Jump to content

Islamic radicals 'infiltrate' the Labour Party


Recommended Posts

This is disturbing, could it be happening in other countries and if so how can we stop it.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/labour/7333420/Islamic-radicals-infiltrate-the-Labour-Party.html

The Islamic Forum of Europe (IFE) — which believes in jihad and sharia law, and wants to turn Britain and Europe into an Islamic state — has placed sympathisers in elected office and claims, correctly, to be able to achieve “mass mobilisation” of voters.

Speaking to The Sunday Telegraph, Jim Fitzpatrick, the Environment Minister, said the IFE had become, in effect, a secret party within Labour and other political parties.

“They are acting almost as an entryist organisation, placing people within the political parties, recruiting members to those political parties, trying to get individuals selected and elected so they can exercise political influence and power, whether it’s at local government level or national level,” he said.

“They are completely at odds with Labour’s programme, with our support for secularism.”

Mr Fitzpatrick, the MP for Poplar and Canning Town, said the IFE had infiltrated and “corrupted” his party in east London in the same way that the far-Left Militant Tendency did in the 1980s. Leaked Labour lists show a 110 per cent rise in party membership in one constituency in two years.

In a six-month investigation by this newspaper and Channel 4’s Dispatches, involving weeks of covert filming by the programme’s reporters:

* IFE activists boasted to the undercover reporters that they had already “consolidated … a lot of influence and power” over Tower Hamlets, a London borough council with a £1 billion budget.

* We have established that the group and its allies were awarded more than £10 million of taxpayers’ money, much of it from government funds designed to “prevent violent extremism”.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 119
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

So let me get this straight, people who conspire against the government in hopes of greater religious tolerance are just as traitorous as people who conspire against the government in hopes of greater religious intolerance?

That seems extremely centrist. I trust I'd be wrong to assume you would conspire against all religions in hopes of greater government, it's own tolerability notwithstanding?

Personally I'd like to see a lot less of both religion and government.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So let me get this straight, people who conspire against the government in hopes of greater religious tolerance are just as traitorous as people who conspire against the government in hopes of greater religious intolerance?

Incorrect supposition.

They are not looking for greater religious tolerance. They are looking for much much less tolerance. In which case they have much in common with the gunpowder plot conspirators.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The people in the gunpowder plot were in fact looking for greater religious tolerance.

Uh, no. They were looking to overthrow the Protestant James I and the overwhelmingly Protestant Parliament, put James I's baby daughter on the throne as a puppet ruler while they restored the Catholic state that had existed prior to Henry VIII's break with Rome. If you think the Catholic rebels, if successful, would have promoted any kind of religious freedom, you're out of your mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The people in the gunpowder plot were in fact looking for greater religious tolerance.

Incorrect. They were looking to replace the protestant with the most oppresive form of christianity the world had known.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Catesby may have embarked on the scheme after hopes of securing greater religious tolerance under King James had faded, leaving many English Catholics disappointed

Link

Their aim was to displace Protestant rule by blowing up the Houses of Parliament while King James I and the entire Protestant, and even most of the Catholic, aristocracy and nobility were inside. The conspirators saw this as a necessary reaction to the systematic discrimination against English Catholics

Link

Obviously its bad news all around when government and religion merge. Everyone gets intolerant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Incorrect. They were looking to replace the protestant with the most oppresive form of christianity the world had known.

Indeed. While the Elizabethan Compromise doesn't pass the modern test of religious tolerance, considering the status of Protestants in Catholic kingdoms like Spain and France during the period, it was a positive egalitarian paradise. Plotters like the Wintour brothers (Thomas and Robert) hardly suggested that the success of the Plot would have lead to a lovely tolerant egalitarian state (the Wintours had been keen to get Philip III of Spain involved a few years prior to the Plot, and if eyeball knew anything about the Spanish, he wouldn't be thinking this had anything to do with religious liberty).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Indeed. While the Elizabethan Compromise doesn't pass the modern test of religious tolerance, considering the status of Protestants in Catholic kingdoms like Spain and France during the period, it was a positive egalitarian paradise.

James's attitude towards Catholics was more moderate than that of his predecessor, perhaps even tolerant. He promised that he would not "persecute any that will be quiet and give an outward obedience to the law",[9] and believed that exile was a better solution than capital punishment: "I would be glad to have both their heads and their bodies separated from this whole island and transported beyond seas."
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When it comes to religion and government I don't think I believe anything I read or hear.

I'll probably stay even further clear of the two now.

I'm not sure what you're saying. On one count, you say an Islamist group's infiltration of parts of the British Labour party is all about religious freedoms, when the group's stated claim is the Islamization of the UK. And then you come out with the lovely bon motte about the Gunpowder Plot being about restoring religious freedoms in England. While I'll concede that probably some of the plotters were probably as naive as you are, it's very clear that the plans were the restoration of the Catholic Throne, close ties with Catholic Spain, and that heavily suggests that English and Scottish Protestants were in for a very rough ride, much rougher a ride than the English Catholics had had under Elizabeth or James I.

Edited by ToadBrother
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Indeed. While the Elizabethan Compromise doesn't pass the modern test of religious tolerance, considering the status of Protestants in Catholic kingdoms like Spain and France during the period, it was a positive egalitarian paradise. Plotters like the Wintour brothers (Thomas and Robert) hardly suggested that the success of the Plot would have lead to a lovely tolerant egalitarian state (the Wintours had been keen to get Philip III of Spain involved a few years prior to the Plot, and if eyeball knew anything about the Spanish, he wouldn't be thinking this had anything to do with religious liberty).

No, given this it seems more about liberty in general. Governments are little if any better than religion and when both get mixed up people get intolerant, as they should.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, given this it seems more about liberty in general. Governments are little if any better than religion and when both get mixed up people get intolerant, as they should.

I can't speak for MDancer, but my point is that you have wholly misjudged the intentions of the Gunpowder Plotters. They weren't about restoring religious toleration, because prior to Thomas Cromwell's clever manipulation of Henry VIII's break with Rome into the full-on onslaught of the English Reformation (remember, Henry broke with Rome, not with Catholicism itself), Protestants weren't exactly a well-respected group either.

I agree that religion and politics should not mix, and it is in some part because of the religious wars in Europe, including ancillary events like the Elizabethan Compromise and the Gunpowder Plot, that the argument became so strong for the Jeffersonian "Wall of Separation". This is why having Islamic radicals attempting to seize the Labour Party or some portion of it is damned disturbing and has some parallels to the Gunpowder Plotters, who viewed the compromises at that time as unfair to their faith, and even a threat. The Islamists are not interested in religious liberties, they are interested in ending other religions, the very anathema of the notion of religious tolerance and liberties which the Enlightenment thinkers, so moved by the horrors of the European religious struggles, had formulated as a solution.

Edited by ToadBrother
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure what you're saying. On one count, you say an Islamist group's infiltration of parts of the British Labour party is all about religious freedoms,

No, here's what happened. I googled up Gunpowder Plot and then on the basis of reading Catesby may have embarked on the scheme after hopes of securing greater religious tolerance under King James had faded, leaving many English Catholics disappointed I made the mistake of assuming the Gunpowder Plot was the antithesis of what the Islamists want. Trust me, I don't want Islamism in the government any more than I do Flying Purple Monsterism.

when the group's stated claim is the Islamization of the UK. And then you come out with the lovely bon motte about the Gunpowder Plot being about restoring religious freedoms in England. While I'll concede that probably some of the plotters were probably as naive as you are, it's very clear that the plans were the restoration of the Catholic Throne, close ties with Catholic Spain, and that heavily suggests that English and Scottish Protestants were in for a very rough ride, much rougher a ride than the English Catholics had had under Elizabeth or James I.

Yes, I see that. Clearly its just as ridiculous to let Protestants or Catholics get any closer to a Parliament than an Islamist. OTOH if you did want to blow them all to Kingdom Come it makes sense to do so at the same time. Perhaps some of the plotters weren't so naive after all.

Edited by eyeball
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I see that. Clearly its just as ridiculous to let Protestants or Catholics get any closer to a Parliament than an Islamist. OTOH if you did want to blow them all to Kingdom Come it makes sense to do so at the same time. Perhaps some of the plotters weren't so naive after all.

Huh? We were having a perfectly sensible conversation, and then you get petulant. The Gunpowder Plot was in 1605, four hundred years ago. Catholics were completely and fully emancipated in the UK in the 19th century. The only real discrimination left is the Act of Settlement 1689 which denies Catholics the Throne (that is also in force in Canada), and since that effects only an exceedingly small number of people, it's hard to argue that it represents any kind of anti-Catholic sentiment.

I don't see Anglicans or Catholics in the UK seeking for a more religious state. Technically, the UK is Anglican, in that it has an established church, but religious freedoms have been fully enjoyed since the 19th century.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting that whenever someone starts a thread on Islamic radicals doing something that might confern people someone from the Left tries to divert the thread onto another path - sometimes quite succesfully.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is disturbing, could it be happening in other countries and if so how can we stop it.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/labour/7333420/Islamic-radicals-infiltrate-the-Labour-Party.html

There are parts of major cities in Europe, including in the Uk, which are virtual no-go zones for police. They're ruled by Muslm groups and the authorities are terrified of inciting some sort of clash with "minorities" and so kowtow to them and keep the police out.

Not all that different from McGuinty and his raw terror at a the thought of a confrontation with the Indians around Caledonia.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Huh? We were having a perfectly sensible conversation, and then you get petulant. The Gunpowder Plot was in 1605, four hundred years ago. Catholics were completely and fully emancipated in the UK in the 19th century. The only real discrimination left is the Act of Settlement 1689 which denies Catholics the Throne (that is also in force in Canada), and since that effects only an exceedingly small number of people, it's hard to argue that it represents any kind of anti-Catholic sentiment.

I don't see Anglicans or Catholics in the UK seeking for a more religious state. Technically, the UK is Anglican, in that it has an established church, but religious freedoms have been fully enjoyed since the 19th century.

Not petulant, facetious. Obviously the Catholics and Protestants both grew up and stopped trying to use the government to subjugate everyone. I suppose one day the Islamists will too.

That said the infiltration of left wing parties by a fundamentally conservative ideology seems ultimately doomed to fail. The Islamists would probably have better luck taking over the government via the Tories.

Edited by eyeball
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not petulant, facetious. Obviously the Catholics and Protestants both grew up and stopped trying to use the government to subjugate everyone. I suppose one day the Islamists will too.

It will happen there cease to be Islamists. Islamism is vigorously prejudiced, has very stated goals of the expansion of Islam and the destruction of secular governments. Most Muslims are in the same boat most English Catholics were in the 16th and 17th centuries, unfairly painted with the same brush as a few radicals and fanatics, except modern Western Muslims have much more power to alienate the radicals then the English Catholics of yore did. At the end of the day, it is up to the Muslim communities in the West to open up to the wider society, stop protecting the fanatics among them, and demonstrate, as generations of Catholics did, that they are loyal to their countries rather than to some ethereal religious bonds.

In the meantime, I see no reason than the Brits specifically, and the West in general, should treat Islamists, or any group seeking to overthrow lawful governments and plutocratic secular society with some sort of theocracy as traitors. To my mind, the Toronto 18 should sit in prison for the rest of their lives, and count themselves lucky that we don't line their violent, evil, treacherous asses up and put bullets in them.

That said the infiltration of left wing parties by a fundamentally conservative ideology seems ultimately doomed to fail. The Islamists would probably have better luck taking over the government via the Tories.

Left-wing parties tend to advocate more strongly for immigrant and minority groups. Conservative groups tend towards more traditional values, and thus are far more likely to be distrusting of, say, Muslim groups. Both of these descriptions are overly broad, of course, but it's difficult to imagine Islamists being able to infiltrate the British Conservative party at any level.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That said the infiltration of left wing parties by a fundamentally conservative ideology seems ultimately doomed to fail. The Islamists would probably have better luck taking over the government via the Tories.

Most if not all islamic states and islamic nations are socialist. The socialist ideas of Labour are not alien to folks who expect governent housing, government jobs..etc etc...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Within 50 years a Western european nation will go through a civil war based on religion. I like the UK personally, but you could make a good argument for France or spain. I think if the Africans give the germans any trouble more then they already are the Germans will just expell the whole lot of them. The germans never had any qualms about other skin colors getting the rough treatment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most if not all islamic states and islamic nations are socialist. The socialist ideas of Labour are not alien to folks who expect governent housing, government jobs..etc etc...

I think the real mistake is trying to typify Islamism as a left or right wing ideology. To me it more resembles Fascism. In other words, it kind of robs from everywhere. There is a socialist component, to be sure, but there is also a sort of nationalism (in this case Islamism) coupled with a strong anti-individualist ethic and a cry for values that aren't really as traditional as they appear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,714
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    wopsas
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Venandi went up a rank
      Explorer
    • Jeary earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Venandi went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Gaétan earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Dictatords earned a badge
      First Post
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...