Guido reported that that looney, dishonest, hate mongering ‘New European’ has been trying to stir up yet more hate and anger with its latest edition which doubles as toilet paper…though the old joke that more crap comes off it might well apply here…

Remain-cheerleading newspaper The New European has accidentally released an internal marketing note detailing its plan to “stir up controversy” and inflame community tensions across Britain’s Brexit heartlands.

The sneering front page was emailed out this afternoon accompanied by a note revealing The New European‘s ploy to sow division in order to boost sales:

“The cover story – Skegness: The seaside town that Brexit could close down; this is unlikely to go down well, locally, and there is an opportunity to stir up some controversy locally – worth sending the cover and the story to local television and newspapers (as I don’t suppose we sell many copies there).”

The BBC’s report on this is somewhat less than honest, missing out as it does the fact that the Neo European intended to ‘stir up controversy’ in an area where so many voted for Brexit…the BBC skirts the issue not acknowledging that this was done deliberately with the intention to create controversy and anger…and then adds a quote from the Neo European that Leave voters are stupid…so no change there then from the Remainders…

The magazine appeared to be aware that the cover would prompt controversy, as it acknowledged in an email sent out with a copy of the front page ahead of publication.

The email suggested the cover and article were “unlikely to go down well”.

The editor, Matt Kelly, has responded to some of the criticism on social media, tweeting: “Yet again, so many leavers demonstrating inability to understand satire.”

The BBC also gives the impression that it is only the ‘stupid’ Leave voters who will be upset..and yet Remain voters in the area are just as annoyed..

As Ingo Kramer, head of the Confederation of German Employers’ Associations, put it, “We need immigration for our labor market and to allow our social system to function.” Large numbers of these immigrants have come from Muslim countries, bringing with them a religion and social mores radically different from Europe’s. Yet European countries have done a poor job of demanding assimilation of immigrants into the cultures of their new homes.

The result has been large concentrations of immigrants segregated in neighborhoods like the banlieues of Paris or the satellite “dish-cities” of Amsterdam. Shut out from labor markets, plied with generous social welfare payments, and allowed to cultivate beliefs and cultural practices inimical to liberal democracy, many of these immigrants despise their new homes and find the religious commitment and certainty of radical Islam an attractive alternative. And like the two French-Algerian brothers who attacked the offices of the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo, some turn to terrorism.

Such violence, along with cultural practices like honor killings, forced marriages, and polygamy, remind Europeans of just how alien many immigrants are. They are stoking a political backlash against Muslims, the political consequences of which will be disruptive, if not dangerous. Populist parties, for example, opposed to unfettered immigration, angry at sluggish economies, and chafing against E.U. regulatory encroachments on national sovereignty, are growing across Europe. And there are signs that there is a constituency for these parties.

‘It will be vital to challenge apologists for terrorism.’    

Prevent Programme

 

Andrew Neil asks…

Perhaps he should have listened to the likes of Tommy Robinson instead of showtrialing him at the behest of the Islamist Mehdi Hasan……they don’t need a reason other than you’re not Muslim…..

Islam the religion, in Ms. Hirsi Ali’s view, is a Trojan horse that conceals Islamism the political movement. Since dawa is, ostensibly, a religious missionary activity, its proponents “enjoy a much greater protection by the law in free societies than Marxists or fascists did in the past.”

Ms. Hirsi Ali contends that the West has made a colossal mistake by its obsession with “terror” in the years since 9/11. “In focusing only on acts of violence,” she says, “we’ve ignored the Islamist ideology underlying those acts. By not fighting a war of ideas against political Islam—or ‘Islamism’—and against those who spread that ideology in our midst, we’ve committed a blunder.”

A whole new ballgame…and it’s here, according to Tommmy Robinson in a very unPC video as he ‘exposes and opposes’ Islam and criticises the MSM and the Establishment for turning a blindeye to the real threat as he sees it, not terrorism but cultural Islam…he says there are two types of people…those affected by Islam and those who will be affected by Islam.  I’m guessing he won’t be given the same freedom to express his views on the BBC as they give the Muslim fundamentalists from the likes of Cage, MPACUK and the MCB.

At least one MSM publication is not turning  a blindeye….The Wall Street Journal...

Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Islam’s Most Eloquent Apostate

The West’s obsession with ‘terror’ has been a mistake, she argues. Dawa, the ideology behind it, is a broader threat.

The woman sitting opposite me, dressed in a charcoal pantsuit and a duck-egg-blue turtleneck, can’t go anywhere, at any time of day, without a bodyguard. She is soft-spoken and irrepressibly sane, but also—in the eyes of those who would rather cut her throat than listen to what she says—the most dangerous foe of Islamist extremism in the Western world. We are in a secure room at a sprawling university, but the queasiness in my chest takes a while to go away. I’m talking to a woman with multiple fatwas on her head, someone who has a greater chance of meeting a violent end than anyone I’ve met (Salman Rushdie included). And yet she’s wholly poised, spectacles pushed back to rest atop her head like a crown, dignified and smiling under siege.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali, born in Somalia in 1969, is Islam’s most eloquent apostate. She has just published a slim book that seeks to add a new four-letter word—dawa—to the West’s vocabulary. It describes the ceaseless, world-wide ideological campaign waged by Islamists as a complement to jihad. It is, she says, the greatest threat facing the West and “could well bring about the end of the European Union as we know it.” America is far from immune, and her book, “The Challenge of Dawa,” is an explicit attempt to persuade the Trump administration to adopt “a comprehensive anti-dawa strategy before it is too late.”

Ms. Hirsi Ali—now a research fellow at Stanford’s Hoover Institution, where I also work—is urging the West to look at Islam with new eyes. She says it must be viewed “not just as a religion, but also as a political ideology.” To regard Islam merely as a faith, “as we would Christianity or Buddhism, is to run the risk of ignoring dawa, the activities carried out by Islamists to keep Muslims energized by a campaign to impose Shariah law on all societies—including countries of the West.”

Dawa, Ms. Hirsi Ali explains, is “conducted right under our noses in Europe, and in America. It aims to convert non-Muslims to political Islam and also to push existing Muslims in a more extreme direction.” The ultimate goal is “to destroy the political institutions of a free society and replace them with Shariah.” It is a “never-ending process,” she says, and then checks herself: “It ends when an Islamic utopia is achieved. Shariah everywhere!”

Ms. Hirsi Ali contends that the West has made a colossal mistake by its obsession with “terror” in the years since 9/11. “In focusing only on acts of violence,” she says, “we’ve ignored the Islamist ideology underlying those acts. By not fighting a war of ideas against political Islam—or ‘Islamism’—and against those who spread that ideology in our midst, we’ve committed a blunder.”

The way it will go…

From this…

To this…

To this….and note how the man stays the same……it’s the woman, Janet Jackson, who is changed by Islam the most….

Divorce seems to be the only answer.

We’ve already asked the question as to why the BBC continues to give so much unquestioning airtime and respect to Baroness Warsi, someone who is not a voice of moderation but is a conservative, that is, fundamentalist, Muslim who propagandises on behalf of that ideology every chance she gets….her latest book proclaiming that Muslims are not the ‘enemy within’ and making huge excuses and demands for what she calls tolerance..but is in reality a demand to allow Muslims to live under theocratic rule without interference.

We’ve also asked why Google et al are under so much critical scrutiny for producing ‘fake news’ getting Trump elelcted, Brexit passed and giving a platform to extremists when the BBC is allowed to campaign to stop Trump and Brexit and promote Jihadism without a word of criticism.

It is a curious blindspot that there is so much concern about ‘democracy’ being undermined by Social Media content when Saudi Arabia and fellow Gulf states channel millions, if not billions, into Western countries in order to further the advance and dominance of the Islamic ideology, funding mosques, madrassas, universities and other educational establishments as well as Islamic cultural and outreach institutes and centres that operate to spread the Faith…not to mention political collaboration as the ‘elite’ ingratiate themselves with the Saudi regime.

The fact that we have some 3 million Muslims now living in Britain has meant that voices criticial of Islam are muted in order not to cause ‘offence’ by exposing the reality of the religious ideology unlike in the past where politicians and commentators could speak freely of those hard truths.

The last terror attack in London is a case in point where senior police officers preferred to talk of ‘international terrorism’ rather than Islamic terrorism, some in the Media preferred to not mention Islam in relation to this and politicians fed us a narrative that this was nothing to do with Islam…as is the case with all such terrorism in their eyes.

We have a Tory candidate, Andy Street, who proclaims that poverty is to blame for terrorism and of course that the problem is coming from only a tiny minority in the Muslim community.  Then we have Michael Gove, concerned about ‘Islamism’ but is he concerned about ‘Islam’?  Seems not.

According to Gove Islamism perverts a great faith to inspire violence.  He says that ‘The ideology which drives Islamist extremists may seem alien to many of us in the rational, sceptical, secular West and that it is a sort of madness.  A belief system that governs everything…is to most of us inhumane and irrational.  But unless we understand the nature of this belief system then we will always be one step behind in the battle against terrorist attacks’

So…all good so far…Gove seems to understand that the ideology drives violence.  But wait….he continues…‘It cannot be stressed often enough that the great religion of Islam is a very different belief system from the ideology of Islamism’.

No, no it is not.  Islamism is part and parcel of Islam…..What he calls ‘Islamism’ is merely the drive to implement ‘Islam’ fully as intended by ‘Allah’…the Koran being revealed because the Christians and Jews had not followed their scriptures exactly and had also split their religion up into different sects….not allowed by Islam…hence Shia and Ahmadis are not considered ‘Muslim’.

Islamism is not an ideology, it is a process to implement an ideology.  Islam is political.

There are no extremist Muslims, Islam is ‘extreme’ as an ideology…extremism is part and parcel of Islam…ie it is the ‘normality’ not the extreme, hence a ‘Muslim’ is not an ‘extremist’ just a Muslim….there are people who follow Islam in the proper manner and there are moderates and cultural Muslims who don’t actually live as full ‘Muslims’.  I think it was Iqbal Sacranie, once head of the MCB, who stated that ‘there is no extreme Islam, no moderate Islam, there is just Islam.’  I’m guessing he would know if anyone would.

As Gove himself says, if you don’t understand the beliefs you won’t deal with what is happening…but then again our politicians don’t want to deal with what is happening…the Islamisation of Europe…to do so would mean making Islam illegal…and that’s not going to happen…the only genuine opposition to the Islamist surge will come from the ground up as the ‘elite’ collaborate out of cowardice and the belief that they will come out on top whatever the regime is.

In the Spectator we have an article that says ‘Theocracy should scare us more than terror’…but our politicians and media, the BBC/Guardian, don’t dare say that….but ‘Theocracy’ is rapidly coming our way.  You may not become ‘Muslim’ but you’ll certainly be subject to its laws as we are forced to ‘respect’ and kowtow to Muslim culture, laws and sensibilities in order not to cause ‘offence’.  Islam is political, it is cultural, it is about conquest and colonisation, it has little to do with spirituality in reality……Islam governs every aspect of a Muslim’s life……

Islam’s founder was a warlord.

The real issue is not violence or terrorism but theocracy. Islamist violence stems from anger that Islam’s theocratic potential is being thwarted.

The difficult truth is that Islam is a religion that, from its inception, idealises a very close unity of religion and politics, and that when this ideal is thwarted some of its adherents become enraged. I don’t know whether it can move away from its theocratic impulse, but I am pretty sure that we ought to speak honestly about it.

You may remember the ‘Lancaster Plan’ which someone in the comments brought our attention to…now the write up in the New English Review is somewhat colourful but you cannot deny the basic truth of what is being said about the way we are forced to suppress opinion about Islam in public, otherwise shouted down as racist or Islamophobic, and how politicians would rather surrender to the Islamists than confront them…oh not the violent ones…that’s easy, but the activists who conduct a cultural jihad, that use the law, the media, politics, and infiltrates society to every level in order to further their aims….as encouraged to do so by Mehdi Hasan….and indeed the BBC’s own Mishal Husain  told us when she began on the Today show that she hoped to use the position to promote the image of Islam.  The Trojan Horse plot is a classic example of an attempt to Islamise the UK by the backdoor, non-violently….carried out to a blueprint produced by the most representative Muslim body in the UK…the MCB.

Most commentators like to address the most dangerous issues in terms of violent extremism but that is not the real problem, it’s a deliberate device by the likes of Warsi to divert attention from the very serious concerns about Islam itself…what are those violent extremists intending to force upon us with that violence?  The same thing non-violent conservative Muslims wish to do….make the UK Islamic.  The issue is indeed a choice between theocracy and democracy.

What does the supposed Lancaster Plan consist of?……

The consensus was that we were, and would remain for the foreseeable future, at risk and that the Islamic violence in western societies would gradually increase as the years went by.

Then, quietly and with good manners – almost apologetically, one of our fellow guests disagreed with us. He stated quite plainly that the situation in Britain would not be allowed to get out of hand as had happened, in his humble opinion, on the continent. What was more, he asserted, the British government had a Plan to keep the Muslim situation in the U.K. under control, and had had such a Plan in place since it was drawn up under the Blair Labour government back in 2005, after the bombings in London, when it had been known as the Lancaster Plan.

The Lancaster Plan contained several different provisions that could be brought into play to defuse the threat of Islamic violence in the U.K.

The first stage was, so he said, the careful use of legislation to make any criticism of Islam, or Muslims, almost impossible. 

The careful positioning by many NGOs, and left-wing thinkers, of criticism of Islam and Muslims as racist had not been entirely co-incidental either, so he averred, but had been initiated and encouraged by government officials in furtherance of the first stage of the Lancaster Plan.

The first stage of the Plan had been a success in that the Muslim population of the U.K. had taken full advantage of it to assert their uniqueness and to demand the respect that they felt was their due, the man said calmly.

Stage two, he informed us, had also been put into effect, but it was only an experiment in devolving power to small areas of the U.K. – Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland (Ulster) – whilst still keeping the U.K. together as a type of politically whole unit. This was so that structures could be put in place to continuously manage that type of change. This would enable, he told us, the granting of some degree of autonomy, in an orderly and managed fashion, to various Muslim enclaves around the country when this became necessary. Precedents for devolution would have been established and the change could therefore be managed easily and without too much fuss from the general population. The whole Plan was really about managing the changes that the Muslims in the U.K. will keep demanding.

He went on to say that further stages of the Lancaster Plan envisaged granting these enclaves the right to implement their own laws, such as sharia law, granting Muslims the right to travel between these enclaves but remain subject only to the laws within them while so doing and expanding the enclaves as the need arose. The final stages of the Plan, he informed us casually, foresaw the need to alter the laws outwith the enclaves as they became bigger and more powerful in the national parliament – repealing such things as the laws that decriminalised homosexuality, the laws that granted equal rights to women and the laws that made all religions equal. The death penalty would have to be re-introduced and it would become necessary to assert in law the primacy of Islam and the superior position of Muslims in the U.K, but by the time that that would have to happen Muslims would constitute at least thirty percent, and more probably fifty percent, of the population. If the current government plans for the increased immigration of Muslims stayed on course then there should be no trouble in reaching that percentage in about fifteen years time, he told us. That would also ensure Britain having good links to the rest of the Islamic world through family and clan ties. The Plan was quite plain about the necessity of confusing and misdirecting the current population about immigration by distracting it with constant talk about refugees and overseas aid and other such trivia that could be magnified out of all proportion.

Such changes would occur incrementally and the formulators of the Plan believed that each small change would pass almost unchallenged for each as it happened would affect only a tiny number of people, or an easily despised minority such as gay people.

It may be fanciful that it is an actual worked through plan, but it could quite easily be the ‘plan’ by default as politicians stand back and don’t stop this process…which is well underway….the BBC having two Muslim heads of religious programming  being just one sign of the ‘elites’ fawning stupidity as was the promotion of Warsi to Chair of the Tory Party in a pathetic attempt to curry favour and show how diverse they were.  Just remember Labour opened the borders in order to ethnically cleanse Britain, to ‘brown’ it, and to rub the Right’s nose in diversity…don’t underestimate the stupidity, naivety and sheer self-destructive impulse that drives the Left in its hatred of ‘Britain’ and indeed the ‘West’…..Merkel is another case in point….political correctness, and fear of the Media, drove her policy and not common sense, national interest and security.

The Obligation of Jihad

“Allah hath granted a grade higher to those who strive and fight with their goods and persons than to those who sit (at home). Unto all (in Faith) hath Allah promised good. But those who strive and fight hath He distinguished above those who sit (at home) by a special reward,” Quran Chapter 4: The Women, verse 95

Some quotes from the BBC’s ‘Muslims Like Us’….

Britishness…British values for me, colonialism, institutional racism, theft and genocide…and race.

-The race thing.  The majority of racist abuse I’ve ever taken in my life has been from other Muslims.

It is an irony that the BBC’s ‘Muslims like us’ programme, meant to reassure us that Muslim were just like us, in fact confirmed every ‘prejudice’ you might ever have held….only one true liberal among them, the rest soon reverted to fundamentalist attitudes and many revealed strong anti-British feelings…it reflected real society and showed how so-called ‘moderate Muslims’ weren’t really moderate and that a few determined ‘radicals’ could dominate a community….either by persuasion or force of personality or indeed of physical intimidation…the less radical in the end surrendering rather than argue their position….as in the TV show as in a real community…those prepared to use cultural ‘pressure’, blackmail, or even force, such as intimidating women into wearing the hijab or veil, will win….helped by the useful idiot non-Muslims…Muslims like us was commissioned by the woman, Fatima Salaria, who is now the BBC’s head of religious programming….a deliberate appointment by the BBC, after already appointing one Muslim to the post, to rub peoples’ noses in Islam.  Islamisation?  The BBC is there to help….the ‘Telephate’ cometh.   The BBC loves to humanise Muslim terrorists…lovely lads and lasses led astray or made angry by nasty Islamophobians…

Look at this story about “An extremist in the family”, which will pull on the heartstrings of those feeling sorry for the poor, delicate radical wannabe Islamic terrorists out there waging war, raping, torturing and butchering for fun.

We hear from Nicola Benyahia, painting her son, who has gone off to Syria, to be pure and angelic, all with a blasé, matter of fact approach to dumping your life and going off to fight for IS. As if to normalise the most deplorable of acts and point fingers at everyone else.

And look what the political editor of the New Statesman thinks…..the ‘Liberal’ media is bonkers and completely delusional…….

Thousands of Londoners turned out for a vigil for the dead and injured after the terrorist attack in a show of defiance and solidarity…it’s just a shame that they will be so badly betrayed by the politicians who are now making fine speeches about defending British values and the British way of life, and of course betrayed by the Media, the BBC in particular, as it starts the blame game, blaming failures in the security services, failures of the Prevent programme, failures of British society to accept and integrate Muslims, failure to ensure a foreign policy that meets the approval of Muslims, and of course the BBC’s exoneration of the killer as we find he is not really a Muslim, he has perverted the real religion, and that he has been a victim of British society’s antipathy towards Islam and Muslims….er…even though he isn’t a real Muslim.

Sadiq Khan said at the vigil…..

“Londoners will never be cowed by terrorism”.

Of course that’s nonsense as not just Londoners but the political establishment and the Media cower before and pander to the Muslim narrative of victimhood, the narrative of a ‘backlash’ against Muslims, a narrative that says radicalisation is only a result of discrimination and disaffection compounded by Islamophobia which only increases when terror strikes…thus the real victims are Muslims…and the Establishment does indeed cower before that ‘argument’ making Muslims the favoured group with special status….with evermore liberty to follow their religion…where will that lead?…You can see where devolution took us as the SNP get evermore confident and demanding…and you can see that the politicians will bow down before the onslaught of their demands as Gordon Brown’s proposals to give the SNP massively increased powers and freedoms illustrates.  How long before we have a Muslim ‘calipahte’ within our borders, a mini-Pakistan with its own laws and independent status?

The BBC is already providing that platform for Muslim activists to press that agenda as we were told by the Today show that Muslims feel unfairly picked on by the ‘prejudiced’…asking ‘Do Muslims fear an adverse impact on their community?‘[from a backlash from prejudiced, racist people]…such prejudice mustn’t be allowed to drive communities apart [Isn’t it Muslims themselves who segregate themselves and live in ghettoes?]…Muslims are the victims and government programmes like Prevent only add to that perception that they are being unfairly targeted…the Prevent programme is ‘rotten, toxic and counter-productive’.  [Believe it or not the man saying this was a Muslim from the government’s own ‘Hate crime advisory group’…any wonder things don’t work?]

Do you know what the answer is?  Let the Muslims run the de-radicalisation and security programmes themselves…no, really. Let’s have murderers, rapists and burglars all run the police, justice and prison service…I’m sure they feel unfairly targeted by the police and court system…surely only they have the knowledge and integrity to produce a system that really works….for them….just so long as they are not angry and disaffected eh?

But what are these British values and way of life that we defend?  The question is is it compatible with Islam…and the real answer is……no.  How can it possibly be….a 1400 year old doctrine that hasn’t changed, and cannot change, one that preaches hatred towards the ‘Kufaar’, hatred towards gays, that makes women second class citizens, that allows slavery and religious war until ‘Islam reigns supreme’, as opposed to a modern, progressive set of values that promote democracy, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of thought and lifestyle, gay rights, feminist rights, anti-racism and a rich and varied lifestyle that encourages difference, innovation and individuality?

The politicians and media will never admit the truth about Islam because then what?  Shut down all the mosques and ban Islam?  Never happen, so they continue to bury their heads in the sand and bluff their way as they lie to the public as society is gradually Islamised by the self-same politicians who are too afraid to make a stand.  The Telegraph tells us of the truth…

People in MI5 tell me that denying the connection between Islamism and terrorism derives from the belief that if you accept it, there’s no hope for a multicultural society in Britain: we would just have to recognise that part of the population is permanently liable to become terrorists.

Churchill was also one who told the unvarnished truth..

“Mein Kampf…..The new Koran of faith and war: turgid, verbose, shapeless, but pregnant with its message.”

Of Islam….

No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilisation of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilisation of ancient Rome.”

Even Boris let slip the reality…

To any non-Muslim reader of the Koran, Islamophobia – fear of Islam – seems a natural reaction, and, indeed, exactly what that text is intended to provoke. Judged purely on its scripture – to say nothing of what is preached in the mosques – it is the most viciously sectarian of all religions in its heartlessness towards unbelievers. As the killer of Theo Van Gogh told his victim’s mother this week in a Dutch courtroom, he could not care for her, could not sympathise, because she was not a Muslim.

The trouble with this disgusting arrogance and condescension is that it is widely supported in Koranic texts, and we look in vain for the enlightened Islamic teachers and preachers who will begin the process of reform. What is going on in these mosques and madrasas? When is someone going to get 18th century on Islam’s medieval ass?

Will May get 18th century on Islam’s medieval ass or will she continue to peddle the lie that the terrorist attack had nothing to do with Islam?

Tom Holland: We must not deny the religious roots of Islamic State

Salafism today is probably the fastest-growing Islamic movement in the world. The interpretation that Isis applies to Muslim scripture may be exceptional for its savagery – but not for its literalism. Islamic State, in its conceit that it has trampled down the weeds and briars of tradition and penetrated to the truth of God’s dictates, is recognisably Salafist. When Islamic State fighters smash the statues of pagan gods, they are following the example of the Prophet; when they proclaim themselves the shock troops of a would-be global empire, they are following the example of the warriors of the original caliphate; when they execute enemy combatants, and impose discriminatory taxes on Christians, and take the women of defeated opponents as slaves, they are doing nothing that the first Muslims did not glory in.

Such behaviour is certainly not synonymous with Islam; but if not Islamic, then it is hard to know what else it is.

The London attacker has been named as Khalid Masood, the BBC tells us lots about him except of course his religion…they even tell us that he, presumably, posed as a teacher when hiring the vehicle that he used in the attack…no doubt the BBC would portray this as the cause of the attack..so disaffected was he by government ‘cuts’ to the education budget that it drove him to attack Parliament….pretty sure the BBC will find something in his life to explain away his terror attack and pass the blame onto ‘society’.

Still, the BBC is on a bit of a Jihad of its own against the government….did you notice that in the couple of weeks before the by-elections in Copeland and Stoke, in which Labour campaigned hard on the NHS, the BBC was pushing out lots of bad news stories about the NHS and its budget….just before the last PMQs before the by-election vote the BBC released its latest research…subsequently quoted in PMQs by Corbyn.  Was the BBC trying to support Labour in the by-election?  Similarly you may have noted the BBC going in hard on education….referring constantly to ‘budget cuts’ when in fact no cuts have been made, more money put in in fact…..as the NAO reports…‘government increased the schools budget by 7.7%‘.  What is different is pupil numbers…they have shot up…due to migrant mothers having so  many kids…another reason the NHS is under so much pressure.  The BBC didn’t once make that connection in my hearing during all the discussions that flooded the airwaves.

Yesterday the BBC released another piece of its research on education, again just in time for PMQs and funnily enough Corbyn’s subject was education.  Coincidence?

School governors have pointed to a “catastrophic” squeeze on budgets, as the government prepares to introduce a new funding formula for schools.

A snapshot survey of 4,000 governors by the BBC sheds light on the existing funding pressure in England’s schools.

National Governors Association head Emma Knights does however back the principle of the new funding formula.

Ministers say schools are funded at record levels and that the budgets rethink will end inconsistencies.

But the dramatic impact on already stretched budgets – even before the funding formula kicks in – has left ministers under pressure from Conservative backbenchers and head teachers in all areas of England.

Note nowhere does the BBC mention the actual cause of the ‘crisis’….

The difficulties being faced by schools across England were spelled out by the governors who responded to the BBC questionnaire.

“Diabolical”, “devastating” and “catastrophic” were among the words used to describe prospects for schools.

So…where exactly do the governors ‘spell out the difficulties faced by schools’?  The BBC  has merely produced a list of reactions not causes.  Where are the causes of these dramatic impacts, the funding pressures, the catastrophic squeeze on budgets?

Oh hang on is this the explanation?…

The underlying financial problems faced by state schools in England were highlighted in a National Audit Office report in December last year.

The spending watchdog said schools would have to find £3bn in savings by 2019-20, amounting to budget cuts of 8%.

No…nowhere do we get the root cause of the ‘underlying financial problems’ ….some of the so-called cuts are in response to higher wage, pension and NIC costs…the BBC misses off the last bit of the quote…‘by 2019-20 to counteract cumulative cost pressures, such as pay rises and higher employer contributions to national insurance and the teachers’ pension scheme.’...the budget isn’t cut, it’s costs going up that mean efficiencies have to be made…..the schools have to choose between these and pupils’ education…but the real cost is more pupils…note the BBC’s report fails to mention this quote from the NAO…

Mainstream schools have to make £3.0 billion in efficiency savings by 2019-20 against a background of growing pupil numbers and a real-terms reduction in funding per pupil.

The Department’s overall schools budget is protected in real terms but does not provide for funding per pupil to increase in line with inflation. In the 2015 Spending Review, the government increased the schools budget by 7.7% from £39.6 billion in 2015-16 to £42.6 billion in 2019-20. While this increase protects the total budget from forecast inflation, the Department estimates that the number of pupils will rise over the same period, by 3.9% (174,000) in primary schools and by 10.3% (284,000) in secondary schools. Therefore, funding per pupil will, on average, rise only from £5,447 in 2015-16 to £5,519 in 2019-20, a real-terms reduction once inflation is taken into account.

Only in the BBC’s ‘reality check’ do we get a mention of pupil numbers…and no mention of immigration as the cause…a ‘baby boom’ but whose ‘baby boom’?…..

Reality Check verdict: The absolute amount of money in the pot for schools in England is at record levels but once you factor in rising pupil numbers, inflation and running costs, schools will have to cut approximately 8% from budgets by 2020.

It is true that this is the biggest pot in cash terms, but, of course, how generous the pot is depends on how many pupils there are in the system.

There was a baby boom in the early 2000s, which has been hitting primary schools for several years and is now moving up through the secondary system.

Between 2009 and 2016, the school system expanded to take in an extra 470,000 pupils.

The Department for Education says that between 2016 and 2025 there will be a further increase in the state school system, up from about 7.4 million pupils to about 8.1 million.

So there is a crisis in school funding, despite record levels of spending….and the BBC is not keen to spell out the real cause…mass immigration…and its costs.  Immigration remember is beneficial and economically virtuous….as long as we ignore the extra billions we have to pump into the NHS, schools and housing, not to mention prisons, to keep the infrastructure going in order to cope with all these new people.

Record spending and wes till can’t cope…guess the answer must be more immigration as it’s so economically beneficial and pays for itself…no?

If there is a God I think he’s having a laugh as he reminds the BBC of the dangerous vanity and hubris of its ‘moral’ grandstanding.  Just as the BBC broadcasts a sententious piece on a Jihadi ‘bride’ who returns to the UK a former British inmate of Guantanamo, one of those the BBC so loves to celebrate and whose cause it loves to fight, has blown himself, and several others, up in a suicide bomb attack in Iraq….let’s hope he got the chance to spend the £1 million he scammed by working the human right’s system.  That’s one less ‘radical’ voice given airtme on the BBC to spread their lies….of course we still have Moazzam Begg, another BBC favourite…and how can we forget MEND…

Here is what Andrew Gilligan said about Mend and the Islam Channel..

But what of the latest BBC programme about ‘Islam’ and Islamic issues…perhaps the BBC should rename itself the ‘Islam Channel’?

‘A World Elsewhere’ is a two part series that tells the sad tale of a young Muslim girl who is radicalised, heads off to Syria and then returns to to the UK.  The first part supposedly tells of how she is radicalised, the second part tells of her return to the UK.

Having listened to the first part I can perhaps save you 90 really dreary and confused minutes by saying don’t bother yourself, it’s the usual BBC pro-Islam, anti-West fare.

The programme is written by an ex-BBC producer,  Clara Glynn, who some might think hilariously, produced the low kitsch programme back in the 1990’s, ‘Celebrity Mantelpiece’…the really glorious wry twist is that the last one was with Enoch Powell, a clip of which you may be able to listen to here.

Glynn obviously had a bit of atoning to do to make up for tainting herself with Enoch and so has devoted her life to shilling for Allah with programmes such as this… ‘Safe House’.  Produced in 2013 it gives a taste of today’s programme as it portrays the Muslim character as a victim of prejudice and an over-reactive government.  This is an interesting comment from the review...’major powers in the West have alleged that chemical weapons have been used in Syria, providing them with the justification to supply weapons.  It’s the WMD syndrome all over again, with decisions being made on the basis of supposition, implication and conclusions rather than hard evidence.’ ……hmmm…except it is absolutely proven that chemical weapons were used in Syria.  Then there’s this…’What the play vividly dramatized is how anti-Muslim prejudice, held by those who pretend to be otherwise, immediately brands all of those who embrace that faith.  The idea that Islam embraces many different notions, just like Christianity, seemed to elude all of those charged with making the decision or whether or whether or not to clear Akmed’s name’….Again…hmmm….no-one ‘brands all those who embrace that faith’….but Islam is ‘one faith’…that’s the whole point of Islam, the reason for its ‘revelation’…as said in the Koran itself many times…one faith, one God, one mosque.

So that sets the tone for the latest Glynn production which sets out to explain how and why a Muslim girl from Glasgow can become radicalised.  Or that is what we are told is the intention.  What we get is something different…nothing less than a narrative that could come straight out of the mouths of the Jihadi recruiters that the programme is supposedly meant to be making so unattractive.  A narrative it has to be said that the BBC is guilty of peddling itself.  What we get is almost a glorification of the Jihadis…a vision that heading off to Syria is a ‘crusade’ to save Muslims abandoned by the West.  We are presented with a long list of why a Muslim might join up as well as singing the praises of Islam and damning the West….Muslims invented mathematics, the computer, universities and medicine…and oh yes, thank Allah for Zayn Malik for being Muslim and for standing up to the haters…Yep, the haters….that’s a reason for Jihad…racist jokes in the playground and Islamophobia in general…Jihad..it’s your fault.

Yes, you cause Muslims to become radical because you hate all Muslims and Islam and you know what, the Islamic State is just like Britain fighting the Nazis…Assad being the Nazis of course….no doubt channelling Mark Easton who thought the Muslim radicals were indeed just like Churchill, or Mandela or Gandhi.

Sure there was a bit about how horrible the Islamic State might be…but blink and you’d miss it.  The bulk of the narrative was taken up with slick anti-Western jibes and lies…you will say ‘but of course that’s included, how else can you show the process of radicalisation?’…..Except there were no qualifications, there was no challenge to the narrative and the reason why there was no challenge is because the narrative was the exact same one the BBC has been feeding the Muslim community for years now, telling them they are the victims of illegal wars that target Muslims as well as historic ‘wrongs’ such as Sykes-Picot and the Crusades, and that they are also the victims of Islamophobia in the UK.  The BBC feeds the Muslim grievance industry and provides the Jihadi recruiters with an ample supply of angry and discontented potential recruits.

What’s missing from this highly dishonest and misleading programme is the real root cause of radicalisation…being Muslim…a defining characteristic of the ‘Muslim’ terrorist and something that provides the ideological and cultural background necessary to make the link between Muslims here and those in Syria….this is what the self-described ‘Muslim Parliament’ said back in the 1990s…long before the 2003 Iraq war that the BBC blames for radicalisation…

‘Jihad is a basic requirement of Islam and living in Britain or having British nationality by birth or naturalisation does not absolve the Muslim from his or her duty to participate in jihad: this participation can be active service in armed struggle abroad and/or the provision of material and moral support to those engaged in such struggle anywhere in the world.’  Muslim Parliament

Here is a BBC programme from 1993 that shows us that ‘radicalisation’ is rooted in the religion…

Young British Muslim Saqib Qureshi investigates the rise of new forms of Islamic activity in Britain. He looks at how groups who are active in “Dawaah” – calling on people to accept Islam – are growing in strength, fuelled by a sense of grievance at western hostility to their faith.

Note that ‘Dawaah’ was a crucial component of the Islamic State’s recruitment drive…

This blueprint was implemented with astonishing accuracy in the ensuing months. The plan would always begin with the same detail: The group recruited followers under the pretense of opening a Dawah office, an Islamic missionary center. Of those who came to listen to lectures and attend courses on Islamic life, one or two men were selected and instructed to spy on their village and obtain a wide range of information.

When Muslims ask non-Muslims to put on hijabs for a day, or to visit the mosque to see how friendly Muslims are, this is not an innocent action, it is Dawaah, the intent is to recruit you, not for violent Jihad but for Allah, they want converts.

Also we hear nothing on the programme of what is preached in Mosques, nor what are the likely discussions being held in Muslim households up and down the country concerning western foreign policy, Israel, Jews and ‘Islamophobia’…we know well that families have been radicalising their own children…at least one father was showing his daughter beheading videos and was himself shown to be a radical.  Muslims are taught to be angry about how Muslims are treated…even by supposed anti-Radicalisation groups such as the Jan Trust which said the problem was not the anger [mothers in the group being shown ‘radicalisation’ videos said they themselves would become radical having seen them], the only issue was how that anger was expressed…so no attempt to put any issues into proper context in order to lessen the anger…the opposite in fact.

Maryam tells of her son’s anger with the situation in Gaza, where her family come from: “When they see the way things are going, it wasn’t right. It’s double standards.”

‘Grievance about Syria’

As she speaks the others nod their heads in tacit sympathy.

“But now they go for Syria. My son was in a demonstration for Syria because they say something is not right,” says Maryam.

All the women say their teenagers are curious and often angry about events in the countries where their families originated, as well as being keen to do something.

Ms Mughal says of Maryam: “Her son has a grievance about Syria, but he has channelled it positively by attending a demonstration rather than destructively.”

This BBC programme is just another excuse to tell us how wonderful Islam is and how terrible the West is.  It will do absolutely nothing to stem the flow of recruits to the Islamic State [remarkably still ongoing despite the obvious setbacks for them] and indeed might actually persuade some Muslims to join up.

Good old Aunty.  Badly written, badly produced, confusing, misleading and only half the story, and peddles the Jihadist narrative.

The Obligation of Jihad

“Allah hath granted a grade higher to those who strive and fight with their goods and persons than to those who sit (at home). Unto all (in Faith) hath Allah promised good. But those who strive and fight hath He distinguished above those who sit (at home) by a special reward,” Quran Chapter 4: The Women, verse 95

Graeme Wood’s The Way of the Strangers: Encounters with the Islamic State reminds us of something that ought to be obvious: Islamic State is very Islamic. “The reality is,” Wood wrote, “that the Islamic State is Islamic. Very Islamic.” “The notion that religious belief is a minor factor in the rise of the Islamic State,” he observes, “is belied by a crushing weight of evidence that religion matters deeply to the vast majority of those who have travelled to fight.”

Pankaj Mishra, someone so pro-Islam it must hurt.  Someone so pro-Islam that he is in complete denial about the very real effect of the ideology upon its devotees.  Someone so pro-Islam the BBC would inevitably want to exploit his thinking.

We’ve already had a look at Pankaj Mishra’s first outing on Book of the Week and concluded that it’s no coincidence that his pro-Islam, anti-Trump, anti-Brexit, anti-Hindu rhetoric gets pride of place on the BBC and that perhaps ‘Butterflies and Wheels’ is correct when they conclude about his writing that….‘It’s ugly, nasty, bullying, innuendo-laden stuff…. patronizing clueless nonsense.’

Listening to today’s serving and it just confirms my initial thoughts as we get a determined defence of Islam and the usual narrative that is peddled by the BBC and Muslim activists in the UK trying to distance ISIS from their own radical activities.

What we got was an attempt to airbrush Islam out of the picture as he tried to suggest that Muslim terrorists had no  religious intentions but were in fact religiously illiterate and driven by globalisation not religion….there is no scriptural imperative…which kind of ignores the facts on the ground.  He tells us that ISIS recruits are all petty criminals with a liking for drink, drugs and women and whose knowledge of Islam is limited to what they can glean from ‘Islam for Dummies’.   That’s of course a narrative pushed by the likes of Mehdi Hassan, who as a Shia has no liking for the Sunni ISIS but is himself an Islamist. A narrative that deliberately ignores all the highly educated and devout recruits who head out to Syria to join ISIS….the same sort of people who, had they remained in the UK, would be fêted by the BBC as devout Muslims in need of protection from the Islamophobes.

So all those Muslim terrorists who do it in the name of Islam, all those terrorists who shout Allah Akbar as they pull the trigger, all those Muslims who rush to join a fundamentalist Islamic State, they’re none of them real Muslims.

But again we’ve looked at this many times…and that’s a narrative that’s a huge lie…it has everything to do with Islam and until you accept that truth you will never find a solution.

Tom Holland: We must not deny the religious roots of Islamic State

Salafism today is probably the fastest-growing Islamic movement in the world. The interpretation that Isis applies to Muslim scripture may be exceptional for its savagery – but not for its literalism. Islamic State, in its conceit that it has trampled down the weeds and briars of tradition and penetrated to the truth of God’s dictates, is recognisably Salafist. When Islamic State fighters smash the statues of pagan gods, they are following the example of the Prophet; when they proclaim themselves the shock troops of a would-be global empire, they are following the example of the warriors of the original caliphate; when they execute enemy combatants, and impose discriminatory taxes on Christians, and take the women of defeated opponents as slaves, they are doing nothing that the first Muslims did not glory in.

Such behaviour is certainly not synonymous with Islam; but if not Islamic, then it is hard to know what else it is.

Then how about an expert on ISIS?  Could he tell  us if the religion of peace is the source of so much trouble?  You betcha…

Graeme Wood’s The Way of the Strangers: Encounters with the Islamic State reminds us of something that ought to be obvious: Islamic State is very Islamic.

Time present and time past are both perhaps present in time future. In Islamic State’s propaganda, they certainly are. Sayings attributed to Muhammad that foretold how the armies of Islam would defeat the armies of the Cross serve their ideologues as a hall of mirrors. What happened in the Crusades is happening now; and what happens now foreshadows what is to come.

How much does Islamic State actually believe this stuff? The assumption that it is a proxy for other concerns – born of US foreign policy, or social deprivation, or Islamophobia – comes naturally to commentators in the West. Partly this is because their instincts are often secular and liberal; partly it reflects a proper concern not to tar mainstream Islam with the brush of terrorism.

“The reality is,” Wood wrote, “that the Islamic State is Islamic. Very Islamic.” The strain of the religion that it was channelling derived “from coherent and even learned interpretations of Islam” and was fixated on two distinct moments of time: the age of Muhammad and the end of days long promised in Muslim apocalyptic writings. Members of Islamic State, citing the Quran and sayings attributed to the Prophet in their support, believe themselves charged by God with expediting the end of days. It is their mandate utterly to annihilate kufr: disbelief. The world must be washed in blood, so that the divine purpose may be fulfilled. The options for negotiating this around a table at Geneva are, to put it mildly, limited.

“The notion that religious belief is a minor factor in the rise of the Islamic State,” he observes, “is belied by a crushing weight of evidence that religion matters deeply to the vast majority of those who have travelled to fight.”

When Wood asks Hamza Yusuf, an eminent Berkeley Sufi, to demonstrate the group’s errors by relying only on the texts revealed to the Prophet, he struggles to do so: “Yusuf could not point to an instance where the Islamic State was flat-out, verifiably wrong.” This does not mean that it is right but it does suggest – despite what most Muslims desperately and understandably want to believe – that it is no less authentically Islamic than any other manifestation of Islam.

The achievement of Wood’s gripping, sobering and revelatory book is to open our eyes to what the implications of that for all of us may be.

As with Donald T. Trump anyone coming in to drain the swamp had better watch out…the inhabitants of the swamp won’t take it lying down.

There’s going to be a new editor for the Today programme and already she’s shaking things up and disturbing the entrenched orthodox…

BBC slaps down new Today programme editor over pledge to open Thought for the Day to humanists

The new editor of the Today programme has been rebuked by the BBC before taking up her post over a pledge to open up Thought for the Day to humanists.

Sarah Sands, who will join the show later this year, said that the religious slot, which airs at around 7.45am, should surely “also include humanists”, because religion was “robust enough to have challengers”.

But a BBC spokesman said that Ms Sands, the current editor of the Evening Standard, would not have any say over the daily broadcast, which is overseen by the corporation’s religion department, and that there were “no plans” to change its format.

In a piece in the Financial Times Ms Sands wrote: “This slot, it seems to me, is about the meaning of life, so the title hardly does it justice. It is much, much more than platitudes about Jesus and Brexit, balanced now and then with a view from another faith.

“And if this is about profound faith, surely we should also include humanists? I admire religion and believe it is robust enough to have challengers. I wonder what the listeners think of this.”

To me the interesting comment is not on Thought for the Day but is the one about Brexit…is this a hint that she may change the Today show approach to Brexit…and actually introduce more balanced reporting on the subject?

‘When Labour is on the defensive, as now, the NHS is a powerful instrument of attack.’

When you’re in dire political trouble, your party is tearing itself apart, your own position is in doubt and the polls show you are heading the way of the LibDems call the BBC. They can help.

Labour is in melt down, internally and in the polls as the looney left took over the asylum.   Corbyn has lost control, well he never had any really, and the firm smack of authority is just as much a fantasy to him as to Max Mosley.

But fear not, the BBC is here to help.  It has stepped in to plug Labour’s credibility gap and provide the ‘official opposition’ to the government that Labour fails to.  It is no mere chance that the BBC has chosen to bombard the government with ‘facts’ on the NHS’ performance recently…facts, facts, facts and yet not so much.  We get lots of stuff we already knew, lots of alarming reports of the ‘crisis’ in the NHS, lots of sensationalist reports of the meltdown of A&E and yet not so much on the causes, or the real causes I should say, and not so much on the solutions other than to constantly ask Ministers if they will be providing more money.  No coincidence that the BBC released its information just in time for Labour to use it in PMQs as their main attack theme.  The same BBC that refused to release the video of a school which was bombed with a chemical weapon in Syria just before the vote in Parliament as to whether military action could be authorised…..the BBC influencing the politics with its manipulation of the news?

The real problem is that A&E is vastly over used with millions more patients coming through its doors…Up to 2003 the number of patients calling into A&E was around 14 million, now it is around 23 million.

Even Sir Robert Francis, whom the BBC interviewed this week, told us that the problem was a growng populaton and more complex cases for elderly patients…the BBC chose to report that if the crisis goes on we are heading towards another ‘Stafford’….when the BBC reported on ‘Stafford’ originally they signally failed to mention Labour by name in so many of their reports as if to try and distance Labour from responsibility.

The Telegraph notes….

All week the BBC has been running special programmes and reports on the NHS. We have learnt that the system is “in crisis” with hospital accident and emergency wards overwhelmed and patients often left for hours before being seen.

Without wishing to denigrate the corporation’s journalism, what has this told us that we did not already know?

Anyone tuning in would imagine the system was on the verge of collapse. Yet the big story with the NHS is not that it struggles to keep its head above water because it needs more money to stay afloat; we know that. The real issue is that no one is prepared to recognise that it needs to be run differently if it is to survive.

To use a medical metaphor, the BBC has once again identified the symptoms but has shunned any serious diagnosis of the cause or the cure.

Pointing out the flaws in the health service is the easy bit.   Inevitably, the debate reignited by the BBC always ends up in the same place: how much more can be taken out of taxes for the NHS.

The Conservatives …. always risk political damage whenever the NHS becomes an issue. Not for nothing did Ed Miliband, the former Labour leader, want to “weaponise” the health service during the 2015 election campaign.

When Labour is on the defensive, as now, the NHS is a powerful instrument of attack.

There is something depressing about this cycle. A great national institution is being crucified on the altar of party politics.

The BBC of course has no problem exploiting the NHS as a ‘weapon’ as it tries to prop up its own ailing and elderly political relative just as it had no problem sacrificing so many Syrians on the altar of ‘Peace’…a peace that actually brings more war, thousands dead and millions of refugees…but that’s another BBC story for another time.

Also in the Telegraph…

Why won’t the BBC dare to look at the real causes of the NHS crisis? 

The former Chancellor Nigel Lawson once famously said that “the NHS is the nearest thing the English have to a religion.” Over recent days the BBC has taken on the self-appointed role of championing the faith.    

The chosen method of the Corporation to achieve this has been the traditional one of the evangelical preacher: to create a mood of terrifying, apocalyptic crisis where salvation can only be achieved through ever more fervent worship and ever greater devotion to the case.

As a result, the BBC news this week was completely dominated by NHS stories. Day and night the bulletins were filled with dire reports from the “front line”, as if the health service were a war zone. Viewers were bombarded with images of weeping nurses, stressed-out doctors, and patients lying on trolleys.  

Funny old world as the BBC twists and turns and contorts itself in a desperate attempt to maintain its grip on the news agenda.

Fake news is big news these days and the BBC is at the forefront of  peddling it whilst at the same time presenting itself as the defender of truth and accuracy…as James Purnell so helpfully informs us…

When there is so much information and misinformation, the BBC can be a trusted guide through that abundance.

That’ll be right.

You may have noticed recently a curious tic the BBC has…when the accusation of fake news is directed at itself or one of its friends it laughs the idea of fake news off as a fanciful invention of Trump…there is no such thing as fake news.  However when it suits the BBC Trump is the creator fake news and the father of the post truth age.  Last week we had Nick Robinson tell us that it wasn’t Putin who was spreading lies and and misinformation creating a post truth era it was Trump….a pretty astonishing statement from a puffed up, preening presenter about the President of the USA.  Later Robinson interviewed two experts on cyber security and information wars…they told us that there was ‘nothing fundamentally different happening now to what happened previously.’  In other words truth was always a commodity that could be bought and sold….ie we are not in a post truth era at all…the BBC is lying to us…as usual.

Such a revelation did not stop the trailer for Any Questions stating that we are in such a post truth, post fact, alternate fact era.  Isn’t it great that the supposedly impartial, accurate and trustworthy BBC is such a dishonest and corrupt peddler of misinformation?

The BBC has teemed up with Buzzfeed as you know…which is remarkable as Buzzfeed is possibly worse than the hated Mail being a click-bait site in essence.  The BBC held its nose in the search for the ‘youth’ audience and to have a useful idiot it could use to do the dirty work the BBC couldn’t be seen to be doing…such as the publishing of the fake and very dodgy dossier on Trump created by an anti-Trump snooper.

The so-called dossier was patently suspect as even Buzzfeed admitted..and now Buzzfeed is being sued for falsely naming someone in relation to the dossier...

A Russian-tied tech firm named in a controversial dossier containing uncorroborated allegations about President Donald Trump and the hacking of Democratic National Committee email accounts announced late Friday that it has filed defamation suits against the online news site BuzzFeed, its editor in chief and a former British intelligence agent.

The lawsuits were brought by XBT Holdings, a Cyprus-based company owned by Russian tech magnate Aleksej Gubarev. Lawyers for his firm filed complaints Friday in London against the former spy and his company, and against BuzzFeed and its editor in chief, Ben Smith, in Broward County Circuit Court in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, where XBT’s subsidiary Webzilla is headquartered.

“The dossier included libelous, unverified and untrue allegations regarding XBT, Webzilla and Gubarev. The lawsuits seek yet undetermined compensation for the damages suffered by XBT, Webzilla and Gubarev as the result of the publication of the dossier,” a statement said.