Scathing Letter to Richard Desmond, From a Daily Star Reporter Who Quit Due to Papers Anti-Muslim Stance

If you haven't seen the letter to Richard Desmond from former Star reporter Richard Peppiatt, then I suggest you do so now. (Letter in full here) At first I thought it might be a spoof (albeit a good one) from a left wing blogger, but it seems like the real deal. The prose of this letter is wonderful (one example about the Muslim loos thing, he says how the paper got all "flushed" over the story!). It is loaded with very funny barbed sarcasm and contempt for the journalistic atrocities Dirty Desmond has committed. The letter is a surreal and damning insight to Desmond's empire. He describes how he just made stuff up about Kelly Brook off the top of his head. Dressed in a burqua and wore M&S underpants at the same time. Tried to propose to Susan Boyle (she declined his offer btw!!). That; apparently stories about Jordon (not the country) took precedence over the Egyptian uprising. That the paper only has one reporter to cover the entire North of England, and that they just pinch stories off the Mails website. That the stories it prints wouldn't stand up to a "gnats fart". All of this he surmises looks to Desmond as:

"[I] suspect you see a perfect circle. I see a downward spiral. I see a cascade of shit pirouetting from your penthouse office, caking each layer of management, splattering all in between."

I'm not saying his time at the Star is laced with a healthy dose of cynicism!

The letter has a more serious point to make, and it seems the straw that broke this camels back was the dubious EDL coverage the paper gave, stuff about how the EDL was to become a proper political party. (actually all the story was about was Tommy Robinson, the EDL leader - wanted the EDL to become a political party.) and the incessant anti- Muslim sentiment of the paper. And it is here that Mr. Peppiatt hammers the nail squarely on the head:

"You may have heard the phrase, "The flap of a butterfly's wings in Brazil sets off a tornado in Texas." Well, try this: "The lies of a newspaper in London can get a bloke's head caved in down an alley in Bradford."

If you can't see that words matter, you should go back to running porn magazines. But if you do, yet still allow your editors to use inciteful over insightful language, then far from standing up for Britain, you're a menace against all things that make it great."

It's not often that I give someone from Fleet Street credit, but kudos to this guy. If a few more have the balls to vote with their feet, who knows?

Will the Daily Star Start Openly Supporting the EDL?

This headline is an utter misrepresentation of course. All the actual story boils down to is that EDL leader Tommy Robinson (or Stephen Lennon as he is really called) wants to turn his ramshackle mob into an official political party, somewhat in the manner that Nick Griifin did. Apparently one of his key policies will be, [he] is going to outlaw the Quran and make it more compatible with British traditions. WTF??!!* The story may just be a case of if wishes were horses; we would all ride, on the part of Robinson. No, what is striking is that the Star seems to be ratcheting up support for the EDL. This headline is actually not the most tacit of the signs that Richard Desmond may be allowing his paper to support such a dodgy group. The Star claims in the same article that a phone poll they conducted resulted in a staggering 98% (that figure has been revised to 99% in later articles.) of readers agreeing with the EDL policies**. Admittedly a tabloid phone poll is as dubious as a Jeremy Kyle lie detector test, but what about this loaded strapline from another article, this one about two Muslim Respect councilors not giving a standing ovation (though they both claim to have smiled appreciatively) for a soldier awarded a George Cross medal.

Admittedly the colon does imply that it means that is just the stated intent of the EDL (why not word it ....EDL say they will fight for ....?), but it could be interpreted [by the readers] as an endorsement of the group by the Star, and I am certain this was intentionally done.

If that wasn't bad enough, we then get the following editorial piece, that I will paste in full, as it has to be seen in it's entirety.

"Critics say the English Defence League is a racist, extremist organisation that's filled with hate. The group's leader Tommy Robinson strongly denies this. He says members have no problems with race.

But he admits he is against 'barbaric' Islam and the way it affects Britain. Whatever side of the fence you fall, one thing's for sure.

There is a visibly growing support for the EDL. It is attracting people across Britain to its ranks who feel the same way.

This should be a warning to the major political parties. Key voters are so fed up with them that they are looking elsewhere.

And there are real underlying issues here with Brits who feel abandoned by their leaders.
The EDL are now planning to field election candidates. If the Tories, Labour and Lib Dems don't heed this and address key issues they could soon become a political force.

Then, whether you like them or not, Tommy and his followers will have to be taken very seriously."

Hmmm.

Although not quite a "Hurrah for the Blackshirts.". Is this an all but endorsement of the EDL, from the most racist tabloid in Britain? Which I might add has pumped out the most appalling lies that can only be seen as an attempt to shit stir community relations in this country.

I do wonder if Desmond is using his dying papers, now not "pressured" by the IPCC; as vehicles for his own bizarre xenophobic views. I'm not just talking about the rumours of him singing "Deutchland uber Allies" to his execs whilst goosestepping about in his offices. Check out this article from as far back as 1994 pointing out how his pornos were peppered with an obsessive level of racially related material. What with the whole "Pull out of Europe" thing at the Express and now this. All I do know is that as far as I am concerned, the Star and the EDL thoroughly deserve one another.

Twats.

This post from Roy Greenslades blog, has heaps of interesting stuff on the whole affair.

This post from Ian Burrell shines much more light on the behind the scenes decisions to run with the "endorsement" front page headline. That it was the editors decision and not Desmonds, as I had suspected. And that the EDL are making capital on the publicity.

*This isn't an atypical display of Robinsons buffoonish ignorance. This toe curling performance on Paxo's show gives you a clear indication of Tommy's towering intellect.

** Without being privy to the wording of the phone poll, and how broad the level of "agreement" (though not support) with EDL is, we can take such a lofty figure with a pinch of salt. Likewise there is the fact that those who support the EDL are much more likely to ring in.

Baroness Warsi and Anti Muslim Bigotry in the UK

1. What the BBC puts Muslims.... story was really about.

2. I flush the "Muslim toilests" down the loo as bullshit

3. 5cc demolishes the "Muslims tell British to go to hell..... headline

4.MCB tell the Daily Express a few home truths. (presumably after they had finished telling us all what to teach in our schools.)

I found all of the pictures above just by typing Daily Star / Express Muslims, no loaded terms like racism etc. I also found that what the front page images were saying was either untrue or completely distorted in every item I have put up above. With this in mind it is interesting to hear what Baroness Warsi had to say about anti-Muslim prejudice in the UK today.

Baroness Warsi's speech has been pretty controversial to say the least. If you look on the Telegraph blogs which is generally a good place to find varying right wing conservative opinion (Warsi is a Tory after all.) you get a mixed response to what she said, from the ghastly Lord Tebbit basically saying she should shut her mouth, to Peter Oborne agreeing with her, and lots of comments on his article... er not. As I said the debate is rather confused and seems to fall between two issues, the first being whether or not Muslims are particularly singled out in the prejudice stakes. The second is whether the British have a legitimate reason to fear of Islam / Muslims in the UK to "justify" that fear. Let us look first at argument number one, are Muslims particularly susceptible to prejudice in the UK? In my opinion this is pretty straight forward and I agree with Baroness Warsi that it is pretty widespread and in some ways the acceptable face of prejudice these days. The sentiments around the headlines I have shown imply that British Muslims demand special treatment; that they as the minority expect the majority to confirm to their values. Muslims are ungrateful and unpatriotic towards Britain; no - they actually hate the UK, and that they have a sense of victim hood (listen to Jon Gaunt's claim of "bleating" in this heated interview on the Jeremy Vine show, about 13 minutes in.) and that they have the audacity to claim to be victims of prejudice, a claim no one in the majority should indulge at face value. The sense that the Muslim minority are the recipients of special treatment at the expense of the white majority was in some part a triggering point in the Burnley race riots 10 years ago. Again as with the headlines, this seems t6o be more a case of here say than actually having any basis in objective truth if you care to sift through the evidence. All of which is mixed in with urban myths and misunderstandings over individual anecdotes blown out of proportion and falsely repeated as truths. Anecdotally I do a few hours in my local pub on a Thursday night, and I overheard two separate patrons grumbling about these very things in relation to the Warsi speech, that was in one five hour shift. Then there are those stupid chain posts on facebook, things like "you can't do X in case it offends minorities [aka Muslims], that do the rounds with depressing regularity. So on these levels yes, Muslims in the UK are more vulnerable to facing prejudice in relation to other people.

The second argument revolves around whether Islam, or at least the radical forms of Islam are a threat to modern Britain and the West itself, and is Islam uniquely incompatible with western values? Well in the case of radical Islam yes it is a threat to western values, but that doesn't make it unique. The founding doctrines of Islam like the other Abrahamic sects are a product of their times, which aren't our times. They were written in a rougher tougher age when justice was rough and justice was done by hitting people with swords. Where women's rights were unheard of. Where enslaving your fellow man was just "stuff that happened". It is therefore no surprise that religious fundamentalists of all the major religions will end up clashing with the liberal pluralistic values of the democratic west. The old testament and the harsher end of the Quran is about as far removed from what we would call "western values" as you can get. If Islamic fundamentalists take this stuff at face value then it is unsurprising that some will denounce the west as decadent and whatever. However let us not forget that right wing Christian authoritarians regularly denounce the west, and sectarian organisations like the EDL clearly loathe pluralism and democracy though they claim to be patriotic.

It is often claimed that Islam is uniquely evil and incompatible with western values. This really isn't true. Religions sort of sawtooth in the violence done in their name, at present radical Islam is peeking all over the world, and violence is done in the name of Islam, even on the streets of London in 2005. But let me stress that religious violence is not just confined to Islam, all the major religions will resort to bloodshed if taken to extremes. That when people resort to a combination of dogma, adherence to violent medieval codes of practice and supremacism, then the shit will hit the fan. But that was part of Baroness Warsi's point. Muslims are a diverse group of people, some take it too literally, most pick and choose what to believe. Most probably haven't even read most of the Quran, like most who say they are Christians, who haven't even read most of the Bible. Most modern people either couldn't or wouldn't be able to follow them totally to the letter these days anyway. All Muslims seem to be far to often lumped in as one monolithic group of ultra excitable fanatics who want to burn and stone stuff at the drop of a hat, and that is just removed from reality. As for Islam being uniquely incompatible with a liberal democratic society. Take a look at the protests in Iran in 2009, and the people of Tunisia rising up against a grasping kleptocrat. Seems the people in those countries aren't to keen on living under authoritarian regimes, both countries that are Islamic majority ones.

I would be naive to say that Islam has it's fair share of problems, all human organisations do. The Abrahamic faiths will always struggle to find their place in a modern democratic society that increasingly seems to reject the influence they once had (and a good thing that is too.) and contradicts the archaic doctrines they hold dear. But when I see the horrible comments about Muslims on the Telegraph blogs, and some of the casual racism spouted off as truth, we have to remember that these are human beings we are talking about. Muslims aren't some monolithic alien species who are wholly incompatible and irreconcilably different from the rest of us, a point I believe Ms. Warsi was trying to make, and a point that sometimes needs to be made a lot more.

They're (Not) Banning Christmas. Part 1

We're not even in December yet, and the "You can't celebrate Christmas because it might offend Muslims" stories are beginning to creep in the newspapers, like a festive equivalent of reindeer shit at the bottom of a Christmas stocking. These stories will never go away - ever. They are as much a part of the festive season as mince pies, crackers and a fifty minute episode of a popular comedy that is passed of as a "Christmas special." This one concerns light displays in Rochdale that were put up to celebrate both Eid and Diwali being kept up alongside the traditional Christmas lights. In short a non - story. I think it is a rather touching move on the part of the council, I don't know why it is just - nice. It's an unpretentious non patronising and understated inclusive thingy that is quite a pleasant touch. In short you'd have to be a bit of a tit to object. So try telling this to perennial muppet Philip Davies; Tory MP for Shipley (not in fucking Rochdale):

"I’ve no idea why local authorities up and down the country are so ashamed of celebrating Christmas.

They aren't. Get your facts straight.

‘All this kind of pussyfooting around is done in the name of not offending other people from other faiths.

‘But it tends to be done by white middle-class people with some kind of bizarre guilt complex."

I'm pretty sure Davies is just taking at face value, secondhand information about a story he knows nothing about. I actually believe if you told him that the full moon offended Muslims in Britain as it was an affront to their symbol, so in response Burnley council are going to sell their own town to China to buy enough antimatter to blast it to a permanent crescent shape -he'd believe you, and give a really nice soundbite for the right wing press into the bargain.

I'm sure the Daily Star will exercise that rigorous impartiality in regards to a "Muslim" story, that only a downmarket tittyfest run by a prono wonk can achieve.

"CHRISTMAS IS HIJACKED BY MUSLIMS AND HINDUS"

Or not. Yet more lies to pander to racist boneheads. All we need.

This is pretty ominous stuff. There is simply no amount of integration or meeting half way that minorities (especially Muslims) can attempt that will seemingly stop this kind of stuff. Or any cross community project that is sneered at as "political correctness gone mad, sucking up to Muslims". Is it simply that you are damned either way? These sorts will simply have a pop whichever way you go? What a bunch of pricks.

Merry Winterval.

Let's Talk Toilets.

It must be a bloggers highlight, a posting devoted to the khazi. But then I don't write Daily Star headlines, so there we go. The headline above refers to the installation of two "Nile Pans" (one for the ladies, one for the gents loos.) at the Rochdale Exchange shopping centre (Rochdale has a large Muslim community.) These are squat toilets, popular in Asia, parts of France and Italy, instead of the good old British throne set up. I don't really give a shiny shit about shitter setups, but I was taken aback by the Stars take on this. It seems that quite a few facts have been flushed away like turds too! So let's have a look at the some floaters that refuse to budge shall we (No more toilet metaphors!)

"Muslim Toilets."

They aren't just Muslim toilets. These loos exist in all sorts of places. I have it on good word that they are the norm in Korea, and very common in Japan too. They were never "Muslim Only" either, anyone is free to use them. This is purely an attempt to imply that Muslims receive special treatment. In this case no.

" Middle East-style squat holes."

Nice choice of words there. I'll leave it at that.

"PLANS for Muslim-only loos at a major shopping centre are going down the pan."

There is a vague implication that" "normal" loos are being phased out. Not true, there is only one per sex.

"But wasting public money on stupid ideas like this cannot be allowed."

It's a private business. No public money is being used.

"We get hole in the ground toilets banned"

The vague report only says they are considering it.

Truly truly a new nadir in Desmond journalism.

ADDENDUM.

There are two sort of funny additions to this story. The first is a soundbite from Shipley MP Philip Davis, quite possibly - after stiff competition, the stupidest man in parliament. Seems Davis is keen to preserve the sensibilities of Christian crapping, with this unintentionally brilliant quote:

"'This strikes me as a classic case of excessive pandering to a politically correct minority,' said Philip Davies, Conservative MP for Shipley.

'We in Britain are rightly proud of our toilets, and the onus is on people who come to this country to appreciate them for what they are.

'It's absolutely ludicrous - Thomas Crapper would be turning in his grave!"

Proctology defined! Oh yeah! Thomas Crapper didn't patent the flush toilet either!

All joking aside, it is pretty bad when the Star is printing blatantly false anti-Muslim sentiment on the front page. Stuff that could be corrected with even cursory research. This strikes me as material deliberately designed to incite racial conflict, and it's staring us in the faces of news stands all over the country. Hmmm.