The Swedish-Israeli War of Words

David T

It that theory is right - and I don't think it is - then Bildt could have outflank the Israeli Government by saying something like this:

"This government deplores the publication of this story, which appears to be based on no evidence at all, and which not only echoes the centuries-old blood libel against Jews, but also replicates the plot of an anti-semitic TV series from Iran and a popular Turkish film. Sweden respects freedom of speech, as does Israel, and so both countries understand that there is no question of censorship. However, it is a disgrace to see Sweden's most prominent newspaper peddling such inflamatory material at a very difficult time."

There you go. Israel's supposed cunning plan would be wholly thwarted.

The truth of the matter is that this story is so big for the following reasons.

1. The story is a sensational one but is backed by no evidence.

2. The story is published, not by some small fringe racist tabloid, but by a Left leaning, trade union funded broadsheet.

3. The notion that Jews ingest non-Jews has been a key component of antisemitic discourse for 1000 years now. Although other lies - that Jews control world politics, banking, the press - have been quite easy to recycle in the modern age, most of us thought that the blood libel was gone for good.

Well, we were wrong.

Finally, the Swedish Government shut down the website of a far right political party that reprinted the Mohammed Cartoons.

http://www.thelocal.se/article.php?ID=3029

So, although nobody is asking for censorship of this newspaper, the Swedish government clearly has no particular problems in shutting down speech which they regard as inflammatory and racist.

Chris

It is depressing that 'Aftonbladet's editor pretends to believe (and I'm damned sure it is a pretence) that freedom of speech means that such speech should be immune from criticism. It seems invariably to be lefties who try to mount this ridiculous counter-attack when their garbage is objected to. Cf the Dixie Chicks, who were shocked - shocked! to find that their actions had consequences they didn't like.

Daniel Korski

Very good points, David T. There is an additional issue. The story was printed in the culture section, not the news section.

Dirty Euro

Chris all the dixie chicks did was give a legitimate opinion and they got death threats. Why do you justify that?
Sending death threats is not legitimate freedom of speech.

David T

"Culture" in this context being a euphemism for "not true"?

Peter from Maidstone

There is a difference between believing that it is possible that Israelis might countenance such actions and saying that Jews might. It seems to me reasonable to criticise and condemn Israeli actions and this does not automatically refer such actions to all Jews. I do not believe any of the slurs against Jewish people, but I do believe that secular Israelis have much to answer for. If there is no truth in the allegations then show that they are false, likewise if there is evidence behind the allegations then make it public. We should not be afraid to criticise Israelis, anymore than any other particular Middle Easterners. As far as I can see the anti-semitism angle is just being used to shut down any criticism of Israel and has nothing to do with any animosity towards Jewish people.

Verity

David T over eggs the pudding: Your opening sentence would have been sufficient as a suggestion of the way the Swedish Government could have responded: "This government deplores the publication of this story, which appears to be based on no evidence at all" without your suggested continuation of "and which not only echoes the centuries-old blood libel against Jews, but also replicates the plot of an anti-semitic TV series from Iran and a popular Turkish film ...".

It is not the business of the Swedish Government to be a propagandist for Israel. Under similar circumstances, other countries demand a retraction, not a public relations campaign.

David T

Sure

But if a Swedish newspaper posted a story which indicated that American black men connected with the NAACP were engaged in systematically raping vulnerable white girls, I think we'd expect some reaction.

That would be so, particularly if the only "evidence" consisted of anecdotes and rumours.

The reason we'd expect a reaction is because the notion of black men raping white women is a very deeply embedded racist trope.

Now, I expect that - were such a story to be published - you'd hear some people arguing that the NAACP is a dodgy organisation which deploys accusations of racism to prevent people from talking about crime committed by black people. Perhaps they'd also add that they were only talking about the NAACP, and not ALL black people, so it couldn't be racist.

Frankly, that's pretty much the sort of discourse I'm seeing at the moment, in comment pages of blogs and the like. We're also getting surreal conspiracy theories, like the one above, which suggests that somehow Israel engaged in an incredibly risky and likely-to-fail plot to trip up the Swedish government, to undermine Obama's I/P strategy!!

The only people who would buy a story about a NAACP plot to rape white women, are those people who think that black people are natural born rapists

The only people who buy this story are those in an earlier era who would have believed that Jews drink the blood of non-Jews.

logdon

The article was, without doubt an outrageous blood-libel along the lines of the Protocols of Zion. Antisemitism run wild in suggesting that gentile blood was used in the baking of Passover matzo bread.

Now, the same old, same old.

For that it should be denounced and Jan Helin, the editor of Aftonbladet, hauled in front of an inquiry to examine such evidence and, if lacking, he should the be prosecuted.

This is yet another left wing attack on Israel and has to be stopped in it's tracks. Now!

The blogs are afire with this story and one today, caught my attention.

http://rubinreports.blogspot.com/

Based on the the Nazi accusatory slander which pours out of the ME like molten lava.

Monday, August 24, 2009
Who Needs Nazis When We Have Arab Nationalists, Islamists, and Extreme Leftists?
By Barry Rubin

After running an article accusing Israel of murdering Palestinians, Jan Helin, the editor of the Swedish newspaper Aftonbladet, said that it was only an opinion piece. Following criticism, though, he then published even more articles to that effect. In his defense, Helin explained, “I’m not a Nazi. I’m not anti-Semitic.”

I’m sure he isn’t a Nazi. Whether or not he’s an antisemite, Helin certainly has no real understanding of what that means. But the key to the problem we’re having with Helin is in the first part of the sentence.

Today, the Nazis have become the measure of evil in the world, perhaps the sole source of evil historically. If you don’t like someone for a wide variety of reasons, you call him a “Nazi.” Yet the Nazis had no monopoly oneEvil nor on antisemitism.

This is used for a wide range of issues, behaviors, and opinions. Of course, the truly monstrous nature of Nazism is often wildly understated, so that if Israeli forces accidentally kill a civilian or a Palestinian family is evicted for not paying rent to a landlord, this is said to make Israel a Nazi state.

But I want to focus on the other aspect: Was anyone monstrous in the world who wasn’t a Nazi?

If you are on the left, you cannot be a Nazi because they were a right-wing party, albeit with populist socialist as well as nationalist overtones, correct? So you cannot be an antisemite, or extraordinarily repressive, or supremely evil? Helin is a Swedish Social Democrat, so he isn’t a Nazi, so he can’t be an antisemite, and he can’t be responsible for doing evil, right?........

As they say, read it all

Oscar

Vile anti-Semitic libel, which is covered well in this week's Jewish Chronicle for those who are interested. There is a dark strain of anti-Semitism in Sweden, bolstered by the ever growing Muslim population. Don't give it the oxygen of publicity.

Verity

David - In your response, if indeed someone (in this day and age! It is inconceivable!) published a story about black men raping white women, I would not expect the Government of the United States to respond. What a publication chooses to publish is up to the publication - as are the legal consequences if it is actionable - not a national government.

Logdon, under what Swedish law should "Jan Helin, the editor of Aftonbladet, hauled in front of an inquiry to examine such evidence and, if lacking, he should the be prosecuted." ???

Good grief, you people! Get a grip!

Stavros

David T:"a disgrace to see Sweden's most prominent newspaper peddling such inflamatory material"
On the contrary, Aftonbladet is the equivalent of the Sunday Sport.
People should note that the controversy's main flag-waver is Avigdor Lieberman, who has a Soviet-style attitude to the press. He, and other Israelis, think that the press should be the government's mouthpiece, and are surprised when other governments don't have such a primitive views about freedom of the press.

Derek

If the Israeli government asked the Swedish government to condemn the story in Aftonbladet and the Swedish government's response was to invoke the principle of freedom of expression and press freedom not to do so, the Swedish government is being illogical and side-stepping its responsibility. Condemnation of publication, one should not have to point out, is different from banning an article or threatening the editor of the publication of the newspaper with future limits on his right to publish whatever he wants. The Issraeli government was not asking the Swedish government to limit freedom of the press.

Al Jazeera on its website on Monday wrote that Aftonbladet "...commented on its story on Sunday, acknowledging that it had no proof of any organ theft but argued that the story deserved publication because of the issues it raised".

No doubt the idea that the media can publish assertions of facts for which it has no proof will prove to be a popular one in many British publications. I was always told though, albeit as an outsider,that principled journalists required at least two direct sources, the second confirming the first.

Pace Verity, it is eminently reasonable for one democratic government to ask another democratic government, both of which uphold freedom of expression and freedom of the press, to condemn publications who abuse those freedoms by ignoring that fundamental principle of responsible journalism in a way that will lead to further hatred and consequent endangerment of the first government's people. A government's first responsibility, as our own seems to have forgotten, is to protect its people. One can extrapolate from that that another government's responsibility is to protect a friendly government's people by condemning the groundless spreading of pernicious rumour.

The more benign consequences of Aftonbladet's publication of its unproven allegations can be seen in the naive, and possibly disingenuous, post here of Peter of Maidstone. I am sure that the imagination of CHs can grasp how the muslims, left- and right-ing anti-semites, and those generally who place more importance on rants against free peoples before logic or truth will seize on Aftonbladet's article to spread their malevolence.

Those whose imagination does not run that far can research the inception, development and final disproving of the Jenin "massacre", if they have a taste for instruction.

Chris

My response to Dirty Euro appears to have been rejected, so lest he think I'm unable to answer his question, here's another attempt. Where, Dirty, do I say that I defend death threats? And do you know what a straw man is?

logdon

Verity
August 24th, 2009 7:15pm

Aftonbladet now backing off? Fearful of a legal backlash? Newspapers do not easily relinquish authenticity of a story like this without reason.

Come on Verity, this is serious stuff and Arabs lap it up. And completely believe the hocum.

If the British Army had been accused of harvesting organs in Iraq or Afghanistan imagine the outcry?

http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/027335.php

August 24, 2009
Swedish editor admits that he had no evidence for Jewish blood libel story

Jews are stealing organs from Palestinian children and selling them, aren't they? After all, the Swedish paper Aftonbladet said so.

The only problem is, they made it up. Or repeated jihadist propaganda.

"Aftonbladet editor admits: No evidence," from the Jerusalem Post, August 24 (thanks to all who sent this in):

The Swedish tabloid Aftonbladet, which caused a media stir in recent days with an article claiming IDF soldiers were harvesting organs from Palestinians, published an editorial on Monday denying Israeli claims.

"I'm not a Nazi," Aftonbladet editor Jan Helin wrote. "I'm not anti-Semitic."

No kidding, really?

Instead, he described himself as "a responsible editor who gave the green light to an article because it raises a few questions." He did note, however, that the paper had no evidence that such horrific practices were being carried out.

On Sunday, Aftonbladet published a follow-up article, defending the offending report written by freelance journalist Donald Bostrom. The second article maintained that the organ-harvesting matter "should be investigated, either to stop the relentless Palestinian rumors, or, if the rumors prove to be true, stop the trade in body parts."

That's a significant retreat, you'll notice, from claiming that it was actually happening.

David T

"On the contrary, Aftonbladet is the equivalent of the Sunday Sport."

It may not be a very good paper - I think that's a given - but it is owned by the Swedish TUC.

Now it appears that the family didn't tell the journo that their son's organs had been stolen:

http://www.hurryupharry.org/2009/08/25/sorry-who-is-saying-organs-were-stolen/

JONNY

And if there is truth in the allegations?

logdon

David T
August 25th, 2009 9:43am

"it is owned by the Swedish TUC. "

Which goes a long way in explanation.

The Left/Pali alliance is, to me, inexplicable given PC and the way they treat women yet all those Marxist no-marks paraded our streets with, 'We're all Hezbollah Now' banners not too long ago.

In the land of the blind, it seemed there was no one eyed man.

And have we witnessed Jewish rioting on our streets over this, pace the Motoons?

I think we can draw our own conclusions on true cultural relativity from this one.

Derek

@ Jonny And if the moon is made of green cheese?

David T

"And if there is truth in the allegations?"

Sorry - who is saying that there is truth in them? Not the family, and not the newspaper.

I think what you've done is you've mistaken a description of a TV show for a documentary.

Some people watched the X Files and imagined it to be evidence of a conspiracy between the US Government and aliens, you know.

Ridcully

"If there is no truth in the allegations, then show that they are false.
Why should Israel have to prove its innocence?

James

If the government is backing up the "Freedom of the Press" then why don't you run those derogotory mohammed cartoons. Since the paper is free to do so. It is quite clear that this journalists is extremely anti-semitic and many of the swedish people may be also. I say BOYCOTT any swedish product. Aftonbladet and the swedish government should be ashamed for allowing this.

Peter Burman

To David T.: Thank you for your wise analysis and for speaking out. Thank you!

Jane Pearce

“In January, 2002, an Israeli cabinet minister tacitly admitted that organs taken from the bodies of Palestinian victims might have been used for transplants in Jewish patients without the knowledge of the Palestinian victims’ families.

“The minister, Nessim Dahan, said in response to a question by an Arab Knesset member that he couldn’t deny or confirm that organs of Palestinian youths and children killed by the Israeli army were taken out for transplants or scientific research.

“‘I couldn’t say for sure that something like that didn’t happen.’”

Amayreh writes that the Knesset member who posed the question said that he “had received ‘credible evidence proving that Israeli doctors at the forensic institute of Abu Kabir extracted such vital organs as the heart, kidneys, and liver from the bodies of Palestinian youth and children killed by the Israeli army in Gaza and the West Bank.”

http://counterpunch.org/weir08282009.html