You can tell a lot about a society by watching what kind of people it puts into positions of power and influence.
Thorbjørn Jagland is a former Prime Minister of Norway from the Norwegian Labour Party. Since 2009, he has been the Secretary General of the Council of Europe (CoE). He was reelected to this position for a second term, with the support of parliamentarians from across Europe, on June 24 2014.
The CoE was established in 1949. It is distinct from and less powerful than the European Union. However, it has a formalized cooperation with the EU on a range of issues, for instance those related to immigration. This cooperation has been strengthened under Jagland’s lead. The CoE further enjoys friendly relations with many Islamic organizations and has made combating so-called “Islamophobia” in Europe one of its stated priorities.
In addition to heading the Council of Europe, for years Mr. Jagland has also been the Chairman of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, which awards the annual Nobel Peace Prize. Under his leadership, the Nobel Peace Prize was awarded in 2009 to Barack Hussein Obama, when he had only been US President for a few months. In 2012, Jagland and the Nobel Committee awarded the Peace Prize to the European Union (EU). The Socialist Jagland has for decades been a passionate supporter of supranational organizations such as the EU.
One of the three women who shared the Nobel Peace Prize in 2011, Tawakkol Karman from Yemen, has close ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. The Norwegian Nobel Committee knew about this and thought it was fine. Jagland told reporters in Oslo that he disagrees with the widespread “perception” in the West that the Brotherhood is a threat to democracy. The very same man has warned repeatedly for years against the allegedly great dangers presented by “Islamophobia” and people who peacefully voice anti-Islamic viewpoints.
In Jagland’s view, being associated with the Muslim Brotherhood makes you a potential partner worthy of the Nobel Peace Prize. If, on the other hand, you peacefully oppose Islamic inroads into the Western world then that makes you virtually a threat to world peace.
On August 1 2013, Thorbjørn Jagland “attacked the Norwegian press for allowing the extremist blogger Peder ‘Fjordman’ Jensen to air his anti-Islamic views.” He warned against letting the ideology allegedly held by the mass murderer Anders Behring Breivik to enter the mainstream:
“If you read what Fjordman has published online, you can easily see that he is coming from the same mindset. The only difference is that while Fjordman writes, Breivik acted. But there is not much difference between giving Fjordman the support to publish his opinions and giving the killer himself a public microphone.”
In July 2013, he stated that he fears violence in Europe due to increasing xenophobia and the “criminal” views held by some people regarding mass immigration. In an essay in the daily Dagsavisen, Jagland expressed concern that if people like me were able to express their views, convicted murderers might be next. “Someone has to say stop before we find ourselves on a slippery slope where Fjordman’s voice becomes more and more normal.”
Jagland singled out a couple of people by name in addition to me. One was Anders Behring Breivik, who killed 77 people with his attacks in Norway on July 22 2011. The other was Arnfinn Nesset. Nesset is a former nurse and one of the worst serial killers in Scandinavian history. In 1983 he was convicted of poisoning 22 patients, but he was strongly suspected of having killed many more than that. For murdering dozens of human beings, he was sentenced to 21 years in prison. This was and remains the maximum prison sentence one can receive in Norway, regardless of the nature of your crime. Because of good behavior in jail, Arnfinn Nesset served only 12 years behind bars, or a few months for each murder. Breivik himself was sentenced to just over 3 months in jail per murder.
Thorbjørn Jagland, a former Prime Minister and President of the Storting (Parliament) from the country’s largest political party and the Secretary General of the Council of Europe, thus directly compared me to two of the worst murderers in Scandinavia, both convicted of murdering dozens of people. He didn’t think there was much difference among the three of us. Jagland’s claim was that if we allow evil people like me to broadcast their opinions in the public debate, the next logical step would be giving an open microphone to serial killers.
I am sure some of my most dishonest critics will accuse me of “whining” for bringing this up again, but I don’t have any criminal record whatsoever, not even a speeding ticket. I would just like to point that out. I would further assert that the main issue here is not actually me, but rather how certain people in positions of power choose to exercise the influence that they possess. Is it wise of a man who is the leader of the Nobel Committee and claims to promote tolerance of other people’s viewpoints to say this? Is it appropriate behavior for a former Prime Minister and current leader of the Council of Europe to compare peaceful, non-criminal citizens whose views he disagrees with to convicted serial killers? I maintain that this is unwise and inappropriate.
Ironically, Thorbjørn Jagland has previously shown few scruples in having a dialogue with representatives of a totalitarian regime, guilty of the mass murder of millions and probably tens of millions of people. Apparently, the only ones you cannot have a “dialogue” with are native Europeans who oppose Islamization or object to being turned into a minority in their own countries by rampant mass immigration from every corner of the planet.
There are quite a few examples where not just the same groups, but in some cases the same individuals, appeased Communism a few decades ago and appease the forces of Islam today. From Scandinavia, one prominent such case would be Mr. Jagland. It is well-documented that he was one of many figures on the political Left who had a file in the KGB, the secret police of the Soviet Union, because he was seen as a useful contact.
Unlike his fellow Labour Party member and convicted spy Arne Treholt, there is no evidence that Jagland did anything overtly criminal in his talks with KGB agents. Yet it is arguably foolish behavior to believe you can have any form of “dialogue” with people representing totalitarian belief systems, who are only here to infiltrate our societies and subvert our freedoms. These days he is displaying the very same foolishness when dealing with dangerous Islamic movements and countries.
Unfortunately, I am not a member of the KGB or the Muslim Brotherhood. Perhaps Thorbjørn Jagland would have been more willing to listen to my viewpoints if I had been.