Beste Ronny Naftaniel,
Ik geef je een voorbeeld van de wijze waarop het CIDI propaganda bedrijft:
| Orgaanschandaal misbruikt voor anti-Israel propaganda |
| maandag 21 december 2009 | |
| De Zweedse krant Aftonbladet beweerde in augustus dat Israel Palestijnen vermoordt voor hun organen. http://www.cidi.nl/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=616&Itemid=1 |
Oke, deze bewering is het uitgangspunt van het CIDI. Klopt die bewering? Nee. Nu de feiten: Dit is wat in Aftonbladet stond:
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.
“Why are they keeping the bodies for up to five days before they let us bury them? What happened to the bodies during that time? Why are they performing autopsy, against our will, when the cause of death is obvious? Why are the bodies returned at night? Why is it done with a military escort? Why is the area closed off during the funeral? Why is the electricity interrupted?” Nafe’s uncle was upset and he had a lot of questions.[8]
Boström also writes that unnamed UN staff members told him that "organ theft definitely occurred", but that they were "prevented from doing anything about it."[8][10] He also reports the response of the IDF spokesperson as being that the allegations of organ theft were lies, and that all Palestinian victims are subjected to autopsy on a routine basis. Boström notes that according to Palestinian statistics for 1992, Bilal Ghanem was one of 133 Palestinians killed, and one of 69 who went through postmortem examination. He concludes the article with his opinion that the questions surrounding what is happening remain unanswered and should be investigated.[8]
Dit lijkt mij als onafhankelijke journalist een keurig bericht. De enige conclusie die ik kan trekken is dat de pro-Israel lobby, inclusief het CIDI, tegen een serieus onderzoek is om precies te kunnen vaststellen wat er is gebeurd met de Palestijnse slachtoffers van de Israelische orgaanroof.
Hier zijn de Israelische reacties:
Government
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.[13] On August 23, the Israeli Prime Minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, called for the Swedish government to condemn the article. An Israeli official quoted him as saying: "We're not asking the Swedish government for an apology, we're asking for their condemnation." The Israeli Finance Minister, Yuval Steinitz, said that a continued Swedish refusal to condemn the article, might lead Israel to cancel a visit, scheduled for September, by the Swedish Foreign Minister, Carl Bildt. Steinitz told the Israel Army Radio that "Whoever doesn't distance himself from this kind of blood libel might not be a welcome guest in Israel at this time. Until the Swedish government understands differently, the state of Israel, the state of the Jews, cannot ignore anti-Semitic expressions and modern recycling of medieval anti-Semitism". The Israeli Government Press Office, which accredits foreign journalists visiting the country, said it was delaying its approval for an Aftonbladet correspondent and photographer who are seeking permission to enter the Gaza Strip by the maximum ninety days allowed by regulations.[14]
Netanyahu said that history was replete with Blood libel against Jews that have led to the murder and that "These matters cannot be taken lightly. We are not asking from the Swedes anything that we did not ask of ourselves".He reminded his ministers that in February, 2009 after a satirical skit on the Israeli Channel 10 which poked fun at the Christian belief that Jesus walked on water and Mary was a virgin had angered the Vatican, then-Prime Minister Ehud Olmert expressed regret and sorrow for it. Netanyahu commented: "I don't recall that Olmert's condemnation damaged press freedom in Israel". The Israeli Foreign Minister, Avigdor Lieberman told Army Radio that "[w]hat angers us is that the Swedish government didn't condemn it but hastened to reprimand the ambassador who did find it right to condemn" the story, which Lieberman compared to historic antisemitic tracts.[15] He accused Sweden of hypocrisy, saying that the affair has "an odor of anti-Semitism." [16] Lieberman noted the Swedish condemnation of the Muhammed cartoons affair in 2005, as well as Sweden's shutting down of an Internet site in the country that posted the caricatures and the Swedish foreign minister letter of apology to the president of Yemen for it. He criticized Sweden for its silence earlier in 2009, when the city of Malmö decided not to allow spectators to a Davis Cup match between Sweden and Israel.[17]
The Israeli Interior Minister, Eli Yishai, said that he would act to prevent Aftonbladet reporters from receiving work permits in Israel, and the Welfare and Social Services Minister, Isaac Herzog said that Israel should take legal steps against the paper. When asked why Israel did not investigate the article's claims, Israel's envoy to Sweden, Benny Dagan, said: "Why don't we investigate why the Mossad and the Jews were behind the bombing of the twin towers? Why won't we investigate why Jews are spreading AIDS in the Arab countries? Why won't we investigate why Jews killed Christian children and took their blood and organs to bake matzot on Pessah?".[17]
Media
Gideon Levy, writing in Ha'aretz, criticized the article and the Israeli response, saying that the article damaged "the fight against the occupation." Levy criticized Boström for not engaging in documentation, investigation and the presentation of proof. He noted that, "There were cases in which the organs of Palestinians who had been killed were harvested without permission, something the [Abu Kabir] Institute of Forensic Medicine has done to others in Israel, for research purposes. But it's a long way from that to suspicion of trafficking in organs based only on the fact that in 1992 a dead Palestinian was found whose organs had been removed and his body sewn back up. And 17 years later a few Jews were arrested on suspicion of trafficking in human organs. That's not professional journalism, that's cheap and harmful journalism." However, he called Lieberman's response "ludicrous," and stated that it had done diplomatic damage to Israel.[18]
Maariv published an article reporting that much of Boström's story came from his 2001 book “Inshallah,” which it states was financed in part by the Swedish Foreign Ministry.[19][20]
Haaretz claimed Avigdor Lieberman’s reaction was “no less outrageous or inciting” than Bostrom's article. Accusing him of overreaction, an editorial stated: “Lieberman's impassioned and demagogic reaction has damaged Israel. It cheapened the Holocaust, blew the article out of proportion and caused an international uproar, pushing Sweden - which currently holds the presidency of the European Union - into an unnecessary confrontation with Israel.” [21]
Civil society
Former diplomat Colette Avital said that Sweden should know that there is a difference between freedom of the press and freedom of opinion, stating that “freedom of expression is not unlimited, even in that beautiful northern country.” She also criticized Israeli official and media reactions as “blown out of all reasonable proportion.“ She criticized the Israeli Foreign Minister for voicing “ridiculous and ultimately harmful threats” that the Swedish minister's visit might be canceled, or that Swedish journalists will be refused entry into the country.[22]
A support meeting of families of Israeli and Palestinian organ and tissue donors on Aug 26 at Sourasky Medical Center in Tel Aviv discussed the newspaper report. Participants stressed a message that "organ donation is saving lives without any conditions" and called the report black propaganda against Israel.[23]
Lees verder: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Aftonbladet_Israel_controversy
Zoals je ziet Ronny, die reacties zijn deels hysterisch en getuigen weer van het feit dat er door de zionistische leiders wordt gelogen en bedrogen en gechanteerd met dat eeuwige gezeur dat kritiek op Israel antisemitisme is. En dat is een walgelijk standpunt aangezien de moord op zes miljoen joden gebruikt wordt om een moreel verwerpelijke politiek te verdedigen.
Hou op Ronny met het suggereren dat kritiek op Israel een andere vorm is van antisemitisme. Het is inderdaad 'een banalisering van de onschendbare tragedie van de Holocaust.' En hou op met die propaganda, waarbij de woorden van serieuze journalisten worden verkracht.
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten