Breivik et al Continued: Organized Political Terrorism - The Norwegian Massacre, the State, the Media and Israel

I'm sorry, NDPP, but I've just gone and re-read the original article and whether you're aware of it or not, this is sheer, unambiguous anti-Semitism written by a well-known anti-Semite. This lunatic conspiracy theorist actually suggests that Mosad was responsible for the Norway massacre. No doubt, he probably thinks that we started the Reichstag fire as well. He has a long history of Jew-baiting conspiracy nonsense including stating that Israel had advance knowledge of the 9/11 attacks and has written numerous other anti-semitic articles, including one in which he mocks Barack Obama as "America's First Jewish President". This sort of filth has no place in progressive discussions and I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume your peddling of anti-Semitic trash was inadvertent but please be more careful in what you quote.

Oh, I see. Because some mentally unbalanced monster calls himself a "zionist" (a term which has become utterly meaningless), we should use that to condemn an entire country and an entire religion. Thanks for the clarification and for showing that your promotion of anti-Semitic diatribes from a well-known anti-Semitic author were deliberate.

Mr.Tea wrote:

Oh, I see. Because some mentally unbalanced monster calls himself a "zionist" (a term which has become utterly meaningless), we should use that to condemn an entire country and an entire religion. Thanks for the clarification and for showing that your promotion of anti-Semitic diatribes from a well-known anti-Semitic author were deliberate.

Equating criticism of Israel and Zionism with anti-Semitism on babble is a no-go.  Inferring that babblers are anti-Semitic because of their criticism is a personal attack.  If you can't or won't accept that, you really have no place here.

Rebecca West wrote:

Equating criticism of Israel and Zionism with anti-Semitism on babble is a no-go.  Inferring that babblers are anti-Semitic because of their criticism is a personal attack.  If you can't or won't accept that, you really have no place here.

Did you read the article he linked to, Rebecca? It spoke of a vast Jewish conspiracy, it repeated discredited conspiracy theories that rely on old canards of dual loyalty and duplicitous Jews. Have you looked at the author in question? He has a long history of attacking not just Israel but Jews in general and tired old stereotypes of "Jewish financiers", nonsense about how we control the media and the banks and how Obama is a puppet of the Jewish people. Criticism of Israel is fine. I do it all the time, as do most Israelis. The author of this article is an anti-Semite.

About the author of said article:

"

In a 2006 article entitled "9/11 Anti-Semitic Conspiracy Theories Still Abound", the Anti-Defamation League noted Petras's assertion there was evidence that "Israelis" may have known about the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks but withheld the information from the United States government.[8][9] Petras has called American Zionists "Israel's fifth column," a synonym for traitors, goes on to stereotype the American Jewish community "primarily defined by their entrepreneurial capacities," and then calls them "upholders of a doctrine of offensive wars."[5] Petras has also called Israel "the most militarized country in the world."[5]

In a 2009 article, the ADL again criticized Petras, sating that he has blamed the current economic crisis on the "Zionist" control over the U.S. government and world events, and has argued that pro-Israel Americans have launched a massive crusade to push the U.S. into a war with Iran. The ADL also alleged that Petras' conspiracy theories also include the anti-Semitic accusation that the American Jewish community is "controlling the communications media" and is "bloodthirsty" in its appetite for war. He has stated that [U.S.] presidents are at the disposal of "Jewish power" and maintained that Jews represent "the greatest threat to world peace and humanity."[10]

"

In an article written in 2009, Petras wrote that President Barack Obama had a "one-sided and longstanding commitment to the State of Israel and loyalty to the Zionist Power Configuration (ZPC) in the United States, as well as the long-term and successful effort of a network of financially and politically powerful Jewish Zionists to 'embed' Obama to their 'Israel First' political apparatus." He also argued that "The conversion and promotion of Obama as an Israel-Firster is an excellent case study of the methods the ZPC has used to build a near invincible power base in the US political system" and that "His capitulation to the Zionofascists was the inevitable consequence of his intimate and longstanding ties to his liberal-Zionist backers." In addition, he stated that "The Zionist-influenced mass media took their cue from the far-right and orchestrated a hate campaign against Reverend Wright and his links to Obama." He concluded his article by stating that:

"Clearly Obama is a greater war monger on issues involving Israel then even Bush: It comes with being a "Jewish President""[13]

In the same article, he stated that "The Zionist self-promoters (ZSP), ever ready to take credit for any success (no matter how notorious and immoral) - Wall Street speculators, Ivy League professors, Pentagon militarists, cultural gurus and even the key patrons of art forms like jazz and constantly rewrite history (or biography in the case of Obama) to maximize their self-importance in all aspects of American life." He also added that:

"Not only do the Zionists and their embedded clones rule the White House, they also have the political apparatus (left, liberal, center and right) to silence, insult, witch hunt and isolate any critic of their agenda, their organizations and of the State of Israel."[13]

Mr.Tea wrote:

About the author of said article:

"In the same article, he stated that "The Zionist self-promoters (ZSP), ever ready to take credit for any success (no matter how notorious and immoral) - Wall Street speculators, Ivy League professors, Pentagon militarists, cultural gurus and even the key patrons of art forms like jazz and constantly rewrite history (or biography in the case of Obama) to maximize their self-importance in all aspects of American life." 

Don't forget the role of dentists & podiatrists in the conspiracy:

http://www.atlanticfreepress.com/news/1/13763-james-petras-phd-the-state-and-local-bases-of-zionist-power-in-america.html

The power of Israel in the US does not reside only in the influence and leadership of powerful Washington based “pro-Israel lobbies”, like AIPAC. Without the hundreds of thousands of militant locally based dentists, podiatrists, stockbrokers, real estate brokers,profesors and others, the “lobby” would be unable to sustain and implement its policy among hundreds of millions of Americans outside the major metropolises.

NDPP wrote:

Der Spiegel Probes Links Between Israel, Norway Killer

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4102754,00.html

"German paper warns Europe's right-wing Islamophobes have found willing allies in Likud.."

"Israel has dismissed Egyptian claims that a series of shark attacks in the Red Sea could have been the result of a plot carried out by its foreign intelligence agency, Mossad.

Rumours had circulated in Egypt that there could be an Israeli connection to this unusual spate of Red Sea shark attacks.

However, it was comments attributed to the South Sinai governor, Mohamed Abdul Fadil Shousha, carried on an official Egyptian news site that drew attention.

"What is being said about the Mossad throwing the deadly shark [in the sea] to hit tourism in Egypt is not out of the question, but it needs time to confirm," he is reported to have said."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-11937285

 We have got the Israeli lobby here in full force today.  Israel is an evil murderous regime led by religious fanatics (who happen to be Jewish) who are intolerant of any views but their own.

I don''t intend to trade nasty quotes with you but it is easy to find Israeli politicians calling for ethnic cleansing and other crimes against humanity. Why don't you expend some energy decrying their words and actions.  

According to your insistence that saying Jews or Jewish is anti-semetic then this writer is clearly beyond the pale and I hope you start a thread condemining him for his outrageous use of those terms. 

Quote:

Arab Israelis who have been charged with certain types of crime are more likely than their Jewish counterparts to be convicted, and once convicted they are more likely to be sent to prison, and for a longer time. These disparities were found in a recent statistical study commissioned by Israel’s Courts Administration and the Israel Bar Association.

The study found that 48.3 percent of Arabs who were convicted of violence, property crimes or drug or weapons offenses received custodial sentences, compared to 33.6 percent for Jews. The average prison sentence was nine and a half months for Jews and 14 months for Arabs.

http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/israeli-arabs-more-likely-to-b...

bekayne wrote:

Northern Shoveler wrote:

I read him attacking Zionists not all people of Jewish descent. 

What had been historically a “stateless” people (citizens of secular non-Jewish states) primarily defined by their entrepreneurial capacities

He's describing Zionists?

No. Don`t let him off so easy. Read the article in full. He is not describing `zionists`. He is describing JEWS.

Quote:

Some 57% of respondents said the influx of immigrants and foreign workers greatly endangers the Jewish nature of the State of Israel, while approximately 21% thought the danger was only moderate.

 

Only 19% said the situation only slightly undermined the Jewish character of the state, or did not endanger it at all.

 

Among the ultra-Orthodox, religious and traditional respondents, a vast majority believed that the State's Jewish character was jeopardized (93%, 85% and 71% respectively), while some 43% of seculars responded similarly.

 

When asked what they would think if a mosque or a church was to be built next to their place of residence, some 43% respondents said they would firmly oppose it.

 

"Absolutely not, this is the Jewish state and it is forbidden to build such places," replied 80% of haredim, 69% of the religious, 52% of traditionalists and 31% of secular respondents.

 

So any comments on the inherent intolerance and racism in these views held by the majority of Israelis?  

Mr.Tea wrote:

While we're at it, do you think that Iran is an "evil murderous regime led by religious fanatics (who happen to be Muslim)" or are you merely another two-bit anti-Semite?

There you go again with that really wide tar brush.  Everyone is an anti-Semite to you and that is why I give your view of any critics of Israel zero credibility.

I spoke to the Iran issue issue already but here it is again.  i don't give a flying fuck whether the religious assholes are mullahs or rabbis they are still intolerant and deserve to be denounced for their abhorrent views of the "other."

Northern Shoveler at Post # 17 wrote:

I would like to see the Israeli architects of this open air prison tried for crimes against humanity.  They may be all Jewish but more importantly they are all Israeli.  I personally prefer democracies that are not based on religion.  Iran and Israel are just failed ideas in democracy because they both give religion an official place in their legal and political systems.  The only real difference is that the Iranian regime kills less people and doesn't bomb people every other week. 

Get this thread back on topic, or I'm closing it.

Rebecca then please change the title of this thread so some of us don't get the impression that this terrorists pro-Zionist views are part of the discussion. 

My apologies for not understanding that in a thread that includes the media and Israel that talking about Israel was verboten.  I am even more surprised since my whole debate with the Israeli apologists has been on whether the opening post was anti-Semitic or not.

So how does one get the inside scope on what a thread is really all about?

Northern Shoveler wrote:

So how does one get the inside scope on what a thread is really all about?

I was wondering that myself, hence my question at #9 about whether my post about a couple who saved 40 people that day was on topic at all. 

(meaning in part, that I find the thread title's scope a bit one-directional).

The man who has confessed to killing 77 people in Norway has made a list of "unrealistic" demands, his lawyer says.

Anders Behring Breivik wanted the government to resign and Japanese specialists to assess his mental health, Geir Lippestad told reporters.

The far-right extremist admits killing eight people with a bomb in Oslo and shooting dead 69 on Utoeya island.

Meanwhile, the leader of the right-wing Progress Party has warned that Norway still faces a serious Islamist threat.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-14372038

Caissa wrote:

 

Meanwhile, the leader of the right-wing Progress Party has warned that Norway still faces a serious Islamist threat.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-14372038[/quote]

 

Of course they do.  They'll deny any personal responsibility, but continue to feed the mindless bigotry and hate, just like anti-abortion and anti-gay fundies do.

What is the topic here exactly Rebecca?   The article posted did make some really silly conspiratorial suggestions about Israel being directly involved via Mossad, and regardless of Mr. Tea's probable political leanings, the author does seem to be one of the nutters who like to skate close to the line seperating anti-Zionism from anti-SEmitism.   Just because Zionist assholes still rely on that tired "criticise/attack Israel=criticise/attack Jews" nonsense (lacking any moral defence for what theyre Doing, anymore) doesn't mean that anti-Semtism in the genuine sense doesn't still exist.  Even among some of those professing to be leftwingers. 

I think this is a bit more serious than 'fashion crimes' and has nothing to do with pigeonholing.  The right will use anything to make the left look bad, particularly regarding sacred cash-cows like Israel and "the war against (Islamic)terror".  

Rebecca West wrote:

 it's taken from the article, though how Israel has anything to do with the Norway mass murder, besides being the flimsiest of pretexts to criticize Israel (I mean, seriously, there's enough to criticize without having to invent connections using spurious logic) is beyond me.

Jewish Journal wrote:

Breivik’s purported Israeli nationalism is something entirely different from everything we might recognise as Zionism. Although Herzl’s manifesto was indeed a call to Jewish nationalism, it was written within the context of fin de siècle European movements to create new nation-states which united all peoples which belonged to a certain nationality or linguistic group, such as Germans and Italians.

By contrast, the Oslo bomber’s manifesto explicitly rejects more liberal or general interpretations of Zionism familiar to the United States and Western Europe. When addressing the question of Nazism, Breivik that the “so-called liberal Jews” were disloyal, presumably during the interbellum at a time when calls to emigrate to Palestine increased in volume, “similar to the liberal Jews today that opposes nationalism/Zionism and supports multiculturalism”[sic].

“Jews that support multiculturalism today”, he adds, “are as much of a threat to Israel and Zionism as they are to us (emphasis added). So let us fight together with Israel, with our Zionist brothers against all anti-Zionists, against all cultural Marxists/multiculturalists”. His conclusions are draped in the language of European anti-Semitism, echoing the calls made in Soviet Russia after the Second World War to target ‘rootless cosmopolitans’.

The nationalism Breivik stresses is indeed one born in the postwar crucible and infused with the more aggressive and destructive ideologies such as Soviet communism, and in particular Nazism and its neo- strand. His nationalism is exclusive and discriminatory: one which speaks to notions of racial and religious purity, an opposition to political pluralism and left-wing ideologies, and in the most modern European context, an attachment to what has been dubbed “Islamophobia”, but which might more accurately if less pithily be called anti-Muslim discrimination.

A sizeable chunk of Breivik’s support for Israel is derived from this very negative emotion. His particular interpretation of the source of Israeli-Palestinian antagonism derives from the Crusades, which is an obsession for him. Breivik cites Serbian author Srđa Trifković, in order to argue that Palestinian opposition to Israel is derivative of a repulsion to the idea of a Jewish state existing on land which is part of the Dar al-Islam, or the House of Islam. This reaction, Breivik asserts, has direct historical parallels to the time of Saladin and the movement to demolish the Christian Crusader states of Antioch and Jerusalem.

While Breivik often in his manifesto speaks of the importance of defending Israel, he never goes so far as to explicitly set how it ought to be defended, and more importantly what it is he thinks he is defending. It certainly isn’t any of the values associated with Israel by those liberal Zionists he frequently demonises: democracy; open political discourse; the rule of law. Breivik in fact stresses a support for some elements of present policy that have turned the international community against Israel, including the Security Barrier, which he describes as “working as intended”.

Rather, Breivik seems to perceive Israel as the frontline in a war that he perceives all Muslims are waging against Jews and Christians: “If Israel loses in the Middle East, Europe will succumb to Islam next”. He includes in the manifesto a chunk of an interview with Mohammad Asghar, an ‘ex-Muslim’, who states that Muslims “intend to destroy Israel” and subsequently will “take over the Earth from the followers of other religions” by acquiring deadly, radioactive weaponry and then expanding their populations in non-Muslim nations to the point where they will demand autonomy and later independence.

This kind of support for Israel, if it can be deemed as such, is wholly negative and hateful, borne out of a visceral detest for Muslims. And, it would appear to span the far-right parties of Europe, if not quite in the occasionally eccentric fashion of Breivik with his attachment to conspiracy. In the United Kingdom, the leader of the British National Party Nick Griffin, who in 1998 referred to the Holocaust as “a mixture of Allied wartime propaganda, extremely profitable lie, and latter witch-hysteria”, came out in 2009 in support of Operation Cast Lead, saying he supported Israel’s war “against the terrorists”.

His particular spin on the issue – an alliance with Israel as a means to a war against Islam – is not played out in the party’s manifesto, which on foreign policy says nothing at all about Israel or the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Rather, their main aim is to “reach an accord with the Muslim world whereby they will agree to take back their excess population which is currently colonising this country”, which the rest of their efforts focused on the other menace, the European Union. (A Union, it should be noted, Breivik believed to cooperating with the Arab world to ‘Islamise’ Europe).

http://www.jewishjournal.com/opinion/article/breivik_the_anti-zionist_20...

Please stop trying to stifle debate that makes you uncomfortable.  The article that led off this thread is not the only source talking about this mans support of Israel.  Should we also not talk about his Xian ideals either?  Which parts of his warped ideology are allowable for discussion . Please provide a list.

The article heading this particular thread was a smelly piece of conspiracy bait, by a author who does indeed appear to have anti-semitic leanings.   Therefore noone has any obligation to take it seriously.  Thats not silencing. thats just commonsense   And not every bad thing happening in the world is the direct responsibility of "Zionists" either.  This is as good a place to add that qualification as any other.  The reality of politics is that aholes will use any excuse to act like aholes, aolthough Israel Oc plays a role in mantatining the necessary hatred quotient in the xenophobic West.    I am willing to consider the idea that neo-cons abd their movemnt are partly responsible -not for the act but the hatred sowed-- as they have relied all long on using any existing prejudices to get what they want.   And I know of almost NO neo-con that doesn't appear to believe a good deal o this hatemongering themseolves.  That again dosn't mean the Mossad organized this whole thing.  To directly counter one of the pointr in the article cited, its perfexctly easy for one guy (or a few small groups) t blow up a building and kill alot of unmed kids with nohere to run.  Thats wht I'm reacting to here, the artricle -A; and the assumption B- that ALL antiZionist material is equally valid.

Here are some other sources and one thing is clear.  None of them accept his ideology as Zionist but they all spoke out because it is a big part of his manifesto.  Instead of that kind of denial on babble we got pro Israel activists attacking the messenger as anti-Semitic.  I prefer knowing what this man is actually promoting even if it is a mish mash of politically irrational thought.  

Quote:

In the 1,500-page tome, which mentions Israel 359 times and “Jews” 324 times, Breivik lays out his worldview, which includes an extreme, bizarre and rambling screed of Islamophobia, far-right Zionism and venomous attacks on Marxism and multi-culturalism.

http://www.jpost.com/International/Article.aspx?id=230762

http://www.jta.org/news/article/2011/07/24/3088679/norway-killer-espouse...

http://www.anti-semitism.net/zionism/european-jewish-leaders-disavow-bre...

He said Hitler betrayed Europe for not turning his armies on the Arabs and free Jerusalem.