Saturday, July 18, 2009

The Fall of Swedish Public Media

Our Swedish correspondent CB has a report on the latest about Mohammed Omar, Sweden’s media-darling Muslim, who was “radicalized” last winter by the Israeli operation in Gaza, and has made public appearances in the media holding forth against Israel and in support of radical Islam.

CB includes this introduction to his translation:

The following article is from the noted blogger Dick Erixon. He puts his finger on the fact that our old friend Mohammed Omar is at it again and has now published an interview glorifying Hitler on his blog (well, these days he’s at it most of the time, so there’s nothing new on that front) and still gets a platform in Swedish public media.

The interesting thing is that Omar is lending his “talents” to both extreme right-wing media and Swedish public media (notably in Paulina Neuding’s longer article in Svenska Dagbladet), and Swedish public media seems to be fine with it. It’s no secret from them that Omar is calling the Holocaust a Zionist myth and is a supporter of terror-organizations (Hamas, Hizbullah and the present Iranian regime), and they still doesn’t have a problem with his views.

National Today is a paper for the Swedish Nazi party, the National Democrats. That’s the people Mohammed Omar associates with and still receives invitations to Swedish Public Television.

If they had a problem with this, Omar would not have been on the sofa at the big morning program at SVT, Wednesday July 15th, as an expert on the present situation in Iran. The same Omar who recently claimed that CIA and not the Basiji was behind the killing of Iranian freedom-symbol, Neda Soltani, with the aim of further increasing the unrest in Iran after the elections. Omar’s previous statements apparently didn’t lead the people at Swedish public television to do any research into Omar’s most recent doings. Or do they know about the things that Neuding and Erixon report, and still feel it’s OK to promote this guy?

Should Omar be silenced? Of course not! But it is very disturbing that Swedish public media either does very sloppy vetting on the people they give a platform to, or the people in charge secretly think Omar’s views and work are mainstream enough to be exempt from hard questions.

Why else bring in a supporter of Ahmadinejad as a reliable expert on the present Iranian situation? With the new debate about Omar going on in the Swedish media, will the Swedish public and tax-funded media wake up and start acting as reporters, and ask Omar hard questions about his reasons for publishing a Hitler-glorifying interview on his blog? Or has their Leftist ideology totally blinded them from seeing these kinds of people for the extremist they are?

It will be an interesting but predictable time to hear the silence from public media, or maybe the half-hearted apologies (i.e. lies) about not knowing. But I would like to be surprised for once and hear an honest repentance, a wake-up call and a new orientation towards a real public media, shining their light on unsavory ideas and actions like Omar’s. If not, Erixon is correct: Swedish public media have succumbed to acting as an institution of indoctrination.

And lo, great was fall of it!

And now the translation of Dick Erixon’s article:
- - - - - - - - -
“For us Muslims, Hitler is a hero”

Thursday July 16 2009 9:02

A person who appears diligently on SVT [Swedish public television], SR [Swedish public radio] and other media is Mohamed Omar. This is how it sounds on his blog when Ahmed Rami answers Omar’s questions:

“I view Hitler’s movement as an intifada against the Jewish power in Germany. Hitler pursued a resistance struggle in the same way that the Palestinians do…”

“For us [Muslims] Hitler symbolizes the good. He was a hero.”

Thus it is entirely OK now, according to PC-Sweden, for those who like Hitler to appear at SVT and SR without being questioned and debated. The media are allowing themselves to be infiltrated and colored by the most extreme forces, without even reflecting about it. That is usually usually [sic] called indoctrination.

See more: Paulina Neuding in Svenska Dagbladet: Should SVT run errands for extremists?


laine said...

For "Swedish Public Media" substitute "leftist extremist media".

For "extreme right media" substitute also "leftist extremist media".

Then there's no mystery why "both" give a terrorist promoting antisemitic imam a soapbox. There's no "both". It's a single extremist mentality and it's found on the Left.

The Left's enormous public relations coup is twofold:

1) they managed to ascribe their secondary socialist tumor the Nazis to the right side of the ledger, on the sole basis that he turned on their favored communist tumor the Soviets. That was simply a falling out among leftist thieves who had signed the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact of co-operation dividing up eastern Europe. Then one of the thugs got greedy and the other thug joined with "the good guys" to save his own skin and ended up grabbing the loot he'd been promised by Hitler and running a worse criminal enterprise that set new records for holocausts.

2) the Left according to the Gramsci protocol for cultural communism infiltrated and came to dominate all western organs of public information, including public education and the media. This leftist dominated media has consistently presented leftist views that have become progressively more blatant and extreme as "centrist". Concomitantly, anything to the right of them is then presented as "extreme right wing" and smeared with the poor fit of nazism. That a few ignorant boys dress up in nazi regalia and spout the meme that they are right wing does not make it so.

The Right or conservatives as I prefer to call us has been absolutely lousy at the propaganda war. (If we really were Nazis we'd be a lot better at it). It's the Left, whether Nazi or Soviet that has a lock on this "talent".

Conservatives are for liberty and individual rights. Both Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia were totalitarian systems with significant similarities (including denial of individual rights and eventual anti-semitism) and trivial differences.

Sweden has no extreme right (demanding small government) or even centrist media. It is all left all the time, call it what you will. How much more extreme can you get than opening your gates to people who declare their intention is to substitute themselves and their culture for yours? Why are these crazy people allowed to get away with calling themselves moderates or centrists or hide behind double euphemisms like "Public (meaning government) media"?