The 'sin' of omission

In an article earlier this month, the Northwest Evening Mail reported that a retired dentist in the Lancaster area had been arrested and charged with "being in possession of an explosive substance for an unlawful purpose" after "a record number of explosives" were seized. It is claimed that police found "rocket launchers, chemicals, British National Party literature and a nuclear or biological suit" in his house . This find appear came shortly after the discovery of twenty-two 'chemical components' at the house of his alleged accomplice, Robert Cottage, a former BNP election candidate, who lives in nearby Colne.

A further article, published by The Burnley Citizen, reported that local police superintendent Neil Smith had "moved to reassure residents and stressed: It is not a bomb making factory" before adding that the find was "not related to terrorism". Another local newspaper, The Nelson Leader reported on the first appearances by the two before magistrates courts.

Given the nature of the find, you would imagine that the national news media would be all over this story in no time. Wrong! Here we have a substantial haul of weaponry that would do real damage to real people, and it receives precisely ZERO coverage in the national media.

This is in stark contrast to the almost frenzied blanket coverage of the trial of Dhiren Barot, who is being tried for conspiracy to carry out terrorist acts, despite the fact that only evidence against him are some deranged scribblings he made on a notepad where he fantasised about carrying out terrorist attacks on major public buildings in the United Kingdom and United States. Never mind the fact that "The Crown could not dispute claims from the defence that no funding had been received for the projects, nor any vehicles or bomb-making materials acquired".

According to the mainstream media, Mr Barot, who has obvious mental-health problems, is the real terrorist - despite having no means whatsoever to bring his crazed ideas to fruition, and having no known connection with anyone who does. However, when presented with the largest haul of items likely to be used in terrorist acts, voices in the same mainstream media fall strangely silent.

Of course, the guilt or innocence of those arrested in Lancashire is up to a court to decide and they have a right not to be tried in the media. However, the same careful avoidance of publicly discussing matters that are sub-judice does not seem to have come into play in the case of Dihren Barot.

His guilt or innocence should be determined by a court of law, based on the evidence presented. The outcome of his trial should not depend upon or be in anyway influenced by the feverish salivating of the gutter press (or gutter TV news for that matter) , nor the selective reporting of the so-called quality media and their servile acquiescence to the relentless demonisation of selected groups. Regretably, it seems that large swathes of the mainstream media have already been happy to act as his judge, jury and executioner.