|
|
 "Mowgli made leader of the Bandar-log" by John Charles Dollman On August 3rd US Senator Brownback wrote a letter, expressing concern over Israel-hatred and anti-Semitism, to Norway’s ambassador to Washington DC. While this site published the letter on August 12th, Norwegian journalists failed to find it newsworthy. Members of the opposition disagree, and are now questioning Norway FM Jonas Gahr Støre over it.
The Progress Party, the third largest party and the enfant terrible of Norwegian politics, vexes the ruling west-of-the-river elite something terrible. Not only do Progress Party politicians fail to graduate from Berg or Oslo Katedralskole, but they are uncouth and unwashed, believe the wrong things for the wrong reasons and are generally quite annoying. It would be fair to say that the Norwegian establishment holds the same contempt for the Progress Party as Rudyard Kipling demonstrated that he held for the Indian independence movement when he depicted them as the Bandar-log, the apes who though they could become human by mastering the secret of fire.
Progress Party politician Øyvind Vaksdal now calls on Norway FM Jonas Gahr Støre to explain how he aims to deal with the letter. Unauthorized translation from the Parliament website:
Document 15
Question:
Øyvind Vaksdal (FrP): Is the Foreign Minister familiar with the communication from Norway-friend and Kansas Senator Sam Brownback where he expresses considerable worry for the increase in anti-Semitism in Norway, how does he react to the contents of the letter, and in which manner will the Government respond to this communication?
Grounds
Norway-friend and Kansas Senator Samuel Dale “Sam” Brownback sent on August 3rd a letter to the Norwegian authorities through our Washington ambassador Wegger Christian Strømmen, where he expressed considerable worry over the increasing anti-semitism in Norway. In the letter, which he asked be made known to Norwegian authorities and commercial life, he also attached a note from the Simon Wiesenthal Center where also members of the government were accused of having contributed to this disquieting and very negative development. With the exception of a minor mention in Dagsavisen on August 18th, the serious communication from Senator Brownback has, as far as the undersigned is aware of, been passed over in quiet.
The good Øyvind Vaksdal is of course quite right to ask this question, and it is concerning that the media has not already done so. The problem is, just as the Norwegian establishment regards the Progress Party as a pack of jeer-worthy Bandar-log, it regards the Jewish state of Israel as nothing less than that fierce-some man-eating tiger, Shere Khan. And we all know what must be done with such beasts, don’t we?
Norway FM Jonas Gahr Støre is yet to answer Øyvind Vaksdal’s question.
 NRK reports on the Naqba without mentioning war which caused it Journalist Laila Ø. Bakken of the Norwegian State Broadcasting Authority NRK manages to report on how Abbas’ family fled during the “Naqba”, while completely omitting any mention of the 1948 war which caused the “Naqba”.
Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Iraq and Lebanon declared war on Israel the day after it proclamation itself as a state. As for the Palestinians, they had already been waging war against the Jews for some time prior to this. The war of 1948 set two refugee streams into motion: one refugee wave of Jews fleeing Muslim lands, and one refugee wave of Palestinians fleeing Israel.
The question is how and why NRK’s Laila Ø. Bakken choses to mention only one of the effects of the war, and not the cause of it. There are several alternatives: 1) She honestly does not know 2) The 1948 war makes the Palestinians look bad, as it was a war of aggression against Israel. Since Laila Ø. Bakken does not want to make the Palestinians look bad, she omits the entire war 3) It is not necessary to mention the war. Doing so would just obfuscate the point of the article, which is to give readers some background information on Abbas.
If pressed for an answer, Ms.Bakken will deliver something along the lines of alternative #3. Regardless of what she answers, the result is the same: it makes Israel look bad.
This is of course not the first time a Norwegian journalist manages to emphasize the evil of Israel by going into the details of the “naqba” while ignoring the fact that the “naqba” was one of the consequences of the 1948 war of aggression on Israel. This site has observed the same phenomenon repeatedly before. The Norwegian edition of Le Monde Diplomatique, for instance, managed to do the very same thing on May 1st 2009. In October the same year, we observed VG make itself guilty of the same error. There are more examples out there.
 Hans Olav Syversen from the Christian Democrats refers to a letter from the Minister of Defense Vårt Land today reports that the Christian Democrats (KrF) and Conservatives (Høyre) aim to stop Minister of Defense Grete Faremo (Labor) from boycotting Israeli companies on an individual basis. The article (above) refers to a letter from Grete Faremo (below).
Excerpt from Vårt Land: In a recent letter to Stortinget minister of defense Grete Faremo confirms that Israel’s military operations in Gaza contributed to Rabintex not being permitted to bid for delivery of helmets to the Norwegian soldiers to Afghanistan. The letter presents the following statements:
1: Norway does not boycott Israel.
2: Rejection of bids made by Israeli companies are made on technical and legal grounds.
3: In the case of Rabintex’s bid for delivery of helmets, this was rejected in part due to the situation in Gaza at the time. (Meaning the incident on the Mavi Marmara after it attempted to break the Israeli-Egyptian blockade of Hamas-run Gaza, the only territory on earth ruled by a party which refers to “The protocols of the elders of Zion” in its charter)
4: Norway has recently had a “constructive dialogue” with Israel on the Rabintex case especially and other issues in general.
5: Norway has recently approved two “potential” purchases of equipment from Israeli companies.
Read the letter below. If you do not know Norwegian, use Google-translate.
SPØRSMÅL NR. 1610 TIL SKRIFTLIG BESVARELSE OM HANDEL MED ISRAELSK FORSVARSMATERIELL
Jeg viser til brev fra Stortingets president av 23. august d.å. med spørsmål til skriftlig besvarelse fra stortingsrepresentant Ivar Kristiansen om ovennevnte.
Innledning og bakgrunn
La meg innledningsvis få presisere at det ikke foreligger noen boikott av israelske leverandører. Det er ikke forbud mot anskaffelser av israelsk forsvarsmateriell. Utgangspunktet er det samme som for enhver annen anskaffelse av forsvarsmateriell til Forsvaret: Det er Forsvarets behov for materiell som er styrende for hvilket materiell som anskaffes. Valg av leverandør skal således baseres på en avveining av forhold som funksjonalitet, pris og kvalitet. Derimot er det, i henhold til praktiseringen av det norske eksportkontrollregelverket, ikke tillatt å eksportere norsk forsvarsmateriell til Israel. Som kjent innebærer anskaffelse av forsvarsmateriell fra utlandet at det avtales såkalte gjenkjøpsordninger over visse kontraktssummer. I Norge er terskelverdien for gjenkjøp i dag 50 millioner kroner. Norsk gjenkjøpspolitikk er i stor grad innrettet mot eksport av norsk forsvarsmateriell til landet vi anskaffer fra, eller industrisamarbeid med landets forsvarsindustri mv., slik dette går frem av St. meld. nr. 38 (2006-2007). Således vil en anskaffelse av forsvarsmateriell over 50 millioner kroner fra utlandet med stor grad av sannsynlighet også innebære at det i en eller annen form eksporteres norsk forsvarsmateriell til dette landet.
Eksisterende retningslinjer
Det ble i oktober 1990 – i samråd med Utenriksdepartementet – fastsatt egne retningslinjer for anskaffelser av forsvarsmateriell fra Israel. Dagens retningslinjer ble senest revidert i 2002, og har således vært uendret siden Bondevik II-regjeringen. Retningslinjene gjelder bare for materiell som kan unntas fra lov og forskrift om offentlige anskaffelser i medhold av EØS-avtalens art. 123. Retningslinjene inneholder enkelte beskrankninger for kjøp av israelsk forsvarsmateriell, men gir også rom for utøvelse av politisk skjønn for den til enhver tid sittende regjering. Den viktigste beskrankningen i retningslinjene er at anskaffelser over gjenkjøpsgrensen ikke kan gjennomføres fordi det ville medføre potensiell eksport av norsk forsvarsmateriell til Israel. I henhold til retningslinjene skal alle potensielle anskaffelser under gjenkjøpsgrensen legges frem for Forsvarsdepartementet for vurdering fra sak til sak. I henhold til etablert praksis blir imidlertid også saker over gjenkjøpsgrensen lagt frem for departementet for vurdering og endelig avgjørelse av avvisningsspørsmålet. Det er i denne forbindelse viktig å understreke at det blir foretatt en reell og konkret vurdering i hvert enkelt tilfelle.
Regjeringens avvisninger
Selv om retningslinjene åpner for skjønnsutøvelse i hvert enkelt tilfelle, har regjeringen både i sin første og andre regjeringsperiode etterstrebet å behandle israelsk forsvarsindustri på en mest mulig åpen og forutsigbar måte. Regjeringen har videre på ingen måte endret norsk politikk overfor Israel i retning av en særskilt boikott. Derimot medfører det riktighet at det både i regjeringens første og andre periode har forekommet avvisninger av israelske forsvarsleverandører. Tilsvarende har flere konkrete vurderinger resultert i motsatt konklusjon. Det er samtidig vanskelig for departementet å kommentere de enkelte sakene i detalj, i første rekke av konkurransemessige årsaker. Flere av sakene knytter også seg til pågående anskaffelsesprosesser.
I totalt tre av tilfellene der israelske leverandører er blitt avvist, har dette hovedsakelig hatt sin bakgrunn i at anskaffelsene har hatt en antatt kontraktsverdi som overskrider gjenkjøpsgrensen og derfor ville medført potensiell eksport av norsk forsvarsmateriell til Israel. Ut over dette har regjeringen også vektlagt det aktuelle materiellets politiske sensitivitet. I denne forbindelse vurderes det blant annet hvorvidt materiellet er av styrkebeskyttende og defensiv karakter – eller om materiellet kan karakteriseres som skarpt og offensivt. Endelig har regjeringen vektlagt den generelle konkurransesituasjonen i de enkelte avvisningstilfellene.
Når det gjelder den konkrete vurderingen knyttet til anskaffelse av stridshjelmer, ønsket ikke Forsvarsdepartementet å tillate Rabintex å delta i den kommende konkurransen. Det må understrekes at det ble vurdert å være tilstrekkelig konkurranse om anskaffelsen, også da Rabintex ble avvist. En viktig del av begrunnelsen for avvisningen av Rabintex var den ekstraordinære situasjonen som hadde oppstått som følge av den israelske militæroperasjonen i Gaza. Departementet kommuniserte sin begrunnete avgjørelse til leverandøren selv, og senere også til israelske myndigheter. I ettertid har det vært en konstruktiv dialog med israelske myndigheter om denne saken spesielt, og norsk politikk på dette området generelt. I denne forbindelse er det blitt kommunisert fra norsk side at det heller ikke i dette tilfellet var tale om noen boikott eller endring av policy fra norsk side – men at denne og lignende avvisninger måtte ses som enkeltstående tilfeller. Det er også blitt foretatt godkjenninger av israelske anskaffelser etter avvisningen av Rabintex.
Helt nylig har Forsvarsdepartementet godkjent to nye (potensielle) anskaffelser fra israelsk forsvarsindustri, slik at det godkjente (potensielle) beløpet under regjeringens to perioder hittil kan estimeres til om lag 170 millioner kroner.
Med hilsen
Grete Faremo
When Charles W. Freeman had to resign from a position with the Obama administration in March 2009, he blamed the Israel-Lobby. On Wednesday he visited NUPI in order to speak about US-Israel relations.
Vårt Land reports, in an NTB article, that Freeman has as little faith in the current round of peace negotiations as Norwegian ME pundit Hilde Henriksen Waage. Freeman’s visit raises two questions:
1) Freeman is famously critical of Israel and the US-Israel lobby. Why does NTB not mention this? All NTB says about this is that he is “controversial” in the USA. Why not tell the public straight out that Freeman blamed the Israel-Lobby after being forced to resign in 2009?
2) Other speakers NUPI have invited to speak include Walt and Mearsheimer, authors of “The Israel lobby”. Does NUPI prefer to invite critics of Israel over supporters of Israel? If so, why?
 Screenshots from Norwegian newspapers Aftenposten and DagenMagazinet Not even in Scandinavia does democracy work flawlessly. Is there an invisible hand at work?
In the screenshot above (left) we see an op-ed from yesterday’s Aftenposten, with Eirik Vatnøy from Civita, a liberal think tank, asking some rather poignant questions. Vatnøy points out that it appears as if the Scandinavian media has taken it upon itself to shield the electorate from undesirable politicians.
The article inserted on the right hand side is from yesterday’s DagenMagazinet, reporting on how the conservative parties of Denmark protest against the censorship of Sverigedemokratene and requests that the Council of Europe sends observers to the Swedish election.
Editorship is not censorship
The screenshot below is from a column in today’s Dagsavisen, with columnist Hege Ulstein pointing out the difference between censorship and editorship: censorship is carried out by the state, whereas editorship is carried out by the press. Ulstein concludes by asking, rhetorically, how it can be required of the press that it disseminates a narrative based on emotions (Rather than, we may presume, fact). This is more than a bit rich. Dagsavisen for years has shamelessly disseminated a Palestinian narrative so rich in heart-throbbing emotion that the newspaper might as well have been an in-house production of the Palestinakomiteen. When one furthermore takes into account that the editor of Dagsavisen is a self-professed pro-Palestinian and that the newspaper survives on generous handouts from the red-green coalition government, the picture becomes clearer.
 Screenshot from Dagsavisen
Three men were apprehended this summer on suspicion of terrorism. As the Washington Post points out, we Norwegians were told that we at no time have been in any danger whatsoever.
Norway ‘bomb plot’ underscores al-Qaida pitfalls
In late 2009, Jakobsen went to Norway’s Police Security Service and began providing information on Davud’s activities after what he described as a worrisome change in the Uighur’s behavior, Jakobsen’s lawyer Kjell T. Dahl said this summer.
“There are strengths and weaknesses in decentralization,” said Magnus Norell, a terrorism expert at the Swedish Defense Research Agency. “It’s a strength because it’s difficult to find these plots unless you stumble upon them or have very good intelligence. Also, you can bring in people who might not be able to join otherwise. The weaknesses – they came to the surface in these cases.”
Although the bomb plot stalled, Davud apparently did not. Officials believe that, despite the loss of contact with al-Qaida in Pakistan, Davud had his next move in the works. He was planning to travel abroad sometime later this summer, according to documents and officials.
While authorities do not know exactly where he planned to travel or why, they suspect he may have been aiming to meet an al-Qaida-related contact, possibly one of several in Turkey tied to the facilitator who brought him to the training camp in Waziristan.
Davud and the two others remain in detention in Norway awaiting trial, which is expected to begin sometime next year.
Norwegian prosecutors have said they plan to file terror conspiracy charges against the men, who face up to 12 years in prison if convicted. The suspects’ lawyers say their clients intend to plead not guilty.
—
Associated Press writers Matt Apuzzo and Adam Goldman in Washington; David Stringer in London; Kirsten Grieshaber in Berlin; and Suzan Fraser in Ankara, Turkey, contributed to this report.
In material terms, being Norwegian is like winning the lottery. Intellectually it is like living in a carnival. Once groupthink sets in there is nobody left to comment upon how it affects us, and prominent citizens can act bizarrely with impunity .
The JP, which editor of Aftenposten Harald Stanghelle tells us is a right-wing rag which conspires against Norway, has published Dead Jews and living trees a very worthwhile article by Manfred Gerstenfeld, dealing with the issue of whether Europe has learned form its past. Old hat? Ah, but history usually is. Anyway, Norway gets a mention:
On August 23 an event of apparent worldwide importance occurred in Amsterdam: The chestnut tree Anne Frank had seen from her hiding place fell during a storm. Hundreds of media from all over the world, including Israel, showed photos of the fallen tree or reported on it. Saplings were taken to be planted in the US, Israel and other countries so that the tree lives on.
Sarah, a 15-year-old Jewish girl from Amsterdam, is the same age as Anne was when she died. She has not raised any international interest. Two months ago she told the daily Het Parool that she would no longer wear her Star of David in public, since she had been beaten up by three youngsters a few years older than her when they identified her as a Jew.
The contraposition of these two stories is, in a nutshell, symbolic not only of the Netherlands but most of Western Europe. There remains substantial interest in the suffering of dead Jews, even to the extent of caring for a tree which was seen by one of the most celebrated victims of the Holocaust. There is far less interest in aggression against living ones.
THE ANNE Frank story reemerges every few years, usually for not particularly important reasons. In 2004 the Dutch Catholic broadcasting station (KRO) asked the public to elect the most important Dutch personality ever. Anne ended up in the top 10. This created a problem as she had never held Dutch nationality. She died stateless in the Bergen Belsen concentration camp in Germany.
KRO then started a campaign to posthumously grant Anne Dutch citizenship. Her worldwide notoriety ensured that the Dutch were happy to consider her one of their own. A majority of parliamentarians, both on the Right and Left, were willing to support such a step, which turned out to be legally impossible. Subsequently the absurdity of such a move dawned upon the decision makers.
What about the other German Jews in the Netherlands who had been murdered in the Holocaust? And what about those turned away at the borders? In 2007 the imminent threat of the chestnut tree falling, and the decision of the authorities to cut it down, created new publicity for the plight of Anne Frank. There was great public opposition, money was collected and a special steel structure built to protect the tree from falling.
As said, this motif of interest in dead Jews while willing to look away from current anti-Semitism, and at the same time defaming the Jewish collective in the State of Israel is not a Dutch speciality. The number of examples is endless.
Kristin Halvorsen, leader of the Norwegian Socialist Left party and minister of education, is notorious for her anti-Israel views in her country. In 2006, she wanted to boycott Israel. Yet in 2007 she insisted on speaking on behalf of the government at the annual Holocaust memorial ceremony.
Germany is the country where the study of this motif is of greatest interest. There are many Holocaust memorials and much reference to the murder of the Jews. Yet, at anti-Israeli demonstrations “Death to the Jews” is again heard on the streets of the country. Even if it is mainly shouted by immigrants from Muslim countries, it should raise far more concern than it does. The more examples one watches of the discrepancy in attitude toward dead and living Jews, the more one understands how little Europe has learned from its past.
The writer has published 18 books, including The Abuse of Holocaust Memory Distortions and Responses (2009)
The article is written by Manfred Gerstenfeld, who, even though he is a well meaning man and a friend of Norway, is regarded by some Norwgians as an enemy simply because of his legitimate Norway-criticism. Notice how the JP credits him with having written 18 books. This is the same man Aftenposten’s editor Harald Stanghelle gets away with calling a “blinkered fanatic” who allegedly “conspires” against Norway.
That’s how groupthink works.
In Aslak Nore book “Ekstremistan” the author predicts that in the near future, Norway will be more mulit-cultural, for good and for worse.
The reader is treated to some of the latter in Nore’s interview with a Norwegian convert to Islam, who reflects upon some of her formerly held beliefs. The following unauthorized translation is from page 209-210 of the book:
The first Birgit said to her converted girlfriends after the attacks on September 11th was: “You know it was the Jews who were behind it? There were no Jews in the World Trade Center”. Everybody nodded. In the time that followed Birgit carried a picture of Osama Bin Laden in her wallet. The Jews were blamed for everything. In addition to the usual macro-political conspiracies the Jews also ran municipal politics in Oslo. Moreover the principal at Birgit’s childrens’ elementary school was Jewish, Birgit believed. He had refused to forbid the flute. – The Jews were blamed for everything that was wrong with our own societies, she says today.
Not really comforting, then. If a principal can be suspected of being Jewish for refusing to forbid the flute, what can be suspected of someone who, say, reads a book about anti-Semitism. That he works for the Elders of Zion? Be that as it may, author Aslak Nore predicts that in the future, multicultural Norway will be both better and worse than it is today.
So there you go.
This blog is not about Israel or the Norwegian Jews. It is about Norway’s perception of and relationship to Israel and Jews. Yet Norway is only one little piece in a larger puzzle. It is while trying to solve this puzzle that foreigners every now and then are brought to pay attention to us up here in the kingdom of Norway.
Leblogdenoach picks up on National Review’s story on the “progs” of Norway. Excerpt:
Insolite et encourageant - ils sont jeunes et très intelligents (brainy). « Le Parti du Progrès se fait un devoir de servir des oranges de Jaffa – des oranges en provenance d’Israël – à ses conférences. »
« Nous allons manger des pommes de terre israéliennes », annonce notre hôte, malicieusement et avec une joie provocatrice. C’est Kristian Norheim, « secrétaire international « du Parti du Progrès, un parti reaganien et thatchérien ici en Norvège [un parti très pro-Israël - deuxième parti norvégien après les socialistes, il a obtenu 23% des votes aux élections de 2009]. Sept d’entre nous sommes réunis pour un repas festif. C’est quoi la grande affaire des pommes de terre israéliennes ? Oui, vous avez besoin de connaître la Norvège. Israël n’est pas le pays préféré de ce pays. C’est un pays où les produits israéliens sont généralement boycottés et maudits, et pas consommés. Le gouvernement norvégien a été le premier en dehors du monde islamique à reconnaître le Hamas. [...]
As Robin Shepherd has pointed out: Europe’s obsession about Israel is no judge of Israel, but of Europe.
Norwegian ME pundits agree that the upcoming talks will fail. Here is how and why they might be right, for the wrong reasons.
According to conventional Norwegian wisdom, the logic runs like this:
The Middle East peace talks can only be successful only IF Obama applies pressure to Netanyahu BUT if Obama applies pressure to Netanyahu then the US Israel-Lobby will move against Obama. THEREFORE Obama will not apply pressure to Netanyahu and this round of peace talks will fail.
The analysis above is weak, as it 1) exaggerates the power of the US Israel-Lobby 2) takes it for granted that the US Israel-Lobby is in the pocket of Netanyahu 3) takes it as a given that Netanyahu rules as some sort of Caesar when in reality he has no more freedom of movement than his coalition government allows him. Most importantly however, this is not a “dictator’s choice” kind of situation. There is another party to the peace talks – the Palestinians. Like Netanyahu, Abbas has no more freedom that Palestinian politics allow him, and when it comes to Hamas they do not allow a very great deal at all.
If we care to take the above into account, the analysis becomes more complex:
The Middle East peace talks can be successful only IF both Netanyahu and Abbas find the terms of peace agreeable WHICH only is possible if the terms are agreeable also to the coalitions they represent BUT if significant parties on either side believe they will strengthen their hand by waiting AND agree that they therefore are better of by postponing peace talks THEN this round of peace talks will fail.
Norway’s policy, of course, is the same regardless of whether all or none of these complexities are taken into account. It consists of a) flinging money at the Palestinians and b) blaming the Netanyahu government for any peace talks failure.
In effect this means that Palestine holds a card reading “Financial prosperity for elites guaranteed”, that Norwegian pundits will hang Netanyahu regardless of events, and that the Norwegian public will continue to be duped with simplistic analysis because that is what keeps our B-grade pundits afloat.
 October 26th 1941. In certain circles of Norwegians, Holocaust inversion is seen as quite acceptable. Such inversion is only possible when one is unfamiliar with the facts of the Holocaust.
See examples of how prominent Norwegians make themselves guilty of Holocaust distortion.
The picture above is of Masha Bruskina, a 17-year old Jewish high school graduate, nurse and partisan, who was hung by the German 707 Infanteriedivision in Minsk, Belorussia on October 26th 1941. As neither she nor her comrades were hanged by drop, they suffocated slowly rather than having their necks broken quickly. Yet Masha Bruskina was only one single individual in a mass murder which counts its victims by the millions.
The Holocaust has no rival. There is nothing to compare it with. The many prominent Norwegians who have made themselves guilty of Holocaust inversion must be brought to task for it.
The picture above is used in a Youtube version of Leonard Cohen’s Partisan.
See examples of how prominent Norwegians make themselves guilty of Holocaust distortion.
 National Review on Oslo and the "Progs" Editor of the National Review Jay Nordlinger recently visited Norway to attend the Oslo Freedom Forum 2010. He also got to know the Norwegian “progs”, members of the Norwegian Progress Party. Notice how Nordlinger has noticed what sadly has become one of Norway’s salient features – a pathological and disgraceful apathy against Israel. As for the fact that Israel is primarily populated by the same people which we (yes, the purge was carried out by Norwegians) tried to annihilate during the Holocaust? Ah, well, a mere coincidence.
They tell us.
German ThyssenKrupp builds submarines and tests them in Norwegian fjord. Now a regional division of Labor “expects” that the government refuses ThysseKrupp to test two submarines which are to be sold to Israel.
The last seven days we have seen VG point out that the Ministry of Defence is actually boycotting Israel in violation of official government policy, the opposition accuse government of hypocrisy on the same grounds, a report of Norwegian armaments exports tripling over the last six years, the oil fund divest from two Israeli companies, and the boycott debate being revived in both municipal politics and at the University of Oslo.
Aftenposten today reports “MFA considers submarine application“. Unauthorized translation:
Confirms
- We have newly received an application. It awaits treatment, and will be decided upon within short, says spokesman Bjørn Sveningsen in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to Fædrelandsvennen (Ed: newspaper).
He confirms that the application is being treated in accordance with the rules for export control, that is as a weapons export case.
Critical
Vest-Agder Arbeiderparti (Ed: regional division of Labor) resolved this summer against testing of Israeli submarines in Kristiansand.
”Norway has resolved not to contribute to delivery or sales of war material to countries which are already at war. This permission which has been given to testing of Israeli submarines in Norwegian waters, may in our perspective be regarded as a contribution to sales and exports of war materials. The Labor party of Vest Agder expects that government says no to weapons exports to Israel, and thereby stop the testing of Israeli submarines in Kristiansand” the statement reads.
For many years Norway has rejected export licenses for weapons and armaments for Israel. But during the first Bondevik government, Foreign Minister Knut Wollebæk gave an all clear sign to a visit by three manned Israeli submarines to Kristiansand.
ThyssenKrupp tests submarines for an array of customers in Norskrenna. Most of the customers are NATO-countries.
It is interesting to recall that Israel once applied for closer cooperation with NATO, and that Norway spoke against it. And this was during what Norwegian ME pundit Hilde Henriksen Waage has defined as a time when Norway was virtually “religiously” in love with Israel.
NORWAC doctors Mads Gilbert and Erik Fosse have supported the Islamic revolution in Iran. They have supported the bombing of 9/11. They have inverted the Holocaust by claiming that Gaza is “worse than Warsaw”. Yet Norway’s Foreign Minister has written back-cover praise to their book “Eyes in Gaza” and our Prime Minister has told them that “all of Norway” supports them. On the poster above, we see LO (TUC) and SV (The Socialist Left, a government party) endorse a speech given by Erik Fosse on August 19th.
Yet there is no lobby to be identified here. There is merely sympathy for Palestine and fair and legitimate expressions of public opinion. Or at least, this is what we are led to believe.
|
|
Recent Comments