UK British News Megathread - aka CWCissey's news thread

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
https://news.sky.com/story/row-over-new-greggs-vegan-sausage-rolls-heats-up-11597679 (https://archive.ph/5Ba6o)

A heated row has broken out over a move by Britain's largest bakery chain to launch a vegan sausage roll.

The pastry, which is filled with a meat substitute and encased in 96 pastry layers, is available in 950 Greggs stores across the country.

It was promised after 20,000 people signed a petition calling for the snack to be launched to accommodate plant-based diet eaters.


But the vegan sausage roll's launch has been greeted by a mixed reaction: Some consumers welcomed it, while others voiced their objections.

View image on Twitter


spread happiness@p4leandp1nk
https://twitter.com/p4leandp1nk/status/1080767496569974785

#VEGANsausageroll thanks Greggs
2764.png


7
10:07 AM - Jan 3, 2019
See spread happiness's other Tweets
Twitter Ads info and privacy


Cook and food poverty campaigner Jack Monroe declared she was "frantically googling to see what time my nearest opens tomorrow morning because I will be outside".

While TV writer Brydie Lee-Kennedy called herself "very pro the Greggs vegan sausage roll because anything that wrenches veganism back from the 'clean eating' wellness folk is a good thing".

One Twitter user wrote that finding vegan sausage rolls missing from a store in Corby had "ruined my morning".

Another said: "My son is allergic to dairy products which means I can't really go to Greggs when he's with me. Now I can. Thank you vegans."

View image on Twitter


pg often@pgofton
https://twitter.com/pgofton/status/1080772793774624768

The hype got me like #Greggs #Veganuary

42
10:28 AM - Jan 3, 2019
See pg often's other Tweets
Twitter Ads info and privacy


TV presenter Piers Morgan led the charge of those outraged by the new roll.

"Nobody was waiting for a vegan bloody sausage, you PC-ravaged clowns," he wrote on Twitter.

Mr Morgan later complained at receiving "howling abuse from vegans", adding: "I get it, you're all hangry. I would be too if I only ate plants and gruel."

Another Twitter user said: "I really struggle to believe that 20,000 vegans are that desperate to eat in a Greggs."

"You don't paint a mustach (sic) on the Mona Lisa and you don't mess with the perfect sausage roll," one quipped.

Journalist Nooruddean Choudry suggested Greggs introduce a halal steak bake to "crank the fume levels right up to 11".

The bakery chain told concerned customers that "change is good" and that there would "always be a classic sausage roll".

It comes on the same day McDonald's launched its first vegetarian "Happy Meal", designed for children.

The new dish comes with a "veggie wrap", instead of the usual chicken or beef option.

It should be noted that Piers Morgan and Greggs share the same PR firm, so I'm thinking this is some serious faux outrage and South Park KKK gambiting here.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm curious. What was in this bill that was such a disaster?
Off the top of my tired head
-Transition period of 2 years. We are subject to all of their laws and regulations, but do not have representation in the European parliament. Can be extended.
-Single Customs Union with the EU. Binds UK to customs tariffs and other aspects of the CU
-Irish Backstop. After leaving, Ireland would remain in the Customs Union and Single Market until FTA is agreed between UK and Ireland. This would massively undermine UK Internal Market.
-Judicial ties to the CJEU/ECJ. Courts may defer/ask questions to the ECJ on points of EU law...as they do now.
-Divorce Bill - There is an exit bill of £37.8 bn to be given to the EU to pay "all obligations it undertook as a member of the EU". This more than anything should be an immediate fuck off to them. You have to pay to stop being a member of the EU. Reason they want this is because the UK funnels in a shit load of cash into the EU, far more than most of the other nations. German and UK money is primarily being used to prop up small states. Us leaving without giving them this will fuck them over hard. The EU likes to pretend that they don't desperately need it, but they do, moreso than us needing them.

These are off the top of my head. Put it this way. May has had 50 cabinet ministers resign. 33 of them were related to this bill. That's how utterly crap this is.
 
Last edited:
but critics argue the encryption makes it harder for the Government to find terrorists and paedophiles online.

Ah yes, because if there's anything pedos and jihadists are known for, it's operating in public channels, and if there's anything the UK is known for, it's for dealing with pedo jihadis.
 
Seems like some really don't like DoH.

The Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) has formally adopted DNS-over-HTTPS as a standard, and reignited a debate over whether it's a danger to the web's infrastructure.
The IETF gave the proposal its blessing late last week by elevating it to Request For Comment (RFC) level as RFC 8484.
...
Paul Vixie, one of the architects of the DNS, reckoned it's nothing short of a disaster. On Friday, he tweeted: "[DNS over HTTPS] is a cluster duck for internet security. Sorry to rain on your parade. The inmates have taken over the asylum."
...
"[DNS over HTTPS] is an over the top bypass of enterprise and other private networks. But DNS is part of the control plane, and network operators must be able to monitor and filter it. Use [DNS over TLS], never [DNS over HTTPS]."
 
why not just use a VPN that has a DNS changing feature? or TOR browser? features like these that are built into everyday casual use browsers usually suck, like opera VPN or any of the free VPN extensions out there
 
features like these that are built into everyday casual use browsers usually suck, like opera VPN or any of the free VPN extensions out there
That's probably because those browsers were never built with DNS fuckery and VPNs in mind and they're just sort of welded onto the side like a tumor. Brave is the only one I know of that was able to integrate a VPN relay well and that's just because they're using TOR.
 
That was the spin when she began her term in office, the image of a strong willed woman with an Iron will. History will show that she was nothing of the sort, flip flopped, and is the worst post war conservative PM.

To give the most inaccurate and simplified of rundowns:
-Initially appeared to be a competent leader, with high rankings in the polls, and indicated that she would follow the will of the people and give them Brexit, stating time and time again that come March 29 2019, Britain would leave the EU, deal or no deal.

-That dropped massively after she called a snap election in order to consolidate power (She became PM after David Cameron stepped down, and was put into the position of PM without a Conservative Membership Vote because her opponent stepped down) and extend Conservative stay in power (as opposed to the 3 years she had remaining from the 2015 election, she would push the next mandatory election to 2022). She ran one of the worst campaigns imaginable, based off of a laughable repetition of the phrases "Strong and Stable" and "Brexit means Brexit", apparently trying to pull some Trumpian styled slogan based campaign (Build the Wall, Make America Great Again/MAGA, Even got one of his chief campaign officers to help). So confident in her lead that she pushed controversial (for Brits) points onto her manifesto, such as upholding the tradition of foxhunting and the Winter Fuel payment. This lead to a DECREASE in seats, leading to a minority government and having to ally with the DUP to get a majority. It also turns out that she completely leaves her cabinet in the dark regarding policy making, and relies on her aides and the civil service to implement policy, with them only seeing the manifesto mere hours before it went live.

-Since then, she has rolled back from her position of Leave on the 29th, Deal or No Deal, to pushing forward a Bill that is a complete surrender on all fucking points. It is such a pile of shit that we would have been better off staying in the EU than leaving with that Bill. She tries to pass it once...and fails. She then tries to pass it again....and fails. Once more...and another fail. She is such a fucking disaster that her party holds a vote of no confidence in her as the leader, then the Commons hold a vote of no confidence in the party, each time, she is able to survive like an irritating cockroach. (This would be the equivilant of the Republicans trying to vote Trump out, then trying to do Impeachment proceedings, and both failing...kinda). Brexit was delayed, and she pushed a bill to remove "Hard Brexit" off of the table (which I don't recall as properly binding, though I may be wrong).

-Each time, more of her ministers have been resigning. She then states that to pass the bill, she would team up with Commie Corbyn to get it through...only for negotiations to break down. She then releases the "new, amended bill" which includes a vote in the House of Commons on holding a Second Referendum. This is the last straw, and the 1922 committee manages to gather enough support to CHANGE THE RULES on how long before another vote of no confidence. Yes, she is so bad, there was enough support to potentially change the rules on kicking the PM out. She made the announcement to step down rather than be humiliated...and so we are where we are now.

-Brexit policy aside. Her administration was a disaster. The got caught up in the Windrush Scandal, which involved people from the Windrush Generation (British Africans and Jamaicans who came to the country in 1948) being detained and threatened to be deported, as well as long term residents being refused re-entry into the country due to a clerical error. This lead to the Home Secretary, Amber Rudd, resigning in disgrace...only for May to later bring her back in as Minister for Work and Pensions. Edit: To me, this looks like AR taking the fall for a fuckup made by TM, as they initially got warnings in 2013 that this error was occurring, when May was Home Sec. Looks like AR took the fall, then was later called back to fill a minor position, though by that time, so many ministers had resigned that she was running out of options, so why she did so is anyones guess.

-Her government has been one of the most pro-nanny state governments in a while, and is perfectly happy with rolling back freedoms using similar excuses to Blair and Bush (It's to protect from terrorism/hate crime/ protect the children). This has led to the terrible and much mocked porn loisence (protect the kids), a ban/increase tax on sugar (it's for your health, fuck making your own decisions). Her banning Tyler the Creator was not done by her as PM, but when she was Home Secretary under Cameron, with her sending him a signed letter. It is also on her watch that the Tommy Robinson and Count Dankula cases (though the latter is in Scotland under the SNP and their devolved powers), so that also didn't help. She is also allowing Huawei to help build part of the 5G network which supports the 5 Eyes (UK, US, Canada, NZ and Australia), which is a massive security risk and ended up with her firing her Secretary of State for Defence (and longtime supporter) Gavin Williamson for allegedly leaking it (which he denies and I call bullshit). US has rightly refused to use the 5G network so long as Huawei is working on it, so the whole thing is pointless.

-Overall, a completely pathetic PM who managed to piss away a massive amount of support, waste everyones time, implement hated authoritarian laws, make the UK look like a joke internationally for both the laws and its inability to get its shit together. She has managed to fuck the party into the dirt, and has made the task of implementing a proper Brexit a colossal pain in the ass for her successor. Undoubtably the worst conservative PM postwar, and definitely in the running for top 5 worst PMs of all time.
Thanks for that write up. It's all such a convoluted clusterfuck, it's hard to keep up with it all.

Really, Cameron's big surprise in the referendum result, and then May's surprise at her weakened government after the election should have let these chucklefucks know that things weren't business as usual, and they actually needed to stop being exceptional. No such luck, though.

What a disasterous phase for the British parliament. I don't know how May could have done a worse job of things with Brexit.
 
I posted this in the Brexit thread and it's worth reposting here. Huffpost appears with their hot take:

Theresa May Is Just Another Professional Woman Dragged Down By Unprofessional Men

Dressed in a red suit, her hair blowing in the uncompromising wind, Theresa May confirmed her intention to resign as prime minister on Friday. In a speech which outlined her infamous determination and resolve, Theresa May confirmed she would resign from office on Friday 7 June.

In doing so, May will trigger a Conservative leadership election, one of the most important in the country’s history. While there are numerous ministers and backbenchers supposedly set to confirm their intention to stand, it’s notable that Boris Johnson is the current frontrunner. So, picture this, within a matter of weeks he could be the next prime minister.

In essence, we could be replacing one of the most collected and professional women in politics – I have no idea how she’s handled the last few months but it should be bottled and sold en masse – with one of the most unprofessional of men. And in some ways, that’s much of his public appeal.

It would be moderately alarming and eyebrow raising if this was an exception but, as part of what now seems to be an emerging trend, it’s a prospect that should be unsettling. Despite the moderate advancements that have been made towards equality within the political world, around the globe, unprofessional, inexperienced men are being promoted over experienced, professional women. And it’s a trend that needs to be talked about.

There’s an often overlooked double standard in how male and female politicians are assessed within the political world, with women often being judged under a much stricter magnifying glass that that of their male counterparts.

When Diane Abbott made her now famous mathematical error on police pay during a 2017 interview with LBC, she was ridiculed and declared unfit for public office. Yet, by contrast, Boris Johnson published comments that referred to burka wearing Muslim women as ‘post boxes’, he was considered brave for expressing his offensive beliefs. And is now potentially set to be the next prime minister.

When women make mistakes, they are seen as being incompetent, stupid and unsuited for the political world. Yet, when men make mistakes, they are seen as having made mistakes, are seen as figures of fun and face little further judgement on their character or their ability.

Yet, this is just the average politician being criticised in a far from standardised way but electoral trends are now showing us that women are being further punished should they dare to enter any kind of political contest.

We only have to look to the United States to see the full consequences of this phenomenon in action. At the 2016 election, Donald Trump was new to the political foray, with no actual political experience but bundles of supposed ‘character’. On the other hand, you had Hillary Clinton, a woman who had spent the past five decades living and breathing the political life. Whilst she was undoubtedly tainted by hers, and her husbands, past behaviour, she was certainly a much more respectable and experienced candidate. Throughout the campaign, Clinton often faced criticism for her outfit and her hairstyle selections, whilst Trump’s hair has now become a signature of the his unprofessional appearance.

Yet more concerningly, Clinton was often misjudged for her marriage to former president Bill Clinton. It was he that had an affair and yet, it was often her that faced criticism. And it’s not a phenomenon that is unique to the United States. During the Labour Party leadership election of 2015, which saw Jeremy Corbyn triumph over his more experienced counter parts, a similar rhetoric was noted. In this election, experienced politician Yvette Cooper chose to stand and was an initial front runner. Yet swathes of people immediately declared themselves unable to vote for such a politician. Why? Well, not because of her political beliefs or past voting record, but because of her marriage to divisive politician Ed Balls.

Women are often are judged by the relationships that they hold and are traditionally seen as being ‘tainted’ by such associations. It’s a trend that is intrinsically sexist and outdated, as it suggests that women are still unable to differentiate their partners opinion from their own.

But amongst all of this, there is hope for the future and the 2020 presidential election could now see more women than ever choosing to be considered for the White House. So, despite everything, it seems that on the whole, women are more determined than ever and are not yet being deterred by this damaging trend.

As is the case with fad diets, fashion and even politics trends, by their own nature, fade into history, and when they do someone has to be there to pick up the pieces. In this case – just as Theresa May has attempted to do with Brexit – professional women will be there to clean up after unprofessional men.

Great, so what is it that we do in the meantime?

We, as a collective,, have to stand up to the often dominating status quo and challenge outdated and misjudged traditions. We have to fight back at elections, and do so by standing and ensuring that people vote, making our voices heard and refusing to be silenced.

But more importantly, we have to take a leaf out of Theresa May’s book and stand resilient in the face of such a storm.

The roads of history are paved with stories of fantastic women and when backlash culture dies, we will be there to pick up the pieces.


It wasn't that she was completely incompetent at enacting a policy she knew about before taking the leadership noo, it was all because she is a woman. Clearly if it was a guy dithering around not knowing his arse from his elbow we'd be just fine about it... Fuck off huffpost.
 
Thanks for that write up. It's all such a convoluted clusterfuck, it's hard to keep up with it all.

Really, Cameron's big surprise in the referendum result, and then May's surprise at her weakened government after the election should have let these chucklefucks know that things weren't business as usual, and they actually needed to stop being exceptional. No such luck, though.

What a disasterous phase for the British parliament. I don't know how May could have done a worse job of things with Brexit.
@Ponderous Pillock brought up some extra points on the Brexit thread which I forgot/didn't know as to how useless she was. One of the key reasons she completely fucked Brexit up was by neutering both of her Secretaries of State for Exiting the European Union, David Davis and his replacement Dominic Raab (who looks like a frontrunner to take over). She frustrated them by not letting them lead negotiations in the areas they were appointed in, instead putting a unelected civil servant in, Olly Robbins, to perform negotiations. This guy is a staunch Europhile who was caught at a bar saying that the Withdrawal Bill which he had pushed was designed to allow Britain to re-enter the EU in 5 years, and even enquired about getting a Belgian passport. This is who she relied upon to get what she wanted.

A complete disaster. Olly Robbins should be hung from the top of parliament for being a complete slimy shit-bag.
 
@Ponderous Pillock brought up some extra points on the Brexit thread which I forgot/didn't know as to how useless she was. One of the key reasons she completely fucked Brexit up was by neutering both of her Secretaries of State for Exiting the European Union, David Davis and his replacement Dominic Raab (who looks like a frontrunner to take over). She frustrated them by not letting them lead negotiations in the areas they were appointed in, instead putting a unelected civil servant in, Olly Robbins, to perform negotiations. This guy is a staunch Europhile who was caught at a bar saying that the Withdrawal Bill which he had pushed was designed to allow Britain to re-enter the EU in 5 years, and even enquired about getting a Belgian passport. This is who she relied upon to get what she wanted.

A complete disaster. Olly Robbins should be hung from the top of parliament for being a complete slimy shit-bag.

Even then, the "Inside the European Union" (or whatever the dross was called) documentary they had spins DD being useless, and they ensured they fed that back to the UK government. Of course, the BBC hid that documentary away (in which the EU shows its hatred and belligerence for the UK in full fucking flow) on BBC Four.

Highlights include:

EU was originally terrified as the UK was assembling a hugely competent team, with New Zealand offering to loan trade negotiators and their expertise for these negotiations. This combined with the UK's previous reputation of being "perfidious albion" actually had the team worried.

DD was unfortunately rather lazy at his job and would sod off. This is because DD could delegate well and resulted in the UK demanding the EU go line by line to justify the random price tags they kept quoting. Also repeatedly asking for things that had been granted to other third party states in an agreement.

EU calling tory negotiations "Fucking pricks" as soon as they were out of earshot and wanted to physically assault them.

EU celebrating when they couldn't believe their luck at how much they got from us thanks to the useless negotiating team under Robbins, with him frequently offering far more than his brief permitted to the point Raab had to hastily take the eurostar to Brussels to tell them the government wasn't offering things Robbins had said was on the table.

Ultimately, this (now hopefully dead) withdrawal agreement will go down in the history books as a very close shave from a Prime Minister who won't be painted kindly at all by all but bitter remainiacs.

She can join Eden and Lord North on the "The fuck did we have these mongs in power?" pile.
 
She certainly played her hand very badly, but I don't think we should forget that the hand she was dealt was terrible to begin with. Personally, I'm much more inclined to blame David Cameron for creating this mess, rather than Theresa May for failing to pick up the pieces.
yeah, he was an insufferable fucking cunt; May is to Cameron as mild eczema is to congenital syphilis
 
Is it safe to say the UK is the biggest shithole in the western world? When there banning pornagraphy and arresting people for edgy jokes Orwell is just around the corner.
it's been turning into East Germany II: The Klumps for the last decade or two - we've already got the shortages, now we just need the bread lines and the Stasi
 
@Ponderous Pillock brought up some extra points on the Brexit thread which I forgot/didn't know as to how useless she was. One of the key reasons she completely fucked Brexit up was by neutering both of her Secretaries of State for Exiting the European Union, David Davis and his replacement Dominic Raab (who looks like a frontrunner to take over). She frustrated them by not letting them lead negotiations in the areas they were appointed in, instead putting a unelected civil servant in, Olly Robbins, to perform negotiations. This guy is a staunch Europhile who was caught at a bar saying that the Withdrawal Bill which he had pushed was designed to allow Britain to re-enter the EU in 5 years, and even enquired about getting a Belgian passport. This is who she relied upon to get what she wanted.

A complete disaster. Olly Robbins should be hung from the top of parliament for being a complete slimy shit-bag.
Maybe she was just a big The Thick of It fan?
 
Now if you want to kill yourself in the UK you've gotta hope you have some chronic, fatal genetic disorder and wait around in hospital until the death panel decides to pull the plug.

It's easier if you're a little girl, but first, you have to be raped by a hundred barbarians before they turn your body into kebab.
 
If fetishes need to be banned because they're oppressive, yet fetishes often come into being as a reaction to what is forbidden/verboten, then how does a police state ever actually stop its citizens from defying their authority?

:thinking:

“Now I will tell you the answer to my question. It is this. The Party seeks power entirely for its own sake. We are not interested in the good of others; we are interested solely in power, pure power. What pure power means you will understand presently. We are different from the oligarchies of the past in that we know what we are doing. All the others, even those who resembled ourselves, were cowards and hypocrites. The German Nazis and the Russian Communists came very close to us in their methods, but they never had the courage to recognize their own motives. They pretended, perhaps they even believed, that they had seized power unwillingly and for a limited time, and that just around the corner there lay a paradise where human beings would be free and equal. We are not like that. We know that no one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it. Power is not a means; it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship. The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now you begin to understand me.”
 
There are myriad ways in which an ISP can block websites without reference to DNS. IP blacklisting, SNI/host header inspection, and metadata analysis are just a few methods which readily come to my mind (and I'm by no means an expert).
Cloudflare is working on encrypting SNI.

I like that countries like the UK are trying to pull this shit so we can repair security holes in the internet.
 
I have to imagine that Google decided go against this utterly badly handled idiocy because while they may be evil, they take pride in being efficient profesional evil. This is literally Lawfull Evil sneering over Chaotic Evil stupidity.
 
https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/...nment-blueprints-shaping-post-terror-planning


'Mind control': The secret UK government blueprints shaping post-terror planning
After the 2017 London Bridge attack, local officials were told: 'We're sending you a hundred imams.' How hashtags, vigils and flowers are used to steer the public towards grief instead of anger

" class="video-embed-field-lazy container-element" style="box-sizing: border-box; cursor: pointer; position: relative;">
Ax2FWS4qYVw.jpg


By
Ian Cobain
in
London
Published date: 22 May 2019 06:34 UTC | Last update: 7 hours 12 min ago
The British government has prepared for terrorist incidents by pre-planning social media campaigns that are designed to appear to be a spontaneous public response to attacks, Middle East Eye has learned.
Hashtags are carefully tested before attacks happen, Instagram images selected, and “impromptu” street posters are printed.
In operations that contingency planners term “controlled spontaneity”, politicians’ statements, vigils and inter-faith events are also negotiated and planned in readiness for any terrorist attack.
The campaigns have been deployed during every terrorist incident in recent years including the 2017 London Bridge attack and the Finsbury Park mosque attack.

EXCLUSIVE: UK experts working on post-terror planning for Gulf states
Read More »
Within hours of an attack, other campaigns are swiftly organised, with I “heart” posters being designed and distributed, according to the location of the attack, and plans drawn up for people to hand out flowers at the scene of the crime, in apparently unprompted gestures of love and support.
The purpose of the operations, according to a number of people involved in their creation, is to shape public responses, encouraging individuals to focus on empathy for the victims and a sense of unity with strangers, rather than reacting with violence or anger.
Many of the operations are said to be modelled on extensive plans that were drawn up in the UK to channel public anger in the wake of any attack on the 2012 London Olympics.
Some had been devised the previous year, at a time when social media platforms were aiding communications between protesters during the Arab Spring – and when a series of riots were erupting in towns and cities across England.
One senior figure involved in that contingency planning says that the riots had “absolutely terrified” the British government, and that Theresa May, who was then home secretary and is now prime minister, had been particularly shaken.
Croydon
A riot police officer stands guard in front of a burning building during riots in Croydon, south London, in 2011 (AFP)
The measures drawn up in advance of the Olympics were intended to “corral the Princess Dianaesque grief” that was expected to emerge after any mass-casualty attack, a reference to the public mourning that followed the death of Princess Diana in a car crash in 1997. This person describes those measures candidly as an attempt at “mind control”.
Although there was no terrorist incident at the 2012 Olympics, variants are said to have been deployed in the wake of every attack in the UK since then.
“The point I noticed change was the Olympics,” says one veteran contingency planner in the UK.
“The management of the secret, hidden emergency planning work behind the Olympics became the social control that we would fall back on if we had any terrorist attack, or if we had any disruption. It’s 'this is the hashtag we go to'. And we’ve never come back from those days.
“This job has changed significantly from planning for organic, people responses to tragedy, to being told: ‘We would like the people to do that, how do you get them there?’”
“A lot of the public’s responses are spontaneous, of course. But a lot are shaped. The [British] government doesn’t want spontaneity: it wants controlled spontaneity.”
'That's what we want'
Officials at the Home Office in particular are said to have been impressed by football fans’ demonstrations of support for a Premier League player, Fabrice Muamba, after he suffered a cardiac arrest and collapsed on the pitch in March 2012, four months before the start of the Olympics.
At subsequent matches, fans of many different clubs held up placards and bannersbearing messages of support for Muamba.
MEE understands that during subsequent contingency planning meetings, Home Officials suggested that replicating such a response could assist the recovery process after any terrorist attack, and result in the Olympic Games continuing.
Fabrice Muamba
Arsenal fans display an image of Fabrice Muamba in March 2012 after the footballer suffered a caridac arrest while playing for Bolton (AFP)
“They were saying: ‘That’s what we want. If something happens at the Olympics, we want you to make people respond like that. And then the people will want the Olympics to carry on.”
A number of Western governments are understood to have exchanged information about the way in which they use social media in an attempt to shape public responses following terrorist attacks.
Examples of “controlled spontaneity” within the UK that MEE has identified include:
  • a media campaign that was swiftly deployed after a number of British and American aid workers were beheaded by Islamic State militants in 2014.
  • the use of hashtags, posters and vigils after the London Bridge attacks of June 2017 in which eight people were murdered and almost 50 injured.
  • a Twitter, Facebook and mainstream media campaign that was employed later that month, shortly after a man drove his van into a group of people outside a mosque in north London, killing one person and injuring 10 others.
Union Jack hijab
After Alan Henning, a British aid worker, was murdered by Islamic State in October 2014, the Research, Information and Communications Unit (RICU) – a controversial propaganda unit that is part of the Office of Security and Counterterrorism at the UK Home Office – turned to a striking image that had already been developed by one of its private sector contractors.
The image created by Breakthrough Media, a London-based communications company, was a photograph of a woman wearing a Union Jack hijab, taken in profile.
The Sun
The image of a woman in a Union Jack hijab was used on the front page of The Sun (Twitter)
It had been developed, according to an internal Breakthrough document seen by MEE, because “the UK authorities wanted to challenge ultraconservative and misogynistic interpretations of Islam – particularly those around women – in order to promote the true face of Islam among vulnerable UK communities”.
The document explains that RICU’s objective was to “establish a platform for British Muslim women to set out an alternative interpretation of Islam and to take a lead in countering extremism in their communities”.

EXCLUSIVE: UK 'grassroots' anti-extremism campaign produced by Home Office
Read More »
The outcome, it goes on, was Making A Stand, “a new British Muslim women’s campaigning organisation and network active within British Muslim communities and with an increasingly high-profile in the national media”.
A few days after the murder of Henning, the campaign described as Making A Stand approached The Sun, a tabloid newspaper, which agreed to dedicate its entire front page to the Union Jack hijab photograph.
Inside, the newspaper devoted a further six pages to coverage of political leaders and members of the public who said that they were making a stand against Islamic State terror.
Emails disclosed under the Freedom of Information Act show that RICU monitored online reaction to the Sun’s front page, which its staff acknowledged as “our product”.
Staff at Breakthrough were delighted with the way their work had been passed on to the Sun: a framed copy of the front page was hung in the company’s central London offices.
The Union Jack hijab is one one of hundreds of media projects that Breakthrough had designed on behalf of RICU as part of the UK’s controversial counter-radicalisation programme known as Prevent.
Recently rebranded as Zinc Network, the company continues to bid for, and win, RICU contracts. Zinc Network had not responded to requests for comment at the time of publication.
Internal RICU documents seen by MEE say the unit is working “at an industrial scale and pace” to develop messages that aim to “effect attitudinal and behavioural change” – particularly among Muslims. The involvement of the UK government is rarely acknowledged.
‘We’re sending you a hundred imams’
While covert messaging developed as part of the Prevent programme is aimed at Muslims, particularly young men, attempts to plan for “controlled spontaneity” in the wake of a terrorist attack are aimed at the general population.
The day after the London Bridge attacks, a team of men arrived at the scene of the murders in an unmarked van.
They could be seen being admitted behind the police cordon, where they plastered walls with a number of posters bearing images of London, and number of hashtags that were already circulating on Twitter: #TurnToLove, #For London and #LoveWillWin.
This practice, known in the UK as fly-posting, is a minor criminal offence, but police admitted the members of the fly-posting team behind their cordon and took no action. The men doing this work declined to tell journalists who they were, or where they were from.
When the cordon was eventually lifted and members of the public were able to return to the scene of the attacks, they found themselves surrounded by apparently impromptu signs of the public’s defiance and unity.
London Bridge
Religious leaders gather near London Bridge on 7 June, 2017 (AFP)
The day after that, a government official telephoned Southwark Council, the local authority for the area where the murders happened.
“He said: ‘We’re sending you a hundred imams,’” a council official recalls. Two days after that, about 100 imams and Muslim community leaders from across the UK duly appeared on the bridge, and one read a statement condemning the attack.
The following weekend, a group of Muslims arrived at the bridge and handed out thousands of red roses. One of the organisers described it as “a symbolic gesture of love” for people affected by the attack.
What the event’s organiser did not say is that she worked at the Home Office, in law enforcement.
She told MEE that it was entirely a "grassroots" initiative with no government assistance: "I was acting as a member of the community and sought assistance from my personal networks."
The 'hero' of Finsbury Park
A week later, in the early hours of Monday morning, an Islamophobic lone attacker, Darren Osborne, drove his van into a group of men near a mosque at Finsbury Park, north London.
A number of young men restrained Osborne, and protected him from attack by others. A little while later they were joined by Mohammed Mahmoud, the mosque’s imam.
By the following morning, the hashtag #WeStandTogether was running across Twitter, after initially being promoted by police and police commanders.
As journalists gathered at the police cordon, a number were approached by a woman who called herself Gabbie, and explained that she worked for a company called Horizon PR.
What “Gabbie” did not say is that “Horizon PR” had been created by Breakthrough Media and another communications company, M&C Saatchi PR UK, and that Breakthrough has used it to promote the messaging it creates – and disseminates through co-operating civil society groups – under the terms of its contract with RICU.
Finsbury Park Mosque
Posters on the wall outside Finsbury Park Mosque following a van-ramming attack at another mosque nearby (AFP)
A number of journalists have told MEE that “Gabbie” offered to introduce them to a man standing nearby. This man explained that his name was Shaukat Warraich and that he was from an organisation called Faith Associates.
Warraich stressed to the journalists the role that the mosque’s imam had played in protecting Osborne until he could be handed over to police. This came to dominate news reports in the days after the attack.
Warraich did not say anything about his organisation’s relationships with both Breakthrough and with the British government’s propaganda unit, RICU.
Faith Associates, a limited company, has for several years been funded in part by government contracts, and internal Breakthrough and RICU documents seen by MEE show that it works to disseminate government messages.
MEE understands that subsequent media reports have caused some ill-feeling in the area: the young men who restrained and protected the killer before the imam arrived at the scene believe their role had been overlooked.
“They were proud that they had done the right thing, but believe that they were then portrayed as a lynch mob,” said one person who prays regularly at the mosque. The young men are now rarely seen at the mosque, he added.
Asked about the role that he and "Horizon PR" had played in amplifying Mahmoud's role in conversations with journalists, Warraich replied that he had been working to promote mosque security for some years.
Mohammed Mahmoud declined to comment.
‘Flowers, not riots’
The blending of traditional emergency planning – the police, paramedical and hospital responses - with the use of post-attack propaganda appears to have gathered pace in the UK in recent years.
This has been a time when covert government messaging has been developed as part of the Prevent programme, and during a period when the growing use of social media has offered new opportunities for the creation of “controlled spontaneity”.
By 2016, Facebook was recognising that its reach would be extended still further if it operated as an emergency response institution following disasters.
Some governments have become increasingly nervous about the power of social media, however, and will attempt to shut it down rather than make use of it – as happened in Sri Lanka after more than 250 people were killed in suicide bombings in April.
In the UK, central and local governments are obliged to prepare for the aftermath of any disaster under the terms of the Civil Contingencies Act 2004, a piece of legislation that arose out of the vulnerability that Tony Blair’s government is said to have felt during a series of crises early in his premiership.
In late 2000, countrywide protests over fuel prices led to petrol shortages, panic buying and the prospect of economic collapse. The following year an outbreak of foot and mouth disease cost the country an estimated £8 billion ($10.25bn) as livestock was slaughtered and many rural areas sealed off.
Once the Act was passed, a National Recovery Working Group was established within the Cabinet Office, the UK government’s central department.
This body established protocols and guidance documents that would be used to aid “recovery”, which was defined as a distinct phase after a terrorist attack or a natural disaster.
The Cabinet Office offered the following definition: “Recovery is the process of rebuilding, restoring and rehabilitating the community following an emergency.”
Dr Lucy Easthope, a leading figure at the Cabinet Office emergency planning college, has written that “recovery” has since come to be seen as “a specific phase of the disaster that emergency planners attempt to order and something that can be planned for in advance before the specificities of the emergency are known. (The implication being that that these details are a minor issue, capable of being filled in later.)”
London Bridge
Construction workers lay flowers near the scene of the London Bridge attack in June 2017 (Reuters)
In order to keep the recovery process under control, hashtags and Facebook posts are said to be examined exhaustively in advance of their use, to establish that they can be used without provoking an unintended reaction.
After a terrorist attack – or any other disaster – Cabinet Office teams will work very quickly with the Red Cross and with local contingency planners, who usually send out the first social media messages, MEE has been told.
Emergency planners will also advise on the form of words that political leaders should use after such an attack, and enact the pre-planned vigils and inter-faith events.
“What is wanted is flowers being handed out outside mosques,” one emergency planner emphasises, “and not riots”.
'Get the Novichok cleared up'
One place where the local team was said to have rejected some central government planners’ suggestions was Salisbury, the town in central England where Russian agents used a nerve agent known as Novichok to poison a double agent, Sergei Skripal, and his daughter Yulia in March 2018.
“In Salisbury, people were telling us: ‘We’re not going to wear T-shirts saying I heart Salisbury – we just want you to get the Novichok cleared up.’
“We can play the hashtag game in Manchester, where there’s a lot of young people, and they like it. In Salisbury there’s a lot of ex-military, and people just seemed to have good sense. So we didn’t use the usual recovery stuff there.”
Manchester City, Abu Dhabi and the rise of English football's new order
Read More »
A number of the people involved in the advance planning of “controlled spontaneity” clearly have some misgivings about the way in which emergency planning for the immediate aftermath of terrorist attacks is being combined with propaganda techniques that are intended to influence the responses of the public.
Easthope – who wrote British government recovery management plans for more than a decade – has disclosed her concern that the multi-faith displays of solidarity that are negotiated in advance of terrorist attacks, and the pre-planned messages of resilience on social media, may not always be the best way to respond.
Perhaps, she has written, “the fight rhetoric has gone too far” and it is a mistake “to insist that the first message should be ‘we shall overcome’ as if the enemy was on the beaches.”
‘Anaesthetic for the community’
Some emergency planners are also concerned that the needs of bereaved families are rarely paramount when plans to create “controlled spontaneity” are being developed.
“The hashtag can start to feel very empty very early on, and I don’t think this ever really puts bereaved families at the heart of what you’re doing,” says one. “It’s an anaesthetic for the wider community, but it’s no replacement for really good humanitarian care for the people most badly affected.”
Haka
Schoolchildren in New Zealand perform the haka in March, three days after an attack on mosques in Christchurch left dozens dead (AFP)
Nor, some say, is the public being encouraged to engage in debate about the causes of the hatred that underpin terrorist attacks.
“The government wants the Twitter storm or the Facebook storm to be in its gift, and of course it can’t be: but you can distract people by putting up a photograph of a French flag or whatever.
“We are not having these debates because we are saying ‘I heart so-and-so’, and ‘I’m going to change my profile picture to a New Zealand flag’, and ‘I’m going to do the haka in the school assembly’.
“When there’s nothing people can actually do, they can change the photo on their Facebook page. Then they can feel they’ve done something about it, they can go to work, and they’re not agitating the government.
“But we’re not going to get to the bottom of terrorism by socially engineering a response. We’re not doing the difficult debate. And what that stops, is true learning.”
The Cabinet Office said some information about its emergency planning was publicly available, but some remained for internal use only. It did not comment on criticisms of its current operations.
This article is available in French on Middle East Eye French edition.
 
Back
Top Bottom