The 17 year old Somalian has several serious crimes on his conscience, but the worst is probably the rape of a young girl at Hoybraaten (Oslo suburb) one year ago. Oslo Court states that the rape was unusually brutal, and lasted for several hours. The young girl was threatened with a knife and beaten. The Somalian choked the girl so brutally and for so long, that the medical doctor who afterwards treated the girl, said that she could have died. Her voice has changed. The girl is now suffering from severe psychological problems in the aftermath of the attack. The Youth was sentenced to four and half years in prison, where three years was made conditional, which means he will serve only one and a half years. The sentence also included another rape, where his Norwegian-Moroccan friend raped a 13 year old girl, whilst the Somalian helped to threaten her and keep guard. She was also brutally treated, and is experiencing serious problems after the experience. The Court states that the girl was harassed by the family of the Norwegian-Moroccan and his friends. It went so far that the girl was angry at her own mother for giving the name of the rapists to the police. The girl wanted to pay the offenders to make them leave her alone. Her psychological condition became so bad she had to be forcibly sent to a psychological institution. Her schooling is destroyed.

Aftenposten should be commended for even printing this politically incorrect article, which is unfortunately rare in Norwegian media. The original article in Norwegian quickly got more than one hundred comments by readers. There were so many furious comments that the newspaper suddenly decided to remove them. In general, my impression is that a rapidly increasing part of the population distrusts Muslims. Only massive media censorship conceals this fact, and I suspect the same goes for much of Europe. However, Aftenposten seem to have forgotten an article they printed five years ago. In 2001, two out of three charged with rape in Norway’s capital were immigrants with a non-western background according to a police study. Norwegian women were the victims in 80 percent of the cases. A leading member of the Liberal Party (Venstre), Odd Einar Dørum, demanded all the numbers be put on the table: “A scumbag is a scumbag, regardless of skin color”. From 2001 to 2005, Dørum was Norway’s Minister of Justice, and nobody has seen these statistics since 2001. The number of rape charges in Oslo have continued to rise. There is ample evidence of brutal gang rapes, something that used to be rare in Scandinavia, being committed by immigrants against native girls.

Not only have the authorities done nothing to stop this trend of racist attacks against native Norwegians, they have taken steps to increase crackdowns on “racism” by the natives. In 2005 Stortinget, the Norwegian parliament, passed a new Discrimination Act, prepared by then Minister of Integration, Erna Solberg, who earlier called for the establishment of a sharia council in Norway. The act says in pretty clear words that in cases of suspected direct or indirect discrimination based on religion or ethnicity, native Norwegians are guilty until proven otherwise. The immigration spokesman for the right-wing Progress Party, Per Sandberg, feared that the law would jeopardize the rights of ordinary, law-abiding Norwegian citizens. Reverse burden of proof is combined with liability to pay compensation, which means that innocent persons risk having to pay huge sums for things they did not do. FOMI, a Norwegian anti-Islamic website, was recently charged with “racism and spreading Islamophobia” for translating one of several articles by Frontpage Magazine, with comments, about a Muslim rape wave in the West.

Bruce Bawer, author of recently published book “While Europe Slept: How Radical Islam is Destroying the West from Within,” devotes a good deal of space to European media in his writings, which is appropriate. Norwegian Prime Minister and leader of the Labor Party, Jens Stoltenberg, has stated that “journalistic diversity is too important to be left up to the marketplace.” The government is still running two out of Norway’s four national TV channels, and three of its national radio channels. NRK, the Norwegian equivalent of the BBC or Burka Broadcasting Corporation in the UK, complete with the same anti-American, anti-Israeli and pro-Islamic bias, was the only national TV channel in Norway until 1992, three years after the fall of the Berlin Wall. Leader of the right-wing Progress Party, Mr. Carl I. Hagen, has labelled NRK “ARK,” or “Labor Party’s Broadcasting Company,” since until the 90s, most of its leaders were former leading members of the Labor Party. In addition to this, something that would be unthinkable in the USA, Norwegian taxpayers actually subsidize commercial Norwegian newspapers. This is supposedly to ensure diversity of opinions. This system means that Norwegian taxpayers, whether they want to or not, subsidize the existence of Norwegian Communist newspaper Klassekampen (The Class Struggle), whose members in the 1970s strenuously denied any mass-murders done by Pol Pot and his comrades in Cambodia, denouncing these accusations as “capitalist lies” to slime a successful, Socialist nation. Norway’s only professor of journalism at the University level, Sigurd Allern, is a former leader of the Communist Party. He is today teaching critical thinking to aspiring journalists at the University of Oslo.

At the same time, Norway can hardly come up with a single decent conservative newspaper, the closest being business daily Dagens Næringsliv. The most rightist newspapers, such as Aftenposten or VG, could at best be described as centrist or even soft-leftist, with a few individual journalists as being centre-right. Diversity of media in Norway thus means the whole range from hard-leftist to soft-leftist, with the Norwegian equivalent of the New York Times being as far right as you get. As Bawer notes, when he first came to Norway, he was impressed by the number of newspapers the average citizen reads on a daily basis. Only later did he start to question what information they were actually presented in these newspapers.

Norwegians pride themselves in their sophisticated and informed view of the world, viewing Americans as somewhat simplistic and brainwashed by FOX News propaganda. The very word or concept of “Eurabia” has hardly been mentioned at all in Norwegian media. One prominent journalist, not a Leftist by Norwegian standard, told me that Eurabia is just another conspiracy theory, on par with The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion. Kari Vogt, historian of religion at the University of Oslo and widely considered and quoted as the leading expert on Islam in the country, has stated that Ibn Warraq’s book “Why I am Not a Muslim” is just as irrelevant to the study of Islam as The Protocols are to the study of Judaism. A Norwegian NGO called the Freedom of Expression Fund supports the translation and publication of bin Laden’s speeches. They also awarded the editor of Communist newspaper Klassekampen with the Freedom of Speech award for his bravery in defence of free speech. He has shown sympathies for Islamic terrorists in his columns.

For some strange reason, Bruce Bawer’s book has so far been widely ignored by Norwegian media, despite the fact that Bawer lives in Norway and that his work is being read with interests by experts and laymen on both sides of the Atlantic. Could it be that Mr. Bawer has touched upon some sensitive issues that the sophisticated Norwegian press don’t want to talk about? Michael Moore’s books criticizing the USA were translated into Norwegian and sold very well. Any chance this will happen to Bawer’s book, criticizing Europe?


 

<  back     next  >