THE LAST LABOUR GOVERNMENT has much to answer for; but the way it tolerated the recruitment of Islamic terrorist at Finsbury Park mosque in London must take the biscuit for sheer idiocy. Having encouraged mass immigration as well as becoming signatories to the European Human Rights Act, that would eventually prevent them from taking meaningful action against many illegal’s landing on our shore, the Labour government then allowed London to become the main recruiting station in Europe for jihadists. Afraid to provoke the Muslim population, Finsbury Park, Regent’s Park, and the East London mosques were left to fester during the late 1990s.
London became known contemptuously as Londonistan throughout Western Europe as the recruitment centre for al-Qaeda. We now know, thanks to the latest documents from Wikileaks, that 35 of the Guantánamo detainees passed through Finsbury Park; no doubt under the tutelage of Abu Hamza (also known by the tabloids as “hooky”) and Abu Qatada. Hamza was finally brought to justice - but long after the horse had bolted.
I believe no post war government has so ill-served their nation as did the last Labour administration. What they effectively did was stop all discussion and debate about immigration; they weakened our ability to deal with the problem by signing up to a document that gave precedence to European law over our own. As a result the British government has had to pay out millions of pounds under human rights laws; effectively, to terrorists.
Islamism found a misguided friend in the last Labour government, who stamped on all debate that questioned the Multicultural society that they gave birth to and sought to pollinate the whole of society with. Multiculturalism was armed with a powerful weapon to use against its opponents - the law.
For all sorts of legal obstacles had been put in the path of discussing race and culture, ever since Enoch Powell dared speak out in the 1960s. It was partly because of Powell’s actions that the whole idea of Multiculturalism was given so much weight. One of its originators was Roy Jenkins who was, as are politicians today, much concerned with this country’s social cohesion. Following the immigration of the 1950s, Jenkins thought that by allowing other cultures to retain their cultures and live according to them within British society, much unrest could be avoided between the immigrant and the white “aborigines”, as they should now be known.
The law started to take a hand in 1968 with the Race Relations Act, making it illegal to refuse housing, employment or public services to people because of their ethnic background. The act was introduced following the now famous (or infamous) speech in April of that year by Enoch Powell.
From such small acorns great oaks shall grow; and a whole new race relations industry has flourished, and apparently seeded by a single speech by a single politician. A politician who felt he had to speak out for the sake of his country, its history and culture; all of which meant everything to him. More, it seems, in retrospect, than any of these things meant to the Europhile Roy Jenkins. But then it appears that, toward the end, Mr Jenkins began to have his own doubts about the multicultural “experiment” that today causes as much animus among the third generation immigrant as it does among the white British.
We now have an apartheid cultural exclusion zone where integration is made impossible because Multiculturalism rejects it. Multiculturalism sets cultural boundaries. It says that the national culture of the country in which it is practiced is just another of many different cultures. What was once British culture, has become one of many with no seniority left to it. Is it no wonder that such groups as UKIP, EDL and BNP are gathering the disaffected white British, when all of the main parties have bought into Multiculturalism and abandoned the people who built and made this country strong.
None of the main parties are what they advertise themselves as being. The Conservatives are no longer conservative; the Labour party are no longer Socialist, and the Liberal Democrats are just a capricious movement that moves happily between the two. For in reality the modern version of all these main parties are synonymous. They no longer pursue the ancient difference that once divided them. Thus they brand any party extremist that stands outside of their meretricious circle.
THE LABOUR PARTY effectively froze debate on immigration by associating it with racism. This was yet another crime against their country that the Labour government relished implementing to retain power by associating the Conservative party as the party of anti-immigration, and thus racism. To the Labour party the two became synonymous; and after Enoch’s performance, the Conservative party feared that the mud thrown at them would stick with the electorate and so set about becoming no longer the “nasty” party.
All of the main parties are today culpable. We can blame Labour for replacing the working class with millions of immigrants and reinforcing their position through European human rights legislation; but the culpability of other parties in accepting this paradigm as if it were handed down to them from Mount Sinai carved on a tablet of stone, is also unforgivable. But this is what we have today. Cameron, the Conservative leader, cares little, it seems, about what the word Conservative means (tradition). Like Tony Blair before him, who cared little for what the word socialism meant for Labour (the working class); Cameron is more concerned about power and its stickiness, than about the past.
It is about time that those Conservative voters who know the meaning of the word, turned away from the superficiality of David Cameron’s neo-what party. Conservative Britain exists regardless of class. Conservatism is what keeps a nation alive. Even socialism has a conservative (right-wing) streak.
Modern Conservatism has however become indistinguishable from modern Labour or Liberal Democrat. The so called centre ground of British politics has eviscerated all meaningful ideological differences between the parties and reduced such “differences” to the pace of change rather than the need or desirability of change itself.
I STARTED THIS PIECE by describing the last Labour government as idiots. But in the 1990s they proved successful idiots (from their own perspective), by opening our boarders to large scale immigration, and by also charging those within the Conservative party of racism, if they dared question the policy. By doing this they silenced the tongues of their class enemies and kept the flow of immigrants coming in, in the hope that the votes of such people would eventually replace those of the traditional working classes whose votes were done away with by Thatcher in the 1980s.
The last Labour government was responsible, through a lack of courage, for the training of Islamists in various London mosques. They allowed the proliferation of potential terrorists to be dogmatised in London mosques before travelling to Afghanistan to vent their anger on the many British soldiers serving their politician’s interests.
It is inexplicable to me how such a government could have got it so wrong. But the then labour government were more concerned with winning the next election than they were with altering the flow of immigrants.
How many British soldiers serving in Afghanistan will have met their fate at the hands of those 35 Guantánamo detainees will never be known. But the last Labour government’s lack of effort in keeping them out of the country in the first place, or arresting them once they entered, only shows the worthlessness of the last Labour government.
No comments:
Post a Comment