David,

I found a longer story here, but they seem to use the same terminology.

Two youths described by police as Asian attacked Canon Michael Ainsworth at St George-in-the-East Church in Shadwell, Scotland Yard confirmed this evening (Friday).

David, why the objection to the term Asian youths. If two white youths attacked someone for being Muslim would you prefer the BBC to call them Christians ?

Colm wrote ... David, why the objection to the term Asian youths. ... Sikhs and Hindus object strongly as the are massively under-represented within the Asian prison population and presumably within convicted offenders as well.

The East London Avertiser

... One pensioner who contacted the Advertiser said: "This was a terrible attack on Canon Ainsworth in our churchyard. He was set upon for a gang of thugs. There was blood everywhere. All the church members are in shock by what happened. Our canon is such a nice man who has done so much for the parish. It's been very upsetting. ...

... Scotland Yard said: "The group is thought to have been made up of three youths, two of whom attacked Canon Ainsworth. They also allegedly made remarks insulting his occupation." ...

...[Police] are appealing for witnesses to the midweek attack on March 5 at around 7pm ...

if this was reversed it would be a major hate crime of islamaphobia and persicution of muslims.

Hell stories like this are totaly missed by the general US population and press. When you say Asian youths the picture that comes to the American mind is Bruce Lee or Jackie Chan not little Mohammed

Well Mama/Troll, this has been treated by the police and reported by the press as a hate crime, or more specifically a faith crime. There is no censorship or cover up or downplaying of this attack, and if your immediate picture of an 'asian youth' is a Bruce lee lookalike, so what ?. That has nothing to do with this story.

Colm,

My observation is that all the stories are quoting the police who use the term "asian youths." The media do not appear to be deleting or editing anything the police gave them.

I think David makes a fair point. The attack has been labeled a faith crime, so the attackers must have been motivated at some level by hatred of christianity. The police are no doubt worried about a pc backlash (pardon the pun) if they labeled the attackers by their faith rather than their race.

The term "asian" covers sikhs and hindus as well as muslims. Sikhs and hindus are not known for aggression against christians, but muslims most certainly are.

Colm glad to hear that you think it has been properly reported, It read to me like they were playing it down treating it more like a mugging.

My point about the use of the word asian was to illustrate that over here if you use the word ASIAN in a story it would only be used to describe people of ORIENTAL decent NOT Middle Eastern or Muslim...

Also preventing any story from your side of the pond using that "identifier" as being reported as a Muslim/MiddleEastern story over here

I guess that went over your head

But, Peter, is it the BBC (and every other outlet reporting this story) or the police who are to blame? David's point absolves the police and blames only the BBC. Do you think that the police know both the ethnic and religious designation of each of the "youths" and is purposely throwing witnesses off the track? Grizzly Mama/Troll would have been misled by this.

No it didn't go over my head, it's just that an American perception of the term 'Asian' is irrelevent when a reporter of a British media organisation writes a local news story in the UK .

Also you display your ignorance (which you often do when slagging of events from the UK) by claiming it was being played down as a mugging. Sure, that's why it was prominently and instantly labelled a faith hate crime.

The reason why the youths are being reported as Asian by appearance is because they haven't been arrested yet, and while it a very high probability that they come from a Muslim background the police aren't in a position to say that until they make arrests.

Alan

Fair point. The BBC can only report what the police have said, and police practice is to use the blanket term "asian" even in a faith-motivated crime such as this. If the victim had been an imam and the attackers white, the term "white" would have been used, not christian.

forget it Colm your to hostile...

excuse me if I think 4 short paragraphs doesn't do the story justice. I guess Asian youths attacking priests is so common place over there that it just doesn't rate anything more than that. EXCUSE ME if thats SLAGGING a common British problem...

Priest hurt in faith-hate attack

A priest has been attacked in the grounds of his church, in what police described as a "faith-hate" crime.
Canon Michael Ainsworth, 57, was injured by two Asian youths at the church, in Tower Hamlets, east London.

Canon Ainsworth said a third youth watched as he suffered cuts, bruises and black eyes in the assault at the church of St George-in-the-East.

The youths also jeered at the priest for being a churchman in the attack on Wednesday night, the Met Police said.

An appeal for witnesses has been made.

I guess the attacks are so common that you refuse to even remark on it...LOL

yes of course Mama/Troll whatever you say. Are you trying to beat a record for getting a story wrong. Firstly you bizarly claim the word Asian shouldn't be used because it makes Americans think of Kung fu actors, then you claim the press here downplayed it as a mugging when the very headline on the BBC news said it was a 'faith hate' attack, then you claim oh it must be so common in Britain because it is not being remaked on, yet here we are doing just that, commenting on a story that ha been significant enough to be mentioed on a national news outlet and picked up for discussion on UK blogs. You couldn't be more inaccurate if you tried.

The Sikhs and Hindus are right to be angry at this use of the euphemism "Asian" here. The crimes are committed by Muslims--the ethnic background is meaningless in this context.

It is funny...I don't see much of this type of thing over here. There have been incidents, but they have been few. Maybe we have something to look forward to.

"Asian". Technically correct to some degree, but fundamentally dishonest at the core. Only a sniveling weakling would use this term with a straight face. When I see the Sikhs and Hindus engaging in this bigoted criminality, then we can talk. "Asian" indeed.

No Phantom you are wrong. The police can only describe the appearance of the youths, they cannot state that they are muslims until they find the culprits. Besides, is it correct to use the term Muslims on youths who may have as much to do with that faith athe average white teenager might have with Christianity. If a couple of white teenage thugs attacked Muslims and did so deliberately becasue they were Muslims would it be fair to describe them as 'Christian thugs'.

Oh and we don't see too much of this sort of thing over here also. To my knowledge this is the first news story I am aware of involving an attack on a priest by allegedly Muslim youths. I don't seek to downplay it or hide that fact that the attackers might be Muslims ,I just get a bit fed up at the smug generalisations that Mama/Troll has made of the reporting of this story and use it to mock how terrible and cowardly Britain must be about Muslim aggression.

What do they call "Asians" who commit bias crimes, who are caught, and who say that they are Muslim? Surely there would have been one such incident.

Not just talking about attacks on priests--lets expand the net to include attacks on practioners of the Sikh, Hindu, Jewish and Christian faiths ---and to women and girls from Muslim backgrounds who seek to date/marry outside the faith--and to those born Muslim who want to leave the faith.

Does the suspect pool thereby increase at all? Should the guilty parties of these things all be classified as "Asian" (wink/nod) or should we call them by the common denominator of which all are aware?

Should the guy who killed van Gogh be called an "African"?

I think that those who commit the broader scope of crimes that I spoke of are likely to know the Koran, and to attend mosque, and that the white yob attack you speak of to be likely committed by those who do not know the Bible, or God help us attend church.

But if the only way to get people to recognize Muslim crime is to call white yob attackers of Muslims "Christians", then go right ahead. There will be a net gain in truth there.

Phantom,

Only a sniveling weakling would use this term with a straight face.

Are you equally disrespectful to members of the NYPD as you are to the constables in the UK, or only if they do what they are told without smirking?

Phantom

You are making points with which I do not disagree at all. I seek not to downplay crimes commited by Muslims for faith based reasons at all. I do not wnat any truths to be hidden and indeed such know attacks should be labelled Muslim attacks and attackers always. I was just explaining the reason why 'Asian' was used in this story which is as yet - however obvious it may seem - definitively unexplained. In the UK broadly speaking when the police wish to issue descriptions of suspect persons they used 3 terms generally, White Black and Asian, thats all, it isn't a conspiracy, or cringing before the Muslim population, just a standard example of how police report incidents.

The BBC can only report what the police have said, .....
Saturday, March 15, 2008 at 02:11PM | Peter

So the BBC will not report anything other than that which the police say? The broadcaster doing as it's told? I don't think so! If a mullah or imam had been attacked by some whitey, the BBC would have been crawling all over it to get more info .... and even done some investigating. The BBC colludes with the police in covering up the misdeeds of islam. However, we now know it. Does anyone here really believe that the perpetrators were anything other than muslim? If so, please state who the likely lads are.

Allan

Would you be content for the BBC to describe an attack on a muslim imam by white yobs as an attack by christians?

Has there been any in depth reporting of this story? All the versions I found seem to be based on the PA feed with little amplification.

Colm

"I just get a bit fed up at the smug generalisations that Mama/Troll has made of the reporting of this story and use it to mock how terrible and cowardly Britain must be about Muslim aggression."

That for one thing is pure Bullshit! The only one I mocked was YOU.

My point about Asians which obviously did go over your head was Now stay with me on this.

A lot people (believe it or not) in the US read the British News. As does our Press. A story about ASIAN youths would not light the Radar up on most people here. DUE TO THE FACT that we are a people seperated by a common language. ASIAN in the US means ORIENTAL. THAT POINT passed over the point of your head.

I do however DISAGREE with your assesment that by saying "faith-hate attack" in the Headline of a 4 I repeat 4 paragraph news column brings it to the level of an OUTRAGE in the press.

Did they lead the TV News shows with the story?

Did they compare it to the religouse attacks of old Protestant against Catholic?

Did they do a comparitive on the number of attacks against Muslims to the number of attacks against Christians?

Did they even put up descriptions of the "youths" anywhere?

If a 4 paragraph piece in the press is your idea of outrage well then I guess your sensibilities are riled alot easier than mine. Which by your tone in all your posts points to that that must be true.

As for me just coming on and Slagging your precious news stories I don't know what you've got in your pipe but you ought to think about changing it.

I have pretty much been off the site except for a few minor comments on the weekends for over the past 3 weeks due to my work schedule.

Since you seem to catagorize me as a crank I will just lump you into the catagory of tripper or better yet Jo.

In other words the only thing worth commenting to you about should be done only on a level to screw with you.

The Troll (just so you know who is posting)

Thanks troll, I feel mighty honoured to be put on your 'triplist'. You really prove that you can't handle genuine criticism or being shown up for your own ignorance. You react by throwing your toys out of the pram. I proved you wrong and you don't like it. Oh and seeing as you didn't get it the first time let me repeat. I perfectly understood what you meant by the American idea of 'Asian' the first time you said it, no need to bolster your weak arguments by repeating it again and again.

Mama,

"ASIAN in the US means ORIENTAL. THAT POINT passed over the point of your head."

1. Given that most Americans are so woefully ignorant of world geography, I'm not surprised they don't know that Iraq for example is in Asia.

2. I wasn't aware that Colm had a pointy head. I'll be extra nice to him from now on :0)

no colm. Where is your criticism? I see a petty little tirate over the cultural differences of what an asian is but I would love for you to point out where you critisized me or where you even answered the 4 questions I put to you.

If just dismissing someone counts as critisizm in your mind than I really do have less respect for you.

You said you didn't see the relevance to my stating that asian means something different over here. Instead of just seeing that that was a side observation on the cultural difference by two peoples with a common language. You went off on a tangent about it being irrelavant, So I have explained it several times and as far as I can see you still missed it and where and how did you prove me wronge that a 4 paragraph blip in the press equals outrage as you claim?

I ask the 4 questions again. Now if you want to prove me wronge post links where any of these 4 things have happened. If you can't do that put a link to atleast a story where they have expanded the coverage.

Did they lead the TV News shows with the story?

Did they compare it to the religouse attacks of old Protestant against Catholic?

Did they do a comparitive on the number of attacks against Muslims to the number of attacks against Christians?

Did they even put up descriptions of the "youths" anywhere?

If you can't do that (and I know you won't because you are the one that has taken his ball and gone home.) Then it is not I who has been proven wronge.

Unless you want to equate that national outrage only rates 4 paragraphs in Britain?

Contrary to what your ego may tell you discussion on the blogs does not equal national attention and outrage or all this fuss about Obama would have been frontpage months ago when it was discussed on the blogs.

Dawkins also proves the point. It's not geography it's a difference in terminollogy that seperates us on what an Asian is. If you walked into a NY police station and said 3 asians attacked you they would look for people of Oriental decent NOT Middle Eastern.

Yes we are just poor ignorant Americans, who would raise a little more fuss over a christian being beaten by a group of muslims just because he is christian.

I'll make a bet with anyone that is interested that Colm will refuse to address the questions above.

I will also put it out to anyone David included to answer whether or not the 4 questions are honest and relevant.

Does anyone here really believe that the perpetrators were anything other than muslim? If so, please state who the likely lads are.

So, Peter, who do you think the mystery 'youths' are, apart from being 'Asian'? Hindus? Sikhs perhaps? Zoroastrian (they really are violent, you know)? Or even Buddhists? Come on Peter, let's have your considered opinion.

And on the matter of white attackers being described as Christian, has this happened? I could imagine that the BBC would be carrying out a more thorough investigation into any attack by whites on a muslim instead of colluding with the ever-so-PC police in covering up the identities of faith-haters. Who are the haters? It's surely relevant to a 'faith-hate' crime?

Alan Alan Alan,

Your slagging this news story. You can't ask those type of questions or any question in that line of thought.

It has been shown the proper perspective as a faith-hate attack.

Just ask Colm, not that you'll get an answer from LilJo but it's worth an ask...LOL

Sunday, March 16, 2008 at 12:34AM | Dawkins

I'm not sure what dawkins was doing in that post. I know that geographically, Iraq is in Asia but in political terms, it is surely better understood as being in the Middle East - it gives a better idea as to who lives there.

By dawkins logic(?), the term 'Asian' could then be used to describe 3 billion people including white Russians. But I would have thought that a news report would attempt to be as accurate and concise as possible so as to better inform the public. Clearly, where there is a very high probability to near-certainty of muslims being violent, the BBC (and the police) attempts to obfuscate. Whenever this happens, the public now jumps to a conclusion - and the conclusion will be correct. It's the muslims!

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23455746-details/Vicar+attacked+for+%27being+a+Christian%27+after+hate+campaign+by+yobs+who+claimed+his+church+%27should+be+a+mosque%27/article.do

Oh dear, it's pointing to the RoPers.

But, Peter and Dawkins, whom do you reckon did the deed on the priest?

Dawkins was just feeding Colm by saying Americans are stupid.

Alan do you mean to tell me with all the prominant outrage that this story has seen in the British Press that YOU DON'T KNOW...

You can't be saying that every news source in the country hasn't lead with this story today I mean come on it has been labeled a hate-fait attack.

Bottom line is three little Mohameddins attacked and stabed a member of the christian clergy following the teachings of their religion. And by monday it will all be swept away

-- whom do you reckon did the deed on the priest?--

I've narrowed it down to the Quakers or the Buddhists.

Mama,

Of course I was just teasing you! But I didn't imply Americans were stupid, simply ignorant. I love my American friends dearly yet sometimes I listen with open mouth as they display an extraordinary ignorance of geography beyond North America. Put it down to insularity, caused by inhabiting a big and largely self-sufficient country. Why would they need to know about the rest of us? :0)

And yes, I don't doubt the padre was set upon by three nasty little Muslim yobs. Since most of them don't touch alcohol I can only conclude they were fired up on religious zealousness aka sectarianism.

I certainly hope it won't have blown over by tomorrow. I've just read an excellent piece by John Cornwell, who looked at Islamic (non)integration in England. Scary stuff. If the same thing happens anytime soon in Northern Ireland, I'm out of here, probably to the relatively Muslim-free hills and pastures of South America.

Ahhh going to join all the escaped Nazis in South America ehh....LOL

Mama,

Yup. Shall I tell them you send your regards? :0)

Allan

As my earlier posts made clear I have no doubt that the perps were muslims.

Why don't you answer my question about white youths attacking an imam being described as christian? Would you object to this?

Sauce for the goose and all that....

Which religion were these youths:

"Another group of youths intervened to protect him and they helped him into the rectory as the attackers fled. "

Troll

I hope a lot of people took you up on your bet because you are about to lose it. I didn't take my ball and walk off, I went to bed and I have been out this Sunday Yes even us loopy liberal nutters have to sleep sometimes and do other things than comment on blogs.

You claim that I will refuse to answer your 4 questions , so here goes.

Firstly let's put to bed this nonsense about what Americans think an Asian is. I wasn't disputing or mocking what you view as an Asian. I fully understood why different geographical and cultural experiences can lead to terminolgy variations. I said it was irrelevent to how the term is used in a British news report or by British officials. Police in the UK describing the term 'Asian youth' don't have to worry about what that means to Americans. They aren't addressing the remarks to an American audience that's all I meant by that analogy.

Now you choose one news source (the BBC website) and somehowe assume it is the only news report in the whole UK on the story. I saw 2 national Sunday newpapers today, both mentioning the story prominently, and one - The Sunday Times - gave it a significant analysis, including comparisons of inter religious attacks, and came to the conclusion that Muslims and Jews were more likely to be attacked for their faith than Christians. The story has not been censored and no it did not lead national news bulletins , but then again sadly many murders do not lead national bulletins , as violence becomes more prevalant and frankly this wasn't the worst story of violence of the weekend. No the media have not hidden the M word in this story, but you chose to make am ingorant series of claims about 'dhimmified' Britain on the basis of reading one story in one website, all I am guilty of is educating you a bit, oh and ensuring you lost your bet.

Colm, if that's how you are thinking, read the link below and give me your opinion on it. Don't worry, you won't get contaminated.

http://www.bnp.org.uk/2008/03/06/racism-cuts-both-ways/

As for:

Why don't you answer my question about white youths attacking an imam being described as christian? Would you object to this?

Sauce for the goose and all that....

Sunday, March 16, 2008 at 08:21PM | Peter

Well, Peter, show where this has this ever happened or is this just one of your imaginary questions?

Allan

Again you dodge the question. If it were to happen?

Colm: Well stated comeback. Troll apparently has been working too hard, and his raging persona (unchecked by actual facts as usual), seems to have been aggravated more as of late.

Peter, if it were to happen? If white youths were to attack an imam and be described as Christian, then I would have no objections if it were so i.e. the white youths were Christian. Has this happened or is this just an imaginary Peter-question?

Note that the perps of the attack on the priest should be described as muslim because they will describe themselves as muslim because they are muslim.

Mahons

Thanks for the compliment.

Allan

I have read the link and a pretty depressing article it makes. I have no doubt that broad;y speaking the media and the authorities in general are more willing to immediately label a racist murder when the victim is a member of an ethnic minority than when it is a white person. I don't seek to pretend that doesn't happen, but equally I don't think there is a planned consistency to the medias approach to murders. Some white victims get a great deal of publicity and so do some non-white victims. Sadly the vast majority of murder victims of all colours get little more than a fleeting mention in local papers. In our increasingly violent society there is often just too much bad news for the media to do justice to the victims.

I assume that the description "asian" came from the police. We hardly want the police to describe suspects as "Muslim looking" Or Christian looking either.

But other reports include more detail than the BBC. The Telegraph for example.

The Rt Rev Stephen Lowe, Bishop of Hulme, who used to work with Mr Ainsworth, said: "I would want to see a condemnation of this cowardly behaviour by senior Muslims in the community and really hope there isn't an over-reaction from the white community."

The fear with the BBC is that they have a view that we can't be trusted with too much information.

Colm (Lil Jo)

Glad to see you found the time to respond. Now show me anywhere in any of my posts where I said anything about the dhimification of Britain. You can't because I didn't.

Like I said you call me a crank yet it took you two days to come up with other stories (I don't see any links by the way).

I will take your word that they are what you say they are. So tell me did they catch the Youths yet? Did they put up a composit picture of the perps? Was there a follow up story today or is it just old news?

What you missed in all this while you were so busy defending your countries imaginarily impuned honor was the fact that your outrage was a much better read than the lack of outrage in the paper.

Troll

Please point out where I called you a crank ?

I am going to put this to bed now, suffice to say, I am here and I know a lot more than you about how this story was reported. But feel free to comfort yourself with your false prejudices about how the British press treated this story.