News corporations, controlled by cultural Marxists/multiculturalists, full scale war against cultural conservatism/nationalism. 

Мы поможем в написании ваших работ!


News corporations, controlled by cultural Marxists/multiculturalists, full scale war against cultural conservatism/nationalism.

This involves thousands of examples of character assassinations (everything from a hatchet job on a Bruce Bawer book portraying him as a “foam-around-mouth-racist to ignoring other essential works completely) and other direct attacks and deliberate “media blackouts” regarding Muslim riots (and other issues they do not wish to cover) in Western Europe.


On September 14th, 2009, a person I am familiar with was contacted by a friend who works for a major Norwegian news agency. He told him about something terrifying and upsetting he had been witness to regarding the coverage of the Gøteborg intifada (Muslim Riots in Gøteborg, Sweden during Ramadan in August/September). According to him, all major news agencies in Norway (in cooperation with the largest Swedish news agency) had made an alliance in order to prevent the truth from getting out, or at least keep the truth from getting out for as long as possible and at least until after the Norwegian elections September 13th.


His exact words were;



“It is a dangerous road we are walking when the truth is systematically held back and when we are willing to go this far in order to cover up the consequences of the multicultural society. This has been allowed to develop to a degree where it is a democratical problem. “



It is really disturbing how the major news agencies managed to reach a consensus regarding this deliberate cover-up or “media blackout” with the intention of censoring the riots. How was it possible that we would end up with a synchronised media corps which is willing to go this far to hold back the truth from the Norwegian/Swedish people about something so important?



The following log describes how this transpired:


August 21/22nd – reports are received in major news desks regarding Muslim riots in Gøteborg, Sweden. An article is created in one agency but the chief editor decides not to publish it.


August 22nd – a manifest of Jihad is posted in Rosengård, Sweden, Norwegian media companies are informed about this on the 23rd. It is clear now to many of the chief editors in the major Norwegian news agencies that this indicates that the rioting will continue and that it is indeed news worthy. However, most of them assume (hope) the riots will end within a week at most.


August 23rd – Early in the morning, the chief editor in Aftenposten, Hilde Haugsgjerd was contacted by Jan Helin in the major Swedish newspaper Aftonbladet where she is asked to keep a lid on the story and/or at least write as little as possible about the riots. She is told to inform other Norwegian chief editors. It is unknown what else was discussed.


After this phone call with Jan Heling, Hilde Haugsgjerd calls the chief editor in Dagbladet, Anne Aasheim where they agree that this is a story which could significantly benefit the Norwegian Progress Party (FrP, the only anti-immigration party) as it would put immigration/asylum seeker/Islam related discussions on the agenda just before the elections. This must be prevented at all costs. They agree to contact chief editors in all major Norwegian news agencies and hold a teleconference where they discuss this issue later that day (it should be noted that ALL Norwegian news agencies are supporters of multiculturalism with many of its key personnel with political Marxist/pro-multiculturalist background). According to the source, it has been confirmed that the following individuals participated in the teleconference:


Editor of VG Nett: Espen Egil Hansen (on behalf of Bernt Olufsen), Hans-Tore Bjerkaas (editor in NRK), Carsten Bleness (editor in Dagsavisen), Jan Ove Årsæther (editor in TV2), Hilde Haugsgjerd (Aftenposten) and Anne Aasheim (Dagbladet).


According to the source, there was a tense mood among the participants. Espen Egil Hansen and Jan Ove Årsæther suggested to give the story ”some” coverage so that there would be no speculations concerning the fact that Norwegian news agencies had censored the riots if they lasted longer than expected. They drew parallels to the Paris riots and discussed that it could escalate. According to the source, Anne Aasheim raged at Espen Egil Hansen and Jan Over Årsæther and accused them of promoting racism and helping the Progress Party election apparatus (FrP) by wanting to cover the riots.


They all agreed in the end that the most pragmatical approach was to not cover the riots at all and to inform other editors in different news agencies to deliberately ignore it as well.


August 28th – two murder attempts on Swedish police officers and multiple arsons of cars and buildings results in a situation where the major Swedish news agencies are “forced” to cover the riots to a certain degree. As before, it is decided that the word: “Islam”, “Muslim”, “Jihad” or “intifada” shall not be included in any articles or reports (this is a common consensus among European MSM in general).


An increasing amount of tips (and demands from individuals to cover the events) pours in to the Norwegian news desks but still they all refuse to cover it (only 1-2 weeks until the Norwegian elections).


6-8 September - They manage to maintain censorship until around September 6-8th. After that, reports are starting to be published on independent blogs and these events are being distributed on the internet. Many individuals on online forums are demanding that the MSM cover the events and they are calling it an outrage and un-democratic behaviour. The pressure increases on the news agencies.


At this point, Hilde Haugsgjerd starts to doubt whether it is too risky to continue the media blackout. She is starting to experience increased pressure from her own staff (Aftenposten used to be a cultural conservative news paper up to 1972, when it was infiltrated by cultural Marxists, and is still regarded as the most conservative of the MSM news agencies). After a few phone calls back and forth among the editors during this time the issue is discussed again and they are evaluating the possibility to end the censorship. However, they all agree to continue with the media blackout.


September 13th (1 day before the Norwegian election) – Hilde Haugsgjerd makes a call to Anne Aasheim and tells her that she is going to publish a short article about the riots, but that she will make it moderate (scaled down) and will ensure that the article is not highlighted. This decision is made to create a sort of alibi so that conservatives cannot claim that Aftenposten is deliberately plotting against the Norwegian people by participating in non-democratic activities (deliberate media blackouts). At this point there are loud discussion on various forums and blogs about the MSMs “full scale war” against the Progress Party (FrP).


Some of the explanations used to conservatives who have demanded coverage in this period (regarding the Swedish, British, French riots) include:



- NRK: Three different explanations: “Not newsworthy” and “we haven’t heard anything about this” and “the decision to cover this story is under consideration”.


- TV2: “We haven’t heard anything about this”


- Aftenposten: “Our reporter (who was about to cover this) is sick, we will cover it shortly”



September 14th – Norwegian elections – Progress Party result: 22,9% (down 6-8 percentage points from earlier polls due to intensive media attacks from a synchronised news corps for eight weeks straight.


September 20thNRK, the Norwegian state channel, is now (after 6 weeks!) running a television broadcasted story about the intifada in Gøteborg, Sweden, one week after the election…





All major news agencies in Norway deliberately conspired (and continue to conspire) against the Norwegian people and sabotaged the 2009 election by initiating media blackouts of essential events (the Muslim intifada in Gøteborg, the Muslim riots in several places in the UK and the Muslim riots in France a couple of months earlier). Not only did they “rob” the the Progress Party of essential coverage which would have guaranteed the party at least 28-30% of the votes (if these events had been given the appropriate coverage and attention). Every single news agency (some of which had been neutral towards the Progress Party in many cases) synchronised a “full scale media/labeling war” (employing primarily scare tactics and various other attacks) against the Progress Party eight weeks before the election. At this time the Progress Party was at 28-30% on multiple polls and I guess the MSM panicked (as the following 8 weeks of synchronised war campaign indicates).


At the end of the day, they, the major news agencies succeeded in sabotaging the election again and ruining the FrP turnout. FrP bled during this media war campaign and lost 6-8 percentage points, ending on 22,9%.


The almighty Norwegian/Swedish cultural Marxist media corps significantly manipulated the Norwegian election and the cultural Marxist/multiculturalist government (consisting of the Labour Party, Socialist Left Party and Center Party) were allowed to continue their old path of mass-Muslim immigration (colonisation) and Islamisation of Norway.


These types of un-democratic media strategies are not limited to Norway/Sweden but are prevalent in all Western European countries. France is a very good example where media blackouts are increasingly common (even by ministerial instruction).


There is no such thing as a “free press” in Western Europe and there haven’t been since the last cultural conservative (critical of multiculturalism) news agencies where infiltrated during the 1970s. A majority of Western European countries do not have a single cultural conservative news agency left which is contributing to paralyze our democracies by making them dysfunctional. This again contributes to radicalise moderate cultural conservative forces because an increasing number of people feel that we are now living in a repressive totalitarian cultural Marxist/multiculturalist state.


There is no democracy in Western Europe, and Norway and Sweden are two of the world’s most repressive Marxist regimes.



You are not democratic unless you are a cultural Marxist/ multiculturalist?!


Israel's ambassador to Sweden has been summoned[1] by Sweden's foreign office to discuss the diplomatic discord following an article in a national newspaper[2] claiming Israeli soldiers harvest the organs of dead Palestinians. The diplomatic spat has its source in the decision by the Aftonbladet [3] newspaper to publish the article which details allegations of the systematic harvesting of the organs of Palestinian men. The Israeli foreign minister Avigdor Lieberman compared the allegations to old antisemitic lies. "It is regrettable that the Swedish foreign ministry does not intervene when it comes to a blood libel against Jews, which reminds one of Sweden's conduct during World War II when it also did not intervene," an Israeli government statement quoted Lieberman as saying.


Sweden's foreign minister Carl Bildt[4] has rejected calls from Israel for the government to distance itself from the newspaper article. Writing on his blog[5], Bildt argues that Sweden's free press and tradition of free speech are the best defence against "breaches of judgment, bad taste and transgressions of core societal values." "There are calls from some quarters in Israel that we in some way or another should take an official position to distance ourselves from this article or even to intervene to prevent such an article being published," Bildt states. "But our country does not work that way - and neither should it." The foreign minister concludes by defending the importance of protecting free speech.


The fact that the anti-Israeli and anti-American writer Helle Klein, for many years the political editor of Aftonbladet, at her blog[6] also speaks warmly of "free speech" is such an extreme case of hypocrisy that it simply cannot go unanswered. Free speech does not exist in Sweden. Although some countries such as Britain and Belgium are trying hard to claim the title, I would personally rate Sweden as being probably the most totalitarian and politically repressive country in the entire Western world as of 2009, and Aftonbladet has made substantial contributions to this repressive climate. Sweden has huge problems caused by mass immigration, and Muslim immigration in particular, but speaking honestly about this is absolutely taboo among the mainstream media. According to journalist Karen Jespersen[7], Helle Klein has stated that "If the debate is [about] that there are problems caused by refugees and immigrants, we don't want it." Opinion polls have revealed that two out of three Swedes doubt whether Islam can be combined with Swedish society, yet not one party represented in parliament has been genuinely critical of the immigration policies, and there is virtually no real debate about multiculturalism and Islam.


As I have stated in my essay Why Europeans Should Support Israel [8], the demonisation of Israel should be rejected not just because of Israel, but because of Europe. The very same people who are demonising Israelis are also demonising native Europeans who resist the Islamisation of their lands and the state-sponsored colonisation of their countries by alien peoples. The truth is that Israelis defend themselves so that their daughters do not have to suffer rape at the hands of Muslim Jihadists, the way the authorities in Western European countries, and in Sweden in particular, allow to happen every single day. Here are a few relevant quotes from the chapter The Case of Sweden [9], taken from my book Defeating Eurabia [10]. I suggest that Israelis send some of these quotes to Aftonbladet, Helle Klein and Carl Bildt and challenge them with the information it contains:


The Swedish organisation Expo has demonstrated a willingness to “share information” with radical groups of “anti-Fascists” in Antifascistisk Action (AFA). The thugs of AFA in the spring of 2008 destroyed[11] the car of an elderly woman and wrote “ nasse “ (Nazi) on top of it. As it turned out, they picked the wrong car. Yet years of such attacks against private citizens have not prompted the authorities to crack down on their activities.

Leading newspaper Aftonbladet has close ideological ties to the Social Democrats, the country’s dominant party for most of the past century. Helle Klein, its political editor-in-chief from 2001 to 2007, during a demonstration organised by Islamic and anti-racist organisations in December 2006 stood in front of a banner which read “ A Sweden for all - Stop the Nazi violence “ and held a speech warning against Islamophobia in the media. Klein has voiced sympathy for terrorist organisation Hamas[12] in her editorials while warning against the threat posed to world peace by Israeli aggression and the Christian Right in the USA[13]. Hamas is a Fascist organisation openly calling for mass murder of Jews. Violent attacks against Jews in Europe in 2008 are to an overwhelming degree caused by Muslim immigration, which is encouraged by the EU and the national political elites. The irony of warning against “Nazi violence” while showing sympathy for an organisation that wants to finish what the Nazis started apparently doesn’t strike Ms. Klein.

One of Klein’s fellow columnists at Aftonbladet, the long-time Communist Robert Aschberg, is the publisher of Expo magazine. Leading Expo member Charles Westin in October 2007 published the book Brunt! (“brown,” as in “Fascist”), where he let members of AFA contribute some of their intelligence regarding “right-wing extremists,” among them people associated with the legal party the Sweden Democrats. In addition to Mr. Westin, the book was co-authored by Mats Deland, who is a journalist in Aftonbladet. Why is it considered OK that a representative of one of Scandinavia’s largest newspapers, with ties to the country’s largest political party, thus associates himself openly with an organisation known for physically assaulting members of a legal opposition party, even in their private homes?

Before the elections in 2006, the established parties cooperated in boycotting the Sweden Democrats and other “xenophobic” parties. In one of many similar incidents, which extreme Leftists bragged about on the Internet, around 30 members of the SD were attacked during a peaceful, private party outside the town of Växjö. The brave “anti-Fascists” threw tear gas into the building, forcing people outside where they were beaten with iron bars and axes. Open, aggressive and sometimes violent harassment of critics of the country’s immigration policies has been going on for years while the authorities have largely turned a blind eye to the problem. Seemingly encouraged by the silence from the establishment to political violence, extreme Leftists have stepped up their attacks to include mainstream parties. Sweden is witnessing the greatest explosion of street violence in its history, and a woman is raped every two hours. Expo, which is backed by the media and the major parties, has been campaigning against the Sweden Democrats for years. Daniel Poohl from the unelected organisation Expo states[14] that it’s “not undemocratic” to deny the SD access to political influence.

According to Jonathan Friedman, an American Jew working in Sweden for years, “no debate about immigration policies is possible, the subject is simply avoided. Sweden has such a close connection between the various powerful groups, politicians, journalists, etc. The political class is closed, isolated.” The elites are worried to see their power slip away and therefore want to silence critics, for instance the Sweden Democrats, a small party opposed to immigration: “It is a completely legal party, they just aren’t allowed to speak.…In reality, the basis of democracy has been completely turned on its head. It is said: ‘Democracy is a certain way of thinking, a specific set of opinions, and if you do not share them, then you aren’t democratic, and then we condemn you and you ought to be eliminated. The People? That is not democratic. We the Elite, we are democracy.’ It is grotesque and it certainly has nothing to do with democracy, more like a kind of moral dictatorship.”

As Bruce Bawer writes in the article While Sweden Slept [15]: “Sweden Democrats have been the targets of events that recall China’s Cultural Revolution. Staged ‘people’s protests’ by members of the ‘youth divisions’ of other parties have led to the firing of Sweden Democrats from their jobs. A few weeks ago, a junior diplomat was dismissed when it became known that he was a member of the party and had criticised his country’s immigration policy. On several occasions, thugs loyal to the ruling parties have broken up SD meetings and beaten up party leaders.” What do the governments in countries like Norway and Sweden do about it? They continue to fund their Marxist lynch mobs as they are successfully silencing their annoying political rivals.























Also see “2.67 Democracy not working”.




Последнее изменение этой страницы: 2016-04-07; просмотров: 438; Нарушение авторского права страницы; Мы поможем в написании вашей работы! Все материалы представленные на сайте исключительно с целью ознакомления читателями и не преследуют коммерческих целей или нарушение авторских прав. Обратная связь - (0.065 с.)