Ansar al-Islam responsible for UN bomb
A former Ansar al-Islam member claims to TV2 Nettavisen that the group, now under a new leadership, was behind the UN headquarter bombing in Baghdad:
- Ansar al-Islam is divided. A number of the former members of the organisation, who were active while Mullah Krekar was the leader, have given up and gone home. However, a small group has seized control and is still active, Mullah Krekar's brother Khalid Faraj Ahmad tells TV 2 Nettavisen. [..]
Krekar's brother has an interest in downplaying Krekar's current influence over the group, of course, but this could indicate a split between the more locally oriented fanatics, (which I suspect includes Krekar), and the ones with a broader, al-Qaeda style point of view, possibly even that the group has gone from being merely cooperative with al-Qaeda to becoming fully part of it.
Gill Doyle, Northern California | 2003-09-03 20:32 | Link
Ashcroft met the other day with his counterpart in Norway. He's visiting now in Norway, for those of you who have not heard. Apparently, Krekar was on the agenda, and some Norwegians worried that the Americans might ask that Krekar be handed over. It's my impression that Norwegians are less concerned about Krekar than they are about the possibility that the Americans might take him away. Ansar al islam, Hussein's massacres, al Quaeda, Palestinian terrorism do not concern Norwegians. I just don't think they give a damn. The Americans -- that's what bothers them. By all means, the Americans must be stopped.
Stig Sandø | 2003-09-04 13:33 | Link
Gill Doyle, I am pretty sure norwegians are concerned about Ansar Al-Islam, Saddam Hussein's massacres, Al-Qaida and palestinian terrorism. But that concern cannot be turned into a 'carte blance' extradition of *anyone* to *any* country where there is a risk of death penalty for the crimes the person is accused of. So unless the US can give a written guarantee that someone extradited to the US will not risk the death penalty, he will not be extradited. Like other european countries we don't allow death penalties either directly or indirectly. That's a good principle, and it's a principle that separates western civilisations from rogue nations.
The problems are not any lack of norwegian concern or norwegian laws here, we are concerned about terrorism and we have laws in place. If the US really wants Krekar extradited they have a few thousand bureaucrats quite eager to do a written guarantee that the US will not seek the death penalty. But losing face for the top brass is apparently worse than winning the "War on Terrorism".
The US has not sought extradition of Krekar, why is that?
Bjørn Stærk | 2003-09-04 14:00 | Link
Stig: I'm not a strong supporter of the death penalty. My attitude is more pragmatic - it's much more important for Norway to investigate and prosecute crime better than to introduce the death penalty, and it's equally more important for the US to eliminate faults in its judicial system that convicts innocent people than it is to abolish the death penalty entirely. And since we don't have the death penalty and the US does, it's only natural and sensible of us to be concerned about extraditing people that risk death in the US.
But this is _one factor_ of many. It should be weighed against others, such as the extent of the person's crimes. I see no reason why, for instance, we should refuse to extradite a mass murderer to the US, simply to make a statement. It may be a good statement, but it's not an extremely important statement. There are more important statements to make.
As for Krekar, I'm still not convinced that he's a terrorist by Norwegian or American law. He has violated the terms of his residency permit, and that's what matters to me. Maybe we could give him to the Iraqi Kurds for a (monitored) trial - they're the ones he harmed.
Sandy P. | 2003-09-04 18:03 | Link
-- But that concern cannot be turned into a 'carte blance' extradition of *anyone* to *any* country where there is a risk of death penalty for the crimes the person is accused of.--
There were more suicides in phrench prisons in 2001? 2002? than there were people put to death in the US.
What you fail to realize is that Western Civilization is a crime and we are all under a death penalty. And DNA is revolutionizing proceedings.
These vermin cannot be rationalized with. They must be put down like the rabid dogs they are.
And one thing, if the death penalty was put to a vote by each country's citizens, we all might be surprised. It has support in Britain.
Does this mean you're also against abortion?
Gill Doyle, Northern California | 2003-09-04 19:48 | Link
>Gill Doyle, I am pretty sure norwegians are concerned about Ansar Al-Islam, Saddam Hussein's massacres, Al-Qaida and palestinian terrorism.
No, I don't think so. Most Norwegians were vehemently opposed to Hussein's overthrow. That amounts to support for Hussein. Remember, too, that Norwegians opposed U.N. sanctions before they opposed the war, insisting that sanctions killed thousands each month in Iraq. Norway has given refuge to Mullah Krekar, though the man is certainly responsible for numerous killings perpetrated during his tenure as leader of Ansar al-Islam. Norway enjoys the man's celebrity and treats him as though he were Moses come down from the mount. Anti-semitism in Norway (unacknowledged in Norway, but evident to any visitor) and Norway's romance with the Palestinian resistance fighter -- the Palestinian David -- encourage an unconsionable acceptance in Norway of Palestinian terror. Anti-Americanism in Norway has so skewed Norwegian thinking on international issues that most Norwegians now consider America to be a greater threat to world peace than al Quaeda and its ilk. And how many times have you heard it said, Stig, that America deserved what it got on 9/11? And from Norwegians I have heard far worse -- that, for example, 3,000 dead are nothing as compared to the millions that Americans have slaughtered in their fascist wars.
>But that concern cannot be turned into a 'carte blance' extradition of *anyone* to *any* country where there is a risk of death penalty for the crimes the person is accused of.
Krekar is not just anyone, and America is not just any country. You know that America is at war with Ansar al-Islam and may have reason to want its spiritual leader, Herr Krekar.
>So unless the US can give a written guarantee that someone extradited to the US will not risk the death penalty, he will not be extradited.
Ashcroft has said that that can be arranged. I don't think that the death penalty is at issue here. At issue, I would say, is Norway's determination to thwart any reasonable American request. There are a great many folks in Norway who hate America and would consider Krekar's extradition to America as a humiliating defeat for Norway.
>Like other european countries we don't allow death penalties either directly or indirectly. That's a good principle, and it's a principle that separates western civilisations from rogue nations.
I know your country's policy. I'm not saying it's bad. You're suggesting that America is a rogue state. That's a bit extreme, I think. I've heard that one before and it's indicative of the anti-Americanism that characterizes Norwegian thinking. To oppose the death penalty under all circumstances is, in my opinion, too dogmatic. To advocate the death penalty under all circumstances is similarly dogmatic. I would rather take a practical approach to the death penalty and say that it might be applied when there is no doubt that you've got the right man. However, since mistakes have been made, and innocent men have been sentenced to death over here, abolition of the death penalty in America is real possibility now. I expect it will happen here some day.
>The problems are not any lack of norwegian concern or norwegian laws here, we are concerned about terrorism and we have laws in place.
Yes, Norway may have taken measures to protect itself , but what is it doing to help eliminate islamist terror abroad? Not much. It keeps a low profile, doesn't it? The Norwegian public seems hardly to demur when Palestinians kill Israelis or when Hussein slaughters Kurds, but they march in the thousands when America goes to war with such killers.
Why do you put quotation marks round War on Terrorism? Do you oppose a war on terrorism? Are you a pacifist?
>The US has not sought extradition of Krekar, why is that?
I would suppose it is because they have not decided yet whether he is worth having. Norway, though, has apparently decided that Krekar is a great addition to its own civilization. He has found a country where murders are not executed, but feted.
Rune Kristian Viken, Oslo | 2003-09-04 20:10 | Link
Gill Doyle wrote:
> Most Norwegians were vehemently opposed to
Where we now? Interesting. I didn't notice.
> Anti-semitism in Norway (unacknowledged in
I'm sorry, I've never noticed that anti-semitism you're talking about. I don't think there are many people that think negatively of jews in Norway. Actually I know of exactly NONE.
However, there are plenty of people that think negatively about the policies/politics of the state of Israel, that think some jewish organizations really should Get Over WWII, and so forth. Hell, it's 50 years ago - why are people STILL bickering on about gold in switzerland, "ibm supporting the nazi's" and all that shit?
Oh, and the palestinians. Then we're onto politics again, which has nothing to do with anti-semitism, but the treatment of the palestines in Israel - which is abysmal.
> You know that America is at war with Ansar
And that is One Good Reason not to hand him over. You would quite simply not be objective. If we had an international crime court (which america for some idiotic reason didn't support) then _that_ would've been the proper avenue.
Sandy P. | 2003-09-04 23:04 | Link
Well, I have to agree w/Rune there, Gill, the UN and Arafish and his thugs do treat the Palis abysmally in Israel. Would Christians let their "brothers" live in "refugee camps" for 50++ years? One would think that with that tremendous suffering they would have absorbed them by now. As usual, they all jaw-jaw a good game.
Of course, so do the Jordanians, Syrians, et al, treat them abysmally. Now, if the EU cut off the blood money.....
Well, we'll see what they do if they truly decide to consider Hamas and the other thugs political arms' terrorists.
Sandy P. | 2003-09-04 23:07 | Link
Oh, and as to the water issue whereby the Palis had to pay and the Jooos don't, well, just consider it their version of dhimmitude.
What, you think only muslims can play the game?
Stig Sandø | 2003-09-05 00:20 | Link
[snip long rant about (imaginary) anti-semitism and other unrelated matters by Gill Doyle]
>> Me: So unless the US can give a written guarantee that someone extradited to the US will not risk the death penalty, he will not be extradited.<<
> Gill Doyle: Ashcroft has said that that can be arranged. I don't think that the death penalty is at issue here. At issue, I would say, is Norway's determination to thwart any reasonable American request. There are a great many folks in Norway who hate America and would consider Krekar's extradition to America as a humiliating defeat for Norway. <
If Ashcroft (according to you) says that he has no problems waiving the death penalty, why are you getting so worked up?
However, your perception of the attitude and minds of the norwegian people and government seems to be so wide off the mark that you might accidentally be describing life on another, so far undiscovered, planet. Leave science fiction to professional authors.
Gill Doyle, Northern California | 2003-09-05 00:25 | Link
>Where we now? Interesting. I didn't notice.
You didn't notice that most Norwegians opposed the U.S. invasion?
>I'm sorry, I've never noticed that anti-semitism you're talking about. I don't think there are many people that think negatively of jews in Norway. Actually I know of exactly NONE.
The fact that you and others like you don't notice is just the problem. Go take a look at this link. One of the most active debates on Aftenposten's debate page for quite a while now. Then tell me what you think. For those of you who don't understand Norwegian, the link to which I refer points to a debate about whether or not the Holocaust actually ever happened. Still a debatable point in some circles in Norway.
>However, there are plenty of people that think negatively about the policies/politics of the state of Israel
>that think some jewish organizations really should Get Over WWII
There's where you demonstrate an alarming insensitivity to Jewish sensibilities. No anti-semitism in Norway?
>Oh, and the palestinians. Then we're onto politics again, which has nothing to do with anti-semitism, but the treatment of the palestines in Israel - which is abysmal.
Correct. I am in agreement there. Yet, sympathy with the Palestinian cause does not justify widespread acceptancein Norway of terrorist tactics. Nor does it explain Norwegian indifference to Israeli suffering. Take a look at your papers, will you? Israeli casualties are frequently overlooked. Every Palestinian scrape and bruise, on the other hand, is lamented.
>And that is One Good Reason not to hand him over. You would quite simply not be objective. If we had an international crime court (which america for some idiotic reason didn't support) then _that_ would've been the proper avenue.
In fact, it is you who are not objective. For you have condemned America already in your mind. We cannot be fair or objective, you have decided. For this reason, you think, Norway must protect a killer like Krekar -- a known terrorist. Why does Norway protect a killer? Is that your notion of justice? As for the ICC, you should know why America opposes the ICC. It is because the world is full of folks who cannot be objective in their assessment of American behavior.
| 2003-09-05 02:01 | Link
>If Ashcroft (according to you) says that he has no problems waiving the death penalty, why are you getting so worked up?
I'm not "worked up", as you say. And the extradition issue per se does not interest me. What interests me is the fact that Norwegians are mobilizing already to oppose an extradition request that has yet to be made. Little Norway wants to show that it can stand up the American bully.
>However, your perception of the attitude and minds of the norwegian people and government seems to be so wide off the mark that you might accidentally be describing life on another, so far undiscovered, planet.
Could be that Norwegians are unused to hearing criticism, though fond of dishing it out. Truly, Norway is for many Norwegians an undiscovered planet. When there is so little diversity of opinion in Norway, there will be a great number of ideas that Norwegians are unused to hearing. The anti-semitism that you think doesn't exist is obvious to folks who know what anti-semitism is and isn't. Problem is, Norwegians can't identify the beast, because they are too used to living with it. How large is Norway's Jewish population? Tiny. Why is that? Well, until about 1850, I think, Jews were not allowed to settle in Norway. Not that many Jews anywhere in Europe, for that matter. Seems they disappeared round about 1939-45. Biggest concentrations today in Russia, Israel, and America. What's missing in Norway is a corrective to the anti-semitism that walks unnoticed up and down Karl Johan and through the various chat channels in Norway. Because there are virtually no Jews amongst you, you have no one to help catch you before you blurt out statements such as we heard recently from Herr Viken -- "some jewish organizations really should Get Over WWII, and so forth. Hell, it's 50 years ago." Intolerance of Jews, gypsies, and even catholics is ingrained in Norway. Second-nature. Or do you think still that I am "katolsk i hodet"? I would guess that the presence now in Norway of a growing Muslim population has led to increased sensitivity to Muslim concerns and issues. Norwegians grow tired of hearing about the Holocaust (if they believe, to begin with, that it really happened). Yet, they seem never to grow tired of Palistinian complaints. They can find it in them, even, to feel compassion for the leader of Ansar al-Islam. Jews, on the other hand, are still fair game in Norway, as they have so little voice. No one to stand up for them.
Sandy P. | 2003-09-05 03:19 | Link
Rune, the Jooos are supposed to get over WWII, but when will Europe???
Maybe you should take your own advice and figure out why Europe hasn't moved on in 50 years, why it's still the Jooos' fault.
9/11 has exposed Europe's shitty little secret
How convenient that Europe is once again trying to transfer blame. The Jooos/Americans are bringing it on themselves. If only they were more like us. Krekar and the rest of the vermin are fascists in turbans. Europe what's coming and once again, Europe fails to stop it before it gets bloody. And like Switzerland, keeps funding it.
Europe's Pali proxies will not be allowed to finish the job Europe started.
Rune Kristian Viken, Oslo | 2003-09-05 09:44 | Link
>>> [Norway Opposed Hussein's overthrow]
There is a quite big difference between the goal and the methods used to reach that goal. When the US actually _did_ invade, I think most norwegians hoped the war would be shortlived and that Hussein should be removed as soon as possible.
>>> [Lots of antisemetism in norway]
So called "revisionists", also known as neo-nazis. I used to run a BBS called "Arcade's BBS" where we had one of those. Interesting chap - I think I was among the ones who managed to convince him how wrong he was - at least he had changed his attitude when I met him in real life some years later.
I can give you some information about that group of people. They're a tiny group, aprox 50-200 in Norway if I remember the statistics correctly, but quite vocal - especially on bulletin boards / webboards. They mostly base their arguments on the good ol' "Leuchter Report" written by some idiot called "Fred Leuchter" - who I seem to remember is an american. It's STILL defended by some idiots such as David Irving, and a canadian named "Ernst Zundel" (the guy behind that nazi Zundelsite thingie).
There's a great site called "nizkor" (www.nizkor.org) which debunks all the holocaust denial crap. Also, see "alt.revisionism" on Usenet for a continous ongoing debate about it all.
Oh, and just to turn your argument against you. Whether the holocaust happened or not is _still_ a debatable point in some circles in the US. ;-) You have idiots all over the globe, included in Norway.
Are you implying something?
First of all, being "sensitive" about issues won't help the world go forward - for that to happen you have to forgive and forget (Not forget as in "erase from history", "forget" as in stop bickering about it all the time).
Let me put it another way. I don't see _any_ reason why young people today should have to cough up resources because their grandparents were involved in a war 50 years ago.
> Yet, sympathy with the Palestinian cause does
The problem is that both Israel and the Palestinians use unacceptable methods. When one looks at the differences in military strength, it's a tad more _understandable_ that the palestinians use terrible means. However, not acceptable.
> In fact, it is you who are not objective. For
You _can_, but we can't _expect_ you to be. I would equate it to handing over a suspected rapist to the victims father.
Some would call that justice, other would .. be a tad more .. uhm .. well - I think you get the point ;)
> For this reason, you think, Norway must protect
*known*. That shows how fair a treatment he would get, doesn't it? :) (Of course, I believe him to be a fscking terrorist too, but you get my point).
> Why does Norway protect a killer?
Same argument as above.
> Is that your notion of justice? As for the ICC,
When you refuse to cooperate with the world, don't expect the world to cooperate with you all the time.
Bjørn Stærk | 2003-09-05 15:18 | Link
I don't agree with Gill that Norwegians are anti-semites - at least it's very difficult to prove. We're clearly not conscious anti-semites, and trying to prove subconscious anti-semitism is near impossible. So at best it's a sidetrack. What's obvious is that Norwegians are _anti-Israel_, in the same sense that we're anti-America. In fact, the two are related. This is easy to prove, by for instance looking at the slant in the press of the Palestinian conflict.
That said, anti-semitism is a thread in European culture that runs way back, and keeps exploding at regular intervals. It's not impossible that today's anti-Israelism has cultural roots in or is even a modern form of anti-semitism. It just isn't a very useful debate.
As for Holocaust deniers, Rune-Kristian is right - they're a minority, a very small minority without any political presence. I don't agree that the Jews should "get over it", though. I mean, if you're a Jew, the only way to get over anti-semitism is to cut yourself off entirely from your own history. Jews are sensible to be on the watch for a recurrence of anti-semitism in Europe, and they're sensible to ensure a dependable means of defense. For the same reasons that Poland is sensible to seek friends beyond Germany and Russia (ie. the EU and US) - because they've been crushed between them so many times in the past. It's about learning from history.
Rune-Kristian is wrong about Norwegian support for the war on Iraq, once the war actually started. It's not that Norwegians wanted the Americans to lose, but they wanted and expected to see their own gloomy predictions turn true, to be able to say "Ha, told you so!" There were no shouts of joy (even in print) when Iraq fell, when almost every single doomsday prediction turned out false. There seemed to be rather annoyance with the Americans for not failing, and everyone quickly seized on the first, best opportunity to present the occupation as a failure. (First the exaggerated looting, now the "resistance", lack of UN authority, etc.) The speed and ease with which this happened was not that of relief that the worst case (even the best case!) scenarios had been avoided, followed by being worried about the problems still left, but one of almost stubborn gloominess. It was the same style of thinking as before the war, but quickly redirected onto new problems, any problem, as long as it was an _American_ problem. Though rationally everyone wants a prosperous and democratic Iraq, that viewpoint is severely distorted by anti-Americanism. Ultimately, I think Norwegians take more personal satisfaction with watching the Americans fail, than watching them succeed, even though rationally they may know the last is morally superior.
Sandy P. | 2003-09-05 17:58 | Link
--Ultimately, I think Norwegians take more personal satisfaction with watching the Americans fail, than watching them succeed, even though rationally they may know the last is morally superior.--
Why limit it to just Norwegians, Bjorn?
Den Beste has got a goodie up, wordy as usual, tho.
--When you refuse to cooperate with the world, don't expect the world to cooperate with you all the time.--
We are not giving up our Constitution to get along. Non-negotiable; maybe if *the world* adopted some of our protections we'd be more flexible??? ICC is not "international law" it is European law and the court is a bunch of toadies. Did you read how they were picked?
Gill Doyle, Northern California | 2003-09-05 18:16 | Link
I agree, Bjørn, that our discussion of anti-semitism in Norway is a digression. Our focus here should be on Krekar, I think, and Norwegian excuses for protecting the man. However, Norwegian solicitude for Krekar does bear some resemblence to its refusal to cooperate in the pursuit of Nazi war criminals. You might remember that Norway was criticized earlier this year by the Simon Wiesenthal Center for refusing to assist in the apprehension of Nazi war criminals.
Norwegian authorities cite a "statute of limitations". And so at both popular and official levels, it seems that Norway wants to forget about the Holocaust.
I agree, too, that Norwegians are not conscious anti-semites. They just need a little consciousness-raising.
Again, my take on the Krekar situation is this. Norwegian authorities no doubt regret allowing Krekar to enter Norway. Most Norwegians would probably also like to be rid of the man. However, Norwegian law apparently makes it difficult now to expell the fellow. For anti-Americans in Norway, Krekar has become a kind of cause celebre. I can't imagine that anyone there seriously defends the man's values and past, yet the anti-Americans rally round him and will resist his extradition -- if the Americans should ever want him extradited. Since Ashcroft made it clear during his recent trip to Norway that the death penalty could be waved, should America want to extradite Krekar, the death penalty cannot be used as an excuse by Norwegians wanting to protect Krekar.
I don't know if America will ever want Krekar extradited, but the day may come, you know, when a new Iraqi government will demand that he be handed over to Iraq for crimes committed there. What will Norway do then with its Mullah Krekar, I wonder?
Harry | 2003-09-08 04:02 | Link
I say let the terrorist scum stay in Norway and live off the Norwegian taxpayers. If they want them so bad let them keep them. But they had better never leave Norway.
Diana | 2003-09-11 08:51 | Link
It is absurd if Norwegians think that terrorists who kill innocent men, women, children and babies are morally equivalent to those who defend against those attacks even when there are innocent victims killed in the process.
Let's get something straight; Israel was never called Palestine until near the time of the defeat of the Romans. Before that time the land was either called Israel or Canaan. Arabs calling themselves "Palestinians" claimed they were descendents of the Philistines to take what does not belong to them. They claimed the name Philistine was related to the name Palestine. It was a lie. The two names have absolutely nothing in common. The Philistines were an Agean sea people most likely from Crete. When that lie was proven and mainly laid to rest, they changed their story to say they were descended from Canaanites. That also is a lie as the Canaanites were not even Arabs. Arabs were given a large amount of lands of their own nevertheless they fought with those of the nation of Israel from time immemorial.
The truth is Israelites (including the tribe of Judah) were the only ones that ever had a nation in that land besides the Canaanites and they were defeated. The Arabs are late comers who killed or deported the Israelites, stole their homes, land and Temple for their god Allah. They did this with no compensation for what they stole. just as their evil book commands.
Breville TR40 Sandwich Press | 2004-12-08 06:11 | Link
An interesting read! I'll consider what you said over my christmas holidays. I want Art Attack - Digital for Christmas!
Trackback URL: /cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/407
Post a comment
Comments on posts from the old Movable Type blog has been disabled.