Whilst there clearly are people who are receptive to the idea that Anders Brevik was recruited by Mossad to ‘discipline’ Norwegian society, the non morally failed rejection of Ola Tunander’s peddling of this in Nytt Norsk Tidsskrift (New Norway Journal) has been to unequivocally see it as a reworking of the calumny of a baleful, Wandering Jew wreaking havoc in foreign cities.
One example of this comes from PhD candidate at the University of Oslo, Johannes Due Enstad who has published a denunciation of Tunander and the editorial department of the Nytt Norsk Tidsskrift in Aftenposten.
Any Norwegian speakers able to offer a translation are welcome to do so. In the meantime, here are the hallucinogenic qualities of Google Translate.
The goal of the New Norwegian Journal (NNT) will be “to provide insight and profiled argument in the Norwegian public debate.” The journal is peer reviewed, which should mean that the articles are in print are the results of a thorough process to ensure scientific quality.
Readers of a peer-reviewed journals should be confident that they will be served, maintain high professional standards.
In light of this, it is more than a little strange to watch Ola Tunander strange text Inspirational, Stakeholders, Initiation Master and Investors in Breivik’s World in print in the latest issue of NNT (4 / 2011).
This article is an insult to the informed public, it consists of a heat-up of insinuations, loose ends and vague statements that do not lead any other way than in a fog of conspiratorial ideas about hidden connections in which particular Israel occupies a Omino place.
Strange about the Israeli “stakeholders”
Really strange is the article in the discussion of Breivik’s “stakeholders”.
According Tunander it is reasonable to interpret the controversial (and later editorial sorry) op-ed to Barry Rubin in the Jerusalem Post 31 July, which states that the AUF supports terrorism and that it was “ironic” that they themselves were affected by it, as a “threat” and a “half-public signal” from the Israeli side.
“Was there anyone who would mark against Norway that the Norwegian-Israel policy is ‘unacceptable’?” Asks Tunander rhetorical, and follow up by mentioning the Lillehammer affair in 1973, where Mossad agents executed a Moroccan waiter (Tunander falsely claims that he was Palestinian) in the belief that he was one of the Palestinian terrorists involved in the Munich massacre.
It is mildly unclear what Lillehammer and Mossad have to do with 22 July.
Clearer is not in the sequel, where Tunander presents “a simple chronology” to “give an idea”: In May and July, before the terrorist attacks criticized Israel official Norwegian policy towards the Palestinians; 18 July said JG Minister to Mahmoud Abbas that Norway was prepared to recognize a Palestinian state, 20 July said Minister of Utøya that the Israeli occupation must end and the wall torn; 22 July was the “pro-Israeli Breivik” attacked Utøya, and two days after Israel said Defense Minister, Ehud Barak, that Israel wanted to mobilize European support to prevent Palestinians from seeking state recognition at the UN.
Israel, Mossad and 22 / 7
You should make an effort to discern the outlines of an argument, and there is no easier in the next section.
It draws Tunander namely two new rabbits out of hats, the Jewish paramilitary group Irgun bombing of the King David Hotel in Jerusalem in 1946 and the so-called Lavon affair in 1954, Israel’s Defense Minister Pinhas Lavon had to go after revelations that the intelligence service had recruited Egyptian Jews to perform minor bomb attacks against British and U.S. targets in Egypt (Tunander claims misleading that it was “brutal bomb attacks” where “building [is] was blown up,” but it was really small, homemade bombs that went off in libraries, a post office and a theater after closing, there were no injuries).
Now it gets strange, and read one asks what the hell Lavon affair or King David bombing has to do with what happened in Oslo and Utøya 22 July 2011.
Tunander answer, believe it or not, is that the bombing of the King David hotel also occurred 22 July, and that these two cases demonstrate the “Israeli tradition of terrorism.”
Finally, cited ABB’s “manifesto” that Israel is “our primary allies” and that “it has been determined [when] the attack will be executed.” It Tunander thus doing is nothing less than to insinuate, without either shame or reason, that Israel had a hand in it on 22 July 2011 – that this was a way for Israel to punish Norway for the pro-Palestinian policy.
22 / 7 that Israeli criminal
The article, which also reviews various actors and organizations Breivik has had or may have had contact with is affected by many hints and insinuations, but lacks concrete arguments.
Tunander conclusion is equally helped and retningsløs as the rest of the text. On the one hand appearing central Israel, “Breivik’s attack appears here as a new King David Hotel operation: the 22 July “.
On the other hand, states that “the operation [perhaps] a Saudi response to an Israeli game”, for “perhaps Saudis believe that the Israelis have gone too far, and that as a countermeasure has recruited paramilitary anti-jihadists through the Eastern European mafia to allow them to question the anti-jihad collapse of legitimacy. ”
This type konspiranoid speculation abound on websites such as Nyhetsspeilet.no. What does that have to do in a serious journal?
Tunander is also possible to argue that there is a serious “discussion about whether the essential elements of al-Qaeda has been infiltrated by the Israelis, and the latter uses these groups to discredit Islam.”
Israel and al-Qaeda
Who are the serious players who discuss Israel infiltration of al-Qaeda? The claim coated by a single reference, namely the website Veterans Today, who besides being a practical resource for American war veterans, publishes texts not only that 11 September was an Israeli-American inside job, but also that the Holocaust is a Jewish exaggeration.
This is representative of Tunander source criticism. Elsewhere he refers a certain Wayne Madsen, an American writer whose writings include published on the website rense.com, where else can you find lots of Holocaust denial and other rennesteins antisemittisme.
The editor should apologize
NNT has fool of himself by dropping through to such a degree unscientific, insubstansiell text. Editor Cathrine Holst should apologize or at least to answer for this, but I find it hard to see that there is justification for publishing this type of unwarranted and insinuating nonsense in a supposedly serious academic journals.
Hat-tip Johannes Due Enstad in the comments