The spin given by the AP to September 11th's incident in London, England is so blatant one cannot believe it's not coming from Josef Goebbels or Baghdad Bob. Or perhaps from Nancy Pelosi.
The AP is deliberately manipulating their readers' perceptions by adding irrelevant information and using manipulatively-biased labelling of the parties involved to give people wrong impressions.
Jihad Watch tells us what happened, and so does Atlas Shrugged. And, naturally, they do away with the predictable dhimmitude and political correctness propaganda spewed by the American Press, in which the spin comes first of all, is verbally diarrheic, gratuitous and includes references to "fascists" and Nazis, in an obvious attempt to make readers think that the planned peaceful demonstration by the SIOE was somehow fascist/Nazi-like. Bizarrely, the AP also refers to the violent, supremacist, "Allahu Akhbar"-screaming Muslims as "anti-Fascist groups". Talk about propaganda!
To be fair to the AP, they do have three short paragraphs of actual news, out of the whole article, though this actual news, to their discredit, is finally(!) found near the very bottom:
On Friday, an openly Islamophobic group, Stop Islamification of Europe, promised a evening protest outside a northwest London mosque to coincide with the eighth anniversary of Sept. 11 and with Ramadan, the Muslim holy month.
Yes, SIOE is "openly Islamophobic". Just as the average person is "openly Nazi-phobic". Of course. It's sane and correct to be afraid of Islamic supremacism, fascism and imperialism and to be vehemently opposed to having religious zealots impose their beliefs onto oneself and one's country. Nothing wrong with being "Islamophobic". Because Islam is scary and a threat to humanity in its fundamentalist form, which is very, very dangerous and very, very real, clear and present, not that the likes of the AP dares to tell us, because they're obviously afraid of Islamic supremacist retaliation themelves, were they to tell the inconvenient truth thereabout.
Only a handful of demonstrators showed up—and they were vastly outnumbered by Muslims coming to defend the mosque.
See? The Islamic supremacists prevented SIOE from having a peaceful demonstration against Islamic supremacism, fascism and imperialism. Yup, the supremacists won.
Police hustled the protesters away from the angry crowd. But television footage showed Muslim youths racing through the streets shouting "Allahu Akbar!", waving Islamic banners and throwing glass at riot police. Scotland Yard reported 10 arrests.(Emphasis mine)
Now, why couldn't the AP just, simply report on precisely what happened? Why did they have to set a background, a theme, within which the average reader would likely be manipulated into thinking that the violent, police-attacking Islamic supremacist mob was just angry about what the AP wants us to believe are "fascists"?
Obviously the AP doesn't subscribe to FOX News's fair and balanced philosophy of "We report. You decide". Seems more like the AP is all about "We tell you what. You believe it".
Like world-renowned, respected Islam expert Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch sarcastically says,
So it's "fascist" to oppose the spread of an ideology that would extinguish free speech, freedom of conscience, and the equality of rights of women with men and of people of all creeds? Tell me another.
Now, bear in mind that the SIOE demonstration was actually approved by police. So it was ok and all that to go forward with it. But the Muslims prevented it from happening, via premeditated violent intimidation (a form of "jihad", one could call it).
Via Atlas Shrugged:
Eight people have been arrested during a demonstration outside a mosque in north-west London where an anti-Islamic protest was planned.
About 1,000 people gathered outside Harrow Central Mosque as activists from Stop Islamification of Europe planned to demonstrate outside the mosque.
Seven people were arrested for possession of offensive weapons including a hammer, a chisel and bottles of bleach. Police believe these arrests were not linked to the SIOE protest. (BBC)
Those folks in the excerpt above were obviously from amongst the thousand-some Muslims.Despite having approved the SIOE demonstration, police changed their minds and ordered it cancelled. They arrested the organizer "to prevent breach of peace" (hey, thats' the sort of thing the Chinese Communist Regime does to people, to prevent them from doing things that would be inconvenient in some way to the Communist Party, etc.). Funny, that, as it was the Muslims who were already actually doing just that!
Stephen Gash was told by a senior sergent of the police to call off the demonstration in Harrow. He was then arrested to prevent a breach of the peace…
More than 1000 mainly muslims gathered infront of the SIOE demonstration where they stopped people to attend the demonstration.
The police could not handle the muslim counter demonstraters. The senior sergent said that he didn’t want any of his policemen killed.
Obviously, the police fear the supremacist Muslims, knowing from empirical observation that many of them are likely to be violent. They pretty much indicate this when they back off from Muslim mobs, as they don't want to risk the officers' lives. From whom else do police back off? Can you think of anyone else from whom they back off, even when they're being attacked by apparent criminals (assaulting a police officer is a crime, after all)?
See, the Islamic supremacists know this. This is why they use massive, violent mobs to intimidate the police into arresting anti-Islamic-supremacism protestors. It's a strategy that works, and a strategy that's obviously forcing police to violate the civil and human rights of peaceful, pre-approved anti-Islamisation protestors. It's a frightening precedent, the police opting to violate the good guys' rights to prevent violence from the bad guys. Something is obviously very wrong, what's been going on. Effectively, the police are sending the message to the bad-guy mobs that violent intimidation in overwhelming numbers works.
For the Big Media, of which AP is a part, and they provide propaganda to pretty much the rest of the Big Media, it must be understood that SIOE is not racist or anything like that. One need only visit the SIOE website for oneself. One will find no evidence of racism. After all, Islam is not a race, but rather an ideology. And the SIOE is opposed to Islamic supremacism, fascism, imperialism and to Sharia Law and Islamization (turning countries into Islamic theocracies over time).
SIOE's slogan is "Racism is the lowest form of human stupidity, but Islamophobia is the height of common sense".
"Progressives" would say it's bad to be afraid of Islam, that to be afraid of Islam is "phobic", or irrational. But those who have taken the time and expended the effort, like myself, to carefully educate oneself as to the truth of what's going on in the real world vis-a-vis radical, fundamental, supremacist, imperialist Islam worldwide, and the nature of Islam itself and how it's practiced today, plus the mentality of Islamic supremacists... well, to be afraid of this isn't "irrational", but is obviously common sense.
Contrast that to the "Progressive" (neo-communist/intermational socialist) movement's phobias with respect to Christianity, Judaism, America and Israel. They're irrational, as they're operating based on false propaganda they receive from various sources, including the Big Media.
Further, if it's common sense to be afraid of Nazis, skinheads, etc... then it's also common sense to be afraid of supremacist Islam.
Besides, the so-called "anti fascists" (the supremacist Muslims) in this incident were violent and were yelling, "Allahu Akhbar", indicating from such behavior and utterance that they are dangerous zealots.
Also...
