Look again at 'Snow White' (Leftist with snow up nose alert)

Not that anybody's going to agree with me, but there is no glorification of Palestinian terrorism whatsoever in the now infamous pool-of-blood art installation in Stockholm – not by the artists, not by the Swedes, not by anybody.

Just the opposite. Snow White and the Madness of Truth makes Palestinian terrorism – and Israeli repression, too, but mainly Palestinian terrorism – so graphic and immediate as to be nauseating, which is the effect terrorism and repression should, but unfortunately don't, have on people at large.

The Jewish reaction to the artwork and to Ambassador Zvi Mazel's trashing of it show how automatically we've come to see anti-Semitism everywhere, especially in Europe. It also shows how as soon as the cry of anti-Semitism goes up loudly enough, there is no discussion in Israel or the Diaspora about whether or not it was justified.

I'm afraid Jews see Snow White very much like American blacks saw the murder charges against O.J. Simpson – through a prism distorted by trauma, but also by defensiveness and communal pressure, and with reflexively closed minds.

As for myself, Snow White is probably the only modern art installation I've ever seen – albeit in this case only on TV and in the newspapers – that I think I understand. When I learned that it showed a picture of a Palestinian suicide bomber who'd killed 21 Israelis and that her picture was floating on a pool of fake blood, I concluded immediately that whatever the artists were trying to say, they certainly did not mean to glorify terrorism as all of Israel has charged.

If you want to try to glorify a suicide bomber in front of a civilized audience, you do not spell out that she killed 19 civilians eating in a restaurant (the text of Snow White made a mistake in the death toll). But above all, and most obviously, you do not show the suicide bomber, in this case Hanadi Jaradat, floating on a pool of blood. That is guaranteed to bring to mind – and to the stomach – what happened to the terrorist's victims. It will cause viewers to react to what she did with loathing.

NO, IF you want to glorify Palestinian terrorism, you airbrush out any trace of Israeli victims, and the only images you show in connection with the terrorist are of Palestinians being shot down, of Israeli tanks and soldiers, of barbed wire, etc. That's how it's always done.

Then when I read the text of Snow White, it became even more clear that the artists, Israeli-born Dror Feiler and his Swedish wife Gunilla Skold Feiler, intended not to applaud terrorism but to bring home its devastating effect.

"She secretly crossed into Israel, charged into a Haifa restaurant, shot a security guard, blew herself up and murdered 19 innocent civilians... And many people are indeed crying: the Zer Aviv family, the Almog family, and all the relatives and friends of the dead and the wounded," goes part of the text's conclusion.

"Murdered... innocent civilians... crying... the Zer Aviv family, the Almog family..." If the Feilers are anti-Semites, they're the most incompetent anti-Semites who ever lived.

For good measure, Dror Feiler said in an IDF Radio interview that what Jaradat had done was "the worst, most horrific thing." He also said that by embracing terrorism, the Palestinians "were removing themselves from the family of civilized nations." I don't know what more the Feilers or Swedish officials have to say or do to convince people. But again, of course, I'm not saying this is a "pro-Israel" artwork. Snow White isn't out to dramatize only the effect of Palestinian terrorism but also of Israel's military occupation.

It shows that before Jaradat became Israel's victimizer, she was Israel's victim. "For the June 12 deaths of her brother and her cousin... Seemingly innocent with universal non-violent character... She was hospitalized, prostrate with grief, after witnessing the shootings... After his death, she became the breadwinner and she devoted herself solely to that goal," read parts of the text.

In his radio interview Feiler said, "Blood was spilled before, and then she went and spilled more blood." The installation is saying that there is a causal connection between Israeli killings of Palestinians and Palestinian killings of Israelis.

I don't know whether or not the Feilers think it's a one-to-one connection – that Palestinians engage in terrorism only because of Israeli military repression. I myself think there are also other reasons, including a Palestinian societal bent towards violence and radicalism, and Islamic fundamentalist mania.

But I also think that suffering and death at the hands of Israelis is definitely one of the causes. When Janadi saw her brother and cousin get killed by IDF soldiers, I'm sorry, that was without doubt one of the reasons she blew up Maxim's.

You may disagree with this view, but is it a glorification of terrorism? Is it anti-Semitic? I'm afraid it's no more than common sense, as bleak as it is. Innocent victims become victimizers of innocents – this is the logic of tragedy. Or maybe "the madness of truth."

While finding the installation in "bad taste," Robert Rydberg, the Swedish ambassador to Israel, said, "The piece is about a Palestinian woman having murdered innocent civilians. It mentions the names of the tragic Israeli victims in Haifa. It is not a justification of suicide bombings."

Rydberg went on TV to voice his understanding of the sensitivities of Israelis. He lit a yahrzeit candle with a relative of a terror victim at the demonstration outside the Swedish Embassy. Is he an anti-Semite? Is Sweden, the home of Raoul Wallenberg, a country that symbolizes fairness and decency, a sponsor of incitement to terrorism? Come on. Open your eyes.

I have followed this affair with great interest! But now I can´t resist posting my views.

Is the cry noticed here about boycotting Swedish produce a fair verdict? Is Sweden a anti-semitic country? Anti-israel? Is Mazel guilty of being an anti-swedit?

I am not sure, but Swedish media (left and right) has moved their positions forward as more information about the event unfolds.

For example, according to Haaretz and JP the Ambassador planned his actions beforehand. Is it then an political action against the piece or a political action meant to discredit Sweden internationally in general?

One of Swedens more influencial jewish journalists Anita Goldman recently wrote "... Hanadis evil deed was prepared technically, economically and ideologically. A political culture with powerful ties to a fundamentalistic theology was ready to sink its claws into and exploit Hanadis understandable and righteous grief. Hanadis deed is an expression of a political culture. That is also true about the acts of the israeli ambassador. He is the emissary of a economically, ethically and a morally bancrupt government."

From what was a collective bow of the head before the accusations of being one of the ugliest things you could call someone in Sweden - an anti-semit, by media and politicians from all camps, the sentiments are now, wait a minute, this does not add up (for example the claim about the jewish artist turned down by syrian protests have showed to be completely bogus).

As I have written before, the Europe and especially Sweden has an unique obligation to be extremly vigilant against the rise of anti-semitism due to our history and maybe we could do better or more. Are the true anti-semits in Sweden - yes there are, are the Sweden clamping down on them - my answer is yes at least the visible ones. Most dangerous if you ask me is the kitchen table racism/anti-semitism, the kind you don´t see, thats what is most important to combat through information and education.

But the bottom line is, if an israeli ambassador calls an israeli born artists piece an invitation to kill jews, Sweden in general an anti-semit country (and thereby Swedes in general) then what shall we call those elements from now on who openly hates jews, use anti-semitic sterotypes, open or overt invits violence against jews?

Mazel cries the wolf is coming - and the world is listening. But is the wolf really coming or is he exploiting the powerful word anti-semit for political purposeses?

As a Swede, I can never fully comprahend the suffering of the jewish people, I am aware of that, but does that mean I cant have an opinion? critize a sitting government?

Is the current government of Israel crying the wolf is coming so loud and often that when it does no one will listen? Will the word continoue to have as strong meaning as it has in Sweden today? Or will the systematic reinforcement and exploitation of the word by populists harm the word?

And yes the "piece of art" is disgusting - I have seen it in person.

Would appreciate comments...

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.