An Electronic Intifada review uncovers justification that Thor Halvorssen, a owner of a Oslo Freedom Forum, receives poignant appropriation from a same financiers who support a Islamophobes who desirous anti-Muslim Norwegian mass torpedo Anders Behring Breivik. Despite being presented with this evidence, a Norwegian supervision and Amnesty International are embracing Halvorssen, a long-time far-right romantic and a scion of a politically-connected family tied to Venezuela’s US-backed opposition.
This week in Oslo, hundreds of people from around a universe are entertainment for a fifth annual Oslo Freedom Forum, a tellurian rights discussion billed as “a three-day limit exploring how best to plea authoritarianism and foster giveaway and open societies.”
Produced by a New York-based Human Rights Foundation (humanrightsfoundation.org), a eventuality is sponsored by, among others, Norway’s Labor Party supervision (in a form of a Ministry of Foreign Affairs), a City of Oslo, and Amnesty International Norway. Norwegian Foreign Minister Espen Barth Eide is scheduled to broach prepared remarks during a forum.
Oslo is still scarred by a ruthless uproar carried out by a worried nonconformist Anders Behring Breivik, a Norwegian citizen who fashioned himself as a apostolic horseman on a goal to save Europe from a flay of Muslim immigration.
His murdering debauch began on 22 Jul 2011 with a bombing that killed 8 persons and harmed 209 others outward Oslo’s sure supervision building. The assault finished some 25 miles to a north during a summer stay for a girl wing of Norway’s statute Labor Party, where he massacred 69 persons, many of them children and youths.
Breivik insisted a bloodbath was compulsory to stop those he saw enabling mass Muslim immigration — those he called “cultural Marxists” and generally a Labor Party — accusing them of “contributing to a routine of surreptitious informative and demographical genocide.”
The torpedo summarized his views in a 1,500-page manifesto, inventory a far-right Americans who helped radicalize him. They enclosed a many scandalous purveyors of anti-Muslim resentment, such as Jihad Watch owner Robert Spencer, Frank Gaffney of a Center for Security Policy, and Middle East Forum executive Daniel Pipes, whose papers Breivik excerpted during length.
Among a suggestions for “Further Study” supposing by a torpedo were links on YouTube to a 2008 promotion film Obsession: Radical Islam’s War Against a West, that has been promoted as “the singular many absolute square of media over a past 5 years in persuading normal Americans to a Islamist threat” (Fear, Inc.: The Roots of a Islamophobia Network in America, Center For American Progress, 26 Aug 2011, p. 16).
Breivik clearly suspicion it was absolute too and would assistance explain and transparent his ruthless rampage.
It is of open record that a Oslo Freedom Forum receives estimable financial support from a Norwegian government. But usually a small handful of people know that one of a largest donors to a Human Rights Foundation — a author of a Oslo Freedom Forum — are Donors Capital Fund and a associate Donors Trust, Inc.
Donors Capital Fund is a same worried American substructure that spent millions of dollars to comment a placement of millions of copies of Obsession, and that has lavished hundreds of thousands of dollars over a years on a network of maestro Islamophobes that Breivik cited as his inspirations.
Donors Capital Fund is usually one of several vital funders to a Human Rights Foundation that have been among a principal donors or conduits for appropriation to a Islamophobic hatred groups and ideologues who helped radicalize Breivik.
One chairman who positively knew this is Thor Halvorssen.
Oslo Freedom Forum’s worried brainchild
Who is Halvorssen? He is best famous as a owner and CEO of a Human Rights Foundation, where he is listed as a sole staff member. The Oslo Freedom Forum is his brainchild, a confab he has sought to code as “a Davos for tellurian rights.” The thesis of this year’s discussion is “Challenging Power.”
Halvorssen is also a worried activist, film author and scion of Venezuela’s rich chosen whose years of impasse in ultra-conservative politics enabled him to corral a tiny sect of mostly far-right moneymen into bankrolling his Human Rights Foundation.
The Electronic Intifada has performed Internal Revenue Service (IRS) 990 forms filed by a Human Rights Foundation that embody formerly undisclosed information about a donors.
The forms uncover that a Human Rights Foundation perceived approximately $600,000 in donations from a Donors Capital Fund from 2007 by 2011. Based in Northern Virginia, Donors Capital Fund is radically a jelly comment for a cadre of rightist donors who stake a regressive movement.
The Electronic Intifada’s examine of IRS filings by Donors Capital Fund and Donors Trust shows that a Human Rights Foundation perceived $764,950 from 2005 by 2011 from Donors Capital Fund and Donors Trust, all though about $5,000 entrance by a Donors Capital Fund.
“Since a comment handles income from mixed donors and donors names aren’t disclosed, contributions finished by a Donors Capital Fund are formidable to trace,” a Center for American Progress conspicuous in a 2011 landmark news “Fear, Inc.” “Potential donors are compulsory to open a smallest $1 million comment to implement a fund’s services.”
In 2009, Donors Capital Fund channeled $60 million to several regressive causes and from 2009 by 2011 a whopping $21,318,600 “to groups compelling Islamophobia,” according to a Center for American Progress.
Shadowy nonprofit supports Islamophobic film applauded by Breivik
In 2008, Donors Capital donated $17,778,600 to a murky nonprofit called a Clarion Fund — after renamed a Clarion Project (“Mystery of who saved worried ‘radical Islam’ discuss deepens,” Salon, 16 Nov 2010).
The concession paid for a Clarion Fund’s placement of a film Obsession during a tallness of a 2008 presidential discuss — an apparent try to connect Democrats and then-Senator Barack Obama as diseased on terror.
In a film, grainy clips of Nazi girl saluting Adolf Hitler mix into footage of Muslim crowds chanting in unanimity opposite Western imperialism. With explanation from a who’s who of anti-Muslim activists, including Daniel Pipes, a film implies that domestic Islam is today’s chronicle of Nazism, and that between 10 and 15 percent of a world’s Muslim race poses an imminent, existential hazard to a West.
Thanks to this support, some 28 million DVDs of a film were tucked into a Sunday book of internal newspapers and delivered to Americans in pitch states opposite a country. Eventually, a film reached Breivik as good and is applauded in his manifesto.
Breivik cited Pipes during slightest 18 times in his manifesto; in one section, he quoted a far-right academician commenting, “Self-hating Westerners have an out-sized significance due to their distinguished purpose as shapers of opinion in universities, a media, eremite institutions and a arts. They offer as a Islamists’ auxiliary mujahideen.”
Pipes’ Middle East Forum has benefited immensely from a munificence of Donors Capital Fund, reaping $2.3 million from a substructure between 2001 to 2009, according to a Center for American Progress.
In 2010, a Norwegian journal Klassekampen investigated what it referred to as Thor Halvorssen’s “secret funding,” that it suspected was “associated with a right side of a United States.” Halvorssen told contributor Sarah Sorheim: “I accept income from a accumulation of opposite people and environments. But that does not meant we indispensably support their domestic views.”
Sorheim asked him: “why not divulge who your sponsors are?” He deflected, explaining, “Since we got so many courtesy here in Norway, I’m still meditative about either we can divulge a lists.”
Prior to this review by The Electronic Intifada, a full border of Halvorssen’s worried appropriation was unknown. And discordant to a claims he finished to Sorheim and to The Electronic Intifada, his domestic views seem to align orderly with many of his pivotal backers and with those they support.
In an emailed response to The Electronic Intifada, Halvorssen settled that a $600,000 donated to a Human Rights Foundation by Donors Capital Fund from 2007 by 2011 that is disclosed in a Human Rights Foundation’s 2011 IRS filing indeed came from his possess family.
“The Harry Halvorssen Fund is an comment we set adult with Donors Capital/Donors Trust and it is a sure car by that my mom and we make a contributions to [the Human Rights Foundation] and other giveaway pursuits trimming from ecological concerns and scholarships to inner-city children in New York, to equine rescue,” he stated.
None of a income supposing by a Donors Capital Fund, he said, went to support a Oslo Freedom Forum, though he and his mom present apart supports by a Human Rights Foundation to support a Oslo Freedom Forum. “The Harry Halvorssen Fund has never finished any contributions to any film called Obsession,” Halvorssen wrote.
To be sure, a kinds of donor-advised services for vital donors and legacies that Donors Capital Fund provides to vital philanthropists are also offering by many timeless foundations, such as a Chicago Community Trust or a New York Community Trust, as good as other financial institutions.
So since did Halvorssen select to support a Human Rights Foundation and other causes by Donors Capital Fund, that is sinister by a repute as a pass-through for unknown donors to give huge sums to virulently Islamophobic and anti-gay causes?
“My choice of regulating Donors Capital Fund/Donors Trust is shaped on a fact that if we were to pass divided suddenly we know they will unequivocally particularly reside to donor intent,” Halvorssen wrote to The Electronic Intifada. On a website, Donors Trust states that it was determined “to safeguard a vigilant of donors who are dedicated to a ideals of singular government, personal responsibility, and giveaway enterprise” is reputable even after they die.
Halvorssen offering an analogy to explain his motives: “People we competence remonstrate with competence also open a bank comment during Chase Manhattan Bank, where we have a repel card; this doesn’t meant that Chase Manhattan Bank is obliged for their activities or that other business are to lift some kind of common shortcoming for their banking choices.”
But this analogy competence not be exact; on a website, Donors Capital Fund states that usually organizations “approved by a Donors Capital Fund house of directors are authorised to accept grants from donor-advised supports administered by Donors Capital Fund.”
Even if Halvorssen were to be taken during his word about his attribute with Donors Capital Fund, he can't explain since a Human Rights Foundation relies on other pivotal members of a Islamophobia industry’s financial network.
The Sarah Scaife Foundation, one of a 4 foundations tranquil by regressive banker Richard Mellon Scaife, donated $325,000 to Halvorssen’s Human Rights Foundation between 2007 and 2011, according to IRS filings.
According to a Center for American Progress, Scaife’s foundations contributed a towering $7,875,000 to a Islamophobia attention between 2001 and 2009.
Among a vital recipients of Scaife’s income was a David Horowitz Freedom Center, that perceived $3.4 million during a eight-year duration documented in a “Fear Inc.” report.
The David Horowitz Freedom Center happens to be a sure unite of Robert Spencer, a Islamophobic pseudo-scholar who claimed in a video talk with a regressive website Politichicks that a Muslim Brotherhood has penetrated low into President Obama’s White House middle circle. Breivik referenced Spencer’s work no fewer than 162 times in his manifesto.
Then there is a Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, that contributed $145,000 to a Human Rights Foundation from 2007 by 2011, according to IRS forms. As The Electronic Intifada recently reported, a Bradley Foundation has helped compensate a salaries of some of America’s many destructive anti-Muslim agitators. These embody David Horowitz, a creator of “Islamofascism Awareness Week,” Pipes and Frank Gaffney, publisher of conspiratorial pamphlets like his 2010 “Shariah: The Threat to America,” in that he warned that American Muslims were intent in a “stealth jihad” to place a nation underneath a control of “sharia,” or Islamic law.
Breivik cited Gaffney and Horowitz a sum of 9 times in his manifesto.
False-flag swindling theories
Gaffney, for his part, hosted Halvorssen on a 22 Apr 2013 book of Secure Freedom Radio show, introducing him as “a conspicuous male I’ve had a payoff of meaningful for a prolonged time.”
Asked by Gaffney about a new Boston Marathon bombing, allegedly perpetrated by a Chechen-American brothers Tamerlan and Dzokhar Tsarnaev, Halvorssen suggested Russian President Vladimir Putin wanted to feat a bombings. Putin, he said, sought to confuse from “a legitimate government-in-exile” that “wants to demeanour to a West” — a transparent anxiety to a banished Chechen politician Akhmed Zakayev, whom Halvorssen hosted during a Oslo Freedom Forum in 2009.
Gaffney asked Halvorssen, “Did he [Putin] have something to do with this conflict in Boston — that he was regulating Tamerlan Tsarnaev?”
“I have questions about it, Frank,” Halvorssen settled in an fatiguing tone. “I have critical questions.” With his answer, Halvorssen demonstrated a willingness to indulge furious swindling theories that fit his domestic agenda.
Halvorssen’s hard-right libertarian supporter
Rounding out a tiny fast of vital donors to Human Rights Foundation is Peter Thiel, who contributed $535,000 to Halvorssen’s organisation by his personal substructure from 2007 to 2011.
Thiel warranted his happening as a try capitalist, assisting to found Paypal and investing in Facebook. He is also a worried libertarian ideologue who declared, as reported by a Southern Poverty Law Center in 2012, “I no longer trust that leisure and democracy are compatible.” Thiel went on to censure a prolongation of voting rights to women for “hav[ing] rendered a idea of ‘capitalist democracy’ into an oxymoron.”
Besides Halvorssen’s pet tellurian rights project, Thiel has financed a scandalous and now-discredited ACORN video prick by worried filmmaker James O’Keefe.
A Feb 2012 profile of Thiel published by Mark Ames in The Nation conspicuous that a libertarian billionaire “co-authored an anti-affirmative movement book, The Diversity Myth: Multiculturalism and Political Intolerance on Campus — a book that belittles ‘imaginary oppressors’ of minorities, blames homophobia on homosexuals and attacks domestic partnerships.”
Halvorssen presented Thiel with an endowment during a 2010 libertarian film festival, Libertopia, hailing him for “revolutioniz[ing] a financial system.” The following year, he invited Thiel to pronounce during a Oslo Freedom Forum.
“I support a Human Rights Foundation and a Oslo Freedom Forum since their concentration on dissidents engages a egghead discuss as good as a dignified cause,” he remarked to a website The Street (“Peter Thiel Urges Investing in Human Rights,” 20 Jun 2011).
In response to questions about a Human Rights Foundation’s acceptance of support from Scaife, Thiel and other vital donors of Islamophobic and ultra-conservative causes such as a Bradley Foundation, Halvorssen gave this matter to The Electronic Intifada:
Any concession or extend supposed by HRF is finished with a sure bargain that a substructure is giveaway to examine and examine regardless of where such investigations competence lead or what conclusions HRF competence reach. We enthuse appropriation from anyone who cares about tellurian freedom. This does not meant HRF endorses a views or opinions of a donors. In plain language: We are grateful, absolved and unapproachable that we accept support, as this eventually means that a goal is being endorsed. This does not, however, meant we determine [with] a views of those who support us. Likewise, some donors on this list competence eventually remonstrate with a decisions and open statements of HRF. Their inclusion on this list in no approach implies that they determine with all of HRF’s positions or activities.
While Halvorssen takes a lax perspective about a activities of his principal funders, he has opposite standards for where others should get their money.
When actors Hilary Swank and Jean-Claude Van Damme supposed payments to be luminary guest during a birthday celebration of Ramzan Kadyrov, a conduct of a Russian puppet regime in Chechnya, Halvorssen denounced them. “Hilary Swank apparently has a right to acquire a vital interesting a top bidder, though this arrange of dishonesty should be exposed,” he said. “We contingency remember a flaw of Mariah Carey, Nelly Furtado, Beyoncé and 50 Cent [who] were unprotected … singing for Gaddafi’s family and earning millions of dollars for it” (“Hilary Swank, Van Damme slammed for attending Chechen boss party,” Digital Spy UK, 11 Oct 2011).
As for libertarian ideologue Thiel, Halvorssen wrote to The Electronic Intifada: “Peter Thiel is not usually a donor, we cruise him a personal friend. … Peter’s friendship to tellurian rights, preparation and nonviolence are extraordinary. We are anxious to have him as a donor and as a former orator during [Oslo Freedom Forum].”
This year, a Thiel Foundation is listed as a sure supporter of Halvorssen’s forum.
Norwegian government, Amnesty respond
The Electronic Intifada common some of a information about a Human Rights Foundation’s donors with Ragnhild Imerslund, a Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs communications arch and orator for Foreign Minister Eide.
Imerslund concurred that a Norwegian supervision has supposing 800,000 Norwegian kroner ($138,000) to compensate for “participation by Human Rights Defenders from a Global South to a Oslo Freedom Forum 2013,” that she called “an critical locus for deliberating tellurian rights issues.”
Regarding a donors to a Forum’s author and creator, Imerslund pronounced only, “Questions per sources of appropriation for a Human Rights Foundation should be destined to them.”
Similarly, Gerald Kador Folkvord, Political Advisor to Amnesty International Norway, wrote that “To a best of a knowledge, nothing of a sponsors of a Oslo Freedom Forum (mind you, it’s a Forum we are endangered with; who competence or competence not support a classification Human Rights Foundation outward a Forum does not unequivocally regard us as we have no other exchange with them) has been concerned in activities undermining tellurian rights so severely that we couldn’t be partial of an eventuality they are sponsoring.”
“The Sarah Scaife Foundation is not listed among a sponsors of a Oslo Freedom Forum,” Amnesty’s Folkvord added. “When it comes to their support, if any, to The Human Rights Foundation, a latter would have to answer for that.”
Folkvord pronounced that Amnesty had paid for one “human rights defender” to transport to Oslo and, “with a other organizations involved, Amnesty participated in discussions around a module of a Oslo Freedom Forum and suggested issues and speakers.”
The Electronic Intifada asked both a Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Amnesty how they suspicion members of a Norwegian open would respond to a fact that a Human Rights Foundation — a author and begetter of a Oslo Freedom Forum — counted among a many inexhaustible supporters a same donors that means a Islamophobic activists cited by Breivik as inspirations. Neither offering a reply.
The right connections
So how did Halvorssen conduct to secure appropriation from Norwegian supervision sources? And since are supervision officials so dismissive when presented with justification that he is concurrently upheld by rightist army propagating eremite bigotry?
A 26 Nov 2010 news in Norway’s daily Klassekampen offers some probable answers (“Gir millioner til sine egne”).
According to a paper, a Oslo city legislature increasing appropriation for Halvorssen’s Oslo Freedom Forum in 2010 while slicing amicable spending amid a worsening financial situation. Leading a bid to ramp adult open appropriation of a tellurian rights forum was a politician from a Liberal Party named Ola Elvestuen — a hermit of Per Elvestuen.
And who is Per Elvestuen? As Klassekampen revealed, he has been listed as a “coordinator” and “director” of a Oslo Freedom Forum. He is also is a house member of Ny Tid, a repository owned by Halvorssen and a orator for a Halvorssen-owned Hunter Media Inc.
Thanks to a tangled web of high-level connectors and an apparent box of nepotism, a Oslo Freedom Forum has thrived.
Fortunate son of Venezuela’s elite
Halvorssen is a scion of an oligarchic Venezuelan family closely related to a domestic antithesis that shaped opposite recently defunct former President Hugo Chavez. His mother, Hilda Mendoza Denham, a approach successor of Venezuela’s initial dual presidents, is a member of one of her country’s many successful clans.
Halvorssen’s father, also named Thor Halvorssen, was a rich successor who gained control over Venezuela’s telecommunications monopoly. In 1989, then-President Carlos Andres Perez allocated Halvorssen Sr. as Venezuela’s “anti-drug ambassador.” That same year, President Perez’s supervision was obliged for committing one of a misfortune massacres in complicated times: adult to 3,000 persons were killed protesting President Perez’s oppressive International Money Fund-imposed purgation module (“Victims of Venezuela’s Caracazo clashes reburied,” BBC News, 21 Feb 2011).
Halvorssen Sr. is reported to have helped display a tip bank accounts his longtime crony Perez used to misappropriate open money, allegedly earning a rage of a boss and his middle circle.
As Perez sought to deflect off inspection and an electoral challenge, a array of bombs exploded around Caracas. Halvorssen Sr. was immediately arrested and indicted of orchestrating a belligerent tract to manipulate a Venezuelan batch market. He was detained underneath oppressive conditions and usually liberated after 74 days interjection in partial to involvement from Amnesty International.
With his father privileged of all charges, Halvorssen Jr. refers to him currently as a former “political prisoner,” describing him as a force that helped enthuse his seductiveness in tellurian rights. But there was another side to a elder Halvorssen that was wrapped in amour and that stays hidden in mystery.
Besides his purpose as a businessman and supervision official, Halvorssen Sr. was a part-time spirit who, according to a 19 Nov 1993 news by a Associated Press, “cooperated with a CIA” and “was used to flue income to Nicaraguan Contra personality Eden Pastora” (“Trafficker, Alleged Terrorist Penetrated CIA, DEA in Venezuela”).
In her book Hostile Acts, publisher Martha Honey records that Halvorssen Sr. served during a early 1980s as boss of a Committee in Defense of Democracy in Nicaragua, a CIA front organisation “used to convene informal open opinion opposite a Sandinistas …” (p. 237).
A 29 Nov 1993 essay by US News and World Report describes Halvorssen Sr. as a “CIA source” and records that he was also a US Drug Enforcement Agency adviser during a time, though that a organisation eventually cut him loose, citing his bent towards “duplicity and manipulation.” According to a report, Halvorssen Sr. “had surprising ties to and believe of drug traffickers” (“At play in a fields of a spies”).
Just as a father retreated from a general scene, a son began to make his name.
Anti-feminist, anti-environmentalist, anti-Arab
In a 2010 talk with Klassekampen, Halvorssen said, “Personally, we am no worried ideologue, as some have described me. I’m liberal. Period” “Jeg er liberalist”). He described himself in a same terms to The Electronic Intifada.
But a demeanour during a early stages of Halvorssen’s career, that he spent as a regressive user combating happy rights initiatives, feminism and multiculturalism on US college campuses, suggests otherwise.
Like his father, Halvorssen enrolled during a University of Pennsylvania. He initial gained notice in 1994, when he authored a guest explanation for The Daily Pennsylvanian perfectionist that impending students be warned before requesting to a propagandize that “it competence be lethal to live in West Philadelphia,” a mostly African-American area surrounding Penn’s campus.
As editor of a regressive tyro repository Red and Blue, Halvorssen courted debate when a repository ran a Nov 1994 mainstay called “One Man’s Vision of Haiti” that was illustrated with a blueprint of a spell doll. “To a best of my knowledge,” a article’s author wrote, “the usually imports from Haiti we have in this nation are banished dictators and cab drivers.”
The article’s announcement influenced a snub of African Americans and Haitians on campus, eventually call Penn administrators to temporarily repel propagandize appropriation from Red and Blue. For Halvorssen, a occurrence crystallized his clarity that conservatives on campus were an oppressed minority.
He emerged after college as a executive executive of a recent worried organisation called FIRE, or a Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, fortifying devout students opposite charges of anti-gay taste and combating hatred crimes legislation.
FIRE has been saved by dual worried foundations that also support Halvorssen’s tellurian rights mini-empire: a Sarah Scaife Foundation and a John Templeton Foundation, an devout outfit directed by John Templeton Jr., a maestro worried romantic who has donated some-more than $1 million to anathema same-sex matrimony in California. In 2009, HRF noted that a Oslo Freedom Forum “was finished probable in vast partial interjection to a inexhaustible extend from a John Templeton Foundation.”
Right-wing campus operations
Halvorssen also found work during a time as a module executive for a Intercollegiate Studies Institute, another distinguished worried campus operation. Under his direction, a organisation cursed a investiture of a women’s studies module during Yale University, angry in an 1 Apr 1998 press recover that a module “delves into a many radical issues of belligerent feminism and homosexuality while totally ignoring normal womanlike roles.”
Halvorssen’s domestic sovereignty stretched with his initial of a Moving Picture Institute, a libertarian film association that constructed “Mine Your Own Business.” Financed by a Canadian mining company, a film was promoted as “the world’s initial anti-environmentalist documentary” (“A Maverick Mogul, Proudly Politically Incorrect,” The New York Times, 19 Aug 2007). The Moving Picture Institute perceived some-more than $300,000 by Donors Capital Fund and Donors Trust from 2005 by 2011, according to those organizations’ IRS filings.
Next, Halvorssen oversaw a creation of a 2007 documentary called Indoctrinate U (the whole film is on YouTube). The film facilities an pledge regressive filmmaker named Evan Coyne Maloney erratic around campuses attempting to survey confused propagandize administrators and poking fun during feminist students who had determined women’s centers on their campuses.
Towards a finish of Indoctrinate U, Daniel Pipes and ultra-Zionist academician Martin Kramer aspect as articulate heads, warning that Arab donors have been secretly running a anti-American bulletin of university departments.
Kramer also appears on a pages of Breivik’s declaration creation remarkably identical statements: a torpedo quotes him aggressive a Palestinian-American academician Edward Said and angry that “academics were so rapt with ‘Muslim Martin Luthers’ that they never got around to producing a singular critical examine of bin Laden and his complaint of America.”
Campaign for Venezuela regime change
In 2004, Venezuela’s US-backed domestic antithesis mislaid a hard-fought 2004 referendum directed during recalling Chavez, whom it deliberate deceptive from a start. The voting formula were approved by former US President Jimmy Carter’s Carter Center as “reflect[ing] a will of a Venezuelan electorate.” According to a Carter Center, “balloting day was conducted in an sourroundings probably absent of any assault or intimidation.”
However, during an progressing antithesis criticism convene perfectionist Chavez’s ouster, Halvorssen’s mom was shot and wounded, allegedly by a Chavez loyalist.
It was afterwards that Halvorssen claimed to comprehend that “defending [college] students’ rights while there were people in Venezuela being shot for conflicting with a government” was “a small absurd” (“My cooking with Thor,” The Pennsylvania Gazette, March-April 2008).
He embarked on an general discuss for regime change in Venezuela, with his Human Rights Foundation heading a way.
In 2005, Halvorssen took to a neoconservative Weekly Standard to paint Chavez as an anti-Semitic tyrant seeking to settle a “resistance bloc” that placed a US, Europe and Israel in grave danger. Halvorssen called for “democratic alternatives to Chavez,” describing him as a pivotal believer of “terrorist groups in South America and apprehension sponsors in a Middle East.”
That same year, Halvorssen appeared as a guest on a radical worried televangelist Pat Robertson’s radio module The 700 Club. A week before hosting Halvorssen, Robertson had urged a US to “take him [Chavez] out,” declaring, “if he thinks we’re perplexing to murder him, we consider that we unequivocally ought to go forward and do it.”
When Robertson denied job for Chavez’s assassination — an apparent fabrication — Halvorssen leaped in to urge his host. “The chairman who began this, who started a judgment of assassination for domestic reasons, was in fact Hugo Chavez, and his unfamiliar apportion is a former riotous terrorist,” Halvorssen told Robertson. “They fundamentally have no station to impugn anyone who finished remarks that like — we know, that were misinterpreted, like a ones we made.”
Halvorssen’s mania with overthrowing Chavez deepened after a boss was re-elected. In 2008, Halvorssen railed opposite a actor and film author Danny Glover in an editorial for Fox News, accusing him of “coddling Chavez” for usurpation financing from a Venezuelan supervision for dual films in development. He went on to credit Hollywood supporters of Chavez of providing “a superb boost” to a spirit of Palestinian “terrorists.” The source for Halvorssen’s surprising explain was Aaron Klein, a author for a far-right swindling site WorldNetDaily (“Hollywood A-Listers Prove Ignorance in Supporting Hugo Chavez,” 31 Mar 2008).
Venezuelan terror-sympathizer hired by Human Rights Foundation
Also in 2008, Halvorssen’s Human Rights Foundation hired Aleksander Boyd, a Venezuelan antithesis deputy shaped in London. Boyd was a scandalous upholder of terrorism opposite Venezuela’s inaugurated government, carrying created a following on his website:
“I wish we could decapitate in open plazas [Venezuelan politicians] Lina Ron and Diosdado Cabello. we wish we could woe for a rest of his remaining existence Vice President Jose Vicente Rangel … we wish we could fly over Caracas slums throwing a passed bodies of a criminals that have broken my nation … Only barbarous practices will vacate them, many a same approach [Genghis] Khan did. we wish we was him.” He after declared, “Re: advocating for assault approbation we have mentioned in many occasions that in my perspective that is a usually resolution left for traffic with Chavez” (“Friends in low places,” The Guardian, 1 Sep 2007).
When a Norwegian repository Manifest criticized Halvorssen’s employing of Boyd in a 12 May 2010 exposé, Halvorssen responded, “We knew of his comments before we hired Boyd and asked him about these comments and he stated, plainly, that it was an entrance in his dream diary that was online.” He combined that Boyd left a Human Rights Foundation in 2009.
In 2010, Halvorssen invited his initial cousin, a Venezuelan antithesis personality Leopoldo Lopez, to pronounce during a Oslo Freedom Forum. Lopez, a Harvard-educated mayor of a rich district in Caracas, was among a politicians who sealed as witnesses in a new supervision after Chavez was quickly suspended in a unsuccessful US-backed manoeuvre in 2002.
Lopez is a son of a former oil executive — Halvorssen’s aunt — who allegedly funnelled increase from a state-run oil association into his new domestic party, heading to crime charges that placed his domestic ambitions in peril, as a Associated Press reported in Feb (“Leopoldo Lopez, Opponent Of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, Faces Corruption Charges In Venezuela”).
Described by a US embassy in Venezuela as “vindictive, and power-hungry” though also as “a necessity,” Lopez received vast sums of financial support from a US government-funded National Endowment for Democracy.
At a 2009 Oslo Freedom Forum, Lopez was a presented as a “human rights leader,” appearing during an eventuality that had been graced by Nobel Prize target Elie Wiesel and Nobel hopeful Vaclav Havel. He influenced his assembly with lofty tongue about peace, democracy and a entrance call of freedom, casting a Venezuelan antithesis as “David opposite Goliath.” “We know that we will overcome,” Lopez proclaimed, “we know that change will come in Venezuela.”
Noting that Lopez’s coming during a Oslo Freedom Forum was lonesome distant some-more heavily in Venezuelan media than in Oslo, where it was probably ignored, Manifest indicted Halvorssen of regulating his tellurian rights confab for a purpose of “whitewashing Leopoldo Lopez … to settle a genuine contender for a Venezuelan presidency.”
The repository described a Oslo Freedom Forum as a deftly crafted “Washing Machine.”
The weight of knowing
Are those who collected on theatre during a tellurian rights “Davos” being used to varnish a distant domestic bulletin of an desirous regressive user with ties to narrow-minded plutocrats and conspiratorial Islamophobes? Do they know about Halvorssen’s genuine history, about his funders and friends among America’s far-right? Most competence not.
Unfortunately for a Norwegian Foreign Ministry and Amnesty International, they are not among those with a oppulance of pleading ignorance.
Presented with a revelations unclosed by The Electronic Intifada, they discharged them as immaterial, and even irrelevant. In a city still scarred by Breivik’s rampage, it is tough to suppose that these contribution could be so simply cleared away.
Ali Abunimah contributed examine to this article.
Max Blumenthal is an award-winning publisher and bestselling author.