Mohammed Emwazi: Are Security Service Actions threatening the Security of Britain?

ss

For some reason there is a perception in Britain and indeed, in the Western world that security services are a squeaky clean in their approach to protecting the citizens of this country. This, despite the fact that they have been exposed in violating the very principles, which are lauded for keeping the “civilised world”, civilised.  In the damning judgment of Binyam Mohamed in 2010, it was found that the Mi5 did not respect human rights, nor renounced torture, misled MPs and operated in a “culture of suppression” in dealing with the court.

As the papers did what they do best – control+c and control+v reports, it seemed as though the corporate media suddenly had an epiphany: we are copying some real journalism here, this needs to be spun asap!

Reading the recent reports demonstrates evidence of media spin once again, where the (government) spin-doctors are in full-swing to skew the story of “Jihadi John”, or Mohammed Emwazi. The focus of the media rapidly shifted to the conveniently government-narrative-compliant “ideology” as a causal factor. The Daily Fail began its campaign against CAGE and Asim Qureshi who were cited in the original Washington Post article, after perhaps realising the implications of the initial report.  CAGE became smeared across the papers for suggesting that a person as violent as Mohammed Emwazi could actually have been a normal human being. Media outlets usually pointing the finger at mental disorders in “white terrorism”, began pointing the finger at CAGE for attempting to “contextualise” the man’s actions, forgetting that the government has been imposing its own academically-wanting contextualisation of belligerent actions on the Muslims community for decades. The academically-wanting conveyor-belt theory to terrorism has been the go-to theory for the government, counter-extremism “experts” from the Quilliam Foundation and the bigoted Henry Jackson Society.

Continue reading

Yet More Trojan Hoax Half-Truths From Andrew Gilligan – The Debacle at Small Heath School

GilliganSmallHeathSchool

Gilligan is back on the Trojan Hoax train and this time he has targeted a Muslim head teacher in Birmingham.  His article, like his other clichéd, formulaic, propaganda material is a blatant attack on Islam itself. Not that we needed evidence of his bias.  We have already seen his favourable treatment towards the Jewish community whilst downplaying anti-Muslim crimes and disgustingly playing Jews off Muslims in the process (see also here). We have also seen how shoddy his lies and spin-ridden propaganda work is (see herehere and here)

Smear By Labelling

In this article, he attempts to make a link between the head teacher and the two brothers who left for Syria, by highlighting the fact that the brothers attended the school she was formerly at. Note, however, that there are damning allegations that UK security agencies had allowed the brothers to leave the UK and may have met them in Turkey.  Investigating this would constitute journalism though, something which Gilligan is clearly not.

Continue reading

Deceitful Andrew Gilligan’s Attack on Islam

Andrew GilliganLiar

Gilligan has been exposed here (and here) to be one deceitful writer.  His neocon motivations have led him to lie, deceive and distort, all with an aim to depict Muslims as sinister as possible and fulfil the neocon agenda.

In his latest piece, carrying an undertone of racism, he subtely maintains the “Muslim takeover” gist by starting out with the aspects which have been removed (Victorian buildings) and the group of people who haven’t: Muslims.  His article provide cherry-pickings of his deceit, peppered with what seems like a sales-pitch for PREVENT and the Channel programme – he sets out the entire article with the typical, colonialist, “moderate” and “radical” or “extremist” dichotomy. We all know where we have heard this language before.

Gilligan wants to somehow show that “extremist” preachers at Al-Manar masjid are exerting an influence on youth there. In doing so he highlights the Muthana brothers who are now purportedly fighting with ISIS.  The irony is he admits the link between the two aspects, (the masjid and the “radicalisation” of the brothers), is tenuous at best, stating:

“That’s not to say, of course, that they were necessarily radicalised at the mosque. But if you look at the kind of people who’ve been preaching there, it doesn’t seem impossible.”

He then proceeds to base most of his diatribe off the back of this unsubstantiated link.  Typical Gilligan. *Sigh*

Gilligan Attacks Islam

Continue reading