Muslim infiltration.

The Telegraph tells, among others, a tale of radical Muslims organizing to take over a London borough council, diverting funds designed to prevent extremism to the Islamic Forum of Europe (IFE) and its allies, threatening moderate Muslims, mandating school closings for the Muslim festival of Eid, and engineering a 110 per cent increase in Labour Party membership in at least one political constituency, among other activities:

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, [MP and the Labour Government’s] Environment Minister, said the IFE had become, in effect, a secret party within Labour and other political parties.

A six-month investigation in the United Kingdom by the Daily Telegraph and Channel 4 led to a report containing this:

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”.

IFE leaders were recorded expressing opposition to democracy, support for sharia law or mocking black people.

Does anybody doubt that this would not be a problem if the U.K. had not thrown open its doors to large-scale Muslim immigration? Of course, it wouldn’t. But for the insanity of the West’s immigration obsession -- esp. obsession with third world immigration (and antecedent and concurrent blindness to the problems it creates) -- there wouldn’t be school holidays in Britain for Muslim celebrations and there damn sure wouldn’t be massive cash transfers from Britons to people who see no problem with jihad against Britons and yearn to impose shariah and dhimmitude on them.

And piss on the graves of their ancestors. Did I leave that out?

On tangential point, I notice that a large amount of money was available to this particular London borough to “prevent violent extremism.”

First, there’s no such thing as non-violent extremism. Vile, excessive, rabid, prejudiced, bigoted, hateful, unpleasant and/or intemperate speech does no violence to anyone and who cares if someone’s “feelings” are “injured”? What does real and lasting injury to humans is actual violence, such as shooting, cutting, burning, and beating. Being a member of a racial, ethnic, or social group and having that group castigated or unfairly or viciously described, criticized, or characterized causes no injury whatsoever. A day doesn’t go by that I don’t read or hear that my country and the white race are uniquely evil, irrational, oppressive, and intent on covering the entire planet with plastic grocery bags and a thick coat of 10-30W motor oil. Intemperate speech is a gift to us all that allows us to identify the febrile nimrods and lightweights among us who incidentally get to blow off steam. And need to. As Justice Brandeis aptly observed, the remedy for bad speech is not regulation but more speech.

Generally, the only kind of speech that society has an interest in regulating is false speech, true threats, and speech that is highly likely to cause dangerous rational or irrational audience responses. Just because someone feels anger, alarm, or resentment over what someone else says is nothing that the rest of us need to indulge or even be bothered with. Most of us don’t keep a crowbar or scimitar next to our La-Z-Boy recliner but anyone who does should be plenty cooled off by the time they put the key in the ignition to go on over to beat the tar out of some wise guy, or lop off his head.

Making truthful statements about what a disgraceful collection of doctrines the Muslim religio-socio-econio-political system is just nothing for the state to concern itself with and if Muslims have an answer to them (other than anonymous death threats and torching 25,000 automobiles) no one should interfere with their efforts. Common decency might even require they be given a chance to respond in the same or similar forums. If, that is, Muslim bashing isn’t using up all available space or bandwidth, of course.

Secondly, I’m at a loss to figure out what kinds of expenditures by a borough council would prevent extremism. Well, plane tickets home (the real home) for anyone caught exiting a mosque or owning a Koran would be a start. But expenditures for education, health, police, and whatever the Muslim equivalent of midnight basketball would be are the normal expenditures of any local government entity anywhere and have as their aim making life there at least tolerable and, with luck, maybe even fantastic. (Think midnight T&A movies in the park and cheap beer on the school lunch menu.)

The problem of Muslim extremism -- is there any other group in Britain blowing up or planning to blow up British buses, subway trains, and planes other than Muslims, I’m curious? -- seems to have something to do with Islam. Maybe the council could spend money on bringing in speakers to explain why Islam is the perfect doctrine to guarantee a degree of social, political, and scientific backwardness that only years of earnest study can make clear. In the original Latin, mind you.

"Islamic radicals 'infiltrate' the Labour Party. A Labour minister says his party has been infiltrated by a fundamentalist Muslim group that wants to create an “Islamic social and political order” in Britain." By Andrew Gilligan, Telegraph.co.uk, 2/27/10 (emphasis added).