A month after the London bombings, life is carrying on. The broadcast promise of more destruction from al-Qaeda struck a strange note; the intent was to intimidate, but the bizarre scene and the weirdness of the man made the venomous video almost an example of high camp. Meanwhile there was an unease among commuters in London, whose boarding of a train or a bus was a small act of courage and defiance.

These extraordinary circumstances have inevitably prompted an intense debate over the many-tiered complexities of multiculturalism. Commentators should not help the Islamophobia industry by exaggerating claims of an anti-Muslim “backlash”. The response by most Britons to recent events has been overwhelmingly moderate, measured and a tribute to their tolerance.

In advising Muslim women that they would be justified in not wearing the hijab, since wearing it might invite attacks, Dr Zaki Badawi, the chairman of the Council of Mosques and Imams, yesterday regrettably helped to further the notion that the headscarf is a symbol of hate. It is not. Muslim dress has thankfully not been politicised in Britain as it has in France. Certainly the fundamentalist organisation Hizb-ut-Tahrir, which is banned in Germany and much of the Middle East, has tried to make it so. They encouraged a teenage girl to bring a test case against Denbigh High School. They have so far failed to ignite a widespread campaign in favour of conflict on the issue.

An article of clothing should never become a barrier to integration. The turban and the yarmulke have not prevented Sikhs and Jews from assimilating. The danger is that drawing too much attention to Muslim dress will, in fact, turn it into an inflammatory symbol of separate identity.

Dr Badawi says that he made his remarks in response to an approach from a woman who was concerned about going out in the present climate. He was not advising women to give up the headscarf but was making the point that since the hijab was designed to identify women as Muslim and thus protect them from molestation, if it led to harassment it ought not to be worn. Yet however well-meaning his comments, he should have confined them to the original audience. It was unfortunate that he let the BBC, and the BBC let itself, devote prime time to the issue in a way that was almost guaranteed to escalate controversy.

It is important to keep the facts in mind rather than make sweeping statements as to what might be happening to relationships between communities in this country. The Metropolitan Police announced this week that 269 “faith hate” crimes have been reported since July 7, compared with 40 in the same three-week period last year. Clearly, some shameful incidents have occurred. But the number of really serious and physical assaults have also been mercifully few.

It seems likely, in fact, that there has been both an exaggeration of the seriousness of the incidents that have been reported, and an underestimation of the number of relatively minor but still unpleasant incidents, such as verbal abuse. Many sensible law-abiding Muslim citizens do not wish to complain. They seem to take the view, rightly, that Britain is going through an unusual period, in which the unpleasantness of a few does not imply any change in the underlying tolerance of the majority. Britons are a lot more tolerant then the fanatical followers of al-Qaeda or their apologists.