Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien
I don't think the article is suggesting that it's all fine and 'that's that' on the basis of that article. It clearly states they were chaperoned. It is obviously from the side of the people in the school but doesn't pretend not to be nor pretend to be an authoritative investigation into the issue.
|
Which for me begs the question of why it's in a newspaper. There is extensive, cautious use of language to avoid presenting opinions as facts however the overall tone is that the DfE, and those reporting on it all are victimising the school for doing well. This is absurd and the piece utterly ignores the mounting evidence of issues in the school.
I mean for heaven's sake, he published a denial from the governor that there was anything up without any criticism or balance. This guy co-wrote a paper on Islamising secular schools in the UK a few years back and the presence of an extremist-linked preacher was advertised in the school's own newsletter.
The mockery that the piece faces from most of the comments shows just how ridiculous this piece is. It rather justifies the accusations against this newspaper and indeed the BBC over selective reporting, obsessive ignorance of any issues with 'multiculturalism' and pandering to a 'metropolitan elite'.
It should be noted Gilligan presents what he says in his column as facts and the school, etc, can most certainly make complaints and in the case of individuals take him to court for libel, just as was done over his coverage of Tower Hamlets which was so roundly condemned by people like Mehdi Hasan alongside Guardianistas who accused him of Islamophobia.
Shedloads of complaints came in, the evidence won, Gilligan gets to continue describing Lutfur Rahman as linked to extremists despite Mehdi thinking Rahman is awesome.
The writer of this piece incidentally seems quite convinced from his tour that the school is 'good'.
This is supposed to be the Grauniad's education man. Can you seriously take a newspaper seriously if it happily regurgitates things which are provably false because they follow its own agenda?
It's like the Daily Mail thrown into reverse and put on steroids.