According to a report in the Telegraph "A new counter-terrorism strategy will attempt to tackle preachers who do not advocate violence but tell their followers that democracy and Islam are not compatible." and "Such preachers are not breaking the law but are said to form the first in a series of steps to radicalism." The article also advises "The Home Office is currently spending £80m on community projects designed to stop young Muslims from being radicalised."
So £80m of taxpayer's money is being spent on the prevention of radicalisation in the name of 'diversity'. It could, perhaps, be argued that preaching democracy and Islam are not compatible is undermining our chosen system of government and that it is 'subversion of the state'. What is the difference between preaching that democracy and Islam are not compatible and preaching violence?
Answer - none, so can we please save £80m of our money?