Dear Magnus,

I sincerely doubt that you speak for "alle i Norge" - because you certainly don't speak for me (despite my English language, I do live in Norway).

Dagbladet have published an interview with a muslim man living in Norway saying some pretty worrying things. He says he wants Norway to become an Islamic country; he supports women being covered from head to toe in niqabs/burkas; and that our laws should be derived from the Quran. If this man had his way, 50% of the Norwegian population would be forced into wearing cloth bags and presumably beaten if they try to escape. This man has no respect for women; and he has no respect for our civilized western values and ideals. He paints a frightening vision of life: a vision which is fundamentally hostile to our core democratic values. A vision which he wants to take over Norway.

Muslims with this attitude living in the West should concern us before anything else - before Palestine, Israel or any other troubled part of the world. The truth is that we have people living amongst us - here in Norway - that have a hatred for us and our way of life, and they think their hatred is divinely warranted. They aren't open for discussion or rational argument. They simply "know they are right" because that is what their holy book tells them.

The Quran explicitly states that women can be beaten by their husbands; the core doctrine of Islam is to kill, convert of subjugate non-believers; it contains justification for holy war and for suicide bombings. It is time we speak honestly about this - especially since these awful views seem to be spreading into our peaceful, democratic societies.

I'm all for tolerance, and I am as peaceful as they come - but I have no idea why you think that Dagbladet should not be publishing articles like this. Dagbladet - and more newspapers - should be writing more about this problem. We have frighteningly intolerant religious lunatics living amongst us that want our way of life destroyed. And I want this scary fact to be written about and discussed as the worrying problem that it is, not ignored or played-down, as you seem to want it.

I look forward to hearing from other people about this issue :-)

Cheers.

The point is: He will not have his way. End of discussion!

Your original post seemed to be making a complaint towards Dagbladet for publishing an interview with a muslim fundamentalist living here in Norway. You didn't think that Dagbladet should be publishing such stuff, and claimed they only did it to sell more papers.

I gave several reasons why I think they should have published it, and why we would all be wise to continue discussing the very real threat of Islamic violence that could well be creeping into our peaceful and democratic country. I felt I made a pretty good case why these discussions are an important part of our discourse.

You then evaded every single one of my points and arguments, and simply asserted that your word was the "end of discussion". Sorry, but that isn't how discussions work :-)

I do agree with you that "he won't get his way" - but that is no reason not to publish the interview in a newspaper. If we are living side-by-side with people that want to "kill, convert or subjugate" us, then we should absolutely be talking about it in newspapers, public forums, and even places like facebook (although people can censor their own profiles there).

I am still eagerly awaiting a single reason you can put forward that will convince me why we should not be discussing these things in public, and why you think Dagbladet should not be publishing interviews and articles that are relevant to this discussion.

Actually, my last answer sums it up.

I think your answer was flippant and, more importantly, wrong.

You simply say that these people "will not get their way" and then walk away with your eyes closed. But the reality is that Islamic people like him are already subjecting women here in Norway to genital mutilation, and there have even been "honor" killings in the name of Islam. That's right: here in Norway! In England the problem is even worse. In Islamic countries the problem is so widespread that it doesn't bear thinking about. Go and ask Ayaan Hirsi Ali. They "will not get their way"? These people are already getting their way!

I say it is about time we start discussing it, honestly and openly.

You say it should not be discussed, you then complain to newspapers when it is discussed, and you offer no argument to back up your position.

Ok! We have an expression in Norway :"Gjøre en høne av en fjær". This is actually what Dagbladet is doing. They should focus on the real problems in the society, instead of making them up.

You might want to read what I actually wrote, compare it with what you are writing, and then think about if you are represented in the "alla i Norge" - and if that is what iam saying.

Oh, I see - you don't think this man and his belief system is a "real problem"?

• Believing it is okay to force women to live their lives inside cloth bags;
• Believing that it is okay to beat your wife because a "holy" book says so;
• Wanting to replace our hard-fought democracy and freedom of expression with a stone-age 7th century Sharia law;

I would say all of these are "real problems"!

This is the same belief system that the 9/11 bombers had, and the London and Madrid bombers. This time, he is in Norway. On our doorsteps.

You want the problem to be ignored, and actually make a public complaint when it is discussed in a newspaper. You cynically suggest the newspaper is only publishing it to sell more papers.

I say we have a duty not to ignore it; we have a duty to discuss it.

There is absolutely no reason to blow up a picture of extreme islamists on a daily basis in a country where these people have proved years ago that they might even be friendlier and less hostile when push comes to shove then the ethnic norwegians themselves. This was - for those observing - clearly demonstrated during the protests against certain Muhammed-drawings. If you recall.

Besides Alex, lets say for the sake of argument that you were a scotsman, do you think it would be fair then to have daily stories of drunk scots raving in our streets or do you think this would paint an unfair picture? By the way there is some scottish blood in me so no offense.

Actually, the only guy that have done something like that in Norway have some similarities with your way of thinking. He, as you, feared the same things like you. I dont think we should give him, or his friends in belief any more time in the media either.

Andre: I do not support blowing things out of proportion, and I do not support newspapers creating false sensationalist stories to increase sales. I simply think that it is a bigger issue than we often admit, and it should be discussed. If someone tries to say we should not be discussing it, I will simply argue that we should discuss it - and offer reasons why.

Magnus: I am appalled you would make that comparison, and think you should be ashamed of yourself for doing so. You know very well that I am peaceful, rational, and that violence abhorrs me - throughout this whole thread I have argued that the best response to something that I perceive as a threat is discussion. I am pro-discussion. For you to then compare me to a mass-murderer is way below the belt, and has lowered the whole discussion.

I bet there is some muslims who would say the same to you, as you say to me. You are starting by writing something from the Quran,by doing so including some more than the few muslims with extremist views. Rawelling about "on our doorstep" and other baloney. Why is it so different that I compare your toughts with the only terrorist (who also feared Islam) who actually made an attack in Norway, from what you are doing?

But that´s not the issue at hand Alex, the issue at hand is exactly the fact that things get blown totally out of proportion. And this does nothing good at all, but on the contrary it just blurs down the whole discussion to a point of being almost useless and counterproductive.

Presis mitt poeng! Dette er ikke laget for å fremme en debatt, for det finnes ingen å debattere mot. Fremstillingen er overdrevet og det finnes overhode ingen grunn til å slippe folk til i mediene utelukkende fordi de er tullinger.

It seems we are all in agreement that we don't want to see things get blown out of proportion.

But then it comes down to: exactly when should it be reported in newspapers to create a serious debate for a serious problem, and exactly when are the newspapers exaggerating? This is more subjective, and more difficult to answer. A case could be made that we have a problem if only one person thinks in that way. I guess when Magnus said that the interview was "ikke laget for å fremme en debatt, for det finnes ingen å debattere mot" - that is his opinion (that there isn't any problem worth debating over), whereas I would be leaning towards the other side - it could be more of a problem that we admit, and there may be more people like that that we think, and is a discussion well worth having (and regularly). The phrase "gjøre en høne av en fjær" is relevant here (in English: "make a mountain out of a molehill") and this really is something worth debating over! Let's say for the sake of argument that these "clowns" are harmless and pose no threat - then I would ask you, at what point should we start taking them seriously?

Magnus: enough with the Breivik thing already. The reason that comparison is unfair and below the belt is so plainly obvious that I am amazed I need to spell it out: my means of getting my message across is by peaceful and honest debate and discussion - whereas his was to murder innocent children. Let's move on without unfairly bringing me down to that level please.

...oppfattet jeg var et poeng her. Jeg ser at Alex York ikke er en av de som er lei av å høre om.

Jeg lurer på om Alex York er interessert i å høre om ikke-ekstremistiske, fredelige tronde uten xenofobi eller rabiate ideer om utslettelse av #denandre?

For egen del syns jeg Dagbladet har melka kua tørr. Både føljetongen om terroristen fra Frogner og fotfølgingen av rabiatene fra Oslo Øst og Larvik bidrar til å flytte fokus vekk fra de som utgjør den store, store majoriteten, og den store, store viljen til sameksistens, samhandling, demokrati og debatt.

For det blir ingen debatt av Dagbladets melking. Det blir fronter.

In USA the celebrated American publisher Lulu sells a book called "Defeating Eurabia" by an author called Fjordman. He is presented by the following words: "The preeminent essayist, historian, and one of the leading lights of the counter jihad movement, Fjordman, has released his first book. Europe's most reliable witness and modern historian has completed a compendium of analysis and data of the islamazation of Europe". Do you think Fjordman represents these "our" deeprooted values you speak about in your comment?

Magnar: if you are trying to trick me into saying that Fjordman is my hero, please grow up. I know who Fjordman is, and I know which other person idolized him. I've never read Fjordman, and don't intend to.

Evy: Would I like to hear about non-extremist, peaceful immigrants who come here and work hard to integrate and cooperate? No, not really. I don't need to read news articles about that. I can see it all around me, every day: the vast majority of immigrants come here in peace, and are valued by society, and society values them. I see peaceful people everywhere - peaceful Norwegians, and peaceful non-Norwegians who are enjoying a peaceful life here in this great country. I don't need to read a story about that. I live that story every day. I am proud to put myself in that group of peaceful non-Norwegians who have found a new life here. I am proud to be a part of that story.

But there seems to be two points at hand: the first is whether Dagbladet are "milking the cow dry", as you put it. Perhaps they are. Perhaps not.

The second point is the one I am more interested in, which no one seems to be responding to: it only takes a tiny minority to screw everything up for the rest of us. This Bhatti guy who wants Sharia law implemented across Norway has a worldview which is quite simply incompatible with our democratic values. That is a fact. Sam Harris (highly recommended, BTW) frequently points this out: these kinds of people have a 7th century belief system, in a context where we have 21st century destructive technology at hand. It is the elephant in the room that we would all be wise to talk about.

In fact, this whole discussion doesn't need to have an Islamic spin on it. I am simply pointing out that we live in a world where one person could screw up a lot of things for a lot of people. It could be an Islamic suicide bomber; it could be the CEO of Goldman Sachs; the US president; the North Korean "dear leader"; a lone Christian fanatic.

The goal should be to build a sustainable civilization where we can all live in happiness together. We won't reach that goal if we have more people like this Bhatti guy. We won't reach that goal by pretending he doesn't exist, either. The means of getting there - is discussion, and open-ended conversation, and reason.