After Akershus County Deputy Mayor Liv Gustavsen (FrP) attended a Ramadan iftar organised by the Gülen movement, questions have arisen about FrP’s stance on Islam and migrants.

Document has interviewed Jon Helgheim, political advisor to FrP, to get a clarification.

– Akershus county deputy mayor Liv Gustavsen chose to attend a Ramadan Iftar. The Gülen movement was behind the invitation, which Gustavsen accepted. Your question is therefore whether this is now FrP’s new policy towards Islam in Norway?

– Like all other politicians, FrP’s representatives also receive many invitations from companies, organisations and religious communities. Especially as mayor and deputy mayor, you take part in a number of small and large events. You meet many nice people and these meetings are often educational. You don’t have to agree with them politically or do anything more than turn up at these events. Who FrP’s mayors and deputy mayors have dinner with says nothing about our political line. Anyone who has followed FrP knows that we are in favour of a strict immigration policy that in practice abolishes the possibility of gaining asylum in Norway, that we say no to special requirements for Muslims and that we stand firm on retaining our cultural heritage.

– You wrote in a reply to Fredrik Græsvig on X that he was absolutely right about Donald Trump, and you go even further by saying that you were previously wrong about the press writing about how dangerous Trump was after storming Congress. Can you elaborate a little more on what it is that makes you think this, and is this also a position held by FrP? After all, Carl I. Hagen doesn’t think the same thing.

– I didn’t write that I was wrong about the press after the storming, I wrote before the storming. The background to my comment is that I had a statement before the storm that the press was definitely wrong about how dangerous Donald Trump is. Donald Trump has shown through a series of very disturbing actions and statements that the people in the press who warned against this have been proved right. For FrP, it is important to safeguard Norwegian trade and security policy interests in dialogue with both the US and Europe.

– After a major upturn in the polls recently, the latest poll has now given FrP a major setback. The summer will be decisive before the election, and we wonder what FrP will emphasise as its most important issues during the election campaign.

– FrP has made great progress compared to the last general election. The Støre government has no new solutions and will continue with the same policies that have chased value creators out of the country and given Swedish criminals a foothold in Norway. FrP is the only alternative that will recognise the waste of people’s tax money and give people more freedom through lower taxes and fees, increased security by upgrading the Armed Forces and building up the police, as well as providing more care by using all the good forces in health and elderly care and reducing health queues.

– Many of our readers feel insecure about FrP because the party apparently wants to distance itself from those in the population who are nationally conservative. What do you and FrP have to say to this group?

– There is little to suggest that people are unsure of where FrP stands. FrP has a clear policy and the party’s ideological basis is clearly formulated in our party programme. There are only a few people who are very concerned about what you call the ideology, the vast majority are concerned about the policy. FrP wants major tightening of immigration policy, cutting out wasteful aid and useless climate measures, preserving our cultural heritage and does not want authoritarian ideologies or faiths to gain a greater foothold in Norway. FrP is the clearest party on these points and there is no reason for uncertainty.

– J.D. Vance’s speech at the security conference in Germany caused most of the Norwegian delegates there to freeze, and they chose not to applaud after the speech. The main point of the speech was that Europe no longer has the freedom of expression that democracies should have. What do you think of the speech and would you have clapped for it?

– J.D. Vance had several correct points in his speech, especially on immigration. The problem is that he and the entire Trump administration are in a glass house and show clear anti-democratic traits themselves. They don’t recognise election results, they censor and spread factual errors on a number of issues, so it should start with themselves. Another problem is that Vance said the internal problems in Europe are a bigger threat than Russia, for example, and that’s not true. As of now, Russia is the biggest security challenge for Europe. That doesn’t mean, of course, that we shouldn’t also focus on tightening immigration policy, etc.

– Many people in Norway are now very concerned about the large-scale immigration of non-Western migrants to Norway. To put it bluntly, it’s the Muslims that people fear the most. FrP is in favour of freedom of religion, but has expressed scepticism about Islam as a factor in Norway. However, this has now become a fact. During Eid at the end of March, more than 8,000 Muslims gathered to pray and practise their religion right next to Ikea at Furuset in Oslo. Is this something that FrP is familiar with, or not? If the latter, what does the party want to do about this since it is also in favour of religious freedom?

– FrP is in favour of religious freedom and the freedom of the individual. This also means that we will honour the right not to be forced to engage in religious activities. FrP believes, among other things, that the state should not support Muslim religious communities, and we are opposed to prayer calls and other forms of disruptive and intrusive forms of religious practice. FrP is also very sceptical about how some Muslim religious communities engage in both social control and preaching a message that can lead to extremism. We therefore want much better control of Muslim religious communities, including who can be preachers, what kind of extremist message they preach and that they adhere to our Western values and democratic rules. Although we are in favour of freedom of religion, this in no way means that we cannot ensure that religious communities do not break laws and rules.

 

Les også

Document.news encourages our readers to engage in an interesting and polite debate regarding our articles. Please write in English only and read our debate guidelines prior to posting!

Popular articles

Similar articles