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.
Western authorities today would like us to believe that only “militant Islamists” are our enemies and that we should cooperate with “moderate Islamists” such as the Muslim Brotherhood, carefully ignoring that Sayyid Qutb, a MB ideologue, inspired many members of the terror network al-Qaida. Cooperating with the Muslim Brotherhood now would be comparable to working with “moderate Nazis” like Joseph Goebbels during WW2.
From the Centre against Racism, Kari Helene Partapuoli, Mari Linløkken, Rune Berglund Steen and Shoaib Sultan in an essay argue in favor of increased surveillance by the police and the security services of websites frequented by right-wing extremists and Islamophobes, which they seem to consider largely the same thing. They advocate extended possibilities for registering people who express non-violent but “xenophobic” opinions.
Partapuoli and Berglund Steen later claimed that they do not advocate surveillance of critics of mass immigration or Islam, although their May 2012 report strongly indicates precisely that. Representatives for the Norwegian Police Security Service such as Lasse Roen have also expressed their interest in more surveillance.
In August 2012, Shoaib Sultan, Kari Helene Partapuoli and Rune Berglund Steen published another newspaper essay specifically stating that the security services should put “greatly” increased emphasis on keeping an eye on those who voice any public opposition to mass immigration, “especially anti-Islamists,” as they stressed.
Janne Kristiansen was head of the Norwegian Police Security Service (PST) from 2009 to 2012, but received massive criticism for the PST’s failure to prevent Breivik’s massacre and was forced to resign due to a minor mistake she made afterwards. Until the day of her resignation she continued to maintain that despite Breivik, by far the greatest terror threat to our society still comes from militant Islamic groups. This was not what the Multicultural mass media wanted to hear, so they pushed to have her removed and eventually succeeded.
Kristiansen’s replacement as head of the country’s domestic intelligence service is another woman, Marie Benedicte Bjørnland, in line with the Scandinavian policy of promoting gender equality. On NRK Dagsrevyen, Norway’s largest TV news program, she stated that the security services should have made “antijihadism” and anti-Islamic movements a higher priority for police surveillance. This will no doubt be corrected in the future.
The government-appointed 22 July commission reviewed everything related to the 2011 attacks. Their official report was published on August 13, 2012 and severely criticized the inadequate response to these attacks by the police authorities. The report (Chapter 4, pdf) talked about “right-wing extremists and anti-Islamists,” as almost synonymous, and mentioned “anti-Islamic” attitudes as potential signs of dangerous extremism, specifically highlighting Øyvind Strømmen as one of their esteemed “experts” on this issue. The Norwegian Police Security Service (PST) voiced similar views in a March 2012 report about possible security threats.
A disturbing pattern emerges here: Mass immigration, including Muslim immigration, will continue as before, but the authorities will clamp down harder on critics of these policies. Peaceful anti-Islamists are treated in almost the same way as militant Muslims, and surveillance of Islam-critics is intensified. This seems to be the sad, although not entirely surprising, trend in several Western countries. This is occurring at the same time that Western governments are supporting the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood and facilitating the international spread of Islamic sharia law.
Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.