Pages: 1 2
LO, the influential Norwegian Confederation of Trade Unions, has intimate – some say organic – connections to the ruling Labor Party. Together, the two organizations have arguably made up the country’s most important network of power for generations. Sections of LO will from 2012 on donate half a million kroner every year to the Norwegian Centre against Racism to combat right-wing extremism. “To be against the Multicultural society, as Breivik says, is nothing other than what Hitler espoused,” says Leif Sande, who represents one of LO’s subgroups.
Kari Helene Partapuoli, leader of the Centre, which already receives millions in direct state support annually, says the money will partly be spent on mapping international networks opposed to multiculturalism. Partapuoli earlier warned against the dangers of “subconscious” racism, stating that there is a racist in all of us. She didn’t explain what kind of mental exorcism will be required to drive out our racist inner demons, however. Shoaib Sultan, the former General Secretary at the Islamic Council of Norway, currently works for them as an advisor on how to deal with extremists who oppose the colonization of their country through mass immigration.
In late 2011 there was a demonstration against racism at Youngstorget in Oslo arranged by LO. Its powerful national leader, Roar Flåthen, promised that the labor unions will fight relentlessly against racism and intolerance throughout society and in the workplace. “We want a Multicultural society. This is enriching,” he told the crowd. Flåthen is also a politician for the Labor Party and sits on the board of A-pressen, a large national media company partially controlled by LO that is the whole or partial owner of dozens of local or regional newspapers.
The leaders of LO have been known to consult with – or, as critics claim, instruct – the Prime Minister on how to deal with certain sensitive political matters, especially when the PM comes from the Labor Party. Although a few critical comments can be heard about this, by and large this state of affairs is considered acceptable in Norway.
Post-Breivik, writer Øyvind Strømmen has been hailed as one of the country’s “leading experts” on the counterjihad movement, which triggers roars of laughter from those of us who actually know it well. He has even lectured for the police plus Minister of Justice Grete Faremo from the Labor Party on how to increase surveillance on the Internet of alleged extremists who are critical of the Labor Party’s immigration policies.
Sadly, they won’t face too much opposition to these policies from other political parties, either. Erna Solberg, leader of the Conservative Party of Norway, also wants stronger action to combat “hate.” She has called for coordinated actions in all segments of society, from the schools to the police, in order to stamp out “racism and extremism” in any way, shape or form. It is implied here that “racism” means opposition to mass immigration.
Solberg has for years encouraged continued or increased mass immigration and praised the wonderful “diversity” this supposedly brings to the country. Moreover, she has called for establishing a sharia council so that local Muslims can use Islamic law in family affairs with state approval, and has warned that Muslims in the Western world are now being harassed in a manner similar to the way Jews were treated during the rise of the Nazis in the 1930s. This was said not by a Socialist, but by the leader of the so-called conservative opposition party in Norway.
Øyvind Strømmen advocates having more regular police patrols on the Internet to monitor nasty websites that are critical of Islam or mass immigration. He lectured the important July 22nd commission on the alleged dangers of Islamophobic right-wing extremists. In the daily Vårt Land, he warned against giving dangerous fascist extremists who are critical of Islam, multiculturalism or mass immigration too much access to the mass media.
The state-sponsored Centre against Racism in a May 2012 report explicitly defined “Islamophobia” as one of the main branches of contemporary right-wing extremism, along with anti-immigration sentiments/xenophobia and neo-Nazism, claiming that “Most right-wing extremists hate Islam” and attributing this to fear of the unknown.
In addition to Øyvind Strømmen, one contributor to this report was the PhD Candidate Anders Ravik Jupskås. He wrote about “radical right-wing populists” such as the evil Geert Wilders and his Party for Freedom in the Netherlands, the True Finns in Finland or the Swiss People’s Party in Switzerland. Another contributor was Kristian Bjørkelo, a folklorist with an expressed personal interest in political extremism, cannibalism and the history of the vibrator as a sexual tool. It’s unclear how that makes him an expert on issues related to Islam, but he’s very concerned about the counterjihadists and the many alleged dangers they represent to civilized society.
The Centre against Racism argues that mentioning the term “dhimmi” is a sign of extremism, even though this is a perfectly legitimate Arabic word cited in Islamic religious texts. Apparently, merely citing the very texts Muslims themselves use is a sign of “Islamophobia” and by extension right-wing extremism. They also promote the old lie that “jihad” does not mean Holy War, just “struggle,” and suggest that the very term Holy War does not exist in Islam. The powerful organization Expo is spreading similar disinformation to Swedish pupils.
The term jihad means exactly what it appears to mean: Holy War to establish Islamic supremacy and the rule of sharia law, eventually globally. It is true that there are non-violent aspects to this struggle as well, but that is equally true of all wars. Warfare since before Sun Tzu and The Art of War in ancient China has consisted of armed struggle combined with skillful use of propaganda, diplomacy and disinformation to confuse the enemy. These various aspects of the struggle complement each other, but propaganda does not replace armed struggle.
Pages: 1 2