BBC reports on 2,823 honour attacks in the UK last year, but what’s missing in this story?

To illustrate a point, I have posted the entire BBC article below. Read the article, and see if you can spot what is obviously missing. The answer and a comment are given below.

BBC article:

'Honour' attack numbers revealed by UK police forces

UK police recorded at least 2,823 so-called honour attacks last year, figures from 39 out of 52 forces show.

A freedom of information request by the Iranian and Kurdish Women's Rights Organisation (Ikwro) revealed that nearly 500 of these were in London.

Among the 12 forces also able to provide figures from 2009, there was an overall 47% rise in such incidents.

Honour attacks are punishments on people, usually women, for acts deemed to have brought shame on their family.

'Mutilations'

Such attacks can include acid attacks, abduction, mutilations, beatings and in some cases, murder.

Ikwro said its research, carried out between July and November, is the best national estimate so far of the extent of honour violence in Britain, although the charity says the figures do not give the full picture.

They found that eight police forces had recorded more than 100 honour-based attacks each in 2010.

The Metropolitan Police had the most at 495, followed by West Midlands (378), West Yorkshire (350), Lancashire (227), Greater Manchester (189), Cleveland (153), Suffolk (118) and Bedfordshire (117).

Of the 12 police forces able to provide 2009 comparison figures, nine recorded a rise in attacks and three saw totals fall.

The biggest rise was in Northumbria, which saw figures leap by 305% from 17 in 2009 to 69 in 2010, followed by a 154% jump in Cambridgeshire from 11 to 28.

A quarter of police forces in the UK were unable or unwilling to provide data and communities have often been reluctant to talk about the crime, Ikwro said.

Its director Diana Nammi said families often tried to deny the existence of honour attacks and those who carried them out were "very much respected".

She told the BBC: "The perpetrators will be even considered as a hero within the community because he is the one defending the family and community's honour and reputation."

She added that there was not enough support for victims, and many needed continuing help and protection.

"For some cases, police and some organisations just help them up to a length of time, then they will stop," she said.

"With honour-based violence, the threat may be a lifetime threat for them."

'Significant number'

Ikwro's report said: "This is the first time that a national estimate has been provided in relation to reporting of honour-based violence.

"The number of incidents is significant, particularly when we consider the high levels of abuse that victims suffer before they seek help."

The Metropolitan Police said its domestic violence training for officers included the issues of honour-based violence and forced marriage.

The force said that in addition each of the 32 London boroughs had a community safety unit, with a total of more than 560 specially trained officers.

A spokesman said: "The Metropolitan Police Service has been on a significant journey regarding how we police honour-based violence over the past decade, and has played an instrumental part in developing work in this field.

"We have used our organisational learning over the years to inform our current policies, staff training and operating procedures.

"We know that like other hate crimes, honour-based violence is under-reported however, and remain very concerned about this."

The Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo) published a strategy in 2008 aimed at gauging the scale of the problem and recommending that all English and Welsh forces start recording the number of honour incidents.

Of the UK's 52 forces, 45 have now done that, although there is no national guidance in Scotland.

The 52 comprise 39 in England, four in Wales, eight in Scotland, and the Police Service of Northern Ireland.

Commander Mak Chishty, the Association of Chief Police Officers lead for honour-based violence, said he was satisfied the 2008 strategy was being implemented.

"We're now in consultation on a new strategy. All front-line staff have received awareness training and every force has a champion on honour-based abuse.

"Acpo is confident that any victim who comes to us will receive the help they need."

A Home Office spokesman said: "We are determined to end honour violence and recognise the need for greater consistency on the ground to stop this indefensible practice.

"Our action plan to end violence against women and girls sets out our approach to raise awareness, enhance training for police and prosecutors and better support victims."

Answer: The words Islam, Islamic, and Muslim are not mentioned once in the 700-word article.

Comment:

Our overly politically-correct liberal journalists—so-called journalists to be more precise—are at it again dumbing down the reader. Without the words Islam, Islamic, and Muslim the article is meaningless; who has committed these crimes—no one? This kind of reporting is very dangerous indeed; without reporting who actually committed the crimes, no discussion takes place and therefore nothing can be rectified. It’s as asinine as reporting with a headline like this: ‘Bank was robbed by people.’

We are in trouble, and it doesn’t matter whether you live in the UK or here; our children get dumbed-down politically-correct education and dumbed-down media to top it off, so it is no wonder they vote National, Labour, and the Greens etc. To rectify this problem we need a major overhaul of education; we have to root out liberalism from education completely—unless we do that we are pushing the proverbial s*** up hill. We have got to get our kids questioning and critically analysing everything; once that is achieved, objective reporting will follow as less students will depart schools as indoctrinated liberals.

As conservatives, we know truth is on our side, but getting that truth into mainstream culture has to be the fundamental objective; once that is achieved then just maybe we will see less ridicule of people such as Richard Prosser.

Have a read of the The Commentator article below—from where this BBC story was derived:

The Commentator article:

BBC reveals huge scale of honour attacks in Britain, fails to mention the word “Islam”

At least 2,823 people, mainly vulnerable young women, were brutalised in Britain last year by members of their family. But BBC report censors out the key information

All right. I’m not going to make this difficult. The families giving the orders, as well as the victims, are, in the overwhelming majority of cases, Muslim. Surprised? No, of course you’re not. Honour attacks ranging in brutality from beatings to murder are commonplace in many parts of the Muslim world.

Since Britain, like many other European countries, has imported sizeable Muslim communities, which are to a significant degree unassimilated, the cultural practices of the old country have survived the transition to the new.

Finally, the figure of 2,823 attacks is almost certainly a gross under-estimate since, apart from anything else, it is drawn from only 39 of 52 UK police forces.

Got it? In just over 150 words (including title and summary) you now know all the basic information, and as intelligent, informed citizens you can have a discussion on what to do about it. That’s what journalism is for.

Propaganda, on the other hand, is intended for something else. It is designed to present a politically charged narrative held to with a fanaticism that will allow no mention of facts that contradict it. It is thus deliberately intended to lower the quality of the discussion by erasing key pieces of information.   

Enter the BBC, which reported on the matter in a lengthy, 700-plus word article and failed to mention the words “Muslim”, “Islamic” or “Islam” even once.

As I write this I am flicking back to the story itself so I can double check using the Find function. Could I be mistaken?

Here goes: “Islamic”? “No Matches”. “Muslim”? “No Matches”. “Islam”? “No Matches”.

This is how societies go down: when matters of the profoundest significance to their character, and potentially their very existence, have been rendered undiscussable by the people that set the terms of public debate.

Clearly the people who wrote and edited that story should be dismissed.

They won’t be of course because the mind-numbing, multiculturalist narrative that demanded censorship of the salient evidence is effectively institutionalised as the dominant narrative across the BBC as well as the wider liberal establishment. Read more