This lady(!), Debbie Hayton, has restored my faith in human nature!

The Dutch event is just a silly and unhelpful stunt. Tehran is serious news which should be well covered by the British media. But it isn't! There's the shame.

What I find odd, is that missing from the Brexit crisis argument (and what goes on with the Conservatives) is any mention of "the balance of power", the guiding star of British foreign policy since Tudor Times!! In 60 years or so, maybe sooner, an isolated Britain, sitting down to negotiate with China, say, will be laughably inferior. Unless, of course, it has become the 51st state of the USA!

European Anti-Semitism today is largely a consequence of the "Palestinian problem". At a dinner party recently with educated "middle of the road" friends and acquaintances when Palestine was mentioned, I found myself in a minority of 1 (out of 12). Israel is bad entity; Look at what it has done to the poor Palestinians. That's what everyone thinks! As best I could I tried to mention (amongst other things): (1) The million Christians who had to leave their homes and land in the former Ottoman Empire after WW1. Nobody hears about them these days; (2) Likewise, no one hears about the hundreds of thousands of Jews who had to flea their homes in "Arab territory". Bagdad used to be the "largest" Jewish city in the Middle East. It was the poor Palestinians who were put into camps and turned into a political/religious weapon; and a reason and means to continually harass and threaten the existence of Israel. (3) Jews are Palestinians, they have always lived there, and there was nothing wrong in them seeking independence (and other Jews joining them). The problem was the Arabs/Muslims refused to give an inch on anything whatsoever. By giving nothing, the Arabs/Muslims "lost nearly everything". It is their fault. Etc. As far as I could tell I didn't change any minds. And, it was obvious that what I had to say was totally "novel" for my fellow diners.

It may well be true there is some kind of human blood lust at work in those who carry out atrocities. However, in this case those blowing themselves up probably believed they were going to paradise. I think that has something to do with Islam.

"I don’t think you understand the scale of what Israel and more specifically the zionists have done, are doing and plan to .... .... " Where does someone like that get their ideas and information? Sarsour is obviously plugged in to the sources that typically MEMRI covers and you occasionally report here.

Why (almost) no people in any of these photos!? They are fascinating to look at, but somehow "empty" and unreal.

It's good to hear some Muslim voices standing up for Asia Bibi, but I suspect the three imams mentioned are a long way from being mainstream; there's the problem. A Dr Usama Hasan works with/for Quilliam. I don't know if it is the same one, but Quilliam is regularly lambasted by the British Muslim establishment. However, buried in the MCB website you will find this brief statement. They wouldn't take any lead on the case, of course, but even they find it politic to say: “There are unfounded media reports that Pakistani national Asia Bibi is being denied asylum into the UK because of concerns from British Muslims. We find such insinuations to be as nonsensical as they are divisive. We see no reason why Asia Bibi should be denied asylum into the UK”.

It ranks as one of the most stupid decisions of the last 100 years. The one (feeble) excuse/explanation I've heard is that it was taken under pressure from Shia sectarian interests. Even after all the horrors of WW2 the Allies only removed the top strata of Nazis.

.... I wouldn't go out of way to remove this stain on Irgun's reputation ....

About 90 innocent civilians were killed in the King David Hotel attack. So I wouldn't go out of my way to cast the Irgun in a favourable light even if this new explanation is correct. BTW, I fully support the right of Israel to exist.

A powerful piece indeed, especially with those figures, but quite mistaken nevertheless. The Islamic State was not a bit player. Those figures also show the strength of the opposition to Assad. And that opposition would be doing exactly what Assad's regime is doing if it had been on top. "... the liberal democratic order, the superiority of western values" mean not a jot in that part of the world.

A big part of the problem is that too many people don't get statistics. A particular race might produce more people with particular good or bad characteristic than other races, but the vast majority of that race are just like you and me!

Pity, that! I don't suppose MEND will be looking at JW but they are people who should be reading the article!

Do you know if the original article has appeared in other publications/sites? It is not just on JW?

Something wrong here. This got published on the Guardian. (No Comments, of course!) "Morrissey also appeared to suggest that politicians were afraid to refer to Abedi as an Islamist extremist." “Manchester mayor Andy Burnham says the attack is the work of an ‘extremist’. An extreme what? An extreme rabbit?” https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/may/23/morrissey-attacks-politicians-and-the-queen-over-manchester-terrorism-response

Hmmm. The Times (I think) ran a big cartoon feature portraying the bomber(s) as coward(s). Politicians still fall back on the same accusation. They may be psychopaths, mentally disturbed, losers, very stupid and ignorant, sadists, but they are not cowards. They kill themselves. They believe they will go to paradise. This is what their religion teaches. If you die in killing the enemies of Allah you are blessed with heavenly rewards for eternity. There is something wrong with their religion. We need to spell that out!

He should be at liberty to say all those things. The red line as you suggest is a call to violence. But there is another aspect to it. What about “a right of reply”? Should there be a right of reply? How do we get the opportunity to tell him what we think and where he is wrong? Yes, attitudes such as his might be exactly what helped motivate the Manchester bomber. And, who recruited him, who employs him, what do his colleagues think? Are they of the same mind? Where does he come from? Why is he living in Denmark?

“A shallow fetishisation of ‘togetherness’ takes the place of any articulation of what we should be together for – and against.” I’m all in favour of spelling out what we are against, but, of course, if that was done it would starkly demonstrate the failure of our politicians over the last several few decades to deal with certain versions of Islam. The last thing they will do is admit to that. I recommended it in another comment, but I’ll recommend it again, if I may. One of the Amazon reviewers of Baroness Warsi’s “The Enemy Within: A Tale of Muslim Britain” paraphrased her chapter concerning British Foreign Policy as follows: “British foreign policy is the reason young Muslims turn to terrorism. We must not give in to this type of blackmail. [So far, so good!]. We must pursue the foreign policy we believe is right. Our foreign policy is wrong. The human rights and values (democracy etc.) we demand British citizens including British Muslims subscribe to at home should be the basis of our foreign policy yet we are friends with dictatorships such as Saudi Arabia, and Egypt and odd cases like Pakistan who deny these rights and ignore these values. This hypocrisy is what infuriates young British Muslims. We have to change our foreign policy and stop working with or supporting these countries until they subscribe to human rights and British values.”

Islamic reform is a real mish-mash. If you enjoy banging your head against a brick wall you can try reading some examples of modern Islamic thinking such as ““Woman’s Identity and Rethinking the Hadith” by Nimat Hafez Barazangi of Cornell University. Or try Baroness Warsi’s proposals in her “The Enemy Within: A Tale of Muslim Britain”, only slightly less painful! The greater advance will be for Muslims to understand the shaky foundations of their religion and to recognise its man-made character. I know it will take a very long time for such understanding to become widespread but it is the only real solution. It has taken Christianity more than 100 years to go through a similar process. Modern media may speed up the process for Islam. We need a lot more (and better) programmes like Holland’s effort on Channel 4.

".... whereas before the nineteenth century the Prophet was viewed as a mystical leader, afterwards he came to be seen more as a kind of early, oriental, version of Napoleon or Alexander - a military figure. Well, Holland knows more about the early history of Islam than I do, but that did surprise me". You shouldn't be surprised. For all his knowledge Holland sometimes expresses outrageously incorrect opinions. It's difficult to judge whether it's some kind of tactic to win over certain readers, or he really believes what he says.

It’s incredible. The cost of the equipment (hire, whatever), knowing how to use it, the time and space it must take. And what about dealing with the building owners! Do they get a say in it! That’s before the painting starts. Getting everything right, perspective, dimensions, in those huge spaces while working a few feet (?) from the surface shows amazing skill.

How on earth do they do those paintings?! Is there a special painters DIY IKEA scaffolding kit?

Excellent review but what a completely stupid title. "The West can never hope to understand Islamic State" Mind you, it is the New Statesman.

If you study the comments and the votes on the comments on any article in the Guardian to do with Islam, you will see they are overwhelmingly critical of Islam or whatever argument is being pushed to explain some objectionable Islamic belief or behaviour. And, judging by the quality (spelling, grammar, punctuation) and the length of comments they really are Guardian readers, and not trolls from the Daily Mail or the BNP. It is a remarkable publishing phenomenon. On the subject of Islam the Guardian is totally out of step with its readers. There is a survey of it which you can see here: https://islamsurveyed.files.wordpress.com/2016/02/readersdontmatter-attheguardian.pdf The irony is the Guardian could do more to help Muslims by being sensibly critical at least some of the time and by supporting Muslim reformers, instead of being so-wilfully one sided, and publishing vomit inducing material such as this latest piece. No wonder comments are OFF.