In January of last year, Zelo Street covered the story of Jack Letts, a young man in his early 20s who converted to Islam while in his teens. He had been given the full character assassination treatment by both the Mail and Sun after they found out he had travelled to Syria. Soon, he had been reinvented as an ISIS terrorist, with the Murdoch Sun claiming he was “the first white British male known to have joined IS”. He wasn’t.
The Mail clearly wanted to get involved in this auction of defamatory nonsense, and so invented a family for Letts: Mail Online said it “understands 'Jihadi Jack' is now a frontline fighter for the brutal terror group and lives with his Iraqi wife and his son Muhammed after moving to the Iraqi city of Fallujah from Raqqa”. He didn’t have an Iraqi wife, or a son. But there were very good reasons for the press to go overboard.
Despite the Sun claiming Letts was “posh”, his parents John and Sally are of modest means. The Mail tried to use John Letts’ appearance on BBC Countryfile as a way of suggesting otherwise, which was also bunk. The reality is that the press knows the Letts family does not have the means to take them to the cleaners, and so have been lying about their son with impunity. And the Sun is now back on the case.
Hence the headline “'GET HIM HOME' Jihadi Jack Letts’ parents to SUE the Government to try to bring ISIS terror convert, 21, home from Kurdish prison in Syria”. Letts is not an “ISIS terror convert”. But that is a mere sighting shot: “Jack Letts ran away to join ISIS aged 18 after converting to extremist Islam at school in Oxford”. He didn’t run away, he hasn’t joined ISIS, and hasn’t converted to “extremist” anything.
But this, whisper it quietly, is what happens to the little people like John and Sally Letts. Our free and fearless press knows it can lie about them more or less with impunity. It therefore does so, shamelessly and blatantly, knowing this will gain them sales and clicks. So on they go: “JIHADI Jack's parents are planning to sue the Government to try to being their terror convert son home from Syria”. He still isn’t a “terror convert”.
John and Sally Letts
Hence “Muslim-convert Jack - dubbed Jihadi Jack after he ran away to join ISIS in Syria aged 18”. He still didn’t run away, and still hasn’t joined ISIS. But he and his family are being defamed viciously by the paper which has succeeded the late and not at all lamented Screws - which was identified by a former Murdoch employee recently as a conduit for MI5 political blackmail and other smear operations.
John and Sally Letts are firmly of the opinion that our security services, in association with the Murdoch press - Zelo Street will name the journalist concerned in a follow-up post - know full well that their son is not and has never been a terrorist, yet have screwed over the family royally when all they wanted was to get Jack home. For objecting to being used in this way, the Letts family are now being openly smeared by that same press.
Seasoned Murdoch watchers will recognise this behaviour from many past instances of bent and twisted journalism. The victims of Mazher Mahmood, and all those involved with seeking justice over the Daniel Morgan murder, know the nature of this beast. It is a beast that has not changed its spots. It will carry on misbehaving - unless and until We The People call a halt. Zelo Street will have more on the Jack Letts case later.
I admit to seeing the name Letts and thinking, "oh God, they let mad uncle Quentin get to him and radicalise him"...
Post a Comment