Aftonbladet: Here’s How to Tell the Difference between Opinion and Propaganda

We would hope that the discerning reader would have an understanding of the difference between factual reporting and opinion journalism which is factually based, but takes a particular side on an issue.  Perhaps we are naïve, but we would also expect that the publishers of a so-called “mainstream” newspaper would differentiate between opinion columns and unabashed propaganda writing.  By “propaganda” we are using the term in its most negative sense; promoting a particular agenda with total disregard for the facts, or to put it more plainly, outright lies spread to create animosity towards the opposing position, and sympathy for the writer’s pet ideology.

Last week Jan Guillou published an opinion column in Aftonbladet which could arguably read as a tidy little lesson in leftist persuasion.  Guillou mixes a number of elements to evoke reader sympathy for the Israel boycott campaign, although his ultimate objective is revealed later.  Guillou sympathizes with trade unionists, smearing the Moderate Youth as scabs for daring to oppose the Dockworkers Union’s boycott of Israeli goods and Swedish trade.  But there is no issue of workers’ rights here. 

He then jumps in with the claim that Israel is an apartheid state—reiterating the nasty “Zionism is racism” canard.  This is a “big lie” tactic if ever there was one.  Unlike the old South African apartheid laws, Israeli law contains no racial laws restricting education, vocation or residence for its Arab citizens.  In fact, compared to the rest of the Middle East, Israeli Arabs and Palestinians have a higher standard of living, especially Arab women.  And, incidentally, Israelis themselves are very racially mixed.
Of course, then Guillou jumps in with an even bigger lie—that Arabs are denied voting rights in Israel, because “they are not Jewish”.  This is a totally outrageous claim.  Arab Israelis vote in Israel, and there are fourteen   (that’s 14, Jan) Arab members of the Israeli parliament representing a number of parties.  Residents of the West Bank and Gaza vote in their own elections. 

Guillou isn’t ignorant of these facts.  There is an underlying agenda here.  It’s important to remember that Guillou is a left-wing extremist who was actively involved with the PFLP terrorist organization as well as the KGB.  He understands the power of propaganda and totally hates Israel. For those who are ignorant, this piece of pseudo-journalism reinforces baseless misconceptions about Israel—which is, in fact, the only democracy in the Middle East. Contrary to Guillou’s assertions, Israel is the only country where minorities and women have a voice. But, for the useful idiots, Guillou offers another “reason” to hate Israel.

However, for those who understand Guillou’s propaganda in the context of the extremist agenda, it’s clear that what he is calling for is for Palestinian Arabs to have a vote—not in the developing state which is the Palestinian Authority, and not in the totalitarian mullocracy of Hamastan in Gaza—but to vote in the State of Israel. Yes, the real point that Guillou is making is a call for a one-state solution through a flood of Arab voting from the West Bank, Gaza and the “Palestinian diaspora”. 

Just a hint to the useful idiots—this means no more state of Israel.  Yes, it’s okay to eliminate a Jewish state, because when genocide comes from Muslims—say, like the Turks trying to kill off Kurdish culture or citizens—it’s not genocide; just ask Mr. Erdogan.  Also remember, when the racially Arab Sudanese kill off black Sudanese in Darfur, that’s not racism or genocide either.
That's why Guillou makes reference to whites who left Zimbabwe, while noting that South Africa is “still a country”--it's to cover the fact that he wants to eliminate Israel.  It’s just throwing a bone to Israelis—you could live as dhimmis in a Palestinian state, just like those happy Zimbabwean white farmers who have had their land confiscated, or live barricaded in their farmhouses to avoid getting shot at. But isn’t that what Israeli “racists” deserve? Yes, the solution—or the final solution—is really simple.

Well Mr. Guillou, dhimmi status is no picnic—just ask the more than 70% of Israelis of Middle Eastern descent.  Yes, most of Israel’s citizens came as refugees; not just from Helen Thomas’ Poland and Germany, but from the nearly extinct Jewish communities of Algeria, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Libya, Morocco, Syria, Turkey, Yemen, etc.

Israel has no intention of opening itself up to mass extinction.  And to Aftonbladet we say that to allow this sort of genocidal propaganda to pass for mainstream “opinion journalism” is completely inexcusable. If exterminating the Jewish state is really mainstream opinion in Sweden, it’s time for a boycott to be directed not at Israel, but at Sweden. 

This post was written by Chanah Shapira, with thanks to Adam Eberhag