Indeed, I am simplifying (illegitimate? No!), that is because I have to limit myself to 1200Z.❗
The framing & the judgments in the article are indeed clearly evident:
“Brazen Dodging”
Brazen = bold, shameless (see Duden)
The correct interpretation is that this was referring to the figure that thereby allowed Indonesia.
Accordingly, according to the authors, intervention would have had to occur:
“FIFA moved the tournament to Argentina as a result
..
the World Cup would thus have had to strip Indonesia of hosting”
Thus, of course, according to the article, Indonesia stands as the “bad” one against whom action would have needed to be taken👎
“Shaming [❗] remains, in any case, that..[the Fig.] shows greater understanding for the exclusion request of the Indonesian host than for the problems,
… of a worldwide growing antisemitism to which it is exposed”
Not only is antisemitism attributed to the following example, but also to Indonesia, which is obvious❗
Here, not only are other reasons for these sanctions against Israel not mentioned, but their admissibility is categorically negated, since only antisemitism can serve as the explanation👎
Naturally, this, however, also reinforces antisemitic clichés👎✔️
