It is a question that many Muslims would rather they were not asked. Do you think those people killed by military strikes in foreign lands should be compared to those killed by terror attacks on UK soil?

The fact is comparing terror attacks on UK soil to bombs being dropped on women and children in Syria will resonate with many Muslims.

It is like opening Pandora’s box and many would rather we were not put in the position of challenging this.

More pertinent is the question that if you believe this can you be classed as an 'extremist'? And are you in some way glorifying acts of terrorism?

Yesterday, there was understandable alarm over such a suggestion from ISIS bride Shamima Begum. Her comments feature on the front pages of the national newspapers.

In an interview with the BBC, Shamima Begum, said the deaths of 22 innocent people in the terrorist attack on an Ariana Grande concert in 2017 were akin to the "women and children" being bombed in IS territory in Baghuz.

She told the broadcaster: "I do feel that it's wrong that innocent people did get killed. It's one thing to kill a soldier that is fighting you, it's self-defence, but to kill the people like women and children...

"Just people like the women and children in Baghuz that are being killed right now unjustly, the bombings. It's a two-way thing really.

"Because women and children are being killed back in the Islamic State right now and it's kind of retaliation. Like, their justification was that it was retaliation so I thought 'OK, that is a fair justification'."

The problem for those managing 'anti-extremism' policy is that Muslims will in fact find this comparison plausible.

Are the lives of innocent Muslims any less worthy of commemoration than those killed by a deranged killer on UK soil. Does this make you a ‘terrorist sympathiser’? And are you committing an act of treason even for suggesting there is a comparison?

If asked the question how would you as a Muslim answer? Would you try to mask your true feelings?

It is unlikely you will read an opinion piece such as this anywhere else in the country and here is why.

To challenge the above point means that you can classed as someone who is ‘appeasing terrorism’ or you are a Muslim who is bringing up issues we would rather not discuss. The latter means you are trying to emphasise a point we would rather wasn’t mentioned.

Let us quietly keep these views to ourselves because saying anything otherwise draws attention to Islam and Muslims.

In the past decade there has been a concerted effort to change the perception of Muslims to wider audiences but this issue draws us into a recurring conundrum - that of loyalty to the nation or loyalty to your religion.

Muslims will state categorically there is no justification in any terror attack regardless of what has happened elsewhere. At the same time they will answer any critic who says that the lives of Muslims in another country are any less important – even when killed in war zones.

Deaths of innocent people is to be condemned no matter where it happens.

I have spoken regularly to people who will state just because you happen to be in the line of fire does not make your life less important.

If they bring up these points and they were non-Muslim would they still be classed in a way a Muslim is? Or do you have to be of a certain skin colour and background to be a ‘threat’.

Any challenge to ‘radicalisation’ must face up to questions such as this. Unfortunately, this is almost impossible.