A sculpture of UN’s first secretary general Trygve Lie, standing outside the Furuseth centre in Oslo, has been
vandalized by a group of immigrant youths. The youths tied a chain around the monument and used their car to pull it down from its plinth. The act is believed to be a response to the ongoing Israeli-Lebanese war. This is the second time in two weeks that the sculpture has attracted the attention of vandals. On July 24, car tires were placed around the base of the sculpture and set afire in an attempt to destroy it. Burning tires were also placed around the head of the sculpture. Last night crime technicians were at the scene trying to asses the damages. It’s not known if the sculpture suffered irrepairable damages. Two youths has been apprehended in connection with last nights fire.
Trygve Lie was an eager supporter of the creation of Israel, and he used his position in the UN to help secure the establishment of the jewish nation. The police believe that this is the underlying motive behind the attack on the sculpture.
Anti-Israeli sentiments has been running high in the city lately. Within a periode of two weeks we’ve had attacks on the city’s only Synagouge, we’ve had anti-Israeli demonstrations that has resulted in the burning of the Israeli flag, and of course we’ve seen the publication of the infamous anti-Israeli piece crafted by bestselling Norwegian author Jostein Gaarder.
What’s next? A full scale intifada in the city of Oslo?
12 comments:
No wonder why it is happening in Oslo,
THe norwegians became the most propinent anti-israeli and biased leaders in the western world. After ciltivating "cultural" antisemtism on teh goverment level , providing the the islamic terror with goverment legitimizatin , simply promoting muslim terrorism - such eductaion gives its fruit. As for me I stop buying any goods from Norway. I will encourage all my friends throiught the world to do teh same in their personal life and in tehir companies. Hey Norewgians - you are preparing ground for your intifada . Do not claim afterwards that there were no signs for it...
The condition of the sculpture after being pulled down does not matter. It can be repaired or replaced.
What matters is this: The vandalism was the work, once again, of "immigrant youths," that is, Muslims. This is a GOOD thing because it again shows real Norwegians what kind of people these Muslims are.
Observer, I hope Muslims in Norway carry out more and more acts of vandalism, more and more acts of viloence etc. Maybe then Norwegians will finally move hard to throw Muslims out of Norway and take control of Norway once again. With enough vandalism and violence in the streets of Oslo maybe even the police and the government itself will have to act in Norway's defense for a change.
Ruben,
I think you’re right in your assertion that an increase in violent crime is necessary to bring about a change in our immigration policies. It’s sad that it’s innocent Norwegians who have to pay the ultimate price for this change though. I would feel a lot better if it was the politicians themselves.
It is incorrect to say that Jostein Gaarders article was anti-Israel. The truth is that it was very pro-Israel. Pro-Israel of 1948.
Considering the fact that the article is written in an old Testament style, it is very strange that Israelis seem to have a very difficult time understanding and interpreting it. They should have some experience in reading the Talmud. I hope they show more attention when they read it. They probably do. All the evidence points towards that some people actually wants to miss understand what Jostein Gaarder says.
Another thing worth mentioning is the fact that the statue of Trygve Lie is and was an offense to good taste. I'm sure the people of Furuseth are proud of him, but they really deserve a better statue. The sad thing about incidents like this is that now the symbolic value of the statue has increased. Now it will never disappear. I think the problem of the statue is that they tried to cram too much symbolism into it. They wanted it to be at the same time a statue of Trygve Lie and a statue of Trygve Lie as the secretary general of the United Nations. They weren't interested in Trygve Lie as much as they were interested in the man who was the Secretary-General. This was symbolized by putting him behind a stupid podium.
It was pure vandalism. A symbolic act committed by our “new compatriots”. Nothing more.
Action speak louder than words, isn’t that so?
If memory serves me, it was Winnie Mandela's group of thugs in So. Africa who made the burning tire around the neck the fashionable thing to do to anyone who disagrees with you. hmmmmmmm
Anonymous,
re: Gaardner's article.
Can you please explain what was pro-Israel in that article?
If you already want to say it was pro-Israel, then you must mean 1947, not 1948. According to the 1947 UN Partition Plan, Jerusalem was supposed to be an international city and Palestine itself was supposed to be a patchwork of Jewish and Muslim areas. The Mulims did not accept the partition plan and went to war with the result that Israel conquered (west) Jerusalem along with the Galilee and other areas and Jordan conquered (east) Jerusalem.
Most countries do not accept Israel's conquests which is why barely any country has its embassy in (west) Jerusalem.
So going back to being "pro 1947 Israel". I doubt you'll find one Israeli who supports that or even thinks of that as an option(Israelis love to fool themselves, that is true). After all, they all know that going "back" to the Jewish Palestine of 1947 means simply the end of existence for the Jewish state.
So, you were saying you're pro Israel?
p.s. and I would also be interested in knowing what in that article was old testament or talmudic style.
Esther,
according to the Oslo agreements, the status of Jerusalem will be determined by peaceful negotiation. The situation there is obviously too complicated for anything else. I don't think Jostein Gaarder thought a lot about Jerusalem when he wrote the article. The state he doesn't recognize is Israel including the West Bank and Gaza. That is, the state of Israel as it was after the 1967 war.
Re: the Talmud
in an interview the same day he wrote this article, Jostein Gaarder said that it was consciously written in the style the prophet Amos used 2750 years ago when he prophesied that the bad things would happen to Israel because they knew God, but rebelled. I suppose the relevant part of the Bible would be the book of Amos.
anonymous,
The Oslo agreements do not talk about Western Jerusalem. They're talking about Eastern Jerusalem (ie, the part of Jerusalem that was conquered in 1967).
I'll repeat a bit of history. According to the 1947 partition plan Jerusalem was supposed to be an "international" city under UN (or something similar) control. This same plan divided Palestine into a Jewish Palestine and an Arab Palestine.
In 1948 the Jewish Palestinian state declared independence and called itself Israel. The Arab Palestinian state never declared its existence. Instead, the Arab countried surrounding Israel attacked the new Jewish Palestinian state.
As a result of the war, Israel conquered the western part of Jerusalem and Jordan conquered the eastern part, which includes the Old City. In general, Israel conquered various parts of the yet to exist Arab Palestine (ie, Galilee), Jordan conquered other parts (ie, West Bank) and Egypt conqeured a bit too (ie, Gaza).
The "World" does not recognize Israel's control over Western Jerusalem. Therefore, only Costa Rica and 2-3 other countries have their embassies in Israel's capital.
This was the situation BEFORE 1967.
During the 1967 war Israel conquered the eastern part of Jerusalem from Jordan.
I'll repeat. Norway does not have its embassy in Jerusalem. This is not due to the 1967 war.
I'm aware that Mr. Gaarder did not think much when he wrote the article. If he did not think much about Jerusalem, and about the Jewish connection the Land of Israel.. wasn't it a bit difficult for him to write an article about it?
Re: Amos. All I can say is that I doubt Mr. Gaarder's work will be read 2000 years from now. But I guess we must all strive for something.
Amos, btw, was talking to his own people. Maybe Gaarder should take an example from him and turn to the Norwegians, warning them what would happen if they follow evil?
I'm aware that Mr. Gaarder did not think much when he wrote the article.
That comment was a bit on the cheap side.
If he did not think much about Jerusalem, and about the Jewish connection the Land of Israel.. wasn't it a bit difficult for him to write an article about it?
Since the Palestinian authorities had already given up on western Jerusalem during the Oslo Accords. I think it a bit silly of you to be so hung up about it. It's important and difficult, but not really relevant to the article Jostein Gaarder wrote.
Re: Amos. All I can say is that I doubt Mr. Gaarder's work will be read 2000 years from now. But I guess we must all strive for something.
Jostein Gaarder, being the humble man that he is, would be the first to agree with you. Personally, I'm not a big fan of his writing.
Amos, btw, was talking to his own people. Maybe Gaarder should take an example from him and turn to the Norwegians, warning them what would happen if they follow evil?
If you by following evil mean blindly accepting everything Israel does without questioning its legality and consequences, like some Norwegians do. Then I would say that Gaarder really did attempt to warn Norwegians about what would happen if they follow evil. Since Gaarder has refused any translations of his article, it is difficult to accuse him of not talking to Norwegians.
but it is possible to accuse him of underestimating the power of globalization.
Anonymous,
You're asking why I'm "hung up" about Western Jerusalem. Yesterday Costa Rica announced that since they don't want to offend "our Muslim friends" they are moving their embassy from Jerusalem to Tel Aviv. This leaves El Salvador as the only country in the world which has its embassy in Israel's capital.
In the 1980s, Israel passed a law reunifiying east and west Jerusalem. At which point the UN decreed that no member country should have its embassy in Jerusalem. Only 13 countries had their embassy in Jerusalem till then. This has nothing to do with the 1967 war. This has nothing to do with Israel's control over the West Bank.
The Arabs, to the best of my knowledge, have never agreed that Israel has a right to exist as a Jewish state, not to mention control west Jerusalem. But, if you find a document stating so, I'll be glad to see it. Just keep in mind, in 1948, there were Arab residents in what is today west Jerusalem, just as there were Jewish residents in what is today east Jerusalem. Both sides had to flee due to the war. When Arabs talk about the 'right of return', this includes neighborhoods in west Jerusalem.
Back to Gaarder and Amos. If I understand both you and Gaarder correctly, Gaarder decided that he'll teach the Jews that they're no better than any other nation. I think that's misunderstanding Amos. Amos did not come to teach the Jews that they were no better than anybody else, since they didn't think so. He came to teach them that morality is something that's expected of everybody.
Bringing up the issue of "the chosen people" as if it means "the people who think they're allowed everything" is wrong. Take a look at where this issue is brought up in the Hebrew Bible. No where does it say that Jews have any rights for being the chosen nation. They have the obligation to uphold the moral code they have received. A moral code which today stands at the basis of Judeo-Christian tradition, a moral code which values life.
I don't think this is the place to start debating Israel's moral actions, especially as Israel doesn't claim to be a religious Jewish country and does not uphold religious Jewish law. Doing so would require a long explanation which I can't give in a 'quick' comment. However, I do think that the world as a whole expects much more of Israel than it does of itself. As Tuvye, of Fiddler on the Roof says, some Jews wish that at times God would choose somebody else.
Post a Comment