If you let lots of people into your country then you will get differences. Young men particularly feel the need to defend their religion and fight for waht they believe in. If Islam says that gays are amoral then young muslims will fight gays - that is their right. A Muslim gang went into a gay pub in Newham and beat them up. These attacks are because they need to fight for what they believe in end of.

Yes, human rights are universal. Islamists threaten more than LGBT rights - also is their firing line are Jews, women and liberal Muslims

Not condemning a hatemonger because of their 'race' is so obviously racist that it should not need to be said.

Those who denounce Outrage! specifically for opposing Islamist preachers and homophobes are racists. Period.

@Helen Wright

'Peter Tatchell himself has refused to storm a mosque [in the same way he stormed a church], in protest at religious sponsored homophobia. He is a coward and would rather protest anywhere other than in a muslim area.'

So many blinkered absurdities in one paragraph. Tatchell has done far more than storm Mosques. He has announced his views outloud at Hizb ut-Tahrir rallies and other extremist gatherings, often at the expense of his own physical safety. He is the complete opposite of a coward.

It's always the same dreary pattern of defence mechanisms with Tatchell's critics. The reason that bullies on both the political left and right have an axe to grind with him is because of how honest he is in pointing out the hypocrisies of both sides and how indifferent he is to other people's opinions. People will look at his attention-grabbing antics and leap to the conclusion that he is a single issue campaigner - a manifest falsehood. Malicious lies and smear campaigns are spread about him by the gutter media, following a trend begun by Simon Hughes and the Liberal Party's vicious homophobic campaign against Tatchell in the Bermondsey by-election.

I appreciate that Tatchell's black & white view of the world doesn't sit well with some people, but nobody here can call themselves left wing (I understand NS is a left-wing periodical) unless they agree that there is something fundamentally wrong in the established social order which should be challenged at its core.

When Islam is in a minority they loves talking about Tolerance, they talk about the tolerance that people must show towards minorities.

But when Islam is in a majority, minority rights are nowhere to be seen. In a majority - Human rights even the most basic (womens) rights are nowhere to be seen.

All the left who support the minority of Gaza should no if they ever became a majority and joined up with the Muslim brothers - Jews would be slaughtered in there beds.

However Israeli Arabs enjoy the most freedoms of Muslims in any country in the middle east -

get on the right side of the argument, side with the civilized man - not the savage.

Nice to know that some on the left, see these people as fascists, in the same way they do the BNP, or EDL. Normally I get told by the left, that UAF only do political fascism, not the religious motivated variety. Gay people have the right to live in the East End without harassment. Multiculturalism has a lot to answer for.

Peter's column is welcome and needed but is only scratching the surface of a very serious and very complex problem.

Islamic attitudes towards homosexuality should not be separated from Islam's attitude toward women, sex, the human body, which is designed to maintain the paternalistic system and the notion of the virtuous Muslim male at all costs. The attitides all flow 'logically' from the same source and set of aims and assumptions.

One thing Peter should bear in mind is that Muslims only view the 'bottom' or 'passive' type as homosexual. Many Muslim men, are open to having sex with other men provided they are 'top' only without it affecting their own sense of masculinity and righteousness; in fact this type of man is often most vociferous in condemning homosexuals because it helps in keeping them down, and dependent and fulfilling an important role in providing sexual release for men when there is no female 'available'. The social function and perception of homosexuality then is quite different. Throughout the Muslim world gay men are pressured or forced become transgendered as a 'solution' to the 'problem' of homosexuality and to also make themselves useful to the paternalistic system.
Even to refer to 'gay muslims' without clarification is therefore somewhat misleading.

Another absolutely key aspect is that many on the Left, not just the Respect and SWP parties, but including newspapers like the Guardian and Independent are very afraid of printing anything that even implies a criticism of Islam or the culture of Muslims in Britain. Any negative aspect arising from the Muslim commuity is simply presented as a 'misinterpretation' of Islam, whereas in fact the reactionary social beliefs are held by a much bigger section of the community. The Left wants all Muslims to be regarded as part of a victimized community because it fits their desire to create a political alliance with ethnic minorities.

There IS a more peaceful and tolerant strain within Islamic tradition and it is this which should be grasped by the local & national governments and media. The fundamentalists should be shunned and their demands refused. There are things ordinary citizens can do; object to halal-only menus in restaurants/canteens, defy restrictions on naked showering/changing, defy bans on the use of dogs as passengers and companions. All of these things and more are being sneaked in by fundamentalists who have bamboozled local authorities into believing these are REQUIRED by Islam, when in fact they are not, they are only RECOMMENDATIONS.

This is nonsensical. In case Mr Tatchell hasn't noticed, there is a group called the EDL that deliberately (and legally) by Mosques and Muslim neighbourhoods. The kind of language Tatchell uses reminds me of the paranoid and delusional 'conspiracy theory' rantings endemic to the Islamophobic right. It is of no surprise that idiots like 'Sven' and others, are immediately drawn to articles such as this, given the implicit notions of the 'establishment' being 'soft' on 'Islamists' (it's all a big conspiracy, I guess, but to what end?). Perhaps we're all slowly being 'Islamified' Mr Tatchell? Or perhaps you have a propensity to be particularly hysterical (Melanie Phillips style) when it comes to the perceived crimes of 'Muslims'. Yeah the BBC, the Guardian, the Lib-Lab-Con parties, the Daily Mail, the Telegraph, the Times and the Indy are colluding with a few numpties from East London. One might surmise, about modern Britain, that 'Muslims control everything'. Where have I heard this level of paranoia before?

these lowly illegitmate muslim males hanging out in street corners need to be dealth with a firm hand..thats the only solution to thick headed thugs

Islam was invented by a gangster from a primitive and illiterate society. It has caused untold misery for 1400 years. For reasons known only to themselves, British politicians have seen fit to allow islam to become established in Britain, and we must now face the consequences.

Sam what is proves is that when people like Peter who happen to write factually about Muslim Biggots idiots like you bring up the old Islamaphobia card. I can speak for most people who are fearful of Islam that we don’t hate Muslims because they are different, dark skineed or speak in a funny accent. It is because of the words and actions of Muslims - it isn’t an irrational fear, its real and there are serious issues within Islam.

Please stop trying to spread this myth that Islam is peaceful. Please stop trying to tell us we are Islamphobes, when most of the people commiting acts of terror and oppressing Muslims are other Muslims – are they greasy Islamphobes too????
It is not asif we are talking about a Muslim thief or drink driver who have broken the law just like anyone else. No, these people are committing acts of bigotry that are directly linked to and propagated by there religion and it is there religion that defines them and how they wish to define themselves - not us. If a Muslim drink drives its nothing to do with his religion...but the biggotry in this article is inspired by Islamic teachings.

When the Islamic Jihadi’s flew planes into the twin towers, holding the Koran, screaming Alluh Akbar, can we not say that this was linked to Islam for fear of being called racist????

What do they have in common?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rd8cRvZZv44&feature=BFa&list=FLrbR5sS3tdy...

Wembley isn't a mosque, is it, Peter? And a church isn't exactly sticking your neck out either.
You were offered company to attend a mosque but didn't accept.

Sam, your an Idiot, no one is making anything up, facts are facts,

Because their are made up conspiracy theories surrounding Jews doesn't mean to say the same is being portrayed for Muslims.

The fact the EDL exist isnt an argument to not disucss the issues of Islam, they are a tiny blip in the specter of the Islamic Supremacists.

It's not judicial homophobia - it is a government sponsored leniency towards the muslim religion itself - as if respectful muslims would be offended by idiots like this being prosecuted.

Gay muslims deserve the same rights as everyone else and at this time, they deserve extra protection from the cretins in their community and elsewhere.

Peter Tatchell himself has refused to storm a mosque [in the same way he stormed a church], in protest at religious sponsored homophobia. He is a coward and would rather protest anywhere other than in a muslim area.

And where is the so-called UAF in all this? Their heads would explode if they have to think about any bigotry not carried out by white men and especially when it is carried out by a muslim.

Equality and respect apply to all - not just non muslims. And for goodness sakes, just because a muslim is gay, doesn't mean he or she must tolerate the disgusting homophobes in their own communities.

In reply to Sam:
I did not post anything on Harry's Place. They posted my article, in the same way that they often cross-post articles from other websites and newspapers. It is good to get progressive articles published anywhere. Ken Livingstone used to write for The Sun. I supported his decision. Challenging the ideas of readers of a right-wing newspaper or blog is exactly what a good lefty should do.
My 40 year record of supporting the Palestinian national cause stands for all to see, as does my equally long record fighting racism and defending the Muslim communities.

What a lot of words. Here is the way it is. Homosexuals trump feminists. Blacks trump homosexuls. Muslims trump blacks. That seems to cover the waterfront. Except perhaps that absolutely anybody trumps Christians.

This is too funny.

The 'intellectual left' imploding as they bestow complete religious freedom on Muslims and then wrestle with the consequences.

Just like the unions' inability to come to terms with the left's immigration policies.

An unholy alliance of mis-aligned interests.

"Us gays2 as like "us wimmin" and as kike "us lager drinking men" is justa term these days it seems.

It you want to bother the botty, we do not mind, carry on. But by christ do not become paranoid about it. That is your conscience that is. Like me bothering my conscience on girlies fannies, above eighteen years old by the way, honest, as they sit down. Tht's life.

Gays will do anything for attention

Reply to Helen Wright:
I don't want a medal but I think your accusations of cowardice are a bit strong. Six of us faced off 6,000 Islamists threatening to kill us at Wembley in 1994.
BTW: Have you stormed a mosque? If not, why not?

I think this is a thoughtful article.

Where indeed in front of a court are the printers of the stickers and those who proposed them to the lad?

I agree the point made about upsetting - if we all went to jail for upsetting people, Ken Clarke would have a prison bill that would require 90% discounts on sentences for guilty pleas.

Yes it is true that I for one did not protest other issues in the East End of London, for the simple reason I did not know of them (and don't live there to learn of them).

Yes it is true there is a careful-footedness when it comes to Islam, when I, for one, am a bit more free with criticising sects within Christianity for homophobia.

It is partly for concern of creating community dissent in circles and communities where social cohesion is far from satisfactory. It is also because I don't want to criticise a mosque because of some of its connections on a guilt-by-association basis.

I know there are some dodgy characters at work, but I also know that many decent men and women attend mosques, and I don't want to slam a mosque when I lack a more precise target. And not speaking Bengali etc, I cannot know at whom exactly I should fire my darts.

Peter at Twickenham:
I never said this case sets any kind of binding legal precedent. I merely stated that by including causing "upset" as an apparent grounds for criminalisation, the well-intended judge was widening the interpretation and scope of Section 5 - and in a way that I think is dangerous to free speech.
True, I am divided and torn as to whether Hasnath should have been prosecuted at all, given that he was not inciting violence. My article reflects my lack of certainty on this point. Is that a bid thing, to honestly express one's divided opinions?

Well done atrlcie that. I'll make sure to use it wisely.

It is clear many Britons, especially on the Left are in denial about the Islamification of the country. As someone living in France and visiting Britain about every 6 months I can say that there are many indications that the UK is undergoing a form of Islamification, and is just a couple of levels behing France in that regard. Peter, are you aware that are more than 80 Sharia Law courts (mostly in the hands of fundamentist 'Islamic scholars' from Pakistan and north Africa)already operating in the UK? The decisions of these courts have standing in all our Law Courts now. Soon, they wil be able to exert stronger influence of the legal case you deiscuss here, in fact in every area of Muslim interaction and relations with other comunities. Fundamentalists are often in control of local mosques in the UK and their interpretation when presented to the local authorities in areas such as health, education, etc, is accepted without seeking more progressive interpretations.

The government should take a stand in not accepting their standing until they are reformed, and promote only progressive interpretations of Islam. Most politicians and media are too afraid to address this problem. I am afraid that soon it will be too late to change course and the result will be increasing tension and conflict.