The headline warns.: “Berlin – Group of youths attack Jewish dance group.” What image does that headline conjure? Nazis? Skinheads? A little Third Reich retro wanna-be’s?
The lede in the piece doesn’t help either to clarify things either.
A Jewish dance group was attacked with stones by a group of children and teenagers during a performance at a street festival in the Germany city of Hannover, police said Thursday. One dancer suffered a leg injury and the group then canceled their performance.
The teenagers also used a megaphone to shout anti-Semitic slurs during the Saturday afternoon attack, Hannover police spokesman Thorsten Schiewe said.
Many people reading that think to themselves “oh no not again” but in the next graph there’s finally a bit of a clarification as to who the “youths” might be.
Police said the incident is under investigation and that they do not have an exact number of attackers yet. Schiewe said there were several Muslim immigrant youths among the attackers.
How about instead of classifying them as youths we actually say who they really are. Something tells me if it were Catholic youths stoning Jews, the media wouldn’t be so vague.
So what we have here is the rise of anti-semitic forces in Europe attacking Jews and the world pretending not to notice. You know, maybe “oh no not again” was the proper response after all.
June 25, 2010 at 4:12 pm
Reminds me of Mark Steyn's observation of news sources avoidind the m-word and i-word:
From Thursday's New York Times: ''Nalchik, Russia — Insurgents launched a series of raids today in this southern Russian city, striking the area's main airport and several police and security buildings in large-scale, daytime attacks that left at least 85 people dead.''
"Insurgents," eh?
From Agence France Presse:
"Nalchik, Russia: More than 60 people were killed as scores of militants launched simultaneous attacks on police and government buildings . . ."
"Militants," you say?
From the Scotsman:
"Rebel forces battled Russian troops for control of a provincial capital in the Caucasus yesterday . . ."
"Rebel forces,'' huh?
From Toronto's Globe & Mail:
"Nalchik, Russia — Scores of rebels launched simultaneous attacks on police and government buildings . . ."
"Rebels," by the score. But why were they rebelling? What were they insurging over? You had to pick up the Globe & Mail's rival, the Toronto Star, to read exactly the same Associated Press dispatch but with one subtle difference:
''Nalchik, Russia — Scores of Islamic militants launched simultaneous attacks on police and government buildings . . ."
Ah, "Islamic militants." So that's what the rebels were insurging over. In the geopolitical Hogwart's, Islamic "militants" are the new Voldemort, the enemy whose name it's best never to utter.
June 25, 2010 at 5:41 pm
romishgraffiti: That was WELL DONE, indeed! And right on the mark. I actually read the headline of this yesterday and immediately pictured a bunch of Aryan-looking skin heads stoning a group of Hesidem trying to do that Russian Cossack dance. (Oh scary peek inside my brain – sorry!)
Words make all the difference, huh? I forget that Europe is a Muslim continent now. At least we are allowed to use the I and the M words here. I use I all the time – especially when I'm talking about myself.
Anyway…in Europe they say "Asian" youths whenever them mean Muslim – which really ticks off a lot of non-Muslim Asians I would suspect.
July 1, 2010 at 8:44 am
I watch enough EuroNews, and France24 to have pictured the Muslim Youths attacking Jews, poverty stricken people are more likely to b racist, and in South Africa there are often clashes and marches!