So you appear to be saying that the 'right' were responsible for "Londonstan" and then you make an excuse for anti western attitudes amongst Muslims due to the Iraq war.

Now the term came about in the mid to late nineties when Major and Blair were in power.

In your post you imply that the UK intentionally tolerated radical Muslims and I imagine by implication stopped extradition of suspects in order to buy peace from these terrorists.

Point me to the Tory politician or indeed Labour politician who accepted this compact. If this happened at all it was far more likely to have been a cross party convenience devised by civil servants.

You describe the Iraq war as being a form of radicalization of some British Muslims.......Yes, it was. That isn't a fault of an unpopular decision made by western government....These are made all the time. instead it's a fault of the failure of multiculturalism...A policy, in the main, presued by the left....Other countries were the left are almost non-existent...America for example....Just how many American Muslims went to kill westerners?.....It was a tiny number in a country with five times the population....Whereas we have thousands of 'nutters' to monitor.

For hundreds of years we have gone to war with Christian countries.....Did we have this issue then?

Radicalization is impossible to stop but the reason it's been easier in this country is almost entirely down to left wing ideology.

Your third paragraph sums up why I criticise the left for the problem of Islamic extremism in this country.

Lets straighten out a few things. Those on the right wouldn't have these people here...It's a European body's rules...That organization the left support...Which stop this country from deporting these individuals easily.

The principle of 'no borders' and multiculturalism, which I repeat, is almost exclusively a left wing belief system for decades any raised issues with this country's Islamic movement was greeted by an almost obsessive and blanket accusation of racism and bigotry. The left created a 'fear' of talking about these issues....Some still do try to shut down debate.

To answer the third paragraph I have no issue with those who attack a person's right to peaceful religion being called bigoted. I have no problem with those who attacked a person's race being called a racist.......But this isn't what happened in many cases....It's the Gordon Brown mindset of 'bigoted woman'.

Any serious debate or complaint was tarred with the same racist finger pointing. It's only very recently that some on the left chose to temper their words and paper over their own re-actions.

So you might think it is simplistic but I do blame the left for some of why we have such a big problem here.

Edited by Stirlingsays (21 Jun 2014 9.36pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

See, for example, BBC News website 26 September 2001:

"Britain's relationship with Bin Laden dates back to the 1980s when Whitehall and Washington pumped billions of dollars to Muslim fighters fighting the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan.

Arab volunteers recall fondly passing through Britain en route to Bin Laden's processing centre near the Afghan front.

With victory against the Soviets in 1989, many of the "Afghan Arabs" headed back to Britain.

Cash for Jihad

Like Beirut in the 1970s, London became a safe haven from which to broaden the Jihad armed struggle from Afghanistan to the secular regimes of the Arab world.

Libyan, Tunisian and Egyptian Islamists, many of them ex-fighters, all made London their base and some 2,000 Middle East dissidents a year poured into Britain. "

So the BBC say we did something and that's the proof.....Now I'm a fan of the BBC but I don't think it's valid to state something as a fact that in reality is journalism.

If it were as you say it was wouldn't it be more likely to find some discussion of this stuff in Benn's or Thatcher's accounts?

Edited by Stirlingsays (21 Jun 2014 11.08pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

To me there is a huge elephant in the room which is being ignored. Saudi Arabia is covertly pouring large amounts of money into Islamic religious schools with Britain a major target. They are actively funding the spread amongst gullible believers of their own brand of harsh Islamic philosophy knowing full well the West won't confront them because it needs their vast oil supply. Orthodox Jewish communities are doing the same. The Catholic church still tries but has been pulled back a bit by rationalism.

There should be no religious schools in modern secular democracies. All children should be taught the truth about the world and the universe, then if they want to believe in divine creations or fairies at the bottom of the garden as adults they're free to do so. Instead Moslem, Orthodox Jewish and Catholic schools are pumping out a whole new generation of narrow-minded ignorant believers who will struggle to integrate, let alone peacefully co-exist. Being able to quote medieval texts by rote, with all their fairy story versions of reality, is no preparation for coping with a modern world where we can fly to the moon.

Islam needs a reformation but unfortunately it never went through the humanizing influence that the enlightenment shone on Christianity. Remember Christianity was once dominated by violent extremists (the inquisition anyone). Thankfully for Britain Elizabeth I defeated the armada and thinkers like Newton and Darwin were allowed to tell us the truth about who we are and where we've come from.

Religion should have no primacy over reality. Children should be spared a parents fear of the dark. Believe what you want to soften the existential puzzle but leave children to at least start out with the truth. Stop the brainwashing of children or we'll pay a terrible price down the line with a whole new generation of mad extremists from all sides.