'No further action'

MailOnline reports:

Bullet point five says:

Arrests made after two held over alleged plot to attack the London Olympic canoeing event

The article does not elaborate on this, but a MailOnline article from 29 June does:

It explains:

Two Muslim converts have been arrested on suspicion of plotting an attack on the London Olympic canoeing venue after police spotted them on a dinghy nearby.

An 18-year-old and a 32-year-old were detained after dawn raids were carried out at separate addresses in east London by officers acting on a tip-off.

Sources said the arrests were made after the men were seen acting suspiciously close to the venue in Waltham Abbey, Essex, on Monday.

These arrests were reported elsewhere, including the Telegraph which seemed to present this 'Olympic terror plot' as fact in its main headline:

Yet neither the Mail nor the Telegraph appear to have reported any subsequent developments in the case - in particular, the fact that both men were released without charge the following day.

As Associated Press explained:

Scotland Yard says an 18-year-old and a 32-year-old arrested at separate addresses in east London last week have been freed "with no further action."

So not only does it appear that the Mail and Telegraph have failed to inform their readers of this, but MailOnline is today mentioning the arrests again.

(More on this from Islamophobia Watch)

(A report on Islam and Muslims and the British Media (pdf), by Unitas, was submitted to the Leveson Inquiry this week)

Blink and you'll miss it

Remember the 'Muslim Plot to Kill Pope' front page of Saturday's Express?


Yesterday, it was announced that every one of the six men who had been arrested had been released without charge.

Did the Express put this news on the front page? Not quite. Here's page nine of today's paper:


Still can't see it? It's here:


So the Express falsely labels the six men 'Al-Qaeda-linked Islamic terrorists plotting to kill the Pope' on the front page on Saturday, but only mentions they have all been released without charge in one easy-to-miss sentence at the bottom of page nine on Monday.

The Express' owner (Richard Desmond) and editor (Peter Hill) should be ashamed.

(Huge thanks to Daniel Selwood for the pics)

PCC must act over Express' 'Muslim Plot to Kill Pope' front page

The Metropolitan Police have said:

Six men who were arrested under the Terrorism Act 2000 on Friday, 17 September, were all released without charge late on Saturday night and early this morning.

Hearing the six men have been released without charge may come as something of a shock to readers of the Express who had been told on Saturday that the men were almost certainly guilty, having hatched a 'Muslim Plot to Kill Pope':

Every media outlet was reporting the arrests on Friday, but there was a very clear note of wariness in the coverage. The indication was that the police acted out of caution rather than any serious threat.

But the Express doesn't do subtlety - especially when there's a chance of accusing Muslims of something awful. Look at the first sentence:

Islamic terrorists disguised as street cleaners allegedly hatched an audacious plot to blow up the Pope.

As Sim-O points out, the Express is declaring these six men were definitely 'Islamic terrorists' but were only 'allegedly' plotting to kill the Pope.

But then the Express makes it sound as if there was definitely a plot as well:

The threatened attack was foiled at the 11th hour after police raided a cleaning depot in London as the suspects prepared to start their shift yesterday.

It was strange to see the Express' front page sub-head calling the men 'bogus street cleaners'. The paper was more convinced they were 'Islamic terrorists' than actual street cleaners.

Most of the rest of the quotes and information about the arrests that appears in the Express' article was repeated elsewhere. But one Express-only sentence stood out:

It is feared plotters with links to Al Qaeda planned “a double blow to the infidel” by assassinating the head of the Roman Catholic church and slaughtering hundreds of pilgrims and well-wishers.

As there was no plot, and no one else seemed to be reporting this claim, the suspicion is the Express used dramatic licence here. By putting 'double blow to the infidel' in quote marks, it makes it seem as if someone has actually said this. But they don't say who. Because no one did.

Sim-O points out another line that also only seemed to appear in the Express:

An investigation is also under way to determine if the foreign nationals had entered Britain legally and were entitled to work here.

The Express seems to be saying: even in the unlikely event they aren't found to be 'Islamic terrorists', there's sure to be something dodgy about their immigration status.

This was a quite disgraceful, scaremongering, hate-inciting front page from the Express. Will they give so much prominence to the fact they've all been released without charge? Of course not.

The question is what will the PCC do? As there are six men directly involved they will only consider a complaint from one of them. Although it would be understandable if they didn't want to remain in the public spotlight, let's hope they do complain.

But if they don't, the PCC should consider acting anyway.

The Express used its front page to smear six men as Islamic terrorists with links to Al-Qaeda. A front page correction, retraction and apology must follow.

Churnalism, terrorism and alcoholism

Ben Goldacre's Bad Science column on Rentokil is excellent. He shows how the Telegraph, Evening Standard and the Mail all mindlessly repeated some bogus claims made by Rentokil in a classic bit of churnalism.

Yes, Mr Dacre. Churnalism. In the Mail.

The journalists did nothing to investigate or verify the story, or even consider that Renotkil's claims that 2,000 bugs are in every train compartment might not be totally believable.

After a week and a half of obfuscation, Rentokil eventually issued a 'clarification and apology' because, they said:

it might be helpful to explain how we arrived at the numbers and where things went so wrong.

Quite. They added:

We’re really sorry that the numbers that appeared in the media were wrong and misleading and we’ve put in place a number of measures to ensure it doesn’t happen again.

So the numbers have been exposed by the Guardian and retracted by the company behind them. Yet the Mail, Telegraph and Standard articles are still live. Why?

This is a clear example of where the PCC should be pro-active in ensuring the articles are removed and clarifications posted.

By contrast, the PCC would be hard pushed to act on articles about Ian Davison, however, because there aren't any.

Davison had produced ricin and possessed 'documents which detailed how to make explosives and could by used in acts of terrorism'.

When he was arrested last June, the Mail called him a 'white supremacist' who wanted to 'poison ethnic minorities'.

Davison admitted the charges in court last week - yet the tabloid press has been absolutely silent since then.

It's a quite astonishing silence, which shows the stark contrast between how terrorists and terror suspects are treated by the press based on the colour of their skin and religion.

Indeed, the Mail spent more time covering the case of Cossor Ali, who was cleared of 'failing to pass on information that would be useful in preventing an act of terrorism'.

But according to the Mail, an innocent Muslim woman is more newsworthy than a white man who admits to producing ricin.

There's more on Davison and media coverage of ricin plots at Septicisle.

One more recommended read: over at the Beer Blog, Pete Brown has exposed the Mail's latest attempt to scare people about drink.

Recommended read

Please read Know Your Enemy by Mehdi Hasan which appeared in the New Statesman a few days ago. It makes a compelling case about the variations in reporting on terrorists when they're Muslim and when they're not (as noted here before). As the article begins:

Why isn’t the trial of a man charged with preparing for terror attacks using tennis-ball bombs being reported? He’s not a bearded Muslim

Terror arrests you might have missed

A week ago a father and son were arrested in County Durham under the Terrorism Act. Police said that 'suspected ricin was found in a jam jar' in the home of a 'suspected white supremacist'; the son was arrested on suspicion of inciting racial hatred and later re-arrested under the Terrorism Act.

The Mail stated that they were involved in a plot 'poisoning ethnic minorities' but this is based on a much vaguer statement by the police that this was 'one of our lines of inquiry'. (The Sun and Star don't mention a possible target, as the Mail and Express do.)

As with any terror arrests, these claims should be treated with some caution. But what is so noticeable about this story is how un-noticeable it was. The Mail's coverage is here, the Sun's here, the Star's here and the Express' here and here.

But compare that with the coverage with that two months ago when there were arrests in Manchester of a group of young Muslims under the Terror Act. That was on the front pages and full of lurid details of a plot to blow up football stadia and shopping centres. None of which, of course, was true. But the difference in the level of coverage is striking. And maybe the 'ricin' plot will also turn out to be no such thing.

But if the police had arrested a Muslim father and son, with ricin in a jam jar, who wanted to kill whites, imagine the coverage that would have received. Why should there be this difference?

As if to prove the point, the Mail gave undue prominence yesterday to the story that two men on the missing Air France flight apparently shared names with suspected terrorists. One day later, the paper reports that the two men have been 'cleared' (the original story has been modified so no longer exists, but a version from the Evening Standard site remains).

But 'cleared'? Cleared of what? Surely these two dead men should never have had their names and reputations dragged through the mud before the truth was discovered. And given their exoneration came only a day later, it proves it wasn't exactly difficult to disprove the slur.

Yet once again the Islamophobic agenda of the media takes precedence over such things as fact checking.

(Thanks to Enemies of Reason for writing a post which reminded me to write about the ricin arrests!)

Making up a target for a deadline

A little earlier this afternoon, Chief Constable Peter Fahy of Greater Manchester Police gave a very open press conference regarding the arrests of 12 men in the North West last night.

This morning's newspapers were full of stories, partly aimed at Bob Quick, whose blunder saw the operation brought forward - according to Fahy - by only 24 hours. This doesn't stop the Mail lambasting Quick for the size of his pension, despite the fact he's devoted 31 years to the police service.

But there was another common thread.

The Daily Star front page read 'Terror plot to blow up top footie grounds', suggesting that: Fears were growing over a bomb threat to last night’s Euro cup clash as police foiled a “major” terrorist attack....There is no immediate suggestion the stadium was the target but one of the raids was just three miles away.

Of course, since they mention that the 'raids were brought forward after a serious security blunder' it's hard to understand how they think a football match beginning within hours of the arrests was a target. But this is the Star we're talking about.

The Mail ran with 'Terror gang' may have been 'plotting to blow up shopping centre and nightclub' which claimed: Police believe possible targets were the Trafford Centre shopping centre in Manchester and a nightclub frequented by footballers.

The Express said 'Shops and nightclub were terror target' and went into greater detail: Senior sources also revealed the alleged terror cell planned to attack the Birdcage nightclub in Manchester city centre or the Trafford Centre shopping complex. The nightspot, with its dancing showgirls, has become hugely popular, attracting thousands of clubbers each week. Detectives believe it was chosen as a symbol of “western decadence”.

The Sun led with 'Four potential bomb targets' which said: Intelligence sources believe the Trafford Centre and a huge Manchester nightclub called The Birdcage were being eyed-up by the gang. And today it emerged that two other major shopping areas in Manchester had also been under observation. The Arndale Centre and St Ann's Square — both in the heart of the city — had been visited by some of the suspects.

The last line is a classic - why is it surprising that some people living in Manchester had visited major Manchester shopping centres?

However, in Fahy's news conference, he was asked specifically about the targets. And as the Independent reports, he said this:

Clearly, there's been some speculation about certain locations, particularly in the North West, concerning this investigation. There is no particular threat against any particular location and certainly not the ones mentioned in the media.

Hmm. Surely the media wouldn't indulge in such unfounded speculation as they rushed out stories for the first editions. Would they?