WHITE HOUSE GHOSTS

Short story

He was romping, never a care for the world. The more it tried to weigh, the easier he threw it off.  His hair, that was the thing. And some other stuff. He padded, dazzling, white robe flashing, maned head thrusting, shoulders rolling, hips and knees loose, thighs rubbing together, shhch, shhch, shhch, kind of sensuous, into the bedroom and onto the emperor bed.

On his back, toasting in warmth, he let his gown fall open, and embraced gravity. Golden lights; in the sheen of soft polished glass, his reflection glowed back from the walls, golden too – and when he sucked in his stomach! Look at that ladies/not bad for a man of seventy/pretty good for a man of forty!  On your knees!

He’d been abused (scorned, mocked, derided, protested, loathed, detested). A  bloated, inflatable caricature had appeared overnight and bounced for almost a day – a day! – in front of his own windows. His face was a pig, a turd, an arse on international placards; even his name translated badly. People didn’t think he saw, but he did, and he could laugh at it, pathetic, sad, such levels of animosity, but who else put up with this? What hell-hole would fit these howling marchers? Anywhere else, they’d be in it. Crying like babies. Choking like dogs.

Still, the job had something. The vultures were pecking air around him, but he wasn’t dead. He could stamp, shout, swing, leave the blood-sucking kill-joys white with rage and silence.  The fun he was having! War bad – send in the drones! Guns bad – more guns! Walls, blood, strength, soil, god, not that he believed, he didn’t believe anything, but hey, the crips, the tacos, mooslims, beggars, niggers, perverts, all the losers, animals, who’d shed a tear? And the hate and fear boiling up and the menace and rush of the crowds – crowds, baying for him; crowds swaying to him; full throat battle roars when he spread his arms, slammed to silence when he raised a finger – who’d have thought it would feel so good?

Well, he hadn’t. But he’d got it. 

The screens pulsed. The burger wraps piled up. Tongues of old fat and sugar licked the air. He padded to the shower, returned, sank back into the Siberian goose feathers, flicked the channels to sharks and shooting. There was a knock on the door. A slavey knock. The boys who’d blustered through the panels had gone, taking defiant red-veined noses, oil-slick hair and eyes like old bodies with them. How he laughed inside when they pleaded. Some went quiet and respectful, trying to stay in control, that was funny too.  Whatever. They were still working away for him, no getting away from him; deals, wheels, new allegiances, putting the barbed walls up, fragmenting whole continents, breaking and remaking the world. It spun under him, giddy; he could stretch out a finger tip and touch the desert; lift an eyebrow and influence the snow; bring sun; reign death; watch the money roll in. What a ride.

The knock again. He barked a no. Chasing after him. Contaminating his area. He was echoed by a yip.

Now he had a secret. Nothing else about his life – sex, lies, wives, failures, family, hair, make-up, shakedowns, gangsters, diet, germophobia, cowardice, decor, morals, dick – was a secret. But this was. Even though he did not yet know it in words, only knew it on a cellular level, this was due to be a secret. His spine iced, enlarged, filled his body. He stared. The thing on the floor stared back, and blinked.

It was about the size of a – what? He had nothing that size. A small coffee pot. A giant burger. One of its eyes bulged. The other squinted. Its ears went up and sideways, and then sagged. It was almost bald. The hair it had straggled in lumps, grey, oily and matted in places, like felt. It had three legs. One at the front. As he stared at it, it wobbled.

His foot was out to kick, but he caught it back. The thing looked diseased. It had fangs sticking out of a short, stubby snout. As he looked, it crouched. The puddle was huge. It lapped against the bed. It steamed.

The first pillow went straight through it. The second flumped against an oil of some naked French bathers. The remote smashed off a mirror. One of the screens instantly started spraying laughter, over some woman pretending to be him.

The button brought the maids running to a jam in the doorway, then through, willing, ready, but now he was starting to admit there was a problem. That pillow. And the fact that one of the maids – dumpy, wouldn’t do her – was treading through its head. There was a frozen moment. Then the skinny one, face rigid, stooped and picked up the wrapper from his last burger. She was standing in the steaming lake; her hand had to go straight through the dog’s – it had to be a fucking dog – ass to do it.

A low burbling from the bed. The maids rooted; swayed. Then, a cracked roar. It brought the guards racing in from the desperate dull corridor, guns out, hostile faces stitched over excitement and relief. The maids leapt towards each other before their knees gave way, hands shooting up like synchronised swimmers. Then, at the doorway, appeared the face of his deputy, his Second-in-Command. Working late, haunting the hallways, as usual.

“Is there a problem?” it said, hopefully.

He knew his enemies. His mouth closed. The thing scuttered under the bed, and he sprang off as if bounced, shouting to change his room, change his room, walking, buttocks clenched, at speed, out down the corridor. It was useless. He could feel it behind him, hear a kind of wheezy snuffle all the way.

It followed him everywhere. Into rooms, through doors, up in lifts, down in lifts, round and round his office, keeping a nose right behind his heels. No-one else could see it, that was the thing. It was unbelievable. He kept spinning, kicking at it, and every time it would stare at him, solidly, while his shoe just passed right through it. A tumour? He felt fine. Side effects from all the vitamins? Maybe, but could he ask? They’d already marked him down as mental. He kept his doctor close, like all his enemies, he’d been told that by his own daddy, but not that close. Never show weakness. Never retreat. Hell, he’d enjoyed it.

Snuffle snuffle snuffle. That was it. He would just ignore it. Rise above. He shrieked. The thing had stuck a rotting, nitrogen cold nose against his ankle.  

That night he slept with his wife. He’d have tried anything. The thing stood beside the bed, bulging eye glinting over her increasingly hysterical objections. At her last mercurial screech it squatted, slowly, and, from behind, jetted out an arc, a broad, raking spray of brown; globules and chunks coruscating in a thin, murky fluid, and endless. As his wife grabbed the quilt, announcing her determination to sleep in the bath – and to lock the door, make no mistake – her bare brown pink-tipped feet  sludged straight through it. One particularly thick patch bubbled up between her toes, and then the duvet dragged after her and he did start to vomit, beating her to the bathroom, reaching the john, bent double. The thing was already sitting there, looking expectant. As he staggered back, retching, it got up on the seat, somehow, balanced, fell in, and licked the bowl. Now, as it hopped out again, it was covered in undigested bits of burger and formless, nameless slime. Things were not getting better.

“Can you see it? Can’t you see it?”

His wife looked at him, swiping and kicking at the air, chin covered in puke, and smiled. A bony foot planted between his buttocks, and shoved him out. The door lock thunked behind him. He stood, like a bewildered bull, in the fecal room. The thing stood, proprietorially, beside him. Flecks of matter dropped off it.

He kept trying. For the nights he tried women, of course, ones he could reliably pin down without a shellacked nail being driven into his balls. There were many of them; paid, unpaid, glossy, desperate, three at a time, one after the other. The thing usually hid under the bed, which might have helped, except that it had started to stink.

Rolls, waves, torrents of corpse putridity surged around the mattresses – for he was moving from room to room, home to tower, hotel to hotel. Interestingly, if he could have been interested, the women always smelt it before he did. The sniffing would start,  then the gagging, then they would yawn, horribly, and projectile vomit, usually over him, sometimes while he was on his hands and knees chucking and chundering himself. Perfume, Vicks, noseplugs, all had no effect.

His staff put this down to some new perversion, naturally, and discoursed knowledgeably on Roman vomitoriums, though they noticed the women, bursting wild-eyed and emptied from various bedrooms, seemed to be enjoying themselves even less than usual, and their boss not one whit.

The days were bad. “All right!” he’d say, rubbing his hands together, in a parody of his old self, as henchmen and ghouls and blobs and blondes waited round the table, eyes expectant, lips yearning to spit out waves of fulsome compliments. And then he’d whoop and leap in the manner of a March hare, and no-one would know that a putrid ear iced with slime had just rubbed casually down his soft, yielding shin. He took to wearing knee socks. It took to pissing on his shoes. Once it crawled up his arm and sat on his shoulder, reeking and evacuating, as he tried to announce some fanbase-friendly decision. “Lock them up! Lose the children! Lose the keys!” His cries grew wilder, but no-one seemed to notice, apart from the sudden twitches, the yells, the occasional flail at empty space. And the smell, of course, the smell.

It was spreading. His deputy had anosmia. Incapable of smelling anything. That figured. But the others started looking like walkers in a violent gale, regressing, when seated, to fractious schoolchildren, tipping their chairs further back, further back as he spoke, until one knocked himself out on the radiator. Workmen investigated drains, tore up, redecorated; useless. Rooms became thick with concrete dust, buckets of aftershave, deluges of scent; plants wilted; personal fans buzzed like miniature Messerschmitts around him. He’d almost got used to it, himself.

Back alone together, he still kept his shark screens blaring all night, until it began to howl. Glasses broke. His eardrums whopped, squealed, threatened to shatter too. It seemed, though, to like music, he found, flipping frantically through channels. An ear cocked, its howls diminished. They settled on classical, although being forced to listen to classical made him mad.

“Has your friend been taking care of herself?” said his doctor, looking stern. “Eating and so forth?”

Of course he had been eating, stuffing it in, distracting, burger after burger, but recently not so much. His skin was sagging in handfuls. His chest had shrunk.

“She” cunning, this “thinks it eats what she eats. It must be eating something, else how could it crap so much?”

“How indeed” the doctor commented, after this was put to him. Idly, he sprayed some more surgical spirit on the desk, casually bent down, surreptitiously inhaled from a small bottle, continued cordially with every atom of his chaotic being to loathe his client. It seemed to give him shape.

“I’d advise your friend” he said decisively

“Yes?”

 “To see a doctor”.

“So he stinks” his deputy was saying, with some interest.

“It’s more than that. No-one can get near him. Fucking Lizardman, made him sit by a window, then left the room. They communicated via keyboards. He looks clean, no-one can say he doesn’t. But the smell”

“What’s it like?”

“Like a rotting cow in a hot yard after months of rain. Like writhing old fish guts left for years in a pool of sewage. Worse. I can’t describe it. There’s like an onion element too, and I don’t know what. It’s unbearable”

They were walking through the gardens, of course not unobserved; perhaps not overheard. Fireworks flared in the pale polluted night. It was Halloween.

Across the lawn, down in the mezzanine, the kitchen staff were telling the traditional ghost stories. One former inhabitant, for example, still lurked in the room which held his carved wooden bed; occasionally he would be seen drifting down the corridors, mildly spooking residents and guests.

“He never does anything” complained a maid.

They eyed the corner where the dark, austere figure of the senior housekeeper sat. Expectantly. She bent forward.

“The story is this” she said.

“The voters can’t smell him” the deputy was saying, thoughtfully.

“Not on screen they can’t” said the Head of Security darkly. “Next gig, we’ll have to put the podium maybe half a field away. Lay on some sprays. It’s getting stronger. I was just coming down the corridor; he must have been down there an hour before and I had to – excuse me”

He stopped to throw up decorously in a rose bed.

“You can’t impeach a man for stinking” the deputy noted.

The housekeeper was holding her audience.

“At first it is small, very small. And then, as it comes towards you, it gets bigger and bigger, and its mouth opens wider and wider and it gets closer and bigger and closer and bigger and then!”

“Yes?”

“End!” She slammed her wide spread hands together, with the crash of a mantrap.

“Aahh” sighed the staff with satisfaction.

Pooling shadows, scritching in corners, dead dry roaches sucked into vacuums. There were witches out there, thousands of them, spelling him. He’d seen the hashtag. Losers. People trying any old. Crazy crazy crazy. It was all crazy. His head wasn’t working right. Bring in the torturers; bring on the psychopaths – they did nothing for him. Nor could all the sycophantic cries, all the hate and fear in the world console him; too far away, unreal. His deputy was the only one who stayed close. How was that fair?

He’d returned to his old room, it made no difference. Shower after shower, removing invisible germs. Claws scrabbling at his toes, his hair, his nose. He’d stopped playing golf: it had started shitting in the holes. When he’d held his ball up, rare moment of victory, the stuff – warm, gluey, corrosive – dripped lusciously down the tender inside of his arm.

He was trudging instead, head down, around the course, when he saw it. It must have had noticed something in the long grass: its oozing stump of a tail was quivering. It pounced. A squeal. A flurry. The bloody head of a baby rabbit shot across the grass tips.  It trotted back to him, licking its chops. He almost smiled. That night, as he lay on the pillow, he felt a small throb next to him, a tiny heart beat. His reflex hand stopped, continued through chilly space to the mattress. But a nose like a freezing shiv burrowed into his shoulder.

The next meeting – foreign somewhere, high power – they went in together. The reps of the world smelt them and recoiled. Rallied, gagging, stood over as he smirked up at them. Splatters shot out from the thing shifting round on his shoulder, liberally dousing those pseuds, bleeding hearters, power-mongers all. They’d lock, bomb, blast bear cubs, torture in a heartbeat, tear the earth too, if pushed.

And how he’d push. He had friends, good men, smart men. Leaders. Talented, well fed, killers with hands-on experience; knew what suited them; they’d take anything from the big man; had to, he was the biggest in the big league. He giggled, sneered, punched the air, left.

Euphoria still filled him as he swaggered back into the house. That was it, make it part of a team. He lay on the bed, appetite back, munching to the sounds of Mozart or some such thing. Plotting: an attack here, an invasion there; some wilderness bulldozed; plastic liberated; rights removed. Rights! Voices swelled in the background, lamented, rising. His chest shivered. His brain mulched. The bottle dropped slowly from his hand. They were all against him. He didn’t have a friend. He’d never had a friend. They’d hated him at school, just for throwing rocks at toddlers and having the best knives.

Wait, what? He didn’t think like this. He was the one. He was the number one. Always had been, always would. Kick them, kill them, hit right through them. That was him. Not this. Fucking music. His poor brain. Sometimes it hurt. It was sending him pictures. His second wife. His proper wife. What a beauty. She’d loved him. She’d said she loved him. Best sex ever. Wouldn’t hear a word against him, still wouldn’t talk. This one wouldn’t even hold his hand. Bitch! How did he get to this? That music! He’d take the howls. He stabbed at the control.

And there she was. Suddenly. It was incredible. Older. Some chat show, some slob fawning over her. How hot did she look? Talking about peace somewhere. Palestine? She cared, that was her shtick. She’d always cared; animals, people. Him. He knew he’d screwed up. Tried to stick with her. Then she was gone. It was something, not to hold on, when you wanted.

But he was older. He could get her back. Join in her causes. Yeah. Peace. Kids. Deprived rabbits, whatever. A new man. Healthy. Those were the days. His brain was waking, he could feel it; firing up.

He looked round. And there it wasn’t. Not there. Not under the duvet, not under the bed. No smell, no shit. Nothing! He was saved. He was saved. It was love, love had done it. Her love for him. His love for her. He gazed, entranced, at the screen, planning a call, a meeting, a beginning, eyes running over her face, her body, her long, wonderful, naked legs. Her leg.

It was there. Attached already, upright. Tongue hanging out, dripping. Flashing pink as it humped and drooled and humped and pumped at her, bulging-eyed, straining-haunched, panting, thrusting, matted hair shedding, shuddering, shuddering to an end. There were screams from the screen. The smell came back in a slap like a tsunami. It was over.

“No, Charles, no change” the deputy was saying to a CEO on the phone a week or so later. “Of course, he’s not as young as he was. Naturally we pray he bounces back. Yes, he seems very content to rely on me. No, just on me; for some reason he won’t see anyone else. Or was it the other way round? I rather think” and here the deputy paused for a thin smile “I rather think he gets up their noses”.

Some squawking from the other end.

“The Lord giveth, and the Lord taketh away. Yes indeed. Still, it’s an ill wind, and I fancy I’m perfectly competent. Too kind. Yes. I will of course inform you if anything changes. Not at all. My regards to you both”.

He replaced the receiver gently, tidied a few papers on the desk, made a note in a small black book. Plans and vested interests were vying for his attention, but his mind remained as firm and clear and simple as steel. Another small, righteous war beckoned. A larger, God-sanctioned crusade was approaching. Profits in the relevant industries continued to soar, demonstrating yet again the Bible truth: the rich were virtuous, blessed by God.

“Have mercy on the poor sinners” the deputy thought to himself most sincerely. The door to the office cracked open, and he frowned. Some unfortunate member of staff who had yet to learn who their boss was. He prepared, in no uncertain terms, to tell them.

Instead, at ankle height, appeared a small, white face. Then, a small white body. Blue eyes, slightly unfocussed, surveyed the room. The deputy stared. It was a kitten. A very young kitten; a tiny pure white puffball of a kitten, with a jaunty little tail, and paws like miniature moon boots. The deputy was not fond of cats, or any creature, but as it wobbled through the door, looking round the room with obvious interest, he could feel, despite himself, an almost childish grin spreading across his face.

“And who might you be?” he said.

The kitten paused in its attempt to bat away a mote of dust with a ridiculous front paw and, eyes crossing slightly, appeared to locate his voice.

“Come right on in, why don’t you” he found himself saying, rather more fondly than he’d intended.

The kitten seemed to consider the acres of carpet between them. Then, flicking its silly tail, it began to advance, slowly, uncertainly, taking a detour under the previous resident’s luxury sofa. Gilt and velvet, such terrible taste, thought the deputy. He’d ordered a sensible, upright version, in solid mahogany and tartan.

The kitten, clearly sharing his view, was viciously attacking a tassel. He clicked his tongue, and it stopped, yawned, displaying its pink mouth; its silver teeth. It was bigger than he thought, he realised, as it continued towards him, far too large to fit under a sofa, surely. Silver teeth? The closer it got, the bigger it seemed to get.

Good heavens, it was impossible. Now it was advancing on the desk. He stood, frozen, unable even to squeak. It was getting closer. Getting closer, getting larger. Closer. Larger. Closer. Larger.

Oh my God.

End

The Love Life of Chickens

The Love Life of Chickens, a true story

Leo died, suddenly, in the night. He was missed by many, and openly mourned by his mother, a tiny hen, with an absurd bonnet for a comb, who spent the day making the loud, anguished noises she had last produced when her entire set of chicks was eaten by a badger.  Leo, survivor of a much earlier brood, had been a fine cockerel: somewhat short and stout, but perky, and immaculate in appearance. A reliable sort, he would keep an eagle eye out for kites, shouting the alarm and bunching his hens together while he stood protectively in front of them. Moreover, he had a gentlemanly approach to females, waiting until they had eaten before he jumped on them, and sometimes searching out delicacies – strawberries, slugs – to reward them.

It was a generally happy flock, under Leo’s wing. But there was one chicken who was not happy.  He was another cockerel, known, for some reason, as Inch, and life had been weighted against him from the start. He was born in the days when the flock still had two bare-necked hens; a rather rare breed of chicken, since it does exactly what it says on the tin. These hens had originally been smuggled into a clutch of eggs by a neighbour, as a joke: seeing their long, pink, wizened necks sticking out of ample heaps of puffy black plumes, it was almost impossible not to think of vultures and, in winter, of snoods.

The bare-necks were, however, charming and maternal characters, of whose benign tolerance Leo took full advantage, and the result, one day, was an extremely strange chick. For a few days it was a fairly normal black and white Leghorn, like its father. Then it suddenly sprouted a tiny, skinny, bare neck. And then, just as everyone was hoping it was not a cockerel, it produced a sad clump of feathers, at the front of its neck, and about half way up. This was obviously its attempt at Leo’s proud, leonine ruff, but it was not a success. It looked, in fact, like a badly tied cravat; or a miniature, moth-eaten boa.

From then on, Inch developed rapidly, but not in a good way. He grew tall, for a cockerel, to be fair, but most of him consisted of legs and (bare) neck, with a shambolic mash of plumage in between. When he finally emerged from adolescence, still with his mangy cravat, and topped off by a flamboyant, poppy-red comb, he looked even more peculiar. Permanently under attack from an outraged Leo, and scorned by every right-thinking hen, his attempts at passion consisted of running frantically at unsuspecting females from behind, and trying to do the deed before they noticed. Their subsequent squawks of horror would alert his father, who would round the corner, eyes blazing: the main view of Inch, in the early years, was of a fleeing bottom, propelled by agitated, stilt-like strides.

Fortunately, chicken sex is in any case a brief, torrid affair – ten seconds would be positively tantric – and so, occasionally, Inch had his moment. Once in a while, one of the less confident hens would even start to hang around with him. ‘Oh, Inch has got a girlfriend’ people would remark, in a pleased way, but it never lasted. Quite apart from his appearance, his personal hygiene was non-existent, and his eating habits appallingly selfish; worse, his nerves were those of a hysterical diva, which made it wearing just to share the same field. Within a week the hen would be back in Leo’s harem, and Inch would be back to lurking in bushes, alone.

Then the four rescued battery hens arrived. They had spent the long car journey to their new home clucking and crooning with lively interest in the back: their pallid, featherless state caused some concern, but set against that were the four large eggs which rolled out of the box after them. They were put into a small run next to the main coop, lavished with corn and yoghurt and garlic and cheese and madeira cake, and left to settle in.

It was a week or so before Inch discovered them. He was first seen peering at them intently from about three feet away; a phase which lasted for several days. It could have gone on for ever,  but battery hens are, despite all odds, the most curious, friendly creatures imaginable. Inch, finding that, instead of bolting for cover, they were cooing at him with every appearance of enthusiasm, grew emboldened. Soon, he was swaggering up und down in front of them, chest out and pawing the ground, while the batteries clucked back through the wire, greatly impressed. Of course, they had never seen a cockerel before.

And when they were eventually released into the wider world, Inch was in heaven. The battery hens’ many good qualities evidently included loyalty: they were his constant companions, and cheerfully available at all times. Even Leo seemed to approve of this new arrangement, and left them all alone. Admittedly, Inch’s personal habits still left much to be desired, and nor did the batteries’ calm aplomb initially rub off  – he would still scream and run around like a headless version at any opportunity. But there came a day when, quite decisively, his hens decided to take him in hand.

‘What is Inch doing?’ someone remarked one morning. And there, in front of the kitchen window, where the other chickens would congregate in the hope of getting grapes, was Inch. Normally he would be dithering behind the fuchsias. Instead, he was standing stock still, while on either side of him, a battery hen was assiduously grooming his neglected and, frankly, grubby plumage. They were working with a fussy and intent air, just like a mother getting out a tissue and rubbing at her child’s face before a party. As they got further and further up his neck, Inch jerked his head away, then went back to bearing it nobly, and the analogy was exact.

This became a regular sight, with the battery hens taking turns at it and, while Inch would never look handsome, he certainly looked cared for. So everything in the garden was rosy, until Leo fell off his perch.

Being the sole male among a dozen females went straight to Inch’s head. He spent the first few weeks leaping on every hen at random, neglecting the battery hens like a playboy in the process. Unlike his father, who was invariably the first out of the coop, checking for predators, he had always been a late riser – now, he was worse. An unconvincing crow would be heard at about eight, followed by a long period of restful silence, after which, once everyone else had emerged, Inch would appear and head straight off to stuff his face with corn; and any hen in sight with gusto.

And then, suddenly, his mojo seemed to sputter. He started to stand around, rather haplessly, as though overwhelmed by choice, or exhaustion. The battery hens seemed to bear him no real grudges but nor, it was noticeable, were they sticking beside him: in fact, the whole flock had begun to roam far and wide, in a rather pointedly self-sufficient manner. Nor, which was also remarkable, were the battery hens grooming Inch any more. His tail began to droop; his plumage lost its sheen: he began to spend his days either trailing after small groups of hens, who ignored him, or  wandering aimlessly, like a lost poet, on his own in the shrubbery.

This rather miserable state of affairs lasted for months. Until this morning, actually, when someone came back from the chicken coop with the excited news that Inch had, for the first time, been the first one out of the door. What sign this delivered to the hens, or what personal epiphany it represented, is anyone’s guess. But by this afternoon, all the chickens had gathered together again, reunited, to the annoyance of the sheep, in the sheep hut. Inch was in the middle of this warm collection of feathers, tail up, bare neck extended, comb raised high. And, on either side of him, two ex battery hens were carefully grooming his wings.

Hate Marches

It was hard to know what the London Israeli counter protest thought it was doing. Laughing behind a heartrending banner saying ‘Bring them Home Now’ was one thing: people behave oddly in the face of horror. But enthusiastically waving the flags of a government starving, bombing, imprisoning, torturing, maiming, and burning people alive, while shouting playground taunts through a megaphone, to a soundtrack of Bob Marley?

Unlike the Maccabi Tel Aviv football supporters who recently rampaged through Amsterdam, they looked perfectly normal, even respectable, these 150 odd people. And yet the dimension they added to the huge London march for Palestine on Saturday November 2nd was surreal. It’s possible to understand those who still cling to the beautiful myths of the state of Israel; the sanctuary to which Holocaust survivors fled, even though around a third of those still surviving are living there in conditions of shocking poverty and isolation. Children have been born there, forced into the military there, lived there, killed for it, died there. A homeland founded on death and dispossession is a homeland nonetheless.

But who can now say they don’t know what the government of this US satrapy is doing, and who can say they support it, without being obviously psychopathic? Without going to Tel Aviv, here, in a small, barricaded corner next to Vauxhall Bridge, was the opportunity to find out, and unfortunately, it was, obviously, people driven beyond human empathy by something – fear, nihilism, racism, guilt, sadism, revenge lust, desperation, tragedy: who can tell? “They’re probably paid” said a friend of mine.

Prominent commentators and politicians have long demonised these vast, peaceful marches as antisemitic ‘hate marches’, and indeed, the hate was here: while sneering and jeering at all the 100,000 or so passing marchers, the counter protest’s shrieks and howls rose to an incoherent crescendo as the Jewish Bloc marchers, who included descendants of Holocaust survivors, appeared. This is not, as Torah Jews in the West, or the ultra-Orthodox Jews beaten and humiliated by the state police in Tel Aviv, or Israeli peace institutions such as B’Tselem, or Breaking the Silence, or Israeli conscientious objectors, can attest, about religion or nationality, or Judaism, at all, of course.

Such a sad, disturbing spectacle aside, the 21st London march against genocide was somewhere no-one wanted to be: even the third march had felt like a stretch too far; as though something else in the communal contract had been shattered. Poll after poll over the last year has shown only tiny minorities of the UK population are against an immediate ceasefire, or against suspending arms sales to Israel. The revelation that a change of UK government has done precisely nothing to alleviate the horror, instead adding more fiddling with words, while, against all international laws and humanity, cities and people burn, did not, however, seem to diminish the spirit of resistance.

I was helping to steward the London march: a line of us holding hands in front of the barricades and the counter protest; standing between it and the marchers they were trying to provoke; protecting the marchers from anything more than lame insults, and the triumphant Israeli tunes which replaced Bob Marley. ‘Tel Aviv! Tel Aviv!’ yodelled the sound system, as the waving Israeli flags conjured images of thousands of small, dead bodies, of hospitals, schools, homes, lands razed to rubble, of prisoners stripped and marched and disappeared; of traumatised, suicidal IDF soldiers; of the Israeli hostages whose families have been fighting their government for a ceasefire since October 7th.

Sure, the marchers responded: their expressions of solidarity, determination and rejection changing to almost universal revulsion when the counter protest came into view. Otherwise, out of 100,000 people, the Jewish Chronicle had discovered one marcher ranting’ about ‘Synagogues of Satan’. Two marchers were arrested, the JC also reported the Metropolitan police claiming, ‘after being observed carrying a placard suspected of expressing support for a proscribed organisation’. Certainly, one young Muslim woman, terrified and crying, had been arrested, dragged out of the crowd by police at the end of the march, held on her own behind shutters in a car park, and then driven off in a police van, for a placard saying ‘If you’re not enraged, you’re not informed’ on one side, and ‘Resistance is not terrorism’ on the other. She was later released without charge.

Since then, of course, the counter protest’s less middle class, uninhibited side has been on public view, at least on social media, attacking Dutch citizens, tearing down Palestinian flags, disrupting a minute’s silence for the victims of the Valencia floods with whistles, jeers and flares, and chanting ‘Fuck the Arabs’, among witticisms about schools not being open in Gaza because ‘all the children are dead. Children aged 5 – 9 years old are the age group most represented among the dead in Gaza, a recent UN study has found. Almost 70 percent of victims are women and children.

A young Dutch reporter filmed the Maccabi gang grabbing metal poles and planks of wood, before they roamed the streets. ‘They began attacking houses of people in Amsterdam with Palestinian flags, so that’s actually where the violence started’ Amsterdam council member Jazie Veldhuyzen told Al Jazeera. ‘As a reaction, Amsterdammers mobilised themselves and countered the attacks that started on Wednesday by the Maccabi hooligans’.

The prime minister of the UK retweeted its foreign secretary’s response to this: he was standing ‘with Israeli citizens and Jewish people across the world’.  Other world leaders, including Biden, joined the UK to condemn these anti-semitic attacks’. The Israeli government, mainstream news sources, Western politicians and the UK Daily Telegraph described this as, or compared it to, a ‘pogrom’; for those unaware of the origins of the word, it was used to describe a wave of attacks which ‘raped and murdered their Jewish victims and looted their property’ in pre and post Tsarist Russia.

‘Chilling scenes in Amsterdam remind us of an ancient evil’, the Telegraph explained. If you’d only watched the BBC you would have been horrified on behalf of the Maccabi supporters and, by extension, on behalf of anyone Jewish. Some Maccabi supporters were attacked, at least one reportedly thrown into a canal. Four people are being held in custody. Overall, five people, of unknown nationality, were taken to hospital, and later released. Meanwhile Sky News deleted a report which showed and analysed the timeline of Maccabi violence, re-edited it to include the words ‘anti-semitic violence’, and then deleted it again.

The Israeli government continues its genocidal ethnic cleansing of Gaza. Attacks in the West Bank are following a similar path. Lebanon is being destroyed, block by block, village by village. Another UK national march is planned in London for the 30th November. The UK Trades Union Congress, which passed a unanimous motion in September demanding an end to all arms trade with Israel, and reiterating support for Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) is encouraging a Workplace Day of Action on November 28th in support of an immediate ceasefire.

Meanwhile, on the 8th November, a week after the London counter protest was waving its flags, and just around the time when Maccabi Tel Aviv supporters were chanting ‘Let the IDF win to fuck the Arabs!’;  Philippa Greer, human rights lawyer and Head of Legal for UNWRA in Gaza reported as follows:

‘Today entering Gaza City. The ruins of life. A donkey laying dead attached to a cart with someone’s possessions. Clusters of people crossing to the South, with too much to walk with under the sun and given the length of the journey. A man carrying a white flag in front of his family. Women about to collapse, dragging bags over the ground, walking backwards, stopping and closing their eyes. A man on the ground in underwear, with soldiers near the checkpoint. A woman presumably crossing with him, stalled, distraught, in desperation. They passed by these ruins’.

My government is supporting this. Let us not pass by.

Extract from ‘Cracking the Whip’: Voting for War & Brexit

Q1) Do you think that if the vote on Iraq had been a genuinely free one, the
government would have been defeated?

Q2) Do you think that if the vote to trigger Article 50 had not been whipped, the
result would have been different?


A) Yes to both (former government whip).

Chapter 3: Case Studies: https://consoc.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Cracking-the-Whip.pdf


LOVING THE PEOPLE: 5 DAYS IN BLACKBURN

This seems like the right time to repost this, written during the general election of 2005. I’d gone up to Blackburn to canvass for former ambassador Craig Murray, who was standing against then Labour foreign secretary Jack Straw, his former boss. The far-right British National Party seemed to be rising there, and going to Blackburn, in the media psyche, was seen as akin to popping over to Afghanistan. Once again, the backdrop was war, and images of war; poverty and what felt like a national crisis of the soul.

******

‘You think we’re thugs!’

I was in front of Blackburn’s town hall, and the twenty or so women who had me surrounded were bristling with anger, like irate schnauzers.

‘I didn’t say you were thugs. I said that your leadership engages in, or actively promotes, violence and hatred’ I replied, adding, since it was true: ‘You don’t look like violent people’.

‘We’re not violent people’ they agreed, subsiding slightly.

‘You’re probably perfectly nice people, in fact’ I added.

‘Well, we are nice people’

‘So why do you support the BNP?’

At this, the body of women in front of me boiled, and heaved. Occasionally, one would dart forwards, emphasising her point with a raised fist, a clenched frown, a particularly agitated hand movement.

‘We might not be allowed to hang up our St George’s flag!’

‘That’s right!’

‘They might not let us celebrate St George’s Day!’

‘We always celebrate St George’s Day!’

It seemed that women who supported a far right, xenophobic party, whose leaders were mired in violence, to say the least, were doing so because they were worried about a future in which they might not be allowed to celebrate St George’s Day. They were mainly small, exhausted, valiant husks of women, whose weariness, over the years, had been engraved into the bone: in short, they looked like careworkers, who could always do with more parties, not less. But I was still puzzled. I’d come to Blackburn from Walthamstow in London, where Muslim people proudly display the St George flag too. Also, I was fairly sure, St George was Lebanese.

‘It’s our culture!’, cried one of the most drained and passionate of the group.

‘What culture?’ I asked, unfairly. ‘Shakespeare?’

‘Yes! It’s not the National Front, you know. It’s changed. Look at Ali here’ – she gestured to a small man of Asian appearance who was, there was no other word for it, skulking on the sidelines. ‘He’s with us!’

‘So, the BNP stands for peace and love now, does it?’ I asked, sarcastically, as I was sure it didn’t.

Her face fell. ‘Well, you can’t love everyone, can you?’ she said, rather anxiously.

Could anyone love everyone? Could you love the BNP? It was a good question. I had been canvassing in Blackburn for the general election, knocking on doors and asking questions designed to raise emotions, but the intensity and fury of a tiny percentage of them had taken me, and my fellow canvassers, almost entirely by surprise.

‘Hello, I’m canvassing for the election and I wondered whether you were going to vote? Can I ask why not? My goodness, that was a statement so full of rage and hatred and bitterness that I may have to vomit over your primulas’ my canvassing spiel would have run on several occasions, if I’d been strictly honest.  

But my canvassing partner, a tall, rather passionate sort of Welshman, was having none of it.

‘You cannot exclude them. You need to listen to them. These people need to be listened to’ he would say. He did not mean anyone should listen to the BNP’s leadership. He meant that we should listen to the people the leadership are convincing, and who are, in turn, convincing everyone else, that places like Blackburn have a race problem.

Because Blackburn does not have a race problem. It says something that this is probably the most controversial statement anyone can make about Blackburn. Local journalists choke. Whole dinner parties go silent. Even visitors look at you as though your brain has somehow sneaked out of your ears. Of course Blackburn has a race problem. It is axiomatic that Blackburn has a race problem. After a while you begin to wonder why they don’t just put it on the road signs. ‘Welcome to the diocese of Blackburn, twinned with Bloemfontain, South Africa. And you thought they had a race problem!’

Some people might consider briefly whether they mean that Blackburn has a religion problem. Everyone is entirely confused about whether they mean there’s a problem between white people and Asians, or white people and Muslims, after all. But no, even they will decide, springing back to the idea like overweight bungee jumpers, Blackburn has a race problem. 

And Blackburn does, indeed, have several problems. The first, and most obvious is that the council, like some crazily dull jigsaw designer, has stuck groups of people together in huge blocks, depending on their skin colour: the opposite to the policy carried out in London by the then GLC As a result, sounding like a racist in Blackburn isn’t odd, but obligatory. ‘Let’s canvas the Asian area’, you’d find yourself saying. Or ‘No, let’s go to an all white estate’.

But canvassing, because it lets you invade people’s doorsteps and basically ask them whether they’re happy or not, is an enormous privilege. In an interestingly haphazard manner – one day on a poor white sink estate, the next gazing in some awe at spotless, beautiful Muslim children – we managed to listen to hundreds of people all around Blackburn, which was how we discovered that Blackburn does not have a race problem.

For one thing, the council had occasionally miscalculated, and mixed things up. You’d round a corner on a white estate to find a Muslim family barbecuing tensely in a back garden, surrounded by skinheads in England shirts. And, because this was Blackburn, and you had absorbed some of the PR, you would think, ah hah. But, if you kept looking, the Muslim family would relax once the briquettes caught fire, and the skinheads would turn out to be shy. It was most unsatisfyingly undramatic. If you were looking for a race problem, that is.

After five days of canvassing, we’d concluded that the people of Blackburn, of whatever complexion, just weren’t hateful people. If they seemed otherwise, it was rarely because they were racist, even the ones who claimed to be. In truth, they invariably turned out to have a real reason for feeling violently scared, or violently unhappy. Like the fact that the bank had deliberately let them go £250,000 into the red, and was now rubbing its feelers together and waiting around to seize their house, for example, as one hairdresser, who’d started her own business, told us, almost in tears. While, down the road, a lonely, bitter man, in front of a tidy, very small semi, was furiously raking his scrap of a lawn, the same bit, over and over again, while billboards around him displayed ads of laughing young people jumping merrily into continental swimming pools.  

Poverty was everywhere; from the bare shelves of the Muslim shops at the top of the hill, to the shirtless toddlers paddling in empty beer cans at the bottom. There was, not unnaturally, quite a lot of what politicians call apathy, but which we voters know is despair. ‘What’s the point of voting?’ about half the people had said. ‘They’ve always done it, and they always will’.

‘It’ meant war, or torture, or vote-rigging, and ‘they’ meant either the government, or Blackburn’s Labour council, which has been merrily controlling the town for decades, to the obvious benefit of no-one, except themselves,

‘Well it’s true’ you would have to agree. ‘But Craig Murray’s standing up to it’. And, indeed, our former ambassador to Uzebekistan was standing in Blackburn on an independent anti-war ticket, and spending his own money on it, too.

‘Oh, him’ people would say, and look more cheerful. And, back at Murray’s campaign office, you could find Blackburn’s full and joyous spectrum; from Zoroastrian motorcyclists to Christian pensioners; Muslim holy men, to a chap with tattoos and a bulldog.

‘You can’t love everyone’ the BNP woman had repeated. It’s true that my notes, on later inspection, contained a few exceptions. There was the local BNP organiser, on one of Blackburn’s better off, middle-class streets (“lower middle”, my trained classist brain corrected, taking in the immaculate net curtains). She – it was a she – was a tiny woman, vibrating with nastiness, like a vicious hen, whose tall, hapless husband stood behind her like a standard lamp, waiting for orders, while she bullied and chivvied the rank and file, who she obviously considered beneath her, and who, surprisingly, went along with it.

And then, there was one of the leaders, who stood leaning against his large, designer gate-post, looking amused, while his eyes of arctic chill slid slowly over you like frozen slugs. ‘Swanky house. Man polite. Seems OK with violence. Nasty eyes’ my notes record, rather shakily. Even he had probably been, I thought later, a relatively decent baby.

‘You know, brother’ I’d heard one of the leaders of the Muslim Committee for Public Affairs saying to his friend. ‘I feel more at home in some Christian churches than I do in some mosques. I go in to look at the architecture’ he’d added, hastily. ‘And people in churches come up, and say hello, and ask how they can help. We Muslims need to reach out more. Not be suspicious of people, that’s not how the Prophet taught us.’

According to the press, his group were extremists. ‘You can’t love everyone’ the BNP woman had kept saying.

‘Why not?’ I’d asked, but she couldn’t answer.

FAKING HATE

A Guardian commentator is currently, and understandably, freaked out by the number of upticks for the vicious, hateful Daily Mail comments they’ve been reading, while ‘Reform’ posts are swamping twitter feeds. ‘Bots’ are occasionally mentioned in political coverage, but few people are aware of how far bot activity goes, and to what depths it can reach. It’s too late to rewrite this before the election now, so below is a section from my MA dissertation in 2020, with apologies for not having tidied up the academic language. Particularly relevant bits are in bold.

A version published by Byline Times (without the academic references): https://bylinetimes.com/2024/07/03/the-spiral-of-silence-and-the-rise-of-the-bots/

THE RISE OF THE BOTS

Hostile information campaigns, Rahman et al report, include the spreading of disinformation or biased information; spreading narratives by traditional media via proxies, or covert identities and using automated social media accounts (bots) or inauthentic social media accounts (trolls) (2020, p6).

Governments being shown to run such propaganda operations have, in the past, used a combination of human operatives and computer programming. In Azerbaijan, Israel, Russia, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, student or youth groups are hired by government agencies to use computational propaganda, report Bradshaw and Howard (2019 p 9) . Young people are also employed in the Russian and Chinese troll farms, while in Mexico young people acting as “cyborgs”, and “bot herders”, along with fully automated social media personas, formed the backbone of President Nieto’s successful 2012 election campaign (Pomerantsev 2019, p62).

In the UK, the Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) are now “broadening their recruitment base” to deal with increased demand for cyber actions (ISC, 2019); recruiting in schools in areas of socio-economic deprivation (Kennard, 2020). As The Intercept reported, GCHQ “has developed covert tools to seed the internet with false information, including the ability to manipulate the results of online polls, artificially inflate pageview counts on web sites…and plant false Facebook wall posts” (Fishman & Greenwald, 2015).

CAPTCHAs (and re-CAPTCHAs) are the computer-automated tests designed to distinguish robots from humans, used for security reasons; for example, as a protection to stop the creation of fake on-line accounts. Not only have computer scientists developed machine-learning programmes which solve them (Bursztein et al. 2014); “captcha farms” are multi-million dollar businesses described as “digital sweatshops”; based in economically-deprived countries, where (human) employees solve CAPTCHAs for a rate of $0.17 (£0.13) per 1000 CAPTCHAs solved (Netacea 2019).

It is, reports InfoSecurity magazine “a Nigerian-fraudster-style of economy with people effectively working along with the malicious bots in order to overcome human challenges. The bots are actually passing off this work to a human” (Puddephatt 2019).

4.3 Bot Armies

Ben-David et al, in a comprehensive study of the way in which far-right groups network and circulate hate on Facebook, point out that the largest growing threat is from right-wing extremists and hate groups, and argue that online, “hate practices are a growing trend and numerous human rights groups have expressed concern about the use of the Internet—especially social networking platforms—to spread all forms of discrimination” (2016, p1170). Lingiardi et al (2019) found that women, gay people, lesbians and immigrants were the main targets of hate speech in Italy.

In fact, the targets of this hate speech are, as Antonio Guterres puts it, “any so-called other” (2019). In order for such hate speech to reach the necessary prominence in public media and discourse, it must be, firstly, visible. This is achieved by targeting prominent celebrities, together with politicians, journalists, lawyers and anyone else who might be expected to speak for the “so-called other”. Racist abuse predominates and women in power are repeatedly targeted. A 2017 UK survey by Amnesty found that Asian and black women MPs received 35% more abusive tweets than white women MPs.

However, hate speech being “weaponized for political gain” (UN, 2019) is not a sign that, as the UN puts it, this is not ” the loud voices of a few people on the fringe of society”. On the contrary, the “weaponization” consists exactly of reinforcing and amplifying these voices, forcing them into the mainstream as a result.

Researchers at Carnegie Mellon university performing a preliminary examination of over 200 million tweets discussing the coronavirus found that about 45 percent were sent by accounts more resembling “computerized robots” than humans; for example, tweeting more than would be humanly possible (Owen, 2020). Collating reports of such activities worldwide, which is rarely if ever done, leads to an overwhelming picture, regardless of the fact that the numbers are almost certain to be underestimates: “almost all bad bots are highly sophisticated and hard to detect” (Levine, 2016).

The individuals behind the bots remained unknown. Katie Joseff, from the Digital Intelligence Lab, who co-authored the report, said that anyone could be behind them. “It wouldn’t be at all out of the realm of question for Nazis or anyone on the alt-right to be able to use bot accounts” she said. “They are very accessible, and people who just have normal social media followings, or even high schoolers, know how to buy fake accounts”.

At least 60 percent of the tweets about the 2018 Central American refugee caravan, which saw thousands of migrants making their tortuous way through Mexico to the US border, were estimated to be by bots, which had evolved from “simply sending automated tweets that Twitter might delete” to working to “amplify and spread the divisive Tweets written by actual humans” (Lapowski, 2018).

The Anti Defamation League found that between 30 to 40 percent of accounts regularly tweeting hatred against Jewish people were likely to be bots (van Sant, 2018). In total, according to the ADL report, they produced 43 percent of all anti-Semitic tweets (2018). The report, which came out the day before 11 people were murdered in a shooting at a Pittsburgh synagogue, concluded that political bots were “playing a significant role in artificially amplifying derogatory content over Twitter about Jewish people”.

In Indonesia in 2019, the BBC reported that any account using the hashtag #FreeWestPapua, representing the campaign for independence from Indonesian annexation, was immediately flooded by automated messages promoting the Indonesian government. The same Twitter bots also targeted Veronica Koman, an Indonesian human rights lawyer, with rape and death threats (Strick & Syavira, 2019).

In Finland, a similar hate campaign was launched against a journalist who, ironically, had broken the story about the pro-Kremlin propaganda machine operating through Twitter bots and bot networks (BBC, 2018).

One of the most active accounts spreading “anti-Muslim hate” in the UK in 2017 was one of thousands of accounts subsequently determined to be a fake, created in Russia. It had also spread pro-Brexit messages. The twitter account of “Jenna Abrams”, who tweeted anti-Muslim and anti-feminist hate to over 70,000 followers, was revealed as another bot (Hope Not Hate 2019).

In fact, one-third of the Twitter traffic regarding the Brexit referendum was generated by merely 1% of the accounts, a large majority being automated or semi-automated bots, reported Schaefer et al (2017, p4). They also found evidence of a “massive” army of Japanese bots run by extremist right wing supporters of the successful right wing candidate Abe, which flooded social media with aggressive and hateful tweets during the 2014 election.

After the 2017 US Senate Intelligence Committee hearings, attempts to restrict “botnets” – inter-connected webs of accounts – resulted in over 117 thousand “malicious applications” and more than 450 thousand suspicious accounts being blocked, report Vasilkova and Legostaeva (2019, p126). Malicious bots have been found operating across every topic, including climate change, where a quarter of tweets attacking both the science and Greta Thunberg, were found to be bots (Milman, 2020).

When automated bots can tweet thousands of times a day, and advanced bots have developed to use human messages, and spread them automatically, does it even, in such an artificial landscape, make sense to talk about “hate speech?”

4.4 How to Fake the Hate

By regularly culling millions of fake (automated) accounts and hate posts, Twitter and Facebook have made headlines, and given the impression that the issue of fakery and hate online is at least partially being dealt with. Most recently “a global network of fake accounts used in a coordinated campaign to push pro-Trump political messages” was deleted by both platforms (Horwitz & McMillan 2019). Very few people are aware of the real extent and reach of the programmes, and the extent to which digital spaces can be manipulated.

Public awareness can extend to the issue of “fake followers”; although people are less aware of how cheap and easy it is to purchase them – $50 for 2,500 “followers” for example (Hubspot, 2019). Again, one of the most high-profile examples is Donald Trump, over 60 percent of whose twitter followers were estimated to be “bots, spam, inactive or propaganda” (Fishkin, 2018). Both governments and ‘legitimate human users’ who are online proponents of hate speech have easy, cheap access both to buying thousands of followers, and using bots to retweet their own messages, or those of others, or each other.

Equally, very few people know that in 2019, Microsoft engineers at Beihang University and Microsoft China, disclosed that they had developed a bot that reads and comments on online news articles. It is made of a reading network that “comprehends” an article and extracts important points, and a network which then writes a comment which is based on those points, and on the article’s title (Yang et al. 2019). “Our model can significantly out-perform existing methods in terms of both automatic evaluation and human judgment” say the authors.

It is important to note that there were “existing methods”; something of which even the few journalists who responded to Microsoft’s announcement seemed unaware. “Essentially” reported Vice “the paper is suggesting that a system that automatically generates fake engagement and debate on an article could be beneficial because it could dupe real humans into engaging with the article as well”. The researchers, Vice noted, left that statement out of the updated version of their report. Instead, they acknowledged that a bot which pretends to be human, and which comments on news stories, may pose some “risks” (Cole 2019).

As the Irish Times pointed out, the code was now available on the free tech platform GitHub: “so, although Microsoft acknowledges it would be unethical to use this to deceive people, there is nothing stopping those with the technical know-how from doing so” (Boran 2019).

Alongside this (and almost entirely unreported) are bots which can be used to upvote or downvote comments on a range of media platforms. The influential news and discussion platform Reddit exemplifies the problem, with dozens of sites offering the chance to buy automated upvotes or downvotes there. Toffee (2017) proved that it was both “easy and cheap” to maliciously manipulate posts and comments. Facebook and Disqus have also been linked to automatic bot votes.

The results, said Carmen at al, showed that anyone with a political agenda can secretly manipulate Reddit votes, boosting visibility and interaction, at an average cost of $1 each thread (2018).

This has an effect. “Readers tend to estimate public opinion based on those comments” reported Jeong et al – and also change their own opinion in the face of it. Jeong et al. examined one of South Korea’s main news portals, Naver News, and discovered more than ten thousand comment threads which were highly likely to have been manipulated. They found that co-ordinated manipulation in recent years had significantly increased (2020).

4.5 Traditional Media: Amplifying Hate in the UK and Beyond

Hiding in the open, the largest perpetrators of hate speech in the UK, online and off, are the press. The right-wing British media was “uniquely aggressive in its campaigns against refugees and migrants” reported the United Nations High Commission for Refugees (Berry et al. 2015). Irish travellers, Gypsies and Roma had also been the subject of focussed long-term attacks: most egregiously by the Sun, the Daily Mail and the Daily Express: all of which display prominent headlines in every UK high street.

While German newspapers were also found to be using dehumanising language which portrayed refugees, for example, as a “common threat” (Fischer, 2019) the UN Human Rights Commissioner highlighted the “decades of sustained and unrestrained anti-foreigner abuse, misinformation and distortion” in the UK press, the most extreme of which was comparable to the language which incited the Rwandan genocide (UNHCR, 2015). In 2017, former UK Conservative minister, Baroness Sayeeda Warsi, called hate speech in the UK press a “plague…poisoning our public discourse…crowding out tolerance, reason and understanding “; in this case with Muslims the principal target (Ruddick, 2017).

Although physical sales across the mainstream press have been falling, what is little understood is these papers’ worldwide online reach. They are still thought of as “British” but the Sun has a global readership of over 32 million monthly online; the Daily Mail and the Express around 25 million (Tobitt, 2019). Recent campaigning by “Stop Funding Hate” which persuaded companies, through consumer pressure, not to advertise on such platforms, seems to have had an effect, with the group recording a drop in anti-migrant front pages from over 100 in 2016 to zero in 2019 (2020).

Alongside the online reach, however, come the newspaper comments sections, which are meant to be regulated by the newspapers themselves and by the Independent Press Standards Organisation (IPSO). As campaign group “Hacked Off” report, the sections are instead a “Wild West” of unregulated inflammatory hate speech, where racist comments can receive hundreds or thousands of “upvotes” and remain on the site for months, if removed at all (2020).

Comments on the MailOnline’s (Daily Mail) coverage of a fire at a refugee camp in Lesbos on September 9th 2020 (Pleasance, 2020) demonstrate the fact that the hate speech of previous headlines (“Migrants: How Many More Can We Take?” 27th August 2015) has moved to below the line, where it has become even more virulent.

“Turning Europe into the same cess-pit they come from” reads one top-rated comment. “These are the kind of Sc++m the UK is letting in” and “These people are from countries that are essentially cesspits and they seem to want to turn the world into the same hole they crawled out of” read others. The refugees are compared to “soldier ants”, “invaders” and “money grabbers”. A month after publication, the comments were still in place. The UK government, Hacked Off report, intended to exempt newspaper comments sections from any Bill regulating the internet (2020).

Two UK newspapers not cited by the UN in its denunciation of hate speech were the traditionally liberal, sometimes seen as left-wing, Guardian, and its Sunday paper, The Observer. Although producing headlines such as the previously mentioned, and inaccurate “There’s a social pandemic poisoning Europe: hatred of Muslims” (2020) which can do little but spread fear and division among the communities it apparently aims to protect, the comment sections of both are well-moderated, and largely free of hate speech.

However, the Observer’s coverage above, and its more recent coverage of the QAnon conspiracy illustrate a larger problem: the apparent inability, or unwillingness, by mainstream media to address computer-generated propaganda.

The QAnon conspiracy, described as “the Nazi cult rebranded” had, the Observer reported, grown to “terrifying” levels in the UK and elsewhere: with membership on Facebook groups up by 120 percent; engagement rates up by 91 percent; and millions of tweets and posts using QAnon-related phrases and hashtags (Doward 2020). “Britain is the second country in the world for output of Q-related tweets” reported the website Wired, basing its piece, as did the Observer, on a report by the Institute of Strategic Dialogue (ISD) (Volpicelli 2020).

Tech investigators had found, two years previously, that QAnon was, from the beginning, artificially boosted by bots (Glaser, 2018). Researchers at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey had successfully programmed the latest in artificial intelligence neural networks to reproduce QAnon propaganda (McGuffie, Newhouse 2020). The ISD’s report mentioned automatic bots once, in passing, with a reference to a report suggesting that Russian bots may have boosted the QAnon traffic on Twitter (Gallagher et al. 2020, p12); the Observer and Wired did not mention it.

Even in media which does not promote hate speech, the strategies behind, and opportunities for, artificial inflation of posts, tweets, hashtags and comments are unexamined. As yet, there has been no investigation comparable to that of the research into Naver News (Jeong et al. 2019) on the sources and manipulation of hate speech in UK online comments, or into the upvoting of such comments.

Consistent, large UK majority For Immediate Ceasefire, v small minority Against

YouGov Poll 19th October 2023

“From what you’ve read and heard, do you think there should or should not be an immediate ceasefire in Israel and Palestine?”

There definitely should: 58%

There probably should: 18%

TOTAL FOR: 76 percent

There definitely should not: 3%

There probably should not: 5%

TOTAL AGAINST: 8 percent

https://yougov.co.uk/topics/travel/survey-results/daily/2023/10/19/e363e/1

YouGov Poll 21 December 2023

“From what you’ve read and heard, do you think there should or should not be an immediate ceasefire in Israel and Palestine?”

There definitely should: 48%

There probably should: 23%

TOTAL FOR: 71 percent

There definitely should not: 6%

There probably should not: 6%

TOTAL AGAINST: 12 percent

YouGov Survey 13 February 2024

“At this time do you think Israel should continue to take military action or stop and call a ceasefire?”

Stop and call a ceasefire: 66 percent

Continue to take military action: 13 percent

https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/48675-british-attitudes-to-the-israel-gaza-conflict-february-2024-update