05-23-2018 10:30:41 AM -0700
05-18-2018 12:27:15 PM -0700
05-17-2018 08:38:50 AM -0700
05-11-2018 07:34:04 AM -0700
05-09-2018 10:17:16 AM -0700
It looks like you've previously blocked notifications. If you'd like to receive them, please update your browser permissions.
Desktop Notifications are  | 
Get instant alerts on your desktop.
Turn on desktop notifications?
Remind me later.


Stretch, grab a late afternoon cup of caffeine and get caught up on the most important news of the day with our Coffee Break newsletter. These are the stories that will fill you in on the world that's spinning outside of your office window - at the moment that you get a chance to take a breath.
Sign up now to save time and stay informed!

The Gray Lady's Baby Steps

It's getting so you can't even rely on the New York Times anymore. To print wholesale lies about Europe, I mean.

A few weeks ago, I noted that the Times, which has long led the way in all but ignoring the catastrophic consequences of the ongoing Islamization of Europe, had actually published a reasonably honest December 10 report about a Molotov cocktail attack on a synagogue in Gothenburg, Sweden. While avoiding the words Muslim and Islam, the Times had made it clear that the perpetrators weren't, say, Amish immigrants from Lancaster County, Pennsylvania. The Times had even followed up with an op-ed on the broader issue – anti-Semitism in Sweden – by a Swedish writer who did use the word Muslim.

Given the Times's post-9/11 record on these matters, this one-two punch came as a shocker. This is, after all, the paper that won a Pulitzer in 2007 for a three-part whitewash by reporter Andrea Barnett of a pro-jihad Brooklyn imam. It's the paper whose Book Review section has systematically ignored honest books about Islamic ideology while promoting Islam apologists like Karen Armstrong and Ian Buruma. It's the paper that repeatedly gave rock-star treatment to Tariq Ramadan, the oily Islamofascist leader who's currently jailed in France on rape charges.

On March 3, the Times did it again. In a prominent, 2000-word article, Ellen Barry and Christina Anderson addressed the topic of Swedish gang violence with (for the Times) astonishing frankness. The framing story was about Daniel Cuevas Zuniga, a universally beloved 63-year-old Chilean who, as a “left-leaning” opponent of the Pinochet regime, immigrated to Sweden in 1985, had a job “caring for adults with severe disabilities and Alzheimer's disease,” and, feeling increasingly unsafe in his neighborhood, planned to move with his wife to Thailand this coming April. In February, however, he was killed by a hand grenade – a weapon that, while all but unheard-of elsewhere in Western Europe these days, has become big in Sweden.

To any veteran Times watcher, it was clear why the reporters chose to focus their article on Zuniga, of all victims of immigrant crime in Sweden: as a “left-leaning” immigrant himself, and one who worked in the caring professions, he was far safer to offer up as a figure of sympathy than some ethnic Swede. Also typical of the Times was the reporters' effort to blame Sweden's problems, as much as possible, on the flow into the country of weapons left over from the Bosnian War. The article also contained the predictable assurances that, for all its problems, Sweden's crime rate really isn't so bad, at least not compared to some places in the U.S. Oh, and the reporters made sure to refer to the Sweden Democrats, who call for reduced immigration, as a “far right-wing party.”