|
The enemies of reason has already pointed out the way in which the Daily Mail has turned this story into a pop against 'Muslim' extremists:
Before we go over to today's Mail atrocity, I just want to ask you this question. You'll get the answer right, because I know you're very bright. Who do you think is portrayed as 'extremists' by the Mail in a story - (a) a bunch of nuts in balaclavas waving England fans taking over a town centre, terrifying families, smashing up shops, beating up people and getting arrested, or (b) people who weren't even at the event?
As the enemies of reason points out, how can angry demonstrators attacking cars and causing civil unrest be classed as solely a demonstration against Muslim extremists? Were the cars somehow perpetuating Muslim messages of hate?
Tabloid Watch looks at how the Daily Mail is not the only paper to gloss over the event without too much analysis, including the point that most newspapers stated the aim of the march was 'peaceful protest' but none of them cared to explain why the protesters felt the need to wear balaclavas. If it was a peaceful protest on one of the hottest days of the year so far it seems the only justification for balaclavas is to hide the faces of those present because they knew full well that violence was going to ensue - it was part of the protest, not an unfortunate side effect.
Naturally the armchair revolutionaries that comment on the Mail website are full of excitement that the poor put upon white people in Britain are finally making a stand:
Well its about time.....lets be proud to be english.....and stand up and be counted.
- nigel preston, bishop auckland, uk. allentown, usa., 25/5/2009 2:02
Click to rate Rating 702
I wonder if Nigel Preston is sure just what these people are standing up for. The protesters are not celebrating British or English culture, they are projecting vile racist violence against fellow citizens in the UK. Muslim extremists are like any other extremists: pretty small in numbers and pretty insignificant in the great scheme of things. So how intimidating Asian people, or any other ethnic minority is a justifiable response to one form of extremism is not at all clear to anyone but the idiots taking part in the protest or commenting on the Daily Mail website.
Should ethnic minorities now hate all white people because of the reaction of a small minority of extremists who took part in this protest?
Furthermore one commentator even goes so far to blame political correctness for the arrest of the violent protesters:
Good to see someone finally standing up for England. A shame it had to end in violence, it that because the English, due to Politcal Correctness, are the only ones who are not allowed to protest for what they beleive in though??
- Clare, Perth, 25/5/2009 2:10
Click to rate Rating 1451
This fucking moron not only lives in Perth (way to go for standing up for England) but is supported in her feverish dribbling by over 1400 Daily Mail readers. Sadly this is the mindset of some people who think that political correctness is somehow stripping people of fundamental rights - and in some ways I guess it is.
For example, if you are the kind of un-evolved, ignorant, shit-kicker that attends this kind of protest then you have been stripped of the right to call a black person a 'nigger' or an Asian person a 'fucking Paki'. You can no longer beat up a person for being a different colour or for being gay. You have lost these rights because we live in a world that is on the whole becoming more tolerant - whatever you or the Daily Mail may think you are merely a noisy minority.
The vast proportion of intelligent people realise that political correctness isn't perfect, sometimes people get the wrong idea and take things a step too far that isn't needed. But this doesn't hurt anyone and such points are minor when we consider that essentially political correctness is about being polite and respecting others - surely these are traditional values to be encouraged?
The whole idea of 'fighting back' against extremism is completely flawed, yet it is a mindset that is often perpetuated by the Daily Mail. Take for example an article (a two-page spread in the print edition) in the Daily Mail last week basically suggested that German POWs in Britain during WW2 lived in a holiday camp and 'didn't want to escape'. The whole article was kind of outraged that whilst Europe suffered at the hands of Nazis and Fascists, we treated German POWs with humanity and kindness.
Here's the point: this is exactly the response that should be given to tyranny and extremism. In order to fight Nazis or Fascists we had to maintain our civilisation as being fundamentally better and fairer than the one they were trying to create; how could we condemn them if we started to abuse human beings in a like manner?
Likewise, we condemn modern extremism because it generally runs contrary to the values that we consider important in at civilised society. If are response to extremism is to embrace it and use it as a tool to fight back then we become the very depravity that we have supposedly taken up arms against. If we therefore become extremists we have only defeated ourselves.
However, I do not think these people are fighting anything; they are simply standing up for their values of hatred, intolerance and racism. They are extremists, but rather than being roundly condemned on the front page of every tabloid they are left to small articles and are treated somewhat sympathetically in them.
That somehow the fact that the police deal with violent protests with arrests is somehow the fault of 'political correctness' or that the violence was perpetrated as a result of 'inequal 'equality' laws created by Labour' is a sign of just how the warped worldview of the tabloid press is infecting the minds of people too stupid to think for themselves.
|
