Race

It’s Not So Brilliant Here Either

Civil liberties, Corruption, Europe, Policing, Poverty, Race
Published on

The US may treat European visitors like vermin (see previous post) but we’re hardly spotless in our attitude towards immigrants, as events in Naples show:

Residents of the former communist stronghold on the northern outskirts of Naples have been raising hell about the camp since Saturday, when a woman claimed a Gypsy girl had entered her flat and tried to steal her baby.

The first Molotov cocktails descended on the improvised huts and cabins on Tuesday evening, after which the 800-odd inhabitants began moving out of the area in groups. On Wednesday the fire-raisers, said to belong to the Camorra, the Neapolitan equivalent of the Mafia, burnt the camp in earnest, watched by applauding local people and unchallenged by the police. When firefighters showed up to douse the blaze, local people taunted and whistled at them. The last Roma moved out under police protection.

Only then did local politicians shed a few crocodile tears: Antonio Bassolino, governor of the Campania region, declaring: “We must stop with the greatest determination these disturbing episodes against the Roma.” Rosa Russo Iervolino, the Mayor of Naples, chimed in: “It is unthinkable that anyone could imagine that I could justify reprisals against the Roma.”
More…

I don’t know enough about the state of Italian politics to say that we’re seeing a surge of modern Mussolini-ism with the reaccession of Berlusconi to the presidency – but it doesn’t half look like it. Crimes committed by Romanians are a hot political issue in Italy:

Since Romania’s accession to the EU this year, the authorities say that over 1,000 Romanian immigrants have arrived in Italy each month.

Since June last year 76 murders have been committed by Romanians.

The mayor of Rome, Walter Veltroni, says that 75% of arrests for murder, rape and robbery in his city this year can be attributed to Romanians.

Mr Prodi believes Italy is not alone in facing this new wave of crime and he has called on Europe’s home office ministers to meet and find a solution.

The Romanian prime minister has responded by sending police liaison officers to major Italian cities to help.

Of course this is Naples and there’s more to this particular outbreak of violence than just politically organised hatred; Naples is well-known to be a stew of corruption, crime and poverty and the local mafia don’t like rivals. Times are getting harder too, for the worried poor and worried-about-getting-poorer middle classes – where Berlusconi sees his support – who are looking for scapegoats for their troubles. The Roma fit the bill, as has been depressingly usual throughout their peripatetic, outcast history in Europe.

As is also depressingly usual in European history concerted government and police action intended to pander to the political base is fostering a culture of tacit approval for mob violence.

Police in Italy have arrested hundreds of suspected illegal immigrants in raids across the country.

Expulsion orders were issued for several dozen of those detained. More than 100 Italians were also arrested.

One raid was on a makeshift camp housing Roma (Gypsies), on the edge of Rome. Italian concern about immigrant crime has tended to focus on the Roma.The police crackdown was part of a week-long operation in Rome, Naples and northern Italy.

It is an apparent sign of the change of policy promised by the new right-wing government of Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi.

.

(Except it isn’t new policy, it was his predecessors’ policy too.)

What is important to remember is that this isn’t a case of plucky litle Italy repelling invading criminal gangs from Fortress Europe’s borders: after all, Romanians are our fellow EU citizens, with theoretically equal status to all other EU citizens, including the right to reside in other EU countries. If other EU member countries were to follow Italy’s example, in light of the spread of the mafia EU-wide we’d be expelling Italian criminals from the capitals of Europe by the planeload and Berlusconi would be complaining about ethnic cleansing – which is essentially what this is, but because it’s Roma, it’s OK.

But the first act of ethnic cleansing in the new Italy passed off with little fuss. Flora Martinelli, the woman who reported the alleged kidnap attempt on her baby, said: “I’m very sorry for what’s happening, I didn’t want it to come to this. But the Gypsies had to go.”

Wasn’t that the refrain of the Good Germans, and the Hutus too?

Is It Because He Is (Quite Probably) White?

Race, Religion, War on Terror
Published on

Yet again a home-brewed explosives case doesn’t get the full-on terrorist treatment:

Man hurt by home-made explosive

A building in north Devon has been sealed off after a home-made explosive went off, injuring a man.

The Royal Navy’s bomb disposal team also carried out a controlled explosion on a second device found at the flat in Barnstaple on Sunday afternoon.

Police said a 47-year-old man was being treated for hand injuries, apparently caused by the first explosive.

Neighbouring flats at the property in St George’s Road were evacuated. Police have ruled out any terrorist links.

Have they? So soon? Really, I thought the police needed at least 42 days to decide that?

It being Barnstaple, I realise the accused is probably white and probably not Moslem and therefore considered innocent of any terrorist intent – as per usual – but that does seem rather hasty to me.

Faradiddles and Fairytales

bigotry, Manufacturing consent, Media, Race, Religion
Published on

Have you heard the one about the jihadi on the No. 81 bus? What about the apparently professional people who believe in witches and demons?

But first the jihadi on the bus.5 Chinese crackers illustrates how an Islamophobic urban myth is slipped into general currency:

Urban myths and Muslim bus drivers praying

[…]

I thought something might be fishy when I saw ‘Get off my bus, I need to pray’ in the Sun last week. Having pictures or even video of a Muslim bus driver praying on his bus does not prove that the driver made his passengers get off so he could pray.

Via Islamophobia Watch, we can have a look at this article from the Slough and Windsor Observer, ‘Bosses defend Muslim who stopped the 81 bus to pray’, which explains:

London United Busways say they have carried out a full investigation after driver Arunas Raulynaitis rolled out his prayer mat to perform his daily prayers, facing Mecca on the number 81 bus in Langley.

Bosses have analysed evidence, including CCTV footage, and say the driver was actually on his 10-minute break when the incident took place at around 1.30pm on Thursday.

They added that the control room had in fact radioed Mr Raulynaitis to terminate the bus outside Langley Fire Station in London Road because it was running late due to road works. Passengers were asked to leave the vehicle while they waited for another bus to pick them up to complete their journey.

[…]

But a 21-year-old passenger – who was hoping to join the bus before it terminated – told the Observer: “People were fuming because they said the driver had asked them to leave so he could pray.

“Most people ended up waiting for 15 minutes and weren’t happy. I was late for work so I got a lift with my friend. But it was a hassle I didn’t need.”

So, the driver was told to stop the bus because it was behind schedule, and he decided to pray at that point because it was time for him to take his break. Not really worth reporting in a national newspaper. Unless you make dodgy assumptions about the guy’s motives.

It’s exactly this sort of story that led the passengers on the bus to believe that the driver had told them to get off so he could pray. If you’re primed to think a particular group are arrogant and prone to demanding other people bend to their whims to accommodate their needs, you’re far more likely to conclude that anything a member of that group does that you don’t like has been done for that reason.

We visited friends in Langley (close to Slough) quite recently and I was surprised – hardly any of the locals were noticeably Moslem or even non-white, oddly so considering it’s so close to Heathrow. Other than at Heathrow itself and in Tesco in Slough did I once see a hijab or a brown face. (Though to be fair, we were only there two days. Perhaps it was the weather.) Funny how these kinds of stories emanate from mostly all-white enclaves, though.

That said, I don’t think anyone should get prayer time at work anyhow, no matter what their religion and/or job is. Do it on your own time and if your prayer schedule doesn’t fit the normal working day, or your Sunday is sacrosanct, then you should look for work that will specifically accomodate that, or be self-employed as many religious do, quietly and with no fuss. But some religious make a hell of a fuss and think their religion should be the way of life for everyone, regardless of their beliefs or lack of them, and many of them are Christians.

Perhaps the media might choose to report on that, or on the increasing stridency of religious people in secular life generally? What about reporting on the government-funded, class and race-based faith schools, currently institutionalising religious sectarianism and embedded privilege into yet another divided generation? The situation can only worsen once this ghettoised cohort of British children gets into the workforce.

As it is a Christian doctors’ association has already pressured the doctors’ ruling body, The General Medical Council, to release new guidelines that allow them, the religious, to refuse treatment to patients for conditions which they find personally morally suspect, on the grounds of a vague all-encompassing ‘conscience.’

The lobby groups, some funded by spiritual/political mentors in the USA, are triumphant, having already successfully bullied UK pharmacists over the matter of refusing contraception and particularly the morning-after-pill.

even that isn’t enough for some religious:

David Jones, a Roman Catholic professor of bioethics at St Mary’s University College, London, said that doctors with a strong objection to abortion may feel like “an accessory to murder” if they directly referred patients to other doctors for the procedure, as the GMC suggests. “How this guidance will be implememented is crucial,” he said.

Jafer Qureshi, a co-founder of the Islamic Medical Ethics Forum, which advises Muslim doctors on issues including medical euthanasia and organ transplantation, added that medical students had recently complained about a “climate of intolerance” to their beliefs.

But where are the lurid red-top headlines about medical missionaries and foreign fundies interfering in the NHS and policing our morals?

If I saw the tabloids campaigning against fundamentalism generally – if only in defence of Page 3 stunnas – and there were a few more disapproving (and true) stories of fundamentalists of other religions than just Islam interfering with the rights of others, then I’d be less inclined to think this Langley item is a made-up story designed specifically to appeal to the average BNP voter.

Fundamentalists of all types seek to overcome their own weakness and ultimate lack of faith by imposing on us. Many (and they’re usually the most visibly pious) secretly lack the ability or the will to hold to the tenets of their religion or to live a right life acording to their chosen beliefs; they know they are weak and it’s so much easier to comply when all the discipline comes from outside.

So they seek to construct a society in which to sin is impossible, a place where they won’t have to try at all and can just go along with the rules, parrot the right words, and be saved with no exertion at all. Which slightly misses the point of the spiritual life, which is all about the personal effort.

But to get back to the way the media treats fundamentalism and the religious; Islamic fundamentalism is demonised because of the way many Moslems look. Many British Moslems are non-white, an artifact of postcolonial immigration patterns. But Christian fundamentalism is nothing to worry about, the media think; after all it’s homegrown, sort of, and mostly practiced by whites (though becoming less so, witness the influence of African evangelicals and EU Catholics). Nevertheless the tabloid news equation can be ultimately reduced to Moslem=non-white=bad, Christian=white (ish)=good.

Myself I’m much more concerned about the GP who’s goes all ecstatic and happy-clappy on Sundays and who thinks dominionism is no bad thing, or the cabinet minister who shirks his duty to his constituents in order to appease an archbishop, than I am about a tired bus driver taking a restful little contemplative break on his own time.

UPDATE: Now see, this is exactly what happens when you give any public ground to the religious.

Real science or closet racism? How to tell in one easy step.

Race, Wingnuts
Published on

Yes, once again the dreaded disease of bellcurvism has reared its ugly head, where people who loudly proclaim not to be racists believe that Science(tm) tells them that, unfortunately, these people are just less intelligent than us and here are the graphs to prove it.

Now you, as intelligent but busy blogreader could follow the back and forth of arguments to decide whether this really is science or closet racism masked as science, but you just don’t have the time. So here’s how to tell in a few easy steps:

  1. The claims made about a group’s intelligence are consistent with racist stereotypes about this group?
  2. It’s closet racism
  3. Erm.
  4. That’s it

Oh sure, Atrios and Lawyers, Guns and Money have some actual reasons why the science used in the most recent outbreak of bellcurvism is bogus, but only this blog saves you valuable reading time by providing this handy rule of thumb, leaving you free to look at more kittens.

And best of all, this method also works to determine whether something is real science, or sexism masked as science!

Comment of The Day, Belated

Comment of the Day, Policing, Race, Religion, UK politics, War on Terror
Published on

Martin Kettle’s hateful Guardian opinion piece on Saturday has drawn over 192 comments so far, a preponderance of them hearteningly negative. Kettle’s thesis seems to be, in short, that it’s fine for innocent people to be executed on the streets without arrest or trial if it keeps him, Martikn Kettle, personally safe: Reaction was swift:

Outradgie November 3, 2007 5:05 AM

Kettle has here contributed one of the most poorly reasoned and ill-informed articles seen on CiF, and that is quite an achievement. To pick a few of the more egregious errors:

1. “… the conviction of the Met this week was bad news not good news. The tyranny of the insurance-driven risk assessment culture – which ironically the commissioner would now be negligent to ignore – means you and I will be less well-protected in future by the police than we were in July 2005.” The Health & Safety at Work Act gives no right of civil action, such as pursuing compensation, see in particular s.47 of the Act. Compensation is independent of any prosecution under the Act. The penalties imposed upon conviction under the Act are fines. Under UK law it is illegal to provide insurance against criminal penalties. (Simon Jenkins’ attempts to pontificate on H&S law here have also been greatly undermined by his complete ignorance of this distinction. People injured or made ill at work would still be pursuing civil actions if no H&S statute had ever been enacted and no H&S regulating agency existed.)

2. “The police genuinely thought De Menezes was a suicide bomber.” No, they did not. They did not know who he was, or what he was doing. There was total confusion and incompetence, but they killed him anyway.

3. “Ken Livingstone is wholly correct to say that health and safety legislation was never drawn up for such extreme situations as this. And the law is not just an ass but an outright threat to liberty if this week’s judgment means a future armed officer is afraid to fire at a real suicide bomber in similar circumstances.” It is rubbish to say the legislation does not apply in “extreme circumstances”. Was London under martial law that day? It is very common for those who break H&S law to say there were special circumstances. It’s easy to do a job right when there is no pressure. The law is intended to restrain reckless behaviour especially when it’s tempting to cut corners. There is nothing in this court case that need inhibit any police officer from firing at a suicide bomber. What should be inhibited is firing at innocent people, as an outcome of bungled, incompetent, mismanaged, disorganised and reckless policing.

4. “Londoners are at much greater risk after this ruling.” Pure tosh. There are many more armed police than terrorists in London, and it is vital that they are well trained and responsible. Today we read “Mohammed Abdul Kahar, 23, who was shot in the shoulder during a raid by police on his home in Forest Gate in 2006, says he and his brother Abul Koyair, 20, were stopped by armed police with one officer shouting “shoot him, shoot him”.” Not so very long ago there was the miserable story of how Harry Stanley was shot dead by police for walking home with a repaired chair leg. This was made many times worse by over 120 Metropolitan Police armed officers walking off the job when an attempt was made to hold responsible the two who killed Stanley. How can people feel safe when armed police refuse to be accountable and put themselves above the law? What makes Kettle think safety means armed police should be free to kill anyone with impunity? Benjamin Franklin might have been thinking of fools like Kettle when he remarked “Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”

5. There is a threat to liberty from terrorists, and there is a threat from lethally stupid police work. These are linked in a way Kettle has missed. The killing of De Menezes was a failure at every level: tactically, operationally and strategically. Tactically, because even if he had been a genuine threat, he was only intercepted when he was on a train. Operationally, because he was nothing to do with the people being pursued, and while killing him and trying to mop up the mess, there was less attention and resource to deal with the real targets. Strategically, because this killing spread fear and discredited the police, doing the terrorists’ job for them, and helping to alienate ordinary people whose support is vital. Fighting terrorism depends above all on keeping community support. This prosecution is the only real demonstration so far that the UK really acknowledges the gravity of the failure that day; it is a small step to recovering the moral standing and respect that is vital if the UK is to prevail.

.

That’s just one of many in similarly devastating vein. It’s well worth reading the whole thread, but don’t expect any response from Kettle himself, who’s conspicuous by his absence. Moral cowardice seems to be his bag.

I find iit hard to believe that any thinking person could have written such a fatuous and hollow article and worse, that an editor commissioned it and presumably approved it and paid for it.

Leaving aside his errors of fact, was Kettle trying to provoke, lighting the blue touchpaper and retiring to watch the fireworks? That’s cynical enough with feelings running so high and being deliberately whipped up by politicians.

But if as seems likely he really does think it’s OK for innocent people to be executed ad hoc on the streets by armed squads, on mere suspicion, without arrest or trial, just to keep him personally safe, then he is a disgusting human being.