Anders Behring Breivik Joins Bush’s Christian Crusade vs Islam

by karenfish | July 24, 2011 at 08:57 am
1210 views | 6 Recommendations | 30 comments

Photos

Anders Behring Breivik Joins Bush’s Christian Crusade vs Islam

Anders Behring Breivik Joins Bush’s Christian Crusade vs Islam

see larger image

uploaded by karenfish

by Karen Fish 

Anders Behring Breivik acted alone. Maybe there was another shooter. It may have been Anders Behring Breivik and one other man. It was an isolated incident: not. In fact it was a continuation of a 2,000 year old war between Judaism, Christianity, Islam and every other religion.

 

On September 16, 2011, five days after 9/11 US President George W Bush stood on the White House lawn beside his wife Laura Bush, and President George W Bush said, “We’re facing a new kind of enemy, somebody so barbaric that they would fly airplanes into buildings full of innocent people, and therefore we have to be on alert in America… We are a nation under attack. We need to be alert to the fact that these evildoers still exist. We haven’t seen this kind of barbarism in a long period of time.”

 

10 years ago US President George W Bush continued: “No one (except for a student or Professor of Religious Interfaith Studies) could have conceivably imagined suicide bombers barrelling into our society and then emerging all on the same day to fly US aircraft into buildings full of innocent people and show no remorse. And this is a new kind of evil; (if you don’t count the evil all over the Bibles of Judaism, Christianity and Islam). We understand and the American people are beginning to understand, this (Christian) CRUSADE, this war on terrorism (Islam) is gonna take awhile.”

 

President Bush began the Christian Crusade on Islam by attacking Muslim Afghanistan. Then President Bush continued the Christian Crusade on Islam by attacking Muslim Iraq. US President Barack Obama has continued these two wars and now he has attacked the Muslim country of Libya.

 

Anders Behring Breivik did not leave much to the imagination regarding the motives for his Oslo shooting rampage in his youtube video “Knights Templar 2083 – Anders Behring Breivik”  Anders Behring Breivik, baptized a Protestant called for a Protestant return to the Catholic Church headed by the Pope. The Crusades were 1,000 years ago when the Pope sent his Christian soldiers across Europe massacring every Jew in their way until they stood knee deep in Muslim blood in Jerusalem, wresting back control of the Holy Land from the Muslims to the Christians.

 

The Poor Fellow Soldiers of Christ and of the Temple of Solomon aka the Knights Templar on horseback with large red crosses on their armor and shields were the Pope’s elite soldiers of the Crusades. Anders Behring Breivik joined the New Knights Templar organization which formed in London in 2002. Anders Behring Breivik’s youtube video and shooting rampage are a recruitment tool for the new Knights Templar to beat back Islam from conquering Western Europe by violent and demographic Jihad, mass immigration of Muslims into Western Europe and having numerous children.

 

At Interfaith Harmony and Peace the Only Solution  it says “As long as the Holy Scriptures of religions contain countless commandments to kill all of the people outside of your religion in return for eternal paradise there can never be interfaith harmony.” The Western World is now well familiar with Islam’s promise to Muslim martyrs of eternal paradise and 72 virgins. On his youtube video Anders Behring Breivik says, “Knights Templar is truly a fearless Knight. His soul is protected by the armor of (his Christian) faith. He does not fear death, he desires it. Because through the deed of martyrdom he is fully able to serve his kin on Earth as he is assured the reward of imperishable glory in the Kingdom of Heaven.” No one can imagine a nuclear 9/11 leading to Nuclear World War III and the extinction of life on Earth. Who needs interfaith harmony?

 

 

 

Advertisement
recommend Sign In or Join to post comments
0
tikun

Karen, Sorry words do not kill, people. Blaming his horrific behavior on theology is dropping down a dangerous rabbit hole. How about people wearing Che t-shirts. Does that encourage todays young people to commit the atrocities this sick excuse for a hero brought to South America ?

This sick hate filled Norwegian lives in a country that has a history of hate, fascism, and  anti-semitism that has nothing to do with religion.

Sow what you reap..


1
karenfish

Anti Semitism has nothing to do with religion? You're joking, right? 

0
tikun

anti-semitism has transcended religion. It may have its origin in it but the use of Israel, Jews:as a race, people, country, etc is the mitigating factor regarding anti-semitism today. When Islamic radicals and extremists of today use the protocols of the elders of zion as the truth and the grand mufti of Jerusalem 1940's era  befriended  Hitler, this is not about Judaism but about a "people" that is disliked and hated.

When the far right blames every economic disaster and terror attack on the jews and the conspiracies they create it is about Jews as a people and not about the religion.

In fact this might be the only group that has suffered and continues to suffer from this hatred, especially regarding Israel. Before this guy was outed the internet was full of every conspiracy theory and accusation imaginable that some how  Israel, the mossad, and the Jews in general perpetrated this horrific act.


0
UFO Blogger

EXPOSED: Illuminati - Freemasons Secret Society Behind Norway Bombing and Shooting

http://www.ufo-blogger.com/2011/07/exposed-illuminati-freemasons-secret.html



0
karenfish

Aren't the Freemasons a branch of the Knights Templar?

0
tikun

Just to add a little support:http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4099434,00.html

In a societal climate such as this, extremists of all shades are not subject to much scrutiny. One can see this best concerning extreme anti-Semites. Tore Tvedt, Norway’s best known neo-Nazi, had once told the country’s leading paper Verdens Gang – the one whose buildings were bombed last Friday – that “the Jews are the main enemy;” “they killed our people;” “they are evil murderers;” “they are not human beings and should be uprooted.” In 2007, the District Court found him not guilty of anti-Jewish harassment. This verdict was later overturned.

 

This same court, however, found another right-winger, Terje Sjolie, not guilty because Norway grants freedom of expression. He had said that the country was being destroyed by Jews.

 

In the meantime, an additional element has come to the fore and will stress Israeli aspects remotely connected to the massacre even more: Well-known anti-Israelis such as Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Stoere and Sidsel Wold, the NRK state broadcasting group’s correspondent in Israel, spoke at the Labor Party’s youth camp before the massacre. Stoere was welcomed while in the background posters were hanging with “Boycott Israel” written on them.


2
karenfish

Hi Tikun,

You wrote that neo-Nazi Tore Tvedt said, "The Jews are the main enemy; they killed our people." The root of the Holocaust the War Against the Jews was that the Jews in the Gospels killed the Christian God Jesus Christ. This is all straightened out at 

The Temple of Love - The World Peace Religion  along with everything else dividing Judaism, Christianity, Islam and every other religion.    

2
Karen Hatter

Frank Schaeffer is the son of Religious Right founder/leader Francis Schaeffer. 

Mr. Schaeffer has professed that he, his father and former U.S. Surgeon General C. Everett Koop played an integral part in the radicalization of the Religious Right, helping to politicize and create the anti abortion movement within religious circles.

He expresses his concern that there are correlations to be found with Oslo tragedy and some of the thought processes used to justify various positions in the Religious Right movement in the United States, with shared beliefs springing from the same body of literature and interpretive religious doctrine.        

In a country awash in weapons and wallowing in the rhetoric of rebellion against an "evil" government, sporadic outbursts of murder tinged with political overtones seem as inevitable as they seem horribly "normal."

It doesn't seem like much of a stretch to foresee a day when a "secessionist" group and/or members of some "militia"--let alone one lone individual--will use their U.S. passports, white skins, and solid- citizen standing as a cover for importing a weapon of mass destruction to "liberate" the rest of us from our federal government's "tyranny" and/or to "punish" some city like New York, known as the U.S. "abortion capital" or San Francisco as the place that "those gays have taken over." And the possibility of an assassination in the same vein is a never-ending threat.

What we fear most from Islamist terrorists will be unleashed here as it was in Norway.

Terror is on the way on the way from our very own Christian and/or Libertarian "Tea Party" type activists inspired by right wing "Christian" intellectuals and political leaders like Bachmann who - after the killing starts -- will then disown them and express horror at their actions, actions that are in fact the logical extension of the anti-government rhetoric spewing from Congress and the religious right.

Also at NowPublic:

My Interview with Religious Right Founder's Son, Frank Schaeffer

Religious Extremism and U.S. Politics: Often an Ominous Pairing

1
karenfish

That's scary.

0
Karen Hatter

Yeah, I thought so too.

3
karenfish

It's even scarier after reading your interview with Frank Schaeffer. That has to be one of the biggest eye opening articles I've ever read Karen. It literally took my breath away. Anyone looking at what's going on in America today has to read that article. What ever happened to the separation of Church and State? 

2
Karen Hatter

My deepest thanks for your comment and recommendation for my article, Karen.

As someone that spearheaded the development of the Religious Right during its infancy, I think Mr. Schaeffer's eerie cautionary tale shouldn't be dismissed or taken lightly.

Neither the Religious Right, nor the TEA Party for that matter, adhere to the belief of separation of church and state. They've been busy rewriting history to make the claim that the founding generation of the United States meant them to be entwined, despite all evidence to the contrary but, why should facts stop their misdirected momentum? 

0
Majid Ali

What would you call him? was he a muslim terrorist? International  media will link him to Islam one way or the other. I know he is a terrorist but not, christian, muslim or anyone related to religion. 

3
karenfish

He is obviously a terrorist because he committed a horrific act of terror against numerous children. We can call him what he calls himself, a Christian Crusader against Islam, a Knight Templar.

2
Karen Hatter
"The operation was not to kill as many people as possible but to give a strong signal that could not be misunderstood that as long as the Labor Party keeps driving its ideological lie and keeps deconstructing Norwegian culture and mass importing Muslims then they must assume responsibility for this treason," according to the English translation of Heger's ruling that was read out after the hearing.

Karen, barring any possible mistakes in the translation, his position is very similar to elements of the Right Wing here in the United States.

The alleged perpetrator of the Oslo tragedy has railed against multiculturalism, a pet peeve held by many within the Right Wing movement in the United States and by former Republican Party representative Tom Tancredo, who has proclaimed multiculturalism at the heart of destroying American values. He also advocates against ALL forms of immigration, legal as well as illegal.

Mr. Tancredo delivered the opening night address in February 2010 for the national TEA Party convention hosted in Nashville, Tennessee by Judson Phillips' Tea Party Nation (TPN). Mr. Tancredo has also advocated a return to literacy tests before Americans can vote in elections. His remarks on re-instituting literacy tests on opening night were warmly received.

The Voting Rights Act of 1965 abolished the use of literacy tests, which had been used for nearly 100 years to deny and thwart the ability of formerly enslaved people of African descent their right to vote, in their case, having been grandfathered into the nation as citizens after their complete emancipation in 1865. Bear in mind, only so called Black males were allowed to vote. Only American White males had previously been allowed to vote.


Judson Phillips of the Tea Party Nation (TPN) has advocated that Americans that do not own property shouldn't be allowed to vote. Statistically speaking, the majority of so called minorities are more likely to rent or lease the apartments or houses in which they live.    

Eliana Benador, a columnist for the Tea Party Nation, laments the abolition of the Immigration Act of 1924.
Eliana Benador, a conservative public relations flack who was canned from her Washington Timesblogging position after she speculated that Huma Abedin, a top aide to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, may have married now disgraced Congressman Anthony Weiner as part of an Islamic socialist plot to takeover America, is a new Tea Party Nation columnist. Starting with a bang, one of her first columns for TPN was a July 4 column entitled “AMERICA IN DANGER AS SHE CELEBRATES 235 YEARS INDEPENDENCE.” She began by lamenting that Americans have “forgotten the lessons taught by slavery,” then inexplicably pivots to bemoan the racial diversity of the nation.

Ominous but obtuse, Benador warned TPN readers, “As America celebrates her 235th Independence Day, she finds herself under siege from all kinds of enemies: The known and the unknown; the external and the internal enemy.”  Nowhere in the article are these enemies defined.

Instead, in a mix of racism, nativism, Islamophobia, and even old-school anti-Irish bigotry, her columns argues: abolishing the “National Origins Formula” unleashed an “invasion of America” by immigrants that are causing a reduction in “original American voters” and “bringing in a whole new texture of culture, 100% foreign to what America’s origins were as its wonderful adventure began back in 1776.”[2]


The Immigration Act of 1924, also known as the National Origins Act, sought to restrict certain groups of individuals, with the choice of individuals selected to be excluded highly influenced by the flourishing eugenics movement of those times.
As the flow of immigrants shifted from northern and western Europe to southern and eastern Europe, calls for immigration restrictions emerged. Seen largely as inferior to their northern and western European cousins, the often swarthier, olive-skinned newcomers (such as Slavs, Italians, and Jews) were of concern especially to the adherents of the newly emerging area of pseudoscientific inquiry known as eugenics. Concerns about their “poor racial stock” and the evils that could result by allowing them into the United States were voiced by Immigration Restriction League founder Prescott Hall, as well as by members of the American Breeders Association and the Eugenics Record Office, among others.
      

1
karenfish

The Native American Indians must be laughing their heads off at all of this.

1
Karen Hatter

Well, Karen, since it wasn't until the Snyder Act of 1924 that Native Americans were granted status AS United States' citizens, I'd venture they're not that surprised.

The Snyder Act of 1924, admitted Native Americans born in the U.S. to full U.S. citizenship. Though the Fifteenth Amendment, passed in 1870, granted all U.S. citizens the right to vote regardless of race, it wasn't until the Snyder Act, signed during the Coolidge Administration, that America's native people could enjoy the rights granted by this amendment. The 1934 Reorganization Act ended land allotments and provided for return to tribal ownership of surplus lands. It also encouraged tribal self-government and tried to improve the economic conditions of Native Americans.

Even with the passing of this citizenship bill Native Americans were still prevented from participating in elections mainly due to the fact that the Constitution left it up to the states to decide who has the right to vote. The state of Maine offers a good example of this illegal disenfranchisement. Maine was one of the last states to comply with the Indian Citizenship Act, even though it had granted tax paying Native Americans the right to vote in its original 1819 state constitution.

 

0
tikun

Hi Karenfish, I am missing something when you talk of Judaism dividing people? Along with other religions. Judaism has many perspectives and holds many view points regarding the unity of the "one". I find nothing in it exclusive to anyone. Belonging to a group that seeks the "unity experience" at no ones    expense does not make for bad religion. Ignorance does however. Generality does however.

Trying to always link some nut case to a left wing or right wing movement to satisfy ones self-righteous justification and "demonization" of a group of people  for ideological reasons is a sad scenario and bankrupt to the core. The need to "connect" the dots by insinuation, even association is a dangerous precedent. But we all know how much we love to do it and enjoy taking sides in this feeding frenzy. See some of the comments above.


2
karenfish

You say that you don't understand how Judaism and other religions divide people.

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/int/long.html 


Anders Breivik proudly boasts of his membership in the New Knights Templar formed in London in 2002. This right wing radical Christian extremist lunatic just shot 90 Christian children dead at point blank range because their parents allowed Muslim immigration into Norway.


3
Karen Hatter

No matter the outcome of the mental status of this man, he has clearly identified his leanings and what fueled or influenced his thought processes.

No one is PHYSICALLY responsible for Breivik's actions, especially since he has allegedly confessed.

HOWEVER, he has indicated his leanings through his writings that reveal the direct influence of Right Wing commentators and websites here in the United States that have AIDED his demented rationalizations and justifications for his actions.

In a manifesto posted online, the admitted killer, Anders Behring Breivik, praised (Right Wing blogger Pamela) Geller. He cited her blog, Atlas Shrugs, and the writings of her friends, allies, and collaborators—Robert Spencer, Jihad Watch, Islam Watch, and Front Page magazine—more than 250 times. And he echoed their tactics, tarring peaceful Muslims with the crimes of violent Muslims. 


He wrote that all Muslims sought to impose "sharia laws" and that "there are no important theological differences between jihadists and so-called 'peaceful' or 'moderate' Muslims." He reprinted, as part of the manifesto, a 2006 essay by "Fjordman"—a blogger whose work appears frequently on Geller's site—which argued that "radical Muslims and moderate Muslims are allies" and that because Islam teaches deception, no Muslim who claims to be moderate can be trusted.


Scan Geller's blog and her friends' sites, and you'll see how thickly these ideas pervaded Breivik's online world. Jihad Watch says "Islam is intrinsically violent." Islam Watch asserts that "terrorism … is the real Islam," that "Islam is beyond alteration," and that "it needs to be emasculated, marginalized or eliminated altogether." Geller has published Fjordman's views—"I do not believe that there is such a thing as a moderate Islam"—with her own proud note that "I have long derided the 'moderate Islam' meme as a theory with no basis in reality or history."

0
tikun

I find it offensive and a dangerous left wing "totalitarian" response trying to blame right-wing writers for his insanity and action. Never has Karen ever blamed left-wing writers that Osama and others have praised for his craziness. You try to shut up opposing view points and you give up freedom of speech. There is a difference between a liberal democracy and a totalitarian democracy. Your choice. Just remember one day your intolerance is going to come home in bite you in the ass.

4
Karen Hatter

I think one would be hard pressed to find any writings of bin Laden praising what you have referred to as 'left wing' sources, Tikun.

Most attempts to claim the so called Left Wing was somehow linked to or responsible for influencing any events of the past few years has originated from the Right Wing, as their machinations consisted of bizarre linguistic acrobatics to falsely proclaim some Right Wing adherent or admirer was an admirer of the Left. 

Never allowing lack of facts to halt their momentum, the very writer, quoted by this individual in his manifesto, Right Wing blogger Pamela Geller, before anyone had ANY facts about ANYTHING in relation to the attack, immediately proclaimed the act was the work of Islamic terrorists, which turns out to have been completely false.

The children's camp that was attacked, being called a political camp, has been lambasted, BY the Right Wing, as a camp for socialists, the favorite nemesis OF the Right Wing.   

If you had carefully read my comment, Tikun, you would have noticed that I stated that the alleged perpetrator HIMSELF named those with whom he found ideological or political affinity. 

I was not required to somehow extrapolate his leanings or inspiration. He made it plain by naming them and including excerpts from their writings in his manifesto.

His manifesto includes references to a number of Right Wing sites hosted/written by American Right Wing ideologues.

It should be noted that as the Right Wing and its supporters scream intolerance, they nearly always refuse to distance themselves from the actions of those that point to them as their source of inspiration.

Tikun, the Right Wing's refusal to distance themselves from these types of individuals will CONTINUE to bite the Right Wing in THEIR/IT'S ass, revealing the scarcity of honesty among the majority of proponents of Right Wing ideology, that choose to infuse and spread their message(s) with intolerance and hate.

No one is required to be tolerant of anyone's right to call for the deaths of others because they don't like their politics or religion.

0
tikun

Karen you really do need to you your research. You get paid and have a responsibility to be honest instead of parroting a left-wing agenda and spinning the truth to blame every thing wrong under the sun on "right-wing" propaganda, etc. It is a sad day in the US and the world that intelligent journalists are so blinded by their own hate and obsessions.


I make no excuses for either the left or right's view of life on this planet. What I find so dangerous is the need to excuse hatred when it is articulated by the folks you so love to hate.

3
Karen Hatter

Read the alleged perpetrator's manifesto, Tikun, to read for yourself the Right Wing influences he names and quotes in his writings. 

When this tragic event occurred, Republican Party conservative Patrick J. Buchanan, presidential hopeful in several elections in the 80s and 90s and an 'old head' of the Party with influence in the Right Wing, after the standard condemnation of the alleged perpetrators murderous acts offered, regarding the perpetrator's rationalizations ....

In a recent column about the events in Norway, after a perfunctory condemnation of the bombing and murder spree unleashed by Anders Behring Breivik, Buchanan was classic Buchanan suggesting that, "Breivik may be right."

My honesty is not in question however, your ability to read and understand observational facts is called into question.  

As I stated above, any physical blame for the actions of the alleged perpetrator of the murders of the children at the camp lies solely with the actual perpetrator.

What has influenced his actions has been named by the alleged killer himself, with him believing himself to be some sort of Christian crusader. Maybe it would be best if you sought him out to ask him to recant his statements and beliefs and his affinity with Right Wing ideology and some of the Right's proponents.

And, as I said above, no one is required to be tolerant of anyone who states a belief that those of another faith or political belief deserve to die.  

0
tikun

@ Karenfish, You know nothing of Judaism and to use a political agenda by others as a source for your statement about Judaism is sad. I am not here to defend it but to inform you that your knee-jerk response with quoting the Torah, in English, which does not even come close to the true meaning of the words, leads you on a path of stupidity and ignorance.

Arrogance in thinking you have all the answers and know the truth is just plain foolishness and only leads to prejudice and hatred. Not justice and peace.


0
tikun

Hi Karen,

His action determines his fate. Ideas do not kill people. People kill people. I am unwilling to blame anyone else for the the action of a madman regardless who or what he may have believed in . For someone to give reasons or excuses for their behavior is to deflect the responsibility to the "other".

If someone in Germany decides to kill a Jew and blames his fascist/racist  ideas and influences on neo-Nazi propaganda is that a reason to blame them for his actions. A group of African-American teenagers are believed-alleged to have beaten up whites leaving the Wisconsin State fair recently. If they base their hatred on Farrakhan's statements does that mean that Farrakhan should be held accountable for their actions?

An African-American is harmed by someone that aligns himself with the tea party group does that mean the tea party supporters should be held accountable?


This is a very slippery slope you are walking on. Regardless how much we dislike the rhetoric of these "extremists" in a free society only ACTIONS determine guilt by law not ideas.



3
Karen Hatter

It is you, Tikun, walking a "slippery slope" as you continually turn a blind eye to and defend the violent, extreme rhetoric of the Right Wing.

When it is advocated that because another has different religious beliefs or political views that those individuals or groups should be eliminated or killed, I will say for the final time, and you may continue to fight for the rights of those whom you feel are somehow being denied their rights, which they are not as they spew their venom non stop on a daily basis, that words not required to be tolerated in a freedom loving society and should be looked upon as terroristic threats, are calls for the deaths or murders of those with whom one disagrees.     

That crosses the line in civilized society. 

In truth, I hope the Right Wing continues it's descent, which I have no doubt it will, beyond acceptable articulation of speech so their actions can be dealt with in due course.


0
tikun

Karen, I do not defend the violent and extreme rhetoric of the right wing. I am very disappointed in your personal attacks on me rather then addressing the points that I made.  You have avoided everyone of them. I will not continue this dialogue any longer with you since I thought you had more in you then just knee-jerk hatred of anything or anyone you disagree with.

You are all too aware by now that I never included direct threats as acceptable language in a free society. However, when it comes from a  Farrakhan it appears okay in your play book.

Avoid and deflect is the typical manner in which you want to debate issues. Time will tell how this plays out in the U.S. and the world.



4
Karen Hatter

Tikun, I have been addressing and commenting on ACTUAL FACTS that have been revealed regarding the alleged perpetrator of the Oslo, Norway massacre and his SELF identified political, ideological, philosophical shared belief system with the Right Wing, with the massacre claiming the lives of almost 80 people, including children, at the summer camp.


WHEN and IF there is found, after a tragic massacre of individuals, a circumstance which is NOT hoped for, as WAS found in this case, an almost 2,000 page manifesto, that includes excerpted opinions, commentary and rhetoric from so called left leaning websites, Minister Farrakhan's words or the words of any OTHERS, being highlighted as having influenced this/these fantasy perpetrator(s), from the fantasy perpetrator's(s')' point of view, to explain his/her/their actions, THEN there can be claimed a correlation to be addressed between YOUR comments and my remarks and the influence of writings/utterances that may have impacted the/these fantasy perpetrator(s).


Since THIS alleged Oslo perpetrator HAS named/included his influences IN his manifesto, it is an odd exercise to argue, 'Well, even though that's what his writings say, the things he highlighted and excerpted IN his writings really have nothing to do with his actions.'  

0
tikun

A Response:
Norway's gov't attacked us for merely pointing out in various ways, that Norway should not use Breivik’s attack as justification for further weakening Norwegian democracy.     In the wake of Anders Breivik’s massacre of his fellow Norwegians, I was amazed at the speed with which the leftist media throughout the US and Europe used his crime as a means of criminalizing their ideological opponents on the Right. Just hours after Breivik’s identity was reported, leftist media outlets and blogs were filled with attempts to blame Breivik’s crime on conservative public intellectuals whose ideas he cited in a 1,500 page online manifesto.

My revulsion at this bald attempt to use Breivik’s crime to attack freedom of speech propelled me to write my July 29 column, “Breivik and totalitarian democrats.”


While the focus of my column was the Left’s attempt to silence their conservative opponents, I also noted that widespread popular support for Palestinian terrorists in Norway indicates that for many Norwegians, opposition to terrorism is less than comprehensive.

To support this position, I quoted an interview in Maariv with Norway’s Ambassador to Israel Svein Sevje.

Sevje explained that most Norwegians think that the Palestinians’ opposition to the supposed Israeli “occupation” is justified and so their lack of sympathy for Israeli victims of Palestinian terrorism was unlikely to change in the wake of Breivik’s attack on Norwegians.

Since my column was a defense of free speech and a general explanation of why terrorism is antithetical to the foundations of liberal democracy – regardless of its ideological motivations – I did not focus my attention on Norwegian society. I did not discuss Norwegian anti- Semitism or anti-Zionism. Indeed, I purposely ignored these issues.

But when on Friday, Norway’s Deputy Foreign Minister Espen Barth Eide published an unjustified attack on me on these pages, he forced me to take the time to study the intellectual and political climate of hatred towards Israel and Jews that pervades Norwegian society.

That climate is not a contemporary development.

Rather it has been a mainstay of Norwegian society.

In a 2006 report on Jew hatred in contemporary Norwegian caricatures published by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, Erez Uriely noted among other things that Norway banned kosher ritual slaughter in 1929 – three years before a similar ban was instituted in Nazi Germany.

And whereas the ban on kosher ritual slaughter was lifted in post-war Germany, it was never abrogated in Norway.

As Uriely noted, Norway’s prohibition on Jewish ritual slaughter makes Judaism the only religion that cannot be freely practiced in Norway.

Fascism was deeply popular in Norway in the 1930s.

In the wake of the Nazi invasion, Norwegian governmental leaders founded and joined the Norwegian Nazi Party. Apparently, sympathy for Nazi collaborators is strong today in Norway.

As the JCPA’s Manfred Gerstenfeld noted in a report on the rise in Norwegian anti-Semitic attacks during 2009, two years ago the Norwegian government allocated more than $20 million in public funds to commemorate Norwegian novelist Knut Hamsun on the occasion of the Nobel laureate for literature’s 150th birthday. As The New York Times reported, in February 2009, Norway’s Queen Sonja opened the, “year-long, publicly financed commemoration of Hamsun’s 150th birthday called ‘Hamsun 2009.’” But while Hamsun may have been a good writer, he is better remembered for being an enthusiastic Nazi. Hamsun gave his Nobel prize to Nazi propaganda chief Josef Goebbels. During a wartime visit to Germany, Hamsun flew to meet Adolf Hitler at Hitler’s mountain home in Bavaria.

And in 2009, Norway built a $20 million museum to honor his achievements.

As Uriely explained in his report, “Norwegian anti- Semitism does not come from the grassroots but from the leadership - politicians, organization leaders, church leaders, and senior journalists. It does not come from Muslims but from the European-Christian society.”

Despite indignant claims that the two are unrelated, Norway’s elite anti-Semitism merges seamlessly with their anti-Zionism. An apparently unwitting example of this fusion is found in Eide’s attack against me in last Friday’s Post.

Eide’s attack on me revolved around my citation of Ambassador Sevje’s interview with Maariv. In his column Eide wrote, “Several other Israeli media have latched on to this [interview] as well.”

While this may be true, I first learned of Sevje’s interview in the US media. Specifically, I read about the interview at Commentary Magazine’s website, the Jewish Telegraphic Agency’s website, and the website of the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America (CAMERA) before I read the original interview on Maariv’s website.

Commentary, JTA and CAMERA are not Israeli organizations or outlets. They are Jewish American organizations and outlets. Eide’s conflation of them with the “Israeli media” indicates that the deputy minister has a hard time separating Jews from Israelis, (and by extension, Jew hatred from Israel hatred).

One of the Jewish Americans who attacked the Norwegian ambassador’s willingness to distinguish between Palestinian terrorist murderers of Israelis and Breivik’s terrorist murder of Norwegians was Harvard Professor Alan Dershowitz. Dershowitz said, “I know of no reasonable person who has tried to justify the terrorist attacks against Norway. Yet there are many Norwegians who not only justify terrorist attacks against Israel, but praise them, support them, help finance them and legitimate them.”

In March Dershowitz experienced Norway’s elite anti- Semitism-qua-anti-Zionism firsthand. Dershowitz was brought to Norway by a pro-Israel group to conduct lectures at three Norwegian universities. All three university administrations refused to invite him to speak. Student groups acting independently of their university administrations in the end invited Dershowitz to give his lectures.

As Dershowitz explained in a Wall Street Journal article, he was the victim of an unofficial Norwegian university boycott of Israeli universities. The unofficial boycott is so extensive that it bans not only Israeli academics, but non-Israeli, Jewish academics that are pro-Israel.

And lest someone believe Norway’s anti-Jewish boycott is due to the so-called “occupation,” as Dershowitz pointed out, the petition calling for an academic boycott of Israel begins, “Since 1948 the state of Israel has occupied Palestinian land.”

The Norwegian elite’s rejection of Israel’s right to exist, and ban on pro-Israel Jewish speakers from university campuses goes a long way in explaining Norway’s support for Hamas. If Norway’s opposition to Israel was merely due to its size, rather than its very existence, it would be difficult to understand why Norway maintains friendly contact with Hamas. Hamas is after all a genocidal, terrorist group, which like the Nazis seeks the annihilation of the Jewish people as a whole. Yet Norway’s Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Store wrote an article justifying his relations with Hamas as in line with Norway’s embrace of “dialogue.”

As Store’s deputy Eide’s unrestrained and unjustified attack against me, and as Norway’s academic – and to a large degree media – boycott of pro-Israel voices make clear, Norway’s embrace of dialogue is as selective as its condemnation of terrorism.

Here we should recall that Norway’s ruling class supported Hamas against Israel in Operation Cast Lead.

Israel’s dovish Kadima government only began the operation in Gaza because it had no choice. For months then prime minister Ehud Olmert sat on his hands as southern Israel was pummeled with unprovoked barrages of thousands of missiles and rockets from Gaza. Olmert was forced to take action after Hamas massively escalated its rocket and missile attacks in November and early December 2008.

While silent about Palestinian aggression, Norway’s government attacked Israel for defending itself. As Store put it, “The Israeli ground offensive in Gaza constitutes a dramatic escalation of the conflict. Norway strongly condemns any form of warfare that causes severe civilian suffering, and calls on Israel to withdraw its forces immediately.”

Two of Store’s associates, Eric Fosse and Mads Gilbert, decamped to Gaza during Cast Lead and set up shop in Shifa Hospital. The two were fixtures in the Norwegian media, which constantly interviewed them throughout the conflict, and so spread their libelous charges against the IDF without question.

Fosse and Gilbert never mentioned that Hamas’s high command was located at the hospital in open breach of the laws of war.

When they returned home, they co-authored a book in which they accused the IDF of entering Gaza with the express goal of murdering women and children.

Store wrote a blurb of endorsement on the book’s back cover.

Store visited Israel in January. During his visit he gave an interview to the Post where he ignored diplomatic protocol and attacked the Knesset’s contemporaneous decision to form a parliamentary commission of inquiry into foreign funding of anti-Zionist Israeli NGOs.

The basic rationale for the commission was that Israelis have a right to know that many purportedly Israeli groups are actually foreign organizations staffed by local Israelis. And many of the most virulently anti-Zionist NGOs staffed by Israelis operating in Israel are funded by the Norwegian government. Store arrogantly opined, “I think it is a worrying sign” about the state of Israeli democracy.

During Operation Cast Lead, Oslo was the scene of unprecedented anti-Semitic rioting. According to Eirik Eiglad, protesters who participated in anti-Israel demonstrations – and even a supposedly pro-peace demonstration – called out “Kill the Jews” and attacked policemen who tried to prevent them from rioting. Demonstrators at a pro-Israel demonstration were beaten. The Israeli embassy was threatened. Pro-Israel politicians who participated in the pro-Israel rally were beaten and received death threats.

It is a fact that the day before Breivik’s massacre of teenagers at the Labor Party’s youth camp on Utoya Island, Store spoke to them about the need to destroy Israel’s security fence. The campers role-played pro- Hamas activists breaking international law by challenging Israel’s lawful maritime blockade of the Gaza coastline.

They held signs calling for a boycott of Israel.

Despite their obvious animosity towards Israel and sympathy for genocidal, Jew hating Hamas terrorists, at no point did I or any of my Jerusalem Post colleagues do anything other than condemn completely Breivik’s barbaric massacre of his fellow Norwegians. And yet, the Norwegian government attacked us for merely pointing out in various ways, that Norway should not use Breivik’s attack as justification for further weakening Norwegian democracy.

Following the massacre, the Post published a well-argued, empathetic editorial making these general points. In response, the paper was deluged by unhinged attacks claiming that the editorial was insensitive and excused Breivik’s crimes. In response, the Post published a follow-up editorial last Friday apologizing to the Norwegian people for the earlier editorial.

I was not consulted about this editorial ahead of time, and the editorial does not reflect my views. However I understand the moral impulse of not wishing to pour salt on anyone’s wounds, which stood behind the decision to write it.

For my part, I will not request a similar apology from the Norwegian government for gratuitously attacking me. I will not request a similar apology from the Norwegian government and elites for libelously defaming my military, my country and my people. I will not request a similar apology from Norway for limiting Jews’ freedom of religion in Norway. I will not request a similar apology from Norway for comparing Israel to Nazi Germany and celebrating Norwegian Nazis.

I will not request such an apology because there are certain actions that are simply unforgivable.

caroline@carolineglick.com

What is NowPublic?

NowPublic lets people work together to cover news events around the world.

Find out more

Crowd Power

Anonymous
First Flagged at 8:58 AM, Jul 24, 2011 by Anonymous (not verified)
These members have powered this story:

Related Stories

Recommendations (6)

Most recently recommended by:
 

closeSign in to NowPublic

is reporting from