The Media’s Character Assassination of Lars Hedegaard

pic_giant_030613_SM_hedegaard-450x328By :

It’s starting to look like the Book of Job. For years, he’s been demonized in his nation’s media for criticizing Islam. In 2011 and 2012, he was put on trial – not one, twice, but three times – for violating a Danish law that makes it a crime to insult or denigrate a religion. Last month, a guy came to his door dressed as a mailman and tried to kill him; his survival seems nothing short of a miracle.

You might think that in the wake of this assassination attempt, Lars Hedegaard would get some respect – or at least solidarity – from the Danish media. But you could only think that if you were unaware of the aftermath of the murders of Pim Fortuyn and Theo van Gogh, whose bodies weren’t even cold when Dutch journalists set about smearing them even more enthusiastically than they had before, essentially blaming them for their own deaths. Many of Lars’s fellow Danes, to be sure, did rally round him after his close call. But in large part, the Danish media’s reaction was depressingly predictable. As I noted just last week, a couple of morally challenged employees of the newspaper Ekstra Bladet actually tried to follow a moving van to Lars’s new home, apparently so they could print the address; fortunately, the police foiled their effort.

Alas, that wasn’t the end of it. On Sunday, Deadline, a program on the state-owned TV channel DR2, aired a half-hour taped interview with Lars by reporter Martin Krasnik. Krasnik’s introduction, tacked onto the beginning of the show later, was not promising. In a manifest attempt to paint Lars as an extremist, Krasnik mentioned Lars’s hosting of Geert Wilders at the Free Press Society and Anders Behring Breivik’s citation of Lars in his “manifesto.”

Read more at Front Page

See also:

In Defence of Lars Hedegaard (

Gay anti-Jewish bigots enable Muslim anti-gay bigots

pinkwashingBy Adam Savit at Center for Security Policy:

For grievance-based identity groups on the left, embracing Islamic radicals has often been politically expedient but morally deficient.  From women’s organizations who ignore endemic domestic violence in Islamic societies, to black groups who ignore that the Islamic regime in Sudan still enslaves black children, the silence of these purported ‘civil rights’ organizations has been stunningly hypocritical.

Yet all of these groups are expert at mobilizing against what they consider the neo-colonial, racist apartheid regime of Israel.  Israel is also, ironically, the only Middle Eastern country that would tolerate them on its soil.

Considering that gays are routinely beaten, murdered by vigilantes, and executed by sovereign governments in the Islamic world, the tendency of left-wing gay organizations to champion Israel’s jihadist enemies is particularly disturbing.

Writing for the Gatestone Institute, Alan Dershowitz identifies a new strain of anti-Israel hysteria in the gay community which characterizes Israel’s tolerant attitude as ‘Pinkwashing’:

This burlesque of an argument first surfaced in a New York Times op-ed that claimed that Israel’s positive approach to gay rights is “a deliberate strategy to conceal the continuing violation of Palestinians human rights behind an image of modernity signified by Israeli gay life.”

The author of the piece, a ‘professor of the humanities,’ apparently lacks the creativity to imagine that Israel might be exhibiting tolerance for gays, not because it hates Arabs, but because it is a Western democracy that believes in the right of the individual to make his or her own choices.


The Leftist / Islamic Alliance

unholy alliance

Frontpage Editor Jamie Glazov Defends Michele Bachmann on ABN TV, hosted by Robert Spencer: