Comments on: Israeli Foreign Ministry Smears Human Rights Watch Analyst

By: Hannah

Hannah — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 02:36:16 +0000

There’s no need for MFA to do its own dirty work here. Thatis what it has its consultants like NGO Monitor director Gerald Steinberg, for.

By: Richard Silverstein

Richard Silverstein — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 18:19:48 +0000

Human Rights Watch wrote in The Guardian of the foreign ministry’s involvement. I even provided you the link to the story where you could’ve read about the claim & dealt with it. But you’re either too lazy or too caught up in yr own righteousness to care. I didn’t make it up though you’d like people to think so. I trust HRW’s record of accuracy far more than NGO Monitor’s, which is one of the sleaziest of the members of the Israel lobby slime industry.

And to call NGO Monitor’s work “analysis” does a deep disservice to the term. Propaganda, smear–those are far more apt terms of description.

By: fiddler

fiddler — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 13:51:26 +0000

Even for public display and distribution it depends on context. History books about the Third Reich for example would regularly (and legally, of course) display some “forbidden” items on their covers. My copy of Kurt Vonnegut’s novel, Mother Night, also sports a swastika on the front. There’s no question that such use is legitimate.

The BGH, Germany’s highest regular court, has fortunately reversed that scurrilous “AF stickers are forbidden” decision.

By: Naftali Balanson

Naftali Balanson — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 10:07:26 +0000

This post is full of inaccuracies, foremost the headline and first paragraph. As the New York Times has reported, the Garlasco-Nazi memorabilia story was first raised on the MereRhetoric blog (http://www.mererhetoric.com/archives/11275875.html). NGO Monitor (http://www.ngo-monitor.org/article/expert_or_ideologues_hrw_s_defense_of_marc_garlasco_s_nazi_fetish) and others have expanded this analysis.

The Israeli Foreign Ministry (MFA) was not involved in any way in the research or publicity of this issue. To suggest otherwise is entirely false, and is a transparent, and baseless, ploy to change the story to Lieberman, instead of dealing with the real problem: HRW’s and Garlasco’s lack of credibility.

Also, as far as I am aware, the MFA has not commented on Garlasco at all. Perhaps you are confusing the PMO (Prime Minister’s Office),where Ron Dermer works, with the MFA: they are both 3 letters, after all.

Naftali Balanson
Managing Editor
NGO Monitor

By: Koshiro

Koshiro — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 08:15:41 +0000

Well, the restrictions of §86a are actually relevant, but would not apply to this case. Possession, acquisition and private use are not at all illegal. Public display and distribution would be, but this is not the case here.

That said, when it comes to swastikas, German authorities often have a “confiscate first, look up the laws later” attitude. There was a long legal struggle a while ago after stickers displaying a crossed-out swastika were declared forbidden by overzealous authorities. Stickers of this type are, of course, used by anti-fascists:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0e/Hakenkreuz_im_Verbotsschild.svg/180px-Hakenkreuz_im_Verbotsschild.svg.png

By: amir

amir — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 04:28:07 +0000

I want to see if I got this right because I only heard about this now. Is Garlasco the guy posting on a forum as a premium member called “German Combat Awards” under the name Flak88 and has an avatar with a swastika on it while talking to “Giel” who also has an avatar with a swastika on it and Garlasco is wearing the “iron cross” shirt which I assume he posted on the forum?
http://www.germancombatawards.com/thread.php?postid=11687#post11687

By: Finally

Finally — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 03:39:32 +0000

Indeed, the NGO Monitor website makes clear that Steinberg is also a consultant for the Israeli Foreign Ministry.

By: fiddler

fiddler — Mon, 14 Sep 2009 22:00:29 +0000

NormanF is wrong. AFAIK (IANAL) collecting and trading original WW II memorabilia (even original editions of Mein Kampf, but not copies) is legal even in Germany within the restrictions of §86 and §86a StGB (penal code).
http://dejure.org/gesetze/StGB/86.html, …86a.html (in German)
Those restrictions (§86.3) mean that civic education, defence of the Constitution, art, science, research, teaching, reporting and similar activities are exempt from the prohibition.