There is, however, an even better reason why the Aftonbladet article is palpably false. As stated in the article concerning the death of the Palestinian:
"The first shot hit him in the chest. According to villagers who witnessed the incident he was subsequently shot with one bullet in each leg. Two soldiers then ran down from the carpentry workshop and shot Bilal once in the stomach."
However, when a bullet strikes a body, it tumbles ("yaws") and can cause extensive internal damage before exiting the body. Anyone interested in "harvesting" organs would not shoot a person both in the chest and the stomach for fear of damaging the organs.
Aftonbladet's editors are calling for an investigation of the purported 1992 incident? They should be busy investigating stupidity and anti-Semitism at their own newspaper.
It is the same as with accusation that Jews use blood to make matzo. Does not matter how many times you say matzot are made with water and flour. Truth does not matter here.
ReplyDeleteEven the Palestinians the author quotes deny they talked about organ stealing. Nevertheless, Europeans, including officials, do not see anything wrong in the article. Can we conclude that anti-Semitism is still part of popular European culture?
Answer: Yes.
ReplyDeleteJeffrey,
ReplyDeleteYou are a lawyer. What do you think: can Israel sue this paper? Can some group of people in Israel sue this paper? If yes, why nobody does it? There should be some legal ways to deal with it!
Court (and threat of boycott of his new car) stopped Ford's anti-Semitic paper. It worked with Ford.
Aftonblodet and the author of this article are being sued by Adv. Guy Ophir for libel in the amount of $7.5 million in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York. See: http://www.scribd.com/doc/19100830/Summons-Filed-v-Aftonbladet-in-NY
ReplyDeleteWhy do you think he is doing it from New York? I heard, court can refuse to hear it. Israel needs its own ADL!
ReplyDeleteAftonbladet publishes an English version that contained a translation of the original article; this English version, I believe, is distributed in NY. A suit filed in NY will get a fairer hearing than in Sweden.
ReplyDeleteYou say "A suit filed in NY will get a fairer hearing than in Sweden". What about an Israeli court? Were there such cases, when Israeli court considered defamation against Israel or IDF?
ReplyDeleteIf Israeli court makes decision that the paper has to pay, can they enforce it? What about an American court? Can an American court enforce it?
I just want to understand what is an advantage to file it in USA, contrary to Israel. There should be a legal way for Israel to defend itself, other than filing a complain in USA, where the newspaper is sold in one church.
If a suit were to be filed against Aftonbladet in Israel, the newspaper would most likely not defend itself, and although the plaintiff might prevail, there would be no way of realizing a monetary judgment: Aftonbladet is not doing business in Israel, it has no assets in Israel, and a Swedish court would not enforce the Israeli judgment. On the other hand, in New York Aftonbladet distributes its newspaper, and it can be argued that they are present and doing business there.
ReplyDelete