Noorse ambassadeur ziet verschillen met aanslagen tegen Israel

 

Ik heb mij behoorlijk geërgerd aan sommige anti-islam blogs en commentatoren waarin het Noorse jongerenkamp is vergeleken met de Hitlerjugend of werd gesproken van een plan van God tegen een land dat de Joden in de steek laat en kwaad berokkend. Maar dat de Noorse ambassadeur in Israel meent even de vele slachtoffers van aanslagen aldaar te moeten schofferen, vind ik minstens even onbestaanbaar. Van een ambassadeur verwacht je, los van zijn eigen opvattingen en die van zijn land, diplomatiek optreden. Door de aanslagen in Israel enkel als gevolg van de bezetting neer te zetten rechtvaardigt hij ze en geeft er Israel zelf de schuld van.  

 

Geweld tegen burgers is natuurlijk nooit gerechtvaardigd, zeker niet wanneer deze welbewust als doelwit werden uitgekozen. En zoals Elder hieronder duidelijk maakt, is het bespottelijk om te beweren dat de bezetting de oorzaak is van deze aanslagen, of je moet menen dat het hele land is bezet en eigenlijk de Palestijnen toebehoort.

 

Helemaal los van de aanslag in Noorwegen, wens ik dat het land wat realistischer naar Israel en het conflict met de Palestijnen gaat kijken, en ik wens dat iedereen aanslagen ver van huis met slachtoffers uit een ander land en van een andere achtergrond even erg vindt als aanslagen dichtbij gericht tegen je eigen land. 

 

RP

-------------- 

 

Norway remains utterly, hopelessly clueless

http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/2011/07/norway-remains-utterly-hopelessly.html

 

From JTA:

 

Norway's ambassador to Israel drew distinctions between the Oslo and Utoeya massacres and Palestinian terrorism.

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."

While Sevje voiced sympathy for Israeli terror victims, having experienced "the inferno" of such attacks during his posting, he saw little chance of Norway reviewing its Middle East policies.

"We Norwegians consider the occupation to be the cause of the terror against Israel," he said. "Those who believe this will not change their mind because of the attack in Oslo."

I wonder, Mr. Sevje, does Hezbollah exist because of "occupation" as well? Because Israel isn't occupying any Lebanese territory, and yet Hezbollah still threatens Israel. Explicitly.

Does Hamas and Islamic Jihad terror exist because of the "occupation?" Because their leaders say that they are against the existence of Israel altogether. Explicitly.

Are Hamas rocket attacks against southern Israeli communities because of "occupation?" Because they accelerated after Israel evicted all Jewish families from the area. If "occupation" causes terror, wouldn't one expect the attacks to disappear when the occupation disappears? 

Is Fatah's history of terror because of the "occupation?" Because Fatah was founded before 1967. And their logo still shows a map of "Palestine" that insists that Palestine is on both sides of the Green Line. 

Was the terror attack against the AMIA in Argentina, an attack roughly as deadly as the ones in Oslo, because of "occupation?" Because it is hard to imagine how an attack thousands of miles away is related to that.

Are the Palestinian Arabs who chant at rallies "Palestine is our country, and Jews are our dogs" referring to the areas on the Jordanian side of the "Green Line"?

Was the Ghriba synagogue bombing in Tunisia in 2002 because of "occupation?" Because it was, you know, a synagogue.

Were the hundreds of attacks against Israel before 1967, before anyone ever heard of "occupation," occupation,  because of "occupation"?

Do the Muslim students in Norway who routinely express admiration for Hitler because he killed Jews - documented in a 2010 Norwegian Broadcasting Corporation report - say that because of the "occupation?" 

Did an Iranian general, just recently, call to destroy Israel altogether because of his opposition to "occupation?"

As an ambassador, you must be a bright guy, so I'm certain you can explain exactly how "occupation" is the common thread that runs through all these examples. Please, enlighten us with your astounding Norwegian wisdom.