Paper review 10/2/07

Now that six of the nine men arrested in Birmingham have been charged the press reporting on this case is more fact-based. However, whilst speculation and rumour is down, it’s not out.

Times:

It is understood that all of the charges relate to the alleged plot to kidnap a Muslim soldier, behead him on film and post the footage on the internet.

Telegraph:

The men are accused of supplying equipment to terrorists between March last year and January this year, under the pretence of bringing in aid for Pakistan earthquake victims.

The Times says that the indictment against Parviz Khan, 36 stated:

that between November 2006 and January 2007 he “engaged in conduct to give effect to his intention to kidnap and kill a member of the British Armed Forces”.

Note the word “kill”. In the whole of the Time’s report this is the only instance in which the word “kill” is employed. The same report uses the word “behead” twice.

The Telegraph uses the word “kill” only in the headline. It uses the words “execute” and “execution” as substitutes in the body of its report.

The Daily Mail and the Sun each use the word “behead” once.

Meanwhile, the Guardian reports Assistant Chief Constable Shaw’s criticism of media reporting:

Mr Shaw also criticised some of the press reporting, and possible damage to the investigation and local communities, asking for "care and responsibility" in covering the case and speaking of "frustration and damage" to communities labelled in the press.

But characterisations of Birmingham’s Muslims as people who are angry continue.

The Telegraph implies that they are angry and liable to act in an undignified manner.

[ACC Shaw] tried to calm tempers in the Muslim community by praising their leadership and emphasising that the arrests were "more than a policing operation"… Dr Mohammad Naseem, the chairman of the Birmingham Central Mosque, said the city's Muslim community should remain dignified and let the law take its course.

The Times does the same:

Mohammad Naseem, chairman of the Birmingham Central mosque, urged the Muslim community to remain dignified and calm.

The Times and Daily Mail find space in the same story to write about the charges against Abu Izzadeen. How the two stories are related (er… they’re both about Muslims?) I don’t know. Nor, apparently, do the Time and Mail, except to say that Abu Izzadeen made a speech in Birmingham which is now under investigation.

News: 6 men charged

From Birmingham Post:

West Midlands Police said Basiru Gassama (29), from Birmingham, will appear at Westminster Magistrates’ Court in London on Saturday. He is accused of withholding information about a potential act of terrorism. On 8 February five others appeared, amid tight security, at City of Westminster Magistrates' Court.

One of them, Parviz Khan (36), is accused of planning to kidnap and kill a British soldier.

He faces a charge, between November 1 2006 and 31 January 2007, of engaging in conduct "to give effect to his intention to kidnap and kill a member of the British Armed Forces".

Khan and the other four – Amjad Mahmood, Mohammed Irfan, Zahoor Iqbal and Hamid Elasmar – are all charged with two offences each.

One is under section 5(1) of the Terrorism Act 2006 and the other under section 17 the Terrorism Act 2000.

The first alleges that between March 30 2006 and January 31 2007 they engaged in conduct to give effect to an intention to supply equipment for use in committing acts of terrorism;

The second states that between the same dates they entered into or became concerned in a funding arrangement that they knew or had cause to suspect "may be used for the purposes of terrorism".

Khan also faces the charge alleging the kidnap plot while Mahmood (31) is also accused of failing to disclose information which might have been of "material assistance" in preventing the alleged plot.

Khan, Mahmood and Elasmar (43) did not apply for bail. A bail application for Iqbal (29) was refused.

Iqbal and Irfan (30), whose bail application was withdrawn, were also remanded in custody.

All five men are now due to appear at the Old Bailey on February 23.

Paper review 8/2/07

The Telegraph and the Times could report that two people have been released without charge and that questions are being raised about, not only the unnamed briefings to the press but also, the investigation iteslf. But no... they would rather take the opportunity to tell us about those ever-angry Muslims.

Anger at release of two held over ‘beheading plot’ - Times
Muslim leaders reacted with anger last night after two of the nine suspects alleged to be involved in a plot to kidnap and kill a British soldier were released without charge.

Warning over 'beheading plot' arrests - Telegraph
Muslim leaders yesterday warned police of a backlash after two men arrested over an alleged plot to kidnap and behead a Muslim soldier were released without charge.

This is very similar to the Sun's headline and first para:

Muslims' fury at kidnap probe - Sun
MUSLIM leaders have warned of a backlash over the police probe into the alleged plot to kidnap and behead a British soldier.

Whilst the Independent and the Guardian quote from one of the released men, the Times only quotes him in one para. The Telegraph meanwhile is oblivious "The men immediately went into hiding and declined to comment." However, it does quote their lawyer, Gareth Pierce.

The Guardian says "Lurid details of the alleged "beheading" plot were passed to a small group of reporters, before all nine men had been detained... Police have expressed anger at the briefings... Some of the details have since been dismissed as untrue." But not before its says "The Guardian understands that the operation was stepped up in December after one person was seen near a soldier, who was feared to be a potential victim, and another was seen to buy video equipment."

The papers are yet to report that Liberty has written to the Home Secretary and filed a Freedom of Information request relating to unnamed briefings to the press by Whitehall sources.

Past performance: Forest Gate

The press has been busy over the last few days telling us about beheadings, orange jumpsuits, execution houses in Tipton, hitlists and such. All their information is, of course, coming from unnamed sources. However, we’ve been here before. I remember reading about unnamed sources and their warnings about suicide vests and bomb factories six months ago…

The Metropolitan Police’s 2nd June 2006 raid on an address in Forest Gate, East London, provided the press with enough material with which to implant fear and suspicion in their readers just a day after the raid was launched.

The raid was carried out on the basis of "specific intelligence" from a sole untested source that the police said they wanted to "prove or disprove" (Telegraph 3/6/06 page 4). However, police were unwilling to talk about the specifics of the case but the Health Protection Agency provided assurances that the threat to the public was very low. The Independent pointed out that "no neighbours were evacuated" (3/6/06 page 5). Furthermore, police had found no "weapons, chemicals or evidence of a planned attack" (Daily Mail 3/6/06 page 4).

But the papers were unrepentant in warning the public of a "'suicide vest' which would pump out poisonous gas" (Mail page 1) and planting fears that "a bomb containing poisonous chemicals may be in the hands of Islamic fanatics elsewhere in the capital" (Daily Express 3/6/06 page 1). The Times went to the trouble of splashing an arty picture of a man in a suicide vest on its front page. Express readers were treated to a smaller picture of a "martyr's vest" on page 4.

On its front page the Guardian wrote that there were fears that "an attack on a British target using an unconventional weapon could be staged soon" (Guardian 3/6/06 page 1). It was only on the inside pages that it pointed out that, in fact, there was no intelligence on a specific target and that the threat level remained static (Guardian page 5). Other papers were more specific and less reserved in inciting fear. The tabloids expounded on possible targets where the, as yet not charged, men may have deployed their, as yet not found, chemical/gas bomb/vest. The Express predicted that it was "likely the plotters were aiming to attack a Tube train in a chilling repeat of the July 7 atrocities" (Express page 4). "A pub crowded for a World Cup game" (Mail page 1) and a "crowded shopping centre" (Express page 4) were also among the targets revealed by the Sun (quoting a "senior security source"), Mirror, Mail, Express and Times.

The Mirror and the Mail were careful to put quotation marks around their alarmist front page headlines: "HUNT FOR THE 'POISON BOMB'" (Mail), "HUNT FOR 'POISON BOMB'" (Mirror). But the Sun and Express convinced themselves, despite the evidence, that a bomb actually existed. An unnamed "senior security source" assured the Sun that it was "absolutely certain this device exists" (Sun 3/6/06 page 4). The Express, however, was unwilling to divulge why it was assured of the existence of a bomb. It remains to seen whether the Sun's unnamed "senior security source" is the same as the one who encouraged reporters to speculate on probable targets.

The Times and Express editorials expressed dismay that the Independent Police Complaints Commission was given access to the address after one of the occupants was shot.

The Independent asserted that suggestions that the raided house "was being used as a bomb-making factory were discounted" (Independent page 5). But the Times was adamant that it was a "suspected weapons factory" (Times 3/6/06 page 1), the Mirror called it a "suspected poison bomb factory" (Mirror 3/6/06 page 7) and the Express went with the less industrial "bombers lair" (Express page 4).

Despite the fact that police were not searching for anyone else in connection with the Landsdown Road raid and that the existence of a bomb or device was as yet unproven, the Sun's opening paragraph on its front page read, "cops were last night frantically hunting terrorists armed with a lethal chemical bomb" (Sun page 1). The Sun's "Security Advisor and SAS hero", Andy McNab, had two questions for the suspects which needed to be extracted from them "any way possible" (Sun page 5). "First, where is the device? Second, what did they plan to do with it?" Ominously absent was the question, "does the device exist?"

The Times reminded its readers that it had only been two weeks since that police in Manchester and Merseyside arrested eight men in connection with al-Qaeda activities. It failed to mention, however, that two of the three men arrested by Greater Manchester police had been released without charge and that the other man was being held under immigration laws (Guardian page 5). The Express' editorial wandered how many terrorist suspects could be deported (Express page 16).

The Sun revealed that one of the men, Kahar Kalam, regularly used a local internet café. Still more shocking was the Sun's revelation that he visited it "at least once a week, spending an hour at a time at a computer terminal" (Sun page 4).

Local residents were asked to describe the arrested men. A relative of the men told the Express that one of the men "works long shifts for Royal Mail" (Express page 4). The other man was described as a "straightforward guy" (Express page 4). The Telegraph was told by a friend of the men that "we are British born and we treat this country with respect" (Telegraph page 4). But the Times seemed to warn readers against taking these descriptions as evidence that the men were innocent until proven guilty: "Today's terrorists are suburban men who neighbours invariably describe as 'hard working, respectable and British to the core'" (Times page 7).

Neighbours' portrayals of the men as "deeply religious, praying five times a day" (Sun page 4) caused the Express to right a 'love it or leave it' editorial. Going off comments about the religious devoutness of the arrested men, the Express opined "those who feel blind loyalty to Islam and none whatever to Britain should go and live in an Islamic country and leave the rest of us in peace" (Express page 16).

The brothers were subsequently released without charge and completely vindicated on all allegations made against them in the press. However, the same speculation and misreporting is now being made about the men arrested in Birmingham.

Mad Mail's Maldies

The Daily Mail reports that West Mids Police Chief David Shaw is not happy with “Whitehall” leaks about the case surrounding the arrests in Birmingham.

Police chief's fury over 'Labour leaks on beheading plot'

The senior policeman leading the investigation into an alleged plot to behead a Muslim British soldier believes the inquiry has been "hijacked" by the Government.

Assistant Chief Constable David Shaw was "seething" when he discovered Whitehall officials leaked sensitive details of Operation Gamble to the media in an apparent attempt to divert attention from the problems engulfing Tony Blair.

The Mail says ACC Shaw is “increasingly frustrated that the anonymous briefings may be impeding his officers' efforts to gather evidence.” Hmm... which papers got their information from these anonymous sources? Could one of them have been... the Daily Mail? Yes.

“Yesterday senior military sources told how…”
“A senior military source said yesterday…”
“One insider added…”
“One source described the…”

“Security sources believe…”
“Senior anti-terrorist officers believe…”

“A senior security source said…”
“Security sources said that…”
“A source at West Midlands Police said…”

Further, “last Wednesday morning, only a few hours after the dawn arrests of nine men in Birmingham, Mr Shaw watched despairingly as details of the operation he hoped would remain secret flashed up on TV.” As well as watching them on TV, ACC Shaw could also have read despairingly the details of the operation on the Daily Mail website.

The use of tactics thought to be involved in the latest alleged terror plot would be a highly significant development, an expert said after the Birmingham raids.

Terror analyst Professor Paul Rogers, of the University of Bradford, said it was crucial to establish whether the alleged abduction plan was an isolated one-off or part of a wider movement.

The Daily Mail says that among the leaks which are causing discomfort to ACC Shaw is the “account of how two soldiers were used as "live bait" to try to flush out the suspects.” But which papers reported these discomforting leaks? Could one of them have been the Daily Mail? Yes... and yes.

The soldiers are said to have allowed themselves to be used as "bait" while they were placed under unprecedented surveillance as officers waited for the terrorists to strike.

Two British Muslim soldiers targeted by the alleged beheading gang were used in an extraordinary "sting" operation to snare their assassins, it has emerged.

Their every move was monitored by MI5 agents. The two men wore tracking devices, with similar beacons attached to their cars, and armed response teams were on permanent standby to stage a rescue mission in case a kidnap plot was sprung. It is thought the soldiers may not even have been allowed to tell their families.

“Referring to Birmingham, he said: "I am acutely aware that members of the community are confused and bewildered by what is being said by the media." No doubt the Daily Mail can count itself as one agent which added to said confusion and bewilderment.

On a side note, the Daily Mail describes Birmingham’s Muslims as inflamed, rancorous and in need of pacifying.

Mr Shaw never intended for the public to know, at least not yet, the existence of the alleged beheading plot, fearing the huge publicity would only further inflame Birmingham's Muslim communities at a time when he needs their assistance.

Following the leaks, senior officers were sent to try to pacify community leaders and explain that the police were not to blame.

Mr Shaw, a married father of two, is a highly respected figure among the city's ethnic minorities and is understood to be dismayed at the rancour in the Muslim community that the interference from Whitehall has produced.

Veils and V-signs

The woman on the left could very well have been making a victory sign. It was most probably an expression of resistence and resilience. However the Sun characterised this picture thus:

One STUCK two fingers up in a V-sign, the second STARED icily ahead and the third SHIELDED her face with her hand, despite only her eyes being visible.

The same picture also appeared in other papers:

* in the Telegraph the woman is "giving vent to her feelings"

* in that evening's Birmingham Mail it is simply a "gesture"

* in the Daily Mail it is above the headine "Hostility and Fear on the Quiet Streets"

* and in the Express it is "obscene"

However, the Sun is the only paper which caricatures all three women in the picture. The woman on the left could be giving a victory sign and not "sticking two fingers up." The woman in the middle could just be looking at an assembled pack of photograpers and not "staring icily ahead." The woman on the right could just be fixing her niqab or she might even have a headache. She is not necesarily "shielding her face" (why would she need to? She's wearing a niqab!)

Not to mention the fact the press could be trying to arouse further hostility against the veil by featuring this picture so prominently in their coverage of a "terrorist plot".

"Allegedly"

"Alleged" can be used when referring to someone against whom an allegation has been made. The arrested men are suspects. They are suspected to have engaged in activities falling under the remit of the Midlands Counter Terrorism Unit. As of yet (4/2/07) no official allegations have been made against the arrested men.

Even if we accept the use of the word "alleged" as valid, it was used in many instances as primers to speculation:
* Guardian frontpage - "members of the group are alleged to have been preparing to film the kidnap victim as he begged for mercy before being murdered, and were then planning to post the footage on the web." The Guardian then has a further two stories about the "plot" alone on page 5.
* Times frontpage - "the hostage was allegedly to be paraded in an orange jump suit." A dominating picture of Ken Bigley in such an orange boiler suit is also on the frontpage.
* Express page 5 - "alleged plot would have been a chilling mirror of how Briton Ken Bigley was kidnapped and beheaded in Iraq." And so begins a nine para story devoted just to this.

No factual information is likely appear in sentences which include the following:
"allegedly foiled..."
"allegedly planned..."
"might be targets..."
"suspected plot is said to have..."
"alleged plotters..."
"alleged plot..."
"would have been..."
"If this proves to be accurate..."

Newspapers are there to give us the facts. They are not there to let their imaginations run wild on the basis of tit-bits of information from mysterious unnamed sources.

Many column inches were given over to expounding on unconfirmed reports. However, one or two paragraphs would have been sufficient to tell the public about what unnamed sources are saying:

Sources close to the investigation say that the aim of the alleged plot was to kidnap serving members of the armed forces, perhaps while they were on home leave.

Talk of orange jump suits, execution houses in Tipton, 72 hour deadlines and such is speculation. Fanning speculation, rumour and fear is not a good thing for the press to be doing.

Telegraph editorial 2/2/07

A Telegraph editorial takes issue with West Midlands Police's decision to distribute leaflets to the communities affected by the raids.

The Telegraph says that the fact Muslims need things explained to them represents a 'gap between the Muslim community and the rest of the population.' They are, effectively devoid of understanding and unable to comprehend that they should just ignore the 700 officers, blocked roads, and sealed premises that have appeared in their area.

This being the Telegraph the editorial manages to link this to "doctrine of multiculturalism". It asks why do "the black or Chinese communities" not get similar leaflets. Hmm... but why use the example of black and Chinese communities and not Sikhs and Hindus? Could it have something to with the fact that the police leaflet is in 4 Indian subcontinent languages? The leaflet is in English, Urdu, Hindi, and Bengali. It is not for Muslims. Otherwise it would have been in English, Urdu, Arabic, Farsi, and Somali.

The Telegraph knows the leaflet is not for Muslims but for the general public in the affected areas. However, it is trying desperately to stereotype the Muslim community as being, among other things, beneficieries of "special treatment".

The fact that the police might be trying to offset press speculation about the case doesn't cross the Telegraph op-ed writer's mind. Talk about a gap in understaning...

Independent and Guardian 1/2/07

The Guardian's frontpage story on the Birmingham raids is split into roughly half. Half the story talks about the men arrested and the raids and the other half is devoted to ellucidating on the speculation. The phrase "alleged to have been" is used three times on the frontpage.

Page 4 of the Guardian has two stories about the arrests and raids. Page 5 however has two stories about the unfounded unnamed source-inspired "plot". One story is given over to giving a potted history of the beheading and videotaping terror technique. In a story about the alleged victim the following speculatory words and phrases are employed:
"alleged..."
"thought to have..."
"allegedley..."
"was to have been..."
"would have been..."

Even though it quotes assistant chief constable Shaw as saying that speculation was unhelpful, the Guardian speculates anyway.

The absence of this story from the Independent's frontpage is not a sign that it is not joining in with the speculation-fest.

* page 4
"suspected plot..."
"alleged plan..."
"alleged plot, if proven..."
"thought to be a..."
"alleged plot..."
"Details [...] still unclear..."
"alleged conspiracy..."
"alleged plot..."
"would have been..."

On page page 5 Professor Paul Wilkinson from St Andrews university joins in with his take on the "plot".

Telegraph 1/2/07

The Telegraph's headline reads "Beheading plot: security stepped up for Muslim soldiers". The headline gives no indication towards the fact this the plot is being alleged by unnamed sources and has no official credence whatsoever.

The frontapge has a few instances of speculatory language:
"allegedly foiled..."
"allegedly planned..."
"might be targets..."
"suspected plot is said to have..."
"alleged plotters..."
"alleged plotters..."
Page 2:
"alleged plot..."
"would have been..."
"If this proves to be accurate..."

On page 5 Philip Johnston offers some commentary. He cites some previous comments by Dame Manningham-Buller as an intro to his piece but fails to provide any coroboration for his take on the "plot" apart from saying once "police said".

The Sun 1/2/07

Following the arrests of 9 men in Birmingham on Wednesday morning West Midlands Police told the media not to engage in speculation. They said that it is "unhelpful of the media and potentially damaging to the investigation or any future court cases to speculate on the details of this investigation." However the Sun took no heed.

I tell a lie... the Sun did take heed - it presented everything as fact, not speculation. No qualifications appeared on its frontpage of 1/2/07 which featured an image from the execution video of Nick Berg. A terror gang did plan to kidnap a British Muslim soldier. They did plan to behead him. And they did plan to show the execution on the web. No need for a trial. The Sun's got this one in the bag.

Defence editor Tom Newton Dunn elucidated further. Two people are on the run. The execution was to have taken place in Tipton (of all places). Two soldiers were being targeted. After several paragraphs of Sun-style "facts", in the bottom left hand corner of page 6 doubt creeps in: "the plot was said to have been at an "advanced stage."" Further on, "the plot is understood to have been..." and "it is not known whether..."

Towards the end Mr Dunn quotes West Mids assistant chief constable David Shaw in two and a half paragraphs. However there is no space to mention that assistant chief constable Shaw had also said "my professional judgement as the officer in charge of the operation is that some of the speculation has been unhelpful and is potentially damaging to the criminal investigation."

Mirror 1/2/07

The most striking and to-the-point frontpage headline from February 1st's press was in the Mirror - "Behead a Hero."

In the sub-headline the word plot is in speech marks. But it is not in speech marks in the first para of the frontpage story. A plot to kidnap and behead a British soldier is presented as fact. The only qualification on the frontapage, apart from 'plot', is that the plotters were allegedly days away from carrying out their plan - not that the plan itself is only an allegation.

Page 4 has a half-page headline: They Were Planning a 'Ken Bigley'. The only mention of ken Bigley in the accompanying story however comes from an unnamed "senior source". This uncorroborated information from a single source doesn't prevent the Mirror from putting in a picture of Ken Bigley.

Parts of the Mirror's page 4 report could possibly have been lifted from the Times. Consider the following:

* Mirror
"The terror gang are said to have been planning to carry out the kidnap, torture and murder in the space of just 72 hours, to evade the intense police investigation that would follow."

* Times (page 2)
"The plan was to be carried out within 72 hours because the plotters knew the kidnapping would result in an intense police search, security sources said."

Or maybe they just spoke to the same unnamed spook.

Page 6 of the Mirror has a pic of a woman in a veil. Other national papers to feature pics of women in veils to accompany the "British soldier kidnapping and beheading plot" story are Daily Mail, Express, Telegraph and Sun.

However, the story on page 4 is a piece by Roy Hatersley about the need to be cautious and remember that no-one has been charged. he warns of the dangers of govs crying wolf and says that extremists are oddballs and dropouts from the Muslim community. The editorial is similarly cautious. It reminds us that a man was shot in Forrest Gate and that cool heads need to prevail.

Speculatory language in the Mirror is less than half of what it is in the Times, Mail and Express:

* page 4
"beheading plot gang..."
"allegedly plotted..."
"it was planned to..."
"are said to have been..."
"police believe..."
"alleged target..."
"if this alleged plan..."

Daily Mail and Daily Express 1/2/07

The speculation continued in the Express and the Daily Mail. But here it was a little more brazen. No quotation marks for "up-market tabloids" thankyou very much. Frontpage headlines in both papers went all out and made the seemingly factual statements that 'Al Qaeda was behind plot to behead soldiers' (Daily Mail) and there was a 'Plot to behead soldier here in Britain' (Daily Express). However both papers offered no evidence - just what unnamed sources told them.

The Daily Express used the following speculatory primers:

* page 1
"it was feared..."
"suspected plan was to..."
"thought to be most likely..."
"It is thought...

* page 4
"alleged conspiracy..."
"it is believed..."
"said to have rehearsed..."
"believed to have..."
"also believed to have..."
"It is understood..."
"would have been..."
"If this is true..."

* page 5
"alleged plot would have been..."

* (and for good measure) the editorial
"The thought of..."
"Whether or not..."
"alleged to have been..."
"said to have been..."

The Daily Mail did the same:

* page 1
"alleged plot..."
"would have been..."
"would have caused..."
"alleged plot..."

* page 5
"it is quite possible they would have..."
"could have been..."
"understood to be..."
"It is understood that..."
"It is believed..."

* page 6
"alleged kidnap..."
"would have been..."
"alleged kidnap..."
"would have used..."
"it is believed..."
"alleged plot..."
"if police suspicions over the alleged plot are well founded..."
"alleged plot..."
"alleged plot may have been foiled..."

One page 7 of the Mail there was sympathetic piece outlining some of the things that friends and neigbours have said about the arrested men. Reporter Paul Harris described the difficult generation gaps that exist within Birmingham's Muslim community and the resentment and anger felt by young Asians. A cousin of an arrested man described a "peace-loving family person". Another man is described as a hardworking son who's mother is now at home crying. The report talked of a cultural and racial mix in an anonymous urban environment. The arrested men are everywhere referred to as quiet people who kept themselves to themselves. However just before finishing the piece, Mr Harris remembers he is writing for the Daily Mail and says "Sadly, it is this very anonymity which has provided shelter for evil."

Times 1/2/07

On the day of the arrests West Midlands Police told the media not to speculate about the 9 arrests in Birmingham. In a press statement they said that it is "unhelpful of the media and potentially damaging to the investigation or any future court cases to speculate on the details of this investigation."

However the frontpage of the next day's Times was full of just such speculation. The frontpage had a picture of Ken Bigley and an accompanying story continues on page 2.

The main frontpage headline used speech marks (Muslim soldiers 'faced kidnap and beheading'). One of two subheadlines also used speech marks (British Muslims working for police and Civil Service 'targeted as collaborators').

Apart from the use of quotation marks the frontpage section of the main story had six instances of non-commital speculatory statements:
"alleged plot to kidnap..."
"allegedly drawn up a hitlist..."
"believed to have narrowed their choice to [...] three men..."
"understood to be in protective custody..."
"would have been filmed..."
"was allegedly to be paraded in an orange boiler suit..."

And all this in the 4 little columns under the dominating picture:

There are only two pieces of factual information in the Times' frontpage story of 1/2/07. They are, word for word:
"Nine men held in police raids across Birmingham after six-month operation."
"six-month intelligence operation culminated in a series of pre-dawn raids in Birmingham invloving 700 police."

The story continued onto page 2 where the speculation also continues:
"alleged plan was to..."
"Like ken Bigley [...] the hostage was to be paraded..."
"The plan was to be carried out within 72 hours..."
"The intention was to..."
"Muslims would have been..."
"The group allegedly spent months..."
"said to have..."
"police believe the kidnappers were planning to abduct Muslim civil servants..."
"This would have been..."
"plot could indicate..."
"The suspected plotters may have believed that..."
"It is understood that..."
"alleged kidnappers appeared to be..."
"The suspects are believed to have..."

Factual information eventually reappeared in the last four paragraphs of the thirteen paragraph story.

Newspaper frontpages 1/2/07

The background

This is an edited version of a BBC report which gives some background information.

Nine people have been arrested in Birmingham under anti-terrorism legislation.

Eight men were arrested following a series of morning raids. Police made the ninth arrest this afternoon on a motorway in the city area.

Police said their investigation may take “days, if not weeks”.

A total of 12 addresses in the Sparkhill, Washwood Heath, Kingstanding and Edgbaston areas have been sealed off and are being searched following raids at about 0400 GMT, say police.

Eight men were arrested at separate addresses and are being held at a West Midlands police station.

‘Dynamic operation’

In a press conference at about 1530 GMT, Assistant Chief Constable David Shaw, of West Midlands Police, said the ninth arrest had been made just minutes earlier.

“I think that illustrates to you that this remains a dynamic, fluid operation and this is by no means finished,” he said.

The search of all the premises would take “some days” to complete, he added.

He said police were at “the foothills of what is a very, very major investigation for us” and officers were actively seeking help from the community, in particular from Muslims.

Community advice lines in a range of languages were being set up and 5,000 leaflets will be distributed to local people, he added.

“We think is it is critical that we involve them in what is going on as much as we can,” he said.

Muslim community leader Shabir Hussain said the community should co-operate with the police and remain vigilant of unusual activity in their homes.

“The community is under stress,” he said.

“They do not know where their children are, they do not know what they do. At the mosque we are saying ‘open your eyes, look underneath your feet’.”

Unnamed sources have been briefing the media throughout the day that the aim of the alleged plot was to kidnap serving members of the armed forces, perhaps while they were on home leave.

He stressed the arrests were based on intelligence, which could prove to be wrong.

The Ministry of Defence said it could not confirm or deny reports of such a plot.

Two houses and a general store in Alum Rock, near Washwood Heath, were raided.

The Maktabah book store in Stratford Road, Sparkhill, which is believed to sell Islamic literature, was also raided.

‘Anger and cynicism’

Police have cordoned off roads around Jackson Road and Foxton Road, in Alum Rock, and Poplar Road and Stratford Road, in Sparkhill.

The BBC’s Phil Mackie said there had been some anger and cynicism among locals who had witnessed previous terror raids in the area without anyone being charged.

Baswant Kant, who lives in Stratford Road, near the junction with Poplar Road, said about 55 police officers “turned up in white vans” in the early hours of Wednesday morning.

“They went into shops and restaurants along the road - a lot of people got arrested,” he said.

Saqib Hussain, of Sparkhill, said he had visited the raided book shop many times and “had never seen any suspicions of terrorist activity”.

Mohamed Barber told BBC News his cousin was one of the men arrested in Alum Rock.

“We can vouch for him he is innocent. He doesn’t even have time to go to Friday prayers - that’s how busy he is,” he added.

If any of those arrested turn out to be innocent, this should be made clear
Ayub Pervaz, mosque president

Abdul Ghaffoor, a regular shopper at the general store, said he had never heard politics being discussed in the shop.

Leaders at the Alum Rock Islamic Centre, the main mosque in the area, said the community was shocked at events, but urged calm and appealed to people to co-operate with the police investigation.

Ayub Pervaz, the mosque’s president, said: “If people have broken the law they should be brought to justice.

“But we also appeal for no trial by media. If any of those arrested turn out to be innocent, this should be made clear.”

The eight arrested following the morning raids are suspected of “the commission, preparation or instigation of acts of terrorism”.

Home Secretary John Reid urged restraint and described it as a “major operation”.

The Midlands Counter Terrorism Unit ran the operation with the West Midlands Police, the Metropolitan Police and MI5.