It may be difficult to imagine a 900-year-old hoax cropping up into contemporary antisemitic discourse, but to this day, the blood libel remains a powerful weapon in the arsenal of the antisemite.

Monstrous calumnies descended straight from the blood libel have become regular fodder for the Arab press, often associated with reports of fictitious Israeli “massacres” that are intended to demonize Israel, dehumanize her people and delegitimize her supporters. Among these fictions are claims that Israel has infected Arab communities with HIV and corrupted Palestinian women with aphrodisiac candy. Sometimes, as though to underline their antisemitic provenance, these claims are extended to accuse “Jewish doctors” of a conspiracy that extends to infection and corruption throughout the whole world.

It was something else, however, to see the latest variant of the blood libel published earlier this month in Sweden’s Aftonbladet, the largest circulation daily newspaper in Scandinavia.

Sprawled across two pages and accompanied by hideous photographs, the story, entitled “They plunder the organs of our sons,” published allegations that the Israel Defense Forces routinely harvest the organs of Palestinians who die in their custody. The author, who based the story entirely on alleged Palestinian “testimony,” now says he takes no position as to the veracity of the charge. Had he done some reasonable research, he would have discovered that, in fact, the opposite is true: Israeli organs are being transplanted into Palestinian patients.

Despite the absence of any independent evidence to substantiate these lurid allegations from clearly biased sources, the paper, which is owned by the Swedish Trade Union Confederation, published the article without any research and with no effort at any sort of due diligence. This was not even a matter of facts being contorted to fit a hypothesis; there are no facts here, simply baseless mendacity.

In the face of the unsurprising outrage by Israeli officials, Sweden’s Ambassador to Israel rightfully expressed her disgust with the article. The Swedish government, on the other hand, has preposterously used the “freedom of expression” argument to defend Aftonbladet’s action and implicitly to castigate the ambassador for her critical stance.

This situation may be about a lot of things, but it is assuredly not a test case for freedom of the press. Since when do governments or politicians refrain from commenting on or criticizing what is published in the media? Surely if politicians can gripe about media coverage, say, of taxation policy or environmental initiatives they can express a view against vitriolic hatred published in the media. Can it really be the Swedish government’s official policy that horrifying racism cannot be the subject of official comment when it is published in a newspaper?

Let’s be very clear yet again: not all criticism of Israel is antisemitic, nor should all criticism automatically be so labeled. The mainstream Jewish community does not use that epithet casually. But, unfortunately, there are times when criticism of Israel crosses the line, and must be called what it is. Taking reasoned exception with particular policies or practices of the State of Israel is entirely fair. Israelis and Canadian Zionists do it all the time. But the forceful reaction by the mainstream Jewish community to the Aftonbladet story is by no means an example of “criticism chill.” When the antisemitic shoe fits, it must be worn.

The line at which criticism of Israel becomes antisemitism, despite its polite disguise as anti-Zionism, is clear. It is crossed by those who demonize Israel, of all countries, as the new “Nazi state” or as the putative racist successor to apartheid South Africa. It is also crossed by those who attempt to demonize and delegitimize Israel and deny the legitimacy of its fundamental nature as the modern and democratic expression of Jewish self-determination. Those who single out Israel for unique and discriminatory treatment among the community of nations, while turning a blind eye to humanitarian outrages that shriek out for attention, also cross the line.

Today, the enemies of Israel treat it as the new “Jew among Nations.” Their attack is against the Jewish state as a collective, rather than against individual Jews. But the purpose is the same — to attack Jews for the crime of being Jewish.

The problem with blood libels is not merely the hate in their words but the poisonous and all-too-often lethal violence they encourage in their wake. These lies must be seen as equally repulsive when cast against “Jews” in the abstract or against the one state in the world that represents Jewish nationalism within a vibrantly multicultural and inclusive society. Aftonbladet’s offensive and unsubstantiated story alleging Israeli organ trafficking is the latest shameful addition to an infamous trail of lies, innuendo and fabrications that have historically set the stage for the violent and deadly persecution of the Jewish people.

There is still time for the Swedish government to do the right thing and condemn this article and the newspaper that shamefully published it. No interpretation of the scope of press freedom should be wide enough to immunize this hateful screed and the threat it represents from denunciation. So far, however, the Swedish government’s silence has been deafening.

Bernie M Farber is the Chief Executive Officer of Canadian Jewish Congress