Compare and contrast:
A Swedish newspaper publishes a blood libel, accusing Israelis of taking (and selling) organs from Palestinians. Israelis are outraged. They file paperwork.
Deputy Foreign Minister Daniel Ayalon filed a formal grievance with the Swedish government Wednesday following a Stockholm newspaper’s report accusing Israel of trading in the stolen organs of Palestinians.
They ask the Swedish government to condemn the hateful lies.
“I demand the Swedish government condemn this groundless article,” said Ayalon.
They threaten to summon the Swedish ambassador.
The Foreign Ministry is reportedly considering summoning the Swedish ambassador and reproving him for his government policies, “Which allow such a hateful publication to go without censure.”
Ouch. Plus, there’s a very angry comment in my previous post (although I seriously doubt any prosecution could occur, as I’m unclear as to what Israeli laws were broken by the publication of this article).
Now, let’s think of another instance where a Nordic nation published something in a newspaper that stirred up controversy. Like, the publishing of a dozen Mohammed cartoons.
Danish Muslim organizations, who objected to the depictions, responded by holding public protests attempting to raise awareness of Jyllands-Posten’s publication. Further examples of the cartoons were soon reprinted in newspapers in more than fifty other countries, further deepening the controversy.
This led to protests across the Muslim world, some of which escalated into violence with police firing on the crowds (resulting in more than 100 deaths, altogether),[1] including setting fire to the Danish Embassies in Syria, Lebanon and Iran, storming European buildings, and desecrating the Danish, Dutch, Norwegian and German flags in Gaza City. While a number of Muslim leaders called for protesters to remain peaceful, other Muslim leaders across the globe, including Mahmoud al-Zahar of Hamas, issued death threats.[2][3] Various groups, primarily in the Western world, responded by endorsing the Danish policies, including “Buy Danish” campaigns and other displays of support. Danish Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen described the controversy as Denmark’s worst international crisis since World War II.[4]
Funny how the most horrific things get published about Jews, in so many different publications, in so many different nations, so often, and yet, Jews don’t set fire to cars or riot or murder people in protest. And of course, there are the usual suspects who will also say that Jews are “overreacting” when they get upset about lies like this one.
It’s telling that the author was interviewed on Israeli radio, and even said that he had no clue whether the allegations were true. But that didn’t stop him from publishing them.
Interviewed on Israel Radio on Wednesday, Bostrom said he was worried by the allegations he reported but could not vouch for their accuracy.
“It concerns me, to the extent that I want it to be investigated, that’s true. But whether it’s true or not – I have no idea, I have no clue,” he told the station.
That’s how it works these days. Prove you didn’t kidnap Palestinians and steal their organs, Israel. Bostrom is shocked, shocked I say, at being called an anti-Semite. He’s not anti-Semitic. Just ask him.
I mentioned Der Stürmer in my last post. Here’s an image that Bostrom would probably approve (after stating that he’d want it to be investigated whether or not Jews drain Christian children’s blood and drink it):
Photo of anti-Semitic Nazi propaganda rag Der Stürmer blood libel
Then and now. There’s not much difference. This is why people like Bibi Netanyahu warn that it’s 1939 all over again. The constant demonization and dehumanization of Israelis is sounding a drum that we’ve heard before. The difference, of course, is that this time, we Jews are armed and able to protect ourselves.
Oh, and we’ll write really nasty posts about you when you lie about us. Fear us.
While I’m hardly an expert on international law (or even Israeli law, for that matter), isn’t that a clear-cut case of libel? Isn’t libel something you can sue somebody for? I mean, isn’t that how Holocaust deniers get prosecuted? It’s not simply because they’re saying the Holocaust didn’t exist (since as vile as that is, it still falls under freedom of speech), but because they claim Jews lie about the Holocaust for whatever reasons, when it’s been proven beyond reasonable doubt that it did happen, ergo Jews do not lie about it, which makes it a libel case.
Since the Swedish newspaper is making a serious allegation it can’t possibly prove, wouldn’t that make it liable for prosecution for the exact same reason? It’s like if I claimed American troops in Iraq massacred and raped every single Iraqi civilian they came across, or something idiotic like that. Wouldn’t I be required to produce evidence to back my claim or get the sh*t sued out of me by angry American soldiers?
The problem is you’d have to sue them in Swedish courts, and it would have to be the IDF, I presume, or the state of Israel, doing the suing. Also, you’d be bound by Swedish libel law, whatever that is. I expect that aside from the denunciations, there will be no action, though I’d love to see them sued for libel. I think we could even find a Jewish lawyer or three to help.
I believe that a lawsuit is absolutely necessary to publicize the fact that this is a scandalous lie, otherwise some Swedish fools are going to believe it’s true. Its time to hit back hard with something that will scare the hell out of anyone that contemplates writing the same kind of ridiculous hate garbage.
There has to be consequences for this kind of anti-Semitic behavior, or, things will spiral out of control.
Damn. Now I’m going to have to boycott IKEA.
Your post deserves to go on the front page of the Washington Post and/or the New York Times. Which means, of course, that it’ll never happen.
Figures it would be the Swedes. Very chummy with the the Nazis until Hitler started losing the war.
I am a lawyer but not an expert on libel law, so at least under U.S. law who would have actual standing to sue is not clear to me. However, our First Amendment, while not as limited as the academic left would like it to be, is not unlimited. One condition for libel is publishing something defamatory and untrue either knowing it is false or with reckless disregard for its truth or falsity.
My offhand, nonprofessional guess is that publishing an allegation when you haven’t even bothered to check on its veracity would at least be prima facia evidence of defamation in this country. I have no idea what the Swedish law is or, more importantly, whether a Swedish court would be likely to rule that Jews can be legally defamed.
This gets very little world attention. Evicting a couple of people who hae not paid rent after a lengthy litigation process, on the other hand, draws international condemnation.
I know it’s not my business, but at the next meeting you people should try to get Meryl
promoted to head the media.
The ones you have in charge now just don’t seem very competent.
Veeshir,
The Elders are very old fashioned and they might not take to a woman running such an important office, no matter how incompetent the current head is. He’s also the nephew of one of the Elders (which is how he got the job in the first place). We need a new set of Elders.