As I’ve reported here and in the paper, there are strong, credible and repeated allegations that Lutfur Rahman, the extremist-backed mayor of Tower Hamlets, received substantial support in both cash and kind from a group of powerful local businessmen during his internal party campaign to be Labour’s candidate – support that he has not declared to the Electoral Commission. These allegations are one of the main reasons why Labour sacked him as its candidate. If true, they are a criminal offence.
Well, Gilligan continues to claim many things, like Lutfur Rahman is “extremist backed”. I suspect that his claim that Rahman “accepted money from local businessmen” is also questionable.
The entire blog is about how hard done he is. How the Electoral Commission hasn’t done his bidding.This is the man who exercised undue influence on the Labour NEC when it made its decision to expel Rahman from the party. He accuses the Electoral Commission of
trying to sabotage the parallel police enquiry
He takes the word of a single source for this, the leader of the Tory gorup on Tower Hamlets council, Peter Golds. I smell another rat (besides Ted Jeory that is).
One of Islamism’s most important allies as it makes inroads to the public institutions of this country is the weakness and pusillanimity of Britain’s state regulators. As I reported in the paper the other week, both Ofsted, the schools inspectorate and the Charity Commission, have been busy whitewashing various hardline Muslim schools. The tactics used by the Charity Commission, in particular – deliberately evading the actual issue, and deliberately answering the wrong questions – bear a striking resemblance to the Electoral Commission’s modus operandi here.
This is pure paranoia. It’s reminiscent of the “reds under the beds” hysteria of 1950’s America. Again, he has offered no evidence for this assertion beyond the hearsay of a single source.
The comments on Kennite’s blog are worth a look too.
This one is from “Palookaville” and sums of the ignorance of the majority of commenters on Gilligan’s blog,
Anders, your analysis is spot on. How many of the muslim population of the UK have Islamist views and for how long have they held them? What percentatge of them are pursuing their objectives in the way you outline and what percentage of them are following the “Jihad” route? Extremist opinions were bred/indoctrinated into them long before 9/11. Incredibly, 9/11 “inspired” quite a few of them to become more extreme.
The question I’d like to know is how can a ‘serious journalist’ like Andrew Gilligan make accusations about someone when he hasn’t got a shred of useful evidence? This commenter seems to think that all Muslims are fundamentalists. What’s worse is that Palookaville thinks Kennite’s ‘analysis’ is “spot on”. Truth be told, there is no analysis, just undiluted yellow journalism.
The comment below Palookaville’s is just as hysterical,
The Muslim invasion of Britain, indeed Europe, is organised and well-planned. They have targeted the institutions of government, the bureaucracies and local authorities for infiltration because they realise that is where the power to reshape society resides. Even if the police wanted to pursue the matter, it would have to go through the Crown Prosecution Service, which has now been comprehensively infiltrated by Muslims. Nothing is going to be allowed to get in the way of the Muslim demographic jihad.
“Muslim invasion of Britain”? Why didn’t anyone tell me this was happening? Why wasn’t this covered by our 24-hour rolling news channels? I demand better from the Murdochracy!
Truth be told, Gilligan should be writing for the Daily Sport, where the in-house editorial style is more in keeping with his style of journalism.
I’ll leave you with this video. There’s barely any difference between this piece of Cold War propaganda and the sort of mush that Kennite churns out.