A Crash Course In Politics. (What It Is And What It Is Not).

Sticky

Translated by me from the Norwegian article: ” The Paradox of the lifeboat – a crash course in politics” by Kent Andersen. Originally published on the 4th of April 2017 right here.

I love discussing politics – especially with people who I completely disagree with. As there is something deliciously civilised in fundamentally disagreeing about a topic, while still being respectful towards the other party. But after ten years in politics a problem surfaces: Way too many people don’t understand what politics clearly is, and what it is not.  And that’s not just the voters. I often read journalists and politicians who reveal a very bad understanding of what politics really is. I will therefore offer a quick and useful course to all.

When important democratic actors lack political understanding, it becomes a sign of illness for the democracy, as there is an absence of a firm foundation upon which right decisions can be made to steer society in the right direction. Everything from voters to kings have to see the difference between politics and its absolute opposite, emotionalism – if not the entire society can wither without anyone noticing or understanding the warning signs. Politics is not exactly cosy. It can even be quite brutal stuff in brutal times, so let me say something about that.

What is politics? 

Politics is synonymous with distributing assets and burdens in a society through the use of power. It is the business within a social system and field of ruling towards firmly established goals, where priorities have to be sorted, values/assets allocated and means chosen and used.

Keywords are therefore: Benefits and burdens – management and goals. Priorities, distribution of value and means within a social system and field. It is politics. The understanding of this determines whether or not our children will inherit a society at least as rich, harmonious, peaceful, safe and successful like the one we’ve enjoyed, something that is the entire point of the political management of a country: The goal is to leave behind something better to those who succeed us. How best to accomplish this, is disputed. That is why there exists different political parties, directions and ideologies.

What is the opposite of politics?

The definition of politics facilitates the identification of politic’s antithesis: Emotionalism.  Emotionalism has enormous appeal to voters and politicians alike, because it is so easy to unite around, and appears to be so “nice” in the moment. But emotionalism does not encompass leaving an improved society to our successors. Emotionalism is about the creation of the best society in the moment. Regardless of what the cost may be, or how the future will pan out. It is a competition of virtue-signaling – without any consideration for coming generations. Politics is responsible. Emotionalism is irresponsible.

“We cannot pit weak groups against each other.”

This is a favoured phrase for the emotionalists or for people who know zero about politics. Any budget is precisely about “pitting weak groups against each other.” Politics is exclusively about comparing groups: to prioritize who will get, and who will lose. To put A up against B is the exact meaning of politics. So if anyone utters this ridiculous sentence, then point at them and yell “emotionalist!” As they are about to ruin everything for your children.

With emotionalism the resources are always infinite. 

The budget can always be blown up by loans so that nothing has to be prioritized. “Everything is possible,” and nothing is impossible, and there are no negative consequences. Everything occurs in the vacuum of the moment, no burdens have to be distributed, and all future problems are marginalised, silenced or refuted. Emotionalism also lacks any standpoints besides good intentions: Everyone will receive, and nobody has to pay. Everything can grow into the heavens, nobody should feel left out, and nobody should lose. It is a reckless “free lunch,” that is tempting to fall for, as the dangers are not obvious: Emotionalism functions just as well as politics – in the short run. Emotionalism can actually erect a collection of magnificent public buildings in Bjørvika to billions of Norwegian kroners, in a capital that is broke, where tax levels are sinking, and loans decrease. Everything works out quite well….until the bill arrives.

Emotionalism works – short-term. 

Emotionalism is incredibly tempting to politicians who are elected for short stints. It works, and creates more friends than enemies. Emotionalism purchases votes in exchange for cash. But the price is high, as emotionalism is a credit card: Success always happens at the expense of the future.

Ruling through emotionalism means that nobody knows where they are heading, or where they will end up.

Ruling through politics means that everybody knows where they are heading, and where  they will end up.

Politics means keeping a clear, steady course, and communicating it: “We are going there, and not there.” It means a common understanding of where the end station is. (Without everyone necessarily agreeing on it – politics has nothing to do with consensus, if that was the case it would be lethally boring). Greats like Gamal Atatürk, Margaret Thatcher and our own Einar Gerhardsen, are in a class of their own, since they engaged in society building with a long-term vision, with clearly defined goals, plans and means. (Many hated them, but so what?) It was easy for the voters to understand what their society was to become. Emotionalism on the other hand, has no end goal, no plans for how to succeed, and no empirical success data to show to. The emotionalists promise everything to everybody, and promise that everything will improve as long as they can keep going a little bit longer. But they are lying. Coming generations will pay the price, and they will hate it.

It is not politics if:

  • You don’t lead after clear plans towards a defined alternative, but rather satisfy everybody in the moment.
  • You lack clear, quantifiable goals for the future which tells you what the end result should be.
  • You lack clear priorities. If one political sector is to be the focus, then others will lose focus and support.
  • Assets/valuables are allocated, and it is obvious who will benefit, but unclear who will carry the burden.
  • The means are hidden or diffuse.
  • There is more consideration for activist groups than the silent majority and coming generations.
  • The politics take place outside the voter’s social system, territory or sphere of interest.

There are therefore many criteria that have to be fulfilled in order for something to qualify as politics. If we look at the Norwegian leadership today, we can see that within several of our sectors the criteria are being met – whether it is the fishing industry, the public school system, or common transport. The only matter that stands out like a sore thumb, is Norway’s immigration policy — it is not only Norway, but also Sweden and the whole of Europe. In this area the checklist display big and systematic deficiencies:

The emotionalism that steers immigration:

  • Immigration is “impossible to control due to international laws and conventions, ” and is therefore not really managed. There are no systems or policies that ensures knowledge of what next year will bring.
  • Immigration politics have no clear goal and no clearly defined outcome that can be evaluated.
  • There are no clear priorities, besides the fact that the funds are infinite regardless of the cost – in contrast to for example, social help for the elderly, where there is always a lack of funds.
  • Assets are distributed without ever revealing who carries the burden: Welfare for the elderly, welfare in general, roads, school, police and the military are typical sectors who see their funds decreased, but the context is often hidden and badly communicated.
  • Activists wield enormous power, while the majority is marginalised.
  • Immigration is accomplished outside the nation’s social system, territories and spheres of interests. It does not benefit Norway or its inhabitants, but benefits other  countries and other nations’ citizens.

Politics is cynical in relation to what is needed.

Sadly politics come across as pretty “mean” in comparison to emotionalism. Politics is about conserving the voter’s own interests both today and in the future, and it is therefore “egotistical” over other countries and people. (But they have their own politicians, so why do they want ours?) Real politics can undoubtedly be perceived as cynical and brutal, because it encompasses a bone-hard knowledge of reality:

Resources are seen as limited and the budget absolute: If someone receives, there will always be someone who loses. When you walk in direction A, you remove yourself from direction B. The emotionalists always attempt to conceal such consequences, therefore there exists a good basic rule: Real politicians will always gather more opponents and critics that the emotionalists. Politicians become controversial, but look way better in posterity and historically when the easy emotionalism has been forgotten.

An illustration of how politics work: The story of lifeboat 4.

When (the for the occasion) fictional passenger ship “Politikos” tipped over and sunk in the North-Atlantic they failed to deploy all their lifeboats, and nearly 500 people jumped into the ocean. The few lifeboats that were actually deployed were not fully loaded, and it was therefore instantly initiated to rescue people from the ice-cold water.

Aboard lifeboat 4 the sailor….let us call him Winston Roosevelt, was given command of the freezing horrified passengers. He took control, and commanded immediately with an authoritarian voice:

– This lifeboat takes 50 people. Now we have to do everything to save people!

After a while there were 40 people aboard and the lifeboat was heavy loaded. Nobody knew how many days it would take for the rescue team to appear. The rations were limited, the future uncertain, but despite this Winston was crystal clear:

– There are more survivors! Row over there! We have to do everything to save people!

A cluster of 8 people were picked up. There was barely space for them. There were still too many people struggling in the ocean but Winston was uncompromising:

– There are 4 more! We have to do everything to save people!

They rowed over, and carefully hauled the four aboard, so that the boat was dangerously overloaded. But it did not help much. Eight people were laying ten meters away from them and were screaming for help in their utter desperation. Then Winston commanded:

– Row away!

Everyone aboard protested with tears and anger. They yelled:

– You said we had to do everything to save people! Winston gazed over the cramped lifeboat, and said sorrowfully but steadfast:

– That’s what we’ve done. Now we sadly have to get political.

Lifeboat 4 was the only one still afloat when the rescue team arrived.

Emotionalism can clearly be seen in a political environment where the photo of a drowned kid washed up on a beach dictates consensus rather than the collection of empirical data. This mentality could also be observed when Norway’s former leadership constantly declared that “Norway was not at war” despite deploying our soldiers to contribute to NATO’s military operations.

When People Can Not Process What They Are Reading.

Sticky

Years ago I remember taking offence to a Serj Tankian song called “The Unthinking Majority” I thought of the title as extremely arrogant and felt it was disappointing that a political artist, or at least an artist with politically motivated work, would express himself in such a way.

I took offence to how The Chimp Paradox. was presented as well as I don’t think of it as a good idea to address the masses like they are mongrels.

I don’t talk to people like they are s-t-u-p-i-d, I have no interest in saying “those people over there.” I’m part of this world just like everyone else, I’m not above the law, I will fail, I will be wrong and just because I’m right about certain things doesn’t mean that I will be right about others. (Depending on how you define what is right or wrong). We are all hiding behind statistics funny enough and drag out surveys like a final piece of evidence. Yet statistics can be misleading, which is why every side has “evidence” to back up whatever claim they might have. Yet once you de-bunk the collection of data, it might not seem as straightforward after all…  someone disagreeing with you politically doesn’t give you the right to dismiss them as unintelligible, unless it has  been clearly debunked time and time again that what they support is inefficient and false. Meaning: that “truth” has been consistently buried and banned on their part so that their “ideology” can prevail well-guarded from justified scrutiny.

” If I disagree with you, you have to be retarded…” is not a particularly well thought out argument. The same goes for name-calling. If you want to pull the “you are an idiot card” you truly need to have a substantial amount of hard evidence, just as if you are going to pull the “you are insane argument.”

Yesterday my brother and I had a very long and interesting conversation as he is currently reading a lot about genes & IQ. This is of course a very controversial topic as the current orthodoxy is that there is only equality. We spoke and agreed about the grandeur of a meritocracy, discussing how evidence shows that the general IQ at universities have increased since “future leaders” are recruited from all aspects of our societies. The general “intelligence” has therefore gone up since education isn’t only reserved for the children of the wealthy. Yet….the dark side of the moon are quotas enforced when politicians decide that they want to lift the “entire population” or 50% of the population up. As amiable as this may sound like it is simply not do-able.

The result will be a collection of educated people, with official papers for jobs that they cannot really do. This might seem un-fair, but it is actually true. (feel free to read up on all of this, there’s lots of information.)

As horrid as it might be, 50% of the population will not be geniuses. If you drown people with knowledge this will not change as their brains just cannot process the information. This is of course very depressing if you fundamentally believe in “giving everyone a fair chance” by raising the population up, stretching towards national greatness. I take it that this is why those who “headhunt” for the best have to look internationally, to poach “the best people” for their projects.

Yet among the best you also have some cases of those who over think to such an extent that they almost think themselves into idiocy. That’s when  degenerate social constructs are presented to the world, as it might make sense logically if you disregard the human factor or if your brilliance is restricted to one field. There are also those who use elaborate sentences, spending an enormous amount of time on research only to be biased or completely off the hook in terms of their conclusions. The mind is a tricky beast.

Different groups of people have different trait frequencies. There is a plethora of information regarding this. I’m currently reading articles that would certainly come across as “controversial” to all of those who subscribe to the notion that ” we are all created equal.” That said, just because we are “all created differently” doesn’t mean that civil liberties should only be reserved for a small group. I suspect that the furore against “admitting that genuine diversity exists” reminiscent of mass hysteria happens, because people don’t want the idea of “this group being better than that group” gaining ground once again. My point is that “supremacy” or feelings of superiority will emerge regardless, as people will always “find something” to make them “stand out,” even if it is not “legitimate.”

Whether it is a financial situation making someone feel superior to those who are destitute or whether destitution raises ones victim status to such heights as to make someone morally superior. Grievances can be perceived as legitimate and worthy of punishment by the state directed towards those guilty of wealth. The rich person might feel superior but the poor will too, as their struggle makes them superior morally speaking. Rich = mean, poor = good. In terms of appearance it is “all about personality” since slim and/or pretty = mean while fat and/or ugly = nice. A person who looks good and uses this as an asset might feel that this is the “ace up their sleeve,” but just as this can create a sense of “I’m better than you” the traditionally unattractive can relish in their misery by again being seen as the “victim” or “challenging traditional standards of beauty.” Someone who is good at school/academics and/or good in any other field such as sports, music, business you name it, will feel that this is their “ace” whereas those who aren’t good at anything at all can take pride in being morally virtuous since they are unambitious. They are nice because they will not make anyone else “feel bad” by beating them in a competitive sense.

Being honest about “diversity” is not the same as treating people horribly. It means being honest and aware of the challenges a nation faces, both internally and internationally. How can one create the best school system for example if people are in denial? Maybe it is a good idea to focus more on practical training than merely theory designed for the brainy? Maybe a division at an earlier age would be an idea, so that those who hate reading could thrive by learning “how to be handy?” Maybe segregating the genders, so that boys can be approached like boys without being reprimanded for not being like the girls could benefit boys who are falling behind in the effeminate education system?  What will result from such a religious devotion to modern orthodoxies as we have today is the firing of any academics who dare to uphold “the truth,” which brings to mind the popular representation of “the dark ages.”

It seems like our enlightenment has gradually brought us closer to darkness since any truths violating the  “feelings” of a group, regardless of how marginal the group is, are discarded or left in obscurity. Writing about democracy, in fact mentioning and addressing in-depth any of the issues mentioned above could result in volumes upon volumes of material, which is what we supposedly have academics for. They are not there to be fired if their findings collide with the “values” of our modern “dictatorship of goodness,” it is their job to find the truth or to seek to find the truth through empirical evidence.

To demonstrate how frustrating it is with people who cannot process information that isn’t even particularly complex, I’ve included a series of screen shots below. This is how democracy looks like in practice, this is why it is easy for critical thinkers, obsessed with “truth” to fall into the unforgiving, melancholic, grip of misanthropy.

On Friday, the 24th of March 2017, these three individuals were trending on FB…

Trending on FB

Katie Hopkins was making waves online due to her commentary about the terrorist attack in Westminster. People were raging because she had the audacity to suggest that England has a cultural problem and that the UK is weak in spirit. Her commentary pretty much addressed what I had been addressing in one of my own blog entries, so I was of course puzzled by the negative reactions she experienced as what she had written seemed spot on. (Unless one chooses to be in denial). While I was scrolling around the timeline connected with the “Hopkins topic” I came across a guy in the USA. I agreed with his entry and shared it on my personal FB.

Online Democracy 1

What followed was a public online argument where the guy who had authored what you see above had to defend himself from people who clearly didn’t understand his original post at all. It is not hard to comprehend what he is saying. An interesting thing to note is that he didn’t know that his post was set to “public….”

Online Democracy 2

Obviously I’m trying to protect the identity of these people, as one does…You can see that one individual agrees, then one is clearly disgruntled about Hopkins, someone else agrees, but then enters a very typical argument: “rather __________, than racist.” This is a slogan that has been advocated by Swedish Feminists in particular.

Racist Clear.

What you see next is a very typical argument…”the guy was British.” Well…to be fair no he was not…This was a muslim man of foreign descent, who happened to have a British passport and citizenship…in this day and age that is not really the same as being from that particular nation. A woman of absolute muslim descent, walking around in full traditional, muslim dress, is not Norwegian just because she happens to have a Norwegian passport. She is a citizen yes, and is lucky to live in a western country, where you can enjoy the full benefit of citizenship regardless of where you originally come from. The lady (note how these individuals are women) clearly does not understand the argument from the American man. Her conclusion is that he is “racist clear” whatever that may mean…..

Enters a proper Racist.

Then enters a proper Racist. This clearly illustrates what I’ve been addressing on my blog in so many of my entries. The guy who initially started this discussion has up to this point engaged in arguments protecting himself from the false accusation that he is racist, then enters a real racist, who generalizes and is completely unapologetic in his views. An argument then ensues between the “accused-non-racist” and the “I’m-proud-to-be-racist-racist.” The leftists have succeeded in destroying the meaning of the word “racist” just as they’ve dismantled the word “hate” as used in “hate speech.” False accusations of people being “brown shirts” have taken away the severity of “you are a Nazi” since everyone who at this point questions the left in any way is labeled “literally Hitler.” The unavoidable result is that people will just get nauseated whenever the WW2 argument is brought up, and not for the “right” reasons…..people might even start saying “yeah…what did we really fight for? Maybe the Nazis should have won?” these type of sentiments will probably become more widespread as a result of the left’s way of arguing, rather than an explosion of pro-Nazi sentiments. In other words, if you poke someone long enough they’ll get sick and tired of your bullshit.

Exit Nazi & Permission to share posts

A certain somebody asks for permission to use this discussion in a blog entry….the racist from the previous frame, admits that he is proud to be what he is.

Enters random guy.

Another character enters claiming the “he was British argument” before the classical “IRA argument” is brought up. In fact this whole thread illustrates all the common narratives in the current political climate. Note how the “new arrival” in this thread uses the “fake news” narrative. The American who accidentally ended up in a public discussion, that ended up highlighting all of his points due to the contribution by those who are hating on him, is becoming tired….as can be understood by his posting below…

the IRA argument

Argument continues

The American who started the thread tries to conclude the discussion, at this point he also adds one of his comments in the thread into his original post, in order for people to see where he is coming from. The lady with the “IRA argument” clearly can not let it go, so another discussion then ensues with an evidently tired American, baffled by the inability to process basic information displayed by those attacking him….

Arguing Online.jpg

The thread, as it looked like at that point, ends with this:

Conclusion

This discussion alone prove the points I addressed above. It would have been one thing if these screenshots were my only evidence…..but no…hold on… I got more……

The argument below is more sophisticated in nature due to how the participants express themselves. Regardless of this the topic is the same; I’m calling this sequence ” The Oxford Argument.”

OA1

The post attracted one individual who decided to express his dissent….this was counter-attacked by a guy who was clearly interested in commencing a discussion.

OA2

OA3

OA4

OA5

” I read that paragraph but I just hear racism.” Again that same old card is used in an incorrect manner. Also note how these individuals perceive Muslims as the victims and any precautions on the part of “the west” as unjustified racism. The argument is made from “the dissenter” that concerns about Muslim supremacists are justified, especially when seen from a historical perspective. This of course clashes with the current orthodoxy or the false enlightenment claim, that all men are created equal. By admitting that there is an enemy you are merely engaging in discrimination. Even when “the dissenter” specified “NOT ALL muslims” it was still concluded that he was a racist and “good riddance.”

My last example before I conclude my entry stems from my very own Twitter. Yes you’ve read that right. I launched this blog a couple of years ago at the request of my fans, not really knowing what my blog would be about.  I’m not a “pink blogger” I like to read, and enjoy to think, discuss and write about what I’ve read. I’m a virtuoso musician and would classify myself as pretty geeky. My blog entries where I’ve written about personal matters have proven very popular and overall I’ve certainly seen that people adore entertainment while abhorring intellectual discussions. I’ve shared my blog entries on my Twitter and in my entries I usually provide people with links to the articles and/or YouTube videos that inspired me to write that specific blog entry, so that people can see my “sources.”

This year I received a request to do an interview about my entries for the very first time. I was asked about the content on my blog regarding Islamism mainly, since it seemed like the interviewer was obsessed with ‘the terror threat.” I replied to the best of my ability and said among other things this:

“It’s obvious that there are some who are just born with a “complaining gene.” We are spoilt in our part of the world. I don’t think there’s ever been a point in history where people had it better. There is healthcare for everyone, there is so much food that the poor are obese, everyone has access to some sort of education, pollution levels are much better than they were under the industrial revolution for example, you will not be imprisoned or chemically castrated just because of your sexual orientation, women can get an education, work their way up into the system. You can come from a minority background and become the leader of a nation or go into important government positions in a country that you weren’t even born in. We’ve come as close as we can get to Utopia and should just be happy, but no. Then you get people complaining about trans-gender bath room issues, micro-aggressions, sexist snow-removal and pronouns. There is no end to the stupidity. I believe in equality when it comes to the starting point and opportunity, but it has now been brought to my attention that those who talk about egalitarianism usually advocate equality when it comes to outcome. Which doesn’t make any sense to me.”

I also said this:

“Yes, there are plenty of disturbing videos of this, I’ve posted some of them on my blog. You got angry young Muslim men shouting and then you got angry young white men shouting. Looks like a mess, especially if tensions escalate.”

Then you got this:

“I assume that the majority are afraid, because people like to conform and don’t want to be ostracised. They see what happens to those conservatives and classical liberals who speak out and decide to stay quiet, whereas those who shout the loudest are those who hate immigration because they actually are real racists and real nazis.”

…and this:

“What it is that we want immigrants to “integrate into” for example is a question nobody is asking. We keep on mentioning vague values, that apparently are “our shared values,” but it can easily seem that we don’t really have a cultural identity anymore. It is not strange that foreigners should be horrified at the fractured families of the West or the unintelligible mainstream entertainment we have that produce nothing but icons of degeneracy and vulgarity. High culture of beauty and excellence is something we have sacrificed on the altar of modernity. Spirituality and faith has been crushed and is routinely mocked. Masculinity is actively worked against in the school system. It is understandable that people would be reluctant to “integrate” into this. Let’s not forget that. After all, why should anyone respect a culture that doesn’t even respect itself?”

If you read through these segments you will understand that this is not a racist talking, but someone who is concerned, especially if you read the whole interview. What I say is critical of militant Islam and the effects of “the change” that has been imposed on Europe. When asked about: “What about Islamism in Scandinavia? Have you been back to Norway recently? What do you see happening there?” I replied in an honest way; describing a country where immigration has become stricter but where certain specific changes were observed by me during some visits back home:

“1-Norway has changed to such an extent that my father and I were the only white people at a supermarket up in the mountains, deep into the fjord land.
2-I’ve had elevator rides where I was the only white person and the only woman not wearing a burqa.
3-I’m not even Norwegian anymore, I’m an ethnic-Norwegian apparently.
4- I visited my grandmother some years back and there was a terror warning on the news “today the terror alert has been raised to severe.” That, in particular is ridiculous. Why are we supposed to accept this as a new reality?”

First of all it is important to specify that Norway is not America. If you live in the USA and you get surprised by encountering an Afro-American or a Native-American, well then you got issues. America has always been a diverse “nation,” there was diversity among the caucasian population, there was diversity due to slavery and the “original population.” Norway is not America. We got Norwegians and then we got Samis, who are nomads living up in the North, moving around between Northern countries with their reindeer, etc; It is just and right to question the changes that have been imposed on Scandinavia, as these are neither natural nor justifiable IF they result in demographic displacement or gradual demographic replacement. It is racist, to support this type of activity and the fact that these type of measures are supported and initiated by ethnic Europeans is nothing but extraordinary. (Obviously I have to specify that there is a major difference between some immigrants here and there, and demographic displacement/replacement. I hope that people can comprehend that….) It cannot be justified in any way, that English people should all of a sudden find themselves becoming minorities in certain parts of their country, nor can it be justified that there are “no-go-zones” in Sweden, but an interesting thing to note, and this is important, is that I highlight that the worst of these changes is the terror threat, that we are supposed to treat as “normal.” 

So far so good, one should hope, but no. Even though it should be ridiculously easy to follow what I’m writing above, I received this tweet after the release of the interview:

evil CIC 2

Curious I decided to check out this individual and saw this:

CIC evil1

First of all I said in the interview that I don’t live in Norway anymore. I also said that “my father and I were the only white people at a supermarket up in the mountains, deep into the fjord land.” This describes a supermarket. I also describe being in an elevator as the only woman not wearing a burqa. I’m clearly describing a country undergoing radical fundamental changes. But I’m not describing an entire town, and seen from a European perspective it all makes sense, if you’ve followed what I wrote above. In the interview I can be quoted as saying ” I’m not even Norwegian anymore, I’m an ethnic-Norwegian apparently.” Again this goes to demonstrate a “core change” within a Nation. I’m not even Norwegian anymore.” So you see a change of word-use in terms of how an ethnic group is being addressed and labeled. This is not minor. Obviously this is not hillbilly talk, as a hillbilly would probably behave like this:

Enters a proper Racist.

Some months later I received another Tweet from a different individual as a response to a blog entry I had published on January the 30th, 2017.

twitter argument.jpg

These are some quotes from the blog entry that he was referring to:

“We need to make sure that we advance into the future “with baby steps” so that we can successfully integrate the new-Europeans into the fabric of our societies, without losing ourselves.”

We are reaching a tipping point & the only sensible course of action would be to do everything in our power to prevent escalated chaos within our continent.”

“….then why not keep those who like it here & have integrated well, while sending out those who do not?”

“If “refugees” thrive at the expense of the original European population, it will create anger and resentment within the ethnic populace and rather than directing this anger towards government figures, we run the risk of this sentiment being directed towards innocent muslims.”

These things are clearly not written by someone who hates ALL Muslims. This is obviously written by someone who is concerned about EVERYONE. And someone who is critical towards Militant Islam. No wonder that people give up, when those who are “moderates” or tempered in their assessment, are accused of being “racist.” I did the dumbest thing and decided to engage with this man in a short Twitter argument as I obviously assume that my fellow human beings “can understand what I write.” I’ve made the mistake of expecting people to be reasonable. Which brings us back to the very beginning of my very long entry…. Here are the Tweets:

T1

t14

T2

T3

t10

t11

t12

T4

T5

T6

T7

T8

Again, I’m obviously not racist, but then comes the kicker:

t9

At this point I realised that what I was engaging in was pointless….When I then saw the thread further up in this entry later that month I realised that I had to write a blog entry. It is a serious issue that so many cannot comprehend the information that they are presented with. Sure, it is tough to read science papers, especially if written in an academic language, it is difficult to read ancient literature, of course this is hard, but none of what I shared on here today is. None of it. None.

This is why politicians talk “down to people” this is why there are PR agencies that are commissioned to create and manufacture easy slogans and “perfect” official personas. People who never say anything that contradicts or challenges the orthodoxy, even when they are aware of how bad things are, such as Podesta. This is how corporations get away with blood on their hands, because they are good at marketing and making their products “human.” How healthy is this for a society and how healthy is it for the west? Not particularly, which I’ll address in my next entry, where I’ll discuss an article I read some days ago about “Politics vs. Emotionalism.”

The Odyssey – for children.

Standard

Years ago I learned about Greek legends in school – it’s been a while so I was curious to check out my younger brother’s child copy of “The Odyssey.” It was very cool but it was surprising to read something so “politically incorrect” in this day and age 😀 I certainly enjoyed it and see why boys and men alike will never tire of these tales. Much could be gained from sharing these stories with school children in the North as well; conditioning our future to solely depend on a modern, convenient, high-tech, pacifistic social construct can best be described as reckless. What happens the moment that climate change or destabilisation as a result of conflict shatters our current comfort?

Memed, My Hawk by Jasjar Kemal.

Standard

After having read so much serious and factual material it felt strange to embark on a work of fiction. In many ways it reminded me of watching a piece of drama while downing popcorn which is something I seldom do. The book feels long and is probably of interest to those who enjoy easy escapism into a distant slightly altered reality. Kemal offers a very amusing portrayal of “the people;” meaning the wavering of opinions and general dodging of uncomfortable confrontations – even if it results in the imprisonment of an innocent. The work features a villain who abuses the villagers under his command; rather than a cry for political reform (which could have been his intent), the author offers an excellent assortment of different characters with opposing temperaments and traits, a talent that will always stand the test of time as social structures and how they are applied are merely a reflection of “the tribe” inhabiting and operating said system rather than a total result of “capitalism” or “feudalism”or any other structure in and of itself – unless the social construct is the design of said group in addition. In which case the whole package reflects the ethnicity behind it a 100%. One must be careful to blame religion for example as the sole catalyst for warfare historically, which is an absolute incorrect assumption many hold. The only way that war, conflicts or suffering could potentially/theoretically be avoided would be through the drastic genetic alteration of “man,” which goes to show you how awkward it is to believe in a “peaceful state of nature.” The State of Nature is violent and brutal;  injustice is therefore something that we should expect, as even a “just society” where everyone reaps what they’ve sown will be fundamentally unequal. Something to think about for those who believe that the simple removal of capitalism, for example, with the introduction of absolute communism will create some sort of utopian state….

This book came into my possession thanks to my grandfather, who insisted that I had to take it with me last time I visited him. The work literally smells like my granddad’s old apartment so it has a personal, nostalgic value for sure. My copy of “Memed, My Hawk” has been translated from its original Turkish to Norwegian – which is important for me obviously, since I live abroad speaking and writing in another language! My copy was published in 1971 by Aschehoug. There seems to be some text missing in the middle of the work, I assume this must have fallen out during the translation/printing. There are also some very apparent typos in this section as well, but these obvious flaws are reserved for a relatively small portion of the book.

Some quotes I enjoyed from these 294 pages:

“Ethvert menneske vokser til og utvikler seg i overensstemmelse med den jordbunn det er født på.”

“Bare drømmene levde. Den menneskelige innbilningskraft kjenner ingen grenser, uansett hvor snevert synsfeltet er.”

“Og da tankene hans først hadde sprengt den trange livssirkelen som den skjebnebestemte maktesløsheten satte opp, så ble det også lidenskapeligere.”

The British Military & Police Force in Numbers.

Standard

After having read “Warriors & Citizens – American Views of Our Military edited by Kori Schake & Jim Mattis,” I decided to google the size of the British forces. Downsizing seems to have been on the agenda not only in my native country of Norway, but also here in England just as it was in the USA under the Obama administration. In this day and age with all of our shared threats/enemies in Europe I thought that this information could be of interest to everybody:

TOTAL BRITISH ARMED FORCES

OVERVIEW (as at late 2015)

REGULAR FORCES
Royal Navy 33,450 (includes 7,000 Royal Marines)
Army 92,000 (includes 2,700 Gurkhas)
Royal Air Force 35,030
Total Regular Forces
160,460

(Figures are for trained and untrained personnel and include small numbers of Full Time Reserves).
Army Figure includes about 2,700 Gurkhas
By 2020, Regular Forces levels are planned to be about: Army 82,000, Royal Navy 30,000, Royal Air Force 33,000

RESERVES
Army 20,480
Maritime 1,940
Royal Air Force 1,500
There are probably over 50,000 Regular Reserves who could be recalled in a major emergency.
MOD Civilians 61,630 (late 2015)

More can be read here: Armed Forces.

The first line of defence for a terror attack in the UK is the police force. Before any of the military units detailed later in this article can go into action on UK soil, authorisation to do so must be given by civilian authorities. This authorisation usually comes from a crisis response committee held in special conference rooms in Whitehall. Sometimes referred to as COBR or COBRA, these committees are headed by the Prime Minister or other top civilian leaders. COBRA analyses the level of threat and determines how to respond. As the politicians and security chiefs sit in committee, it will be the police on the scene of a terrorist incident who will be the first responders.

Each United Kingdom police constabulary maintains a specialist firearms capability with tactical team members trained to Authorised Firearms Officer (AFO) standard or higher. AFOs are roled with carrying out law enforcement operations outside the capability of regular, unarmed officers. AFOs in an Armed Response Vehicle (ARV) unit would typically be the first armed police unit to arrive at the scene of a terrorist attack.

More can be read here: Elite UK Forces.

The UK military’s primary counter-terrorism unit is the Army’s 22nd Special Air Service. At any time, one full SAS Squadron (around 60 men), designated the Special Projects Team, is on standby to respond to a terrorist incident. Squadrons rotate into the CT role on a six-monthly basis. The SAS wrote the book on rescuing hostages from buildings, planes, trains and vehicles.

The file from where I copied this was automatically downloaded when I clicked on “Police numbers in England & Wales – Parliament UK.” If you google it you can get the file yourself and see the graphs, etc.

Police numbers in England & Wales

●  There were 124,066 full-time equivalent police officers in the 43 police forces of England and Wales on 31 March 2016, a 2,752 decrease (2.2%) compared with a year earlier. In addition there were 296 central service secondees (bringing the total to 124,362). There were 2,968 British Transport Police officers.

●  Since March 2003 this headline measure of police strength has included staff on career break or maternity/paternity leave. Excluding staff on career break or maternity/paternity leave, to enable longer term comparisons, the strength of the 43 police forces was 118,779 at March 2016, the lowest level since March 1985.

●  Since 2010 there are nearly 20,000 fewer FTE police officers, a reduction of nearly 14%.

●  Police forces recruited 4,735 officers in the 12 months to March 2016, with 7,701 officers leaving over that period.

●  The proportion of female police officers in England and Wales has increased from 7% in 1977 to 29% by 2016.

●  Ethnic minority strength as a proportion of total police service strength increased from 1.0% in 1989 to 6% in March 2016. In London, the proportion of ethnic minority officers in the Metropolitan Police force is 12%.

● The Library’s Police Service Strength briefing paper contains updated UK-wide statistics.

These are the requirements if you feel like joining the law enforcement in the UK:

As you might imagine, applicant guidelines are fairly comprehensive, but here are a few highlights:

-there are no minimum or maximum height requirements
-there is no formal educational requirement, but you will have to pass written tests
-you must be either a British Citizen, a citizen of the EU or other states in the EEA, or a Commonwealth citizen or foreign national with indefinite leave to remain in the UK
-although you may still be eligible to join the police service if you have minor convictions/cautions, there are certain offences and conditions that will make you ineligible. If you are at all unsure, contact your chosen force for more information
you must physically and mentally be able to undertake police duties.

More can be read right here: Police Recruitment in the UK.

This is a very interesting interview with the American Defence Secretary James Mattis even though I find some of his remarks regarding ISIS slightly puzzling. There are those who regard Islamist terrorist organisations such as ISIS as 100% legitimate in terms of their relation to the militant aspects of Islam. This is apparently why young people decide to leave Europe to join them, because they are seen as “true.” So how you can make “Islamism” illegitimate if their “legitimacy” is justified within “holy texts” beats me, unless these parts of the text are omitted. It is good to hear that America intend to humiliate the enemy, but all I could think of when hearing this was how we here in Europe are constantly being delegitimized and humiliated when confronted with Islamists within our own borders :/ Our entire construct is routinely mocked when our law enforcement officers cannot even do their work. Our laws are mocked if immigrants pursue their “holy laws” rather than ours and they actually get away with it…. and German officers and their entire government mock themselves when they “bury” or plan to bury banned “extreme” Qurans, out of fear of offending Muslim immigrants within German territory. The behaviour of Europeans resemble a charade of a comedy embarrassing to witness. The compulsion to look another way and pretend like nothing is overwhelming in the wake of such disappointments. Especially when law enforcement in Sweden and France “lose control” over French and Swedish territory. With all this special treatment towards “new-countrymen” we make ourselves look inferior within our own nations and as if though we have no identity or heritage worth protecting … Who looks foolish exactly? We are the humiliated ones.

CIA Hacking.

Standard

For some reason I ended up reading about Signals Intelligence not that long ago. It is quite interesting to see how data collection can win wars and what an impact it has had historically. It is certainly relevant in today’s 1984 environment. The loss of privacy we are experiencing is grotesque, yet maybe it is necessary due to how the “battlefield” has changed? The idea of giving away all civil liberties and especially how the CIA and other “spy institutions” can potentially abuse their power is frightening. Yet this man has a point. It is a massive blow to our defence when whistleblowers either reveal our vulnerabilities and/or leak sensitive information. It might be justifiable in the name of liberty but it is certainly not in the name of national security and military superiority.

Top 12 Sean Spicer Moments.

Standard

Some months ago I said that I would make a tribute to the most badass press-secretary ever, well here it is 🙂 Enjoy!

Sean Spicer obviously hates this specific kind of ice cream. Nobody knows why but memes on social media are endless.

He does not approve of Daft “Funk” either… ↓

…and made the news when he retweeted The Onion making fun of him. Those on the left didn’t consider that Spicer could have tweeted it to have some fun or as an act of sarcasm. They took this re-tweet as a confirmation about Sean Spicer’s “limited cognitive function.”

This was my “introduction” to the press-secretary. I loved every second of it and have been a fan ever since.

Another hilarious Spicer moment where he tries to explain the obvious to the press-corps.

Sean Spicer is “parenting” the media.

The title of this video says it all – watch it and laugh.

It is very helpful to have screens so that you can explain e-v-e-r-y-t-h-i-n-g.

When you’re stuck in a rut.

When none understands.

When you have to demonstrate and explain with “models.”

It is utterly American that “Covfefe” even became news. Makes me think of Chewbacca Mom an all sorts of other oddities. People are strange!

Diversity – Why It Is A Complex Issue.

Standard

Several times I’ve received great expertise and service at the hands of personnel of immigrant background in the UK. I’ve ran into successful mixed couples, my own family is at this point multi-ethnic and an old childhood friend of mine has converted to Islam, even adopting a “foreign” way of speaking her native language …

On the other hand; there is an over-representation of immigrants when it comes to crime, prisons in the UK are recruitment grounds for Islamists, territories are becoming no-gone zones for European natives and European nations are constantly being undermined in terms of their cultural identity and heritage in order to be “open” and “inclusive.” Quotas are enforced, killing off the idea of a meritocracy, racial targeting of “whites” is rampant when it comes to sex-attacks committed by Muslims not to mention the well documented struggle a great amount of migrants face when trying to function within a western democratic societal structure.

It is easy to become sceptical towards diversity when focusing on the latter, but equally easy to feel guilty about these feelings when encountering likeable and/or high achieving individuals from the same group as mentioned above. It is equally disappointing if stereotypes are re-inforced and confirmed by the behaviour of those of immigrant background as one lives in the hope that all of these are the products of biased, out of date, prejudiced thinking.  It must surely be beneficial to “import” high achievers into ones society as long as these individuals don’t engage in cultural subversion, just as it cannot possibly be in the interest of any reasonable ruler to flood their nation with the very worst from other cultures.

It is especially interesting to note that certain European leaders threaten those who don’t want to listen to them, with sending in more migrants. By referring to these people like they are some sort of a weapon, these politicians display that they are conscious and fully aware of the current “European issue” which of course can make one question their motives and end goal with importing even more aliens indiscriminately . 

It is easier to call someone out on their “funky business” when dubious leaders are impeded from hiding behind foreigners … My father for example, explained how “cultural marxists” wished to destroy an old Norwegian fortress of historical significance, erecting housing projects in its stead. Why tear down a monument of military significance if not to dismantle parts of a nations cultural heritage? Again, the agenda of the “deconstructionists” become apparent when they don’t have Islam and/or any other alien group to hide behind…..

How can the current cultural crisis be solved in Europe? That is a very good question as one cannot forget or deny the bad, nor can generalisation be allowed to destroy and undermine valuable contributions from individuals. There is no reason to be filled with antipathy when running into a well integrated, well functioning foreigner, but there is also a serious danger to the integrity and safety of a nation if the “common-will” is to “give up” ones territory entirely, especially when this happens voluntarily, willingly … which surely must be unprecedented, historically speaking….

If one is to follow the current progressive agenda, it means undermining and de-valuing blood spilled by previous generations who died in battle to preserve the dignity, borders and future of Europe’s various indigenous ethnic groups. It is a sensitive and problematic issue, that can neither be brushed under the carpet or be entirely presented in a grim light. In my opinion it is crucial that immigration is halted completely from cultures alien to the European continent as of now, in order to stabilise a very unstable situation. If it could become illegal by law for future immigrants to self-segragate then maybe this could help as well. Massive responsibility rests on the shoulders of our civilian leadership that have as of now failed miserably by not being more critical as well as modest when opening up the “gates.”

As flawed and divisive as multiculturalism is, it has become our reality and with that reality comes an avalanche of social issues that has to be addressed in a balanced and nuanced way, without destroying the integrity and validity of western societies, without altering and falsifying history in order to sell fictious modern narratives, without diminishing western authority or smashing any hopes of future prosperity for those law abiding, well integrated aliens who would be unethical, immoral and unheard of to deport.

  1. A very important and accurate article. If you have limited time then please read this and the article mentioned about Western Civilisation, below. ↓
  2. An equally important article about a topic that should concern us all: The Crisis of Western Civ.
  3. The President of the German police union, admits that “integration” has failed ever since Germany initiated their “multiculturalism project.” For 30 years we’ve proven that it can’t be done – the Video has English subtitles.
  4. This is part II of an extremely interesting article concerning “high-trust” vs. “low-trust” cultures. This is a must read for all of those who don’t believe in borders and who don’t want to admit that “genuine diversity” exists. It also presents a completely different perspective in the migrant debate: Why are those who chased away Europeans risking their lives to get back under Euro-rule? A very awkward scenario for sure.
  5. This is a very intriguing article about (drumroll) Sweden … It is the descendants of immigrants who are guilty of the crime wave. Who would have thought?
  6. This is an alarming video. A must see as it talks about future migrant predictions. Any individual who justify strengthening other continents and nations, should think about the repercussions this can have for our future.Our future problem with Africa.
  7. A shocking article about:Totalitarian Sweden. This is a story of a couple who unfortunately found themselves in the middle of altercations between “new-Swedes” and the police. They filmed the ordeal and uttered “anti-migrant-sentiments” which isn’t strange considering how Sweden is currently suffering under the “humanitarian-load.” The result? They were asked to denounce their quips by admitting to having “unsound minds” due to mental health. It is an interesting thing to note that mental disorders are increasingly stigmatised in order to cover up both “terrorist-activity” and “resentment towards migrants.” An ugly reality. Very ugly and utterly oppressive. The couple was fired and had their equipment confiscated. 
  8. Erdogan addressed an issue that those on the right (and probably the police & the military) have been concerned  about for a long time. – Look at us we are so many, & look at you, you are so few…. – Turkish Agitation Europe.
  9. This is an article about the same problem, the quotes are in English, but the main text is in Norwegian. Foreign agitation.
  10. This is the second video I’ve seen of an Italian reporter being chased by migrants when reporting on their ordeal. One of the videos I linked to here on my blog was from the satirical news-program”Striscia La Notizia” who were creating a  critical story about the “new arrivals” and their criminal activity, but this video , depicts a female reporter for a serious tv-program creating a sympathetic portrayal of the hardships of the migrants before an alien man tries to attack her and she is thankfully rescued by a taxi driver… In the (now)removed video you can hear her saying that the “refugees” are heading north…..Nice.
  11. According to this reportage this lady understands “Arabic.” This made it possible for her to understand what “the new arrivals” were saying as she witnessed the alien masses streaming into the continent. An interesting watch.
  12.  A couple of articles about the tragedy that is “modern-Sweden.” Our neighbours have become a cautionary tale for anyone who might feel inclined to support “feminist politics” or the idea of being “a humanitarian superpower.” This article is in English but this other article that is very descriptive of the deep cultural issue is in Swedish. Hate-crimes are a very “real-thing” but not quite how the mainstream might imagine it. Racism is rampant towards ethnic locals. Now how to you explain or justify that?
  13. The online-behaviour depicted in this article is spot on. Anyone reacting to the recent terrorists attacks in England with anger “reacted wrong.” It is of course understandable that individuals with limited knowledge about the current “ice-berg-issue-with-immigrants” will perceive terrorism in Europe as the “act-of-evil-people” not as the ‘visible-tip-of-a-gigantic-ice-berg.” If the mainstream media were more vocal and if people paid more attention to mainstream and independent news, they would be mortified. Never before has an enemy been more excused or loved.
  14. Ariana Grande is more equipped than the Pentagon to handle the terror threat apparently….It’s the end of the world as we know it, & I don’t feel fine.
  15. The best anti-west propaganda ever. This video is a must watch!
  16. A peaceful Muslim doing the right thing.
  17. 23.000 Jihadis are strolling around in the streets of Britain, taking it easy. The quotes in this article are in English, so it is possible to understand the issue, the rest of the text is in Norwegian. The mess.
  18. Aesthetic perimeters in France. Yes. It is not nice to call a spade a spade. I remember walking underneath the Eiffel tower taking lots of breathtaking pictures in 2007. Shame that I don’t know where those photos are anymore.
  19. A very interesting “Macron-leak” if it is genuine. Apparently it is. I remember having to frequent “mandatory French classes for non-French speakers” when I attended school in France. I was the only non-muslim and beside one Arab boy and myself nobody else even bothered to put in any effort to learn French. They were just killing time, mocking the initiative. Taking into consideration that the EU apparently envisions “the new-European man” these documents shouldn’t come as a surprise. 😦
  20. If you feel like going for a swim in Europe.
  21. What really happened at the Bataclan?
  22. A very good article presented in a very professional manner about modern-Europe.
  23. The Catholic Church’s Involvement with Immigration. This is why people lose faith. At least in the organised-established-corruptible-bureaucratic-structure.
  24. A tragic video about the destruction of English identity … the worst part is that you can’t make this up.
  25. It is predicted that “Swedish-conditions” will contaminate our nation as well. It is said than coming generations will be worse. This article is about crime committed by immigrants/aliens in Norway.
  26. Norway’s official conservative newspaper declaring that “Europe is not primarily a Christian continent” before they continue with their ethno-masochism in order to protect Islam.
  27. A Norwegian independent news website, set the record straight regarding our cultural heritage and ancestry. The title of this article translates into ” Aftenposten have chosen submission.”
  28. A shocking article from Norway’s official statistics bureau revealing that we have more Polish immigrants in Norway than people from “alien cultures.” This is very revealing when one considers how representative other cultures are in terms of crime and racist activity directed towards locals…A surprising find…
  29. Yet if one looks closely … Population predictions Norway…do we have reason to worry? Absolutely if one looks closely at the methods of the bureau; at a certain point you are considered a “Norwegian” even though you are technically a foreigner.
  30. This is very bad news about Norway’s “welfare-bubble,” contrary to what our leaders like to delude their voters into believing, Norway is not the world’s richest country and needs to wake up!
  31. This theory could very well be why we’ve deluded ourselves:The Noble Savage
  32. A very interesting article with this off-putting title:”Breivik’s Norway.” It is a worthy read and especially interesting if what ABB wrote is actually true. Wether it is or not is hard to tell, unless he contacted the authorities each time he bore witness to a hate-crime.
  33. A video about the current ordeal in our part of the world:”Diversity in Europe.”
  34. A disturbing article that everyone should read. I’ve shared it several times and will probably continue doing so:”Racism towards Whites.
  35. Here are some videos/articles from Tommy Robinson. He is commonly depicted as a “right-wing-extremist” but this does not seem particularly accurate. Please take the time to check out this:”Justice for Chelsey.” This is a very good video that anyone should take the time to watch: “Maajid Nawas vs. Tommy Robinson.” This is Robinson making videos about how upset he is about racist violence in England:”Tommy Robinson” & “Tommy Robinson Again.
  36. This might be the reason as to why “integration” has failed in Europe. We’ve created  specific systems for ourselves and there is no guarantee that other people will neither like our constructs nor function within them: “All traits are heritable.
  37. More about our genetic heritage: “Replicants.”
  38. Evolution is happening faster than what we thought … we are becoming even more different to one another: “We Are All Mutants.
  39. A very interesting read that should be made mandatory:”The Race FAQ.”
  40. Another article along the same lines:”Such a thing as Race.”
  41. How the world reacts to unconventional truths:”The Ugliness of reality.”
  42. How to write an article meant to condemn only to sound like you’re endorsing “the enemy” since what ‘the bad-guy” said makes sense …Charles Murray.
  43. Genes… notice how the picture in this article, published by a mainstream media outlet has been removed by The New York Times….I took a screen shot of it ↓Diversity
  44. A very interesting guy sharing lots of relevant information. I’ve checked out all of these:”Information Processing – Several Articles.
  45. 100 Years of Ideology. This is quite interesting. It’s in all in the blood as our ancestors said.
  46. More of the same:”Bowling with our own.”
  47. How a brilliant man lost everything due to his lack of political correctness:”Watson.”
  48. Nixon talking about IQ:”Nixon phone conversation.
  49. Here are a coupe of articles about “The Alt-Right.” I don’t know enough about this guy to have an opinion, some say he is a right-wing extremist, others say he is not. I’m certainly not endorsing neo-nazis but the articles I’ve linked to are worthy a read. “Why is the alt-right so threatening?” & “The long history of “Nazi punching.”
  50. A Donald Trump supporter losing his love for The President. I still like the Trump administration, but it’s interesting to read/see other perspectives….
  51. I don’t like the style of this YouTuber at all, but he has some interesting points. So even though I find his presentation vulgar, it doesn’t hurt checking it out: “This week in stupid.”
  52. An interesting video about the skeptic community. It is very true that people construct their very own carefully designed echo-chambers. Trying to open people’s eyes to untraditional narratives is a hopeless operation. I’ve officially given up. There will be no more entries about “the Islamist-threat” coming from me after this. I’ve said a lot, I’ve proposed solutions, I think the only next step would be to 1)write petitions &/or 2) run for office. “The End of the Skeptic Community.
  53. Since this entry is about diversity it makes sense to include this intriguing video about: “The Kurdish Question.” This is very informative and eye-opening. Please check it out!
  54. I will finish off this long entry with links to a number of articles from Norway; some of these I’ve been thinking about translating. I will publish at least one of them in English, in due time….  “Politics vs. Emotionalism.” this article describes how the west has fallen for “the emotional” rather than the “boring, factual, realpolitik.” It was very enlightening to read it actually as it is very easy to recognise where/how we are failing. In my opinion it should be: 1)illegal to promise unrealistic policy-changes that cannot be fulfilled & 2)illegal to drastically alter war-efforts, initiated by the outgoing administration, if it is detrimental to the desired outcome of the involvement. No wonder the world is as messy as it is when one administration can initiate a war-effort and a new, incoming administration has the power to just abruptly halt it. If you have made the decision to overthrow a regime – then you better make sure that you got things under control maintaining a presence in the region. It’s not about popularity or at least it shouldn’t be. It is about what is best for the country. This next article is about how the “mainstream” try to sell a narrative about how Norway used to have Sharia-law… if you ever wondered how deep we’ve sunk into denial over our own identity then look no further than here: “Re-defining what it means to be ethnic-Norwegian,” uff…excuse me if I vomit. Our police-force is being nannied by “sociologists” who will probably succeed in making officers quit in protest. They do everything in their power not only to undermine Norwegian identity but to deny Norway’s problems with crime due to our “cultural enrichment.” When you try to be a cop … in a politically correct climate…
  55. The title of this article is: Europeans will lose the only place on the planet, that they call “theirs.” & Europe the proud, has become an old lady tired of life who refuses to eat. Very good articles that should be translated into English….
  56. Here is an overview of Norwegians killed by foreigners in Norway between 1981-2008. At least 58 individuals were killed in this time-period a pretty  big number compared to the 4-5 foreigners killed by Norwegians in the same time-frame. I have written about the racist murder on Benjamin Hermann before, but I had no idea that the number of murders directed towards “100%” Norwegians looked like this…it is a very different story than the one presented by the major media-outlets out there. Where is SOS Racism when ethnic-Norwegians are the victims? (Si det….man kan jo spoerre seg…)Due to how unconventional-facts have a tendency to disappear, (just look at the article I shared concerning the police) I’ll paste in the article in its entirety below. This is not mine in any way, I’m just spreading this information and making sure that if it gets deleted, well…then there is a backup here (I’ve added the highlights):“Frem fra glemselen”

    Siden 1981 til og med 2008, er minst 58 norske menn og kvinner blitt drept i Norge av utlendinger eller noen med innvandrerbakgrunn. Det er en lang rekke av drap som hver gang knapt fikk en avisnotis og i dag er fortiet og glemt. I samme tidsrom er 4-5 innvandrere blitt drept av nordmenn.

    1 1981, sommer, Bjørn Erik Solberg, Oslo, 24 år, skulle hjelpe en kvinne som ble trakassert av sin mann, men ble i stedet knivdrept av mannen som var en innvandrer fra Nord-Afrika

    2 1991, ? mars, Gunvor Refsdal, forgiftet med timetylklorid i vin av sin mann Hani Abdullah.

    3 1991, 3. sept. Tage Ansethmoen, Oslo, lege, drept med 20 knivstikk i sitt hjem av en marokkaner.

    4 1991, 14. des. Jarle Næss, Bergen, 23 år, dørvakt og bokser. Skutt midt i hjertet og drept med en halvautomatisk 11,25 Remington US Army, av marokkaneren Nour-Eddin Khouya, utenfor utestedet Maxime i Bergen. Marokkaneren kom til Norge i aug. 1990, og får midlertidig oppholdstillatelse. Kameraten til Næss, Bård Trones (25) blir skutt i magen, men overlever.

    5 1992, 26. jan. Tore A. Holthe, Gjøvik, 27 år, knivdrept av to marokkanere – 24 og 31 år.

    6 1992, 14. aug. Paul Gamlem, 31 år, ble sparket til døde i Oslo av to pakistanere – 17 og 19 år.

    7 1993, 7. mars, Berit Backer, sos. arbeider, ble kvalt i sitt hjem av en innvandrer fra Kosovo. Drapsmannen ble idømt sikring, men fikk senere norsk statsborgerskap og oppholdstillatelse i 2001.

    8 1993, 24. april, Linda M. Sandvik, 24 år, Oslo, Kvalt av en iraker, – også tiltalt for flere voldtekter.

    9 1994, 21. juli, en nordmann ble knivdrept i Larvik av en palestiner. (Nærmere detaljer mangler).

    10 1995, 13. okt. Kvinne, 57 år, sos. arbeider – brent inne da en iraner tente på Veitvedt sosialkontor.

    11 1996, 17. des. Heidi S. Sørli, drept av sin jugoslaviske mann som rømte, – er ikke pågrepet.

    12 1997, 3. mars, Randi Rastad, Høybråten, 61 år ble dyttet ned i kjelleren av utlendinger fra Brumunddal og døde av sjokk/ hjerteattakk.

    13 1997, (6.?) nov. Hilmar Jarle Fjørtoft 68 år, pensjonert sjømann fra Ålesund, ble funnet drept i sin egen leilighet i Latinskolegata 6. Fjørtoft var blitt utsatt for grov stump vold. Gjerningsmannen var tamilen Sivaguru som kom som asylsøker til Hareid i 1987. Tamilen fikk 12 års fengsel pluss sikring. Straffen omfattet også voldtekt, seksuelle overgrep og grov vold. Han slapp ut tre år før tiden. Nå er han tiltalt for to nye voldtekter i Ålesund (aug. 2007).

    14 1998, 1. mai, Tom Halvorsen, Rogaland, 18 år, drept ved tvangsdrukning. Vietnamesisk aksjon.

    15 1998, 21. mai, Ken-Gøran Abrahamsen, Balsfjord, 28 år, sparket i hjel i Oslo av 17 årig pakistaner.

    16 1998, ? ? En ung nordmann kom tilfeldig i ildlinjen mellom to innv. gjenger i Oslo og ble skutt.

    17 1998, 15. juli, Marie Louise Bendiksen, Sjøvegan, drept og brent. En 20 årig tamil pågrepet.

    18 1998, 26. juni, Bernt Chr. Reppe, Moelv, 24 år, skutt av en pakistaner i Rosenkratzgt, Oslo.

    19 1998, 31. okt. Rune Åge Berg, sparket i hjel av en 16-årig makedoner i Akersgata, Oslo.

    20 1998, 14. nov. Ulf Bråthen, 42 år, taxisjåfør skutt i bilen av to utlendinger (19 og 23 år) på Godlia.

    21 1998, 10. des. Ola Wangen, 33 år, knivdrept på Grunerløkka av en sinnssyk iraner på frifot.

    22 1999, 17. mai, Barbro Zhedini, Oslo, drept av sin tunisiske mann Hassa Zhedini og dumpet i Gjersjøen. En arm avskjært. Hassa Zhedinis bror var med på ugjerningen.

    23 2000, 31. jan. Vegar Midtveit, 18 år – jaget av utlendinger utfor en skrent ved Kristiansand – og døde.

    24 2001, ?. jan. Gry Husein, funnet i Skienselva, kvalt av sin palestinske mann Gamal – fra Israel.

    25 2001, 20. jan. Kennet Alexander Otnes, Larvik, 20 år, øksedrept, partert og lagt i dypfryser av en 18 årig afrikaner.

    26 2001, 27. juli, Hanne Kristine Olsen, Bergen, 29 år, ble kjørt ned og drept av sin palestinske samboer, Yasin Jabr, 40 år. Deres barn ble hardt skadd.

    27 2001, 8. aug. Gunn Sivertsen, Haramsøy, og hennes 3 barn ble mordbrendt av sin chilenske samboer.

    28 2001, Gunn Sivertsens første barn.

    29 2001, Gunn Sivertsens andre barn.

    30 2001, Gunn Sivertsens tredje barn.

    31 2001, 26. aug. Gunn Merete Lode, 32 år, knivdrept av en 42 årig gift trebarns far fra Danmark.

    32 2002, 20. jan. Kristoffer I. Bastesen, 19 år, knivdrept i Kr. Augusts gt, Oslo av sin thailandske kamerat.

    33 2002, 13. apr. Einar T. Rønning, Råde, 23 år, dørvakt på Chez, knivstukket i lysken av 4 muslimer.

    34 2002, 13. apr. Martin Morisse, Jessheim, 26 år, dørvakt på Chez, knivstukket i lysken av 4 muslimer.

    35 2002, 9. okt. Kjell P. Dahlberg, 48 år, knivdrept på Bogerud T-bane i Oslo av en chilensk asylsøker.

    36 2002, 18. okt. Inger Sund, Sognsvn. Oslo, 69 år, ranet og drept i sitt hjem av to asylsøkere som hadde fulgte etter Inger etter at hun hadde vunnet 30.000 på bingo. Drapsmannen, Moez Ben Noureddeine Rouissi, klarte å rømme ut av Norge. Via Tyskland ble drapsmannens identitet oppsporet. Han hadde blitt retunert til Tunisia av tyske myndigheter, der han ble idømt 15 års fengsel for drapet, i 2007.

    37 2002, 3. nov. Johnny Øvergård, Balsfjord, 43 år. Drept av sin somaliske drosjesjåfør på Frogner.

    38 2002, 13. des. Henry Simonsen, Alta, 56 år, drept med øks av sin russiske kone, Elizaveta Georgienna Sytnik.

    39 2003, 17. feb. Audun Bøland, 39 år, bussjåfør, knivdrept på Valdresbussen av en asylsøker fra Etiopia. Etioperen hadde samme dag drept en annen asylsøker på et asylmottak i Valdres.

    40 2003, 15. juni, Anie B. Olsvik, Haugesund, 83 år, drept om natten i sin seng av to innv. fra Libya.

    41 2003, ? des. Cathrine Halvorsen, Kongsvinger, 34 år, drept av en iraker. Azad Ghaleb Ali som er siktet, klarte å rømme. Politiet er derimot sikre på at det er Ghaleb Ali som er gjerningsmannen.

    42 2004, 19. febr. Eli S. Høyland, Stavanger, 49 år, kvalt i sitt hjem av en Tysker, 29 år.

    43 2004, 3. aug. Terje Mjåland, Skien, 23 år, døv, knivdrept på trikk 17 i Oslo av en somalier, 41 år.

    44 2004, 25. aug. Helge Nylund, 34 år, skutt av en sjalu 52 åring fra Afghanistan. Han skjøt seg selv.

    45 2004, 4. sept. Marita Strøm, Namsos, 38 år, skutt i en bil i Irak av sin mann Osman Omar Osman fra Irak.

    46 2004, ? sept. Lise Johanni Johanson, drept på Teisen i Oslo av en mann fra Irak, 23 år.

    47 2004, 28. okt. Hedda Karterudseter, Seljord, 19 år, kvalt i Sogndal av den gifte somalieren Hassan Samriye Hashin, 35 år.

    48 2005, ? jan. Mary Ann Hansen, Bodø, 42 år, knivdrept av en algirer 31 år, mens hun holdt deres felles barn i armene. Algireren fikk første gang avslag på asylsøknaden i nov. 2002, og endelig avslag, med beskjed om å forlate Norge, i mars 2003.

    49 2006, 20. (?) feb. Finn Abelseth, Oslo, opprinnelig fra Ålesund. I begynnelsen av 30-årene. Mandag 20. feb. ble han funnet bevisstløs utenfor boligen sin i Schønings gate 32. Døde senere på sykehus. Han skal ha blitt banket opp av en gjeng pakistanere natt til søndag 19. Dette i følge en kamerat som Abelseth ringte til før han mistet bevisstheten.

    50 2006, 29. mars, Stein Sjaastad, Oslo, lege 58 år, brutalt stukket ned og drept på sitt kontor av asylsøkeren Kamel Mellah 37 år, fra Algerie.

    51 2006, 25. juni, Anne Marit Søgård, Torshov i Oslo, 41 år, skutt og drept i sin leilighet med 6-8 skudd fra håndvåpen av to pakistanere med norsk statsborgerskap, Haidar Hussain 21 år og Ali Ayaz Shafa 19 år. Søgårds kjæreste ble også forsøkt drept, men overlevde. Hussain ble i nov. 2005 dømt til 2 år ubetinget fengsel for flere brudd på narkotikalovgivningen. Begge pakistanerne ble dømt til fengsel i 13 år, 27. mars 2008. En tredje person ble frifunnet.

    52 2007, 31. jan. Arild Lund, Drammen, 56 år, drept av tre litauere i sitt hjem.

    53 2007, 30. april, Anne Grete Vollum, Overhalla i Nord-Trøndelag, 35 år, gravid med tvillinger i 8. måned, drept av sin tidligere mann asylsøkeren Bahadir Mirzaolimov 26 år fra Usbekistan. Mirzaolimov kom til Norge i 2005, men fikk avslag på sin asylsøknad i 2006.

    54 2007, 30. april, Anne Grete Vollums ufødte barn (tvilling).

    55 2007, 30. april, Anne Grete Vollums ufødte barn (tvilling).

    56 2007, 30. april, Cicilie Watnan Lian, Overhalla i Nord-Trøndelag, 7 år og Anne Grete Vollums niese, drept av Bahadir Mirzaolimov. Vollums ti år gammle datter var også i huset. Hun ble bundet fast under ugjerningene. En av småpikene skal også ha blitt voldtatt av asylsøkeren.

    57 2008, 8. desember, Jonas Pedersen, Oslo, 31 år. Drept av to polakker, 48 og 45 år, etter spark mot hodet i basketak på Europarådets plass i Oslo sentrum. Hendelsen skjedde 6. desember, men Pedersen døde av skadene 8. Den ene av de to ble frikjent, samt en tredje polakk, 36 år, som kjørte bilen.

    58 2008, 16. desember, Ann-Mari Solås, Mørkved utenfor Bodø, 32 år og tobarnsmor. Drept med flere knivstikk utenfor sitt hjem av en iraner, 43 år, som kom til Norge i 1991 som asylsøker gjennom FN. Iraneren ble norsk statsborger i 1998.

    Anmerkning – kommentar til ”Frem fra glemselen”

    Denne lista, med 58 drepte nordmenn fram til og med året 2008, er en konsentrat av notater ved R. Halgjern, Odd Lønø, Torfinn Hellandsvik, Agnar Andersen og Bjørnar Røyset. Lista omfatter kun nordmenn og kvinner som er drept i Norge av noen med innvandrer bakgrunn. Derfor er det ikke tatt med utlendinger som er kommet til Norge og blitt drept her av våre innvandrere/ asylsøkere, heller ikke er tatt med nordmenn som drar til andre land og blir drept der.

    Lista viser at i 10-års periode fra og med 1995 – til og med 2004, er 34 norske blitt drept i Norge av innv. utlendinger (i gjennomsnitt 30 stk.). I samme tiårs periode er det registrert 3 (tre) drap på innvandrere i Norge som er begått av nordmenn.

    Denne drapslista gir fullverdig grunnlag for beregning av denne makabre utviklingen (prognoser) i lang tid framover – og hvem som er mest kriminell.

    Innvandrerbefolkningen, ca. 400.000 (i 2005) (inkl. svensker), utgjør bare ca 1/12 del av Norges totale befolkning Allikevel blir altså i gjennomsnitt ca. 10 nordmenn i dag drept for hver innvandrer som blir drept av nordmenn.

    Dersom innvandrerbefolkningen blir like stor som den etnisk norske befolkning om ca. 45 år – uten å endre sin kriminelle tendens – vil altså drapslista vise 12 ganger flere drepte nordmenn – med ca. 360 per 10 år, mens nordmenn vil gjøre seg skyld i 3 drap på innvandrerbefolkningen i samme 10-års periode. Dette fordi antallet etniske nordmenn ikke vil bli høyere enn i dag..

    Dersom man med grunnlag i nevnte tallfakta vil beregne den prosentvise andel av denne kriminaliteten i forhold til størrelsen på dem nevne folkegrupper – for dermed å se hvem som er mest kriminell – har jeg kommet fram til følgende reelle prosentsats:

    Innvandrerne står 99,17 prosent og nordmennene står for 0,83 prosent av alle drepte i denne sammenheng.

    Nevnte prosentsats vil ikke endre seg selv om innvandrerbefolkningen blir like stor eller høyere enn den opprinnelige norske befolkningen omkring år 2045 – slik realistiske antropologer har forutsett. Når det gjelder voldtekt, ran og mishandlinger, er antakelig den prosentvise andel omtrent det samme.

    Ovenstående fakta og prognoser blir den bitre virkelighet dersom utviklingen får fortsette i samme spor som nå. Hvis man vil unngå, eller stoppe utviklingen mot en slik virkelighet om ca. 45 år, – må noe drastisk og effektivt iverksettes – og det straks! Noe å tenke på for våre naive og tafatte politikere!

    Agnar Andersen