A universe of beauty, mystery and wonder

A universe of beauty, mystery and wonder

Friday, December 2, 2016

HITLER AND THE US MEDIA in the 1930s, and ISLAM AND THE MEDIA today - Parallel cases of JOURNALISM MALPRACTICE in its failure to promptly identify and denounce ideologies of supremacism, antisemitism, and genocide

© Unauthorized duplication of this blog's material is prohibited.   Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full credit and link is given to Otters and Science News Blogspot.  Link to this post: - Thank you for visiting my blog.
  • The following article by media analyst Sean Durns highlights just some of the most egregious failures by the western media in the 1930s to expose the true nature of Nazism. 
  • They engaged in all sorts of mental contortions to excuse and even support Nazism. 
  • Hitler was, after all, an enemy of Communism, a powerful reason to go easy on Nazism.
  • That media tolerance and support was sustained in spite of Hitler's very clear record of racism, and his book Mein Kampf's stated goals of world conquest and genocide.   
  • Today the political equivalent of Mein Kampf is the Koran.
  • The Koran and the Hadith, the most sacred Muslim texts, clearly state Islam's goal of global conquest, the Allah-mandated murder of Infidels, and a political system that calls for sharia law and gruesome punishments for those who offend Allah.  
  • Incidentally, the words Jihad and Kampf both mean "struggle".  
  • The parallels between western media's tolerance and even defense of Hitler in the 1930s, and of Islam in the 21st century are absolutely stunning.
  • And the parallels between Nazism and Islam are downright chilling.
  • It's relevant to see the daily efforts by the western media to absolve Islam of any connection between repeated acts of jihad and its motivating ideology, Islam. 
  • Journalists, and political leaders as well, go out of their way to find excuses for those acts of carnage. 
  • In an act of willful blindness they refuse to even take a look at the Koran and Hadith with their clear mandates for violent jihad against the Infidel, or to read about the fourteen centuries of Muslim bloody conquests in Asia and Africa.
  • Media pundits are quick to label Trump and his supporters as "Nazis" but they say absolutely nothing about the inherent anti-Semitic nature of Islam.
Read more about Muslim genocide figures here

The Fuhrer and the Fourth State

By Sean Durns
Research Analyst at CAMERA
 (Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America)
“There can be no higher law in journalism than to tell the truth, and to shame the devil,” U.S. commentator Walter Lippman once said. How then, did the U.S. media cover a man responsible for some of the most evil and heinous acts in recorded history: Adolf Hitler?
Press coverage of the German dictator defies a simple and neat summary, as the U.S. media was not, and has never been, a monolithic entity and coverage of Hitler naturally changed over time. Nonetheless, some patterns can be discerned from a cursory glance at the early years of Nazi rule.
Upon Hitler’s ascension to power in 1933, some U.S. news outlets did not see a devil, but rather, much needed stability being brought to a country that had been in economic and social upheaval since before the Great War.

Hitler and the Nazis were providing a “dark land a clear light of hope,” according to a 1933 dispatch by the Christian Science Monitor that was cited by the American historian Dr. Rafael Medoff (“The American Papers That Praised Hitler,” The Daily Beast, Dec. 20, 2015). CSM praised, at its outset, Nazi rule for bringing order; quite literally for making the trains arrive “punctually.”
Continue reading this article and see others on current media malpractice in their reporting on Islam

The U.S. press baron William Randolph Hearst was quoted by Putzi Hanfstaegnl, an early Hitler backer, about his purported views on the Nazi rise to power.
According to the Aug. 23, 1934 issue of The New York Times, Hearst said that Hitler’s “Germany is battling for her liberation from the mischievous provisions of the Treaty of Versailles…This battle, in fact, can only be viewed as a struggle which all liberty-loving people are bound to follow with understanding and sympathy.”
Although Hearst’s publications initially published articles by Hitler and his fellow fascist Benito Mussolini, the businessman, and the empire at his disposal, would eventually become a critic of Nazi rule and an advocate for their Jewish victims.
Other U.S. newspapers, despite evidence to the contrary, including the virulent antisemitism easily discerned in Hitler’s writings and speeches, nonetheless sought to look for moderation in the new Nazi regime.
As Medoff has pointed out, the Berlin bureau chief for The New York Times, Frederick Birchall, claimed that there was a “new moderation” in the political atmosphere after Hitler took power. Similarly, The Philadelphia Evening Bulletin stated in a Jan. 30, 1933 report that “there have been indications of moderation” by Hitler.
Elsewhere, some journalists displayed a tendency to underestimate the objectives of the new authoritarian regime.
The Pulitzer Prize winning American journalist, Hubert Knickerbocker, was one of the more perceptive members of the press to cover Nazi Germany. As detailed in Andrew Nagorski’s 2012 book Hiterland, Knickerbocker—in contrast to many of his colleagues—was one of the first to record rising anti-Semitism and to note it’s centrality to Nazi ideology.
Yet, when it came to Nazi war aims, in 1933 Knickerbocker believed that, “The odds are too great against Germany for anyone but a mad German to consider making war now against France and her allies. Contrary to a considerable body of opinion abroad, it may be positively asserted that there are no madmen running Germany today.”
But as Ian Kershaw noted in his two-volume biography of the German dictator, Hitler’s rhetoric and Nazi ideology itself had begun to emphasize the need for Lebensraum (living space) from the late 1920s onwards.
Some outlets had been misreading Hitler long before he came to power.
For example, The New York Times, in a Nov. 21, 1922 article claimed, “Hitler’s anti-Semitism was not so genuine or violent as it sounded.”
“He was,” they assured readers, “merely using anti-Semitic propaganda as a bait to catch masses of followers and keep them aroused, enthusiastic and in line for the time when his organization is perfected and sufficiently powerful to be employed effectively for political purposes.” What The Times missed of course, was that anti-Semitism was central to the Nazi movement’s “political purposes.”
Long after Hitler became the Führer—after he enacted the Nuremberg Laws, dispossessed Jews and opened concentration camps—The New York Times would, in at least one article, proceed from the minimization of his ideology to outright hagiography.
As my CAMERA colleague Gilead Ini pointed out, a 1939 New York Times Magazine article entitled “Herr Hitler At Home In The Clouds,” failed to critically detail Hitler’s policies, opting instead to record that the dictator “makes no secret of being fond of chocolate,” that he “likes an after-breakfast stroll on his mountain” and, perhaps most absurdly, that “Hitler can be a good listener.”
Perhaps one reason for this puff piece—and for the failings of those before it—is the access that journalists gained by not asking critical questions, be they of their own misperceptions or of Hitler himself.
Indeed, the Nazis often curtailed press access after an unfavorable story, as Nagorski noted in his book.
This is evidenced in papers across the Atlantic as well. As the editor of The London Times, Geoffrey Dawson, told his Geneva correspondent H.G. Daniels on May 23, 1937, “I do my utmost, night after night, to keep out of the paper anything that might hurt their [German] susceptibilities. I can really think of nothing that has been printed now for many months to which they could possibly take exception as unfair comment (William Shirer, The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, Simon and Schuster, 1959).”
* Hitler in conference with the Palestinian leader Amin al Husseini, the Mufti of Jerusalem.  They worked on details of the Final Solution, and on the plan to also slaughter all Middle East Jews.
*  Shared goals and shared genocidal anti-Semitism that endure to this day among European anti-Semites and their allies, the Muslim Palestinians. 
*  Billions of Euros pour into the terrorist Palestinian Authority with the aim of murdering Jews and weakening and eventually dismantling Israel. (Blogger) 
* Palestinian militia routinely make the Nazi salute and eulogize Hitler. 
* Palestinians are adored by the media and by human rights organizations. 
* Their acts of carnage against Jews are dismissed by the media as 'resistance'.
* Their acts of violence against other targets elsewhere are reluctantly acknowledged as terror - sometimes. (Blogger)
Sean Durns continues.....
Unfortunately, the press giving antisemitic regimes the benefit of the doubt did not end in the Führer bunker.
Some in the media have insisted that the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Muslim Brotherhood—both entities committed to, among other things, the destruction of the Jewish state of Israel—are “moderate.” And some journalists have displayed a tendency to minimize Iran and the Brotherhood’s antisemitism. For example, in a June 23, 2012 Op-Ed “Not-So-Crazy in Tehran,” Nicholas Kristof of The New York Times insisted that Iran couldn’t be a police state because “Iranians are irrepressible.”
To Kristof, the presence of a Jewish member in Iran’s parliament implied that the authoritarian regime—the chief sponsor of U.S.-designated terror groups committed to Israel’s annihilation—couldn’t possibly be as antisemitic as some claimed.
On July 18, 2012—a little more than three weeks after Kristof’s article—a suicide bomber with ties to Hezbollah, the Iranian-backed Shi’ite terror group, murdered five Israelis and a Bulgarian bus driver at the Burgas airport in Bulgaria.
The press was not alone in underestimating and misreading Hitler and the Nazis, but it is worth noting that the media influences policymakers, as well as the general public. The conceits that Hitler’s anti-Semitism was merely for political purposes, that his objectives were not expansionist in nature, proved to be costly. Not only for the Jewish people, but for the estimated 27,000 people who died, on average, everyday from the spring of 1939 until the war’s end.


Sean Durns
Sean Durns is a Research Analyst at CAMERA (Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America)
*  Education:  Master of Science (MSc), History of International Relations at the London School of Economics and Political Science
LinkedIn profile
See his CAMERA columns archive here


What the media refuses to talk about:

Muslim Antisemitism
Pat Condell
More videos by Pat Condell



Wolfgang Herles (pictured) claims Germany's news agenda is 'laid down by the government'TOP GERMAN JOURNALIST ADMITS GOVERNMENT SETS NEWS MEDIA AGENDA

- THE CONSPIRACY OF SILENCE on Muslim criminality among government, media and police in Europe

A retired media boss at a major German state broadcaster has admitted his network and others take orders from the government on what — and what not — to report.

National public service broadcaster Zweites Deutsches Fernsehen (ZDF), which was recently forced into a humiliating apology for their silence on migrant violence and sex assault is being drawn into a fresh scandal after one of their former bureau chiefs admitted the company takes orders from the government on what it reports. He said journalists received instructions to write news that would be “to Ms. Merkel’s liking”.



January 2015 - MEDIA MALPRACTICE IN THE COVERAGE OF ISRAEL as exposed by former AP correspondent Matti Friedman
Selected excerpts:
  • The international press in Israel had become less an observer of the conflict than a player in it. It had moved away from careful explanation and toward a kind of political character assassination
  • Israel’s flaws were dissected and magnified, while the flaws of its enemies were purposely erased
  • Something toxic is driving this –  ” Jews are troublemakers, a negative force in world events, and that if these people, as a collective, could somehow be made to vanish, we would all be better off”.
  • When I worked in the AP’s Jerusalem bureau, the Israel story was covered by more AP news staff than China, or India, or all of the fifty-odd countries of sub-Saharan Africa combined. This is representative of the industry as a whole.
  • People observing this conflict from afar have been led to believe that Israel faces a simple choice between occupation and peace. That choice is fiction.
  • The Palestinian choice, it is said, is between Israeli occupation and an independent democracy. That choice, too, is fiction
  • (Partition for the creation of an Islamic Palestinian state) will bring the black-masked soldiers of radical Islam within yards of Israeli homes with mortars, rockets, and tunneling implements. Many thousands will die. 
  • No international investment or guarantees, no Western-backed government or Western-trained military will be able to keep that from happening, as we have just seen in Iraq.
  • The only group of people subject to a systematic boycott at present in the Western world is Jews, appearing now under the convenient euphemism “Israelis.”
  • The Jews of the Middle East are outnumbered by the Arabs of the Middle East 60 to 1, and by the world’s Muslims 200 to 1.
  • Neo-Nazi rallies at Palestinian universities or in Palestinian cities are not covered — I saw images of such rallies suppressed on more than one occasion.
  • Jewish hatred of Arabs is a story. Arab hatred of Jews is not. 
  • The time has come for everyone to admit that the fashionable disgust for Israel among many in the West is not liberal but is selective, disproportionate, and discriminatory.



SAMPLES of 2016 international media headlines that take pains to avoid mentioning Palestinians as terrorists.  They highlight their deaths, as if they were victims, instead of aggressors in the war against the Jews.



Image result for images  media terror has nothing to do with islam


No comments:

Post a Comment

Thank you for visiting my blog. Your comments are always appreciated, but please do not include links.