At the end of November this year, Nico Ernst, a member of the organization Pro-Nordrhein Westfalen, was assaulted by a mob of leftists (1); the attack comes shortly after:
There has been little to no media coverage of the above incidents. By contrast, when the synagogue in Dresden was recently vandalized, the incident was presented as a right-wing terrorist act and became front-page news (1,2). The finger pointing began almost immediately. Some blamed the country's right-wing nationalist political party, the NPD (1,2), for inspiring the culprit to act; others tried to use the incident to promote an upcoming demonstration against "the right" (1), implying that "the right" was responsible for the synagogue incident. The online edition of the popular news magazine der Spiegel wasted no time blaming "Rechtsextremisten" (right-wing extremists) for the act (1). This was hardly surprising, considering that Der Spiegel is a left-wing newspaper known for funding Germany's left-center political party, the SPD, and, with this allegiance, eager to villainize - and gain from villainizing - the right. This, of course, is not what Der Spiegel wants the public to know. If you are trying to deliver your message as "the truth" and seek to gain from such an agenda, it is never good for your audience to suspect that your goal is to manipulate them.
Perhaps the above is why, once it was revealed that an Algerian immigrant was responsible for vandalizing the synagogue (click here for the police report), Der Spiegel tried to cover its tracks and modify its article by changing the accused culprit from "Rechtsextremisten" (right-wing extremists) to something else, like "Unbekannte" (unknown persons). See for yourself here.
But note the selection of the word "Unbekannte"; the word strips away the fact that the culprit was a migrant which, for Der Spiegel, is critical to cover-up, because the left-wing view is that Germany should become a land of migrants (which is why the party locks horns with the right), while the right-wing view is that it should not. The left has nothing to gain from admitting that the synagogue vandal was a migrant, especially after having blamed the vandalism on the rightists who are now vindicated and in a position to blame left-wing pro-immigration policies for the crime. In short, Der Spiegel got caught with its pants down.
And so, the vandalism that the Left wanted to use to mobilize the public against "the right" with was not something the NPD, patriotic circles in eastern Germany or some violent Nazi extremists could be blamed for; rather, responsibility fell on the shoulders of some poorly-integrated Algerian immigrant who, if it wasn't for the left's overwhelming political influence in Germany, and immigration initiatives, would not be in Germany causing trouble in the first place.
- an attack on a national fraternity
- the firebombing of an office belonging to the pro-German National Democratic Party (NPD)
- an arson attack on a clothing store appealing to cultural heritage
There has been little to no media coverage of the above incidents. By contrast, when the synagogue in Dresden was recently vandalized, the incident was presented as a right-wing terrorist act and became front-page news (1,2). The finger pointing began almost immediately. Some blamed the country's right-wing nationalist political party, the NPD (1,2), for inspiring the culprit to act; others tried to use the incident to promote an upcoming demonstration against "the right" (1), implying that "the right" was responsible for the synagogue incident. The online edition of the popular news magazine der Spiegel wasted no time blaming "Rechtsextremisten" (right-wing extremists) for the act (1). This was hardly surprising, considering that Der Spiegel is a left-wing newspaper known for funding Germany's left-center political party, the SPD, and, with this allegiance, eager to villainize - and gain from villainizing - the right. This, of course, is not what Der Spiegel wants the public to know. If you are trying to deliver your message as "the truth" and seek to gain from such an agenda, it is never good for your audience to suspect that your goal is to manipulate them.
Perhaps the above is why, once it was revealed that an Algerian immigrant was responsible for vandalizing the synagogue (click here for the police report), Der Spiegel tried to cover its tracks and modify its article by changing the accused culprit from "Rechtsextremisten" (right-wing extremists) to something else, like "Unbekannte" (unknown persons). See for yourself here.
But note the selection of the word "Unbekannte"; the word strips away the fact that the culprit was a migrant which, for Der Spiegel, is critical to cover-up, because the left-wing view is that Germany should become a land of migrants (which is why the party locks horns with the right), while the right-wing view is that it should not. The left has nothing to gain from admitting that the synagogue vandal was a migrant, especially after having blamed the vandalism on the rightists who are now vindicated and in a position to blame left-wing pro-immigration policies for the crime. In short, Der Spiegel got caught with its pants down.
And so, the vandalism that the Left wanted to use to mobilize the public against "the right" with was not something the NPD, patriotic circles in eastern Germany or some violent Nazi extremists could be blamed for; rather, responsibility fell on the shoulders of some poorly-integrated Algerian immigrant who, if it wasn't for the left's overwhelming political influence in Germany, and immigration initiatives, would not be in Germany causing trouble in the first place.
