Especially if there supposedly is routine sealing of graves in cement. Which is not clear from your links (were bodies completely encased so that no one could ever get in without a jackhammer?) In any case it sounds like cement shortages have put a crimp in whatever custom is involved, not to mention thwarting diabolical Israeli plans to make sure their evil deeds were forever hidden from public view.
But inexplicably allowing a supposedly damning photo from reaching the outside world. Seems like there are still holes in this story and in the allegations overall, which could be answered by a forensic investigation if enough people wanted it (exhumations are done all the time in this country, and even with changes of decomposition (which vary according to things like climate/dryness) a lot of information can be gained.
Most importantly for our conspiracy theorists, where’s the answer to how the Israelis could 1) snatch people off the street without any workup to see if they are eligible to be organ donors, and 2) accomplish the actual organ removal in sophisticated medical centers using lots of trained personnel and support staff, all of whom, together with soldiers, transporters, higher-ups and anyone else involved on various levels are somehow managing to maintain perfect secrecy about the affair, in a country that is well known for open debate and leaks on controversial issues?
Why would there need to be a large number of people involved in the conspiracy? The operation itself yes - but why the conspiracy? A drugged / unscious body turns up at the hospital, why does the transplant surgeon need to know how it got there?
Liker wise a dead body is passed to the army unit returning it - why do they need to know how / where / why / when it became dead?
I know that in my work life I have done things just because my boss said so without knowing all the background - why does this need to be any different?
Organ transplantation requires a team approach and diligent workup beforehand, involving both the donor and recipient. In particular, transplant surgeons do not say “whoops, here’s a body to work on, neat-o, I’ll just hoick out the kidneys and send 'em on, no documentation required, no questions asked.”
And even low-level personnel, Army or otherwise are going to ask questions if civilians are being hauled off the street for no apparent reason.
It does not make sense, unless one is big on conspiracy theories, likes to play connect-the-dots and believes the Israelis are evil and nefarious. Many conspiracy buffs think along those lines, but that doesn’t make their beliefs rational.
Ehe. Now IKEA will suffer due to this debacle. That’s what they get for selling all that anti-semitic furniture! Seems like they picked up some ideas from the Muhammed protestors, with all these death threats and boycotts.
He also outlines the Swedish actions during WW2 (even though they are irrelevant to the debate), both as an “enabler” of Germany but also a savior of 20,000 Jews, to discredit Lieberman’s comment.
Does anybody have a grasp of internal Israeli politics, Alessan? The Israeli government should know by now that there is nothing to be had from the Swedish government (all that about constituionality), but still they continue pushing their demands. So, could this whole thing be mostly for internal consumption to draw attention away from some criticism against their administration?
I don’t mean that they planted the Aftonbladet article (unless you want to be zionist conspiracy minded ), but that they seized the opportunity to create a distraction.
Lieberman is a thug with the ethical makeup of a Soviet apparatchik who’s pissed off that Bibi has locked him out of the peace process; I despise him and everything he stands for.
However, as is often the case, he and the Israeli government are following, not leading public opinion. People here are genuinely furious about the whole affair. Israelis have very little love for Europeans to begin with, and this latest scandal has merely confirmed this world view.
Ehh, after some reading about him it appears that he’s pretty much a complete nutjob. Some right wing extremist who calls for executions of MP’s who talk to Hamas, dealing with Palestinians as the US finished off Japan in WW2, and that they should emulate Russia’s behavior in Chechnya. He seems very unfit for his position.
There’s a cement shortage in Gaza, not in Israel. It’s not completely inconceivable that the Israeli troops returning the body brought cement with them, you know.
Personal incredulity again. Simply because the photo hasn’t been explained yet doesn’t mean it can’t be.
Does Gaza have enough sufficiently trained forensic investigators to perform such a task? Or would they have to come in from outside, thereby being subject to Israeli approval first? One does not simply walk into Gaza.
Bilal Ghanan was a man wanted by the Israeli army for stone-throwing, and he was not simply snatched off the street - he was arrested in an organized late-night raid. Look, here is a full translation of the article. It answers most of the questions you’ve asked in this and earlier posts, so take a few minutes to read it if you’re so inclined.
And nobody’s making any claims all this is done in complete secrecy. Hell, the illegal purchase of organs from Turkey, Eastern Europe, and Latin America has been known about for years. Besides, Israel doesn’t need that kind of secrecy in the first place - they’ve got the Palestinians effectively under their thumbs, and they have the convenient scapegoat of anti-Semitism to parade around if anyone outside the country starts asking questions.
Finally, I’d like to note that in this op-ed piece from the blogs of the Telegraph that Boström has gone on the record on Israeli radio as follows:
While Stephanie Gutmann rightly criticizes Aftonbladet for making a double-page feature out of the article (again, the paper is more sensationalist press than serious journalism) there is no foundation whatsoever for the accusations of anti-Semitism and elevating the article to the level of serious diplomatic incident. Hell, I’d like to see the accusations investigated too. If they are entirely unfounded, so much the better; if they are true, then this is something that more than deserves the light of public scrutiny and condemnation. But screaming “Anti-Semitism!” at the first whiff of a question doesn’t help the Israeli side of the issue whatsoever.
You seem quite sure of this; can you present an example of something similar happening? That is, the Swedish government, under its current constitution, issuing a condemnation of a newspaper or other publication?
I’m not all that familiar with the Swedish Constitution, other than the links henrichek has provided, but I know the Norwegian Constitution says that freedom of expression can only be abridged when “particularly weighty considerations” justify it. The interpretation of this has always involved things like publishing state secrets and the like. It does not include telling lies, no matter how vicious the lies may be, nor who or what the lies may be about. Norwegian and Swedish law are very similar, and I have no reason to believe they aren’t similar in this respect as well.
The Israeli government could demand a retraction and an apology from the newspaper, or they could take the newspaper and/or the author of the book to court. Instead they’re asking the Swedish government to make an exception to its national laws about freedom of the press, and issue an unprecedented official condemnation of the newspaper. That cannot and should not be done.
Any comment on Tom Segev’s article I linked to a bit earlier? Is he known in Israel?
Additionally, it can certainly be seen as insulting that you ascribe the writings of an op-ed article as the beliefs of an entire nation. How does this scandal confirm that view? An Aftonbladet op-ed is no more the voice of our people than any one independent newspaper is the voice of Israelis.
Can you explain the need for involving our government and creating a “diplomatic crisis” over an article in a well known sensationalistic newspaper?
Is there really the belief among the Israeli public that our government has anti-semitic beliefs, expressed by the lack of condemnation of this article?
If so, I just can’t agree with that, and it can also be seen as an insult towards us. We do have laws against hate speech and anti-semitism does fit in there. Anti-semitism is even the main cause that put the law into existence back in '48. Similar laws exist in many European countries. There has been an unanimous condemnation of anti-semitism in our parliament, and racist sentiments are certainly not welcome in the wider society either. If a case can be made that the article is against those laws (I don’t have the legal knowhow to make such an assessment), feel free to take it to the courts.
As it happens, our constitution forbids any action to be taken by the government against a printed article, and I think it’s wrong for you to expect them to do so anyway.
Tom Segev is a well known and respected left-wing historian.
Are you familiar with the phrase “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing”? That’s what we see your government doing: nothing. There’s no such thing as a neutral stance with these things. By failing to condemn you’re implying consent.
And that, incidentally, is the basis of the comparison with WW2.
Any action? Really? So if a Swedish newspaper criticizes a Swedish politician, he isn’t allowed to respond? I’m not talking about shutting down the newspaper, just saying “I disagree” or “that is incorrect”. They legally can’t say such things?
Double-edged sword here, buddy. If the things Boström questions are in fact true, and such things are unquestionably evil, then right now Israel is doing nothing. Less than nothing, in fact; there’s a world of difference between quietly ignoring evil and actively covering up the possibility of its existence through diplomatic threats and knee-jerk shouts of “Anti-Semitism!”
Yeah, except for that rescuing the 8,000 Danish Jews bit.
Good Lord, just how obtuse does the fight against lurking anti-Semitism render someone, anyway? There’s a vast world of difference between an individual politician responding to criticism or arguments in the press, and the government taking actions to apologize officially to another country and ensuring that such articles are never, ever, ever printed in their mass media again. Henrichek might be able to shed further light on this as s/he is probably more familiar with the Swedish constitution than I am, but I would feel it’s a safe guess that document also differentiates between the two.
Except that there’s no evidence whatsoever that it’s true - even the paper in question admits it. It pure conspiracy-theory nutbaggery, desiged specifically to be as insulting as possible.
Maybe you don’t understand the cultural implications involved: at best, the article is accusing the Israeli government of descerating corpses; at worst, it’s accusing them of murdering people for the purpose of desecrating corpses. This is a very, very serious accusation in Israeli culture.
Now who’s being obtuse? The Israeli government did not ask for an apology, and it certainly did not ask that it ensure that such articles aren’t written again. What do you think we are, Iran?
All we ask is for a senior Swedish government official to speak in condemnation of the article. That’s it. Speaking isn’t against the law, even in Sweden.
1.Israel, like many other countries, suffers a chronic shortage of transplantable organs. Evidence: Ehud Olmert’s program to encourage Israelis to become organ donors, which had inadequate results.
2. A man has been arrested in the United States for trying to broker an illegal kidney sale from an Israeli donor. Confirmed by several independent news sources.
3. Israel has a standing policy of illegally purchasing organs from various places around the world. Reported in a Swedish paper of record, quoting an Israeli newspaper of record reporting on the conference where this policy was revealed.
4. Palestinian men who have died in Israeli custody are being returned with their bodies clearly sliced open and sewn up again. Weakest item of the four, but some evidence has been furnished to back this up.
Especially given items 2 and 3, which are true and are deserving of full condemnation, few rational, thinking people would simply wave away item 4 as a conspiracy theory. It has not yet been proven true, but there is evidence that makes the question worth further investigation - which is not helped by abject accusations of anti-semitism and diplomatic threats.
How best to respond to the accusation, then? Throw around accusations of anti-Semitism, threaten to cancel a planned state visit by a foreign dignitary, and sling the mud of regrettable history? Or actually investigate it?
If and when Israel conducts a full investigation and conclusively proves this is not true, then I will stand right beside you and demand a condemnation of the article and an apology from Boström. As it is, the way Israel is reacting to this article is way off base and way out of proportion. Investigate and disprove first, then demand restitution.
Aha. Why do you think his opinion is is so different from yours? Since you say respected I assume that he isn’t considered “anti Israel” or some loon. I mean, he should have an understanding of history and being a Jew (right?) he should understand those issues too.
I am familiar with the phrase. Though I did not recommend doing nothing. As I said if your accusations that it’s pure blood libel are correct, it should fall under the hate speech laws. The accusation that our government is doing nothing is wrong too. I can’t make any specific references here, but I am fairly sure they have various programs for combating racist ideas, including the school curriculum.
And that the lack of condemnation means consent is also wrong. I will try to explain my understanding of the constitution on this point, but I have no legal training at all so keep that in mind. My understanding is based on reading the relevant part (you can too if you’re interested, I linked to it in a previous post, in english) and what has been said in media.
Basically it boils down to the fact that censorship is forbidden. One might think that it’s all good as long as they don’t take actions to for example shut down the paper, but as the Committee of the Constitution said after our previous FM was reported there after the Muhammed debacle, undue influencing can cause pressure that in reality can lead to stopped publications. So they say that the government should maintain a safe distance from influencing any publication decision by constitutionally protected medias. Our FM has already been reported to the Committee on the Constitution for possible breach of this.
Why not take Aftonposten to court? It would be quite legal and a good deal more sensible. Of course Israel would have to prove that the ‘organlegging’ (Larry Niven only guessed half of it) is untrue, but I don’t hope that would be difficult.
To take something up with the government, that same government have no control over and can’t legally do anything about, is stupid.
Because the Swedish Government represents the Swedish people. At least, that’s how we see it: the purpose of a government is to speak for a nation.
I note that none of your points event hint to the fact that Israelis have ever taken organs against their owners’ will. The difference between buying organs (which I also condemn) and stealing them is the difference between going to a prostitute and rape. The first does not imply the second.
How best to respond to the accusation, then? Throw around accusations of anti-Semitism, threaten to cancel a planned state visit by a foreign dignitary, and sling the mud of regrettable history? Or actually investigate it?
If and when Israel conducts a full investigation and conclusively proves this is not true, then I will stand right beside you and demand a condemnation of the article and an apology from Boström. As it is, the way Israel is reacting to this article is way off base and way out of proportion. Investigate and disprove first, then demand restitution.
[/QUOTE]
What’s to investigate? No-one has presented even a shred of credible evidence. At the same time, the claims’ resemblance to classical European blood libels is too close to be coincidental.
No. At some point one has to take a stand and say, “This is bigotry. We cannot stomach it.”
They don’t seem to be working all that well.
And anti-hate laws only work so well. Your smart hater knows how to push the line without crossing it.
I see. We seem to have a culture clash here, between what Swedes consider important and what Israelis do. So what compromise would you suggest between what my people want and what your people are ready to give?
), but that they seized the opportunity to create a distraction.