Today in overtly racist lying

Well, this one didn't take long to get from the Teenage Mutant Ninja press to the glorious mainstream, did it? Here's the Daily Caller:

Sadiq Khan, London’s first Muslim mayor, announced Monday that “body shaming” advertisements will no longer be allowed in London’s public transport.

... Khan was not clear in what would determine which ads would be banned, as it doesn’t include all images of people in underwear or swimming clothes. Most underwear and bikini models though can be assumed to have non-average bodies.

Because why -- even when "go online and Google it" is a thing stupid candidates say in actual debates -- would anyone bother to look up TfL's advertising policy? Large amounts of it will look familiar if you've worked in a shop that sold enough advertising* to have advertising standards. When might a ban come into play, you ask?

The advertisement refers to or portrays (or gives the impression of portraying) a living person unless the written consent of that person is obtained and is produced to TfL.
 
Indeed, lots of societies that aren't run by Muslims -- say, the society that spent eight years trying to fine a TV network a thousand dollars per breast-millisecond over a Super Bowl halftime event -- regulate public portrayals of the body. It's hard to imagine an adult being surprised at the idea, as the source paper isn't:
Adverts which put Londoners under pressure over body image are to be banned from the Tube and bus network.

Sadiq Khan announced that Transport for London would no longer run ads which could cause body confidence issues, particularly among young people.

The Mayor,** a father of two teenage daughters, warned the ads could “demean” women and encourage them to conform to unrealistic or unhealthy body shapes.

TfL’s new advertising policy, which does not include all images of people in their underwear or swimming gear, is only expected to affect a handful of the 12,000 adverts a year which run across the network, including at bus shelters and on-street sites.

The Daily Caller, in other words, is just making stuff up. The scary Muslim dude hasn't banned "sexy women" and probably couldn't, should he have wanted to. But that was a minor point for The Fox Nation (at right), and by the time it became Tuesday's fourth most important story at Fox proper, it had picked up a mildly clever deke that tied it into the Trump campaign:

The newly elected mayor of London's call for a ban on public ads that show scantily clad women has critics complaining the move has more to do with his Muslim roots than his concerns about "body-shaming."

Do tell!

Sadiq Khan, who became the city's first Muslim mayor in May, called for a ban on ads showing women in bikinis in a letter published in the Guardian, saying images such as the controversial "Beach Body Ready" one used by Protein World send a harmful message.

"As the father of two teenage girls, I am extremely concerned about this kind of advertising which can demean people, particularly women, and make them ashamed of their bodies," Khan wrote. "It is high time it came to an end."

Hmm. I don't see a letter to that effect at theguardian.com, though that does seem to be in the statement the Guardian quotes. From that evidence, it seems fair to conclude that Fox too is simply lying. There is no call for a "ban on ads showing women in bikinis." Here's TfL again:

For example, while the use of underdressed people in most underwear advertising may be seen as an appropriate context, gratuitous use of an overtly sexual nature will be unacceptable.

But Fox has a bigger story to tell:

The move is not sitting well with critics who believe it is an accommodation to Muslim sensibilities. In strict Islamic society, women are supposed to dress "modestly," which can mean anything from a head scarf to a full burka with only eye slits.

"Muslim mayor banned ads with bikini-clad women on TFL. Stand by for adverts for burkinis," tweeted Daily Mail columnist Katie Hopkins, a fierce critic of the increasing influence of fundamentalist Islam on British culture.

Others tweeted that the mayor should also ban ads regarding erectile dysfunction and even weight loss products if he is serious about ensuring ads don't offend the general public.   

I'm all in with that. Hell, I'll go it one better: Let's ban all direct-to-consumer marketing of prescription drugs, especially uptake inhibitors. But the point here isn't about advertising standards, much as I wish we still had them. Nor is it about British journalism's evolving sense of what's culturally appropriate in public seminudity. It's about journalists -- and people who pretend to be journalists -- telling lies.

As a general rule, lying in journalism isn't random. Like terrorism, it has a purpose -- here, to remind anyone who's distracted by the multiple factors influencing the Orlando attack that the real enemy is both Islam and the culture of appeasement that allows Islam to sink its sharia claws into a society cowed by political correctness. The party press and its anointed candidate are -- surprise! -- united in an openly racist appeal to their bottom-feeding supporters. Please take every opportunity to expose them to public ridicule and contempt.

* Why does The Daily Caller hate free enterprise? Why does The Daily Caller HATE AMERICA?
** Yes, the Standard forgot to mention the mayor's religion. Sharia already has its tentacles around Londonistan, you betcha.