May 2nd 2012
1. Prof. Galtung has been working on the case of Anders Behring Breivik
since the very day of the man's murderous onslaught on July 22nd 2011. In
this capacity, Prof. Galtung was invited late 2011 to give a public lecture
at the University of Oslo to elaborate the components of
Breivik's
motivational and political psychology.
Professor Galtung was shocked by the reaction to some of his peripheral
observations in connection with his ongoing inquiry into Breivik's mind in
Norway. He did not expect to be labelled totally incorrectly as
anti-Semite. He refuses this utterly repugnant black-white etiquetting.
Günter Grass was also labelled as anti-Semite and denied access to Israel
when he published a poem that warned against a specific point,
a possible Israeli attack on Iran.
2. Again: All of this results from his ongoing inquiries into the Breivik case. All want to disassociate
themselves from Breivik, but it is clear from Breivik's own statements that he is firmly rooted in the Judeo-
Christian history, including myths. As a Free Mason, he is a member of a secret organization with a
loyalty oath. From a researcher's perspective, this "conspiratorial oath to secrecy" makes a meaningful
police investigation impossible.
3. Johan Galtung received a series of questions by email from the Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz. His answers
are added at the end for public perusal. They have not been quoted in the Ha'aretz article, but been
completely twisted out of context and misrepresented.
Almost everything human has positive and negative aspects. Some people cannot accept any criticism at
all. Yet a critic may be your best friend. If someone walks towards a cliff, who is a real friend, the one
who says, "Go right ahead!" or the one who says, "Stop, turn around, you are in danger!" There is no
doubt who is a true friend.
4. Galtung fully recognizes that the "Protocols", as revealed in 1921,
are a sickening falsification, probably fabricated by the Russian Secret
Police, to justify the pogroms. But he does not know precisely who was the
author, a point prominently echoed by
Umberto Eco for his masterful "The Prague Cemetery". Galtung is fully
aware that they represent a very sensitive issue that brings up all the
sufferings of the Jewish people. This trauma notwithstanding, it is important
that people know of those aspects of the content, which deal mainly with the
use of debt bondage as power. The major actors that currently apply debt bondage are China,
Japan and the EU relative to the US, Germany relative to peripheral
countries in Europe, like Greece, Italy, Portugal, Spain and Ireland (GIPSI)
and the World Bank relative to the World; for a horrifying example, see
John Perkins (2004) "Confessions of an Economic Hit Man". That people of
Jewish belief and Judaism have nothing to do with any of this goes without
saying.
5. To criticize Israel's current foreign policy is not anti-Semitic, but
a part of democratic debate. Johan Galtung, like many others, is the
proponent of a prosperous and peaceful Israel, in peace with all its
neighbors. He has a concrete proposal, first time made public in 1971: A
Middle East Community of Israel with its five Arab neighbors, modeled after
the European Community of the Treaty of Rome, which went into effect in
1958. This very proposal was published by Akiva Eldar in Ha'aretz in 2007
under the title
"Ingredients for a True Peace Process."
Appendix: Johan Galtung's complete answers to questions by Ofer Aderet at Ha'aretz, 29 April
2012
Click here to download this comparison as PDF.
Anthony Judge
I find the exchange very unfortunate for a number of reasons.
I also have endeavoured to derive insights from the Breivik case -- at a time when equivalent numbers are killed on a daily basis in many countries. I note the lack of attention to the situation in the Congo for example. Norwegians have every right to find Breivik's actions repugnant in the extreme. I note that Norway contributes forces to the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan. Is there any problem with a Norwegian killing 80 Afghans with the authority of that body? How many Afghans have Norwegians killed? I endeavoured to explore what we might learn from the paradoxical world in which we live in an article posted via the Transcend Media Service:
Gruesome but Necessary: Global Governance in the 21st Century?
Extreme normality as indicator of systemic negligence
(https://www.laetusinpraesens.org/musings/gruesome.php)
It is understandable that people want simple answers. The chaos of the times does not lend itself to simple answers. The issue is what is to be learned from the disasters to which we will be increasingly exposed. If Norway in its entirety believes Breivik should be condemned, why waste tax payers money on a trial. Justice could be done, as Obama claimed, with respect to the termination of Osama -- from whom no one wished to hear.
With respect to the anti-semitism label in the case of Johan Galtung, the problem for all concerned is that NOTHING problematic can be said about Israel without the critic being potentially so labelled. It is my sense that it is impossible to prove that anyone is NOT anti-whatever. This is the well-documented legal issue of it being impossible to prove a negative. Someone who is declared a "self-hating Jew" cannot prove the contrary. Israel cannot prove that it is NOT anti-peace. Iran cannot prove that it is NOT developing nuclear weapons. Someone accused of being anti-American under McCarthy could not prove the contrary. The US Security Service cannot prove that its agents did NOT endanger Obama in Columbia. So Johan Galtung cannot prove that he is NOT anti-semitic.
My interest in endeavouring to transcend a futile pattern of accusation is to determine whether the potentially offended party is able to offer "guidelines" to others who might see reason to criticize its behaviour -- irrespective of whether the concern is anti-science, anti-Islam, anti-blasphemy, anti-women, etc. I have argued this case in:
Guidelines for Critical Dialogue between Worldviews: as exemplified by the need for non-antisemitic dialogue with Israelis? www.laetusinpraesens.org/docs00s/diachose.php
Unfortunately, in the current case, it is the very nature of the trial by media which is so deeply regrettable. No one will be satisfied, except those that would like to see someone hung from a scaffold in public according to the style of the Middle Ages