So Norway wants to boycott Israel? [Via Mark Steyn] Fine, g’ahead. What’s stopping you?
More than 40 percent of Norwegians are already boycotting Israeli products or are in favour of doing so, according to a poll published Wednesday, two days after Israel’s deadly raid on a Gaza-bound aid flotilla.
The survey, conducted on Tuesday by the InFact institute and published Wednesday in the Verdens Gang tabloid, showed that 9.5 percent of the Norwegians questioned were already boycotting Israeli products, while 33.5 percent said they would like to.
Only 29.4 percent of the 1,028 people polled said they were opposed to such a boycott, while 27.6 percent said they had no opinion on the issue.
Kristin Halvorsen, Norway’s health minister and head of the Socialist Left party, called on Tuesday for the international community to boycott arms trade with Israel, in line with Norway’s existing policy.
The Socialist Left Party? Isn’t that straight out of the Department of Redundancy Department?
But fine, Norway, indulge your inner Goebbels. (Like him, you have no balls at all.) Don’t let the truth get in your way; it might kill your Jew-hating high.
Think I’m taking this too far?
Then why is another headline in this poxy paper: Will Israel drop an atomic bomb?
Iran has more centrifuges whirling than Turkey has dervishes, and this… this… fish wrapper is worried about Israel.
And speaking of fish: that’s where our boycott of Norway should start:
The country is richly endowed with natural resources – petroleum, hydropower, fish, forests and minerals – and is highly dependent on its oil production and international oil prices. Only Saudi Arabia exports more oil than Norway. Norway imports more than half its food needs.
Norway has to import more than half it’s food, huh? I think I see a bargaining position. Hey, Copenhagen*: hungry? This Wendy’s Double Bacon Cheeseburger sure smells good. Or are you going to stick with the Fishamajig? Again. Nachos with guacamole or baked haddock? Again.
Now, don’t get me wrong. I could eat seafood every day. But I’m glad I don’t have to.
Israel has been known to drop leaflets warning in advance that they are going to bomb the terrorists hiding (openly) among the general public.
Israel should set up a blockade around Norway and drop leaflets encouraging the hostiles to surrender. I suggest the corndog pizza:
They’d surrender faster than you can say liberté, egalité, fraternité.
*I know it’s Helsinki**, not Copenhagen, but I’m re-working the John Belushi joke from Animal House about the Germans bombing Pearl Harbor.
** I mean Stockholm.
Looks like I owe Helsinki (I mean Warsaw) an apology:
A perusal of The Helsinki Principles on the Law of Maritime Neutrality, a basis for international law on the subject, shows that Israel was well within its prescriptions in forcibly stopping the Gaza-bound flotilla.
The relevant clauses in the Helsinki Principles read as follows:
5.1.2 Protection against attacks
(3) Merchant ships flying the flag of a neutral State may be attacked if they are believed on reasonable grounds to be carrying contraband or breaching a blockade, and after prior warning they intentionally and clearly refuse to stop, or intentionally and clearly resist visit, search, capture or diversion.
(4) Merchant ships flying the flag of a neutral State may be attacked if they
(a) engage in belligerent acts on behalf of the enemy;
(b) act as auxiliaries to the enemy’s armed forces;
(c) are incorporated into or assist the enemy’s intelligence system;
(d) sail under convoy of enemy warships or military aircraft; or
(e) otherwise make an effective contribution to the enemy’s military action, e.g., by carrying military materials, and it is not feasible for the attacking forces to first place passengers and crew in a place of safety. Unless circumstances do not permit, they are to be given a warning, so that they can re-route, off-load, or take other precautions.
5.2.1 Visit and search
… [B]elligerent warships have a right to visit and search vis-à-vis neutral commercial ships in order to ascertain the character and destination of their cargo. If a ship tries to evade this control or offers resistance, measures of coercion necessary to exercise this right are permissible. This includes the right to divert a ship where visit and search at the place where the ship is encountered are not practical.
Blockade, i.e. the interdiction of all or certain maritime traffic coming from or going to a port or coast of a belligerent, is a legitimate method of naval warfare. In order to be valid, the blockade must be declared, notified to belligerent and neutral States, effective and applied impartially to ships of all States. A blockade may not bar access to neutral ports or coasts. Neutral vessels believed on reasonable and probable grounds to be breaching a blockade may be stopped and captured. If they, after prior warning, clearly resist capture, they may be attacked.
See you in court, a-holes.