Enemies of Reason Poundshop potshots at the media moral maze.

21Sep/1012

Want to see something really scary?

Following on from yesterday's slightly scary film trailer for evil atheists stealing Christmas, I was pointed in the direction of the following festive film, which I hadn't seen before. But seeing as we're in the run-up to Winterval, it deserves another outing for those of you who haven't had to sit open-jawed through it before.

I should warn you, it is unintentionally hilarious, but does contain a person that many of you will find objectionable, scarily stroking a cat (a mixed-race cat, at that) which has apparently been nailed to his leg to keep it from throwing itself into the fire through the sheer shame of being stroked by him.

23Oct/097

Now let these idiots fade away

It's only been a week since Jan Moir's spectacularly stupid column, but she's tried her best to outdo it today with a spectacularly stupid 'apology' that's more 'je ne regrette rien' than 'mea culpa'.

And no, I'm not linking to it. She got the link-love last week, quite rightly, as everyone wanted to share around the awfulness of what she wrote. But not this week. Go and find it if you want - if you can bear the thought of her web traffic going up by one more number. Last week everyone read her shite, and she claimed few of us did; this week let no-one read her pisspoor excuse of a gritted-teeth apology, and she'll probably imagine the whole world has been delighted by her brilliant words.

But she'll fade away, if we let her, and we should. It's all dying down now. She'll carry on with the same old crap, time after time, but she won't get the attention she so clearly was delighted with. It's time to let her fade away into the mass of other tabloid columnists, some of whom will outdo her for stupidity, for bigotry, for insensitivity in the coming weeks and months. There will be times to call out others when they step over the line. And there will be a chance for the PCC to appear to be anything other than the Wizard of Oz, an impressive front with nothing backing it up. But we'll see whether they decide to have some courage, or wait for the dust to settle and accept the matter has been somehow 'resolved'. I have a fair idea what the answer is.

And farewell to Nick Griffin, too. He's had his week in the sun. People feared he might come across well on Question Time, that he might appear statesmanlike or intelligent and might be able to dodge the questions cleverly. Not really, from the glimpses I've seen so far. He looked shifty, edgy, not particularly bright, and came out with the kind of bigoted shite you'd expect - shite that's not a million miles away from what the tabloids have been printing this week with regard to population growth, of course, or what they regularly print about Muslims, but shite nonetheless. It wasn't a sparkling performance and now the mystique has gone down a little bit.

So it's time for him to fade away, as well. He's been given the 'oxygen of publicity' and he's looked like a fairly crap politician. It's what I'd always suspected. He's not some evil genius who's going to hypnotise the world; he's just a racist who is marginally more clever than most racists. That's all. Just because someone went to Cambridge it doesn't make them Erasmus. To the Oxbridge elites who run our newspapers - and yes, I'm looking at you, The Guardian - it might seem that way, but it isn't.

So let's let them fade away, Griffin and Moir both. They've had their say and now it's time to tell them, with all politeness and respect, to fuck right off. Because there are more important things to detain us between now and the next general election, wars being fought in our name, torture happening in our name. It's easier to focus on something personal, an arsehole like Moir or Griffin, and less easy to focus on something wider, more complex, more detailed; but that doesn't mean that it's impossible. But these two clowns have had their time and have detained us for long enough, I think.

21Oct/091

Lying about immigration? Surely not

This is not about Nick Griffin. I've decided I'm not going to mention the smellyfaced cockwipe on here for a few days, so that I'm not accused of being obsessed with the vile bastard or giving him any undue credit. So although this is about immigration lies, this is not about the man whose entire raison d'etre is immigration lies - partly because everyone knows he lies about immigration, whereas they may give a little more credence to what a reporter in their daily paper says; and partly because he's a shit-stuffed hatemonger who is getting lots of attention already, which he's presumably delighted about. The despicable weaselly-voiced lie-vomiting Nazi. So from here on in, he's not going to turn up at all.

No, while Gr*ff*n is fairly open about his stance on immigration, and you can be fairly confident he'll come out with lies to back up his unsavoury views, our newspapers represent a position from which they claim to be looking at the facts objectively and merely revealing what's going on. Which would be fine if that was indeed what they did. But no. They look for outlandish stories that will outrage their readers; they look for statistics that can be warped into shape; they look to give their blue-rinse brigade a ride in the "They're all coming over here!" ghost train at the breakfast table.

So we had the story earlier this week of a man being allowed to stay in the country just because he's got a cat. Except of course you know that's not the case. The cat had nothing to do with it; it was merely a minor detail in the case which everyone involved in it insisted had no bearing on the final result. Strange, then, that it was only the Telegraph who decided to bring that rather important point to our attention, with other newspapers simply hacking away at the facts until what remained was what they wanted to write: BLOODY FOREIGNER COMES OVER HERE AND WE CAN'T KICK HIM OUT BECAUSE HE'S GOT A BLEEDING CAT! YOU COULDN'T MAKE IT UP... oh. You could.

Not that that stopped Littlejohn, of course, who based his entire argument about the piece in the Daily Mail and ignored all the details in (marginally) better quality publications which showed what the facts were. Sometimes I wonder if he reads past the headlines. Oh but so what, you're saying to yourself, everyone knows Littlejohn is a tedious little man who mysteriously wins Polemicist of the Year awards despite constantly lying about immigration, telling porkies about PC Britain and basically never checking his facts - Why should all this matter? Well:

Unfortunately, for the BNP, Stormfront and other racist website/forums where this story has appeared, it is now accepted as 'fact'.

Guess what - racists care even less about the truth than Littlejohn. Once it's appeared in a national newspaper, though, they can use it as 'evidence' to back up their hatred, for there's still a degree of trust (albeit rapidly diminishing) in what people see on the printed page, as opposed to what's been typed onto a computer scren. Was it really a surprise that the horrific English Defence League used a video composed almost entirely of Daily Mail and Daily Express stories for its recent campaigning? Does it matter when newspapers get it wrong with agenda-driven rubbish? Yes. Yes it does, when it's giving racists, and violent racists at that, justification for their hatred.

And so to yesterday, and this marvellous sentence from Five Chinese Crackers:

Using the magic words, "according to the Daily Express," which is about on a par with saying, "according to that bloke swinging a plastic bag and shouting Bible verses in French next to Victoria Station," in terms of reliability, the Mail regales us with the same flipping figures I looked at way back in March...

Have a look at the post to see how the papers make the immigration figures misleading, and you can see for yourself what they're trying to do. MigrationWatch are the people sticking the coke in the furnace, but the Mail and Express know what they're doing. And when they don't have a new immigration story to lie about, like the man and his bloody cat, they simply regurgitate exactly what they wrote several months ago.

But why now? Look, I promised I wouldn't mention him again, but it's just that there's a certain arsehole appearing on a certain outdated politics programme on Thursday night, and to coincide with that, the most anti-immigration screamsheets are trying to do two things: firstly, to say that they are distancing themselves from him; secondly, to say that they are repeating his arguments word for word, then having thousands of rabid commenters turning up on the stories saying "I WANT TO VOTE FOR SOMEONE WHO'S GOING TO SAVE BRITAIN, LOVELY OLD NICK'S GOT MY VOTE AND NO MISTAKE!" - do you know, I just wish they'd come out, and be honest, and say: "Yes, we're only a fag-paper away from Griffin, what of it? We sell loads of papers based on absolute bollocks and lies about immigration, and our readers love it, because they're racist too. And what the fuck are you going to do about it?"

But no, they have to go through the same pantomime every time. We're not racist, but... here's some racism.

Meanwhile, today's Express carries yet another immigration scare story, this time about 40,000 'illegal immigrants' who have gone 'missing'. The files date from 2003 and many are not 'missing' but simply 'not here any more' or 'not traceable because they're here illegally and perhaps understandably don't want to draw attention to themselves'. It's not a new story - you'll remember that back in April, Boris Johnson called for an amnesty on illegal immigrants. But it's a story about immigration, which implies there's chaos, and THOUSANDS OF 'EM, and every week is immigration week at the Express - and luckily enough our friend at MigrationWatch was contactable, now there's a relief:

Sir Andrew Green, chairman of the population think tank Migrationwatch, described the revelation as “Yet another skeleton in the Home Office cupboard.” He said: “This is symptomatic of the utter chaos in the asylum and immigration system during the past 10 years. Nobody in the private sector would get away with such a performance.”

'Population think tank' - yes, of course it is. Not a pressure group which attacks everything to do with immigration, no sir.

Of course, all these stories come from the same newspapers which do the tango with a certain fat one-eyed politician who shall not be named, but which then claim only to have brushed against him on their way to the toilet. And then they dismiss him and attack him in the strongest possible terms, with a nod and a wink to his supporters, who flock to their publications in droves.

20Oct/0910

Nick Griffin’s weaselly voice

No doubting what's going to be the star of Question Time this week - Nick Griffin's weaselly voice.

I have to admit I hadn't really heard it very much until earlier today, when he popped up on the radio to whine about how the BNP are 'non-PC' (that's 'non-PC' in the sense of 'actually being racist', I think) and why it was well within their rights to use images of Winston Churchill and a (Polish!*) Spitfire in their election communications.

I've said before how I don't think there's anything to fear from Griffin being invited onto Question Time - and, as I wrote earlier, the BNP love to be victims. The Griffinfuehrer would love to walk into the QT studios covered in freshly-chucked eggs and claim that 'the Left' was trying to silence debate. He loves playing the victim as much as all racists do and will make the most of anyone trying to physically stop him from attending the broadcast. That in turn will bring even more attention to the debate - which, let's remember, is Question Time; not Griffin Time - whereas it would be better for it to slip by, as every other episode of the programme generally does, rather than it being a big deal.**

And when I heard him on the radio earlier, I thought: hang on a minute. He sounds rubbish. Not just the content of what he says - that's objectionable enough, of course, but I had expected that - but there was something inherently ridiculous about the way he sounded. It's like those days when Gerry Adams was on telly and the pointless broadcasting rules (let's not forget the right can 'silence debate' just as stupidly as the left) make him look like someone out of a 1970s dubbed martial arts film, albeit beardy and Irish. When you finally heard his real voice you thought to yourself: Oh, how dull.

And it's similar with Griffin. The BNP thrives on a bit of mystique, if you can call it that. They love not just being victims but also the idea that they're a bit naughty. Do you know what I mean? It's the 'No-one likes us, we don't care' attitude. But once their leader turns out to be a whiney twerp who sounds like a very tiny moped over-revving at traffic lights to try and overtake a milk float - the only other public figure I can think of with such a laughably terrible voice is Mike Tyson, but his job was never to present political statements - some of that toughness and mystique will fade away.

Griffin's nothing special. Sure, he's private-school educated, went to Cambridge and had a clever idea to try and mask the BNP's inherent racism and cruel streak for minorities with a load of specious waffle about disenfranchised working classes - but I can't help wondering if keeping him out of the limelight has done the BNP a bit of a favour. All the enormous potholes in his logic notwithstanding, his presentation is pretty pisspoor. His weaselly voice makes everything he says sound like a rather irate mosquito bubbling with rage, not an insightful politician trying to speak for anyone other than himself.

Will this all backfire, and Griffin produce a sparkling display of rhetoric that will delight the QT audience, and the wider TV audience? I doubt it. Probably what will happen is that there'll be a bit of disruption before, maybe even during, and possibly after. Griffin wants that. He wants to get the headlines for being the stoical defender of free speech, attacked by all sides - because the truth is that he's a whiney bastard, a racist and a fool, who looks like an idiot and sounds like an idiot. It's great to protest about him, but let's not give him what he wants. The public can see him for who he is - and what he is.

* The Griffinmeister later claimed this was a deliberate move to celebrate the role of Polish pilots in the Second World War. Which is of course absolute toss.
** "Aha!" you might well say. "Then why are you writing this? Won't your impenetrably dull blog contribute to a sense of anticipation about the tubby bigot's appearance on Thursday night?" - to which I say, I can see where you're coming from on this one, but no. So much noise is already being created about this matter, and I think a lot of it is needlessly panicky; that awful turd turning up on the QT panel isn't going to be the end of the world, and we mustn't get ourselves into a tizzy about it. Chill out. Think of some nice images. Kittens. Puppies. Racists dying in horrific accidents. See? You're feeling better already.