Recent email from Sidsel Wold to Dr.Manfred Gerstenfeld: “As I have written before: I have answered, I am finished with this story, I have nothing to add. And I don’t know why you waste your time by mailing me. SW“
To those of you who are not familiar with the story in question, below is the email sent by Dr.Manfred Gerstenfeld, editor of the book, “Behind the Humanitarian Mask, the Nordic Countries, Israel and the Jews”, that was obtained by the Tundra Tabloids in response to the outrageously terrible three minute interview (Honest Reporting labeled it “a haranguing“) in which Dr.Gerstenfeld was allowed only 20 seconds to speak before being cut off by Wold.
NOTE: The article originally published by Sidsel Wold is available in both English and in the original Norwegian, here. The “final” statement by Wold shows the utter contempt the Norwegian media in general, has for the people they are supposedly performing a valued service. We have the same problem here in Finland as well.
8 April 2010
You informed me that you lost the text of my interview with you and that you have broadcast another text which you call an “interview” with me, a copy of which you have sent me.
I gave the text of this so-called “interview” with me to a Norwegian acquaintance of mine to transcribe and translate, (for full text, see below).
What emerges is that this so-called “interview” is, in fact, a mix of the following three elements:
a) some quotes of mine, where I speak for a very short period;
b) several statements which you attribute to me, a substantial number of which I never made and are your inventions;
c) your own remarks which, to different extents, it is unclear to the listener whether they are yours or mine.
The Ethics Code of the Society of Professional Journalists states that journalists should “Test the accuracy of information from all sources and exercise care to avoid inadvertent error. Deliberate distortion is never permissible.” Your text flagrantly breaks these rules.
Examples of false quotes attributed by you to me:
I did not say that all Norwegian bishops are out to get Israel with the exception of one. I could not say that as I have read about the position of four bishops in total, three of who are against Israel.
I did not specifically name any Israeli NGOs which spread hatred of Israel. This subject is the specialized domain of NGO Monitor and I did not enter into details on this subject. As far as I know NGO Monitor does not claim that all the organizations you mention are spreading hate of Israel. The insertion of the names, in what are supposedly quotes of mine read out by you in the interview, are falsifications. You inserted the names of the organizations on your own initiative
I did not say that most of the journalists and academia are out to get Israel. Indeed, many journalists who deal with Israel are anti-Israeli and in the academia there are key figures and others who are extreme anti-Israelis.
I did not say that the aim of these anti-Israelis is to hit the Jews. Their aim is to hit Israel.
I did not say that Norway is credible. What I said is that Norway has “the image of being credible”, which is something radically different.
You say in the broadcast text:
“He believes that those who criticize Israel today are anti-Semites and that Norwegian elites are the worst of them all. Yes, Norway is the spearhead of the world when it comes to disseminating of Jew-hatred, illegitimate anti-Israeli criticism, he believes.”
This is a radically false construction made by you which has nothing to do with what I believe. You have manipulated a variety of texts, which you attribute to me, and on the basis these manipulations you falsely construct my “beliefs.”
When you lost the tape you had a number of honest options:
1) not to broadcast the interview;
2) try to contact me in Norway which was not all that difficult. You could have called my secretary or my home for my contact details;
3) accurately quote texts from my book Behind the Humanitarian Mask, Israel and the Jews, The Nordic Countries, Israel and the Jews, a copy of which I gave you.
You chose a fourth option: to produce a constructed text which contained a large number of fallacies, air them during a short broadcast, and attribute them to me. I now wish be given equal air time, in which only my words will be broadcast, in answer to questions without any independent comments by you.
If I do not receive a satisfactory answer from you before 11 April 2010, I will feel free to take any steps I deem necessary.
As this correspondence concerns an item which was broadcast and was aired in the public domain, I do not consider the contents confidential.