The Turkish "Humanitarian" Armada -- An Italian View

UPDATING 6-14 & 10-17-2010 at bottom

The peace process means peace of mind for antisemites

Fiamma Nirenstein, the deputy chairperson of the foreign affairs committee of the Italian Chamber of Deputies, discerns a slight improvement in the international view of Israel's action to stop the fake humanitarian Turkish armada from breaking the blockade of Gaza, now ruled by Islamic fanatics and bigots. Her piece is remarkable for her real knowledge of what was going on compared to the fashionable, simplistic Judeophobic accounts elsewhere in the world's "news" media.


The Left Is Now Rethinking: Enough Mud on Israel

Il Giornale 9 June 2‏010

After the accusations poured on Israel, now comes the mea culpa of the international press and observers. Even Bernard-Henri Levy condemns the disinformation. Reuters is accused: blood and knives removed from the photos

* * * * * * *

Israel is a major subject for discussion in today’s world. It is the apple of discord, the preferred pretext for attacking the West, the best weapon for legitimizing the old striped totalitarian Soviet peace flag. It is the worm that gnaws at the soul of Leftist Jews who adore their narcissistic-diasporic legitimization that exempts them from the hardly elegant experience of being a people, indeed, a nation. Above all, it is the issue that enables the antisemites to express themselves under cover and enables the automatic UN majority to be strong. It is also the best of the red capes to wave in front of the Islamist bull, as Ahmadinejad did in Istanbul, when he promised to wipe out Israel, and as Bashar Assad did in Syria and Erdogan, the Turkish prime minister, did, who is building an Islamist career for his country by threatening Israel.

But excess is deforming and the huge amount of mud poured on Israel lately has disgusted even Bernard-Henri Levy, one of the most active critics of Israeli policy (He and others authored the leftist so-called JCall document against the Israeli government and criticized Israel immediately after the flotilla event). Precisely in HaAretz, a pacifist, hypercritical paper, he condemned the disinformation and criminalization deployed against Israel, while retaining his reservations about the “stupidity” of the operation and of the Netanyahu government.

The world is rethinking, and maybe that is also because the slow realization of reality is weakening the pressure, Israel is showing courage on the issue of a [international investigating] commission. Jerusalem has many good reasons for rejecting an international commission that, according to the UN Council for Human Rights (Italy voted No), is supposed to investigate the behavior of the Jewish State during the unfortunate boarding and takeover of the ship Marmara. The French foreign minister Bernard Kouchner considers it a good idea and in order to reinforce the meaning of the commission he requests that Turkey take part in it. That is strange, given the certainly non-neutral role of Turkey in that event and given that Erdogan stokes the fire and threatens, together with Ahmadinejad, to go to the coast of Gaza with his own ships, even personally.

In general, Israel’s experience with investigating commissions, with UN institutions moreover, has been disastrous. An outstanding illustration was the commission directed by Judge Goldstone which used only sources sympathetic to the Palestinians to draw up a devastating report about the Gaza War. In fact, it forbade Israel to defend itself and quoted only activist-witnesses that call armed units and human shields for Hamas “civilians.” Israel, that can judge itself very severely by itself, as demonstrated by the Winograd Commission that was pitiless on the Lebanon War of 2006 and caused the dismissal of many civilians and military men, is planning therefore at the moment two independent investigating commissions, even if Netanyahu is still awaiting American approval for the second: The first, military one, will be guided by General Giora Eiland, a calm personality, admired for being cultured; the second is to be made up of local jurists, expert on international and maritime law and of two international jurists, one an American, as observers. It will not be their duty to interrogate the soldiers, whom Bibi is careful not to let be directly accused. The commission should examine the conditions of the encounter on the ship Marmara, the legality of the naval blockade, the question of “proportion” in the encounter.

In reality, with the passage of the hours, as many international observers, the press, the TV, Bernard-Henri Levy and companions make their mea culpas, the circumstances of the event on the Marmara have become ever clearer. Criticisms have been made by many of the military modality of the attack, but that the “pacifist” ship was transporting armed thugs belonging to an organization that had supplied weapons to Hamas, to the Islamic Jihad and even to al-Qa`ida and that it was sprinkled with persons who wanted to win paradise through becoming shahids, is certain.

What has not been well clarified, however, is the role of Turkey, that launched the fleet although warned of the danger that that entailed; that knew who the men of the IHH were, and that allowed them to embark anyhow in conspicuous numbers from a different port without checking them, that now rides the event in the most blatant way, using Istanbul as a launch platform for bellicose operations. Turkey acts enthusiastically in every domain: It was reprimanded by Angela Merkel by her defining herself as prime minister for the Turks who live in Germany; it raised eyebrows when it sought de facto to save Iran from the sanctions by offering to enrich Iran’s uranium itself; when a radar station within Turkey collapsed unexpectedly while NATO is supposed to have needed information on Georgia, obtained by radar.

Standing out is the fact that Abu Mazen went personally to Erdogan to explain to him that what he is doing gives Hamas an advantage over its worst enemy, Fatah. A fire like the one that Turkey is threatening to kindle to Israel’s detriment can spread even to the detriment of the arsonists.

- - - - - - - - - end- - - - -for original see here- - - - - -

It may well be that world public opinion is turning away from the lies of Erdogan and of his Western comrades in the "Free Gaza movement." After all, there has been too much real information that emerged before and after the boarding of the Mavi Marmara about the thuggish character of the IHH operatives on the boat who attacked Israeli commandos who came down one by one from a helicopter, thereby facilitating the endeavor of the Turkish thugs to seize and beat and stab them. That was an Israeli mistake of intelligence evaluation and of command. But the thuggish character of the "peacemongers" was obvious for all to see in many videos and audio recordings and still photos. So even many of the usual anti-Israel hypocrites had to step back and reconsider what went on.

What is disappointing in the article above is that Israel's govt and prime minister seem to be giving in to a hypocritical demand by certain Western govts and the UN, etc., that an "international invesigating commission" be set up to investigate only Israel and not Turkey, an investigation that would supposedly be "transparent" and "impartial" and any other suitable adjective that the reader may care to add . Meanwhile, Erdogan and Ahmadinejad's open incitement to war and threats of war against Israel are not openly or directly condemned by the West, including the USA. Israel should take its case to the so-called International Court of Justice at the Hague where of course, Israel will get no justice because of the inherently political structure of the ICJ and the UN as a whole, but it would be helpful to raise the issue, to make the accusations anyhow, to accuse, in my opinion. The UN "human rights council," which is dominated by tyrannies and, in particular, the Organization of the Islamic Conference [OIC] (its chairman a Turk named Ihsanoglu), should not be allowed to be the party making accusations and demanding investigations. The role of the Islamist Turkish govt of Erdogan in instigating and executing this affair should be exposed to the whole world.
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
UPDATING 6-14-2010
Eve Garrard, a writer, points out some of the widespread hypocrisy deployed against Israel, especially on account of the Turkish armada incident [here].
Leon de Winter, Dutch novelist, perceives the international Left's hypocrisy over the Turkish armada [here]
UPDATING 10-17-2010 The important Italian daily, Il Giornale [which Fiamma Nirenstein writes for] of 1 June 2010 judged that "Israel did right to shoot" at violent jihadist thugs on the Mavi Marmara [here]. "With the excuse of pacifism, a fleet of ships wanted to violate the sovereignty of the Jewish state and bring aid to Hamas." The novelist Amos Oz disagreed with the Israeli government decision to stop the "aid convoy." But he adds, "I don't know them, these pacifists. Many of them cannot be defined as such. They are Islamic militants sympathizing with Hamas. They have ties with terrorist organizations. I believe that they were looking for a provocation. This is a fact. Among them, to be sure, were pacifists in good faith. . ." Here's a problem. Can pacifists in "good faith" sympathize with Hamas? Were they so ignorant as not to know what Hamas stands for? That their convoy was making publicity for Hamas? Were they 100%, sincere and consistent pacifists?

Arab Peacemonger Is a Warmonger -- Will CNN Admit It?

UPDATING 6-7-2010


At the beginning of the week, while the Mavi Marmara, a Turkish ferry boat run by the Turkish jihadi foundation IHH [here (pdf) & here & here] was sailing toward Gaza to create a provocation, an incident meant to make Israel look bad in world public opinion, CNN's Rosemary Church interviewed a well spoken humano faker named Osama Kashoo [here] As befits a spokesman for a fake "humanitarian" expedition, Kashoo told CNN viewers that he loved all mankind; he loved peace and all people and all things. See the interview here.

However, other video films were made on the ship showing the very peaceful, loving Mr Kashoo. In one of these films he appears chanting the triumphalist Islamic jihadist battlecry, Khaybar Khaybar ya Yahud, Jaysh Muhammad sa ya`ud. This chant celebrates an early jihad battle victory led by Muhammad himself in which the defeated Jews of the Khaybar oasis were massacred, enslaved, humiliated and dispossessed of their lands, their moveable property and their dignity. Their wives were taken as concubines by the Arab-Muslims, including by Muhammad himself. Here it is again with translation:

Khaybar Khaybar ya Yahud, Jaysh Muhammad sa ya`ud

[Remember] Khaybar Khaybar O Jews, Muhammad's army will return for sure.

Our peaceful, loving innocuous peacenik, Osama Kashoo, sits among a group of other jihadis chanting away, chanting a war cry, a chant of humiliation of Jews. See here. My suggestion is that you watch the two videos, trying to catch a glimpse of Kashoo on the right side of the group of chanters. Here is a still of Mr Kashoo sitting with his friends and chanting, raising his fist in a quintessentially peaceful gesture.


Below is another shot of our two-faced warmonger.


- - - - - - - - - - -
UPDATING June 7, 2010 Thugs of IHH stand over wounded bodies of captured Israeli soldiers. Some of the Turkish thugs carry knives which have been thoughtfully cropped out of the photos by Reuters which took it upon itself to preserve the sacred narrative of innocuous "peace activists" murdered by Israeli commandos without provocation. Thanx to LGF for noting the deliberate alterations or embellishments of two --not one-- photos from the Mavi Marmara [here].

War Candidate Obama Drops the Anti-War, Anti-Military Mask with a Thud and Assumes the Mask of National Security Obama

Revised 8-17-2008

The Change candidate comes out of his chrysalis as the old standard Washington statesman that we know so well.

The Prince of Salina [in Lampedusa's The Leopard] said that in order for things to stay the same, things must constantly change. That may explain why some Establishment circles favor the candidacy of Senator Obama, the "Change" candidate, who endeavored mightily not to be specific about which changes he would introduce. Indeed, anti-war, anti-military Obama seems to have been a cocoon or chrysalis from which "national security" Obama is now emerging. This latter day Obama wants to shift troops from Iraq to Afghanistan, where they will presumably be either out of harm's way or in a better position to go after al-Qa`ida. This was stated by Obama's foreign policy advisor, one Susan Rice. It was also stated by the pacifist saint himself in his speech at the Berlin Victory Colunn [24 July 2008]. So the advocate of change is himself changing --back to the old style Washington "statesman" that so many millions believed he had come to drive out.

Here is Susan Rice:

In an interview with SPIEGEL, Obama's leading foreign policy advisor Susan Rice said: "Neither Germany nor the US has the luxury of assuming that we can skate by on half-measures in Afghanistan and Parkistan and not risk suffering the consequences." She added that the "US has to put more resources and troops into Afghanistan, and NATO should do the same, while, to the greatest extent possible, lifting operational restrictions." [Der SpiegelOnline, 7-21-2008]

Zbigniew Brzezinski is also mentioned as a foreign policy advisor to Obama. If Zbig is involved at all, then he is likely to be the truly senior advisor although not involved in day to day minutiae. After all, Zbig spent four long years as Jimmy Carter's national insecurity advisor. In this capacity he very proficiently laid the groundwork for future wars. The world is far from recovering from Zbig's hyperactive foreign policy heaving and churning.

Here's some info about Obama's trip to Berlin where he spoke at the Victory Column, a monument dedicated to 19th century German victories against Denmark, France and Austria.
Here are the immortal words of the pacifist saint himself:

No one welcomes war," he said. "I recognize the enormous difficulties in Afghanistan. But my country and yours have a stake in seeing that NATO's first mission beyond Europe's borders is a success. For the people of Afghanistan, and for our shared security, the work must be done. America cannot do this alone. The Afghan people need our troops and your troops; our support and your support to defeat the Taliban and al Qaeda, to develop their economy, and to help them rebuild their nation. We have too much at stake to turn back now." [ABC News 7-24-08]

Hitler had the monument moved to its present location. What does it mean that Obama spoke at a monument to victory, several military victories in fact, that was set in its present location by Hitler?? Do the obamabots not comprehend that their idol, supposedly against Bush's war in Iraq during his primary election campaign against Hilary, is now advocating more war in Afghanistan?? Maybe war in one place is better than war in another location. But it's still war. Can we agree on that?

- - - - - - - - - - - - -
Coming: More on Obama the war candidate, More on the anti-Jewish racism of the "Peace Process," Jews in Jerusalem, Hebron, the Land of Israel, archeological updates, peace follies, propaganda, etc.

A Peace Agreement Is Not Necessarily Peace

Here's another fraud of the "peace process." It is the notion, widely disseminated and advocated by Western politicians, diplomats, journalopropagandists, and other peacemongers, that an agreement --in particular one called a "peace agreement"-- means peace, represents peace, will lead to peace, and so on. Agreements and accords can just as easily lead to war, even peace accords can lead to war. So if President Bush Junior can bring about an "agreement" between Israel and the "palestinian authority," most likely by twisting craven Olmert's arm, that most likely will not mean peace or bring peace. It will simply be an agreement that can improve the strategic situation of the Arab enemies of Israel, especially if Israel gives up strategic territory, such as the north-south Judea-Samaria mountain ridge [גב ההר] for the sake of a "peace agreement." In that case, a "peace accord" will surely lead to more war, to more rockets falling on Israeli cities, and so on.

For example, look at the Munich Accord of October 1938. It was touted by British PM Neville Chamberlain as "peace in our time. . . peace with honor" With Czechoslovakia strategically weakened by having given up the mountainous Sudetenland, mainly populated by ethnic Germans who were Czech citizens, Hitler invaded and occupied the rump --the remainder-- of Czechoslovakia in March of 1939. Yet Britain and France did not much protest this invasion. It was not until Hitler's Germany invaded Poland in September 1939, in cooperation with the Communist USSR, that Britain and France decided formally thatHitler was an enemy. But they did little about it. The period between the invasion of Poland in 9-1939 and the invasion of France in June 1940, less than a year later, is called the Phoney War [la drole de guerre]. This is because little was done to fight the Nazis or get ready to fight them in that period. By the way, at that time, Communists in the parliaments of France and Britain were opposed to any measures of military defense by their countries. This contributed to the French defeat in 1940. Before we forget, Poland and France both had full diplomatic relations with Germany before they were attacked and invaded in 1939 and 1940 respectively.

Other falsehoods of the misnamed "peace process" are
1) the notion of a "palestinian people" which in fact never existed in history, and even now does not exist. Whereas the PLO charter [see Article I particularly], which supposedly guides the palestinian authority, claims that the "palestinian Arab people" is part of the Arab nation and Palestine is part of the Great Arab Fatherland [call it Homeland, if you don't want to acknowledge the Nazi nature of the PLO], the Hamas on the other hand, believes in the Islamic nation, al-Ummah al-Islamiyyah. In fact, neither the PLO/PA nor the Hamas and its satellites like Islamic Jihad are really interested in a "palestinian" state alongside Israel. They ultimately want a great Arab state --the PLO/PA-- or an great Islamic state ruled by a new caliph --Hamas.
2) the "peace process" is really leading towards peace and is meant to lead towards peace. Shmuel Trigano, quoted in an earlier post here, points out that what is really going on is more of a war process [processus de guerre]. See the earlier post of 15 December 2007.
3) a corollary of 2) is the falsehood of the trustworthy, scientific nature of the "peace process." By calling it a "process," the mindbenders are insinuating that the "peace process" somehow has the trustworthy inevitability of an industrial process or a technical process.
4) That there is an Israeli-Palestinian conflict which must be solved. However, the other Arab states are nearly all enemies of Israel as are many many Muslim states. Consider Pakistan and Malaysia. Both Pakistan and Malaysia oppress and persecute the non-Muslim minorities in those countries. Just in recent years the civil rights of non-Muslims in Malaysia, mostly Chinese and Indians [Hindus & Sikhs], have been further cut away and these people have been more and more subject to Muslim Shari`ah law with all that implies [dhimmi status].
5) While the Organization of the Islamic Conference and most of its member states openly avow their hostility to Israel, the EU and several of its member states individually and other Western states, give billions of dollars every year to the PA, supposedly to build up its economy. In fact, much of the money goes to corrupt leaders at or near the top or to finance terrorist operations, and/or to pay the PA "security services" [arafat created more than dozen of them, so none would get so strong as to be able to challenge his supremacy], and/or to pay for the PA schools that slander Jews every day and incite hatred for them [that is, us Jews] and pay for the PA electronic media that do the same, etc. So, objectively speaking, many Western states and the EU are also hostile to Israel, perhaps more hypocritically than the Arabs.

In view of the above, let's honestly admit that Shmuel Trigano is right. We are facing a war process, not a peace process.
- - - - - - - -
Coming: More on the falsehoods of the "peace process," peace follies, propaganda, Jews in Jerusalem, Hebron, & the Land of Israel, Jewish history, etc.

False Premises of Annapolis & of the "peace process"

It is characteristic of decaying
societies and ruling groups that
they are incapable of adjusting to
the evolution of reality. They repeat
discussions and arguments and behaviors
that have failed, but which they cannot
renounce because they have been as if
hypnotized by their own beliefs.
The myth of the "peace process"
in the Middle East is one of these. ******
Le propre des sociétés et des pouvoirs
finissants est leur incapacité à s'ajuster
à l'évolution de la réalité. Ils réitèrent
des discours et des comportements qui
ont echoué mais auxquels ils ne peuvent
renoncer parce qu'ils sont comme
hypnotisés par leurs propres croyances.
Le mythe du «processus de paix» au
Moyen Orient est de ceux-là.
[Shmuel Trigano, "Le Besoin d'un nouveau
paradigme pour le Moyen Orient,"
France-Israel Information,
juillet-aout-septembre 2007, p 5]

One of the big lies of the "peace process" [and of the Annapolis Conference] is that a "peace process" necessarily ends up in a state of peace. This is idiotically viewing a "peace process" as something like a scientific or industrial process that always produces the same results. As if it were like heating water to 100 degrees celsius which --we know from experience-- will cause it to boil and evaporate as steam. Or the process may be like kindling a fuse that leads to well-packed dynamite. Which --we know from experience and reputation-- will bring about an explosion. Of course a "peace process" may very well end up in an explosion but that's not what the promoters of the process would have us believe. They speak of a "peace process" as if it were scientifically sure to result in peace. They might prefer an analogy to putting out a fire. The rage of the "palestinians" over "unfair treatment" might be likened to a fire which Israel could put out by giving them territory which would have the effect on "palestinian" or Arab rage of the chemicals in a fire extinguisher which put out fires.

Of course that may work in a natural science like physics or chemistry but not in political science. The diplomatic peacemongers disregard or pretend to be unaware of the fact that human beings in all their variety, with their virtues and vices [more of the latter than the former], are involved.

Shmuel Trigano writes that the Oslo "peace process" has "proven itself over the years to be, above all, a war process" [processus de guerre]. That seems obvious to many people, probably to the overwhelmingly majority of Israelis. But it still has to be said. And repeated over and over. Because, as Trigano points out, "'the peace process' still continues today. . . and some push the impudence or the farce" so far as to "announce to us a soon to come final --'historic'-- peace agreement."
So much for "peace processes" in general and the Oslo "peace process" in particular.

Another big lie is that there is a people called a "palestinian people." Actually, those people now fashionably called "palestinians" consider themselves merely a section of the Arab nation [see Article One of the PLO charter, among other documents]. There never was a "palestinian people" in history and indeed the Arabs did not traditionally call the country "palestine" nor did they see it as a separate, distinct country. Rather for Arabs and other Muslims it was an undefined, indistinct area of bilad ash-Sham [translated as Greater Syria or Syria]. But the "palestinian people" notion is necessary for creating a body of public opinion in the West in favor of taking territory away from Israel, territory vital for Israel's defense against the Arab states in general or against Arab and other Islamic states. Shmuel Trigano points out that:

After 15 years of illusions, two facts force themselves to be noticed:
1) The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is an Israel-Arab conflict, or Israel-Islamic conflict (indeed, Pakistanis and Indonesians, even Muslim Europeans who have become Islamists, are not Arabs).
2) The Palestinians don't want a Palestinian state but the disappearance of the state of Israel.

Hence, Israel is not fighting merely "palestinians" but Arabs generally and other Muslims. Thus Trigano refutes two more lies of the "peace process," that is, that Israel is fighting "palestinians" alone, that there is an "Israel-palestinian" conflict, and that the palestinian Arabs or other Arabs want a separate "palestinian state," much less a state alongside Israel living at peace with Israel.
Of course, President Bush Junior claims that that's what he wants. But if he thinks that that's what the Arabs want, then he's a fool or ignoramus or liar or all of those.

Bush also now says that setting up a "palestinian state" is a "national interest" of the USA. That could be true but it is a matter of interpretation at best or a matter of definition. Bush and the State Department want people to believe that it is within their competence to decide what is the American national interest. But should Americans rely on Bush or the State Department? Jimmy carter and his power behind the throne, Zbig Brzezinski, helped bring the Islamic fanatic Khomeini to power in Iran. The current ranting, bomb-brandishing leader of Iran, Ahmadinejad, was a follower of Khomeini. So carter-zbig's policy helped bring Ahmadinejad to power years later and now the world faces the threat of the atomic bomb in the hands of maniacs. In 1990, james baker, Daddy Bush's secretary of state, helped fascist Syria take over most of Lebanon. This kind of policy is sometimes called "realism." Yes, it's real, real kooky. No doubt walt-mearsheimer agree that a "palestinian state" is a national interest of the United States, one of those national interests that they often talk about as a general category but don't specify when they complain that Israel thwarts US "national interests." If so, then Bush Junior and walt-mearsheimer are on the same team.

That is, walt-mearsheimer aid Bush and Condi Rice [signorina riso amaro] in promoting a "palestinian state." But it is seldom argued any more or even questioned whether there is a "palestinian people," for if there were no "palestinian people," then people throughout the world might ask: If there is no "palestinian people," then why is a "palestinian state" necessary?
- - - - - - - - -
Coming: more lies of Annapolis and the "peace process," peace follies, propaganda, Jews in Jerusalem, Hebron, and the Land of Israel, etc.

Norwegian Judeophobia in Cartoons -- Expel the Norwegian Ambassador!! Stop the Quislings Now!!

The bad faith of Norway's government is blatant and outrageous. Not only does Norway recognize the Hamas government of the "Palestinian Authority" zones, which indeed rejects the Oslo Accords negotiated by Norwegian mediation --indeed rejects any peace with Israel-- but most of the Norwegian press insults Israel and the Jewish people. Here is an acount by Erez Uriely who lives in Norway.

ANTI-SEMITISM IN CONTEMPORARY NORWEGIAN CARICATURES

Erez Uriely

Jewish mainstream media associate Norway with efforts to bring peace to Israel and the Middle East. Accordingly, we would expect the Norwegian media to propagate tolerance towards Jews. But in reality, the Norwegian media (and its politicians!) imprint in the public mind the ideas that Jews are a negative and arrogant people who care little for others; that they steal and cheat; that they are the source of violence, the cause of wars and therefore a danger to world peace. This anti-Jewish propaganda must be taken seriously, since everybody knows that pests must be eliminated – a central idea that enabled the Holocaust and other persecutions of Jews throughout history.

As usual these days, rather than blaming the “Jews”, the target is defined as “Israel” – the land and the country of the Jews. This propaganda is served in a sophisticated manner: packed in nice words, moral motives and love for humanity. Thus, the old
attitude towards the Jews continues its venomous life, more intensive and stronger than ever. Contrary to the common myth, anti-Judaism does not originate from the masses, but from leading politicians, major church leaders and leaders of major state-sponsored organizations, who expend vast efforts to present “Israel”, i.e., the Jews, as evil.

The most active anti-Jewish campaigners in Norway are of the “left-wing”, including politicians and the journalists who control the mass communication media. The mainstream newspapers demonize the Jews of Israel, creating sympathy for their enemies. The fastest and most effective means to spread that message is through caricatures.

Norwegian caricatures are not as crude and grotesque as the anti-Jewish caricatures that are so common in the Muslim world, but they are worse than the caricatures spread by the Nazi Germans. We must wake up and resolutely stop anti-Judaism propaganda from being distributed by the main Norwegian communication channels to the people. This propaganda was spread before the Holocaust and it must not be allowed again, against those who survived. [English summary of Hebrew article, Nativ March 2007]

Erez Uriely is the founder and director of the Norwegian Israel Center against Anti-Semitism (NIS) which focuses on uncovering expressions of hostility in the media and public organizations against Jews and Israel. EU has published numerous articles in the Norwegian media.

One of the main ways in which Norway does its work of wrecking the peace throughout the world is the Orwellian "peace prize." The Nobel Peace Prize was endowed by the inventor of dynamite, Alfred Nobel. He assigned the Norwegian government [which appoints a committee for the purpose] to award the yearly prize, which entails a substantial amount of money. Otherwise, some awardees might turn it down for the sake of their honor. The Nobel Peace Prize is separate from the Nobel literature and science prizes which are awarded by Sweden.

Here is a cartoon from the Israeli press [the cartoonist Shiloh] about the absurdity and hypocrisy of the "peace prize."

Hanging on the wall alongside the pictures of mass murderers Saddam Hussein, Bin Laden, and Nasrallah, is "Nobel Peace Prize." Arafat asks his American guest, pointing at the prize certificate, "Did Sharon ever get anything like that?"

- - - - - -
Coming: more on Norway, peace follies, Jews in Hebron and Jerusalem, etc.