2009 Aftonbladet Israel controversy: Difference between revisions
→The article: copy edit |
→The article: to be clear about his |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
The photograph accompanying the article was that of the body of Bilal Ghanem, who was 19 years old when he was killed by [[IDF]] soldiers during the [[First intifada]] on May 13, 1992. According to [[The Jerusalem Post]], Jalal Ghanem, Bilal's brother, could not confirm the allegations made by the Aftonbladet, but said that there were stitches on Bilal's body that ran from the chest down to the bottom of the abdomen, and that his teeth were missing. Jalal also said the only time the family saw the Swedish photographer was at Bilal's funeral when he photographed the event. Their mother denied having told any foreign journalist that her son's organs had been stolen, but said that she does not rule out the possibility that Israel was harvesting organs of Palestinians. Another relative of the family, Ibrahim Ghanem, said the family never told the Swedish photographer that Israel had stolen organs from Bilal's body, and speculated that, "Maybe the journalist reached that conclusion on the basis of the stitches he saw on the body." He also said that the family does not know if the organs were removed because they never had their own autospy conducted.<ref name=jpost1>{{cite news|url=http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1251145107193&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull | title=Palestinian family: We didn't say organs taken|last=Abu Toameh |first=Khaled|date=24 August 2009 Updated 25 August 2009|accessdate=2009-08-29|work=[[Jerusalem Post]]}}</ref> |
The photograph accompanying the article was that of the body of Bilal Ghanem, who was 19 years old when he was killed by [[IDF]] soldiers during the [[First intifada]] on May 13, 1992. According to [[The Jerusalem Post]], Jalal Ghanem, Bilal's brother, could not confirm the allegations made by the Aftonbladet, but said that there were stitches on Bilal's body that ran from the chest down to the bottom of the abdomen, and that his teeth were missing. Jalal also said the only time the family saw the Swedish photographer was at Bilal's funeral when he photographed the event. Their mother denied having told any foreign journalist that her son's organs had been stolen, but said that she does not rule out the possibility that Israel was harvesting organs of Palestinians. Another relative of the family, Ibrahim Ghanem, said the family never told the Swedish photographer that Israel had stolen organs from Bilal's body, and speculated that, "Maybe the journalist reached that conclusion on the basis of the stitches he saw on the body." He also said that the family does not know if the organs were removed because they never had their own autospy conducted.<ref name=jpost1>{{cite news|url=http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1251145107193&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull | title=Palestinian family: We didn't say organs taken|last=Abu Toameh |first=Khaled|date=24 August 2009 Updated 25 August 2009|accessdate=2009-08-29|work=[[Jerusalem Post]]}}</ref> |
||
No quotes from the Ghanem family appear in Bostrom's article, though Bostrom does describe his first-hand impressions of Bilal's funeral service which he attended:<blockquote>Together with the sharp noises from the shovels we could hear laughter from the soldiers who, as they waited to go home, exchanged some jokes. As Bilal was put in the grave his chest was uncovered. Suddenly it became clear to the few people present just what kind of abuse the boy had been exposed to. Bilal was not by far the first young Palestinian to be buried with a slit from his abdomen up to his chin.<ref name=Bostrom/></blockquote> The next paragraph of the article provides quotes from other Palestinian families, and reads as follows:<blockquote>The families in the West Bank and in Gaza felt that they knew exactly what had happened: "Our sons are used as involuntary organ donors," relatives of Khaled from Nablus told me, as did the mother of Raed from Jenin and the uncles of Machmod and Nafes from Gaza, who had all disappeared for a number of days only to return at night, dead and autopsied.<ref name=Bostrom/></blockquote> |
|||
No quotes from the Ghanem family appear in Bostrom's article.<ref name=Bostrom/> |
|||
== Israeli reaction == |
== Israeli reaction == |
||
Revision as of 15:42, 29 August 2009
 | This article appears to be slanted towards recent events. (August 2009) |
The Aftonbladet-Israel controversy refers to an article in Sweden's largest tabloid, implying that the Israeli Defense Force stole organs from dead Palestinians. This evolved into a diplomatic controversy between Israel and Sweden.
The article
In August 2009 the Aftonbladet ran an article on its culture pages written by freelance writer Donald Boström. The article probed possible connections between Operation Bid Rig in New Jersey, an illegal-organ trade network and money laundering operation involving rabbis, politicians and trusted civil servants, and events in the Palestinian territories, where some of the bodies of Palestinians killed by the Israel Defense Force were being returned after five days with stitches running from their belly to their neck. Bostrom detailed his own observations of this phenomenon during his stay in the region in 1992, as well as the views of some Palestinian families whose loved ones were returned in such a state, and who relayed their suspicions that the organs were being harvested.[1]
The photograph accompanying the article was that of the body of Bilal Ghanem, who was 19 years old when he was killed by IDF soldiers during the First intifada on May 13, 1992. According to The Jerusalem Post, Jalal Ghanem, Bilal's brother, could not confirm the allegations made by the Aftonbladet, but said that there were stitches on Bilal's body that ran from the chest down to the bottom of the abdomen, and that his teeth were missing. Jalal also said the only time the family saw the Swedish photographer was at Bilal's funeral when he photographed the event. Their mother denied having told any foreign journalist that her son's organs had been stolen, but said that she does not rule out the possibility that Israel was harvesting organs of Palestinians. Another relative of the family, Ibrahim Ghanem, said the family never told the Swedish photographer that Israel had stolen organs from Bilal's body, and speculated that, "Maybe the journalist reached that conclusion on the basis of the stitches he saw on the body." He also said that the family does not know if the organs were removed because they never had their own autospy conducted.[2]
No quotes from the Ghanem family appear in Bostrom's article, though Bostrom does describe his first-hand impressions of Bilal's funeral service which he attended:
Together with the sharp noises from the shovels we could hear laughter from the soldiers who, as they waited to go home, exchanged some jokes. As Bilal was put in the grave his chest was uncovered. Suddenly it became clear to the few people present just what kind of abuse the boy had been exposed to. Bilal was not by far the first young Palestinian to be buried with a slit from his abdomen up to his chin.[1]
The next paragraph of the article provides quotes from other Palestinian families, and reads as follows:
The families in the West Bank and in Gaza felt that they knew exactly what had happened: "Our sons are used as involuntary organ donors," relatives of Khaled from Nablus told me, as did the mother of Raed from Jenin and the uncles of Machmod and Nafes from Gaza, who had all disappeared for a number of days only to return at night, dead and autopsied.[1]
Israeli reaction
The claim in the article sparked an angry reaction by Israeli Foreign Ministry official Yigal Palmor who associated the article with the medieval blood libel.[3]
Swedish press reactions
Another Swedish newspaper, Sydsvenskan, criticized Aftonbladet for publishing for what Sydsvenskan called "an anti-Semitic conspiracy theory."[4]
Henrik Bredberg in Sydsvenskan said, "Donald Boström publicised a variant of an anti-Semitic classic, the Jew who abducts children and steals their blood... The regrettable aspects just seem to grow and grow... the Israeli government rages and speaks of an article which 'shames Swedish democracy and the entire Swedish press'. Hardly. Freedom of expression and freedom of the press are part of democracy... Dare to believe in freedom of the press and open debate. Even when individual editors make stupid and tasteless decisions."[5]
Bredberg also said in the same paper, "The Foreign Ministry has made it clear that Swedish freedom of the press applies. Good. Aftonbladet should not be given the unwarranted glory of martyrdom... Publication seems to represent an obvious lack of judgment. Unfortunately the lack of judgment did not stop there. The Swedish ambassador in Tel Aviv... attacked the article and thereby created the impression that having views about or intervening in individual publications should be a task for the government and its representatives."[5]
Several political commentators have pointed out that that Sweden upholds the presidency of the Council of the European Union at the time of this dispute. From an Israeli point of view, they say, discrediting Sweden as anti-semitic may be a way to reply to several months of European criticism on Israeli Middle East politics.[6] [7][8]
Swedish Government Reaction
Elisabet Borsiin Bonnier, the Swedish ambassador to Israel has strongly condemned the article, stating: "The article in the Swedish newspaper is shocking and terrifying for us Swedish, as it influences the Israeli citizens... The embassy can not emphasize more its disgust."[9] The Swedish foreign ministry and the Swedish foreign minister Carl Bildt distanced themselves from the ambassador's statement and underlined that Sweden is a democracy with freedom of press, and that the state representatives should not comment on individual articles in newspapers, which the Constitution allegedly forbade.[10]
The Office of the Councellor of Justice, however, said that the government could go much further in its criticism of the article without violating the Constitution.[11] Mårten Schultz, senior lecturer in jurisprudence, thought that the appeals to freedom of speech were "attempts to use the rhetorically convincing status of the freedom of expression and press legislation in order to pursue a political agenda", and exhorted politicians and journalist to bring out and read the Freedom of the Press Act before they say what the government is not entitled to do.[12]
Donald Boström and Aftonbladet Reaction
The author of the article, Donald Boström, spoke to Israel Radio on 19 August 2009 and said he was worried by the allegations he reported: "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 "[13] Boström told CNN that the purpose of his article was to call for an investigation into the claims about stealing organs in the early 1990s.[14] Helle Klein from Aftonbladet responded to Israeli allegation "The Israeli reactions to Aftonbladet's article about illegal trading in organs break records for exaggeration... The harsh tones from the Israeli side do not benefit the State of Israel... How should the Israeli government's behaviour be understood? It's about realpolitic... The Israeli government is one of the most extremely right-wing in the country's history and Foreign Minister Lieberman has had a cool reception in both the USA and the EU... Lieberman and Netanyahu need an external enemy to blame to unite domestic opinion... and Aftonbladet's article was a chance for the Israeli government to demonstrate its ability to act against alleged anti-Semitism."[5]
Other reactions
According to Yossi Klein Halevi, writing in the strongly pro-Israel The New Republic, Donald Boström would have readily admitted that he has no proof the accusations are true and the Palestinians he quoted in his article would have since denied making those accusations.[15]
Matthew Cassel wrote on his part in the pro-Palestinian Electronic Intifada that "Baseless organ theft accusations are a propaganda gift for Israel, and deflect attention from its well-documented war crimes in the West Bank and Gaza Strip".[16]
Lena Posner-Korosi, leader of Sweden's Jewish community, criticized Israel's official response to this article, stating in an interview with the Israeli army radio that the Israeli reaction and media outrage had provided the claims with much more exposure than they would have had otherwise, and blown the story out of proportion [17]
See also
References
- ^ a b c Aftonbladet: "Our sons are plundered of their organs"
- ^ Abu Toameh, Khaled (24 August 2009 Updated 25 August 2009). "Palestinian family: We didn't say organs taken". Jerusalem Post. Retrieved 2009-08-29.
{{cite news}}: Check date values in:|date=(help) - ^ Macdonald, Alastair (19 August 2009). "Israel slams Swedish tabloid's organ theft story". Reuters. Retrieved 2009-08-19.
- ^ Berthelsen, Morten (19 August 2009). "Swedish newspaper 'blood libel' sparks harsh condemnation". Haaretz. Retrieved 2009-08-19.
- ^ a b c BBC
- ^ Sydsvenskan: Political strategy behind Sweden-bashing
- ^ DN: Ordförandeskapet i EU störs av Israels ordkrig
- ^ Dagen: Arne Lapidus: Att slagkraftigt angripa verkliga och inbillade fiender ger ofta inrikespolitiska pluspoäng
- ^ http://www.mako.co.il/news-military/israel/Article-7d5089fd8323321004.htm
- ^ Bildt, Carl. "Principer och praktik". Retrieved 2009-08-21.
- ^ Lag tillåter hårdare artikelkritik TT, 25 augusti 2009.
- ^ Mårten Schultz: Inget grundlagshinder för att kritisera Aftonbladet ("No constitutional ban on criticism of Aftonbladet") Newsmill.se, 24 augusti 2009.
- ^ Friedman, Matti (19 August 2009). "Israel furious over Swedish newspaper article". Associated Press. Retrieved 2009-08-19.
- ^ Swedish paper's organ harvesting article draws Israeli outrage, cnn. accessed 24 August 2009.
- ^ Yossi Klein Halevi (2009-08-27). "Incitement to Murder". The New Republic. Retrieved 2009-08-27.
- ^ Matthew Cassel (2009-08-24). "Baseless organ theft accusations will not bring Israel to justice". Electronic Intifada. Retrieved 2009-08-27.
- ^ "'Those who don't condemn Swedish story may not be welcome'". Jerusalem Post. 2009-08-23. Retrieved 2009-08-27.