Thursday

Aftonbladet (AB)

Aftonbladet (AB) is Sweden’s (and the Nordic region’s) largest evening paper. It might even be called the Social Democrats’ “house” paper. It has been convicted (in one rare case) for hate speech and agitation against an ethnic group (the Jews) on their moderated Internet chat page. What AB, among others, failed to “moderate” was a link leading straight to a “cartoon” on Radio Islam, praising AB for standing up against the “Jewish lobby” (supposedly in control of the Swedish newspapers). The same AB that later was freed by the chancellor of justice after a few of their reporters had asked neo-Nazis to do a Hitler salute for the paper’s photographer.
The image below was the starting point for the following Israeli news reports.
Aftonbladet
Wolfgang Hansson, Saturday September 30, 2000
An Israeli soldier marches forwards. A wounded young Palestinian sits on the ground. A momentary picture from yesterday’s riots in Jerusalem. Three Palestinians died and at least 96 was wounded. Photo by AP.
Wolfgang Hansson, supposedly as one of AB’s “experts” on the Middle East, was from this day utterly and completely wrong about the facts surrounding the eruption of the intifada. The picture above is actually of a Jew, who had just been attacked by an Arab mob. The Israeli soldier is shouting at the fleeing mob, defending the blood-soaked Jew, Tuvia Grossman, and saving him from being beaten to death.
Any attempt to correct the text of this online article from AB has yet to be seen, even today to when this is written, four years later.

But during these four years the real power in Sweden – the media – had been pumping out its biased messages (and propaganda) in the largest evening paper. In chronicles it’s possible to shape public opinion. This is a well-known fact. The AB columnists are promoted thus: ”Every day, read chronicles written by the sharpest pens in Sweden.” I concur and couldn’t agree more, and every day when I read their “sharp” chronicles I feel repeatedly stabbed in the heart. Their pens are not only sharp; they’re poisonous as well as dangerous. They manage, with their slandering and treacherous lies about the democracy Israel, to poison peoples’ minds and inflict me with disgust.
Some excerpts from the lengthy recurring chronicles:
…“Images gnaws at my memory and makes me wonder, how does the warm Israel friends and Israel apologists feel today?
They certainly cannot justly use their harangues of “realistic politics” and “fighting against terrorism”, about Israel as ”the Middle East’s only democracy” and that the sulky Arafat can blame only himself since he neglected to accept the chances to create a country of his own, when he rejected Bill Clintons initiative in January 2001 at Camp David.
More than this has also happened. What we see is a mixture of military superiority, racism, theocracy and fascism.”… - Staffan Heimersson
This chronicle is published at the same time as the same paper gladly pumps out the lies and distortions from Jenin, handfed by the ISM extremist Andreas Malm to TT. Being “superior” – what does that mean in this context? That Israel should be nice to enemies who have sworn to destroy them? “Racist”? People of every nationality, ethnicity, color of skin and religion can be found within the Israeli society, including Jews who voluntary have come or fled to Israel to escape persecution in other countries. A whole lot of them were rescued by previous Israeli government actions. “Theocracy”? Iran with its nuclear ambitions is a theocratic country with is ayatollahs ruling the country from their elevated positions. In Israel the orthodox rabbis are in a minority position of perhaps ruling the synagogues and preaching the Ten Commandments. ”Fascists”? The Arab/Muslim world combined has with force ethnically cleansed out most other minorities within their realms, minorities who in thousands flee from their oppressive regimes yearly.
Not a single word about condemning the Arab/Muslim terrorism.
…“Ariel Sharon belongs together with other criminals in history
Israel’s prime minister, Ariel Sharon, does not only belong to the political history but also in a higher degree to the criminal history. He defies the UN resolutions that demand that Israel should leave the occupied territories, and instead lets his occupational army murder, injure, ruin, destroy.”…
- Rolf Alsing
Again, the object of hate seems to be the elected leader who doesn’t willingly allow his people to be slaughtered accordingly to the terrorists’ wishes, and added to this inflaming adjectives and outright lies in order to spice it all up. The conclusion we are being led to here is that democratic leaders belong in jail, while terrorists don’t.
Not a single word about condemning the Arab/Muslim terrorism.
…“In Sharon Bush has found the perfect partner. Bush combats terror. Sharon generates terror. Terror experts concluded already this autumn that perhaps the most dangerous threat against the terrorist war would be if there weren’t to be any more attacks.
Sharon has cleared that threat. Sharon generates tinned suicide bombers. Sharon’s genocidal murder politics against the Palestinians can’t even be thought of as something else than a subsidiary affiliation to the Global War Against Terror.”… - Carl Hamilton
This is a perverse and completely reverse way of guilt reasoning where the victims of terror are being blamed for their own death. Did perhaps Barak also create suicide bombers prior to Sharon, when offering 97% of the disputed areas, and only received terror as response? Just like all previous Israeli leaders trying to reason with the PLO officials, who all received the same kind of response. With the same kind of distorted logic one could also blame the Jews prior to the Second World War for the creation of Waffen SS.
Not a single word about condemning the Arab/Muslim terrorism.
“At Corsica ‘terrorism’ pays off
Sometimes so-called terror can be profitable

Therefore, of course, the struggle must continue in Palestine and all free people should do what they can to support and encourage the struggle against the illegal Israeli occupation.” - Herman Lindqvist
This conclusion from the recognized historian and author Herman Lindqvist is truly astounding, not to mention that it could be regarded as a direct incitement to terror. With his own twisted “logic” the editors’ office at AB should therefore be considered a legitimate bomb target for anyone who would get the idea that this paper conducts media occupation, while hiding in their well armored and fortified news desk bunkers. Or perhaps terror doesn’t pay off during circumstances such as these?
Not a single word about condemning the Arab/Muslim terrorism.
…“Israel occupies with total military superiority Palestinian territory with the appearance of unlimited military support from the USA. The occupied, oppressed and humiliated gets the blame, unique in occupational history.
In American media there is no occupation, only Palestinian terrorists. Homeless Palestinian families whose houses and gardens have been destroyed practically don’t exist in mass distributed American news.
The Palestinian youth has no future and some claim that they might as well just die as martyrs. Arafat is made powerless and at the same time he gets blamed for all Palestinian deeds. Logic usually doesn’t belong to real politics. 17 of the EU projects for the Palestinians have been destroyed by Israeli military.” - Gunnar Fredriksson
Once again it’s clear to see that those who should be blamed (in AB’s opinion) are the ones who defend themselves against the terror aggression, all the while the aggressors get the sympathy and are absolved. It could be compared to the same pattern a defense lawyer would take with the client(-s) charged with sexual predation against the victim of a gang rape, where the victim would have no one to blame but herself since she was wearing a short skirt.
Not a single word about condemning the Arab/Muslim terrorism.
“The new Israelis: Immigrated Russians

Is Israel a democracy? A simple comment would be: Ask the Palestinians!
The Sharon government was elected with a large majority and his politics has according to the latest opinion polls support by 72 per cent . A large part of the opposition even wants more hard-line politics. Why does a democracy support the ongoing brutality?”… - Gunnar Fredriksson
Why is the former nationality of the Jews of such great interest? Take a good look at how Sweden has handled the Jewish asylum seekers from Russia. (They were sometimes refused and told that they can go to Israel instead.) And how would a fictional chronicle named ”The new Swedes, immigrated Arabs” be perceived in the Swedish media? Where Arabic asylum seekers, refugees and immigrants instead are collectively labeled as “settlers” on Swedish soil and blamed for abusing the welfare system, at the expense of the “native” tax paying Swedes? A hypothetical article like that would without hesitation instantly be judged as prejudicial and xenophobic, but when it comes to Israel’s absorption policy and laws concerning immigrating Jews, who often have fled from persecutions – the rules are very different indeed. But sure, one could ask the Arabs what they think about democracy, and why not begin within their own dictatorships first, try with the few that dare to speak up, that would surely make it more interesting. Like the founder of Palestinian Human Rights Monitoring Group (PHRMG ) Bassem Eid, put under house arrest by the PLO, and who claims he has to follow the Israeli media in order to keep up with what’s going on within his own society. In an openhearted interview on Channel 8 on the show Global Axess a rerun was aired on April 21, 2004, where the reporter Thomas Gür conducted the interview. That Eid thought that there was not even the slightest freedom of press and that Yassir Arafat’s PLO is corrupted, and that PA tortures and kills its own people in the style of a gangster organization, was obvious and beyond any doubt.
“Terrorism – a “huge success” for Israel

Violence pays. Terrorism works. If you murder enough people with enough ruthlessness and during long enough time, one wins. One gets accepted and respected, gets a country of its own, one becomes prime minister and gets to drink coffee with the president of the USA at Camp David. Look at Israel and its leader.”… - Liza Marklund
The writer is a famous and (in Sweden) well-known author of crime novels, who once more shows that she is gifted with a large portion of imagination. However, in the area of basic historical knowledge she doesn’t seem to be particularly gifted. Israel was not “given” anything by the UN, which she so ignorantly claims. They Jews worked for their land with blood, sweat and tears, and they were also overcharged by the Arab effendis in the cities, who in turn got very rich during the 70 years before the independence of the State of Israel was proclaimed. The UN’s sole contribution was a majority vote of its member countries in order to accept Israel’s declaration of independence as being declared legitimate, when the British left, after their mandate term expired. Marklund also pumps out distortions of alleged Israeli war crimes.
Not a single word about condemning the Arab/Muslim terrorism.

She also, in the same chronicle, states:
“From Björn Kumm's book, “History of Terrorism” I quickly fetch the following fact: The first terrorists in the Middle East were Jewish nationalists.”
OK. Then in chapter terrorism have a look, and to take a closer look at what Kumm states as being “facts”.
…“There will never be a positive development as long as the USA supports the Israeli occupation and apartheid politics towards the Palestinians. That the Palestinians, since Israel’s establishment 1948, had to carry the burden of the European Jew persecutions is the most central question when it comes to the relations between the Muslim world and the West. Few in the USA seem, strangely enough, to understand what the expulsion of a couple of millions Palestinians from their homeland and thereafter daily humiliation for decades have meant. Israel constantly breaks international agreements and is well equipped with weapons of mass destruction.”… - Gunnar Fredriksson
Plain and simple history fabrication being published. First of all, it wasn’t “a couple of millions”, secondly, the newborn State of Israel urged its Arab inhabitants to stay. Thirdly the surrounding Arab leaderships urged the Arabs to get out of the way. And the USA gets blamed for supporting the only democracy in the Middle East.
Not a single word about condemning the Arab/Muslim terrorism.
“Sharon’s regime contributes to extreme Islamism

It is important to separate between anti-Semitism and political criticism against the government of Israel. But the claim that it is almost the same thing has for long been used as a polemic weapon by Israeli government interests, and even by Swedes. It is now being used as a method to try and stop criticism against the military occupation, the breakdown of Palestinian society, the apartheid politics and daily humiliations against Palestinians. Such an Israeli state is not a democracy.”… - Gunnar Fredriksson
It’s Israel’s fault of course. Again. Yet another accusation of the apartheid politics, which seems to be an ongoing theme in AB. And why not blame the current Israeli prime minister for a 1400-year ongoing fundamentalist Islamic feudal medieval phenomenon? It has – of course – nothing to do whatsoever with the European inherited tradition of blaming the Jews for every bird that falls from the sky. Legitimate Israel criticism? Hardly. What we see here is the good old classical “I don’t’ hate the Jews BUT… (always the but)”, the kind of distorted previous alibi attempts where the author first claims that he actually knows the difference between legitimate criticism of the Jewish state and anti-Semitism, and then goes on slandering with ramblings that this particular state is certainly not a democracy after all, while Israel keeps defending itself from terrorists who for the last 80 years or so have proclaimed a never ending Holy War against the Jewish “infidels”.
Not a single word about condemning the Arab/Muslim terrorism.
“In every third TV-show and every second paper there is quarrel between the Jewish left, which dominates the entertainment business and media, and the Christian right-wing which dominates everything else. The absurdity is that they quarrel about “facts”. As if anything in the Bible could even be considered being facts!

But then, who killed Jesus? The Jewish elitist priest in the Temple, not common Jews, and he just let it happen, that was the whole point. Jesus had a death wish. But that’s just my interpretation, and am certainly no theologian.”…
- Fredrik Virtanen
So, the entertainment editor finishes by fortifying and securing his own ignorance on issues he obviously doesn’t even have a beginner’s clue about. These statements came alongside the Hollywood produced movie “The Passion of Christ” by the actor/director Mel Gibson. Although Virtanen at first strengthens the classical anti-Semitic myth which still to this day is nursed by Nazis and Islamists, that the “Jewish left, which dominates the entertainment business and media” at a left-wing paper where he himself is employed, in order to really emphasize his latter thesis, he first claims that nothing in the Bible can be regarded as facts, and after doing so he comes to the brilliant conclusion that a vile anti-Semitic tale, that through history has been a repeated incitement to pogroms and persecution against Jews, the Jewish leader in form of the “elitist priest”, still is the one responsible for the murder of Jesus. What references he uses for this conclusion the readers are not told, since he already has rejected the Bible as the source for his own thesis. Even DN had the decency to have it translated and ran an honest essay on this subject by Stan Schwartz.

There is still an ongoing and recurring pattern here:
There is not a single word about condemning the Arab/Muslim terrorism!

Jan Guillou

Jan Guillou, President of the Association of Journalists and Publishers, with some five thousand members, is a recurrent columnist in Aftonbladet. He is also one of Sweden’s bestselling modern authors and made his fame in the 1970’s when he revealed that the Swedish police were “spying” on its own citizens. He was found guilty of “unlawful intelligence activities” against the Swedish military. In his chronicles in Aftonbladet Guillou happily takes any opportunity to slander Israel and the USA.

He was one of the co-writers of the Swedish book Inshallah where he, and a number of likeminded journalists, described their personal views and opinions on Israel. He has an entire chapter devoted to himself, where his main claim is that friends of Israel use the anti-Semitic accusations time and time again for no good reason. In this particular chapter it becomes clear that he doesn’t like the non-Jewish Swedish PhD Henrik Bachner, who is clumped together with all the others Guillou doesn’t like, as being “anti-intellectual propagandists”. He obviously thinks that there was something fishy about Bachner’s dissertation. “The dissertation in Lund may be a joke, that it was approved of might be explained with the fact that the opposing scientist was the chairman of the Swedish Committee Against anti-Semitism, in other words a brother in arms,”. It should now be clear that Guillou doesn’t even begin to comprehend how a higher educational dissertation thesis is conducted, with the highest available expertise present as opponents.

Yet, in the same chapter he gladly writes about his own memories of the Munich massacre at the Olympic Games in 1972, which he refers to as a “change of trends”, on page 405 (in the paperback edition), stated as an example of Guillou’s skills as an author (of fact proven history):
“The East German border police lost control over the situation and shot all Palestinians and Israelis dead. In the media it looked as if the Palestinians had murdered as well as the Israelis themselves.”
In this context, it’s time to quote Guillou only a couple of pages earlier, where he self-confidently boasts about the memories of the good old happy days in the Swedish Palestine Groups: “nothing is so ingratiating as when the opponent in a debate is lying and denies obvious and proven facts”.

At the Olympic massacre, which Guillou just “altered” the history of, terrorists would forever darken the memory of nations coming together during peaceful events, when masked Arabs at gunpoint kidnapped the Israeli Olympics team in order to use them for blackmail and extortion against the state of Israel. Perhaps Guillou is of the opinion that the unarmed wrestling coach Moshe Weinberg and the heavy weight lifter Joseph Roman shot themselves in the face as well as in the back? And that they did so as they tried to stop the terrorists from entering the Israeli Olympics quarters? Guillou should know the answer to this as a self-proclaimed gun expert, and with his own previous hunting show at TV (he even paid Eskimos to go hunt polar bears with him, but when the adventurer Göran Kropp later shot one in self-defense he wrote an angry column about it, raging about the “bear murderer”). Guillou usually, in his books with the made-up agent Carl Hamilton (who in Guillou’s world of fiction works with PLO against the Israeli “state terrorists”) opens the story by describing graphic and detailed murders. Or perhaps he meant that it was the East German border police who tossed in the hand grenades, into the terrorists’ escape chopper where the remaining Israeli Olympic athletes were held, bound to hands and feet, before blowing them to smithereens?
German police “shot all dead”? The surviving three terrorists were later extradited by the German government who gave in to terrorist threats from to the Arab world a couple of weeks later, when Arabs yet again took new hostages and threatened once again to murder innocent people.

Sometimes it almost seems like a parody. Guillou claimed that the 12 year old boy Muhammad al-Dura of course was shot by Israeli forces, and then attacked his colleague Wolfgang Hansson for “spreading lies at Ahlmark-level” when Hansson reported that children are being used for propaganda purposes by the Arabs. Hansson in turn responded, in the column “Head Priest and Other One-eyed Viewers”. Aftonbladet confirmed two years later that all evidence in the shooting of Muhammad Al-Dura point toward that it was “ricochets” from Arab weapons that killed the boy, and after that, approximately a year later, the paper still runs a report in translation claiming that Israeli forces were responsible for his death.

The “lie at a Ahlmark-level” has to be explained further, since it in fact seems that Guillou doesn’t like Ahlmark and this is his not too mature way of showing it. In a later chronicle he writes “… the most bizarre of the writers in our snooty morning daily now finds it self-evident to seriously argument that the Palestinians on occupied territory should be fenced in…”
This right after Ahlmark had finished a chronicle on the subject, which only concluded the elementary logic, translated in my own words, as subtly as possible, as follows:

Probably even a retarded village fool would understand that the safest way to protect himself against those whose intend to harm him (in this case mass slaughter of Jews), would perhaps be to keep them as far away as possible from their intended targets. If one then picks up a copy of Ahlmark’s Swedish book The Tyranny and the Left there might be some more clues to the discontent. It turns out that Ahlmark has devoted an entire chapter (Chapter no 16) to Guillou’s merrier days of his youth and even quoted his own words in a men’s magazine, from an article by him that was published in 1969. In this article, Ahlmark reminds the readers of how Guillou, together with armed Arab terrorists in northern Israel, at night under the cover of darkness, were booby trapping roads around Jewish civilian communities, in order to later – at a safe distance of course – proudly watch the bombs go off. Guillou himself describes this in his own words. But this has probably nothing to do with anti-Semitism. At least not if Guillou has anything to say about it. Or the fact that the Swedish Security Police during the 1970’s took a closer look at him and his comrades’ activities.

Of course Ahlmark’s very name can make some of the journalists in AB fume as well as foam at the mouth and get off in ranting and irrational outbursts in the form of chronicles, seemingly detached from any logic or fact. ”Regardless of either Ahlmark should feel lonely, because an extreme message such as his should not be able to attract many people’s attention.” was one jealous comment on his latest book: It’s the Democracy, Stupid!

“Guillou can’t know what the security police wrote” about him in his file, the evening paper Expressen reports. At first Guillou is not particularly welcome in the United States allegedly because of what the Swedish Security Police have written in their secret files about him. Perhaps it also has to do with what he publicly stated on why he wasn’t willing to honor the minute of silence for the innocent terrorist victims after the attack on the World Trade Center on 9/11 and left in protest when the memorial was being held. Then he publicly accused the Norwegian journalist Åsne Seierstad’s book, “The Book Dealer in Kabul” in which she wrote of her experiences in Afghanistan as a news correspondent before she went to the frontline during the war in Iraq, as “an invention from beginning to end.” (Later Seierstad’s book passed Guillou’s own in the sales list.) Guillou’s first book, “The Evil” which became a huge success, claims to be based on his own upbringing at experiences from boarding school and the penalizing system he allegedly was subjected to there.
Guillou had written the following statement about another book that he actually liked:
…“Literature is more or less made up. If it is so then the proportion is one-tenth make belief and nine-tenths fact and it becomes literature. Journalism is truthful. It is that simple and then the students at philosophical seminars can say whatever they like about the truth. We journalists know what truth is.”… - Jan Guillou
If one continues to read an interview in Metro it also becomes clear that Guillou “hates” the evening paper Expressen. What makes an investigative journalist hate an evening paper then? To find out, let’s read that very paper. In a number of articles Guillou is mentioned with the following headlines:

August 18, 2003 “Teacher: “Guillou was a nightmare”
August 26, 2003 “Fellow students’ criticism”
August 26, 2003 “Fellow students: “Jan Guillou is lying”
November 2, 2003 “My son is lying about “The Evil.’”
November 6, 2003 “Guillou leaves the Publicists Club.”

Although his art teacher claims that Guillou was “a nightmare”, his schoolmates testify that he is lying about the school system in general, and his allegations about the penalizing system in particular. He also claimed that his schoolmates were jealous of him and his success, since he claimed to be “the only one to become successful” after school. This is debunked by the fact that his former classmates are described thus: “Four are corporate managers, one is chief of the Baltic office at the World Bank in New York, one is a four star colonel, one is a general director, one a PhD in technology and several others are lawyers” according to Expressen.

Even Guillou’s own mother, reported to be sound of mind at the age of 81, claims in an interview for the first time, that: “It’s terrible that Jan escapes like this into his fantasy world. He did that already as a child. Jan has always had trouble separating fantasy from reality“. Who is to be believed? Guillou himself or his own mother? It seems that Guillou doesn’t really like truthful news or investigative journalism after all, at least not if he himself is the object of investigation. And this man has been one of Sweden’s most famous authors and writers for decades.

Helle Klein

Political editor-in-chief. Lutheran theologian of Jewish origin.
“Keep going, Freivalds

“Stop the wall now!” 105 Swedes demand in an urgent call in Saturday’s issue of Aftonbladet. It was a protest against the wall that Israel is building in the West Bank. Archbishop KG Hammar, former SSU chairman Mikael Damberg, Dror Feiler for Jews for Israeli-Palestinian Peace, the Green party’s Gustaf Fridolin, author Anders Ehnemark, and LO [union] investigator Örjan Nyström are some of the signatories.
It would be excellent if the Middle East could have a wider public commitment here at home, just as the south Africa question once gathered citizens from right to left, from churches, the political establishment and the business world.“ - Helle Klein
Klein has obviously come to the conclusion that Israel, which has already tried most suggestions, should not have the right to defend itself from threats coming from the areas where terrorists are located. She evidently joins the group and keeps cheering to the tune of the new Swedish foreign minister. She doesn’t understand that a fence is a temporary and un-bloody solution.
Yes, its possible that a fence might cause problems for Arabs wishing to go to Israel for various reasons, and that some of them without a doubt have the intention of killing as many civilian Jews as possible. The fence can be dismantled as soon as there is no need for it anymore. However, dead Jews cannot come back to life. So what about a public statement and urgent call sounding like this instead: “stop the terror!”? With the direct focus, of course, aimed at the Arab Muslim terrorism, which has struck almost on all continents around the globe during the new millennium? But such an idea is obviously not conceivable and it’s definitely not something Klein and her ilk would ever even consider writing about.

She looks cornered after having made an utter fool of herself, but she can’t have much to say in her defense to this because so far the only excuse has been that she is viciously being slandered because of her sex. (!) Of course, her brother in arms, Jan Guillou usually comes to the rescue on his white horse and shining armor in situations like these, and writing in a commanding tone, he points out that her great grandfather in fact was a Rabbi (as if this would explain her behavior and be OK to use as an alibi) – “Although it is humiliating having to accept the turnaround burden of proof with or without a great granddad who was a Chief Rabbi.” This is used as an excuse for what she herself later writes in her rabid Israel criticism. Perhaps Guillou doesn’t know his colleague as well as the thinks? From a published online chat at AB comes the following:
Stina says: Are you a priest?
Helle Klein says: No am not ordained, but I am a graduate in theology. I have in other words a priest education from the university of Lund. I thought of becoming a priest.
It’s rather safe to conclude that she obviously renounces her Jewish origins, and never mind what or who her grandfather was. What she had written at this specific time, what Guillou was trying to defend, was an editorial with the headline reading “The Crucified Arafat”, a choice of terminology that according to both of them has nothing whatsoever to do with any so called classical anti-Semitism. Is it just a mere coincidence that an age-old and well-known accusation of Jews crucifying Jesus, is used once again, an accusation which has worked as a starting signal for Jew persecutions and pogroms in Europe during the last 2000 years? This Freudian slip was even noticed outside Swedish duck-pond in the first suppressed EU report as “a reference to one of the most well-known anti-Semitic myths.”

Guillou accuses Israel of apartheid May 18, 1998.
So does Klein May 12, 2003.
So does Olle Svenning, when quoting Hammarberg’s Palme Center prizewinner, the Holocaust denier Hanan Ashrawi on January 30, 2003.
Klein then went on, in a frenzy, in April 2004 and wrote four anti-Israeli columns in a row. In order to get a grasp of what kind of importance a political editor-in-chief of the largest evening paper with this ancestral history has, one only has to look at the salary. Klein’s monthly paycheck is larger than the ruling Swedish prime minister.

March 29 - “Best weapon against terrorists: Peace”
That didn’t work with Hitler, and it obviously didn’t work with Arafat either.
April 4 - “The Church have hopes for the Palestine campaign”
Hopeful when it comes to boycotting Jewish victims of terrorism instead of the Muslim Arab terrorists who commit the atrocities should perhaps not be something to be proud of and to brag about in a sane world.
April 12 - “Darkness falls over the Middle East”
“Hebron was once a lively commercial centre, the most important larger city in the West Bank”
But when was this, according to Klein? Conveniently no time period is presented and no additional information on this is provided. Lets check the previous travel journals from the church representatives that Klein seems so fond of. A Swedish vicar Nordlander (1899) describes thoroughly in his journals how the Jews are restoring the land, with water ponds and by hand crushing and carrying dirt to the valley terraces with fresh soil in order to plant grapes for wine producing, just like in the days of Jesus. About the “commercial centre” one can read:
“At present its population amounts to eleven to twelve thousand persons, with nine mosques and two synagogues. The streets are narrow and filthy; the houses are made from stone with flat roofs, and with small cupolas. The industry here is, as in Bethlehem, rather vivid. The production consists mostly of glasswork such as lamps, motley and partly colored rings to wives and girls. These rings find their way further into the desert. And they are cheap. For two piasters one gets one hundred arm rings. Leather bottles, beautifully crafted and strong, are made in great numbers, and the Jews, six to seven hundred of them, produce raisin, wine, dibs or grape syrup and, as already mentioned, the grapes here as well as the figs, pomegranates, pistachios and olives – are the most delicious in the whole land.”
And about the tomb of Abraham in Hebron he writes:
“But the fanatical Mohammedans guard this grave more carefully than they do David’s tomb. Not one single Jew or Christian has set foot on this site, not until the successor to the English throne in 1862, after tremendous negotiations pains and annoyance, was allowed to enter with his escort.”
Another Swedish Christian traveler, Nathanael Beskow, had similar observations in 1926:
“Hebronites are famous for being the most fanatical Mohammedans in Palestine, and very hostile to strangers.”
Or was it perhaps in 1929 Helle Klein was thinking of, when Arabs ethnically cleansed the city from Jews through mass murder in the form of pogroms, chasing off the few surviving Jews who had to flee for their lives, while the Arabs looted and stole their property? Or when Jordan once again ethnically cleansed the area of Jews, and then illegally and against international law for two decades between 1948 and until 1967 occupied the territory? Was it when it was strictly prohibited for Jews to live there – when there was real Arabic apartheid?

April 19, 2004 “An apartheid state is being created.” Just another example, of the tiresome apartheid accusation, a recurring theme in the editorials, especially after the history of Hebron and the settlers. So, what is apartheid? It means literally “segregation”. Read on:
Main Entry: apart·heid
Pronunciation: &-'pär-"tAt, -"tIt
Function: noun
Etymology: Afrikaans, from Dutch, from apart apart + -heid -hood
1 : racial segregation; specifically : a policy of segregation and political and economic discrimination against non-European groups in the Republic of So. Africa
2 : SEPARATION, SEGREGATION
Per Ahlmark had already debunked this slandering distortion 34 years earlier. Perhaps the political editor-in-chief Klein and her colleagues could ask for a copy of her own uncle and co-author Ernst Klein, of the book “The Hated Israel” from 1970? In this book one can read in the part, where comparing Israel with former South Africa on page 156 to 160, that “few parallels can be more false”. A quickly rewritten summary, which was already claimed then, still stands:

• Israel is a democracy with voting rights for all its citizens.
South Africa was a police state where the majority wasn’t allowed to vote.
• Israel has freedom of Parliament.
South Africa critics and opponents were jailed, tortured and killed.
• Israel nurtures equal rights and fights against class-distinction.
South Africa’s white minority government used the black majority for personal gain.
• Israel is constantly pledging for negotiations with its opponents.
South Africa refused to speak with the liberation movements.
• Israel was accepted by a majority of nations after a UN vote.
For example, Rhodesia’s governing authority proclaimed its own authority, which was rejected by the UN who refused to acknowledge the state.
• Israel has freedom of press and any politicians and journalists can visit and freely contact enemies of the state of Israel (which they still do).
South Africa was closed to plenty of journalists and vast areas of the country were totally sealed off to any visitors.
• Israel was formed by Jews living in the land, as a safe haven after the European genocide of the Jews.
South Africa was formed after Europeans moved there, not to escape persecutions, but in order colonize foreign land with which they had no previous historic or religious connection.
• Israel’s Jews systematic restoration work on the previously destroyed region was performed by immigrants who bought the land they later cultivated.
South Africa colonizers used the land’s minerals to gain personal wealth and used the black majority as an enslaved workforce.

“The extremists have taken over on both sides” it was claimed already back then, in the 1970, when Israel had had a social democratic governing, after recurring democratic elections, where the few extremist such as communists or religious fanatics only managed to get a fraction of the votes. In South Africa the apartheid politics were being constructed step-by-step, a police state successively being imposed, and strong opponents of Africans and liberals seized power and legislation with force. Now, if one exchanges “South Africa” with “the Palestinian Authority” as of today instead, one gets closer to the truth of whom it is promoting apartheid rulership in the beginning of the new millennium.

Another interesting fact about this book, as Per Gahrton maliciously noted, is that the other co-author was Thomas Hammarberg, who later found his way to the Palme Center. What did he write in this book? Well, one chapter is named “Al Fatah [Arafats own party branch] and the Jews”, and the chapter starts with Hammarberg quoting:
“’Our goal is to liberate Palestine from the Zionist oppression. It cannot be done with peaceful means. We struggle towards creating instability, panic and economical chaos inside Israel. We want to stop the immigration. A fire of revolution will also be created inside Israel itself.’
Thus concludes Yonis Katari, one of the spokespersons for the PLO, regarding their movement’s goal and their strategy.”
Some 30 years after Hammarberg wrote this, the foundation he headed, handed out the prize to Holocaust denier Ashrawi of PLO, while Fatah was fulfilling just that specific goal strategy within Israel, the one promising to create mayhem and havoc inside Israeli cities with mass-murdered and maimed Jewish civilian victims as a result.

But not only are Arabs expected to continue to live in Israel and in the disputed areas, all their relatives and all their descendants who have never set foot in the state of Israel, and who are the only ones in the world that inherits their status as refugees generation after generation, but also expect to have full rights of “return”. This is what they expect, after generations of grotesque indoctrination in camps, learning to hate Jews and being drilled for the ultimate destruction of Israel, while Jews in the Diaspora who return to Israel are being labeled as foreign immigrants. What these critics mainly complain about is first that Arabs shall have the right of return, but Jews who wish to do the same are instantly labeled as “settlers”. The few Jews living in the disputed areas after the previous Arab ethnic cleansing and illegal occupation are called “settlers” – never mind if they have been there for generations. Then an Arab state shall be imposed, the 23rd Arab state in the Middle East, where Jews might perhaps be allowed live under Arab rule, which so far has been only proven to be equal to corrupt dictatorship that openly praises Jew murder. Such a state would, especially after the recent decade of Arab Muslim terrorist atrocities, only be regarded as one huge prize in honor of terrorism. And it would send a clear signal to other terrorists around the world that terrorism pays off. This becomes more and more Kafkaesque, as when Kafka meets Alice in Wonderland with Aftonbladet’s illogical distortions, where the land of Judea obviously, at least to Israel critics, serves better as an Arab apartheid regime closed to unwanted Jewish “settlers”.

Aftonbladet is foremost, at least among the more educated Swedish Jews with some self-preservation left, known as a platform for rabid Israel criticism (be the critics of Jewish heritage or not) where the critics can have their undisputed and unchallenged arena, spewing forth their hatred without having to take any responsibility for the consequences or follow the ethical codes for the press, as they are getting paid plenty to produce this kind of rubbish. The Jerusalem University and the non-Jewish PhD in anti-Semitism, Henrik Bachner, has produced several case studies on this particular paper’s writings with clear traces of anti-Semitism over the recent decades.

Yet another comprehensive scientific study emerged in the form of a report from Uppsala University’s Department of Media and Communication, which concluded the quantity of statistics from a collection of an impressive 103 editorials, from Aftonbladet and SvD’s chronicles during a time period of four years between 2000 and 2004. Some sad facts as the conclusion states:
“The text analysis showed that the usage if certain anti-Semitic stereotypes now and then are expressed as criticism against Israel. This happens only at editorial space in Aftonbladet. The stereotypes that occur are the image of the Jew as a cruel and ruthless murderer, Christ killer and as being dishonest and unreliable, the so-called Judas portrait. “
But perhaps the best self evident illustration of this paper’s anti-Israel stance was when AB translated a Hamas leader’s speech, without any explanatory comments at all, into Swedish, bearing the headline Hamas wants peace [sic!] , thereby legitimizing sought after terrorist leaders (where the political characters states “kill… Jews”) by providing for such terrorists an arena for their distorted world views, on the very day another bomb explodes at the market in Carmel square in Tel Aviv resulting in three dead and 38 injured, for which PLFP claimed the “credit“, the latter being the same organization that the chairman of the Swedish Left’s youth party previously had urged the public to fund, going against international law.

There is a handful of Jews in Sweden who after recurring words and actions are given media space, but their words cannot be taken as being representative for the majority of the Diaspora Jews or the Jews within their own society, unless their official spokespersons, for example the Jewish council, backs it up.

Helle Klein and her colleagues might speak for Aftonbladet. However, none of them speaks for me or my Jewish heritage, the Diaspora or for Zionism.

Continue to chapter, media critics complaints go bloggers



Links to this post:

Create a Link



<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?