Where is the Noble Side of Norway and Other Nations?

[Batman]

EU Releases Aid to Palestinians

06/19/2002 3:31 PM EDT

By PAUL GEITNER

BRUSSELS, Belgium (AP) - European Union lawmakers voted Wednesday to release $17.7 million in aid to the Palestinians that had been held up over accusations some of the money was going to fund terrorism.

The vote included a demand for disclosure about how the money is spent. It came after EU external affairs commissioner Chris Patten defended efforts to track the more than $1.3 billion spent in the past decade on projects in the occupied territories.

"We have found no evidence of EU funds being used for any purposes other than that for which they were intended," Patten told the European Parliament's foreign affairs committee.

He also said the committee risked undermining the EU's credibility if it blocks assistance that had been approved last year by the 15 member states.

"If we turn our back on this, any words about Europe having a part in the Mideast peace process are pretty worthless," he said.

The committee put off its vote two weeks ago following charges that some EU money had been used to fund weapons or support terrorist activities.

Investigators from the European Commission, which administers EU aid, met with Israeli government and security officials and sought comment from the International Monetary Fund, which monitors EU payments and reports monthly on whether conditions are being met.

Patten conceded that corruption in Yasser Arafat's Palestinian Authority and other problems made it impossible to know where every euro finally ended up.

"It's an impossible question to ask in the real world," he said. "We are doing everything we can do and will follow any other constructive advice."

The measure calls for Patten to make additional efforts to provide what chairman Elmar Brok called "full transparency and full information" about where EU money is spent.

"We can't send out the message that whatever happens, however much tensions escalate, Europe carries on paying," said Armin Laschet, a German conservative.

Since June 2001, EU aid has included $9.4 million a month in budgetary assistance to the Palestinian Authority to make up for Israel's refusal to hand over customs and taxes it collects on the Palestinians' behalf.

Patten argued that by preventing the financial collapse of Arafat's "legitimate" administration, which was established under earlier peace accords, the EU "has prevented even greater chaos and anarchy" by helping to ensure the continued delivery of health, education and other services.

"If there is to be a Palestinian state, there has to be a Palestinian Authority," he said, describing the EU as promoting reforms toward a "free society and free market."

Most committee members expressed satisfaction with the investigation, while pushing for even stronger vigilance.

The lone opponent to the measure, Olivier Dupuis, complained that the West has been too willing to back authoritarian regimes in the Arab world, especially since the Sept. 11 attacks, to win support in the fight against al-Qaida.

"This is the opposite of the message we should be sending to the Arab people, which is support for democracy," he said.

[peacelover]

I cannot speak for Norway, but did any of you stop playing the victim long enough to consider that maybe the reason European people dislike Israel is due to Israel's actions, plain and simple?

We're not stupid.

We can see right through statements such as "Apparently, some of Europe's cultural elite cannot forgive Israel for defending herself against homicide bombers and terrorists"

Can you really not see the flaws of the above statement? Can you honestly not?

That statement represents the fundamental lack of understanding of people's grievances with Israel. Israel is going to have to do better than some fancy words like that.

If you want to defend Israel, fine, but I do get a little tired of people assuming it's down to anti-semitism as an excuse to avoid the real issues.

People also tire of this:

"The stench of appeasement of terrorism in Europe"

"these products come from a place with a shameful past that continues to operate as a European free zone for Neo-Nazis and other right wing extremists."

"Then all the Europeans can go back to public Jew hating and proclamations in a continent absent of Jews. The level of antisemitism will explode of course since the worst form of it exists in places with no Jews, but there will be few to zero Jews who might suffer for it"

Well, I guess it eases the pressure to label an entire continent anti-semitic just because they don't ignore the independent human rights reports that come from the Middle East.

The above threee quotes are examples of nothing short of PROPAGANDA

A lot of people in Europe are sympathetic to the anti-semitic cause - you should have seen the outcry at Le Pen's description of the holocaust as a 'footnote of history'.

But I can tell you one thing for sure. Millions of Europeans died fighting the Nazis, without which, I doubt if there would be any Jews left. many war veterans are still alive, many are still alive who lost people they loved.

So this unrelenting desire to blame the entire continent does not go down well. It really doesn't.

'Sorry millions of you died fighting against the nazis, but actually, you had it coming cos you caused it'

That's essentially how it comes across.

And this fanatical exaggeration that the modern day situation canbe compared to the 1930s and 1940s - well maybe my history's bad, but I thought a lot worse happened than that Israeli goods had a label stuck on them.

Living in Europe, I can promise you that you are fuelling anti-semitism with these ill-advised remarks.

Sorry if you don't like the sound of that - but it is the truth.

And I maintain that you are sheltering yourselves from the reality of you insist the only reason for not liking Israel is anti-semitism. We're just get our sources from human irghts organistaions, rather than from the IDF

[Mediocrates]

So this unrelenting desire to blame the entire continent does not go down well.

As opposed to blaming Israel and Zionism, generally.

It really doesn't. 'Sorry millions of you died fighting against the nazis, but actually, you had it coming cos you caused it'

So what do you resent most, anger or ingratitude? Or is it resentment and therefore blaming the victim?

Living in Europe, I can promise you that you are fuelling anti-semitism with these ill-advised remarks.

Do wish we were still court Jews or is that an outright threat?

[elke]

And what exactly do these "human rights" sources you listen to say about the following:

1. Bombings of pizzerias
2. Bombings of religious observances
3. Mob lynchings
4. Using ambulances to transport explosives

Let's stop here. Looking for this information will keep you well occupied for a long time, because they say little or nothing.

Once you are done with those, we can continue with more.

[peacelover]

Amnesty.org

"Amnesty International today condemned the deliberate attacks in Jerusalem and Haifa which killed at least 25 Israeli civilians including four children, and left more than 200 wounded.

A suicide bomb in a crowded pedestrian precinct in Jerusalem around midnight on 1 December was followed by a suicide car bomb 10 minutes later. These two incidents killed 10 Israelis and wounded around 70. On 2 December a suicide bomb on a bus in Haifa killed 15 people and wounded 38 people.

The attacks were claimed by Hamas.

"These attacks are horrifying and tragic," Amnesty International said. "We call on armed groups to end immediately the direct targeting of civilians which contravenes the most fundamental principles of humanity."

"Amnesty International strongly condemns the killing of civilians in a suicide bombing on Sunday 25 February 1996 and calls on Hamas to stop such bombings.

We utterly condemn this appalling attack, said Amnesty Internationals Secretary General Pierre Sané, who recently led a delegation to Israel and the Palestinian Authority.

The deliberate and arbitrary killing of civilians can never be justified in any circumstances. We call on Hamas and other armed opposition groups to stop such attacks immediately...

A bomb shattered a commuter bus in Jerusalems main shopping street, Jaffa Street, shortly before 7am, killing 25 people, including the bomber. At least 15 of those killed in the attack were civilians. A second suicide bomb in a booby-trapped car 50 minutes later killed two people, including one woman soldier who was waiting at a bus stop and hitchhiking post used by soldiers returning to their bases after the weekend. The second victim may have been the bomber. At least 80 people are said to have been wounded in the two attacks. Responsibility for the bombings has been claimed by the Izz al-Din al-Qassam Brigades, the military wing of Hamas (the Islamic Resistance Movement) an Islamist movement opposed to the Palestinian Authoritys peace agreements with Israel.

The bombings were said by Hamas to have been carried out in reprisal for the killing of a Hamas member, Yahya Abu Ayyash, said to have made bombs used by suicide bombers in the past, who was killed in Gaza on 5 January 1996 by a booby-trapped telephone. The killing was thought to have been carried out by Israeli intelligence services although the Israeli Government has not claimed responsibility or denied involvement in the attack.

No action can ever justify the deliberate and arbitrarily killing of civilians, said Amnesty International. The right to life is a fundamental right which must be respected by all. There has to be an end to such acts of carnage."

Moving on to HRW:

"Yet again, suicide bombers have deliberately targeted civilians-this time a crowded rush hour bus carrying schoolchildren and office workers starting their day," said Hanny Megally, executive director of the Middle East and North Africa division of Human Rights Watch. "When Palestinian groups violate the most basic international law in order to draw attention to their own plight, revulsion is the only appropriate response; any other message is lost."

Human Rights Watch has repeatedly called on Palestinian leaders to stop the attacks and bring those responsible to justice.

Yesterday's attack is the most deadly since a March 27 suicide bombing in Netanya that killed twenty-eight people at a Passover meal. Hamas also claimed responsibility for that attack."

"Human Rights Watch condemned the December 12 attack by armed Palestinians on a bus near the Israeli settlement of Emmanuel, in which ten Israeli civilians were killed and twenty-nine injured, and called for those responsible to be brought to justice. "We condemn this horrific act as a violation of the most basic principle of international humanitarian law, the absolute prohibition against targeting civilians, " said Hanny Megally, executive director of the Middle East and North Africa Division of Human Rights Watch. "The fact that those attacked live in settlements that are illegal under international law does not make them legitimate military targets."
Yesterday's attack followed a spate of suicide and other bomb attacks against Israeli civilians by members of Palestinian armed groups and Israeli military attacks on Palestinians suspected of planning or carrying out attacks on Israelis. Two Palestinian suicide bombers also mounted an attack yesterday near the Neveh Dekalim settlement in the Gaza Strip, killing themselves and wounding four others."

I could go on.

If what you're getting at is that these human rights orgs are part of the alledged world wide conspiracy against Israel.. well, whatever helps you to sleep at night bro.

"So what do you resent most, anger or ingratitude? Or is it resentment and therefore blaming the victim?"

It's the lack of foundation for saying that the whole of Europe were Nazis. No one's asking you to be grateful, but no one will accept you saying that we didn't lift a finger against the Nazis, or that we were responsible for them.

"Do wish we were still court Jews or is that an outright threat?"

Of course it's not a threat.

I wish antisemitism would be tackled reasonably, and therefore I feel, more effectively. It won't work to label everyone who doesn't automatically agree with you an anti-semite, you'll just alientae people.

And saying criticsm of Israel is anti-semitic is nothing short of a cop-out

[NewsGuy]

Originally posted by peacelover
If what you're getting at is that these human rights orgs are part of the alledged world wide conspiracy against Israel.. well, whatever helps you to sleep at night bro.

I'm glad to see those few instances of "alleged" human rights organizations finally doing anything other than their usual biased anti-Israel activism. This is a new and welcome development to know that they are being reined in.

But for you to pretend that those groups have been neutral in the past, or concerned with the human rights of Israelis is probably something you prefer to believe to help you sleep at night.

Let's rewind just a bit... Does the so called "anti-racism" summit at Durban, S. Africa ring a bell? Amnesty Int'l kept its big mouth shut at the shocking display of Anti-Semitism that perverted the entire conference. Not a peep was heard from this self-described champion of human rights, even when a sign reading "Hitler should have finished the job" was displayed at the UN's Anti-Racism summit.

When a proposed resolution by Arab racists was drafted, urging the boycott and dismantling of the State of Israel, as well as branding Zionism as a racist movement, all that Amnesty's secretary general, Irene Khan could get her little self to utter was "There is language in the document that AI doesn't agree with." A silly little brush-off for an organization that considers itself an activist.

And when 80 NGOs joined in a statement condemning the Anti-Semitic actions of that conference, Amnesty refused to sign the joint statement. That in itself is a clear message about AI's hypocritical anti-Semitic stand.

But apart from the racist, anti-Semitic conference in Durban, historically so-called human-rights groups have always chosen the Arab side, even when hundreds of Israelis were massacred and thousands wounded by Arab and Islamic terrorists. Come to think of it, have you ever heard the term "terrorist" used to describe the Palestinian actions? "Armed groups," yes. "Terrorist?" No, not really. That terminology all of a sudden becomes murky when Jews are the ones being massacred.

It's the lack of foundation for saying that the whole of Europe were Nazis. No one's asking you to be grateful, but no one will accept you saying that we didn't lift a finger against the Nazis, or that we were responsible for them.

Maybe no one with the backbone or basic moral decency to admit the facts would agree with that.

But actually, many countries in Europe participated in the Nazi attrocities against Jews. Sure, many Europeans are tired of bearing the guilt for the actions of their fathers or grandfathers, but historically speaking, it was just 2 seconds ago that Europeans were happily forcing 6 million of their Jewish population into gas chambers and incinerators.

This is not to say that all Europeans are anti-Semites, nor does it bear on all current events. Still, when certain European countries arrogantly presume that they are in a position to judge Israel, or indeed, judge anyone for that matter, I strongly disagree. At the very least, the EU should quietly shy away from taking any actions whatsoever that may further harm its Jewish victims' ability to live with peace in dignity in the Jewish homeland of Israel.

And saying criticsm of Israel is anti-semitic is nothing short of a cop-out

In the vast majority of cases, those who oppose the right of the Jewish people to live in Israel independently and securely, are in fact Anti-Semitic. There is a very close tie between those two viewpoints. Saying its a "cop out" is in itself an attempt to divert attention from the underlying motivations of the vast majority of Israel's critics. Not all, but the vast majority.

[Batman]

To: cg.newyork@mfa.no
emb.wahington@mfa.no
terje.hauge@mfa.no
oyslebo@mfa.no
oyslebo@mfa.no
tora.thorsrud.faeste@mfa.no
monic-s.jakobsen@mfa.no
ole.orset@mfa.no

To Whom It May Concern:

It has come to my attention that it has become policy in Norway to place stickers on all products that are grown or made in Israel. Please explain, in detail, why you have instituted such a policy?

In addition, please explain why the following disturbing events have become pervasive in your country! (i.e. Norwegian stevedores have refused to unload Israeli farm products; Norwegian "labor youth group" campaigned to bar Israeli singers from the Eurovision Song Festival!)

In addition, why does the Progress Party want to ban circumcision? (for health purposes???).

I have heard nothing-nothing of your moral outrage at the hundreds of mainly Israeli CHILDREN and women mercilessly blown up while sitting down for a Passover meal or a piece of Pizza or an Ice Creme Cone. Is your country presently labeling all imported products made or grown in the West Bank or the Gaza Strip? If not, why not? Why the double standard?

Are you the same Norway that initiated the "Oslo Accords"-- that tried to find the path to a just and long lasting peace between Israel and the Palestinians? What has happened to you?

May I suggest that instead of spending your time labeling Israeli imports--- you spend some time reflecting on your current attitudes and your historical prejudices and begin setting national standards that are applied EQUALLY!!!!

I will do everything I can to make the Travel Industry aware of Norway's blatant bigotry. I would think a country with a history of Nazi collaboration would be more careful with whom it associates!!!

M.M.
Sales and Marketing Director, Hospitality and Travel Industry

[Vic]

Originally posted by Batman
EU Releases Aid to Palestinians[...]

Originally posted by NewsGuy
At the very least, the EU should quietly shy away from taking any actions whatsoever that may further harm its Jewish victims' ability to live with peace in dignity in the Jewish homeland of Israel.

FYI: Norway is not a member of the EU

[cerulean]

Are you the same Norway that initiated the "Oslo Accords"-- that tried to find the path to a just and long lasting peace between Israel and the Palestinians? What has happened to you?

I hope not to sound like an apologist, but I wanted to try to balance the picture so you can get an idea of where Norway is and why it might have gotten so far off the track (although it's very reasonable to also point out that anti-Semitism has always been there, and just varies in amount).

My perception from personal contacts and friends and reading is that Norway sees itself as being the harbinger of progress in the entire world, making up for its small size by bringing goodness everywhere (pride is a big part of the issue). Norway is justifiably proud of its domestic achievements in respect to the status of women. Gro Harlem Bruntland, the Norwegian PM at the time of the Oslo agreements in the early 90s, has done a great deal of work in the UN in respect to the status of children and women.

The fact that Norway has so much oil wealth means that it is not facing the same painful decisions of other European countries in respect to budget cutbacks. Norway has a large foreign aid budget (one of the largest per capita in the world) and a strong tradition of sending aid workers to beleagured parts of the world (both secular and overtly Christian, but I think mostly secular now) and these workers have done a great deal of good providing medical, educational, agricultural, and economic services. The Norwegian Parliament (the Storting) is responsible for awarding the Nobel Peace Prize (another great source of pride).

So why the current situation with Israel?

First, there were the Oslo agreements. Norway saw the Oslo agreements as feathers in its cap, a sign of how enlightened and superior it was to bring peace between two intractable enemies.

But Oslo has failed! (At least I think it has, and I think most agree.) Norway is unwilling to accept an error on its part, so therefore the blame has to go somewhere else. It can't be with the beleagured Palestinians, who are suffering so badly, after all. So, falling back on historical precedents (perhaps unconsciously), that included forbidding Jews from Norway until the mid-1800s, Norway blames Israel.

My suggestion for neutralizing Norway (if not bringing it onside) is to appeal to this sense of pride (deserved or not). I can't say what will work or not, but pointing to Norway's record (apart from Israel) and then contrasting its record on Israel might be a good start.

(My incomplete, oversimplified opinion.)

[Mediocrates]

Or maybe it costs them little political or economic capital to be dramatic.

I for one refuse to buy any computers made in Syria. I call for an embargo on all Syrian computer electronics

[peacelover]

Originally posted by NewsGuy


But for you to pretend that those groups have been neutral in the past, or concerned with the human rights of Israelis is probably something you prefer to believe to help you sleep at night.

Hi newsguy. Well, I'm only 18 and don't know too much about what Amnesty, B'Tselem (are they anti-semitic?) and HRW etc have done through their history, but I find their coverage at the moment to be quite fair. For example, whenever there is a suicide bomb, there is an Amnesty condemnation of it, and there are many articles which criticise the PA's treatment of Palestinians, as well as the Israeli government's treatment of them.

PA Rough Justice

I quote now an extract of Amnesty's response to a suicide bombing, to show that they are utterly opposed to such violent acts. There are countless more condemnations like this one.

"These attacks are horrifying and tragic," Amnesty International said. "We call on armed groups to end immediately the direct targeting of civilians which contravenes the most fundamental principles of humanity."

Let's rewind just a bit... Does the so called "anti-racism" summit at Durban, S. Africa ring a bell? Amnesty Int'l kept its big mouth shut at the shocking display of Anti-Semitism that perverted the entire conference. Not a peep was heard from this self-described champion of human rights, even when a sign reading "Hitler should have finished the job" was displayed at the UN's Anti-Racism summit.

There was much condemnation in the Western world at the anti-semitism displayed at Durban, if Amnesty did not condemn it then they should have... however, I don't agree that their failure to do so negates their ability to report on the Middle East.

Amnesty is not a racial equality organisation, and its aim is not to counter racism, but human rights abuses. Its aims are " to free all prisoners of conscience; ensure fair and prompt trials for political prisoners; abolish the death penalty, torture and other cruel treatment of prisoners; end political killings and "disappearances"; and oppose human rights abuses by opposition groups."

Trying to lower racist feeling does not fall under those categories. Its not their main area. I would like for them to branch out into combatting racism as well, but as it is not their organisation's job to tackle racism, which is not a human rights abuse unless it is translated into action, I do not feel that Durban's events in any way suggest that Amnesty cannot be trusted with what it says about Israel and the territories.

And when 80 NGOs joined in a statement condemning the Anti-Semitic actions of that conference, Amnesty refused to sign the joint statement. That in itself is a clear message about AI's hypocritical anti-Semitic stand.

I don't know a lot about that petition, and could not find any information on it. They should have signed it, however, I don't agree that their failure to do so makes them intrinsically anti-semitic, especially given their objections to the rise of anti-semitism in places such as Tunisia, where a synagogue was recently burned down. However, I have emailed them to complain that they did not challenge this anti-semitism at Durban, as I feel this is disgusting.

In any case, defaming Amnesty isn't really much good to Israel's reputation, as there are so many other human rights groups that are also critical of Israeli policies. You can't seriously think they are all anti-semitic.

Come to think of it, have you ever heard the term "terrorist" used to describe the Palestinian actions? "Armed groups," yes. "Terrorist?" No, not really. That terminology all of a sudden becomes murky when Jews are the ones being massacred.

The human rights groups do not tend to call anybody 'terrorists'. I think this is a specific policy, as they believe that everyone has human rights, and to label people terrorists (even if they are) can make their mal-treatment in prisons etc seem acceptable.

The tend to speak about 'terrorist actions', and 'suspected terrorists' due to the common belief among society that terrorists do not have human rights, an opinion that HRW etc would disagree with.

I don't necessarily agree with not using the word 'terrorist' very often. But I think you are wrong to say they only leave it out when it is Jews who are dying.

In the vast majority of cases, those who oppose the right of the Jewish people to live in Israel independently and securely, are in fact Anti-Semitic. There is a very close tie between those two viewpoints. Saying its a "cop out" is in itself an attempt to divert attention from the underlying motivations of the vast majority of Israel's critics. Not all, but the vast majority.

There is a difference between opposing Israel's right to exist and criticising its treatment of Palestinians.

Those who oppose its right to exist may well be anti-semitic.
However, those who disagree that collective punishment as a response to terrorism is acceptable are not necessarily anti-semitic, and I don't think you have the evidence to say that anti-semitism is the 'underlying motivation' of the 'vast majority' of people who criticse Israeli policy.

[Mediocrates]

"We condemn suicide bombers"

"These attacks are horrifying and tragic," Amnesty International said. "We call on armed groups to end immediately the direct targeting of civilians which contravenes the most fundamental principles of humanity"

Which groups?, dare you name them?, where are they located and what acts do you refer to?, can you name the victims?, can you place the dates?

"Can we go get lunch now?"

"We condemn racist zionist IDF murderers"

"Let's protest, sanction, intimidate, threaten, march, deport.."

Amnesty is not a racial equality organisation, which in this context is dangerously close to saying there is no such thing as a hate crime. Are you SURE you want to say that?

are " to free all prisoners of conscience; ensure fair and prompt trials for political prisoners; abolish the death penalty, torture and other cruel treatment of prisoners; end political killings and "disappearances"; and oppose human rights abuses by opposition groups."

Please read that again slowly, perhaps out loud, for context. What does it say? It says AI's mission is directed against identifiable governments. Since we all 'agree' Palisitine is not a state AI has no mandate scrutinizing them. It's like any other social services apparatus - they can do what they do in light of their mission and how they view the world. AI does no see a world where terrorism is anything that they can or should look into, all their 'condemnations' aside.

However, those who disagree that collective punishment...

Be very very careful with your word choice. There are 3 phrases that are considered my most to be acceptable hate speech or politically correct hate speech. One is 'racist' - you can call someone a racist and it will take on a factual life of its own. Two is 'ethnic cleansing' - something that gets parroted around as if it meant what the words ethnic and cleansing mean. Really it's very lazy hate speech. And three is 'collective punishment' - which is, in the absence of actualy facts, or news or information a kind of opinion or world view that takes on the qualities of fact. At best a squishy phrase like "you're mean" which is really filler and doesn't add anything of substance.

That's what hot button propagandist words are - fire and smoke but there's nothing burning but some cheap fireworks. They are substitutes for fact for thought for reflectio.

[Batman]

thanks for the info about Norway not being part of the EU.

so, that would be the Other Nations.

[James]

And saying criticsm of Israel is anti-semitic is nothing short of a cop-out [/B][/QUOTE]

Oh now tell us how You really feel! You have alot of words but basically Israel is wrong and Islam is right?

[James]

http://www.israelinsider.com/views/a...views_0397.htm

On the heels of Mr. Roed-Larsen's now-infamous remark that Israel "ceded all moral ground" in Jenin, comes word from his home country of Norway that some supermarket chains have decided to place special identification stickers on products from Israel. Other Scandinavian countries may follow suit. The Norwegians say the stickers do not constitute a "boycott" of Israel; they just want their customers, who are overwhelmingly pro-Palestinian, to pay attention to where these products are produced.
Maybe the rest of us should run down to our local supermarkets with a pad of yellow "post-it" notes so that consumers of Norwegian salmon or Jarlsberg cheese can also pay attention to where those are produced. Stick them on the packages with a note: these products come from a place with a shameful past that continues to operate as a European free zone for Neo-Nazis and other right wing extremists.

Those asking the question of whether Europeans are anti-Israel because of Israel's actions in fighting terror, or because of their own latent anti-Semitism, should study the example of Norway.

Behind the current disclaimer of a boycott you will find that Norwegians are quite experienced at boycotting Israel. Norwegian labor unions have recently refused to off-load Israeli farm produce. Last year, a Norwegian "labor youth movement" organized a campaign to ban Israeli singers from the Eurovision song contest. Another Norwegian group has been boycotting Israeli oranges since the early 90s. This group, "Boikott Israel," rejuvenated by the latest "Intifada" to include a boycott of all Israeli commerce, denies on its website that it is anti-Semitic but states that its goal is the end Israel's "50 year occupation" of, and the return of all refugees to, a "free Palestine." Not anti-Semitic? In 1941, the graffiti on Jewish businesses in Oslo read: "Jews, go to Palestine." To campaign now in Norway to get the Jews out of "Palestine" seems anti-Semitic to me, if only by process of elimination.

Indeed, the roots of Norwegian boycotts of Israel run deep. Anti-Semitism has held a unique place in Norwegian politics since the 1930s when Vidkun Quisling, later the leader of a Nazi puppet government in Norway, formed the National Union Party. While many Norwegians fought with the Resistance, many became eager collaborators of the Nazis, including some 60,000 members of the National Union. Under its auspices, Norway formed its own branch of the SS and established academies sending hundreds of officers each year to the German military. One very active neo-Nazi group in Norway today is the Institutt for norsk okkupasjonshistorie (Institute for the History of Occupied Norway), composed of descendants of members of the Quisling party, the Waffen SS and others dedicated to cleansing their wartime reputation.

The aspect of the holocaust in Norway that was particularly Norwegian was the liquidation of Jewish property, much of which was divided up by Quisling and his followers. When the war ended, the Norwegian reparations commission shamelessly accepted doctored figures kept by the Quisling government in order to reject most Jewish claims and avoid paying others more than pennies on the dollar. Then in 1997 a new commission, appointed after a journalistic expose of the injustice of the first commission, issued a report, which actually recommended adherence to the earlier decision. However, a scandal erupted when it was discovered that an organization of former Nazis had provided a scholarship to a researcher on the new commission. The Norwegian prime minister ultimately intervened and compelled the government to accept a dissenting report.

Today, neo-Nazi propaganda, band concerts and other events are commonplace in Norway. Norway's ultra right-wing groups play host to gatherings of like-minded groups from Sweden and Denmark with little fear of official interference. More significantly, according to a report published by the Stephen Roth Institute of Tel Aviv University, the extreme right wing Progress Party is the second largest party in Norway with 25 out of 160 seats in the Parliament. Among other racist and anti-immigration views, this party advocates banning male circumcision. Schechita (kosher slaughter) is already forbidden by Norwegian law.

Given their past and present history, Norwegians are hardly qualified to accuse any other country of having ceded "moral ground." Their warning stickers on Israeli goods are the modern-day equivalent of painting "Joden" on the Jewish-owned businesses of Oslo and Trondheim in 1941. We needn't be reminded that after that, all of Norway's remaining Jews were deported to Auschwitz. Fewer than 30 survived the Holocaust.

I'm not the sort that usually pays attention to boycotts and counter-boycotts, because often you don't know who you are really hurting. But there is a good reason why I won't be buying Norwegian products any time soon, or cruising on the Norwegian Line. Their stickers have caught my attention.

Views expressed by the author do not necessarily reflect those of israelinsider. [/B][/QUOTE]

Israel produces "goods" accepted by countries willing to accept
quality produce and not afraid of what the Arab Nations think!