Monday, 1 March 2010

Islamic radicals 'infiltrate' the Labour Party

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:

Mr Galloway now says they were one of many groups which supported his anti-war stance and had never sought to influence him.

The IFE has particularly close links to Tower Hamlets council. Seven serving and former councillors said Lutfur Rahman, the current council leader, gained his post with the group’s help.

Some said they were canvassed by a senior IFE official on his behalf. After Mr Rahman was elected, a man with close links to the group, Lutfur Ali, was appointed assistant chief executive of the council with responsibility for grant funding.

This was despite a chequered employment record, a misleading CV and a negative report from the headhunters appointed to consider the candidates. The council’s white chief executive was subsequently forced from his post.

Since Mr Rahman became leader, more council grants have been paid to a number of organisations which our investigation established are closely linked to the IFE.

Funding for other, secular groups was ended or cut. In the borough’s well-known Brick Lane area, council funds were switched from a largely secular heritage trail to a highly controversial “hijab sculpture”, angering many residents who accused the council of “religious triumphalism”.

Schools in Tower Hamlets are told by the council should close for the Muslim festival of Eid, even where most of their pupils are not Muslim.

Mr Rahman refused to deny that an IFE activist had canvassed councillors on his behalf. He said: “There are various people across Tower Hamlets who get excited, who get involved.”

He would not comment on concerns about infiltration, saying they were “party matters”. He said: “If you look at our flagship policies, like investing £20 million to tackle overcrowding, you can see that we are working for everyone.”

The IFE said it did not seek to influence the council and had not lobbied for Mr Rahman. “If anything, existing members of the Labour Party have joined the IFE, rather than the other way round,” it said.

The group insisted it was not a fundamentalist or extremist organisation and did not support violence.

New labour are responsible for every single death, beating and hatred of the Indigenous population by ISLAMISTS.
And now they want to join the BNP, due to New Labours EHRC Hate Quango.
The BNP have been telling you that things were not quite as they seem.
Where have our SECURITY FORCES BEEN ?'s monster devours its creator labour party being-taken-over by islamists/


Silly Kuffar said...

We need to remove every Muslim who has been given an Office of Authority over the INDIGENOUS British and Remove New Labour from office and Charged with Treason, then Hung from the neck until DEAD.

Dr Chris Hill said...

Dear Silly Kuffar,

You said:
" .........Remove New Labour from office and Charged with Treason, then Hung from the neck until DEAD."

I say:
"It's important that the opposition (of whatever party) to this Islamicfication keep cool heads and resist any temptation to make statements that might be used to paint such opposition as coming from violent extremists. Saving our nation, not revenge, must be our aim.

Chris Hill

Andy said...

and yet the wars go on..

On a completely unrelated note.
Under British law: "No representation, no taxation".

So, if they "Ban the BNP". No tax will be payable due to no representation.

Silly Kuffar said...

I agree Chris but you must take this in the Context of TREASON, for which the Death Penalty has been removed by New Labour.
I'm sure every self-respecting Patriotic Brit shares my concern abour the DESTRUCTION (and I literally mean Destruction)of these Isles and people.
I don't see it as being used to show the BNP in a bad light but I do see a lot of people, not just Nationalists, calling for New Labour Traitors to be tried for TREASON (of which they are GUILTY as there is enough evidence to back that up), found Guilty etc.
I don't think calling for the Death penalty for TRAITORS is extreme.

Andy said...

No, I'm sorry but the law of treason cannot be removed. They lied. Its written into "Common law". There are parts which were statutes.

Even speaking of removing this law is treason. Those who have mentioned it have still committed the offence and have in reality been stripped of office.. Its still in effect under law. The only lie that maintains it is "Might is Right". We simply haven't strung them up yet.

Dr Chris Hill said...

This Talk of violent retribution simply isn't constructive, and will simply drive voters away from parties whose members advocate it.

But getting back to the posting itself.
Surly one would have expected the news that; home grown foreign groups (unfortunately that's not a contradictory term these days) have been infiltrating UK government, and political parties, with the aim of implementing an Islamic state would have been headline news in all the national newspapers. Is the lack of such headlines due to the threat of a boycott, of any papers daring to mention it, by Islamic newsagents?

Was the takeover of our local sweetshop (ie newsagents) in the 1960's and 70's simply a first step to silencing the news media? The individual ship-owners themselves would not have had to have been in on the tactic, only the financial institutions loaning the money for such purchases would have had to have been part of the plot.

You don't need to own the newspapers themselves to censor stories, if you control their distribution.
Chris Hill

Silly Kuffar said...

Chris it's not Violent's TREASON were up against.
Were not out to cause mayhem on the streets, only making the Traiors pay.

Silly Kuffar said...

Muslims and "Sharia" banking.
That's how they were able to afford small businesses, when the Indigenous shopkeepers struggled in the 70s muslims were able to buy the corner shops at a fraction. Now they have their own banking system which cuts the middleman (western banks and loans) out.
Now they are taking over Petrol Stations, Taxi Companys etc.
The 70s was the start even though then Islam and Sharia were never mentioned.