All 3 entries tagged Islam
January 29, 2008
Writing about web page http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/?ito=1640
I've recently written a couple of blog posts on some hideous pieces of recent Daily Mail tripe. It is only fitting that the next paper I should have a rant about is The Evening Standard. It is of course owned by Associated Newspapers Ltd. (responsible for other such tripe like The Mail on Sunday and The Metro).
If you're a Londoner as I am, it's not unusual to glance at the Evening Standard headlines from time to time. Has Madeline been spotted? Let's print a hideously inappropriate story! Red Ken cares about the environment? Let's print another hack attack! You get used to it.
Today was slightly different. Making my way home the Standard forced me into a double-take. I felt compelled to buy the issue to see any justification for the headline. What was the headline?
"MUSLIM PLOT TO BEHEAD SOLDIER" - Wonderful. Imagine encountering "JEWISH PLOT TO KILL MAN". What do you think your reaction would be? More importantly, do you think the Evening Standard would in any event carry such a headline?
It's disgusting, offensive and I'm going to telephone the ES tomorrow to ask for a comment.
April 12, 2007
I notice this graffito while on the Victoria Line. I normally don't give graffiti more than a glance, but this is precisely because most graffiti is little more than 'artist'/gang signatures and random phrases. I've rarely seen racism etched or painted into the windows or walls of the tube, yet this is the third time I've seen this exact phrase three times on London underground trains and I've encountered anti-Arab racism twice in the past couple of years.
It's quite worrying to see such things on the public transport system, at least in the areas to which I travel. While antisemitism continues to worry British tabloids and broadsheets, not much seems to be being done about rising Islamophobia and anti-Arab racism in London and, perhaps, other areas of the UK.
February 09, 2006
The Danish newspaper really wanted to test the measures of freedom of speech right? It didn't set out to offend Muslims but, essentially, to bring us the important message that some Muslims are giving all Muslims a bad name right?
Well, no. They deliberately set out to offend Muslims and they weren't acting as bastions of free speech. The paper (and no, I'm not confusing singular and plural – I'm interchanging the paper and "they") had previously refused to print cartoons of Jesus in a variety of silly poses because it would have been offensive to readers. The editor is now claiming that "offensive" was the wrong word and the cartoons were simply "bad". Which makes sense of course, considering these 12 cartoons depicting Mohammed PBUH were veritable works of art.
The self-same paper is now planning to shore up its publicity by publishing comedic/critical/offensive (one presumes) cartoons in relation to the holocaust. Can't wait to see B'nai B'rith, ADL et al. get their panties in a twist.