web analytics
August 20, 2014 / 24 Av, 5774
Israel at War: Operation Protective Edge
 
 
At a Glance

Posts Tagged ‘Weekly Standard’

U.S. Sends Anti-Israel Advisor to Anti-Semitic Sweden

Tuesday, April 17th, 2012

U.S. President Barack Obama’s controversial anti-Semitism advisor, Hannah Rosenthal, will be visiting Sweden on April 24 to meet with Ilmar Reepalu, the famously anti-Israel mayor of the city of Malmö.

According to the American embassy in Stockholm, Rosenthal has been following the rise of anti-Semitism in Malmö for some time and wants to make sure that there are no politicians in the area that encourage discrimination, racism, or hatred against Jews.

Rosenthal’s visit to Sweden is likely to amount to little more than an empty photo opportunity. This is because Rosenthal and Reepalu are both self-styled “progressives” who hold the insidious belief that Jews are to blame for anti-Semitism because of their support for Israel.

Like other European countries, Sweden has experienced a significant uptick in anti-Semitic hate-crimes in recent years. Jews in Sweden are frequently subject to harassment and some have been physically assaulted; Jewish cemeteries in the country have repeatedly been desecrated; Jewish worshippers have been abused on their way home from prayer; and Jews have been taunted in the streets by masked men chanting phrases such as “Hitler, Hitler” and “Dirty Jew.” Some Jews in Sweden have stopped attending prayer services out of fear for their safety.

The problem of anti-Semitism in Sweden is so widespread that the Los Angeles-based Simon Wiesenthal Center has advised Jews to avoid traveling to the country altogether. “We reluctantly are issuing this advisory because religious Jews and other members of the Jewish community there have been subject to anti-Semitic taunts and harassment. There have been dozens of incidents reported to the authorities but have not resulted in arrests or convictions for hate crimes,” the center said in a statement.

Malmö, the third-largest city in Sweden, has become an especially hostile place for Jews, who are increasingly subjected to threats, intimidation, and physical violence.

The only synagogue serving Malmö’s 700-strong Jewish community has been a frequent target of attack. The synagogue, which is often the target of bomb threats, has also been set on fire, and now has security guards stationed around the building. The windows of the synagogue have been replaced with bullet-proof glass, while the Jewish kindergarten can only be reached through reinforced steel security doors.

The situation for Jews in Malmö is so bleak that some 30 Jewish families have already left the city for Stockholm, England, or Israel — and more are preparing to go.

The upswing in anti-Semitic violence in Malmö is being attributed to two key factors: the exponential increase in the number of Muslim immigrants in the city, and Malmö’s bigoted left-wing mayor, who rarely misses an opportunity to publicly demonize Israel.

Muslims now comprise between 20% and 25% of Malmö’s total population of around 300,000, and local observers say most of the increase in anti-Jewish violence in recent years has been perpetrated by shiftless Muslim immigrant youth.

Anti-Semitism is also being stirred up by Ilmar Reepalu, the left-wing mayor of Malmö, who has a pathological obsession with Israel.

Reepalu, who has been mayor for more than 15 years, says Jews are to blame for anti-Semitism because of their support for Israel.

In January 2010, for example, Reepalu marked Holocaust Memorial Day by declaring that Zionism is racism because it is an “extreme ideology that puts one group of people over another.”

In an interview with the daily newspaper Skånska Dagbladet, he also said: “I would wish for the Jewish community to denounce Israeli violations against the civilian population in Gaza. Instead it decides to hold a [pro-Israel] demonstration in the Grand Square [of Malmö], which could send the wrong signals.”

Reepalu was referring to an incident in January 2009, during Israel’s brief war in Gaza, when a small demonstration in favor of Israel was attacked by a screaming mob of Muslims and Swedish leftists, who threw bottles, eggs, and firecrackers as the police looked on.

In July 2011, after a Hollywood film production company cancelled plans to shoot a movie in the southern Swedish province of Skåne due to concerns over anti-Semitism in Malmö, Reepalu cast his rage on the Simon Wiesenthal Center for issuing the travel warning.

Reepalu, in an interview with the newspaper Sydsvenskan, said: “I have a feeling that the Simon Wiesenthal Center is not really looking for what is happening in Malmö but they want to hang the people who dare to criticize the state of Israel. Are they once again saying I should be silenced? I will never compromise my morals.”

More recently, Reepalu accused Jews in Sweden of teaming up with an anti-immigrant party to “spread hate” against Muslims.

In a March 22 interview with the magazine NEO about the rise of anti-Semitism in Sweden, Reepalu said the Jewish community has been “infiltrated” by the conservative Sweden Democrats party to promote their mutual disdain for Muslims.

This Cancellation A Long Time Coming

Wednesday, August 18th, 2010
            Joseph Epstein, one of America’s most distinguished essayists (and a man who over the past couple of decades has made his way along the well-trod political path from left to right), has canceled his subscription to The New York Times.
The difference between Epstein and the countless other readers who’ve given up on the Times is that he has both the ability of expressing the reasons for his decision in several paragraphs of clean, graceful prose and the platform to do so in a very public manner – in this case in the pages and on the website of The Weekly Standard.
            In an article appearing in the magazine’s Aug. 16 issue titled “Adios, Gray Lady,” Epstein writes that while the Times once enjoyed an aura of “a certain stateliness the the possession of high virtue,” those days are gone.
“[T]he Gray Lady,” he continues, “is far from the grande dame she once was. For years now she has been going heavy on the rouge, lipstick, and eyeliner and gadding about in stiletto heels . I’ve had it with the old broad; after nearly 50 years together, I’ve determined to cut her loose.”

Far from being an impulsive act, Epstein’s break with the Times was years in the making. Though he doesn’t mention it in his Weekly Standard article, back in 1994 he wrote a lengthy essay on his problems with the paper – “The Degradation of the New York Times” – for Commentary magazine, in which he lamented the paper’s steady drift away from at least making an attempt at objective reporting to out-and-out advocacy disguised as news coverage:

 

[T]he news columns of the Times have become so filled with opinion that one has become all but inured to the phenomenon . Certainly, during the Reagan years it was rare to pick up a piece about the economy without finding mention of what I came to think of as that musical-comedy team of Savage Cuts and Chilling Effects: every Reagan budget cut was savage, the effect of every cut chilling. Not that one should ever read a newspaper story without a proper measure of skepticism, but in The New York Times of late the gentle whir of political axes being ground has come to serve as a kind of basso continuo to the paper’s reporting.

 

Elaborating on his decision to forgo the Times, Epstein writes: “For so many decades the paper has been part of my morning mental hygiene. Yet in recent years I’ve been reading less and less of each day’s paper. With the exception of David Brooks, who allows that his general position is slightly to the right of center but who is not otherwise locked into a Pavlovian political response, I find no need to read any of the Times‘s regular columnists. Every so often I check to remind myself that Maureen Dowd isn’t amusing, though she is an improvement, I suppose, over the termagantial Anna Quindlen, whom I used to read with the trepidation of a drunken husband mounting the stairs knowing his wife awaits with a rolling pin.”
And it’s not only the paper’s columnists Epstein realizes he can live without. “I’d sooner read the fine print in my insurance policies,” he wrotes, “than the paper’s perfectly predictable editorials.”

Here, too, Epstein’s dismay was already evident in his 1994 Commentary essay:

 

It was once the traditional but unspoken belief of American liberals that, in any grouping of political views, they occupied the Center – or certainly would in any reasonable world. For better or worse, the Times, in past days, sought that Center in its editorials; because it is not always so easily located, the paper could at least on occasion take unexpected positions. No longer.

One can now predict how the Times will come out editorially on nearly every issue, problem, or question of the day. The only amusement, or instruction, is in watching its editorial writers squirm in defending the indefensible, or rationalizing the irrational.

 

Reading both of Epstein’s articles – and bearing in mind they were writen sixteen years apart – one doesn’t know whether to marvel at his ineffable patience in waiting this long before finally kicking the Times to the curb or to ask, perhaps uncharitably but with only the best of intentions, Why the interminable delay?

 

Jason Maoz can be reached at jmaoz@jewishpress.com

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/media-monitor/this-cancellation-a-long-time-coming/2010/08/18/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: