The persecution of Muslims by the British Media is real, and endorsed by millions

Unitas Communications has today published the report that it has submitted to the Leveson inquiry entitled: “Race and Reform
: Islam and Muslims in the British Media.” Overall, the report finds that:

a persistence of anti­‐Muslim trends in British Media reporting on issues relating to Islam and Muslims has directly contributed to inaccurate stereotypes and misconceptions about British Muslims in wider British society, and thus to an increasingly hostile climate that has enabled a escalation of anti-Muslim hate crimes over the last decade.

The report has some interesting survey findings detailing the sheer scale of negative reporting towards Muslims, Islam and the repeated assertion that British Muslims are ‘extremists’ and a ‘threat’ to the UK. The report also details the impact that such reporting has had, making non-Muslim British citizens increasingly believe the narrative being spun by an influential media – and the report does comment on the ability for tabloid newspapers to set the agenda and tone of news coverage in Britain. The figures are stark:

In 2010, 75 per cent of non‐Muslims now believe Islam is negative for Britain and that Muslims do not engage positively in society. 63 per cent do not disagree that “Muslims are terrorists”, and 94 per cent agree that “Islam oppresses women.”

The report makes several recommendations – some of which address the issues that this blog and others have repeatedly highlighted. For example, their first recommendation:

A key problem that has been identified with the PCC is that the code of conduct applies only to individuals who have been reported about inaccurately, with a resulting inability to launch third party complaints. Therefore the code of conduct must be amended to address discrimination against groups through false and inaccurate reporting, rather than just individuals.

This is something that is badly needed, and something that seems so obvious. It is has been frustrating over the years to blog about purposefully inaccurate reporting targeted at groups, knowing that the PCC (powerless as it is / was to provide effective sanctions) couldn’t even pass comment on one of the most popular and insidious hobbies of the press.

There seems to me to be an concerted effort in Western societies to solidify the misguided belief that the systematic targeting of a race or group of people stopped when Hitler shot himself in a bunker in Berlin. Our obsession with Nazism stems from the belief that this was something extraordinary, unique and never to be seen again. World War II has taken on some kind of mythic status in which the good civilisation – and more worryingly, America, a nation that had all but wiped out the indigenous population of the land they claimed as their own and whilst fighting the horrors of Nazi Germany still retained its right to segregate its black population – won and evil was defeated, for the final time (after all, the war was labelled as a sequel).

Although nations swore never to stand idly by whilst millions were persecuted by the apparatus of the state or its population, it remains a fact that genocide didn’t stop with the death of Hitler. We have seen plenty of genocide since then – in Europe as well as beyond – but we now refer to it dishonestly as ‘ethnic cleansing’ so as to avoid the legal obligation (drawn up after WWII to prevent such horrors ever happening again) to do anything about it.

My point is that we need to move on from this belief that we’re all decent folk because our ancestors played a part in defeating Hitler, this doesn’t make us his antithesis, and it doesn’t prevent our institutions from targeting groups through the systematic use of propaganda. It seems to me that we use WWII as some kind of persecution benchmark, which means that unless British Muslims are being rounded up and sent by train to deathcamps then they’re not really being persecuted. It leads to a society in which Right-Wing newspapers can publish an wilfully inaccurate article aimed to demonise Muslims as an homogenous group, whilst offering a free DVD about Britain’s glorious role in defeating Hitler who demonised Jews as an homogenous group.

We need to start making more of these worrying incongruities, because they really matter.

The report makes interesting reading and it reminds me of this strange Internet phenomenon where apparently any argument is automatically lost if any parallel is drawn between the point under discussion and Nazi Germany. This is, again, trying to isolate Nazi Germany as exceptional, something that captures our imaginations so vividly because it seems to us a kind of fantasy world in which a civilised country abandons any kind of moral code and commits state-led genocide. I just think this kind of attitude – even if it is intended to be flippant and aimed at people whose first response to any argument is to mention Hitler and consider the discussion over – is dangerous because it makes us complacent. It makes it sound as if we are absolutely certain that we would never commit those acts and therefore any comparison of events in our society to events in Nazi Germany is inherently laughable and should immediately result in that person being labelled as so wrong they are do not even require refuting.

I think there are a great deal of parallels that can be drawn between the Nazi persecution of Jews and the British press’ treatment of Muslims. When anyone is taught about propaganda they are, again, taken back to WWII with an analysis of Nazi propaganda, as if propaganda began and ended in Nazi Germany. In truth, you could easily study the increasingly negative and hysterical propaganda aimed at British Muslims and gain just as clear an understanding of the evils of propaganda in a civilised state as you would by looking at Nazi propaganda.

Just because the end result is unlikely to be the same, doesn’t mean we don’t need to start asking serious questions about the kind of press that the citizens of the UK fund with their buying choices. Not to mention a regulatory system that doesn’t even concern itself with the possibility that newspapers could target groups with dishonest reporting in order to demonise them.

Mike Buckingham: England team lost because a lack of racial purity

Yesterday I had the misfortune of glancing at an open copy of the South Wales Argus and was met with the bearded face of someone I had never heard of: Mike Buckingham. After reading it I searched online for some of his other ‘work’ and am now struggling to put into words what an ignorant, bigoted and face-palmingly stupid person he is.

His main column yesterday was a lengthy rant about being stuck in traffic for 3 hours on the M4, largely because the M4 around Newport is still in the process of being widened and people have been stuck in traffic for the last couple of years because of this. He whinges about getting tickets when parking on double yellow lines, and complains that the Ryder Cup will not bring any boost to the Welsh economy:

Five retards being hired to work in an electrical store for the purposes of chewing gum and occasionally shooting bored glances in the direction of confused customers without any clue as to what they are supposed to be selling seems nowadays to qualify as a ‘jobs boost’.

With a casual mention of gypsies tarmacking driveways we can see that Mike Buckingham isn’t surrendering to the PC brigade, but there is one thing he wants to surrender to: Nazi Germany.

Immigration and multiculturalism have been blamed before for England’s exit from the World Cup (rather than simply being a bit shit) but never in such stark racial terms as Buckingham manages:

HAD I not been minus four at the time I would have been for Chamberlain and his policy of appeasement before the last war.

The reason Germany thrashed England in the World Cup is that it is a better-organised society and one united around the idea of itself as a Northern European country with values which are superior to anybody else’s.

After rubbing my eyes and re-reading the above, yes, it still seemed clear that he is arguing that Germany’s success was based on racial and ideological purity, and given his clear reference to Chamberlain’s appeasement he seems to be directly praising Nazi Germany’s ‘superior values’. As if he wasn’t being clear enough at the start he then moves on to say:

This is where we were before multiculturalism fatally undermined England and its sense of identity and self-belief, and will as surely do the same to Wales.

The irony is that the current German football team draws its strength from multiculturalism, as the press have made much of the origins of a few of their best players. Of course, the point being that until the recent changes to German citizenship rights these players could never have played for Germany. Certainly the Nazi’s obsession with obliterating Poland – they viewed the Polish as sub-human – would have made sure that ‘superior’ German values would have robbed the German team of superior players.

As with most columnists blaming the defeat on foreigners, immigration or multiculturalism, his argument is utterly ridiculous and relies on a string of badly worn stereotypes:

The Germans, in football as in all else, pick the best people for the job.

In Britain we pick the least worst, unless they happen to belong to an approved-of minority in which case we settle for the truly useless.

Again, Mike didn’t think this through, given that the German manager, in picking the best players for the German team, has neglected racial purity and selected players born in Poland and so on. Furthermore, I don’t think anyone has ever suggested that the England team is made up of ethnic minorities picked merely to fill a quota, so this point has nothing to do with his main argument and is simply a way of saying that any ethnic minority employed in Britain is ‘truly useless’ and only employed because of the colour of their skin or ethnicity.

The South Wales Argus pays this piece of shit a salary.

Mike rounds off his six paragraphs of astonishing racism with another sly bit of praise for Germany’s supposed racial purity:

Germany is what we were and, largely because of the inclusion and equality ethos of the last 40 years reaching its acme under the last government, may never be again.

So, Mike’s basic message is absolutely crystal clear: equality and inclusion is bad; Nazi Germany’s superior values and racial purity (and the millions killed in pursuit of this) is good – and what we should aspire to return to.

Having Googled Mike Buckingham I can bring some of his other views. Like his thoughts on the Haiti earthquake:

since the mid-80s over £10 billion has been given to the country in aid with £900 million in 2008 alone.

These phenomenal sums should have made the island into a paradise, leaving the locals free to do nothing more than slit the throats of chickens in voodoo sacrifices and wait for the next tsunami of dollars to hit them.

Yet the country is a basket-case…

There is however, a solution.

As they are now people should be free to give money to Haiti, or to tsunami victims or any other cause that strikes them as being worthy.

But, they should be informed by the proper reporting of events and our government should not send one solitary halfpenny unless the donation can be seen to be of benefit to us in foreign policy, economic or military terms.

That sounds heartless. But I do not pay the Government to have feelings on my behalf.

Both the prime minister and Mr Cameron have said they will protect the £7.8 billion aid budget paid for out of our taxes. That is stupid.

The reason has little to do with human empathy and a lot to do with reinforcing the notion that people from blighted places are perpetual victims – usually because the imaged evils of capitalism or colonialism have made them so – and thus should be placated by huge amounts of dosh making any effort on their parts unneccesary.

On the Swiss banning minarets from their country:

There is absolutely nothing wrong with a country saying that it does not want more Muslims within its borders.

If Switzerland were to close its borders to those of that religion and repatriate every Muslim not legally dwelling there we would have to say that it was a matter for the Swiss and the Swiss alone.

I suppose there must have been something a bit daft about the Muslims otherwise they wouldn’t have wanted to get into Switzerland in the first place…

But to deny people legally resident in the country the outward symbols of their religious belief is mean-spirited and priggish and in a word, Swiss.

Switzerland is a dreary little country which an 19th century British politician once described as ‘an inferior sort of Scotland’.

The cities are architecturally boring and if deprived of their pretty dusting of snow would be no more attractive than Lodz, Lepizig or one of the other central European places with a ‘z’ in it.

Its not as they couldn’t do with a couple of minarets and a mosque dome or two to brighten the place up.

I do not buy South African products if I can help it because the post-Apartheid regime is every bit as wicked as that which preceded it.

I buy petrol at Texaco station when I possibly can since that company supported Franco in the Spanish civil war.

But what sanctions can I take against Switzerland that doesn’t seem to do or make anything?

Sadly the rest of his racist drivel doesn’t appear to be online – probably because of the negative comments under the Haiti article about why the Argus publishes such racist tripe. I can see I’ll have to keep an eye on this twat, though I am not sure my sanity can take much more of this shit.

If you have enjoyed reading this blog then please vote for me in a competition I have entered to win my bride an amazing holiday, it only takes 30 seconds and I cannot win without your support – remember, you are allowed to vote once every 24 hours for me, so please vote again if you have not already done so. Click here to vote, click here for more information.