A Blow to Freedom in Norway

Bruce Bawer is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center and the author of “While Europe Slept” and “Surrender.” His book "The Victims' Revolution: The Rise of Identity Studies and the Closing of the Liberal Mind" is just out from Broadside / Harper Collins.


Pages: 1 2

I have worked for HRS, and am proud of it.  Founded a decade ago by two women, Hege Storhaug and Rita Karlsen, with a passionate interest in guaranteeing the rights of Muslim women and girls living in Europe, it has always batted very much above its weight, producing solid reports that have led to important legislation in both Norway and Denmark relating to subjects like forced marriage, honor killing, genital mutilation, the sending of European Muslim children to Koran schools in Pakistan to be “educated,” and the difference between men’s and women’s right to divorce under sharia law.  HRS’s work has always been controversial among multiculturalists, because instead of bowing before the immigrant group and its cultural and religious values, HRS has fiercely defended the human rights and integrity of individuals within that group.  This emphasis differentiates it dramatically from a raft of other official and quasi-official “rights” groups in Norway and elsewhere in Europe, which produce little more than PC rhetoric designed to promulgate the idea that the only real problem with Islam in Europe is native Europeans’ Islamophobia.

The public face of HRS is Hege Storhaug.  Although her career has been driven by an ardent devotion to equality, religious liberty, and freedom of expression, she has consistently been smeared by left-wing critics as a disrespecter of Islam, and she was among the figures who were most brutally blasted by the cynical multiculturalists in the weeks after July 22.  Audun Lysbakken, a young member of the furthest left of Norway’s major parties, the Socialist Left (which makes Labor look moderate), serves as Minister of Children, Equality, and Social Inclusion; it is through his ministry that HRS is funded, and he has for some years now played the Javert to HRS’s Jean Valjean, making no secret of his eagerness to leave HRS high and dry.  July 22 provided him with a great deal of leverage to do so.  Now, with the release of next year’s budget, he would appear to have succeeded, if not entirely but in very large part, at his unworthy goal.

If this is a sign of things to come, it is not a good one.  For it suggests that one of the legacies of July 22 may be an abandonment of official support for the kind of work HRS does and the values for which it stands.  Such a shift would represent a major victory for the multicultural mentality which, in the name of cultural respect, insists on turning a blind eye to the most monstrously barbaric aspects of other cultures and on embracing as friends and allies Muslim leaders who have nothing but disdain for Western freedom and democracy.  And it would constitute a terrible defeat for women and girls born into Muslim communities who thought that living in Norway meant that the authorities respected their rights under the law as surely as it did those of any native-born Norwegian woman or girl.  It is hard, in short, not to conclude that in slashing funding to HRS, the Norwegian government has given a tacit thumbs-up to every petty tyrant in Norway’s Muslim community and has slapped in the face every female Norwegian Muslim who yearns to breathe free.

Pages: 1 2

  • crackerjack

    Why should the taxpayer be forced to finance pressure groups and subsidise their leaders? Storhaug is free to start a political party that caters for her anti-immigrant agenda, gain a mandate and join the political debate. Writing books, running blogs and appearing on talkshows is her personal affair. Her personal views are worth no more to the taxpayer then those of any other norwiegan.

    • heartsfan

      well put..

    • winoceros

      Shameful. Imagine, if you will, the United States slashing in half programs that monitor their vulnerable individuals: the elderly, foster children, previously abused or neglected children, women's shelters, the victims of human trafficking. Imagine further programs that enrich and comfort their oppressors abound.

      Imagine the little girls in your child's class to her right and to her left, in turn, are absent a few days, returning gingerly to school as they deal with the new and painful reality that there are adults who are supposed to care for them who just had them held down and for no reason at all, sliced off most of their labia, and the part of their clitoris that according to some stranger was just "too long." They never trust physicians again. Imagine the schoolteacher watching in horror and dismay as one by one, the teen girls in her classroom begin disappearing, leaving school and never coming back, now a possession in another country, forcibly married, and raped constantly.

      See, I would think that the duty of a nation is to protect its citizens, as well as those under its protection. I expect that "progressive" Norway would want to do that, don't you?

      I expect a Norwegian would be embarrassed to have this creature Lysbakken anywhere near the public sector, with so little disregard for human dignity and liberty. If they have any sense at all, they would publicly shame him, and at the very least, appreciate the effort to burn a laser in the direction of the ravishing that Muslim males can have on everyone else. That some here would find protection and truth-telling is just too distasteful to fund, too impolite to Norway's newest inhabitants and too contrary to the PC cult-dogma of their lofty academics, in some utopian hope that the suffering of others will just hush, hush and fade to black, like the invisible in the lowest Hindu castes of old, is outrageous.

      Examine yourselves. What upbringing must you have had where you can actually think that it is not the duty of a government to protect its citizens from abuse, torture and separate "justice"?

      I thank you, Mr. Bawer, and find you and your fellow writers the gulp of fresh air at water's surface in the ocean of submission in which we are being asked to swim.

      • heartsfan

        zzzz….zzzzz….. too long and boring. I'm asleep already.

        • winoceros

          I can understand that. Civics is hard.

          • intrcptr2

            Well, sure, if you have trouble with the reading part…

        • mrbean

          You sound like Butthead reading errrrr,,,, aahhhh…. words,,, words …. duh….duuhhhh This sucks.

        • intrcptr2

          Yes, we knew that from your earlier response.

      • drliamfox

        So, if you're concerned about the government slashing funds for vulnerable people in society… the unemployed , the disabled, immigrants, schools, healthcare … I hope to God you never voted republican!

        • winoceros

          No, I am specifically calling out the groups I mentioned above. Do you have a comprehension problem? Not sure why you feel the need to extrapolate out to other large groups with different issues…must be a Democrat thing. Or just lack of ability to deal with the specific issue being discussed.

    • Travis

      NRK is fully supported by the government. I bet that it's budget did not suffer any cuts.

      • http://www.reversespins.com/pcmarx.html Rudolf Blodstrupmoen

        Oh no, it didn't! The license fee rose again!

    • matt

      hay crackersmack…if you think hating genital mutilation as anti immigrant attitude, then move your liberal crackerjack butt to Libya and let them carve out your cookies you kook!! and by the way idiot…Storhaug IS in the debate dummy!!

      • crackerjack

        Ever wonderd why Storaug and the likes never complain when Muslims mutilate the genitals of their male offsprng? In fact, Storaug and the likes will be sure to slamm any protests agains genital mutilation of infants as a blow against freedom of religion, cultural heritage and argue that boys dont need certain parts of their sexual organs anyway.

        Three guesses why?????

        • http://www.reversespins.com/pcmarx.html Rudolf Blodstrupmoen

          "Ever wonderd why Storaug and the likes never complain when Muslims mutilate the genitals of their male offsprng?"

          I'm not sure what you mean by "the like", but I and many others working against the Establishment are fierce and outspoken opponents to any kind of violence (except self defence).

          Just like Halal/Kosher slaughtering, neither male nor female genital mutilaition are acceptable; no matter if those perpetratng the crime are Muslims, Jews or something else.

    • intrcptr2

      So let me guess here, you're a Norwegian who actually believes in the free market and basically unfettered capitalism, rather than the all-inclusive socialist state that currently exists; which decided a while back that Hege's opinions (Pretty much solidly based in empirical reality) ARE just as valuable as any other and thus should be funded by the taxpayers?

  • StephenD

    Cutting HRS is merely the "camels nose under the tent flap." Opps, I think that was a Freudian slip. Camels nose. LOL
    Seriously, letting Sharia Law or any portion thereof gain any ground paves the way for more of the same until before they realize it they have a duel system for legal redress and a foreign law having equal footing rooted in the codices of a 7th century trade route bandit.

    • Chiggles

      Well, no, "camel's toe" would have been a Freudian slip.

      • http://www.reversespins.com/pcmarx.html Rudolf Blodstrupmoen

        And a really nice one at that!

  • PhillipGaley

    For treatment of the dedicated Leftists' difficulty of impossibility of seeing any decent woman in response to themselves, Islam presents a welcome answer and really, the only possible option—institutionalized sensuality and female control and exclusion, much as was active in the NAZI vision of model Society, . . .

  • nunyainct

    Islam SHOULD be criticized, and clamping down on speech that exposes the barbarism is wrong. Muhammad beheaded scores of his adversaries, the Qu'ran, the blueprint for jihad against non Muslims and moderate Muslims, points out that non Muslims are to be subjugated or killed, while moderate Muslims who do not fully embrace Islam are also to be killed and are "worse" than infidels. Moderates are NOT in power in Islam. It is the "orthodox" fundamentalist Muslims who are in power and who work tirelessly to wage Jihad around the globe. Islam is incompatible with civilized society, the Qu'ran, Muhammad, the ahadith are clear as to the goal of Islamic hegemony around the world and one need know little more than the cornerstone of dar al Harb and dar al Islam, house of War and house of Islam, respectively that there will be no peace in the world until Islam reigns supreme, to understand Islam is not meant to coexist. Islam's goal is to dominate. Islam is pestilence to civilization, ask any Copt, Jew who has lived in the Middle East, or ask any woman who has had her clitoris amputated because of the barbaric inhumane beliefs rampant in Islam.

  • Cynic

    It should be mentioned that for some years now Fatah has been taking part in the Workers’ Youth League’s annual summer camp with all that it implies.

    • tanstaafl

      Ech. I'm not surprised, just wondering where you got your information?

  • waterwillows

    I do think it has become most evident that many western leaders embrace Islam. While they might not have openly said so, their actions are the real facts. In this day of massive information, they can not claim ignorance.
    It is surprising the large number of western leaders who have shown a marked dislike for women.They see no problem with enslaving females to a sexual rape nightmare. Nor do they see any problem with encouraging those who would strip the woman of all rights as a human being.
    The genocide of all Jews everywhere is brushed aside, in their quest to be the slaves of evil.
    Same goes for blacks. They see the castration, enslavement and death of blacks as minor in their quest of the supremcy of evil. They will not openly say so. Yet their intense encouragement of Islam speaks loudly for them and their real intentions.

    These so called leaders of the west, too soft on Islam, are a genuine threat to all that makes for human dignity and justice. They are evil.

  • mrbean
  • UCSPanther

    It almost sounds like Norway is going on the warpath against anyone who disagrees with their societal ideology.

    As for that camp where Brevik did his rampage, I can see why Glenn Beck compared it to the Hitler Youth (A little too harsh IMO, but rather accurate in the fact that summer camp was a "youth wing" of the labour party.)

    • winoceros

      Seriously. What would be the difference? Uniforms? Recycling bins?

      • trickyblain

        Not preaching to kill all the Jews and take over the world in the name of the Fuhrer?

  • ObamaYoMoma

    Some of these Muslims have assimilated magnificently, making clear that they are grateful to live in the free West and to become productive and loyal members of society.

    With all due respect to the writer, those relatively few Muslims that have readily assimilated and matriculated into productive and contributing members of society, are not Muslims at all but instead blasphemous apostates that per the dictates of Islam should be executed.

    Meanwhile, the vast over whelming majority of Muslims, not just in Norway, but in country after country and anywhere and everywhere mass Muslim immigration has occurred, have flat out refused to assimilate and integrate and instead have formed segregated Muslim no-go zones ruled by Sharia as fifth columns and in direct contravention to the laws of the states in which they reside. Indeed, Muslims never ever migrate to the West or anywhere else for that matter to assimilate and integrate but instead to eventually to subjugate and dominate to make Islam supreme via demographic conquest.

    • winoceros

      Yes, and thank God for the apostates. Their voices are the most powerful in the debate today.

    • tanstaafl

      The best one can say about "moderate" Muslims is that they might not kill us now. Until the jihad conquers "Dar-Es-Harb", then we infidels will either convert, become dhimmis or be killed by any Muslim with a weapon. "Moderate" or "extreme".

      • ObamaYoMoma

        The practice of classifying Muslims into moderate and radical camps is a political correct multicultural myth. The truth is the sixth and most important pillar of Islam makes it an obligatory duty for EVERY MUSLIM to fight jihad in the cause of Allah against unbelievers for the spread of Islam. It doesn't just make it an obligatory duty only for RADICALS to fight jihad in the cause of Allah and it doesn't just make it an obligatory duty only for EXTREMISTS to fight jihad in the cause of Allah, while at the same time giving the so-called MODERATE MUSLIMS an exemption and free pass from fighting jihad in the cause of Allah. Instead the sixth and most important pillar of Islam makes it an obligatory duty for ALL MUSLIMS to fight jihad in the cause of Allah against unbelievers to make Islam supreme. No exceptions.

        Therefore, ALL MAINSTREAM ORTHODOX MUSLIMS ARE JIHADISTS! A few of them are violent jihadists, while most of them are non-violent stealth and deceptive jihadists, and the few of them that are not jihadists are not Muslims at all but instead blasphemous apostates that per he dictates of Islam should be executed.

        • Khanzool

          I think you are grossly misunderstanding 2 things in your argument. The first is separating Islam into 2 camps: it is not moderate and radical, there are many interpretations for the Quraan and Islam in general, and while certain interpretations are indeed radical, these interpretations may still be completely peaceful. for example, a muslim may be radical in the sense that he does not believe any non-muslim can enter heaven, whereas another muslim is radical in the sense that he wishes all non-muslims dead. the latter is the MINORITY.

          The other point that you misunderstand, is Jihad. Jihad is interpreted and applied in many different ways, as an example, giving charity is considered Jihad. Defending your country upon being invaded is considered jihad. the problem is that to some people, again, a minority, Jihad means the killing of enemies of Islam, and when they try to figure out who these enemies are, they get carried away and consider all non-muslims enemies of Islam.

          "sixth and most important pillar of Islam makes it an obligatory duty for ALL MUSLIMS to fight jihad in the cause of Allah against unbelievers to make Islam supreme"

          not unbelievers, opposition. strictly physical opposition. The Quraan is supposed to be read within the context in which it was delivered, and while i am not a muslim (i am an arab living in a ME country) i do know the distinctions and how people misunderstand. There are problems with the religion, but please read the Bible and compare, all religions came in an age where life was pretty barbaric, and cannot be taken literally like that in our day and age.

          • ObamaYoMoma

            I think you are grossly misunderstanding 2 things in your argument. The first is separating Islam into 2 camps: it is not moderate and radical, there are many interpretations for the Quraan and Islam in general, and while certain interpretations are indeed radical, these interpretations may still be completely peaceful. for example, a muslim may be radical in the sense that he does not believe any non-muslim can enter heaven, whereas another muslim is radical in the sense that he wishes all non-muslims dead. the latter is the MINORITY.

            With respect to your silly assertion that there are many different interpretations of the Koran and Islam in general, with all due respect that is taqiyya (deception) intended to deceive gullible kafir infidels already blinded by political correct multiculturalism.

            The truth is because unlike the holy books of real faith-based religions as opposed to Islam, the Koran is considered to contain the divine uncreated words of Allah as delivered by Muhammad, Allah's final messenger, the divine words contained in the Koran are considered to be perfect, just, and immutable, and as such can only be interpreted in the most literal sense possible.

            In fact, all major schools of Islamic jurisprudence in both Sunni and Shi'a Islam are in full agreement on approximately 75 percent of the Koran, which includes all major substantive issues. On the other approximately 25 percent, they differ only slightly in very minor ways. Nice try at deception though.

            The other point that you misunderstand, is Jihad. Jihad is interpreted and applied in many different ways, as an example, giving charity is considered Jihad. Defending your country upon being invaded is considered jihad. the problem is that to some people, again, a minority, Jihad means the killing of enemies of Islam, and when they try to figure out who these enemies are, they get carried away and consider all non-muslims enemies of Islam.

            You are correct, jihad as opposed to terrorism is interpreted in several different ways and is not always violent. Indeed, despite the fact that violent jihad in the West is routinely conflated with being terrorism, the reality is jihad and terrorism are not one and the same thing but instead two mutually exclusive and entirely different manifestations altogether.

            Indeed, terrorism, which can be for any number of political causes and as its name implies is always violent, is a product of Western civilization only. While jihad, on the other hand, which is holy fighting in the cause of Allah against unbelievers to make Islam supreme and in stark contrast to terrorism can be both violent and non-violent, is a product of Islamic civilization only.

            As a matter of fact, the non-violent varieties of jihad relative to the violent varieties of jihad takes place today astronomically far more prevalently. Yet, because violent jihad in the West is routinely conflated as being terrorism by those blinded by political correct multiculturalism, the many non-violent varieties of jihad consequently takes place throughout the world today totally unacknowledged and unopposed.

            For instance, mass Muslim immigration to the West is a very prevalent form of non-violent jihad, as Muslims never ever migrate to the West or anywhere else for that matter to assimilate and integrate, but instead to eventually subjugate and dominate in order to make Islam supreme via demographic conquest. I mean if you look at everywhere and anywhere mass Muslim immigration has been occurring, you will see the vast overwhelming majority of Muslim immigrants just like clockwork flat out refusing to assimilate and integrate and instead forming segregated Muslim no-go zones ruled by Sharia as fifth columns and in direct contravention to the laws of the states in which they reside.

            Indeed, just as you stated above, giving charity is considered Jihad. Defending the Dar al Islam (the realm of submission) upon being invaded is considered jihad. However, when you state a tiny minority of Muslims are misunderstanding Islam by killing all non-Muslims, it is very clear that is taqiyya (deception) meant to dupe gullible kafir infidels already blinded by political correct multiculturalism, as again per the sixth and most important pillar of Islam, it is an obligatory duty for EVERY MUSLIM to fight jihad in the cause of Allah against unbelievers to make Islam supreme. No exceptions.

            Indeed, you are fulfilling your holy obligation to wage jihad by virtue of living here in the West for the purpose of demographic conquest and by also trying to deceive gullible kafir infidels via taqiyya.

            –Continued below

          • ObamaYoMoma

            "sixth and most important pillar of Islam makes it an obligatory duty for ALL MUSLIMS to fight jihad in the cause of Allah against unbelievers to make Islam supreme"

            not unbelievers, opposition. strictly physical opposition. The Quraan is supposed to be read within the context in which it was delivered, and while i am not a muslim (i am an arab living in a ME country) i do know the distinctions and how people misunderstand.

            With all due respect, if you are really a non-Muslim Arab living as a second-class dhimmi citizen in an Islamic country somewhere in the Middle East as you deceptively claim, you would be violently oppressed and systematically persecuted when not outright slaughtered altogether, and the last thing you would be doing is spending time on the Internet trying to defend your Islamic oppressors.

            There are problems with the religion, but please read the Bible and compare, all religions came in an age where life was pretty barbaric, and cannot be taken literally like that in our day and age.

            Of course, Muslims like to pretend that Islam is just a Religion of Peace™ just like any other faith-based religion, but Islam requires total, complete, and unconditional submission to the will of Allah, as each Muslim in effect is the devoted slave of Allah. Indeed, in stark contrast to true faith-based religions where adherents are perfectly free to question and challenge the texts and tenets of their respective religions and to leave their religion or convert to another religion altogether if they so desire, because the freedom of conscience in Islam is forbidden, those same actions, blasphemy in the first case and apostasy in the second, are capital offenses punished under the pain of death in Islam.

            Indeed, what faith-based religions punish blasphemy and apostasy under the pain of death? The answer, of course, is none of them. Hence, Islam obviously is not a faith-based religion as it purports itself to be in order to dupe gullible kafir infidels. Instead, Islam is a supremacist theo-political totalitarian ideology that seeks to subjugate the world via the imposition of Sharia, and in that context Islam is far closer to being a supremacist totalitarian ideology like Communism than it is to being a religion. As just like Communism, Islam seeks world domination, and the end result of Islam exactly like Communism is draconian totalitarianism, poverty, despair, and hopelessness.

  • jmc610

    I read Mr. Bawer's book "While Europe Slept" not too long ago… He wrote it in 2006. I couldn't believe the shape some of the countries were in then & more than five years later it's much worse. I think alot has to do with our acceptance of Multiculturalism. I think it's gone too far.
    As Mr. Bower explains in his book, "…the Muslim community is segregated to an extraordinary degree." He also went on to say, "…they rejected freedom of conscience, denounced the separation of church and state, and insisted that Muslims had no obligation to obey the rules of a secular society."

    NYC was always the "melting pot". We had so many different people come here because they all wanted the same… Life, Liberty & the Pursuit of Happiness… The Melting Pot signifies Unity, an allegiance to our nation but now under Multiculturalism we see just the opposite. We see class warfare, immigration wars between states & WH, & segregation in our classrooms.

    I hope it's not too late for us. I have a five year old daughter & pray that she will be safe and live free.

  • maturin20

    The price of small government, I suppose.

    • winoceros

      No, it's the difference between cities paying $50,000 per year plus benefits for a "cycling coordinator" and having case workers visit abusive homes. Smart people, who aren't bored by all the long, tedious city council meetings and budget talks, should be able to see the difference if they aren't busy handing out political candy to their voting blocs.

      • maturin20

        I didn't know bicycles were such a threat to social services.

        • winoceros

          You are the same maturin20 who was trying to make comments regarding economics, right?

  • maturin20

    No, that was days ago. I'm a new person now.

    • winoceros

      Must be. Who, understanding economics enough to criticize the "anti-science" stance of "Republicans" regarding economics, would be stupid enough to not understand the opportunity costs of governmental planning?

      Let us know when you have other brilliant thoughts about the lack of protection by the state for subjugated, beaten and tortured women within its borders.

      • maturin20

        I see enough of the latter at work.

  • http://www.reversespins.com/pcmarx.html Rudolf Blodstrupmoen

    Well, for the lunatics running the asylum, I bet it REALLY makes perfect sense!