We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.
Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]
|
Another bomb plot in the UK… But not the usual suspects it appears. I just came across this story more less by accident.
David Bolais Jackson, 62, of Trent Road, Nelson, was arrested on Friday in the Lancaster area after leaving his Grange practice for the last time. Jackson was charged with being in possession of an explosive substance for an unlawful purpose. However, it is unclear who or what the intended target might have been.
Police found rocket launchers, chemicals, British National Party literature and a nuclear or biological suit at his home. The find came shortly after they had recovered 22 chemical components from the house of his alleged accomplice, Robert Cottage, a former BNP election candidate, who lives in Colne. The haul is thought to be the largest ever found at a house in this country.
Some BNP members stockpile the largest ever haul of explosives found at a house in the UK and this does not make the front page of the national media? Did I just somehow miss the articles about this in the Telegraph, Guardian and Times?
|
Who Are We? The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling.
We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe.
|
Whatever you want to make of it, I saw this several days ago on Socialist Worker who were making the point that the failure to make the mainstream media was symptomatic of islamophobia, as per Guardian commenters.
I don’t think I believe the islamophobia explanation, but it is kind of weird it hasn’t been bigger news.
The Burnley Citizen says that charges are being brought under the Explosive Substances Act 1883. Chatter on the internet suggests that this requires more substantial evidence than a terrorism-related charge, which is as much as I know.
Yes. In fact most prosecutions of anything I would recognise as terrorism – as opposed to owning a map, or downloading stuff about bombs and poisons off the internet… – are brought either under this Act or common law.
“Conspiracy to cause explosions” and “causing explosions” were criminalised by that Act (which was passed during a wave of Fenian bombings) because of difficulties in demonstrating an intent to cause injury, that would otherwise allow common law charges.
Contrast that jurisprudential approach to modern “terrorism” legislation (and much other legislation), which seeks to outlaw in the broadest possible terms anything the authorities might not like in some circumstances and creates official discretion to decide when and to whom it applies.
If it was there, they drew a veil over it…
Actually, I heard about it a few days ago while hanging out on the Guardian’s Comment is Free forums (I like to wind myself up). Several people brought it up to show the racism/anti-islamicism/whatever of the media in their concentration on the veil, asking why it wasn’t front page news but then insisting that the veil was the most important issue facing humanity, one poor soul eventually screaming that Jack Straw’s threat to 2 million Muslims to remove their veils was down to his colonialism and violent sexual pathology. If only South Park had a rapid response unit…
I guess the report, talking about ‘chemicals’ rather than ‘bombs,’ isn’t enough for hacks to go on. And rocket launchers could be empty milk bottles. I’d also suggest that the Guardian gets more kicks out of fighting perceived racism (Jack Straw’s comments) than real racism (BNP, Islamists, street violence, and so on).
Very true, very true. There must surely be less to that article than meets the eye.
The Burnley Citizen says that charges are being brought under the Explosive Substances Act 1883. Chatter on the internet suggests that this requires more substantial evidence than a terrorism-related charge, which is as much as I know.
In suggesting that rocket launchers might be milk bottles, I wasn’t looking to downplay the story, just trying to think what caution might have prevented journalists running with the story. Equally, it could be laziness or a lack of interest in anything happening outside London, but it’s not islamophobia or support for fascism, as many sites are claiming.
Googling for BNP “Robert Cottage” brings up only the local papers that first reported it, nothing national. It’s clear that bloggers are more interested in this than the mainstream media, but it would be good to have more to go on. Doesn’t anyone do investigative and follow-up journalism any more?
As Mr Christopher Booker has often pointed out (and not just in relation to European Union stories) the general answer to Eleutheria’s question is “no”.
Modern journalists, for various reasons, tend to just work with press handouts.
If they are not spoon fed a story (by someone) they will not tend to report it, and they tend to report what they have been spoon fed – investigations seeking the truth are not common.
one poor soul eventually screaming that Jack Straw’s threat to 2 million Muslims to remove their veils was down to his colonialism and violent sexual pathology.
If it is one thing such people are consistent in, it is their psychological projection.
I think it is just as important for the blogosphere to expose the British (k)Nucklescraper Party in their distorted positon, as it then gives “justification” for other outrages by their opposing fascists.
It is a tad askew. When this happens in the Middle East (Israeli “atrocity” reported, Palestinian attack unreported), I am rather tempted to suggest an anti-Israel bias coming from anti-semitism, but I can’t imagine all these journalists having an anti-Islam bias to the extent that veils get more coverage than bombs. Indeed, these are the same papers that usually misreport what is going on in Israel in favour of the Muslim interpretation. What is going on?
I think a less directed theory of bias seems to fit events here more easily: Journalism is just a series of accidents that result in something to read on the tube.
The “nuclear or biological suit” found is almost certainly an army surplus NBC suit; available at pretty much all military surplus shops. Paintballers use them a lot, as they are cheap and the charcoal lining offers some padding.
There was a series of raids of far right groups on the Continent last week; I wonder if there’s a connection?
I just hope the police consulted the fascist community before the raid.
LOL. Quote so, Pete, quite so. Mustn’t hurt their feeling.
A very interesting case. First off, I don’t believe at all that the MSM’s underreporting of this story is rooted in anti-Islamic attitudes, because I see no evidence that they have such attitudes — quite the contrary. The MSM party line is to downplay the connection of Islam to terrorism, to minimize Muslim violence and threats against mainstream Western society, and to emphasize “Islamophobia” and supposed “racism” against Muslims on the part of Westerners. Based on that, you’d expect them to be trumpeting this story from the rooftops. Hallelujah! A terrorist who isn’t a Muslim! Better yet, a terrorist who is an ordinary mainstream British person with ties to a racist organization! At last they get a story which actually fits their preferred paradigm of mainstream society as the racist villain while Muslims are innocent victims with no special proclivity for terrorism. You’d think they’d milk this for all it’s worth.
Let me go out on a limb here. I suspect that (A) mainstream British society’s exasperation with Muslim violence and intimidation has understandably reached the point that many people would actually sympathize with violent retaliation against Muslims (as in the Windsor case); that (B) the MSM knows this; that (C) the MSM suspects that Mr. Jackson’s plot, if such it was, was targeted at Muslims; and that (D) the MSM fears that if (C) became widely known, there would be a widespready reaction of public sympathy for Mr. Jackson, something they would dread to see. In this context, it would make sense for them to downplay Mr. Jackson and hope that nobody hears about him.
Maybe I’m talking through my hat here; I’m not British and don’t have firsthand knowledge of the public mood in Britain these days. But I’d be interested to hear what those who do have that knowledge think of my hypothesis.
A very interesting case. First off, I don’t believe at all that the MSM’s underreporting of this story is rooted in anti-Islamic attitudes, because I see no evidence that they have such attitudes — quite the contrary. The MSM party line is to downplay the connection of Islam to terrorism, to minimize Muslim violence and threats against mainstream Western society, and to emphasize “Islamophobia” and supposed “racism” against Muslims on the part of Westerners. Based on that, you’d expect them to be trumpeting this story from the rooftops. Hallelujah! A terrorist who isn’t a Muslim! Better yet, a terrorist who is an ordinary mainstream British person with ties to a racist organization! At last they get a story which actually fits their preferred paradigm of mainstream society as the racist villain while Muslims are innocent victims with no special proclivity for terrorism. You’d think they’d milk this for all it’s worth.
Let me go out on a limb here. I suspect that (A) mainstream British society’s exasperation with Muslim violence and intimidation has understandably reached the point that many people would actually sympathize with violent retaliation against Muslims (as in the Windsor case); that (B) the MSM knows this; that (C) the MSM suspects that Mr. Jackson’s plot, if such it was, was targeted at Muslims; and that (D) the MSM fears that if (C) became widely known, there would be a widespready reaction of public sympathy for Mr. Jackson, something they would dread to see. In this context, it would make sense for them to downplay Mr. Jackson and hope that nobody hears about him.
Maybe I’m talking through my hat here; I’m not British and don’t have firsthand knowledge of the public mood in Britain these days. But I’d be interested to hear what those who do have that knowledge think of my hypothesis.
I very much doubt that white fascists would have any sympathy with the public in this context. And I doubt those in the media think so either.
It will be interesting to see if there is any more to this story. The way it reads so far makes me think it might be a bit overplayed. I suspect the MSM will run the story when it goes to trial.
Infidel753,
I think you’re pretty close to the mark there. To highlight this case would require an implicit admission by the MSM that there is a “white backlash” (not that I would support such a violent response). They will also have in mind the millions of pounds worth of publicity given to the BNP at the local elections last May and the clear electoral benefit they received.
After all, blowing people up does produce results – Sinn Fein/IRA are hardly on the fringes of NI political life these days.
Granted, though, there is plenty of MSM bias which can be boiled down to lazy and shoddy journalism (what are they teaching them on these media studies courses FFS)?
It is interesting that it wasn’t covered, regardless of what the actual “take” turns out to be, yes.
Though I notice the report says “chemicals” and “components”, not “explosives”.
And “rocket launchers”? Well, I have an M-72 LAW tube in my basement. It’s a “rocket launcher”.
Of course, I don’t have the M-72 66mm anti-tank rocket that goes in it, and no amount of explosives in the world would allow me to produce one, so it’s a novelty rather than a weapon.
I also have a gas mask, and plenty of people (not me, though) have activated-charcoal suits (for paranoids worried about chemical attack or for hunting, to hide scents – the former is a much more likely explanation in this case), which combined are likely to be described as a “nuclear or biological suit”, inaccurately.
It’s quite possible, depending on the nature of the “chemicals” and “chemical components”, that the man meant ill or was a terrorist-in-preparation. But given the vague nature of the report, it’s not obvious that he is, either.
It is curious that the “chemicals” are not described as “explosives” or even “explosive precursors”.
I mean, bleach is a “chemical”, and you can trivially use it to make a chemical weapon (chlorine gas), but everyone, figuratively, has a bottle of it, so it’s no big deal, typically.
Questions, questions.
It is puzzling. There may be something in the ‘BNP v Islam’ theory, that is, if you absolutely had to choose sides, how many would side with Islam?
Perhaps better to downplay it, but then, why not downplay all these muslim stories in the first place? I have been driven to distraction by the number of ‘Islam this’, ‘Muslim that’ stories now seemingly heading every news bulletin for some time now seemingly.
There is one other explanation: stifle the response now in order to be able to wheel out the story in a blaze of publicity just prior to the May elections.
I’d like to think the press would have more integrity than to carry out propagandist work to order but then, I’d like to believe in Father Christmas too.
This hypothesis will be verifiable ( or not ) in about seven months time, if anyone can still remember this thread by then.
Andy
Andy you make a good point there; the Westminster low-lifes would dearly love to “release” this one at an appropriate moment – either to influence elections or perhaps as a smokescreen to usher in even more draconinan policies (internment?), or perhaps to divert attention from a major Islamic atrocity……
What nobody has picked up on so far is, there was no overt offence committed, no ‘attack’ thwarted, so just who exactly made the complaint that led to this fishing trip by the plod?
I don’t think anyone here can deny that Special Branch (or whatever they call Blair’s Secret Police these days) spies on BNP members; but who else are they snooping on?
I’m sensing that the courts are starting to pay more attention to prejudicial comments prior to trial.
If I’m right, and these gentlemen have already been charged, then it may be that the cops haven’t released a great deal of info, and the average national newpaper reporter is outside his comfort zone/network oop norf.
Also, the re-organisation of the terrorist squads may have overlooked responsibility for press releases. After all, they remain under the “not fit for purpose” home office.
Seems only one of the major news agencies carried the story, as well as the local level news. Some far left-wing news agencies have also republished the local news agency story as their own.
This may or may not have anything to do with the fact that officials are now backpedaling fast on previous ‘shocking’ reports, and seem to be dropping a lot of the charges they were going to make originally. They went rapidly from saying it was the ‘largest haul’ of that particular chemical explosive ever in the UK (which could have been ANY amount of certain chemicals, really, even less than a half pint of some types) to saying as of last night that there were no actual ‘explosives’ in the house, but there seemed to be chemicals that explosives could be ‘made’ from.
That the average home ‘cleaning chemical’ cabinet also usually has ‘chemicals that explosives could be made from’ was not mentioned.
According to my sister in-law, who works for CBS in London, the big news agencies turned down this story. A story like this, which is rapidly showing itself as possibly being a ‘mountain made out of a mole hill’, is something the large agencies could hurt their ‘credibility’ by airing if in fact it turns out not to be as ‘huge’ a story as the first report claimed, and even the local police who made the arrest said they did not think it was ‘important’ enough to issue a press release statement. She also said flat out that if anyone really wants ‘real’ news the only place to get it is from little local agencies, as the big agencies are more interested in ratings, and shock/entertainment value for ratings, than in ‘facts’.