All Islam is political.

Liberals can only defend the institutions and society they support by relentlessly challenging the basic tenets of Islam that are anathema to their liberal views.

Liberal society's protection of Islam is turning out to becoming a classic example of the Paradox of Toleration in operation. That states that if a society is tolerant without limit, their ability to be tolerant will eventually be seized or destroyed by the intolerant. And Liberals are helping this to come about by persecuting those who criticise Islam in a truthful and accurate way whilst continuing to ignore all the faults of Islam’s ideology.

Oh yes it was!

You do know that you look totally ridiculous by claiming that leaving the EU and trading on WTO terms would destroy the economy, don't you? Your hyperbole does you no credit. Even Cameron said during the EU campaign that Britain could survive outside the EU, meaning he could not present a credible case for saying leaving would destroy the economy.

NO!

Voting to remain was NEVER a vote for the status quo but another step towards "an Ever Closer Union".

A truly idiotic comparison!

John Wilkinson and the other Maastricht rebels did not defy the vote of the people as there had not been a referendum on the Maastricht treaty whereas these 12 rebels are seeking to reverse the will of the people as expressed in the referendum that we should leave the EU and CU, the SM and the jurisdiction of the ECJ. And don't dare to claim we did not vote for that because Cameron made it perfectly clear during the referendum that voting to leave meant leaving the SM and the CU etc.

Fake news garbage. Employment figures are published by the government and unemployment rates remain low, particularly compared to the EU.

Mass migration has been responsible for contributing significantly to worsening working conditions, for adding to the housing shortage and therefore increasing house and rent prices, for driving down wages and for stagnant output per worker. Why should employers offer full time contracts when there is such an abundance of cheap labour they can exploit on zero hours contracts? Why should they train British staff when they can recruit from abroad?

The problem with lefties is that they don't have the intelligence to realise that liberal policies like open borders enable the working classes to be exploited by employers and that Brexit and managed migration is in the interests of both Middle England and the working class. Only by making labour scarcer by reducing immigration significantly will employers have to actively compete to recruit and retain workers and offer them better wages and conditions and only then will productivity start to increase.

There is hardly an advert from a large company in the food and retail business on TV - Tesco, M&S, John Lewis - that does not feature a mixed race couple or an ethnic minority people as the main or only characters featured nowadays. They don't seem to be speaking to Middle England either.

"but the overwhelming majority actively support the companies direction"

They would be mad not to do so, wouldn't they?

The companies direction should be building their business and not getting involved in politics. Companies that get so involved in politics will only recruit and retain like minded staff and they may not be the best people for the job

What is really, really, weird is that employees in an office anywhere in the world have holsters, let alone wear them at work!

Christianity has a good ideology but some bad people which we are now dealing with. The problem with Islam is not bad people but bad ideology which we are ignoring.

There is nothing in Christianity that encourages paedo behavior by anyone and it is rightly viewed by Christians and secular society as a heinous crime but Mohamed married a 9 year old girl Aisha and in Islam there are still arranged marriages and women and girls hold a very much inferior position in Islam. The Muslim gangs who abused young white girls in Rotherham and elsewhere were influenced by the ideology of their religion to abuse them because they weren’t Muslim – that made it easy for them to hold them in contempt and ripe for exploitation. They did not exploit any Muslim girls in that way.

The Koran contains at least 109 verses that speak of war with nonbelievers, usually on the basis of their status as non-Muslims. Some are quite graphic, with commands to chop off heads and fingers and kill infidels wherever they may be hiding. Muslims who do not join the fight are called 'hypocrites' and warned that Allah will send them to Hell if they do not join the slaughter. It is not surprising therefore that Islamists can recruit jihadists to kill infidels and why prisons and petty criminals are a recruiting ground for them.

Unlike nearly all of the Old Testament verses of violence, most verses of violence in the Koran are open-ended, meaning that they are not necessarily restrained by historical context contained in the surrounding text (although many Muslims choose to think of them that way). They are part of the eternal, unchanging word of Allah, and just as relevant or subject to interpretation as anything else in the Koran.

Most contemporary Muslims exercise a personal choice to interpret their holy book's call to arms according to their own moral preconceptions about justifiable violence. Islam's apologists cater to these preferences with tenuous arguments that gloss over historical fact and generally don't stand up to scrutiny. Still, it is important to note as I noted above that the problem of Islam is not bad people, but bad ideology.

Unfortunately, there are very few verses of tolerance and peace to balance out those calling for nonbelievers to be fought and subdued until they either accept humiliation, convert to Islam, or are killed. Mohamed's own martial legacy, along with the remarkable emphasis on violence found in the Koran, have produced a trail of blood and tears across world history and, since 2007, now here in our country.