Jag tror, som sagt, inte att Newsmillredaktörerna själva hyser den typ av åsikter som en stor del av de publicerade kommentarerna ger uttryck för. Det är också korrekt, som de påpekar, att kommentarerna är hårt modererade – hur förskräckliga de än är, har mycket av det värsta lyfta bort. Newsmill representarar utan tvekan en opinion, som kanske inte är manstark men som genom internet blivit röststark.

Det är också där problemet ligger. Newsmillredaktörerna vet naturligtvis att om de verkligt kraftfullt skulle ingripa mot de rasistiska skribenterna skulle de att börja med få personliga problem, i form av hot och trakasserier. Men de förstår också att den rasistiska opinionen utgör en stor del av deras publik – den publik de behöver för att kunna sälja debattutrymme för dyra pengar. Där ligger det verkliga probemet, inte  i redaktionellt slarv, som Lagercrantz påstår.

Ett annat problem är naturligtvis att det inte längre är självklart på den liberala sidan att hålla rent från sådant här (vilket är ett rimligt krav, vare sig det ställs på den politiska högern eller vänstern). I en klok kommentar publicerad på Expressens kultursida påpekar Lawen Mohtadi att migrationsminister Tobias Billströms attityd mot Romer av allt att döma är djupt känd, helt enkelt en respekterad form av rasism, åtminstone inom den politiska högern. Även om jag utgår från att det är kommersiella och inte rasistiska motiv som ligger bakom Newsmills “millnings”-övergrepp, är det förstås allvarligt att det inte sitter i ryggraden att avstå från sådant, även när det gäller Romer och bosniska muslimer. Desssväårre lär Billströms äckel vara mer spritt inom det liberala lägret än vad någon ännu vill erkänna (det representerar trots allt regeringens officviella hållning).

Dessvärre skymmer allt detta den lysande utredning som förre folkpartiledaren Maria Leissner överlämnade i förra veckan. Men läs den, även som en påminnelse att om att det fortfarande finns antirasistiskt engagerade liberaler. Maria Leissner har tidigare nämnts som en av personerna bakom folkpartiets invandrarfientliga utspel 2002, men hon har revanscherat sig.

Uppdatering: För egen del har jag skrivit en gång på Facebook, en replik, som jag mer eller mindre var tvungen att skriva. Givetvis utan någon som helst ersättning – vilket är illa nog, det finns självfallet ingen anledning att skriva gratis åt Bonniers och riskkapital. Hursomhelst, nu blir det inte fler gånger. Känner du likadant, och har ett Facebookkonto, klicka här.

Jag begriper inte hur detta går ihop med det trams som migrationsminister Tobias Billström vräker ur sig på Newsmill, till diverse sverigedemokraters stora glädje (han skriver att det romerna kastas ut ur Sverige för sitt eget bästa). Men det är regeringens huvudvärk, och inom kort, väljarnas.

Utredningens ordförande, förre folkpartiledaren Maria Leissner, och dess vice ordförande, förre länspolismästaren Gunno Gunmo, ska tillsammans med de romska experna Soraya Post, Domino Kai och många fler ha all ära att ha åstadkommit en text som kommer att förändra vår syn både på romerna och på den svenska staten och det svenska samhället. Det var på tiden och äras den som äras ska – jag hade uppriktigt sagt inte väntat riktigt det här. Eftersom jag haft glädjen att dra ett strå till stacken vet jag också att professor emeritus Charles Westin låtit sin djupa humanism och sitt starka civilkurage vara ett stöd för utredarna.

Det finns alltså all anledning att studera den finska domen. Den är på 150 sidor och på finska. I höst kommer en översättning, men tills dess kan man studera det här pressmeddelandet på engelska (som jag hämtat från W A Schabas blogg):

DISTRICT COURT OF ITÄ-UUSIMAA
Division 1
PRESS RELEASE
11 June 2010
Judgement in a criminal case of genocide
Prosecutor > Francois BAZARAMBA (R 09/404)
1. ABOUT THE TRIAL AND HOW TO OBTAIN THE JUDGEMENT
Porvoo District Court detained Francois Bazaramba on 6 April 2007 on the re-
quest of the National Bureau of Investigation. The prosecutor has brought
charges for genocide on 29 May 2009, and the main hearing at the Porvoo Dis-
trict Court began on 1 September 2009. The last court session was held on 26
April 2010.
During the trial, the District Court has heard 68 witnesses, of whom only one
has lived in Finland. Two witnesses arrived in Porvoo from the United States of
America, one from Canada, three from Belgium, one from Switzerland, one from
Kenya, one from Germany, one from Holland, and four from Zambia. In addition,
the District Court has been to Kigali, Rwanda to hear 38 witnesses and to Dar
es Salaam, Tanzania to hear 15 witnesses. A site visit was also conducted in
the community of Nyakizu, Rwanda.
The entire judgement (115 pages) can be ordered from the Court either as a
PDF file (free) or in print (copy fee) by e-mail
(petra.spring-reiman@oikeus.fi). French and English translations of the judge-
ment will be given out later.
2. INDICTMENT AND DEFENCE
The indictment relates to the Rwandan genocide that took place between April
and July 1994. In the genocide, some of the Rwandans belonging to the ethnic
Hutu group killed 800,000 Rwandan people belonging to the ethnic Tutsi group
and some moderate Hutus.
The primary charges concern acts of genocide committed in Rwanda, prefec-
ture of Butare, community of Nyakizu between 1 January 1993 and 31 May
1994. According to the charges, Bazaramba has, with intent to destroy in whole
or in part the Rwandan Tutsis as a group, killed Tutsis and ordered them to be
killed as well as made their living conditions worse. The specifics of the charges
concern inflicting on Tutsis conditions of life calculated to bring about their phys-
ical destruction, provision of training on killing and violent acts, as well as ac-
quisition of weapons, killing of Tutsis and giving of orders to kill Tutsis and lead-
ing attacks to the Cyahinda Church and its surroundings and to Mount Nyakizu.
Bazaramba has denied his complicity in any of the acts referred to in the indict-
ment. According to his own account, he has not even had such an ascendancy
or authority in the local community that he could have ordered or incited anyone
to commit violent acts. As Bazaramba had been adopted by a Tutsi family, he
had been forced to hide himself at his friends’ place in Kibangu at the time of the
killings. Bazaramba had also helped many Tutsis during the genocide, inter alia
by hiding them at his home.
According to Bazaramba, the prosecution witnesses have been pressured and
tortured in Rwanda to give false statements on Bazaramba’s complicity in the
genocide. Behind this lie the political interests of the Tutsi administration which
ascended to power after the genocide. Tutsi administration wants to get the
educated and wealthy Hutus living both in Rwanda and abroad convicted so
that the Tutsi minority could still remain in power in Rwanda.
3. JURISDICTION OF THE DISTRICT COURT AND THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL
COURTS
The Porvoo District Court (now District Court of Itä-Uusimaa, hereafter: the
Court) has been obliged to deal with the charges brought against Bazaramba
since Finland dismissed the request to extradite Bazaramba to Rwanda for a tri-
al. The charges have been brought and the matter has been investigated in the
Court by virtue of universal jurisdiction provided in the Criminal Code of Finland.
Criminalisation of genocide in Finland is based on the Convention on the Pre-
vention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, adopted by the UN in 1948,
which Finland has acceded to in 1959. The provision on genocide was laid
down in the Criminal Code of Finland in 1974, and this is the first time that the
said provision has been applied.
It would not have been possible to deal with the charges against Bazaramba in
the international criminal courts. The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda
(ICTR), established by the UN Security Council, has dealt with the most serious
crimes committed during the Rwandan genocide for more than 10 years.
However, ICTR has no longer admitted any new cases due to its backlog of
cases. Neither the International Criminal Court (ICC), established in The Hague
in 2002, could have dealt with Bazaramba’s case, because the ICC cannot, by
virtue of its statute, deal with any events that have taken place before the stat-
ute entered into force on 1 July 2002.
4. ACCUSATIONS OF TORTURE OF WITNESSES AND OTHER CHALLENGES IN THE
EVALUATION OF EVIDENCE
During the trial, Bazaramba’s defence has demanded that the Court remove
testimonies of 19 prosecution witnesses from the evidence material. The de-
mand is based on an accusation that the persons in question have been tor-
tured in Rwanda.
The Court considers that in respect of two witnesses, such facts have come up
which lead to establishing that these witnesses’ testimonies have been obtained
as a result of torture or another comparable procedure with the aim of receiving
information as referred to in Article 15 of the UN Convention against Torture. In-
voking the testimonies of these witnesses as evidence in any proceedings
would be against the prerequisites for a fair trial, which is why they have not
been taken into consideration. In respect of other witnesses, instead, no such
facts have come up that would require that their testimonies could not be in-
voked as evidence.
The reliability of testimonies must always be evaluated in a normal Finnish crim-
inal procedure and the trial concerning genocide has not made an exception in
this respect. The linguistic and cultural differences and the political nature of the
events under investigation have, however, made the evaluation exceptionally
challenging in this trial. When evaluating the reliability of the testimonies, espe-
cially the significance of relay interpretation, the special characteristics of the
African culture, the subordinate position of the witnesses in prison as well as the
influence of conceptions formed in the gacaca proceedings and the influence of
general political factors must have been taken into account.
4. DECISION OF THE COURT
Bazaramba’s social position and alibi
Based on Bazaramba’s own testimony and testimonies of several witnesses, it
has been considered to be established in the case that Bazaramba has, due to
his wealth and high education, had a relatively high social position in the local
community. Although this kind of position has not created such a position for
Bazaramba where his orders would have been obeyed without qualification, it
has nevertheless been considerably easier for him than for others to bring out
his ideas and to make others to act according to them.
The position of Bazaramba as a Hutu who had been adopted by a Tutsi family
has been controversial and potentially very dangerous. On one hand, it can be
regarded as plausible that Bazaramba had been forced to hide himself after the
violence started. On the other hand, however, it can also be plausible that Baz-
aramba had felt, due to his background, a need to draw a clear distinction
between himself and the Tutsi people by taking part in the persecution. The
testimonies by both prosecution and defence witnesses about Bazaramba’s
whereabouts and movements during the period of the most intense violence
between 15 and 21 April 1994 have provided evidence against the alibi provided
by Bazaramba. Based on the testimonies, the Court has come to a conclusion
that merely on the grounds of the alibi provided by Bazaramba, it has not been
possible to exclude the possibility that Bazaramba has been involved in the acts
according to the indictment.
Bazaramba’s complicity in the acts of genocide
Inflicting on Tutsis that lived in the Maraba sector and its surroundings conditions of life
calculated to bring about the physical destruction of the group
The District Court considers that Bazaramba has, with intent to destroy in whole
or in part the Rwandan Tutsis as a group, inflicted on Tutsis that lived in the
Maraba sector and its surroundings conditions of life calculated to bring about
the physical destruction of the group through the following acts:
- Bazaramba has, by giving a speech of incitement against Tutsis in Birambo
market place on 15 April 1994, spread anti-Tutsi propaganda and incited Hutus
to killings through fomenting anger and contempt towards Tutsis. (Here, the
Court did not find Bazaramba guilty in all of the points of the original charge.);
- Bazaramba has organised road blocks and night patrols set up in order to
control Tutsis as well as led these activities;
- Bazaramba has forced Tutsis to leave their homes;
- Bazaramba has been responsible for acquiring and distributing equipment,
such as matches, needed for setting residential and other buildings owned by
Tutsis on fire and incited and ordered Hutus to burn these buildings;
- Bazaramba has distributed the movable and immovable property that had
been left behind by Tutsis or that Tutsis had violently been robbed of.
Training on killing and violent acts and acquisition of weapons
The Court found Bazaramba not guilty on these charges.
Killings in the Maraba sector and its surroundings
Five unidentified Tutsi men
The Court found Bazaramba not guilty on these charges.
Emmanuel Habonimana, Dina, Agnes Mukamutesi and an unidentified Tutsi woman
In the middle of April 1994, Bazaramba has ordered and incited Hutus to kill
Emmanuel Habonimana, his Tutsi wife Dina and a Tutsi woman named Agnes
Mukamutesi as well as an unidentified Tutsi woman in their company. As a con-
sequence of the order and the incitement, the victims have been killed with dif-
ferent kinds of weapons, such as maces and swords. The orders have been giv-
en in a situation where there has been an intent to destroy in whole or in part
the Rwandan Tutsis as a group.
Bellansilla Mugagashugi
The Court found Bazaramba not guilty on this charge.
Approx. 12-year old Tutsi boy named Mujemana
The Court found Bazaramba not guilty on this charge.
A Tutsi woman named Agnes and her infant
The Court found Bazaramba not guilty on this charge.
A Tutsi man named Anderea
The Court found Bazaramba not guilty on this charge.
A Tutsi woman named Beatrice
Bazaramba has, after the middle of April 1994, with intent to destroy in whole
or in part the Rwandan Tutsis as a group, ordered Hutus to search for the hid-
ing Tutsis and to kill them. As a result of the order given by Bazaramba, a Tutsi
woman named Beatrice, who was the wife of a man called Gedeon, was killed
with a mace.
Cyahinda Church and its surroundings
Bazaramba has, with intent to destroy in whole or in part the Rwandan Tutsis
as a group, participated in some of the attacks against Tutsis conducted
between 15 and 18 April 1994 to a church and its surroundings located in the
Cyahinda sector. (Here, the Court did not find Bazaramba guilty in all of the
points of the original charge.)
Mount Nyakizu and its surroundings
Bazaramba has, with intent to destroy in whole or in part the Rwandan Tutsis
as a group, led some of the attacks conducted between 15 and 18 April 1994 to
Mount Nyakizu and its surroundings and given orders and instructions that
have led to the killings of Tutsis. (Here, the Court did not find Bazaramba guilty
in all of the points of the original charge.)
—
By acting in the manner described above, Bazaramba has been found guilty of
committing genocide.
(Finnish Criminal Code, Chapter 13, section 4, subsection 1, Act 987/1974)
5. PUNISHMENT
The punishment for genocide is imprisonment for at least four years, or for life.
The reason for such a large penal scale is that genocide can be committed not
only by killing members of a group, as in extreme cases, but also by pettier
forms of offence, for example by inflicting on the group conditions of life calcu-
lated to bring about its physical destruction through destroying homes of the
group or through hindering their nourishment supply.
The Court has found Bazaramba guilty of an offence which without a genocidal
intent would be judged as a murder or incitement to murder. For those crimes,
the only possible punishment is life imprisonment. Because of this, the Court
considers that the sentence of life imprisonment is in fair proportion to the dan-
gerous and damaging nature of the offence that Bazaramba has been found
guilty of.
Bazaramba is sentenced to life imprisonment.
6. DECISION ON FEES AND EXPENSES OF THE DEFENCE
The Court has given a separate decision concerning the claims for fees and ex-
penses of the defence. The decision has been given the same day as the judge-
ment.
7. NATURE OF THIS PRESS RELEASE
This is an unofficial press release and only the main points of the judgement
have been covered here. More detailed reasoning can be found in the official
judgement.

Bortsett från detta och några ytterligare tveksamma formuleringar är Zanders huvudkritik att min bok är för tjock vilket han menar beror på att jag valt att vara för fullständig. Det är en skarp kritik och jag hade gärna sett den exemplifierad, särskilt som han verkar mena att det är en metodfråga (jag ser det nog snarare som en redigeringsfråga).

Resultatet är hur som helst, när jag halkar in på artikeln, att 55 procent är glada, 2 procent nyfikna, 30 procent arga och 11 procent uttråkade. Ska vi tolka det som att en majoritet av Newsmills läsare helt enkelt är FÖR folkmord?

Att Newsmill har blivit en samlingsplats för allsköns skumrask som tidigare refuserades av insändarredaktörerna må vara hänt. Redaktörerna var säkert en gång i tiden uppriktiga med att det skulle vara ett demokrati- och yttrandefrihetsprojekt.

Men med den typen av idiotiska frågor uppmuntrar man folkmordshögern, åtminstone i min bok.

Civil Rights Defenders presenterar på sin hemsida ett projekt för att kartlägga massakerns omfattning.