Actually, al-Muhajiroun had gone into someone else’s house under false pretences and tried to impose their own rules. The democratic response would actually be to divide the hall into three sections: one part for men who want to be segregated, one part for women who wnat to be segregated and one part for people who don’t care.

I was there and would have preferred the debate to have gone ahead rather than having it stopped on the spurious grounds of infringing the rule of non-segregation.

If only someone had the presence of mind to ask those who were against and for segregation to raise their hands as well as those who didn’t care, and resolved the matter by a democratic vote, even if it meant that the segregationists would have had the day, since they were in the majority.

Not being an extremist trying to make a point, I was actually happy where I was.

It was a trumped-up reason to stop the meeting, and an opportunity was missed to have these Muslims explain to us how and why their version of Sharia is so perfect and beautiful, and for Douglas Murray and anyone else to challenge this.

If they were hiring and paying for the hall, it behoves those who wished to attend what was after all a free meeting to abide by their rules.

To do otherwise would have been an abuse of hospitality.

If invited to someone’s house and asked to remove my shoes before crossing the threshold, I would do so without hesitation and with good grace, even if it were my custom to sleep in my boots in my own home.

It is after all only good manners.