Us (the British) and them (the Muslims)

The front page and main story of Thursday's Daily Express is a clear and unsubtle attempt at maintaining the "us and them" mentality which is so often levelled by that paper against Muslims:

The headline refers to the shouts from "a group of men" (according to the Mail) who were sitting in the public gallery during the trial of Roshonara Choudhry, the woman convicted of stabbing Stephen Timms MP earlier this year.

As the Express reports:

JEERING Muslim fanatics turned an Old Bailey court into a battleground yesterday after an Al Qaeda follower was jailed for stabbing an MP.

In unprecedented scenes the angry mob chanted “British go to hell” as would-be assassin Roshonara Choudhry was handed a sentence of life with a minimum of 15 years.

Rather than leading with the story at hand, the sentencing of Choudhry to "life" imprisonment, the Express has chosen to focus on the deranged rantings of a few nutcases in a courtroom instead. (Both the Daily Mail and The Sun have also gone with this angle, but neither has chosen to put it across in as brazen a way as the Express.)

That there are Muslim extremists who say such things is beyond a doubt. However, the Express' decision to make this the key focus of the story, along with the deliberately ambiguous language used in the headline, is an attempt to imply that these shouts are in some way an expression of what every Muslim thinks about the British.

The Express sees Muslims as a homogeneous mass that is in complete agreement with the ramshackle fanatics at its fringes. The headline is a dog-whistle signal for the idea that "Muslims" disapprove of "us British".

Can you imagine, for example, what the Express would have done if the men who broke into shouts of "Go to hell, Britain" were Christians? Would the Express have replaced "Muslims" with "Christians" in the headline? Would they even have mentioned it so prominently in the first place?

I doubt it.

Continuing the theme of rampant hysteria, the Express' article states that:

The gang, sitting in the public gallery, chanted “Allahu akbar” or “God is great” and another demonstration raged outside the court.

"Raged"? Gosh, that sounds dramatic, doesn't it?

Between the Express, the Daily Mail and The Sun, the "raging" demonstration seems to have comprised of at least three poor souls holding particularly unimaginative print-outs:

In their articles about Thursday's events, the BBC and the Telegraph make no mention of the men holding signs outside or of the shouting from the gallery, and the Guardian makes a passing reference only to

a small demonstration... taking place outside the court.

An examination of The Sun's article reveals the following:

Security men bundled the ranting bigots from Court Seven after the disgraceful scenes.

But the three were allowed to continue their poison rants [sic] in the street - yelling "British soldiers must die."

According to this, the demonstration outside appears to have consisted of the same men who were shouting in the gallery. Therefore the Express' claim that "another demonstration raged outside the court" seems pretty baseless.

Nonetheless, expect the wearisome English Defence League to seize this stormy teacup with both of their grubby hands.

Thanks to Minority Thought, "A blog about bad journalism"

Calling All Bigots: The Daily Mail Comments Boards Need You!

So. You want to join the online army of the Far-Right and aid the BNP blog, do you? Well, such a noble enterprise is a big commitment.

Some of you on the Far-Right will have jobs, however, and simply cannot spare the long minutes needed to create something so majestic and eponymous as the Green Arrow site. No. Mere mortals – possibly with only a passing interest in fascistic bigotry as a lifestyle choice – have to set your sights lower.

Have you considered the Daily Mail Comments Boards as an entry-level introduction to the wonderful world of petty-minded racist imbecility?

As a budding numbskull, you will possibly be a reader of the Daily Mail, already. Its comforting blend of film stars with cellulite (for which they must be roundly condemned), gentle nostalgia for The Good Old Days When You Could Leave Your Front Door Open And Teenagers Didn't Go Round Stabbing Each Other On Their Facebooks, allied to a reassuring lack of too much actual “News”, has found favour with the ill-educated since the days of Moseley (sterling chap, by the way, and just the sort of no-nonsense politician Britain needs today...).

On the internet (or “t'internet”, as you amusingly call it, ever since you saw that hilarious – and CLEAN – family entertainer Peter Kay do his routine) you can not merely read all the stories of the print edition; you can COMMENT ON THEM, ALSO!

Imagine! YOU can pass ill-informed, kneejerk judgement on the Issues Of The Day! YOUR baseless witterings will be there for ALL THE WORLD TO SEE!

That'll show 'em, eh?

But first, you need to understand a few basic ground rules.

The most important is this: Regardless of how much damage the current Government do with regards to the economy, public services, foreign relations and the general wellbeing of the Nation, everything (wherever possible) remains the fault of the previous Government for at least the next two years. The previous Government will, at all times, be referred to in your comments as “LIEbour”, “Liebore”, “Nu-Labour” and “Za-Nu Labour”. (The appellation “Za-Nu Liebore” is something of a philological stretch, and should only really be used by the more experienced utter twat. Don't worry – you'll get there one day!)

The current Regime should be referred to as “LibLabCon” or “ConDem”.

Remember: You should NEVER admit to being a member of the BNP. In fact, we find that an active DENIAL of membership or support will allow you to get away with even more outrageous buffoonery (in much the same way as anyone who begins a statement with the words “I'm no racist, but...” is very probably still pining for the Good Old Days Of The Wehrmacht).

By way of practice, why not try copying these statements out fifty times each:

“I'm not a supporter of the BNP, but if the Marxist elite ever allowed them to form a Government it would surely usher in a new Golden Age of peace and prosperity for all in our once-great Nation.”

“I have no time for Nick Griffin, but anyone can see that he would rule with exactly the sort of iron fist that this country needs.”

See? It's easy!

Now then: What story to pass comment upon? There are three categories of Daily Mail story involved in this. I suggest you start with Category One – the Nursery Slopes of commentary.

Category One includes all those pieces which bear a direct relation to BNP policy. Something about Asylum Seekers crossing the Channel in a lorry can easily be appended with something lazy and obvious.

“These “people” are criminals – let them drown!” says “Mr Brown”

“WE MUST BRING THE ARMY BACK FROM AFGHANISTAN AND POST THEM AT DOVER WITH THE ORDERS SHOOT TOO KILL! NOW!” adds “Force Five”. (Special note – using capitals makes your post appear more important and will draw the Reader's eyes away from any grammatical errors.)

As you can well see, Category One stories are almost too easy a target. After a short time learning the basics, however, you should be ready for the move to Category Two: Those stories and articles which can be related to the BNP mindset, but it takes a little more work.

A story about a comparison between the standards of living in France and Britain, for example. Not, at first glance, something the average Online Warrior might have much interest in, but look!

“I would like to leave Britain to all the riff raff from the Eastern block countries and elsewhere! No! Rather ship them all out and stay here! Soon it will be a case of SPOT THE ENGLISHMAN!!” says “Teacher”. Beautifully done; notice how “Teacher” begins to advance one argument before dramatically reversing His/Her position and ending on an hilarious punchline. Certainly a Master of the craft in the making.

Category Three, however, should be left to the truly expert. These are the stories with, seemingly, no conceivable bearing on BNP policy or concerns. To the True Master, however, there is NO SUCH THING as a story which cannot be turned into an opportunity for simple-minded bigotry.

Take this piece, for example: A genuinely tragic story concerning a double suicide. Surely, one might think, no-one could possibly get away with scoring cheap xenophobic points off something as awful as this? But no...

“Anyone wondering why this is happening isn't living in the real world” says “Oliver”. He continues: “competition from taxpayer-funded foreigners is excruciating...What will eventually happen is a breakdown of civilisation...that will be the end of government in the UK.”

A work of genius. To move so effortlessly from a story of personal tragedy to an apocalyptic vision of future anarchy brought about by “foreigners” is truly masterful.

Such a towering cretin surely has a glittering future among the ranks of the BNP.

So Has that fired you with enthusiasm? Go on then – sign up for the Daily Mail Comments Board and you, too, can show yourself as the confused, narrow-minded, bigoted bile-dribbler that you undoubtedly are!

Good luck – and remember: Although the Boards claim to be moderated, ANYTHING will get through!

BNP’s ugly lies about NHS staff

Screen grab taken from Easington BNP Facebook on 13th April 2010

Easington BNP have spread vicious lies about Muslim NHS staff in order to whip up racial hatred and anti-Muslim sentiments.

The BNP’s propaganda appears to have got its inspiration from a story that appeared in the Daily Mail relating to Muslim doctors and nurses being allowed to cover themselves up while at work. The article raises reasonable concerns about religious equality in the NHS. However, it does not say that Muslim NHS staff are no longer required to wash themselves before attending patients.

The original article explicitly says:

“The new guidance says staff can wear uniforms with long sleeves as long as they roll them up securely above their elbows to wash and when they are on wards.”

A Department of Health spokeswoman told Nothing British:

“The revised workwear guidance gives further clarity to front line staff about the need for staff to have good hand hygiene when in direct patient care. It does not change previous policy.

The guidance is intended to provide direction to services in how they can balance infection control measures with cultural beliefs without compromising patient safety.”

Scaremongering stories about Muslims in order to create the perception of “Islamic colonisation” is an essential and classic part of the BNP’s electoral strategy. It is deliberately designed to conflate Islamic extremism with Islam and exploits voters legitimate fears about extremism. The consequences are plain to see: hysterical racial hatred towards ordinary Muslims.

By spreading these revolting lies the BNP should realise they are playing directly into the hands of Islamic extremists, who can then reasonably claim that the press is responsible for the rise in “Islamaphobia”. It also makes the real fight against Islamism all the more difficult as anti-extremism campaigners become fearful of being labelled racist and Islamaphobic.

The issue of religious dress codes in the work place is a question of suitability and equality; not a conspiracy about Muslims attempting to kill non-Muslims through the spread of infection.

There is nothing patriotic about spreading malicious lies about those who work extremely hard to save British lives on a daily basis.

Nothing British

Colour me suspicious

[Yesterday] morning, a story made my Crackers sense tingle. Not to tell me that a tabloid story was rubbish, but to tell me that something behind a few tabloid stories was very fishy indeed. there are wavy lines coming out of my head right now.

'Single mother of eight living in a £2.6m mansion - so much for Labour's housing benefit crackdown' is currently the top story on the Mail Online website. It's funny that Labour's housing benefit crackdown gets a mention in the headline, because the council responsible is Kensington and Chelsea, the toriest of tory councils.

The four-storey villa in Notting Hill, West London, which costs taxpayers £7,600 a month, has five bedrooms, three bathrooms, a double living room, study and roof terrace.

says the article. And here's why the family in question has been housed there:

Miss Walker was given the house last September on a three-year lease because a rule introduced in April 2008 forces local authorities to place tenants in private properties if suitable council homes are unavailable.

Hey, I know this is Kensington and Chelsea, but do you think there might be cheaper properties in the borough. Like around Ladbroke Grove, or the World's End Estate or down towards Olympia and the West Ken Estate? Surely there are ex-council places up for grabs.

So, in the run up to an election year, a tory council just happens to reveal an extreme example of something that might make 'Labour's housing benefit crackdown' look stupid. With a single mother as the beneficiary. A dark-skinned single mother. A dark-skinned Muslim single mother. Ticks too many 'Daily Mail hatred' boxes to be an accident, right?

How about 'Taxpayers pay £1,600-a-week for family of ex-asylum seekers to live in luxury five-storey home'. Hey, this one ticks a lot of boxes too. Ex-asylum seekers (who ought to be referred to as 'refugees' by the Code of Practice that the Mail's Editor is in charge of) no less. Another set of tabloid boogeymen put in a really expensive house, this time in Westminster - the council involved in the infamous gerrymandering scandal of the 80s. We know there are lots of ex-council properties in Westminister, because the council sold off as many as they could to potential tory voters.

This time, the paper makes sure we're told:

'It's important to note that the amount of housing benefit payable for tenants is determined by government policy and not local councils. This rate is calculated and updated on a yearly basis according to the value of the local rental market. We have absolutely no discretion in this area.

'Property rents in Westminster are among the highest in the country so it is perhaps unsurprising that a family claiming housing benefit for a property of this size would need to submit a claim for this amount.

'We would, however, like to see the entire housing benefit system changed to enable councils to have more control'.

All Labour's fault, you see.

This story mentions another from last year for a win triple - 'Inquiry ordered over Afghan family living in £1.2 million 'council house''. Ooh, brown asylum seekers given ridiculously expensive housing in a tory council. Where have I heard that before?

Okay, I heard it here first since this is the oldest story, but this one caused a furore in which people ended up sacked. It took Smellyface to make the connections for us this time.

And those aren't the only differences between the first story and the two new ones. Check out the picture in the earliest story, with Ms Saiedi peeking out from behind her front door, not even opening it far enough for even the sneakiest of peeks to the inside of the house. Now look at the pictures in the two newest articles, as the residents allow an 'MTV Cribs' style showcase for the Mail.

Why, it's almost as if someone spotted the story from last year and said, "Hey - that's a jolly good way of attacking Labour," and deliberately contrived a couple more cases of scary tabloid boogeymen being given ridiculously expensive new accommodation. And then thought to remind us of the original with 'Afghan family STILL in seven-bed £1.2m house taxpayer has been funding for a year', with the nationality of the family in the headline. You know, in case we forgot.

What's the betting nobody gets sacked or disciplined this time round? Not because these two were deliberate in any way, of course, but because it's Labour's fault. I'm sure Westminster Council would never become involved in any trickery with their housing system to cynically troll for tory votes. Again.

I'm absolutely certain nobody looked at the way the loophole that allowed the original incident to occur was closed and thought, 'Ah, capped at a five-bedroom limit, eh? Let's see what we can do with that!'

That would be dishonest.

Five Chinese Crackers

The tabloids and right wing extremism

Just who are these blackshirted fellows?

The relationship between tabloid reporting and the increase in the BNP's popularity is an interesting one to look at. We know tabloid nonsense gets churnalised over on the BNP's website, we know that the party advertises and sells Melanie Phillips' book via its website, and we know the policy of attacking Muslims rather than any other group is based on the prominence of negative stories in the news media, so it seems the tabloids are at least contributing to an environment where far right ideas may seem more attractive to some.

There is still a little bit of ambiguity between cause and effect here though. Does tabloid coverage cause people to vote for the BNP, or are the tabloids merely reflecting a rightward shift in public opinion? I know what I think, but you know what? I'm not going to bother arguing it right now. And that's because it's much much easier to show how the tabloids contribute to support for the campaign of new ball-'eds on the block, the English Defence League, to kick off violent confrontations with brown people Muslims. (More on the EDL at Bartholomew's Notes on Religion, and the BBC).

The EDL have produced a video to drum up support for their campaign to stir up violent trouble and drag the country back to the seventies and 40 odd years further back with their black shirts and stiff armed 'seig heils' march for freedom by supporting the restriction of religious, er, freedom. Or something. It's geared toward an upcoming event in Manchester.

The video's a bit rubbish, and amounts to a series of still images juxtaposed against each other to stirring music. Rumbold at Pickled Politics has pointed out the pisspoor crusader imagery, but there is a series of 22 images in the video that are of particular interest to this blog.

These 22 images are of headlines from the news media and around the internet - headlines to negative stories about Muslims. Only three of these stories are not from the mainstream media. Here's a league table of where the 19 that are left come from:

1. The Daily Mail/Mail on Sunday (8)
2. The Daily/Sunday Express (4)
3. The Daily/Sunday Telegraph (3)
4. The BBC (1)
5. The (DGMT owned) Evening Standard (1)

Here's the surprising thing. Only six of those stories are about specific terrorist plots, and none are about 9/11 or 7/7. Rather than stories including emotive images of the twin towers exploding or the Russell Square bus with the roof blown off, the remaining 12 articles pictured are examples of scaremongering about sharia law, the number of schoolchildren speaking English as a second language and so on. It would probably be useful to go through them and give quick and dirty rundown of the 'ooga-booga look at the scary brown people mainstream articles' used for recruitment to the EDL cause.

Daily Mail/Mail on Sunday
Will Britain one day be Muslim? - an opinion piece (in the 'News' section and not flagged as opinion), which mentions 'the enemy within', scaremongers with guff about birth rates and bigs up Mark Steyn.

Britain has 85 sharia courts: The astonishing spread of the Islamic justice behind closed doors - from our old friend, Steve Doughty. While the article does manage to bury the fact that the law allowing the courts to operate also covers Jewish Beth Din courts, it includes a lovely big box headlined 'The elders who dole out justice in secret'. Ooh, spooky.

Schoolboys punished with detention for refusing to kneel down and pray to Allah - a story that fails to explain or link to later information about the case that revealed that the boys were not given detention for failing to kneel and pray to Allah. You might have thought that would be relevant. It wouldn't have mattered much if the EDL had included screenshots from the story that revealed that the teacher had never made pupils kneel and pray to Allah or put anyone in detention for refusing to do so anyway, as it was still headlined Teacher sacked after 'making pupils kneel and pray to Allah' during RE lesson. Hurrah for truth and honesty.

English-speaking pupils are a minority in inner-city London primary schools - the headline there is a lie. Pupils who speak English as their first language are a minority in inner London primaries. Hurrah. Truth and honesty.

The Pope must die, says Muslim - now, Anjem Choudhary is a prick, and there are better ways do describe him than merely by his religion. Like, er, 'prick'.

Government renames Islamic terrorism as 'anti-Islamic activity' to woo Muslims - a James Slack classic. The headline makes the value judgment that terrorism carried out by Muslims is 'Islamic' at the same time as offering a false reason for the change in the way such terrorism is referenced. The article later reveals that the change is because "Security officials believe that directly linking terrorism to Islam is inflammatory, and risks alienating mainstream Muslim opinion" - and that Jaqui Smith used the term once rather than it becoming the official government label for such activity. Truth and honesty?

Daily/Sunday Express
HATE PREACHER: I WANT SHARIA LAW IN BRITAIN - there's a better description of Anjem Choudhary than 'Muslim'. Or 'prick', for newspaper purposes at least.

NOW MUSLIM CLERICS TO TEACH OUR CHILDREN - a repeat of scaremongering stories from March 2008, in which the paper expressed outrage that schools should be considering allowing 'Muslim clerics' to talk about Islam in school religious education. I covered these earlier stories in Fury over children being taught together and learning about one another and Fury over paper printing nonsense front page headlines.

MUSLIM SCHOOLS BAN OUR CULTURE - need I say any more?

BROWN: DON'T SAY TERRORISTS ARE MUSLIMS - the headline isn't actually true. It refers to the same sort of thing as the Mail story above. Although that one came six months later.

The Daily/Sunday Telegraph
We want to offer Sharia Law in Britain - a more sober look at sharia courts from the Telegraph, which still manages to open with a negative vignette about the 'mundane' tasks they carry out.

CIA warns Barack Obama that British terrorists are the biggest threat to the US - a story actually about how a former CIA officer who had advised Obama told the Telegraph that the biggest threat was from Britain. Not, as the headline would suggest, a story about how Obama is currently being advised by the CIA that Britain is definitely the greatest terrorist threat to the US.

The Evening Standard
I want to see flag of Allah flying over Downing St - Anjem Choudhary again.

Now, although the EDL do further monkey around with these stories with the way they're juxtaposed (putting the more sober Telegraph story next to the fearmongering ones from the Express and Mail, or the one about children not being able to speak English next to ones about Muslim Schools 'banning our culture' for instance) most of their work has been done for them. Even the papers themselves create false impressions by monkeying around with the juxtaposition of images and words and even entire stories, just like the EDL. Look at the Mail story scaremongering and making false claims about the number of school pupils who can't speak English. It only tangentially involves Muslims, and yet it's included in an anti-Muslim video because the picture the paper used to illustrate it includes a girl in a headscarf.

But it's not just the careful placement of images and stories that the tabloids help out with.

Of the six Mail headlines that aren't about specific terrorist plots, three are false (I'm including the 'detention for not kneeling and praying to Allah' story because the updated version is false), one is opinion dressed as news, one is reporting the results of a right wing think-tank as absolute truth and the last labels a ridiculous extremist merely with his religion, which is about as useful as labelling him 'bearded man'.

Of the four Express headlines, three have been exaggerated beyond the recognition of the facts in the story itself, and two perform the famous Express trick of casting Muslims as not 'us' or 'ours'.

The rest (including the ones from the Telegraph and Standard) are either spun in a quietly negative manner or reporting something Anjem Choudhary has said. There's little wrong with those things by themselves, but when they're included alongside misleadingly exaggerated scaremongering - as they are in the papers themselves as well as the EDL video, they don't really help community relations very much.

I've left aside the ones about terrorist plots, because you can't really blame papers for reporting these. They have also been exaggerated, but not only by the papers. Obsolete has more about these, and they're not exactly straightforward themselves.

So there you have it. Tabloid distortion used directly to recruit for extreme right-wing activity. I'm not merely surmising that these stories might help in this aim - I'm showing recruiting material that deliberately uses direct screenshots of the stuff I write about here to stir up support for the goons we've seen trying to provoke violence - sometimes successfully - in recent months.

Here's the difficult question. Would the EDL exist to produce this video at all if it wasn't for the sort if dishonest coverage the video contains?

Five Chinese Crackers