4
3
2
The Oslo Attacks: Comment and Analysis - by Stephen Lendman
What to make of them is at issue. Many questions are unanswered. Are they similar to previous European and US post-9/11 attacks? Was a single individual responsible or were others unnamed or not known involved? Was it homegrown and/or outside inspired, despite what's been reported?
And why Norway, an unlikely target despite its NATO membership, token participation in Afghanistan, and Libya operations it scaled back and will end entirely by August 1. Last May, in fact, Defense Minister Grete Faremo told Norway's Parliament that despite taking part in NATO air attacks (dropping 289 bombs):
"There is no military solution to the situation in Libya. It must be solved politically."
She added that Norway would scale back operations after its three-month commitment ended on June 24, ahead of ending them entirely weeks later.
At the same time, Norway supports Palestinian independence, de jure UN membership, and Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Store heads an international aid committee for Palestine. Moreover, its parliament earlier passed initiatives critical of Israel, and Finance Minister Kristin Halvorsen (from 2005 - 2009, now Education Minister) proposed boycotting Israeli products in 2006 though Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg disapproved.
However, in August 2010, Norway declined to purchase Israeli military products because of tensions between Israel and Palestine as well as its neighbors.
It's not known, but Friday's attack may relate to Norway's support for Palestinian sovereignty. Perhaps it was planned and initiated to influence its policy on granting full Palestinian UN membership in September, and may also be part of Washington's Global War on Terror.
Moreover, the notion of a lone bomber/gunman is very suspect, especially one able to kill 91 people, an unprecedented nearly impossible feat singlehanded. Were there others involved?
These and other questions demand answers, as well as specific bombing details, including whether what happened demanded expertise beyond the capability of untrained people.
Who gains and loses from every terror incident must also be asked, certainly not suspects charged, convicted and imprisoned. Geopolitical interests are central. This time Western and Israeli ones are key.
On July 22, New York Times writers Elisha Mala and J. David Goodman were in battle mode headlining, "At Least 80 Dead in Norway Shooting," saying:
"A lone political extremist bombed the government center here on Friday, killing 7 people....before heading to an island summer camp for young members of the governing Labor Party and killing at least 80 people."
A July 23 follow-up headlined, "Death Toll Rises to 91 in Norway Attacks," saying:
"The Norwegian police charged a 32-year-old man (Anders Behring Breivik, identified as) a Christian fundamentalist with right-wing connections, over the bombing of a government center here and a shooting attack on a nearby island that together left at least 91 people dead."
Police didn't know if he was part of a greater conspiracy. "What we do know," said police official Roger Andresen, "is that he is right-wing and a Christian fundamentalist." Oslo police chief of staff Johan Fredriksen said he wasn't surprised that a blond, blue-eyed man was involved. He likely would have made a harsher statement if a Muslim was charged, homegrown or otherwise.
