Wednesday, July 27, 2005

scumbags at the express

I know I really shouldn't be surprised at the belligerant, racist and deeply unpleasant reporting at the Daily Express (the newspaper whose front page generally makes the Daily Mail look like the model of reason), but the appalling example of today's paper still shocked (and shocks) me. Unbelievable.

Thanks to Linkbunnies.org for bringing it to my attention, even though it made me angry.

25 comments:

Pete Ashton said...

It looks like some photoshopped spoof cover. In fact I had to double check it wasn't. Blimey.

Powerful Pierre said...

Think it's real...?

http://www.express.co.uk

paul said...

Unbelievable. Patsy Kensit's in Emmerdale?

This is real filth - hopefully it will be remembered as one of the many mistakes on the road to the Express's (hopefully imminent) closure

jonathan said...

I dunno how the Express's war on asylum seekers plays out in terms of their circulation.

I've stopped reading those circulation figures because every time I see a new one published it goes out in the Guardian as 'triumph for The Guardian as the Times hits lean streak' and in The Times as 'Guardian wobbles while Times soars ahead', or similar.

They seem to be open to endless interpretation. But I hope the Express's sales are plumetting, they certainly deserve to be.

Anyone remember the Express's short-lived 'liberal middlebrow tabloid' phase in the mid-90s? They even took out ads in the Guardian boasting of their progressive tendencies...

Will said...

They mispelled err or is that misspelled or misspeled ...anyway they got the spongeing wrong
http://yabass.blogspot.com/2005/07/sponging.html

Laban said...

It's outrageous and I'm furious.

They completely failed to mention the guy's prison sentence for mugging.

It should have said 'Bombers are sponging criminal asylum seekers'

Laban said...

unless by 'sponeging' they meant that they frequented traffic lights with a bucket and squeegee, earning an honest living threatening motorists.

Never mind. I'm sure it'll turn out that some of the bombers AREN'T asylum seekers on benefits. None of the first 4 were either, except that Lindsay German, who I think signed on. Oh, and the one whose Dad had a chip shop.

Anonymous said...

The REAL problem is that in about a years time (if he is the person arrested in Birmingham this morning) this person will be standing trial for terrorist offences. His lawyers will have a arguable case they he cannot receive a fair trial. We may be faced with a terrorist we cannot try (Art 6) and a who we cannot deport (Art 3). All for lack of restraint by the press

Anonymous said...

Racist?

P. Froward said...

Anon.: Yes, racist. When asylum seekers come to Britain, it would be tantamount to genocide — cultural genocide, if you will, a far more vicious and ugly form of genocide than the perhaps regrettable but undeniably refreshing and candid directness of Sudan or the Nazis — to stigmatize the native customs and folkways that they bring with them, and far worse to attempt to force them to give up those precious souvenirs of their lives in foreign lands. These customs, such as habits of diet or dress, or setting off explosive devices on public transportation for example, are their only anchor as they attempt to establish a new life in the midst of a hypersexualized, materialistic, patriarchal Western culture which they understandably despise as laughably inferior to their own in its values and institutions, all of which are by their standards absurd in principle and corrupt in practice. To deny them that anchor is, very precisely and literally, exactly what the Nazis did in fact do, figuratively speaking. Would you deprive them of their sass, sir? At long last, sir, have you no decency, no decency at all?

So what if they're not in fact asylum seekers? Even if they were, the Express's view would still be the repugnant ravings of a gang of unrepentant fascists, jackbooted journalistic wolves eagerly dragging the national debate down into the gutter where they make their home in the swamp.

Was that OK? Should I have mentioned the Nazis more?

jonathan said...

Actually a pretty bad satire of us liberals, but the fact remains that the emphasis the express puts on recording immigration issues and the pointedly aggressive editorials it runs mark it out as, if not actively racist, then at least jingoistic, prejudiced and offensive. No-one mentioned nazis till you did, but we all know that Desmond likes that kind of thing.

Quite apart from the gross journalistic innacuracies contained within the story...

DICKY DESMOND said...

Okay okay, you're right.

We'll rewrite the headline.

BOMBERS MAKE LEGITIMATE PROTEST ABOUT ISLAMOPHOBIA AND SOCIAL EXCLUSION


Is that better?

The editor

jonathan said...

Or just, 'OK, we won't tell lies any more', which is all they did.

Deogolwulf said...

Let us all hug a tub of yoghurt.

Anonymous said...

I`m also outraged at this cover. As a fan of the daily mail and the sun i wish one of them had thought of it first.

Stephen Newton said...

In the absense of trackback, a link
http://www.stephennewton.com/2005/07/daily-express-provoking-bombers.html

And a very low effort e-mail campaing to the PCC.

Anonymous said...

Grauniad fawning over immigrant criminals promotes BNP.

jonathan said...

Gah - but where did The Guardian fawn over these 'immigrant criminals'!?!?! They haven't. Someone earlier implied that I was suggesting the bombers were making a 'legitimate protest' for chrissakes! All you tories from Laban's blog seem to think that the left are idolising these bombers - but I've seen no evidence of that at all!

dicky desmond said...

Relax man - just having a laugh at your po-faced indignation, that's all...

Love your 1980s use of the word 'tories' as an insult. Very student gwant....

Good luck with the PCC. As both Ibrahim and Omar were refugees and in receipt of benefits - and they did, after all, attempt to bomb public transport with the intent of causing mass fatalities - I think it is not unreasonable, nor untruthful, to call them "sponging asylum seekers" - although I would of course add the word CUNTS.

pip pip!

jonathan said...

Hmm. OK, a bit po-faced.

As for tories being a 1980s insult? We've been using that as an insult without the slightest fall-off for the last 28 years round my way...

Anonymous said...

Just what is the aim of this headline then?
Is it that getting tough on sponging asylum seekers will prevent terrorists blowing up trains?

Or is it about as relevant as pointing out that Charles Manson had outstanding parking fines?

Or is it just to sell shit newspapers to moronic readers?

Anonymous said...

When did the Guardian fawn over these immigrant criminals?

Obviously you don't know any Sassy muslims

paul said...

Anon - Are you suggesting that Dilpazier Aslam is an immigrant criminal over whom the Guardian fawn? As this isn't true, I'll ask it too: Where did the Guardian fawn over these 'immigrant criminals'?

Dicky - I know I shouldn't get drawn in but by most definitions sponging is not the same as receiving benefits (hope you never claim your state pension) and asylum seeker is not the same as a refugee. So the Express may have a case to answer under the first part of the PCC code concerning accuracy.

Anonymous said...

And the error of the article was what? Are we to believe that Joe Blogs or the local bishop is just as likely to blow us up as a certain religion of peace?
Are we not meant to be outraged that scum like this come here, take our money and then blow us up? I think the front page said it perfectly. What bit didnt you understand?

PaydayLoans said...

k0cFbn You have a talant! Write more!