Israeli vandalises Swedish suicide bomber art

[Theben]

Oh, ok then.

[Hueij]

Originally posted by Theben
Great. Now the CGers will be *****ing about Poly for a month...

What's a CGer?

Oh, and KH:

[Theben]

CounterGlow'er

[Buck Birdseed]

A poster at Counterglow.

[Ming]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
See you around, Ming.

Yep... see you around. Send me a PM when you are interested in posting again.

[Edan]

Here is one person who's interpretation, IMO, matters far more than anyone's here:

Ora Regev, whose son Nir was killed in the attack at Maxim restaurant, told The Jerusalem Post she would like to thank Mazel for his actions. "He did exactly what needed to be done," Regev said. "This may not have been diplomatically or politically correct, but the time has come for people to think about us as well, about our feelings."

She said the exhibit, which she only heard about following the incident, is a terrible insult to the families of the victims, and is a "prize for the terrorist."

[Pekka]

Well just for the sake of debating, I saw it on TV news, and it looked awful lot like he threw the lamp in purpose, not just unplugged it. Anyway, makes no difference to me, he didn't go wild crazy anyway, but did interrupt a little bit.

I think it was inappropriate to attack the 'art', because they are often times kind of controversial anyway, but then again it wasn't a good idea that piece of 'art' anyway and I fully understand how someone good flip off and do something like that.............. it was tasteless work IMO.

[VetLegion]

Wow, 7 pages and one ban too - 8/10 to Winston, Ned and others.

As to the topic, I doubt this ambassador simply acted rashly, such persons get filtered from diplomacy before getting into important positions. I think he knew what he was doing, and if I was Swedish govt. I'd pack him to the first plane to Israel, with a copy of "Rules of diplomatic conduct", on government expense.

Just to be clear, Israelis have every right to be pissed if they care to, but that changes nothig in this case.

[Buck Birdseed]

Analysts here think it was a pre-planned act too, but maybe that's cause we've grown up in a country which maybe more than any other values the separation of progessional and personal conduct. I remain doubtful- would the Israeli covernment really pre-sanction such a flagrant piece of stupidity?

[The Mad Monk]

Originally posted by Theben
Great. Now the CGers will be *****ing about Poly for a month...

We do not "***** about Poly".

Banned Polytubbies come to our site to do that.

[The Mad Monk]

Ned, I'm about as far politically from Krazy as one can reasonably get, and he has never insulted me.

[Winston]

The ambassador himself said to the Sunday edition of Israeli newspaper Haaretz that his action was in no way spontaneous. It was planned in advance after he read of the installation in a Swedish paper.

So it was not a matter of the ambassador having a bad temper and not being able to control it.

[Combat Ingrid]

Originally posted by Ned
The United States should send a strong message to Sweden to protest this one sided display that is ultimately an outrage to humanity.

[Winston]

And just to make things clear, I didn't report KrazyHorse to the mods. He caused his own downfall just by behaving the way he did.

[The Mad Monk]

Originally posted by Winston
The ambassador himself said to the Sunday edition of Israeli newspaper Haaretz that his action was in no way spontaneous. It was planned in advance after he read of the installation in a Swedish paper.

So it was not a matter of the ambassador having a bad temper and not being able to control it.

That certainly puts an interesting twist on things...I wonder what was going on in the backchannels between Israel and Sweden before this?

[Ned]

Originally posted by The Mad Monk
Ned, I'm about as far politically from Krazy as one can reasonably get, and he has never insulted me.

I have no explanation for that, Monk.

However, KH thinks he has a right and almost an obligation to insult people with whom he disagrees. I hope you would agree that that kind of thinking is as inappropriate as the ambassador's conduct he is ridiculing.

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by Winston

So it was not a matter of the ambassador having a bad temper and not being able to control it.

Indeed. In that case it is a matter of planned, deliberate, vandalism. Very appropriate behaviour for an ambassador. Lovely that his prime minister is chearing him on, too.

[Ned]

Edan, the Swedes really need to show a little more sensitivity here. Their callousness to the feelings of Israeli's and Jews is simply remarkable. They can no longer focus on the conduct of the ambassador because he has been supported by the government of Israel.

[The Mad Monk]

I don't know, I think you just have bad chemistry.

[Combat Ingrid]

Originally posted by Osweld
Indeed. In that case it is a matter of planned, deliberate, vandalism. Very appropriate behaviour for an ambassador. Lovely that his prime minister is chearing him on, too.

I should add that this brilliant ambassador is known to call Swedish officials antisemites whenever he needs to complain about something. Apparently, his friends back home like that

[The Mad Monk]

The incident, widely reported in the Swedish media, occurred at the opening on Friday of the "Making Differences" exhibit, part of an upcoming international conference on genocide hosted by the Swedish government and in which Israel is scheduled to participate.

This is what I don't understand. It is an international conference where Israel is an invitee. Now, maybe things have changed in diplomacy, but I thought there was a rule that when nations do things like this, they make sure the setting isn't going to annoy the participants. "Shape of the table" and all that. Whether the exhibit is offensive or not (and I stand by my assessment), if Israel had mounted objections to it beforehand, wouldn't it be proper for the Swedes to oblige?

[Hueij]

Originally posted by Ned


I have no explanation for that, Monk.

However, KH thinks he has a right and almost an obligation to insult people with whom he disagrees. I hope you would agree that that kind of thinking is as inappropriate as the ambassador's conduct he is ridiculing.

No I don't agree and I applaud KH for doing what he did. In all my years here I never saw KH post anything but intelligent posts (well, the drunk thread may be an exception). But argueing with the likes of you and Winston would make anyone snap. And then you had to whine to the mods about it. But I guess people like you are too afraid to stand your own ground. ********

[Winston]

Originally posted by Combat Ingrid

I should add that this brilliant ambassador is known to call Swedish officials antisemites whenever he needs to complain about something.

Viewed from this side of the Sound, some Swedish officials do carry themselves with a clear antisemitic demeanour, so one can't rule out the ambassador might have a point.

[Hueij]

Edit: deleted, don't wanna get banned

[Winston]

Hueij, tell me nice and calmly, why are you so outrageously pissed off that some people don't see things the way you do?

[Ned]

Originally posted by Hueij

No I don't agree and I applaud KH for doing what he did. In all my years here I never saw KH post anything but intelligent posts (well, the drunk thread may be an exception). But argueing with the likes of you and Winston would make anyone snap. And then you had to whine to the mods about it. But I guess people like you are too afraid to stand your own ground. ********

I find it quite amuzing that both you and KH argue on the one had that it was inappropriate for the Israeli ambassador to lose his cool in face of provocation and to justify similar behavior by yourselves if someone says something with which you strongly disagree.

[cinch]

Originally posted by Ned


I find it quite amuzing that both you and KH argue on the one had that it was inappropriate for the Israeli ambassordor to lose his cool in face of provocation and to justify similar behavior by yourselves if someone says something with which you strongly disagree.

And I find it quite "amuzing" that you can be so repetitive and ignorant of the situation.

Let's lay it out, nice and simple:

Israeli ambassador finds out about art display that angers him because he doesn't understand it. He plans to destroy it. He attacks said artwork, physically.

KH is trying in vain to get his point across to certain people in this thread, and when he is met with stubbornness and repetitiveness, he snaps and attacks you (Ned), verbally.

There is a world of difference.

[Hueij]

Winston, I'll try to stay calm...

It's not the people that see things another way like I do. I found out a lot of them do and actually sometimes they even succeed to let me see that their view is the right one and mine was wrong.

What gets on my nerves is people that rehash their arguments over and over even when they are shown the facts (in bolded letters no less).

So if you'll excuse me, I'm going to do something I never did before and put you and that other ******** that got KH banned on ignore.

Nice to have known you...

[cinch]

Originally posted by The Mad Monk


This is what I don't understand. It is an international conference where Israel is an invitee. Now, maybe things have changed in diplomacy, but I thought there was a rule that when nations do things like this, they make sure the setting isn't going to annoy the participants. "Shape of the table" and all that. Whether the exhibit is offensive or not (and I stand by my assessment), if Israel had mounted objections to it beforehand, wouldn't it be proper for the Swedes to oblige?

Considering the artwork is in no way intended to support anti-Israeli activities, maybe the Swedes thought that Israel wouldn't mind?

Also: it's an international conference with many countries attending. It's not as if Sweden invited a team of Israeli diplomats over, and then accosted them, personally, with pro-Palestinian propaganda.

It was just a work of art, one of many in an art show that itself was simply one part of the conference.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Winston
Hueij, tell me nice and calmly, why are you so outrageously pissed off that some people don't see things the way you do?

If you want to know why people are annoyed, it is pretty simple.

- You post your opinion and then others respond with reasons why they think you are wrong.

- Then you are supposed to post your reasons for why their reasons are wrong. That's called discussion.

- but you've indulged in the fanatic's favourite trick of basically repeating your initial opinion and wilfully ignoring the evidence that has been presented to you. You didn't even do it in a particularly smart way - I can understand perfectly well why he got annoyed.