thumb|The location of Norway (dark green) in Europe

The history of Jews in Norway dates back to the 1400s. Although there were very likely Jewish merchants, sailors and others who entered Norway during the Middle Ages, no efforts were made to establish a Jewish community. Through the early modern period, Norway, still devastated by the Black Death, was ruled by Denmark from 1536 to 1814 and then by Sweden until 1905. In 1687, Christian V rescinded all Jewish privileges, specifically banning Jews from Norway, except with a special dispensation. Jews found in the kingdom were jailed and expelled, and this ban persisted until 1851.

In 1814, when Norway gained independence from Denmark, the general ban against Jews entering the country was "continued" in the new Norwegian Constitution. Sephardim were exempt from the ban, but it appears that few applied for a letter of free passage. After tireless efforts by the poet Henrik Wergeland, politician Peder Jensen Fauchald, school principal Hans Holmboe and others, in 1851 the Norwegian parliament (the Stortinget) lifted the ban against Jews and they were awarded religious rights on a par with Christian dissenters.
thumbnail|300px|Jewish cemetery in Sofienberg, Oslo

The first Jewish community in Norway was established in Oslo in 1892. The community grew slowly until World War II. It was bolstered by refugees in the late 1930s and peaked at about 2,100. The population was devastated during the Holocaust, in which a significant portion of the Norwegian Jewish community was murdered by Nazi Germany. Jews remain one of Norway's smallest ethnic and religious minorities.

Middle Ages
The first mention of Jews in Norse literature is found in Postola sögur in Iceland in the 13th century, where they are mentioned along with the more general pagans. The literature of this time referred to Jews as "gyðingar," "juði," or in the Latin form "judeus." Jews were also mentioned in unfavorable terms in subsequent literary Icelandic sagas, such as Gyðinga saga (Saga of the Jews).

However, there are sources that dispute anti-Semitism in Norway in the Middle Ages for the simple reason that there was no evidence of the presence of Jews in the country. A comprehensive study of contemporaneous documents, for instance, such as testaments, contracts, and legal cases among other primary data did not mention Jews or a Jewish community in Norway. Scholars cited that those mentioned in Church documents can be considered "virtual Jews" in the sense that the citations were indirect and that these mentions were probably symbols of non-Christian behavior.Adams & Heß, 2018.

Reformation and Enlightenment
In 1436 and again in 1438, Archbishop Aslak Bolt prohibited celebrating a day of rest on Saturday, lest Christians replicate the "way of Jews," and this prohibition was reinforced through several subsequent ordinances, including those in Diplomatarium Norvegicum.Jacobsen (2006)" …, ok ær theth løgurdax helg, som Juda oc hædhninga plega at halda, æn æy cristne, …" citing Bolt's statutes on Saturday holidays and prayer.

The first known settlement of Jews on Norway territory was based on a royal dispensation. The first known mention of Jews in public documents relates to the admissibility of Sephardim, Spanish and Portuguese Jews who had been expelled from Spain in 1492 and from Portugal in 1497. Some of these were given special dispensation to enter Norway.

While Norway was part of the Danish kingdom from 1536 to 1814, Denmark introduced a number of religious restrictions both to uphold the Protestant Reformation in general and against Jews in particular. In 1569, Fredrik II ordered that all foreigners in Denmark had to affirm their commitment to 25 articles of faith central to Lutheranism, on pain of deportation, forfeiture of all property, and death.

The earliest recorded direct mention of Jews occurred in documents published in the 17th century when a group of Portuguese Jews were allowed to settle in Norway.  Restrictions were lifted for Sephardic Jews already established as merchants in Altona when Christian IV took over the town. Christian also issued the first letter of safe passage to a Jew (Albert Dionis) in 1619, and on June 19, 1630, general amnesty was granted to all Jews permanently in residence in Glückstadt, including the right to travel freely throughout the kingdom.

In this condition, the existence of anti-Semitism can be considered negligible because the traditional Jewish prejudice often stemmed from the perception that the Jews controlled the economic, political and social spheres of a specific European society.

Public policy toward Jews varied over the next several hundred years. The kings generally tolerated Jewish merchants, investors, and bankers whose contributions of benefit to the economy of Denmark-Norway on the one hand, while seeking to restrict their movements, residence, and presence in public life. Several Jews, particularly in the Sephardic Teixera family, but also some of Ashkenazi origins, were given letters of passage to visit places in Denmark and Norway; but there were also several incidents of Jews who were arrested, imprisoned, fined, and deported for violating the general ban against their presence, even when they claimed the exemption granted to Sephardim. Christian IV of Denmark-Norway gave Jews limited rights to travel within the kingdom and, in 1641, Ashkenazi Jews were given equivalent rights. Christian V rescinded these privileges in 1687, specifically banning Jews from Norway, unless they were given a special dispensation. Jews found in the kingdom were jailed and expelled, and this ban persisted until 1851.

The European Enlightenment led to moderate easing of restrictions for Jews in Denmark-Norway, especially in Denmark's southern areas and cities. Some Jewish families that had converted to Christianity settled in Norway. Writers of the time increased their interest in the Jewish people, including Ludvig Holberg, who figured Jews as comical figures in most of his plays and in 1742 wrote The Jewish History From the Beginning of the World, Continued till Present Day, presenting Jews to some extent in conventional, unfavorable stereotypes, but also raising the question about mistreatment of Jews in Europe.

Consequently, as stereotypes against Jews started entering the awareness of the general public during the Enlightenment, there were also those who rose in opposition to some, if not all, of the underlying hostility. Lutheran minister Niels Hertzberg was one of those who wrote against Norwegian prejudice, ultimately influencing the later votes on the constitutional amendment to allow Jews to settle in Norway.

Constitutional ban
There was a blanket ban on Jewish presence in Norway since 1687, except with a special dispensation, and Jews found in the kingdom were jailed and expelled. The ban persisted until 1851. Based on short-lived hopes that Denmark's concessions at the Treaty of Kiel in 1814 would allow for Norwegian independence, a constituent assembly was convened in Eidsvoll in the spring of 1814. Although Denmark had only a few months earlier completely lifted all restrictions on Jews, the Norwegian assembly, after some debate, went the other way, and Jews were to "continue" to be excluded from the realm, as part of the clause that made Lutheranism the official state religion, though with free exercise of religion as the general rule. The ban was against Jews and Jesuits entering the country. Sephardim were exempt from the ban, but it appears that few applied for a letter of free passage. On 4 November 1844, the Norwegian Ministry of Justice declared: "…it is assumed that the so-called Portuguese Jews are, regardless of the Constitution's §2, entitled to dwell in this country, which is also, to [our] knowledge, what has hitherto been assumed."

Several of the framers had formulated views on Jews before the convention had started, among them Lauritz Weidemann, who wrote that "The Jewish nation's history proves, that this people always has been rebellious and deceitful, and their religious teachings, the hope of again arising as a nation, so often they have acquired some remarkable fortune, led them to intrigues and to create a state within a state.  It is of vital importance to the security of the state that an absolute exception be made about them."

Those who supported the continued ban did so for several reasons, among them theological prejudice. Nicolai WergelandNikolai Wergeland's son was Henrik Wergeland, the poet who later would play a decisive role in reversing his father's views and Georg Sverdrup felt that it would be incompatible with Judaism to deal honestly with Christians, writing that "no person of the Jewish faith may come within Norway's borders, far less reside there." Peter Motzfeld also supported the ban, but on the slightly different basis that the Jewish identity was too strong to allow for full citizenship. Other prominent framers, such as Hans Christian Ulrik Midelfart spoke "beautifully" in defense of the Jews, and also Johan Caspar Herman Wedel-Jarlsberg expressed in more muted terms the backwardness of the proposition.

Those who opposed admission of Jews prevailed decisively when the matter was put to a vote, and the second paragraph of constitution read:

This effectively maintained the legal status quo from about 1813 but put Norway sharply at odds with trends in both Denmark and Sweden, where laws and decrees in the early 19th century were granting Jews greater, not more limited liberties.

Meanwhile, a small number of Jewish converts to Christianity had settled in Norway, some of them rising to prominence. Among them were Ludvig Mariboe, Edvard Isak Hambro, and Heinrich Glogau. In 1817, Glogau had challenged Christian Magnus Falsen, one of the proponents of the ban against Jews at the constitutional assembly about the meaning of the prohibition, asking whether he should be embarrassed by his ancestors or his homeland when relating his legacy to his children. Falsen responded by asserting that Judaism "carries nothing but ridicule and contempt toward the person that does not profess to it...making it a duty for each Jew to destroy [all nations that accept him]."

Indeed, a number of Jews who found themselves in Norway were fined and deported. A ship bound for England floundered off the west coast of Norway in 1817, and one of those who washed ashore was Michael Jonas, a Polish Jew. He was escorted out of the country under heavy guard. This heavy-handed approach caused consternation, and the chief of police in Bergen was ordered to personally pay for the costs of the deportation. There were also deportation proceedings against suspected Jews who could not produce a baptismal certificate, among them the singer Carl Fredrich Coppello (alias Meyer Marcus Koppel), opticians Martin Blumenbach and Henri Leia, Moritz Lichtenheim, and others.

Repeal and initial immigration
thumb|300px|Every year the Jewish community of Norway commemorates Henrik Wergeland, the driving force behind the repeal of the ban
The deportation of Jews who had either come to Norway by accident or in good faith caused some embarrassment among Norwegians. The first who advocated for a repeal was the poet Andreas Munch in 1836. But it was Henrik Wergeland who became the leading champion for the Jews in Norway.

10th parliamentary session, 1842
Henrik Wergeland was the son of Nikolai Wergeland, one of the members at the constitutional assembly who had most strongly objected to admitting Jews to the country. The younger Wergeland had long harbored prejudice against Jews, but travels in Europe had changed his mind. He published the pamphlet Indlæg i Jødesagen on August 26, 1841, arguing passionately for a repeal of the clause. On February 19, 1842, his efforts to put the matter to a vote in the Norwegian parliament was successful, when the proposition was referred to the Constitution Committee. On September 9, 1842, the motion to repeal won a simple majority: 51 to 43, but, falling short of a supermajority (2/3) it failed.

On October 26, 1842, Wergeland published his book Jødesagen i det norske Storthing ("The Jewish issue in the Norwegian parliament"), which in addition to arguing for the cause also provides interesting insights into the workings of the parliament at the time.

Parliamentary sessions in 1845, 1848, and 1851
Wergeland had submitted a new proposal to parliament later on the same day that the first repeal had failed. He died on July 12, 1845. The constitution committee referred their recommendation to repeal exactly a month after his death, on August 12. Several versions were put to vote, but the most popular version won 52 votes to repeal, only 47 to keep; worse than the last vote.

In 1848, the motion to repeal earned 59 to 43 votes, still falling short of the 2/3 required. In 1851, finally, the clause was repealed with 93 votes to 10. On September 10, all remaining legislation related to the ban was repealed by the passage of "Lov om Ophævelse af det hidtil bestaaende Forbud mot at Jøder indfinde sig i Riget m.v." ("Law regarding the repeal of the hitherto permanent prohibition against Jews in the realm, etc.")

Early 20th century media, public opinion and policy

thumb|200x200px|Who's Who in the Jewish World. An attache to antisemitic periodical Nationalt Tidsskrift listing Jews and presumed Jews in Norway. First edition was printed in 1925.
In spite of fears that Norway would be overwhelmed by Jewish immigration following the repeal, only about 25 Jews immigrated to Norway before 1870. Because of pogroms in Czarist Russia, however, the immigration accelerated somewhat in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. By 1910, there were about 1,000 Jews in Norway.

Though the minority was small and widely dispersed, several stereotypes of Jews gained currency in the Norwegian press and popular literature in the early 20th century. In books by the widely read authors Rudolf Muus and Øvre Richter Frich, Jews are described as sadistic and obsessed with money. The attorney Eivind Saxlund published a pamphlet Jøder og Gojim ("Jews and Goyim") in 1910, which was characterized in 1922 as "antisemitic smut literature' by a writer in Dagbladet. Saxlund sued for libel and lost, but earned the admiration of the newspaper Nationen, who praised Saxlund for fighting "our race war." In 1920, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion was published in Norway under the title Den nye verdenskeiser ("The New World Emperor").

In 1916 Norwegian writer Mikal Sylten published an antisemitic periodical called Nationalt Tidsskrift. In 1917 he started using the Swastika as its symbol, several years before Adolf Hitler. The periodical was of a racist nature and published Antisemitic conspiracy theories. The periodical declared itself as the "only Norwegian journal that studies in depth Jewish true ties to events in the world and here at home" . An attache called Who's Who in the Jewish World was printed four editions starting 1925.  This pamphlet contained a list of Jews and presumed Jews in Norway, sorted by occupation. Housewives and children were listed under Different Occupations. Sylten was tried for his collaboration with the Nazis during the German occupation in the legal purge in Norway after World War II.

Shechita controversy
Prejudice against Jews became a focal point in the controversy about the legality of shechita, the Jewish practice of ritual slaughter. The issue had originally been raised in the 1890s, but a municipal ban on the practice in 1913 in Oslo brought the matter to national attention.

Early opposition
Efforts to ban shechita put well-intended humane society activists in league with antisemitic individuals. In particular, Jonas Søhr, a senior police official, took a particular interest and eventually rose to the leadership of the Norwegian Federation for Animal Protection, while also opposing admission of Jewish refugees during World War I. The animal rights cause was used as a means to attack not just the method of slaughter, but also the community itself.

Those opposing the ban included Fridtjof Nansen, but the division on the issue crossed party lines in all mainstream parties, except the Agrarian Party (today, the Centre Party), which was consisten in its opposition to schechita. During the 1890s, protests were raised in the Norwegian press against the practice of shechita, on the grounds that it was cruel to animals. The Jewish community responded to these objections by stating that the method was humane.

A committee commissioned on 11 February 1927 consulted numerous experts and visited a slaughterhouse in Copenhagen. Its majority favored a ban and found support in the Department of Agriculture and the parliamentary agriculture committee. Those who opposed a ban spoke of religious tolerance, and also found that schechita was no more inhumane than other slaughter methods. Ingvar Svanberg writes that many of the arguments against shechita were based "on the distrust of 'foreign' habits" and "often contained anti-Semitic elements".Ingvarg Svanber, "The Nordic Countries", in David Westerlund, Ingvar Svanberg. Islam Outside the Arab World. Palgrave Macmillan. 1999. p. 395.  C. J. Hambro was one of those most appalled by the antisemitic invective, noting that "where animal rights are protected to an exaggerated extent, it usually is done with the help of human sacrifice".

1929 ban
The controversy continued until 1929, when the Norwegian parliament banned the practice of slaughtering animals which have not been first stunned or paralyzed. The ban remains in force today.

No forms of religious slaughter are named as being banned in the Norwegian legislation.European Convention for the Protection of Animals for Slaughter, Explanatory Report, article 1726 Norwegian law requires that animals be stunned before being slaughtered, without exception for religious practices, which is incompatible with shechita.  The Norwegian Islamic Council, on the other hand, has found that sedation is compatible with halal rules, provided that the animal's heart is still beating at the time of slaughter.

Continued debate
The former chief rabbi of Norway, Michael Melchior, argued that antisemitism is one motive for the bans: "I won't say this is the only motivation, but it's certainly no coincidence that one of the first things Nazi Germany forbade was kosher slaughter. I also know that during the original debate on this issue in Norway, where shechitah has been banned since 1930, one of the parliamentarians said straight out, 'If they don't like it, let them go live somewhere else.'"Arutz Sheva: Even After EU Vote, European Shechita Still in Danger, May 8, 2009.

Representatives of both Muslim and Jewish communities, citing scientific studies, dispute the assertion that traditional halal and kosher slaughtering methods lead to unnecessary animal suffering. Norway's acceptance of hunting, whaling and sealing were also raised as proof of the alleged hypocrisy of the Norwegian position. Minister of Agriculture, Lars Peder Brekk of the Centre Party (which has always rejected shechita, see above), rejected the comparison.

Proponents of the continued ban, including officials from the Norwegian Food Safety Authority claimed that animals slaughtered according to shechita were conscious for "several minutes" after they were slaughtered, and writer and farmer Tore Stubberud claimed that animals in Judaism had "no moral status... pure objects for ... archaic, religious needs", and wondered whether the EU, in allowing for such slaughter had become "purely a bank, without values".

To get around the ban, kosher meat has had to be imported into the country. In June 2019, it was proposed to extend the ban to imports of kosher meat. The proposal has also been described as antisemitic.Kosher and cows – Religious strife in Norway

Holocaust

thumb|Antisemitic graffiti on shop windows in Oslo in 1941. The graffiti at the forefront reads "The Jew parasite got us 9 April" while the graffiti to the side reads "Palestine calls for all Jews. We don't stand them anymore in Norway."
thumb|200px|Antisemitic graffiti on a Jewish-owned tailor shop in Oslo, 1942, reading "Palestine calls, Jews are not tolerated in Norway."
Niels Christian Ditleff was a Norwegian diplomat who in the late 1930s was posted to Warsaw, Poland. In the spring of 1939, Ditleff set up a transit station in Warsaw for Jewish refugees from Czechoslovakia that had been sent there through the sponsorship of Nansenhjelpen. Ditleff arranged for the refugees to receive food, clothing, and transportation to Gdynia, Poland, where they boarded ships bound for Norway. Nansenhjelpen was a Norwegian humanitarian organization founded by Odd Nansen in 1936 to provide safe haven and assistance in Norway for Jewish refugees from areas in Europe under Nazi control. The sanctuary in Norway was only shortlived.

Germany occupied Norway on 9 April 1940, and a number of Norwegians were immediately arrested, and two months later the occupying force established the first prisoners' camp at Ulven, outside Bergen. Many Jews who could, fled the country. "Nearly two-thirds of the Jews in Norway fled from Norway".Kronikk: Frontingen av «Den største forbrytelsen» gir en Holocaust-historie uten nyanser [Op-ed: To front the book The greatest crime, gives a history of the Holocaust – without nuances] Of these, around 900 Jews were smuggled out of the country by the Norwegian resistance movement, mostly to Sweden but some also to the United Kingdom.United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, Norway, http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005460 In 1942, before deportations started, there were at least 2,173 Jews in Norway. Of these, 1,643 were Norwegian citizens, 240 were foreign citizens, and 290 were stateless. At least 765 Jews died in German hands;This number does not include Jewish Soviet or Polish prisoners of war that died in captivity as a result of murder or mistreatment in Norwegian camps, nor Allied Jewish soldiers killed in action in Norway. Prisoners of war who were found to be Jewish were singled out and abused. . more than half of the Norwegians who died. Only between 28 and 34 of those deported survived their continued imprisonment in camps (following their deportation)and around 25 (of these) returned to Norway after the war.

During the War, the civilian Norwegian police (politiet) in many cases helped the German occupiers to arrest those Jews who failed to escape in time. In the middle of the occupation of Norway by Nazi Germany, there were at least 2,173 Jews in Norway. Records show that during the Holocaust, 758 Norwegian Jews were murdered by the Nazis — mostly in Auschwitz. In addition, at least 775 Jews were arrested, detained, and/or deported. Most of the Jews who survived did so by fleeing the country, mostly to Sweden, but some also to the United Kingdom. The Jews fleeing to Sweden were in many cases assisted by the Norwegian resistance, but sometimes had to pay guides. A few also survived in camps in Norway or in hospitals, or in hiding. All Jews in Norway were either deported and murdered, were imprisoned, had fled to Sweden, or were in hiding by 27 November 1942. Many of the Jews who fled during the War did not return and, in 1946, there were only 559 Jews left in Norway. Between 1947 and 1949, the Norwegian government gave permission for 500 displaced persons to live in the country, although many later left for Israel, Canada, or the United States. About 800 Norwegian Jews who had fled to Sweden returned. By the mid-1950s, about 1,000 Jews resided in Norway, of whom 700 lived in Oslo and 150 in Trondheim.

Forty-one Norwegians have been recognized by Yad Vashem as being Righteous Among the Nations, as well as the Norwegian resistance movement collectively.Norwegian Righteous among the Nations, Yad Vashem website

1990s: World War II restitution

thumb|Sanctuary of the synagogue in Trondheim
In March 1996, the Norwegian government appointed a Committee "to establish what happened to Jewish property during World War II … and to determine to what extent seized assets/property was restored after the War."

In June 1997, the Committee delivered a divided report, split into a majority and a minority:
 the majority view of uncovered losses was estimated to be 108 million Norwegian krone (kr), based on the value of the krone in May 1997 (≈US$15 million).
 the minority view of uncovered losses was estimated to be 330 million kr.

On 15 May 1998, the Prime Minister of Norway, Kjell Magne Bondevik, proposed 450 million kr, covering both a 'collective' and an 'individual' restitution. On 11 March 1999, the Stortinget voted to accept the proposition for 450 million kr. The collective part, totaling 250 million kr, was divided into three:
 Funds to sustain the Jewish community in Norway (150 million kr).
 Support for development, outside Norway, of the traditions and culture which the Nazis wished to exterminate, to be distributed by a foundation where the executive committee members are to be appointed one each by the Norwegian Government, the Norwegian Parliament, the Jewish community in Norway, and the World Jewish Congress/World Jewish Restitution Organization. Eli Wiesel was suggested to lead the executive committee (60 million kr).
 The formation of a national museum for tolerance, established as the Norwegian Center for Studies of Holocaust and Religious Minorities (40 million kr).

The individual part was estimated to total not more than 200 million kr, as compensation to individuals and their survivors, with a maximum of 200,000 kr each. By 31 November 1999, the last date for individuals to apply for compensation, 980 people had received 200,000 kr (≈US$26,000) each, totaling 196 million kr (≈US$25 million).

However, Norwegian estate law imposes estate tax on inheritance passing from the deceased to his/her heirs depending on the relationship between the two. This tax was compounded at each step of inheritance. As no death certificates had been issued for Jews murdered in German concentration camps, the deceased were listed as missing. Their estates were held in probate pending a declaration of death and charged for administrative expenses. So, by the time all these factors had their effect on the valuation of the confiscated assets, very little was left. In total, 7.8 million kr was awarded to principals and heirs of Jewish property confiscated by the Nazis. This was less than the administrative fees charged by governmental agencies for probate. It did not include assets seized by the government that belonged to non-Norwegian citizens, and that of citizens that left no legal heirs. This last category was formidable, as 230 entire Jewish households were killed during the course of the Holocaust.

Contemporary situation
thumb|200px|Exterior of the synagogue in Oslo, note concrete barriers
, there were about 1,500 Jewish people living in the country as a whole. The number of registered members in religious Jewish communities has been declining in recent years, and was 747 in 2015. Most of these were based in Oslo.

There are two synagogues in Norway, one in Oslo and one in Trondheim. The Oslo Synagogue runs a full cradle-to-grave range of facilities, including a kindergarten and cheder. They both also have an outreach program to gather still functioning groups in Bergen and Stavanger. In June 2004, Chabad-Lubavitch established a permanent presence in Oslo, also organising activities in other parts of Norway. Oslo also has a Jewish renewal rabbi who organises services and activities. There was a Society for Progressive Judaism in Oslo, which no longer exists. The Jewish community in Norway is represented by Det Mosaiske Trossamfund (The Mosaic Community), which is affiliated with the World Jewish Congress.World Jewish Congress – Norway Other Jewish organizations in Norway include B'nai B'rith, WIZO, B’nei Akiva, Keren Kayemet, Help the Jews Home (Hjelp Jødene Hjem), a Kosher Meals on Wheels, Jewish study circles, and a home for the elderly. There is also a Jewish community center in Trondheim.

Norwegian Jews are well integrated into Norwegian society, and prominent among them were Jo Benkow, a former president of the Stortinget; Leo Eitinger and Berthold Grünfeld, both notable psychiatrists; Robert Levin, the pianist; writer, actress and theater critic  and Bente Kahan, an actress and singer. Of these, only the last two are still living.

Antisemitism in contemporary Norway

The mainstream Norwegian political environment has strongly adopted a platform that rejects antisemitism. However, individuals often privately hold antisemitic views.Stephen Roth Institute report on antisemitism in Norway Odd Bjørn Fure: Antisemitism in Norway – Background paper

There have been episodes of desecration of the Oslo Synagogue.Aftenposten Newspaper: "Synagogue vandalized"  In July 2006, during the 2006 Lebanon War, the congregation issued an advisory warning Jews not to wear kippot or other identifying items in public for fear of harassment or assault.Aftenposten Newspaper: "Jews warned against harassment"

On 17 September 2006, the Oslo Synagogue was attacked with an automatic weapon,Aftenposten Newspaper: "Synagogue shooting spurs calls for tighter security"  only days after it was made public that the building had been the planned target for the Algerian terror group GSPC that had been plotting a bombing campaign in the Norwegian capital.Aftenposten Newspaper: "Synagogue was terror target"  On 2 June 2008, Arfan Qadeer Bhatti was convicted for the shooting attack and given an eight-year preventive custody sentence for serious vandalism. The Oslo city court judge could not find sufficient evidence that the shots fired at the synagogue amounted to a terrorist act.Bhatti acquitted of terrorism, convicted on other charges , Aftenposten, 3 June 2008 The synagogue in Oslo is now under continuous surveillance and protected by barriers.

In August 2006, the writer Jostein Gaarder published an op-ed in Aftenposten, titled God's Chosen People. It was highly critical of Israel, as well as Judaism as a religion. Allegations of antisemitism and an intense public debate resulted in the Jostein Gaarder controversy.

In December 2008, Imre Hercz filed a complaint to the Norwegian Press Complaints Commission against Otto Jespersen, a comedian who mocked the Holocaust, but fellow comics and his TV station backed the performer. Jespersen joked on national television in his weekly routine that "I would like to take the opportunity to remember all the billions of fleas and lice that lost their lives in German gas chambers, without having done anything wrong other than settling on persons of Jewish background." Jespersen also presented a satirical monologue on antisemitism that ended with, "Finally, I would like to wish all Norwegian Jews a Merry Christmas – no, what am I saying! You don't celebrate Christmas, do you!? It was you who crucified Jesus," on 4 December.http://fr.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1228728269544&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull  Jespersen has received criticism for several of his attacks on social and ethnic groups as well as royalty, politicians and celebrities, and in defence of the monologue TV 2 noted that Jespersen attacks in all directions, and that "if you should take [the monologue] seriously, there are more than just the Jews that should feel offended".

In 2010, the Norwegian Broadcasting Corporation reported that antisemitism was common among Norwegian Muslims. Teachers at schools with large shares of Muslims reported that Muslim students often "praise or admire Adolf Hitler for his killing of Jews", that "Jew-hate is legitimate within vast groups of Muslim students" and that "Muslims laugh or command [teachers] to stop when trying to educate about the Holocaust". One Jewish father also told how his child had been taken after school by a Muslim mob, "to be taken out to the forest and hanged because he was a Jew". (The child escaped.) In February 2015, however, a group of young Muslims organised 1,500 people to form two 'rings of peace' around the synagogues in Oslo and Begen in response to recent terror attacks against Jewish centers in Europe.

Unconnected with Norwegian Muslims, antisemitic graffiti was sprayed on a school and sports facility in Skien in August 2014. Later that year, a swastika was carved into the glass doors of the Trøndelag Theater, the day after the premiere of a Jewish puppet theater performance. In October 2014, a Jewish cemetery was vandalized in Trondheim, with sprayed marks and the word 'Führer' scribbled on the chapel.

An article published by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs stated that antisemitism in Norway comes mainly from the leadership – politicians, organization leaders, church leaders, and senior journalists. Despite dissenting opinions, it claims that antisemitism in Europe originated in Muslim immigration, this essay blames the European-Christian leadership for antisemitism that began around 1000 CE, centuries before Jews came to Norway. Another issue arising from the article is the publishing of antisemitic caricatures. Since the 1970s, many pro-Palestinian caricatures have been published in the Norwegian media. But a comparison of those depictions with antisemitic caricatures from the Nazi-era show some similarities. Common motifs such as 'Jews are evil and inhuman', 'Jews rule and exploit the world' and 'Jews hate peace and propagate wars' are repeated in more recently published drawings, as well as in antisemitic sketches from the beginning of the twentieth century.

According to an ADL telephone survey of 501 people, 15% (+/-4.4%) of the adult population in Norway harbor antisemitic attitudes and 40% of the population agree with the statement, "Jews are more loyal to Israel than to Norway", and 31% think that, "Jews still talk too much about what happened to them in the Holocaust." However, this survey has been criticized for being unreasonably simplistic in its classification of "harboring antisemitic attitudes".

See also

 Trondheim Synagogue
 Jewish Museum in Oslo
 Oslo Synagogue
 The Holocaust in Norway
 Chabad

References

Bibliography

Westlie, Bjørn: Oppgjør: I skyggen av holocaust. 2002. (The story behind the 1997 commission)

External links
The Jewish community in Oslo
Religious communities, Norway Central Bureau of Statistics
Antisemitism in Norway 2012, The European Wergeland Centre
Two public documents about the 1997–1999 discussion regarding restitution of assets seized from Jews during WW II
Summary in English of the majority view
Summary in English of the minority view

The community grew slowly until World War II.

It was bolstered by refugees in the late 1930s and peaked at about 2,100.

The community grew slowly until World War II .

It was bolstered by refugees in the late 1930s and peaked at about 2,100 .

Lær mer om hva Det Mosaiske Trossamfund i Oslo har å tilby sine medlemmer Gudstjenester Vi holder gudstjenester hver shabbat og til alle helligdager BARNEHAGE Den jødiske barnehagen - et flott sted for jødiske barn å vokse opp SENIORHJEM Jødisk Bo og Seniorsenter - et varmt hjem for eldre jøder i Norge KOSHERLISTEN DMT Oslo har utarbeidet «Kosherlisten», slik at man selv kan identifisere hvilke produkter som er kosher KOSHERUTSALG DMT Oslo har et lite utsalg i Oslo hvor man får kjøpt kosher kjøtt, ost, godteri og delikatesser Besøk Jødedommen Har du spørsmål om jødedommen, jødiske helligdager, eller jødisk tro og praksis? Ta da en titt på jødedommen.no, en side om jødedommen som eies og driftes av Det Mosaiske Trossamfund Gå til Jødedommen.no VÅRE LEDERE Møt lederne av Det Mosasiake Trossamfund KOMITÉER Frivillig innsats er selve hjertet i DMT - les hvordan du kan bidra MEDLEMSSKAP Vil du bli medlem? Les her om fordelene med å bli medlem

Question: how many refugees were in the united states in the 1930s

Answer: 2,100

how many refugees were in the united states in the 1930s

Question: when did the refugee community begin to grow

Answer: World War II

when did the refugee community begin to grow

Question: what group bolstered the community in the late 1930s

Answer: refugees

what group bolstered the community in the late 1930s

Question: when did the refugee population reach 2,100

Answer: late 1930s

when did the refugee population reach 2,100

Question: how did the community grow after ww2

Answer: slowly

Question: when did the refugee population begin to increase

Answer: 1930s

when did the refugee population begin to increase

Question: how long did the refugee community grow

Answer: until World War II

The population was devastated during the Holocaust , in which a significant portion of the Norwegian Jewish community was murdered by Nazi Germany .

Religious communities and life stance communities
Updated: 27 September 2021
Next update: Not yet determined
More figures from this statistics
- 06326: Members of congregations in religious and philosophical communities outside the Church of Norway, by religion/philosophy
- 08531: Members of congregations in religious and philosophical communities outside the Church of Norway, by religion/philosophy (C)
- 06339: Members of Christian communities outside the Church of Norway, by religious communities
About the statistics
The statistics show how many people are members of religious and life stance communities outside the Church of Norway. Statistics on religious and life stance outside the Church of Norway are based on reports from county governors for communities applying for state subsidies.
This statistic encompasses religious communities and life stance communities by the Act on religious communities and life stance communities (trossamfunnsloven), in addition to the regulation on registration and grants for religious communities and life stance communities (trussamfunnsforskrifta). The data is collected with legal basis in the Statistics Act (statistikkloven), Act of 21 June 2019 No. 32 relating to official statistics and Statistics Norway § 10.
Previously, the following acts applied:
Religious community: Approved religious community according to act of 13 June 1969.
Life stance community: Approved life stance community according to act of 12 June 1981.
Classifications for this statistics are based on the application form from the communities. Statistics Norway has been responsible for the categorization of communities at the organizational level, partly based on the new application form as well as the old form. Numeric codes are made as a help to IT-work.
Name: Religious communities and life stance communities
Topic: Culture and recreation
Division for Education and Culture Statistics
National level
Yearly except for 2005
Irrelevant
All statistics on religious and life stance communities in Statistics Norway is stored in a responsible and standardized manner in consultation with Datatilsynet
The main purpose of these statistics is to show how many people are members of religious and life stance communities outside the Church of Norway. Statistics on religious and life stance outside the Church of Norway are based on reports from county governors for communities applying for state subsidies. The statistics have been published in SSB since 1972. Before 1972 the statistics were based on data from the population consensus.
Ministry of Culture, Ministry of Children and Families, other government services, research institutions, religious and life stance communities, media, students and others interested in the subject.
No external users have access to the statistics and analyses before they are published and accessible simultaneously for all users on ssb.no at 08 am. Prior to this, a minimum of three months' advance notice is given inthe Statistics Release Calendar. This is one of Statistics Norway’s key principles for ensuring that all users are treated equally.
This statistic encompasses religious communities and life stance communities by the Act on religious communities and life stance communities (trossamfunnsloven), in addition to the regulation on registration and grants for religious communities and life stance communities (trussamfunnsforskrifta). The data is collected with legal basis in the Statistics Act (statistikkloven), Act of 21 June 2019 No. 32 relating to official statistics and Statistics Norway § 10.
Irrelevant
All religious and life stance communities that have been approved by the county governors and which receive state subsidies are represented in the statistics. The statistical unit is a community. According to the law all religious and life stance communities outside the Church of Norway have the same right to apply for state subsidy, but some communities do not make use of this right. The statistics do not include information on the number of congregations and do not distinguish between registered and unregistered communities. Communities not applying for subsidy one year are not represented in the statistics for that year.
In a registered community the applications has to contain certain information and the priest or the principal has tasks decreed by law. As concerns the unregistered communities less information is required and the priest cannot carry out tasks decreed by law.
Data sources
Data source for this statistics is electronic data from the Brønnøysund Register Centre (BRC). The data is based on applying scheme with assignment of the members. As of 2005 the assignments were sent to BRC for check. After the yearly check is carried out the data file is electronically exported Statistics Norway. The statistics includes all the communities applying for subsidies each year.
Sampling
Irrelevant
The data file is sent electronically from Brønnøysund Register Centre to Statistics Norway when they have completed the necessary control of the member lists received from the county governors.
BRC is responsible for the control on behalf of the Ministry of Culture. The control of the member lists is mainly checking up on double membership (at the individual level) between all religious and life stance communities and the Church of Norway (Dnk) and the National register. BRC has executed the necessary controls of the business number and personal identification number, and thus eliminates duplicates. The data file that Statistics Norway receives contains information on the organizational level. Data is compared with data the year before. Figures that differ too much from previous year will be checked particularly.
Statistics on religious and life stance communities is a summary statistic. Apart from summary of reported figures, no special analysis is made.
Not relevant
Not relevant
Statistics Norway has produced official statistics on members of religious and life stance communities since 1971 based on questionnaires that county governors receive in connection with the awarding of state grants. Members are considered those who have affiliation with a church, i.e. children below 16 years, when they are not enrolled in the Church of Norway. The distribution by county is where congregations are registered, and do not always match county of residence to each member. Before 1970 SSB published tables on religion based on consensus data.
From 2005 the number of members is based on a new registration system. Comparison of tables with previous years must bee done with care. One should also be careful not to make comparisons between the 2005-2006-2007 when clearing work with duplicates had special focus those years. The distribution by county is from 2006 based on county of residence to members. From 2021, there was no longer municipality linked to the organizations in the files received by Statistics Norway, therefore there is no longer a county division in the statistics. Also from 2021, a minimum number of members in a society of 50 was introduced for payment of state subsidies.
The statistics for the religious and life stance communities comprises only communities of members that has requested for and received state subsidies for each year. A source of error can be that some communities forget to apply or because of some other reasons are not represented in the statistics. In 2012 two relatively large communities was not represented in the statistics, but are represented in the statistics per 1.1.2013
As of 2005 SSB has received the electronic data from Brønnøysund Register Centre. SSB consider the quality to have been considerable improved after the duplicate check.
Not relevant

Question: who murdered a significant portion of the norwegian jewish community

Answer: Nazi Germany

who murdered a significant portion of the norwegian jewish community

Question: what increased the norwegian jewish population in the late 1930s

Answer: refugees

what increased the norwegian jewish population in the late 1930s

Question: what was the peak population of norway in the 1930s

Answer: 2,100

what was the peak population of norway in the 1930s

Question: what event devastated the norwegian jewish population

Answer: the Holocaust

what event devastated the norwegian jewish population

Question: what event devastated norway's jewish population

Answer: Holocaust

what event devastated norway's jewish population

Question: when did the population of norway begin to increase

Answer: late 1930s

when did the population of norway begin to increase

Question: what community was murdered during the holocaust

Answer: Norwegian Jewish community

what community was murdered during the holocaust

Question: when did the population of norway peak

Answer: 1930s

Some Jewish families that had converted to Christianity settled in Norway.

Some Jewish families that had converted to Christianity settled in Norway .

Writers of the time increased their interest in the Jewish people , including Ludvig Holberg , who figured Jews as comical figures in most of his plays and in 1742 wrote The Jewish History From the Beginning of the World , Continued till Present Day , presenting Jews to some extent in conventional , unfavorable stereotypes , but also raising the question about mistreatment of Jews in Europe .

Blind på det ene øyet
Etter 11. september 2001 har vi sett at en rekke vestlige intellektuelle, deriblant Gunnar Skirbekk, har forsøkt å stilisere den vestlige opplysningstiden som eksklusivt vestlig og som ensidig frigjørende og progressiv.
Av Helge Vidar Holm og Torgeir Skorgen, Romansk institutt, UiB
Gunnar Skirbekk skal ha takk for saklige kommentarer til vår kronikk om de arabiske bidragene til vestlig kultur- og filosofitradisjon (BT 20.01). Skirbekk og hans medarbeidere har i 1996-utgaven av læreboken deres for forberedende prøve i filosofi føyd til en ryddig og skikkelig framstilling av arabisk filosofi i middelalderen, og en opplysning om dette nyanserer selvsagt (uten å imøtegå) vår påstand i kronikken den 20/1 om at de fleste nyere, norske lærebøker i denne disiplinen har utelatt slike fremstillinger. Disse lærebøkene var imidlertid ikke vårt hovedanliggende i kronikken, - utgangspunktet vårt var redaktør Olav Kobbeltveits utsagn i BT 10/1 om at muslimer flest befinner seg i illiberalitet og at de «gjennom dialog og 'sand oplysning'» bør hjelpes «ut or den mørke middelalderen». I den forbindelse vil vi gjerne ta opp noen sider som vi finner problematiske ved Skirbekks innlegg.
Opplysningstidens fremste filosofer kan være tvetydige støttespillere i en postkolonial kontekst. Eksempelvis er Voltaire en sterk referanse i spørsmål relatert til konflikter mellom forskjellige avskygninger av kristen tro, men i en dagsaktuell, multikulturell livssynsdebatt lar hans generelle antisemittisme og hans ulike rasistiske utsagn seg vanskelig forsvare. Også andre av Fornuftens fremste talsmenn fra det attende århundre kommer sørgelig til kort når man går deres holdninger til fremmede kulturer nærmere etter i sømmene. At den europeiske opplysningstidens selvforståelse var hegemonisk, kan vanskelig benektes. De fleste av epokens fremste talsmenn oppfattet seg som representanter for universelle, allmenngyldige verdier, som andre folkeslag riktig nok burde få del i, men da på opplysningsfilosofenes premisser.
Slike premisser og en slik selvforståelse ser en videreført i våre dagers debatt. Siden Voltaires, Kants og Holbergs tid har vi imidlertid vært gjennom avslutningen av en kolonitid som fremdeles preger vestlig diskurs: vår opplysningstids var unik og gjør oss til læremestre for folkeslag med annen kulturell bakgrunn; og har vi lært noe verdifullt av andre, for eksempel muslimer, var det i en periode langt forut for Opplysningstiden. Vår vilje til dialog er slik den lange tider var på misjonsmarken: visst vil vi hjelpe de andre, visst kan vi interessere oss for deres kultur og lytte til dem, men premissene er våre. Slik blir dialogen monologisk, - det er vi som representerer den religiøse sannhet eller den filosofiske fornuft.
Skirbekk påberoper seg på den ene siden vilje og beredskap til dialog med den muslimsk-arabiske verden. På den andre siden er det vanskelig å overse at hans egentlige hovedanliggende er å argumentere for den vestlige opplysningsfilosofiens og -kulturens overlegenhet i forhold til den arabiske, med henvisning til sentrale, vestlige tenkere: «Når så opplysningstida kom på 1600- og 1700-talet, med fri meiningsdanning og religionskritikk, er det Vest-Europa som fører an. Det finst ingen muslimsk motpart til intellektuelle som Spinoza, Voltaire, Hume, Kant eller Ludvig Holberg.». Det er ikke første gang Skirbekk hevder dette, BT-sitatet finner vi igjen i en litt annen form i et større innlegg han publiserte i Dagbladet 24.05.04 under tittelen «Islam - den ellevte landeplage?». Underteksten er ikke til å ta feil av: Skirbekk inviterer til dialog uten egentlig å anerkjenne sine muslimske dialogpartnere som diskusjonspartnere på samme nivå som ham selv.
Vi har merket oss at Gunnar Skirbekk legger vekt på selvkritisk meningsutveksling som den vestlige opplysningsfilosofiens adelsmerke. Desto mer forunderlig er det at han viser til Holberg og, ikke minst, til Kants religionskritikk som eksemplarisk progressiv og frigjørende. Han risikerer dermed å legitimere de samme opplysningstenkernes blindhet og intoleranse. Ludvig Holbergs antisemittisme lar seg like lite fornekte som hans aksjer i den dansk-norske slavehandelen, og Immanuel Kant går Holberg en høy gang med sine pinlige raseteorier og antisemittiske utfall mot jødene som nasjon. Som en parallell til Skirbekks manglende anerkjennelse av islam som en rasjonell religion, kan det være interessant å merke seg at Kant i sin religionskritikk angriper jødedommen som en stivnet og bakstreversk lovreligion, fremmed for kristendommens vekt på det enkelte subjekt og for opplysningstidens frihetsideer. Etter den religionstolerante tysk-jødiske opplysningstenkeren Moses Mendelssohns død i 1786, bemerket Kant i et brev til kong Fredrik den store (17/10-1794) at «de kristne derved ikke hadde lidd noe tap, men den jødiske nasjonen desto mer», og at «jødene derfor burde bære utgiftene til et minnesmerke over Mendelssohn alene.»
I innlegget i Dagbladet som vi viste til ovenfor, skriver Skirbekk følgende, à propos interkulturell dialog og intellektuelle læringsprosesser: «Ein ting er å forstå, noko anna å akseptere. Her må vi, heldige arvingar av Holberg og opplysningsprosjektet, ta vårt tak for eit felles løft til fordel for alle dei som ikkje har vore så heldige å få den sjøvrefleksive religionskritikken som ein del av allmenndanninga.» Til dette vil vi bemerke at hvis dette «løftet» skal fungere, må vi først gå i oss selv og erkjenne at en virkelig interkulturell dialog krever både respekt for dialogpartnerens ståsted og kunnskap om vår felles historie, der vår egen fortid gir oss liten grunn til å hovere.
Opplysningstiden gav oss to store revolusjoner og antatt universelle menneskerettigheter. Men den gav oss også slavehandelen, kolonialismen og den vitenskapelige rasismen, med bl. a. Linné, Voltaire, Hume og Kant som viktige bidragsytere. Dette er opplysningstidens farlige skyggeside: En arrogant oppfatning av den vestlige opplysningskulturen som overlegent rasjonell, og en orientalistisk nedvurdering av andre kulturer og religioner som irrasjonelle, tilbakestående og passive. På denne måten bidrar vestlige intellektuelle mer eller mindre utilsiktet til å legitimere nedarvede fordommer om berettiget, vestlig hegemoni, noe som igjen kan tas til inntekt for dagens neo-kolonialisme (f. eks. Irak-krigen).
På bakgrunn av dette, ønsker vi å bidra til en offentlig debatt som problematiserer den vestlige opplysningstiden både med henblikk på dens utopisk frigjørende impulser og dens repressive og intolerante skyggeside i form av kolonialisme, orientalisme og rasisme. På disse punktene kan det være nyttig å trekke fram andre opplysningstradisjoner enn de som Skirbekk påberoper seg i sitt innlegg. I essayet ”Hva vil det si å opplyse?” advarte Mendelssohn mot farene ved et enøyd opplysningsprosjekt som ikke balanseres mot respekten for mangfoldet av kulturelle og religiøse tradisjoner. I tradisjonen fra Averroës' lære om de to sannheter' (religionens og filosofiens) gikk Mendelssohn inn for at de tyske jødene skulle opplyses og samtidig forbli jøder. Dannelse består ifølge denne tradisjonen i å kunne balansere universelle prinsipper om menneskerettigheter med respekten for andres kultur og religion.

Question: where did some jewish families that converted to christianity settle

Answer: Norway

where did some jewish families that converted to christianity settle

Question: who wrote the jewish history from the beginning of the world, Continued till present day

Answer: Ludvig Holberg

who wrote the jewish history from the beginning of the world, Continued till present day

Question: when did holberg write the jewish history from the beginning of the world

Answer: 1742

when did holberg write the jewish history from the beginning of the world

Question: some jewish families in norway converted to what religion

Answer: Christianity

some jewish families in norway converted to what religion

Question: what book did holberg write in 1742

Answer: The Jewish History From the Beginning of the World

Question: what did holberg raise the question about of jews in europe

Answer: mistreatment

what did holberg raise the question about of jews in europe

Question: what raised the question of mistreatment of jews

Answer: mistreatment of Jews in Europe

what raised the question of mistreatment of jews

Question: who settled in norway

Answer: Jewish families that had converted to Christianity

He published the pamphlet Indlæg i Jødesagen on August 26, 1841, arguing passionately for a repeal of the clause.

He published the pamphlet Indlæg i Jødesagen on August 26 , 1841 , arguing passionately for a repeal of the clause .

On February 19 , 1842 , his efforts to put the matter to a vote in the Norwegian parliament was successful , when the proposition was referred to the Constitution Committee .

|
|
10. ordentlige Storting 1842
|
|
(Sidehenvisninger til Stortingsforhandlingene for 1842.)
|
|
19. februar
|
|
Wergelands grunnlovsforslag (SA, SEP 70 = SEP 284, 1839) refereres
og besluttes sendt Konstitusjonskomiteen - 100.
|
|
22. februar
|
|
Konstitusjonskomiteens foreslår å innhente Høyesteretts
betenkning hvorvidt siste del av Grunnlovens § 112 er til hinder
for at Jødeparagrafen oppheves.
SA, SEP 106 - 113-115.
|
|
26. februar
|
|
Stortinget vedtar Konstitusjonskomiteens forslag - 115.
|
|
16. mars
|
|
Uttalelse fra Børs- og handelskommiteen
i Bergen.
Vedlagt SEP 362, 1848.
|
|
19. mars
|
|
Høyesteretts
betenkning ang. opphevelse av Jødeparagrafen.
SA, SEP 256, vedlagt SEP 362, 1848.
|
|
20. mars
|
|
Uttalelse fra Børs- og handelskomiteen
i Drammen.
Vedlagt SEP 362, 1848.
|
|
21. mars
|
|
Uttalelse fra Børs- og handelskommiteen
i Christiania.
Vedlagt SEP 362, 1848.
|
|
26. mars
|
|
Uttalelse fra Børs- og handelskommiteen
i Trondhjem.
Vedlagt SEP 362, 1848.
|
|
30. mars
|
|
Høyesteretts betenkning besluttes sendt Konstitusjonskomiteen
- 119.
|
|
4. april
|
|
Betenkning fra det teologiske fakultet ved
universitetet.
Vedlagt SEP 362, 1848.
|
|
11. april
|
|
Brev fra stortingsrepresentant og medlem av Konstitusjonskomiteen
Jonas Anton Hielm til professor Frederik Holst, påtegnet den
sistes svar, om Grunnlovens § 2 kunne skape problemer for et møte
av nordiske naturforskere som var planlagt arrangert i Christiania
i 1844.
Vedlagt SEP 362, 1848.
|
|
11. mai
|
|
Forestilling fra cand. chirurg. H. Reichenbach i Altona, datert
22. april, besluttes sendt Konstitusjonskomiteen - 67.
SA, SEP 299, ikke trykt, vedlagt SEP 362, 1848.
|
|
1. juni
|
|
Skriv fra boktrykker S. A. Steen, datert 26. Mai, vedlagt 100 eksemplarer
av tillegget til Kristiansands Stiftsavis
nr. 42 side 1, side
2, side 3, side
4.
SA, SEP 319, ikke trykt, avisen vedlagt SEP 362, 1848.
|
|
22. juni
|
|
Representant fra Kristiansand, Jacob von der Lippe fremlegger en
forestilling fra handlende i Kristiansand. Besluttes sendt Konstitusjonskomiteen
- 76.
SA, SEP 326, ikke trykt, vedlagt SEP 362, 1848.
|
|
30. juli
|
|
Erklæring fra politimesteren i Christiania vedlagt underrettsdom
mot jøden Henri Leia som fikk bot for, som optiker uten leidebrev,
å ha oppholdt seg i Christiania fra 1832 til 1833.
Vedlagt SEP 362, 1848.
|
|
30. juli
|
|
Erklæring fra politimesteren i Bergen om at det siden 17.
mai 1814 ikke har vært fler enn to jøder i Bergen:
1) i 1817 en skipbrudden polsk jøde ved navn Michael Jonas,
og 2) i 1828 optiker og instrumentmaker Martin Blumenbach som var
underveis til Trondheim, men ble avvist og returnerte til Göteborg.
Vedlagt SEP 362, 1848.
|
|
5. september
|
|
Konstitusjonskomiteens innstilling. Med 5 mot 2 stemmer foreslås
det at Jødeparagrafen skal utgå av Grunnloven.
SA, SEP 383 med 47 bilag som alle er vedlagt SEP 362, 1848 - 248-287.
(Trykt som tillegg til Den norske Rigstidende 1842, nr. 163; side
2-3, side 4-5, side
6-7, side 8-9, side
10-11, 12-13, side
14-15)
|
|
5. september
|
|
Konstitusjonskomiteens innstilling om Jødeparagrafen refereres
- 23-24.
|
|
8. september
|
|
Brev fra Henrik Wergeland til Konstitusjonskomiteen med kommentar
til innstillingen (Side 1, side
2.)
Vedlagt SEP 362, 1848.
|
|
9. september
|
|
Konstitusjonskomiteen innstilling forkastes av Stortinget med 51
mot 43 stemmer - 287.
|
|
9. september
|
|
Henrik Wergeland gjentar sitt forslag om
opphevelse av Jødeparagrafen i litt modifisert form.
Forslaget lyder nå: ‘Bestemmelsen i Grundslovens § 2, sidste
Passus, saalydende: "Jøder ere fremdeles udelukkede
fra Adgang til Riget" - ophæves.’ - 352-353.
SA, SEP 393.
|
|
10. september
|
|
Wergelands forslag antas av representanten Søren Sørenssen
og 35 andre representanter. De samme fremsetter også forslaget
i en alternativ form: ‘Bestemmelsen i Grundslovens § 2, sidste Passus,
saalydende: "Jøder ere fremdeles udelukkede fra Adgang
til Riget" - sættes herved ud af Kraft.’- 252-253.
SA, SEP 393.
(Trykt som tillegg til Den norske Rigstidende
1842, nr. 163.)
|
|
13. september
|
|
Forslag fra representanten Søren Sørensen, datert
10. september, om å anmode regjeringen om opplysninger om
jødene og deres forhold, forkastes med henholdsvis 58 og
67 stemmer - 353, 396.
SA, SEP 398, ikke trykt.
|
|
15. september
|
|
Forslag fra representanten J. H. Sæter og 3 andre representanter
med to alternative forslag til endring av Grunnlovens § 2 som begge
hadde Jødeparagrafens opphevelse som konsekvens.
SEP 411 - 470-472.
|
||
|
[Forrige kronologi] [Neste
kronologi]

Question: when was the repeal of the clause brought to a vote in the parliament

Answer: February 19, 1842

when was the repeal of the clause brought to a vote in the parliament

Question: what was the name of the pamphlet he published on aug 26, 1841

Answer: Indlæg i Jødesagen

what was the name of the pamphlet History of the Jews in Norway published on aug 26, 1841

Question: where was the repeal of the clause referred to in 1842

Answer: Constitution Committee

where was the repeal of the clause referred to in 1842

Question: when was the pamphlet indlæg i jødesagen published

Answer: August 26, 1841

when was the pamphlet indlæg i jødesagen published

Question: in what year was indlæg i jødesagen published

Answer: 1841

in what year was indlæg i jødesagen published

Question: in which parliament was the repeal of the clause put to a vote

Answer: Norwegian parliament

in which parliament was the repeal of the clause put to a vote

Question: in what year was the repeal of the clause brought to a vote in the parliament

Answer: 1842

in what year was the repeal of the clause brought to a vote in the parliament

On October 26 , 1842 , Wergeland published his book Jødesagen i det norske Storthing ( " The Jewish issue in the Norwegian parliament " ) , which in addition to arguing for the cause also provides interesting insights into the workings of the parliament at the time .

|d.IV,b.3,s.370 ||
|
JØDESAGEN
I DET NORSKE STORTHING
EFTERRETNINGEN
1.
. . . "Hvad rager dig det Kirketaarn,
o Efraim, min Mand?
Lad staa det Luftens Steenskelet!
Det staaer vel ei saa ganske ret;
dog staa i Aar det kan.
O stirr ei der ved Vinduet,
med Armen under Kind,
ud i den graa Septemberluft!
I Kamret er der Ambraduft
og Lampers Maaneskin.
Der staaer Divanen. Op til den
er Mirjams Harpe sat.
Kom! Aftnen ville vi forslaa!
Jeg tager mine Smykker paa
ifra min Brudenat.
Du fletter ind dem i mit Haar,
o Efraim, som da,
snart som en Qvast, snart som en Krands,
snart spredte ad som Duggens Glands,
i Vexel til og fra.
Og Mirjam hviler ved dit Bryst,
og Harpen op til mit.
Saa Aftnen ville vi forslaae.
Lad Kristenkirkens Taarn blot staae,
og se ei mere did!
Hvad gives mere stolt og haardt
end dette Spiir, hvis Fløi
isønderriver bløden Sky,
den vilde haste over By
til Ro paa fjerne Høi?
|d.IV,b.3,s.371 ||
|
Hvor, i den graa Septemberluft,
tungsindigt mørkt det staaer!
som om det Rod og Stamme er
til denne skumle Taage, der
saa lavt i Aften gaaer."
" -- Jeg tæller kun den Krageflok,
der flyver Taarnet om.
Den finder intet Fæste der.
Thi Taarnet ubarmhjertigt er
som Kristnes Kristendom.
Jeg tæller dem, og tænker paa
Hvad nu i Norge skeer.
Der Jøden ei, som fremmed Gjæst,
faaer mer end Kragen Fodefæst
paa Kirketaarnet der.
Hvad Folket vil -- jeg ahner det --
er allerede gjort.
I Aften bringer Posten Bud.
Det banker . . Mirjam, se dog ud!
Det banker paa vor Port".
"Det var en Hund, som skrabed paa.
Den har ei Huus i Nat".
"Saa luk den ind, saa sandt vi veed,
at Jehovahs Barmhjertighed
ved Himlens Port er sat"!
"Men Tys! Nu kommer Posten vist.
O Mirjam, se paany"!
"Det var en Fugl, som Ruden slog".
"Ve, Mirjam, om du ei den tog
da i dit Hjertes Ly"!
"Men hør! det banker atter paa.
Nu kommer sikkert En.
Nei bliv! Det var mit Hjerte blot,
der slog som aldrig det har slaaet.
Nu, Mirjam, se igjen"!
|d.IV,b.3,s.372 ||
|
. . . Hvor flaggred Mirjams lange Haar,
det sorte, vildt og løst,
da ind hun treen, som om det vil
det Smertens Budskab dække til,
hun bærer ved sit Bryst!
JØDESAGEN I DET NORSKE STORTHING
FREMSTILLET AF HENR. WERGELAND
Solch' theure Wahrheit ward verfochten,
und überwunden ist sie nicht.
Euch, Kämpfer, ist kein Kranz geflochten,
wie der beglückte Sieg ihn flicht.
Uhland.
DEN 9DE SEPTEMBER
LYS OG MØRKE. KONSTITUTIONSKOMMITTEEN OG DENS INDSTILLING
Fredagen den 9de September 1842 er ikke en uvigtig Dag i
det norske Folks Historie. Den er mærkelig i Europas, i den
hele Kristenheds, i Menneskehedens. Aaret har ikke opviist nogen
betydningsfuldere Forhandling inden alle de lovgivende Forsam-
linger. Det var da Forslaget til Ophævelse af Bestemmelsen i
Norges Grundlovs § 2, der fremdeles forbyder de mosaiske Troes-
bekjendere Adgang til Landet, blev afgjort i dets Storthing; og
Resultatet af denne Dags Forhandlinger indeholder mere end
nogensomhelst anden der afgjort Sag tillige en Angivelse for
Verden, som denne vil lægge Mærke til, af det Kultur- og Ci-
vilisationspunkt, hvorpaa det norske Folk for Nærværende be-
finder sig.
Det norske Folk? Sagt formeget. Dog er Repræsentationen
dets Blomstkrone, som bærer dets Slægts- og Artsmærker, hvoraf
det kjendes. Men paa den store milliongrenede Busk ere ikke
alle de enkelte Blomster fuldkomne; nogle endog saa vantrevne
og lidet udviklede, at man ikke skulde kjende den igjen paa
dem. Sørgelige Undtagelser selv i Repræsentationens Midte kunne
derfor ikke gjøre Tanken, at intet Folk har et velvilligere Hjerte,
|d.IV,b.3,s.373 ||
intet Folk et lysere Hoved, til forfængeligt Selvbedrag. Der kan|
være Uaar i Historien, i en Nations Udvikling, Uaar paa Mænd,
paa Beslutninger og sjelelige Bedrivter. Men Taalmodighed! Det
er som naar Busken hviler et Aar, skydende Blade eller skiftende
sine tørre Qviste. I det næste kjende vi den igjen i dens ejen-
dommelige Fylde og Herlighed, feirende ligesom en Høitid for
sin egen Natur.
Europas Nationer tænke godt om Os, baade formedelst vor
Nationalkarakteers Ry for gammeldags, uddøende Dyder og for-
medelst vor Statsforfatning. De ere ikke uvidende om at Norge,
med Hensyn til denne, har sin Plads fremmest i de konstitu-
tionelle Staters Rækker, nærmest efter de republikanske; og de
af dem, som fortjene Navnet af frie og oplyste, ville ikke und-
lade at bedømme Norges Adkomst til denne Rang efter det paa
hiin Dag, en Menneskealder efter Konstitutionens Indførelse,
Passerede. Dommen vil blive streng. Den vil lyde paa Hen-
viisning til Barbari, paa Uværdighed til en saadan Forfatnings
Besiddelse. Det vil være den offentlige Stemme i Europas meest
civiliserede og frie Lande, som vil fælde den, og i de ufrie ville
alle oplyste, i den vide Verden alle ædle og følende Mennesker
tænke det samme.
Men det vil være en Uretfærdighed; og forat forebygge den,
udgives i vort eget og et fremmed Sprog dette Skrivt, der er
en Række af Dokumentationer fra det norske Storthings ypper-
ligste (ja uden disse skulde de vel heller ikke være dets ypper-
ligste) Medlemmer, for at hiin Menneskealder ikke er gaaen hen
for Normændene uden Fremskridt i deres politiske Oplysning.
Hiint Forslag, der naturligviis forudsætter en saadan Fremgang,
uden at kunne angive det Punkt, den har naaet, eller mere end
blot haabe den tilstrækkelig, skulde ellers ikke have været frem-
sat, og heller ikke have nydt hverken den Understøttelse, det
fik, eller sin senere Adoption af paa det nærmeste samtlige dets
Talsmænd og Understøttere. I 1814, paa den konstituerende
Rigsforsamling, gave alle Repræsentanter sin Stemme til hiin
Banlysning; 28 Aar efter gave over Halvparten af Repræsen-
tationen sin til dens Ophævelse. Mere kan man ikke forlange
af et Folk, hvis Fleerhed af aktive Borgere endnu ere opdragne
hiinsides Forfatningens Fødselsaar, og som er blevet ængstligt
for sin Konstitution, og har troet at finde Beskyttelse derfor i
|d.IV,b.3,s.374 ||
streng Overholdelse af dens Integritet, det Slette med det Gode.|
Det er en Fordom, en haardpandet politisk Overtro; men det er
en Nyhed, hiin Majoritet forkynder, at den staaer for Fald. Og
det blev tydeligen sagt under disse Forhandlinger. Repræsen-
tanten Ueland, det opstukne Mærke baade i denne og andre
Sager for Fleerheden af Storthingsbønderne, blev under dem
adspurgt af Forslagets Vedtager, Sorenskriver Sørenssen, om han
virkelig mente, at Grundloven aldrig skulde undergaae nogen For-
andring, og han maatte svare med et nølende Nei, at han ikke
saa kunde mene. Enkelte tør dog nok mene saa for fuldt Alvor,
og at Manden af deres Midte her sagde formeget; men af en-
kelte Blylodder vil ikke Tiden lade sig standse i sin Flugt. Bag-
efter ville disse Folk see, at det har gaaet an, om de end aldrig
faae Øinene op for at det var Følgen af en indre, sjelelig Nød-
vendighed, af den, som styrer den moralske Verdensorden. Det
er denne, Forfædrene kaldte "Skuld", den mægtigste, Guderne
betvingende Norne, hun som var den eneste Fortrolige med Al-
faders Vilje.
Sagens Udfald er bekjendt: af 94 Medlemmer stemmede 51
for Konstitutionskommitteens Indstilling, der med 5 Stemmer mod
2 gik ud paa at anbefale Forslaget, og 43 imod; og det erholdt
saaledes ikke, paa 11 Stemmer nær, den 2/3 Stemmeflerhed, som
udfordres for Grundlovsforslag. Men at det første Gang ikke
manglede mere, er allerede betydningsfuldt for Fremtiden, som
dog har sin bedste Forjettelse for denne Sag i, at Storthingets
meest udmærkede Navne, næsten uden Undtagelse, findes imellem
de Een og Femti. Dens fremtidige Sejer skulde allerede være
forjettet med dens Talsmands, Sørenssens, og med de Trendes i
Konstitutionskommitteen, Fosses, Hjelms og Riddervolds Navne;
nu, med de Øvriges, som have sluttet sig til Disse, kan denne
Fremtid ikke længer være saa fjern. Det var et af de Nederlag,
som ere Sejre; det var en Sejer uden Roes. Det var en Kamp
imellem Intelligenz og Fordom, Humanitet og Barbari, Lys og
Mørke, hiint svangert med Kristen- og Menneskekjærlighedens
ædleste Varme, sammensat af Nationens meest straalende Navne,
dette kun opvisende faa, det er værd at hefte en beklagende
Erindring ved. Det var en Storthingets Solformørkelse; skarpere
er ikke Solskiven deelt imellem Lys og Mørke under et saadant
partielt Fænomen, end Thinget viste sig ved Stemmegivningen i
|d.IV,b.3,s.375 ||
denne Sag. Og hvorledes foregik denne Kamp? Siden der ikke|
var Talent mod Talent, var der da Grunde mod Grunde? Der
var dog 6 Præster paa Modpartiets Side -- sex Præster! Nei,
intet bestyrkede mere Forsvaret end Angrebet. Saa slet blev
det ført, saa slet, at Ordet "Debatter" ikke kan bruges om det
Passerede, at Undseelsen var synbar, at det afvexlende vakte
Latter, Medlidenhed, Uvilje, Forbauselse. At en god Sag for-
svares slet, taaler man, fordi Sagen taaler det; men man taaler
ikke, at en slet Sag forsvares slet. Man vil idetmindste have
Talentets Glimmer over den nøgne Usselhed. Man vil jo have
selve Mørkets Geister af en vis Skjønhed. Slet Forsvar for slet
Sag vækker Modbydelighed, fordi man ved oftere givne Exempler
er bleven paa en Maade vant til og har faaet et Krav paa, at
høre den blive forsvaret godt. Men ved denne Leilighed maatte
selve Sagens Forsvarere ogsaa paatage sig Arbeidet, at fremhæve
hvad der burde anføres imod. Modpartiet havde alene forbeholdt
sig deslige Jammerligheder, som f. Ex., at de vare reiste hjemme
fra sine Bygder med sine Nei'er, at Grundloven var bleven given
af saa oplyste og fædrelandssindede Mænd, at man burde blive
staaende ved deres Bestemmelser, at et Folk var Herre i sit
Land som en Mand i sit Huus, hvor han kunde vise eller kaste
hvem han vilde paa Døren, at en Reisende var i Galizien bleven
generet af en Jødes Paatrængenhed o. s. v. Belavet maatte man
nu vel være paa at møde den værste Fiende, Fordommenes tætte
og træge Hær med Klubber i Hænderne, og man fik ogsaa det
Skuespil, at de dermed iblinde sloge hverandre for Panden; men
man forbausedes over ikke at finde en Anfører med et bedre
Vaaben i Spidsen, men kun en Kamp ved at vende Ryggene
imod, et Forsvar ved Massen, og ved at trække sig bag en Vold
af Uimodtagelighed for Grunde. Den graahaarede Bonde, som
først tog Ordet paa Modpartiets Side, var oprigtig nok til at er-
klære dette, at han nemlig var reist hjemmefra med sit Nei, og
den ene af Dissenterne i Kommitteen hentede sine Forholdsregler
der nordfra, fra et af Norges vildeste, mindst oplyste Distrikter,
som vel ogsaa derfor altid har været det uheldigste med sin
Repræsentation. Paa en saadan Viisdom, som hiin Bondes, maatte
naturligviis Konstitutionskommitteens Indstilling, Dokumenterne til
Sagens Oplysning og de forskjellige Taler være spildt Arbeide,
og oprøres maatte man ved at mærke under ethvert af Mod-
|d.IV,b.3,s.376 ||
partiets Ord den usleste af alle Grunde: den, at man havde|
dømt før man havde hørt.
Vist er det imidlertid, at saa ikke var Tilfælde med Alle før
de havde hørt til Ende. Selve Forhandlingerne, det Overbe-
visende i Forsvarene, det Usle og Futile i Angrebene, bestemte
ikke alene flere Tvivlende, men forvandlede paa Stedet flere af
de hjemmefra bragte Nei'er, og bevirkede i Gemytter, som dog
besad Imodtagelighed for Grunde og ømmedes ved at fornegte
sit eget Hjerte, en Erkjendelse af Sagens Retfærdighed, som de
endnu ikke havde faaet af dens Dokumentation. Dette er ikke
blevet nogen Hemmelighed, ligesaalidt som det Faktum, at en
syvende Præst, slagen af Blusel over hvor slet den Mening blev
forfegtet, som han var kommen med i Thinget, henreven af sine
bedre Standsbrødres Taler, og dog ikke noksom Tvingherre over
sit Hjerte til at røste imod de Sætninger, han maatte elske, gi-
vende efter for disse Bevægelser i sit Sind, suspenderede sin
Stemme og ilede ud i Voteringens Øjeblik. Flere Repræsentanter
have ikke lagt Dølgsmaal paa, at det gjorde dem ondt, at have
stemmet imod en Sag, hvis Retfærdighed de maatte indrømme
ikke kunde bestrides, men som de kun ønskede yderligere for-
beredet og bedre fattet og antaget af den store Almeenhed. En
af Neierne har offentligen givet en lignende Erklæring, og endnu
En af dem har uopfordret tilstillet Udgiveren heraf en Skrivelse,
med Tilladelse at gjøre den bekjendt, hvori han forsikkrer, at kun
Grunde -- som han dog fortier -- der næste Storthing ikke ville
være tilstede, var Aarsagen til, at ogsaa hans Navn findes imellem
de 43, og at "Ingen kan mere hjertelig ønske og med større
Længsel imødesee Mosaiternes Indlemmelse iblandt os og Deel-
agtiggjørelse i vore Goder". Det er en Bonde. Angeren er
altid oprigtig. Massen af de 43 var ogsaa Bønder. Kun otte af
dem deeltoge i Æren at findes paa den Side, hvor Kristendom,
Humanitet, Intelligents og Talent fandtes. De øvrige have ikke
bidraget til at skaffe sin Klasses Krav paa overtalligen at besætte
Storthingsbænkene Venner i den oplyste Verden.
Konstitutionskommitteen var ypperligen besat, med Undtagelse af
Repræsentanterne Gaardbrugerne Guddal fra Nordre Bergenhuus
Amt og Nødbek fra Lister og Mandals Amt, hvilke begge, alene
|d.IV,b.3,s.377 ||
fordi de første Gang vare Repræsentanter, ikke burde været|
Medlemmer af denne vigtigste Storthingskommittee. Ventede man,
at de, af beskedne Hensyn, om ikke til nogen anden Mangel end
denne, eller af Ærbødighed for en Fosses, en Hjelms, en Ridder-
volds Patriotisme og bedre Skjønnende skulde underordne sin
Mening deres, da tog man Feil af disse to Undtagelser fra den
Beskedenhed, som især klæder den aandige Armod saa vel.
Om Guddal er der sagt, at han virkelig troede, at Jøderne dyr-
kede Billeder; men det kan blot være en øjeblikkelig Forglemmelse
af sin Børnelærdom hos denne Lovgiver. Længe stod han alene
imod Konstitutionskommitteens øvrige sex Medlemmer; men under
dens endelige Forhandlinger viste det sig i Navnene Guddal &
Nødbek contra Foss, Hjelm, Riddervold, Bjørnsen og Koren, at
Lige havde søgt Lige, at der inden Kommitteen, ligesom ved che-
miske Bundfældninger og Amalgamationer, var foregaaet en Af-
sondring efter det Eensartede. Man saae i Kommitteen i det Mindre
hvad der i det Større foregik i Storthinget. Men for et lettere
Kjøb besidder ikke et Folk en fri Forfatning, end at det ofte
maae see sig i det Enkelte slet repræsenteret. Værre er det, at
selve Storthinget er af Ubekjendtskab udsat for at tage Feil
af sine Folk og at give Personer en direktere Indflydelse
paa Lovgivningen, hvis højeste Opgave det maatte være, i sine
Hjembygder at leve de bestaaende Love saa efterretteligen som
muligt. Og saaledes vare da hine to nye Repræsentanter slum-
pede ind i Konstitutionskommitteen, hvor de udrettede alt hvad
de kunde, og det var, ikke at deducere nogen Modargumentation,
men at gjøre saameget, at dens Indstilling ikke blev eenstemmig.
Dens Lyspartier erholdt en Slagskygge, Kommitteens øvrige Per-
sonligheder en Modsætning i disse to dunkle Figurer, som frem-
hævede dem endnu mere. Sandheden kunde kun vinde ved at
Fordommen havde sine Repræsentanter, stumme, ubevægelige
som den. En Æressag maatte det have været, i en saa for-
tvivlet Stilling dog at vove et Forsvar; og det skulde have gjort
dem daddelfrie, om det endog kun havde bestaaet i en Gjentagelse
af de saa ofte hørte Kræmmerængstelser; men Kommitteindstil-
lingen indeholder ingen Anførelse af Grunde fra de To, og Troen
paa Konstituenternes Ufeilbarhed kan dog vel ikke her frigjøre,
eller fortjene Navn af Forsvar. Det var en Protest som Stenens
imod at flyttes. En kaotisk Forverden bringer sig endnu i Er-
|d.IV,b.3,s.378 ||
indring ved disse over Marken enkeltspredte Klippemasser. De|
ere dens Repræsentanter midt inde i Kulturens Enemærker. Saa-
ledes er det Gamledages Fordom repræsenteres langt inde i ly-
sere Tider, af enkelte Protesterende, af disse korte Nei'er, haarde,
ubevægelige som hine Forverdenens efterglemte Stene.
Imod disse Tvende stode da Mændene Foss, Hjelm, Ridder-
vold, Bjørnsen og Koren -- de Første gamle Navne i Storthingenes
Historie, den Sidste første Gang paa dette Repræsentant. Men der
var ogsaa noget Interessant ved denne unge, tilbageholdende, men-
neskevenlige, i sin Egn saa afholdte Mand. I flere Aar nemlig
Kapellan hos gamle Niels Hertzberg, Mosaiternes varme Talsmand,
har han succederet den Salige som Sognepræst til Kingservig i
Hardanger, og i denne Sag opført sig som om han handlede paa
sin forrige Principals Vegne, som om den Gamles Skygge havde
mødt. Han talte ikke, men han fortjener denne Omtale, da Ingen
bør forbigaaes i denne Fremstilling, som personligen har havt
nogen Andeel i Sagen, i Talerne eller i Indstillingen. Hans Navn
findes ved denne som Kommitteens Sekretær.
Skrev jeg ikke dette ogsaa for Udlandet, at det ikke skal mis-
dømme Repræsentationen, vilde det være overflødigt at fremstille
for Landsmænd i Ordenes mangelfulde Træk de tre Førstnævntes
udmærkede Personligheder. Det er den Sags Støtte, de have
forherliget med sine Navne, at de kjendes og elskes af dem alle.
Deres Profiler, saa ofte seete i Afbildninger, ere kjendte i Lan-
dets Fjerner, deres Navne hilses ved enhver patriotisk Leilighed,
der kalder Normænd tilsammen. Men de og de øvrige Mænd af
den 9de September have erhvervet sig Krav paa Andres end blot
deres Folks Interesse. Man maa kjende dem, see og høre dem.
Paa ingen Landsmand dvæle Normændenes Øjne med det Behag
som paa Artillerikapitain Herman Foss, Repræsentant fra Bergen
paa Storthingene 1827 og 28, fra Moss i 1830, og sidenefter uaf-
brudt fra Kristiania. Somoftest er han Odelsthingets Præsident.
Han er Folkets Mand i egentlig Bemærkelse, og det fordi han
er bleven det ved ikke at smigre det. Han er Thingets Ridder
uden Frygt og uden Daddel, Oppositionens Hjerte og Samvittighed.
Den humaneste og mildeste Karakteer gav ham fra først af Plads
i dets Centrum, om man vil forstaa denne Benævnelse hos Os,
hvor en "Venstre" og "Høire" ikke, som i andre Nationalforsam-
linger, ere tydeligen adskilte som Ørnens Vinger, men ligge uud-
|d.IV,b.3,s.379 ||
viklede sammen som Ungens i Ægget. Men fra dette Centrum|
gik han ud; hvert Storthing forøgede hans Dygtighed og hans
Popularitet; og nu siden 1836 danner han Middel- ikke Yder-
punktet i den Fraktion af Thinget, som, om dets Medlemmer
ordnede sig efter Meninger, vilde blive dets "Venstre". Demo-
kratiet kjender hans Uafhængighed, og roser sig ikke i sit Hjerte,
hvor Foss, ved Kniberier, og især hvor det angaaer Statens Selv-
stændighed og Majestæt, ikke har været med. Aldrig er han det,
og da mindst. Næst Sørenssen er han maaskee Thingets bedste
Taler. Hans Foredrag er, til Indhold og Materie, vægtigt, fuldt-
tonende, transparentklart, opvakt uden dog at være spillende, lyst
uden at være glimrende, uagtet en vis Fremstøden ustandset
strømmende, som den dybe, ikke skummende, Bæk. Med bevidst
Overblik følger det altid Sagen selv, udtømmende uden at ud-
brede sig eller tage Vindfang under og at stige i Høiden. Hans
Organ giver det en egen Eftertrykkelighed, der stemmer saavel
med dets altid ordnede Indhold. Sjeldnere, end man skulde tro,
stikker dog Digteren -- thi Foss er en Mand med "Schwert und
Leyer" -- frem deraf. Han undgaaer det med Flid for Skrøbelig-
hedens Skyld, der har Mistillid til poetisk Foredrag, som om æsthe-
tisk Skjønhed var Sandhedens Sminke og ikke dens naturlige Aasyn.
Dog ved Spørgsmaal, der angaae Nationalæren, bliver hans Tale
belivet og varm, Eftertrykket endnu stærkere, fuldt af hiin Stød-
takt. Da kan man være vis paa, at den ikke store, men vel-
byggede, Mand med det aabne, franke, ridderlige Aasyn reiser
sig. Han lægger Hænderne paa Skranken . . "Kapitain Foss har
Ordet" . . og en Tale høres, klar, logisk, overbevisende, somom
den tonede direkte ud af den høithvalte, overordentlig smukke
Pande. Dog taber den ikke ved at gaae igjennem hans, selv med
en liden Læspen, tydelige og mandige Organ.
Foss har ført en Atheniensers Liv i Republikens gode Dage,
deelt imellem Literaturen og Politiken i Folkeforsamlingen. Man
skylder ham som Medforfatter en Bergens Beskrivelse, et vid-
løftigt Værk af Lærdom, Flid og Talent, som mangen rigere Li-
teratur fattes Sidestykke til, og hans poetiske Gaver har ikke
blot viist sig i vellykkede Oversættelser, f. Ex. af Frithjofs Saga,
men ogsaa i egne Frembringelser. Hans Batteri ruller frem
under hans Artillerisang, Alle stolte og begeistrede over, at
Herman Foss, Nationens Yndling, er deres Chef og Kammerat.
|d.IV,b.3,s.380 ||
Udenfor Tjenesten, naar Folket ikke har kaldet ham tilthinge,|
har Regjering og Kommune havt mangesidigt Brug for denne
Mand, hvis Arbeidsomhed er ligesaa ualmindelig som hans Evner;
og derfor har vel ogsaa Lyren maattet hænge mere paa Væggen,
end den ellers vilde have gjort. Et mærkeligt Træk af denne
samvittighedsfulde Arbeidsomhed og udholdende Dygtighed an-
føres i Expeditionssekretær Fougstads Skrift om Storthinget i 1836,
hvor det hedder: "Til det overordentlige Storthings vigtigste Be-
slutninger hører den, der sikkert vil bevirke vort Koffardiflags
frie Brug paa alle Have og i alle Havne. Det er bekjendt, at
Indstillingen er et Natarbeide af Kapitain Foss. Efterat have bi-
vaanet en lang Storthingssession til Kl. 8 om Aftenen, satte han
sig i Storthingets Sekretariat for at skrive denne Indstilling, og
man fandt ham ved Arbeidet den følgende Morgen, hvor han
atter indtog sin Plads som Repræsentant i Thinget". Udgiveren
skrev dengang disse, "Natten imellem den 21de og 22de Januar
1837" daterede, Linjer:
"Til Herman Foss.
Nu hvil Dig, Borger! Det er fortjent.
Nu løst er Flagget. Dit Værk er endt.
Ak, Norge eier ei Laurbærskov!
Derinde, vilde jeg, at Du sov.
Dens søde Mørke den Natterad
dog ei betalte, Du vaagen sad.
Dens Frugt ei læsked med nok Behag
den Mund, hvis Aande slog ud vort Flag.
Dens Blades Glimmer, mens Duggen ved
sin egen Vægtighed skjalv og gled,
kun minded mat om hvor tidt og tæt
de Stjerner faldt mens Du skrev Dig træt.
Dens Vellugt skulde dog aande ind
en qvægsom Drøm i dit trætte Sind.
Og hvis mit Hjerte for haardt ei slog,
at drømme der jeg til det dig drog.
Nu har du levet en virksom Dag:
en Dag af Nætter. Befriede Flag
er Aftenrøden, som den har endt.
Nu hvil Dig, Borger! Det er fortjent".
|d.IV,b.3,s.381 ||
Men dette er ikke den eneste Gang Foss har ydet et saadant|
Sujet. Gad man staae op ved første Hanegal, mellem Midnat og
Morgen, og liste sig henunder hans Vinduer, vilde man ofte i
Storthingstiden kunne træffe ham ved Natlampen, tvingende Søvnen
med Kaffe, holdende Geisten vaagen med Anstrengelsernes Over-
incitation, med Arbeidets Paahvilende. Det maa være færdigt og
endnu engang overvejet og gjennemseet til han gaaer i Thinget.
Det ligger da i Portefeuillen, han bærer under Armen.
Det andet Medlem af Konstitutionskommitteen, Indstillingens
Forfatter Højesteretsadvokat Hjelm, er endnu navnkundigere i
Norge end Foss. Det er det Navn Menigmand letter paa Hatten
for, og som forekommer ham som et Løsen til at raabe Hurra.
Han har uløseligen kombineret det med 17de Mai, og han ima-
ginerer sig i "Jonas Anton Hjelm" en Slags Løve med tolv Mands
Vid liggende foran Grundloven halv indsvøbt i Nationalflagets
røde Folder. Hjelm har ogsaa forsvaret det som en Løve. Der
har idetmindste været en Leopards Murren i hans snarrende
Stemme, naar han har anstrengt den for Nationalæren og de
unionelle Krav. Paa disse Anliggender har han kastet sig med
hele sin Sjels Fyrighed. Hjelm er vore Storthings interessanteste
Personlighed, og visseligen det største Geni, som har viist sig
inden dem. Han er Oppositionens Hoved; men det er for stort
for saa liden en Krop. En Revolution vilde være hans Element.
Han er en revolutionær Karakteer. I hvilkensomhelst National-
forsamling vilde han være en Stjerne, glimrende yderst paa Ven-
strens Spidse. I Frankrig vilde han have, i den første konsti-
tuerende Forsamling, staaet Mirabeau, i England Fox ved Siden.
Naturen synes at have glemt Næse og Mund, saa smaa ere
de, under Bestræbelserne for at organisere hans Hoveds Indre
des fuldkomnere. Men Geniet tindrer ud af hans smaa pariser-
brune Øine ligesom hans kortbørstede graa Haar synes strittende
reiste af dets Elektricitet, og et velvilligt Smiil ligger skinnende
over de runde Kinder, saa man ikke har let forat finde Sporet
af de Sindslidelser, som man veed denne fyrige Sjel har havt at
føle. Thi hans Skjebne har ikke staaet i Overeensstemmelse
med hans Evner. Indviklet i en politisk Trykkefrihedsproces
nogle Aar efter Foreningen, faldt han i Unaade, berøvedes Re-
gjeringsadvokaturet, og den ministerielle Karriere, som ikke usand-
synlig havde aabnet sig for ham, lukkedes. Han trak sig tilbage
|d.IV,b.3,s.382 ||
til Gaarden Alby i Nærheden af Moss; men saa glimrende hans|
Advokatur havde været, havde det dog ikke levnet ham saa-
meget tilbage, at en Mand, der i sin Økonomi ledes saameget
af geniale Smagshensyn, i Længden kunde undvære denne Leve-
vei. Hans Tilbagekomst til Kristiania betegnedes af Udgivelsen
af et Maanedsskrift for Literaturen og af et af en afdød Ven
forfattet Skrivt om Unionsstater; men man har Grund til at be-
klage, at en for Literaturen, og navnlig for Kritiken, saa skabt
og udrustet Mand ikke giver sig mere af med den. Men Embeds-
og Storthingsforretninger optage hans Tid, og hans Dygtighed til
at arbeide, der endog overgaaer Fosses, overbelæssedes ligesom
dennes, endskjøndt Hjelm veed at tage sig det mageligere. Han
har været Repræsentant fra Smaalehnenes Amt i Aarene 1830, 33,
36, 37 og 42. I 1839 undskyldte han sig med en Døvhed; men
denne Gang toges den ikke for god, og nu flytter han sig i
Thinget i Nærheden af den Talende, og replicerer fra det Sted
han da sidder paa. Ved hans Foredrag hefter en komisk peren-
nerende Hæshed, saa dets Rækker af den fineste Logik og Dia-
lektik tage sig ud som Diamantkjæder og gyldent Filegranarbeide
under graa Spindelvæve. Deri, i Dialektiken, har han sin uop-
naaelige Styrke. Det gaaer til Volteslaaen. Stundom fristes han
af sin Overlegenhed deri til at bruge den, somom Midlet var
ham ligegyldigt, til en speciel Hensigts Opnaaelse, men som dog
aldrig staaer i Strid med de liberale Grundsætninger og de fædre-
landske Interesser hans hele Sjæl hvidgløder for. Den hvidgløder;
saaledes har endnu ingen Normand kjæmpet for Landets Ære
og politiske Ret som Hjelm. Fosses Nationalfølelse rødgløder;
Dens, vi komme til, driver det kun til at det Sorte bliver varmt,
men ikke rødt.
Det er til Provst Riddervold, 8 Gange Storthingsmand fra Fre-
derikshald. Han er Storthingets Bevidsthed, dets personificerede
Fornuft, uafhængig indtil Isoleren, og dog er det ham, man lader
gribe Styret i vanskelige Omstændigheder, som Lodsen griber
Skibets. Da, naar Debatterne have forvildet sig, Amendementerne
ophobet sig, naar Sagen synes tabt i en Turv af Forviklinger, da
synes han, som Minervas Fugl i Tusmørket, at see klarest, som
den kloge Spindel at finde lettest frem gjennem Traadene. Han
deler derfor Storthingets Præsidentskab med Sørenssen, der kom-
mer ham nærmest i det vanskelige Hverv, at kunne styre For-
|d.IV,b.3,s.383 ||
handlingerne. Selv aldrig forvildende sig, synes deres Forvikling|
at være det Element, hvori hans Aand bevæger sig fyrigst, ud-
spændende friest sine Fibrer. Dette Skarpsindets kombinerende
Overblik, denne urokkelige Besindighed gjør ham til Storthingets
mest imponerende Personlighed. Ingen er elsket som Foss, Ingen
beundret som Hjelm, men Ingen anseet som Riddervold. Sørenssen
har 3/4 eller mere af alt dette, og saaledes dog den stærke Hyl-
delsens Tribut. Et alvorligt Ansigt, en høj majestætisk Figur,
klare skarpe Øine, det lidenskabsløse Foredrag, saa tørt og ma-
thematisk nøiagtigt gjengivende hans Tankegang, som om det var
en chladnisk Lydafspeiling i Sand af Bevægelserne indenfor hans
Pande -- alt dette giver tilsammen et fortræffeligt Udtryk af
denne praktiske Tænkers Sjel. Kunde jeg tænke mig dem syn-
bare, vilde jeg tænke mig dens Organer ordnede saa harmoniskt
og strengt korrekt som Cellerne i en Citron. Den sorte præste-
lige Kalot klæder et saadant Hoved godt. Dog vil jeg ikke tænke
paa Sixtus, paa Ignatius eller de berømte politiske Kardinaler,
men Minerva, Datteren af Zeuses Hjerne, burde have havt saa-
danne Præster.
I Modsætning til hine to Bønder tællede Konstitutionskommit-
teen en, som bedre vidste at hævde Standens Navn for politisk
Oplysning. Det var Ole Bjørnsen, Kirkesanger i Hvidesø i Telle-
marken, men en Præst i sin Oplysning og i sin Tænkemaade,
Digteren Zetlitzes feirede Ven, fra hvis eget lyse Hoved og ædle
Hjerte mangen Folkesang er udstrømmet i hans Hjemdale. Han
har paa de 6 Storthing, han har været Repræsentant siden 1815,
altid været at finde imellem de uafhængige Moderate, og naar
hans Røst, dyb som en Kirkeklokkes, har lydt, har det altid været
for en Sag, som har gjort hans Humanitet Ære. Vi ville altsaa
træffe ham igjen mellem Talerne for Jødesagen. Der mere. Thi,
som yttret, Ingen af Mændene af 9de September, som personligen
have havt Andeel i Sagen, i Indstillingen eller som Talere, bør
forbigaaes hvor Hensigten er at give Verden en fuldstændig Af-
bildning af det Passerede. --
Indstillingen, der var overdraget Hjelm at udarbeide, kunde
hverken med Hensyn til Skarpsindighed og stilistisk Færdighed
eller til Interesse for Sagen været given i bedre Hænder. Den
var anbetroet en Arbeidsdygtighed, rastløs som Saugens under
den styrtende Fos, en Pen, skarp og fiin som en anatomisk Skalpel.
|d.IV,b.3,s.384 ||
Men ogsaa Indstillingerne i to andre betydelige Sager vare sam-|
tidigen blevne lagte paa hans Skuldre, og en Sygdom slog sig til i
den sidste Tid, saa hans Arbeide i denne Sag blev saa seent
færdigt, at Kommitteen endog ikke fik Tid til at lade alt hvad
han havde skrevet trykke. Dog udgjør Indstillingen fulde 17 tæt-
trykte Sider i stor Folio, hvoraf dog Dokumentationen optager
en stor Deel. Men klart er det, at det ikke kunde gavne Sagen,
at Indstilling og Afgjørelse, formedelst Storthingets nær anstun-
dende Opløsning, fulgte saa nær paa hinanden, at dets Med-
lemmer ikke fik Tid til at gjøre sig bekjendt med den før den i
Afgjørelsens Time oplæstes af Præsidenten. Denne Mislighed gav
Anledning til nogle vidtløftige Debatter før Referatet af Indstil-
lingen, som tog Tid og Kræfter bort fra selve Sagen, og hvilke,
om man vil forstaae dem, Indstillingen her maa forudskikkes, dog
med Udeladelse af det meer Overflødige i Dokumentationen.
Altsaa -- lad os tænke os, at vi først have gjort os bekjendte
med Indstillingen før vi sætte os tilbage til den 9de Septbr., og
imaginere os, at vi om Morgenen Kl. 9 ile afsted for at være
Vidner til Lysets og Mørkets Kamp i det norske Storthing. Siden
skulle vi see og høre den, saa godt det lader sig gjøre for mig
med Pen og Blæk.
"KONSTITUTIONS-KOMMITEENS INDSTILLING
ANGAAENDE
FORSLAGET OM OPHÆVELSE AF SIDSTE PASSUS
I GRUNDLOVENS § 2.
(MED UDELADELSE AF ENKELTE SPECIELLERE REFERATER
AF DOKUMENTERNES INDHOLD).
Paa 9de ordentlige Storthing har Repræsentanten, Sorenskriver Sørenssen,
fremsat et af ham som eget vedtaget Forslag fra nuværende Bureauchef og
Rigsarchivar, Henrik Wergeland, af saadant Indhold:
"Sidste Passus i Grundlovens § 2, saalydende: "Jøder ere fremdeles
udelukkede fra Adgang til Riget", udgaaer".
Dette Forslag med dets Motiver har, ifølge Storthingets Beslutning af
28de Juni 1839, under Præsidentens Haand, overeensstemmende med Grundlovens
|d.IV,b.3,s.385 ||
§ 112, været ved Trykken kundgjort, tilligemed de øvrige paa 9de ordentlige|
Storthing fremsatte Forslag til Forandringer i Grundloven. Af de til samtlige
Repræsentanter uddeelte Aftryk vil det sees, at der ved Kundgjørelsen ikke
befindes nogen saadan Mangel, som gjør den uovereensstemmende med For-
slaget. Dette er, tilligemed de øvrige paa 9de ordentlige Storthing fremsatte
Forslag til Forandring i Grundloven tilstillet undertegnede Kommittee til
Indstilling.
Motiverne for samme ere af Forfatteren udførlig udviklede, og Kom-
mitteen anseer det overflødigt her at gjentage eller extrahere Samme.
Proponenten har erklæret, med Forslaget at tilsigte, at Jødernes Eman-
cipation i Norge maatte være fuldstændig. Indskrænkning i nogensomhelst
Henseende, saaledes som til visse Steder eller Erhvervsgrene, er efter hans
Formening altid en Tilsidesættelse, der føles som en Uretfærdighed, og har
alle dennes ulykkelige og bittre Følger for begge Parter.
Foruden til de i selve Forslaget udviklede Motiver, tillader Kommitteen
sig at henvise til et særskilt Skrift i Anledning af Samme: "Indlæg i Jøde-
sagen", hvoraf Proponenten har tilstillet ethvert af Storthingets Medlemmer
et Exemplar. -- -- --
Efterat Sagen var Kommitteen tilstillet til Behandling, har den Tid efter
anden modtaget følgende yderligere Oplysninger igjennem Proponenten, deels
umiddelbar fra ham, deels fra Andre igjennem Storthingets Præsidentskab.
A.
I det svenske Sprog:
1. Bekræftet Afskrift af det kgl. Svenske Kommerce-Kollegii Skrivelse
til Hs. Kgl. Majestæt, angaaende fornyet Reglement for de i Riget
bosatte Jøder, dateret Stockholm den 10 April 1837.
2. Bekræftet Afskrift af en Skrivelse fra Stockholms Stads Politi-
kollegium (formeentlig) til Over-Statholderen, Magistraten og Bri-
gadechefen for Borgerskabets Kavalleri- og Infanteri-Korpser, dateret
10de Mai 1808 -- efter en i Stockholms mosaiske Menigheds Arkiv
forvaret bekræftet Afskrift, -- angaaende et fra de i Stockholm
værende Handlende af den "Jødiske Nation" indgivet Andragende
om at maatte, i Anledning af udbrudte Krigsuroligheder, da Stadens
Borgerskab var opfordret til militær Tjeneste, blive indrullerede i
Borgerskabets Kompagnier, for at opfylde de Pligter, der paaligge
dem lige med Rigets øvrige troe Undersaatter. Tilbudet, uagtet
erkjendt for et altid hædrende Beviis paa Hengivenhed for Konge
og Fædreneland og paa en Tænkemaade, som Nationen ved flere Lei-
ligheder har yttret, -- tilraadtes ikke modtaget, fordi Borgerskabets
Indrullering allerede var sluttet og Antallet tilstrækkelig til det for-
nødne Vagthold; dog at Nationen ei derved betoges Adgang til, i
Forhold til sin Evne, ved Sammenskud at medvirke til Lettelse af
Borgerskabets, ved Mandskabets Beklædning og i andre Maader, saa
længe Vagtholdet varer, forøgede Udgifter.
3. Et Bidrag til "Nyaste Freya", dateret den 12 Aug. 1841, indeholdende
nogle Ord, foranledigede ved en Opsats i Nyaste Freya No. 77 betitlet:
et Ord om Jødedommen, i Anledning af Indsenderen H. i Freya
No. 751.
|d.IV,b.3,s.386 ||
4. En Skrivelse fra den Norske og Svenske Minister i Haag, Hochschild|
til H. Wergeland af 25de Mai 1842, angaaende Jøderne i Amsterdam
og Haag, hvorom mere nedenfor.
B.
I det hollandske Sprog, med franske og norske Oversættelser:
5 -- 10. 6 Skrivelser2 til Advokat, Ridder af den hollandske Løveorden,
Lipmann (Israelit), de 4 første daterede fra Haag l9de, 20de, 21de
og 23de April d.A. fra Finantsministeren Hochhuisen, Justitsminister
van Hall, Krigsminister List, den 5te, dateret Breda den 23de April
fra Antwerpens Citadels tapre Forsvarer General Chassé, den 6te
dateret Amsterdam den 26de April fra Statsraad, Præsident i Amster-
dams Arrondissements-Tribunal, M. C. van Hall, hvori de i det Væsent-
lige eenstemmigen bevidne, at, efterat Israeliterne i en Tid af 47 Aar
have været deelagtige i alle nederlandske Statsborgeres Rettigheder
og Pligter, har dette ledet til de gunstigste Resultater. Den neder-
landske Stat, -- yttrer Ministeren for det Indre derhos, -- har aldrig
3
|d.IV,b.3,s.387 ||
havt mindste Anledning til at angre denne Reform, uagtet særegne|
Omstændigheder have foraarsaget, at Massen endnu staaer tilbage i
Civilisation. De have viist sig som tro og retsindede Borgere og især
udmærket sig i den Tidspunct, da Landet befandt sig i en vanskelig
Stilling, siger Finantsministeren, og Statsministeren giver dem det Vidnes-
byrd, at de have lagt Fædrenelandskjærlighed og Borgersind for Dagen
paa en Maade, der gjør deres Forstand og Hjerte Ære, samt at de ere
i Fædrenelandet erkjendte som gode Borgere og som saadanne agtede
af Regjeringen; Krigsministeren yttrer, at de opfylde deres militære
Pligter ved Nationalmilitsen med samme Troskab som Kongerigets andre
Indbyggere, og desuden oftere ere frivillig engagerede, saa at der af dem
befinder sig mange Officerer, Underofficerer og Soldater i aktiv Tjeneste
i Armeens forskjellige Korpser, og at de stedse have opført sig roesvær-
digt m. v. General Chassé bevidner at have havt et stort Antal af
Israeliter under sin Commando i 2 Aar i Antwerpens Citadel, hvor de
have givet Prøver paa Mod, Troskab, Disciplin og Udholdenhed. Som
Mand af Ære forsikkrer han, at, dersom han endnu engang skulde gaae
i Krig, vilde han prise sig lykkelig ved at have Tusinder af disse brave
Soldater at kommandere.
Statsraad M. C. van Hall, Justitsministerens Fader, der ligesom de
øvrige har yttret sig om de heldige Virkninger af den for henved 50 Aar
siden foregaaede Reform i Jødernes Stilling, erklærer, at han mod Enden
af det forrige Aarhundrede var anbetroet Rets og Politiets Haandhævelse
i Amsterdam, og havde da overflødig Leilighed til at kjende Israeliterne
som fredelige, Lovene og Øvrigheden lydige Folk. Han var ofte i den
Nødvendighed at beskytte dem mod sig kaldende Christnes Had, Foragt
og Fordomme, men havde aldrig Anledning til at tage nogen Forholds-
regel mod dem selv. Hans senere Erfaring i andre Forholde og i Sær-
deleshed som Præsident i Hovedstadens Tribunal har paanyt stadfæstet
dette, især efter at de mindre dannede Jøder ere ved deres Troes-
brødres Foranstaltning sikkrede en mere regelmæssig og mere virksom
religiøs, moralsk og intellektuel Underviisning.
Ved at indsende disse Dokumenter med Skrivelse til Sorenskriver
Sørenssen af 19de Mai dette Aar har Proponenten ladet følge:
11. En Skrivelse til ham fra fornævnte Advokat Lipmann, dateret 3die Mai
dette Aar. I denne Skrivelse karakteriseres General Chassé som de
Nederlandske Krigeres og M. C. van Hall som deres Øvrighedspersoners
Nestor, samt denne som dybsindig Lovkyndig, stor Literatus og ind-
tagende den største Rang blandt Landets Lærde; -- begge endnu i
levende Live nydende den Udødelighed, som de ere opstegne til paa
modsatte Veie. -- Derhos tillægger Advokat Lipmann, at de anførte
Dokumenter ville indeholde fuldkommen Gjendrivelse af de Kalumnier,
der indeholdes i Konsul Egidius's Beretning, hvis Værd ellers kan skjøn-
nes deraf, at der gjentaget citeres et Skrift af Dr. Fabius, uagtet denne
høiligen roser Jøderne i Amsterdam, især fordi de have gjort store
Offere til Bedste for de Fattige.
I Forbindelse hermed har Proponenten endvidere indsendt:
12. en senere Skrivelse fra Advokat Lipmann af 21de Mai dette Aar, hvori
han anker over, at Hr. Egidius ikke har bygget sin Beretning paa noget-
somhelst Beviis, men troer, at hans Autoritet alene skal være tilstrække-
|d.IV,b.3,s.388 ||
lig og beklager sig over hans Upaalidelighed, idet Dr. Fabius Vidnes-|
byrd paaberaabes. Med dette sender han
13. En Erklæring fra Dr. Fabius selv, der gaaer ud paa, at han med
Forbauselse har erfaret, at man har paaberaabt sig hans Frem-
stilling af de kirkelige og municipale Forhold i Amsterdam, som
stillende hans Medborgere af den Israelitiske Kultus i et ufordeel-
agtigt Lys; men at Intet er mere fjernt enten fra ham eller fra hans
Ord. Tvertimod har han ladet deres vedholdende og nidkjære Bestræ-
belser for at lindre Fattiges og Lidendes Skjæbne vederfares Ret-
færdighed, og til den Ende sammenlignet deres Indretninger med
andre religiøse Samfunds, hvoraf Resultatet paa ingen Maade er
ugunstigt for dem; at hans Hensigt ikke har været Bedømmelse af
den politiske Emancipations Resultater, hvilke han aldrig tvivlede
om vare heldbringende, og kunde ikke formode det muligt, at man
paa saadan Maade kunde misbruge hans Bemærkninger.
Det ovenfor anførte Brev fra Minister Hochschild, i det svenske
Sprog, (No. 4) er ligeledes foranlediget ved den omhandlede Beret-
ning fra Konsul Egidius, og gaaer ud paa, at Ministeren ikke under
sit korte Ophold i Holland har havt Anledning til at søge nærmere
Oplysning om det moralske Standpunkt, hvorpaa Jøderne befinde
sig, og han har kun ganske kort opholdt sig i Amsterdam; men det
forekommer ham som Konsulens Yttringer om dem maa være bygget
paa særegne mødte Ubehageligheder, og ikke at burde tjene til
nogen Rettesnor med Hensyn til Lovbestemmelser angaaende denne
Nation. I Haag er Detaljhandelen saavelsom Bank- og Penge-
Operationerne for største Delen i deres Hænder, men Ministeren har
aldrig hørt Klage over dem; tvertimod ere de anseete for sikkre og
prompte i Pengeanliggender, fordi de ved indtræffende Uheld altid
ere beredvillige til indbyrdes at hjælpe hverandre. -- Kommitteen har
forøvrigt ikke kunnet erholde nærmere Kundskab om Indholden af
den saaledes for utroværdig erklærede Konsul Egidius's Beretning,
da Sorenskriver Sørenssen, hvem Konsulen skal have meddelt den,
har erklæret, at han efter den indskrænkede Betingelse i Henseende
til dens Afbenyttelse, hvorunder Consulen har tilstillet ham den,
ikke anseer sig berettiget til dens Meddelelse, og kun Misbrug af
privat Udlaan af Samme til Hr. Bureauchef Wergeland er Anled-
ning til, at den mod hans Villie er benyttet til Erhvervelse af de
anførte Erklæringer mod den.
C.
I det tydske Sprog:
Efter Storthingets Beslutning af 11te Mai dette Aar er Kom-
mitteen tilstillet til Afbenyttelse:
14. En Skrivelse til Storthinget, undertegnet Cand chir. H. Reichenbach,
dateret Altona 22de April dette Aar, hvorved han finder seg for-
anlediget til at hæve sin advarende Stemme og sender til den Ende:
15. 3 Exemplarer af et trykt (tydsk) Skrift under Titel, saaledes over-
sat: "Beviis af den jødiske Religion, at Jøderne ikke kunne emanci-
peres i de kristelige Stater, naar de Christne ikke derved ville gjøre
sig dem skatskyldige og underdanige, fremkaldt ved Hr. Dr. Stein-
heims Meditationer, af H. Reichenbach, Cand. chir."
|d.IV,b.3,s.389 ||
16. Ved Skrivelse af 9de Juni sidstleden med Bilag, en af Studiosus|
phililogiæ Autenrieth, der af Wergeland anføres at være fød tydsk og
Lærer i sit Modersmaal, meddeelt Bedømmelse af det Reichenbachske
Skrift, der gaaer ud paa, at det indeholder 25 grammatikalske Feil og
langt talrigere stilistiske Synder og Feil mod Periodebygningens Love,
samt at Indholdet svarer til Sproget. Forøvrigt anføres, at ved Cand.
chirurgiæ forstaaes kun "Feltskjærerelev eller Barbeersvend, der har
faaet kongelig Tilladelse til at besøge de chirurgiske Forelæsninger ved
Universitetet."
I en af Bureauchef Wergeland foranlediget Bedømmelse over Skrif-
tet ved Overlærer Musæus, indført i Bladet Granskeren af 19de Juni
d.A. (5. Hæfte No. 37 -- 38) kaldes det et Miskmask af de blandt den
raaeste Pøbel herskende Fordomme mod Tilhængere af den mosaiske
Troesbekjendelse, som fornuftigviis ikke kan antages at vilde have Ind-
flydelse paa oplyst Mands Omdømme om dette Religions Samfunds
Medlemmer.
Kommitteens Mening om Skriftet afviger ikke meget fra de anførte.
Det kunde formeentlig ikke ligge indenfor Grændserne af dens Pligt
at foranstalte det for Storthinget oversat, som blot til Afbenyttelse den
tilstillet, i Særdeleshed naar det finder det at være af den nævnte
Beskaffenhed. Men denne umiskjendelige Beskaffenhed gjør det ufor-
nødent længere at opholde sig ved dette Skrifts Indhold.
Repræsentanten Biskop v. d. Lippe har ved Skrivelse af 16de Juni
d. A. indsendt til Storthinget:
17. En Forestilling, undertegnet 36 Handelsmænd i Kristianssand, grundet
paa at denne Byes Handlende, da der ikke gives nogen Handelskom-
mittee, ikke have havt Anledning til at udtale sig om "Forslaget, der
gaaer ud paa, at Jøder skulle tilstædes Adgang til at bosætte sig i
Norge."
Efter Opfordring af Sorenskriver Sørenssen har Kommitteen erhvervet
18 -- 21. Betænkninger over Forslaget fra Børs- og Handelskommitteerne i
Kristiania, Trondhjem, Bergen og Drammen. Disse Betænkninger ere
trykte og uddeelte til samtlige Repræsentanter.
De gaae samtlige, saavelsom den ovenmeldte Forestilling fra endeel
af Kristianssands Handelsmænd ud paa, at det maa ansees skadeligt at
indrømme Jøderne Adgang til Riget. 2de Medlemmer af Drammens Børs-
og Handelskommittee have gjort Undtagelse herfra, og erklæret sig for
Forslaget.
Blandt de ved Grl. § 112 bestemte Betingelser for Antagelsen af
hvilketsomhelst Forslag til Forandring i Grundlovsbestemmelser er den,
at Forandringen ikke maa modsige Grundlovens Principer, men alene
angaae Modifikationer i enkelte Bestemmelser, der ikke forandre Kon-
stitutionens Aand. Da der inden Kommitteen yttredes Tvivl om hvor-
vidt denne Grundlovsbestemmelse maatte være til Hinder for Forslagets
Antagelse, indstillede Kommitteen under 26de Februar d. A. til Stor-
thinget at benytte den Ret, som Grl. § 83 giver, hvilket af Storthinget
bifaldtes. Høiesteret har derefter afgivet
22. Betænkning af 19de Marts derhen, at Forslagets Antagelse ikke vilde
overskride den ved sidste Deel af Grundlovens § 112 bestemte Grændse
for Storthingets Myndighed, hvori dog en Minoritet af 2de af Rettens
|d.IV,b.3,s.390 ||
Medlemmer har været af anden Mening, paa Grund af, at den 8de af|
de af Rigsforsamlingen paa Eidsvold den 16de April 1814 vedtagne "fore-
løbige Grundsætninger" indeholder samme Regel som den, der er gaaet
over i Grl. § 2, forsaavidt den nu er foreslaaet ophævet. Fremdeles
gaaer Høisterets Betænkning som det synes i denne Deel eenstemmig
ud paa, at Forbudet i § 2, Udtrykket "fremdeles" maa antages at angaae
alle Jøder, altsaa ogsaa de saakaldte Portugisjøder, som dog indtil den
Tid, ifølge Pl. 23de Januar 1730, ikke vare udelukkede. I alt Fald kunde
dog, ifølge Betænkningen, Forbudet imod Portugisjøder, naar Grundlovs-
bestemmelsen antages at omfatte dette, som øiensynlig givet i en vild-
farende Mening, ikke henregnes til Grundlovsforandringer, saa at der
dog Intet kunde være til Hinder for at bortrydde de forskjellige Menin-
ger om Forbudets Udstrækning, hvortil dets nuværende Form har givet
Anledning, ved en authentisk Forklaring deraf.
Af den i Høiesterets Betænkning antagne Mening om Forbudets
Almindelighed mod alle Jøder synes konseqvent at maatte følge, at
heller ikke Leidebreve, efter Landslovens 3 -- 22 -- 1, maae kunne til-
stedes, efterdi Grl. § 95 neppe kan tillægges den Betydning, at den
hjemler Dispensationer fra selve Grundloven; hvorimod man, ved at til-
lægge Udtrykket "fremdeles" i § 2 den Virkning, at det indskrænker
Forbudet til Jøder, hvem Adgang til Riget, efter den til den Tid be-
staaende Lovgivning, var negtet, udentvivl maatte komme til det Resul-
tat, at Leidebreve fremdeles kunne gives.
Kommitteen har dernæst anseet det for dens Pligt, at søge saavidt
muligt authentisk Oplysning om der enten i Statskirkens Lære eller den
jødiske Troeslære maatte være nogen væsentlig Betænkelighed mod at
aabne Jøderne Adgang til Riget. Vel er nemlig for Tiden endnu egentlig
ikke Spørgsmaal derom, uden ialfald for en enkelt Deel, og dette kun
under Forudsætning af saadan Fortolkning af Grundloven, at den i
Strenghed mod Jøderne, og ikke blot i dens Buds Stabilitet, gaaer videre
end den private Lovgivning; men da baade Forslagets Præmisser ud-
trykkelig erklærer dets Hensigt at bane Mosaiterne Veien til i Tiden at
faae Borgerret i Riget, og Sagens Natur maatte lede til den samme
Forudsætning, saa fandt man det hensigtsmæssigst, ved at indhente Op-
lysninger i Sagen, at søge disse i saadant Omfang, at de ogsaa kunde
benyttes, naar i sin Tid Spørgsmaal om videre Udvikling af den private
Lovgivning om Jødernes Retsforhold maatte opstaae. Kommitteen hen-
vendte sig saaledes til det theologiske Fakultet ved Rigets Universitet,
som den formeentlig meest kompetente Autoritet til at meddele de
attraaede Oplysninger; og erholdt
23. Fakultetets Betænkning af 4de April d. A., der i det Hele eller dog i
det Væsentlige stemmer med de Begreber om Forholdene, som Kom-
mitteen forud havde dannet sig, og saaledes bestyrker disse.
Den gaaer ud paa: at naar den omhandlede Deel af Grl. § 2 skal for-
staaes saaledes, som det er Fakultetet bekjendt, at den faktisk er for-
staaet, at det er forbudt Jøder, endog som blot Reisende, at opholde sig
inden Norges Grændser, synes dette saa bestemt stridende mod den Ret,
ethvert Menneske, der ikke er aabenbar Forbryder, har som Menneske
og Verdensborger, at der formeentlig ikke kan være Tvivl om saadan
Bestemmelses Utilbørlighed; -- at der med Hensyn til Statens offentlige
Religion Intet kan være til Hinder for at give Jøder, med Bibehold og
|d.IV,b.3,s.391 ||
Udøvelse af deres Religion, Ret til at bosætte sig i Norge, og det hvad|
enten man seer hen til den christelige Religions Aand, som et aandeligt
Samfund, hvori Tro og Kjærlighed er Samfundsbaandene, ikke ydre
Tvang og Magtbud, eller til Statskirkens ved Grundloven bestemte For-
hold til Staten; -- at der heller ikke i den mosaiske Religion, forsaavidt
den grunder sig i det gamle Testamente, hvilket ogsaa af den christne
Kirke erkjendes for Gudsord, kan findes Noget, der sætter Jøden i
Opposition til vor Rets- og Sædelighedsorden, og kun en grov Misfor-
staaelse eller Fordreielse kan af det gamle Testamentes Lære udlede
Noget Modsat; -- at derimod de saakaldte Rabbaniter eller Talmudister,
der antage, tilligemed det gamle Testamente, ogsaa Talmud og endeel
andre rabbinske Skrifter som Troes og Sædeligheds Norm, have deri Bud
og Lærdomme, der, saafremt de følges, sætte Jøden i bestemt Modsætning
til vor Stats Rets- og Sædelighedsorden. Til disse (Rabbaniter eller
Talmudister) henregne flere Forfattere alle europæiske Jøder, i Mod-
sætning til de østerlandske eller karaitiske, der forkaste Talmud, og
desaarsag af de orthodoxe Jøder kaldes Kjættere.
Imidlertid erkjender dog Fakultetet, at, efter Udsagn af Mænd, om
hvis Troværdighed man ei er berettiget til at tvivle, er Opposition mel-
lem Kristne og Jøder mere og mere traadt tilbage, ligesom der gives
flere Exempler paa, at Jøder have gjort store Opofrelser i de Lande
eller Stæders Interesse, hvis Borgere de vare; -- Facultetet antager der-
hos ikke at de europæiske Jøder i Almindelighed hylde hine talmu-
distiske og rabbinske Læresætninger, eller at de, som antage dem, holde
sig til dem i deres hele Udstrækning. Herom finder Fakultetet Stad-
fæstelse i en hos Jøderne i Danmark af det danske Kancelli sanktioneret
Agende, samt en af Kongen af Danmark sanktioneret Lærebog i den
mosaiske Religion, hvilke Skrifter Stænderforsamlingen i Roeskilde 1838
har paaberaabt i sin Petition til den danske Konge om de danske Jøders
Valgbarhed til Stænderforsamlingen ligemed Kristne. Saaledes troer
Fakultetet, at Jøderne ikke ubetinget bør udelukkes af vort Stats-
samfund, skjønt det tilraader størst mulig Forsigtighed, saa at ingen
af de Fordringer eftergives, som man i borgerlig Henseende gjør til
Landets egne Børn.
Med Hensyn til Fakultetets Yttring om hvorledes Grundlovens § 2
faktisk er blevet forstaaet, og for desuden at komme i Besiddelse af de
Erfarings-Data, som her i Landet kunde erholdes, har Kommitteen søgt
Oplysning i vedkommende Kontorer under Regjeringens Justits-Departe-
ment, og hos Politimesterne i Kristiania og Bergen, hvor enkelte af Kom-
mitteens Medlemmer vidste, at Forhandlinger om Jøder vare passerede.
Saaledes er man kommet i Besiddelse af følgende Dokumenter:
24 -- 25. Erklæring fra Politimesteren i Kristiania med vedlagt Underrets-
dom mod Jøden Henri Leia, der som Optikus uden Leidebrev ("om ellers
et saadant nu kan meddeles" -- hedder det i bemeldte Dom) opholdt
sig her i Staden i Aaret 1832 til 1833, hvorfor han er idømt Bøder efter
L. 3 -- 22 -- 1 og transporteret ud af Landet.
Politimesterens Skrivelse oplyser forresten, at der i de sidste 4 à 5
Aar har her været et Par Jøder, men disse have havt Leidebrev; deres
Ophold har været kort og de have Intet foretaget, hvorpaa der kunde
være noget at udsætte. Til hvilken Afdeling af den mosaiske Religions
Bekjendere -- om de nemlig have henhørt til de saakaldte portugisiske
|d.IV,b.3,s.392 ||
Jøder, som Plakat af 23de Januar 1750 omtaler, vides ikke, saa at|
rimeligviis ingen Undersøgelse derom har været anstillet; hvilket tyder
hen paa, at man har forstaaet Grundloven paa samme Maade som
Høiesteret.
Erklæring fra Politimesteren i Bergen, hvoraf erfares, at der ikke siden
17de Mai 1814 har været meer end 2 Jøder, nemlig:
1) polsk Jøde, Michael Jonas, dertil ankommet den 30te December
1817 som Passageer med et havareret Skib bestemt til London, forsynet
med Pas fra Kønigsberg af 29de Oktober næstforhen, og den 5te Januar
næstefter afsendt til Kristiania under Geleide af Politiadjutant Schøn-
berg. Det er formeentlig denne Begivenhed, hvortil det sigtes i: "Con-
versationslexicon der Gegenwart", -- et meget udbredt tydsk Skrift
-- 2 B. S. 1163 -- naar der under Artikel Juden (Jøder) blandt andet siges:
"Den eneste Stat, som til dette Øieblik ingen Jøder taaler, er Norge.
Grundloven af 1814 udelukker dem udtrykkelig fra alt Ophold i Riget.
Her har derhos de hensynsløse Antipathier mod det jødiske Folk længst
vedligeholdt sig og ere skarpest indprægede. Imidlertid træffer den
Daddel, som udgaaer herfra, kun Normændenes Tolerants, ikke deres
Retsind; thi intet Folk kan nægte dem Ret til, efter egen fri Villie, at
ordne de Bestemmelser, efter hvilke det skal være Fremmede forbudt at
komme i Landet og blive deelagtige i Samfundets Fordele. Fra den
moralske Side er vistnok Sagen anderledes beskaffen. I den Henseende
fortjener især den Haardhed og Følesløshed Daddel, med hvilken, som
man forsikkrer, selv skibbrudne Jøder behandles paa den norske Kyst".
2) Optikus og Instrumentmager Martin Blumenbach, ankommet den
5te Juni 1828 med Pas fra Gothenborg til Trondhjem af 5te Mai samme
Aar, men paa Betydning om nøiere Undersøgelse, hvis han forblev,
samme Dag afreist til Gothenborg.
27. Kongelig Resolution af 3die April 1833, hvorved naadigst er bifaldt den
Norske Regjerings Foranstaltning under 5te Marts næstforhen, at den
Jøden Henri Leia efter Christiania Bythingsdom af 31te Januar samme
Aar (ovenfor No. 25) for uden Leidebrev at have indfundet sig i Riget,
ilagte Mulkt 800 Spd. afsones med Fængsel paa Vand og Brød i 28 Dage.
28 -- 29. Ansøgning fra Politimester Friele, med Bergens Stifts paategnede
Erklæring af 30te December 1820 og 27de Januar 1821 og Skrivelse fra
Bergens Stift af 24de August 1822, som viser de nærmere Omstændig-
heder med Jøden Michael Jonas's Transport til Kristiania, og at Bergens
Politimester ved Høisteretsdom er tilpligtet at betale og har betalt de
dermed foraarsagede Omkostninger, til Beløb 278 Spd. 81 ß.
Efter indhentet Underretning fra Christiania Politikammer er Michael
Jonas fra Kristiania, ifølge den med Regjeringens Politi-Departement
eller daværende 3die Departement førte Korrespondence, først i Februar
1818 foranstaltet transporteret til Gothenborg, hvor der videre vilde blive
sørget for hans Underholdning.
30 -- 34. Politiforhør, optaget i Kristiania 18de November 1826 over en Sanger
Karl Fredrik Copello, der blev anholdt sammesteds som formeentlig
Jøde, stillede Kaution for sin Tilstedeblivelse i een Maaned for imidler-
tid at skaffe Attest forat han var døbt, men derpaa undveeg; hvorefter
Kautionisten sagsøgtes til Betaling af Bøder efter 3 -- 22 -- 1, men ved
|d.IV,b.3,s.393 ||
Kongelig Resolution fritoges for at tilsvare disse Bøder mod at udrede|
Bøder 30 Spd. efter L. 1 -- 22 -- 6.
35 -- 36. Skrivelse fra Finants-Departementet til Justits-Departementet om
Leidebrev for Hofraad Hambro, som bekjender sig til den mosaiske
Religion, for at kunne personligen i Kristiania gjøre Anbud og under-
handle om et attraaet Statslaan, og fra Statssekretariatet til Justits-
Departementet, at af Hans Majestæt, paa Indberetning, at Regjeringen
under 3die Juni s. A. har bevilget Hofraad Hambro Tilladelse til at fore-
tage en Reise til Kristiania med Omegn, og der opholde sig i en Tid af
6 Uger, var naadigst resolveret:
"Opbevares i Arkivet".
37 -- 40. Skrivelse fra Finants-Departementet til Justits-Departementet af
17de Juli 1834 om Leidebrev for Salomon Heine i Hamburg, som bekjen-
der sig til den jødiske Religion, for at konferere med Departementet
angaaende en af Artiklerne i den med Hambro & Søn under 21de fore-
gaaende Maaned afsluttede Kontrakt om et Statslaan -- tilligemed det
originale Leidebrev, som tilbagesendtes, da det formedelst Sygdom ikke
benyttedes, og Kongelig Resolution af 27de August s. A. at Regjeringens
Indberetning derom skulde opbevares i Arkivet.
41. Regjeringens underdanige Indstilling af 14de Mai 1839 om Leidebrev
for Moritz Lichtenhein af Altona, som bekjender sig til den jødiske
Religion, samme Aar at foretage en Reise til Kristiania, Drammen og
disse Steders Omegn paa 4 Maaneder, hvilket bliver at indløse med
10 Spd. -- tilligemed Formular til Leidebrev for Jøder.
Af denne Indstilling erfares de Grundsætninger, Regjeringen antager
i Henseende til Jøders Udelukkelse fra Adgang til Riget. Det hedder
nemlig deri: "Da Grundlovens § 2 blandt andet indeholder den Bestem-
melse, at Jøder fremdeles ere udelukkede fra Adgang til Riget, maa det
formeentlig antages, at det nu som forhen er overladt til Deres Majestæt
i særegne Tilfælde at tillade Personer af den jødiske Troesbekjendelse
at indfinde sig i Riget, og paa saadan deres Reise at tilstaae dem frit
Leide, ligesom det paa den anden Side er klart, at ingen Jøde, for-
saavidt han ei henhører til den portugisiske Nation, lovligen kan opholde
sig her uden naadigst Tilladelse". Og videre:
"Efter den Ugunst, hvormed Jøders Ophold her i Riget saavel i den
ældre Lovgivning som i Grundloven er betragtet, bør Tilladelse til et
saadant Ophold formeentligen kun meddeles, hvor det for Vedkommende
er af nogen særdeles Vigtighed personligen at kunne indfinde sig her,
og under Forudsætning af, at ingen særegen Betænkelighed derimod
frembyder sig, ligesom Tilladelsen ikke synes at burde gives større Om-
fang med Hensyn til Tid eller Rum, end der kan skjønnes at ville
være aldeles nødvendigt til det tilsigtede Øiemeds Opnaaelse".
Hans Ansøgning om Leidebrev sees at have gaaet ud paa Ophold i
Norge i en Tid af 2 Maaneder, men Indstillingen paa, at det kun skulde
bevilges for Ophold i Christiania og Drammen med Omegn i 4 Uger.
42 -- 44. I Skrivelse fra Statssekretariatet til Justits-Departementet af 31te
Mai 1839, 27de Juli 1840 og 30te August 1841, hvorved meddeles 3de
Kongelige Resolutioner angaaende Leidebrev for bemeldte Moritz Lich-
tenhein af Altona, den første af 24de Mai 1839, for en Reise til Kristiania
og Drammen samt disse Steders Omegn i en Tid af 4 Uger mod Betaling
|d.IV,b.3,s.394 ||
af 10 Spd., -- den anden af 5te Juli 1840, hvorved bifaldes Regjeringens|
Foranstaltning om at have under 3die Juli s. A. meddeelt ham Leidebrev
til i bemeldte Aar at foretage en Reise her til Riget, og her at Opholde
sig i en Tid af indtil 4 Maaneder, den 3die af 25de August 1841, hvor-
ved bifaldes Regjeringens Foranstaltnng, at Leidebrev er meddeelt ham
til Reise m. v. i sidstbemeldte Aar, -- aldeles ligesom 1840.
45. Skrivelse fra Statssekretariatet til Justits-Departementet, hvorved med-
deles Kongelig Resolution af 24de Marts 1840:
1) at Leidebreve for Jøder blive at udfærdige uden Gebyhrs Erlæggelse.
2) om Leidebreves Udfærdigelse for Hofagent, Grosserer Samuel
Wulf Heilbuth af Kjøbenhavn, som bekjender sig til den mosaiske
Religion, med sin Søn Harry Hermann Heilbuth til en Reise paa 3 Maa-
neder samme Aar her i Riget.
Ved at sammenligne de 3 sidste Leidebreve med foranførte Indstilling
og Resolution af 1840 (No. 41 og 42) synes man at kunne slutte, at
Regjeringen tildeels har antaget andre Grundsætninger angaaende Leide-
breve end de som den i Aaret 1839 bekjendte sig til, baade med Hen-
syn til Tid og Rum. -- Da der af Kommitteens Medlemmer var yttret,
at Grundlovens § 2 skulde have vakt Betænkelighed ved at vælge noget
Sted i Norge til Samlingssted for de Nordiske Naturforskere ved deres
Møder, afvexlende med Sverige og Danmark, og denne Omstændighed,
om det forholder sig saaledes, var til en vis Grad, endog i videnskabelig
Henseende, at afskjære eller indskrænke Norges Forbindelse med den
øvrige Verden, saa ansaaes det hensigtsmæssigt at søge Oplysning herom.
I den Anledning hoslægges
46. Skrivelse til Professor Holst med hans paategnede Svar af 12te August
d. A. Vel sees det heraf, at den omtalte Betænkelighed ikke virkelig er
opstaaet, ligesom det og er bekjendt, at Kristiania virkelig er bestemt
til Samlingssted for Mødet i 1844; men man har troet ikke at burde tilbage-
holde denne Oplysning, med Hensyn til, at allerede Nødvendigheden af
Leidebrev for Videnskabsmænd paa en saadan Reise synes at indeholde
noget Paafaldende.
Foruden de foranførte, deels meddeelte, deels samlede, Materialier
til det forhaandenværende Spørgsmaals Bedømmelse, er Kommitteens
Medlemmer og formodentlig ogsaa Storthingets øvrige Medlemmer, til-
stillet, uden at det vides fra hvilken Haand, et trykt Blad:
47. Tillæg til Kristianssands Stiftsavis No. 42, indeholdende som det synes
ikke uvigtige Grunde4 mod Antagelsen af det her omhandlede Grund-
lovs Forslag, og Kommitteen har anseet det som dens pligt at tage
dette Skrifts Indhold under Overveielse, ikke alene med Hensyn til
dets Indhold, men ogsaa med Hensyn til Bestemmelsen i Grundl. § 112,
at Forslag til Forandring skulle ved Trykken bekjendtgjøres, hvilket
antyder, at de Bemærkninger, som saadan Bekjendtgjørelse fremkalder,
bør være Gjenstand for speciel Overveielse.
Førend Kommitteen gaaer over til at uddrage Resultaterne af den refe-
rerede Masse af Materialier, troer den ikke at burde undlade at gjøre op-
mærksom paa, at den heromhandlede Motion allerede meget tidlig under
1 tilbakeSkrevet af en Mosait. I Kommitteeindstillingen vidtløftige Recit hedder det: "I Afhandlin-
gens 3die Afdeling anføres, at Frankrig og Holland, det katholske Belgien, Hessen-Kassel og Nord-
amerika have skjænket Jøderne et Fædreneland i Ordets fuldstændige Bemærkelse, og disse have
2 tilbakeAnledningen til at erhverve disse særdeles vigtige og relevante Dokumenter gav nogle
Besvarelser fra den norsk-svenske Konsul i Amsterdam, Hr. Egidius, paa endeel Spørgsmaal
betræffende Mosaiterne i Nederlandene, fra Vedtageren af Forslaget, Sorenskriver Sørenssen. Lige-
som jeg holdt det for min Pligt, at meddele ham alle Oplysninger om Sagen, som maatte falde mig
ihænde, viste han mig den Opmærksomhed, at lade mig see disse Besvarelser, der, indheftede i
Bilagform, vare vedlagte et Brev, hvori Hr. Konsulen udbad sig Diskretion, ikke for dette Doku-
ment, men for en anden vedlagt Meddelelse. Dette Sidste fik nu saa være; men angaaende
Besvarelsen af Quæstionerne, som det var Hr. Sørenssens Hensigt at meddele Konstitutions-
kommitteen, erklærede jeg strax, at jeg nærede saadan Tvivl om Paalideligheden deraf, at jeg, som
Sagens naturlige Advokat og pligtig til at skaffe Propositionens Vedtager alle de Oplysninger, det
stod i min Magt at erhverve, vilde forsøge at faae de samme Qvæstioner besvarede af endnu
kompetentere Autoriteter i Nederlandene, ja vel, om muligt, af selve Regjeringens Medlemmer.
Saameget mere maatte jeg føle mig opfordret dertil, som Konsulens Yttringer stode i ligefrem
Strid med hvad jeg selv havde anført i mit "Indlæg" om Jøderne i Nederlandene. Gjennem Hr. Lip-
mann, der selv har været af de liberale Tidender bragt paa Bane som Kandidat til Justits-
ministeriet der, lykkedes det mig at erhverve ovenciterede slaaende Dokumenter, og min Hensigt
at neutralisere Konsulens Angivelser og at tilintetgøre deres Indflydelse paa Sagen, naaedes saa
fuldkommen, at de ikke videre kom for Dagens Lys. Da Hr. Egidius senere beklagede sig i Brev
til Hr. Sørenssen over at han havde hørt ilde i nederlandske Blade for Meddelelse, gav jeg en
skrivtlig Forklaring over denne Sagens Sammenhæng, hvorhos jeg bragte i Erindring, at det Doku-
ment han havde udbedet sig behandlet med Diskretion, var urørt forblevet i sit Mørke. Forbauset
blev jeg derfor ved i Kommitteeindstillingen at finde anført, at "kun Misbrug af privat Udlaan"
til mig af Egidius' Beretning var Anledning til at den mod hans Vilje var benyttet til Erhvervelse
af Modererklæringerne. Men Kommitteens Formand og Hr. Sørenssen har, som man nedenfor vil see,
oplyst, at denne Tirade, som urigtig og ubeføjet, var strøget i den originale Indstilling, og at den
kun ved den Skynding, hvori Trykningen maatte foregaae uden vedbørlig Revision, er slumpet ind
som en Trykfeil. Den vil saaledes ikke findes i de nye Aftryk af Indstillingen, som jeg er under-
rettet om ville blive foranstaltede.
Udgiveren.
ofret Fædrenelandet deres bedste Kræfter, deres Eiendom og deres Blod; Preussen, Baden, Dan-
mark, England, Würtemberg m. fl. have tildeelt dem borgerlige Rettigheder. Alle Klager, som man
saa ofte har hørt over Jøderne og deres Maade at underholde sig paa, forstumme, naar man giver
dem Adgang til at ernære sig paa enhver lovlig Maade; Klagen over at Jøderne danne en Stat i
Staten har blot der sin Rigtighed, hvor man undertrykker dem, samt paalægger dem alle Byrder
og Forpligtelser, men fornegter dem de borgerlige Rettigheder. I alle de opregnede Lande falder
det Ingen ind at ansee den i Landet fødte Jøde som Fremmed. Jøden som Medlem af et særskilt
Folk existerer ikke mere, og Navnet betegner blot en Bekjender af den mosaiske Religion. Og I
-- saaledes slutter Afhandlingen -- som have egnet disse Linier nogen Opmærksomhed, hader os
ikke længer! Rækker os broderlig Haanden og lader os forenes i tro Kjærlighed"!
4 tilbakeKommittéen slutter dog sit Referat af Artikelens Indhold med den Bemærkning, at den finder
det ikke fornødent videre at yttre sig angaaende disse formentlig tydelige Overdrivelser.
|FORRIGE|

Question: when did wergeland publish his book jødesagen i det norske

Answer: October 26, 1842

when did wergeland publish his book jødesagen i det norske

Question: what was the name of the book published by wergeland in 1842

Answer: Jødesagen i det norske Storthing

what was the name of the book published by wergeland in 1842

Question: what does jødesagen i det norske storthing mean

Answer: The Jewish issue in the Norwegian parliament

what does jødesagen i det norske storthing mean

Question: who wrote jødesagen i det norske storthing

Answer: Wergeland

who wrote jødesagen i det norske storthing

Question: in what year did wergeland publish his book jødesagen i det n

Answer: 1842

in what year did wergeland publish his book jødesagen i det n

Question: what is jødesagen i det norske storthing

Answer: The Jewish

what is jødesagen i det norske storthing

First edition was printed in 1925.

In spite of fears that Norway would be overwhelmed by Jewish immigration following the repeal , only about 25 Jews immigrated to Norway before 1870 .

Norway Virtual Jewish History Tour
Norway, lying on the northwestern edge of the Scandinavian peninsula, has a Jewish history that likely dates only back to the 16th century. Today, approximately 1,300 Jews live in Norway.
Learn More - Cities of Norway: Oslo
Early History
First Jewish Community
World War II Period
Modern Oslo
Relations with Israel
Early History
As far back as the year 1000, the Norwegian king, Olav den Hellige, forbade everyone who was not Christian to live in Norway. It was only in the time of king Christian IV (late 16th century) that we find references to the Jews. The Jews in question were mainly those who in 1492 and 1498 were driven out of Spain and Portugal.
These Sephardi Jews first settled in the Netherlands and in Hamburg. In Norway, these were called “Portuguese-Jews.” Some of them were given special permission to enter Norway when no other Jews could. Those who were still in Norway at the beginning of the 19th century in most cases let themselves be baptized. The king, Christian IV, thought that the Jews could be helpful to his country but because of opposition from the clergy, he had to be satisfied with letting the Jews settle in duchies of Slesvig-Holstein. Jews had been permitted to live there from 1620. They were now granted freedom of religion and, in 1630. the king gave them permission to travel freely and engage in trade in Denmark and Norway. The Jews living in this area were not, as in many other countries, forced to live in ghettos or in special Jewish streets or wear clothes which would distinguish them as being Jewish. In 1641, the king extended his “protection” to include “Ashkenazi Jews,” from Eastern-, Central- and part of Western Europe.
King Christian IV’s successor, King Fredrik III, was not as liberal as his predecessor and during his time the Jews in the area once again lived under strict conditions. They were not allowed to be in the Danish-Norwegian kingdom without a form of visa.
In 1687, when Norway was united with Denmark under King Christian V’s law, the prohibition of Jews entering the country was reinserted. There was a fine for anyone who broke this law and a reward for the person who informed against a Jew. About 150 years later, in 1830, the attitude toward Jews was somewhat more lenient and, by 1844, the Justice Department decided that “Portuguese-Jews” would be permitted to enter freely.
In 1814, Norway acquired its first constitution. This document was relatively liberal, but in §2 it stated that the official state religion was Lutheran Protestantism and that Jews and Jesuits were forbidden from entering the kingdom. The lobbying to change this paragraph was led by the national poet, Henrik Wergeland. In 1851, the ban was indeed reversed, six years after the Wergeland’s death.
Establishment & Development of the First Jewish Community
Following this, Jews in small numbers started arriving to Norway, mainly from Poland and Lithuania. These were often people who did not have money to go to America. In June 1892, the first Jewish community was established in Christiania (now Oslo). The community was first given the name Det Jødiske Samfund i Christiania (The Jewish Community in Christiania) but only one year later it was changed to Det Mosaiske Trossamfund (The Mosaic Community). At this stage there were 214 Jews in Norway, 136 of them living in Christiania. When the community was established, it had about 100 members. They decided to keep to the Orthodox tradition, though most of the members were not very observant regarding Halacha.
A few examples of the goals of the community were:
— To preserve Jewish interests in Norway.
— To gather members for communal synagogue services.
— Engage a teacher.
The development of the community continued through the following years. In 1892, an immigrant from Lithuania was employed as teacher for the children, cantor, shochet and mohel. The same year, fixed times for prayers were set and a place was rented to be used as a synagogue. In 1893, the community employed a rabbi, Dr. Meyer Ashkanaze, and as the number of members increased, the synagogue was moved from place to place.
During the next 30 years, the number of Jews in Norway increased from 642 persons (343 in Christiania) to 1457 (852 in Christiania). The immigrants came from Eastern Europe and the reasons for this great immigration was The First World War, persecution of Jews and general suffering in Europe.
Between 1900 and 1910, there were four small Jewish communities in Christiania at the same time. One of them, Israels Menighet i Christiania, Adath Yeshurun (Israel’s Congregation in Christiania, Adath Yeshurun), was led by the same rabbi Dr. Aschkenaze, who had been the rabbi of Det Mosaiske Trossamfund (The Mosaic Community) only a few years earlier. These communities had very small differences concerning ideology and, by 1910, they had merged into one, namely Det Mosaiske Trossamfund.
In 1917, yet another congregation was established because of dissatisfaction with the way the bigger congregation was run but, by 1939, there was again only one congregation, Det Mosaiske Trossamfund. This has remained the situation until today. About 3/4 of the approximately 2,000 Norwegian Jews, were affiliated to this community in Oslo, or the smaller community, which had been established in Trondheim. The Jewish population, in Norway, has never exceeded this number.
Between 1915 and 1940, Jewish cultural life in Oslo blossomed. Several competing theatrical groups, performing in Yiddish, choirs, cultural organizations (also in Yiddish) as well as academic organizations were established. In 1910, the Jewish Youth Association was established, becoming the most active and important organization within the Jewish community. During the years 1935-1940, several study-circles were held, led by the community’s rabbi, Isak Julius Samuel. In 1942, the rabbi was deported and killed by the Nazis.
World War I & the Reestablishment of the Community
In 1940, the Germans occupied Norway. Norwegian newspapers and media were full of anti-Semitic propaganda and the Norwegian government was taken over by Nazis (Quisling). Two years later, in 1942, 750 Jews were deported to Auschwitz. Of these, only 25 survived. The remainder of the Norwegian Jewry managed to escape to Sweden, where they lived as refugees until the end of the war. More than 100 Jews served in the Free Norwegian Forces, mostly stationed in Britain.
After the end of the war, in 1945, when some of the refugees returned, the Jewish community in Oslo was re-established. They found the synagogue in Oslo unharmed, miraculously. It had been used as a storage place for Nazi-literature and confiscated Jewish belongings during the war. Even the Torah Scrolls were still there, unharmed. The synagogue could, therefore, be used again as soon as it was cleaned up. The new rabbi of the community was Rabbi Zalman Aronzon. The level of activity was much lower than before the war, however, and there were long periods without a rabbi, limited teaching capability and little spiritual leadership. In 1947, the Norwegian government permitted the immigration of several hundred Jewish refugees, mostly from Hungary. In 1960, a community center was built next to the synagogue.
In the late 1970’s a serious revival of the community began, with the appointment of a new, young rabbi, Michael Melchior and a new leadership. The rabbi made many changes in the education system. He tried to build on the principle that “Jewish culture should not merely be learnt but also lived.” The “classroom-education” was extended to include obligatory weekend-seminars and camps, which would let the children experience what they were learning. Since then, many institutions have been established: kindergarten, well-attended synagogue services, Cheider (afternoon classes) for all school children, aged-home, a supply of kosher food imported from Israel and America, study-circles as well as other cultural and religious events. During the last 25-30 years organizations such as WIZO, Bnei Akiva, Maccabi Sports Club, B’nai Brith and Keren Kayemet L’Israel have become popular among the Norwegian Jews.
Due to the small number of Jews in Norway, the leadership believed it was essential to maintain unity and that there should therefore only be one congregation in Oslo (about 950 members) and a smaller community in Trondheim (about 100 members). The policy of the community is to follow Orthodox laws, teachings and traditions. In practice, there is no coercion of members regarding their own degree of observance if regulations are followed within the confines and institutions of the community.
Part of the revival of the Jewish community during the last 20 years has been the introduction of “cantors” from Israel, whose duties include leading synagogue services and teaching. These people come for a couple of years, with their families, and then return to Israel. This arrangement insures an infusion of latest ideas from the Jewish world, especially Israel. During the last decade this has been achieved through successful association with WUJS’ (World Union of Jewish Students) project Arevim. Most of the members Jewish Community in Oslo have very strong ties with the State of Israel and the Community encourages a Zionistic ideology.
Oslo Today
With its about 950 members, the Jewish community in Oslo is, today, very active in numerous areas. Among other institutions and activities, there is a kindergarten and a home for the elderly. There is cheider with about 90 children and youth divided into 8-10 classes according to age, which also arranges weekend-seminars. There is B’nei Akiva, WIZO and B’nei Brith. There are also study-circles, which deal with Jewish subjects, “Open-House” meetings, where current topics are discussed and family-seminars, where about 40 families go to enjoy a meaningful and fun Shabbat together.
The synagogue is used for services every weekday morning, as well as Shabbat and holidays. As mentioned earlier, the Orthodox traditions are used in conducting the services, which on Shabbat are usually attended by 150-200 men, women, and children. The Shabbat-morning service is the religious and social “event” of the week. After the service, a kiddush is arranged in the community center, where the rabbi gives a D’var Torah and refreshments are served.
On August 23, 2006, Norway opened its Center for Studies of the Holocaust and Religious Minorities, a joint project of the Norwegian government and the country’s Jewish community, which will be devoted to the study of the Holocaust and other genocides. The museum and research center are housed in the Villa Grande, which was the residence of Vidkun Quisling, the Nazi collaborator who served as the president of Norway from 1942 until the end of the war. At the war’s end, Quisling was tried and executed for treason.
Although the number of births is slightly lower than the number of deaths each year, there is a steady flow of new people coming in from other countries or converting to Judaism. The last couple of years the number of members in the community has increased, mainly because of the active attempt of the community to include the Israeli citizens living in Norway. In previous years, many of these have come to Norway, married a Norwegian spouse, and then kept away from Judaism. Today this situation has changed and many of the Israelis have become active members of the community. It would seem that the number of Jews in Norway (and members of the Jewish community) will remain stable, at least, for the foreseeable future.
Despite the small size of the Jewish community in Oslo, it has developed and expanded rapidly from its creation until today. Being a minority in the otherwise Christian Norway is not always easy, and there will always be anti-Semitic statements or actions to deal with. But, aside from this, the Jewish community in Oslo is very much part of the greater Norwegian community while at the same time keeping its uniqueness.
Relations with Israel
In 1993, Israel and the PLO held secret negotiations in Oslo that ultimately led to an agreement for mutual recognition and peace agreements referred to as the Oslo Accords.
In May 2016, Norwegian Foreign Minister Borge Brende met with Palestinian Authority (PA). President Mahmoud Abbas, and during these meetings he made a point to emphasize to Abbas that aid coming from Norway was not to be spent on salaries for convicted terrorists. Brende told Abbas the policy is “unacceptable and should be abolished.” The Palestinian leader assured Brende that Norwegian aid would be spent on “state-building and institutional development.”
Norway’s largest and most influential trade union body, the Norwegian Confederation of Trade Unions (LO), voted 193-117 in favor of a cultural, academic, and economic boycott (BDS) of Israel on May 14, 2017. The LO Congress, which meets every four years, voted against the recommendation of its leader, Hans-Christian Gabrielsen, who argued that the Palestinians have a very fragile work situation and many in fact rely on Israel for employment. Norwegian Foreign Minister Borge Brende spoke out against the vote and clarified that the Norwegian government strongly opposed BDS. The leader of the Norwegian Labor Party, who the LO has supported for decades, also spoke out against the measure
In June 2020, Foreign Affairs Minister Ine Eriksen Søreide announced that Norway would withhold half of the year’s funding to the Palestinian Authority’s education system until it stops using textbooks that promote hate and violence. This follows the European Parliament’s condemnation of the textbooks and resolution to oppose EU aid for textbooks. A few months later, the legislature called for cutting $3.4 million from aid to the PA.
Original article by Ingrid Muller.
Sources: The Jewish Community of Oslo;
“Israel thanks Norway for saying aid won’t go to imprisoned terrorists,” Times of Israel (May 16, 2016);
‘Enough is enough’: Norway’s trade unions vote to boycott Israel over Palestine, RT, (May 14, 2017);
Marcy Oster, “Norway will withhold funding to Palestinians over textbooks it says promote hate and violence,” JTA, (June 4, 2020);
Donna Rachel Edmunds, “Norway again cuts PA funding over Palestinian hate education,” Jerusalem Post, (December 12, 2020).
Map: CIA.

Question: when was the first edition of the holocaust book printed

Answer: 1925

when was the first edition of the holocaust book printed

Question: how many jews immigrated to norway before 1870

Answer: 25

how many jews immigrated to norway before 1870

Question: when did jews immigrate to norway

Answer: 1870

Question: what was feared that norway would be overwhelmed by following the repeal of the uk

Answer: Jewish immigration

what was feared that norway would be overwhelmed by following the repeal of the uk

Question: what group of people immigrated to norway in 1870

Answer: Jewish

what group of people immigrated to norway in 1870

Question: what was feared that norway would be

Answer: overwhelmed by Jewish immigration

Question: why did only 25 jews immigrate to norway before 1870

Answer: fears that Norway would be overwhelmed by Jewish immigration

why did only 25 jews immigrate to norway before 1870

Though the minority was small and widely dispersed , several stereotypes of Jews gained currency in the Norwegian press and popular literature in the early 20th century .

Protocols of the Elders of Zion
The Protocols of the Elders of Zion is the most notorious and widely distributed antisemitic publication of modern times. Its lies about Jews, which have been repeatedly discredited, continue to circulate today, especially on the internet. The individuals and groups who have used the Protocols are all linked by a common purpose: to spread hatred of Jews.
"If ever a piece of writing could produce mass hatred, it is this one. . . . This book is about lies and slander."
—Elie Wiesel, Nobel Peace Prize Laureate
Protocols of the Elders of Zion The Protocols of the Elders of Zion is the most notorious and widely distributed antisemitic publication of modern times. Its lies about Jews, which have been repeatedly discredited, continue to circulate today, especially on the Internet. The individuals and groups who have used the Protocols are all linked by a common purpose: to spread hatred of Jews.
The Protocols is entirely a work of fiction, intentionally written to blame Jews for a variety of ills. Those who distribute it claim that it documents a Jewish conspiracy to dominate the world. The conspiracy and its alleged leaders, the so-called Elders of Zion, never existed.
The Origin of a Lie
In 1903, portions of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion were serialized in a Russian newspaper, Znamya (The Banner). The version of the Protocols that has endured and has been translated into dozens of languages, however, was first published in Russia in 1905 as an appendix to The Great in the Small: The Coming of the Anti-Christ and the Rule of Satan on Earth, by Russian writer and mystic Sergei Nilus.
Although the exact origin of the Protocols is unknown, its intent was to portray Jews as conspirators against the state. In 24 chapters, or protocols, allegedly minutes from meetings of Jewish leaders, the Protocols "describes" the "secret plans" of Jews to rule the world by manipulating the economy, controlling the media, and fostering religious conflict.
Following the Russian Revolution of 1917, anti-Bolshevik émigrés brought the Protocols to the West. Soon after, editions circulated across Europe, the United States, South America, and Japan. An Arabic translation first appeared in the 1920s.
Beginning in 1920, auto magnate Henry Ford's newspaper, The Dearborn Independent, published a series of articles based in part on the Protocols. The International Jew, the book that included this series, was translated into at least 16 languages. Both Adolf Hitler and Joseph Goebbels, later head of the propaganda ministry, praised Ford and The International Jew.
Fraud Exposed
In 1921, the London Times presented conclusive proof that the Protocols was a "clumsy plagiarism." The Times confirmed that the Protocols had been copied in large part from a French political satire that never mentioned Jews—Maurice Joly's Dialogue in Hell Between Machiavelli and Montesquieu (1864). Other investigations revealed that one chapter of a Prussian novel, Hermann Goedsche's Biarritz (1868), also "inspired" the Protocols.
The Times, August 17, 1921
The Nazi Era
Nazi Party ideologue Alfred Rosenberg introduced Hitler to the Protocols during the early 1920s, as Hitler was developing his worldview. Hitler referred to the Protocols in some of his early political speeches, and, throughout his career, he exploited the myth that "Jewish-Bolshevists" were conspiring to control the world.
During the 1920s and 1930s, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion played an important part in the Nazis' propaganda arsenal. The Nazi party published at least 23 editions of the Protocols between 1919 and 1939. Following the Nazis' seizure of power in 1933, some schools used the Protocols to indoctrinate students.
Fraud Exposed
In 1935, a Swiss court fined two Nazi leaders for circulating a German-language edition of the Protocols in Berne, Switzerland. The presiding justice at the trial declared the Protocols "libelous," "obvious forgeries," and "ridiculous nonsense."
The US Senate issued a report in 1964 declaring that the Protocols were "fabricated." The Senate called the contents of the Protocols "gibberish" and criticized those who "peddled" the Protocols for using the same propaganda technique as Hitler.
In 1993, a Russian court ruled that Pamyat, a far-right nationalist organization, had committed an antisemitic act by publishing the Protocols.
Despite these repeated exposures of the Protocols as a fraud, it remains the most influential antisemitic text of the past one hundred years, and it continues to appeal to a variety of antisemitic individuals and groups.
The Protocols Today
According to the US Department of State's "Report on Global Anti-Semitism" (2004),
"The clear purpose of the [Protocols is] to incite hatred of Jews and of Israel."
In the United States and Europe, neo-Nazis, white supremacists, and Holocaust deniers endorse and circulate the Protocols. Books based on the Protocols are available worldwide, even in countries with hardly any Jews such as Japan.
Many school textbooks throughout the Arab and Islamic world teach the Protocols as fact. Countless political speeches, editorials, and even children's cartoons are derived from the Protocols. In 2002, Egypt's government-sponsored television aired a miniseries based on the Protocols, an event condemned by the US State Department. The Palestinian organization Hamas draws in part on the Protocols to justify its terrorism against Israeli civilians.
The Internet has dramatically increased access to the Protocols. Even though many websites expose the Protocols as a fraud, the Internet has made it easy to use the Protocols to spread hatred of Jews. Today, a typical Internet search yields several hundred thousand sites that disseminate, sell, or debate the Protocols or expose them as a fraud.
Glossary Terms
Critical Thinking Questions
- How could the spread of a false story like the Protocols be a warning sign for genocide?
- Why do lies and conspiracy theories often exist long after they are proven false?
- How can individuals, groups, and governments combat the spread of and ill effects of misinformation?
- How can knowledge of the events in Germany and Europe before the Nazis came to power help citizens today respond to threats of genocide and mass atrocity in the world?

Question: stereotypes of what group gained currency in the norwegian press and popular literature in the early

Answer: Jews

stereotypes of what group gained currency in the norwegian press and popular literature in the early

Question: what gained currency in the norwegian press and popular literature in the early 20th century

Answer: stereotypes of Jews

what gained currency in the norwegian press and popular literature in the early 20th century

Question: when did stereotypes of jews gain currency

Answer: early 20th century

when did stereotypes of jews gain currency

Question: where did stereotypes of jews gain currency in the 20th century

Answer: Norwegian press

where did stereotypes of jews gain currency in the 20th century

Question: what gained currency in the norwegian press in the early 20th century

Answer: several stereotypes of Jews

what gained currency in the norwegian press in the early 20th century

Question: when did stereotypes of jews gain currency in the norwegian press

Answer: 20th century

when did stereotypes of jews gain currency in the norwegian press

Saxlund sued for libel and lost, but earned the admiration of the newspaper Nationen, who praised Saxlund for fighting "our race war."

In 1920, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion was published in Norway under the title Den nye verdenskeiser ("The New World Emperor").

Saxlund sued for libel and lost , but earned the admiration of the newspaper Nationen , who praised Saxlund for fighting " our race war . "

In 1920 , The Protocols of the Elders of Zion was published in Norway under the title Den nye verdenskeiser ( " The New World Emperor " ) .

- Many Norwegian journalists and leaders espouse the traditional mainstream European anti-Jewish attitudes. Norwegian anti-Semitism does not come from the grassroots but from the leadership – politicians, organization leaders, church leaders, and senior journalists. It does not come from Muslims but from the European-Christian society.
- Despite the fact that the Norwegian law and constitution grant freedom of religion to everyone, Norway is one of the few countries in the world where Jewish ritual slaughter (shechita) of animals is forbidden. The ban was introduced three years before the Nazis took power in Germany and continues till today, whereas Muslim ceremonial slaughter (hallal) is permitted.
- Over the past thirty years, Norwegian media caricatures have sustained a high level of demonization of Jews and the state of Israel. These include portraying Jews as heartless, peace-hating, enemies of humanity, Nazi, bloodthirsty, child-killers, and controllers of the world. This trend has been rapidly increasing over the past years.
Anti-Semitism’s Christian Origins
The notion of anti-Semitism in today’s Norway may seem strange. The country is often portrayed as a calm and universally friendly corner of the European continent. Although Norway may have a record as a humanitarian peacemaker, mainly due to the Nobel Peace Prize that the Swede Alfred Nobel financed and Norway awards, many of its journalists and leaders espouse the traditional mainstream European anti-Jewish attitudes. Norwegian anti-Semitism does not come from the grassroots but from the leadership – politicians, organization leaders, church leaders, and senior journalists. It does not come from Muslims but from the European-Christian society.
Historical Background
Historically, anti-Semitism appeared early in Norway. Around 1000 CE, centuries before Jews came to Norway, Christianity was introduced there along with the concomitant theological anti-Semitism.1 That suggests that the reason for anti-Semitism was not anything the Jews did, but Christianity. Although Jews and Judaism were not directly outlawed at that time, in 1025 King Olav introduced a law requiring the people in the kingdom to be Christians.
In 1436, Archbishop Aslak Bolt forbade the practice of Shabbat in a Jewish manner.2 In 1569, the Danish king Fredrik II, who also ruled Norway, introduced a law demanding that all subjects either follow the Evangelical Lutheran faith or leave the country within three days; otherwise their property would be confiscated and they would be executed.
In 1620, the first Jews were allowed to reside in Norway. In 1651, however, Jews were forbidden to travel in the kingdom.3
Although the attitude toward Jews varied over time, it was never the same as toward Christians. In 1670, Jews were allowed entrance to the kingdom if they paid enough money and proved able to improve its economy. This was true for Denmark and Sweden as well.
A Ban on Jews
When the Norwegian National Assembly in 1814 drafted its modern constitution ostensibly based on the principles of the French and American revolutions, a clause was inserted stating that Jews and Jesuits were not to be admitted to the country. This was stipulated in the second paragraph of the document. That so-called “Jewish paragraph” was annulled in 1851 after a long struggle led by the national poet, Henrik Wergeland.
As European anti-Semitism intensified during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, Norwegians were quick to learn from it and put it into practice. The country’s newspapers actively propagandized against the Jews. For example, in 1930 Aftenposten, Norway’s most important paper, ran an article on its editorial pages about “the Jew sucking through his drinking straw into the nation’s glass.” In 1933, seven years before the Germans occupied Norway, Aftenposten editor Johannes Nesse expressed his understanding for the Nazi attitude toward the Jews and asked “not to show them exaggerated sympathy.”
Ritual Slaughter Forbidden
Getting rid of the Jews was not an alien notion to the Norwegians, who heard their parliamentarians and ministers propounding racialist theory and expressing anti-Semitic ideas. In 1929, Member of Parliament Jens Hundseid told the parliament that: “We haven’t invited the Jews to our land and we have no obligation to hand over animals to them for their religious orgies.”4 Soon after, the Jewish ritual slaughter (shechita) of animals was forbidden.
In principle, the Norwegian law and constitution grant freedom of religion to everyone. In practice, the one exception is the Jews. Norway is one of the few countries in the world where shechita is still banned. In Germany, shechita was forbidden only during the Nazi period. In Norway, however, the ban was introduced three years before the Nazis took power in Germany and continues till today, whereas Muslim ceremonial slaughter (hallal) is permitted. Compassion for animals does not explain the ban on shechita, since hunting is permitted and popular in Norway. About 150,000 people (3 percent of the population) are registered hunters;5 hunted prey often suffers a much slower and more painful death than in Jewish ritual slaughter.
When Hundseid became prime minister (1932-1933), he stated in a speech in the parliament: “Many of those foreigners who come to our country are of an inferior race. Their heredity is bad, but their reproduction is very virile and fast. Our race suffers because of this immigration.”6 Hundseid was intensely anti-Semitic and clearly directed these words at the Jews. However, anti-Judaism was a part of Norwegian racism. In 1934, his party member Erling Bjørnson proposed and led the parliamentary debate on a new law of forced sterilization,7 which was practiced by the Norwegian government during the years 1934-1977.
Forced sterilization was part of the plan to improve the Norwegian race, which was Germanic and Aryan. At that time, racial theory and hygiene were common in European culture. The Gypsies were considered to be inferior and in Norway, to prevent the “contamination of the race,” they were subjected to forced sterilizations. So were “mentally weak” ethnic Norwegians. The Norwegian government and church also implemented an “assimilation policy” aimed at creating a single, “healthy” Norwegian people. Minorities such as the Gypsies and the Sámi (Lapps) suffered oppression, and their children were forcibly separated from their families and sent to be raised “as Norwegians.”8
It was in Hundseid’s government that Vidkun Quisling was appointed defense minister. Quisling later founded the Norwegian Nazi Party, Nasjonal Samling, in which Hundseid also became a member until 1945. After the war Quisling became the scapegoat for treason and with his trial and execution, Norway was “cleansed.”
Contemporary Recycling of Anti-Semitism
Many anti-Semitic caricatures that have flourished in recent years in all the major Norwegian newspapers recycle traditional anti-Jewish motifs. In some cases the link between past and present goes deeper. When the bells of the Oslo Cathedral ring, not everyone can enjoy the sound because its bell chime was financed by a Norwegian Nazi veteran, Ørnulf Myklestad,9 who apparently never changed his mind about the Jews. He also contributed to publishing The Protocols of the Elders of Zion in Norwegian.10
In 2002, the Simon Wiesenthal Center listed Norway as one of the countries that did little to investigate, let alone prosecute, the Nazi war criminals.11 The Norwegian Defense Ministry authorized in 1988 the obliteration of an archive containing information on the Norwegian people and organizations sympathizing with communists or Nazis.12 The archive was erased in 1994 when the World Jewish Congress and Bjørn Westlie, a journalist for the Norwegian business daily Dagens Næringsliv, were gathering information on Nazism and the Jewish property plundered in Norway.
As the issue of Nazism was covered up, the Norwegian media continued to criticize Israel. The assertion that criticism of Israel differs from anti-Semitism is largely used as an excuse to avoid recognizing anti-Semitism and defend its continued practice. In reality, much criticism of Israel has an anti-Semitic character.13
Common Norwegian citizens should not be allowed to evade their responsibility with the claim that they cannot control the media. Had enough Norwegians complained to the newspapers about anti-Semitic expressions, the phenomenon would have vanished in a short time. Norwegians, however, do not complain or take responsibility, and many agree with the message in the caricatures.
Caricatures and Mass Communication
After World War II, Jew-hatred receded in Norway. It resurfaced, however, in the 1970s when the Norwegian media spread propaganda about the Jews’ alleged atrocities against the Palestinian Arabs.
Over the past thirty years, Norwegian media caricatures have sustained a high level of demonization of Jews and the state of Israel. Although not as crude as Arab ones,14 Norwegian caricatures use many of the same motifs. These originated in Europe and including portraying Jews as heartless, peacehating, enemies of humanity, Nazi, bloodthirsty, child-killers, and controllers of the world.15 Only a small sample of these depictions will be presented below.
No other means of conveying a message to the public works more swiftly and effectively than pictures, drawings, and caricatures. Christian Europe has used them to demonize Jews for centuries.16 The technique was perfected by German ingenuity, helping lay the groundwork for the Holocaust. Jews were depicted as scoundrels, parasites, and vermin who threatened Germany and the civilized world, and could be dealt with only by destroying them.
The Holocaust revealed that centuries of Christian17 anti-Semitism had mentally prepared almost every country of Europe, including Norway, for the task of collecting their Jews to have them looted, deported, and killed. Many people actively contributed to the endeavor; the masses generally remained passive and did not protest.
Rejecting the Holocaust by Silence
After the Holocaust, the Germans took some important measures to fight anti-Semitism. But in Norway, both the citizens and the government have tried to reject their responsibility for the Holocaust. As a result, many Norwegian Jews are apprehensive about today’s anti-Semitism, remembering how it built up in the past. Most of the Jews maintain a low profile, and some feel the need to join the critics of Israel.
Before World War II, some Norwegians would paint the words “Palestine calling” on Jewish-owned shops. The Nazi occupiers were assisted even by ordinary citizens in locating the Norwegian Jews to be sent to the extermination camps. Today, many Norwegians in demonstrations chant “Jews out of Palestine” – the ostensibly moral demand to “end the Israeli occupation.”
After the war, some Norwegian politicians, especially from the Labor movement, supported Israel’s fight for existence. Israel’s victory in the 1967 Six Day War made the Jews of Israel popular in Norway. Soon, however, the situation began to deteriorate as pro-Arab sentiment grew. More recently, Norway has granted billions of Norwegian Crowns (more than half a billion USD until 2005) to the Palestinian Authority (PA). It has supported it politically, among other things, by bestowing the Nobel Peace Price on its then leader Yasser Arafat.
On 21 July 2006, while Hizballah was firing at Jewish civilians from the north and Hamas from the south, Norwegian Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg declared that Norway would give 100 million Norwegian Crowns each (approximately 160 million USD) to Lebanon and the PA.18 Such pronouncements and measures send a signal to the people, from the highest level, about who the victims and the aggressors are.
After the Holocaust, Jews both in Israel and the Diaspora believed the establishment of a Jewish state would put an end to anti-Semitism. Instead, to a large extent Israel became its target, facilitating even more intensified allegations. In addition, criticism of the Jews no longer comes exclusively from the Church or individuals but also from governments, Norway’s being a prominent case.
The contempt for the Jews that led to the Holocaust is still very much alive in Norway. To justify their hatred, some now argue that the “Zionists” actually behave worse than the Nazis did: they “occupy Palestinian land,” “oppress the Palestinians,” and “kill children,” just as the Nazis did in Norway and the rest of Europe. Such comparisons flourish and serve to cleanse the conscience of Norwegians and other Europeans, who today support the Arabs even as many of them strive to fulfill Europe’s unfinished Holocaust.
Caricatures as a Means of Hatred
The following examples of caricatures have been divided into eleven groups according to their message.
1. The World Is under Jewish Pressure
Image 1: Poland, 1938 (Propagandowy Kalendarz Poznan; a propaganda calendar from the city of Poznan).
Image 2: “Under the Jewish Pressure” (caricature by Inge Grødum, Aftenposten, 5 December 2001).
The similarity between these two caricatures is startling: the Christian Europeans as the former “victims” of the Jews have been replaced by the Muslim Arabs. The Jew is depicted as a heavy burden on society. The former “Jewish pressure on Christian society” has shifted to the “Palestinian Arab people.”
Both pictures try to show how the Jew callously strangles his victim. His closed eyes indicate animosity, his forehead is wrinkled and unpleasant. The conservative Aftenposten is Norway’s leading newspaper.
2. The Problem Is Judaism
Image 3: Syria, 2000 ( Tishreen, 19 April 2000).19
Hitler’s Mein Kampf and Nazi propaganda in general encouraged hatred of Judaism and communism and declared total war on both. Mein Kampf was swiftly translated and distributed in the Arab world, long before the Holocaust. Even today, many Arabs regard Hitler’s ideas as the ideal solution to the “Jewish problem.” In television, books, newspapers, and speeches, Arab leaders often claim that the problem with Jews stems from their traditional texts.
Image 4: “The Seven Synonyms of Death” (caricature by Dave Coverly, Dagsavisen, 7 January 2004).
“Murder, kill, liquidate, execute” and so on are, according to the Labor movement’s newspaper, a modern version of the Ten Commandments. The Norwegian media often use the Bible against Israel and its religious-Christian supporters. Although the means are sophisticated and subtle, the message is clear: it is Judaism that causes Israelis to murder Palestinians.
3. The Jews Rule the World
Image 5: Austria, 1920 – “Juda” (Karl Paumgarten, Graz).
Image 6: Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon rules the world (caricature by Herbjørn Skogstad, Oppland Arbeiderblad, 18 September 2003).
In both caricatures the Jew rules the world and the victims have no choice but to obey. The Jew manipulates the Christians like puppets and turns them against the Muslims (note the Arab keffiyeh, which in Norway has become a symbol for the PLO).
Here the face of the Jew expresses no feelings. He is merciless and preoccupied with money and control. The faceless Jew’s “invisible hand” (marked “Sharon” and with a Star of David) controls Norwegian foreign minister Jan Petersen (i.e., the Christians). Being under Jewish control, the Europeans can only oppress the Palestinian Arabs (i.e., the Muslims). The motif in the caricature is again religious, portraying Christians and Muslims as weak and frail before the powerful Jewish giant.
Jews controlling the world is an old motif and is central to The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. In Norway, a new edition of the book has been published by the Bergman Publishing House.
4. The Jew: A Robber and a Parasite
A parasite is an organism that utilizes resources gathered and possessed by others. Known examples of parasites are viruses, ticks, rats, and in the human sphere, thieves and robbers.
Verdens Gang has the largest circulation of Norwegian newspapers. Its famous caricaturist Morten M. Kristiansen portrays the Jews of Israel as parasites who stole land from the Arabs and still want every last grain of sand. The Jew’s greed does not leave room for others – reminiscent of the Nazis’ justification for needing Lebensraum. In 1940, the Nazi film The Eternal Jew likened Jews to rats, presenting both as aggressive, parasitic agents that use their genetic advantages to spread all over the world.
Image 7: “Land-Robbers Grab Every Single Bit” (with an untranslatable pun on “Semite”; caricature by Morten M. Kristiansen, Verdens Gang, 25 March 2004).
Image 8: “A Better Species of Human Being?” (caricature by Ulf Aas; the title belongs to the article by Magne Skjæraasen, Aftenposten, 6 June 1992).
Aftenposten’s article “A Better Species of Human Being?” described how the Israelis allegedly used their sense of superiority to allow the massacres in the Sabra and Shatilah refugee camps in Lebanon in 1982. The author, Magne Skjæraasen, presents himself as a “friend of Jews.” He ignores, however, an atrocity such as the Syrian massacre of at least twenty thousand civilians in Hama on 2 February 1982.
Skjæraasen and others like him do not criticize the PLO, the Palestinian Authority, and other Arab and Muslim bodies for killing thousands of Jews and seeking the destruction of Israel. The common claim by Norwegians and others that “we have nothing against Jews – we just oppose Israeli aggression” is exposed by such selectivity and hypocrisy.
5. The Jew as Satan
Image 9: Germany, 1943 – “Satan” (Der Stürmer, No. 9).
The faces of the “satanic Jew” are nearly identical in the caricatures: the long “Jewish nose,” the frowning forehead symbolizing deceit, the narrow cunning eyes looking askance, perhaps at his next victim? The wrinkles seem to indicate evil thoughts toward both the Christians and the Muslims, represented here by Norway’s then Prime Minister Bondevik and PLO chairman Arafat, respectively. In the 1943 caricature, the Jews were shown as if they were threatening only the Christians.
Image 10: The Devil and the Jew (caricature by Oddmund Mikkelsen, Hamar Arbeiderblad, 12 July 2003).
During the Nazi era, Der Stürmer became the most virulently anti-Semitic publication in Germany. The Norwegian portrayal of the Israeli prime minister in this caricature, however, is even coarser and surpasses Der Stürmer in depicting results of the Jew’s actions: a sea of blood and a graveyard with crosses seems to indicate that the victims are Christians.20 The message here is again religious: the Jew kills both Christians and Muslims. The Jewish Satan, represented here by Sharon, is a frightening ghoul whom Christians must fight.
6. The Jew as a Monster
In a caricature that is considered one of the most anti- Jewish in history, the Jew is shown as a mythological monster that endangers the world. Kikeriki was the first publication known to focus on anti-Jewish caricatures. It was published in Vienna and was probably the inspiration for Der Stürmer, which began to appear in Germany in 1923. Kikeriki was under Jewish ownership.21
The alleged nature of the leader of the Jewish state, Ariel Sharon, needs no further explanation. Siri Dokken says that “a political caricature does not show what a person looks like. It is rather my personal perception of how he or she does the job or of the situation that person is in.”22
Image 11: Vienna, c. 1900 (Kikeriki)
Image 12: “The Middle East Not Quite Before the Storm” (caricature by Siri Dokken, Dagsavisen, 4 March 2003).
Did this caricature express Dokken’s and Dagsavisen’s frustration that the Jews were endangering peace in the Middle East and perhaps the rest of the world? Or was it an eruption of a more traditional attitude?
7. The Jew Hinders Peace
These caricatures are so similar that it is difficult to imagine the second could have been drawn without a sidelong glance at the first. In both, the Jew is a giant who cares little about peace or his neighbors. In the former, the word Jew is clearly visible to the right. In the latter, the Jewish kippa is placed on the former Israeli prime minister’s head, although he seldom wore a kippa. Also, the nose helps to identify the “typical Jew.”
Image 13: Germany, 1933-1945, “The Jew: The Initiator and Prolonger of War” (German Federal Archives, Koblenz, 1933-1945).
Image 14: “With a Roadmap for Peace” (caricature by Roar Hagen, Verdens Gang, 30 May 2003).
The Jew in these caricatures, with his half-closed, drowsy eyes, has no semblance of decency or emotions. He wields colossal power; even the mighty United States, like Europe in the past, cannot cope with the Jewish problem.
The common message of these two caricatures is that the Jew is the sole obstacle to peace and the cause of war. This was said in regard to both of the world wars.
Nowadays many Norwegian and other European leaders seem to assume that the threat of war could be avoided if only the Jewish state would stop being arrogant, oppressive, and expansionist. Caricatures such as the above incite against Jews. The Nazis’ “Final Solution” was passively accepted (even by the United States) and implemented in Europe after generations of brainwashing. Today there are efforts to create a similar climate.
8. Secular Media Propagating Religious Ideas
Image 15: The Star of David over Bethlehem (caricature by Inge Grødum, Aftenposten, 18 May 2002).
The (Jewish) Star of David, by replacing the (Christian) Star of Bethlehem, informs the reader that Jewry has converted Bethlehem into a Jewish place. Hence the Jews are acting against the Christians, who regard Bethlehem as a holy city. The three camel riders symbolize the Three Wise Men who, according to Christian tradition, foresaw Jesus’ birth and came to visit him in Bethlehem, over which the Star of Bethlehem shone.23 The caricature insinuates that Christians have to stop Jewish violence but fail to do so.
Image 16: Israeli tanks firing at the Star of Bethlehem (caricature by Inge Grødum, Aftenposten, 05 April 2002).
This conveys the idea that the Jews are at war with Christianity. The symbolic number three appears in several caricatures.
Image 17: “Christmas in Bethlehem” (caricature by Inge Grødum, editorial, Aftenposten, 27 December 2001).
The caricature suggests how the Jews oversee and control the Christian town of Bethlehem. Again an impression is created that the Jews control the Christians, a message to be remembered by the readers during the Christmas holiday.
Image 18: The Jewish plan on the Christian New Year’s Eve: Kill a Muslim (caricature by Inge Grødum, Aftenposten, 31 December 2002).
While the (good) Christian reader celebrates the New Year, the (evil) Jew Sharon plans to kill the Muslim Arafat. The hanging rope is made of an Arab keffiyeh. This image in Christian Europe reminds the Christians not to forget their duties toward the Jews: not only to celebrate New Year but also, in the name of love, to protect the Muslims from the Jews.
Image 19: Christmas Eve 2002: The Star of Bethlehem and the three wise men from the East (caricature by Finn Graff, Dagbladet, 24 January 2002).
Jewish wickedness, symbolized by the Star of David trapping Arafat, is meant to arouse Christian anger. The Three Wise Men abandon their religious duties and ride away on their camels. The message is obvious: the Muslims are victims of the Jews, and the Christians must not neglect their moral and religious duty to thwart the Jews.
Although the Norwegian media is largely secular, it shows a fixation with religious anti-Jewish motifs, many of which have age-old roots. Caricatures and articles create the impression that the Jews are combating Christianity for world domination. Although many journalists present Israel as the world’s worst problem, most know that the “Middle East conflict” is just a fraction of the Muslim war against all other ethnic groups, not to mention the numerous Muslim internal wars. In many conversations this author had with Norwegian journalists, not one continued to deny these realities after a number of places were mentioned, including Kashmir and Sudan, where Muslims attack non-Muslims.
It seems that while some of the journalists simply hate Jews, many more are simply afraid to deal with the difficult problem and prefer the easy solution. Instead of the frightening global jihad, they prefer to see a smaller issue, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, that supposedly can be easily solved.
Journalists cannot express any opinion. The media that employs them decides on guidelines and terminology to be used.24 Two journalists even told this author that they were pressured by colleagues for being “too positive toward Israel.” A clear factor is the common fear of Muslims; it is much safer to blame Israel.
Anti-Israelism in the Norwegian media uses sophisticated propaganda techniques to arouse anti-Jewish sentiments among the public, who are subtly told that they are also part of the conflict. Since the Jews are against Christianity, the Christians must stand together with the Muslim Palestinians against the Jews.
Most Norwegian media kept silent, however, when terrorists seized the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem in April and May 2002 and held nuns and priests as hostages. These terrorists belonged to organizations collaborating with the PA including the PLO, the Al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigade, and Hamas. Several had earlier participated in murderous attacks on Jewish civilians. The Norwegian media also kept silent while Christians were persecuted in Bethlehem after Arafat and the PLO took control there, Bethlehem’s Christian population having declined from at least 60 percent in 1990 to 20 percent in 2001.25 But when Israeli forces surrounded the church and tried to liberate its kidnapped employees and arrest the terrorists, the Norwegian media suddenly took interest.
The caricatures in this group distort what actually happened. The Jews are shown to have supplanted the Star of Bethlehem with their own symbol, the Star of David. The media cynically exploits the sanctity of Bethlehem and Christmas to stir feelings of hatred against the Jews. For centuries, incitement of this sort led to bloody attacks on the Jews of Europe.
Arafat, who had Mein Kampf published in Ramallah,26 was responsible for the murder of more Jews than anyone else since the Hitler era. Nevertheless, many in the Norwegian media celebrated him as a hero and as a victim of the Jews. Norway’s economic support per inhabitant to the PLO/ PA is far greater than any other country’s.27 The fact that Hamas has controlled the PA since January 2006 has not led Norway to stop the funding. On April 10 2006, Foreign Minister Jonas Gehr Støre declared that “Norway remains a major donor to the Palestinian people. We provide about half a billion kroner a year.”28
9. The Jew as Nazi
Image 20: Sharon the Nazi (caricature by Finn Graff, Dagbladet, 4 April 2002).
The retired secretary-general of the Norwegian Labor Party, Haakon Lie, wrote in his autobiography: “The Labor Party conducted serious attacks against Israel; it used caricatures of Finn Graff, which evoked in detail the anti- Semitic illustrations of Der Stürmer in Hitler’s days and of The Crocodile in Moscow.”29
Graff, a left-wing caricaturist, was born in Germany in 1938 and moved to Norway, where his images evoke a positive response. They suggest that the evil in the world originates from two sources, the United States and Israel. Several of his caricatures show the Jews controlling the United States.
10. Jews Must Not Defend Themselves
Image 21: Olmert the Nazi (caricature by Finn Graff, Dagbladet, 10 July 2006).
Image 22: “The Extremists’ War” (caricature by Inge Grødum, Aftenposten, 15 July 2006).
In July 2006, after Hamas and Hizballah attacks on Israel including kidnappings, murders, and shelling, Israel’s government finally ordered the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) to fight back. Some Norwegian politicians, and to a much greater extent the journalists, reacted immediately with criticism of Israel but not of the terrorists. The state of Israel, its government, and especially Prime Minister Ehud Olmert were condemned in every conceivable forum.
Some Arab journalists criticized Hizballah and its Iranian patron. Yet most of the Norwegian journalists did not even mention this Arab criticism.30
The severe Norwegian attacks on Israel cannot be explained by concern for the Arabs. Norwegians and other European concern for the Arabs only arises when Jews can be blamed for their suffering. Criticism of Israel is never so rapid and harsh as when Jews defend themselves. This occurred when Israel decided to build a security barrier, engaged in targeted assassinations of terrorist leaders, and when Olmert ordered the recent campaign. In true European tradition, Jews are expected to suffer but not to defend themselves.
The right to self-defense is far from consistently accepted in modern Europe. Norwegian soldiers fight in Afghanistan against terrorists who do not directly threaten Norway, but Israel is vilified for retaliating against terrorists actively engaged in murderous attacks on Israelis.
In Image 21, Israel’s prime minister is the commandant of a death camp.31 Olmert is dressed in a Nazi uniform within the camp, which is connoted by a high wall, watchtowers, and barbed wire. Above the gate can be read “Jedem Das Seine[m],” which in poor German means “Each one gets what he deserves.” Outside the barracks in front of Olmert lie many Arab corpses. Olmert stands in Nazi boots, laughing and pleased, holding a sniper gun while an Arab he deliberately shot in the head is bleeding. The title of the article describing Olmert and Israel is “Successful,” adding further demonization. The newspaper refused to publish a reaction by this author, stating that it “refuses to allow reprimanding in the newspaper.”
In Image 22, the mighty Olmert tramples tiny Lebanon leaving bloody traces. In the background is Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Iran, presented as a dwarf compared to Israel, can only watch helplessly from the sidelines while Israel destroys peaceful Lebanon.
11. The Jew Likes to Kill
The centuries-old blood libel, which claims that Jews kill Christian children as part of their religious rituals (particularly at Passover), has now been turned into the myth of Jews killing Palestinian children. In both caricatures the Jew is bloodthirsty and murderous. Jewishness is represented by the kippa in the first caricature and by the Star of David in the second.
Image 23: Russia, 1907 – “The Radical” ( Pluvium, St. Petersburg).
Image 24: Norway, 2003 – “Dance Macabre” (caricature by Inge Grødum, Aftenposten, 13 April 2003; Sharon says: “Who dares to throw the last stone?”).
One eye of the Jew is closed or covered, the other eye aiming to kill. The subliminal message is: the Jew turns a blind eye to moral feelings; the Jew is callous and inhuman. He displays no feelings before he shoots, and he shoots children. The Jewish arrogance is evident even in the weaponry: the old “rascal” is armed with a pistol and a dagger; the modern Jew uses a machinegun against children.
The Jew’s face is long-nosed and ugly; such images were seen by children in Nazi Germany, and they influence Norwegian children today. According to the many articles and caricatures published in Aftenposten, the Jews continue to behave in a brutal, primitive manner that arouses indignation in civilized people. Unlike Der Stürmer, Aftenposten is a mainstream newspaper, Norway’s most influential as noted, and is considered moderate.
That caricature illustrated an anti-Semitic article by the journalist Cordelia Edvardson, whom Aftenposten makes full use of in conveying crude anti-Israeli allegations. Edvardson is herself a Jew who was rescued from Auschwitz and now lives in Israel. In several of her articles in Aftenposten and other newspapers, she has compared Israelis to Nazis. In an article illustrated by a drawing of an old train car, Edvardson claimed that Israel forcibly transferred hundreds of thousands of Arabs. She did not, however, protest against the forced deportation of Jews from Gaza and northern Samaria some years later.
Conclusion
There are striking similarities between Nazi-era and contemporary anti-Jewish caricatures, as seen in many Norwegian examples. Then as now, the artists use sophisticated methods to incite emotions. Common motifs include:
• Jews rule and exploit the world.
• Jews are evil and inhuman.
• Jews hate peace and propagate wars.
• Jews are unlike other people.
• Judaism is against other religions.
Recent caricatures convey that Jews are fighting Christians, who must therefore ally with the Muslim Palestinian Arabs.
There is no doubt that Jew-hatred is alive in today’s Norway. The situation is deteriorating with Jews under increasing attacks. This hatred is spread by the leaders of the society – journalists, intellectuals, church and state leaders, including bishops and prime ministers. They belittle the Holocaust while providing political and economic support to elements striving to exterminate world Jewry, first and foremost the Jews of Israel.
The situation, however, is not hopeless. Despite Norway’s history of anti-Semitism, several factors suggest that it is possible to counter the current trend and foster a better attitude toward Jews and Israel. To begin with, the most virulent and effective anti-Semitism originates in a very small, albeit active, elite part of the population.
Second, the Jew-hatred spread by these circles can be confronted because these people are generally sensitive about their image. To be effective, such confrontation must be massive and should come from well-known bodies such as the Israeli government and organizations that fight anti-Semitism. Examples of such efforts are the complaints sent last August by the Simon Wiesenthal Center against the Norwegian caricatures and against the proposal for an amendment to eliminate tax deductions for donations to Israel.32 The few cases in which the Israeli Foreign Ministry did protest against anti-Semitism, and the even fewer cases where the Norwegian Jewish community did so, often achieved good results.
Indeed, Norwegians in general are concerned about their reputation. The Norwegian media often cites how Norway is described abroad. Criticism of Norway and possible damage to its reputation are taken seriously. Leaders often respond the next day to complaints that appear in the media.
A decisive Jewish and Israeli policy against Norwegian anti-Semitism could also improve relations between Norway and Jews and Israel. Fifty years ago Norwegian schools used maps of “Jødeland” (The Jews’ Land), portraying Israel positively as the Jewish state; thirty years ago Norwegian schoolchildren learned to sing the Israeli song “Hava Nagila” and were taught to relate positively to Jews. Today, schoolchildren learn about Israeli soldiers who kill innocent Arab youngsters and aggressive Zionists who forcibly occupy other people’s land. Instead of letting the situation deteriorate even further, it must be improved. It is impossible to eradicate anti-Semitism in Norway and Europe generally, but Jews must work to reduce it to tolerable levels.
Appendix: Who Is behind the Caricatures?
1. The Caricaturists and Journalists
• Ulf Aas has been a caricaturist for Aftenposten since 1948. His caricatures were purchased by the Norwegian National Gallery and other important galleries. He has received many prizes, and in 1999 was awarded Norway’s most prestigious Knight First Class of St. Olav’s Order for his contribution to Norwegian art and culture.
• Dave Coverly is a freelance caricaturist. He sells his work through Creators Syndicate, Los Angeles.33
• Siri Dokken has worked since 1995 for Dagsavisen where her caricatures appear almost daily. She previously worked for the newspaper Dag ogTid.
• Finn Graff was born in Germany in 1938 and immigrated to Norway in 1946. He previously worked for Morgenposten and Arbeiderbladet and has worked for Dagbladet since 1988. The well-known Graff caricatures have been exhibited in Norway, including the National Gallery, and abroad, and have received prizes in Norway and elsewhere. In 2000 and 2005, the Norwegian Media Businesses’ Association awarded him the Newspaper Caricaturist of the Year award. Graff’s caricatures are extremely violent and grotesque by Norwegian standards, commonly attacking the United States, Israel, and the Norwegian Right. No other caricaturist so extensively compares Jews to Nazis as Graff has done.
• Inge Grødum is one of the most renowned caricaturists in Norway, his works appearing almost daily in Aftenposten. He earlier worked for the newspaper Nationen and his works have been exhibited in Norway and abroad.
• Roar Hagen has worked for Verdens Gang since 1986, previously working for Sunnmørsposten and Stavanger Aftenblad. His caricatures have also been published in Die Zeit, the International Herald Tribune, Der Spiegel, Time, Newsweek, and elsewhere.34
• Morten M. Kristiansen works for Verdens Gang but has also published caricatures in Dagbladet. He is also a political commentator, furniture designer, and inventor.
• Oddmund Mikkelsen has worked for Hamar Arbeiderblad since 1988.
• Magne Skjæraasen is a journalist whose article was apparently the inspiration for Image 8 above. He became best known as a columnist for Aftenposten’s culture section. The Jews of Oslo consider him Jew-friendly; many of them, like him, reject Jew-hatred outside Israel but criticize Israel for its self-defense against terrorism and support external pressure against it. Skjæraasen’s attitude toward the Jews is an interesting example of the new anti-Semitism: he has been positive toward the small Jewish minority of Norway but negative toward the large number of Jews in Israel.
• Herbjørn Skogstad currently works for the local newspaper Oppland Arbeiderblad, and earlier for the newspaper Bergensavisa.
2. The Newspapers
Many local newspapers are published in Norway because of the great distances as well as the social structure, which is characterized by numerous small communities. In 2004, 166 newspapers had a total daily circulation of 2,855,071.35 Many of the local newspapers depend on generous government subsidies.
The newspapers mentioned in the text include:
• Aftenposten: The Oslo region, where power is concentrated, is the country’s most important one, and Oslo’s newspaper Aftenposten is the most influential. It is conservative and the second largest paper in Norway with a circulation of 250,000 in 2004. Aftenposten is owned by Schibsted, a leading media group in Scandinavia. Schibsted is apparently a purely economic interest group and not a political actor.
• Dagbladet: With a circulation of 183,000 in 2004, Dagbladet is Norway’s third largest newspaper. Published in tabloid format, it is not sold to subscribers but can be bought in gas stations, shops, and kiosks. Dagbladet’s shares are owned by different companies and concerns. It seems the owners’ interest in the newspaper is economic and not political.36
• Dagsavisen’s circulation is 33,000. It has always been associated with the Labor movement, and in 1894 became the main organ of the Norwegian Labor Party. In 1996 and 1999, it changed owners and is now owned by the Dagsavisen Foundation.37 Its political affiliation, however, has not changed.
• Hamar Arbeiderblad was established by local branches of the Labor Party in 1925. Its circulation is 28,500. Today, it is the largest newspaper of the Hedmark region (approximately the size of Israel). Formally, it is now a nonpartisan newspaper.38
• Oppland Arbeiderblad, a local newspaper with a circulation of 28,500, was established in 1924 as a Labor Party local newspaper. Today it is owned by the A-pressen, a left-wing concern (see below).39
• Verdens Gang (VG) is Norway’s largest paper with a circulation of 365,000. It is a tabloid available in gas stations, shops and kiosks. It too is owned by Schibsted.
• The A-pressen concern was established in 1948 as Norsk Arbeiderpresse (Norwegian Labor Press), but its history began earlier with the founding of the first workers’ newspaper, Vort Arbeid (Our Work) in 1884. Vort Arbeid had a crucial influence on the formation of the Labor Party. In 1989, Norsk Arbeiderpresse merged with another company to form A-pressen. Its board was headed in 2005 by Gerd-Liv Valla, a former Stalin supporter who is also president of the Norwegian Confederation of Trade Unions (LO). On 1 May 2002 (Labor Day), Valla’s and the LO’s main agenda was a call to boycott Israel.
* * *
Notes
* The author thanks the many Christian Norwegians who are devoted to supporting the Jews and Israel. Without their activities, funding, and constant encouragement, NIS’s work against anti-Semitism in Norway would be impossible.
1. Malcolm Hay, The Foot of Pride: The Pressure of Christendom on the People of Israel for 1900 Years (Boston: Beacon, 1950). (Also published in 1975 as Thy Brother’s Blood: The Roots of Christian Anti-Semitism.)
2. Diplomatarium Norvegicum, Vol. 5 (1436), 469-73. Cited in Oskar Mendelsohn, Jødenes historie i Norge gjennom 300 år (Three Hundred Years of Jewish History in Norway), Vol. 1 (Oslo: Universitetsforlaget, 1969/1987), 10. [Norwegian]
3. Mendelsohn, Jødenes historie, 11.
4. Vebjørn Selbekk, Jødehat på norsk (Jew-Hatred in Norwegian) (Skjetten: Hermon, 2001), 42. [Norwegian]
5. The figures are for 2003/04, www.ssb.no/english/subjects/10/04/ 10/jeja_en.
6. Selbekk, Jødehat, 49.
7. Ibid., 50.
8. Forskning, No. 5 (1998); Forskning, 1 August 2000: Kirurgi på rasemessig grunnlag, http://tinylink.com/?64E9g57cpg. [Norwegian]
9. Aftenposten, 7 October 2003, www.aftenposten.no/nyheter/iriks/ oslo/article641877.ece. [Norwegian]
10. Monitor, 3 December 2003, www.oslodomkirke.no. [Norwegian]
11. Efraim Zuroff, “Worldwide Investigation and Prosecution of Nazi War Criminals: An Annual Status Report,” Simon Wiesenthal Center, 2002, http://tinylink.com/?4ZzezOpXvK.
12. Defense Minister Dag Jostein Fjærvoll confirmed the details. Defense Ministry press release No. 054/98, 7 September 1998. [Norwegian]
13. Manfred Gerstenfeld, “Anti-Semitic Motifs in Anti-Israelism,” Post-Holocaust and Anti-Semitism, 1 November 2002, www.jcpa.org/phas/phas-2.htm.
14. See the excellent analysis of Arieh Stav, Peace: The Arabian Caricature – A Study of Anti-Semitic Imagery (Jerusalem: Gefen, 1999). The book contains an important overview and reference list.
15. Manfred Gerstenfeld, interview with Joël Kotek, “Major Anti- Semitic Motifs in Arab Cartoons,” Post-Holocaust and Anti- Semitism, 21, 1 June 2004, www.jcpa.org/phas/phas-21.htm.
16. Stav, Peace.
17. The term Christian is used here to include believers as well as secular persons in countries that for generations have been under the influence of the Christian churches.
18. Prime Minister’s Office, press release 99/2006. [Norwegian]
19. http://memri.org/bin/cartoons.cgi?cat2.
20. It is also possible that the crosses were used because they are the common symbol for a grave in Christian Europe. But since journalists and Norwegian leaders have often accused Israeli Jews of fighting against Christians (as in Bethlehem or Beit Jalla), the first explanation is highly probable.
21. Arieh Stav, personal conversation, 23 August 2006.
22. Siri Dokken, interview in Dagsavisen, 29 December 2004, www.dagsavisen.no/kultur/article1389791.ece. [Norwegian]
23. Matthew 2:1-12, and Christian tradition.
24. Several journalists confirmed this in private conversations.
25. Yoram Ettinger, “The Islamization of Bethlehem by Arafat,” 25 December 2001, www.acpr.org.il/cloakrm/clk117.html.
26. It was published by Al-Shuruq, based in Ramallah. The book became a bestseller in the Palestinian Authority in 1999. See: www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=78801
27. Norwegian Foreign Ministry’s press release from 08 December 2003, Nr.: 207/03.
28. “Support to the Palestinians,” Norwegian Foreign Ministry, press release, 10 April 2006. [Norwegian]
29. Haakon Lie, Slik jeg ser det (As I See It), Part 2 (Oslo: Tiden Norsk forlag, 1983), 132. [Norwegian]
30. Ahmed al-Jarallah, “No to Syrian, Iran Agents, editorial in Arab Times (Kuwait), 15 July 2006, www.arabtimesonline.com/ arabtimes/opinion/view.asp?msgID=1242.
31. Note the copying of a scene from Steven Spielberg’s film Schindler’s List.
32. http://norskisraelsenter.no/engl.
33. www.speedbump.com/contact.html.
34. Verdens Gang’s annual report for 2004, www.vg.no/vginfo/ vg2004.pdf. [Norwegian]
35. Norwegian Media Businesses’ Association, www.mediebedriftene. no. [Norwegian]
36. Dagbladet’s annual report for 2003, www.dagbladet.no/avishuset/ pdf/aarsrapport2003.pdf. [Norwegian]
37. www.dagsavisen.no/omdagsavisen/historie.
38. http://service.h-a.no/index.asp?menuItem=23.
39. Arne Næss, news editor of Oppland Arbeiderblad, telephone conversation, 9 September 2005.
* * *
Erez Uriely is founder and director of the Norwegian Centre against anti-Semitism, a nongovernmental organization focusing on hostile expressions against Jews and Israel in the Norwegian media and public institutions. He holds an MS degree and has published many articles in Norwegian newspapers.

Question: what was the title of the protocols of the Elders of zion published under

Answer: Den nye verdenskeiser

what was the title of the protocols of the Elders of zion published under

Question: which newspaper praised saxlund for fighting "our race war"

Answer: Nationen

which newspaper praised saxlund for fighting "our race war"

Question: what did saxlund sue for

Answer: libel

Question: what was the title of den nye verdenskeiser

Answer: The Protocols of the Elders of Zion

what was the title of den nye verdenskeiser

Question: when was the protocols of the Elders of zion published

Answer: 1920

when was the protocols of the Elders of zion published

Question: what did nationen praise saxlund for fighting

Answer: our race war

what did nationen praise saxlund for fighting

Question: where was the protocols of the Elders of zion published

Answer: Norway

where was the protocols of the Elders of zion published

Question: who sued nationen for libel

Answer: Saxlund

Continued debate The former chief rabbi of Norway , Michael Melchior , argued that antisemitism is one motive for the bans : " I wo n't say this is the only motivation , but it 's certainly no coincidence that one of the first things Nazi Germany forbade was kosher slaughter .

Despite the EU Parliament's vote Wednesday to legalize “shechita,” the Jewish method of humane animal slaughter is still very much in danger.
It was reported on Thursday that the European Jewish Community “hailed” the European Parliament’s vote to legalize the traditional Jewish method of slaughter into European law. However, it was later clarified that in fact, the Parliament only has consultative status in this case, and that the European Union’s Council of Agricultural Ministers will have the final say when it convenes next month.
"During the original debate on this issue in Norway, one of the parliamentarians said straight out, 'If they don't like it, let them go live somewhere else.'"
“Shechita,” as the Jewish method of animal slaughter is referred to in Hebrew, is currently forbidden in Norway, Sweden, Finland, Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania; Switzerland permits shechita for poultry only. Switzerland and Norway are not member nations of the EU.
Though the EU Parliament vote represents a significant victory for the coalition of the European Jewish Congress, as well the Conference of European Rabbis and Shechita EU, the fight is far from over. The Parliament resolved only to “introduce laws” that would be binding across Europe to allow animal slaughter "in accordance with religious rites.”
However, the final text of the proposed amendment to EU law will be brought before the above-mentioned Council in June – but not necessarily in a manner favorable to Jewish interests. The Council, which will convene on June 22-23 in Brno, Czech Republic, will vote on a proposal to require that all animals be pre-stunned before slaughter.
If the regulation passes, EU Member States would ban a practice that has been governed by halakhah (Jewish Law) and observed by Jews for thousands of years. Pre-stunning is forbidden by Jewish Law, and thus a ban on kosher slaughter in the European Union may be a reality as of next month.
A spokesperson for the European Jewish Congress, which has been spearheading efforts to legalize shechita all across Europe, confirmed to Israel National News that “only if the Council decides to pass exactly the same proposal as amended by the Parliament will this change of legalization take place.” The spokesperson further acknowledged that though the Council must take the Parliament vote into account, it is “unlikely” that the same vote will pass in the Council.
Melchior: "...no coincidence that one of the first things Nazi Germany forbade was kosher slaughter.”
"The regulation must not be drafted to allow Governments in Europe to threaten our culture and our freedom to observe our religion," said Philip Carmel of the Conference of European Rabbis. "We will be working very closely with Member States to achieve a satisfactory outcome for all Jewish communities in Europe when they agree upon the final text in June."
Rabbi Michael Melchior, former chief rabbi of Norway and a former Knesset Member, has said that kosher slaughter is more humane than the more common methods of animal slaughter. "The shechitah process ensures that the animal loses consciousness immediately," he explained. "We have been dealing with this issue for many years, and there are many scientific studies that back us up."
The anti-shechita campaign has been viewed as anti-Semitic by many Jews in Europe. When Holland outlawed the kosher slaughter of large bulls in 2002, Rabbi Melchior responded, "They simply don't want foreigners, and they don't want Jews. I won't say this is the only motivation, but it's certainly no coincidence that one of the first things Nazi Germany forbade was kosher slaughter.”
“I also know,” the rabbi said, “that during the original debate on this issue in Norway, where shechitah has been banned since 1930, one of the parliamentarians said straight out, 'If they don't like it, let them go live somewhere else.'"

Question: who was the former chief rabbi of norway

Answer: Michael Melchior

who was the former chief rabbi of norway

Question: what was one of the first things nazi germany forbade

Answer: kosher slaughter

what was one of the first things nazi germany forbade

Question: what did michael melchior argue was one of the main reasons for the bans

Answer: antisemitism

what did michael melchior argue was one of the main reasons for the bans

Question: who forbade kosher slaughter

Answer: Nazi Germany

Question: what country did michael melchior come from

Answer: Norway

what country did michael melchior come from

Question: what was michael melchior's position

Answer: chief rabbi of Norway

Question: what position did michael melchior hold

Answer: chief rabbi

Question: who argued that antisemitism is one reason for the bans

Answer: former chief rabbi of Norway

who argued that antisemitism is one reason for the bans

Proponents of the continued ban , including officials from the Norwegian Food Safety Authority claimed that animals slaughtered according to shechita were conscious for " several minutes " after they were slaughtered , and writer and farmer Tore Stubberud claimed that animals in Judaism had " no moral status ... pure objects for ... archaic , religious needs " , and wondered whether the EU , in allowing for such slaughter had become " purely a bank , without values " .

Hold deg oppdatert på utenriksstoffet
Se igjennom tusenvis av oppskrifter
Spill med kjente og ukjente
Last ned over 275 reiseguider
Slakting uten bedøvelse er uakseptabelt, siden det kan gå flereminutter fra halsen overskjæres, til dyret mister bevisstheten,skriver Tore Stubberud. Her fra halal-slakting. Foto: TERJE GUSTAVSEN
Dyrevelferd. Diskrimeringsombud Beate Gangås vil synkronisere Norge med EU, med muslimenes og jødenes krav om fullverdig rituell slakting, uten bedøvelse.
Det foregår nå en liberalismedebatt, som retter seg mot fri flyt og en markedsliberalisme med autoritære trekk. Å lystre markedet i alt, kan bety å vende ryggen til verdier som engang utgjorde Europas idéinnhold, og EU kan kollidere med seg selv. Er EU blitt en ren bank, uten verdier?
Dyrevelferd har vært begrunnet på mange måter av filosofene. Jeremy Bentham mente allerede på 1700-tallet at vi overalt burde forsøke å øke den generelle sum av lyst og minske summen av lidelse. Senere, bl.a. hos Kenneth Goodpaster, oppsto ideen om at moralsk status er knyttet til streben etter liv i sin alminnelighet. Dypøkologene har i fortsettelsen av Arne Næss stilt spørsmålet om «fjellet har et ansikt», og naturen har for dem en egenverdi. Mange er nå bekymret for metemarken som føler smerte på kroken. Dyreforsøk er forkastelig, men ikke halal?
EU har et generelt forbud mot slakting uten bedøvelse, men gir villig dispensasjoner. Bare fire europeiske land tillater ingen dispensasjoner: Norge, Sverige, Sveits og Island. Dyrevernere, Landbruksdepartementet, Bondelaget og slakteriene, har holdt stand mot kniven uten bedøvelse. Det er et lite mirakel.
Men ved tradisjonell halal og kosher har ikke dyrene noen moralsk status. De er på slaktebenken rene objekter for muslimers og jøders arkaiske, religiøse behov. Det er et overgrep mot dyrene, og parkerer den europeiske tanke om innlevelse, kunnskap og rettigheter for dem som er svakere enn oss selv.
I EUs ministerrådsmøte 23. juni i år ble det klart at Norge kan beholde sitt absolutte krav om bedøvelse under slakting. Norge kan nå ikke tvinges til å godkjenne halal og kosher uten bedøvelse, slik både Jan Benjamin Rødner, Det mosaiske trossamfunn, og Shoaib Sultan, Islamsk Råd Norge, hadde håpet på.
EUs håndtering av rituell slakting er en demonstrasjon av en markedsliberalisme som er grotesk. For å gi dispensasjon for rituell slakting henvises det til religionsfriheten, forankret i artikkel 10 i Fundamental Rights of the European Union. Dette er en tidsriktig offergave på integreringens alter. Dyrelidelsen veksles inn i merverdi. Men det er dyrene som betaler.
Skal vi tro at dispensasjonen fra bedøvelse i EU er ideelt begrunnet? Neppe. I EUs pengemaskin ser man det markedet særlig muslimene utgjør. Det er store tall, og mange dyreskjebner. Her lukter det penger.
I EU slaktes hvert år 360 millioner dyr. Opptil 20 prosent av alle kalver i Spania, Nederland og Belgia slaktes rituelt. Og i tillegg rituelt ca. 50 prosent av alle lam i Frankrike og 90 prosent i Belgia. To varestrømmer koster for mye. I sine fremstøt for det rituelle slaktemarkedet trenger EU ingen kulturrelativistiske sosialantropologer. Alliansen mellom religiøse fundamentalister og antirasister trengs heller ikke nå. De betyr bare sandpåstrøing. Forbrukerrettigheter, respekt for religiøse minoriteter og slakterienes kapitalakkumulasjon jobber sammen. Og pengene teller mest.
I et dyreetisk perspektiv er EUs praksis kynisk. To dyr skal slaktes nå, og møtes med regelverk om dyrevelferd frem til avlivingen. Nå skal det ene dyret inn i panikken og den religiøse sfære. Det andre skal skånsomt bedøves. Her er det tilfeldighetene og markedet som skal avgjøre. Har ikke også dyret et ansikt?
Veterinærene protesterer, men høres ikke. Siden 2002 har Den europeiske veterinærforening (FVE) hevdet at slakting av dyr uten bedøvelse er uakseptabelt, uansett hvordan det gjennomføres.
Veterinærene minner oss om sakens brutale sider. Deres begrunnelse er ikke bare dyreetisk, men teknisk. Slakting uten bedøvelse er uakseptabelt, siden det kan gå flere minutter fra halsen (med luftrør og spiserør) overskjæres, til dyret mister bevisstheten.
Storfe er særlig utsatt, av to grunner. Blodet koagulerer hos storfe svært raskt, halspulsårene tilstoppes og bevissthetstapet utsettes. Den andre grunnen er en arterie som hos storfe ligger så dypt beskyttet i halshvirvlene at den ikke overskjæres ved rituell slakting. Hjernen kan fungere i fem-seks minutter p.g.a. fortsatt tilførsel av oksygen. Resultatet er dyr med overskårne struper som i panikk løper rautende omkring. Dyr har, som oss mennesker, en dyp emosjonalitet og evne til å foregripe ytterligere smerte (antesiperende bevissthet, Hans Jonas). Smerte er kroppens selvforsvar, sa Bergson.
Volden mot dyrene er instrumentell og rasjonell for å nå det målet som skal rettferdige gjøre volden (Hannah Arendt). Fordi dyret vil forsvare seg og angripe den som påfører smerten, har markedet funnet opp Weinbergerfellen. Det er en hydraulisk maskin som under rituell slakting spenner fast dyret, snur det opp ned, og blottlegger halsen. Weinbergerfellen er spesiell smertefull, siden dyret får problemer med å puste pga. blod, slim og oppkast. Fellen er en bisarr konstruksjon, en rasjonell blanding av stål, plast og olje, for å tjene det religiøse behov. Slaktemetoden er voldelig og rasjonell, og samtidig dypt irrasjonell, fra et opplysningsstandpunkt. Veterinærene i FVE ville forby den, men EU-politikerne sa foreløpig nei.
EU-forordningen av 23. juni sukrer pillen. Den fremmer samtidig med dispensasjonsretten til slakt uten bedøvelse, flere nye regler som er ment å øke dyrevelferden. På hvert slakteri utpekes en person med kompetansebevis, dyrene skal forblø raskere, og en skal være særlig oppmerksom på dyr som synes å føle smerte etter slakting. Privat, rituell slakting vil også bli forbudt.
Medlemmene av FVE har i sin maktesløshet laget en forslagsliste for å dempe dyrenes lidelser. I et dyrevernperspektiv virker det nokså grotesk. Dyrene skal helst avlives stående. Sårkantene må ikke berøre hverandre. De smerter. Slaktelinjen skal ikke ha for høy hastighet. Kniven skal være skarp. Lengden på kniven skal helst være to ganger bredden over dyrets nakke. Dette er gode ønsker i et redselskabinett.
Den eneste forskjell på rituell og normal slakting er i Norge bønnen. Ordningen er både antroposentrisk og eurosentrisk. Men den er som skapt for dyrene. For de lider litt mindre.
Det har tatt Europa to hundre år å innlemme dyrevelferd i vår kultur.
EU bør her følge Norge innen dyrevern, og ikke la den flyte fritt. De gamle norske slakterne sa «Ikke for hat, bare for mat». Det var også en slags bønn.
KREMLVENN. For å lykkes som «opposisjonsparti» i Russland er det viktig å støtte statsminister Vladimir Putin. Derfor kan oligarken Mikhail Prokhorov bli ny statsminister. Les saken
I Aftenposten 26. juni viser klimaskeptikeren Ivar Giaever en omgang med fakta så omtrentlig som vi heldigvis sjelden ser fra andre nobelprisvinnere. Les saken
Les saken
I sin kronikk om Christian Ringnes’ meget omtalte skulpturpark på Ekeberg, lager professor i kunsthistorie Ina Blom en egen vri på sin aversjon mot investorens damepark. Les saken
Les saken
Aftenposten har nylig hatt flere reportasjer om eksamensjuks knyttet til PC-bruk. Kunnskapsminister Kristin Halvorsen (SV) sier 23. juni «skoler og lærere må få økt kunnskap om hvordan elever jukser». Denne kunnskapen har vi hatt lenge, og den er formidlet videre til departementet gjentatte ganger. Les saken
Tiden er inne. Tiden er inne til å benytte stormen i kulturminnevernet til vindkraft. Til å gjøre noe med det som er kjerneproblemet. Les saken
For enkelt. Ved de mange medieoppslagene om svikt på offentlige sykehus på kreftområdet, viser helsemyndighetene til de regionale helseforetakene (RHF-ene) og deres «sørge-for-ansvar» for helsetjenester. Les saken
LEDERSKIFTE. Ungarn har ikke glitret som EU-leder. Det skyldes ikke minst den skremmende politiske utviklingen på hjemmebane. Les saken
Det holder ikke å bytte ut de politiske lederne. Les saken
Flere titalls tusen lesere liker Aftenposten på Facebook, og diskuterer et bredt utvalg av saker fra Aftenposten daglig. Delta i debatten på Facebook du også.
Aftenpostens debatter og kronikker finnes også på vår egen Facebook-side. Følg Aftenposten meninger her.
I DEBATTSENTRALEN kan du diskutere med andre Aftenposten.no-lesere. Det er allerede skrevet flere millioner innlegg om nesten hundre temaer.
På Debattsentralens forside finner du full oversikt over alle debattgruppene.

Question: who claimed that animals in judaism had no moral status

Answer: Tore Stubberud

who claimed that animals in judaism had no moral status

Question: how long were animals slaughtered according to shechita conscious after they were slaughtered

Answer: several minutes

how long were animals slaughtered according to shechita conscious after they were slaughtered

Question: who claimed that animals slaughtered according to shechita were conscious for "several minutes

Answer: Norwegian Food Safety Authority

who claimed that animals slaughtered according to shechita were conscious for "several minutes

Question: what did the norwegian food safety authority claim animals were conscious for several minutes after they

Answer: shechita

what did the norwegian food safety authority claim animals were conscious for several minutes after they

Question: what religion did tore stubberud claim had no moral status

Answer: Judaism

what religion did tore stubberud claim had no moral status

Question: what organization claimed animals were conscious for "several minutes" after they were slaughtered

Answer: the Norwegian Food Safety Authority

what organization claimed animals were conscious for "several minutes" after they were slaughtered

Question: what organization did tore stubberud wonder about

Answer: the EU

what organization did tore stubberud wonder about

Question: what did tore stubberud claim animals in judaism had no moral status

Answer: archaic, religious needs

what did tore stubberud claim animals in judaism had no moral status

Of these, 1,643 were Norwegian citizens, 240 were foreign citizens, and 290 were stateless.

Of these , around 900 Jews were smuggled out of the country by the Norwegian resistance movement , mostly to Sweden but some also to the United Kingdom .

Of these , 1,643 were Norwegian citizens , 240 were foreign citizens , and 290 were stateless .

Norway
German Invasion of Norway
On April 9, 1940, Germany invaded Norway. Germany sought to secure naval bases for use against the British fleet in the North Sea and to guarantee vital iron-ore shipments from neutral Sweden.
Despite British attempts to help, Norway surrendered to Germany on June 10. King Haakon VII and the Norwegian government escaped to London. Vidkun Quisling, who in 1933 had founded a fascist organization modeled after Germany's Nazi Party, proclaimed himself prime minister. Quisling's name henceforth became synonymous with collaboration. The Germans quickly became disillusioned with him and established their own administration, but intermittently used Quisling as a figurehead.
Jews in Norway
There were approximately 2,100 Jews in Norway at the time of the German invasion, including about 350 mostly German and Austrian Jewish refugees who had found safe haven there in the 1930s. Restrictions on Jews initially were sporadic, but with the German invasion of the Soviet Union on June 22, 1941, numerous Jews in the northern part of the country were incarcerated. Widespread arrests of Norwegian Jews began in the fall of 1942 with Norwegian police and paramilitary formations supporting SS and German police units. In early October, the authorities arrested all male Jews in Trondheim, a northern Norwegian port city. On October 26 and 27, 260 male Jews were arrested in Oslo, Norway's capital. During the night of November 25–26, 1942, all remaining Jews in Oslo, including women, children, the sick, and people with disabilities, were arrested and interned. They were deported on the "Donau," a ship requisitioned by the Quisling government, which took them to Germany. They were then deported to the Auschwitz-Birkenau killing center.
Despite protests by Norwegian church leaders and some segments of the population, the internment and deportation of Jews from Norway continued intermittently. Fortunately, many Jews received advance warnings of the roundups from Norwegian policemen and members of the underground. Many of Norway's Jews, about 1,000, escaped to neutral Sweden with the aid of the underground. Many others went into hiding.
Between 1940 and 1945, approximately 770 Jews were deported from Norway. Only about 34 survived; most of the others were murdered in Auschwitz. On May 8, 1945, German forces in Norway surrendered to the Allies. Quisling was arrested and found guilty of treason. He was executed on October 24, 1945.

Question: how many jews were in norway in 1942

Answer: 2,173

Question: how many jews were smuggled out of norway

Answer: 900

how many jews were smuggled out of norway

Question: how many people were norwegian citizens in 1942

Answer: 1,643

how many people were norwegian citizens in 1942

Question: where did most of the jews go after the holocaust

Answer: Sweden

where did most of the jews go after the holocaust

Question: how many norwegian citizens were stateless in 1942

Answer: 290

how many norwegian citizens were stateless in 1942

Question: how many of the deported jews were foreign citizens

Answer: 240

how many of the deported jews were foreign citizens

The collective part, totaling 250 million kr, was divided into three: Funds to sustain the Jewish community in Norway (150 million kr).

Eli Wiesel was suggested to lead the executive committee (60 million kr).

The collective part , totaling 250 million kr , was divided into three : Funds to sustain the Jewish community in Norway ( 150 million kr ) .

Support for development , outside Norway , of the traditions and culture which the Nazis wished to exterminate , to be distributed by a foundation where the executive committee members are to be appointed one each by the Norwegian Government , the Norwegian Parliament , the Jewish community in Norway , and the World Jewish Congress / World Jewish Restitution Organization .

Eli Wiesel was suggested to lead the executive committee ( 60 million kr ) .

Til det kollektive oppgjøret foreslås avsatt 250 mill. kroner. Beløpet fordeles på tre områder:
|1.||Et beløp på 150 mill. kroner foreslås overført til de registrerte mosaiske trossamfunn i Norge. Beløpet skal benyttes til å sikre jødisk kultur og fremtid i Norge.|
|2.||Et beløp på 60 mill. kroner foreslås benyttet til støtte utenfor Norges grenser til å minnes og å utvikle den tradisjon og kultur som nazistene ønsket å utrydde, og beløpet fordeles gjennom et fond hvor styrets representanter oppnevnes av Stortinget, Regjeringen, de registrerte mosaiske trossamfunn i Norge og World Jewish Congress/World Jewish Restitution Organization.|
|3.||Et beløp på 40 mill. kroner foreslås benyttet til opprettelse og drift av et kompetansesenter for studier av Holocaust og livssynsminoriteters stilling i Norge.|
Et beløp på anslagsvis 50 mill. kroner av de 150 mill. kroner forutsettes benyttet til tilbakebetaling av gjeld og investeringer. Avkastningen av de resterende anslagsvis 100 mill. kroner forutsettes benyttet til drift og videreutvikling av organisasjoner og institusjoner med det formål å sikre en jødisk fremtid i Norge.
Det foreslås opprettet et fond av de kollektive midler som administreres av et styre bestående av tre representanter for Det Mosaiske Trossamfund i Oslo og to representanter for Det Mosaiske Trossamfunn i Trondheim.
Justisdepartementet forutsettes å motta årlig rapport over bruken av midlene.
Midlene i fondet (kapitalen og eventuell avkastning) skal fortrinnsvis anvendes til undervisnings-, forsknings- eller informasjonsformål. De institusjoner eller prosjekter som støttes må være politisk nøytrale. Nobelprisvinner Eli Wiesel er foreslått å lede styret. Justisdepartementet fastsetter i samarbeid med de registrerte mosaiske trossamfunn i Norge styrets vedtekter og instruks for arbeidet. Eventuelle administrative kostnader for fondet dekkes innenfor rammen av bevilgningen.
Som en del av dette senteret foreslås at det utvikles et politisk og ideologisk nøytralt kompetansesenter for de livssynsminoriteter som finnes i Norge i dag.
Kirke-, utdannings- og forskningsdepartementet søker å få til en realisering i tilknytning til Universitetet i Oslo. Det foreslås opprettet et eget styre for senteret og senteret må sikres akademisk frihet.
Komiteen vektlegger at et kollektivt
oppgjør vil understreke at man nå foretar et oppgjør i forhold til det
jødiske samfunn, fordi den økonomiske og fysiske likvidasjonen var tiltak
rettet mot det jødiske samfunn i Norge som helhet.
Komiteens flertall, alle unntatt medlemmene fra Fremskrittspartiet, er enig i at man ved vurdering og fastsettelse av totalbeløpet til kollektive oppgjør har Regjeringen blant annet tatt hensyn til at jødiske familier i sin helhet ble utslettet og følgelig ikke får noe individuelt oppgjør.
Det er i proposisjonen foreslått at det overføres 150 mill. kroner til Det Mosaiske Trossamfunn (DMT) i Norge. Beløpet skal benyttes til å sikre jødisk kultur og framtid i Norge. Det er i dag registrert to mosaiske trossamfunn i Norge. Det Mosaiske Trossamfunn, som har sete i Oslo, og Det Mosaiske Trossamfunn i Trondheim.
Fylkesmannsembete i henholdsvis Oslo/Akershus og Sør-Trøndelag opplyser at disse trossamfunnene pr. 1. januar 1998 har ca 1050 registrerte medlemmer. Flertallet gir sin støtte til at for å sikre den jødiske minoritets framtid i Norge, er det nødvendig med midler til lokaler, utstyr og først og fremst kvalifiserte ledere og medarbeidere innenfor områdene religion, kultur, undervisning, informasjon, sosial omsorg og administrasjon.
I proposisjonen er det foreslått at et beløp på anslagsvis 50 mill. kroner av de 150 mill. kronene forutsettes benyttet til tilbakebetaling av gjeld og investeringer som oppreising av bygninger og eiendommer, herunder nyanskaffelse av gravlund og barnehage og opprettelse av jødisk museum og bibliotek.
Flertallet understreker betydningen av den kunnskap og innsikt til forståelse av jødenes historie i det norske samfunn som jødiske kulturtilbud, både i og utenfor Oslo, vil formidle. Flertallet forutsetter at eksisterende tilbud på dette området ivaretas. For å sikre intensjonen i proposisjonen forutsetter flertallet at midlene brukes på en slik måte at også interessene til de som ikke er medlemmer av de mosaiske trossamfunn blir ivaretatt.
Avkastningen av de resterende midler forutsettes benyttet til drift og videreutvikling av organisasjonene og institusjoner med det formål å sikre en jødisk bredde og et jødisk mangfold i Norge.
Flertallet støtter departementets forslag om at fondet av kollektive midler administreres av et styre bestående av tre representanter for Det Mosaiske Trossamfunn i Oslo og to representanter for Det Mosaiske Trossamfunn i Trondheim.
Flertallet forutsetter at Justisdepartementet mottar årlig rapport om at midlene er brukt i henhold til Stortingets intensjoner, inkludert regnskap revidert av statsautorisert revisor.
Regjeringen foreslår at det utbetales en erkjentlighetssum som et standardisert beløp på kr 200.000 til de personer som i Norge ble rammet av antijødiske tiltak, for eksempel i form av å ha fått sine eiendeler og sin formue inndratt av okkupasjonsmyndighetene, under den 2. verdenskrig. Ektefelle og livsarvinger forutsettes å kunne tre inn i avdødes sted. Utbetalingen er begrenset oppad til kr 200.000 pr. person.
Det er vanskelig å anslå de totale utgifter til det individuelle oppgjøret, men det anslås at dette vil utgjøre mellom 100 og 200 mill. kroner. Hvis det viser seg at de individuelle utbetalingene utgjør et vesentlig mindre beløp enn 200 mill. kroner, vil Regjeringen vurdere å øke overføringene til det kollektive oppgjøret.
Oppgjøret vil omfatte alle jødiske familier og enkeltpersoner det ble truffet inndragningsbeslutning mot eller som faktisk fikk sine eiendeler inndratt. Videre omfatter det også jødiske familier og enkeltpersoner som ikke eide verdier det kunne tas beslag i, men som ble påført andre lidelser gjennom forfølgelsen eller som mistet livet.
Justisdepartementet tar sikte på kunngjøring av ordningen i norsk og internasjonal presse. Det foreslås satt en søknadsfrist på 6 måneder. Departementet vil i samarbeid med de mosaiske trossamfunn i Norge orientere samfunnenes medlemmer som dette kan være aktuelt for. I tillegg vil World Jewish Congress/World Jewish Restitution Organization bli orientert.
Sakenes spesielle karakter tilsier at det kan være vansker med dokumentasjon. Dette må det tas hensyn til under saksbehandlingen og hvor avgjørelsen nettopp kan måtte bygge på opplysninger som ikke kan la seg dokumentere.
Det foreslås at Justisdepartementet avgjør søknadene i første instans, og at medlemmene av Stortingets billighetserstatningsutvalg blir klageorgan for departementets vedtak om erkjentlighetsbeløp. Saksbehandlingen for klageorganet foreslås å følge samme retningslinjer som for billighetserstatningssaker. Det foreslås ikke adgang til å påklage utvalgets vedtak videre til Stortinget.
Komiteen støtter Regjeringens forslag om at det utbetales en erkjentlighetssum til de personer som i Norge ble rammet av antijødiske tiltak, for eksempel i form av ha fått sine eiendeler og sin formue inndratt av okkupasjonsmyndigheten under den 2. verdenskrig.
Mange av dem som fikk sine eiendeler og virksomheter beslaglagt er nå døde, og komiteen er enig i at ektefelle og livsarvinger forutsettes derfor å kunne tre inn i avdødes sted, og at beløpet fordeles blant disse etter fordelingsreglene i arveloven.
Komiteen er enig i at oppgjøret skal omfatte alle jødiske familier og enkeltpersoner det ble truffet inndragningsbeslutning mot eller som faktisk fikk sine eiendeler inndratt. Videre støtter komiteen at oppgjøret også skal omfatte jødiske familier og enkeltpersoner som ikke eide verdier det kunne tas beslag i, men som ble påført andre lidelser gjennom forfølgelsen eller som mistet livet.
Sakens spesielle karakter tilsier at det kan være vanskelig med dokumentasjon. Det må det, etter komiteens mening, tas hensyn til under saksbehandlingen og hvor avgjørelsen nettopp kan måtte bygge på opplysninger som ikke kan la seg dokumentere.
Komiteen støtter Regjeringens forslag om at Justisdepartementet avgjør sakene i første instans, og at medlemmene av Stortingets billighetserstatningsutvalg blir klageorgan for departementets vedtak om erkjentlighetsbeløp.
Komiteen slutter seg til forslaget om at saksbehandlingen for klageorganet følger de samme retningslinjer som for billighetserstatningssaker.
Komiteen er enig i at det ikke gis
adgang til å påklage utvalgets vedtak videre til Stortinget.
Komiteens flertall, alle unntatt
medlemmene fra Fremskrittspartiet, støtter Regjeringens forslag om at de
individuelle erstatningene gis i form av en erkjentlighetssum som et
standardisert beløp på kr 200.000.
Komiteens medlemmer fra Fremskrittspartiet viser til sine merknader ovenfor under pkt. 3.

Question: who was suggested to lead the executive committee

Answer: Eli Wiesel

who was suggested to lead the executive committee

Question: how much was the collective part of the nazis worth

Answer: 250 million kr

how much was the collective part of the nazis worth

Question: what was the collective part of the nazis divided into

Answer: Funds to sustain the Jewish community in Norway

what was the collective part of the nazis divided into

Question: how many million kr was the collective part divided into

Answer: three

how many million kr was the collective part divided into

Question: how much was the collective part of the nazi holocaust

Answer: 250 million kr, was divided into three

how much was the collective part of the nazi holocaust

Question: how much did eli wiesel contribute to the executive committee

Answer: 60 million kr

how much did eli wiesel contribute to the executive committee

Question: where was the support for development outside of norway distributed

Answer: a foundation

where was the support for development outside of norway distributed

Question: how much money was distributed to sustain the jewish community in norway

Answer: 150 million kr

how much money was distributed to sustain the jewish community in norway

The number of registered members in religious Jewish communities has been declining in recent years, and was 747 in 2015.

Contemporary situation thumb|200px|Exterior of the synagogue in Oslo , note concrete barriers , there were about 1,500 Jewish people living in the country as a whole .

The number of registered members in religious Jewish communities has been declining in recent years , and was 747 in 2015 .

Question: how many jewish people were registered in 2015

Answer: 747

how many jewish people were registered in 2015

Question: how many jewish people lived in norway as a whole in 2015

Answer: 1,500

how many jewish people lived in norway as a whole in 2015

Question: where is the synagogue located

Answer: Oslo

Question: in what year was the number of registered jewish people in norway 747

Answer: 2015

in what year was the number of registered jewish people in norway 747

Question: what has happened to the number of registered jewish people in recent years

Answer: declining

what has happened to the number of registered jewish people in recent years

Question: what has happened to the number of jewish people in recent years

Answer: registered members in religious Jewish communities has been declining

what has happened to the number of jewish people in recent years

Question: what is the name of the thumb on the outside of the synagogue in norway

Answer: Contemporary situation thumb

what is the name of the thumb on the outside of the synagogue in norway

There was a Society for Progressive Judaism in Oslo, which no longer exists.

There was a Society for Progressive Judaism in Oslo , which no longer exists .

The Jewish community in Norway is represented by Det Mosaiske Trossamfund ( The Mosaic Community ) , which is affiliated with the World Jewish Congress .

World Jewish Congress – Norway Other Jewish organizations in Norway include B'nai B'rith , WIZO , B’nei Akiva , Keren Kayemet , Help the Jews Home ( Hjelp Jødene Hjem ) , a Kosher Meals on Wheels , Jewish study circles , and a home for the elderly .

Norway, for centuries part of the Danish kingdom, shared the same Lutheran-inspired laws that effectively restricted Jews from settling in the western regions of Scandinavia. It was not until the time of King Christian IV in the late 16th and early 17th centuries, that some flexibility was afforded to Sephardic Jews, who had been expelled from Spain and Portugal, to settle in the country. This was done in order to encourage the utilization of trading relationships nurtured by that Jewish community and help develop the economy of Denmark-Norway. Though he faced opposition from his clergy, Christian IV allowed Jews to settle in the region around 1620, giving them special permission to enter the country. Christian IV then granted freedom of religion, and in 1630, gave Jews permission to travel and trade freely throughout the kingdom. This later applied to Ashkenazi Jews, who received his “protection” in 1641.
King Christian IV’s successor, King Fredrik III placed stricter conditions on Jews in his kingdom, not allowing them to be in Denmark-Norway without a letter of safe conduct. Such restrictions existed throughout the 18th century and well into the 19th century.
Norway gained its independence from Denmark in 1814, and its first constitution prohibited Jews from entering the kingdom. It was not until 1830, that the attitude towards Jews in Norway eased, and a campaign to lift restrictions on Jewish immigration initiated by the liberal literary figure Henrik Wergeland in the 1840s succeeded in getting the Storting (parliament) to accept a resolution to allow Jewish migration to Norway.
By the end of the 19th century, some 650 Jews had arrived in Norway, mostly from Central and Eastern Europe, settling in Oslo and Trondheim. Jewish community life slowly developed throughout the latter half of the 19th century, as synagogues and Jewish day schools were established. An influx of Jewish immigration from Eastern Europe became commonplace through the following decades, as the result of widespread persecution. Jewish life in Norway really took off in the aftermath of World War I, with expressions of Jewish cultural and religious life – such as Jewish theatrical and Torah study groups – becoming widespread amongst the community, especially in Oslo. By the end of the 1930s, there were approximately 2,000 Jews in Norway.
The aftermath of World War II and the Holocaust saw the Jewish community re-established by returning Jewish refugees. In 1947, the Norwegian government allowed several hundred Jewish refugees from Hungary to settle in Norway. Though the Jewish community’s population was bolstered by the arrival of these refugees and the synagogue was found largely unharmed after the war, the community was largely diminished compared to its pre-war levels, and there were long periods without a rabbi or any spiritual leadership.
It was not until the late 1970s, with the appointment of a new rabbi and new Jewish communal leadership, that the Jewish community in Norway began to experience a revival. A number of Jewish institutions and activities – including Jewish schools, a synagogue, aged-home, and Jewish and Hebrew educational programs – opened in Norway in the last few decades of the 20th century. Norwegian Jews were prominent in general Norwegian society as well. Charles Philipson became the first Jew to serve on the Norwegian Supreme Court, serving as a judge from 1984 to 1990, and Jo Benkow, served as President of the Norwegian Parliament from 1985 to 1993 and President of the Nordic Council in 1983. In 1996, due to public pressure and revelations in the media, the Ministry of Justice appointed a commission to examine the issue of restitution of Jewish property confiscated by the Quisling regime. A fund was eventually established to compensate Jews for their material losses.
Today, Norwegian Jews continue to enjoy a sense of community stability and a growing interest in Jewish religious and cultural life. Moreover, the Jewish community in Norway is considered a part of general Norwegian society, evident by King Harald V’s visit to the Oslo Jewish community in 2009 as part of an effort to reach out to the country's minorities. It was the first time the monarch visited the Norwegian Jewish community. Norwegian Jews continue to be active in numerous areas of Norwegian society.

Question: who represents the jewish community in norway

Answer: Det Mosaiske Trossamfund

who represents the jewish community in norway

Question: det mosaiske trossamfund is affiliated with what organization

Answer: World Jewish Congress

det mosaiske trossamfund is affiliated with what organization

Question: what is the name of the society in norway that no longer exists

Answer: Progressive Judaism

what is the name of the society in norway that no longer exists

Question: what does hjelp jødene hjem stand for

Answer: Help the Jews Home

Question: what is the name of the organization that no longer exists in norway

Answer: Society for Progressive Judaism

what is the name of the organization that no longer exists in norway

Question: what is the name of a nordic organization in norway

Answer: Kosher Meals on Wheels

what is the name of a nordic organization in norway

There have been episodes of desecration of the Oslo Synagogue.

Aftenposten Newspaper: "Jews warned against harassment"

There have been episodes of desecration of the Oslo Synagogue .

Aftenposten Newspaper : " Synagogue vandalized " In July 2006 , during the 2006 Lebanon War , the congregation issued an advisory warning Jews not to wear kippot or other identifying items in public for fear of harassment or assault .

Aftenposten Newspaper : " Jews warned against harassment "

Hold deg oppdatert på utenriksstoffet
Se igjennom tusenvis av oppskrifter
Spill med kjente og ukjente
Last ned over 275 reiseguider
On Saturday evening a man defecated on the steps of Oslo's synagogue, then smashed two windows there.
"He did his business on the steps, went next door and found stones, came back and threw stones at the windows, went next door and found more stones and came back and threw some more," Anne Sender, director of The Mosaic Religious Community (DMT), told Aftenposten.no.
The entire incident was immortalized by the synagogue's security cameras. No one was in the building at the time, but neighbors quickly summoned police. When they arrived the culprit had vanished.
After the incident the DMT has expressed a wish for extra protection of the synagogue, Sender said. She believes that this is especially important in these days, when Jews in Norway feels particularly exposed.
"This is both psychological and quite real," Sender said.
"There was a very concrete example a few weeks ago. At the same time it is important not to exaggerate. Most Norwegians do not hate Jews. But we cannot protect ourselves from this unprovoked violence, even though we try," Sender said.
Les saken
- Det er nok mer smerte i vente, sier Pål Ringholm i First Securities. Les saken
Les saken
Les saken
Les saken
Les om de 25 stedene som er kommet med på UNESCOs liste. Les saken

Question: when did the lebanon war occur

Answer: July 2006

Question: during what war did the congregation issue an advisory warning jews not to wear kipp

Answer: 2006 Lebanon War

during what war did the congregation issue an advisory warning jews not to wear kipp

Question: what did the congregation warn jews not to wear kippot or other identifying items

Answer: harassment or assault

what did the congregation warn jews not to wear kippot or other identifying items

Question: what has happened to the london synagogue

Answer: desecration

what has happened to the london synagogue

Question: what did aftenposten newspaper report in 2006

Answer: Synagogue vandalized

what did aftenposten newspaper report in 2006

Question: in what year was the lebanon war

Answer: 2006

Question: what did the aftenposten newspaper say

Answer: Jews warned against harassment

Question: what have there been episodes of

Answer: desecration of the Oslo Synagogue

The Oslo city court judge could not find sufficient evidence that the shots fired at the synagogue amounted to a terrorist act.

On 17 September 2006 , the Oslo Synagogue was attacked with an automatic weapon , Aftenposten Newspaper : " Synagogue shooting spurs calls for tighter security " only days after it was made public that the building had been the planned target for the Algerian terror group GSPC that had been plotting a bombing campaign in the Norwegian capital .

Aftenposten Newspaper : " Synagogue was terror target " On 2 June 2008 , Arfan Qadeer Bhatti was convicted for the shooting attack and given an eight - year preventive custody sentence for serious vandalism .

The Oslo city court judge could not find sufficient evidence that the shots fired at the synagogue amounted to a terrorist act .

Bhatti acquitted of terrorism , convicted on other charges , Aftenposten , 3 June 2008 The synagogue in Oslo is now under continuous surveillance and protected by barriers .

Hold deg oppdatert på utenriksstoffet
Se igjennom tusenvis av oppskrifter
Spill med kjente og ukjente
Last ned over 275 reiseguider
No one was injured in the shooting, which damaged the front of the synagogue in Oslo's St Hanshaugen district. Police said more than 10 shots were fired, probably from an automatic weapon, at the synagogue's façade early Sunday morning.
"We are taking this type of violence very seriously," Justice Minister Knut Storberget told newspaper Vårt Land on Monday. "That's why it's necessary that police devote all available resources to the case."
Storberget said he'd be contacting The Mosaic Religious Community in Norway (Det Mosaiske Trossamfund, DMT) on Monday to discuss the situation, and to express the government's support for Norway's Jewish community.
Former Justice Minister Odd Einar Dørum helped the synagogue secure NOK 6.5 million in government funding for security in 2003. Dørum now thinks the government and police must consider further contributions to boosting security.
Anne Sender of DMT is asking for around NOK 1.5 million a year over the state budget to improve security at the synagogue. Proposals include closing the street on which it sits, Bergstien, to through traffic and erecting a new security fence.
"Today we're using a third of our members' funding for security measures," she said. "I hope the politicians realize that we can't manage this alone."
Israel's ambassador to Norway, Miryam Shomrat, likened the shooting to an act of terrorism, noting that it came just a month after the Jewish cemetery in Oslo was vandalized and stones were thrown at a window of the synagogue.
"We don't know who's doing this, whether it's Norwegians or foreigners," Shomrat said. "But the fact that there's been an increase (in attacks) and that it's happening in Oslo must be taken very seriously by the political community."
Ser på innfrysing av isbreer, «bleking» av skyer og falske vulkanutbrudd. Les saken
Dette er spareplanen som setter landet i brann. Les saken
Les saken
Les saken
Les saken
Ellers hadde Ekvatorial-Guinea neppe vært i VM.

Question: who was convicted of the 2006 norway synagogue shooting

Answer: Arfan Qadeer Bhatti

who was convicted of the 2006 norway synagogue shooting

Question: when was the norwegian synagogue attacked with an automatic weapon

Answer: 17 September 2006

when was the norwegian synagogue attacked with an automatic weapon

Question: how long was bhatti's preventive custody sentence

Answer: eight-year

how long was bhatti's preventive custody sentence

Question: what is the name of the algerian terrorist group based in norway

Answer: GSPC

what is the name of the algerian terrorist group based in norway

Question: what kind of weapon was used in the norway synagogue shooting

Answer: an automatic weapon

what kind of weapon was used in the norway synagogue shooting

Question: which newspaper reported that the norwegian synagogue was a terror target

Answer: Aftenposten

which newspaper reported that the norwegian synagogue was a terror target

Question: what was bhatti's sentence for

Answer: serious vandalism

In December 2008 , Imre Hercz filed a complaint to the Norwegian Press Complaints Commission against Otto Jespersen , a comedian who mocked the Holocaust , but fellow comics and his TV station backed the performer .

Jespersen joked on national television in his weekly routine that " I would like to take the opportunity to remember all the billions of fleas and lice that lost their lives in German gas chambers , without having done anything wrong other than settling on persons of Jewish background . "

"Off-lining the satellites of any country is actually a casus belli, a cause for war," said Roscosmos head Dmitry Rogozin.
The project manager for Iran’s Fajr program discusses Iran’s satellite initiatives, which are entwined with their rocket program.
Former Iranian satellite official Hossein Shahrabi Farahani argued that Iran’s satellite program has declined over the last seven years following its previous successes between 2009 and 2012.
The communications ministry is avoiding selling Israeli company Spacecom to Hungarian company 4iG due to concerns that Hungarian PM Viktor Orban is closely tied to the company.
Tomorrow.io plans to launch its first proprietary satellite into orbit this year.
The Israeli students' satellite launches marked the first-ever instance where eight satellites built by students were simultaneously launched.
CEO of AI-powered oncology platform: A rising tide lifts all boats, and there was an increased understanding of the importance of companies like us.
Iranian media says Iran successfully launched the Simorgh space-launch vehicle (SLV) to an altitude of 470 km. with cargos on board, releasing footage of a rocket being launched as evidence.
The training exercise involved an adversarial group working to simulate an aggressor nation with space capabilities like Russia or China.
The spacewalk was delayed after an anti-satellite missile test conducted without warning by Russia generated a debris field in low-Earth orbit.

Question: who was the comedian who mocked the holocaust

Answer: Otto Jespersen

who was the comedian who mocked the holocaust

Question: who filed a complaint to the norwegian press complaints commission against otto jespers

Answer: Imre Hercz

who filed a complaint to the norwegian press complaints commission against otto jespers

Question: otto jespersen was accused of mocking what

Answer: the Holocaust

otto jespersen was accused of mocking what

Question: when did imre hercz file a complaint against otto jespersen

Answer: December 2008

when did imre hercz file a complaint against otto jespersen

Question: in what year did imre hercz file a complaint against otto jespers

Answer: 2008

in what year did imre hercz file a complaint against otto jespers

Question: who did imre hercz file a complaint with in 2008

Answer: Norwegian Press Complaints Commission

who did imre hercz file a complaint with in 2008

Question: where did the fleas and lice lose their lives

Answer: German gas chambers

where did the fleas and lice lose their lives

In 2010, the Norwegian Broadcasting Corporation reported that antisemitism was common among Norwegian Muslims.

In 2010 , the Norwegian Broadcasting Corporation reported that antisemitism was common among Norwegian Muslims .

Teachers at schools with large shares of Muslims reported that Muslim students often " praise or admire Adolf Hitler for his killing of Jews " , that " Jew - hate is legitimate within vast groups of Muslim students " and that " Muslims laugh or command [ teachers ] to stop when trying to educate about the Holocaust " .

Gjør klar for vårens siste «Hjernevask»
Sir David Attenborough gjør det igjen.
Se den aller siste episoden nå!
Mr Dorrit får en ubehagelig påminnelse om sin fortid da han møter gamle kjente.
...men de satt neppe på første rad i engelsktimene.
Dette er snaddermat for små og store turgåere.
Sånn har du aldri sett Shabana Rehman Gaarder
Dette er historien om den beryktede boka som førte til diplomatiske kriser.
Åttitallets narkohandel fyrer opp under konfliktene i den italienske mafiaen.
Litauiske InCulto slår ikke an hos ESC-panelet
Med færre deltagere og hardere utfordringer blir det tøffere å hevde seg.
Fem briter og én amerikaner i eksil revolusjonerte komedien.
Jon vet ikke hva kjøkkenredskapene heter.
En bøffeljeger, en munk og en komikerlegende
Anne-Kat. og Dagfinn får føle på kroppen hvordan det er å bli gammel.
Du blir ikke arbeidsledig hvis du er velutstyrt.
Bård får et intenst møte med de iranske supporterne.
Nurse Jackie hjelper sin tidligere venninne
Philippe Starck er ikke nådig: Kun to designspirer får bli.
Virkelighetens «Charlies Angels» opererer i Rio.
En pur ung artist startet karrieren med Metallica.
Et dramatisk møte med en spill levende vulkan i Tanzania.
Din lojalitet kan koste deg mange penger.
Et sprudlende panel tar for seg vonde følelser.
Hvis du ikke er hot, er du vanskelig å selge.
Cårejånni gir jentene proffe sminketips.
Det blir høy spenning på akutten...
Sjokkbehandling, isolasjon og tvang var utbredt på norske sinnssykehus.
Er studenteksamen i ferd med å gå i vasken?
Møtet med en gatesanger kan fortelle mer enn all verdens statsledere.
Hakekorsflaggene heises i Paris. Se de unike bildene!
SOS Rasisme går hardt ut mot Harald Eia.
Jostein må ned i vekt for å få plass i bob'en.
Klarer hun å gjenskape kokkens drømmemåltid?
Noen tøffe tak gjenstår før målstreken kan passeres.
Denne pensjonisten har ikke tenkt til å leve på gamle minner.
Praktikantjobben byr på overraskende utfordringer.
Det muslimske brorskapet er i kraftig vekst.
HBO-dokumentar om den legendariske kampen i Manilla.
Regissørens egen versjon fra 2001 av Vietnavneposet.
Nyhetsmagasin.
Hastigheten blir lagret i din nettleser når du trykker på Lagre innstillinger. Den vil bli brukt som grunnlag for å avgjøre hvilken kvalitet du vil få på multimediafilene i Nett-TV.
Internetthastigheten din avgjør hvilken kvalitet du får i Nett-TV.
Med en god bredbåndsforbindelse (over 1200 kbps) får du den beste kvaliteten. Dersom du opplever hakking, kan du selv velge en lavere kvalitet.
Ved stor pågang kan brukere i utlandet få problemer med NRK Nett-TV. Årsaken kan være begrensninger i linjekapasiteten. Les mer her.

Question: who do muslim students praise or admire

Answer: Adolf Hitler

Question: what was common among norwegian muslims in 2010

Answer: antisemitism

what was common among norwegian muslims in 2010

Question: in what year did the norwegian broadcasting corporation report that antisemitism was common among

Answer: 2010

in what year did the norwegian broadcasting corporation report that antisemitism was common among

Question: who reported that antisemitism was common among norwegian muslims in 2010

Answer: Norwegian Broadcasting Corporation

who reported that antisemitism was common among norwegian muslims in 2010

Question: what do muslim students often praise or admire

Answer: Adolf Hitler for his killing of Jews

what do muslim students often praise or admire

Question: who reported that muslim students often praise or admire adolf hitler

Answer: Teachers

who reported that muslim students often praise or admire adolf hitler

Question: what do muslim students do for their killing of jews

Answer: praise or admire Adolf Hitler

what do muslim students do for their killing of jews

(The child escaped.)

In February 2015 , however , a group of young Muslims organised 1,500 people to form two ' rings of peace ' around the synagogues in Oslo and Begen in response to recent terror attacks against Jewish centers in Europe .

More than 1,000 people formed a "ring of peace" Saturday outside Oslo's main synagogue at the initiative of a group of young Muslims.
The event in the Norwegian capital follows a series of attacks against Jews in Europe, including the terror attacks in Paris in January and in neighboring Denmark last week.
One of the eight independent organisers of Saturday's event in Oslo, Hajrah Arshad said the gathering shows "that Islam is about love and unity."
"We want to demonstrate that Jews and Muslims do not hate each other," co-organiser Zeeshan Abdullah told the crowd, standing in a half-circle before the white synagogue. "We do not want individuals to define what Islam is for the rest of us."
"There are many more peace-mongers than warmongers," he added.
Norway's Chief Rabbi Michael Melchior sang the traditional Jewish end of Sabbath song outside the synagogue before the large crowd holding hands.
Co-organiser Hassan Raja said it was the first time he heard the song.
Ervin Kohn, head of Oslo's Jewish community, called the gathering in sub-zero temperatures "unique."
Several European countries have seen an increase in anti-Semitic incidents recently, starting when the conflict between Israel and Palestinian militants in Gaza intensified last year.
In Paris, three Muslim gunmen killed 17 people at a kosher grocery, the offices of weekly Charlie Hebdo and elsewhere in early January. Last week a single assailant in Copenhagen killed a Jewish security guard outside a synagogue and a Danish filmmaker attending a free speech event.

Question: where did the two 'rings of peace' take place

Answer: Oslo and Begen

where did the two 'rings of peace' take place

Question: how many people were organized to form two 'rings of peace' around the synagog

Answer: 1,500

how many people were organized to form two 'rings of peace' around the synagog

Question: when did the two 'rings of peace' happen

Answer: February 2015

when did the two 'rings of peace' happen

Question: what happened to the little boy

Answer: The child escaped

Question: what did the young muslims form around synagogues in london and be

Answer: rings of peace

what did the young muslims form around synagogues in london and be

Question: where did the two 'rings of peace' occur

Answer: Begen

where did the two 'rings of peace' occur

Question: in what year did a group of young muslims form two 'rings of peace

Answer: 2015

in what year did a group of young muslims form two 'rings of peace

But a comparison of those depictions with antisemitic caricatures from the Nazi-era show some similarities.

But a comparison of those depictions with antisemitic caricatures from the Nazi - era show some similarities .

Common motifs such as ' Jews are evil and inhuman ' , ' Jews rule and exploit the world ' and ' Jews hate peace and propagate wars ' are repeated in more recently published drawings , as well as in antisemitic sketches from the beginning of the twentieth century .

Question: what is an example of an antisemitic motif

Answer: Jews are evil and inhuman

what is an example of an antisemitic motif

Question: what do jews hate

Answer: peace and propagate wars

Question: what type of caricatures from the nazi era show some similarities to those from the

Answer: antisemitic

what type of caricatures from the nazi era show some similarities to those from the

Question: a comparison of antisemitic caricatures from what era shows some similarities

Answer: Nazi-era

a comparison of antisemitic caricatures from what era shows some similarities

Question: what are the common motifs of jews

Answer: evil and inhuman