1) Thank you for your sympathy during this dark time, but those people who want to kill you, they’re not really so bad
One of the more shocking aftermaths of Friday’s terrorism in Norway is the response of Norway’s ambassador to Israel, Svein Sevje. Ambassador Sejve told Ma’ariv:
Svein Sevje said in an Israeli newspaper interview Tuesday that while the Norwergian bomb and gun rampages that killed 76 people and Palestinian attacks should both be considered morally unacceptable, he wanted to “outline the similarity and the difference in the two cases.”
Palestinians, the ambassador told Maariv, “are doing this because of a defined goal that is related to the Israeli occupation. There are elements of revenge against Israel and hatred of Israel. To this you can add the religious element to their actions.”
It’s hard to imagine a more undiplomatic, ungracious or offensive statement. For years we heard lines like “well we don’t endorse the terror but they have a point.” Sevje later said that he can’t imagine peace without including Hamas.
2) Unhinged and not
The New York Times editorial Norway Horror, is an unthinking rant.
Mr. Breivik appears to have been deeply influenced by a small group of American bloggers and writers who have warned for years about Islam’s supposed threat to Western civilization. Their tendency to paint law-abiding Muslims with the same brush as extremists is repugnant. They need to categorically denounce Mr. Breivik’s depravity.
Citizens in a democracy can and will differ over immigration policies. It is the responsibility of political leaders — in Europe and in this country — to ensure that the debate is open, honest and respectful, that it includes all members of society and that it rejects hateful stereotypes. The best way to punish Anders Behring Breivik, and honor his victims, is to ensure that Europe never becomes the xenophobic place he envisioned.
As James Taranto wrote, at least two members of that “small group of American bloggers” – Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer – categorically denounced Breivik’s evil, on Saturday, three days before the editorial appeared. In other words, if the Times was as scrupulous in keeping up with the bloggers as its reporter had been in tying them to the Breivik, they wouldn’t have had any demand.
The Washington Post’s Norway’s Tragedy was much more restrained and responsible.
So it seems worth underlining that, to date, there is no evidence that Mr. Breivik collaborated with anyone — and plenty that he is a deeply deranged individual. The 1,500-page treatise he published on the Internet contains many quotations from such Web sites as the U.S.-basedJihad Watch — but also large borrowings from the writings of Unabomber Theodore J. Kaczynski, another disturbed loner. According to Norwegian press accounts, Mr. Breivik once belonged to Norway’s Progress Party but dropped out years ago because he considered it far too moderate.
It’s true that far-right political parties appealing to anti-Muslim sentiment have grown rapidly in Europe, particularly in Scandinavian countries such as Denmark, Sweden and Finland. It’s a disturbing development, but it is happening in part because some of those parties are trying harder to appeal to mainstream voters and because their attacks on “multiculturalism,” as practiced in Western Europe, resonate widely. It’s no accident that German Chancellor Angela Merkel and British Prime Minister David Cameron have joined in the critique.
Still what’s troubling is how, in contrast, the very real ongoing incitement against Israel that appears generally in the Arab world and specifically in the Palestinian media garners so little mention or condemnation in the MSM.
The government headquarter: Norwegian Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Stoere stated in a press conference a while before, that his country will be the first to recognize a Palestinian State.
“During the coming September and October, there will be a new situation regarding the Palestinian state… We hope the Palestinian state will be a part of the international community by that time,” Stoere was quoted as saying.
Hence, the motive that urged the “Christian” fanatic to launch terror attacks in Norway was the source of terror in the world, Israel; and so, the first European country to declare the recognition of an independent Palestinian State and the right for Palestinians to have a good livelihood, was the first to witness a deadly terror attack since decades.
The violence that accompanies the demonization of Israel is ongoing, surely it requires at least the same level of condemnation that Islamaphobia does.
The New York Times reports Security Council Debate Offers Preview of Palestinian Bid
A preview of the expected showdown over whether to admit a Palestinian state as a full member of the United Nations when world leaders gather here in September played out in the Security Council on Tuesday.
Supporters evoked the Arab Spring, in which millions of people across the Middle East sought freedom from oppression, as a fitting backdrop for an endorsement of the Palestinian people’s release from 44 years of Israeli occupation.
Opponents, essentially Israel and the United States, condemned the idea as an ineffective “shortcut” that would not budge the deadlocked peace negotiations.
The second paragraph is inexcusable. For the most part, the Palestinians do not live under occupation. What they lack is statehood and defined boundaries. They could have both if they negotiated with Israel in good faith, but don’t. Unlike other Arabs, Palestinian freedom or lack of same, is in their own hands. To compare Palestinians to unarmed Syrians facing down tanks is ludicrous.
Furthermore as time goes on, Israel seems to be recruiting more and more European countries to its side. The OIC and its allies make up a formidable and unyielding bloc that Israel can’t hope to match. But to portray Israel and the United States as the only ones who oppose the unilateral declaration without pointing out that Israel is facing an automatic majority that is hostile is misleading. The motivating factor behind support for the Palestinians (which is not matched by financial support) isn’t a belief in justice, but a hatred of Israel.
There seem to be at least three phenomena regarding Israel that are linked to the Arab spring: the unilateral declaration of a state, the current protests about housing (as if Israel’s never experienced demonstrations before) and the protests demanding reconciliation between Fatah and Hamas (which actually were protests demanding less freedom!). Tying these phenomena to the “Arab spring” is more a function of laziness than of actual similarity.
4) M.B.Z. v. Clinton
The New York Times has a brief item about the efforts of the Zivotofsky family to get their son’s passport to say that he was born in Jerusalem, Israel, not just Jerusalem.
In its brief to the court, the administration warned about the consequences of a ruling against executive authority over this area.
Ever since the Truman administration, the brief said, “the United States’ consistent policy has been to recognize no state as having sovereignty over Jerusalem, leaving the issue to be decided by negotiation between the parties to the Arab-Israeli dispute.”
Allowing Congress to interfere, the brief went on, “would critically compromise the United States’ ability to help further the Middle East peace process.”
Given all the legal reasoning and wrangling reported, it’s easy to lose sight of the fundamental issue: Israel is the only country in the world, whose choice of capital city is not honored. Where does the New York Times come down on this issue? I think the fact that the reporter mentions that disgraced former Congressman Anthony Weiner supported the Zivotofsky’s speaks volumes. Mention of Weiner was gratuitous and served only to mock those who support the Zivotofsky’s views.