Wednesday, July 24, 2013

Some Thoughts on the Dubai Rape Case

Also published at Gates of Vienna
The despicable treatment that the Norwegian rape victim Marte Dalelv was subjected to by the authorities in the UAE — who sentenced her to 16 months in prison for alerting them of her own rape — has by now made its round through the various international news channels. The entire world has gotten a glimpse into the depraved mentality of an Islamic regime that relies heavily on the inhumane Shariah when it metes out punishments to non-Muslims and women, whom it views as second class citizens. However, despite the repulsiveness of the case and all the media coverage that it has generated there is nothing unique about it. Women and non-Muslims have always been treated as inferior citizens in the Islamic world, and this highly unorthodox pardon should by no means be interpreted as a change in policy concerning these matters on the part of the authorities in the UAE.

When people in Norway and the rest of the West rejoice at the release of Ms Dalelv, they should bear in mind that there are thousands of women who are in exactly the same situation, women who are locked away in prisons for being raped or who are living under slave-like conditions where they are mistreated, sexually abused and looked upon as subhumans by their perverted and cruel masters, who draw their moral guidance from the Quran.

The fact that Ms Dalelv has now been pardoned for her ‘crime’ of being raped by the ‘generous’ and ‘benign’ regime in UAE is cause for celebration, however there is no reason to celebrate the Norwegian authorities’ craven handling of this case, which can only be described as abysmal. When the incident was first brought to their attention they chose to keep quiet about it, or to use diplomatic lingo, they decided to rely upon ‘silent diplomacy’ to try and lessen Ms Dalelv’s suffering as a convicted rape victim in a misogynistic and morally corrupt Islamic nation which treats rape victims like dirt. This spectacular tactic adopted by the Norwegian authorities result in absolutely nothing, apart from drawing unwanted media attention to the Norwegian authorities themselves. Instead of informing the media about this incident in order to make as much noise as possible and to create an atmosphere where it would be very hard for the authorities in the UAE to ignore this issue, the Norwegian State Secretary, Espen Barth Eide, chose to sit back and twiddle his thumbs while one of his compatriots was treated in the most appalling manner possible in a nation that completely disregards basic human rights.

It should also be noted that Mr. Eide, skilful diplomat that he is, is fully aware that international condemnation and exposure is a highly effective method of getting through to undemocratic regimes and can exert considerable pressure on them to change their behaviour. Taking this into consideration, it’s fair to ask why he chose not to pursue such an avenue. Why is it that Ms Dalelv, who was raped in March, had to endure four gruelling months of sheer hell, not knowing what would happen to her, when this matter could have been resolved in less than a week — which was the case once the media began to sink their claws into the case? Did Mr Eide completely dismiss such a possibility, or are there other more sinister reasons behind his reluctance to apply such tactics?

There are, of course, a multitude of plausible explanations for this cowardly display by the Norwegian authorities — who are otherwise not afraid to criticize other western nations, such as Greece, when they fail to treat asylum seekers with the same obsequiousness that Norway does. One possible reason is that Norway doesn’t want the rock the boat in a region where Norwegian oil companies are heavily involved. Nor do the Norwegian authorities want to cast Muslims in Norway in a bad light and give ammunition to the critics of Islam and Multiculturalism. It would have been very interesting to be a fly on the wall in the corridors of the Norwegian foreign ministry when the first reports of this case started to appear in the media. The ministry must have been thrust into damage control in order to try and save face, and no one can blame them for a lack of effort in that area.

The Norwegian state secretary, Mr. Espen Barth Eide has frantically attempted to portray the Norwegian government as a pragmatic and result-oriented machine that is able to get things done. Mr. Eide has naturally condemned the treatment that Ms Dalelv was forced to endure in Dubai, but unfortunately for him actions speak louder than words, and the fact is that he chose to remain silent right up until the media got a whiff of the story. He and the Norwegian foreign ministry must hold the regime in the UAE in high regard, considering that they didn’t feel the need to embarrass or bring unwanted attention to the authorities in that particular country with such pesky and insignificant matters as the rape and incarceration of a Norwegian woman.

The fact that this case appeared in the media just before the second anniversary of the 22/7 terror attacks in Norway must have been excruciatingly inconvenient for the authorities, who have used the Breivik incident for all it is worth in order to try and silence anyone who might be harbouring critical thoughts about Islam and Multiculturalism. It’s understandably difficult and extremely complicated to try to condemn and smear so-called “Islamophobes” when the evil actions of the religion that the authorities are trying so desperately to defend are delivering such a devastating blow to the heavily glossed picture of Islam that they, the authorities, are trying to present to the Norwegian people. The fact that it occurred in a supposedly ultra-modern and superficially westernized nation, and not in a backward and Stone Age-like country such as Afghanistan, probably made it even harder for them to swallow.

Another problematic aspect of this case is the way that it has been portrayed in the media in Norway. The sugar-coated state-subsidized version has been very misleading and very biased. The media is, of course, in a position where it can spin a story in any manner it feels like. If it chooses to do so, it can quite easily demonize decent people who stand up for basic human rights and detest human rights violations carried out in the name of Islam, and portray them as vile fascists and racists. It can also, however, extol people who are undeserving of any praise and who should be heavily criticized for their inaction and incompetence, which in this case would be the Norwegian authorities. Unfortunately in this particular case the media has decided to pursue the latter angle, which is not all that surprising considering that the media in Norway on numerous other occasions have deliberately muddied the water in order to serve the interests that are most in tune with their own ideology and that of the Norwegian authorities, especially when it comes to matters concerning Islam and Multiculturalism.

If the media had been doing their job instead of singing the praises of the Norwegian authorities for their ‘brilliant’ effort in bringing Ms Dalelv back home, they would have informed the Norwegian people that the authorities have failed to take any decisive steps to secure justice for Ms Dalelv. The only reason why this case had a happy outcome is due to the international media exposure that has affected Dubai in a very negative way, to put it mildly.

But then again, to be fair to the Norwegian authorities, one has to add that the cowardice that they have exhibited in this case is not all that strange, considering that this is the same government that so gutlessly caved in to Islamic forces during the Motoon crisis, and that even took the unprecedented step of sending Norwegian representatives to Qatar, a country on par with Dubai when it comes to moral corruption, to ask for forgiveness from Yusuf Al Qaradawi, the spiritual advisor of the Muslim Brotherhood, for having allowed a tiny Norwegian newspaper to print a couple of cartoons of the prophet Muhammad.

Back then the Government in Norway grovelled like a perfectly conditioned dhimmi before the very same undemocratic forces that earlier this year sentenced Ms Dalelv to 16 months in prison. Vebjørn Selbekk, the editor who republished the Motoons in Magazinet, was tossed under the bus because the Norwegian authorities were too cowardly to stand up to intimidation by the Muslim world. This time, however, they realised that they had to at least try to pull Ms Dalelv out from under the same bus in order not to lose face completely once the international media spotlight started to shine a little bit too brightly in their direction.

It has been a nauseating experience to behold the craven and spineless behaviour of the Norwegian authorities, who only took it upon themselves to act after massive pressure from the international media made it next to impossible for them not to act and make demands towards the UAE authorities in this matter.

Regrettably this incident is not going to have any bearing on the political direction that multicultural Norway has already staked out. Official Norway will continue to pursue its unrealistic multicultural policies and continue to appease Islam, even though by doing so it is actively promoting Islam and a creating fertile ground for a Dubai-like mentality in the country. Ms Dalelv is now finally able to leave the Islamic hellhole of the UAE, and will soon return home to her native country, but the sad truth is that in her lifetime, provided that drastic steps aren’t taken, she will probably be able to witness firsthand how Norway is slowly transformed into a Dubai-style nation where Islamic laws and customs will gradually gain a more prominent position.

The only way for the authorities in Norway to save face and show that they has some spine is to treat these incidents in the most serious manner and show that they are strong defenders of traditional Western liberal values. This can be done by taking an active stand against Islam, the driving force behind the laws that sentenced Ms Dalelv to 16 months in prison in the UAE, and not by pussyfooting around this issue and constantly turning a blind eye to the actions of the adherents of this vile ideology. The only way to regain a conspicuously missing backbone is to stop grovelling and appeasing a thought and belief system that condones the rape of women, that encourages second-class treatment of non-Muslims, and that rejects freedom of religion and freedom of speech.

It is probably never going to happen, but one is allowed to dream at least once in a while.


Monday, June 24, 2013

What is going on inside their heads?

The thing that disgusts me most about the political correct establishment in Norway is the remarkable callousness and mindboggling indifference that they show toward the victims of crimes carried out by individuals whom they have given political asylum and who in most cases are in no need of our protection. Many of these so-called asylum seekers are illiterates with little or no qualifications and with absolutely no intention of contributing to society or to stay on the straight and narrow. Many of them subsequently turn to crime and in many cases very serious crime. The type of criminal activities that these ungrateful degenerates commit to show their gratitude to the nation that took them in housed them and fed them are often very violent and in many cases inflict deep physical and mental scars on its victims. Still this is not enough to prompt the members of the political correct elites to show any moral indignation or outrage for the problems that their failed policies have led to. They don’t shed any tears for the Norwegian women and children that are routinely gang raped, the law-abiding citizens that are mugged and in many cases beaten within an inch of their lives and the countless young Norwegian children that are bullied and physically attacked by gangs of non-ethnic youths for simply being ethnic Norwegians. They have simply chosen to ignore these troublesome incidents and in those rare cases where they are forced to acknowledge that the problem actually exists, they simply sweep it under the rug and try to ignore it as best as they can.

We don’t see any remorse on their part when young women and children get their lives ruined by individuals whom they have welcomed to the country with open arms. We don’t see any remorse when lives are cut short due to minimal impulse control and a complete lack of moral and common decency in those that they so arrogantly refer to as marginalised minorities. We simply don’t hear about any outpouring of moral indignation for the ills that they have brought upon their own nation by actively supporting treasonous policies and by relentlessly pursuing self serving interests. The political establishment do not and will not bat an eyelid no matter how bad the outcome of their policies are, which does raise the question, what are their true motives and  why are they doing this to their own citizens? People who are incapable of showing remorse and empathy are referred to as psychopaths in medical terminology. Psychopathic behaviour is of course frowned upon in the western world so why is it then that such behaviour is so prevalent among the political elites who hold the most important office in the country?

The fact that there isn’t a political will to ensure that women can walk around freely in our biggest cities after dark without having to worry about being assaulted and raped by psychopathic individuals from the third world is very disturbing and it simply doesn’t make sense. Nor does it make any sense that the political elites choose to maintain a corrupt immigration system that sees the arrival of tens of thousands of individuals whose identities cannot be properly verified and whom the authorities know absolutely nothing about. Nor does it make any sense that these individuals are released into society from day one, free to roam the streets of our cities and do whatever they please. It is very hard to come to terms with the fact that the elected representatives of Norway are allowing this to happen and that they continue to follow policies which is fast depleting the nation’s resources and which will ultimately send it over the cliff.

The fact that the political establishment don’t seem to care about the wellbeing of its own citizens is appalling, but what is even more appalling is the fact that the citizens who do care and who do have the decency and moral integrity to voice their concerns are being vilified and demonized by the loyal henchmen of the state, such as the state sponsored media which has clearly forgotten how to do its job, which is to keep an eye on the authorities and hold them to account for their actions. The medias response to any critical arguments are met with accusations of Islamophobia and racism. They’ll use any excuse as long as they don’t have to address the issues at hand, such as the spurious claim that it plays into the hands of right wing extremists who seek to exploit incidents of such nature to stir up racial and religious tensions.

The political elite who are ultimately responsible for this mess will never take a step back and look honestly at the chaos that they have created or to consider whether a change in policy is needed, unlike other normal people who pause, reflect and re-evaluate their options all the time. Doing so would of course mean having to question the wisdom of slavishly following undemocratic recommendations of non-elected international organizations and to ask whether it is in the best interest of the nation to go on importing individuals who have no inclination or prospects of contributing financially to Norway and whose presence there constitutes a serious threat to the future survival of the nations indigenous population.

Individuals who question the wisdom of transforming a once peaceful and prosperous nation into a very unsafe and violent nation, to set it on a course of financial and demographic ruin and established it as a safe haven for illegal immigrants from all corners of the world are not evil right-wing extremists but caring and concerned citizens who have the best interest of their country and their fellow compatriots at heart. It is not those who question and oppose the political correct establishment that have altered the nation beyond recognition. They are not the evil ones. The evil ones are the people that have decided to ignore the clear legal obligation which has been made mandatory for every single Norwegian politician and official representative of the state as set forth in the Norwegian constitution, and instead decided to serve foreign and non-Norwegian interests. Any politician that takes his/her orders from abroad to the detriment of his own nation is a traitor, or to use a more fitting Norwegian term, a Quisling. There are many Quislings’ in Norway at the moment and many of them are unfortunately members of the Norwegian Parliament. Hopefully they can be stopped before they are able to inflict even more irreparable damage to the country that they are so hell-bent on destroying, and hopefully history will remember them for exactly what they are.

Wednesday, May 29, 2013

Some thoughts on Islamic ‘extremism’ vs. standard Islamic doctrine

One of the biggest fall outs of the intellectual decay and moral cowardness that has afflicted the western world in modern times is the increasing number of intellectuals who are no longer willing to speak truthfully on an ever expanding number of issues for a variety of very disquieting reasons. When it comes to issues dealing with religion, or more specifically Islam, many of these intellectuals will do their utmost to try and convince the general population that those who carry out Islamic acts of aggression and terror in the west are simply misinterpreting their religion and that they are merely extremists bringing their faith into disrepute. In fact this need to constantly exonerate an ideology which is almost alone in producing terrorists today has become such a common occurrence that one can almost describe it as a systematic pattern, just as A comes before B and night follows day, the excuses follow every single act of Islamic terror. In fact it has gone so far that people in the west are expecting to be presented with such feeble excuses in the aftermath of Islamic barbarity.

The latest such grovelling exculpation was offered by the British Prime Minister David Cameron and the mayor of London, Boris Johnson who both maintained that the latest Islamic terrorist act in the UK had nothing to do with Islam, despite the fact that the two Muslims perpetrators who hacked to death the off-duty British soldier while chanting Allahu Akbar and then preceded to justify their deeds in front of a camera by referring to the Koran and perceived western aggression in Islamic countries. An appropriate question to ask after having had to witness such exceptional example of cognitive dissonance from the two esteemed British politicians would have to be; what exactly is the true nature of the religion of Islam? What exactly is the difference between the ideology of the so called extremists and the majority of the ostensibly peaceful Muslims? One would assume that individuals who are making such statements, especially those who appear in the media on a regular basis, is at least qualified to speak on these issues and that they have the necessary data to back up their claims. One would also assume that they have an extensive knowledge of the religion itself and of the ideology of those that they prefer to label as extremists.

Those who maintain that there is a distinct ideological difference between the extremists and ordinary Muslims should really be pushed hard on this issue and not simply have their remarks taken at face value by gullible journalists who have no intention of pursuing the issue in an honest manner, which sadly is the case today. Nor should the questions merely deal with the difference in behaviour, but rather about the difference in religious ideology and doctrine. What exactly is it that the extremists are misinterpreting in order to justify their gruesome deeds and are these perceived misinterpretations, according to these esteemed intellectuals, completely at odds with standard Islamic doctrine? Anyone who has bothered to pick up a copy of the Koran and actually read it from start to finish knows that it is an aggressive and immensely hostile book. It is also a book that has numerous hateful verses that deals specifically with the killing and subjugation of non-Muslims. This is a fact that cannot be contested or somehow simply swept under the rug. Appropriate questions to ask are as follow;

Are these hate filled verses deliberately being toned down by mainstream Muslims and scholars as insignificant or perhaps even discredited as relics from a completely different time and era where different values and norms were in vogue? Are the mainstream Islamic nations distancing themselves from these verses?  Is the Muslim world rejecting these verses or are they in fact acting upon them and doing their utmost to emulate them?

These questions have to be answered in order to get an idea of what is considered mainstream and acceptable today in the Islamic world. Are there movements in the Islamic world that are vehemently opposed to the more aggressive passages of the Koran and that are proposing that these should be removed altogether, or are such movements pretty much nonexistent?

Dutch parliamentarian Geert Wilders made a short movie, Fitna, in 2008 which he posted online. In it he highlighted the hate filled Koranic verses that Islamic terrorists all over the world use to justify their attacks, and which they use to fuel their hatred for non-Muslims. In it Wilders has juxtaposed footage of Muslims carrying out terrorist attacks in Europe and the USA and the relevant verses from the Koran. Towards the end of the film Mr. Wilders encourages the Muslim world to purge the Koran of these evil verses and cast aside its hostility towards non-Muslims and take the plunge into the modern age. One can hear, but not see a page being torn from a book, in this case a telephone directory, upon which Mr. Wilders informs the viewers that it is not up to him, but the Islamic world to carry out the necessary reformation of Islam.

A fatwa, or a death sentence was issued for Geert Wilders by the senior leadership of Al Qaeda for having produced the movie. The movie received widespread condemnation from both Islamic and Western countries and numerous Islamic organisations and individual Muslims in the west who wanted to see Wilders severely punished for having offended Islam. Attempts were even made to boycott the Netherlands and Geert Wilders was subsequently refused entry into the UK to attend a screening of the movie on the spurious grounds that his presences in the UK would infuriate the Muslim community. The hostile response to the release of movie, which in reality is nothing but an suggestion to the Muslim world to reform their religion and rid itself of Islamic doctrine that encourages hatred towards non-Muslims, is a powerful reminder of the Islamic world’s view on these matters, such as their view on the overall message of the Koran and their unwillingness to reform Islam and bring the religion into the modern era. The desire to carry out this process is simply not there, which subsequently means that western liberal apologists who keep insisting that Islamic terrorist who commits atrocities in the name of Islam have nothing to do with the religion have a monumental credibility problem. If ordinary Muslims are unwilling to disregard or ignore these verses that teach them to hate non-Muslims then there is simply no evidence whatsoever to suggest that the Islamic terrorist who keep attacking and killing in the name of Islam are extremists who are merely misinterpreting or bringing the religion of Islam into disrepute. They are in fact true representatives of the religion.

It is true however that only a small minority of the Muslim community in Europe carry out such attacks, but that’s not really a convincing argument to rely upon as irrefutable evidence that the great majority of Muslims reject such acts or consequently don’t believe that such acts are mandated by the Koran. Studies carried out in Britain have shown that a large portion of the UK Muslim community support Islamic terrorism and would welcome the introduction of Sharia. It is also worth mentioning in this context a study carried out in the USA which concluded that out of 100 randomly selected Mosques in the country only 19 sold literature and other material that didn’t encourage or condone terrorism and violent behaviour, that is of course apart from the Koran itself which actively encourages both. The study also concluded that the mosques which sold such violent material were also very vocal about their support for terrorism and the funding of terrorism. There are also numerous of examples of Mosques all around Europe that claim to be moderate and embrace western values, but which upon closer examination, through undercover reporting with hidden cameras, have been exposed to be anything but moderate. The most famous case was documented in the British TV documentary ‘Undercover Mosque’, but there are also similar examples from many other countries in Europe.

Still the most accurate way of identifying Islam’s views on these issues is to look at the Islamic world itself and examine the values and morals that it promotes. When we do so we find that many Islamic nations are run in strict accordance with the Koran and traditional Islamic doctrine and that the Koran is relied upon heavily in both legal and criminal proceedings. It also goes without saying that it is strictly forbidden to mock or question the teachings of the founder of the religion, Muhammad, in these countries. We also find that in areas of conflict and war where Muslims are involved, most noticeable in the Muslim world, the more devout practitioners are carrying out acts that are very similar to those that we in the west label terrorist attacks. As a matter of fact since 9/11 - 2001 more than 20 000 Islamic terrorist attacks have occurred throughout the world.

When examining the evidence out there that are available to us, such as Muslim’s reluctance to reform their own religion, their reactions to anyone who even hint about such actions, the way Muslim majority countries are being run, the way they react whenever someone offended their religion and the way non-Muslims are being treated in these countries, it is not unreasonable to conclude that Islamic terrorists are not misinterpreting the Koran, nor are they misrepresenting their religion whenever they are carrying out terrorists attacks. They are in fact following their religion to the letter. This is a fact that needs to be relentlessly pointed out in the west and we need to do away with the standard mantra coming from liberal western intellectuals whenever Islamic terrorist attacks occur. The first step towards defeating Islamic terrorism is to realize that it is in fact Islamic terrorism and not simply terrorist acts incorrectly attributed to Islam.





Thursday, May 23, 2013

A new chapter in Islam’s long running war of intimidation and terror in Europe

The grotesque murder of an unarmed lone British soldier in London yesterday, where two Muslim males first ran over the unexpecting victim with their car in order to incapacitate him, then got out and proceeded to stab and chop him to death with meat cleavers like he was some kind of rabid animal, and supposedly attempting to decapitate him, marks a new chapter in Islam’s long running war of intimidation and terror in Europe in modern times. Such vicious and barbaric tactics have of course been commonplace on other continents for a long time now; hence it is not a major change in strategy by members of the religion of peace, they have just imported one more of their barbaric tactics to Europe and upped the pace in their violent struggle to create a worldwide Islamic Caliphate. The beheading of Buddhist monks in Thailand, the massacring of Christian worshippers in Nigeria and the killing of Christian Copts in Egypt is of course old news for those who have ventured beyond the world of the political correct MSM that for some reason find it enormously inconvenient to present news that portray their favourite European based victim group in a less than flattering light. This time however the MSM had no choice but to describe how die-hard Muslims go about it when they decide to deal with their enemies and it will most definitely not be the last time that they attack in such a gruesome manner in Europe. I’m afraid that this is just the beginning and that the mostly leftwing media is in for one hell of a surprise.

There have of course been other Islamic terrorist attacks in Europe in recent times. Members of the religion of peace even struck in the same city in 2005 when four fellow devout Muslims detonated powerful bombs on the London Public Transportation network killing 52 civilians and maiming countless others, and although that was a truly horrific act of terror I would still venture that this latest attack was more gruesome in nature. The act of hunting down an unarmed, unexpecting and random individual, and then literally slaughtering the poor soul like a rabid dog leaves a far more profound and lasting mental impression on members of the public than powerful bomb explosions instantly killing whoever is unfortunate enough to be in the vicinity when they go off. The fact that the victim was alive when they started working on him, probably fully aware that he was going to be chopped to pieces with meat cleavers and quite possibly decapitated, the pain that he must have felt is a mental image that would make even the strongest of stomachs turn. This is of course something that the terrorist and their sympathisers are fully aware of and which they seek to exploit to the fullest, and the really bone chilling aspect of it all is that their deranged actions can be justified with reference to Koranic verses and various hadiths, a fact that the political correct MSM and the liberal elites seem unwilling to acknowledge.

But it’s not just terrorist attacks that have helped to instil fear and terror in the hearts of the indigenous populations of Europe. There have also been numerous of intimidations campaigns in the last few decades in which Muslims have attempted to silence those who don’t show enough deference to this deranged political vestige from the Stone Ages. This has been achieved by either threatening to use violence or in more severe cases threaten to kill critics of Islam, and there have been no shortage of Muslims who have been willing to carry out these threats, which have made them highly successful. Most people think twice before they speak out publicly if a couple of wrong words could land you in a world of trouble. This was proven once and for all when Dutch film maker Theo Van Gogh was killed in Amsterdam in 2004 by a devout Dutch/Moroccan Muslim for supposedly having insulted the 1.5 billion Muslims of the world. The latest London attack is in many ways reminiscent of this incident. The difference being that Theo Van Gogh was targeted specifically for his part in producing the Islam critical movie ‘Submission’. Theo Van Gogh also knew that he was making himself a target when he decided to start working on this film and he had the opportunity to take the appropriate precautions. Yesterday’s victim however had no reason to expect that he would be targeted and killed by violent Muslims. He was not chosen because he had made insults against Islam; he was simply chosen for being a soldier in the British army.

The fact that Muslims in Europe are now willing to attempt to decapitate randomly selected members of the public  and videotape the atrocity  in order to instil terror into the minds of the rest of population is a dramatic shift in a new direction. However, it shouldn’t come as a surprise as this is a tactic that they have employed frequently outside Europe, in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq just to mention a few examples. I actually mentioned this possibility in an online exchange with an acquaintance a few months ago. I suggested that there would probably come a time in the not so distant future when jihadis’ would kidnap randomly selected people in Europe, decapitate them and publish videos clips of the events online for propaganda purposes as they have done previously in other parts of the world. Individuals who are familiar with Islam and the mindset of its practitioners, and who are not mentally paralysed by political correctness, know that this is an inevitable natural progression of things.

From an Islamic terrorist perspective Woolwich style attacks make a lot of sense. It eliminates the need to acquire difficult to obtain items such as explosives and firearms, it doesn’t require a lot of planning and time consuming preparations and it is almost impossible for the authorities to stop it, just like it is next to impossible for the authorities to stop ordinary murders. The added bonus is that it generates more fear than a major terrorist attack which requires a lot of luck to pull off for the terrorist and a lot of bad luck for the victims to be at the wrong place at the wrong time. Anyone however could be randomly targeted in a Woolwich style attack and the terrorists don’t need a lot of luck to carry them out. Another worrying factor which should make the authorities shiver in their pants is the fact that more and more devout young male Muslims return home from stints in war torn countries with combat experience to match and with no qualms about attacking innocent civilians. Odds are that many of these returning jihadis’ have participated in acts that are just as horrific and despicable, or even worse than the latest London attack. There are hundreds of online video clips of Jihadis’ carrying out the most gruesome atrocities in Syria and elsewhere. It’s naive to believe that these returning warriors haven’t participated in episodes of such nature.

Another worrying aspect is that the authorities in Europe are completely unprepared for this kind of warfare. One question that automatically pops up when pondering this issue is whether the authorities are willing to introduce new tough measures to combat this menace, or if they are simply going to continue to let political considerations take priority over practical manners to effectively deal with this very serious threat. If this latest terrorist attack should become a trend among the more devout Muslims in Europe it will be very hard for the authorities to stop them, and particularly if the authorities refuse to look at the problem in an honest manner. The latest riots in Sweden has shown the world once and for all that the authorities have no control over the mess that they themselves have created and that the problems can’t simply be resolved by means of political correct strategies. The million dollar question is, if this becomes the new reality, how long are the people of Europe willing to accept that they run the risk of being slaughtered by Muslim fanatics every time they venture outside the front door? Fear has always been the terrorists’ strongest weapon and a handful of horrific killings every now and then are more than sufficient to instil an ample amount of fear in the populations.

Unfortunately the silent majority still don’t seem to realize the gravity of the current political predicament that we’re in. They are unable to see that their relative peaceful and calm societies could swiftly be plunged into chaos and anarchy if things are allowed to continue. Many are also incapable of grasping that the authorities in most western nations have already lost control of their societies. They should realize that if things really start to go downhill in Europe and the politicians refuse to take the necessary steps to deal with it members from the various military branches could quite possibly decide to take control and proceed to deal with the problems as they see fit. It’s not unrealistic to expect that military coups could take place within the next decade or so, not necessarily in every country, but at least in some. That’s how it has been in the past in times of turmoil and instability and that’s probably also what it’s going to be like in the future. I sincerely hope that this isn’t the path we’re doomed to take, but with the way things are going at the moment it seem like the most likely scenario.

Thursday, May 9, 2013

A short message

I have decided to create a new blog where I will be publishing video clips and other multimedia content. For those who want to check it out here’s the link:

I will continue to update this blog at regular intervals, but I won’t be publishing/republishing any multimedia material here.


Thursday, May 2, 2013

Update on removed translated article

Norway Keeps a Lid on the Truth

Last night we published a translation by The Observer of an article from about the violence and intimidation experienced every day by young native Norwegians in the culturally enriched Groruddalen district in Oslo.

Between then and now — in less than twenty-four hours — was pressured by the original publisher to take the article down.

Fjordman sends this brief account of what happened today in Norway.

Norway Keeps a Lid on the Truth

by Fjordman says that they were ordered by Finansavisen to remove the text of the Groruddalen story (in English here), despite having originally received a permission to post it. They published a follow-up entry, stating that they had received an enormous popular response to the previous article that was nearly unheard of by the standards of tiny Norway.

It spread like wildfire via alternative media on the Internet, including Twitter and many thousands of references on Facebook.

Norway faces national parliamentary elections this fall, and the left-wing coalition government is now trailing in the polls. Most of the political elites and the mass media do not want to talk about the problems mentioned in the article, especially not in an election year. People might get the wrong — or rather the right — ideas.

Human Rights Service, which republished this article online from the paper edition of business newspaper Finansavisen, is an excellent organization. However, they are vulnerable to political pressure because they receive public funding. Attempts have been made by left-wingers to slash their funding, but the right-wing Progress Party (Fremskrittspartiet) has lobbied to protect the state support for them.
I believe they did lose some of their funding by the left-wing government after Breivik, since they were branded “Islamophobes” who had spread “hatred,” but I’ve heard that some of this was later restored. I’m not familiar with all the details.

Of course, the many Muslim and left-wing “anti-racist” organizations hardly ever have their state funding questioned. Only the very rare organizations that criticize Multiculturalism, such as HRS, ever experience these kinds of threats.

The problems the article described — the harassment and violence directed at the natives in their own capital city — are very real, and rarely talked about as explicitly as in the Finansavisen piece. Many influential people want to keep a lid on any open and honest discussion of these problems, which are caused by the immigration policies promoted by the establishment mass media and the ruling political elites.

“Everything You Have Learned in School is Wrong”: had to delete the Norwegian version of this article. Therefore I have decided to reposted the translated version here:

“Everything You Have Learned in School is Wrong”

Our Norwegian correspondent The Observer has translated an article from about the ghastly predicament in which young Norwegians find themselves within heavily culturally enriched districts of Oslo.

Well-off natives can afford to move to safe, pleasant white enclaves, where they may send their children to school among white native speakers of Norwegian. Less affluent citizens are not so fortunate, however, and are forced to endure the humiliation and degradation of the Multicultural behavioral sink in which their political masters have consigned them to live.

The translator includes this introductory note:
This report shows the real consequences of the enormous betrayal of their people by the ruling elites in Norway. Sadly, the same thing goes on in every Western European country today, and on both sides of the Atlantic.

There is something seriously wrong with politicians who actively pursue policies that have such horrific outcomes. Nor is this ground-breaking information that is being presented in this article — it has been going on for a couple of decades now in Norway.
The politicians know it, but they keep their mouths shut and let the vulnerable ‘youths’ pay the price for their betrayal.

As a matter of interest, Finansavisen (which published the original piece) is one of the very few newspapers in Norway that don’t receive press subsidies. Every Norwegian newspaper journalist is subsidized by the authorities to the tune of $75,000 per year. Which is perhaps also why (as far as I know) no other MSM newspaper has covered this story — for them, Norwegian ‘racism’ against non-Norwegians is all that matters.
The translated article:
Norwegian boys in the new Norway

Over the past few weeks, Finansavisen [Financial Newspaper] has focused on immigration and its economic consequences. We have commented on several of these previously. Last weekend the journalists Kjell Erik Eilertsen, Ole Asbjørn Ness and the photographer Iván Kverme left behind their calculators and computers and met with some of the individuals who are growing up in the new Norway. They decided to focus on the youngsters, Norwegian boys, who are growing up in the most immigrant-dense area of Norway — Groruddalen [Grorud valley] in Oslo. And they have produced an article that other media would probably refuse to print.

Groruddalen is an area that covers four neighborhoods: Stovner, Alna, Grorud and Bjerke. All the neighborhoods have an immigrant population approaching 50 percent.
Finansavisen has made contact with two young boys in the “valley”. One of them, Marius Sørvik, has decided to go public, and his name and picture appear in the newspaper. The other one has decided to remain anonymous. Finansavisen refers to him as “Andreas”. One boy was interviewed twice and the other one on three occasions. They were given copies of the article to read through before it was published, and confirmed that they have been quoted correctly. In addition to this Andreas’ father has read the article and given the newspaper the approval to publish his son’s story.

Two different worlds in 35 minutes

When the decision to travel to Groruddalen was finally made, Finansavisen decided that the journalists should travel there in the manner that most of the youths choose, namely by riding the subway train. The trip from Smestad to Stovner takes approximately 35 minutes, according to Finansavisen, and I guess that during the journey they were shown two different worlds.

When they arrive in Stovner, they hear the voice of “Andreas”:

“A few weeks ago,” he says, “I was entering the schoolyard. They were attacking Lars. There’s a whole heap of them. They always attack as a group. They are dogs, they hunt in packs. They are beating him up. I run in between them and I punch one of them. Then someone comes rushing to and separates us, and yet again I’m being hauled off to the principal’s office, and yet again I am being told that even if they punch us we are not supposed to retaliate. Do you know how insanely provocative such a statement is?”
Finansavisen‘s description of Andreas leaves no room for doubt:

He is sixteen. He is angry. He’s scared. He is brave. He is tired. He wants to tell. He’s got the face of a boy and the eyes of a man.

“I would have gone public with my full identity had it not been for the fact that I have younger siblings. People need to realize what it is like to grow up here,” he says.
Home is a place somewhere in Groruddalen. That’s where he grew up. He spends one week at his mother’s place and the next one at his father’s place. His stepfather is nice. His father is great. His mother is great, but naïve.

That is not the problem. This area is what’s the problem.

“My mum told me that it would be good for me to grow up here. I would get to know the new Norway, get to know different cultures.”

Then we are introduced to Marius Sørvik.

He is nineteen. He is articulate. He is brave. He’s scared. He is weak. He is successful. He has dropped out of school. He has a beard. He is too young to have beard. He is pretty in the eyes of young girls. He is only 19, but he has made four movies. He earns money. Right now he is staying with his mum.

He came to Groruddalen from Fredrikstad when he was one year old. Soon he’ll move back to Fredrikstad.

“They are to be pitied”

The boys have difficulties defining themselves, “the others” and animal metaphors are often used:

They both belong to an animal species that is rapidly diminishing in Groruddalen. They do what all animals do: Come up with survival strategies. Trying to find a way to show off their feathers in all its glory, run and hide when they are outnumbered.

Human nature: The wish to retaliate: revenge, vengeance, one day they might be the strongest, and not be outnumbered. Them. Against them. The others. Strangers with Norwegian passports. The ones they were told to be considerate of when they attended elementary school. Their species has as of yet not been officially labelled. For want of a better term, we chose to use the term that Marius uses to describe himself, a young ethnic Norwegian male.

“All the teachers told me, the principal told me, if I had an altercation with them I had to understand that they were to be pitied, that they came from countries where there had been war. I thought that he was joking. Their grandparents emigrated from Pakistan. So if I hit someone no one would scold me because my grandfather had been a member of the Norwegian Resistance Movement? But I believed in it.”

Duped by the school

The elementary school in Groruddalen is a pleasant experience for both of them in the beginning. They sing the songs, they believe in the songs, they live the songs. Then it starts to sound false, the childhood comes to an end, fifth grade:

“You discover who you are,” says Andreas.

“People are different; everything you have learned in school is wrong,” says Marius.
You have the ethnic Norwegian boys, and then there are the others. Faced with these two choices, the two boys chose different strategies:
Marius’ strategy

He doesn’t lower his head. He refuses to take any crap. He answers back. He’s loudmouthed. He is who he is. It does not matter. But that’s not why they target him. It is an autumn evening in seventh grade. He is playing tennis. When he leaves the court to collect some tennis balls they appear. They are seven or eight Somalis. The beat the crap out of him, he has to get new teeth put in.

Marius doesn’t slow down. He calls a Roma girl a gypsy, something that isn’t appreciated. When her brothers and cousins come for him, he hides in the principal’s office. It has begun.

Andreas’ strategy

He lowers his gaze, he wants to be like them, talk like them, he alters his language, limits his vocabulary, makes deliberate spelling mistakes — ‘an school’, kebab-Norwegian, buys a soft gun, wants to be like the older, tougher, cool Pakistani guys that have cars and money and no job, why not become a Muslim, become a brother?

He wants to be like them, but he doesn’t become like them, something inside him is resisting.

Fragments: the bad grades in the Norwegian classes, the bad friends, Islam, he notices how they view women, as an object, how they react when he tries to discuss Islam with them, how they talk about respect, but don’t show any respect, how they refer to Norwegians as f***ing Norwegians, whitey, potato; something inside him resists.

He withdraws. They notice that he withdraws. Then it starts.

Constant fear

We learn about the suffering of Marius:

He heads off to school an hour before it starts in the morning. He heads home before it finishes in the afternoon. More episodes, more threats. Fear is not an isolated event, but rather a continuous stream.
In tenth grade he goes to see the doctor and lies about having social anxiety. He is given a medical certificate so he can spend as little time as possible in school. He’s scared. Says that they always come in packs. Says that they always stare when he sees them on the subway when there are twenty of them, and when he gets a girlfriend they cry out to him:

“‘Hey Marius have you got yourself a girlfriend,’ and it’s not the words that are threatening, but the way they are being uttered, do you understand, how they look at me and my girlfriend who starts to cry, do you understand?”

NRK’s “concept” of “our valley”

We are being told that Marius’ fears have subsided, although they can still return:

It has been three years since he graduated from high school. He can still feel a twinge of fear whenever he meets the gangs on the subway, but he doesn’t give a ****, he has made four movies, he says what he thinks, he is who he is, the valley is what it is, he writes op-eds about life in Groruddalen and gets them published in VG and Dagsavisen, he is only nineteen but he has already had a heart attack and he has been interviewed twice by the producers of the Norwegian TV series ‘Dalen Vår’ [‘Our Valley’], Elisabeth Brun (see separate article) to find out if his story fitted in with the story about Groruddalen.

It did not.

“Your views do not fit in with our concept,” she said. That TV series is state-funded propaganda. A documentary where the angle has been determined in advance is no documentary, but a half-mockumentary where they have full control of what is being said. If you are going to tell a story about what a great place Groruddalen is, then you can’t talk to young ethnic Norwegian boys, because most of them will tell you that it is a horrible place.

Worried about murders

Andreas is also suffering, despite attempts at hiding it as much as possible:

He has withdrawn into himself, although he still has a Muslim friend from a very religious family. Let’s call him Omar. He tries to persuade Andreas to become Muslim. Omar tells him about the judgment and the hell that awaits all those who refuse to submit to Islam in time. Omar tells him that he needs to stop enjoying life, but rather prepare himself for the next life. Forsake. But Andreas says that he is wary of Islam; actually it’s more than that: he doesn’t like Islam, not the strictness, vengefulness, its view of women, all the talk about the chastity of women, hijab, not because they want to but because they have to.

They discuss. The discussions descend into verbal altercations. “He told me that he was going to kill me. I threatened him back.”Andreas allies himself with ethnic Norwegians in the motorcycle community for protection, a 1% club.

“Had it not been for them he would have killed me.”

Cowardly Muslims

Andreas doesn’t deny that he’s still scared. That he lift weights to gain strength. He also says that he’s contemplating carrying a knife, but that he fears the police knife controls. He says that he’s made deals with his friends, that they will all stand up for each other. Friends who also lift weights and that are into martial arts.

“Muslims don’t fight you on a one-to-one basis. If you meet them alone they are cowards. If I run into Omar alone, he will just walk past me. If I am alone and meet him in a crowd, the best outcome I can hope for is a beating.”

Marius has lifted his gaze. Now he can start to analyze it all.

“There is a hierarchy, where ethnic Norwegian boys are on the bottom rung on the ladder. They will be targeted unless they accede to their rules, if they don’t they become Norwegian immigrants. If a Norwegian boy gets into trouble, odds are that he has a small family and a tiny social network. Unlike a Pakistani or Somali boy, he doesn’t have a clan of brothers and cousins and uncles who come rushing to his aid in the event of a conflict. Most of the time the only thing he has is a single parent.”

Norwegian is weakness, Norwegian culture is on the way out

Andreas believes that the Norwegian culture is being squeezed out.

“Nobody wants to be a Norwegian here. Norwegian is synonymous with weakness. This is a feeling that is also being conveyed by the teachers.

“They are afraid. They don’t dare to speak out. You should have a look at the number of principals that have come and gone at Vestliveien school in recent years, and ask them why they left. They don’t have control, but they do everything to accommodate the Muslim students. In home economics classes everybody has to prepare halal meat. Immigrants do not have to attend ‘NyNorsk’ classes [literally New-Norwegian, which is a different dialect and a different way to write Norwegian — there are two forms of written Norwegian]. I have to attend these classes. The Muslim girls do not have to attend the physical activity classes; because of course they cannot undress in front of other girls. We have to adapt to their culture. They don’t have to adapt to ours.”

Andreas’ views on girls:

“There is one thing that annoys the hell out of me. They can start chasing Norwegian girls, but we cannot go after theirs. It’s something you learn early on. You just don’t go after a Pakistani girl, but Norwegian girls are available to immigrant boys. Norwegian girls prefer them. I don’t know why. I guess it must be that brown skin. That they are tough, that they have money despite not having jobs. They don’t see that they fight in packs, that they are cowards. I asked my best female friend if we could get romantically involved, and she told me that I have the right personality, but the problem was that I’m Norwegian. She wants to become involved with a foreigner.”

He believes that Oslo will eventually become Oslostan.

“It’s not going to happen straightaway, but it that’s the way its going. More and more Muslims arrive here from abroad, and many Norwegians convert. Personally I know of five converts. Here it’s all about Islam; Islam is strong, so why fight it?”

The betrayal and the silence

Andreas says that he feels betrayed. And his conversation with the journalists from Finansavisen is the first time that adults let him speak freely, the first time that he doesn’t have to hold back and place restrictions on himself. He says that he wants to become an actor. He wants to make a movie. Maybe a movie about the real “our valley”. He says that he wants to join the HV youth (the youth division of the National Guard). “He wants the uniform. He craves the authority that a uniform gives. No one messes with a soldier.”

Finansavisen’s reporters suggest that adolescence can be tough for everybody, and they wonder how much of it is actually about growing up in the valley and how much is trauma that many adolescents experience, such as differentness, loneliness and exclusion. They even ask them if they are paranoid — if there really is something to be afraid of. Maybe they have deliberately isolated themselves and gone into hiding and started worshipping imaginary horrors that have replaced reality?

The boys’ response is laughter:

They laugh. They smile. The journalists have not understood.

“It is not imagination when they shout after me, when they threaten me, when they hit me,” says Andreas.

“Are you afraid to walk around alone?”

“I’m not. Not any more,” says Marius.

“There are many places that I don’t go alone. Especially at night,” says Andreas.
We follow Andreas to the subway station.

“Do you see?” he says, and guides our attention to two immigrants. “Do you see how they stare back?”

He’s right. They do stare. We lower our gaze first.

Once again we hear the animal metaphors that permeates their language:

“They are like cats, says Andreas — cats never back down. They challenge you. I get so f***ing mad.”

The subway train arrives. We get on. After a few stop Andreas gets off. We lean back in our seats and try to let the rattle of the train carriage rock us into a kind of sleep. But sleep doesn’t come.
The subway ride from Stovner to Smestad takes approximately 35 minutes.
Epilogue: After having read the draft, Marius gave us a call.

“You can delete the statement that I can walk around safely.”


“I got beat up on the way home from the pub yesterday.”

Additional links to articles that deal with Groruddalen and white flight from Oslo:

Wednesday, April 24, 2013

This is Sven Egil Omdal

I’ve decided to make a little video presentation of the Norwegian journalist, Sven Egil Omdal. So here it is;


Saturday, April 13, 2013

Some thought on multimedia and the counterjihad

They say a picture is worth more than a thousand words ....

Lately I’ve started getting into photo-editing and moviemaking. I’ve downloaded a free photo editing program called GIMP and I have Windows moviemaker installed on my computer, so getting started was fairly straight forward. All I had to do was to set aside some time, obtain some free information from the net and start to take it all in. I should perhaps also mention that it’s a lot of fun and it is very rewarding. When you’re making video clips you really get to use your creative skills, not to mention that you get the see the results of your efforts once you’ve finished. You also have the option of uploading your clips onto YouTube, which is basically a big poster board for multimedia clips. If you’re talented, lucky or clever your videos have the potential of being watched by millions of people all over the world and to leave a profound impression on them. That was probably the biggest reason for taking the time to learn about these things, because it’s a lot easier to get a message out to the masses via YouTube and similar video site than it is through a personal blog consisting of mainly written material, and which compared to YouTube receives very few visitors.

Don’t get me wrong, blogs are powerful tools and they have been instrumental in changing public perception, but in this day and age where everything is fast paced and where people don’t have the patience to spend ten - fifteen minutes reading a text no matter how good or informative it is, a five to ten minute video clip is an ideal alternative.

Why? Because watching a video clip doesn’t require a lot of effort, and the effects are much more profound on the recipient. Reading about the passenger jets flying into the twin towers in NYC on that horrible September day does not evoke the same emotions as watching actual footage of the doomed planes hitting the two skyscrapers, or similarly watching a Muslim mob go bonkers over an innocuous cartoon of Mohammad does tend to give the viewer a better understanding of the rage of the mob as opposed to just reading about in a newspaper article.

Anyone trying to change the public perception or to get a message across via the internet is well advised to present his/her information in a multimedia format.

I also believe that this is a path that the counter-jihad community should pursue more aggressively. Vlad over at does a very good job in presenting informative and interesting video clips that the MSM in many cases try to hush down or completely sweep under the carpet. With access to a network of translators it’s also easy to spread important foreign language videos that would otherwise go unnoticed in the English speaking world. There is no getting away from it, Europe is today the epicentre where the struggle against Islam will either be won or lost in the western world, and because the vast majority of the European countries don’t use English as their first language, the work of the translators is critical, but so is Vlad’s effort and others like him that make these clips available for others to watch.

The impact of motion pictures is so enormous that it has the power to determine political elections, as was the case with the latest US election where both candidates spent millions of dollars on prime time TV ads in order to ensure that their message got across to the voters. Both candidates where drilled by a variety of professional media experts on how to behave and present themselves on TV in general, and on public TV debates in particular. If any of these candidates had opted to ignore the TV side of the campaign and focus more on written material they would have been truly and utterly defeated.

The well informed and those who follow politics closely would probably have preferred such a scenario, but it would have been lost on the average person. And that’s also the way it is in the fight against Islam and oppressive political correctness. Those who are deeply concerned about these issues read countless of articles and in-depth analysis, but the ones who aren’t or simply don’t get it, unfortunately don’t. And they are the ones that we need to reach out to and get onboard.

Even an ordinary blog post would become more potent if its content was presented as a slideshow which also included still pictures and music. Not because the people that worry about Islam wouldn’t read the blog post, but because the uninformed or the uninterested probably wouldn’t invest the necessary time and effort that it takes to read through an article containing 800 -900 words on the subject of Islam. However chances are that they would watch a video on the subject, and chances are that they would probably be left with a more profound impression of the information presented to them.

It’s not my intention to be arrogant, pompous or act superior here, but I honestly believe that that is the way it is.

My advice to anyone who wants to get involved in the fight against the spread of Islam, political correctness and multiculturalism would therefore be to focus more on the multimedia aspect of things as this is going to have the greatest impact.

Odds are that the people who read this blog post, or just scan it, will remember the image of Jens Stoltenberg at the start of it more clearly a few months down the track rather than the words that I have written here, which only proves the point that I am trying to make here.

Monday, April 8, 2013

Islamophobia is just another word for love of western values.

I have made a little video clip about ‘Islamophobia’ where I offer my thoughts on that particular subject. Do have a look at it and see what you think.

Tuesday, April 2, 2013

A couple of video clips

I have received a couple of video clips from a reader in Saudi Arabia on various topics related to Islam. He has informed me that these are important educational clips well worth watching. So I figured I might as well post them here on this blog.
I should however point out that I don’t speak Arabic, so I cannot vouch for the authenticity of the clips, but the reader has assured me that the translation is 100 percent accurate.

Here’s clip number one which deals with farting in the mosque.

And here’s clip number two which deals with Islam and dancing.

Tuesday, February 26, 2013

Hate speech legislation, or introduce harsh penalties for those who try to obstruct free speech?

In the aftermath of the failed assassination attempt on Lars Hedegaard in Copenhagen earlier this month, where an Arabic/Pakistani looking male disguised as a postman tried to kill the well-known Danish Islam critic, newspaper editors and politicians, at least those that bothered to report of the incident, talked in poetic terms about how precious freedom of speech is and that we simply can’t allow anyone to do away with this hard-fought right. It’s nice to know that individuals in powerful positions are willing to stand up for free speech following such an appalling incident, and especially considering that they normally vilify and smear people like Lars Hedegaard who use this freedom to express views that they don’t like under more normal circumstances.

Another intrepid person who uses his freedom of speech to voice opinions that the MSM don’t like is the Dutch parliamentarian Geert Wilders.  And just like Lars Hedegaard he too is on the hit list of fanatic assassins who would love nothing more than to silence him on a permanent basis. As a result of these very real threats Geert Wilders has been given around the clock protection by the Dutch police.

Last week he got to experience close up how the Australian media treat individuals that they don’t like. Their methods are fairly similar to that of their European colleagues. Wilders also got to see how Australian leftwing demonstrators behave, and it should come as no surprise that they are doing their very best to emulate the behaviour of their leftwing brethrens in Europe. At a conference in Melbourne organized by the Q society Wilders got to see firsthand how fanatical leftwing activists critical of his views actively tried to disrupt the event and resort to violence to prevent people from entering the premises and listening to his message.

Such behaviour has unfortunately been allowed to take root in Europe without any real attempts by the authorities to stop it. Violent individuals from organized movements on the extreme left have been permitted almost unopposed to behave violently in order to silence those they disagree with and to deter others from engaging in similar activities.  The demonstrators in Melbourne accused Mr. Wilders of hate speech and of causing animosity and division between the different ethnic groups, which couldn’t be further from the truth. Wilders have repeatedly gone on record stating that those immigrants that embrace western values are more than welcome to reside in the Netherlands, those however who are incapable of doing so have to go.

The demonstrators in Melbourne are of course entitles to believe and say what they like, but what makes them think that they have the right to prevent Mr. Wilders from speaking and violently attack those who have come to listen to him?

What is worse, so-called hate speech, or individuals who are willing to use violence to prevent others from speaking? Most western Governments, with the exception of the US Government, unfortunately seem to believe that hates speech is far worse than real violence

If western authorities were serious about defending freedom of speech they would never have introduced draconic hate speech laws that have completely stifled free speech in Europe and which have given the authorities the power to arrest anyone who doesn’t approve of the official line on such contentious issues as Islam and multiculturalism. Furthermore if the authorities’ had been genuine about defending freedom of speech they would have made sure that this right was properly protected in the eyes of the law. That is not the case today.

Any action whose sole purpose is to deter someone from using this right should be dealt with in the most serious manner. Because when we get down to the nitty gritty, is there really that much of a difference between a dictator preventing his fellow countrymen from expressing themselves freely by the use of terror and intimidation and groups of fanatical citizens that are wiling to attack anyone who dare to express opinions that they find unpalatable, and that are able to do so with impunity? The end result is the same; they’re silencing others by the use of fear.

Why is it that some individuals are given the green light to violently attack others on a regular basis simply because the members of the targeted group have the temerity to express their opinions? And why are they allowed to get away with only a light slap on the wrist and minimal fines in those cases that they are actually arrested? Wouldn’t it make more sense to charge them with obstructing others from exercising basic fundamental human rights?  

How is it that the Dutch authorities can justify spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on prosecuting someone like Geert Wilders for alleged hate speech violations, which they actually did a few years ago, but practically ignore those on the extreme left that are trying to physically assault Wilders and people like him for simply voicing their opinions? Surely it would make more sense to haul the violent leftwing fanatics into the courts, make them endure lengthy trials, pay for their own defence and sentence them to lengthy prison sentences or alternatively give them hefty fines?

How about making them go through similar protracted court processes like the one that Geert Wilders had to endure? There can be no doubts that such an initiative would send out a clear and unequivocal message to others who might be tempted to engage in similar activities. It would also send out a very clear signal that preventing someone from using their freedom of speech through the use of violence and intimidation is simply unacceptable in today’s Europe.

Unfortunately it’s the other way around. Those who express opinions which haven’t been given the official stamp of approval get to feel the full weight of the law. It doesn’t matter that they have refrained from violent activities, their opinions are considered intellectual violence and thus they have to be punished. They get ridiculed and smeared by the leftwing media; they run the risk of getting socially ostracized and in some case even lose their livelihoods for speaking their minds. We’ve come to a stage in history where words are considered to be far more dangerous than a blow from a baseball bat.

In democratic society we only prosecute those who prevent others from using their democratic rights. Why not prosecute violent activists as rigorously as those that are guilty of ‘violating’ the draconic hate speech laws that are in place in most western nations today?  Apparently it’s more important to look after those that are feeling offended than it is to assist those that are being violently attacked by the offended.

Special laws apply to organized criminal gangs, such as Hells Angels and Bandidos, that are known to engage in mafia like activities. Perhaps similar tactics should be used against organized groups that are known to cause violence at public rallies and political event, such as the one that Geert Wilders attended recently in Melbourne? Their tactics are identical; it’s all about intimidation and deterring others from engaging in similar activities. Perhaps the authorities should start to issue restraining orders to know members of such organizations and arrest anyone who are in breach of these? It’s not a human right to assault other people.

Somehow I don’t believe that it wouldn’t go down too well if members from Hells Angels all of a sudden decided to target journalists for looking to closely into the dealings of their club.

Maybe the politicians and newspaper editors that were so vociferous in their defence of freedom of speech but yet so lukewarm of the activities and opinions of Lars Hedegaard should take a long hard look at themselves in the mirror and start sorting out their priorities and re-evaluate their principles? How about being the driving factor in getting such new legislation implemented?

Or perhaps they are comfortable with the way things are as long as they themselves aren’t the target of violence and intimidation?

Saturday, February 9, 2013

Lars Gule: An older version of Anders Behring Breivik?

Also published at Gates of Vienna

Anyone with even a slight knowledge of the political climate today in Norway knows that it is literally career suicide for an academic to oppose the established truth in the tiny little fishbowl that is Norwegian academia. The bowl is full of lidless and bloodthirsty piranhas that are tirelessly working to ensure that everything is running according to the script. Those who diverge from the pre-approved plot are dealt with swiftly and in a very brutal manner. They are virtually shredded in public.
The piranhas set a standard that everyone in the bowl has to submit to. Their brutal behaviour and their willingness to attack sends out a very clear warning to those who might harbour any dissident thoughts. In many ways it’s an academic miniature version of the former Soviet Union, a regime which these self appointed piranhas used to glorify in the 1970s and ’80s, when many of them were active members of various communist organizations and called for a bloody revolution.

Despite the brutal and oppressive disciplinary regime that they have managed to create in Norway, every now and again someone in the fishbowl dares to stick their neck forward and accurately diagnose the obvious democratic deficit and the blatant political bias which exists inside the bowl. The latest dissident is Alexandra Irene Larsen, who wrote an op-ed in VG where she confronted the left-wing agenda found in the Norwegian academy, and in particular in human sciences, which she accurately described as being completely hijacked by leftwing ideologues. To the piranhas this was an inexcusable act of treason which they couldn’t let pass unpunished. They knew that they had to act, and do so in such a manner that it would quell any similar future attempts. They had to set an example, and it had to be a powerful one.

It is quite a spectacle to behold so-called researchers and scientists — who by nature should be very open-minded and actively encourage independent thinking — act like little Stalins whenever someone goes against the consensus that they have imposed upon the rest of the flock. Irrefutable facts and logic are of course impossible to dismiss by rational arguments, so the piranhas have adopted tactics that conveniently sidestep these inconvenient obstacles. Their method is to aim below the belt and portray the messenger of traditional scientific principles as evil, despicable, corrupt and dishonest. They use guilt by association, ridicule, intimidation, sabotage and any other vile technique in their repertoire to smear their victims.

In 2011 they were provided a god-sent present in the form of the Utøya massacre, which inserted a gigantic trump card up their sleeve. A trump card that was so potent that it could beat anything anyone could throw at them, hands down. To link someone with Anders Behring Breivik, especially in Norway, is the equivalent of publicly accusing someone of being a paedophile. The mud sticks like glue and will never quite go away, no matter how unsubstantiated and unfair the accusations are.

Lars Gule is one of these pompous self-appointed piranhas who will use any tactic to publicly crucify those who cross his ideological path. On Thursday he struck once again when in a very aggressive and mendacious manner he exacted his revenge against Alexandra Irene Larsen for having the temerity to shine a critical light on the academic milieu for which he is one of the prominent ideological suppliers. He did this before an audience which consisted mostly of ideologically indoctrinated students and other leftwing academics. Without an ounce of shame he publicly accused Mrs. Larsen of being ignorant, of not having read the proper books, of being intellectually dishonest, and last but not least of having views that are shared by the readership of the Islam-critical blog Gates of Vienna, which according to Gule was Anders Behring Breivik’s favourite website.

The basis of Gule’s extraordinary ‘logical’ deduction was that the op-ed in which Mrs. Larsen criticised the academic climate in Norway had been translated into English and then published at Gates of Vienna. This astonishing nugget of intellectual wisdom comes from a person whose title designates him an associate professor.

The fact that Ms. Larsen had nothing to do with the translation, that she had not given her consent to such an undertaking and was more than likely unaware of the fact that it even existed meant nothing to Lars Gule. The mere fact that the op-ed appeared at Gates of Vienna was more than enough for him, and he accused and condemned her based on something that he himself knew very well that she had no part in. He employed the exact methods he accused Mrs. Larsen of employing, and he did it in such a way that no member of the audience was left in any doubt that they would receive the same treatment should they dare to oppose him or any of his fellow self-appointed salivating watchdogs.

I see Lars Gule as a comic figure, somewhat like the village idiot of earlier times who would shout vile epithets and insults while frothing at the mouth in the town square to the amusement of the spectators that had gathered to behold the behaviour of one who was obviously less mentally gifted than themselves. And it would be fine if the media and academia treated him as the clown he is, but they don’t. The former wannabe terrorist who underwent training at a DFLP terrorist camp in 1977 — the equivalent of a modern day Al Qaeda camp — and who was sentenced to prison for having been caught with explosives which he had planned to use to carry out a terrorist attack inside Israel, gets to set the tone of what is acceptable and what isn’t acceptable in Norway today.

It’s also completely preposterous that a person such as Gule is allowed to publicly condemn others and link them to ABB when he himself is one of the few living Norwegians who bears a strong ideological resemblance to Breivik. There are no more than a handful of ethnic Norwegian citizens who have been convicted of terrorist acts or planning to commit such acts. Lars Gule and Anders Behring Breivik are two of them.

Lars Gule likes to think that he has confronted his past and atoned for his sins, which he attributes to youthfulness and the volatile political situation in the Middle East at the time. But the fact of the matter is that his pitiful and pathetic explanations are just as believable as UFO sightings and green Martians walking around the desert in Nevada. It’s a complete mystery why no one has systematically challenged him in public on his murky and sinister past.

Gule maintains that he intended to place an explosive device outside a non-populated structure in Israel when he was caught with 750 grams of plastic explosives hidden in his backpack at the airport in Beirut in 1977. He has reassured the Norwegian public on numerous occasions that under no circumstances had he intended to target civilians with his powerful bomb, and the gullible Norwegian authorities and the pro-Palestinian Norwegian MSM have embraced this ‘confession’ and rolled out the red carpet so that he could rejoin the flock. No critical voices among the elites have contested this highly dubious version of events, and those individuals who hint that Gule’s account might not necessarily be accurate are quickly reprimanded for being rude and insulting.

Anyone with a fully working brain understands that a criminal when caught by the police will say anything to lessen the significance of his crime and do anything to try to reduce the time he has to spend in prison. The criminal will vehemently maintain that he didn’t do it, and if that tactic doesn’t work he will swear that he didn’t intend to hurt anyone, that it was an accident, that someone else committed the violent act, that he tried to help the victim and so on and so forth. There is a popular saying that prisons are full of innocent people. I venture that Gule is full of baloney.

Let’s look at it from a slightly different perspective. What if Breivik had been caught before he was able to carry out his hideous deeds in Oslo and Utøya in 2011? What if Anders Behring Breivik had maintained in police interviews that he had only intended to blow up an unpopulated structure far away from downtown Oslo and that he under no circumstances had intended to actively target innocent civilians? Would the authorities and the MSM have believed him? Would they have reprimanded those individuals who found this confession implausible and who maintained that it was more credible that ABB had intended to kill civilians?

How unlikely is it that Lars Gule employed the same tactic upon capture in Lebanon, and that he indeed had meant to kill innocent Israeli civilians? The Palestinian terrorist group he joined and supported in 1977 had three years earlier carried out a very bloody and cowardly terror attack inside Israel that resulted in significant loss of life. The infamous Ma’alot massacre of 1974, when DFLP attacked an Israeli elementary school and killed 27 people, mostly children between the ages of 14 and 16, would surely have been familiar to Gule at the time. And these were the people with whom Lars Gule ideologically identified and was so enthused about when he was caught at the airport in Beirut with 750 grams of plastic explosives hidden in his backpack. For all we know Gule could even have intended to blow up the plane that he was about to board.

It is also very plausible that he had a cover story that he fed to his Lebanese interrogators during the police interviews. It’s not uncommon for terrorists to concoct elaborate cover stories that they rely upon when they are arrested. Why should it be any different with Lars Gule?

To me Lars Gule is a despicable person who should be shunned and ostracized, just as Anders Behring Breivik would have been had he not been incarcerated. The only difference between Gule and ABB is that Gule was caught and ABB succeeded. Breivik had also compiled an incriminating manifesto which irrevocably tied him to his actions, and showed that he had intended all along to let himself be apprehended in order to spread his twisted ideology to the rest of the world. Gule was a little bit brighter than that, and didn’t incriminate himself with such nonsense. It’s also doubtful that he would have hung around for the police to come and arrest him should he have succeeded in carrying out his terrorist attack.

Of course it is highly unlikely that Gule will ever be held accountable for his actions. After all, he lives in a country whose leaders protect those on the left who carry out militant acts and commit high treason, as is the case with those politicians who actively collaborated with the KGB and Stasi. The Norwegian authorities have refused to release the names of these Norwegian traitors. But people should at least be made aware of one particular creep who is allowed to enjoy a perfectly normal career and live a perfectly normal live in a country where the rational people are deemed racists and bigots, and would-be terrorists and traitors are treated with the utmost respect.

(Alexandra Irene Larsen's translated op-ed which was published at Gates of Vienna.)