Buried in Kent?

For those saying that the BBC isn't reporting the attack on Britain First leader Paul Golding, well they are. It's on the England & Kent pages of the BBC News website. Of course the BBC (along with every other mainstream media outlet) is holding off on reporting the social media claims (rumours?) that Mr. Golding was attacked by two Muslim inmates. 

Please Mr. President, do it again!

Did you hear Sangita Myska’s report about Britain First on the Today Programme? 

All I can say is impartiality has been abandoned  and value judgments reinstated, in new improved BBC-land. 

Sangita couldn’t conceal the venom in her voice when uttering the words “Far right” “Jayda Fransen" and anything related to “Britain First”. 

Now, we all know that Britain First’s raison d’être is actively fighting the rise of Islam in Britain.

This is racist because Islamophobia is deemed a form of racism. (Racism is  bad, and good people always boast that they haven’t got a racist bone in their body.)

You know that thing that goes: some good people do bad things and some bad people do good things? Well, that explains “pinkwashing”, which, as you know, is how Israel-haters deal with the fact that Israel is “gay-friendly”. In other words, they’re saying bad people do good things to cover up their evil intent. (When Israeli teams rush to disaster  areas, set up field hospitals, treat wounded Syrians and so on it’s only a devious and cunning plan to mask their malevolence.)

This very theme dissolved into farce this morning when two representatives from the anti-Britain-First brigade, a 'born again' anti-BF evangelist and someone from 'Prevent', described the way that Britain First were cunningly and deviously being ‘nice’ to old people and poor people and homeless people and dogs and cats in order to fool everyone into not hating them.

I just thought how lacking in political nous it all was. Did nobody realise that this particular 'accusation' (being nice) could be hurled at any politician of any stripe whatsoever. Particularly the Corbynistas? Being nice is a cunning and devious way of getting votes! They all do it, the good, the bad and the ugly. Sneaky, eh? 

Hilariously, BBC reporter Sangita Myska has fallen into the same trap as The Donald. Talk about reTweeting mad stuff!. Sangita herself seems to have retweeted fake news.

#JaydaFransenFacts skipped English lessons at school pic.twitter.com/zMhe2yQVW9

— jesuiseu 🇪🇺❄️ (@48notwrong) November 30, 2017

As several Twits have pointed out, it’s a photoshop affair. (Or is it?)

A retweet is not an endorsement!

Daily Politics Wednesday 29th November

“Donald Trump, POTUS, has been sharing videos - reTweeting videos which were originally made by the deputy leader of a far right group in Britain called Britain First. Ah, many people regard Britain First as a fascist organisation - certainly on the far, far right, and these tweets purport to show Muslims committing crimes.

Okay, it’s true. Many people do see Britain First in the way Neil described, and yes, the videos are unverified, so they may be less than accurate. (But, hey, as the BBC is wont to say, retweets are not endorsements.)

“He retweeted three posts by a Jayda Fransen today. i assume when he woke up this morning, Washington time. The posts include unverified videos tilted ‘Muslims destroy a statue of Virgin Mary, Muslim migrant beats up Dutch boy on crutches - I think you get the sense of the kind of things there -  

Franzen is 31, I think she’s the deputy leader of Britain First, she’s facing four charges  - she’s currently out on bail - facing four charges of causing religiously aggravated harassment as part of a Kent police investigation into the distribution of leaflets and the posting of online videos during a trial at Canterbury Crown Court in May. 

This might sound like clutching at straws, but being charged by Kent police isn’t exactly conclusive proof of guilt. Why, only a few moments ago Paul Bacon, the solicitor for  Michael Stone, the man imprisoned for a brutal murder that now appears to have been committed by Levi Bellfield, was on BBC News telling the world that Kent police have lost evidence and been decidedly unhelpful to his investigation.

It’s a bit disturbing, too,  that Andrew Neil (purportedly) hasn’t heard of Britain First, since the BBC made a documentary about it - featuring Jayda Fransen and co. - only a couple of years ago. . Isn’t that a tiny bit remiss of Saint Andrew?  He’s supposed to be on top of the news, surely.

“She’s also due to appear in court in Northern Ireland, charged with using threatening and abusive language in a speech she made in Belfast in August. Mr Trump has 46.3 million followers who will have now been sent these videos from Britain First.

I think I’m right in saying, you may know better - that the man who murdered Jo Cox - who struck her down in cold blood - wasn’t he shouting ‘Britain First’? 

Yes, Andrew, as everyone but you seems to be aware. 

“Brendan Cox, the widow,(sic) has tweeted ‘Mr. Trump has legitimised the far right in his own country, now he’s trying to do it in ours, spreading hatred has consequences; the president should be ashamed of himself.”  

In addition to the bizarre nature of the president of the greatest democracy in the world doing this sort of thing it’s a real problem for the British government now, is it not?”

Laura Kuenssberg says everyone would find this completely and utterly repellent. The conversation moved on to the issue of Trump’s forthcoming visit.  Needless to say, everyone present was not enthusiastic. 

Several people have remarked that it doesn’t really matter if the videos are accurate or not, because they represent the sort of thing that does actually happen. 

However, that is the very defence used by Charles Enderlin of France 2, who was responsible for publicising the clip of Mohammad Al Dura all those years ago. If you don’t know the story, Google Philippe Karsenty. 

And, yes, such things do have consequences.  For example, Daniel Pearl’s murder was ‘justified’ by his killers as revenge for Al Dura. That iconic image has been round the world many times while the truth is still having difficulty tying up its bootlaces. So, yes, if you’re in a position of responsibility you need to be truthful and you need to be accurate. Such a pity Trump chose to reTweet dodgy videos of Muslim aggression when there are plenty of genuine ones available. 

Of course we mustn’t forget Jon Donnison’s infamous tweet, which did such a good turn for the Israel-bashing brigade, and his apology was too little too late. In fact, let’s not forget the way that the BBC wallowed, and still does, in unverified footage of “what Israel is doing”, yet I haven’t heard anyone from the BBC condemn this for “having consequences”.  The BBC is unrepentant, where indirectly stirring up antisemitism is concerned. It’s ‘Islamophobia’ that must not be encouraged.

The rise in antisemitism in the UK coincides with the increase in the Muslim population, but I haven’t heard Andrew Neil getting vocal over that. Israel-bashing has become mainstream at a time when Jeremy Corbyn is interviewed respectfully and his past and present affiliations with antisemitic groups is no longer an issue with the BBC’s two Big Andrews.  

Instead of examining the logic of his own position, Andrew Neil views anti-Islam advocacy as fascistic and far, far right, when logic tells us that the opposite is the case. It’s Islam’s hatred of Jews that most strongly resembles ‘Nazi’ hatred of Jews, whereas  anti-Islam sentiment is based on a preference for western-style democracy and freedom. Acknowledging this is presently deemed politically incorrect by the people that run the BBC. 

Of course the circumstances behind those examples of ‘fake videos’ are very different, but there’s enough similarity in the weakness of the argument (that "It doesn’t matter because we know that sort of thing goes on anyway!") to dismiss it out of hand. Yes, it does matter. Trump should never have done it, and really, he should give Twitter a rest altogether. 

That doesn’t let Andrew Neil off the hook though. The one thing that stands out (for me) most of all is that Andrew Neil sees critics of Islam as ‘fascists’ and far, far right.  Is he unaware that Islam’s teachings about Jews bear a striking similarity to that of the fascists and the 'far, far, right' of 1930s Germany? In fact they are near identical. For anyone who values western democracy, criticising Islam’s worst excesses and most antithetical tenets is entirely rational. Hating a religion and hating a people are very different things and equating Islamophobia with antisemitism is cowardly and wilfully ignorant. 

Britain First

In the line of duty I watched another BBC 3 programme in the series about Racist Britain. This episode starred what appeared to be a two-man operation called Britain First.

At first glance it looked more EDL than EDL and more BNP than BNP, but maybe that impression was misleading. The Union Jacks and the sinister white crosses they brandished at rallies didn’t help. It wasn’t a good look, that’s for sure. Many of the crowd that turned up at their marches and rallies sported a variety of shaven headed fashions and looked about 14 years old.

Jayda and Paul were masters of social media, filming their every move and sticking it up on YouTube faster than you could say Tommy Robinson.

As we got to know them, they seemed more intelligent and a little more plausible. Well, Jayda did, Paul not so much.

Jayda insisted that Britain First was not a racist organisation, she said its remit was solely to  oppose the ‘Islamization’ of the country. “We want our country back”  Not particularly convincing I'd say.

The nature of the crowd that supported them as well as the dubious way they went about their business amounted to not a very nice whole. 

Jayda had ‘issues’ - with historic abuse, about which she did not wish to elaborate. She had left home at 14, and lived in a terrible hostel. Admirably and against the odds she managed to acquire a law degree.

At this point I have to mention that the couple suddenly pulled out of the show. They withdrew. The press said they did so because they feared they would be unfairly represented, and I can’t help wondering why it took them so long to figure this out. They must have known they would be unfairly represented from the outset. Even before the outset.

Anyway, the presenter, a young man named Miles Blayden Ryall with an agenda and a bun for a hairstyle interspersed his narrative with explicitly derogatory value judgements, the like of which, had the political scenario been any different, the BBC would declare indefensible.

The way the presenter whined and disparaged his subject was unprofessional and counter-productive. Towards the end of the show, he turned up unannounced with his cameras and was turned away by Britain First minders. Then he demanded freedom to ‘do what he liked in his own country’ with a petulance that had me rooting for Jayda.