Who is responsible for the deaths of British soldiers in Afghanistan? Is it simply the Taliban and their allies? Is it the politicians that sent them there in the first place?

Or is it the Islamic extremists the Taliban allowed to use the country as a base for plotting acts of terrorism, thereby forcing the politicians’ hands? Or perhaps they must all share some of the responsibility? Wherever you stand on the issue, the least our soldiers and their families deserve is for the sacrifices they have made, and which they continue to make, to be respected.

Any sympathy that exists for the Taliban is misplaced. Their brutal oppression of the people of Afghanistan and their backwards religious fundamentalism have long kept the country in the dark ages. But the view that they are simply acting to repel foreign invaders persists. This view is encouraged by the fact that the government failed to adequately justify our involvement, and by the long absence of any clear strategic objectives.

Of course, misplaced sympathy for the Taliban cause is a long way from active support or from complicity in the deaths of British servicemen and women. Most Britons surely regard any support for the Taliban as entirely repellent, and revelations that British citizens have travelled to Afghanistan to fight and kill their fellow Brits are still shocking (to Muslims and non-Muslims alike).

But although these stories may constitute a damning verdict on the state of Muslim integration in this country, the extent of the problem cannot be judged only on the basis of a few isolated individuals.

That is why claims made during a recent Sky News interview with a Taliban commander are so concerning. He alleges that most of the funding the Taliban need in order to continue arming their soldiers, planting road side bombs, killing British soldiers and Afghan civilians, and ensuring that the country remains one of the foremost locations for terrorist training, is provided by individuals in Britain.

His words are an eerie reminder of the way in which radical Islam operates:

“We get donations from our Muslim brothers in Britain for Jihad: It is the duty of all Muslims to pay towards fighting Jihad. This is how we get our money and buy our weapons and carry on fighting.”

Couched in terms of a religious war of Muslims versus non-Muslims his words reflect the growing reality – a significant number of British Muslims feel more kinship with their Muslim ‘brothers’ in the Taliban than they do with their fellow Brits. The ties of national identity have been undermined by the pervasive and dangerous parts of Islam; an ideology has developed that believes that there can be no loyalty to anyone or anything other than Islam, and that it is a Muslim’s duty to violently oppose anyone who challenges this assertion.

This radical form of Islam is by no means shared by all Muslims, but it is growing in power and influence. This is clearly a problem, but it is one that is poorly understood, and which is not easily separated from the need to ensure freedom of speech and religion. Where must the line be drawn, and when does a Muslim who sympathises with the Taliban actually become a dangerous radical? At what point do we realise that the actions of Islamic extremists in Britain are not just unpleasant, but actually contribute to the deaths of our service personnel?

An ideological war is being waged within the Islamic community; a war that the outside world persistently fails to understand. It is a war between moderates and radicals; between those for whom religion is a personal choice which must never be forced upon others, and those who find it impossible to hold any loyalties other than to the spread of hard-line Islamic beliefs. Many British Muslims believe that devotion to their religion is far from incompatible with love of this country and with active involvement in British life. But there are also many who believe that Islam compels them to reject all that this country stands for and justifies any means in speeding what they believe to be its downfall.

This ‘Islamic Supremacism’ is a threat to Muslims as well as non-Muslims, because weeding out the radicals is not an easy task, and often makes ordinary Muslims appear guilty by association. It is made even more difficult by the fear that these radicals create within their own communities. Amongst their weapons are the radical preachers who not only whip up anti-British or Jihadi sentiment, but use religious justification to ostracise dissenting voices. Some of their tactics include the imposition of burqas on women, the operation of Sharia courts (of which there are over 80 already in the UK) and the creation of so-called ‘morality patrols’, that push hard-line beliefs on Muslims thought to be becoming too ‘Westernised’.

Unfortunately, this is just the tip of the iceberg. Radical Islam’s influence is not, as we are often led to believe, restricted to a few extremists who are completely disconnected from the larger Islamic community. Radical Islam is financed by the hard-line Wahhabi sects of oil-rich Saudi Arabia, dominates supposedly moderate Islamic organisations, and has been working hard to infiltrate mainstream political parties to push their own brand of political Islam, or ‘˜Islamism’.

The most alarming evidence of its growing power is the recent election of Lutfur Rahman as the Mayor of the London borough of Tower Hamlets.

Sacked as the Labour candidate following allegations of electoral fraud and concerns about his links to Islamic extremists, and openly regarded as an extremist by the Conservative Party, Mr Rahman ran as an independent, endorsed by the so-called ‘Respect’ Party (whose former leader and Big Brother cat impersonator George Galloway has been filmed giving money to the terrorist organisation Hamas).

Andrew Gilligan of the Daily Telegraph has been investigating the activities of Mr Rahman for quite some time. Besides the fact that Rahman has employed the services of a solicitor, Makbool Javaid, who is known to have often spoken at rallies for the now-banned pro-terrorist group al Muhajiroun, numerous councillors will attest to the fact that Rahman has been helped at each stage of his career by the ‘Islamic Forum of Europe (IFE), an organisation which, as Gilligan reveals, ‘believes in jihad and Sharia law, and wants to turn Britain and Europe into an Islamic state’.

Mr Rahman’s other connections include his ‘spiritual adviser’ Sheik Adel Al-Kabani, who is on record as saying that it is the duty of all Muslims to ‘drive the Jews and Christians out of the Arabian Peninsula’, and the former Respect Party official Abul Hussain, who was expelled from the Party for making anti-Semitic comments.

Despite this, former mayor of London and UAF chairman ‘Red’ Ken Livingston, himself no stranger to accusations of links with Islamic extremists (including those behind the notorious Olympic ‘mega-mosque’) also aided Rahman in his bid to become mayor of Tower Hamlets (much to the dismay of other Labour Party members).

At first glance it may be difficult to determine exactly how such a man came to be elected. Low voter turnout certainly had a part to play, as did the blatant smear tactics used against the Labour candidate Mr Helal Abbas, which accused him of being a ‘œwife-beating candidate’ and a ‘racist’. How typical of UAF supporters to rely on unfounded accusations of racism, whilst at the same time refusing to condemn the racism that is an integral part of radical Islam. Mr Abbas, we know how you feel!

But it is important to realise why Tower Hamlets was chosen as the perfect place for Mr Rahman to rise to power (click here for a revealing French documentary featuring Tower Hamlets and the EDL – English subtitles). Tower Hamlets is the home of the notorious East London Mosque, a hotbed of radical Islamic activity with clear links to the Islamic Forum of Europe. It is also the London borough in which:

- A Christian teacher was forced out of his job for challenging the Islamic extremism and anti-Semiticism of children as young as eight.

- It was proposed that the 350,000 bodies in a Christian cemetery be exhumed in order for the site to be replaced by a ‘multi-faith’ cemetery.

- All town hall staff were banned from consuming ‘tea and sandwiches’ during Ramadan, regardless of their faith.

- The Council proposed a ‘trail’ of arches modelled on the Islamic headscarf.

- An Islamic Girls’ School insists that all pupils must wear the full Islamic veil.

- Tax payers have been helping to spread the intolerant and dangerous beliefs of radical Islam by funding the extremist literature that is to be found in Tower Hamlets’ public libraries.

- Islamic Forum of Europe activists boast of their influence over the local council.

Tower Hamlets is a clear example of Islamisation in action. The election of Mr Rahman only seems to have made it official. No wonder a senior Labour Party member remarked that the election of Lutfur Rahman, who as ‘˜executive major’ would have ‘œalmost total power’ over the council’s £1 billion budget, would make Tower Hamlets ‘Britain’s Islamic republic’.

These concerns may well be legitimate, but they underplay the wide-ranging significance of Mr Rahman’s election. The previous government was often criticised for funding the very extremists that it was trying to combat by supporting seemingly moderate Islamic organisations that turned out to be anything but. If politicians can inadvertently fund Islamic extremists with no serious questions being asked, then how easy would it be for a man in control of a £1 billion budget to siphon off funding to the radical backers that had aided his ascension?

The electoral system means that he could be removed from office by the electorate (in four years time), and this may mean he will be reined in by public opinion, which would react badly to any overt signs of radical Islamic influence. But what about the people that he’s in a position to empower?

The power and influence afforded Mr Rahman mean that he is not only in a position to encourage the development of an Islamic ghetto in the East End of London, but he is also afforded the opportunity to open the door to a whole series of unsavoury characters, and spread the influence of radical Islam yet further into our society. Only time will tell how successful his efforts will be, and whether anything can be done to stop him.

Meanwhile, in Afghanistan, it will be British service personnel who will feel the effects of our continued failure to seriously address the role that radical Islam is playing within the greater Islamic community in Britain, as the Taliban are continually reinforced and rearmed by the generosity of British citizens.

But, unfortunately, Afghanistan is not the only front in the battle against Islamic extremism. International terrorism has shown us that Islamic extremism can strike at any time and in any place. Those who believe that their religion necessitates violent struggle need few (if any) other reasons for committing or supporting continued terrorist atrocities.

With this in mind, there should be a zero-tolerance attitude towards involvement with radical Islamic groups that campaign for the introduction of Sharia law, undermine community cohesion with their support for Islamic Supremacism, justify violent Jihad, or overtly support proscribed terrorist organisations.

British support for the Taliban demonstrates how all of these radical beliefs are linked, and how they are united in their opposition to the fundamental rights and freedoms of the peoples of all democratic nations. The Quilliam Foundation, which compiles reports for the government on the activities of Islamic extremists and their supporters, has exposed numerous supposedly moderate Islamic organisations as sponsors of terrorism or radical Islamic ideology, and we strongly endorse their repeated calls for Islamic radicals to be prosecuted under the Terrorism Act for glorifying terrorism and stirring up racial hatred.

How much longer will we continue to fail to address the threat posed by Islamic extremists, and refuse to recognise the extent to which they have infiltrated sections of British society? How much more aid must British Muslims give to the Taliban and to terrorist organisations around the world before the government acknowledges that we have a serious problem?

How long will it be before all those who have failed to stand up to radical Islam (Muslim and non-Muslim alike) shoulder some of the responsibility for allowing British support for the Taliban to thrive?

How long before the responsibility for the deaths of British soldiers in Afghanistan and the victims of Islamic terrorism worldwide is fairly attributed to the spread of radical Islam?