Norway and terror: Repressing discussion doesn’t help (Barry Rubin)

[shira]

Norway and terror: Repressing discussion doesn’t help
By BARRY RUBIN
08/06/2011 22:50

Comment: People who accept rationales for terrorism and reward those movements politically increase terrorism.


“I do not understand Norway’s position, and I say that as a friend of Norway. If they shoot, if they fire rockets, why doesn’t Norway believe that they are terrorists? What else do they need to do? Let us not forget that Norway and the other Scandinavian countries called in Yasser Arafat and said: ‘If you want a deal, you must first renounce terrorism. You must recognize the State of Israel, and you must commit yourself to peace.’ Why is all this forgotten? What is the difference between the PLO at that time and Hamas today?” – President Shimon Peres, May 2011

“We want Palestine in its entirety – so there will not be any misunderstandings. If our generation is unable to achieve this, the next one will, and we are raising our children on this. Palestine means Palestine in its entirety, and Israel cannot exist in our midst... We liberated Gaza through resistance. We want to conduct resistance in the West Bank as well.” – Hamas leader Mahmoud Zahar, July 2011, a few days before members of Norway’s ruling party expressed enthusiastic support for helping Hamas.

Ironically, the reaction to my article “The Oslo Syndrome,” published in The Jerusalem Post last Monday, proved its thesis, the same point that Peres made. If terrorism is empowered, terrorism is more likely to occur. That uncontroversial point has been blown up into something controversial by deceit.

Essentially, the position of Norway’s media and government is this: Hamas isn’t terrorist, but I’m pro-terrorist.

more...

http://www.jpost.com/International/Article.aspx?id=232742

[shira]

1. Rubin's article uncut - with comments preceding (from Rubin Reports)

Note: This article appeared in the Jerusalem Post in response to recent events. I hope this is the last time I address the issue. If you are going to forward or post a copy please use this one as it has a number of small improvements and is not cut.

Before I begin I want to make five points absolutely clear:

1. I was one of the first people in the world to write condemning the action in Norway as terrorism and as committed by a right-winger. Therefore--and based on my career of 35 years including 30 years working on counterterrorism--it should be clear that I would never endorse the murder of dozens of people. The irony is that a plea to fight terrorism by not granting it rewards was distorted into a pro-terrorist position!

2. A large portion of the Norwegian mass media has repeatedly stated that I endorsed the killings and called the kids at the camp terrorists. This is a lie. False quotes were attributed to my article. To my best knowledge, nobody in Norway tried to establish the truth or report fairly.

3. No Norwegian media--indeed no reporter from anywhere in the world--made any attempt to interview me on this issue and find out what I thought and what I wrote. Imagine, this is the biggest story in Norway and nobody contacted me at all.

4. The Jerusalem Post never discussed this issue with me nor contacted me to discuss the issue and hear my position. I have written for this newspaper for about 30 years without a single controversy arising before.

5. We have arrived at the strange situation in which the Norwegian media and apparently the Norwegian government considers me to be "pro-terrorist" but does not consider Hamas (and a number of other groups one could name) to be "pro-terrorist."

What explains this kind of thing--deliberate lies, deceitful reporting, disinterest in truth, disinterest in fairness? Answer: The conversion of the public debate and media into propaganda exercises in which (ironically, McCarthyist) witchhunts are conducted and those entrusted with the sacred pursuit of truth and accuracy use their positions to spread lies, incitement, and indoctrination.

This has been going on now for some years but there's nothing like experiencing something first-hand to comprehend it well. I now hope to get back to work as an analyst of international affairs and especially of the Middle East.

more...
http://rubinreports.blogspot.com/2011/08/case-study-from-norway-it-is-forbidden.html

[Jefferson23]

3. Rubin:... "I hope this is the last time I address the issue."

Me too.

Fucking moron that he is, 3 back peddles now, or is that 4?

[shira]

4. You're not keeping up. There's no backpeddling - he's not budging. n/t

[Jefferson23]

6. His endeavor is futile, regardless of his numerous attempts.

Perhaps you'll understand that at some point.

[shira]

7. If you say so. n/t

[LeftishBrit]

2. I have never accused Rubin of endorsing or excusing this act of terrorism...

What he is doing is using it to make an anti-Norway political point. Not as bad as endorsing the act, but still pretty nasty.

I don't think many people explicitly justified the murder of the Fogels either; but some used it to make a point against the settlers. And that was also not appropriate.

[shira]

5. He quoted Rabin from 2 months ago saying Norway doesn't recognize Hamas' acts as terror.

In fact, Norway doesn't consider Hamas a terror organization, so Breivik is a terrorist while Hamas is not.

Does that not outrage you? How do you think that resonates with Israel's thousands of terror victims and the rest of the population?

That's part of the problem Rubin was addressing when Norway's ambassador stupidly said as much.

[bemildred]

8. Mr Rubin, the first thing to do when you are in a hole is to stop digging.

:popcorn:

[shira]

9. You and Jefferson23 are proving Rubin's point. You won't even attempt to argue the substance....

...but rather dismiss the argument altogether and misrepresent what he's really arguing.

Same thing goes on here in I/P every day.

Avoidance, deflection, fighting strawman arguments....

Pathetic.

[bemildred]

10. Rubin has no point, he is fending off attacks on his heavily damaged ego, that's his point.

Had he had the wits to keep his nose out of it in the first place, he would not now be in the position of explaining why it was all really other people's fault.

[shira]

11. You should really read the whole article and respond to it, not a strawman.

You're continuing to prove Rubin's point.

Which part of this article, his most recent, do you have a problem with? Don't waste time with something childish like "everything".

[bemildred]

13. Everything. nt

[shaayecanaan]

12. unless of course it is discussion with Hamas...

in which case we want to repress discussion as much as possible.

The Norwegian government does not recognise Hamas as a terrorist organisation, in the same way it does not recognise the Tamil Tigers, the Kosovar Liberation Army, or the PKK as such. Norway has refused to endorse the EU list of terrorist organisations on the basis that to do so would impede its diplomatic efforts in several peace processes (including the very significant role it played in the former Yugoslavia). Norway was also one of the first western countries to hold dialogue with the PLO, and those contacts were to develop into the Oslo accords.

That does not mean that it endorses what Hamas or the Tamil Tigers do, any more than the fact that the US recognises and engages in dialogue with North Korea indicates an acceptance of what they do.

To insist that because of this that Norway is "pro-Hamas" or pro-terrorist is categorically incorrect.