|
Link color codes:
Britannica Wikipedia Project Gutenberg Questia The Teaching Company FindArticles News: The Economist Depesjer Sploid Music chart: 
Worth reading
From the archives: Remember, remember 11 September; Murderous monsters in flight; Reject their dark game; And let Liberty's flame; Burn prouder and ever more bright - Geoffrey Barto "Bjørn Stærks hyklerske dobbeltmoral er til å spy av. Under det syltynne fernisset av redelighet sitter han klar med en vulkan av diagnoser han kan klistre på annerledes tenkende mennesker når han etter beste evne har spilt sine kort. Jeg tror han har forregnet seg. Det blir ikke noe hyggelig under sharia selv om han har slikket de nye herskernes støvlesnuter."
2005: 12 | 11 | 10 | 09 | 08 | 07 | 06 | 05 | 04 | 03 | 02 | 01
|
No Jews on Kristallnacht?
By Øyvind Strømmen, dilettant.no I’ve always had high respect for the Simon Wiesenthal Centre. But after their latest, poorly researched press release, I’m concerned. It’s not their fault originally. The Norwegian tv-channel TV2 is to blame, aided by newspapers like Dagbladet and Norge IDAG, and bloggers like Jan Haugland of Secular Blasphemy. What’s the story? According to TV2 and others, Jews were barred from participating in the Kristallnacht commemoration in Oslo - the police kept them out to ensure their safety. Carl I Hagen from the rightist Progress Party, is “shocked”: - Jews should have been the guests of honour. Rabbi Abraham Cooper of the Wiesenthal Centre is no less concerned: - Can one even imagine a solemn commemoration of the Shoah that itself is Judenrein? But there's a problem: The story isn’t true. Jews have never been barred from the commemoration, and this year, too, Jews took part. But the arrangement committee did not want to turn the commemoration into a political demonstration about Middle Eastern politics. They drew this lesson from last year when Norway's former Conservative prime minister Kåre Willoch criticized Israel and its separation barrier on the Kristallnacht. According to a press release the arrangers “feared that the day would be torn away from its historical role, and the many issues of antisemittism and racism in Norway today”. Therefore they did not want neither Israeli nor Palestinian flags in the commemoration. The only paroles that were to be included were the paroles 130 different Norwegian organizations had agreed upon before the commemoration, paroles like “Nazism – never again” and “Stop incitement against Muslims”. Everyone didn’t agree, and this is where the police came in. They stopped a small number of people on the far right-wing of Norwegian politics from disrupting the commemoration. Among the people they stopped were representatives from the Democratic Party, a party led by former Progress Party politician Vidar Kleppe, who’s well-known for his anti-immigrant opinions, and from Forum against Islamization, an extreme anti-Muslim group. There were also people connected to the Norwegian Israel Centre, amongst these the leader, Erez Uriely. Following the event, Uriely and his wife Rachel Suiza wer, excluded from det Mosaiske Trossamfund (DMT), the Jewish Community in Oslo, who did not find it acceptable that members of its congregation worked together with rightwing extremists. In a press release DMT stated: - In the light of [their] choice to cooperate with groups that DMT strongly opposed on the anniversary of the Kristallnacht, the board chose to exclude Erez Uriely and Rachel Suissa [...] with immediate action. So, the Jews mentioned in the news weren’t just barred from taking part in the commemoration. They were also excluded from the local Jewish Community. The Norwegian Association against Anti-Semitism has also reacted. In a press release they state: - We react strongly against extremist groups who try to bring the Middle Eastern conflict into what is and should be a commemoration of Nazi crimes. On their website the Democratic Party claims that the rightwing demonstrants were anti-Nazis who were barred from demonstrating by anti-Semites who have taken over the Kristallnacht commemoration. Sadly, this is also the impression several Norwegian media and the Simon Wiesenthal Centre leaves us with. In the case of the media that’s lousy journalism. In the case of SWC it’s lousy research. That said it is a sad fact that both the extreme left and the extreme right use the anniversary of the Kristallnacht for their own political purposes, as pointed out in the press release from the Jewish congregation in Oslo. This is the problem both the media and SWC should have adressed.
Bjørn Stærk | 2004-11-13 11:41 |
Link
For more on this, see Andrew Sullivan, Jan Haugland, and Leif Knutsen 1 2 3. I'm mostly with Øyvind on this one: This was blown out of proportion, first by sensation-hungry journalists and then by pro-Israelis who found the story too good not to spread. Norwegian police chasing Jews away from a Kristallnacht commemoration - it just sounds right to those of us who believe that anti-Israelism often crosses the border into anti-semitism. There is a minor scandal here, which is that anti-racists and pro-Israelis seem unable to come together over the Holocaust, which was both the worst product of racism in history and the focal point of modern Israeli history. Both should acknowledge the other group's right to commemorate it and draw lessons from it. Ex-Christian, now Muslim | 2004-11-13 12:06 | Link When you refer to anti jewish feelings, dont say anti semitism, because it is not anti semitism, otherwise it will be anti-arabs as well since the Arabs are also semitic before even Moses was born ! Allan, Melbourne | 2004-11-13 12:28 | Link Phew, so the anti-rasists were not anti-semites after all. Good thing! RSN | 2004-11-13 12:35 | Link Oyvind and Bjorn, I disagree. Just the fact that Jews were prohibited from displaying the Israeli flag says something about Norwegian society's attempt to separate Kristallnacht from Israel and make it into a commemoration event where they can put their humility proudly on display. It's so very Lutheran. The fact remains that all of Europe had a big, big hand in the creation of the state of Israel. It was the Europeans who cooperated with the Nazis in the Holocaust; it could not have been done alone by the Nazis. After it was over, there was the embarrassing question of what to do with the survivors. Repatriation was a problem, since the properties of Jews were now occupied by others. And who could blame the Jews for feeling uneasy about returning to those "homes" and "neighborhoods"? Europe breathed a collective sigh of relief when Jews left for Israel, and supported the idea of an Israeli state from the get go. To deny that is to engage in gross revisionism and distortion. Now that the majority of Jews are gone, European anti-Semitism can be practised anew, albeit with the occasional public ceremony demonstrating remorse. And the Arabs are cheered on as they try to complete the original project of the Europeans: the elimination of the Jews. Ex-Christian, now Muslim | 2004-11-13 12:46 | Link RSN ''And the Arabs are cheered on as they try to complete the original project of the Europeans: the elimination of the Jews.''
What a hypocrite ! Kevin McDonnell, Bergen | 2004-11-13 13:29 | Link Bjørn, I think when you say that the minor scandal is that anti-racists and pro-Israelis were unable to come together over the Holocaust, you have it just about right. I must say it ticks me off immensely when "news" that will naturally incite strong reactions, is the news that is most likely to be "hyped" by a media that is hungry for a big story. It irritates me almost as much as the pre-conceived narrative that often seems to rewrite history in real time, regardless of the facts. As I've said before, this is the philosophical core of that phenonmenon called "spin" which has been discussed before. Sadly, I think that looking superficially at what actually DID happen, makes it easy to airbrush the implications of why there was even this lesser story. You alluded to it when you said that the holocaust was both the worst product of racism in history and the focal point of modern Israeli history. There are forces at play here which made this possible... and they are the same forces which made the original spin on the story seem as though it actually could have been accurate. And there is a story unfolding there which will continue to unfold. Actually, the first I heard of this story at all was when I saw it referenced in the comment section of the post you did yesterday. I was skeptical because it seemed amazing... but I did not dismiss it as impossible out if hand... which is disturbing. So in any case, thanks for the clarification.
Kevin Bjørn Stærk | 2004-11-13 14:03 | Link Ex-Christian: When you refer to anti jewish feelings, dont say anti semitism, because it is not anti semitism, otherwise it will be anti-arabs as well since the Arabs are also semitic before even Moses was born ! Incorrect. The word "anti-semitism" was defined as "anti-Jew" in the 19th century, and has never referred to hatred of Arabs. "Semitic" is a language group which was defined to include both Hebrew and Arabic. There is no "semitic" race. Ex-Christian, now Muslim | 2004-11-13 14:16 | Link You got it TERRIBLY WRONG Bjørn: Semitism" comes from the name of a character in the Bible, whose name was Shem. If you will remember, Noah had three sons who were named Ham, Shem and Japeth. Those who came from Ham were called "Hamites," those who came from Shem were called "Shemites," or "Semites," and those who were descended from Japheth were called "Japhethites." Therefore, anyone who is against the descendants of Shem, would be "Anti-Semitic.: Is that so? Well, let's follow it out a little further. A great-grandson of Shem was born and was named Eber, of Heber. You will find that in Genesis 11:14. Heber had descendants who were called "Hebrews," and his most notable descendant was a man named Abraham, who is called a "Hebrew." (Genesis 14:13) The descendants of Abram (or Abraham) were called Hebrews, especially when the Children of Israel were in Egypt, and the Egyptians called them by that name, "Hebrews." Remember, all the descendants of Abraham were, and are, Hebrews. Abraham had two sons. The first-born son was named Ishmael. His mother was Hagar, an Egyptian. Because Ishmael was not the son of Abraham's wife, he was not given the blessings, which were promised to Abraham, but was to head up a different race of people. The Arabs of today are the descendants of Ishmael. The Arabs are a Hebrew people, because they came from Abraham, who was a Hebrew. The Arabs are also a Semitic people because they came from Shem, the son of Noah. As the Arabs are Semitic, then, anyone who is against the Arabs are" Anti-Semitic." So, if the Jews today are fighting the Arabs, the Jews are" Anti-Semitic," because the Arabs are Semites. Therefore, if the Jews are against the Arabs they are" Anti-Semitic" and should be charge with ''Ani-Semitism'' More readings here: ANTI-SEMITISM: WHAT IT REALLY IS! http://amprom.org/documents_pages/antisemitism.html It is the time to break the jewish monopoly over the title SEMITIC because the jews are not the only semitics in the world.
Michael Farris | 2004-11-13 14:47 | Link "When you refer to anti jewish feelings, dont say anti semitism, because it is not anti semitism, otherwise it will be anti-arabs as well since the Arabs are also semitic before even Moses was born" Okay, what about "Anti-Jewish bigotism" instead? "Jew hatred"???? "Judophobic"???? But no matter what you call it, there's no way to put a nice name on it. Kevin McDonnell, Bergen | 2004-11-13 14:58 | Link Ex Christian, Be that as it may, Bjørn is quite correct when he says that the meaning of the term has become widely accepted as meaning anti-Jew. In fact, in its modern etymology it was a bit artful, and came to replace the term Jew Hatred (which was actually a more honest term and thus harder to rationalize intellectually) in the 19th Century, first in Germany (appropriately enough). Tracing the original use of "Semitic" in modern times, Bjørn is correct again when he says that it is a common nomenclature for a group of languages which have clear commonality in one of the post Sumerian linguistic branches. The reference you make to the biblical "origin" is all well and good, but it is essentially a non sequitur regarding the actual usage of the word itself; and if I might add, is actually a very good example of how your tendency to "redefine" anything that touches on matters Jewish, is highly revealing as to your perspective on what an "enlightened" thought is. I always find it amusing (albeit disturbing) how your ilk has adapted so readily to postmodern sophistry from deconstruction to forms of literary criticism to convoluted historical revisionism in reshaping meaning in your own minds, and thus in your rhetoric. One would think it intuitive that the "nuance" and anchorless methodologies of the meainglessness mongers of faux progressivism would be anathema to an ideology so grounded in self proclaimed moral certainty and ultimate truth. Its extremely revealing as its true nature (and yours) ... that this is not so. KM Bjørn Stærk | 2004-11-13 15:15 | Link Ex-Christian: You got it TERRIBLY WRONG Bjørn. Words mean whatever everyone believes they mean. Anti-semitism has meant hatred of Jews ever since the word was invented in the 19th century. ("Semitic" is a much older word than "anti-semitic", descending as you correctly point out from Shem, son of Noah.) What you mean is that you wish anti-semitism didn't mean hatred of Jews, and that you want it to mean hatred of Jews, Arabs, Maltesans and Ethiopians, (who also speak Semitic languages). I'm not going to follow your wish, but there's a good way to solve this: Every time I write "anti-semitism", substitute the word with "Jew-hatred" in your own mind. Because that is the sense I use it in. Bjørn Stærk | 2004-11-13 15:26 | Link Allan: This episode has already been used by several posters on this blog stating how bad things are in Norway, well they were proven wrong alright. And on many other blogs. There's a lesson here about spreading ideas we want to believe. The question is: How can the damage be reversed? Andrew Sullivan is read by more than a hundred thousand people a day. RSN: Just the fact that Jews were prohibited from displaying the Israeli flag says something about Norwegian society's attempt to separate Kristallnacht from Israel and make it into a commemoration event where they can put their humility proudly on display. It says something, but what it doesn't say is that Jews aren't allow to commemorate the Holocaust. The story most blogs reported left out so many facts that it was incorrect. Yes, there's a battle over the memory of the Holocaust, between those who see it as a racist event and those who see it as a Jewish event. I believe it's both. I also believe it's a shame pro-Israelis and anti-racists can't find common ground here, but that if the only way they can find that ground is by ignoring the Middle East alltogether, then it is rude of pro-Israelis to show up with Israeli flags. nilsr, oslo | 2004-11-13 16:05 | Link Bjørn, I see the point about those being rejected, they probobly shouldn`t be there, but I don`t think the press are being totaly off target. The fact that paroles like “Stop incitement against Muslims” were agreed upon but no mention of the Jews speaks of some political bearings here. Kevin McDonnell, Bergen | 2004-11-13 16:08 | Link Bjørn, "I also believe it's a shame pro-Israelis and anti-racists can't find common ground here..." I agree, but as I said above, the barriers between them are contrived, and they are bound up in the forces that have brought us to this historic, and often history denying place. "but that if the only way they can find that ground is by ignoring the Middle East alltogether, then it is rude of pro-Israelis to show up with Israeli flags. " And because of what I refer to (though admittedly vaguely) above, here I disagree. The principle that things should appear to be about what their actual substance is about, does not preclude the pro-Israelis bringing Israeli flags to a commemoration of Kristallnacht. Would it have been different if it were the case that the groups that were insisting on bearing the flag were NOT apparrently "extremists"? What if the point that a more reasonable group was earnestly making is that the holocaust IS metaphysically bound to the existence of the State of Israel. Is it "rude" to try to make this point part of the discourse? I think not. And within the bounds of free speech "rudeness" is rarely a relevant issue, as you yourself stated yesterday when referring to its nature regarding recent events in Holland.(At one point I believe you used the term "thick-skinned" to describe what is often necessary to engage in free society... and rightly implied that this is a good thing for both truth and freedom.) If the reaction to Israeli flags would have been the "menacing" presence of Palestinian flags along the commemorative route, all the more reason to permit it. Questions need to be asked, not couched in simpering rhetoric and relativistic nonsense. If this seems "unhelpful" to those who would like a nice pleasant Kristallnacht Commemoration... and they impose their authority on its participants in order to make it not so... then we have missed an existentially critical point haven't we? It may seem like a good idea to feel good about the evening and prevent any unpleasantness, but then... this is part of the insidious folly that is making these troubled times potentially catastrophic times. Bjørn, if the only way to "make" anti-racists and pro Israelis find common ground is to impose a denial of where they diverge, than it is hardly common ground that they find, ikke sant? It is an illusion of that which actually serves to perpetuate a state where the so called anti-racists are not standing openly and unafraid on the principles they claim to hold, and where the pro-Israelis can be said to be more about what they are against, than what they are for. That is why the operative word in free speech, free expression and free assembly... is free. This is a seperate issue completely from the wrongness of how the story was actually spun. Its important to keep it as such (that's an ever important caveat in assessing media events). While I agree with both your position regarding the after the fact "spin train", and the fundamental nature of the events it referred to, I think you err in your final assessment. I base this on your own, well formed and often articulately stated principles regarding Liberty and transparency in a free society. Cheers, Kevin Isdor | 2004-11-13 16:21 | Link Ex-Christian now muslim, Why would muslims want to save Jews from total destruction during the middle ages? You yourself said that you believed that Jews eat babies in their religious rituals. Why would you muslims ever want to save such people? I don't really believe that Jews eat babies. Only because I have known many jews but never seen any of them eat babies. Of course I can't be completely sure. But hypothetically if I knew of a religion that was similarily barberic, I wouldn't go out of my way to preserve it or its believers. Especially if this very hypothetical religion posed such a danger to me and of course my children. Strange... Totoro, U.S. | 2004-11-13 16:51 | Link Just saying that the Israeli flag is an incitement speaks VOLUMES about the state of anti-Semitism in Norway. No amount of "deconstructing" can take away the fact that the state of Israel is very dear to most Jewish people. To ban the Israeli flag in a parade commemorating Kristallnacht is beyond bizarre. Time for you so-called logical people to reread George Orwell's 1984. Seriously--there are so many ideas that jump out, including the rewriting of history and the meaning of words, as well as the 5-minute hate sessions. Also pertinent, but a lot more tedious, is Gulliver's Travels, with emphasis on the scientific people who live on an island in the sky. We've discussed this ad nauseum on your blog, Bjorn, but the fact remains that those who want to see Israel destroyed also want to see the Jewish people destroyed. You can "spin" this any way you want. Totoro, U.S. | 2004-11-13 17:02 | Link Just went from your blog to Europundits, where Nelson Ascher discusses the phemonenon of the "voluptuousness of reality"--a mental condition whereby, in an effort to be strictly hardnosed and logical, one becomes immobilized and even irrational. Scroll down. It's near the bottom of his current post on the death of Arafat. Slightly OT but not really--the Presbyterian Church (USA) has just voted to divest itself of all stock that do business with Israel. Are these people (1) fair (2) noble (3) working for an evil cause? I'm sure they think they're fair and noble. Kim Sook-Im,US | 2004-11-13 17:03 | Link hi isdor, http://www.lankaweb.com/news/items02/140802-3.html and also go to: Thank you, Kim Sook-Im Gill Doyle, California | 2004-11-13 17:09 | Link I still don't understand why Israeli flags were not allowed in the parade. And I don't understand why the organizers could not include in their procession Jews of every opinion -- right, left, and center. Was this not an event that was supposed to commemorate what happened to the Jews? And were there not then, as there are now, Jews of every opinion? The fact that Israeli flags are apparently regarded in Norway as something akin to Nazi swastikas is also worth criticizing, I think. Is Israel's very existence controversial in Norway? The flag represents Israel, but it does not necessarily represent Israel's more repressive policies. Kim Sook-Im,US | 2004-11-13 17:16 | Link ex-christian, strictly arabs should be referred to as hamito-semitic. At any rate , if you have read my other comments in the other thread you would reallise that the ahl sSunnah wa lJamah/wa shia' are practising a form of biblical sunnism, or practising a form of old testamental judeo-christianity..the religion of the olden pharasees with its cult like obsession with irrational rites and rituals , obligatory 5x/day salaat/prayer, siyam,fasting, stoning of adulteress, denigration of women, hijab/head dress, which is an old jewish custom, keeping fist-length beard, scrapping and bowing to mecca/actually originally to jerusalem, paying of zakat or obligatory tithes, all these are not quranic, but derived from old judeochristianity with influence of zoroastrian, sabaean, mandaen etc folklores, practises, customs etc. You should go and take a look at the site : www.free-minds.org and www.progressivemuslims.org also there is the possiblity that all this information 'transmitted/revealed' to all these so called prophets could be nothing more than high tech psychotronic manipulations by more highly evolved and intelligent sentient beings w/in the solar system or originating extra- solar system. Zecharia Sitchin is author of a fascinating hypothesis about the extra terrestrial origins of the olden gods of the abrahamic religions/ mentioned in the bible as the annunakis or nephilims. Here are the sites: www.xfacts.com shukran lakum wa ma3a salaamah Kim Sook-Im Jan Haugland, Bergen | 2004-11-13 17:20 | Link Well, that was the attempted whitewash. The police, as reported in the media (which may or may not be correct) has a quite different version. They said even the star of david was not welcome. I am also interested in hearing which jews, carrying a star of david, actually participated in the march this year. Most Norwegians don't even see a problem with banning the Israeli flag in a memory of the kristallnacht, and that is maybe the most troubling thing of all. Pro-Palestinian groups who have been supporting and fighting a terror war against Israel and jews generally for decades have no business even getting close to a kristallnacht march. Instead they have hijacked it. The above article, while emphasisisng that Det Mosaiske Trossamfund excluded Uriely, conveniently ignores that they also refused to participate in the march because of the anti-semitic left-wing groups that were prominent in it. If the march organisers had kicked out the "Blitz" anarchists, who have committed many acts of vandalism against jews in Norway, as well as the people wearing kufiahs ("palestina-skjerf") in support of Palestinian terrorism, then they would have some leg to stand on. The above article also seems to pretend it was against the organiser's wishes and plans that Kåre Willoch last year turned the march into an Israel-bashing contest. Who are they trying to fool? As it is, "SOS Rasisme" has two years running made a memorial march of the start of the murder of six million European jews into an anti-Israel propaganda vehicle. If they don't see that this is an atrocity, an insult to the victims of the Holocaust (many survivors and relatives live in Israel, remember?) and politically tone-deaf, then they have a serious problem. Threatening to sue bloggers who point this out, like they did to Leif Knudesn, doesn't make it at all better. Ex-Christian, now Muslim | 2004-11-13 17:32 | Link Jan Haugland, Bergen '' If the march organisers had kicked out the "Blitz" anarchists, who have committed many acts of vandalism against jews in Norway, as well as the people wearing kufiahs ("palestina-skjerf") in support of Palestinian terrorism, then they would have some leg to stand on. ''
Gunnar, Maryland | 2004-11-13 17:52 | Link >> They said even the star of david was not welcome. LOL. Ok, the plot thickens. All of Bjørn's arguments work in reverse as well. I'm here waiting anxiously for the "real" story. What I don't get is how in the world the police could have the right to do any of this? Wouldn't a restriction of this sort be a civil rights issue? Don't people have a right to walk around with whatever flag they want to? Øyvind, Bergen | 2004-11-13 18:26 | Link Bjørn: In fact, we should probably all use the word "Jew-hatred", instead. Not because anti-Semitism means something else (which can be reasonably argued), but because "Jew-hatred" is a better word. Øyvind Øyvind, Bergen | 2004-11-13 19:17 | Link Gill Doyle: The fact that Israeli flags are apparently regarded in Norway as something akin to Nazi swastikas is also worth criticizing, I think. Pardon my French, but that is bullshit. Israeli flags are not regarded as akin to Nazi swastikas. The arrangers of the commemoration simply did not want it to turn into to a political demonstration for or against Israeli, and therefore didn't want to have flags in the demonstration, neither Israeli nor Palestinian. The background is, of course, partly Willochs critique of Israel last year, a critique that created heavy controverse.That controverse was over a real issue, and SOS Rasisme has taken it seriously. As they should. While their choice can be criticized from different perspectives, it does not signal neither Jew-hatred nor anti-Israeli sentiments. Personally I think it is a sensible choice as it is fully possible to be against both Nazism and anti-Semitism and at the same time sceptical to the state of Israel. It's also simply not true that people wearing David-stars (or for that matter other religious symbols) were barred from taking part in the commemoration. As a matter of fact, the David Star was even used on the official poster for the commemoration. I'll include my translation from the press release from the Det Mosaiske Trossamfund, perhaps the most sensible comment to what happened. I would say that their statements carry much more weight than Jan Hauglands statements on "whitewash". Det Mosaiske Trossamfund astonished over TV2-report The board of Det Mosaiske Trossamfund has, with some astonishment, seen the TV2-reports concerning claims that Jews were barred from taking part in the commemoration SOS-Rasisme arranged in connection with the anniversary of the Kristallnacht 9. november. We want to stress that DMT was invited to take part in the commemoration The board of Det Mosaiske Trossamfund in Oslo (DMT) has been informed that Norsk Israelsenter (NIS) took part in a demonstration in the centre of Oslo on the 9th of November, together with the Democratic party and Forum against Islamization. FOMI represents an ideology that DMT as a cultural and religious minority in the Norwegian society denounces. DMT has no cooperation with NIS. We are, however, aware of the organization being led by Erez Uriely and Rachel Suissa, both have been members in DMT. DMT as a Jewish congregation does not take an opinion in specific political questions if these questions does not have direct consequenses to the work or existance of the congregation in the Norwegian society. This is also true for the Middle East-conflict, eventhough many of our members, of natural reasons, have a deep sympathy with the land and people of Israel. We hope, and pray, that a solution must be found in the conflict that to as a large a degree as possible considers the rights and needs of all parties making it possible for all people and cultures in the region to find a future of peaceful co-existence. From painful experience we know how important it is to fight against all anti-Semitism and racism, and we find it regrettable that representants from both the far left and the far right has used the anniversary of the Kristallnacht to make political statements that go wider than a commemoration of the incomprehensible persecution of Jews by Nazi-Germany. This is the background for our choice not to take part in the commemorations of the Kristallnacht the last few years. Because NIS and the leadership of that organization decided to cooperate with actors DMT strongly condemns the board chose to immediately exclude Erez Uriely and Rachel Suissa from Det Mosaiske Trossamfund on the 9th of November. Might I add that Hauglands statements on wearing a kufiah being an equivalent of supporting terrorism left me baffled, too. Øyvind Bjørn Stærk | 2004-11-13 19:20 | Link Kevin: Is it "rude" to try to make this point part of the discourse? If you want to make it together with other people, yes. It would be rude to hold a meeting where Muslims and non-Muslims come together to condemn the van Gogh murder, and then show Submission at that meeting. If the pro-Israelis don't like the profile of the antiracists' Kristallnacht commemoration, they should create their own. But it seems to me that the anti-racists went pretty far to make their commemoration open for Jews and pro-Israelis. That invitation should have been accepted. For pro-Israelis and anti-racists to come together over the Holocaust would have been a powerful message. They can quarrel over Israel the rest of the year. Totoro: Just saying that the Israeli flag is an incitement speaks VOLUMES about the state of anti-Semitism in Norway. To many anti-racists, the Israeli flag symbolizes a brutal occupation, just as to pro-Israelis the Palestinian flag symbolizes terrorism. If both groups are to be able to take part in a commemoration of an event that is important to both of them, it follows that they shouldn't go about waving Israeli and Palestinian flags. The anti-racists did their part by not waving Palestinian flags. A group of pro-Israelis showed up with Israeli flags. How do you suggest the anti-racists react to that? Should they have tried to resolve the entire Middle East debate there and then? Debate it all through until one side changes their mind? Or insist that the commemoration stay away from modern Middle Eastern politics? Seems obvious to me that the pro-Israelis should either have accepted the terms for taking part in an ME-neutral event, or held their own. Jan Haugland: They said even the star of david was not welcome. I am also interested in hearing which jews, carrying a star of david, actually participated in the march this year. It would be hypocritical to ban the star of David and allow the kufiahs. Were anyone turned away simply for wearing stars of David, or just the ones who also carried Israeli flags? But that is still just hypocrisy. The original story about Jews turned away for being visibly Jewish lacked a lot of vital details. By the way, I don't dispute that the anti-racists have hijacked this event - in the past with an openly anti-Israeli message, and this year by showing up in larger numbers. But I think it would be worth the attempt to make this an event anti-racists, pro-Israelis and Jews can have in common. At least on this one day they could attempt diplomacy. Gunnar: I'm here waiting anxiously for the "real" story. What I don't get is how in the world the police could have the right to do any of this? Wouldn't a restriction of this sort be a civil rights issue? Any potentially volatile event is closely attended by the police, to prevent violence. I suspect the organizers pointed out the pro-Israelis to the police as a likely source of trouble. They were probably right. Instead of removing every leftist activist who might be provoked by an Israeli flag, the police removed the Israeli flags. I seriously doubt they did that for political reasons, and they were within their rights. Public peace trumps the right to protest - even in your country, unless I'm mistaken. Totoro, U.S. | 2004-11-13 19:47 | Link Bjorn . . . You said: "Public peace trumps the right to protest - even in your country, unless I'm mistaken." No, it doesn't work that way. Check out photos of protestors in the United States. I'm sorry you can't see that the Israeli flag is not a "symbol of brutal occupation." It is a symbol of the Jewish state. It sounds like the Jews of Norway have become dhimmified. Those who want to carry the Israeli flag are considered "right wingers." The world is upside down. Propaganda has triumphed over reality. Be assured that us Jews will fight (figuratively and literally) to protect the Jewish state from destruction. If that disturbs the peace of Europeans and others, well that's just too bad. The progress of delegimitizing Israel is proceeding rapidly. But I want to all to think what a world without Jews would be like. Really think about it. The reason you don't see many Jewish terrorists is because it's against OUR Jewish religion to harm the innocent. What if the survivors of a new Holocaust abandoned their JEWISH religion and became vengeful. Think about it. The Israeli occupation is not brutal. If you want to find brutal, look elsewhere. Israelis are trying to defend their country as best they can while millions of dollars are being spent to arm the terrorists who attack them. The hypocrisy of Norwegians is unbelievable.
Bjørn Stærk | 2004-11-13 20:06 | Link Totoro: No, it doesn't work that way. Check out photos of protestors in the United States. So any group of any size can walk anywhere they like and shout slogans? They don't need permits? They're not closed off in free speech zones if there are particular fears of violence? This is news to me. I'm sorry you can't see that the Israeli flag is not a "symbol of brutal occupation." It is a symbol of the Jewish state. You believe that. I believe that. Most of the anti-racists in questions do not. So the question is: Should anti-racists and pro-Israelis attempt to hold a Kristallnacht commemoration together, or should they hold their own? Because if there is any value in holding it together, it's only natural they they should put apart issues they disagree about which are not directly related to the issue. The Holocaust was a horrible product of racism independently of whether the Israeli occupation of Palestine is racist. The Holocaust was a horrible massacre of Jews independently of whether Israel is in the right today. It sounds like the Jews of Norway have become dhimmified. Those who want to carry the Israeli flag are considered "right wingers." But these people were right wingers, at least in the immigration and Islam critical sense of the word. The hypocrisy of Norwegians is unbelievable. Absolutely. The question is: Is there no place at all where anti-racists and pro-Israelis can come together? Not even over something everyone agrees is one of the most horrible events in history? Gunnar, Maryland | 2004-11-13 20:11 | Link >>I suspect the organizers pointed out the pro-Israelis to the police as a likely source of trouble. ok, please excuse my ignorance. Certainly, the organizers have that right. I assumed that jewish folks organized it, so I didn't expect that they would exclude israeli flags. >>Public peace trumps the right to protest - even in your country, unless I'm mistaken. As unlikely as it may seem from my postings, my country is Norway. In the country that I'm currently residing in, I don't believe that people in the public can be touched by the police, until they actually break a law. IOW, the authorities can't do anything about people who might do something. Where people get confused is the distinction between public and private events. A private event on private property is different, since the property owner has the right to remove anyone for any reason whatsoever. For example, the big party conventions. Jan Haugland, Bergen | 2004-11-13 20:18 | Link Bjørn: I mostly agree with you about various issues, Bjørn, but this baffles me. Are you seriously arguing that for a commemoration for Jews killed by the nazis, the jews should be so polite as to not wear the national flag of the Jewish State, to not offend the participants who openly support terrorists who work hard to organise the second Holocaust? Palestinian flags surely have nothing to do on a kristallnacht memorial - period. Israel was created as a direct result of the Holocaust, because events had proved that in the diaspora, jews repeatedly suffered pogroms and genocide. The flag represents the only true hope for securing that the tragedy is not repeated. Equalling Israeli and Palestinian flags and pretend to reach a "compromise" by banning both is disingenious.
Det Mosaiske Trossamfunn chose to not participate, in protest against leftist extremists who have hijacked the occasion. That is really all we need to know. They don't like the jewish individuals who were present at the march for their political views. How does any of this contradict the version of events TV2 reported? They were, after all, not there. Øyvind, if you don't see how westerners wearing the late terrorist godfather Arafat's famous headgear is a support of terrorism, I'm afraid I can't help you. Ex-Christian, now Muslim | 2004-11-13 20:25 | Link Isdor ''Ex-Christian now muslim, Why would muslims want to save Jews from total destruction during the middle ages?''
Source : Sarina Roffé is a career journalist and the author of Branching Out: The Kassin and Labaton Dynasties . She is a member of the Jewish Genealogical Society, Inc. of New York, and Brooklyn's Syrian Jewish community. JEWISH GATES The tolerance of the Umayyad regime made Muslim Spain a refuge for Jews, and their numbers increased dramatically. Source:The Jewish Gates http://www.jewishgates.com/file.asp?File_ID=126 Colin Thubron, the British author, writes in his book Jerusalem, " In the early centuries, the Muslims were generally tolerant of the Jews and lived with them peacefully while Europe was steeped in persecution.'' Salman ben Yeruham, A Karaite Jewish author, writing about A.D. 950, the Muslims granted the Jews access to Jerusalem and its holy sites. Salman wrote: "As it is known, Jerusalem remained under the rule of the Rum [the Byzantines] for more than 500 years, during which they [the Jews] werenot able to enter Jerusalem. Anyone who was discovered entering was ''killed''. When by the mercy of the God of Israel the Rum departed from us and the kingdom of Ishmael [the Arabs] appeared, the Jews were granted permission to enter and reside there." During the reign of Saladin this traditional Islamic tolerance continued. Conversely, when the Crusaders entered Jerusalem, they burned the Jews in their synagogue. From 1099 to 1189, Jews were not allowed to live in the city. But with the Muslim repossession of Jerusalem, Jews were allowed to return. The Spanish poet Yehuda al-Harizi, who was in Jerusalem in 1207, described the significance for the Jews of the recovery of Jerusalem by Saladin: [ In A.D. 1190] God aroused the spirit of the prince of the Ishmaelites [Saladin], a prudent and courageous man, who came with his entire army, besieged Jerusalem, took it and had it proclaimed throughout the country that he would receive and accept the entire race of Ephraim, wherever they came from. And so we came from all comers of the world to take up residence here. We now live here in the shadow of peace. Further testament to Saladin's tolerance comes from the eminent German Jewish historian of the Nineteenth Century, Heinrich Graetz.In his Geschichte der Juden [History of the Jews], vol. 11, published in 1853, he states that the Sultan, " opened the whole kingdom to the persecuted Jews, so they came to it, seeking security and finding justice.'' At about the same time that Jews were fleeing from Spain and seeking refuge in Arab lands and elsewhere (15th and 16th Centuries), the Ottoman Empire opened its doors to them and gave them refuge. The prominent Jewish banker Don Joseph Nasi, a refugee from Portugal, was made advisor to Sultan Suleiman who showered the emigre with honors. There are a number of statements from prominent Jews expressing gratitude to the Ottomans for their generous treatment of fugitive Jews. In his History of the Jews, A. L. Sachar, a former president of Brandeis University, noted: "Jews had found refuge in the Ottoman dominions for many decades before the expulsion from Spain. During the fifteenth-century persecutions in Germany, thousands had fled eastward and had been well received in the Turkish provinces. Life was secure and the morrow could be greeted without terror.'' Source : Arab American Roman Catholic Community: http://www.al-bushra.org/jerusalem1/jerhist.htm Jan Haugland, Bergen | 2004-11-13 20:28 | Link Oh, and Øyvind, in the article above you write "The story isn’t true" But, in fact, everything you summarised above that line is true. Yes, you have additional information, there are counter-arguments, but as far as it goes what TV2 reported is true. What I wrote is true. Thus, Øyvind, you are dishonest, and since you explicitly mentioned my blog, I take that as an accusation of dishonesty that you simply haven't backed up with facts. You could have said there was more to the story, but you said "the story isn't true" which is a blatantly dishonest statement. I am looking forward to seeing your apology. It would also be interesting to see evidence that there actually were some jews marching with stars of david present. Any pictures? Any name? If that would be true, it would certainly be significant for the story. If it isn't, it would be another dishonest defence of "SOS Rasisme". Ex-Christian, now Muslim | 2004-11-13 20:29 | Link Jan Haugland, Bergen ''Israel was created as a direct result of the Holocaust, because events had proved that in the diaspora, jews repeatedly suffered pogroms and genocide. ''
T Hansen - Denmark | 2004-11-13 20:35 | Link Fundamentally I have nothing against safeguarding a memorial of such a sad event from political manifestions. "The organizations finds it *particularly repulsive” that these attempts were made by “groups that use the same rhetorics of hatred against Muslims as the Nazis used against Jews in the thirties" I don´t know anything about this democratic party in Norway. But I do know a lot of parties here in Europe are being compared with nazis for little reason - just one critic remark of Islam appears to be enough at times. SOS racisme in Norway I don´t know much about as well but here in Denmark it´s made up largely with individuals from International socialists and DKP/ML. The first being neotrotkists the second being Communists which still consider Stalin a comrade. They respected not bringing a palestinian flag fine, but how about mentioning who they are and what they stand for when they don´t cover themselves under a figleaf of antirascism? Michael Farris | 2004-11-13 20:35 | Link "BUT WHY THE ARABS AND THE PALESTINEANS SHOULD PAY FOR 'YOUR' CRIMES AGAINST THE JEWS ????" That's not the question. The question is why do the Palestinians do so poorly in direct competition with the Jewish population (and why do most other Arab groups do so poorly when forced to compete with Palestinians?) And learn some history, other Arabs/Moslems detest your beloved Palestinians and are guilty of worse crimes against them than the Israelis are. Isdor | 2004-11-13 20:40 | Link Ex-Christian now muslim, I wasn't claiming that Christians weren't intolerant of Jews or that Muslims were. I was asking why would muslims want to aid the Jews even though they are evil enough to eat babies. Why would muslims want to save Jews from total destruction during the middle ages? You yourself said that you believed that Jews eat babies in their religious rituals. Why would you muslims ever want to save such people? I don't really believe that Jews eat babies. Only because I have known many jews but never seen any of them eat babies. Of course I can't be completely sure. But hypothetically if I knew of a religion that was similarily barberic, I wouldn't go out of my way to preserve it or its believers. Especially if this very hypothetical religion posed such a danger to me and of course my children. Strange... Ex-Christian, now Muslim | 2004-11-13 20:41 | Link Someone here said earlier that the Nazi jews are not brutal in their occupation of the palestinean land, well, let us see the facts: Let us look at this CHRISTIAN Palestinean town under the nazi jewish occupation: ''Beit Jala's overall situation deteriorated dramatically during the years of the Israeli occupation, more than 6,000 dunams of land (about half of the the total land area of the town ) were confiscated for the establishment of Israeli settlements in two strategic areas -one at the highest point of the towns Mount Everest, and the other on the northern side of the town adjacent to Jerusalem, Gilo settlement, which was established totally on confiscated land from the Beit Jala community. Thousands of dunams of the towns most fertile farmland have been swallowed up by Israeli settlement roads, and a whole populated area in the northern part of the town has been cut off and annexed to the Jerusalem municipality . Unemployment and disguised unemployment remain very high in the town, forcing many people to nurture the idea of leaving the country and seeking immigration to make living, a thing which our Municipality works hard to prevent by creating job opportunities. Let us read the UN Commission on Human rights regarding the sadistic nazi jewish occupation of the palestinean land:
http://www.unhchr.ch/huricane/huricane.nsf/view01/400428B523407689C1256E770057784B?opendocument How about AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL ? Israel/Occupied Territories: Excessive use of force http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGMDE150952004?open&of=ENG-ISR Israel/Occupied Territories: Israeli settlers wage campaign of intimidation on Palestinians and internationals alike http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGMDE150992004?open&of=ENG-ISR Israel/Occupied Territories: Killing of children must be investigated http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGMDE150552004?open&of=ENG-ISR
Razing Rafah: http://hrw.org/reports/2004/rafah1004/ Mass Home Demolitions in the Gaza Strip http://hrw.org/campaigns/gaza/
In 1948 thousands of Palestinians took refuge or were driven forcefully from their homes by the Israeli terrorist forces during the war that followed the proclamation of the state of Israel. Many settled in Lebanon. In 1968, Israeli terrorist commandos blew up 13 airliners at Beirut airport. In April 1973, Israeli elite troops, including present-day Foreign Minister Ehud Barak disguised as a woman, entered Beirut flats and shot dead three Palestinian. In March 1978, Israel attacked PLO positions in south Lebanon and occupied a 10 km (six mile)-wide strip north of the Lebanese border. About 1,500 people were killed, mostly Lebanese and Palestinian civilians. In 1978, U.N. Security Council resolution 425 ordered the Israelis to leave Lebanon. They refused! Israel has never complied with a single UN resolution which has been against its illegitimate interests. In 1981, Israel launched air raids on Beirut, killing hundreds of civilians. In July 1982, Israel invaded Lebanon with the declared aim of routing Palestinian guerrillas. Israeli Defense Minister Ariel Sharon promised his army would stop after 40 km (25 miles) but it encircled Beirut, 40 km further north. After bombardments by the Zionist Israeli Terrorists, about 20,000 people were killed, mostly Palestinian and Lebanese civilians. In September 1982, Israeli forces stormed west Beirut, and supported an assault on the Palestinian refugee camps of Sabra and Shatila and allowed more than 1500 of innocent refugees to be slaughtered. In 1985, Israel, under Prime Minister Shimon Peres, pulled most of its forces out of Lebanon and set up a 15 km (nine mile)-wide occupation zone to stop cross-border attacks! The Israeli Terrorist Regime then faced a more relentless resistance force: Hizbullah. In February 1992, in a terrorist act, Israeli gunship helicopters rocketed the car of Lebanese leader Sheikh Abbas Musawi, killing him, his wife and son. Then Israeli forces stormed two villages north of the occupation zone. In July 1993, Israel unleashed "Operation Accountability," a week-long air, artillery and naval blitz in which 130 people, mostly Lebanese civilians, were killed and 300,000 fled their homes. In April 11, 1996, Israel unleashed "Operation Grapes of Wrath". This Israeli genocide with more than 14,000 shells and 1,500 air raids against innocent civilians, Killed more than 300 people mostly women and children (including 102 refugees shelled at a U.N. base in the south), thousands injured, damaged or destroyed more than 50 villages or cities and left more than 500,000 civilians with no home or shelter. http://www.israel-state-terrorism.org Ex-Christian, now Muslim | 2004-11-13 20:44 | Link Isdor I did not say 'I' believe jews eat christian babaies, it was Famous CHRISTIAN Beside, Muslims have a duty to save all humanity, not only the jews. I will not hesitate to save any jew even now even most of the jews nowadays are the archenemies of muslims along with the christian fascists who rule America. Øyvind, Bergen | 2004-11-13 20:47 | Link Jan: When I visited Brüssels last summer I saw a pro-Palestinian demonstration. Oddly, a Jewish man stood a few metres away from the rest of the demonstrators. I first thought he was demonstrating for Israel, and I found him to be brave to stand up against the other demonstrators all alone. I was prejudiced. He was demonstrating against Israel. If I am not mistaken (and if my French is good enough to understand what he was talking about) he even found the very existance of Israeli to be against the word of G-d. I don't think any of his cobelievers were marching in Oslo, but, dear Jan, you seem to forget that the Israeli flag belongs to the national state of Israel and that it isn't a symbol for all Jews. The Nazis did not slaughter Israelis, they slaughtered Jews. It should be possible for people to oppose genocide without embracing the state of Israel. Also, I find it interesting that DMT talks about both far rightist and far leftists using the Kristallnacht to their own ends while you manage to read that they say that they haven't been taking part because of "leftists extremists who have hijacked the occasion". How those those words differ? I agree that leftists and people opposing Israel have been using the Kristallnacht commemoration for things it shouldn't have been used for. That happened this year as well, I read in some newspaper that a demonstration somewhere (possibly in Kristiansand) included a parole against the Israeli "separation barrier"/"wall". SOS Rasisme in Oslo, however, had taken the controverse over Willochs statements last year seriously, as they should. Because they wanted to create a commemoration where people having different views on the Middle East-conflict could feel welcome they said that national flags were unwanted. It's possible to disagree with that choice, but to talk about a "Judenfrei" Kristallnacht commemoration, like you did is preposterous. DMT was, as they point out themselves, invited. Last year a representative from DMT spoke at the commemoration. Finally, Jan, would you say that wearing a suit makes me a supporter of banning alcohol since people known to advocate such a view has also been seen wearing suits? Øyvind Isdor | 2004-11-13 21:09 | Link Ex-Christian Now Muslim, Actually you did say that Jews eat babies. So you are not only a crackpot but you are also a liar. Øyvind, Bergen | 2004-11-13 21:20 | Link Jan Haugland: I'm not about to apologize for anything. On your blog you said this: [...]The shameful acts of the so-called anti-racists in denying jewish symbols access to a memorial for the genocide directed against jews That wasn't true. You've also claimed (in comments to the post, before those were completely hijacked by a real anti-Semite) that SOS Rasisme was lying when they said no banners where allowed in the demonstration, showing a picture of a banner to make your case. What SOS Rasisme did say was that no preapproved banners, accepted in a process with 130 organizations, were accepted. Your claim was false. Judenfrei, you wrote. False. "[the police] argue they could not guarantee the security of jews among the leftist "anti-racists", you wrote. The police did point to the security of the right-wing demonstrators as an excuse, not to the security of "Jews among the leftist 'anti-racists". Once more what you wrote was false. TV2 Nettavisen wrote: "but the arrangement committee did not accept Jewish symbols under the commemoration". That wasn't true either. They also wrote: "Jews wanting to take part in the commemoration was shown away by the police". If you look closely at the report you can maybe say that the actual wording was correct. The impression it leaves, though, is false. The reaction of the Simon Wiesenthal Centre reflects this. By the way, Erez Uriely attacked the commemoration in the newspaper VG in the morning of the commemoration, - The Kristallnacht is being used to create new Jew-hatred, he said. The leader of SOS Rasisme responded: - I can't really understand this. Last year a speaker from Det Mosaiske Trossamfunn took part in the commemoration. This year we have a speaker from the White Buses (a group that arrange schooltrips to concentration camps in Germany and Poland, my note) Thorbjørnsrud also said that no paroles concerning the Israel-Palestine question would be allowed in the commemoration: - On a day of such historical importance I hope that we can stand together regardless of views on Israel and Palestine, stand together against racism and nazism in Norway. With the growing racism in Europe that victimizes both Palestinians and Israelis it is important that we don't let us get divided [in this fight]. Wow, the "so-called anti-racist" even sounds sensible. Øyvind Bjørn Stærk | 2004-11-13 21:25 | Link Jan Haugland: Are you seriously arguing that for a commemoration for Jews killed by the nazis, the jews should be so polite as to not wear the national flag of the Jewish State, to not offend the participants who openly support terrorists who work hard to organise the second Holocaust? Yes - that is, if they want to take part in a commemoration together with such people. I mean, nobody is forcing them to share this event. There could be two independent events, one which emphasises the Holocaust in light of modern anti-racist causes, and one which emphasises it in light of modern threats to the Jewish state. Personally, I see the value of focusing on the one aspect of the Holocaust anti-racists and pro-Israelis agree on, that it was a racist genocide against Jews. Why must everything revolve around modern Middle Eastern politics? But if this is impossible, and perhaps it is, the solution is simple: Hold two independent commemorations. When I was involved with the anti-terror meetings earlier this year, we made an effort to focus on the one issue many could agree on, opposition to terrorism, instead of more divise issues championed by people like myself, like Israel or the war on terror. It didn't work very well, because those we appealed to were suspicious of our motives. For instance, we invited the local Røde Kors to recruit blood donors at the event, but they pulled out after bad press and orders from the top. Nor did we fully achieve neutrality on divise issues - the anti-semitism meeting had a religious / pro-Israeli character. There were plenty of excuses to avoid us. But I still think people should have taken that chance to find a common ground. Just as I think Norway's pro-Israelis should have taken the chance offered to them to find a common ground with the anti-racists, for this one day. Not every day has to be another battle in the Big Fight. Ohad Efrati, Israel | 2004-11-13 21:33 | Link I don't think any of his cobelievers were marching in Oslo, but, dear Jan, you seem to forget that the Israeli flag belongs to the national state of Israel and that it isn't a symbol for all Jews. The Nazis did not slaughter Israelis, they slaughtered Jews. Oyvind, it's worth being aware that the Neturei Karta (these anti-Israel hasidim who you admire) are a tiny minority even among Hasidim, and that their leaders now instruct them not to participate in these demonstrations. Øyvind, Strømmen | 2004-11-13 21:45 | Link Erev tov, Ohad I hardly admire the Neturei Karta, unlike them I believe that the state of Israel is legitime and that it has a right to exist. These Jews are, however, an example that it's fully possible to be a Jew and still opposed to even the idea of an Israeli state. This group would probably have problems marching under Israeli flags, while I'm sure they'd have no problem commemorating the Shoah. There are many non-Jews that feel the same way, and I believe that the choice of SOS Rasisme to leave national flags and opinions on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict out of the commemoration was a good choice. Øyvind Øyvind, Bergen | 2004-11-13 21:52 | Link I'll add that I am fully in agreement with Bjørns last post. It is important to find those common grounds, both in the fight against racism and anti-Semitism and in the fight against terrorism and for peace in the Middle East. Actually, I believe that not only should those critical of Israel and those supportive of the country find together, those who are supportive of Israel should be critical and those critical should support the states right to exist. Sadly, Pavlovian reflexes are all too common. But that's another issue. Øyvind Gill Doyle, California | 2004-11-13 22:05 | Link Øyvind wrote: "Pardon my French, but that is bullshit. Israeli flags are not regarded as akin to Nazi swastikas. The arrangers of the commemoration simply did not want it to turn into to a political demonstration for or against Israeli." Holy mackrel, Øyvind! Calm down. If the Israeli flag is not considered in Norway to be a provocative symbol -- if no one in Norway regards as something akin to a swastika -- then there is no reason to ban the flag. The Jews have their own state now. That's Israel. Israel's formation was definitely a consequence of what happened to the Jews during WW2. Kristallnacht led to WW2. You see the connection? Seems to me that it ought to be OK to display the flag. Folks who have nothing against the Jews might be able to tolerate the idea that Israel exists. Who cares what the others think. Øyvind, Bergen | 2004-11-13 22:15 | Link Gill: I think Bjørn pointed out quite well how both Israeli and Palestinian flags can be understood by the right (or wrong) people. I think his point his good. As I've said before it the decision of SOS Rasisme can be criticized, although I agree with it. Criticize is one thing. Claiming that the Israeli flag "apparently" is seen as something akin to Nazi swastikas in Norway is another. And that's where my French surfaced. Øyvind Øyvind, Bergen | 2004-11-13 22:19 | Link Kristallnacht led to WW2. That's an original theory, by the way. Øyvind Jan Haugland, Bergen | 2004-11-13 22:26 | Link Øyvind, So you stand by your now utterly demolished whitewash of the story. The police said jews with david's stars and Israeli flags would be in danger, and thus refused them to participate in the march. You have repeated it is "false" but you haven't been able to point to any jewish person who actually marched with a david's star. The jews who wanted to go were refused. Unless you can give evidence to the contrary, the march was judenfrei. Referring to obscure sects of anti-Zionsists is disingenious. Some time ago, a black man was arrested in Sweden as part of a group of neo-nazi murderers. Does this prove the Swedish neo-nazis are not racists? There was similarly a jewish revisionist much liked by fascist groups. Does he prove they were not anti-Semites? Yes, it is possible to be critical to Israel without being anti-Semite. This is the same tired old argument. People throwing paint at Israel's embassy, using banners with swastikas in Israeli flags are not "critical to Israel." They are blatantly anti-Semitic. And, lo and behold, these people form the active backbone of the so-called "anti-racists" in Norway. I quoted the SOS Rasisme spokesperson saying no "paroles were allowed." It was on TV, so is a bit hard to deny. Later it was obviously corrected to "no paroles except those we accepted." Well, d'oh! Too bad neither him nor you realised that this destroyed the argument. Finally, Jan, would you say that wearing a suit makes me a supporter of banning alcohol since people known to advocate such a view has also been seen wearing suits? I can't even comprehend the desperation behind this argument. People advocating for and against everything and nothing wear suits. Nobody interprets it as a statement about any political position. The "palestina skjerf" is not a common fashion accessory. It is a political statement, like the white sheets of the KKK (no comparison otherwise). It was introduced by people supporting the PLO and associates' terrorist campaign against Israel. Nobody in Europe will wear it unless he or she is not at least sympathetic to the terror war against Israel and jews (yes, PLO et al killed jews not only Israelis), and opposes Israel. Wearing a symbol of anti-jewish terrorism in a kristallnacht memorial is so obviously tasteless that you keep undermining your position by not seeing it.
I sympathise with your ideals. It would be nice if people could set aside political differences to fight against terrorism. If the anti-Israel left were opposed to terrorism, I guess there would be a chance it could work. Like it would be nice if SOS Rasisme didn't rely on the anti-Semitic loonie left for muscle, so they could have any credibility when they oppose anti-Semitism. Surely, many of them are no doubt secretly appaled by the fringes. But when they chose to have Blitz thugs present instead of having a march that is safe to attend even for right-wing jews, they prove you can't have it both ways. The label "Anti-Racism" is a political weapon against not only neo-nazis and other racist thugs, but is also actively used to smear anyone advocating strict immigration policies and those who express skepticism to Islamists in Norway. The only solution for the future is that leftist "anti-racist" groups keep far away from kristallnacht memorials. They have no right to it. With their dishonest reaction to the aftermath of the latest fiasco, including legal threats and an avalanche of distortions, they have no credibility. Gill Doyle, California | 2004-11-13 22:34 | Link Bjørn wrote: "To many anti-racists, the Israeli flag symbolizes a brutal occupation, just as to pro-Israelis the Palestinian flag symbolizes terrorism. If both groups are to be able to take part in a commemoration of an event that is important to both of them, it follows that they shouldn't go about waving Israeli and Palestinian flags." Well, these attitudes are just plain wrong, it seems to me. Everyone ought to be able to speak his mind. Let them all fly their flags. Let each interpret the meaning of those flags as he will. Why not let them all march -- pro-Israeli people, pro-Palestinian, Nazis. Let the whole circus march right down Karl Johan. After all, isn't that what Kristallnacht is all about -- a time to reflect on what anti-Semitism in Europe has wrought. Put it all on view, then. Because it's still with us -- all of the old hatreds and unresolved issues. Gill Doyle, California | 2004-11-13 22:38 | Link Gill wrote: "Kristallnacht led to WW2." Øyvind replied: "That's an original theory, by the way." I don't know -- I just thought I heard somewhere that anti-Semitism had something to do with WW2. Shows you how little we Americans know about anything. By the way, Øyvind -- you're not a Holocaust denier, are you? Øyvind, Bergen | 2004-11-13 23:08 | Link I'll leave it up to others to decide who's "whitewashing" and not, Jan. The Davidstar was even on their official poster! But no - it was banned, you say. Sounds terribly logical, doesn't it? As far as I can see, the variant of SOS Rasisme is pretty much backed by the Jewish congregation and the hardly Israel-negative organization Norwegian Association against Anti-Semitism. Your version, however, seem to be influenced by a wish to "get" those darn "socalled anti-racists", "Blitz thugs", etc. Frankly there's no reason to whitewash that FOMI and the Democratic party - and people cooperating with them - were kept away. It was the right thing to do when they did not accept the rules 130 organizations had agreed on. "Blitz thugs" don't rule 130 organizations. Since you seem to advocate the view that everyone that doesn't want to walk underneath an Israeli flag is an anti-Semite, and that people wearing "palestinaskjerf" also are - well, it's hardly surprising that you grab the opportunity. Is the "Palestine scarf" a political statement? Indeed? Amongst some leftists it is just as much about fashion as the newest Beckham hairdo, believe me. But then let's accept that it is a political statement. What does it state? And who are to decide that? Those who wear it, or those who'd like to interpret it as bad as possible? I know people who wear the "palestinaskjerf", Jan. They're just as opposed to terrorism as you and I. They've got another thing in common with me, too. They support the creation of a Palestinian state. And if they're making any statement with their scarf, that's it. (The real statement, however, is mostly: I'm a rebel). As for quotes from TV2... well, that's the TV media, Jan. Incidentally I've seen it from the inside through my education. Taking the best soundbites to make a sensationalist story is hardly a problem. Lousy journalism, I called it. Because that is what it is. Finally, I'll include my translation of a press release from SOS Rasisme where they attack TV2. According to Jan they're just "whitewashing". But it might be worthwile reading their version of the story, as well: TV2 - as loudspeakers for the extreme right The last day SOS Rasisme has been attacked by TV2 and the Democrats who has claimed that we refused Jews from taking part in the Kristallnacht commemoration. The organization has now sent a complaint to Pressens Faglige Utvalg (media watch organ governed by the press itself, my note) 1. We never refuser David-stars in the demonstration. Several Jews and others carried David-stars in the demonstration. A David-star was also included in the poster for the commemoration, and it is beyond sense that we should have refused anyone [carrying] this. We have stated that Israeli and Palestinian _flags_ were unwanted, because the Kristallnacht committee is not taking an opinion on the Middle East conflict. The Democrats refused to accept this and were therefore stopped by the police. 3. TV2 scared people. [...]SOS Rasisme has today had phone calls from several Jews in despair, chocked by the report on TV2. They thought we refused Jews from taking part in the commemoration. 4. No participation from racist parties is wanted in our demonstration against racism. What we said no to was that a racist political party - the Democratic party - should misuse the Kristallnacht as a political manifestation. We had informed about this in a press release [prior to the commemoration] Chosen coverage? TV2 has been informed about the information above several times, both before, under and after interviews with us. The channel has stilled chosen to edit the reports in a way that makes it look like we refused Jews from taking part in the [commemoration] and like we have refused people from having David-stars. We find it sad that TV2 knowingly keeps from reporting our information on the commemoration and instead bases their reports on claims from one of Norways most antiimmigrant groups. TV2 should seriously consider what role they want to play in the Norwegian public and what forces they want to run errands for through their speculative news coverage. That was SOS Rasisme. I find it sad that both New York Post (" Øyvind Øyvind, Bergen | 2004-11-13 23:14 | Link Gill: No. I am not a holocaust denier. Why would anyone think so? Punching below the belt seems to be popular these days. The other day my family was probably Quislings, I was told. I can't even remember why. Yes, WWII was about anti-Semitism. But Kristallnacht didn't lead to WWII. You can't expect European powers to be that quick to react, Gill. I thought you American had discovered this by now. And sadly, anti-Semitism wasn't something patented by Nazi Germany. As you say; all the old hatreds are still here. But back then it was also here. In Norway. In Sweden. In other countries. Many people didn't react much to the news about Jews being persecuted - or found it to be exaggerated. In Norway the police force took part in rounding up Jews for the Nazis after the invasion, and sadly too few of us had the guts to stand up. There are few Jews left in Norway. Øyvind Kevin McDonnell, Bergen | 2004-11-13 23:19 | Link Bjørn, I have to say I am utterly flummoxed by your position. To deny that there is a metaphysical connection between the Jews, Krystallnacht, the Holocaust and Israel is an absurdity that boggles the mind. Indeed, to even take the position that in a "commemoration" of Krystallnacht, it will be unacceptable to carry the Israeli flag, renders utterly meaningless the fundamental point of such an event. This is true even if you make the purpose of the event a purely "anti-Racist" one. Why? Because if you defer to the idea that having this flag is "rude" or might arouse conflict, you are innately accepting that it is "good" to appease hatred (in the name of anti Racism!!??). Indeed, even if one stakes out a faux moral high ground by stating that Israel is an oppressive and racist State and thus must not be touted in an "anti Racist rally", it does nothing to immunize from the fact that this alone is a position that fosters negativity in relations between peoples while at the same time stifling the discussion of issues that undoubtedly are bound in racism itself. What ARROGANCE! It is only in the present environment of mass solipsism and ideological narcissism that a group that purports to be against racism could take such a convoluted reasoning to the bar. It baffles me that you do not see this. You went so far as to profer a comparison rife with distorted equivalancies of the kind that have crushed the public discourse over these very issues under mountains of intellectual detritus. Do you REALLY think that the metaphor you implied of bringing Muslims and non-Muslims together to condemn the van Gogh murder and springing the Submission film on them, is the same as carrying the Israeli flag at a commemmoration for Krystallnacht!!!??? Quite simply, you have lost me here.
It seems to me that the idea that we should be able to redefine commenorations like this so that "common ground" can be found between different groups is, under the criteria in which you are defending, an excercise that is worse than futile. I say it is worse than futile because it serves to perpetuate mere illusions of "common ground" since it acts to perpetuate divisions, even those that could be exploded in the light of day. More than anything, this United Nations-esque approach to "successful diplomacy" serves nothing, except to perpetuate the deconstructed meaninglessness of the present status quo. This merely maintains the kind of illusory twaddle that drives the EU and the UN to make their pointless pronouncemnts over things like "progress in establishing a positive dialogue on paving the way to an equitable and peaceful settlement in Darfur". It is hogwash because it addresses nothing, stands for mothing, defends nothing, and achieves nothing. Nobody learns, no light is shed, no understanding is conveyed... and only shadows thrive. The bottom line? A commemoration of Krystallnacht was co-opted by ideologues under the auspices of anti-racism, who beneath that banner, then prevented Jews from participating beneath the flag of Israel. And they did so with self righteous indignance I'm sure. Its a pity they could not be challenged in a public forum to defend their indignance under the theory that it might be borne of any number of insidious (albeit highly nuanced and sophisticated) hatreds... Now THAT would have been useful! That would have been the kind of thing that happens in a free discourse unhindered by postmodern hypocrisy and politically malleable defintions of political correctness. Ultimately, this is a perfect "activism for social justice" story in present Norway. Its insane of course, and morally repugnant. But its perfect.
Øyvind, Bergen | 2004-11-13 23:44 | Link Press release from the Oslo police: The Oslo police has been criticized on several fronts after the Kristallnacht 9th November - that the police should have refused someone from demonstrating [strange wording, yes. my note]. The 9th November a demonstration outside the American embassy had been [legally] reported, the background was an initiative by "the Committee for a free Iraq" [a group with leftist roots, my note]. This was a legal demonstration and everything was in order without the police having to interfere in any way. Tuesday 9th November we received several indications that several of those who took part in the demonstration outside the American embassy later wanted to take part in a demonstration arranged by SOS Rasisme and LO Ungdom [labour union youth organization, my note]. The information indicated that some people on the right wing also wanted to commemorate the Kristallnacht. We received indications that both sides [i.e. leftists mentioned above and rightists, not SOS Rasisme, my note] wanted a confrontation. It was discovered that some of those who wanted to commemorate the Kristallnacht belonged to the Democrats, and that they intented to have their own commemoration. No application or formal notification was made about this. Attempts from the police to get in touch with representatives for the Democratic party were not successful. Our officer on duty contacted the judicial employee on duty who, with background in the Police law § 7 decided to ban the group the Democrats from having their commemoration in central Oslo. This is the background and the facts behind the incidents on the 9th November. Bjørn Stærk | 2004-11-13 23:44 | Link Jan Haugland: But when they chose to have Blitz thugs present instead of having a march that is safe to attend even for right-wing jews, they prove you can't have it both ways. But it is you who says they can't have it both ways. That unless one is allowed to carry an Israeli flag, a Jew or pro-Israeli should not take part in a Kristallnacht commemoration. I agree with your criticism of anti-racists. You know that. What I don't see is why the issue of modern Israel must be forced at a commemoration for the Holocaust. Are you absolutely sure that more is lost by taking part in a relatively neutral event, without flags, but along with people who at other times are you political enemies, than is gained by condemning it? Kevin McDonnell: To deny that there is a metaphysical connection between the Jews, Krystallnacht, the Holocaust and Israel is an absurdity that boggles the mind. I wouldn't call it metaphysical, but I haven't denied that there is such a connection, or that the Holocaust is relevant to understanding modern Israel. I'm just saying that connection is not the most important aspect of the Holocaust, and that it should be possible to stand together against the Holocaust for one lone event without championing that connection. It baffles me that you do not see this. I probably do agree with you on the problem with the anti-racists. But this is about what anti-racists and pro-Israelis have in common. Why should it be so difficult for them to acknowledge that? Do you REALLY think that the metaphor you implied of bringing Muslims and non-Muslims together to condemn the van Gogh murder and springing the Submission film on them, is the same as carrying the Israeli flag at a commemmoration for Krystallnacht!!!??? In the relative amount of offense caused, yes. No other comparison intended. Øyvind, Bergen | 2004-11-13 23:59 | Link Sorry, it was the New York SUN I quoted above. Gunnar, Maryland | 2004-11-14 00:24 | Link >> I don't know -- I just thought I heard somewhere that anti-Semitism had something to do with WW2. Shows you how little we Americans know about anything. Certainly, you are right. Without anti-semitism as the fuel to the fire, Hitler would have been unable to gain power, even though one could argue that any deep seated hatred would have suited his evil purpose. The question I have for you "sophisticated" non-religious folks is this: How do you explain the deeply rooted phenomena of anti-semitism, I mean "jew hatred", which is a much more accurate description. How could .23% of the population be so hated by so many people. In fact, jew hatred is not prevalent in more devout christian communities, but is prevalent in a certain percentage of non-devout, non religious, and muslim people. I would speculate that jew hatred is non-existent among people outside the abrahamian religious family, like hindus. Why? There are many other conflicts, many other forced migrations, but none engender this sort of discussion. Consider that Norway is in the far north, has no significant jewish population, and no particular interest, and yet seems almost obsessed with the Israeli-arab situation. Why? To be blunt: If God doesn't exist, why worry so much about "God's chosen people"?
Gunnar, Maryland | 2004-11-14 00:32 | Link ExC, NRL: BUT WHY THE ARABS AND THE PALESTINEANS SHOULD PAY FOR 'YOUR' CRIMES AGAINST THE JEWS ???? 1) It wasn't their territory, the british originally intended the whole mandate to be the jewish homeland. Gill Doyle, California | 2004-11-14 00:56 | Link Oeyvind wrote: "And sadly, anti-Semitism wasn't something patented by Nazi Germany. As you say; all the old hatreds are still here. But back then it was also here. In Norway. In Sweden. In other countries. Many people didn't react much to the news about Jews being persecuted - or found it to be exaggerated. In Norway the police force took part in rounding up Jews for the Nazis after the invasion, and sadly too few of us had the guts to stand up." OK, good for you, Oeyvind. You're a good man to admit all that. I apologize for my below-the-belt blow. HOWEVER, I continue to be very skeptical of attitudes in Norway (and elsewhere in Europe) toward Israel. The hostility that I see in Europe toward Israel seems hard to explain. Travel the world, and you see no people -- outside the Muslim world -- who get so worked up about this particular issue. I wonder why. And when we Americans are criticized -- when the long litany of crimes is run through by our European critics -- always at the top of this list is what Europe considers the most unforgiveable of our offences: America supports Israel. I think sometimes that Israel's deplorable treatment of the Palestinian people is welcome news in Europe. It seems a useful justification for openly hating Jews again. Øyvind, Bergen | 2004-11-14 01:04 | Link Gill: I've got many things I probably could put on the top of that list you mention. Your support of Israel isn't one of them. I think you've supported them in cases they didn't deserve any support, but such support hasn't merely been given by you guys. Anyway, I support Israel too. I also support the idea of a Palestinian state, though. Øyvind Alene | 2004-11-14 01:06 | Link Øyvind-- That such an event has broader lessons to teach is true, and no anti-muslim or other racist rhetoric could be appropriate. Neither should the event become a political pro-Israel rally. But to disallow the symbols of the nation is to deracinate and universalize the memory, the teaching moment. This horror was inflicted upon Jews. Why may it be remembered only in universal humanist terms? jimmytheclaw, earth | 2004-11-14 01:24 | Link gunnar spot on except the mandate was split half was israel other half trans jordan. google balfour decree from league of nations. prior to the 1967 war the west bank was jordan the gaza strip belonged to eqypt. therefore that makes the palestinians jordan, egyptian, syrian etc... Gunnar, Maryland | 2004-11-14 01:25 | Link >> But I wonder whether the commemoration of Kristallnacht is the right place for expressing this generalized anti-racist sentiment, øyvind, it seems a pattern with you. I can't tell whether is an unwillingness to make a moral judgement, or that you have accepted a false neutrality premise, or a naive kum-baya mentality. Presented with completely opposing sides, you seem always to come down the middle. T Hansen - Denmark | 2004-11-14 01:31 | Link "Without anti-semitism as the fuel to the fire, Hitler would have been unable to gain power, even though one could argue that any deep seated hatred would have suited his evil purpose". I think the conditions of the Versaillés treaty was more than enough. This was the major source of hate in Germany a hate directed towards the French people as well as Jews. But jews where hated everywhere in Europe - some places more than others though - and you can only wonder where it came from?. For Germans probably the Balfour declaration gave it extra extent ? But I actually think Hitler could have won alone by the promises of national restoration, revenge over Versaillés treaty as a matter of fact this is what they majorly did. "Consider that Norway is in the far north, has no significant jewish population, and no particular interest, and yet seems almost obsessed with the Israeli-arab situation. Why?" Well my answer would be 1.8 bio. Moslems largely and widely considering the very existance of Israel hate object number 1. their hate reaching the proportions of the German people after WW1. Gunnar, Maryland | 2004-11-14 01:41 | Link jimmytheclaw from earth, thanks for the correction. It's a bit complicated to recall from memory, but the point is obvious: Israel is a legal entity, and they were attacked by aggressors, and these aggressors then lose the right to what they previously had. You don't resort to violence, and then when that doesn't work out, get to go back to the way things were. It would be like Japan saying to the Americans right before signing the unconditional surrender, "we demand China". Egypt was lucky to get the Sinai back. Israel is way too passive. The problem is that they are mostly lefties that still haven't learned that appeasement only invites more attacks. They will be hated no matter what, so they may as well go for complete victory. Jeff, USA | 2004-11-14 01:41 | Link Øyvind, Bergen: Since you seem to advocate the view that everyone that doesn't want to walk underneath an Israeli flag is an anti-Semite, and that people wearing "palestinaskjerf" also are - well, it's hardly surprising that you grab the opportunity. Is the "Palestine scarf" a political statement? Indeed? Amongst some leftists it is just as much about fashion as the newest Beckham hairdo, believe me. But then let's accept that it is a political statement. What does it state? And who are to decide that? Those who wear it, or those who'd like to interpret it as bad as possible? I know people who wear the "palestinaskjerf", Jan. They're just as opposed to terrorism as you and I. They've got another thing in common with me, too. They support the creation of a Palestinian state. And if they're making any statement with their scarf, that's it. (The real statement, however, is mostly: I'm a rebel). Isn't that irrelevant, though? A Palestinian flag is not appropriate for a Kristallnacht commemoration for very obvious reasons. Israeli flags seem reasonable, but they were chosen to be banned since the organizers don't want this to become a rally about Middle Eastern politics. Fair enough. Why then is a kaffiyeh acceptable? Because leftists wear things which have very obvious political implications of which only they are ignorant? Gunnar, Maryland | 2004-11-14 01:45 | Link >> Ultimately this hate is directed towards the western civilization as a whole. Well, Americans have only come to understand this after 9/11, and this is less understood elsewhere. So this cannot possibly explain the rampant "jew hatred", which has been around a lot longer than a few years. T Hansen - Denmark | 2004-11-14 01:52 | Link I think there should be formed an international anti-hate organization it would be more relevant for the world, because hate in general is the real problem. Thomas Bolding Hansen | 2004-11-14 01:55 | Link I have no clue why the historic hate for jews have arisen - it´s makes no sense at all. But one form of hate lead to another - hate is hate - love is love. Gunnar, Maryland | 2004-11-14 02:28 | Link >> I have no clue why the historic hate for jews have arisen - it´s makes no sense at all. This is one question which seems to have no satisfactory non-religious answer. Øyvind, Bergen | 2004-11-14 02:58 | Link Jeff: I find wearing a scarf, also a "palestinaskjerf", comparable to wearing a David star. It may be interpreted as a political statement, but it isn't necessarily. Both were accepted in the demonstration, and I do not see a problem with this. However, the issue I commented on regarding the scarfs were Hauglands rather radical claims that wearing such a scarf is equivalent of supporting Palestinian terrorism. Gunnar: I have no problem passing moral judgement on neither TV2 and their lousy journalist nor the racist politics of the Norwegian Democratic Party. I also have no problem passing moral judgement on anti-Semitism or Jew-hatred. Alene: I do have opinions on what the Kristallnacht should and should not be used to. I think protesting against hatred and racism in general is okay. However, that is not what I'm trying to do here. I'm trying to show how TV2, Jan Haugland etc. has created and spread a story that isn't true. I've also pointed at the results, such as the New York Sun reporting that Norway now "forbid[s] Jews from marking the anniversary of Kristallnacht". This is how an urban legend is created. And to be frank, I find it quite scary already. Jan: Why do you think Det Mosaiske Trossamfund has bothered to send out a press release telling us that they were astonished by the way TV2 presented the story? Are they helping SOS Rasisme to whitewash the anti-Semitism of Blitz, is that what you're saying? Your not only saying that, though, you're also saying that SOS Rasisme and its coarrangers were lying about Jews being welcome in the demonstration not only after, but also before, the incident you try turning into a "Judenfrei" commemoration. Might I remind you that organizations like Norsk Folkehjelp (Norwegian Peoples Aid) and LO also supported this commemoration. Do you think they would accept anything like that? Do you think the 130 organizations supporting the commemoration would? Never, not once, did SOS Rasisme refuse people from wearing David-stars in the demonstration. Yet you repeat the claim that people wearing the Star of David was not welcome. On what grounds? The only source I can find for this, except of TV2, is a secondhand statement by Jan Simonsen - he quotes an unknown policeman. But then here's the catch: He's a prominent member of the Democratic Party. Do you see a conflict of interests there? The story seen in the press release from the police seems somewhat different than his, the story in the press release from the Norwegian Association against Anti-Semitism, hardly made up of "Blitz thugs" seems somewhat different, the story in the press release from the Jewish congregation seems somewhat different. Now, now, WHO to believe?
Totoro, U.S. | 2004-11-14 03:07 | Link Kevin McDonnell, Bergen . . . Your post of 23:19 expresses my views exactly. Especially the phrase: "profer a comparison rife with distorted equivalancies of the kind that have crushed the public discourse over these very issues under mountains of intellectual detritus." "Mountains of intellectual detritus." That sums it up so neatly. Today Nelson Ascher on Europundits used the term, "voluptuousness of realism" but I didn't think that quite fit the bill, because we generally use the word "voluptuousness" in a more earthy, sexual sense, not an intellectual sense. But Ascher was describing the concept that extreme "realism" can slither into madness, if carried beyond all other considerations, such as common sense. However, mountains of intellectual detritus is a great description of the use of logic to prove the outrageous. For example, now that I know that Norwegians are terrorist sympathizers, I'm going to have their flag banned in Chicago. Because, if it's not banned, I'm going to burn it and that would disturb the peace. But, you say, "Norwegians aren't terrorist sympathizers." Well tough luck to you, because I have the state to back me up (I forgot to mention that the mayor is my cousin). In fact, I don't think you Norwegians should even have a state--you're a bunch of clodfoots who stole the land from the Swedes, who are peaceful farming folk. In fact, maybe I'll send a few billion to the Swedes who want their old country back. You don't like it? I don't care. Just shut up and be good, and maybe I'll let you live. Or, maybe not, depending on what's fashionable this decade. Jeff, USA | 2004-11-14 03:11 | Link Øyvind: I find wearing a scarf, also a "palestinaskjerf", comparable to wearing a David star. It may be interpreted as a political statement, but it isn't necessarily. Both were accepted in the demonstration, and I do not see a problem with this. However, the issue I commented on regarding the scarfs were Hauglands rather radical claims that wearing such a scarf is equivalent of supporting Palestinian terrorism. Whether it is the equivalent of sympathizing with Palestinian terrorism or not is debatable, obviously. But I'm curious as to how you see it to be the equivalent of a Star of David, which has a clear connection to Kristallnacht. I'm also confused when you say you see it as something that "can be political, but isn't necessarily". Can you elaborate further? Is this really something that's so common as a fashion accessory that it has lost most of its political implications? Totoro, U.S. | 2004-11-14 03:19 | Link Bjorn . . . You said: "What I don't see is why the issue of modern Israel must be forced at a commemoration for the Holocaust." Because the people who are trying to delegitimize Israel wish to force Jews to flee for their lives again. Have you heard of the "wandering Jew"? The "rootless cosmopolitan Jew"? Where did these ideas come from? Jews are originally from Israel, and after being pushed out of their homes over the centuries, they were forced to wander--driven from country to country, existing only at the pleasure of the people who claimed that country (who may not have originally been from there but who now controlled it). So, the Jews rebuilt their country. Those who think the Jewish flag is some kind of temporary flag should be disabused of that idea, not encouraged. There is no middle ground on this issue. You cannot paper over the differences between those who recognize the State of Israel and those who want to see it vanish again. Gunnar, Maryland | 2004-11-14 03:19 | Link >> I have no problem passing moral judgement on neither TV2 and their lousy journalist nor the racist politics of the Norwegian Democratic Party. I also have no problem passing moral judgement on anti-Semitism or Jew-hatred. ok, sounds good, but what is the judgement? A historical and factual examination of the so-called palestinian (PLO) movement cannot possibly ignore the reality that it's totally motivated by "jew hatred", and has always been the aggressor. Why then do you make a moral equivalence between the PLO and the state of Israel? And isn't a bit late for you? Ariks | 2004-11-14 03:19 | Link Ishmael was the son of a Kushite woman and he married a Kushite woman. Ishmael doesn't have the birthright of the first born and therefore in a biblical sense Arabs are not semites at all. It is also not proven that Ishmael is really the father of the modern Arabs (ha'aravim - those in the east doesn't necesarily mean Arabs from the Arab peninsula). Secondly the word anti-semite was created in 19th century european literature and has nothing to do with any biblical interpretation. Øyvind, Bergen | 2004-11-14 03:22 | Link I am afraid I expressed myself poorly. I find it generally comparable, it can be considered a political statement, but isn't necessarily. I find no problem with people wearing Palestinian scarfs or stars of David in such a commemoration. Personally I would not use such a scarf there. I also think that the Star of David has a natural place there, and this, I believe, was also the reason the arrangement committee included the Star of David in the official poster of the commemoration. If the kafiyeh was included there instead or in addition I would find it tasteless. Amongst leftists, and even apolitical but "rebel" youth in Norway, these scarfs are fairly common. Within these circles they do not always have a political meaning, no. The Star of David can, obviously, be a symbol both for support of Israel and of Zionism, but also a symbol of belonging to the Jewish religion. It's a historical symbol pointing back at king Davids signature consisting of two dalets, anyway. Øyvind paul | 2004-11-14 03:24 | Link Can anyone find a reference in arabic or a european language to a "palestinian" arab identity prior to 1896? Please name some "palestinian" leaders prior to this period? Please name characterisitcs of language, culture, dress, food, etc that set the "palestinians" apart from syrians or jordanians? What do the damn palistinians have to do with a Kristallnacht commemoration anyway besides the mufti of jerusalems call for Hitler to kill the jews of "palestine" and the arab support for the nazis? you europeans have gone mad! Its amazing. Øyvind, Bergen | 2004-11-14 03:27 | Link Yes, it's late. I do not believe I've made a moral equivalence between the PLO and Israel. You should read my posts closer, Gunnar. If you can find any such moral equivalence, it is I who should do the same thing. I'm not sure your conclusion when it comes to the PLO is completely accurate, either, but there's little doubt that the PLO has had anti-Semitic elements with much influence in the organization, that it has supported terrorism and that it has led Palestine in a wrong direction. Øyvind Øyvind, Bergen | 2004-11-14 03:29 | Link Paul wrote: What do the damn palistinians have to do with a Kristallnacht commemoration? Not much. Which is why the arrangement committee did not want the commemoration to turn into a demonstration on Middle Eastern politics. Jeff, USA | 2004-11-14 03:34 | Link Øyvind: Thanks for explaining. I really wasn't aware that the kaffiyeh is such a common thing there. It's pretty surprising to me, as here they are basically synonymous with Palestine and its causes (the black and white version, at least). Gunnar, Maryland | 2004-11-14 03:36 | Link You don't like it? I don't care. Just shut up and be good, and maybe I'll let you live. Or, maybe not, depending on what's fashionable this decade. At first, I was horrified when I read this, but then I put myself in your shoes. People are casually discussing the rightness or wrongness of banning your flag. It's outrageous. However, I wou |
