||"dawnbreak in the west"|
Thursday, May 05, 2005
There's a breathless article in NRO today from Apostolou. He claims, "
When Labourites like Galloway and, in this article, Yasmin Qureshi play footsie with the Jihad, Labour can convincingly say that they are not following Labour policy. Labour's leader Tony Blair is our strongest supporter, and Labour further booted Galloway (but not yet Qureshi) out of the party. I accept that these are fringe elements.
It is more difficult for the Lib Dems to say the same. When their candidates run on an anti-US platform, they are in agreement with Kennedy and not in opposition. So candidates like Teather and Rowen, while much more passive in their support for the Jihad than are Galloway and Qureshi, can't be shut down like the latter two - as long as they remain passive.
First, one cannot accuse the Lib Dems of pandering to radical Islam, if their aims were already in agreement.
Also, the divisions which the Libs are trying to open up aren't between the Muslim and the unbeliever. There are insufficient votes in that, as too many native Brits are in sympathy with the former.
Kennedy's Muslim policy is decentralised. There is no talk about immigration or crime, beyond throwing money in their general direction; and he proposes to support the universities, currently pro-Islamist. Divisions between the Gentile and the Jew also show promise. Not too many Brits are in sympathy with the latter. But all this will have to be kept on the D.L. - in selected races, and where plausible deniability can be invoked.
On this site
Property of author; All Rights Reserved