If there is something that really upsets me it's people accusing Sweden of being anti-semantic because they care about the horrific crimes crimes committed by Israel towards the Palestinians. People should react to the fact that Israel chooses to use white phosphorus bombs in the densely populated Gaza strip, for example. But for some reason, if the crimes are committed by Israel they don't show up on the radar to the same extent as if they had been committed by any other country. The tolerance level for Israel just seems to be so much higher in the International community.
How come? Perhaps because as soon as Israel is criticized they bring out the "Holocaust card" and call their accusers anti-semantic.
Back in August of this year, Donald Boström wrote a very controversial article (English translation) in the Swedish newspaper Aftonbladet. He described what UN workers and Palestinians had told him while he was in the area working on a book. He spoke to Palestinians who described how Israeli soldiers had stolen the bodies of killed Palestinian men and returned them several days later at night time, stitched together as if an autopsy had been made. But since the cause of death was so obvious, there was clearly no reason for an autopsy. The relatives therefor suspected that the real purpose of the operations was organ harvesting.
The article started a diplomatic war between Israel and Sweden. The Israeli foreign minister went as far as to demand that the Swedish state should intervene. Luckily they chose to support the freedom of press and not to get involved in this affair. But others were quick to pass judgement over Aftonbladet and Boström. Sydsvenskan, another Swedish newspaper, wrote that the article "stinks of anti-semantic thinking" while EU parliamentarian Gunnar Hökmark compares the article to Nazi propaganda and says that Aftonbladet belongs to "the dark forces". Netanyahu also condemns the Swedish government. (Aftonbladet)
It is easier to call "anti-semitism" instead of dealing with the real issue. And the real issue is that Israel is guilty of war crimes which they need to address.
About two weeks ago, Israeli military confessed that they had taken organs from bodies without the consent from relatives. In other words, they stole organs from bodies, many of which were Palestinians. This occurred during the 80's and 90's. Boström's article concerned events from the beginning of the 90's.
So was Boström's article really all that outrageously anti-semantic in the light of all this? When time and time again it turns out that the "crazy anti-semantic" stories are correct, then they should clearly not be seen as anti-semantic, just purely and simply investigative. Unfortunately, journalists fear telling the truth about Israel since they risk having their careers slaughtered.
I guess we shouldn't expect an official apology from Israeli authorities though. It will be just another story soon to be forgotten, and the next time someone says something bad about Israel again, they will be called anti-semantic...I wonder when they will have played all their cards because I am sure getting tired of their all too predictable moves. It's time for the world to take a stand against their lies. That Jews have been wronged does in no way automatically make everything that Israel does right.
In conclusion, if anyone should be blamed for fueling anti-semitism it is certainly not Boström who just reported on the Palestinian situation. The real (indirect?) supporters of modern anti-semitism is clearly the Israeli authorities.
How come? Perhaps because as soon as Israel is criticized they bring out the "Holocaust card" and call their accusers anti-semantic.
Back in August of this year, Donald Boström wrote a very controversial article (English translation) in the Swedish newspaper Aftonbladet. He described what UN workers and Palestinians had told him while he was in the area working on a book. He spoke to Palestinians who described how Israeli soldiers had stolen the bodies of killed Palestinian men and returned them several days later at night time, stitched together as if an autopsy had been made. But since the cause of death was so obvious, there was clearly no reason for an autopsy. The relatives therefor suspected that the real purpose of the operations was organ harvesting.
The article started a diplomatic war between Israel and Sweden. The Israeli foreign minister went as far as to demand that the Swedish state should intervene. Luckily they chose to support the freedom of press and not to get involved in this affair. But others were quick to pass judgement over Aftonbladet and Boström. Sydsvenskan, another Swedish newspaper, wrote that the article "stinks of anti-semantic thinking" while EU parliamentarian Gunnar Hökmark compares the article to Nazi propaganda and says that Aftonbladet belongs to "the dark forces". Netanyahu also condemns the Swedish government. (Aftonbladet)
It is easier to call "anti-semitism" instead of dealing with the real issue. And the real issue is that Israel is guilty of war crimes which they need to address.
About two weeks ago, Israeli military confessed that they had taken organs from bodies without the consent from relatives. In other words, they stole organs from bodies, many of which were Palestinians. This occurred during the 80's and 90's. Boström's article concerned events from the beginning of the 90's.
So was Boström's article really all that outrageously anti-semantic in the light of all this? When time and time again it turns out that the "crazy anti-semantic" stories are correct, then they should clearly not be seen as anti-semantic, just purely and simply investigative. Unfortunately, journalists fear telling the truth about Israel since they risk having their careers slaughtered.
I guess we shouldn't expect an official apology from Israeli authorities though. It will be just another story soon to be forgotten, and the next time someone says something bad about Israel again, they will be called anti-semantic...I wonder when they will have played all their cards because I am sure getting tired of their all too predictable moves. It's time for the world to take a stand against their lies. That Jews have been wronged does in no way automatically make everything that Israel does right.
In conclusion, if anyone should be blamed for fueling anti-semitism it is certainly not Boström who just reported on the Palestinian situation. The real (indirect?) supporters of modern anti-semitism is clearly the Israeli authorities.
Posts
The proper definition of an anti-semite is:
ReplyDeleteA person that the zionist jews hates.
Than this stupid expression makes sense, otherwise not.
And the reason they hate a person is because that person has exposed them in one way or an other.
But they have "used up" that word by now, since the whole world is soon anti-semetic, in their paranoid view.