“There is not a single church, synagogue, Hindu temple, Sikh Gudwara, or other religious building in this country where you will find anything like this.”

Really? Did you conduct a “comprehensive academic survey” of every religious building in the whole country? Or is that just an unsubstantiated claim based on what you already think?

Anyway, I’ve read the report and it doesn’t contain the information on methodology that you’d expect in an academic paper. I’d very much like to know more about the methodology behind this “academic survey” (and I’m not the only one either).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SiuY5JS7ucA

Well worth watching!

Sorry that was a typo, I meant treating them justly/fairly is always the case (defined by then norms of Islamic law). However showing non-Muslims mercy and kindess is contingent to certain conditions - that relates to the laws of warfare.

Just wanted to clarify that.

Denis MacEoin, as far as I know is an ex-Bahai, right wing, Israel supporter. Does it matter, of course it does. You simply cannot discount people’s backgrounds, it’s not exactly conspiracy hunting. That’s why I am suprised that Neil Robinson, someone I highly respect, should preface this obviously malicious report. Policy Exchange is also a centre right, conservative hawkish think tank.

But saying all that, many of these quotes are rooted in Muslim heritage. Declaring enmity to disbeliever in general, even when treating them fairly/with justice within certain condiitons, would be found in any of the main tafseer books - Qurtubi, Tabari, Al-Razi etc.

Some of their statements on Jews and Christians, would be in todays standards, be considered ‘hate filled’. See what Al-Razi calls Jews, the quote is in Izhar Al-Haq (they were a religious community then). Often these traditional scholars would quote extensive scripture.

Agressvie warfare and subjugating disbelievers and imposing what would be considered by todays standards as disriminatory laws, does exist in mainstream Muslim scholarship. These are fully orthodox Sunnis - as you well know. Some have even declared the concensus of the companions and the community on many of these positions.

Does this relate to ‘extremism’ or terrorism? Mainly no. Most Muslims wouldn’t read these texts (few would but them and many exist in huge encyclopedias no one bothers opening) and those who do and would agree know that these laws are very much linked to an Islamic entity - as you pointed out. As for hating disbelievers, well that does not mean you kill disbelievers, decieve them or treat them unfairly. It has little to do with terrorism - which is linked and driven by foreign policy, whether Policy Exchange admit it or not.

However many of these opinions are indeed separatist, and I would argue it does exist as a trend in mainstream medievel texts, but there are separtist communities, who take their religious heritage seriously in other religions e.g. ultra-orthodox Jews. I personaly find such opinions despicable.

I’ll put this as a rule of thumb - when and if the British ruling class come out and say their policies resulted in the deaths of thousands, putting terrorists in the pale, then they can talk all they want about these hate filled opinions. If this report came out of an organisation with that background, than yes it should be taken seriously, as probably is a serious study - instead of an attempt at political hackery.