Warning to Norwegian Civil Servants: Don’t Criticize Eskil Pedersen

Our Norwegian correspondent The Observer has translated an article about the latest casualty of the Norwegian state’s fierce intolerance for dissident points of view. The translator includes this note:

Here’s another example of the consensus tyranny that exists in Norway. If the person in question had made a less than flattering comment about, say, Fjordman on his Facebook page — in which he compared Fjordman to a high ranking German military officer from WW2 or described him as the ideological mentor of Anders Behring Breivik — there would have been no retribution from the political elites in Norway. Nor would there have been any retribution if the person in question had harassed the FrP (the Progress Party) for their ‘racism’ and right-wing policies, which has become somewhat of a sport in Norway among the über-PC crowd.

However, unfortunately for person in question, he chose Eskil Pedersen, the so-called Coward of Utøya, as his target, one of the ‘rising stars’ and the darling of the political leadership of the Labour Party. Hence an example had to be made.

Eskil Pedersen’s ‘retreat’ from Utøya is a big no-no in Norwegian public discourse. A lid has been clamped securely on top of this delicate subject, and it is not to be removed under any circumstances.

Here are links to an article about Eskil Pedersen’s less than honourable ‘retreat’ from the Island on that fateful day, plus two other articles about Norwegians who have lost their jobs because of critical remarks made about Utøya and the Labour Party:

The translated article from VG.no:

Government employee fired for harassing Eskil Pedersen

One of the stenographers employed by the Norwegian Parliament described AUF leader Eskil Pedersen’s escape from Utøya Island as “child sacrifice” on his Facebook page. The man in question has now been fired from his temporary job as a parliamentary stenographer.

The HR manager and Acting Director of the Norwegian Parliament, Bård Knutzen, has told Dagbladet that the behavior of the employee is in breach of the code of conduct, and that the employee will not be given any more assignments.

The man was working as a substitute stenographer for the Parliament’s Secretary Department, whose duties include taking minutes at meetings and debates in the Parliament.

Will not be given any new assignments

“The Code of Conduct, which has been thoroughly explained to all our employees, stipulates that they are bound by these guidelines even after working hours and as private individuals,” says Bård Knutzen to Dagbladet.

He can reveal that the parliamentary administration will send a letter to the individual informing him that he will not be given any new assignments as a stenographer in the future.

The man told Dagbladet that he expressed himself in a polemic on his closed Facebook page where the comments are only visible to his Facebook friends who consist of approximately 800 individuals.

“Hence, I have not made a public statement about Eskil Pedersen,” he says.

“Clearly a public statement”

Ove Skåra, a spokesperson for the Norwegian Data Protection Authority (Datatilsynet), says to Dagbladet that a comment made to several hundred friends on Facebook is considered a public statement.

“To say something to several hundred friends on Facebook is not the same thing as saying something to four friends at a cafe. A statement that is conveyed to that many individuals is obviously a public statement,” says Skåra.

Eskil Pedersen did not wish to comment on the matter.

One thought on “Warning to Norwegian Civil Servants: Don’t Criticize Eskil Pedersen

  1. From ASIMOV, Isaac, Foundation (originally Doubleday: 1951) Bantam (New York: 2004) hardcover, page 134 (Part III, “The Mayors,” chapter 8)

    A horse having a wolf as a powerful and dangerous enemy lived in constant fear of its life. Being driven to desperation, it occurred to him to seek a strong ally. Whereupon he approached a man and offered an alliance, pointing out that the wolf was likewise an enemy of the man. The man accepted the new partnership at once, and offered to kill the wolf immediately if his new partner would only cooperate by placing his greater speed at the man’s disposal. The horse was willing, and allowed the man to place saddle and bridle upon him. The man mounted, hunted down the wolf, and killed him. The horse, joyful and relieved, thanked the man and said, “Now that our enemy is dead, remove your bridle and saddle and restore my freedom.” Whereupon the man laughed loudly and replied, “Never!” and applied the spurs with a will.

    COMMENTARY: Herein the “horse” is a country’s working class and the “man” is that country’s coterie of “intellectuals” so-called, who hate their country or its culture, in toto or in part. These latter, while privately contemptuous of their “steed,” ride it to power. Once in power, they enact their dreams and schemes, including but not limited to opening floodgates of mass immigration to unassimilable ethnies, whereby to send their “steed” to the metaphorical glue-factory. In all, “Labour” parties are malignant tumors in Bodies Politic unfortunate enough to host them.

Comments are closed.