When the Spanish Inquisition took Spain back they killed or enslaved every single Non Christian. The Jews who were able to flee fled to Turkey and were protected by the Muslims.

      It’s totally hypocritical to point the finger at Islam and Muslims while not looking at ones own history and present day offensive unprovoked attacks on Muslim countries such as Iraq, Libya and so on. No Muslim nation is attacking invading or occupying any western nation on the other hand western nations have attacked several Muslim countries in the last decade alone. Which is the primary reason we now have groups like IS gaining a foot hold in the region. So all this scare mongering around Islam and Muslims is just a way of detracting from the reality of the situation which is continued colonization of the Middle East and Asia by way of military occupations, foreign backed puppet regimes and drone killers.

  • Rik

    oh dear,darling Matthew is “unsettled by the mood”Perhaps he and the rest of the media and government might give some consideration why such a “mood” might be forming??
    The lies and denials of the “great and the good” about the joys of multiculturism and diversity might be a start,has he no comments about the mass postal voting fraud and rampant corruption in the Islamic republic of Tower Hamlets?
    How about the mass abuse of young girls in many of our cities by Muslim(NOT ASIAN) grooming gangs and the utter failure of either government or the police to either act or hold any of their people responsible for their pathetic failures and wilful complicity??
    Hate preachers given police escorts while they spew their bile in direct breach of the
    law but quote W S Churchill in public and be arrested instantly.
    Etc etc etc
    We are sick to death of Muslims playing the victim card and expecting the law of the land not to apply to them,it must stop.
    Equal justice for all under the law,or nightmare and old nick await

    • greggf

      Don’t forget Rik, the vast amount of public money showered on these grasping muslim theocrats and apologists, their dubious organisations and muslim welfare claimants who seem intent on deliberately making themselves unemployable.

      http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/british-muslims-face-worst-job-discrimination-of-any-minority-group-9893211.html

      • LuciousVanWinkle

        I love how the tone of that article is all about how it MUST be everyone elses fault that muslims don’t have jobs…. Could it be…just possibly….that they don’t want to work….? Many don’t need to…how many Muslim men have Islamic marriages with 3 wives, who each have a council house and who each receive benefits? That scam is happening in all western countries. Islamophobia does not exist, there’s nothing “irrational” about disliking a group who worship a warmongering paedophile…. Oh gawd look at me being all Islamophobic….. by stating facts….

        • If I had a business – I would never hire a muslim. Once (s)he would start demanding all sorts of exemptions/special rules/considerations due to “religious beliefs” – I would be royally f-ked.

          • Pepperless

            reasons why the equality laws is a burden on employers and should be rolled back

          • LuciousVanWinkle

            Exactly, they would have to be identifiable as a muslim, as increasing numbers are… They know full well that people will not hire anyone wearing religious clothing (excluding sikhs) particularly muslim apparel. In donning the gear, it’s the muslim equivalent of having a face tattoo saying “do not hire me”

          • Icebow

            Quite right too. Employing muzz or giving them benefits only encourages them to breed even more.

          • mohdanga

            Agreed! And don’t buy from them as well.

          • edlancey

            “Agreed! And don’t buy from them as well.”

            I haven’t set foot in a “corner” shop since 9/11.

          • Jack

            Haha, great to see the peasantry are learning to use keyboards. Well done for you Ed! Don’t you think it would be best to let people with an education, with some understanding of the world and the big ideas, tell you when you should be worried? If people like you did, maybe we would have never burned witches….

          • edlancey

            Poor Jack, can hardly string a sentence together and thinks he is “educated” and has “the(sic) big ideas”.

          • Jack

            Great response, I’m in bits. Don’t think I’ll ever walk again. What a great man, so able to defend his ideas with words.

          • edlancey

            And, apart from self-regard, what exactly did your response offer ? You’re not worth wasting any more time on.

          • Jack

            Then why comment? To tell yourself and others that your time is worth something. Is it though?

          • edlancey

            I responded to a comment with a pertinent (and true) point. You, however, have just bitched and whined because you didn’t like my comment. Who is the time waster ?

          • Jack

            The pertinent point being that you haven’t been to a shop owned by a Muslim since 9/11. Yes, compelling stuff.

          • Roger Hudson

            Your punctuation is even worse than your logic.

          • Jack

            You have, once again, said nothing of any relevance or substance. I wish you were PM; we’d have some bloody well punctuated memos!

          • Roger Hudson

            Don’t get confused, there is another Roger Hudson commenting.

          • Roger Hudson

            Talk about hypothesis! Neat verb construction–‘maybe we would never have burned witches’. Solid basis on which to form an opinon.

          • Icebow

            Witches in old England were usually hanged.

          • Jack

            Irrelevant. Thank you for playing.

          • Infidelissima

            ironic talking about education when muslims have the highest rates of illiteracy on the planet

          • Jack

            Why is that ironic? I’m not saying let Muslims from sub-Saharan Africa interpret the world for you. I’m not saying let any race or faith interpret the world for you, just people with a bit more education. Was that really so hard to get?

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Do you perceive yourself to have such an education or are you one of the peasantry?

          • Jack

            Is it not obvious?

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Afraid not old chap.

          • Jack

            So from my tone, my constant dismissal of the abilities of the ‘peasantry’ to properly grasp complex ideas and understand the way that they are completely determined by their circumstances, my repeated insistence that grappling with such issues and forming such intense opinions should be rightly seen as an exercise for people with a bit of an education, you needed me to say explicitly that I thought I possessed such an education? You genuinely have such a laughably poor ability to deduce conclusions from what is right before your eyes? You think that I was wrong to presume you incapable of understanding complex ideas when you struggle with this? It’s like watching a child get annoyed when self-lighting candles just won’t go out!

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            No. I personally think you spend an unhealthy amount of time on the internet, masquerading as an intellectual, regularly punctuated with rolling one off the hand in your mother’s back bedroom.

          • Jack

            My self-confidence….it is in ruins! Anything else, or are you happy to leave it at a pithy, tired, cliché insult?

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            I do apologise. I was trying emulate your tired cliche’d attempts to denigrate others. I’m not going to be lectured by a spotty fat kid whose best friend is his right hand.

            But there you go. Engaging with a tw@t like, you was only going to decend into traded insults. Was that your ultimate aim?

          • Jack

            Was that a long way of saying “takes one to know one”?

            Oh you have me pegged. It will take me a while to get over this thorough character-flogging. My own medicine….it’s bitter! Of course it wasn’t necessarily going to descend to insults, you just got upset and called me a sanctimonious pr!ck, betraying your shattered and weak self.

            Don’t play the victim; take responsibility for your own inability to stand up for your beliefs with anything more than toeing the ‘nerdy internet geek’ line. Hardly an esoteric pursuit is it, the internet?

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            A laugh a minute. Bet you are the life and soul of parties.
            I’m surprised you made it this far in one piece.
            Carry on sir, your points get lost in your arrogance.

          • Jack

            Why would my comments on a thread on the Spectator resemble my behaviour at parties? Why would I talk to c*nts the same way I talk to friends? Are you the same in every circumstance? Do you speak like this during sex? Weird that mate. Another cutting slice into my ego anyway; there’s hardly anything left!

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            If only we could finish it off. One c*nt to another. Hardly a great loss to society.
            What’s sex gotta do with it anyway? Are you a little repressed on that score?

          • Jack

            Well that’s incredible, there’s no way I can recover from that intellectual choke-slam.

            I will answer though; you propose that I behave the same in every circumstance. I ask you if that is a reasonable assumption. I then ask you, rhetorically, if you speak as you do on forums during sex. Obviously you don’t, but you see a rhetorical question is something that we use sometimes to prove our point. Also, talking about sex does not betray any kind of repression as far as I am aware. I won’t hold that against you though, someone of an inferior education won’t be up to scratch with their psychology will they? Anyway, I hope that clear that up. Any more questions, do let me know.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Well you keep coming back. I’ll give you that.
            I think you must be a little bit ‘special’ to have the need to explain in minute detail when obviously you are the butt of the joke. Whatever floats your boat, you sanctimonious pr!ck.
            Will you look at that. We’ve come full circle. Me calling you a santimonious pr!ck again. There really must be something in it.

          • Jack

            The joke? That a joke? Minute detail – 7 lines of text in a narrow column? What have boats got to do with it anyway? Repressing memories of being aggressively fingered on one? Obviously not. Thanks for playing, you’ve been a great sport.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Why are your other school friends round.?Go on. You are too much. You’re making me all nostalgic.. Sniff sniff!

            I think we’re just about done here. Come back with your game face on rather than one sucking a lemon.

          • A_N_Archic

            Says “little red riding hood.”

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Thank you for your contribution.

          • Richard Baranov

            And how do you judge that someone has: “…a bit more education.” ? On the subject at hand, Islam, I regard Mathew Parris as extremely ill educated. But what would I know. I only grew up under Islam and have studied the religion for over 40 years. What’s your qualification for judging others?

          • Jack

            You ask that as if it is some unanswerable flaw in what I was saying. It isn’t like I have here endeavoured to present a full diagnosis of modern extremism, is it? You begin by asking me how we can ever decide whether someone is better qualified to understand something, then you give me your little CV. Which sentence would you like me to disregard?

            Imagine two papers/essays written about the integration of Muslims in the US. Which of these papers is, prima facie, the more valuable? The one written by a law professor at a respected University in a metropolitan city, or the one written by the leader of a white supremacist organisation, who never finished high-school, and who gets his only news from conspiracy rags?

          • Richard Baranov

            Neither. Obviously the answer is someone who knows about the structure of Islam and its implication for law in the U.S.A. or in the U.K. both of which use Common Law. Therefore a professor of law is as useless as your supposed ‘white supremacist’ unless the professor has a knowledge of Islamic jurisprudence. And, if he does have a knowledge of fiqh, he will know that ‘ the integration of Muslims in the US.’ is a proposition dead in the water before he has even begun to write his paper.

            That you seek to dismiss me with your little jibs, makes it perfectly clear you are completely entrenched in your sense of superiority over all who reply to you. Such a person is not open to reason and therefore pointless trying to have dialogue with.

            But you still haven’t explained how you are qualified to judge the remarks of others on this forum. I didn’t use the term “we”, as you suggest in your disingenuous reply. I used the term “you”, therefore addressing you as an individual and you, have, of course skirted that by pretending that I was addressing people in general.

          • Jack

            What an incredibly dishonest reply. The reasons you quote are reasons as to why the professor is not ideally qualified to interpret events. My point would be that he is certainly more CAPABLE than the idiot white supremacist who has never set foot outside of his town, never received any kind of formal education, and who gets his news from ‘some fella in the shop’.

            It is hilarious to see you deride my ‘jibs’, then to propose that a superior tone nullifies a person’s arguments. I will retain the right to look down on such pathetic thinking.

            I am qualified to posit that people who are guided by their prejudices, who are so predictable that it is possible to have a ‘typical jihadist’, should realise that it is only the stupid and the insecure who pursue such a life, and should realise just accept that their version of the truth is probably bloody stupid, which it is. That is what I am capable of positing; one cannot be QUALIFIED to see such sense.

            How opposed to such a suggestion people are is astounding, but it is to be expected. Quite often people actually agree with what I’m saying, but arguing a different point lets them grandstand. I mean, you are reduced to saying that the fictional white supremacist is just as likely to know about fiqh, ijtihad, and wilayat al-faqih as the law professor. What next; they’re both just as likely to have a criminal record? To be subscribers to certain magazines? You are also reduced to answering a “who is more” question with “neither”. Come off it.

          • Richard Baranov

            Well, you simply confirm what I said in the first place about you. You are, quite simply an egotist of the first order who cannot abide that anyone else might be right and you wrong. This is, as if you hadn’t noticed, a place where anyone can voice their opinions. The fact that you seek to regulate it by deciding who is fit and who is not simply makes it utterly clear that you suffer from arrogance and a have issues of low self esteem as do most people like you who seek to overcompensate and control.
            There was nothing dishonest about my reply, and, further, you know it. That your answer is nothing more than evasion would be obvious to any objective reader. The ‘stupid’ individual here does not consist of the other contributors here, it is you with your overwhelming self regard. You are, quite simply, full of yourself and, in the process, you make yourself look ridiculous.

          • Jack

            Another dishonest reply. My entire point is that nobody is more QUALIFIED than anyone else, including you or me, to speak on a topic. However, some appraisals will be more meaningful, being as they are less corrupted by pithy prejudices. Please take your time to re-digest this, and to stop making enormous logical leaps where they are not warranted.

            “This is, as if you hadn’t noticed, a place where anyone can voice their opinions.” – I know, and anyone can hold up their side of the argument. Please respond, and then I probably will, it’s called debating. One side doesn’t necessarily need to change their mind, and that doesn’t mean they ALWAYS HAVE TO BE RIGHT. That’s just a pathetic way to think.

          • Richard Baranov

            You are quite obviously, an absurdity, misrepresent what I said in order to preserve your sense of overwhelming self regard, a symptom of low self esteem if ever there was one. My answer to you was perfectly honest, your answer is not because you deliberately misrepresent what I say in order to preserve your egotism. No amount of reason or argument is going to dissuade you from your self righteous bleating’s that you are right and everyone else wrong and that you, somehow, have the right to decide who maybe fit to post and who may not. Fool you are and fool you will remain until you learn some introspection. Therefore I will not waste my time with you any longer.

          • Jack

            “you, somehow, have the right to decide who maybe fit to post and who may not.” – Not at all. Anyone may post. People don’t necessarily have to agree with them though, and some opinions will be more valuable than others, in the sense of being less corrupted by bias and prejudice. Please explain why this is not the case.

            As far as I can tell, you’ve just responded to my point by saying “Oh you always have to be right don’t you, you think you’re so clever?” and then said you’re going to stick your fingers in your ears because I’m ‘not worth your time’. Do you not see how childishly pathetic that is? Do you not think you should be a bit better than the schoolyard retort of “Mr Smartypants”?

          • Richard Baranov

            Sorry, but I perhaps didn’t make myself clear. You are a silly person, full of yourself and therefore not worth communicating with. You are the type that knows nothing and then scuttles off to Wikipedia in order to pretend you’re clever. I’m really not interested in bothering with you. You need to grow up and, as I said, learn some introspection to curb that overweening ego of yours. You are a know nothing covering up the fact with arrogance.

          • Jack

            “Sorry, but I perhaps didn’t make myself clear. You are a silly person, full of yourself and therefore not worth communicating with.” – Evidently you didn’t mean it though, because you have replied. Just repeating that someone knows nothing does nothing to display their ignorance.

            Wikipedia? You’re the person brandishing about an incomplete understanding of fiqh, seeing as you think it precludes integration.

            Thanks for playing. I trust this will be the end of our lesson, as I am not worth bothering with? Or shall I ignore your winging and await a reply?

          • Richard Baranov

            Sorry, didn’t I make myself clear? am no going to bother with you. You are a stupid ass full of yourself and therefore not worth communicating with. Go elsewhere and exercise your ego. I know that I safely speak for everyone else who has tried to reply to you, you are a bore and not worth any attention.
            You may, if you wish hammer away at your keyboard but you will be wasting your time because you really aren’t worth a reply.

          • Jack

            “Sorry, didn’t I make myself clear? am no going to bother with you.” – You are though.

            “You may, if you wish hammer away at your keyboard” – Thank you for your concern, but I assure you I’m typing quite gently, and quite calmly.

            “you are a bore and not worth any attention” – You are unable to present an argument without getting upset and dismissing opposition to your infallible views as conceited. Weak.

          • Ivan Ewan

            The people with the big ideas made witch-hunts a national phenomenon.

            And they continue to do so.

          • Jack

            Do you mean to suggest that I am wrong in saying the most educated in a society should be trusted to illuminate the rest by pointing to witch-hunts? Big ideas played a part, certainly, but not good ideas. Midling priests decided that they were capable of understanding the ‘big ideas’ of the time, of discerning truth from falsehood, right from wrong, and went about leading their troupe of vermin to hitch some poor woman to the gallows. People with the ‘Big ideas’ can also be people with the stupidest ideas. In fact that is often the case. Understanding these often troublesome ‘Big ideas’ should therefore not be left to the ill-educated, yes?

          • Ivan Ewan

            Of course I mean to suggest you are wrong. Witch-hunts weren’t the idea of “midling priests” – it was Cromwell’s parliament that made them legal. And when I said that witch-hunts continue today, I mean in the modern sense – call-out culture, the idea that people’s livelihoods should be confiscated if they blaspheme against the “big ideas” of the bien-pensant.

            So yes, understanding “big ideas” should be left to the people you snobbily regard as “ill-educated”, since they’re the people who have to live with the consequences of those ideas. If your politician, philanthropist, or patrician’s “big idea” completely fails, he can simply saunter off to ruin another country.

          • Jack

            Cromwell’s government made them legal, and the midling priests decided that they could interpret the law, to find out witch from not-witch, and the plebs decided that they knew the priests had that ability. You genuinely don’t think that if people knew their place, knew that they couldn’t possibly grasp the historical forces that led them to hunt for witches in the first place, knew that they had better leave their impulses aside and trust the direction of better men and women, that the witch hunts wouldn’t have happened?

            Even if you don’t, answer me this: Do you agree that the world would be better off if all the ISIS bum-chums out there, all the EDL, Britain First scum, all the bigoted morons, Jew-haters, Muslim haters, and so on, just stepped back and thought; “Hang on, maybe I am unable to think for myself in any meaningful way. Maybe my prejudices and resentment are the product of historical forces that I can’t comprehend, let alone reflect on. Maybe I should listen to my betters and learn from them”? Of course it would.

          • Ivan Ewan

            Well, no, I don’t subscribe to Marxist theory, so I don’t agree with you.

          • Jack

            Marxist sociology isn’t the only analytical framework that places great emphasis on the importance of context and environment in shaping someone’s beliefs and principles. In fact, assuming that to be the case is how we conduct our day-to-day lives in many respects. Do you subscribe to a notion of historically detached agency then? P.s I’m glad this has now turned into an actual discussion.

          • Ivan Ewan

            You do operate in a binary world. There are shades of difference between the Marxist idea of historical forces compelling little people to enact social change when it becomes inevitable on one side, and history having no part to play in anyone’s decisions on the other side.

            In reality, there is more variance. Sometimes one single person can disrupt and change the destiny of a whole continent, and sometimes they can only change the fate of a single town. But this is very tangential to the point – your idea that history is a steamroller of progress is not falsifiable (we don’t have a time machine to test the idea), and so you cannot justify this notion that only big, important people should be allowed to deal with big, important ideas.

            So let me restate: little people have to live with the consequences of big ideas, so it is natural and logical that they are involved in deciding on those big ideas. It’s the underpinning principle of democracy.

          • Jack

            I assure you i don’t, I was just asking a question. I have no problem conceiving of many degrees of importance in guiding someone’s actions. I think you may have misunderstood me. I will try to be absolutely clear in as short a space as possible.

            I don’t think a person’s importance has any bearing on their ability to interpret the times in which they live. If this were the case, politicians would stop believing they can act against the forces of history and accept that they are relegated to juggling problems for as long as they can without dropping the lot. Rather, I think it is foolish for people with absolutely no grasp of history, of the current state of the world, of the ideologies to which they are so opposed, to hold strong beliefs about certain movements, people, nations, etc, and the dangers they pose.

            Unimportant people can educate themselves on the world and make the most meaningful contributions to civilisation’s progress. Stupid, uneducated people can’t grabble with the big ideas properly. Big people never comes into it. I say people’s betters, because I think, for instance, that Martin Luther King had more worth to humanity than the Shah, even though the disparities in wealth and power was enormous.

            My gripe is with people, such as those Britain First supporters, who can’t point to Mecca on a map, yet think they’re capable of understanding the genealogy of Islamism to the point of being able to make a meaningful judgment on it.

            Single people can have a huge impact, yes. Through them, the forces that made them who they are play out. One hopes more people who’s background has made them good and virtuous rise to prominence.

          • alfredo

            Matthew Hopkins, the witch-finder general, was not a priest, middling or otherwise, but his career was ended, as a matter of fact, by ‘middling priests’, who were the first to cast doubts upon his probity.

          • gkchesterton

            Noticing the negative impact of third-world immigration to the west does not require any “big ideas”. Rather, the opposite is true – not seeing the negative impact requires often impressive feats of intellectual creativity.

            And yes, it is the lower orders that are both:

            a) Less susceptible to the aforementioned “big ideas”

            b) Actually interact with the new reality on the ground on a regular basis.

            This is why it is the yobs that yell the most about “Those Damn Mooselmbs” etc. And yes, these views leave a lot to be desired in terms of nuance and accuracy. But on a fundamental level, listening to the yobs will give you a more accurate perspective on these issues than listening to the Davos crowd.

          • luna

            They still burn people alive, and execute people for witchcraft today in Muslim lands.

          • luna

            Jack, no offense, but please see the term “useful idiot”:

            http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Useful_idiot

            In political jargon, useful idiot is a term for people perceived as propagandists for a cause whose goals they are not fully aware of, and who are used cynically by the leaders of the cause.

          • Jack

            How irrelevant. Well done.

          • Auntiemilibland

            But they sell alcohol, cigarettes, pork sausages, and bacon, hypocrisy or what?

          • tome

            In my workplace most of our officers are muslim and frankly your worry is bollucks. The only thing we have to be concerned over is that they save their annual leave for ede rather than christmas, and that not exactly a problem…

          • Marvin

            Would you even have the intelligence to wonder how much they contribute to ISIS? Do you think that now that they are in someone else’s country, they stop walking around in black bin liners? Probably not!

          • Jack

            I’d never hire someone who can’t put a sentence together properly. Do you not think it sad that an adult begins a sentence with ‘I’d never work with a Muslim’, and ends it with complaints about what it is like to work with a Muslim? “Now I don’t know much about anything, but I think…” – it’s just classic isn’t it. You can appreciate form my perspective that it’s like watching my dog try to figure out how the treat disappeared from my hand.

          • Roger Hudson

            Proof-reading needed. As usual.

          • Pepperless

            Matthew is that you?

          • Jack

            ‘As usual’ is a subordinate clause and as such….actually sorry, correcting your grammar would be irrelevant to the discussion and do nothing but tend to my inflated sense of self-worth.

          • Infidelissima

            read my post above regarding education, Professor

          • Jack

            Again, completely irrelevant to my point. I say I’d never hire someone who can’t string a sentence together, and then I suggest that people who have little in the way of intelligence should refrain from thinking they understand the world. You reply that Muslims globally have the highest illiteracy rates. You do see why that is just hilariously irrelevant, don’t you? It isn’t like I said; “I’d never hire someone who isn’t Muslim because they’re stupid”, is it? I despair.

          • Marvin

            They are illiterate because 99.9% of their brains are full of s***.
            And they are only capable of claiming benefits and breeding like bacteria.

          • Jack

            I didn’t ask why some Muslims are illiterate, but if you want to talk about it, they are illiterate for the same reason lots of people in the world are: they’re very poor. You sound like a Wahhabi cleric with these delightfully childish generalisations. When you get an education, you realise that you don’t have to be dogmatically committed to one extreme or the other. You are allowed to be reasonable you know?

          • Marvin

            If you had the intelligent gene of observation, you would see that the excrement in the brains are their beliefs and total submission to an entity that is manmade and does not exist,
            and is willing to kill anyone who does not conform. Why, do so many billions want to forsake their own lands and infest everyone else’s.

          • Jane Martinsford

            That is why so many small employers advertise anonymously on-line. Any potentially time wasting, insubordinate, vexatious litigants get deleted from the application inbox before they even find out the name of the prospective employer. Small companies just don’t have the time or profits to deal with the costly demands of potential trouble makers.

          • Jaria1

            Hendrik ive got a vrry very old cousin who lives in Australia but has had such an adventurious life it should be published pretty soon.he had adifferent view about employing Muslims and locals whehe was in the far east. Threason being they all hated each other so much none would let the other get away with anything without letting the management know what was happening

        • Jack

          The article isn’t about how it MUST be everyone else’s fault. I can only assume you didn’t bother reading it. Either that or you are only capable of speaking a very narrow range of sentences without sounding completely incoherent, so you just vomit them up whenever the subject is vaguely relevant. Does it not bother you to be this way as an adult? Do you not wish you’d become more?

          • LuciousVanWinkle

            Hi retard, thanks for commenting. Yes, I read the article, and the blame was explicitly aimed at “discrimination”, not the lack of willingness to work, the implication being, it’s the “wacists” fault. Not sure what is incoherent about that. And no, I want to become less, I want to become like you, a pointless footnote with no counter-argument, with nothing to add other than the usual ad-hominem attacks we see you scrawling across the comment section. Grow a penis shitwad.

          • Jack

            Oooo fake gratitude; the beginning of every great comment. So, as THE blame is laid at the door of discrimination, you can easily point me to the sentence where he says, to the effect, “discrimination is the only reaosn Muslims don’t have jobs. It has nothing to do, in any case, with not wanting to work.” You can’t because he doesn’t, and why would he? Only a moron would make such broad strokes to explain complex issues.

            Ad hominem is where you attack the person and NOT the argument. I do both, making me a prick, but my argument remains logically valid. The same way your points are not automatically invalidated by your final sentence. Please try harder.

            Nothing is incoherent about that; I didn’t say your future sentences would be incoherent. Please stop imagining things from my words, it is the hallmark of someone very stupid.

          • LuciousVanWinkle

            Hey Jack-off, did I not just tell you to go and grow a penis?

          • Jack

            Amazing, and there I was, daring to assume that I’m better than you! It is absolutely pathetic that you can’t defend your points with words like any decent or worthwhile human being should be able to.

          • Roger Hudson

            ‘Which they thoroughly deserve’ is a subordinate clause and needs neither capital letter not full stop before it. I could make a packet out of correcting your hysterical drivel.

          • Jack

            Unless someone is claiming that they never make grammatical errors, small mistakes in writing do nothing to invalidate the points made. This is especially true of esoteric rules of English that do little to alter meaning. Thank you for playing. You can take this as a reply to all your comments, which I assume are the same irrelevant and boring tripe about grammar.

          • nfw

            Amazingly rude and condescending.

          • Jack

            Irrelevant.

          • Roger Hudson

            Still problems with punctuation, I see.

          • Roger Hudson

            More what?

        • colchar

          The scam isn’t happening in all Western countries because not all Western countries have the ridiculous benefits system that Britain has. For example, we don’t have that problem here in Canada.

          • Mark Focus

            We have that here in the USA and a President that supports it. I use to consider myself a liberal but now the liberal medicine has become poison. I have never voted for a Republican but it looks like I might next time.

        • Icebow

          I think that they regard benefits as a form of jizya.

        • Auntiemilibland

          And don’t forget the different names they claim in, there’s the caste name, the family name and then the wives surname. Oh and how many white British people work in the Asian restaurant businesses? Racist, but they get away with it.

      • AJ

        The only thing that is really scary is attitudes like your’s Matthew, its people like you with your liberal trash attitudes that have ruined this country and continue to ruin it, there will be a kickback at some point and the perpetrators who have allowed the islamisation of the UK may well find themselves on trial, just hope you are not amongst them.

        • greggf

          A kickback AJ?
          Sure it’s coming, just like the demise of Yugoslavia and the Balkan wars.

          • AJ

            You’re quite right with that one, I wonder who people like Matthew Parris will hide behind when it does, there won’t be much of an Army shortly, when our politicians have had their way and I sure as hell don’t want him on my side, maybe his Musl!m friends will have him, oh sorry homosexuality is forbidden in Isulm, they might throw him off a tall building, or maybe burn him alive, hhhmmmm.

          • Solage 1386

            Matthew may one day find himself being tossed off by bearded Islamists! Still, it’s better than being burned alive I suppose.

          • Neil Saunders

            Elitists like Parris have bolt-holes to escape to, far from the consequences of the policies they favour for the less fortunate.

      • Snibbo

        I read that Independent article… could hardly believe that someone actually believes that skin colour is dynamic… whereas presumably you are born with a religion which never changes?

        Dr Khattab added: “The main components of this discrimination are skin
        colour and culture or religion. But colour is dynamic, which means white
        colour can be valued in one case, but devalued when associated with
        Muslims. Equally, having a dark skin colour – Hindu Indians, for example
        – is not always associated with any significant penalty.”

        • Ivan Ewan

          So… he says that Islamophobia is racist, because people don’t like brown people who are Muslims but don’t mind brown people who aren’t Muslims.

          That’s exactly what racism sounds like, isn’t it?

          • Snibbo

            Well actually he’s going one step further… he is saying that people don’t like white Muslims but don’t mind brown non-Muslims, in other words if you face discrimination based on skin colour then just get over it because unlike our Islamic beliefs, it’s dynamic.

    • scampy

      Referendum on returning muslim immigrants to countries of origin would return a massive YES across the EU?

    • Jack

      Quote WS in public and be arrested instantly? Where have you got that from you absolute moron? There was an EDL rally in the centre of Manchester recently; the police set up a cordon outside the Town Hall, and they were given their little go on the soap box, as a democracy demands. Stop playing the victim, your lot get plenty of time to speak. I’m sure he does have a problem with the corruption in Tower Hamlets: where does he say otherwise? How utterly, utterly pathetic of you to think this is argument.

    • Jack

      Quote WS in public and be immediately arrested? Where have you got that from? Does it not bother you that you are forced to make things up to justify your ravings? The EDL held a rally in Manchester recently; the police diligently set up a cordon outside the town hall, and they were given their soap-box time as a democracy demands. Stop playing the victim, your lot get plenty of time to speak. I’m sure he does have a problem with corruption in Tower Hamlets. He never even suggests otherwise. How utterly, utterly ridiculous of you to suggest that he does because he says he lives there and he doesn’t hate Muslims.

      • Edmund Burke
        • Jack

          So in fact saying something that is pretty offensive and that incites hatred, regardless of whether they happen to have been spoken by someone famous, can get you pulled from your little podium by the police? What a country, hey. I’m in work so can’t listen, but I assume the quote on the screen is what he said? Hardly a coherent argument is it? It seems in this case he wasn’t ‘arrested’ FOR quoting Churchill at all. Bet you love Russia Today.

          I recommend Mill’s On Liberty for you. Search for the chapter on giving a speech outside the corn dealers house.

          • Solage 1386

            Who decides whether something is offensive or incites hatred? The police? You? Me? Who?

          • Solage 1386

            I hate the Islamic religion. I hate Muslims. They are a threat to me. I am an atheist. I have homosexual inclinations. I would prefer that Islam did not exist. Not only Muslims are a threat to me, but also African evangelical Christians, West Indians, and Eastern European Catholics too. I am becoming increasingly intolerant. I have become very unforgiving. I am now a racist, and there is f–k all that any kunt can do about it. Will this offend some people? Then so be it.

          • Jack

            How very brave of you. I’m sure your medal is in the post. You’re right, there is nothing anyone can do about your inclinations. Nobody is suggesting that there should be. If you were out berating African Christians in the street and calling on people to hate them, to make their lives worse, to attack them, then something should be done about that.

            I am an atheist, and I don’t like any religion, especially Islam. I’m not sure what you think that has to do with my comments.

      • colchar

        Yes, quoting WC caused someone to be arrested. ‘Causing offense’ is actually a criminal offense in Britain today which proves that the thought police are alive and well.

        • Jack

          No, causing offence can get someone arrested in certain circumstances. I can’t get arrested for saying: “Success is not final, failure not fatal, it is the courage to continue that counts, can I?” Therefore, you can’t get arrested FOR quoting Churchill, but FOR saying something offensive in circumstances that make it inflammatory. Why is this so hard for you?

        • Jack

          So the words that he said ’caused offense’, so he got arrested. His crime wasn’t ‘quoting Churchill’? Would I be arrested for saying “attitude is a little thing that makes a big difference”? Of course I wouldn’t. He therefore did not get arrested FOR quoting Churchill. What problem you have with this fact is beyond me. Maybe you can get his charge sheet and see the absence of the word Churchill.

          Not that it has any relevance to my point, but I think it is pathetic that ‘causing offense’ can land you in the nick. I think it is obvious that quoting Churchill can’t, by itself, land you in jail.

      • Ivor MacAdam

        Ref Paul Weston, who was arrested for quoting text from Winston Churchill…

        • Jack

          Was he arrested for quoting Churchill? Would he have been arrested if he had said “success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm”? If not, then he was quoted for his words, not FOR quoting Churchill. Please, please try to understand this, it isn’t hard.

          • mohdanga

            You are an idiot. He quoted Churchill directly. And where is there evidence that what he said was ‘offensive’ or ‘inflammatory’?? Because one person complained Officer Plod was on the scene to ensure ‘community cohesion’ was maintained. Not so with the myriad marches through London streets with signs saying ‘Death to the West’, etc….that’s considered free speech.

          • Jack

            The fact that he quoted Churchill is completely incidental; you’re thinking like an imbecile.

            Would he have been arrested for saying: “Never has so much been owed by so many to so few”? Obviously not. Would he have been arrested for saying the same points but with different words, thereby not quoting Churchill? Yes. It is therefore OBVIOUS that he wasn’t arrested FOR quoting Churchill. Quoting Churchill was not his crime. How do you not see that?

            I think it ridiculous that he was arrested for merely expressing his views about Islam, because I expect to be able to speak bluntly about the EDL, about street preachers, etc. That, of course, is neither here nor there when discussing what his supposed crime actually was. Please take a minute and think; it won’t hurt you.

          • mohdanga

            Quotes Churchill, gets arrested, Mr. Mensa says he wasn’t quoting Churchill. Carry on.

          • Jack

            Imagine, after watching Raging Bull and thinking I quite fancied belting someone, I hit someone in the street. If I was then arrested, what would I be being arrested for? I hope the penny drops at some point.

    • colchar

      It is sad to see what Britain has become, and this column exemplifies that. Too bad the writer is too blind to understand why.

    • BOMBA777

      There were no Islamic terrorists in the UK before we aided in the slaughter of Iraqis, Libyans & Syrians. Our hostile governments created this problem. ISIL is just those connected to the west’s victims, & they are hitting out the only way they can.

      • MG

        By that logic, then everytime the Islamists murder someone they will have created one western enemy. If you wanna play the tit-for-tat game, Islam has a lot of backordered smacking. (Yes, Islam murders many people all the time, Western Civilization moved in after they struck a chord)

        • Neil Saunders

          It’s at this point that the debate becomes frustratingly polarised:

          1) Yes, it’s true that the “liberal interventionist” interference in these places was unjustifiable both morally and geopolitically;

          2) No, it’s false that such interference is the sole cause of Islamic terrorism.

          • MG

            I’m saying that you can’t justify the actions of Islamic extremists by the actions of other extreme counterpart. Seriously though, I’d take the gun toting yanks over the Islam crowd any day.

          • Neil Saunders

            To me they’re both dangerous. In many ways, the “Yanks”, as you affectionately term them, are more dangerous because:

            1) As world hegemon they are far more powerful;

            2) For the same reason, they have far more global reach;

            3) They have a form of democracy at home, and justify their actions by appealing to lofty-seeming sentiments.

            That said, it is desperately naive to minimise or deny the threat that Islam poses to the West, especially Europe.

          • MG

            As a Canadian, I have nothing to fear from America. I will admit their world policing is obnoxious, and it usually only stirs up more trouble. That being said, the American government at least utilizes logic and rationale, even if it’s self-serving (even to the point of abusing their own citizens) but that’s more understandable and less dangerous than the loose cannon that Islamic theocracies are. What with ‘fatwas’ and ‘jihads’ and all these nonsensical things that can be ‘instated’ and cause otherwise logical people to do very illogical, violent and horrible deeds.

          • Neil Saunders

            It’s all dangerous if it kills you.

          • MG

            Yea, but it doesn’t kill me. Islamic extremism would if it had any hold over here. (You see, I’m a militant atheist, and anti-theist, my beliefs are tolerated in the Western World, and I even have others with me… Whereas in a Theocracy, I would be killed for blasphemy, defamation of prophets and general dissuasion of their religious beliefs)

          • Neil Saunders

            The Islamisation of Canada might occur faster than you think, or there may well be some other blowback from U.S. foreign policy. Don’t be complacent.

        • BOMBA777

          The west invaded, slaughtered their people & carved up their land long before most even knew what Islam was. Really, get some education.

          “We fire missiles from the sky that incinerate families huddled in their houses. They incinerate a pilot cowering in a cage. We torture hostages in our black sites and choke them to death by stuffing rags down their throats. They torture hostages in squalid hovels and behead them. We organize Shiite death squads to kill Sunnis. They organize Sunni death squads to kill Shiites. We produce high-budget films such as “American Sniper” to glorify our war crimes. They produce inspirational videos to glorify their twisted version of jihad.The barbarism we condemn is the barbarism we commit. The line that separates us from the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) is technological, not moral. We are those we fight.” Chris Hedges.

          • MG

            Eh? I don’t remember doing any of that non-sense, you can’t just attribute actions of nations to people who had nothing to do with it.

            That being said, Islam has done plenty of nasty things WELL before the “West” even existed. Look up what happened during the infancy of Islam, the religion has always been one of violence and war. They inherently are in a constant “jihad” a war against all that is not Islamic, all that does not “submit to the will of Allah” (what a douchebag that “Allah” guy is anyway).

          • SocratesWept

            We in the west have known what islam is from the earliest days of Charlemagne, Martel and the battle of Tours. The whole ‘we started it’ BS might convince an ignorant leftie, but most of europe has a deep remembered wariness about islam.

  • LittleRedRidingHood

    Could it be that people are starting to wake up to the threat of Islamism to humanity?

    • JoeDM

      Call it what it is – Islamofascism

      • Hybird

        No, call it what it really is – Islam.

        • ianec2

          Exactly – all this ‘Islamism’ nonsense gets on my nerves. The religion from which all these problems emanate is Islam.

        • Jean-Claude Cameron

          Nice little trick, disqus_LmUxuRHCQk

          You are an autogenerated replicant designed to deliver the real message and we all know it. Boring.

      • Jack

        The ‘it’ being what?

      • luna

        Call it what it’s adherents call it.

    • Jack

      Well political Islam, or Islamism, in the UK is indeed a growing problem, just as right-wing politics was in the 1930’s. I’m not sure why you think people do not realise that? I am of course not referring to the that the black and white-visioned peasantry and the ’causes’ they concern themselves with; this whole ‘I have absolutely no education but I’m going to assume that I understand the world’ nonsense. I mean, throughout history, the EDLlers of this world have hardly been the forefront of ideological creation, the zeitgeist if you will. I wish they, and their bigoted Islamic counterparts, would realise how determined they were by sociology and let the grown-ups interpret the world for them. But you, you are ever-so insightful. We must get you to Davos next time.

      • LittleRedRidingHood

        What are you wittering on about Jack?

        Oh sorry I get it you’re just being a sanctimonious pr!ck.

        Should I be impressed? You obviously think you know me and my background.

        So if as you say people are aware of the rise of Islamism why is the establishment allowing its growth and shutting down any dissent on the matter?

        • Jack

          Excellent reply, straight to the point, some excellent sarcasm as well. I assure you I’m torn to ribbons. I suggest instead of pretending to struggle to read you actually address what I say.

          The establishment isn’t shutting down debate on the matter. Have you read the Spectator at all? Have you read these comment threads? Do you go to many public debates? Rallies? Obviously not? You seem quite content to drink up your own sensationalism.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Wow, just wow.
            Did you read the comment threads several years ago. The words racist screamed at the mere hint of questioning multiculturalism. Funnily, the debate has only recently opened up when a bloke called Farage started speaking out. Now it is all people are talking about.
            Carry on you vain attempts to belittle, you lose all credibility in the process.

          • Solage 1386

            Leftists assume that all those who oppose them are mad, bad, ignorant, or stupid. They are Good. They cannot make errors. For the left, Reality and Ideology are One. They are unable to learn from the mistakes they can never make. Or perhaps I am wrong. Perhaps I am evil. Perhaps I need to be re-educated. The left will agree.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Don’t I know it. The thing is they are the puss!es who will either run away, or cower in the corner and roll over and die if it all kicked off.
            They think they are respected by championing the multi culti narrative when in reality they are looked upon with the disdain they deserve by the very people for which they are apologists

          • Jennyvstheworld

            Haha – and there again is a classic sign. The “I’m a real man” line. Just so much arrogance. Hilarious.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Not really. Just my opinion. You are entitled to yours. Apart from the fact I wasn’t referring to my masculinity, you doubt I’m a man, real and in the flesh?
            You a feminist by any chance?

          • Simon de Lancey

            Chances are he’s just another fat old keyboard warrior.

          • luna

            So weak to make it personal.

          • Simon de Lancey

            Oh look, another spineless, empty-headed keyboard warrior.

          • Galneiros

            Which is why the term “fatbeard” exists – most of them are fat, beardy, yellow-bellied knobs and the great majority of the right-leaning ones are usually either closet cases or into underage erotica or even worse stuff (eg “furries”).

          • luna

            “An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.”
            Winston Churchill

          • luna

            Ad hominem attacks are a knee jerk reaction. Attacking the character of the speaking rather than the content of the message simply because they aren’t prepared to counter the content.

          • Galneiros

            Leftists assume that all those who oppose them are mad, bad, ignorant, or stupid.

            It’s only natural if they keep running into opponents like you 😀

          • Jack

            Oh goody, we’ve moved on to faux-shock. Or should I say, WOW!

            So what you’re saying is, the establishment aren’t shutting down debate on the matter; as you say, it’s all people are talking about, including politicians. I fail to see the relevance of ‘several years ago’. Thank you for wholeheartedly agreeing with me.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            You don’t have many friends do you!?

            I can’t imagine anyone is very receptive to anything you say or do if you address people in this manner.

            You know exactly what I was getting at. No doubt you’ll want the last word?

            Off you go then chum.

          • Jack

            Not reverse psychology! I’m at a loss of what to do; to reply or not to reply! Of course, it isn’t ‘the last word’, you’re free to respond, and in any case the last word doesn’t mean anybody has won. Don’t be so childish.

            I don’t address people in general in this manner, just people who are being absurdly thick but claiming some degree of insightfulness.

            I do know what you’re getting at. Politicians, in the past, didn’t want to talk about multiculturalism. Now, today, they’re jumping on the bandwagon left, right and centre. Magazines, newspapers, television, radio; the debate is everywhere. I therefore think your claim that the establishment ARE, not were, but are, shutting down debate, is silly. If you disagree, explain why. It’s not hard.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Oh go on then. I’ll indulge you a little longer.
            Based one line Could it be that people are starting to wake up to the threat of Islamism to humanity?
            You launched into your ridiculous tirade, making spurious references to the EDL in an attempt to link my opinion with theirs and of lacking insight into issues which will affect all of us in time.

            Whilst you are obviously reasonably eloquent, possibly educated but limited on an interpersonal level I am unclear on you position.

            Do you agree that Islamism is a threat to humanity or not?

            The narrative from successive governments is no, islam is a religion of peace and Islamism is a perversion of that.

          • Jack

            No I obviously don’t think it is a threat to humanity, I’m not a child. I also don’t think Ebola is a threat to humanity, nor fascism, nor any other thing that can make people’s lives a lot worse for a time in a geographically limited space. I mean, just obviously.

            Why do you think that the length of a sentence determines the length of the reply? Your remark about waking up to the danger a political ideology poses to humanity is sensationalist, and clearly intentionally so. Hence the link to the EDL. They don’t understand Islam in general, nor Islamism in particular, but they still draw wild conclusions for this limited or non-existent understanding. You surely cannot believe that a form if Islam that makes absurd political aspirations, with no backing from the vast majority of people, poses a real threat to the existence of our species or civilisation?

          • Ivan Ewan

            Oh, so humanity is binary.

            if (humans)
            { humanity = “safe”;}
            else
            { humanity = “null”;}

            Right. That makes your arguments so much more reassuring.

          • Jack

            Do you think TB poses a threat to humanity?

          • Ivan Ewan

            Only a very very small one, which can be contained, and is being contained.

          • Jack

            Using the phrase in this way leads one to the point where air-bags pose a threat to humanity. Reductio ad absurdum.

          • Alexsandr

            yes. antibiotic resistant TB could become a scourge throughout the world.

          • Jack

            Could? In some other circumstances it conceivably could?

            “Is” – third person present singular of “be”. It means at this moment in time.

            What a completely mental world you must live in, with millionaires saying that bankruptcy is a major worry for them, and completely healthy footballers retiring left, right and centre because arthritis and tendonitis are big crimps on their game. How sensationalist. How pathetic.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Thank you. You’ve told me all I need to know about you.
            Civilisations have fallen in the past you know.
            I do hope you’re right, because you are gambling with people’s lives when all said and done.

          • Jack

            Is that an intelligent response? No, thought not. Just empty abstractions. Yes, civilisations have fallen before. Does that mean that Islamism is therefore a palpable threat to ours? Obviously not. Thank you for playing.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Probably not by your standards. But then again who are you anyway?

            Arrogant pride before a fall my friend. I’m sure many in the past have said it will never happen here and you are the living proof of such folly.

            Trot on fella, you’ve obviously got it all worked out.

          • mohdanga

            You mean the EDL rallies that are either shut down by police or allowed to be pelted with projectiles by those opposed to them?

          • Jack

            Well those and all the ones allowed to be carried out without hindrance. Surely you do not object to opposition? I have seen one being shut down by the police because the yobs were singing about ‘pakis’ and other slurs. It’s not the police’s fault they can’t conduct themselves with any decency. Not that the other side do, of course, but then that is irrelevant. I only mention it because people like yourself love the ‘whataboutthemlot’ form of “argument”.

          • mohdanga

            So ‘opposition’ includes assaulting people who are marching peacefully? Got it.

          • Jack

            Well yes, of course that counts as ‘opposing’ someone. It isn’t right, but it is hardly conspiratorial, is it? Haranguing is quite different, and that is a much more common experience at EDL rallies.

          • Ivan Ewan

            Hey Jack, you say that the establishment isn’t shutting down debate on Islamism. And yet I barely have to scroll up to find you discussing the arrest of Paul Weston for saying “disagreeable” things on the subject in public.

            How do you have the gall to call others imbeciles, when you yourself apparently have the memory of a goldfish?

          • Jack

            Thank you for replying. There is no need to address me in your comment, I know you’re replying to me.

            I suppose you regard making a general nuisance of yourself “debate” then do you? I find plenty of discussion about the problem of Islamism on television, in newspapers, magazines, leaflets, at public debates, in the pub, in the commons as well as the Lords (perhaps much more in the Lords) actually it has been discussed at length. In academia, work is pouring out on the subject. Yet we are to conclude the establishment is keeping a total lid on it, because one guy got pulled off a soap-box for being a public nuisance? Behave.

          • Ivan Ewan

            “keeping a total lid”

            Weasel.

          • Jack

            I am sorry, do you not understand? That means keeping it quiet, suppressed, out of discussion. You know, the thing the establishment are supposedly doing to the thing we’re talking about? There’s no need to get upset, you can always just ask and I’ll explain a turn of phrase to you.

          • Ivan Ewan

            You enjoy grandstanding, but doesn’t grandstanding only work if there are at least one or two people who are on your side? You’d be able to pull this off on the Guardian, because almost everyone there is as smug about their orthodoxy as you are, but here it’s a bit of a stretch.

          • Jack

            He says, grandstanding. My responses to one-word comments that are just insults is always going to be a bit condescending, isn’t it? I don’t know what orthodoxy you think I’m supporting. I think we’re free to talk about Islamism. I think cowards at many media outlets choose not to, but we are undeniably free to do so. Stop painting me as some caricature because that’s the only thing you can argue against, it’s pathetic.

          • Ivan Ewan

            Really? You think that locking people up over supposedly offensive comments is freedom, really? I’m not just talking about locking people up in front of the town hall. The police have arrested or investigated people over comments made on Twitter. Most recently, someone was investigated by the police for putting up a picture of Mohammad next to Jar-Jar Binks. That’s freedom of speech, is it?

            And it’s not like you can talk about “painting [someone] up as a caricature”, since you indulge the very same tactic against every single person you disagree with.

          • Jack

            I will deal with your points, but I would like to say that my behaviour does not mean I can’t tell people not to behave in a similar way. You can just choose to ignore me; it doesn’t make your behaviour acceptable, so doesn’t have any bearing on what I said. A smack-head who tells you to leave off the horse is giving good advice, no?

            No that isn’t freedom of speech. You keep giving me strange, hear-say examples, but then I can give you examples of where people haven’t been arrested for burglary; doesn’t make it legal does it? Why do you think one counter-example disproves the rule?

          • gkchesterton

            The establishment isn´t “keeping a total lid” on the issue. But it makes sure that the topic is discussed in a fashion that the establishment is comfortable with.

            Indeed, even in the most dictatorial states social problems are rarely kept completely hushed up. Rather, discussion is channeled into frames acceptable to those in power.

          • luna

            It’s dangerously naive to ignore the fact that core fundamental Islamic ideology is supremacist & violent.

          • Jack

            Why is this in reply to me? Can you read? I suggest that nobody is shutting down the debate about Islamism, and you take that as an endorsement of it’s central principles? What an utter buffoon.

      • Cyril Sneer

        ‘Tommy Robinson’ speaks to the Oxford Union:
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GyzGayfI400

        You have no idea who the EDL are and why they were created.

        • Jack

          The Tommy Robinson who left and denounced the EDL after meeting with the Quilliam foundation and being educated on the boringly predictable way that his old views formed? Yes, he did speak at the Oxford Union. You really must try harder.

      • gkchesterton

        Letting the “grown-ups” (a.k.a. “The Elite”) analyze social reality exclusively for you (given that you belong to the lower orders) might make some sense if human society was an intellectual problem to be solved akin to a crossword puzzle. But it´s not.

        Issue 1: Incentives. The incentives of the elites (for there are always many competing and cooperating elites) do not need to be aligned with those of the broader population. Indeed, this is rarely the case.

        Issue 2: Experience. The Elite is generally insular – after all, this is the point of being part of the elite. Better schools. Better neighborhoods. Better restaurants. Thus, if the ship has sprung a leak below the waterline, those in first class are likely to notice it last, so to speak.

        Issue 3: The interaction of 2 and 3 in social signalling. Society is a game where mere accuracy is frequently trumped by other needs, such as the need to appear to others in a certain light. For instance, if the lower orders are banging on about some topic, agreeing with them in itself risks marking you as non-elite. And that´s just not cricket.

        PS.
        Those Islamist chaps are certainly at the forefront of the creation of the Zeitgeist in the middle east.

      • “throughout history, the EDLlers of this world have hardly been the forefront of ideological creation, the zeitgeist if you will. I wish they, and their bigoted Islamic counterparts, would realise how determined they were by sociology and let the grown-ups interpret the world for them.”

        Two mistakes there, (1). to assume that there *are* any grown ups who have freed themselves from their background, presumptions and prejudices, and (2) to assume a moral equivalence between the prejudices of those socialised into a a broadly free, broadly prosperous, broadly tolerant culture (as the pre multicultural UK was), and those socialised into Islam. The states of the Islamic world are divided between theocracy and secular autocracy. The much vaunted ‘Arab Spring’ seems to have been a reaction by the former against the latter, rather than some ‘Prague ’68’ flowering of reason. Your flawed analysis isn’t really a sufficiently strong framework for the risible arrogance and contempt you are displaying

        • Jack

          What a full and thorough analysis of my obviously completely divulged theoretical framework, as presented on these serious, peer-reviewed forumz. I thank you for taking the time to make undue assumptions about my beliefs before you, predictably, spew up some irrelevant modern history (did you get a gold star for that little gem?) that has little bearing on what I was saying. Anyway….

          To assume that there aren’t any people capable of largely freeing themselves from a completely poisoned and prejudiced belief system is to discard pretty much all of sociology, a lot of social science, and for that matter, a great deal of natural science. Of course, nobody can be completely free of all biases, but people can be much more free than others, and the much freer people are those to whom I refer (I hope you do not want people to be so explicit about things that are so obvious, because that would make short comments on a magazine’s website, and life in general, pretty painful). For instance, I think the young man who was abused by his white supremacist father because he lost his job at a Jewish business, who dropped out of school in the worst part of Arizona at age 13, and who went from foster home to foster home with worsening consequences, is very likely to have a certain set of views and values. I would go as far as to say that they would be painfully predictable, and probably pretty stupid. Contrast this to a 25 year old, middle class woman, currently studying for a PhD in anthropology. She speaks 3 languages, including Farsi, and has spent a significant amount of time in Iran, Lebanon and Israel. She consumes news form a range of mediums, and has lived in several countries at various degrees of prosperity.

          Which of these people, do you think, would be better at interpreting and understanding the Middle East at present? Who would be more capable, prima facie, of reflecting on their prejudices and trying to overcome them for the sake of reaching a truer understanding of the world? Obviously the latter.

          I assume no moral equivalence between the EDL and ISIS; where have you got that from? I think both groups contain a very, very high proportion of idiots, so constrained by their pithy prejudices that they barely rank above animals in terms of possessing the human capacity for self-reflection and improvement.

          Your point about the Arab Spring being a theocratic reaction to secularism is, as far as I can see, irrelevant. I agree actually. Please clarify what your point is.

          • I would still need to know more about the individuals in your example rather than their backgrounds. Someone can speak Farsi and view his chosen field through a mind full of junk. Someone can be raised by an abusive neo Nazi and gain a unique perspective into the human condition. I don’t share your faith in the objectivity of those involved in the social sciences, or indeed the field of study’s qualification to be called a ‘science’.

            As for this, “I assume no moral equivalence between the EDL and ISIS; where have you got that from? I think both groups contain a very, very high proportion of idiots, so constrained by their pithy prejudices that they barely rank above animals” yada yada… Firstly, that seems to be something of an unprompted own goal for such a clever cove as yourself, and secondly, I didn’t mention ISIS. I drew a comparison between those socialised into the kind of society we have in post war Britain and those socialised into almost any flavour of Islam. And you did draw such a comparison. The point over the so called Arab Spring precisely followed on from that; that Britain is a broadly prosperous culture in which we had achieved the rule of law, respect for property rights, the assent of the governed, freedom of speech, assembly and the press and a stable democracy. Islam hasn’t and it seems it can only prevent theocratic terror by instituting secular terror. It therefore seems rather disingenuous to use the EDL as a piñata, simply because there seems to be a great reluctance to address the complete failure of Islam as a culture and the consequences of allowing large scale immigration from Islamic states

          • Jack

            “Someone can speak Farsi and view his chosen field through a mind full of junk. Someone can be raised by an abusive neo Nazi and gain a unique perspective into the human condition. I don’t share your faith in the objectivity of those involved in the social sciences” – I agree, and I don’t think the social sciences can be objective. You are again reasoning from my limited examples to general claims, and it is silly. In general, a paper written by someone with a high degree of education, having passed through various liberal institutes of education, and having engaged with a wide range of people and cultures, is more likely to offer something more meaningful and closer to the truth than someone with little education, brought up in circumstances conducive to hatred and prejudice, and with limited or no exposure to other cultures or people. Telling me that it is conceivable that some people might overcome such environmental constraints is a bit odious and serves little purpose.

            “Firstly, that seems to be something of an unprompted own goal for such a clever cove as yourself, and secondly, I didn’t mention ISIS” – I know you didn’t. I do apologise for straying from your agenda, but please allow me the luxury to once again go off-piste a little. ISIS are relevant because my original point is that Islamic bigots, such as the ISIS bumboys and their band of kiddy-fiddlers, share with the EDL an arrogant assumption that they are equipped to understand the world. For instance, people sympathetic to ISIS think that ‘the West’ have it coming. They don’t see that they are just towing the line demanded by history; a power vacuum, high youth unemployment, the failures of nationalism and socialism in the Arab world make all this woefully predictable. The EDL and those who appeal to them think that they somehow see what everyone else doesn’t. It is funny then that a good predictor of membership is being ill-educated, living in areas of high-unemployment, and living in almost segregated towns. What the EDL’s prejudices and ISIS’s (and it’s sympathisers) have in common is that they are predictable, and they are acted upon because they fail to see their own insignificance in the face of historical forces.

            Using the EDL as a piñata? I merely point out that they would hate a Muslim even if he were completely subscribed to the principles of Western society and liberal in disposition (note their hatred for Maajid Nawaz), and as such, are little more than animals. To dismiss them as unable to understand their own circumstances and how those circumstances dictate beliefs is no endorsement of Islam, thank you very much.

    • Jennyvstheworld

      Only a step removed from those that think we’re all ruled by subterranean lizards, the paranoia of bigots is easily identifiable by hyperbole (threat to humanity? Oh please.) and the delusion that their point of view is that of the enlightened, all the rest of us being asleep – naive and unquestioning numpties sleepwalking towards disaster.

      • LittleRedRidingHood

        It may have been a little strong granted. But I’m not enlightened. I’m paying attention to what is going on around me instead of sticking my head up my own at$e. You deny Islamism is a threat of massive proportions all you want, it doesn’t necessarily make you right.
        I’ll concentrate on the glaring issue rather than trying to belittle others thank you so much.

    • BoiledCabbage

      certainly a threat to Britain. lets start there.

      • LittleRedRidingHood

        Indeed a good place to start and every other civilised nation to recognise their own similar threats.

  • WTF

    Funny that, people tend to get genuine phobias against poisonous snakes or spiders, big cats & sharks even if only a small percentage want to actually kill you. Now I wonder why that is ? I’ll leave it to others here who are doing a good job trying to educate Mr. Parris but I fear its a lost cause.

    • Fred Collier

      Phobias come from our ancient genetic history, when these things were a threat to us. This is why no one has a phobia about electricity, though it kills far more than spiders. Clear?

      • vieuxceps2

        I don’t think electricity WANTS to kill anyone, does it? Unlike Jihadis ,eh?

        • Fred Collier

          Is a poisonous spider really aware of what it’s venom can do to us? I think not.

          • Flashman

            A filthy jihadi is quite aware of what his scimitar can do to us, that’s for sure.

          • Fred Collier

            And now the truth is out 🙂

          • vieuxceps2

            Yes, Frd, you think not,neither do you spin.

      • Aberrant_Apostrophe

        It’s not as clear cut as that. Our ‘ancient genetic history’ is but one small part of why we survive our early years as we develop, for example by instinctively knowing where our mother’s nipple is and how to suck to obtain nutrients, or knowing that by falling or jumping from a height might hurt or even kill us. However, the majority of our survival instincts come from experimentation or observation (of our elders), for example in finding out that certain foodstuffs are good and others bad by tasting them, or being told not to put them in our mouths.

        Phobias, which by definition are an irrational fear of something, are complex psychological behaviours that develop in some people but not in others, and are most likely the result of unpleasant childhood experiences. For example, we know that some spiders are deadly, but the vast majority aren’t. Even if told that a particular spider is harmless, some people still run screaming away from it.

        As for fear of electricity, or ‘electrophobia’, some people do have a fear of it, even when harmless low voltages are involved.

      • LittleRedRidingHood

        Phobias are an irrational fear. There is nothing irrational about fearing and being very wary of Islamism.
        Clear?

        • Fred Collier

          There is about fearing your Muslim neighbour. Crystal?

          • Flashman

            That depends on your Muslim neighbour and what strain of Islam he follows. Crystal?

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Not really. My auntie had a muslim neighbour. Disgusting, arrogant, abusive, aggressive. Made her life hell. Then they tried to force her to sell at a vastly reduced price. Her adult daughter was left there alone after she died who is made of stern stuff. She made a point of selling to another party. They were seething.

            You mean those sort of neighbours?
            Clear?

          • Sort of like the “neighbours” who moved in next door to the Serbs in Kosovo …. see what that lead to.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Yes, we took the wrong side in that little conflict.

          • Zanderz

            Wrong. You’re living in a world that doesn’t exist. When the call comes from the Mosque, those ‘friendly Muslim neighbours’ will be the first to chop off your head. Just look elsewhere around the world where this has happened. And don’t say it won’t happen here, because when the numbers are high enough it will.

  • Failedsithlord

    The rationalisation goes ”Islam is inherently pacifist but some bad people misinterpret it”. Well, it’s the other way round. Islam is inherently warlike and promotes intolerance but some good people, thank God, misinterpret it or ignore it.

    • Rather worried

      There is more than one version of Islam — there are many in fact. The trouble however lies in the core texts.

      • Zanderz

        The trouble lies with Mohammed. It is he Muslims seek to emulate. The hadiths and other stuff is all up for negotiation as far as I can tell (hence 5 main schools of Islam), but Mohammed is not. He is ‘the perfect man’. Unfortunately he was a 7th century tribal leader who sought to dominate the world and all before him. He had other unsavoury appetites as well.

        Nothing will change with the core of Islam unless Mohammed is up for critique. Douglas Murray has made some good points on this before.

      • sebastian2

        You are correct in both statements. Mohammedism is quite fragmented though Sunni is the major sect, followed by the Shia – both more or less detest each other: a mutual dislike since around 650 and which set the “religion of peace” on the sort of bellicose and divisive path we witness nowadays and which ignited over “succession” following mohammed’s death. There was instant rivalry over who would take charge. Things haven’t improved, which is why the Gulf States (protected largely by us – but that’s another story) are so fearful of Iran and its nuclear potential. The mere thought causes the sheiks loss of bladder control.

        As for the core texts, these are the repositories of justifications or “reasons” for why their followers do what they do. They are what mohammedans refer to. They are the ultimate authority. There they find supremacism, conquest, violence and subordination readily excused – or even placed as a duty on believers. The more violent passages (Medina) abrogating the earlier more conciliatory ones (Mecca) which, by the way, failed in their attempt to convert Mecca’s powerful pagan – or “multifaith” – wealthy establishment. Although there are “interpretations” of these texts and varying degrees of obedience to them (there are even “secular” mohammedans – though this is an oxymoron), there have been no reformations and so they, and their central doctrines remain unchanged and substantially unchallenged. Their doctrinal authority is intact. After all, they are the perfect ordinances of their deity (if you beileve this). How can the “perfect” be perfected? To disobey or defy them may prove fatal.

        ISIS has emerged from this ancient and intractable background and, as such, does what the quran commands and what its founder practiced himself. This is its compelling appeal for “real”, quran intoxicated mohammedans who pattern themselves on it.

        It doesn’t get much more “islam” than that. It’s as “real” as it gets.

    • vieuxceps2

      Any ideology ,religious or otherwise, that forbids thinking for oneself is un-human and should be resisted by us all, including those poor souls who profess Islam or Marxism or even Judaism.There are no gods, we are alone and must learn to live with that.

    • Islam is the religion of jihad – jihad is known to mean war (no matter what others say). Check it out. Islam therefore is the only religion that is wholeheartedly dedicated to warfare – which they consider to have a ‘spiritual significance’.

    • LastmaninEurope

      ‘Amen’ to that.

    • sebastian2

      Putting it the first way would mean that the alleged prophet and his followers (“some bad people”) were violently misinterpreting the ideology (I cannot call it a religion) he concocted. This, of course, would be ridiculous.

      It can be quite convincingly argued that ISIS is mohammedism at its finest. They are, after all, merely following the “prophet”.

  • alabenn

    Well everyone, lets not hurt the feelings of anyone, who does not think you merit the title, human being.

    • anyfool

      How impolite, innocent until proved guilty, what happened to that.
      I think he means lets wait until they do cut off heads and bomb us in our own lands.

      • Infidelissima

        Lee Rigby’s head was cut off, and we already had 7/7 and who knows how many foiled attacks.

        Apparently that’s not enough.

        • Fred Collier

          I think the point is that, amazingly, not every Muslim in the country was involved in either of those events.

          • wudyermucuss

            No,but every Muslim believes that the Koran is the literal word of their particular invisible floaty friend and that Mohammed,a paedophilic mass murdering warlord is the perfect human being.

          • Mc

            You are employing a straw man argument – Infidelissima is not claiming all Muslims are terrorists. The problem is – according to numerous surveys conducted by respected pollsters – that a significant minority of Muslims across the globe are sympathetic to Muslum terrorists. Considering the vast number of Muslims, those sympathisers amount to tens of millions of people.

          • vieuxceps2

            No,and not every German was a guard at Auschwitz but the whole of Germany was held responsible,wasn’t it?

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            A significant percentage of muslims in this country sympathise or support such actions.
            Why do you think they is?
            Should we not worry that even after being given the same opportunities in education and society they still harbour these views?

        • anyfool

          And it will never be enough, the more heads they cut off, the more victims they will look for.

  • uberwest

    Clactonophobe!

  • Zanderz

    It all sounds a little bit like hand wringing to me.

  • RichardMitton

    You are a despicable, Common Purpose Progressive Mathew. You are blind to the danger of Islam. I had little respect for you before this article, I have zero respect for you now.

    • Sean

      Here here. A veritable sheep in wolf’s clothing. Listen to how he first portrays himself, then spot how he actually betrays himself with his language. Desperate apologist. On what fucking planet is publishing cartoons inflammatory to ‘even the moderates’? If that’s the standard of moderation – an entitlement to be enraged by a cartoon – then that tells you all you need to know about Islam. And that he would defend this…well, that tells you all you need to know about Mr Paris.

  • WTF

    Anti-Muslim prejudice is real and scary, really !

    Most if not all pòsters criticise Islam rather than Muslims, partly for fear of the lefts prejudice of anyone speaking their mind but especially that Islam is the real problem. Its the left like Mr. Parris who have conflated criticism against a religion as an attack against individuals but lets not worry about those small details that spread the lies.

  • Infidelissima

    Poor Muslims. No wonder they are scared, it’s scary being given free homes, schools, mosques, freedom and safety….

    Another day, another dhimmi.
    Now THAT’S scary!

  • Patently E(uropean)

    Must give western society some credit. Just compare what atrocities some Muslims have committed with what the worst of the anti-Muslim bigots have done. Apart from Anders Breivik I really have to struggle to find a real example. And let us assume there is a conspiracy of silence in the media about islamophobic terror attacks, then just look at how normal Muslim immigrants are living in the West. None of these people would consider permanently moving to an Islamic country even extremely wealthy countries. Speak to Pakistani and Middle-Eastern undergraduate students in their final year of study. They have at least 2 years of experience in the UK. While they might protest and play the victim card, they are nonetheless applying for internships and graduate internships in the the UK and they are up-to-date with the ever changing and complicated rules that would let them work in the UK after graduation.

    If you live near a mosque and a synagogue you will notice who is under real threat and who is crying wolf. Just spend a Friday and Saturday standing outside these places of worship and judge for yourself.

    There is racism & prejudice against Muslims, as there is against Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhist and people of chinese or african ethnicity. People might be additionally apprehensive about Muslims now because a decade after 9/11 and all the Islamist attacks since, there seem to no acknowledgement that there is a slight problem in the ‘religion of peace’. Most of the Jihadi’s heading to Syria and Iraq are people who came of age after 9/11 and they seem to be more prone to radicalisation than before. The complaint of islamophobia is largely an attempt to absolve Muslims of blame. If not that, they are blaming Western foreign policy.

    Just imagine if the level of Islamophobia were as high as muslims claim, we would have at least as many terrorist attack on muslims in West as there are terrorist attacks by muslims. Not only that, the people responsible for these islamophobic attacks will blame it on the governments immigration policy, or environmental policy (all that middle-eastern oil is causing global warming) or some bull shit like that.

    Until that happens and until Muslims stop risking limb to come and settle in the west, I’m not going to worry too much about anti-muslim hate.

    • Rather worried

      A poll about a decade ago showed that half the population of the Middle East would like to leave. Hence the pressure for immigration to countries like the UK.
      In my view one of the biggest reasons why things are going so badly wrong is that the British authorities, social services etc have privileged the mosques and the clergy as leaders and spokesmen for the ‘Muslim community’ and marginalised anyone who isn’t a religious leader.

      • Patently E(uropean)

        I doubt if it is the clergy that are really responsible. The few hate preachers are really a rarity. The command wide such wide support because they a harking back to a real unadulterated original and puritanical faith that cannot be countered very easily the obscurantism and moderation of the ordinary muslim cleric. To put it crudey, you can’t prevent every muslim youngster to eschew violence while they continue to propagate a faith that breeds paranoia sees non-muslims as mortal enemies even whilst they live amongst us. Only a small minority may resort to violence, but the antipathy towards non-muslims is more widespread. In fact these grossly exaggerated claims of Islamophobia are a manifestation of how many Muslims have been trained to view the world. Now, if you are a misfit, have been jilted or struggling in life generally, it is psychologically very tempting to project these anxieties and fears in terms of the paranoia that comes with the Islamic faith [akin to Ali G saying ‘is it cause I’m black’].

      • vieuxceps2

        In additon,anyone uttering a word of criticism is straightaway a bigoted racist,despit muslims being of all races.Friend Parris seems to have suffered some mental illness,he was nt always as he is now.

    • LittleRedRidingHood

      Anders Breivik didn’t attack muslims. He attacked the future political generation of useful cultural maxist idiots who would act as apologists and hold the final nails over the coffin of Europe whilst the Islamist knock them in with fervour.

      Personally, I wish he had gone into politics to fight rather than to terrorism. Fight ideas with words and legislation not guns.

      • Fred Collier

        No, he killed children.

        • LittleRedRidingHood

          Who weren’t muslim as was implied.
          Don’t get me wrong. Abhorrent in all ways. I am not denying that and I hope he does forever in prison.

      • Zanderz

        I think we should be thankful that most lone wolf Muslim terrorists are no where near as effective as he was.

    • Zanderz

      I met an Egyptian lady who came here with her husband who was studying for a PhD at university. She was university educated too. They have 2 children. She was a signed up MB supporter. Jews, “AmeriKKKa”, zionists, all the usual suspects she hated.
      Would she return to Egypt I asked?
      “No way she said, will stay here (UK) or go to America”(!!!!)
      Why?
      “Because Egypt is corrupt, children will have no life, not safe, no jobs for us etc.”
      And yet he desire to see a MB revolution in Egypt would only make life far worse there. She didn’t see the disconnect.

      • Patently E(uropean)

        True. For Islamist have not hijacked religion, they have hijacked politics. Analyse their political arguments and you will not make any sense of it. Are they for free market capitalists, socialist statistics, for Western intervention, western isolation, western indifference, you’ll never find out. Sure they are a diverse bunch, but can certainly unit for stoning the adulterers and blasphemer.

  • cartimandua

    Religion is an idea. Muslims are people. They are not the same thing as the idea which is Islam.
    Since Islam when it is anywhere at all in public space leads to all manner of horrors we must be allowed to criticize it.
    Women who “cover” are stupid narcissists. They are making themselves ill and their future children ill. They are also ignoring what actually happens to women under extreme Islam ,you know, the rapes ,honour murders, acid throwing etc etc.
    Do NOT ask me to “respect” women who demonstrate how Islam makes them perpetual selfish children. Modesty is not the cloth on your head and neither is piety.
    What covering does of course is divide the world into “good women” and “the rest”.
    As we have seen and continue to see the rest even children seem to be fair game to quite a few Muslim men.

    • vieuxceps2

      I have an idea that although muslims menace our existence, they are neverthless the ones who suffer most from Islam. If ther were to cast off the silly but pernicious creed they could enjoy a much better life.Damnit, yhey could begin to think for themselves and have freewill.

  • gerronwithit

    Well Matthew, if I had been on holiday in a museum in Tunisia yesterday I feel I would be a little aggrieved at the RoP and its activities. Similarly, if Iwas a Christian and lived in, well, just about any Muslim country I would also find your article a little puzzling. If I was one of 1400 underage sexual victims of Muslim men in Rochdale, so far largely unpunished, I would certainly challenge your article, Matthew.

    All in all, the best that can be hoped for with the Muslim Faith is that when Sunnis slaughter Shias and Shias slaughter Sunnis that they give some of the rest of us a break and maybe a ringside seat to watch the entertainment instead of us being the entertainment for them. Just to be clear Matthew, I don’t like the RoP and anything it stands for.

    • vieuxceps2

      Those who lived in the 1940s remember when a German was automatically a target for murder,but of course, they were at war with us so it’s different today with muslims, isn’t ‘t? Well, isn’t it……?

      • A lot of muslims in the world seem to think non-muslims are automatically a target … Well, isn’t it…..?

    • sebastian2

      Correct. After being tortured and raped of course. He’d probably hit the pavement muttering “This is not the real islam” and wondering why all those moderate mohammedans we hear about weren’t there inflating the bouncy mattress and scolding his murderers.

  • Blindsideflanker

    Parris, why isn’t there Hinduphobia?

    Could it be they don’t go around burning books, demanding this that and the other of us, don’t demand we accept their fascist religious garb, don’t expect us to have to eat their barbarically slaughtered meat, don’t have their preachers insult us, don’t seek to usurp our law with their backward medieval law, don’t seek to create no go areas for Dhimmis. don’t seek to kill us, don’t attempt to bomb us, don’t attempt to decapitate members of our military or police, and don’t plan mass terrorist attacks on us?

    • wudyermucuss

      Good point.
      Sikhophobia?Buddhophobia?
      Strange isn’t it Mathew?

    • jack

      The liberal idiot and his idiot friends, would rather defend the indefensible than use common sense and critical thinking.

    • Zanderz

      Phobias are ‘irrational fears’. There is nothing irrational about being fearful of Islam. Anyone who isn’t a Muslim should be fearful (indeed Islam states that non-muslims SHOULD be fearful of them), and anyone who is a Muslim should be fearful, because you’re first on the list when the Wahabi’s get into power.

  • RichardMitton

    You do understand Matthew that Islam means Submission and that, according to them, there can only be peace when there is a world caliphate. You do understand that don’t you?

  • cartimandua

    MP is expecting everyone to ignore the horrors perpetrated by Muslims which are brought to our eyes on a daily basis by mass media.
    There is something wrong with Islam Parris and I can tell you what. Islamic gender apartheid makes monstrous children(because of abuses towards women) and lots of them.
    There are 100 million in the youth bulge of the MENA region. There are no jobs so they migrate or fight mostly fight.
    Even here Muslim family size is larger than the family size of prudent in work middle class Brits of all ethnicities.
    Muslim men 50% unemployed. Muslim women 75% unemployed.
    And we are not supposed to care???

  • RichardMitton

    You do understand that Islam isn’t just a religion don’t you Matthew?

    • Rather worried

      Of course he doesn’t.

    • Blindsideflanker

      Unfortunately he doesn’t, but like the rest of the useful idiots, he is attracted to the totalitarian, and so happily act as their apologist and turn logic and truth on its head for them.

  • cartimandua

    Only 2 Mosques in the entire UK are modernist. 45% are Deobandi. That’s the Taliban sect. And you MP wonder why there is a problem???

    • Rather worried

      Can you give us a source for that Cartimandua — I am sure you are right. Some of the things that happen among the Deobandis are hair-raising.

      • cartimandua

        https://spectator.com.au/features/9230671/who-runs-our-mosques/

        “According to a database of British Islam, however, only two out of 1,700 mosques in Britain follow modernist interpretations of the Koran. It’s not the same elsewhere in the West. In a 2011 survey of Islam in the United States, 56 per cent of mosques described themselves as following an interpretation of Islam adapted to modern circumstances. This has not happened in Britain.”

        “So which Islamic schools of thought run Britain’s mosques today? The influence of Saudi Arabia’s Wahhabi movement is often cited. But the Wahhabis — or Salafis as they prefer to be called — control just 6 per cent of mosques.

        The largest single group — the one which arguably gives Islam in Britain much of its character — is the Deobandi. It controls around 45 per cent of Britain’s mosques and nearly all the UK-based training of Islamic scholars. What most Deobandi scholars have in common is a conservative interpretation of Islamic law: television and music for the purposes of entertainment, for example, are frowned upon if not banned. Women are advised not to emerge from their homes any more than is necessary.”

        And our stupid leaders try to claim such views are “not a problem”

        • Hybird

          I’d like to know how these “modernists” interpret Sura 5:33 of the Koran – the one that justifies crucifixion and the lopping off of hands and feet and Sura 4:34 which orders that women who step out of line should be beaten. These are instructions from Allah, after all.
          That is the problem anyone attempting to modernise Islam has – the barbarisms come directly from Allah himself and any criticism of them is therefore blasphemy. And the punishment for blasphemy is…

          • cartimandua

            Christians have mostly managed to ignore the nastiest bits of the Bible.

          • L Bhatti

            In regards to the first reference given, it is interesting how 5:32 isn’t included which states that killing a single human being (not muslim, but a human) amounts to the killing of the whole of mankind. Then 5:33 says that those punishments you mention are only for those who wage war against any religious group, not just Islam! It’s as though you have an objection to self defence, which is mentioned in the Koran, in this case…

            Fear against extremisms doesn’t just exist amongst ‘non-muslims’. Muslims who practice the proper teachings of Islam are also fearing these extremists and believe it or not, we are trying to proactively do something about it.

            Yet I also think that the discrimination that is spewing up doesn’t help the cause.. Part of the resolving this growing issue is educating Muslims- especially those who are vulnerable to being sucked into these extremists group. While their actions are far worse, their mentality is that of youth gangs- not pleasant.

            Rather than seeking solutions by shutting out all Muslims from the west, all we would be doing is prolonging the suffering of all minorities that are being oppressed by these extremists. Are we ok with letting fellow Christians, jews, Hindus or people of no faith suffer just because of their demographic location? I think not… They are human beings who deserve to be protected just as we seek our own protection from extremisms.

            By creating a polarisation and clumping extremists with good, honest and peace loving Muslims, we are creating a deeper crack that helps no one. Instead, should we not encourage those who are actively standing up to these extremists, muslim or not? Yes, perhaps proactive muslims are not ‘media-coverage’ worthy but I have met many, many muslims from all walks of life who ARE trying to make a difference.

            All we ask is for help rather than putting us up with those horrible, horrible people who have destroyed so many innocent lives…

          • Ivan Ewan

            You know, this “he who destroys a life” business was addressed specifically to the Jews of Israel, and is a reference to a tenet of the Talmud. It is immediately followed up by Mohammad with a threat, that if the Jews commit a sin according to Islam, they will be amputated or crucified. Such a “sin” might include stating that Mohammad is not a prophet.

          • L Bhatti

            Do you know as Muslims we believe in all of God’s scriptures, including the Torah? We simply believe that the Koran is an extension of the previous laws prescribed by God, almost like an updated edition of a book. So any injunctions of that nature apply to us too. Furthermore, you will find countless examples in the Koran that explicitly state that you can show hostility only against the aggressors (2:193). (aggressor: a person that attacks first). In another verse, the Koran goes to say ‘There is no compulsion in religion’.

            As far as interpretation of a word such as sin; yes, you could interpret it in any way your mind wills. However, any rational person can understand, when you read and ponder on all of the Koran and not just a few words taken out, it certainly cannot allow such heinous crimes. This is then further supported by the life of Prophet Mohammad. He, for many many years was persecuted, driven out of his home yet did not retaliate. It was only when the non-muslims came to take his life, he defended himself. When muslims were large in number, and returned to Makkah, he forgave everyone, including those who brutally murdered members of his family.
            His life was a testimony to how Islam should be lived out.

            The issue is that ISIS (or any other barbaric ideologies) have indeed twisted words to suit their agenda. One of the Spanish hostages who was freed from ISIS, commented on the fact that throughout his entire stay, he did not see a single ISIS member reading the Koran etc.
            These people aren’t following Islam, their only mission is to gain power and they twist perfectly reasonable teachings to their own accord to gain that power.

            I think the responsibility of all other muslims is to fight this notion that Islam allows such things. That’s why I personally believe, a strong factor in demolishing all of this is education and taking action which should have been taken place many years ago.

          • Ivan Ewan

            I don’t think you know anything about the Prophet Mohammad. There is literally nothing IS is doing, that Mohammad did not do or directly sanction at one time or another. He didn’t use Twitter or have an AK-47, but technological differences are the only differences.

            This was Mohammad who, after leaving Mecca because his religious ideas were ridiculed, became a civic leader in Medina and led the people of that city to wage war on Mecca, at first through robbing caravans, choking off their vital supplies, and then when the Meccans retaliated, through wholesale slaughter. Did he forgive any of the survivors? Well, he forgave the ones who bowed to his now-physically-superior religion. He had the rest murdered.

            This was Mohammad who declared, “I have been ordered to fight the unbelievers until they testify that the only god is Allah and that I am Allah’s messenger, or until they pay religious protection money with willing submission and find themselves subdued.” (Q 9:29)

            This was Mohammad who stated that if he were a false prophet, God would cut his aeorta and kill him (Qur’an 69:44) – and who, three years after being poisoned, declared with his final breath that it felt as though his aeorta had been cut. (Bukhari 5:713)

            The truth is, you’ve been lied to. The part of Islam that you’re allowed to know is the part of Islam that it’s currently “safe” for you to know. When your imam wants you to become more aggressive, I’m sure he’ll fill you in on what Mohammad was really like.

          • L Bhatti

            I’m not entirely sure where you are getting your translation from for the Qur’an..

            ‘Fight those from among the People of the Book, who believe not in Allah, nor in the Last Day, nor hold as unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have declared unlawful, nor follow the true religion, until they pay the tax with their own hand and acknowledge their subjection.’ (9:29)

            So anyone who wished to live peacefully had to pay tax. This verse lays out the definition of non-muslim but still were People of the Book. Part of living under the rule of Islam, they are ordered to pay ‘Jizya’- a tax which is much lower than the rate for Muslims: ‘Zakat’!!!

            When the Qur’an has stated that there is ‘No compulsion in religion’, this verse is establishing a state rule- paying tax, much like we do in this country. Furthermore, the verse says ‘with their own hands’ i.e. it cannot be forcefully taken!

            In regards to the your first paragraph, I’m not entirely sure where you are getting your references. The Holy Prophet pbuh never asked the Meccans to accept Islam- he simply asked them to live peacefully side by side.

            A debate is something, but your last paragraph highlights your lack of rational acknowledgement that there are many decent muslims who are loyal to their faith and country and could never betray either one. So on that basis, discussing this isn’t much worth it with someone who takes a highly accusatory tone.

          • Ivan Ewan

            So it hasn’t occurred to you that maybe we unbelievers don’t want to be your subjects?

            Jizya is a tax levied against people on the basis of them being non-Muslims. And that’s just Jews and Christians. Any other type of unbeliever is to convert or die.

            This is Mafia style governance.

          • sebastian2

            ” … paying tax, much like we do in this country.”

            With respect, I can only assume you know nothing about either. May I also advise you against quoting the quran as though it’s the sole, infallible source of historical information or objective evidence. It will not wash.

          • Simon de Lancey

            Part of living under the rule of Islam, they are ordered to pay ‘Jizya’- a tax which is much lower than the rate for Muslims: ‘Zakat’!!!

            In reality, Jizya was much higher than Zakat, plus anyone who paid Jizya was not allowed to leave Muslim land – the punishment for doing so was enslavement which was also the punishment for failing to pay Jizya….

          • sebastian2

            “Do you know as Muslims we believe in all of God’s scriptures, including the Torah?”

            Except that …… you don’t.

        • Rather worried

          Thanks

        • sebastian2

          This is relevant:

          “The Deobandi interpretation holds that a Muslim’s first loyalty is to his religion and only then to the country of which he is a citizen or a resident; secondly, that Muslims recognise only the religious frontiers of their Ummah and not the national frontiers; thirdly, that they have a sacred right and obligation to go to any country to wage jihad to
          protect the Muslims of that country.” …………… “The Deoband school has long sought to purify Islam by discarding supposedly un-Islamic accretions to the faith and reemphasizing the models established in the Koran and the customary practices of the Prophet Mohammed.”

          Houston ……. we have a problem.

  • Robertus Maximus

    No, it’s the Muslims who are scary Matthew. That is not illogical but based on pure evidence, the evidence on view in every area of this planet where Muslims are to be found. Your supine cosy little Metropolitan outlook is the reason we are in this mess, preventing the rest of us in Britain from leading contented lives, free from the threat of that Medieval barbaric ideology. I suggest the Spectator readers club together and send you on a fact-finding tour to Syria and Iraq. Bon voyage!

  • JoeDM

    “unsettled by the mood”

    Many people are unsettled by the bombs and terrorists !!!!

  • zanzamander

    I only wish that this army of progressives (and Islam promoting organisations like Cage) lecturing us on tolerance and prejudice would at least once in their miserable lives go and lecture the followers of Islam in countries Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Isis or anywhere in the Islamic world. Dear old Matthew wouldn’t last a single minute there.

    Btw, I have been informed by my Sikh colleague that Sikhs in traditional religious attire are banned from Saudi Arabia. Perhaps Matthew should go and lecture my Sikh friend on religious tolerance.

  • RichardMitton

    what’s a small percentage of 1.6 billion people Matthew.

    • WTF

      10 million or more !

  • zanzamander

    Matthew is an ideal candidate for the followers of Islam to do their dirty work on us. He is week of mind, gullible, has little or no sense of self preservation and because he gets to write tripe like this also a danger to the rest of us.

  • WillyTheFish

    The majority of German people in the 1930’s and 40’s were not Nazis. However, during the World War created by the Nazis all Germans were, rightly and of necessity, regarded as enemy aliens.

    Or, to pursue a different analogy, in time of plague one does not carry out individual health checks on individual rats. The only sensible, practical approach is to remove the disease vector in its entirely.

    Boot them out.

  • Gerschwin

    Oh do spare me your frangy-pangy love in with the uber-brothers in their smart Afghan trousers and woopsy what lovely fancies they do in pistachio and honey in this part of North London town. It’s a counter culture, one that doesn’t sit well with the rest of the nation, doesn’t sit well at all especially when too many take to murder as a choice and the rest stand by silently and demand their ‘rights’. As someone once said – a fundamentalist will cut your head off, a moderate will stand by and watch. Amen and allahu akbar to that. You get madder with each passing year Parris… or are you just worried you’re becoming irrelevant?

  • zanzamander

    Matthew Parris, do you know that you are a dhimmi?

  • moggie79

    In some ways Matthew’s argument is compelling. It IS unpleasant and gives pause for thought, to see a group of people becoming the target of mass suspicion and mistrust – ‘hate’ is probably pushing it. And yes, it is probably becoming more socially acceptable to openly express a dislike, suspicion, or ridicule of Islam. And yes it’s very easy to point to the lessons of history and apparently similar outbreaks of anti semitism and racism and even homophobia.

    However I would suggest one crucial difference. Anti semitism, racism and homophobia have no roots in anything other than blind bigotry. It’s not as if we can point to things people of colour or Jews or gays have done to threaten or harm the UK or declare war on our values and freedoms, and that despite sometimes appalling things done to these groups over the years.

    Dislike of Islam however has a very real and current basis in a *rational* fear and threat, because number of adherents of the Muslim religion here (and we don’t know how many) really are The Enemy of what we believe and how we live. Many of them DO despise us and our values, and view our wish for democracy, fairness and equality as pathetic weakness. We’re told the majority don’t feel anything like that and I’m very happy to believe it, but the problem is that we don’t know who, living among us, is radicalised and sympathises entirely with jihad. Or indeed views white girls as scum.

    Given that background, on a human level, how saintly would the public in Britain and the West have to be, not to feel suspicious of (especially visibly devout/engaged) Muslims? In a war its not unusual to feel concerned by those you feel could sympathise with the enemy – and this, unlike anti semitism or racism or homophobia, has its roots in a kind of war.

    Until we actually see solid efforts by the Muslim community to put its own house in order, how can you expect people to put their own legitimate fears aside? Hadn’t you noticed that a Muslim leader denouncing extremist actions is headline news? Have you seen the threats and abuse directed at the Muslim founder of the Quilliam Foundation by his own co-religionists?
    The problem is, in the UK at least, efforts at dealing with radicalisation from within the Muslim community are barely the faintest of whispers, compared with their bellows of Islamophobia.

    In other words -‘ yes people from our community have launched terror attacks on this country, left to join ISIS to be trained in terror tactics and torture enslave and murder innocent people. Yes people from our community have targeted white girls and groomed them for rape because they’re seen as ‘whores’. Yes members of our community have utilised nefarious means to take over a London borough and yes a lot of us are demanding the introduction of an alien law system because we don’t want to integrate in any way and want special treatment. Yes we want to ban or intimidate free speech when it might offend us. Yes members of our community are guilty of shameless anti-semitic and anti-gay attacks. And no we’re not doing anything much to try to stop any of it, in fact we’re furious you point it out. And, if you’re suspicious of us, that makes you a bigot. The BBC says so and so does Matthew Parris’

    • Damaris Tighe

      Best post so far.

    • vieuxceps2

      Yes, a good post insofar as Islam is concerned but to label antisemitism,homophobia and racism as “blind bigotry”is unthinking nonsense.
      Antisemitism arises from jealousy at the success of Jews as they live among us but are not of us and prosper by being more clever and ruthless within their own network than we are. Homophobia derives from a sense of the unnaturalness of it and an inherent distaste for their physical couplings. Racism is an innate and completely natural response to the outsider who is seen as a threat.
      I do not say that these feelings are to be encouraged, but I do deny that they result from “blind bigotry”. They are in fact part of normal human life all over the world. Such a claim is not hard to check.

      • moggie79

        First of all I would completely deny that anti semitism arises because Jews are ‘ruthless’. That is unthinking nonsense. Or that homophobia arises because of ‘the unnaturalness of it’ – there is nothing unnatural about it. It exists in nature and is entirely natural to some people. I might agree that racism is an extreme form of tribalism. However none of these are rational – they ARE bigotry. If you have no rational reason to hate or fear a group of people then your hatred is essentially rooted in bigotry – an utter intolerant of difference.

        • vieuxceps2

          Think you’ll find that Jewish businessmen are known for ruthlessness. What businesss ever thrives without a hardnosed leader?
          Homosexuality may occur in nature but that doesn’t make it natural.No doubt incest and cannibalism also occur in nature but I think we no longer accept either as “natural” do we?
          Racism of course occurs the world over and is evidently a form of evolved self-defence against outsiders. Nobody claims it is rational but it is instinctive and therefore not simply to be dismissed as bigotry.

          • moggie79

            You’re seriously claiming that anti semitism is based on dislike of ruthlessness in business? Even if it were *remotely* provable that Jewish businessmen are any more ruthless than any other businessmen and it isn’t), that is a whitewash of the highest order. You think synagogues are being attacked and Jewish cemeteries defaced because thugs think their business practices are too robust?. There is NO rational reason for the West to hate Jews- they are no threat to Western society indeed they’ve helped create it. All thats left is bigotry.
            ‘Natural’ is one of those words like ‘normal’ used by that people who loathe difference in others, people who insist that everyone must think the same as they do, want the same things, believe the same things, do the same things in the bedroom, when in fact what other people do is none of their business, if it harms no one else. And that is the essential point I’ve tried to make. That of rational as opposed to irrational suspicions of groups of people. I find it interesting if unpleasant that you lump homosexuality in with incest and cannibalism though.
            Jewish people and gay people do not harm our culture or other people by their behaviour. To claim otherwise is not rational. I think you need to look up the definition of a bigot by the way. It’s a person who strongly and UNFAIRLY dislikes other people and/or ideas (thats a simple Merriam Webster definition). Racism may be instinctive but it fits the bill.

          • vieuxceps2

            My word Moggie,if you’going to rant on so,please think logically beforehand..Jews are disliked the world over,rightly or wrongly. I don’ know why, just suggested one possible reason. there must be others if what you say is true. I don’t know. I don’t care. Okay?

          • moggie79

            Okay. But the point is that there *aren’t* reasons – rational reasons – for Westerners to hate or be suspicious of Jews. Or gays. They aren’t threatening or harming anyone in our society. The hatred is irrational – an intolerance of difference i.e. bigotry. Using excuses like ‘they’re ruthless in business’ is ludicrous – thats a nasty little stereotype that people like to use to try to pretend they have a rational reason for prejudice. Do whole groups of people blindly hate ruthless business men from other ethnic groups or religions? Are all Jews businessmen? Thats the *logical* point.

          • vieuxceps2

            And stll you rant.In the words of Dr. Johnson-“Sir, I have given you an argument, I am not obliged to find you the understanding of it”.
            Now go in peace.

          • moggie79

            Actually, thats not a rant. Thats making a point in a discussion. You can’t answer it, so you try to diminish it by calling it a rant. Poor show really.

          • vieuxceps2

            I summarise:-
            Anti-Jew feeling-Isuggested ONE possible cause,ie.ruthless in business..
            You say not all Jews do business.
            i point out anti-jew is worldwide, maybe other causes too
            you say no need hate jews as not all in business.
            I say no ,only suggested ONE possible cause .
            you say……etc etc…
            Whirligigs confuse .
            As for gays,increasingly powerful minority bent on attaining influence in media ,govt. and industry.See news and media reports.The new mafia, worldwide networkers.
            I have not enjoyed ourcorrespondence, I think you have an agenda of your own. You may even be a homosexual jewish troll,a cyber hebrew gay. Or perhaps just a ranter.Anyway, there’s an end to it.

    • Grace Ironwood

      Well said, your argument is rather more convincing than Mr Parris’.

    • Simon Morgan

      Well put, sir.

  • Diggery Whiggery

    Islam is a fascism, as is obvious to anyone who actually reads the Qur’an and the Hadiths . A ‘moderate’ muslim and I’m yet to be convinced that such a thing exists behind the facade, is moderate despite his/her religion and its teachings and not because of it.

    Islam is different from other religions in several very important respects and cannot be treated with the same tolerance. Islam is a religion of peace between believers and war on everyone else and to deny that is to deny their religious texts.

    No free, diverse and tolerant society can accept this unique intolerance.

    I’m sorry to disappoint you Matthew, but I’m afraid I’m with the 90% and with good reason.

  • wudyermucuss

    somewhere pretty unpleasant –
    eg just about any Islamic country.
    If you love it so much,off you go.
    PS Take a closet,you absolutely massive hypocrite.

  • Bill Kendall

    Mr Parris, the parents of the Muslim girls who ran away to join ISIS are now trying to blame the Police for that by not keeping them informed, Muslims are also blaming MI5 for ‘Jihadi John’ being so upset he decided to become a murdering terrorist, who will they blame fro the slaughter in Tunisia this week?

    • Rather worried

      It’s a blame culture. And Matthew is standing side by side with the blamers.

    • Monkish

      Don’t you know? It’s a Mossad orchestrated False Flag operation to distract the world from / justify Bibi’s election victory! Evidence: the attack took place the morning after the election. How can you argue with that!?

    • sebastian2

      I saw the Select Committee question the parents, with their odious lawyer alongside. Yes, they tried to blame the police and the security services; border controls; airline check-in desks …….. Nothing new there.

      What they were not quizzed about was the religious environment in that household and the possible compulsory, permanent adoration and hero-worship of the “prophet” and his admirable behaviour. It could surely be this more than anything else that persuaded these groupies to join the “real” mohammedism that their parents perhaps only fantasised about. It was the adoring domestic tilth in which their islamism thrived. In the end, they wanted “in” the fan-club.

      But nobody asked.

  • trace9

    “.. As a matter of fact I live during the working week in London borough of Tower Hamlets, ..”

    ‘the’ omitted? You’re even beginning to speak like an immigrant now, seemingly without realising it. Is it to protectively blend in – or proactively blend in?

    Matthew Parris is a Parrot
    He parrots all the Time
    What he wants
    & What he flaunts
    Thank God he isn’t Mine..

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2961465/Mother-targeted-threatening-notes-racist-graffiti-moving-new-flat-block-told-black-sisters-brothers.html

    Even without religion..

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/comic-riffs/wp/2015/01/12/charlie-hebdo-reveals-next-cover-a-cartoon-of-prophet-muhammad-behind-the-sign-je-suis-charlie/?tid=pm_pophttp://www.washingtonpost.com/news/comic-riffs/wp/2015/01/12/charlie-hebdo-reveals-next-cover-a-cartoon-of-prophet-muhammad-behind-the-sign-je-suis-charlie/?tid=pm_pop

    With it.
    .

    • tjamesjones

      oh what a good point

  • James Maclachlan

    errr Douglas….have a word

  • Michael Rae

    No Christian should be tolerant of Islam. To be Christian brings an obligation to spread the good news. It is not about just doing your own thing in isolation. The same applies to all other religions.

  • tjamesjones

    Matthew Parris, I’m not spitting any bile. But I must admit I’d like to be more convinced that “moderate Islam” is a real thing.

  • whiteafrican13

    “I don’t believe that in the present atmosphere it’s wise to publish
    images calculated to wound and offend not only fundamentalist Muslims,
    but middle-of-the-road Muslims too. There are questions of timing and
    judgment here. When sensitivities are inflamed it is possible to go too
    far.”
    Really, Matthew? Should we also stop eating bacon sandwiches? Should we tear down synagogues? Should we require women to adopt islamic dress? After all, the western view on each of these issues causes offence to many muslims. Meanwhile, Voltaire quietly weeps in a corner somewhere…

  • Jackthesmilingblack

    Is Matthew acting as some type of agent provocateur, or is he really that thick?

    • jennybloggs

      Really that thick. Obvious really.

  • joe_publik

    The article is interesting in its own way – but only as an insight into the thought processes of a “liberal” thinker, writer and commentator. It’s provocative also in just the same way as Dan Hodges frequently is over in the Telegraph. Nothing wrong with that I suppose.

    But the article still remains a nonsense. There is a great deal of hand-wringing, an almost total disregard of some obvious facts and absolutely no concrete proposals for solutions to these obvious issues and problems. Matthew, like many of his kind, earns a (presumably) good living as an empty vessel making much noise.

    To be serious for a moment about a very serious subject: I am sure that neither Matthew nor his fellow politicians nor his fellow commentators are fools. I am sure they can see the same evidence available to the common citizen, and probably a bit more besides. The obvious conclusions are terrifying and too frightening to talk about in public. Anyone who goes through modern western life without a healthy fear, mistrust and scepticism of the religion of Peace and Love is, to my mind, a useful idiot.

    • LittleRedRidingHood

      If true then it is extremely irresponsible of him to write such things.
      I put him in the useful idiot category ages ago.

    • I’ll talk about it – we’re heading for violent civil war – unless these problems are addressed and rectified. And that means anyone who believes sharia law should be implemented in this country need to be told to leave. Incentives should be given to them to move to Muslim countries.

  • jack

    ” I don’t believe that in the present atmosphere it’s wise to publish images calculated to wound and offend not only fundamentalist Muslims, but middle-of-the-road Muslims too.”

    Now is precisely the right time if you realise the grave threat that Islam poses. The insult is to Islam and not to Muslims who will thank us one day for setting them free.

    Islam is also akin to a virus in a computer. It was nicely in its chest in the West, but self interested and idiotic liberalists deactivated our anti-viral software.

    • Mc

      For a wet like Parris, it is never a good time to offend Muslims, mainly because a Muslim terrorist atrocity occurs somewhere every day. As with all wets, Parris doesn’t have the intellectual rigour or integrity to recognise that offending people is critical to keeping free speech alive. When people, especially Muslims and the Left, are no longer offended, one knows free speech is dead.

    • RichardMitton

      Excellent Jack.

    • Grace Ironwood

      Yes, the Parris sentiment is driven by the kind of prudence that says keep your head down so that it isn’t struck off, whether by “progressives” or jihadists.

      The writer is quite clear as to the motivation for his “sensitivity”.

  • Are you reading the comments Matthew? You don’t get much sympathy.

    Matthew: I’m sure you meet lovely “moderate” muslims when you shop.
    Do you buy halal meat? You know .. where animals’ throats are slit whilst they are awake and aware.
    Do you chat with the moderate muslim shop owner about his Hajj to Mecca? You know .. the city non-muslims are not allowed to enter.
    Do you chat about his visits to his mosque? You know .. the place where they separate genders and where women are only 1/2 the worth of a man. And where he is told being gay or an apostate is punishable by death.

    Is your friendly “moderate” muslim shop owner actually actively doing anything about the medieval practices we in the West have a problem with? I can answer you this: he is not. He agrees with all the above.

    If you are not part of the solution .. Matthew: you too are part of the problem. Open your eyes and stop apologising for the people who hate you (and in several countries will actually kill you).

    • Fred Collier

      I think his eyes are open, and he sees that the people who think similarly to you will one day, once they are done with the Muslim bashing, turn on him, and his like. Nice to see you are so close to a muslim shopkeeper though, I applaud your outreach program.

      • I’m gay and therefore islam is a natural enemy for me .. no let me rephrase that: by no fault of mine (being gay), I am a natural enemy of islam and its followers.
        People like me are actively targeted, abused, imprisoned and put to death wherever islam and muslims are in charge.

        I don’t have a phobia of islam … I detest this death cult and anyone who belongs to it, and anyone who apologises for it.
        I do not want to end up on the highest building and be thrown off it.

        • Mc

          The fundamental problem with the likes of Parris is that they refuse / are incapable of recognizing the basics: Islam as practiced by a significant Muslim minority is opposed to Western norms. Refusing to robustly stamp out Muslim efforts to overturn Western norms is not leading to a good place, including for gays like Parris.

      • vieuxceps2

        I assure you Fred, that although I know many people who disagree with MP on this, none of them intend to do him any physical harm. Unlike your friendly neighbourhood shopeeper…..

      • LittleRedRidingHood

        How little faith you have in our tolerance as humans in the modern world.
        Of all things I think homosexuality is now accepted.

  • Mc

    It really isn’t worth going into detail as to why Parris’s article amounts to his usual handwringing nonsense, suffice to say that he is consistently incapable of intellectual rigour.

    I did find it amusing that Parris doesn’t include Rod Liddle among his list of friends – surely a confirmation of Liddle’s journalistic calibre.

  • Hippograd

    Thank the Goddess! After that distasteful Mr Hitchens and his (ugh) conservatism, normal Spectator service is resumed with cuddly Matthew Parris, telling us all what decent folk should think about ethnic enrichment. It’s something to be celebrated! Smash the haters!

  • davidshort10

    I really don’t think the views of a couple of columnists and 500 or so online comments from people hiding behind anonymity, some of them probably drunk, warrant a column saying there is some kind of nation-wide hostility to Muslims in general. But space has to be filled, I suppose. In many parts of Britain, you don’t see a Muslim from week to week. There’s probably some antipathy in Parris’s part of East London to roaming bands of people criticising people drinking outside pubs (some of them the worst kind of intolerant – the British convert) or the same sort of people who put up signs saying this is a Muslim area and dogs are not allowed. How could there not be?

  • Malcolm Stevas

    Parris’s comparisons with anti-Semitism neglect a couple of key facts. There are fewer than 300,000 Jews in this country, according to census figures; and long ago they decided collectively to work hard at integrating into our society. They succeeded: Jews are valued fellow citizens.
    But remind us how many Muslims we have – ? How they have transformed large tracts of urban England? How many of them, according to opinion polls, have a degree of sympathy with Islamic outrages such as 9-11 and the Charlie Hebdo murders? How little so very many of them seem at all interested in assimilating themselves – even should they be capable of doing so?

    • mohdanga

      Jews get on with integrating, contributing and living a productive life, Muslims get on with ghettoizing themselves, not working and blaming everyone else for their problems.

  • Chris Brennan

    Islam is largely a grotesque and absurd ideology. This is not why people dislike Islam or Muslims; they dislike Muslims because it’s an easy and elite backed way of hating people who are very rarely anything other than non white in colour. Check out the groups on Facebook opposing Islam/Jihad etc and you’ll find a massive crossover with people who also support openly racist groups. Many white people of all classes and backgrounds are racist. This is what democracy apparently leads to-people longing for the dominance of an Empire that crumbled, and the sense of superiority it gave thick as pig shit and generally wankerish white people. I say this as a white person. Nowt can be done about people’s opinions whilst governments keep bombing brown people, blaming immigrants for the failures of the bosses system, and while it’s more comforting to feel better than a brown person, rather than feel angry at a rich person. Haters gonna hate.

    • I’m not a racist. So F-off, you hater!

    • Mc

      Take a course on avoiding logical fallacies.

    • LittleRedRidingHood

      It is nothing to do with colour or bombing brown people.
      Many BAME are also racist. Very openly racist. UAF and HopeNotHate are two of the most vile fascist groups to have graced the scene. They are racist.
      Racism is not inherently white as you are somehow insinuating.
      I have no issues with any other race or creed other than islamism and the useful idiot apologists who protect them.

    • William_Brown

      Straight out of the Little Book of State Sanctioned Thought & Obedience.
      If you might just take a while to think for yourself…

    • vieuxceps2

      ” Islam is largely a grotesque and absurd ideology”. Agreed.So is Socialism. Do not presume Brennan to tell me why I think as I do.We white people are not thick as pigshit nor yet wankerish, to use your elegant terms.We leave such traits to the non–white of whom you write and of course to lefty idiotic classs-warriors like you .
      Why mix up a debate on muslim culture with you pathetic marxist claa warfare? Do you see muslims as comrades in your struggle? Be wary of that ,they”ll cook you for breakfast, assuming you’re vegetarian of course….

    • Thanks for that, but, actually – I’m green.

    • “Islam is largely a grotesque and absurd ideology. This is not why people dislike Islam or Muslims”

      Yes, it is.

    • mohdanga

      Yet ‘brown people’ are begging for ‘white people’ to do something about ‘brown people’ killing other ‘brown people’. Hmmm.

    • Tom Allalone

      it’s an easy and elite backed way of hating people who are very rarely anything other than non white in colour.

      That must be why, after every atrocity, our elite assure us it’s nothing to do with Islam, and the reason why the tried, in 2005, to pass a law which made mocking Islam a criminal offence. Utter nonsense.

  • Malik

    A dogmatic adherence to both theocracy and liberty is a form of fundamentalism. And fundamentalism necessarily silences reason and rationality, the dictates whereof would suggest that genuinely moderate voices must be heeded in the interests of establishing a peaceful society. If the garb of wilful blindness is removed, they are plenty such voices around us.

  • Asitis3

    Forget about other religions women etc for a moment and how they are treated ,Parris seems also unaware as to what the followers of islam do to Gays around the world….he will wake up one day and just think oops

    • RichardMitton

      Oops, I’ve just been thrown off a high building!

    • RichardMitton

      Oops, I’ve just been stoned!

    • RichardMitton

      Oops, I’ve just had my head sawn off!

  • Peter Stroud

    I am not anti Semitic, anti Christian, anti Hindu or anti any peaceful religion. But I am against any religion which is firmly against democracy and free speech, Islam is clearly both anti democratic, and does not tolerate free speech. However, I welcome Muslims into this country providing they reject these two aspects of their faith and obey British law, in all its forms. Why should I not detest those Muslims who cheered the 9/11 incident, or displayed posters saying ‘death to all infidels’ or who shout curses at our soldiers returning from Iraq and Afghanistan?

  • Pembroke

    Consider Amal Farrah who appeared on the BBC’s Big Question last week promoting the ex-Muslim perspective. Parris needs to support her in the face of the intimidation she faces from the Muslim community for the ‘crime’ of dropping her recognition of Mohamed as a prophet. THAT is the danger – that we acquiesce when large parts of British society consider apostasy as a crime.

  • Flashman

    Dear me, no matter how many of these articles I read, I’m always stunned by their stupidity. Islam is an imperial project Mathew. Always has been, always will be. And it demands that you submit. Can you not grasp that? Among its captives there are those that don’t take its barbaric teachings very seriously – mostly while living in liberal democracies – but history demonstrates that once a significant number of Muslims occupy the host country, the ‘moderates’ fall in line with the demands of the dominant, alphas. Nonsense and bigotry? Just consider how much of an impact Islam is having on Britain now at just 4.7% of the population. What do you think happens at 10%? 20%? People can read Mathew, they can look around them and see what’s happening. And they don’t like it. Why might that be? What is it about Islam that this exceptionally tolerant peoples doesn’t appear to like? Think, man, think!

    • William_Brown

      The prospect that Matthew would be hurled off of a tall building in an Islamic world, seems rather to have escaped him.

      • Flashman

        Perhaps a week in Mosul would concentrate his mind. Or failing that, Tower Hamlets.

        • Cyril Sneer

          Go the whole hog (excuse the pun) and send him to Raqqa – they got some really tall buildings there which have proven to be of use to ISIS.

          Or he could go to Iran, they use cranes in Iran.

    • Excellent, Flashman!

    • Blindsideflanker

      Not just in this exceptionally tolerant country for Islam seems to have wound up every single tolerant country/people/religion on the planet. Buddhists wouldn’t hurt a fly, but they are at daggers drawn against Islam, then there is Sweden, Denmark, Canada, Australia who are all struggling to cope with Islam.

      Where ever Islam is in a minority you get terrorism, where ever Islam is in the majority you get oppression.

      • Flashman

        Indeed, but ask Mr Parris and his ilk, and they’ll tell you it’s down to these tolerant host countries not being tolerant enough. I fear for the future, because it might be that the only way to put a stop to this is non-governmental. Vast swathes of the media are in Dhimmitude, as are the politicians – so what other choice do the people have? Have you seen the birth rates? Hell, not even the council estate baby mamas can out breed them.

  • Sean

    Pathetic from this Matthew Parris character; this article is rank with the stench of his barely concealed apologism. “I actually do believe in free speech, BUT…this Charlie Hebdo stuff? I’m not so sure. No, I don’t think we should be publishing such incendiary material” all credibility swept away by this point.

  • The PrangWizard of England

    ‘After the discrediting of anti-semitism’. Really? Is it not the case that Muslims and their sympathisers are re-creating it?

  • Pembroke

    Consider Amal Farrah who appeared on the BBC’s Big Question last week promoting the ex-Muslim perspective. Parris needs to support her in the face of the intimidation she faces from the Muslim community for the ‘crime’ of dropping her recognition of Mohamed as a prophet. THAT is the danger – that we acquiesce when large parts of British society consider apostasy as a crime.

  • The hatred comes from within Islam. The Koran has a pathological – indeed, murderous – view on non-Muslims. That hatred has been enacted in the real world thousands of times and is being re-enacted today. Millions have been attacked, raped, crucified, enslaved, abused and murdered because of Islam’s hatred for non-Muslims. The problem is – this hatred is mainstream Islamic teaching, and can be heard coming from the lips of even ‘moderate’ Muslims. The writer is in denial.

  • Britain will not become a Muslim country. Though that is taught in mosques throughout the land, there will be violent civil war long before then, unless the reality can be accepted that there are enormous numbers of people in this country who do not believe in freedom of speech, freedom of thought, the rule of law, respect for property, equality of the sexes, freedom for homosexuals and minorities – and who actively desire to destroy all of them. Every single one of these people should be made to leave the country. There is no need for violence – they want to live under sharia law – they can do, in a Muslim country of their choosing.

    • It’s funny how Matthew dislikes your party so much even though you stand for all the freedoms he holds so dear.
      It’s funny how Matthew is more sympathetic to the likes of Mehdi Hasan (who thinks we are animals) and the UAF.
      Stockholm syndrome comes to mind.

    • Suleiman

      “there are enormous numbers of people in this country who do not believe in freedom of speech, freedom of thought, the rule of law, respect for property, equality of the sexes, freedom for homosexuals and minorities – and who actively desire to destroy all of them”.

      For a minute I thought that you have been talking about British judges.

  • Bonzo

    Oh dear, Matthew, running out of ideas? Still, it is nice to see old methods of discrediting your opponents make a come back: if you criticise any aspect of a culture, religion, or life style you are some sort of “ist” and guilty of some “ism” or other, therefore you should not be allowed to express your views.
    “When sensitivities are inflamed it is possible to go too far.” Wonder how abolitionists and suffragettes would have felt about that?

  • William_Brown

    Click Bait – Nothing to see here – as usual.

  • Patently E(uropean)

    Nobody is confusing all muslims to be terrorist. Just walk out on the streets in any western country and you’ll see Muslims, both western born & new arrivals going about their business unhindered. A few have made themselves visibly Muslim in garb and appearance when previously in the 1980s and 90’s they felt no need to, even in Islamic countries. You really think Muslims would make themselves visibly identifiable if there was this seething hatred of the Muslims.

    This is in stark contrast with how Jews are behaving. They face real threat and have taken numerous and costly precautions to protect jewish lives & property. There is little or no financial support from governments and in fact pressure not to publicise the Islamist threats for fear of exacerbating the situation.

    There is growing concern given what many young Muslims are doing. But this concern is shared by other Muslims too. These fears may be exaggerated somewhat, but it is certainly not leading to Muslims fearing for their lives and safety.

  • SalaamComms

    Thank you Matthew. Much needed article. Muslims, like everyone else, just want to live in peace.

    • Flashman

      Yes, just like everyone else. No different. Absolutely the same. Nothing to see here. Carry on.

    • “Muslims, like everyone else, just want to live in peace.”

      LOL

      https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BpZbVI5CQAAL29-.jpg

    • Infidelissima

      they have a funny way of showing this

    • sebastian2

      “Muslims”? Can you be a little more specific please? Lest you lead us to think you really are all the same.

  • maraismarais

    I agree that hateful language doesn’t help either side but how often has anyone witnessed a truly free exchange of views on this topic on mainstream media ? If Douglas Murray happens to be on QT ? I also agree that not all Muslims should be lumped together but the recent opinion poll , which I assume was considered to be representative as it was ( very briefly ) reported by mainstream media , indicated that between 20 – 35% of Muslims in this country supported or sympathised with the perpetrators of the atrocities in Paris . If you assume , say , that only one third of the Muslim population are adults that still amounts to hundreds of thousands of our population so while it’s not all of them it’s still far too many that are light years away from our values .

    • “20 – 35% of Muslims in this country supported or sympathised with the perpetrators of the atrocities in Paris .”

      And remember – these are the ones feeling comfortable enough to admit this.

      Actual numbers are surely much worse.

  • Picquet

    You can be as intellectually judgemental as you like about this, but the fact remains that the forcible imposition of an alien culture and all of its alien baggage upon ones’ own comfortable life of atheism, bacon sandwiches and good ale makes for deep resentment. Balls to you, Matthew.

  • James

    When government gives special treatment in benefits and social housing, people will get upset.

  • joe_publik

    “….if you read your online responses (and I do) you can emerge from this feeling you’ve been spending time somewhere pretty unpleasant….”.

    Well, 150 odd comments so far Matthew and I’d say a full 90% don’t think much of your article. What do you intend to do about it? Move to the Guardian maybe!

  • Jambo25

    This from a man who has written a couple of stunningly unpleasant anti-Scottish articles over the past months. Its all the fault of the Scots, of course. The lack of the sense of irony is stunning.

  • Bob John

    I’ve got no personal hatred of Muslims (or anyone els for that matter); however, I believe that Jesus Christ is the only and exclusive way to Heaven.

    Although Muslims believe in Jesus (or Isa) as a prophet they do not accept Him as the Son of God and they do not believe He died for our sins and rose again.

    The New Testament clearly teaches that people who do not believe in Jesus as the Son of God are under God’s condemnation for all eternity.

    • joe_publik

      …. and you, my friend, are no better than the Muslims.

      • LittleRedRidingHood

        Except he didn’t threaten to kill you.

        • And that’s a mighty big difference!

        • RichardMitton

          But he will put you in a burning pit for eternity. Well, that’s nice isn’t it.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Well no. He won’t put you anywhere. The almighty, if you believe in that sort of thing, will, but he as a human will not.

      • Bob John

        You are going to Hell if you don’t accept Christ as the Son of God.

      • Silly.

    • RichardMitton

      So just as violent then. Nasty bastard that Jesus and god of yours then. Evil, wicked, cruel and despicable. Fuck any and all of the Abrahamic faiths.

      • Bob John

        You are heading for the flames of an eternal Hell.

  • James

    Muslims choose to hate us and want us to live their way. They bring it on themselves.

  • halfapica

    Mr Parris can’t know much about Muslims if he thinks they’d coutnenance depicting ‘Mary as a whore’ or ‘Jesus as a terrorist’. Maybe ignorance is the problem all round here.

    • He is engaging in the silliest form of whataboutery imaginable. Glenn Greenwald, Seumas Milne and Mehdi Hasan are much better at this Islamist apologetics art-form.

  • David

    Read Rod Liddle in this very issue on what happens to dissenters from the kinds of views in this article.

  • zoya1

    Sad but inevitable reactions to Matthew Parris’ words.

    • WTF

      The only sad thing is the liberal elite never get their heads out from their ass’s to smell the coffee !

  • Pepperless

    Matthew am black, and the anti white prejudice and anti semetism in this country is unbelievable,and this prejudice emanate from the MSM, liberal elite like you. as far as I can see the majority of the people are opressed by moslems and liberals like you ensure they get away with it, eg Rotherham Oxford, Manchester the industrial rape and sexual slavery of white girls from working class background by moslem men. I pray to God that you & your ilks face judgement in this world

    • Cyril Sneer

      Thanks for the comment, you’re spot on with what you say, much appreciated mate.

  • Captain Haddock

    Mr Parris it may be upsetting but the reality is that Islam is a totalitarian faith that brooks no dissent. Medieval Christianity was similar and it took the Reformation, the 30 Years War and the Enlightenment (among other things) for it to move on from that. Islam hasn’t moved on in a similar fashion and many would argue that its diffuse nature means it never can – how could you have a Vatican II of Islam for example?
    When blood is being spilt by people professing to be Muslims on the streets of 21st Century London in a manner akin to the religious zealotry of the 16th century can it be any wonder people are getting aggrieved? Particularly so when many (most?) Muslim spokesmen seem to qualify their condemnation of the violence by reference to a need to understand the hurt feelings of Muslims.
    There is no right not to be offended.

  • samA

    What I read in the comments is pure hatred miles away from any reasoning and rationality. There are those of us who still believe in human values. Hatred leads only to self destruction.

    • Pepperless

      another deluded one the only reason we need coexist is because of the symbol that represent the “C”

    • anotherjoeblogs

      ” Hatred leads only to self destruction “.
      In other words – submit now and save yourself from the choice of dhimmitude, ‘ reverting ‘ or a beheading in the future ?

      • zoya1

        “There is no compulsion in religion” – chapter 2 verse 257.
        Islam protects people of other religions and a Muslim has no right to kill an apostate.

        • Lie. Quran (8:39) – “And fight with them until there is no more unbelief and religion should be only for Allah”

        • Penny

          Zoya, might I suggest you consider the number of Jews left in the Muslim Middle East and of the recent plight of Christians? As the wife of a refugee from these lands (by dint of being the wrong religion) this protection is somewhat ad hoc.

        • anotherjoeblogs

          you should have told me 30 odd years ago and I may have believed you.

        • sebastian2

          I’m beginning to feel sorry for you.

        • “Islam protects”

          People who are not Muslim apologists call that sort of protection “racket”.

    • But Islam doesn’t believe in reasoning, rationality or human values. Read the Koran and the Hadiths and see for yourself. Its injuctions are not in regard to historic battles over 1,000 years ago, they are injunctions to apply the same brutality to non-Muslims for all time until the entire world is Muslim. The hatred emanates directly from the Koran. Read it, don’t believe what I say.

      • zoya1

        People can interpret the Qur’an in the wrong ways but many of us do read and try to study it’s meanings every day and find that Islam is reasonable. Hatred doesn’t emanate from the Qur’an, peace does.

        • Tell me – are you for or against gay marriage?
          Tell me – what do you think should happen to them, when 2 men are caught having sex?
          Tell me – what do you think of a muslim who decides to become a Christian?
          Tel me – what do you think should happen with someone who insults your prophet mohammed?

        • “Islam is reasonable. ”

          Islam is the very *definition* of irrational.

        • sebastian2

          I think you should try to study its meanings a bit harder.

    • There are no human values advocated in Quran.

    • sebastian2

      The Organisation of Islamic Co-operation (OIC) generally subscribes to the Cairo Declaration (of Human Rights) that subordinates everything to sharia. Sharia does not incorporate “human values” as I imagine you mean them.

      Incidentally, the OIC also has an “Islamophobia Observatory” based in wahhabist/salafist Saudi Arabia: one of the world’s most Christianophobic countries. I doubt that they see the irony. We, though, certainly observe the selectivity.

      • samA

        Unsubscribe.

  • JohnCrichton89

    We have widespread support among European Muslims for the institutionalisation of Sharia in some shape or form that is completely irreconcilable with secularism or pluralism, and would spell the end of democracy if allowed to become law.

    We have widespread industrial scale Muslim rape gangs targeting the non-Muslim women and children of Europe, no doubt influenced by their religious belief of supremacy to non-Muslims and females and especially non-Muslim females.

    We have European Muslims calling for our death and subjugation, calling for our genocide, in the name of Islam. And actually going through with it whenever they can.

    With Muslim communities refusing to take any social responsibility and, in fact, blaming everyone else for terrorists inspired and created by their communities.
    Blaming us, the victims of their religiously inspired rapists, paedophiles, murders and slavers.

    Elie Wiesel, holocaust survivor, once said, “When someone says they want to kill you, believe them.”

    • anotherjoeblogs

      I can’t remember who said it or where it was said, but a survivor of the holocaust now living in America explained that while living in Germany in the 1930s, it was pessimism which made him leave for the U.S. The optimists ended up in the camps.The survival instinct seems to be almost defunct in some and these people seem to believe that any form of discrimination is an evil which we need to nullify.

      • Dr Robert K

        The wisest comment here! The kindest interpretation one can put on this article is that the writer is an incurable optimist!

        • anotherjoeblogs

          dunno if he has a contingency plan just in case his risk assessment was skewered.

  • Pepperless

    “Islamophobia, a word created by Fascists and used by cowards to manipulate morons” Christopher Hitchens

    • LuciousVanWinkle

      it wasn’t actually Mr Hitchens, but still a quality quote..

      • colinintokyo

        Yes it was Andrew Cummins.

  • Suleiman

    Quite typical to the pro-Muslim voice among the establishment.

    They are less worried about Islamic terrorism (they do not, probably, use that much public transport, so less chance for them being blown off).
    They are not worried about so-called honour killings.
    They are not worried about enforced marriages.
    They are very mildly, at best, worried about FGM.
    They are not worried about persecution of gays in Islamic countries.
    They are not worried about persecution of national and religious and racial minorities in Islamic countries.
    They are not worried about the incidence of rape, including mass rape, in Islamic societies.
    They are not worried about the oppression of women in Islamic societies.
    They are not worried about the high incidence of first cousin marriages in Islamic societies and its debilitating effect on the population.
    They are not worried about the Islamic societies always having economic demands from others while contributing little themselves to improving their economic lot.
    They are not worried about the treatment of foreign workers in Islamic societies.
    They are not worried about the high level of corruption in Islamic societies, which may even be on a par with our own British corruption.
    They are not worried about the Muslims using the birth-rate as a weapon towards conquering the world.

    But they are worried when I, who do take all these “prejudices” into account (because I care about the victims), express some verbal or written anti-Muslim opinions. A few words – that’s what hurt their sensibilities.

  • Pepperless

    when people like Matthew spew this kind of rubbish which i believe he does not believe him self, one has to follow the money, who is paying Matthew for this? Petro dollar front groups abound in this country and Matthew is the useful idiot, how much is your soul? 30 pieces of silver?

  • thetrashheap

    All this why don’t we all get along stuff is grand but ultimately we have a population with beliefs we don’t share with a 50 year trend of doubling every 10 years. Now at 5% of population 10% of school kids.

    This religion you aren’t fond of is about to get a lot of power over the next 50 years…. What do you think will happen?

    I’ll give you a clue. Any world history book will tell you.

    • Those that desire sharia law should be encouraged to leave the country. Religious maniacs who preach treason should be forcibly removed. These people will be happier living in Muslim countries.

      • RichardMitton

        except they want a world caliphate.

    • rodger the dodger

      I disagree entirely. This is all going to be over, and islam will be back to where it was in about 1950, before the end of the next decade.

      That doesn’t mean, however, that things aren’t going to get much worse before they get better – they will.

      Most people make the mistake of believing trends keep going in the same direction forever, but they don’t. islam is no exception.

  • Hamburger

    As much as I loath religious and racial prejudice I require a level playing field. Of course most Muslims want to earn enough money to raise an educate their children just like the rest of us. Recent studies show that the vast majority of the Muslim population of the UK is revolted by the antics of the extremists. They are the exception in Europe for which I salute them.
    I expect them to isolate and report them in the same way I expect a right wing thinking German to report a Nazi bomber or an Irish republican or a radical socialist to do the same. Unfortunately this is not forthcoming.
    I am reading Jerusalem by Simon Sebag Montefiore at the moment which puts paid to the argument that the other side, it is always the others, started the slaughtering.
    As the old song goes: It takes two to tango.

  • scampy

    Better not try a spot of cottaging Mathew next time you are in Saudi.Iran,Jamaica and many more who are against abnormal behaviour?

  • Guest

    is photo seems to be circulating on twitter as a poster in Rotherham is this true:

  • Andy Blant

    you’re muddle headed Mr Parris. Of course hatred must never be espoused.
    It is time to tease out (very difficult to do) the differences between the very different variations of islam present in our society. At its core, Islam promotes despicable things. It is only because many of our Muslim friends and neighbours have not studied their texts too hard or listened to their leaders too closely and have actually instead imbibed western freedoms and a democratic mindset, that they live peacefully with us. They have a new version of Islam which fits in well with British values and tolerance. But beware, there is every opportunity for them to become radicalised and swing to an extreme that will shock us time and again. We’re shocked because we are refusing to see the underbelly of ‘authentic islam’ as we saw in the case of Jamshed Javeed the Manchester chemistry teacher.
    Authentic islam does not and will not fit with our society. To attempt to say it will and should is muddle headed. What is more it is insulting to those who wish to be authentic.

  • Bob John

    I see you have deleted my post – are some kind of Dhimmi?

  • Being wary of Muslamofascist head-cutters is not prejudice, except in the sense that it is based on clear understanding of all the injunctions to murderous violence against unbelievers in Quran, examples from the vile life of their so-called prophet – who murdered at least 700 innocents in his odious life and is nevertheless looked upon as “the perfect man” by Muslims, who “love him more than their children” as they scream while demanding the “massacre of those who insult Islam”, and knowledge of contemporary events all across the globe in which Muslims both engage in and justify violence in response to any perceived slight against this 7th century mental case who invented a death cult to help him in his conquests.

  • Matthew Parris you spew-mouthed ignoranus. You dhimmi-wit. They taqiyya for a ride.
    Read up: ISIS IS islam. They are simply following the letter of the koran, their booklet of hate, of death. They regard these ‘moderates’ with whom you associate, as apostates worthy only of death (and yet, like peaceable Germans among Nazi’s, they do or say NOTHING about ISIS, and are therefore irrelevant for us but complicit to us).
    islam is a cancer that will need to be completely purged from the Earth – not because we have a problem with them, but because THEY HAVE A PROBLEM WITH US.

    • “ISIS ”

      We should stop using any acronyms and call it what it is: “Islamic State”

  • elaineland

    Another day another muslim rape gang.

  • styants64

    Yep I cannot accept the fact that when one of their own want opt out of the death cult they are branded a apostate and their mullahs want to see their head cut off call me Intolerant but that is how I feel about this nihilistic death cult.

  • Patently E(uropean)

    Matthew Parris is confusing hysteria with hatred. There is great anxiety that more than a decade after 9/11 Muslim leaders and authority figures have not got the message. Western society out of politeness said things like ‘Islam is Peace’ and ‘its a very small minority’, quietly hoping that muslims will be careful what and how they preach their children. No wonder people are outraged that young Muslims seem to be more susceptible to radicalisation than before.

    Jihadis don’t come with a bright orange arrow on their head. Speaking to Muslims I know that many Muslims share this anxiety and hysteria. They might not want these anxieties articulated openly, particularly not on the internet where the debate is never very civil. But to gauge real sentiment from internet comments is ridiculous. Else have I missed the civil war between people dressed in black+blue and people dressed in gold+white?

  • ” I don’t believe that in the present atmosphere it’s wise to publish images calculated to wound and offend not only fundamentalist Muslims, but middle-of-the-road Muslims too.”

    Nonsense. They are not children, and if they can’t abide living in a free society, they are free to leave. They will *not* be missed.

    So let’s have an “image calculated to offend”:

    `O:-D

    Yes, that is the despicable, murderous so-called prophet of Islam, and yes that is a bomb in his turban.

  • styants64

    My only advice to Parris is stay out of Clacton you patronising rsol.

  • rodger the dodger

    “Of course I defend people’s right to mock religion”. Once I read this, I was thinking, “…and the ‘but’ will be along in 5,4,3,2….”

    And sure enough, there it was, right on cue: “I don’t believe that in the present atmosphere it’s wise to publish images calculated to wound and offend not only fundamentalist Muslims, but middle-of-the-road Muslims too. There are questions of timing and judgment here. When sensitivities are inflamed it is possible to go too far.”

    You absolutely DO NOT “defend people’s right to mock religion”. Don’t insult our intelligence by claiming you do. You clearly think we are idiots.

    This piece is a classic dhimmi article. Dyed in the wool, 100%, unmitigated dhimmi.

    • Salman Rushdie memorably called people like this “the members of the but brigade”, after they – Glenn Greenwald, Mehdi Hasan, Seumas Milne and their ilk – started posting terrorism-appeasing articles in the wake of the Islamic Charlie Hebdo massacre. There was usually a “western intervention/poor/oppressed/marginalized/frightened” but-clause about poor oppressed Muslims and the big bad West at the very beginning of their drivel.

    • jeffersonian

      Spot on

  • davidshort10

    My earlier comment was deleted. Wonder why? Is it because I said Parris’s worries were based on a couple of other columnists and about 500 online comments from anonymous people some of whom were probably drunk? Or that I mentioned groups of people in Parris’s part of East London who go around threatening people drinking outside pubs (I expect they only pick on middle-class milksops who have bought into the area, not hard, shaven-headed, tattoo-ed men) or saying parks or squares were forbidden to dogs because a certain religion apparently doesn’t like dogs? I think we should be told!

  • Great article and spot on. Both my neighbours are muslim and its joy to have them as friends. I trust them and they trust me. It is very sad to see so much bile in the comments.

    • Your neighbours are obviously Muslims-In-Name-Only, since they apparently do not strive to make your home a part of their caliphate, and you a “protected” subject .

      Islamic State is Quran and Hadith in action. Get educated:

      http://www.jihadwatch.org/islam-101

      • They are certainly not muslim in name only but a weird definition you have as to what it means to be a muslim!

        • If you call a Quranic definition “weird”, I agree. Quran is nothing but mad ramblings of a 7th century mental case, who else could think that god mandates chopping of hands and feet and crucifixion of innocents?

          That is in Quran 5:33, by the way. Ask your lovely neighbours about it.

          • zoya1

            The injunction in that verse is against those who “wage war” against Muslims not against “innocents”.

          • Nonsense. ” strive upon earth [to cause] corruption” gives Muslims a wide berth to subsume anyone they want under that.

            Your propaganda efforts are really inept, dear.

          • Uhm … only muslims are considered innocents … don’t try to lie to us.

          • It’s truly funny to see cyber jihadis trying to defend their vile, murderous death cult to rational people.

            It must be hard when you realize that your so-called prophet was a despicable murderer, and your religion’s history is nothing *but* a history of conquest by murder and mayhem.

          • Richard

            “You will see many of them befriending those who disbelieve; certainly evil is that which their souls have sent before for them, that Allah became displeased with them and in chastisement shall they abide.” (Koran 5:80)

          • Exactly. *Proper* Muslims do not have non-muslims for friends.

        • Richard

          “O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people.” (Koran 5:51)

          • And then, after saying what allah commanded to “children of Israel” – meaning Jews – in 5:32 – the classic verse which you will always see quoted by Muslim apologists when they lie that Islam is a religion of peace – it has this to say about how Muslims should act:

            5:33 – “Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] corruption is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. That is for them a disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment”

          • Richard

            There are many such verses, which are as valid an interpretation of Islam as what those “friendly” Muslims state is “true” Islam. But understand that people in the West have been Disneyfied, that is, thinking that dinosaurs and elephants are to be understood as loveable dogs and petted. In other words, not a clue with what they are dealing. It is like living in Teletubby Land.

          • All of them collected here, with great explanations about how Muslims use lies to deceive the West:

            http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/quran/023-violence.htm

            http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Islam_and_Propaganda

      • zoya1

        True Muslims are loyal to the country in which they live and will treat their non Muslim neighbours as brothers.

        • Richard

          As we have seen in Lebanon, for instance.

          • Or, indeed, Britain.

          • sebastian2

            Or any islamic state. Just as an aside to this remark, do you, like me, feel offended by “non-muslim”? By this kind of collective negativism that defines all the rest of us by what we are not? It is condescending and derogatory, dismissing us as an ensemble of the faceless lesser.

            Perhaps I should riot to show my disapproval. They would! (And get away with it.)

        • Nonsense.

        • and being your “brother” means we should “respect” the way you treat women, gays, Jews, apostates, animals.

          Whilst you “respect” nothing of our values and culture.

          • Islam deserves precisely zero* respect.

            *cue Muslamic propagandists claiming “you couldn’t say that if Muslims hadn’t invented zero”

          • sebastian2

            Especially when:

            “In 628, a Hindu astronomer and mathematician named Brahmagupta developed a symbol for zero — a dot underneath numbers. He also developed mathematical operations using zero, wrote rules for reaching zero
            through addition and subtraction, and the results of using zero in equations. This was the first time in the world that zero was recognized as a number of its own, as both an idea and a symbol.”

            http://www.livescience.com/27853-who-invented-zero.html

            It’s always interesting to ask a mohammedan why their “arabic” numerals are written in the opposite direction to their quran’s arabic script. (It’s because they’re not arabic.) The calculations the “prophet” made when tallying chopped heads, slaves, booty, converts, camels and wives, would have been in the non-islamic figures of the Hindus: powerful arithmetical tools that mohammedans (who claim everything) have never given them proper credit for.

            He’s a very naughty boy!

          • It’s always funny to see them and their dumb western brain-washed supporters start foaming at the mouth when these facts are calmly presented to them.

          • luna
        • luna

          Decent people with respect for the law of the land, yes. But this is contrary what Islam commands.

    • Blindsideflanker

      And I am sure someone was living next to all the ‘good ‘ Muslims who terrorised , bombed and decapitated people.

    • I almost shuddered when I read that – many Christians said that about life in Iraq, before those same neighbours ‘turned’.

      • luna

        http://www.asianews.it/index.php?art=29131&l=en

        Beirut (AsiaNews) – According to families who fled Maaloula (Syria), some of their Muslim neighbours were involved in the attack that devastated their village located about fifty kilometres from Damascus, dispersing its residents.

        Perceived as a betrayal of the long-lasting trust that existed between Christians and Muslims in Maaloula, where Muslims make up about 30 per cent of the village population.

    • sebastian2

      I hope their say to their friends “Our Christian neighbours live between us and it’s a joy to have them as friends. We trust them and they trust us. It’s very sad to see so much Christianphobia within the ummah.”

    • luna

      “Don’t judge the Muslims that you know by Islam and don’t judge Islam by the Muslims that you know.”

      http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Pages/Statement-on-Muslims.htm

  • tut

    There are 3 phases to Jihad:

    Phase 1–when in the minority (under %3 of population), they cry for ‘Tolerance’.

    Phase 2–when breeding/immigration bring numbers higher, they go on ‘defensive Jihad’. Demand special treatments (veils,honor-killing, stoning), demand Islamic schools, demand Muslim Holidays at work and school, set up no-go zones, etc. and continue to play the victim card while attacking non-Muslims stepping into their no-go zones (see youtube video ‘American Muslims Stone Christian Preachers In Dearborn, MI.’ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vnJBW49afzg and ‘Sharia Law – The Silent Take Over of Europe And America’ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7COTgYq4aRg)

    Phase 3 — when numbers approach near %50 of the population, they go on ‘offensive’ Jihad. Violent demands for Sharia Law and violent attacks on non-Muslims. (see almost daily carnages of how Christians and non-Muslims are being treated any Muslim countries, i.e., beheading, stoning, church bombing, stabbing, etc.)

    This pattern has been the exact same for the last 1400 years. That’s how they conquered the previously non-Muslim countries in North Africa and previously non-Muslim Asian countries like Afghanistan, Malaysia, and Indonesia. Muslims are dangerous and should be deported ASAP from the West or from any non-Muslim countries. Norway deported close to 6000 of them last year and more this year.

    • Exactly right.

    • Ivan Ewan

      There is also Phase Zero: Muslims who are completely kept in the dark and innocent as to the political ambitions of their religion, while their imams play the peaceful dove routine to secure government permission for more mosques.

    • q-pantagruel

      In 1948 Lebanon was a Chistian majority country. Now it is most certainly not. Where did all the Christians go? If you want a recent model of Islam in action – look at Lebanon.

      • Try Kosovo .. which was less than 100 years ago a Christian majority country, and became less than 25 years ago a muslim majority country.
        We all know what that lead to ….

  • Richard

    Prejudice consists of two constituent words: “pre” and “judice” which, when used together, mean to judge a thing beforehand.

    Islam is not judged beforehand, which is how it is that so many millions of Muslims have been allowed to settle in the UK since 1948, as well as elsewhere in Europe. Rather, it is judged AFTER events, like the Twin Towers in New York, bombings on the London underground, killings in Paris, gang-rapes of vulnerable schoolgirls, attacks on homosexuals and others in Tower Hamlets, the creation of no-go zones in British cities, killings in Malmo, rapes in Malmo, bombings in Spain, it goes on and on. Gradually, we have built up an understanding of what it is all about.

    If you want to give it a name, call it “postjudice” as that would be accurate.

    • “postjudice”

      Exactly. I think 1400 years of observing their imperialist, vile, murderous spread was enough, don’t you?

  • UncleTits

    “Anti-Muslim prejudice is real, and it’s scary” – by Matthew Pa…

    Screw that.

  • Ivan Ewan

    Dear Mr Parris,

    We at the Muslims Against Islamophobia Institute, a brand new 501-c tax-deductible charity subsidised by the taxpayer, are grateful and proud that you have chosen to stand in unity with David Cameron, Barack Hussein Obama, and Tayyip Erdogan, against those nasty, nasty people who oppose the imposition of the Shari’a (as Allah’s mercy upon mankind).

    We have decided to bestow on you the title of “dhimmi”, which is almost like being an honorary Muslim! When our revolution comes, you might not even end up against the wall at all.

    Praise to Allah, all-knowing and all-wise, who created this whole category of kafir for those who will not (for some insane reason) become Muslims and who are too feeble or cowardly to fight back.

    Continue to tar the other kafir with the big bad brush of bigotry, Mr Parris, and clear all obstacles to our victory.

    ALLAHU ACKBAR!

    Yours Sincerely,

    Mohammad (cause that really narrows it down)

    • You mentioned Allah’s mercy but forgot to say “most compassionate”.

      I always shudder when I read these vile, deceptive words in the fatwas with which Muslims decree the murder of innocents.

      • Ivan Ewan

        Yeah, I actually thought of the “Allah’s mercy upon mankind” bit because that’s how Anjem Chowderhead always describes Shariah, every single time he mentions it on TV interviews.

        “Most Merciful” would have been the Quranic composition.

        It deeply sickens me that, out of necessity, I probably know more about the contents of the Quran than I do the Old Testament. For that’s a kind of Islamisation too.

        • Quran should be *mandated reading* for all people in the Western civilized world.

          Our ignorance of the enemy within could very well be our biggest and final mistake.

  • WFC

    “I struggle to imagine (for instance) joining a march in defence of the
    rights of Muslims to publish cartoons of Jesus as a terrorist or Mary as
    a whore”

    Sigh. Yet more evidence of the maxim that “multiculturalism” means never having to to take an interest in any of the cultures you wish to “celebrate”.

    Even a passing acquaintance with Islam ought to inform you that Jesus is the second most important person, after Mohammed, in the Islamic religion. Indeed, ISIS believe that he will descend from heaven to lead them into battle with the “anti-Christ”. Did you know that? I suspect not.

    Meanwhile, a passing acquaintance with Charlie Hebdo ought to have told you that anybody and everybody who said “Je Suis Charlie”, and marched in Paris, were indeed associating themselves with a publication which regularly published mocking and pornographic cartoons of Jesus and Mary. Did you know that? I suspect not.

    And you wonder why people say that you don’t “get it”.

    • Parris is truly out of his depth here. It baffles belief that this passed the editorial head-chopping-block, if you pardon the pun.

    • Richard

      People like Parris are trying desperately to push squares into round holes.

      • WFC

        It is odd, the disassociation which muticulturalist to believe, simultaneously, that (a) all cultures are equally valid, but (b) at heart, everyone in the world is really a nice middle class English gentleman struggling to break through the constraints of poverty/imperialism/inequality/racism etc etc.

        • Richard

          It is simple: they are brainwashed, and unable to put two and two together.

    • Cyril Sneer

      Mark Steyn had it right – “Multi-culturalism is a culture of ignorance, an excuse for ignorance.’

  • Pembroke

    “I don’t believe that in the present atmosphere it’s wise to publish images calculated to wound and offend not only fundamentalist Muslims, but middle-of-the-road Muslims too. There are questions of timing and judgment here. When sensitivities are inflamed it is possible to go too far.”
    > you’ll find that those who have taken a rational approach and have read the texts and considered all the belligerence oozing from them and also concluded that the character of Mohamed is undeserving of reverence rationally utterly disagree with this. Mr. Parris ought to be supporting those free-thinkers who have escaped Islam, like Amal Farrah and Ayan Hirsi Ali, not reinforcing attitudes that condemn them for questioning and freely-thinking. I’m truly shocked at this piece by Mr. Parris. If this is what centre-right British intellectuals are thinking we are doomed.

    • `O:-D

    • We’re not doomed – Mr Parris represents a small but very influential minority. Such people, I believe, should be removed from all positions of influence, since they reject the fundamental bases of Western civilisation.

  • English_Independence_Movement

    Oh dear, I wonder how the situation could have come to be.

  • For people interested in combating the activities of vile cyber jihadists like we see on this thread, here are some useful links:

    Islam 101:
    http://www.jihadwatch.org/islam-101

    Comparing Islam and Islamic State:

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B7Q9qQ8CQAAFEtT.jpg:

    Murders by their socalled “prophet” – from Muslamic sources:

    http://wikiislam.net/wiki/List_of_Killings_Ordered_or_Supported_by_Muhammad

    Islam and propaganda:

    http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Islam_and_Propaganda

    Muslims using lies to deceive Westerners:

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B9mZMMsIQAAKUQ1.jpg

    Quran’s verses of violence:

    http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/quran/023-violence.htm

    Percentage of Muslims worldwide supporting violence according to Pew poll:

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B7jJ6sOCUAELob6.jpg

    Muslims educating their children:

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BpZbVI5CQAAL29-.jpg

    And here is a list of lies terror-appeasers use:

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B7LiqShCUAAP2D-.jpg

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B-JZR55IYAA9-ci.jpg

  • Snibbo

    The trouble is Mr. Parris is doing exactly what he accuses others of doing, and treating all Muslims as incapable of debate and therefore in need of paternal protection. Why are they considered unable to defend their religious opinions through argument, as anyone who expresses a set of ideas must do? To take another example, I have seen amongst the Spectator comments some comments about the Labour party supporters which you could describe as “hateful”, but no-one is suggesting that this is “spreading poison” because as adults they are expected to take it and put forward counter-arguments. Why not the same attitude towards Muslims?

    • Exactly Demanding that all of us in our free societies self-submit to insane, medieval internal Muslim blasphemy codes is not only a despicable attack on the most basic freedoms our civilization was built on, but also a very condescending and Islamophobic move.

  • q-pantagruel

    “I don’t believe that in the present atmosphere it’s wise to publish images calculated to wound and offend… When sensitivities are inflamed it is possible to go too far. These, I believe, are such times.”

    Mr Paris, by writing such a line you are capitulating to Sharia and Islamic apostasy laws. These are indeed such times. Times when we must finally take a stand and say No. Not one step more will we allow in the imposition of this hateful and intolerant ideology upon our civilisation. As Sam Harris rightly puts it “Tolerance of intolerance is just cowardice”. You have raised your white flag for all to see. Shame on you.

    • Indeed.

      Just think about it – Muslims *have* already managed to scare Britain into submission. There are no Islamic works of art depicting Mohammed, which are kept in UK museums, on public display for the fear of “offending the poor darlings”, and even online records of such works were deleted.

    • I consider he is indirectly condemning people to death – both here and throughout the entire world. He should re-examine his views and try to find empathy for those non-Muslims and homosexuals who are murdered regularly throughout the so-called ‘Muslim world’.

  • jim

    Poor muslims.What harm have they ever done anyone?Musha God Help Us.

    • Indeed. We should simply think about their 1400-year long war of imperial conquest as “trying to be good neighbours”.

      After all, why would anyone object to being a subservient “protected” person, with less rights and higher taxes? And that is if you’re a Christian or a Jew – others can be killed with impunity.

  • Patently E(uropean)

    I wish the Times would have a verification policy (a la reddit) on commenters. Wonder how many of the 450 so called ‘islamophobic’ comments are actually from Muslims who have otherwise no avenue to demand reform.

    • Richard

      The thing is, Islam has no internal need for reform. Most Muslims are quite happy to carry on with things as they are. They believe what they read in the Koran is from a supernatural being – including exhortations to murder and bloodshed – and don’t have enough intelligence en masse to challenge it. Judaism and Christianity are known to have been the works of men trying to describe what they have experienced, which is very, very different. That is amenable to interpretation and change. Islam is immune from this. In Islam, it is: Islam or Death! Islam has no martyrs for reform, people prepared to face excommunication or the flame, as in Judaism and Christianity.

      • Patently E(uropean)

        Yes. Most non-Muslims don’t understand this distinction. In fact most Muslims don’t understand this distinction either. That’s why they make a false analogy between Islam and Christianity. I don’t know about Judaism but I assume apart from the 10 commandments none of the Tanakh is regarded as the literal word of God.

        Anyway, the truth is the vast majority of Muslims are peaceful because they don’t strictly adhere to puritanical Islam. However, far too many fee compelled to defend it and deny the need for reform, which unsurprisingly emboldens the small minority of Muslims who see non-Muslims as mortal enemies. I minority of this minority are willing and capable of acting on the violent injunctions of the quran. This extremely small minority is the symptom of the hate, not the cause of the hate. There are concentric circles of antipathy with the large majority of Muslims being only slightly paranoid of non-Muslims. No wonder they easily buy the conspiracy that there is an Islamophobia-Industry (which is obviously headed and funded by Jews).

        • Richard

          “This extremely small minority is the symptom of the hate, not the cause of the hate.”

          Most perspicacious.

  • RichardMitton

    Can’t find many posts that agree with you Matthew. So who’s correct, us or you? Remember, it’s a democracy which you don’t get in Islam.

    • sebastian2

      In the islamic state they wish to install here, we could not say what we say on these pages, and live. Among other things, Matthew Parris should remember this.

  • Cheddarcakes

    Just watching the latest Islamic atrocity on the news Matthew oh and reading about the grooming of white girls in Birmingham. Oh those Muslims and their cheeky shenanigans!!!

    • They are simply misunderstood, poor, oppressed, marginalized darlings. It is the Western world’s fault, all of it.

      Quranic injunctions to murderous violence have #NothingToDoWithIslam.

  • Matthew Parris should ask himself one simple question: Is it possible that Islam might one day control Britain?

    This is a probability simply because of demographics, and if it happens which part of Islam will come to the fore? Nice Islam or nasty Islam?

    Nasty Islam is there for all to see in our history books and in the Koran itself. We see it all over the world today and the fact that most Muslims are moderate does not stop it happening one iota.

    If we don’t want to 2050 Britain to resemble Libya today then Islam must be removed from the West. Why is this such an “extremist” thing to suggest? There are many Islamic countries around the world and Islam cannot co-exist with non-Islam because Islam itself is an immoderate ideology.

    Asking Pakistani’s to return to Pakistan is preferable to a 1990s Yugoslavia style civil war in Britain based on fault lines fracturing around racial/religious differences.

    It was a naively catastrophic mistake in allowing Islam into the West and no amount of promoting peace and cohesion by the likes of Mr Parris will stop the wolf attacking the lamb.

    • Richard

      What Labour did was to narrow the ability of people to protest, by introducing more and more laws. We are now so constrained by what we cannot say that it is like living in a strait-jacket. The ability of the government to ensure enough people have enough sweets to distract them from what is going on is why they are desperately trying to outdo each other in terms of improving economic performance. If we are poorer, all the fault-lines they have created in modern Britain will become more apparent, and there will be violence. The only thing keeping the peace is money. It is like social poly-filler.

      The US only works because people are drawn to the money. Otherwise it would also explode.

    • English_Independence_Movement

      “Matthew Parris should ask himself one simple question: Is it possible that Islam might one day control Britain?”

      Demographics ensures that it certainly will, somewhere between 19.8 and 68 years from now it will become the majority social grouping in this country…. then the gays in the land will be living on borrowed time: in Iran they hang gay people, in Syria they throw them off high buildings to their death, in palestine they are stoned by their neighbours…. this list is not exhaustive.

      • Then we must change the future so that does not happen. My previous comment gives a solution.

    • Ambientereal

      Mr. Parris must understand one for all that when a person adheres to the islam indirectly is adhering to the violent laws and traditions that rule this religion. For instance the way muslim men treat women (even the apparently non violent ones) is violent according to the western views.

    • Pepperless

      i bet that Mr Parris has sold his soul for his 30psc of silver, but Karma is a sure thing whatever you sow you shall reap a hundred folds and he would certainly reap his reward in this world and reward would include gnashing of teeth

    • Multiculturalism has been tried for 50 years – and it has failed catastrophically. It is now time to end the experiment. Those who do not accept freedom of thought, freedom of speech, the rule of English law, equality of the sexes, and the rights of minorities, should leave the country – and, where necessary, be cajoled or compelled to leave the country. There are plenty of Muslim lands for them to choose from. They can then live out the rest of their existences in more sympathetic milieus.

  • Ambientereal

    “Discrimination” versus “prejudgment”. Discriminate is to tell the differences between different beings or entities. Black people have black skin (obviously) and curly hair. Slave people are usually tall and yellow are not. If we say green people (I don´t want to mention any actual race) are dirty or purple people are thieves, that is not actually discrimination but prejudgment. If when referring to muslims we state that they are violent, that is not prejudgment but reality, because they state it themselves by adhering to the islam and its scriptures. If I adhere to a group of cannibals, I cannot tell everyone (and be accepted in my statement) that I hate human flesh.

  • grutchyngfysch

    “There are passengers joining this bandwagon whose love of free expression strikes me as having rather a lot to do with dislike of Muslims, and whom I struggle to imagine (for instance) joining a march in defence of the rights of Muslims to publish cartoons of Jesus as a terrorist or Mary as a whore.”

    Nobody marched in support of Charlie Hebdo because of what they published. They marched in support of them because Muslims murdered them for what they published.

    If you are unable to recognise that distinction, I’d question what possible insight you could have into their motives.

    • MikeH

      Yes but these hypothetical Muslims, or their bandwagon jumping proxy, on your hypothetical march would have no need to protest as their right to depict and publish Jesus or Mary in any way they see fit is intact.

      One would also suggest if they did in fact publish such cartoons, however offensive, they would not incur the wrath of crazed machine-gun wielding savages, slaying a random Jewish person as part of their grievance letting rampages.

  • English_Independence_Movement

    A picture of four people holding a banner, three of whom are in Religious garb: Somebody needs to tell them that the sky fairy doesn’t exist, ask them politely to stop wasting their time with their religious navel gazing and invite them to do something more productive for humanity instead.

  • The dangerous naivety of Matthew Parris is chilling. The Muslim prophet Mohammed is considered the perfect man by all Muslims, but what sort of man was he?

    Without going into great detail, there is NOTHING the Islamic State is currently up to in Libya that Mohammed did not do personally. Nothing.

    Islam behaves as it does today (and historically) because it was established by a 7th century version of our very own 21st century Jihadi John – who is also called Mohammed of course. It really is quite simple Mr Parris. Why are you unable to recognise this?

    Is it really just because Muslims are not white and are therefore part of an “oppressed” minority in the eyes of Western liberals?

  • Marcussmod

    Mathew Paris, like Galloway knows the Muslims as victims game is up. His liberal portrayal of Muslims as an oppressed minority is dated and untrue. It is no is longer accepted by an increasing majority.

  • Patently E(uropean)

    The vast majority of Muslims are peaceful because they don’t strictly adhere to puritanical Islam. However, far too many feel compelled to defend it and deny the need for reform, which unsurprisingly emboldens the small minority of Muslims who see non-Muslims as mortal enemies. I minority of this minority are willing and capable of acting on the violent injunctions of the quran. This extremely small minority is the symptom of the hate, not the cause of the hate. There are concentric circles of antipathy, the large majority of Muslims being only slightly paranoid of non-Muslims. No wonder they easily buy the conspiracy that there is an Islamophobia-Industry (which is obviously headed and funded by Jews).

    There is some dog-whistle politics at the expense of muslims, especially in the US, but the target of this politics changes from time to time. A learned and honest Muslim cannot sincerely demand that any Islamophobia be countered without also acknowledging the extreme jew-hatred and violence promoted by the Quran. While we wish we lived in an ideal world with no violence and prejudice, in the real word we must deal with bigger problems first. I would say Anti-semitism, racism against black people in particular, homophobia, transphobia are far more prevalent than Islamophobia.

    • DaHitman

      Brainwashed Islam doesn’t preach peace

    • “Muslims are peaceful because they don’t strictly adhere to puritanical Islam”

      I call them MINOs – Muslims In Name Only.

      But the recent spread of hate preachers and the successful example of an actually Muslim state being created – Islamic State – is now moving ever greater percentages of these so-called “moderates” to the so-called “extremist” version of Islam – meaning Islam as Muhammad, the vile so-called prophet of theirs, practiced.

    • Ambientereal

      There are no “peaceful muslims”, as well as there are no “vegetarian cannibals”, it is an oxymoron. If you don´t believe me ask their women that are treated violently by their husbands and even by the whole muslim community forbidding so many activities that they can easily be called slaves. And it is only a little example of the vast atrocities that “peaceful muslims” do everyday

  • DaHitman

    Don’t spare any thought for the hundreds who die around the world on a daily basis down to Muslims, no.

    Look there is no such thing as a moderate Muslim, show me one protest where they are against extremism on our streets and I may think about changing my mind.

    The only time you will see them on the streets is when others protest against it, they attack them!

  • Greenjohn

    Muslims believe in multiculturalism when they are in a minority in a society. However in countries where a Muslim majority prevails multiculturalism goes out the window. Such societies are cruel misogynistic,homophobic and hostile to other religions.

    Islam is a violent ideology (just read the Quran and the Hadith) that must be opposed by all decent people.

    • DaHitman

      They were happy with immigration until Europeans started flooding the country too, that upset their plans

      • Patently E(uropean)

        True. Thank God for Polish Catholics.

        • DaHitman

          Well at least we know your background

          • Patently E(uropean)

            Am I Polish Catholic. I don’t mind.

          • DaHitman

            Well I’m for getting our borders back

  • mksharma62

    Mathew Parris should ask first of all why should Muslims feel offended if images of their prophet are drawn and shown or cartoons made. No other religious people in the world feel that way if the images of their gods or prophets are drawn. Even if it is bitter satire and bordering on abuse or even abuse all this is tolerated by other religionists to the maximum and only when the reviling exceeds bounds law steps in to avert law and order problems. Long long ago Buddhism also did not countenance the drawings or images of its prophet Buddha. Then first his foot prints were drawn, later his blessing hand, etc. and finally his figures began to be drawn. Later images made, big viharas with big and bigger buddha statues all over the world appeared and in a way idolatry of Hindus in India owes much to this idolatry of Buddhists [though actually the Hindu idolatry might have been more ancient, its development and temple constructions rapidly developed only after Buddhism met with doom in India to a large extent]. Who knows tomorrow even Muslims may draw images of Mohammed and gradually his statues may appear everywhere? Already we have instances (current) in Iran when some images and figures of Mohammed are publicly exhibited… I think not the prejudice against Muslims in general, but the mindset of Muslims must change. They should grow more tolerant and be ready to laugh at themselves – like Sikhs who spin out so many jokes against their own community figures and matters!

  • TNT

    I subscribe for this? What is this mindless apologist s*it?

    • Patently E(uropean)

      It was hidden behind a paywall for the 1st hour. Then the realised what a crap piece it was and removed paywall.

      • davidshort10

        I pay the smallest subscription possible, £2.99 a month on Kindle on my iPhone because after a boycott of a full print subscription of 25 years when the Barclay brothers bought it and brought in the ghastly Andrew Neill I thought I can still read my favourite columnists including friends without contributing too much. Now, you can read it for free by simply getting rid of your cookies once you reach the limit,then start again.

    • Rather worried

      I must say that Matthew Parris’s recent articles are unfortunately grounds for not wanting to buy the Speccie. Sad.

    • Ditto….

  • “venting their hatred towards Muslims?”

    It is perfectly rational to hate Quran – this vile, monstrous hate-filled invention of a 7th century murderous mental case.

    Muslims today are imposing their insane internal blasphemy codes all across the western world. Britain has already fallen; the book which is the root cause of this sort of assault on the basic freedoms of the civilized world deserves that hatred.

    And you are again doing the transparent, ludicrous, laughable Islamist apologia thing by pretending that this hatred is the same as the hatred directed towards Muslims themselves – who are the first victims of this death cult, being usually brainwashed into it as children.

  • DaHitman

    Bet Matthew Parris has never read the Koran, he will understand why they do it and the others never say anything

  • Scradje

    ‘I don’t believe that in the present atmosphere it’s wise to publish images calculated to wound and offend not only fundamentalist Muslims, but middle-of-the-road Muslims too.’
    Why? Is there a special exemption that should be in place for them only? Did we only publish images calculated only to wound nazis in WW3? Could we have cared less if ‘ordinary’ Germans were also offended?

    • Ambientereal

      It offends me to see muslim women to wear those black clothes. It offends me not to be free to say/do what MY LAW allows me to say/do because I may offend someone else´s (foreign) law.

      • Scradje

        Full Islamic dress makes a person unemployable too. Which therefore means that the taxpayer has to subsidise people with hostile beliefs.

      • Rather worried

        It offends me not to be able to eat pork in certain countries, to have to tell women to veil up, to make men and women sit separately and follow different rules, tohave to treat one particular religion and its objects as superior to all others in public etc etc.

        Matthew have you been taking freebies in the Gulf or anything like that? Just wondered.

    • Britain caved in to their threats, and there is now an irrational, medieval, ludicrous Muslim blasphemy code operating in the land, which forbids depicting their vile so-called prophet.

      It is the choice of the people whether that will continue.

  • purpleacky

    People like you, Matthew, would be thrown off a high building and/or stand to death in a Muslim country. Are you sure you want to encourage our progress in that direction?

  • Carter Lee

    Sometimes the mob is right and sometimes the mob is wrong. In this case it is right.

  • m0d3rat3

    a very intellectual argument and thank you for showing rationale at a time when hysteria peaks against the Muslim communities.

    • Nonsense. This article is using the transparent Muslim apologetic points, which are easily demolished.

    • Ambientereal

      Rationale is at the side of those that look at the consequences or their actions. To act following only ideals is very irrational.

    • WTF

      Mis-representation of the facts more like as there is nothing intellectual about this piece of propaganda.

  • davidshort10

    Still can’t get my comments to stay. I am disgusted now by the Spectator. I will cancel my subscription.

    • Greenjohn

      click on “sort by newest”

      • davidshort10

        Thanks, Greenjohn and others! I thought I was being censored for not agreeing with MP who only wrote about his columnist chums and the people who dared criticise him on line. I would v much doubt if he spends a lot of time in certain parts of his East End ‘manor’. i’ve only seen him in gastro-pubs full of wealthy people a stone’s throw from poverty and violence.

        • DaveAtherton20

          Fraser and The Spectator are rather good on near the knuckle comments. After all it is not the Guardian’s Komment Macht Frei.

    • I’m sure that is you repeat some ludicrous line like “Islam is a religion of peace” you’d have no problems at all.

  • Fasdunkle

    The problem is as more gulf money floods into this country the most poisonous islamists are the ones with the funding and the upper hand. That doesn’t do anybody any good.

    When I was at university if anybody had been invited to speak before a student society who wanted to kill gays, adulterers, blasphemers, apostates etc and who wanted to set up a supremacist state where lack of belief in the state ideology meant 2nd class status at best, death at worst, they would have been laughed off the premises.

    These days it is a common occurrence as islamo-fascists regularly appear on campuses – often enabled by people who claim to fight against fascism but in reality they assist it and promote it.

    20 years ago I lived on a street in Bradford which was about 50/50 white/muslim – everybody rubbed along well. Then a deobandi mosque opened down the road – my muslim neighbours were very worried about it but they didn’t protest. Within a year I was being harassed to sell my house. Now the area is 100% muslim – the people who used to just get on with life are gone. In their place are the stoney faced pious bunch and the drug dealers who use islam and its connections as a cover – that area is now very hostile to anybody not in their gang.

    Bradford used to be multicultural – now it isn’t.

    • “Bradford used to be multicultural – now it isn’t.”

      Yes but it is sooooooo enriching, wouldn’t you agree?

      • Fasdunkle

        For a time it was

  • Jaria1

    I dont think Mathew Pariss is aware the people are rightly extremely concerned about the behaviour of terrorists who all worship the prophet .
    I dont see anything resembling the slightest protest let alone action by those that recognise themselves as a loving peaceful religon against those increasing numbers flocking towards Isis who are the opposite of being peaceful and loving.
    Anyone that isnt concerned and ere are those like your Toby Young who think that they are open to diallgue couldnt be more mistaken

    • ” who think that they are open to dialogue ”

      They are open to your submission, inshallah.

    • davidshort10

      Congratulations for spelling both parts of the writer’s name wrongly.

      • Getting his name misspelt is the least of Matthew Parris’s problems.

        A “Quran 101” course would help. I hope The Spectator can pay for it, or we could all chip in.

      • Jaria1

        Thanks we all need pedants to look after minor matters whilst we can concentrate on the important points

        • davidshort10

          Ha .Ha! You dumbo! Get a fucking education and leave me alone, you idiot. When you have completed the education, look up ‘pedantry’, by then you will be able to spell. Depends on your IQ. I will not reply further until you have a high school diploma.

          • Jaria1

            Well done no trouble in spellig fucking i see..
            Your post describes you well.
            High school diplomas clearly teach you nothing but lifes experiences

        • Cyril Sneer

          Win.

      • Jaria1

        ThAts fine we will leave you to look after the spelling whilst others discus the subject

  • Tom M

    Shame on you Parris. Take a look around the world and tell me where there is a Muslim country neighbouring a non muslim country where they live peacefully together. Or where there is a strong Muslim presence in any country that isn’t causing problems. Tell me who it is that is committing appalling atrocities around the world (including the UK) because of their religion.
    And lastly and most importantly who is it that is telling us who isn’t responsible for it all?
    The average man in the street can see all this in spite of all the protestations of the BBC and their ilk and they aren’t daft they are angry and they are being told they are wrong. That is something you never never do.

    • “committing appalling atrocities”

      On the topic of violence and Muslim acceptance and justification of it, and the claim of some poorly educated persons on here that it is all because of “Western imperialism”, what nonsense.

      What sort of “intervention” led to Salman Rushdie being sentenced to death for free speech in 1980s?

      What sort of “intervention” led to cartoonists and Jews being murdered in France and in Denmark for the crime of depicting the so-called “prophet”?

      Violence in Islam is inbuilt. It started the day their so-called prophet invented this vile cult to help him in his conquests.They can deny all they want that the problem is Islam itself, the facts won’t go away.

      But I will concede that *a certain* Imperialism in the Middle East is the root cause of this violence. Let’s have a look at this imperialist, murderous, expansionist, intolerant ideology responsible for it all: Islam.

      pbs.twimg.com/media/B6XFWUaCIAA_OE6.png

    • Parris = journalist => member of NUJ => accociated with UAF = pro-islam. Simples

  • Fasdunkle

    This is the blinkered mindset of the people we are allowing to fund their ideology in towns, cities and universities across the UK

    http://www.arabnews.com/featured/news/720236

  • Diggery Whiggery

    During the Second World War, the government of the day took a hard but necessary decision. They decided to intern pretty much every Italian and German in the country. Most of them had done absolutely nothing wrong, few adhered to National Socialism and many of them were also Jewish, but the risk of even a small number of them acting against this country’s interests was too great. Protecting the home front was considered to be of prime importance.

    Is anybody seriously arguing that this was the wrong thing to do?

    Is anybody seriously denying that we are currently at war and that it is a global war?

    Is anybody seriously arguing that there are people in this country who would do it harm?

    Well then……

    we couldn’t do such a thing today, even if it was feasible, because human rights law would prevent it.

    • Tom M

      During the last war aliens were all interviewed and if considered a threat then interned as you say. Mostly on the Isle of Man (lucky them).
      Internment sounds like a good idea (it would please me no end) but would fail very soon after starting it I fear.
      Firstly it would be difficult for a country that prides itself on freedom of religion and free speech to pick on one religion in particular. I can just hear the wails now. That apart I wouldn’t like to give the Government any excuse to curtail rights at all. Very quickly, once started, it would be my rights that I would find that would be curtailed. For security reasons of course.
      Second where would you put them and for how long? There would be too many to cope with. And their numbers would increase daily because of the civil riots by those not interned.
      On this subject someone else pointed out to me that we had done this in NI during the “troubles” but remember just what sort of mess that resulted in.
      Western Governments are in a bind with Islam and don’t know how to react. Take it as read that Britain won’t do anything without the EU’s agreement (that means never) and the US hasn’t had enough trouble at home yet to even consider it.
      If anybody is going to do something such as ban or curtail the activities of Islam it will be from a country that isn’t directly associated with either of the two mentioned but important enough to have an impact.
      That of course doesn’t rule out actual joint military action somewhere in the Middle East, for Governments that would be the easiest choice.

      • Diggery Whiggery

        “During the last war aliens were all interviewed and if considered a threat then interned as you say.”

        Only at the beginning of the war, by the end they were pretty much all interned in reality.

        I’m not advocating internment today incidentally as the numbers involved would make it just way to costly and unstable.

        If we could get control of our borders so that we could deport all the illegals and exclude further arrivals, I would advocate some form of monetary incentive to leave (it would be cheaper in the long run).

        I would also propose some form of Islam that is compatible with our law and values and therefore permitted under the law. That would of course mean coming up with an authorized version of the Qur’an and Hadiths. Any other form of Islam would therefore be considered a cult and treated accordingly. It would be up muslims to decide whether they stay under those conditions or leave. This is how we dealt with christian extremists years ago and they ended becoming American.

        Freedom of religion is one thing in principle, but in practice Islam is not like other religions and there is a case for treating it differently. A society that seeks to be free, diverse and tolerant cannot accept that millions of people adhere to a doctrine that is intolerant of all those things. Not a society that wants to survive anyway.

  • DaveAtherton20

    Let’s be fair Fraser does let Douglas Murray let it all hang out in The Spectator on Muslims. However, Parris’ article is misjudged. Most of us have only the safety valve of the comments section of articles like this. As we watch our screens and newspapers feeling entirely impotent in the face of Islamofascism and its latest atrocity.

    From what I can see of Muslim and Arab culture, compromise is not only a dirty word but is a sign of weakness. Conflict is decided by a winner-takes-all mentality where either I chop your head off, or you chop off mine.

    At sometime extreme Islamism will have to be confronted. Cameron and the rest of the political establishment do not want to preside over riots in the streets and the accompanying strife that getting to grips even legally with some of these creatures. Imagine what a ban on full face covering, banning arranged marriages, outlawing Sharia, automatic prosecution of parents of daughters FGM afflicted, would provoke?

    The political establishment is kicking the can down the road and Mr. Parris has been sent to calm us down with the accusation of racism.

    • “At sometime extreme Islamism will have to be confronted. ”

      The sooner the better. Any and all means necessary.

      • DVult

        It is coming to that and soon.

        • sebastian2

          I have identical presentiments.

  • omgamuslim

    Multiculturalism should be the default mode in democratic societies. Or am I missing something here?

    • Jack

      Well no, it is a deliberately constructed policy that in operation keeps cultures separate rather than integrating. Multiculturalism isn’t synonymous with respecting other cultures, it is a deliberate policy. Respecting other cultures, politics, faiths, etc should indeed be the default position for democratic societies.

      • omgamuslim

        Fail to see the distinction you are attempting to draw. I can see that cultures can merge or become an amalgam. But integrate ? How? Don’t forget that pre-war Jews were very highly integrated in European societies. It did not cut much ice when it came to it!

        • Jack

          I didn’t say that integration works well and always has worked well, did I? Have you ever actually addressed someone’s argument, or do you always just jump on any chance to quote well known history in a bid to sound insightful?

          First off, I think this will give you a good grounding – http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3600791.stm . It is basic, but it should point you in the right direction for further reading.

          Secondly, your analysis of the position of Jews in (I assume?) 20th century Europe is historically illiterate. To action the holocaust, the Jews had to be ‘otherised’, their culture set apart from everything that made them German, or Polish, or whatever. Multiculturalism essentially breaks that binding glue that genuinely creates social harmony. In my opinion, anyway.

          To merge cultures, to keep things from your heritage but subscribe to the same basic principles as your fellow countrymen and agree to treat each other and your ways of life with respect is obviously possible. To think otherwise is to be in denial, or simply to not want it.

          • omgamuslim

            My point is that the process of ‘otherising’ can take place inspite of integration.

          • “the process of ‘otherising'”

            Muslims self-other. It’s their MO from the day this vile ideology was invented.

          • Jack

            Yes, it can. That is not an argument for multiculturalism though, nor is it against favouring integration over it. It is just a statement of fact. Let me ask you a very genuine question: what do you think of flood defences, are they a good idea? After all, floods can overcome them in extreme circumstances, making them useless.

          • omgamuslim

            Flood defences may be desirable especially when located in the right places.

          • Jack

            Why, when floods can happen even when they are present?

          • omgamuslim

            !00% protection is neither possible nor economic.

    • Cyril Sneer

      That’s only been around since 2004 in this country – it’s a lefty construct, a deliberate attempt to change this nation, it is not a default policy and never has been.

      10 years ago the liberal buzzword was ‘integration’, that’s all you ever heard, integration, integration, integration and now it’s multi-culturalism which is an admittance that integration never worked and now it’s separate cultures living in the same country but not living together or sharing an identity. They should just call it Balkanisation.

    • Importing intolerance into Western civilization was an act of insanity.

      • omgamuslim

        Intolerance in Europe (including the islands) is home-grown.

        • And it was also home-ungrown, during the long centuries of enlightenment.

          Let’s deduce the huge Muslim contribution to its revival – because it is incompatible with civilized life *today* – and see how it goes, eh?

          • omgamuslim

            There is no Muslim contribution to intolerance. Not any that I can detect.

          • “There is no Muslim contribution to intolerance. Not any that I can detect.”

            *chuckle*

          • omgamuslim

            Chuckle is not an instance of intolerance, unless, that is, of your intolerance.

          • You are really pretty poor at this Muslim apologetics thing, you know.

          • omgamuslim

            Where did I offer an apology?

          • Your deceitful posts about the supposedly “protective Islam” reveal it.

            Conquering someone in an aggressive war, and then – if you don’t murder them outright – taxing them higher than your co-religionists and keeping them in a subordinate position is not “tolerance”. It is Islamic supremacism in action.

            Islamic State today is following Quran and Hadith *to the letter*, after the example of the so-called prophet. Murdering POWs and keeping the conquered population in subordinate position, destruction of “idols” and oppression of women: that is the *real* Islam.

          • omgamuslim

            You misunderstand the events in history. Muslims did not conquer Jews. They liberated the population from the oppressive impositions of the the Byzantines. Muslims were the ones who made it possible for Jews to enter, live and pray in J’salem after 500 yrs of ban imposed by the Byzantines.
            IS is fighting a civil war. What is your objection to that? Murdering POWs? Not Muslims. Richard the Lionheart did that, Raymond did that. You are just too fond of baseless myths.

          • ” Murdering POWs? Not Muslims.”

            http://wikiislam.net/wiki/List_of_Killings_Ordered_or_Supported_by_Muhammad

            “You are just too fond of baseless myths.”

            Coming from a Muslim apologist, who tries to label the supremacist imperialist Muslim history of conquest – based on Quranic injunction in 8:39, “And fight with them until there is no more unbelief and religion should be only for Allah” – as “Muslim tolerance”, that’s truly funny: thank you for the laugh.

          • You just made me throw up.

          • omgamuslim

            Sorry. Looked like that was the last bit of your brain.

          • Is that the best you can do? Probably is, you inbred twat.

          • omgamuslim

            How can you know, you brainless batrachian?

          • How tolerant are muslims to apostates?
            How tolerant are muslims to practising homosexuals?
            How tolerant are muslims to non-muslims in Mecca?

            Please do tell me … but I can already predict …you will NOT answer me.

          • omgamuslim

            Not been un-grown. Many of the posts on this and other threads are evidence.

          • No, those are the posts of people who are the carriers of the imported intolerance I mentioned – Muslim apologists like you, who try to portray the ghastly, murderous, bloody history of Islam’s imperial conquests as “tolerantly spreading to give protection to other peoples”.

            http://pbs.twimg.com/media/B6XFWUaCIAA_OE6.png

    • TNT

      Only a Muslim would suggest something so stupid.

      But who am I to judge? I, in turn, believe that preparing to be colonised and civilised sooner or later by the West should be the default mode in Islamic societies.

    • luna

      Islam: House of Islam and House of War

      The world is divided into the House of Islam and the House of War, the Dar al-Islam and the Dar al-harb. The Dar al-Islam is all those lands in which a Muslim government rules and the Holy Law of Islam prevails. Non-Muslims may live there on Muslim sufferance. The outside world, which has not yet been subjugated, is called the “House of War,” and strictly speaking a perpetual state of jihad, of holy war, is imposed by the law. The law also provided that the jihad might be interrupted by truces as and when appropriate. In fact, the periods of peace and war were not vastly different from those which existed between the Christian states of Europe for most of European history.

      The law thus divides unbelievers theologically into those who have a book and profess what Islam recognizes as a divine religion and those who do not; politically into dhimmis, those who have accepted the supremacy of the Muslim state and the primacy of the Muslims, and harbis, the denizens of the Dar al-harb, the House of War, who remain outside the Islamic frontier, and with whom therefore there is in principle, a canonically obligatory perpetual state of war until the whole world is either converted or subjugated.

      Sources: Bernard Lewis, The Multiple Identities of the Middle East, Schocken Books, New York, 1998, pp.121-122.

      • omgamuslim

        ” …. perpetual state of war until the whole world is either converted or subjugated.”

        Sounds very much like the modern Western attitude to the rest of the world!

  • davidshort10

    If it is true, as he claims, that Matthew Parris reads the comments to his article, there are many comments that refer to Mr P’s homosexuality. I think a lot of people would wonder if an article about Muslim (not Islamic) prejudice against homosexuality is not overdue. And no journalist is ever going to die criticising Muslims, Islam or Mohamed. if a journalist is not brave enough to do so, he or she should step out of the debate and not create out of thin air – or should I say the view of chummy columnists and on-line drunks – that there is a scary threat to Muslims in parts of urban England. Re Charlie Hebdo, i suppose the nearest thing that we have is Private Eye and I can never forget the editor, Ian Hislop, saying he wouldn’t criticise Islam/Muslim/Mohamed in his magazine because ‘I don’t want to die!’ then made that hideous, chipmunk grin. Stay safe, Hislop and Parris!

    • edlancey

      Absolutely. Well, since he’s such a slight fellow, at least none of Parris’ muslim friends will need to worry about hurting their “bad backs” (which came in so convenient for claiming DLA) when they hurl him off the roof of Tower Hamlets town hall.

  • A real liberal

    You just don’t get it, do you? And you won’t get it until it’s too late. Because the existential threat that didactic, hateful, racist, nihilistic, misogynistic, history-hating, tolerant (of the most obnoxious and barbaric behaviour by other Muslims) Islam poses to the modern, liberal societies in which you have always lived is beyond your imagining. You just don’t want to think its possible. Well, it is. Look around you.

    • cartimandua

      They really refuse to believe the evidence of their own eyes. We really need t insist Muslims here sign up to modernity and civilized western values.
      Start with Mosques which do not allow women into the main hall… shut them.
      And ban head covering.

      • “shut them.”

        Indeed. The western world has been *far* too tolerant in the face of their hate-preaching intolerance.

      • Ban halal meat too.

  • davidshort10

    Let’s have an article by MP about Muslim attitudes to homosexuality.

    • TNT

      Excellent! He could even do a little accompanying video for YouTube, filming himself with his moderate Muslim guests standing and talking on the flat-roof ledge of a four-storey building.

      It’s hard to know what to be repulsed by more – the core misery and savagery of Islam, or the deliberately self-obfuscated vision of those who excuse it.

  • davidshort10

    Let MP hold hands with his partner drinking alcohol in one of the outside boozer ‘patrolled’ by certain bands of bearded chaps in the East End where he lives and works.

  • davidshort10

    Next time I’m in England and the East End I’ll find out which boozers that are patrolled and will ask MP to sit outside holding hands with a chap and drinking alcohol. Then he will have some real life to write about.

  • MacGuffin

    This article is nonsense.

    If muslims want to be free from accusations of anti-female, anti-jewish, anti-gay prejudices, they can, you know…NOT DO THOSE THINGS. Easy!

    If, however, they wish to continue spouting their backward, medievalist, bigoted nonsense, then they will continue to be called out on it. Quite rightly, in my view.

    I care not one jot for the bruised egos and tender feelings of extremist muslims. Why should I?

  • BillRees

    “Something dangerous is brewing beneath the surface in our country”.

    Matthew, you may have noticed (or perhaps you haven’t) that something has already brewed and has risen to the surface in the Middle East – and it is anti-Christian hatred that is expressed in much more than just words.

    Christians are being murdered all around the Muslim world, and our leaders are doing nothing about it.

    I am not a religious person, but I recognise our Judaeo-Christian heritage, and that it is being threatened by our political elite bending over backwards to assuage Muslim opinion.

    To compare anti-Islamic feeling to anti-Semitism is a bogus argument. Jewish people don’t try to impose their views on the rest of society. Unfortunately many Muslims do. If the rest of us don’t like that, what are we supposed to do?

  • edlancey

    “There are questions of timing and judgment here.”

    Coward.

    • The only question of timing should be, when will Britain exit the current state of self-subjugation to the irrational, medieval Islamic blasphemy code?

      And the answer is, the time is now.

    • sebastian2

      For mohammedans the timing is “never” and the judgement is “sharia”.

  • Frank

    Clickbait article.

  • Patently E(uropean)

    Re the whataboutery citing crusades/KKK/Spanish Inquisition/etc

    It is called civilisation. Gradually understanding what is wrong and changing it.

    Is that possible with the final word of Allah (Koran) and the tradition (Hadith) of the perfect human-being Mohamed that all muslims must aim to emulate?

    It IS possible if Muslims at some level realise that Islam is a religion and like all religions a made up set of rules which become increasingly irrelevant with time. In fact Muslims did understand this until the revival of puritanical Islam in the past few decades. Just look at how the majority of urban muslim women even in Islamic countries dressed in the 60s and 70s and compare it with how they dressed now. Do you think they found the scriptures stipulating the hijab/burka only recently? The increasing observance of the headscarf is only a benign symptom of what’s happened to Muslim society. Whether it is Wahabi, Salafi or Deobandi, they all aim to get back to basics & getting rid of moderation and innovation. Unfortunately, the basics are not quite compatible with the 21st century.

    • Crusades were just a belated and half-hearted response to 400 years of Muslim murder and mayhem.

      The only problem with Crusades is that there wasn’t more of them, earlier.

      • sebastian2

        This is an often overlooked point that should be overlooked no more. Contrast the crusades with mohammedan invasions of Southern and Central Europe.

        • I would even say, it’s more a case of deliberate deception than of merely overlooking the undeniable historical facts about cause-effect relations.

      • luna

        Crusades were also poorly organized and poorly executed. And they led to some attacks on European Jews.

    • As for the woeful devolution of Muslim world, David Starkey said it best:

      https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B7bN5E1CcAAz7lx.png

    • luna

      Sura 9:33, simply put, predicts the conquest of Islam over all religions. Islam must dominate the world through jihad.

      http://quran.com/9/33

      It is He who has sent His Messenger with guidance and the religion of truth to manifest it over all religion, although they who associate others with Allah dislike it.

  • davidshort10

    MP says ” After the discrediting of anti-Semitism, after the discrediting of discrimination against black people, after the discrediting of prejudice towards the Irish, I hadn’t expected to live to see a powerful generalised antipathy against any race or religion gather popular force here”. Well, there isn’t one! There isn’t one!!!!!
    Where is the evidence for God’s sake!
    I am old enough to know about the discrimination against blacks and it still goes on. Lots of people in the establishment – of which MP is one, as a posh Oxbridge chap and commentator on the radio and telly – still hate and discriminate against Jews but there’s never been any big popular discrimination against Jews, quite the opposite, and against the irish was a long, long time ago and the Irish did not get hell when the IRA was murdering people on London with bombs in the 70s. We knew it was PIRAd and that they were a small, evil, socialist-fascist bunch of individuals not representative of the Irish people. This is a truly bad article. If MP wrote this in a hurry just to fill space he should send his fee to a charity.

    • ” any race or religion”

      Notice the old, dumb, laughable, ludicrous line sneaked in about Islam being a race, so if you dislike “Noble” Quran’s injunctions to chop off hands and feet and crucify unbelievers, you’re obviously a racist.

  • Guest

    Something dangerous is brewing beneath the surface in our country, and it worries me that warning lights are not flashing in the minds of many of those I respect most. After the discrediting of anti-Semitism, after the discrediting of discrimination against black people, after the discrediting of prejudice towards the Irish, I hadn’t expected to live to see a powerful generalised antipathy against any race or religion gather popular force here without stirring at least the more liberal of my fellow citizens into resistance. I expected a sense of alarm. There is none.

    Last Saturday my Times colleague Janice Turner used her weekly column to sound a note of anxiety about what she called a new shrillness in attitudes towards British Muslims, and a ‘lumping together’ of all Muslims as though all were extremists. Indeed, she said, we are starting to do the extremists’ work for them. She concluded: ‘In our poisonous, polarising age, it is time to stop seeking difference and ask how we are the same.’

    Now Janice is hardly a bleeding-heart multi-culturalist. She’s been a consistent secularist and has spoken up sharply and repeatedly against sharia, against Islamic attitudes to women, and against the wearing of the full veil in court. So have I. I join her in self-identifying as no fan of important parts of Islamic teaching. Speaking for myself, I’d say (and have) that as world religions go, Islam is not one I much like.

    But the response to Janice’s column shocked me. Among some 500 online posts (a lot, for the subscription-only Times) I’d say that at least 90 per cent were hostile to her argument, and many of them biliously so. I got the same response last summer after writing in the same vein: if you read your online responses (and I do) you can emerge from this feeling you’ve been spending time somewhere pretty unpleasant.

    • cartimandua

      Maybe because the people who post in the Times have a genuine empathy for the millions displaced by hardline Islam, the women of the Muslim world almost universally abused etc.
      The empathy of those “offended” such as yourself is puddle deep.

      • davidshort10

        ? ?

  • Roger Hudson

    Islam was never an accepted belief in England (Britain even), didn’t Edward I (longshanks) set the tone centuries ago. My personal belief is mine and I don’t ram it down other’s throats nor wear any public marks of it. Perhaps Matthew should go and help build a church in Saudi Arabia to learn something.

  • cartimandua

    Its not “bilious” “Guest” to be horrified by a casual acceptance of misogyny,, child abuse, hatred of gays, inhumane animal slaughter, large family sizes on benefits, cousin marriages leading to birth defects etc etc , and of course young British Muslims running away to a mass murdering gang.
    No one has a problem with individuals who sign up to decent western values.

  • davidshort10

    Something dangerous is brewing beneath the surface in [of] our country, and it worries me that warning lights are not flashing in the minds of many of those I respect most. [Flashing warning lights not much use underground]. After the discrediting of anti-Semitism, after the discrediting of discrimination against black people, after the discrediting of prejudice towards the Irish, [decades ago]I hadn’t expected to live to see a powerful generalised antipathy against any race or religion gather popular force here [not happened] without stirring at least the more liberal of my fellow citizens into resistance [hence no resistance]. I expected a sense of alarm. There is none.[hence no alarm or even sense of alarm].

    Last Saturday my Times colleague Janice Turner [handy source for Islamic information] used her weekly column to sound a note of anxiety about what she called a new shrillness [oh, dear, shrill!] in attitudes towards British Muslims [from her vantage point in the Muslim societies across Britain which she took up on her many travels the length and breadth of the nation[, and a ‘lumping together’ of all Muslims as though all were extremists [so many sources, I’m sure![. Indeed, she said, we are starting to do the extremists’ work for them.[Not me, mate] She concluded: ‘In our poisonous, polarising age, it is time to stop seeking difference and ask how we are the same.’[Is that enough, Ed. please send cheque soonest, School fees, don’cha know!]

    Now Janice is hardly a bleeding-heart multi-culturalist. [No doubt!] She’s been a consistent secularist and has spoken up sharply and repeatedly against sharia, against Islamic attitudes to women, and against the wearing of the full veil in court. [But not presumably in any country or region where she might get arrested or beaten up] So have I. I join her in self-identifying as no fan of important parts of Islamic teaching. Speaking for myself, I’d say (and have) that as world religions go, Islam is not one I much like.[so what].

    But the response to Janice’s column shocked me. [Oh, dear!] Among some 500 online posts (a lot, for the subscription-only Times) I’d say that at least 90 per cent were hostile to her argument, and many of them biliously so.[450 people, some no doubt drunk] I got the same response last summer after writing in the same vein: if you read your online responses (and I do) you can emerge from this feeling you’ve been spending time somewhere pretty unpleasant.[As opposed to always being somewhere pleasant as will be the case with privleged national columnists]. What’s so notable is not that lots of people may disagree with a column — I’m used to that and often expect it — but the hateful way the views are expressed: hateful towards Muslims, all Muslims, and hateful towards those of us who don’t share the antipathy. We are immediately damned as sympathising with extremists, despising our country, ‘living in a bubble’, not understanding how ‘most people’ feel, and being ignorant of what’s happening. [Do come along, well-off chaps and chappeses who dominate the print now are accused of that in non-Mussie situations and rightly so] As a matter of fact I live during the working week [which means I have a weekend retreat in the country, don’t cha know] in London borough of Tower Hamlets [so do rich people who work in Canary Wharf] , one of the most Islamic localities in Britain. I shop in the (overwhelmingly Bengali) Whitechapel Road and Stepney markets, I travel almost exclusively by bus, tube and train, [as most people in London do otherwise you’d never get anywhere] and I see the same country my critics do.[they live in the same country] It follows that I know that Muslims, like Christians, come in all shapes and sizes and with a very wide range of opinions of matters religious and secular, and that millions of British Muslims are worried about extremism, some of them worried sick.[It only follows if you talk to them, do you? Give us some quotes from your workaday Muslim muckas!].

    I’m afraid there’s a disinclination to hear this. [from whom?]‘Moderate’ Muslims are attacked as ‘failing to speak up’ where, when?] — and to my dismay I read my friend and fellow campaigner for free speech, David Aaronovitch, [oops anothher writing chum] writing that ‘Muslims have a problem: they don’t believe in free speech.’ [I could go on with these comments, but you get the point]
    Actually very few people believe in free speech, but I do — yet I admit I had and have my doubts about some of the ‘Je suis Charlie Hebdo’ stuff. There are passengers joining this bandwagon whose love of free expression strikes me as having rather a lot to do with dislike of Muslims, and whom I struggle to imagine (for instance) joining a march in defence of the rights of Muslims to publish cartoons of Jesus as a terrorist or Mary as a whore.

    Of course I defend people’s right to mock religion. Of course I was appalled at the Paris murders. I’ve myself written that mockery — even insult — is an important weapon against oppressive piety. But I could not agree with another good friend, Daniel Finkelstein, in arguing last month that not only must we defend people’s right to publish mocking images of the Prophet Mohammed, we must assert their wisdom in doing so. I don’t believe that in the present atmosphere it’s wise to publish images calculated to wound and offend not only fundamentalist Muslims, but middle-of-the-road Muslims too. There are questions of timing and judgment here. When sensitivities are inflamed it is possible to go too far.

    These, I believe, are such times. A few weeks ago, someone sent me (and, I suppose, other journalists) at my newspaper’s office at Westminster a noxious little booklet called ‘Islam Surveyed’. It had over a hundred pages culled from media websites across the spectrum (Guardian, Daily Mail, Telegraph, Huffington Post): a selection exclusively of hostile comments posted underneath articles that had mentioned Islam or Muslims. The anonymous authors of ‘Islam Surveyed’ implicitly claimed that these universally highly ‘recommended’ or ‘liked’ anti-Muslim/Islam comments showed that the vast majority of the British public shared their own antipathies. Readers were to conclude that mass public opinion was overwhelmingly hostile — and (I suppose) to infer that the hostility must therefore be right.

    That use of the word ‘surveyed’ was nasty — as though through some systematic and scientific method something about Muslims themselves and their religion had been established. Imagine receiving a booklet ‘Judaism Surveyed’ which was just an uncritical collection of examples of popular anti-Semitism. My response would be ‘However many people are anti-Semitic, I’m not.’ The online poison-spreaders’ argument — that hostility to Muslims is very widespread so we’d better get wise — should meet the same response. I’m unable to shake off the suspicion that beneath the furious assertions that almost everybody agrees with a point of view, lies the implication that my sort had better wise up. ‘You just don’t get it, do you?’ they say.

    Well I do get it. But I don’t agree with it. The passionate intensity that Yeats said the worst were full of now seems to grip the centre. Anti-zealots are becoming zealous in their anti-zealotry, and I’m unsettled by the mood.

    • TNT

      I wish you had added more parenthetical notes. 🙂

      • davidshort10

        I might yet do so! It was a bit of a long job and I was about to leave work. I took the effort because I find it almost impossible to believe that MP could write such lightweight piece about something that is considered in his world to be important. i don’t actually think it is. I think that the authorities just need to be told to apply the law and regulations to everybody as normal every day and in every circumstance. I applaud for instance bus drivers who ask a veiled person to lift the veil when the person proffers a photo ID. This should be acceptable, and it is to the average bus driver full of passengers some of whom may be Muslim and some of whom may not be.

  • SwitchCode9

    look hear Matthew its not racisim its not culture …ITS all about Crique of a Politiacl IDEAOLOGY …have we NOT the right to crituqe the Left the Right
    communisim..natizism…librals?
    can we ?…. i HATE COMMUNISTS ..I HATE NATIZS….I HATE TOTALITERIANISM..
    DOES THAT MAKE ME A BIGOT TOWARDS COMMUNISTS?..NATZIs?

    NO i am FREE to crituqe their IDEAOLOGY ….SO WHEN A ‘RELIGION’ COMES ALONG WITH A MASSIVE POLITICAL AGENDA AND IDEAOLOGY
    I WILL…I WILL… I WILL…CRITQUE IT TO MY HEART CONTENT

    ITS NOT PERSONAL…ITS POLITICS

  • aRcaNum

    It’s about time.

  • cartimandua

    It is fundamental to western civilization that we are able to separate ideas (religion) from people. They are not the same at all. Muslims like to claim they are the same as their beliefs but that is just not so.
    If cannibals turned up and said they had to eat other people some liberals would go Aww Ok then just a baby or two.
    Lefty liberal men are always awfully keen to sell women and children down the river.
    Its not on Parris it really isn’t whatever the ethnicity of the women and children.

    • Indeed. World’s first people liberated from Islam will be the Muslims themselves.

      • cartimandua

        They are suffering dreadfully wherever it has political power. That poor chap in Saudi who merely blogged for reform could actually be beheaded and Parris would rather not “offend”.

  • Hegelman

    Will you kindly accept my word that I have no more dislike for Islam or Muslims than for any other sector of humanity, but that I DO believe MOST zealously in MY DIVINE RIGHT TO FREEDOM?

    I dislike ANYONE intensely who deprives me of my rights – and that would include YOU, Mathew.

    Clear?

    ZEALOTRY in the right cause is NECESSARY and bracing.

  • Hegelman

    “When sensitivities are inflamed it is possible to go too far.”

    Sez who? YOU are inflaming MY sensibilities. Should I shut YOU up?

    It’s splendid to go “too far”. I suppose Luther and Marx and, er, Jesus, went “too far”.

    “Well I do get it.”

    Oh no you don’t.

  • Stop giving column inches to Douglas Murray then.

  • Hegelman

    “I struggle to imagine (for instance) joining a march in defence of the rights of Muslims to publish cartoons of Jesus as a terrorist or Mary as a whore.”

    I would, if the said Muslims were threatened with death.

    Satisfied?

    • cartimandua

      Muslims regularly call white women whores. They may not routinely call Mary a whore but they do call real living women and girls whores and in the case of little girls we know how many are then treated.
      Labour MP Sarah Champion believes the number of victims may reach 1 million.

    • Feminister

      But Jesus wasn’t a terrorist and Mary wasn’t a whore.

  • Catherine Allinson

    And so Matthew do you ever pause to wonder why it is that so many commenters (mild mannered Times readers) overwhelmingly disagreed with the Janice Turner piece? And why you find yourself at odds with your Times colleagues David Aaronovitch and Danny Finkelstein – men not known for their extreme views? And why you even find yourself at odds with the former head of the equalities commission Trevor Philips who has gone rogue this last week criticising the very multiculturalism he promoted and its legacy and in particular the amount of government money thrown at so called community leaders to appease their followers? He described this as a racket and indeed it can only be seen in retrospect to have fed extremism not to have assuaged it. Pause for thought…

    • Hegelman

      What is wrong with multiculturalism?

      Just because one group – the Muslims – refuse to integrate, that does not mean others like Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists or Jews should also get trageted.

      • cartimandua

        Nothing wrong with a multi racial society where individuals may believe whatever fairy tale they choose. Belief must stay in the private sphere to protect that freedom of belief.
        Multiculturalism claims for the most primitive customs “equality” with our modern western culture.
        That’s rubbish isn’t it?

        • Hegelman

          Reason is all one needs.

      • Penny

        Are you confusing a plural society with a multicultural society, Hegelman? Most people are fine with the former but realise the latter is unworkable.

      • sebastian2

        This a fair point actually. The other groups you mentioned may be tarred with the same brush. This is hugely unjust. Part of the problem lies in the terms sometimes used – by the BBC for instance describing people as “asian”. For the sake of the wholly blameless we should be specific about who we blame.

  • Hegelman

    “Was ‘Je Suis Charlie’ just an example of people venting their hatred towards Muslims?”

    No.

    People would have responded just as angrily had the killers been Christians protesting at cartoons lampooning Christ.

    • Alexsandr

      Je suis charlie was, to me, the distate of one group of people trying to impose their tenets on the rest of us. In the west over the last century we have been slowly stripping back the medieval religious stuff.
      we have allowed lampooning of religion (life of brian, dave allen, stanley baxter, vicar of dibley)
      We have stopped considering women as their husbands chattels and now consider they are equals in society
      We have stopped brushing child abuse under the carpet (largely since Thats Life! openly discussed it on prime time TV, and started childline.
      I could go on
      But now we have a load of people who want to talk to an imaginery friend and who venerate a mysogenistic, intolerant and violent so called prophet, who have a book full of incitement to haterd and violence.
      And many of them think violence, private or state, againt people who are apostates, or who lampoon their tenets is justified. I say to them
      Sorry. in you live in a western liberal democracy, which I like to think the UK largely si, then you have to accept the values. Or go somewhere else.
      And the Danish shootings just showed us how necessary je suis charlie was

      I do not agree with what you have to say, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it. (Voltaire -or his biographer may have made it up)

      Jeg er Charlie

  • Terence Wilkinson

    Great piece. It is time that someone stood up for the vast majority of law-abiding Muslims. In fact I think that Muslims have had a generally positive impact on British life.

    • Alexsandr

      How can you be a law abiding muslim when the violence and intolerant Koran tells you otherwise?
      Because to deny the truth of the Koran is to be an apostate and to be an apostate invites being killed.
      look up koran 4:89

      • Terence Wilkinson

        I live in Glasgow and have never personally been the victim of violence at the hands of a Muslim. A Celtic fan did throw a rock at me. Should I hate all Celtic fans for that reason? Perhaps that does not provide me with enough safety, so should I hate Catholics and the Irish too? There are people in Scotland who would say that I should and have nothing to do with anyone with these labels. That is the problem with labels: it leads you to judge people for what they are, not who they are.

        • Alexsandr

          Methinks you need to stop being so naive.

    • cartimandua

      There is more to it than merely not being crims. Muslims are unemployed (75% of women and 50% of men) yet they have larger family sizes raised on benefits both in and out of work.
      What is positive about that? What is positive about separating women into “good” covered possessions of men and “bad” (any female with real choices in life).
      Sarah Champion thinks the victims of Muslim gangs may be as high as 1 million. That’s 1 million victims of trafficking and gang rape.
      Positive really? All that is replicated in other EU countries. The rape risk for young Swedish females is now 1 in 4.

    • vieuxceps2

      Please list the positive aspects of muslims in Britain. Won’t take long.

    • AverageGuyInTheStreet

      Hahahahahhahahahhahhahhahahaa!

  • Suzy61

    You deftly swerve a huge issue because, I suppose, you have no answer for it.

    Moderate Muslims are ‘attacked’ because they fail to speak up, you say.

    Why don’t you address this Matthew?

    Why are you not asking the moderate Muslims WHY they fail to speak up?

    It is not as if they are somehow ‘unable’ because they usually find it very easy to mobilise themselves and take to the streets (Palestine is the normal dog-whistle) …….but not against the blood-thirsty Islamist that are to blame for causing the non-existent backlash the moderates supposedly fear.

    Could it be that Muslims will not (cannot) condemn fellow Muslims? At least not in a whole-hearted, sincere way.The saga of the three runaway ‘jihadi brides’ is a perfect case in point. The families blamed everyone but themselves (Muslims) and the barbaric clan they have been enticed by (Muslims). They are described as ‘normal’. British families and yet choose to seek legal representation from a fellow Muslim (of course) who is known to be an apologist for extremists.

    They reap what they sow, I’m afraid.

    • cartimandua

      In Pakistan Muslim female literacy is very low indeed. No wonder their children here run rings around them with technology. Those children don’t love their parents and its down to inherited trauma because abuse towards women in Muslim culture is almost universal. 70 to 90 % of women in Pakistan are hit.
      There is also a problem about “traditional” roles for men and women being impossible in the West.
      No Muslim youth can support a non working wife and a vast brood.
      The other reason those kids don’t love their parents is family size. They often seem to come from very large families.

      • WTF

        Careful now, please don’t give them any more excuses than they already use for their behavior !

        • cartimandua

          Multiculturalism sacrifices everyone . It sacrifices ethnic minority women and children first.

        • AverageGuyInTheStreet

          Well there’s the much lower average IQ levels due to the inbreeding with 1st cousin marriage as the norm. And then there’s the further brain damage and dehumanisation in Muslim children caused by repetitive head-banging rote learning of bonkers ancient scrawlings in madrassas. That’s not to excuse so-called British children running off to Syria to join the most repugnant crowd since the Nazis, or those who strap on suicide vests, but it might help explain it.

  • WTF

    Perhaps I misunderstand Matthew Parris’s headline but whose ANTIPATHY are we really referring to, ours or those of the Islamic faith ?

    When we listen to Muslim hate preachers like Anjem Chowdary & many others their hostility, antagonism, animosity, opposition, enmity, dislike, distaste, ill will, ill feeling, hatred, hate, abhorrence, loathing, grudge & repugnance to non Muslims is the epitome of ANTIPATHY. That’s the definition of that word so is it any wonder we rightly fear & loathe Islam for what it represents. Its not Islamophobia but a very real Islamofacism we fear and with good reason.

    A useful link was supplied by Santiago Matamoros in these posts cataloging 43 known acts of multiple killings carried out by or for their prophet and with such a role model as this, is it any wonder we might have a little antipathy towards those who follow his teachings.

    Perhaps Mr. Parris can justify, excuse or appease these acts of violence that are used to try and justify similar acts of violence today !

  • TNT

    The camel-p*ss prophet was engaged in an act of war or mass-murder on average ONCE EVERY SIX WEEKS for the last nine years of its wretched life.

    That is all we need to know about Islam. Matthew Parris is a disgrace.

    • and in his spare time he f**ked a 9 year old girl called Aisha …

      And this guy is supposed to be their ultimate human, who they take their morals from.

      It’s like saying: “Jimmy Saville is my hero, and I will live my life exactly like he did.”

      • TNT

        Indeed.

        And Aisha was more likely six-years-old when that thing began violating her.

        • Always_Worth_Saying

          And true Brit, Mohammed Farrah, named his daughter ….. Aisha.

    • Hegelman

      Form my comments you can verify that I have absolute contempt for Parris and defend the Hebdo cartoons unconditionally.

      But Mohammed founded a religion that made huge,irreplaceable contributions to civilization. It created buildings as beautiful as the Taj Mahal and spread to the West the concept of the zero from India.

      Muslims pioneered algebra (an Arabic word) and much early optics and physics. They were far more tolerant of Jews than the Christians were until recently. Their civiilization deserves respect and gratitude.

      • TNT

        An over-rated tourist spot does not a culture make.

        And early Arab steps in maths and science were soon halted as Islam mercilessly prevailed. The achievements of Islam are clear today – and they are neither numerous nor desirable.

        No respect. No gratitude. Islam is a cesspit.

      • Cincinnatus

        Islam’s contribution to civilization is nil. To the contrary, Islam represents and is a force of barbarity in the world.
        Islam and its pedophile prophet deserve no respect and certainly no gratitude.

  • Hegelman

    What a poor thinker Parris is. What a mediocre mind he has. In the realm of ideas, how can you get anywhere without “going too far”?

  • SchtenGraby

    Well you must have expected it Matthew.

    What do I dislike most?
    Mobs (of all shapes and sizes)…

    • TNT

      And you are part of the biggest and vilest.

      • SchtenGraby

        Nice try TNT, but missed again…

        • TNT

          Not at all, dear. You’re still a teeth-gnashing cheerleader for savagery and mayhem.

          • SchtenGraby

            I think I’m quite the opposite. Not sure how mobs are synonymous with civilised behaviour, but perhaps they are where you live. Love & kisses…

          • TNT

            Love and kisses from a proselytiser for beheadings and ‘judicial’ limb removal?

            Interesting.

          • SchtenGraby

            I’m not in favour of either of those things and I’m sure neither are many Muslims…

  • Freeworld

    I have to say I’m very very disheartened by such morally pompous outpouring, for goodness sake Mathew don’t shoot the messenger, everyone of us in the western world is subject to a curtailing of our hard won freedoms by the constant and determined threats from this vile medieval so called religion which of course is simply a cover for a totalitarian fascist political system. It’s not our fault that there is such a stream of negative stories about the followers of Islam the stories are reflective of what’s happening not some fictional spiteful rumour. Israel defends itself against unprovoked attack and the Muslim community can magic up thousands in a coordinated protest, where are these thousands when we the non Muslims are attacked, raped and murdered by their followers. Well I suppose part of the answer to that lies in the frequency of such outrages, today another atrocity this time on holiday makers in Tunisia. Your piety Mathew is nauseating.

  • Kkat

    Matthew please read up on what an Islamist is. You should be anti-Islamist!
    How can you write about a topic when you don’t even understand the basics.

    Where’s Douglas Murray?

  • Des Demona

    I feel that you can’t see the difference between anti-islamist and anti-islam.
    People should be free to practice whatever religion floats their boat – until they decide to blow me up/behead me/tax me/deny me human rights because I don’t happen to subscribe to their views.

    Islamist versus Islam .That is the difference.

  • anotherjoeblogs

    On the spectrum between Smashy & Nicey and Vlad the Impaler, M.P. sits smashingly nicely on the panglossian end of the spectrum with Pollyanna somewhere middling.

  • Biggleswade St Claire

    “There are questions of timing and judgment here. When sensitivities are inflamed it is possible to go too far”
    So Nostradamus Parris, when do you suggest the exact right time is to draw pictures that offend ?
    Bad timing indeed, but then you could be telling us of the vibrant delights of Tunisia…
    We’re talking of a weekly (daily ?) roll call of innocent dead lives here, not your suspicions of some Dear friend naughty opinions,
    I doubt you “get it” at all, or is it your turn to be the voice of reason & compassion in the Spectator this week ?

  • Alan McGinley

    Completely agree with your comments Rik.

    Can no body in the political establishment see the blatantly obvious that Islamic extremism is as vile and destructive and just as dangerous as the Nazis were in the 1930’s? Can they not see that they have the same fanatical beliefs in their ideology’s i.e. join us or be exterminated? Do the politicians not see that their policy of appeasement does not work on fanatics? The similarities between the present and the 1930’s are astounding like a rerun. Again we seam not have strong politicians with the intelligence to identify evil when its in their face or the ability to stamp out this evil before it is too late. Sadly it will be the innocent from all religious and cultural backgrounds who will pay the ultimate price for their lack of action in dealing with this threat, the same as they now do in many parts of the world where this fanatical evil has taken root.

    • WTF

      There are too many similarities and I think the end result will be tears once again when Islam has to be put in its place once more.

  • Dogsnob

    The very second I hear that Irish people, black people or Jewish people are set on a course to overtake the population of Europe through strategic fecundity, I will be on alert. Even if they are peaceful.

  • Simon Fay

    Clickbait from the faux-country-curate. Go and impale your bum on a scimitar, love.

  • Mark

    Many in the Warsaw Ghetto didn’t believe that “resettlement in the east” meant death and so they cooperated with their own deportation in the hope of something better, in some cases they even argued against those who tried to resist.

    People who write articles like Matthews article above don’t believe what is happening around the world and in London. They think that by cooperating with those who wish them dead, and siding against those who try to resist, they will be left alone.

    It is called denial.

  • John Andrews

    As Rotterdam’s (Muslim) Mayor Ahmed Aboutaleb put it, Muslims who do not enjoy the freedom of expression and refuse to integrate should “get the hell out of here.” If we had more people like him we might accept that the extremists are a minority.

  • Always_Worth_Saying

    ‘if you read your online responses (and I do)’

    Hope you’re reading this. Your multi cultural secular paradise is a dangerously religiously and racially segregated **** ****. It is like Ulster in the 1960s. You can cut the tension with a knife. It will kick off much sooner than you think and your sort will not do well out of it.

  • AverageGuyInTheStreet

    Jews don’t go around raping thousands and thousands of white girls because they’re white, or engaging in heroin warfare, or engage in barbaric acts of mass terrorism.

    • Dan O’Connor

      I am positive that the vast majority of the influencial Jews in international finance goverment , media, the entertainment industry and academia are fully opposed to the demographic de-Aryanisation ( white minoritization ) of the West
      It’s great to have them aboard

      • Innit Bruv

        Aboard the good ship “Looney Tunes”….
        “Great to have them ON BOARD”, you klutz

        • Dan O’Connor

          Never heard of ” welcome aboard ” or ” come aboard ” ?

          Landlubber as well , eh ?

          • Innit Bruv

            I have, it has a slightly different meaning.

          • davidshort10

            it doesn’t.

          • Innit Bruv

            It does (just a question of knowing the English language,that’s all).

  • AgZarp

    What’s with all these lefty BS articles from the Spectator recently?

  • Dan O’Connor

    It may be impossible for you to understand this concept Mr Parris , because it would turn your world view paradigm upside down on its head.
    But the greatest problem in the West today is not the presence of wide spread discrimination .
    The problem is, that there isn’t any.

  • Icebow

    It is Mohammedanism that is scary, and its useful idiots like Parris. ‘It isn’t Islamophobia when they really are trying to kill you’.

  • Jenny_Tells

    By writing this article, Mr Parris has singled out Muslims for special treatment. But we are all supposed to be equal in this glorious multicultural melting pot, aren’t we? Except that Muslims have set themselves apart, and it’s not through our doing. Islam itself precludes integration into the general society. The day that a Muslim woman wins the X Factor is the day that I would be convinced otherwise.

  • Innit Bruv

    Matthew, look no further than some readers’ comments in the very publication you write for. Proof positive, as though it were needed.
    A lot of it has nothing to do Islam per se, as these sort of views precede ISIS,
    Al Qaeda at al by decades.
    Arab/Islam bashing is the one form of xenophobia that is still acceptable in today’s
    Britain.
    Point that out and you are automatically classified as a Lefty, a Guardianista,
    “Muzzie scum”, a “degenerate twerp” etc etc….(As I am sure I will be as a result of this post).

    • “I think that some of the UK’s Muslims could do with some reeducating. Indeed I think the UK would be better off if some of these Muslims relocated to places like Saudi Arabia or Pakistan.”

      Your “Arab/Islam bashing” words, not mine, “bruv”.

      https://disqus.com/home/discussion/spectatorwww/its_not_netanyahus_fault_that_jews_in_europe_are_afraid/#comment-1869444842

      • Innit Bruv

        And I stand by them.
        However, tarring everyone with the same brush, as do some Spectator readers is an altogether different matter.
        Good to see you have been studying Innit Bruv’s “oeuvre”.
        Keep at it, you’ll learn something.

        • “you’ll learn something.”

          Innit.

          • Innit Bruv

            Correctamundo!!

          • davidshort10

            Has innitbruv been indulging a little too much of what is supposedly forbidden by Islam? Almost all of the Muslims I know correctly understand it is not forbidden, just as Christians woke up to the same realisation a few decades ago.

          • Innit Bruv

            I am not a Muslim. What is this “it” that is supposedly forbidden? Please enlighten me.

        • davidshort10

          We won’t.

        • WTF

          Read that PEW report and digest the facts, hope they dont choke you !

          • Innit Bruv

            Matthew Parris has really made fools of people like you.
            You’re making his case for him, dummy!!!

      • David Prentice

        Ouch! Good spot!

        • Innit Bruv

          Nothing there to “spot”.

          • davidshort10

            Yes, there is.

    • Jenny_Tells

      Oh really? One is reminded of 7/7, Lee Rigby, Rotherham, etc. The political inability to remove hate preachers from our country while these people live off state benefits is an affront to decency and logic.
      Islamophobia is what it means: fear of Islam. If you were on a bus and a Muslim got on carrying a rucksack, would it cross your mind that you might be soon playing a harp with angels singing the chorus?

      • Innit Bruv

        The murders of Stephen Lawrence and Anthony Walker, David Copland the London nailbomber, Paki bashing, football hooliganism, lager louts, the EDL (maybe you support them)……..You wouldn’t judge the white working class by these examples.

        “Rotherham etc”…Jimmy Savile, Max Clifford,Stuart Hall, Rolf Harris,
        Jonathan King, Phil Pickett,Gary Glitter, Cyril Smith, no Pakistanis on that list (who knows what they will uncover if and when they investigate Westminster).
        By the way, who is responsible for the trafficking of East European women to work in London’s brothels?
        “If you were on a bus…….angels singing the chorus”.
        You are statistically far more likely to be stabbed to death by a fellow Brit in a major city like London than blown up by some deranged Jihadi. (But then you are probably too obtuse to realize that).

        • luna

          Your streets are not safe anymore.

          • Innit Bruv

            They are safe on the whole,
            The main threat to my security,however is not some deranged jihadi but a fellow Brit.

          • luna

            Your either in favor of Sharia for Britain, or you haven’t been paying attention. Left unchecked the problems (no go zones, terrorism, welfare tourism) are only going to continue getting worse until something gives.

          • Innit Bruv

            I am most certainly not in favour of Sharia law and I most certainly have been paying attention.
            It’s just that I feel far more inclined to take the likes of Matthew Parris seriously than some of the blockheads who have read this article.

          • luna

            The backlash to the problem is not the problem, but if left unchecked something is going to give.

          • Innit Bruv

            Time for bed said Zebedee !!!

          • WTF

            They are as long as its not a Islamic no go zone !

        • WTF

          Statistically you are far more likely to be aware of the real and present danger presented by Islamic extremists than you are by possible dangers from white criminals.

          For a start, 75% of the population has no fear of any pedophile or child molester because they are not a child. However, 100% of us have every reason to fear a potential Islamic extremist who ‘forgets’ and leaves a back pack on a train or bus.

          The threat from being stabbed to death by a fellow Brit, white or black is virtually zero and in all my life I’ve never been threatened even in areas like Brixton where the black community didn’t bother me nor I them. However, I certainly wouldn’t enter a Sharia area of the UK for fear of being racially attacked by some Islamic nut job. Why is it we have non Muslim no go zones for the police in France, Sweden and the UK ?

          Wait for it —- all the lame historical excuses will pour out of your mouth like the diarrhea I had once in the middle east after a bad curry !

    • WTF

      Get real, the only elements of racism we’ve had previously in the past few decades was primarily aimed against coloured people and they didn’t go around be-heading people or sexually grooming underage girls. Even Indians who suffered some racial tensions in the past didn’t go around blowing up our public transport or similar atrocities. Racism was pretty much extinct until some Muslims decided to kill us in the name of their god. Even now, racism is pretty nigh on impossible against Muslims even if the BNP so wished it as Muslims live in no go areas which non Muslims fear to tread.

      Your timeline and dumb rationale has totally blown your argument as this current problem has everything to do with that religion of barbaric practices and only arose when extremist clerics started preaching their hate. For example, why would three well educated Muslim girls from a respectable family, not subjected to any racism decide to go on a ‘Club Islam’ vacation and become Jihadists Ho’s ?

      Whether its was Jordanian doctors trying to blow up Glasgow airport, well educated students or that ‘beautiful’ boy Jihadi John, the cancer of Islam corrupted their minds and turned them into what they are.

      • Innit Bruv

        ZZZZZZZZ….Asians ARE viewed as coloured people hence the Paki bashing I was referring to,hence David Copland’s nail bomb
        in Brick Lane. (let’s remind ourselves that the victims of “Paki bashing” included Sikhs, Hindus ie anyone with brown skin).
        Racism was pretty much extinct? What planet do you live on?
        You are really helping me make my case.

        • Feminister

          I think his point was that British Indians and black British people haven’t reacted to racism in Britain with terrorism.

          So there must be other factors at play.

          • WTF

            Thanks, obviously you understood my point but some are too racist or bigoted to see it.

            The trouble with Jihadist ‘Bruv’ appeasers is they always try and justify the barbaric actions being carried out today in the name of Islam with historic events that are no longer relevant. They’ll cherry pick some point in history and excuse todays be-heading, stoning or gang rape by the religion of peace with some act that western societies may have committed a long time ago but have long since renounced and stopped.

            You NEVER hear any unconditional renouncing of an atrocity committed by Muslim extremists only screaming in the streets across their communities around the world. They celebrate the killing of innocent aid workers, office workers or shoppers executed by their home grown killers and their mindset is like ancient Rome where Christians and others were put to the sword and the crowd roared their approval.

            Very sick minded people indeed.

          • Innit Bruv

            They have reacted in different ways, Black British people in particular (think of the 1981 Brixton riots).

          • Feminister

            Yes. In a different way. Because of differences.

          • Innit Bruv

            Not that big a difference between the murders of PC Blakelock and Lee Rigby. Both horrific.

        • davidshort10

          No, he is not.

        • WTF

          Asians ARE viewed as coloured people !

          I’ll enlighten you if that’s possible as in India there are various ‘shades’ of colour and racism is rife between the lighter coloured and darker coloured Indians for example and there’s not a ‘whitey’ in sight. That said, my point was that racism based on colour in the UK is minor compared to 40 years ago or so, any ‘racism’ as you put it towards Pakistani people is because of the cultural paractices.

          The biggest example of racial attacks carried out in the past 10 years was the racial targeting of underage “white” girls and other non Muslim girls by predominantly Pakistani men. That clearly was a racially motivated crime so in respect of your comment “Racism was pretty much extinct”, I’m right when it comes to the white majority as its very rare today but its risen exponentially in Muslim communities like Rotherham or Oxford.

          Even in Leytonstone where Muslim men attacked white men and women just going about their private business a year or so ago was a racially motivated crime, partly due to skin colour but mainly due to religion/culture.

          Islam is the most racist of any religion in the 21st century and at various levels, its followers will follow its racist preachings. Some will not be overtly racist at all whilst a significant minority are far worse than any historical “Pakibashing” white thugs as they will be-head you !

          • Innit Bruv

            This is very White Trash talk!!
            Matthew Parris has certainly got to you.
            Amazing what crawls out of the dung heap if you prod a little.

  • Dan O’Connor

    Your ilk Mr Parris of ” smart sounding ” snake oil merchants have infected all of the West’s institutions, and transformed our media into the propaganda wing of the Western elite’s demographic terrorism against its own populations , and transformed our universities, the once proud citadels of courageous enquirey, into intellectual Stalinist gulags of White guilt and self hatred and mass cringing conformism , and which has spread like a bacilli that has disarmed and paralysed the natural and healthy auto-immune defences and threat recognition mechanisms that strong nation states in the West have relied upon for centuries to defend themselves against the intrusion of rival, hostile, predatory and parasitical alien cultures
    You and the rest of your multiculti co-religionist witch finder generals and media/ career spivs have one overridding priority above all others , and that is to insatiate your insatiable greed for moral narcissism and social respectablity.

    A time is coming when you will be forced to choose between your pseudo-social respectibility or honour, but you won’t be able to have both
    Hyper moralism, hysterical egalitarianism and hysterical anti-fascism taken to ever increasing heights of willfull self deception
    For the last 60 years the Western elite , its media and educational institutions have waged a´relentless, wicked and cynical war of cultural , psychological and demographic terrorism against their own historical populations
    They have spent the last 60 yeers accusing anyone who dissented from their multi-culti Ponzi scheme criminal syndicate as being a
    ” fascist ” as a way of painting themselves as the exact opposite .
    And it worked, like a weaponised neuro-linguistic psy-ops cattle prod.

    • Innit Bruv

      I’m all for Care in the Community, but one has to draw the line somewhere, ie with you.
      PS: “years” not “yeers”.

    • Innit Bruv

      At least you’ve corrected the spelling mistake !!

  • Altocumulus

    What contemptible tripe

    I used to buy the Times because of Matthew’s and a few others, intelligent and different take on the world and its issues. I can remember being impressed about his opinions on Major, Blair and others. Always from the conservative left field. And best of all, his truly fascinating reports from Kerguelen, somewhere in the deep southern ocean I always wanted to visit but only ever did through his beautiful words.

    And now this. possibly the most contemptible piece of journalism I have ever seen in the Spectator: ‘I do believe in free speech, but let’s not do anything to offend muslims.’

    Because, Matthew, after they’ve killed everyone else, and you’re hiding somewhere deeply special, you’ll be OK.

    And the support for Janice Turner’s grubby little attack in the Times on those supporting free speech and enlightenment values was not impressive.

    I read a Reuters report a couple of months back. A Yazidi 18 year old girl who had been captured and installed in an Isis brothel in Raqqa managed to get a mobile connection with her brother in Kurdistan. She was raped up to 30 times a day by those brave jihadis, and had lost control of her bowel movements as a result. She begged her brother to give the gps to US bombers so she could be put out of her misery.

    There are thousands of Yazidi and Christian girls in Syria and Iraq in the same situation and subject to the same horror. And yet Ms Turner in the Times focused on three spoilt and stupid girls from Tower Hamlets who willingly walked into the abyss. For her, they were the real victims. And Mr Parris concurs. Our disgust at all of this is somehow the issue.

    The real problem here is that we have this useless commentariat that cannot snap out of Muslim=Victim mode, despite how many thousands are murdered and raped every day.

    This is the end of Matthew Parris as a serious commentator on the important issues facing our country.

  • hale992

    Matthew has demonstrated the psychosis affecting those who have been defined as the “naive white liberal dimwits”. Like the Emperor with no clothes, Matthew refuses to see the blindingly obvious. While ordinary, level-headed, reasonable and down-to-earth people can spot the reality, Matthew and his fellow NWLD’s turn away, and pretend it doesn’t exist.

    While some muslims truly are repelled by what happens in the name of Islam, a huge number are not. When 25% of the UK muslim population admit they have “sympathy” with the Charlie Hebdo monsters (how many won’t admit they also have sympathy?), how can he say “that millions of British Muslims are worried about extremism, some of them worried sick”. He seems to think that by travelling on the same bus and working in an area with lots of muslims makes him an expert on how millions of muslims feel and think. Well Matthew, just because you wish it were so does not make it so. It may come as a shock, but you are displaying a pretty condescending brand of “I know the truth and you don’t” arrogance.

    We have yet to witness a single mass rally to protest ANY of the atrocities carried out by islamists. NOT ONE! And they are supported by the likes of Matthew, even to the point of voting for recognition of palestine as a state. What an insult to the hundreds murdered by the PLO, Fatah and Hamas. While muslims in the Middle East and Asia are constantly, daily carrying out attrocities in the name of islam and mohamed, when they are merely following the instructions and copying the actions of the founder and author of their religion, how can he say this is not islam and the majority of muslims don’t agree with it?

    If put to a court of law, with the facts laid out, there can be no doubt and that any true and fair jury would find islam guilty, and muslims as a whole in generality in support of those carrying out islamic outrages and barbarity, and the likes of Matthew complicit in helping the guilty.

  • right1_left1

    Contained within this article is the misguided idea that because most Muslims are moderate, so Parris believes anyway, Islam does not present a danger to Europe in general and the the UK in particular.

    This idea is mistaken.
    The large number of Muslims living in the UK/Europe is the blanket under which extremists are shielded and operate.
    Major social change never occurs due to the usually supine masses but comes about as a consequence of the energy of the dedicated activist.
    The first prophet of Islam is a perfect example.

    It is a fundamental premise of Islam that it is the duty of ALL Muslims to oppose non believers by any means from double speak up to and including violence.

    Islam opposes the basic limited freedoms we have developed in the West.
    (Remember the slogan..to hell with democracy)
    As such it is long overdue that it receives the criticism it richly deserves.

    It should NEVER be an offence to discriminate.
    I would discriminate against employing Parris in my fish and chip shop and I should have the legal right to do so.
    I might even toss him off the Tower Hamlets omnibus. and watch him shoot in the gutter
    Max Miller working class vulgarian that I am hehehehehehehe

  • Dan O’Connor

    In the West today , one of the most grevious sins that you can commit , is to make a
    ” sweeping ” generalisation about any other human identity group
    We are told that only uneducated, stupid, bigoted, hate-mongers who don’t belong in polite company would do this.
    Instead, what the people in the West are expected to do, is to judge every other rival and competing collective human organism such as Islam , consisting of 1.6 billion people , on a one-by-one individual basis, with the assumption that they are all beneficial , non-hostile, benign, harmless and devoid of any sense of in-group solidarity and favouratism, unless at some undefined later date it proves that one or two individuals here and there don’t conform to the Liberal’s blind faith
    When it turns out that an alarming number of these alien immigrant people express beliefs that are hostile to everything that the church of upper / middle Liberal intelligensia / multicult theologists claim to believe in and stand for , this presents a major threat to that which the Liberal intelligenia rely upon to justify their narcissistic self image and moral narcissim , so that grope out in panic desperation to find anything that will deflect the finger of blame away from themselves, because they know that they are responsible for inviting the Frankenstein monster into our lands in the first place and have spent decades smugly and viciously persecuting and ruining any of their own kinfolk who expressed concern.
    This is where the Liberal’s secondary fall back defences of self deception kick in.
    He will then try to find just one exception that doesn’t conform to an observed and well established pattern of behaviour amongst this immigrant group, and rthen he insists that this is proof that no such established pattern of behaviour exists at all
    His prized multi-culti ego-glow social engineerig project, using us as experimental lab rats must not fail.

    This upper/ middle class modern day Liberal clergy are so far up themselves with their own sense of being more modern, more culturally and intellectually advanced , sphisticated and enlightened , that they believe it is never necessary to reexamine their own assumptions , Like 16th century fundamentalist Christians they consider themselves morallly infalllible and synonimous with virtue itself.
    This has lead to a state of self induced cognitive dissonance of plague like proportions throughout every institution of the West , because it has its malignant roots in Western academia itself. They are one big internationlist mutual admiiration society who belleve they are the smartest and cleverest and most enlightened people who have ever existed

    What they have utterly failed to understand is that you can react to every collective human organism like Islam on a one-by-one individual basis until the cows come home , but it doesn’t matter , because collective human organisms consiisting of millions upon millions of cells , called individiuals , react as human coillective shave always done , and that is as human collectives .

    This is were making generalisations about ” whole groups of people ” comes in
    Making generalisations is a DNA encoded and natural and necessary group survival / self preservation instinct .
    In WW2 , nobody said , ” only a tiny ittsy bittsy number of Japanese , or Nazi are extremist ”
    In the Cold War nobody said that only a tiny ittsy bittsy number of Russians actually believed in Communism . Weird that , isn’t it ?
    When a platoon of soldiers are in the trenches and the enemy is charging across the battlefield at them , they don’t try to figure out which are the nice guy moderate enemy and which are the extremist enemy before shooting at them , especially if the enemy is not playing by the same rules and has no such moral qualms
    It is impossible to react on a one-by-one individual basis to rival human collectives
    Only a total idiot cannot fathom the reasons for that or a generation of pseudo intellectual fraudsters and sophists who have hyper moralised and over-intellectualised themselves into a state survival instinct paralysis .

    And yet speaking of making generalisations about ” whole groups of people ”
    Consider this . For the last 50 years, the White people have been the only race on the planet that it has been possible and risk free to collectively demonise, slander, vilify, offend, insult, stigmatise , culturally terrorise , disinherit , territorially and racially de-humaníse and delegitimise , and invaded and ethncially cleanse with utter and total impunity ,
    And the our liberal sociopaths and pathologically diseased ruling elite interpret this as proof of their moral supremacy

    • Innit Bruv

      You need help !!!!

    • James

      “one of the most grevious sins that you can commit , is to make a ” sweeping ” generalisation about any other human identity group.”

      Good job we have national statistics to prevent us from committing “sweeping” sins. There is only one “human identity group” who believe in jihad and commit gang-rape on schoolchildren.

  • Dan O’Connor

    ” Je Suis Charile Hedbo ”

    …and I waged a war against freedom of thought and speech by spearheading a campaign to have the democraticallly elected and anti-Islamisation, anti-immigration , anti-EU party of Le Pen / FN ..banned

  • Dauer_Gast

    Islam is not just a religion, it has a big political component. Its implementation will result in a totalitarian society and opposing it, including its creeping implementation, is just as justified as opposing communism or fascism.

  • Dan O’Connor

    Liberalism is a cutsey sounding name for = cultural terrorism .

    Liberalism is mainstreamed, normalised and repackaged anti-White Cultural Marxism on steroids and the cultural bolshevism of the 21st century

    Liberalism is Cultural Marxism whihc is Political Correctness whih is a modern day religion were everyone, every politician , judge, policeman, civil servant , teacher and media hack has to pay homage at the altar of all of the Left’s Tin Gods , or have his career and livelihood ruined and be ostracised from society .
    The only freedom we have remaining in the West today is the freedom to conform with Liberalism. The freedom to run with the pack

    LIberalism is the 60’s baby boomer cult of intellectual permanent adolescence which is the belief that everything in the West must be radicalised within the social sphere and third world immigration uséd as biological weapon to eradicate and root out ” racism ” ( ethno favouratism amongst Whites ) which means the eradication of White people because Liberal’s believe that White people and all of their children’s children are collectively responsible for the invention of colonialism, homophobia, sexism, patriarchy, slavery, oppression, genocide, ethno-favouratism and not wanting to gleefully hand over their lands and heritage to other hostile alien peoples and cultures who don’t play by the same rules , never lose sleep about the people they have conquered, enslaved and genocided , have no moral qualms about agitating for ther own group interests , have memorised and gush forth with all the cutsey Lefty multiculti mantras about ” tolerance ” and ” equality ” because they are not stupid and realise it benefits them

    Liberalism = Revolutionary Cultural Bolshevism become mainstreamed works like this .
    Anything that is destructive to White people and to the benefit of non-Whites is logical
    Anything that doesn’t harm Whites , and doesn’t benefit non-Whites is not logical

    Paved with good intentions

  • Richard

    “There are questions of timing and judgment here. When sensitivities are inflamed it is possible to go too far.”

    When are sensitivities NOT inflamed? Do you think next week, Muslims will say, “Oh, you know, I feel really relaxed today. I think I won’t try to murder people who post pictures of Mohammed”?

  • Innit Bruv

    Viva Matthew Parris !!!
    You certainly have rattled a few cages.

    • Infidelissima

      LOL, Matthew Parris is a nobody with no influence. Nobody cares about his drivel.

      Netanyahu wining the elections ; now THAT has rattled all the right cages!

      • davidshort10

        !!

      • Innit Bruv

        He DOES have influence, hence the numerous posts by an assortment of disaffected prols and white trash as a response to this article.

  • Augustus

    “The views expressed by anti-Islamists are hateful towards all Muslims…”

    There are quite a few hateful expressions going the other way too: “First the Saturday People, then the Sunday People” comes to mind, and everyone knows what that means. I wonder why`some people want to dress up Islam and strip it of all its shocking elements. Is it because we have become victims of our own perceived indebtedness to others? Because Islam in the West has certainly very quickly understood that it can act as the perfect incarnation for that other. But Muslims are only true brothers of believing Muslims. They feels absolutely no affiliation with Jews, Christians etc., and even less with atheists. The problem lies with the Koran and their prophet, because Muslims will never accept any deviation or dissociation from what their scriptures tell them about those non-believers.

    • davidshort10

      ???

  • Sean L

    A typically nauseating example of what Dan O’Connor refers to below as ‘moral narcissism’. So what if you mingle with the Bengali or travel on the underground? Jesus. I used to live near the Westgate Shopping Mall in Nairobi that was attacked by the Somali Al Shabaab. So what? I also know and work with Muslims who are possibly the nicest people I’ve ever encountered. Utterly irrelevant to the historic reality of Islamic expansionism, its presence here. See also Peter Oborne article in current Standpoint about narcissism in politics. Very much applies to you. Remarkable how almost every commentator is at pains to stress that only a tiny minority of the 1.5 billion Mohammedans are actively engaged in bloodshed. As if we couldn’t figure that out for ourselves! But no such qualification applies to such entities as the West or England or whites. . . And the few that organise against those who seek our collective destruction, such as the EDL are routinely condemned outright: no ‘free speech’ invoked on their behalf! As to personal credentials, my wife went to school in Khartoum, her Kenyan father being employed there for a few years. Far more wary of the Islamic tendency than people here are permitted to be. But then Kenyans have been at the sharp end for some time. Does that then make her ‘racist’ by your lights even if she’s far darker skinned than your Bengali boys, as Kenyans tend to be? She pities us as do many of her people, who are “far right” in your parlance, that’s to say “normal” in their own and everyone else’s, not having renounced all semblance of group allegiance. Though you do stick up for the gays don’t you. . .

    • Innit Bruv

      “such as the EDL,,,,” That explains a lot.
      EDL EDL OI OI OI. London Zoo more likely, in the Apes section.

      • davidshort10

        ? ?

        • Guest

          he’s probably talking about his people, since it is them who most closely resemble apes today, including wiping their backsides with their bare hands

  • Zed largo

    Two things Matthew. Firstly the problem of assimilating peoples of such a different world view, traditions, values and way of,life. Islamic life is not compatible with Western cultures, and the reasons are obvious and manifold. Such an assimilation would take a slow evolutionary process rather than the politically correct social engineering that is dangerous, divisive and sinister. Secondly, and potentially the most destructive problem of all, is not the West against Islam but the internecine conflict that is seething just beneath the surface of relations between people such as yourself who wishes to accommodate Islam within our culture, and those who feel alienated by the entire multicultural agenda. I certainly understand your position in regards to your fears, but do you understand the fears of those who are feeling hateful and very angry about the way Muslim culture has been brought to these shores in such huge numbers?

  • Dan O’Connor

    Back in the baby-boomer 60’s / 70’s Kulturkampf days , those Lefties who are in their 60’s now , were blaming the tribal / ethnic conflicts between people in Africa and the Middle East on the artificial border lines created by the British, French and Belgian colonial powers and they were right .
    The colonial powers, by creating artifically constructed multi-identity nations that had not evolved organically over a long period of time and were not rooted in a common kinship, ancestry, history, mythology, language custom had planted the seeds for future conflict

    And yet, those very same Leftists of the 60’s and 70’s have strived day and night over the last 50 years to create the very same artificial balkanisation and retribalisation of the West which will also create the perfect conditions for conflict and social chaos and even civil war.

    Why do Left / Liberals practice this constant set of moral double standards. ?
    Why is a Left / Liberal and person who will take the side of the non-Whites by knee jerk reflex at every available opportunity ?
    Why is a Left/ Liberal who believes that supporting your own ethnic group in any conflict is ” evil ” and the worst thiig any White person could ever do ?

    There can only be one answer. Leftism / LIberalism / is at its core a racist anti-White cult . It is a civilzational self hating point scoring competition ,
    The more they denigrate and harm their own kin, the more moral and modern and culturally sophisticated , and ” socially progressive ” they feel. To express contempt and hatred and shame for ones own race is considered amongst the Left / LIberas , one of the greatest displays of charity towards the poor
    “Great Oppressed ” , who are more noble and virtuous on account of nothig mor than their non-White ortherness .

    ” Oh look at me , love me , as I bask in the ego glow of moral supremacy as I tell a non-White how much I hate my own history, culture and race , and how guilty and sorry I feel ,
    Oh Love me , love me …I’m a Liberal ”

    It is a personality flaw , a mental affliction , It must be because White liberals are the only human group in all of human history to pursue policies with a religious fanatical zeal which make their own group economically, culturally, politically, territorially and demographically weaker
    Sainthood or bust .

    Just think about this for a few minutes . The White universtity educated middle / upper class cosmopolitan LIberals , are the only group of people in history to have gone to all the effort of evolving a series of arguments , which they have tailor made to fit the unique and different histories of every single White country on earth ( and only White countries ) , and which they use to explain why their land belongs to anyone and everyone and why all Whites are under a moral obligation to collaborate with glee in handing over their lands and heritiage to other alien peoples ..and anyone who objects is an ” uneducated, evil , fascist , bigoted , backward , racist , genocidal, primitive , far right wing extremists ”

    How much longer are going to pander to this sociopathic, evil and malignant tantrum brat cult of nation destroying Death Worshipers ?

  • Feminister

    Being an member of a group through affiliation (e.g. belief) is only marginally comparable to being a member of an group via an innate characteristic (e.g ethnicity, s*x, sexuality, age).

    Muslim is equivalent to practising Jew (affiations), not Jewish (ethnicity). To feminist (affiliation) not female (s*x), etc.

    Now of course we also have a right to our affiations. Even if they are disruptive to others to some degree. But we do to have a right to them without challenge.

    We can’t change our innate characteristics and nor should we be expected to hide them or be discriminated against because of them. Which is why it is as immoral to limit women’s drinking or visibility as a solution to sexist hate crime as it would be to limit black people’s as a solution to racist, Matthew.

    We can and sometimes should change our affiliations. Certainly when those affiliations break the golden rule.

  • davidshort10

    The original headline – not MP’s fault but a dumb intern no doubt – castigated the motives of the Je Suis Charlie people.

  • Dan O’Connor

    If Islam / the Koran was a White / European religion, Left / Liberal would have risen up and run it out of town.

  • davidshort10

    I think this article has lost MP a lot of admirers. I think the tragedy of it might be that he just was in a hurry to fill his space and the poor quality of his submission got through. I feel sure I am not alone in becoming someone who will never read him again. I can listen to the man in the street if I want banality.

  • Feminister

    .

  • Dan O’Connor

    The Throne and the Altar

    The Throne = International Global Corporatist / Geo-Political / MacWorld cheap labour import Oligarchy

    The Altar ; = Left / Liberal / Cultural Marxist Billionaire George Soros /Multi-Culti / Multi-Racial utopian Theocracy

    Multiculturalism and your multicultural sensitivities traning course goes hand in hand with Goldman Sachs, Starbucks, and Zuckerberg

    The White middle / upper class metrosexual radial chic Liberal progressives embrace
    the Big Banker Capitalist % ers

    What a bunch of phonies . They want the Marxist life style for everyone apart from themselves and their friends

  • David T

    The subheading for this piece is:

    “The views expressed by anti-Islamists are hateful towards all Muslims, and to those of us who don’t share their own antipathy”

    But in fact, there’s no mention of Islamists in this piece at all.

    So, two comments:

    1. I agree with a significant part of what Matthew Paris says, although not his “timing” comments on blasphemy.

    2. However, it is what he doesn’t say which is telling. There IS an Islamist based politics in the UK and globally. It is a hugely motivating idea. It is dangerous.

    Yet Matthew Paris doesn’t acknowledge it, and I don’t know why.

    • Rather worried

      Cherchez le Freebie?

    • James Jones

      “I don’t know why.”

      The best idea I can come up with is that substantial quantities of middle eastern oil monies are winging their way Londonistan-wards each month.

      How otherwise can so many people be so willfully ignorant?

      How otherwise could Mr Parris urge on his own death sentence with such undisguised glee?

  • James Jones

    “Something dangerous is brewing beneath the surface in our country, and it worries me that warning lights are not flashing”

    I couldn’t agree more.

    I do not understand that a dangerous medieval death cult is being allowed to flourish under our noses with total impunity and even with immunity from the law.

    I do not comprehend at all why so many influential writers and politicians do not see the danger that is writ so large before us and continue to voice uncritical support for the unimaginable.

    The time to act was 26 years ago when Salman Rushdie was inhumanly sentenced to death by leaders of the barbaric cult for writing a novel. Since then we have allowed barbarism to flurish unopposed with the result that I strongly suspect that we do not have another 26 years of inaction left if we are to preserve our civilisation.

    We are at war and it is long, long past the time to fight back with every tool available.

    • First there must be awareness – and then action. Our so-called ‘elite’ will do everything they can to side with evil, but they must be compelled to do what is right. Civil war can be avoided, however if the necessary steps are not taken it is inevitable.

      • James Jones

        “Our so-called ‘elite’ will do everything they can to side with evil”

        Apparently so, but why?

        • I would like to respond to that properly but I suspect there are legal impediments to my doing so! – The ideology of political correctness is one, but discussions and agreements at a very high level across the world are another. The truthful answer to your question is sinister as hell.

          • James Jones

            Give us a clue!

  • Marvin

    To Matthew and your type of leftie liberal lovey dovey outlook of life from a one dimensional view. How many moslems do you think live in the UK at the present time?
    Ever wondered if the 500/1500 jihadi fighters that went to support the sub human mutants of ISIS had jobs to leave and return to at will? Ever wonder why almost daily there are “moslem” issues in this country, and why all the other religious ethnic people from all four corners of the world manage to live in harmony with the natives of this country? Ever scrutinised the millions of grocer shops that exist in the south east mainly (London) employ people who also claim unemployment benefits and the rest?
    Ever wondered why so many moslems are out of work and are never hounded to find work OR? No you lot would not batter an eyelid when the population of this country filled with the dregs of the world reaches 150million in the very near future.

  • sebastian2

    “The views expressed by anti-Islamists are hateful towards all Muslims, and to those of us who don’t share their own antipathy.”

    What astonishingly inaccurate, liberal bigotry this is! Anti-islamism is a highly desirable antidote to islamophilia and the infatuated RoP dhimmis who seem oblivious to mohammedism’s ugly sentiments and foul deeds.

    When I read about throats sliced, heads chopped, women raped and killed, captured pilots incinerated alive, churches demolished, heritage destroyed, gays flung from buildings then stoned. When I read of polygamy, FGM, sharia, honour killimgs, hate speech, terrorist plots, voting fraud, trojan horses, grooming. When I learn of this, and more, my aversion to islamism tends to grow a bit. Wouldn’t yours? It puts me off the RoP a bit. Doesn’t it you?

    No anti-islamist is hateful towards all mohammedans, though all islamist mohammedans seem hateful towards everyone else.

    Matthew Parris is one seriously confused and prejudiced geezer.

    • Indeed.

      What you listed are direct actions *by* these despicable people, which can be responded to. Muslim terrorism will *never* go away, as long as this death cult exists. We will have to fight it by any and all means necessary; building a firewall between civilization and these barbarians will probably be the only way to manage the situation, alongside merciless, hundred-fold strong responses to any actions by the terrorists, their foreign sponsors, and their fifth-column supporters, the real enemy within.

      But in the final analysis, far more pernicious is the fact that they have already managed to scare the western world into submission; the fact that America and Europe were, for the most part, terrified to re-print Charlie Hebdo front page – even under the cowardly “newsworthiness” rationale – shows that they have already scored a significant victory over Liberty.

      Eradicating thousands of these vermin and keeping others behind that wall will be the easy part; liberating our societies from our self-imposed subjugation to their savage blasphemy code will be the harder, but also *absolutely essential*, first step.

      • sebastian2

        I believe you are correct in identifying the ideological contest we must engage in. This is crucial to what follows. I think it most unwise to allow mohammedism to conceal itself behind the false screen of a “religion” and get away with it. It is an ideology through and through – and with clear intentions. We have to see it for what it is and dismantle it accordingly.

        We witness, though, a creeping “blasphemy law” backed up with violence or threats of it. The intention is obvious: to discourage or forbid all criticism of mohammedism and its dubious founder. Mohammedism is a bully cult. We cannot permit ourselves to be bludgeoned into silence.

        • Sadly, our governments and our media are already silenced. Only genuine political change will reverse this suicidal course.

    • Rather worried

      Religion of Peace by the way does not mean non-violent. It means the state of spiritual tranquillity which someone who has committed themselves to the religion feels. Might be better translated as ‘peacefulness’ or ‘interior calm’.

      • “Peace” has got nothing to do with “Islam”, not even on the lexical level. The word ‘Islam’ is derived from the root verb “istaslama” which means ‘to submit’ or ‘give in’ or ‘surrender’.

        http://wikiislam.net/wiki/The_Meaning_of_Islam

        So, while some people might find “peace” in a state of “submission”, it’s not what most Westerners understand by that word, and therefore the value of repeated Muslim propaganda about the “religion of peace” is understandable. It’s a clear case of deception.

      • luna

        Religion of peace is un-Islamic.

      • sebastian2

        This would include a Rasta on ganja at the Glastonbury Festival. Whilst I do take your wholly benevolent sentiments and admire you for them, I’m sorry to say that mohammedism is in a category of its own. Perhaps the closest it comes to what I guess you mean, is Sufism. This is a kind of mystical “islam” whose tendencies or practices may precede mohammedism and are often condemned as “unislamic”.

        Without doubt to many of us, mohammedism as we know it today, is violent. Whilst not all mohammedans reach for the AK47 or the suicide vest, many do and find ample justification in their texts.

  • Mc

    Parris is a buffoon of the highest order, employing the full range of available logical fallacies and nonsense in nearly every sentence. Just one example is his statement, “That use of the word ‘surveyed’ was nasty — as though through some systematic and scientific method something about Muslims themselves and their religion had been established”

    The last time I checked, surveys across years are a reliable scientific method. Numerous surveys of Muslims across the globe have found that a significant minority of all Muslims hold appaling views that are opposed to the most basic Western norms and freedoms.

    • justejudexultionis

      You beat me to it. Only an imbecile could welcome the presence of Islam in the west. We are told we need millions of immigrants to save our economy, but in allowing the Islamic bigots to settle/colonise Europe, we have simply created a very dangerous and volatile fifth column…

      • James Jones

        “We are told we need millions of immigrants to save our economy”

        This is self evident tosh. The people who say it just want more, more, more, more, more immigrants for their own political ends.

    • WTF

      There is one small consolation, he’ll be first for the chop or being thrown off a roof if Islam does take over. That should give us a little satisfaction should the worst happen.

      • James Jones

        “should the worst happen”

        When, not “should”.

    • James Jones

      “Parris is a buffoon of the highest order”

      But we know he is not actually stupid, I have seen him talk quite cogently on the telly.

      So – presumably someone is paying him to be an apologist for islam and its islamists.

  • justejudexultionis

    Vast numbers of allegedly ‘moderate’ Muslims are highly supportive of the death penalty for apostasy, the introduction of Sharia law throughout the west, the destruction of Israel (and Jews in general) and suicide bombings. The numbers of genuinely open and enlightened Muslims is tiny. Given these facts, and the significant security risk Muslims pose to our country, is it not right to hate, or at the very least to be highly wary of, the vile doctrine of tyranny and bigotry that is the Islamic religion?

      • justejudexultionis

        Yes, raw statistics and hard facts demonstrate the utter incompatibility of the Muhammedan religion and western liberty. We do not want this.

        • People in the West are extremely uneducated about Islam. It is the duty of every decent person to try and change that.

          • justejudexultionis

            On the contrary, we are very educated about it and reject a religion founded by a seventh-century paedophile warlord… I’ll stick with Jesus Christ, thanks.

          • “I’ll stick with Jesus Christ, thanks.”

            You’d have it easy if the caliphate comes – just pay a huge tax and lose some rights, but at least in theory you wouldn’t be killed. Jews too would – again, at least in theory – share the same “tolerant protection” of the “noble Muslims”.

            Atheists, Buddhists, Hindu – and *every other religion* – would suffer genocide, though.

          • luna
          • WTF

            Its a very stark choice if it comes to this, kneel to the Islamic Mafia or kneel to be be-headed !

          • Ivan Ewan

            Surely death is preferable to becoming an economic source of Jihad.

          • Historically, lots of people among the defeated nations unfortunate enough to find themselves on the path of invading Muslim hordes did make that choice. Life always carries a promise of future reversal, and even though it did take centuries, Muslim imperialists were finally expelled from lots of nations – Spain, Southern Italy, Serbia, Greece, other Balkan states, and other nations to the East.

            So the best way is to stop jihadis in their tracks, before they breach our walls – by any and all means necessary – so that nobody in the civilized world is forced to make that choice again.

  • justejudexultionis

    At this point we should point out that Muhammed’s favourite wife, Aisha, was nine years old. Do we really want this kind of religion in our country? Recent events in Rotherham, Rochdale and Oxford would seem to confirm that certain vile Islamic traditions are still very much alive in the twenty-first century.

    • WTF

      Only perverts & pedophiles in the main three parties, the establishment and some police chiefs seem at ease with condoning these vile Islamic traditions !

  • justejudexultionis

    How can Mr Parris, as a gay man, seek to defend the followers of a religion that would have him thrown from the tallest building in London? Given the countless murders of Christians, Jews, homosexuals and other minorities in the Middle East, particularly in Syria of late, how can Parris write this with any sense of decency?

    • WTF

      Liberal fascists have this ‘double think’ capability that allows them to cope with extreme contradictions like Islams death to gays but if Sharia law takes over, I’m sure he’ll be outed for supporting these extremists and be tossed off the Post Office tower..

  • Arthur Ascii

    Matthew, when the media isn’t telling us about the latest Islamist atrocity, or stories about rape gangs throughout the UK who are predominantly Muslim and prey specifically on young white girls, or reports that 27% of UK Muslims sympathise with the Charlie Hebdo killers, and many cannot bring themselves to accept apostates, when we’re being told that we’re being fed features like the one on the BBC website “My and my hijab” as if we give a flying fig, or we’re being told they’re been radicalised because we’re not nice enough to them.

    A British tourist was shot dead by ISIL killers in Tunisia earlier this week, while people leave the UK to join ISIL and return to either evade arrest or into the arms of do-gooders intent giving them support and understanding.

    Yes, we are angry and we’re sick of being reminded of this mess.

    • “people leave the UK to join ISIL”

      These people are “British” only in the most superficial, administrative way.

      Let’s hope that the law will soon allow for them to be cut off from the British people like a cancer that they are.

      • Arthur Ascii

        I suspect you will hope in vain. They will be given every right and privileges of British citizenship and all human rights under European law.

        • Citizenship laws can change. They are not divine like the “holy” Quran is, thank God.

  • If you want to read an incomparably superior – and factually based – take on Islam and its connection to violence, here is Tom Holland’s answer to the ludicrous attempt of the “but brigade” member Mehdi Hasan to deny the Islam of the Islamic State:

    http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/03/tom-holland-we-must-not-deny-relgious-roots-islamic-state

    “It is not merely coincidence that IS currently boasts a caliph, imposes quranically mandated taxes, topples idols, chops the hands off thieves, stones adulterers, executes homosexuals and carries a flag that bears the Muslim declaration of faith. If Islamic State is indeed to be categorised as a phenomenon distinct from Islam, it urgently needs a manifest and impermeable firewall raised between them. At the moment, though, I fail to see it.”

    • WTF

      An excellent piece by Tom Holland that trashes the lame appeasers and apologists for Islamic barbarity. Thanks for the link, maybe there’s hope for us all yet.

      • Indeed.

        Mehdi Hasan’s apologetic effort on that website is also worth reading, if for no other reason then to see once again just how devious appeasers and apologists are.

        • WTF

          Devious and appeasing most certainly he is as in –

          http://www.newstatesman.com/mehdi-hasan/2015/01/muslim-i-m-fed-hypocrisy-free-speech-fundamentalists

          1/ In reference to Charlie Hepdo, “It was a crime – not an act of war – perpetrated by disaffected young men; radicalised not by drawings of the Prophet in Europe in 2006 or 2011, as it turns out, but by images of US torture in Iraq in 2004.”

          It was a war of cultures inspired by religion, pure & simple. What on earth has any alleged torture by America in 2004 got to do with killing the Journalists at Charlie Hepdo and the racially targeted execution of Jewish shoppers.

          2/ “None of us believes in an untrammeled right to free speech.”

          Well, generally we do in the west although we have some legislation that protect people from hate crimes but NOT religion. Mehdi’s comparison of claims that we can’t mock the holocaust are totally flawed as few countries have laws that ban it. In any respect, that would be a hate crime rather than lampooning any religion. Get your head out of your ass Mehdi Hasan and try and understand the difference. It is you and your fellow Muslims who cant seperate the difference between a religion and a ethnic group, not us.

          3/ “Muslims, I guess, are expected to have thicker skins than their Christian and Jewish brethren.”

          Hardly, our liberal fascists have hidden all manner of sexual grooming crimes committed by Muslim men, be-heading of innocents and blowing up 50+ people on London buses and tube trains but despite that, where was the backlash. Where were the white vigilantes, where were the torched mosques or Muslims strung up on lamp posts. The victim status of JJ who was ‘tortured’ by MI5 (just questioned in reality) or even better those three Muslim girls who were victims because they were so disillusioned in the UK living with caring parents, well educated and wanting for nothing, our nasty society persecuted them to become Jihadist H0’s in Syria.

          Our skin is much thicker than Muslims who cry victim for the slightest excuse but its getting thinner and we’re biding our time.

          I’ll leave others to read the original article on just how devious Islamic appeasers and apologists are let alone our own liberal fascists.

          Thanks for the heads up Santiago Matamoros.

          • Well said.

            As for Hasan, Britain is lucky that this despicable person has apparently decamped to America, although I am certain that his lying mug will again be seen on quite a few future QTs. Let’s hope someone finally confronts him with his on-the-record insult to all non-Muslims when he called us “animals”, and his repeated deceptive quoting of the verse 5:32 in Quran as if that somehow contains the essence of Islam (while the verse itself says explicitly that the command contained within it was given *to Jews*), conveniently skipping 5:33 with its institution of the properly Islamic cultural tradition of chopping off hands and feet “on opposite sides”.

            Let’s see how his unique brand of Islamist propaganda fares there.

          • WTF

            He’ll likely come under a lot more scrutiny and opposition from the likes of Robert Spencer, Pamela Geller & Brigitte Gabriel as free speech is practiced better there than here although you still have the appeasers & apologists peddling there lies.

    • sebastian2

      Yes, I saw that but thanks for raising it. Worth a read!

      • Definitely. Blows away the mendacious, insufferable Mehdi Hasan’s epic 5000-words-but-zero-facts failure of a piece to bits.

        • sebastian2

          At the risk of sounding ad hominem, Hasan comes across as a sort of Mr Bean and Joseph Goebbels jumble. A combination of the comical and the duplicitous. A difficult person to nail down- he squirms so elastically – but well worth anybody’s successful attempt.

  • Matthew

    Rik, I don’t know the answer to this but I thought that you might: if you count all the reported crimes against children perpetrated by Muslims (e.g. Rochdale and elsewhere) and by non-Muslims (e.g. children’s homes in Camden and Wales and elsewhere), would the numbers be comparable? If so, should you not conclude that we are all equally human beings, all endowed with essentially the same humanity, or, in some cases, lack thereof?

    • The main point regarding the Muslim grooming gangs is that they weren’t investigated precisely because people like Matthew Parris were scared to death of appearing “Islamophobic”.

      Nobody who follows Quran 100% can be called “humane”. Have you ever read it?

      • Matthew

        And the child abuse in Camden wasn’t immediately investigated because of Margaret Hodge. The reasons why the Rochdale abuse cases weren’t investigated might have been because officials were afraid of upsetting the Muslims in the area, but the result was a lot more upset for the non-Muslims, which you’d think they would have realised, so I don’t think the reasons here can be categorically stated. I think it’s pushing credulity too far to suggest that Islamophobia would trump child abuse in our current social climate.

        I haven’t read the Quran, I’m afraid, but I’m loathe to categorise any group of people by one of the books from which they seek guidance. I know some very humane Muslims and some very inhumane atheists. The inhumane people mainly tend to be sociopaths, a condition that I gather is largely determined by genetics rather than by religion. Humane people, in my experience, tend to be so in spite of any doctrines they might have assimilated, though I concede that in Nazi Germany and during the Ruandan genocide ordinary people were motivated to do extraordinarily inhumane things, and they were both Christian countries.

    • cartimandua

      The Muslim grooming gangs are a new and specific crime perpetrated by mostly Pakistani Muslims. The number of victims may be as high as 1 million.
      It is not “normal” at all when the entire Muslim population is 3 million people.

      • WTF

        Especially when their population is around 5% in the UK but men from their communities are virtually the only ones carrying racially motivated sexual grooming and gang rape.

        • sebastian2

          Others in the community that spawned these groomers must’ve know what their co-religionists were up to. It’s not something you can hide – especially as they seemed so brazen about it. The police ignored it. The services denied it. Both did nothing. The community, however – families, friends, congregation, imams – may actively have concealed it. And yet, they appear to have escaped all possible culpability. Innocent until proven guilty (of course), but still under rightful and reasonable suspicion. How could it be otherwise?

          • WTF

            Totally agree especially with such a tight knit community that only has Muslims and few if any other faith in their midst.

            Even in disparate multicultural communities ranging from say Brixton to Westminster it would be blatantly obvious that racially driven gang rape was happening on their doorstep if a gang of white men were grooming Muslim girls or any girls for that matter. Its a callous lie and so typical these days coming from Muslim community leaders to claim we never saw anything.

            They never saw white girls being treated like meat, they never saw JJ going off to be-head people and they never saw three Muslim girls going off to become whores for Jihadists. These community apologists are either lying their ass’s off, they’re as mentally retarded as the Jihadist or blind to reality due to their religion. I don’t buy it for one second.

          • Mark

            Never mind “close knit communities” Anne Cryer MP (Labour) tried to raise the alarm at least 10 years ago as did various people dismissed as “the far right”.

    • WTF

      Damn it, its those inconvenient facts again that p*** off the liberal fascists so much !

    • thorthane

      NO the Rochdale and Rotherham episodes amounted to the rape of one community by another. It is impossible to believe that the situation was not widely known about in the Pakistani community as groups of friends, work colleagues and even family members participated together. What English child abuse rings were based on workplace or family groups?

  • #NothingToDoWithIslam….except:

    “Ziamani’s Facebook posts charted rapid descent into extremism. He posted comments saying that he was “willing to die in the cause of Allah” and “Sharia law on its way on our streets. We will implement it, it’s part of our religion”.

    http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/mar/20/brusthom-ziamani-jailed-plot-behead-soldier-lee-rigby

    By the way, seeing the judge referring to the “*holy* Quran” is enough to make you vomit.

    Let’s just briefly review some of the “holiness”:

    Chapter 5: 33; Cut off hands and feet, crucify, and banish those who stand against Islam.

    Chapter 8: 12-15; Decapitate infidels; i.e., those who stand against Mohammad.

    Chapter 9: 5, 6; Slay Idolaters

    Chapter 33: 26, 27; Passage justifies the beheading of hundreds of Jewish men, enslavement of their wives and children, and the spoiling of their property.

    Chapter 33: 61-62; God wants the murder of those who stand against Islam.

    Chapter 47: 1-4; Kill those who do not believe in Mohammad.

    What possible meaning of the words “twist” and “interpretation” makes it possible to present *direct emulation* of these supposedly “divine” verses as “a twisted interpretation of the holy Quran”, as the judge said?

  • WTF

    After reading this –

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3003874/The-hopeless-British-ISIS-jihadi-Former-Morrisons-security-guard-threatened-bomb-UK-struggles-peel-potatoes-wash-clothes-Syria.html

    100 years or so ago, UK midwives who were delivering babies at home used to quietly smother them if it was obvious they were physically or mentally disabled to save everyone grief.

    • There’s an excellent comedy film in there somewhere.

      • justejudexultionis

        ‘Smother the Midwife’?

        • That could work too, but I was thinking of something like “Peelin 4 Da Profit”.

  • MrJones

    If the political class are so concerned about Islamophobia perhaps they could consider trying to stop the gang rape of thousands of children as that probably has something to do with it.

    • cartimandua

      It could be as high as 1 million victims.

  • Mc

    I’m unable to decide whether Parris is too dim or too unimaginative to figure out that having a different view from him does not mean that one is a bigot.

  • Altocumulus

    Formerly such an interesting commentator on political and societal events, Parris disappears ever more up his own backside. Like some creepy political version of Elton John castigating Dolce & Gabbana, ever more convinced of the righteousness of his own opinions, he deigns to tell the rest of us mere mortals how wrong we are on Islam, and so much else.

    This was one of the guys who persuaded our Prime Minister to piss away all his political capital on gay marriage, giving us the likelihood of Miliband as our next PM.

    And never forget that sneering report on the benighted folk of Clacton, poujadiste clowns so beneath what Parris expects of all of us, which was widely reported and probably increased the UKIP vote by a significant margin.

    Pass the sickbag, Alice.

    • Innit Bruv

      If all else fails, resort to personal attacks.
      I hardly think Matthew Parris is going to have any bearing on the next election.

  • Dan O’Connor

    ” Anti-zealots are becoming zealous in their anti-zealotry ”

    No Mr Parris, the very opposite is the case. There has been no healthy , natural and normal manifestation of Newton’s Law in the West against the replacement level mass immigration disaster.
    There has not been the necessary normal and natural equal and opposite reaction that any other non-Whites would exhibit if they found themselves subjected in their own lands to the same kind of demographic terrorism by their own goverments and institutions that Western goverments have been pathologically waging against their own historical populations for the last 60 years . They would have no moral qualms about rising up to stop it. All non-Whites, the other 90% of the planet’s population, understand the concept of nationhood, peoplehood and the biological family writ large and practice a sense of ethnic/ racial solidarity unapologetically, and uncontroversially.
    The Establishments across the West and all its public institutions and its media thought police have suceeded in punishing and paralysing with hysterical zealotry the slighest flicker of White people attempting to organise to prevent our becoming disinherited minorities of dwindlling numbers and influence in our own homelands , or even to discuss the most important existential issue Western man has ever had to face in his history.
    You don’t want a debate about it . You want a monologue about it . You want to give a pious moral sermon about it . All of you refuse to debate the issue of mass immigration from a purely sociological / ethnological perspective. You confine it to a cackophany of anti-scientific, emotionalised, oversentimentalised pious sounding sermons that contradicts all the wisdom and evidence of centuries and the human condition, the human sciences , and all the evidence of human history and experience at our disposal
    You and your Establishment are petrified of having your ideas having to compete in the free market place ideas on a level playing field., and that’s why Hitler and the Third Reich is cynically invoked as a bogey man false equivalence at every available opportunity as a form of Pavlovian weaponised neuro-linguistic electric cattle prod to herd any uppity Whites who begin to stray beyond the fence lines of the Left’s thought police plantation, back in their proper place where they belong

    It is impossible to defend that which is under attack without asserting that which is under attack . This puts our native peoples in a Catch22 , damned if we do and damned if we don’t dilemma
    This act of treason and vandalism that the people of the West are being subject to is extreme and destructive in its nature to our social fabric and future security.
    Mass immigration has become the most destructive force that Western man has ever had to face
    Muslims are just nature’s way of telling us that third world replacement mass is a very, very, very bad idea
    Any culture, civilzation or race which becomes the first in human history to unilatterly jetison the concept of an ” us ” and a ” them ” and become incapable of defending its own interests in a very harsh and competive and unforgiving world where nobody else plays by those rules, has no future
    It has an express´ticket to the Darwinian scrap heap of history
    Nature is quick to punish those who forget those unchanging and timeless rules and laws that lie outside of man and beyond his powers to change them
    It did , and it will

    • Sean L

      “Neuro-linguistic electric cattle prod”, good one mate.

  • Innit Bruv

    Well done Matthew !!! Truly a first-class article, bang on the money.
    By far one of the best articles I’ve come across in the Spectator.
    845 comments already….
    The best part is that idiots such as Dan O’Connor,WTF,infidelissima,DavidShort10 et al have done a sterling job making your case for you.
    (But then,they’re probably too thick or too blinded by their own bigotry to realize that).

    • justejudexultionis

      Nobody here believes you. If being opposed to suicide bombings, beheadings and torture makes me a ‘racist’ then so be it.

      1776 LIVE FREE OR DIE

      • Innit Bruv

        Any right-thinking person opposes torture, beheadings and suicide bombings. You need to do better than that.

    • WTF

      Why don’t you go on a ‘Club Jihadist’ vacation and do a bit of be-heading or gang rape as I’m sure it will satiate your base instincts that Islam promotes in sociopaths and retards !

      • Innit Bruv

        Your’e making Matthew’s case for him.
        “Base instincts, sociopath,retard”? Me?
        Your evidence please?

    • “bigotry”

      Nonsense. Pointing out – repeatedly, but obviously to no avail – the fundamental error of Mr. Parris and his fellow travelers – the silly conflation of “hatred towards Islam” and – their favourite rhetorical device designed to perpetrate a Charlie Hebdo on freedom of thought and speech, with illogical “arguments” instead of murderous physical violence (lucky us) – “hatred towards all Muslims” – as if these things were in any way whatsoever interchangeable, is not “bigotry”. It’s merely an appeal to engage reason.

      And you really ought to stop using that word, “bruv”. Along with “Islamophobia”, “fascist”, and “racist”, all of them incessantly directed towards critics of Islam, thanks to people like you it lost any argumentative force – people chuckle it away or simply shrug it off. Congratulations on making these terms useless through repeated misapplication.

      • Innit Bruv

        I shall use Bruv as long as I choose.
        You’ve obviously missed the point.
        That is to say:for some, a lot of this “Islamophobia”is little more than a pretext for xenophobia as opposed to justified criticism, and there is PLENTY to criticise.
        Read the article properly. Matthew Parris himself makes it perfectly clear that he is no fan of Islam. Like many Brits of a certain age he doesn’t want to see a return to the sort of racism and bigotry that was so prevalent in the Sixties,Seventies and Eighties (which, being gay, he may well have encountered himself) .
        (Maybe don’t have a problem with that, or maybe you just weren’t around at the time).

  • Dan O’Connor

    None of the ruling elite and their media wing in the West will explain why they deny to their own peoples the same rights that our ruling elite recognise towards all other ethnicites and races .
    They refuse to justify this monstrous moral inconsistency and racial double standard because they totally control the information space within the wider public sphere with an iron grip., because they know that when their multiculti racket goes tits up , the blame will come knocking at their front door
    Bad ideas need to be constantly enforced
    They and their tightly monitored and policed Cultural Marxist / National Union of Journalist Guidelines policed and controlled media make sure that the debate on the consequences of mass imnmigration it confined with a very narrow ideological spectrum of debate.
    They have evolved an entire arsenal of defence mechanism Catch22 circular reasoning.
    If the polls say 55% of the British people agree with their policies on immigration , the media reports

    ” The people have spoken ”

    If the polls indicate that 55% of the British people object to their immigration policies , the media reports ..

    ” We must not pander to the mob ”

    Win-win for them .

  • Dan O’Connor

    Diana West ; author of ” Death of the Grown Up ”

    ” The baby boomers inaugerated a culture of perpetual adolescence that erodes Western cultural identity.
    This erosion of identity renders us incapable of countering potentially existing threats with adequate resolve and harshness
    Multiculturalism is a childish refusal and fear of making moral and ethical distinctions between right and wrong, good and bad.
    Instead they succumb to childishness of relativism and nihilism, rather than face the more cumbersome questions of adulthood “

  • Tqwt

    Have you thought people are fed up with Islam, and its apologists.

    A soldier get decapitated by two soldiers of Islam. What do we here from the apologists, “Islam is THE religion of peace, and this does not represent true Islam”. Yet the two soldiers of Islam were acting the way Mohammed acted in his life. Mohammed ordered the deaths of 12 people for writing or reciting poetry, is that peaceful.

    Several people commit an atrocity in Paris, against the fundamental right of freedom of speech. People show compassion and identify with the victims, but a minority claim that Muslims are actually the victims, not the dozen innocent dead, and their families.

    Islam is not a religion of peace, it is a religion of subjugation as shown by its long bloody history.

    • Rather worried

      The ‘peace’ in the religion of peace does not mean non-violence. It means the internal spiritual peace which is supposed to come to those who accept Islamic religion and allowed themselves to be ruled by it.

      • Ivan Ewan

        Nope. It’s the peace that will be universal once the following peoples have been exterminated:

        Jews
        Christians
        Hindus
        Buddhists
        Atheists
        Zoroastrians
        Pagans
        Sikhs
        Agnostics
        About 70 sub-sects of Islam, including either Shiite or Sunni

        But of course, any time a Muslim in this peaceful utopia steps into the bathroom incorrectly, or gets a word of prayer wrong by accident – well, he can’t be allowed to live.

        So basically there will be Islamic peace when only one person is left alive on the planet.

  • Dan O’Connor

    The terms ” hate ” ” bigoty ” ” racist ” ” far right ” are magic wands that the
    ” tolerance ” crowd use to silence any ideas they won’t tolerate when they find out they can’t refute them in the arena of ideas.

    They fear that if they are forced into abiding by the noble rules of philosophical fair play and sportsmanship, they will have to compete with their ideas on a level playing field and that they will fail to prove their opponents wrong .
    Because by default they see themselves by some mysterious predetermined process of history as being the most intelligent and enlightened people to have ever existed and synonimous with virtue itself, the prospect of admitting they might have made a mistake after all , fills them with dread. There must be some other explanation-,
    So instead , they have evolved an arsenal of intellectually fraudulenb and pious sounding emotionalised trigger words that they cast upon their opponents like spells and curses as a way to prove their opponents as ” evil ” .
    They would rather sit back and watch their entire civilization being hollowed out and eaten alive and consumed by the ” Other ” from within , than admit they had made a mistake , because they know it means they will lose their iron grip on the goverment, the civil sector ,the media and the universities

    • WTF

      An excellent summation of reality.

  • Dan O’Connor

    Europe has to be destroyed by Muslims as a punishment for the Nazi crimes during WW2 .
    It is not racism that will destroy Europe. It is “anti-racism ” that will destroy Europe.

  • Four years have passed – if they weren’t released already:

    http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/53018000/jpg/_53018763_muslim_teacher304.jpg

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-13566526

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1390082/Muslim-gang-launched-horrific-attack-religious-studies-teacher-did-want-teaching-girls.html

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/8538804/Men-who-beat-up-RE-teacher-were-terrorist-suspects.html

    “Akmol Hussain said: ‘Praise to Allah. At that time nobody was there…Bruv, I don’t care about prison as long as I’m doing it for the deen [religion] of Allah…you know what, he’s not going to get up”
    Arabic chanting in the background included the lyrics: ‘If we are killed, then our Lord’s heavens are for us. If we are victorious, it is the inevitable promise’.”

    I hope Mr. Parris spends the next year preparing to volunteer to guide these lovely “Britons” – whose unfortunate and misguided actions were obviously caused by marginalization, oppression and poverty with which the imperialist West tormented the poor darlings, not their “noble” “religion” (even though they said so themselves – but they can’t be right, of course, because Islam is, as we all know after Mr. Parris explained it to us, *the* religion of peace) – back into British society as its valuable members, committed to building an even more enriched, more multi-cultural future of Britons of all colours and creeds.

    I am truly looking forward to his article detailing the experience.

    • I hope Mr Parris has the guts to follow up on this despicable incident. Let’s see how he can explain this one away.
      I can’t even imagine what this teacher has gone through. I hope he is somewhere safe now and happy.

      • Sadly, it seems that being “safe and happy” for free-thinking people is more and more equivalent in meaning with being “as far from the nearest mosque as possible”.

        • Yes, guess where the UKIP voters moved to?

        • white flight

  • FactsWillOut

    It’s time to stop hating the SS and the NAZI’s.
    As a matter of fact, we owe them decades of reparations for our hateful ways.
    Any event commemorating the holocaust is just thinly-veiled hatred of Germans.

    Such is the logic of this insane article.

    • justejudexultionis

      Nazism is a religion of peace! You can’t tell them to stop beheading, it’s their culture!

      • Mark

        Oskar Schindler was a Nazi, moderate nazism was hijacked and misunderstood by the small minority of nazis who misread the true meaning of nazism and overemphasised the racial biology at the expense of the true peaceful meaning of nazism. In this they were assisted by the aggressive nazi phobia promulgated in the west and the offensive stereotypings of the Fuhrer as a mad dictator or figure of fun by people like Churchill and Chaplin.

        In fact the Fuhrer did his best to form a constructive multi culturalism forging links with the Japanese and Palestinian Arabs, and finding common cause with nazis from many different countries.

        If only we could have understood nazism rather than condemned it outright and failed to engage with its true purpose, the preservation of nations in a loose free trade association with Germany and the development of a Palestinian Arab national homeland.

        One day we will see those noble aims promoted by a European polity in which Britain and America will find common cause.

        *irony off*

    • WTF

      Yeah, lets take a leaf out of Islams book, any hateful ways we have is all down to the Nazis in WWII who persecuted us. Thats it, now we’re purged of our sins !!!

  • FactsWillOut

    I am starting to believe that Europe is a powder keg, like it was in the 30’s, except this time, it’s not just one nation under the boot, it’s most of them.
    Hitler took an economically depressed nation, used strong but hateful rhetoric to energize Germany, turn it into an innovative and strong industrial powerhouse, and went on a mission of conquest, murdering 6 million Jews as he went.
    All it will take is one Nationalist/anti-Islam party with a fire-breathing leader to light the fuse, and this time, much of the rhetoric will be true.
    All of Western Europe is now simmering and seething….
    This time, instead of one country going on a crusade of conquest, you will get a sort of pan-national civil war. It will be interesting to see the propaganda put out by the pro-EU/progressives, who will align with the Muslims, once the fighting really starts.

    • WTF

      I agree and the rivers of blood will be far in excess of what Enoch Powell predicted, he was right about the issues of mass immigration in general terms but due to the time lapse, wrong about the underlying causes.

      • Sean L

        He was spot on about the underlying causes, what he called ‘Indian communalism’, from his time there during the war. He couldn’t have been more aware of it.

        • WTF

          I assume you mean WWII prior to the partitioning of that continent into India and Pakistan.

          I know from first hand experience just why Indian Hindus and I’m certain Sikhs have so much antipathy towards Muslims. Whilst the liberal fascists seem to get their rocks off in accusing white people of racism for some light hearted ethnic joke, they ain’t see nothing when compared with the very real deep seated hatred by those Indians towards Muslims in India & Pakistan as well as the UK. I assume that is what you refer to as Enoch Powells ‘Indian communalism’.

          The UK and northern Europe escaped the ravages, rape and pillage of the Islamic hordes centuries ago but Hindus & Sikhs had four centuries of it from Islamic colonialism which clearly explains the major differences in feeling between their Islamic rulers and British rule that came later. I don’t suggest our colonial period was perfect but in comparison it was relatively benign and any real rebellions were primarily (have a guess) in Islamic areas of that continent prior to partioning.

          Again, the colonization approach between Britain and Islam couldn’t be more different. Britain in India enlisted the support of local leaders to manage a population thousands of times larger than their occupying forces and as such there was little antagonism towards the British as the local villager saw no change. We can contrast that with the Islamic approach of convert to Islam, pay a protection tax or die and that surely explains why Sikhs & Hindus both in India and the UK despise Muslims so much.

          History educates us and explains a lot to me of why we are where we are, but its criminal that our leaders never show any interest in history to learn from it.

          • “The UK and northern Europe escaped the ravages, rape and pillage of the Islamic hordes”

            One of the root causes as to why the West can’t seem to make a unified stand is the lack of common historical memory between Northern and Southern Europe when it comes to the centuries of “enrichment” by the religion of peace. Spaniards, Southern Italians, Balkan Slavs, Romanians, Greeks – they know first-hand what it means to be under the dark cloud of Islam – for centuries. While Renaissance Europe was able to build graceful churches, they had to build walls and forts, and instead of engaging in great scientific, cultural and artistic leaps forward, their people had to sacrifice their lives defending their nations from Muslim hordes.

          • WTF

            I agree, its so often the case that unless you went through some conquest yourself, you cant or in the case of our leaders, refuse to confront the threat. Britain almost uniquely hasn’t really been conquered in any real sense since Roman times as the Norman conquest was I believe more of a few battles and then assimilation of the conquerors.

            We’ve had our civil wars like War of the Roses and Cavaliers & Roundheads and we had WWI and WWII but as a nation, we haven’t really been ruled in the manner of the countries you mention by any foreign power in 2000 years. Even the Roman conquest of Britain for its time was less brutal than Islamic conquest today despite a lot of urban gorilla actions by the ancient Brits.

  • evad666

    People have woken to the bias of the establishment which was wonderfully illustrated by the head of the school in Leicester who proudly listed all the ethnic minority children they had helped and at the end stated the school now needed to focus on the underachieving English.

    • WTF

      I read today that a school in Birmingham banned any discussion to tell its pupils all about an eclipse of the sun and how it happened. I think we can guess what sort of school this was and it harks back to the days when it was heresy to learn science.

    • James Jones

      “the school now needed to focus on the underachieving English.”

      I saw that report. The tragic irony of the situation seemed to escape the the Head.

  • Punksta

    The deep problem Parris skirts, is the poor assimilation of Muslims. This is what allies all of them to some degree with the radicals, both in their own and others’ minds. That and the feeble denunciation of radicals.
    Parris’s blinkered pro-Muslim prejudice is a dangerous development that will only deepen the problem.

    • Richard Baranov

      Parris claims he reads the responses to his columns. I do not believe him because a couple of weeks ago, if that, I pointed out to him that conservatively a hundred million people in the sub continent of India died as Islam progressed, bringing that country down from its highpoint as a civilization to its low in the form of that shambles of a state, Pakistan. I could now give him a short history of Buddhist Indonesia, once one of the great centres of Buddhism in Asia and how, due to the generosity of a Buddhist king, Islam gained a foothold and then, when powerful enough, turned on its host and brought that civilization low too. But it would be ‘water of a ducks back’ Parris like much of his ilk suffers from a bigotry even worse than that of the truly ignorant because he fancies himself as ‘educated’ and therefore enlightened in his views. To that sort of bigot, entrenched in their imagined superiority, reality will not intrude, reasoning will not do it, appeals to history will not do it, appeals to reports of Islamic atrocities on a daily basis literally going on world wide, will not do it. This sort of person cannot be reasoned with. He is as impervious to fact as the maker of the Titanic believed firmly in its unsinkability.

      Parris in his life time, he will not see the West go the same way as India or Indonesia or a whole host of other countries and civilizations who suffered a step back in civilization due to Islam. He will therefore, remain smug in his delusion that others, more knowledgeable or more aware of Islam and its fruits than he is are vulgar bigots who have a “problem with Islam”. But who, in fact have an honest appraisal of that movement whilst he is guided by the first class ignorance of those who see themselves as more urbane and sophisticated in such matters, there profound stupidity not withstanding.

  • James Jones

    At least we can be confidently sure of a few facts:-

    – Islam is the religion of peace and there is no reason to fear it or any of its adherents.
    – Religion does not poison anything.
    – When in the Koran it states “kill the infidels[1]” it does not really mean it. Learned interpreters explain that words do not always mean what they say, language is flexible and any word can be interpreted to mean anything.
    – As everyone knows the Koran is a book of peace and is not a book of religiously aggravated hatred as someone reading it might erroneously conclude from the words, sentences and paragraphs contained in it.

    Alloa akbar.

    [1] Unbelievers.

    • WTF

      I hope this is sarcasm !

      • red2black

        The sleepy town of Alloa seems deserving of praise for some reason.

        • James Jones

          “Alloa seems deserving of praise”

          And why not?

          Alloa akbar. Again.

          • red2black

            I expected you would tell me why.

          • James Jones

            “I expected you would tell me why.”

            No reason at all.

            I saw it on a comment section in a newspaper, it made me chuckle, and I have repeated it here.

            It’s more a question of why not.

            Please feel free to repeat it yourself.

            Alloa akbar.

          • red2black

            You say for no reason, and then give a reason.
            Alloa Akbar to you too.

          • red2black

            An unusual phonetic translation made more interesting by it being coincidental.

      • James Jones

        “I hope this is sarcasm”

        Me too.

        The thing is that accurate statements of the threats we face get moderated out. I hoped this version might survive.

  • charlenehale

    Majority of Christians found Jerry Springer show offensive but we did not make death threats against those who produced it. I chose to turn off the tv when it was on. Not my cup of tea but even worse would be to curse others created in the image of God. I am a Christian and I am not called to hate or murder. God is the judge and if I dislike something well I choose not to be offended and not to look at it. A vast difference in attitude. As a Christian I do not expect others to conform to my beliefs. I am called to love mercy, to love justice and walk humbly with my God. Cannot compare genuine Christianity with Islam. It is not just one or two, but Boko Haram, Isis, Al Shabab, Al Quada, Bashir killing Christians in Sudan it goes on and on …. In Yemen yesterday mosques were blown up by Muslims, Muslims killing Muslims where is the love, tolerance, respect for life, property and libery, do not forget dhimmitude?

  • rj

    I don’t understand why people claiming to be among the most tolerant in our western society appear to lend support to those who are among the least tolerant on this earth.

    • anotherjoeblogs

      This is a very profound problem. Why tolerate intolerance ?
      I am sure you have given it lots of thought. There must be some pathological reason for it rather than adherence to any political ideology. Maybe wishy washy namby pamby lefty has a great deal of truth to it. maybe it stems from childhood when the individual kept on buying sweets for the school bully while the more able started to fight back and this sweet buying appeasement still continues with resentment for those who stood up to the bullying.Dunno rj but a great question.

  • Check it out everyone! Parris is finger-wagging at us about hating people!

    Hello Kettle, my name is Pot.
    You’re black.

  • James Hamilton

    It’s thanks to bleeding heart hand wringers like Mr Parris that we are in the state we are in. We had no need of Muslims, or any other third world immigrants, but you thought you’d bring them in anyway just for the hell of it. What’s the worst that could happen? Well now we are finding out. We have a sizeable fifth common living among us who hate us and want to destroy us. To say nothing of their enthusiasm for breeding and welfare.

    • red2black

      Perhaps the worst that could happen is that they become part of a unified and organised working class, rather than the divided and fragmented one that the new economic system we now live under seems to prefer.

      • James Hamilton

        They are seldom part of what could be called the traditional working class. They either live off welfare or are self employed in all cash businesses like shops, fast food and taxis. Why they should gravitate towards cash only businesses is a mystery for the ages. I’m sure it doesn’t imply any dishonest motive.

        • red2black

          Well, there were always exceptions within the traditional working class, and working for cash-in-hand or being self-employed wasn’t that unusual. There’s a possibility that immigrant and indigenous workers come to recognise what they have in common rather than what differentiates them; that being, in the first instance, their social and economic circumstances.

          • Richard

            Not too sure about that one. I think they’d want you to spend it on mosques: “O you who believe! Lo! many of the (Jewish) rabbis and the (Christian) monks devour the wealth of mankind wantonly and debar (men) from the way of Allah. They who hoard up gold and silver and spend it not in the way of God, unto them give tidings (O Muhammad) of a painful doom” (Quran 9:34).

          • red2black

            I’ve always had more time for Sigurd’s slaying of Fafnir in order to release the Dragon’s Hoard.

      • Dan O’Connor

        All marching together under the Revolutionary Soviet New World Man flag eh ?

        • red2black

          Certainly not.

    • Richard

      “We had no need of Muslims, or any other third world immigrants, but you thought you’d bring them in anyway just for the hell of it.”

      You are very wrong. The Labour Party had great need of them. For their votes. Their own indigenous tribe was not to be trusted.

      • WTF

        True, even Gordon Brown called them bigots !

  • RobertC

    “… as though through some systematic and scientific method something about Muslims themselves and their religion had been established”

    Have a word with Gavin Ashenden (The Times):
    Muslims need to face up to the violence of the Koran
    http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/columnists/article4388885.ece

    If you don’t want sharia (read ISIL, Boko Haram), you are not a muslim. That is not my view, it is the ‘view’ of the koran.

    • Indeed.

      It’s like those utter morons who say – when faced with less-than-flattering stats about the significant world-wide Muslim support for, and justification of, violence, like this one:

      https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B7jJ6sOCUAELob6.jpg

      “yes but have you asked every single one of those 1.6 billion peaceful people, no? well you’re a bigot” – revealing that they are completely oblivious of even the basic workings of polling science.

      #Protip: reading Quran, educating himself about the 14-centuries long history of Islam which was nothing *but* a history of conquest of other peoples by force, and bookmarking http://www.thereligionofpeace.com for weekly updates about the latest Islamic contributions to world peace could help Mr. Parris.

      By the way, here are the latest, post-Tunis developments:

      2015.03.20 (Damasak, Nigeria) – At least seventy dumped bodies are discovered after a town is recaptured from Boko Haram.

      2015.03.20 (Hassakeh, Syria) – Thirty-five Kurds celebrating their New Year are turned into paste by a suicide bomber.

      2015.03.20 (Sanaa, Yemen) – A large number of children are among one-hundred and forty innocents eliminated by Sunni suicide bombers as they worshipped at two Shiite mosques.

      2015.03.20 (Kathua, India) – Radical Muslims storm a police station and murder four people.

      2015.03.19 (Giza, Egypt) – Two people go up in flames when suspected Ansar Beit Al Maqdis firebomb a youth center.

      2015.03.18 (Shirqat, Iraq) – A man and his wife are executed by the caliphate for her not wearing a veil.

  • David Pearson

    “And the more stupid they are, the more like everyone else they think everyone ought to be.” John Wyndham

  • CheshireRed

    Hi Matthew,
    May I make a suggestion? Pop along to the Muslim Council of Great Britain; ask them to publicly, comprehensively and unreservedly reject the directives of the Koran regarding homosexuality – which carries the death sentence – and instead to embrace you in peaceful, non-discriminatory peace-to-all-men brotherly love. (And women, too, obviously)
    See how far you get with changing their views, with getting them to repent their medieval mores and ancient customs, and in particular with their rejection of the spoken word of Allah and of the instructed obligations within their holy book.
    If you get through the meeting without being chucked from the highest point in Derbyshire or, should you be unfortunate enough to survive the fall, being stoned to death by a misunderstood group of Muslim worshippers, do feel free to report back your findings.
    Many thanks.