At last. The BBC give us the detailed story on the school hammer attack.
She told the BBC the men attacked the boy and then another got out a hammer and starting hitting him.
“He fell to the floor and asked them to stop, but they kept kicking him.”
She added: “The boy tried to get up but they kept hitting him, then suddenly they all ran away.”
Police have arrested eight male youths aged between 14 and 20 in connection with the incident.
Those right-wing hate-sheets the Guardian and the Independent tell the same story but with a few angles that the BBC either overlooked or just didn’t consider relevant.
Some parents at Ridgeway School in Wroughton, near Swindon, said the attack, in which four Asian men pinned the boy down at the end of the school day on Thursday, was racially motivated.
Mr Colledge said he was on patrol in the grounds when the boy, who is white, was attacked. “After school had ended for the day and pupils were exiting the premises at least four young adults unknown to the school came into the tennis courts and attacked the pupil, we believe with something similar to a hammer.” He said he understood the boy had been hit more than once and was “bleeding profusely but conscious at all times”.He added: “Relations seem to be very good and pupils mix, play football and chat together. It’s predominantly a white school. Asian pupils probably make up less than five per cent.” But Mr Colledge had heard the attackers were relatives of a pupil at the school.
A mother, who did not wish to be named, said she had heard there had been previous racially aggravated incidents at the school. She believes children walking home from school were subject to verbal and physical abuse from relations of Asian pupils at the school.
Police have arrested eight male youths aged between 14 and 20 in connection with the incident.
That big-budget outfit the Swindon Advertiser also picks up a few things the BBC are prevented from reporting due to budget restraints.
The attack has left many parents afraid to let their children go to school.
A concerned dad, who did not want to be named, said he doubted his children would be going to school today after what had happened.
He said: “Both of my kids saw what happened. They are both traumatised by it. We are shell-shocked. This was a particularly nasty attack.
“This is the third major incident that’s happened in six months.”
He said security around the school grounds needed to be tighter.
“The security is absolutely appalling,” he said. “This is horrendous and it needs to be highlighted.
“We don’t expect the police to be there 24/7 but it’s time the school spent some money on putting up fencing around the perimeter.”
Another mum, who asked not to be named, said she would not be sending her children to school today.
“This is not the first time something like this has happened and something needs to be done,” she said.
“I am absolutely petrified about what might have happened.
“I don’t want my child in the school but he has his exams to take in May and, apart from getting me into trouble, how is it going to help him in the future?”
She said that parents would be waiting at the school gates this morning to demand a meeting with the headteacher.
“Something needs to be done,” she said.
“The last time we were told it was being dealt with and now we are back in the same situation.
“Hopefully this new head will take a different stance.”
In May, six teenagers from Ridgeway were taken to hospital after a group of men jumped out of two cars and attacked students, leaving one with a broken jaw.
Police patrolled outside the school in Inverary Road for a week in an effort to soothe the worries of parents and pupils.
Officers dealing with the case at the time refused to comment on speculation that the fight was racially motivated.
Now it could be argued – and no doubt has been – that reporting such inter-racial attacks could inflame feelings and damage ‘social cohesion’ – and that therefore details of attacker and victim ethnicity should be downplayed or suppressed. It’s not a position I’d agree with – for starters it should not be the job of a news organisation to suppress facts – but it’s a respectable argument for a state-owned, non-independent broadcaster to put forward – assuming it applies to ALL inter-racial or inter-communal attacks. But this isn’t what the BBC do. In practice, attacks by members of the majority community get ‘big air’, attacks on members of the majority community don’t. This not only, in the Internet age, destroys BBC credibility as a news source for a (currently small but) increasing number of people, but by giving a one-sided picture of inter-racial attacks it creates an untrue narrative of only majority perpetrators and only minority victims.
A while back Yasmin Alibhai-Brown wrote an Evening Standard piece commenting on double standards in the reporting of racist murder :
I have talked to some black and Asian inmates serving time in prison for such crimes: most justify their actions as collective retribution for attacks on “their people”.
“Attacks on their people”. Where would they get those ideas from, I wonder ?
which all serves to give the bnp even more credibility:
http://www.bnp.org.uk/news_detail.php?newsId=1308
the more the bbc refuses to acknowledge the nature of these attacks, the more the bnp will sound credible. not good. not good at all. privatising the bbc is the only option.
How many attacks like this, perhaps not quite so severe, go unreported these days ?
I watched the seven minutes or so that Five Live Drive devoted to the hammer story and the few minutes that Newsnight had on it – tucked away near the end between censorship in China and a play on Idi Amin, and not mentioned at all in the introduction so that nobody would have known Newsnight was going to report on it. The woman in the Newsnight studio was wondering out loud if this could be considered a racist attack. The reporter said that would be up to the police to determine. (Yeah, right.)
I’ve also noted the comments by people on other threads here comparing ITN and Sky’s coverage of the savage, racist attack by men on a boy to the BBC’s coverage. The BBC even went to the lengths of burying the story as deeply as it possibly could be buried on its website.
By covering up these racist ‘Asian’ on white crimes, the BBC is complicit in creating an atmosphere of indulgence which will simply embolden the ‘Asians’ to commit more of the same.
Only question is, how many BBC staff are consciously aware that this is what they are doing? In other words, how many are actively working towards the violent domination of the country by adherents of the ‘religion of peace’ and how many are simply numbed by PC idiocy?
Laban is correct that the story is reduced to an “Eyewitness tells of hammer attack” link way down the bottom of the ‘England’ page on the website.
What he neglects to mention is that “BNP ballerina – How the far right shed the old look and won unexpected friends.” gets a photo and prominent position on the same page.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/6255195.stm
with in depth coverage of the protests at The English National Ballet.
“Are Ms Clarke’s politics compatible with her job” a photo caption asks.
One wonders whether that is a question that could be asked more widely
‘which all serves to give the bnp even more credibility’
No it doesn’t.
Just because the BBC is a biased and racist organisation doesn’t stop the BNP being one too.
The BBC and the ‘R’ word.
Man racially abuses Muslim woman
A man who racially abused a Muslim woman and then tried to rip off her veil is being hunted by police. The 37-year-old woman was attacked as she crossed East Park towards the Cenotaph in Southampton on Thursday afternoon. The attacker grabbed her by the neck and told her to remove her veil. He then tried to take it off himself but she struggled free and fled.
Pc Leigh Walker said: “This attack was particularly degrading for the victim.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/hampshire/6258411.stm
Now can anybody point me in the use of that same ‘R’ word being used on the coverage of a certain hammer attack on the BBC?
The BBC has certainly been destroyed as a reliable news source for me. Look at the Bush Iraq surge announcement, the BBC headlined an anti-Bush Republican senator but completely ignored Democrat Al Gore’s 2000 running mate Libermann’s support for Bush. You can support Bush’s policy or oppose it but surely we are entitled to a balanced reporting of the facts.
Bryan:
“Only question is, how many BBC staff are consciously aware that this is what they are doing? In other words, how many are actively working towards the violent domination of the country by adherents of the ‘religion of peace’ and how many are simply numbed by PC idiocy?”
Whoooaa, steady on Bryan! I agree that this looks like it’s a racist attack, but as yet we don’t know what faith the attackers espouse.
Now can anybody point me in the use of that same ‘R’ word being used on the coverage of a certain hammer attack on the BBC?
No. Even if the BBC is dragged kicking and screaming to a lecture on Asian racism against whites it will still insist that it can’t possibly exist.
True Fran,
I’m making an educated guess. I doubt that they are Buddhists.
wheteher as a matter of BBC policy, or indeed by specific Government instruction, the BBC have DELIBERATLY mis-represented the facts surrounding this case.
Whatever you (Dear Reader) think of this and the possible reasons for such obfuscation, the following questions arise;
– can the BBC be trusted to report on issues of race?
– given that people make decisions based in part on knowledge garnered from Media outlets and, given its priviledged and dominant position in the UK, is the BBC now DANGEROUS to your Health & Safety?
– Ought we to be charged money for Deliberate Deception?
– With the Internet and other Media outlets reporting cases such as this with greater accuracy than the BBC, how long can it be before
the BBC is Universally held in contempt?
– Whoever commits them, race-hate crimes are important, building a picture of particular trends is important. If the BBC is not to be trusted to tell the truth on race-hate crimes, why ought we to believe them on Climate Change, Class War, Real War, Finance, the War on Terrorism, Immigration, the consequences of the rise in Islam and the runners and riders in the last race at Towcester?
From pounce
A man who racially abused a Muslim woman and then tried to rip off her veil is being hunted by police
How did he know what race the woman was before (or after) the attempted rip?
Maybe he’s psychic.
“Attacks on their people”. Where would they get those ideas from, I wonder ?
The next thread up gives part of the answer – well done to B-BBC!
Ralph | Homepage | 13.01.07 – 3:36 pm | #
Ahh, but are they a racist organisation? This remains to be answer, but on appearances: probably not. Or, to put it another way, there are racist idiots in every party, but that doesn’t mean we can call them racist organisations. The BNP has a very interesting manifesto that covers a great many issues the other parties are completely unwilling to even touch. When the BBC spends so much time naysaying this party, people will become interested in them and want to find out more.
I honestly hadn’t even heard of them until a few years ago.
For the record, I am not affiliated with the BNP, nor will I be voting for them at the next election. They are socialists, after all…
Like PJ, I spotted that the BBC was coyly joining the campaign to get Ms Clarke sacked, with the photo caption : “Are Ms Clarke’s politics compatible with her job”
But I also thought the other photo was instructive, with “Unite” on each of the posters. “Unite against Fascism” is of course run by the SWP. The BBC’s search for political extremists to expose is severely hampered by total blindness in the left eye. They’re off chasing BNP ballerinas, and all the while BBC Radio 4 comedy has SWP members coming out of its ears.
As with most things perception ia all.The BBC perceives the indigenous population,particularly the English non Metropolitan part,as inherently stupid,conservative(small c) and probably racist.Hence all news items have to be tailored to fit this BBC predjudice.The problem is that bias replaces factual reporting.Racist attacks on whites therefore do not happen.
I’m going to start a campaign for Unite against Thought Fascism (aka Political Correctness).
I wonder how many “Unite against Fascism” activists stood outside the court room in Glasgow demonstrating during the Kriss Donald murder trial?
Self proclaimed “anti-racism” activists have a long track record of suddenly losing interest when victim and attacker turn out to be the wrong colours.
If the BBC is going to post captions like “Are Ms Clarke’s politics compatible with her job”, will they do the same for the SWP members currently spilling their bile on the so called comedy shows they broadcast. Oh silly me, the answer would obviously be yes in that case.
The News Quiz used to be a very entertaining and funny programme now it’s just an embarrassment
Does this also mean the clowns who write Dr Who and Torchwood will also get sacked for pushing their views on national TV? *crickets chirping.*
dave t writes:
“Does this also mean the clowns who write Dr Who and Torchwood will also get sacked for pushing their views on national TV?”
Clown, singular, sadly. The author is one Russell T Davies – leading gay activist and all-round heart-throb of the BBC luvvies.
It’s hard to imagine, given his track record ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell_T._Davies#Adult_television_.26_Queer_as_Folk, that anyone bothered switching on ‘Torchwood’expecting anything oher than propagandist nonsense.
regarding the wroughton hammer attack: channel 4 news mentioned in passing that consultations with Muslim community leaders were taking place as a result. How could the BBC have missed that angle?
Thing is the BBC editors page sought to address the way they’d been downplaying the Kriss Donald murder in Glasgow.
http://biased-bbc.blogspot.com/2006/11/racist-murder-bbc-responses-via-dfh-in.html
Doesn’t look like they’ve learnt anything.
“Are Ms. Clarke’s politics compatible with her job?”
(The job in question being as a ballerina in a subsidized arts-company.)
The subsidized arts in this country are — like the BBC — heavily biased to the left. This is because they have a vested interest in promoting high public-spending policies, being part of the soft end of the public sector. The rest of the package is just the usual leftist agenda.
If Simone Clarke were a Trotskyite or Fenian, the BBC would be cooing over her. And any attempt to criticize her views would be condemned by the BBC as a “witch-hunt”.
The parents said in a report, also in the Swindon Advertiser, that ‘a group calling themselves the “Asian Invasion” had been behind a campaign of bullying at the school.’
To which the Headteacher replied, via the BBC of course, “It is important we don’t give in to prejudice or accept rumour as truth.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/wiltshire/6257933.stm
Yes, I also saw that comment. What gets me is the indecent haste of his attempt to forestall any resentment against the barbarians who carried out the attack.
‘Ahh, but are they a racist organisation?’
Yes.
The only effective method the JR sock puppets have to discredit this blog is to claim we are all right wing racist nutters. Trying to rehabilitate the BNP just feeds that and lets the BBCers attack the man not the argument.
Yes.
Fair enough.
Read the comments about it here.
http://www.thisiswiltshire.co.uk/display.var.1121865.0.0.php#comments_form
The only effective method the JR sock puppets have to discredit this blog is to claim we are all right wing racist nutters. Trying to rehabilitate the BNP just feeds that and lets the BBCers attack the man not the argument.
The point is not to throw the baby – the natural interests and rights of the English in and to England – out with the BNP bathwater. One does not need to be a BNP party member to recover our sense of peoplehood, and to understand all that flows from that.
Arguing for ourselves is just that … not arguing for the BNP.
‘Arguing for ourselves is just that … not arguing for the BNP’
The only people who would suggest that are BBCers who equate not supporting their warped view of society as racism.
My point is that if you look at how the sock puppets respond to the valid issues raised here one of their common tactics is to ignore the points raised and attack comments. Lets not give them the chance.
Another thing the doe is drag people onto side arguments that they feel more secure in rather than the issue at hand.
Exactly, Ralph. The BNP is a side alley that they’re trying to drag people down because there is no way even the liars and propagandists (tautology, I realise) at the Beeb can find a way to soften this story.
I hope the parents take their local education authority, and this deplorable headmaster to court and sue the hell out of them. That should get their attention. In addition, they should bring a private suit for assault against these Pakistani thugs. Never mind whether the police charge them or not – probably not, as the police are not on the side of the law-abiding in Britain – sue them privately anyway, concurrently. The Brits are going to have to take the law, literally, into their own hands with private suits.
They should sue the headmaster for enough money to wreck his life. This would provide other head teachers in state schools with a valuable clue.
the reason why the bbc didn’t pick up the ‘racism’ angles on this story is because of a neglected piece of legislation called the Contempt of Court Act.
http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/section12/chapter_g.html#08
this prevents publication of anything likely to prejudice a future trial once proceedings are active (ie from the point of arrest, on 11 January).
Saying this was a racist attack, referring to previous incidents, local rumours of an organised racist gang – all of that is in contempt of court.
yes, the guardian is culpable. the article you’ve linked to breaks the law. they could be prosecuted.
more importantly, defence lawyers for the nasty little scrote(s) with the hammer could easily argue that negative press coverage has prevented them from getting a fair trial.
so if the bbc and everyone else went to town on this story the way you lot wanted them to, it could well have resulted in the guilty ones getting off on a technicality.
What price your bile then?
jb
So why do they so often assume a racist element when the people accused are white and the victims of another race? the complaint is not that they ignored that element here, but that they treat white-on-minority crime differently. Look at Richy’s link – they admit that they always assumed only white people could be racist, a disgusting piece of racism on their part. Consider that this very biased impression given has encouraged anti-white violence, and that statistics suggest the opposite, a much lower proportion of whites commit racially-motivated violence than non-whites.
If they were even-handed then no-one would make claims of bias.
jb said “the reason why the bbc didn’t pick up the ‘racism’ angles on this story is because of a neglected piece of legislation called the Contempt of Court Act.”
Are you joking? How many times has an incident been called “racist” even before the people responsible have been aprehended. Any way you have also forgotten another law I cannot remember the name of it off hand – but it was brought in as a result of the Steven laurence case, it says that a “racist incident is an incident that is percieved by the victim or anyone else to be racist in nature.” – This is the rule that the BBc folows in every occasion when calling an attack bu a mojority citizen on a minority one “racist”. Please prove me wrong.
I apologise for my spelling above – the last bit should read “This is the rule that the BBc folows on every occasion when calling an attack by a mojority citizen on a minority one “racist”.
The only people who would suggest that are BBCers who equate not supporting their warped view of society as racism.
Young Ralph, you obviously have not a clue what I am saying. The BBC, as with all activists within our deeply liberal milieu, is only objectionable because it attacks the natural rights and interests of Britain’s three native peoples. This blog is absolutely meaningless if it only condemns Marxist-bias, ie left-liberalism, at the BBC. Replacing that with right-liberal “balance” will have no impact upon the native’s ultimate interests. Something more muscular is required.
I onder is you have the originality of thought and the intellectual range to figure it out.
“Britain’s three native peoples” – I think you’ll find that the Scots and the Welsh are Celts and the English Anglo-Saxon.
Jon: “I think you’ll find that the Scots and the Welsh are Celts and the English Anglo-Saxon.”
What utter nonsense. I think you’ll find that over the last millennium or two there has been enough mixing, moving and toing and froing of people, both within and without our islands that we’re all much of a muchness genetically and culturally.
The idea that the average Scottish, English, Welsh or Northern Irish person differs substantially from the average Brit is arrant nonsense – a conceited notion that might suit those who’d like there to be a difference, for whatever stilted agenda they’re pushing.
Guessedworker | Homepage | 14.01.07 – 9:46 pm
This blog is absolutely meaningless if it only condemns Marxist-bias, ie left-liberalism, at the BBC. Replacing that with right-liberal “balance” will have no impact upon the native’s ultimate interests.
Given that marxist-bias is the only bias we get from the beeb, that’s what we attack. I hope that if we were getting right-liberal balance from the beeb many of the commentators here would still be the same people.
We are not pressing for right-liberal balance but impartiality.
‘this prevents publication of anything likely to prejudice a future trial once proceedings are active (ie from the point of arrest, on 11 January).’
If that were true then those BBCers who reported the Anthony Walker murder would be in jail now.
How many times has an incident been called “racist” even before the people responsible have been aprehended
Jon/Ralph: Contempt of Court applies ONLY when proceedings are active – if no-one has been apprehended, you can publish what you like.
Richard: Your point is a good one. Surely it applies to society as a whole?
Actually that Dogwash link to Yasmin Hypocrite-Brown gives her credit where none is due in saying that she occasionally writes something sensible. In the piece quoted, she goes on to say “The new figures prove lethal race hate is distributed among all ethnic groups”.
This is in fact typically deceitful left-liberal sophistry. Yes, hate is distributed among all ethnic groups. But the reader who (stupidly, IMHO) relies on the likes of Yazz for their facts is of course intended to walk away with the wholly false impression that such hate is evenly distributed.
As Yazz well knows, it’s anything but. The last British Crime Survey I looked at showed that ethnic minorities commit 70% of the racial incidents, yet they’re only 6% of the population. Meanwhile, the remaining 94% of the population is lagging badly in doing only 30%.
If – as I think we can – we take the commission of racially-motivated crime as a proxy for the wider prevalence of lesser forms of racial hatred, then the most hate-filled people on our streets, by a factor of about 30, are ethnic minorities.
Finding a white racist is like finding a needle in a haystack. Finding a black or Muslim racist is, in comparison, no harder than finding a haystack on a farm. In fact, in my experience, if you want to hear some really savage contempt expressed for black men, you need only date a few black women…but I digress.
You will not hear this story on al-BBC, just excuses why it’s not a story. Last time I raised this, IIRC Reith or one of his sockpuppets came on to quibble about the definition of ‘racist incident’, apparently taking a much more robust attitude to the Macpherson definition when it’s used to inculpate ethnic minorities than they did when it was being used to play them up as poor widdle wictims.
If only this forensic challenging of assumptions were on display more frequently.
Great post, commandant. Now I await the arrival of John Reith and other BBC apologists. They wont tell us that minority violence should be excused because the poor dears are having such a hard time adjusting to civilization, but that patronising attitude, racist in itself, will underpin all their arguments.
Point of Information: A genetic study showed that the Welsh were still majority Celtic whereas the English and Scots were of a much more indeterminate mix. When various programmes have been done to test englishness almost invariably those claiming to be 100% english have turned out to be nothing of the sort. This line of argument is therefore flawed, better to stick to ones based on culture, tradition, philosophy and history methinks.
I’ve taken a couple of screenshots for posterity:
‘Sikh boy has haircut’ – 10 stories.
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y179/grimerking/haircut.jpg
‘Swindon schoolboy is beaten with hammer’ – 4 stories.
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y179/grimerking/HammerAttack2.jpg
“The last British Crime Survey I looked at showed that ethnic minorities commit 70% of the racial incidents, yet they’re only 6% of the population. Meanwhile, the remaining 94% of the population is lagging badly in doing only 30%.”
Well naturally. I would assume, for practical reasons, that the vast majority of racial assaults take place in towns and cities where different races come into contact. Given that the overwhelming majority of ethnic minorities live in such areas, whereas a hefty proportion of whites live in all-white or mostly-white areas, your statistics are ridiculously skewed.
Case in point:
You’re a young, racist, angry and sexually frustrated Asian living in London. You want to take the fight to the White Man. Whitey only lives round the corner. Easy. One racial assault.
You’re a young, racist, angry and sexually frustrated Black man living in Birmingham. You want to pay the Pakis back for 7/7. The local Gudwara is ten minutes walk away. One racial assault.
You’re a young, racist, angry and sexually frustrated White supremacist living in a small village in the home counties and desperate to give some Untermenschen a pounding. The one Black guy who works in Dixons is built like two brick shithouses knocked through to make an ensuite, and it’s a two-hour bus-ride to the next Darky. Result: no racial assaults, one racially inflammatory posting on the BNP website, later deleted.
“How many times has an incident been called “racist” even before the people responsible have been aprehended.”
Murder and assault aren’t always racist. Yelling racist insults, by definition, is. Therefore if the police “are hunting a man suspected of racially abusing a Muslim woman and attempting to rip off her veil”, we know it’s a racist incident and, since, if he is caught, he will be charged with a racist crime, it’s fair enough to mention racism.
If it’s just assault or murder, and no “racially aggravated” charges have been brought yet, it’s best not to bring race into it. Yes, you can get around it with “It has been speculated that…”, as do the Guardian and other more openly partisan sources. But the BBC, wanting to maintain neutrality, or at least the pretence of it, avoids speculation.