The New York Times does Dutch multiculturalism. And fails. Dramatically.
There are so many things wrong with this piece, from the conspicuously one-sided selection of rent-a-quotes to the utter failure to understand even the basics of the Dutch mind-set, I hardly know where to start.
But let me make just one observation: Any publication that states the following is no more a reliable source of information as is the drunken loud-mouth at the far end of the bar on a late Wednesday night at the pub.
Mr. Wilders’ Freedom Party, which combines racist language with calls for more social spending, won 15.5 percent of the vote in June 2010. He was recently acquitted of charges of hate speech for comparing the Koran to “Mein Kampf” and calling mosques “palaces of hatred.” He wants all immigrants and their children deported and warns of the supposed Muslim plot to create “Eurabia.”
Emphasis is mine. That bit is an outright lie. It is not easy to invalidate. Proving a negative never is. It is not a ‘selective interpretation’ of Wilders’ past statements. It is not a slight hyperbole, which can be explained away by some judicious use of links and quotes. But an untruth it is. A brazen, shameless lie, without any foundation whatsoever.
With that one quote the NYT has terminally disqualified itself from commenting on Dutch affairs. How did that ever get past the fact-checking (assuming such procedures still exist at the NYT)? This is so conspicuously and demonstrably untrue, that no Dutch newspaper, not even the most left of activist, leftist newspaper (think Trouw) would dare write this. Writing such tripe would mean instant destruction of any shred of credibility it has left.
The NYT evidently has given up any pretence of being a newspaper. It has joined the ranks of cheap activist agitprop rags. Is it any wonder an industry that allows such failure is a failing industry?
[UPDATE001] Just in from the KV mailbox, some US liberal clever dick (how the hell did he/she find this place?) telling me my argument is void, because I refuse to demonstrate the NYT falsehood.
I beg to differ. The burden of proof lies with the NYT and all those that support that (dish)rag: Show me the speech, article, or interview where Mr. Wilders states his resolution to deport ‘all immigrants and their children’. Until such time, which is going to be somewhere around the time sub-zero temperatures are recorded in hell, the argument as well as my assessment of the NYTs’ quality stands. Period.