Norwegian Foreign Minister attacks Barry Rubin
Norwegian Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Store has attacked Professor Barry Rubin for allegedly labeling as 'pro-terrorist' the Utoya youth camp, at which 76 young people were murdered by a normal Norwegian boy. I'll come to Barry's response in a minute, but first let's look at what Store said (via Daily Kos, which takes the opportunity to pile on and bash Barry).For a somewhat more nuanced explanation, here's Norway's Minister of Foreign Affaris Jonas Gahr Støre (Labour). (The article is in Norwegian, here's a Google translation.)You all know better than that. The Labour Party and the AUF do not support terrorism in any way... unless it's 'Palestinian' terrorism directed at Israeli Jews.
Rubin's claims are outrageous, and I'm not going to comment on them in any length. I will just say that the Labour Party and the AUF do not support terrorism in any way. They are not extremists.
Svein Sevje said in an Israeli newspaper interview Tuesday that while the Norwergian bomb and gun rampages that killed 76 people and Palestinian attacks should both be considered morally unacceptable, he wanted to "outline the similarity and the difference in the two cases."If that's not supporting terrorism, I don't know what is.
Palestinians, the ambassador told Maariv, "are doing this because of a defined goal that is related to the Israeli occupation. There are elements of revenge against Israel and hatred of Israel. To this you can add the religious element to their actions."
"In the case of the terror attack in Norway, the murderer had an ideology that says that Norway, particularly the Labor Party, is forgoing Norwegian culture," Sevje said, referring to suspect Anders Breivik, a Christian nativist who is opently anti-Islam and anti-immigration.
And Barry's response?
1. Am I justifying the murders and saying they were well-deserved? Of course not.Read the whole thing.
I don't in any way believe such a thing. These were as I've said from the beginning terrible acts of terrorism. In the article you will see my explicit argument that nobody should be a victim of terrorism even if they support politically a group committing terrorism. Since my argument is that NO terrorism--defined as the deliberate murder of civilians as part of a conscious political strategy--is acceptable, why would I justify the cold-blooded murder of dozens of unarmed, non-violent people in Norway?
To justify it I would have to be saying that I supported the murder of young people because I disagree with their political views or those of their elders. That would be insane though, of course, that is precisely what actual terrorists do. And many "respectable" people wrote in various ways that the September 11 attacks on America were "well-deserved." That was precisely the kind of thing I had in mind as something dangerous and to be condemned when writing the article.
2. In short, since the entire purpose of the article is to urge a universal condemnation of terrorism and to ensure that it doesn't bear political profit, I had no intention of endorsing terrorism in this case! The point of the article can be simply stated as follows: It is a dangerous thing to empower or reward terrorism anywhere because that makes terrorism seem a successful strategy and thus encourages more terrorism. If you argue politically that terrorists are justified in the Middle East or, to put it a different way, that they aren't terrorists at all, you are making terrorism more likely to happen. It is tragic--not justifiable or deserved but horrible--that such people or such a country then becomes the target of terrorism.
...
4. If Hamas uses a strategy of terrorism and then gains Western sympathy and help, then Hamas and other groups will conclude that terrorism works. Thus, more terrorism will take place and more innocent victims murdered. It is not true to say that I claimed any group in Norway applauded terrorism against Israelis. They either did not define it as terrorism, did not take it into account as a factor to be considered, or supported groups despite the fact that they used massive terrorism. Indeed, Norway's ambassador himself said that people in his country viewed terrorism as only a response to occupation while the main newspaper attacking me repeatedly denied--and denies--that Hamas is a terrorist group.
5. I never said and don't believe that the camp in Norway was a terrorist training camp. A terrorist training camp is a place where people are trained to use guns, explosives, and various methods to stage military attacks and then escape afterward. What went on in the camp in Norway was purely conversational, theoretical, and political. That's obvious.
...
9. My goal is to reduce the frequency and effectiveness of terrorism and to reduce the number of victims. This article was written in that spirit--to save lives in future. It is based on 35 years of work on this issue and following it on a daily basis. When those who attack me--overwhelmingly one faction within Norway--insist that Hamas is not a terrorist group and thus distinguish between "justified" terrorism and "non-justified" terrorism they are doing what I'm being accused of doing. By the way, that is precisely the same way that Norway's ambassador to Israel characterized the view of people in that country (as I quote in my article).
Labels: Anders Behring Brievik, Barry Rubin, Jonas Gahr Store, Oslo bombing, Oslo syndrome, Utoya massacre
posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 12:44 PM
6 Comments:
It feels like we are all on different planets in discussing the . Prof. Rubin doesn't seem to have even noticed this stunner in Mr. Store, in empathizing and sympathizing with Palestinian attacks on Israelis, presumably including the rocket that landed on a Druze woman inside Israel last week):
"To this you can add the religious element to their actions."
The Palestinians are Muslim. Haven't these Marxist Caliphate people (like Mr. Store) been pounding into our heads that the terrorism happening all over the world have nothing to do with religion? What on earth is this Norwegian Foreign Minister asserting here? That terror attacks on Israelis are supportable because of Islam???? This single assertion from this Foreign Minister seems like front page news to me!
Professor Rubin has mixed denial of the charges against him with better arguments condemning those who have condemned him. Too bad! It removes some of the power of his anti-Norwegian arguments.
1) Norway supports terrorism in the form of antisemitic rhetoric
2) Norway has no forums in which pro-Israel arguments can be presented - not in the press, not in the government, not in its educational system, not in social settings. This circumstance counts as prejudice.
3) Norway's opposition to Israel is based upon the weakness of the Jews and the strength of the Muslims among their population. It is so typical of a self-serving, unconsidered, amoral view that its contents and emotions can be ignored by people interested in the facts of the matter.
4) Norwegians know so little of Israel that they have been able to dehumanize Israelis without any consequence to them personally or politically. This ignorance serves their purposes. It is precisely like the Germans in the towns surrounding the concentration camps who damn well knew, but needed to be dragged to the camps by Eisenhower for reality to finally break through their self-serving denial.
5) Based upon the last point, I would characterize the majority of Norwegians as self-centered and thick-skinned, and thus being unable to consider the prejudicial nature of their so easily acquired anti-Israel attitudes.
6) By denying Israel's claims to Judea and Samaria - and in some cases to Israel within the green line - they place themselves among the enemies of the Jews. With or without serious consequences to them, at least history will judge them so!
The Norwegian minister is an antisemite, and sends shudders down my spine.
It is so disgusting that he justifies terrorism against Israel because of Israel's "incitement," so to speak. Using his revolting excuse for "logic," terrorism against Norway is justified, because of Norway's insane form of antisemitism and terror support.
Of course, terrorism against civilians is NEVER justified, but this is the poor excuse for "logic" expounded upon by the revolting ambassador.
Hmm. "Svein Sevje said"... I thought the post was still quoting the Minister of Foreign Affairs Store. But now I see it is quoting the new AMBASSADOR from Norway to Israel.
"To this you can add the religious element to their actions."
Well, he would know, because he was ambassador recently to Sudan and was in Syria and Lebanon... all these places without Jews, where they do these same terrorist attacks on people they don't like, and feel justified in doing it.
So, Israel can ask this new ambassador (and his boss) on what points is this reference to the "religious element of their actions" any different from what Geert Wilders or Robert Spencer assert? Why is it ok for the Norwegians to say things like this, but other people who say it are put in a blender by the lying media propagandists and the enlightened court system? For that matter, could these Norwegian meddling ambassadors and secretaries please assemble backup references for these statements that they are making...
Norway's definition of religious extremism:
People that want to live somewhere because of their religious beliefs: Religious extremists.
People that want to murder Jews because of their religious beliefs: Oppressed freedom fighters.
Utterly disgusting.
Good stuff Carl and nice coherent write up on the entire situation.
Post a Comment
<< Home