Western Norway July 2026

How Did a Seat on the Fredrikstad Municipal Council Become a Platform for Cross-Border Hacking, Blackmail, and Ethnic and Religious Abuse?

The Values and Ethical Principles That Define These Norwegian Institutions

In Norwegian political culture, the Socialist Left Party (SV) is widely recognized as one of the strongest advocates for human rights, the fight against racism, the protection of minorities, and social equality. Therefore, the emergence of a candidate from this established party whose conduct stands in direct contradiction to these principles represents a serious blow to its political and ethical credibility.

The Fredrikstad Municipal Council (Bystyret) represents the highest local political authority responsible for managing public affairs and municipal resources with integrity. Its members are bound by a strict Code of Ethics (Etiske retningslinjer), which requires an unwavering commitment to four fundamental pillars: safeguarding public trust, combating racial and religious discrimination, preventing abuse of power and conflicts of interest, and prohibiting intimidation and harassment (Trakassering).

Any regression by a political actor into hate speech or digital blackmail does not merely constitute a violation of criminal law; it represents a fundamental collapse of that individual's representative legitimacy and a blatant breach of the ethical principles upon which the municipality was established principles intended to protect the dignity of its citizens and preserve civil peace.

Dialogforum Østfold is established as a platform for interfaith dialogue and multicultural engagement, with the aim of strengthening community, tolerance, and mutual respect among different religious and social groups. The forum’s core values are founded on dialogue, mutual understanding, and cooperation across religious and cultural boundaries.

As an organization operating within the field of interfaith dialogue and social cooperation, this role carries a responsibility to promote:

• Combating racism, hate speech, and discrimination by upholding human dignity, respect, and equality for all individuals.

• Promoting integration and dialogue between different religious and social communities, while contributing to the development of mutual trust and understanding.

• Demonstrating moral and social responsibility, with representatives and members expected to uphold the values of tolerance, respect, and accountability both in public and private contexts.

The Scandalous Paradox of Three Pillars Betrayed by Misuse

The most striking and disturbing paradox lies in the presence of a single candidate occupying positions connected to these three pillars of public trust, while his conduct stands in direct opposition to the principles they represent:

• The Dialogue Forum (Dialogforum):
  Established to build bridges between communities, promote dialogue, and reject hatred and discrimination.

• The Fredrikstad Municipal Council (Bystyret):
  Governed by strict ethical standards and a responsibility to protect the dignity and trust of its citizens.

• The Socialist Left Party (SV):
  Whose declared mission is to combat racism and defend human rights.

The presence of a candidate who engages in blackmail and intimidation, who expresses blatant racial contempt ("Gypsies, thieves, rootless"), and who attacks religious communities, while holding a role within this dialogue forum, serving as an elected representative on the Fredrikstad Municipal Council, and representing the long-established SV party, constitutes a profound and alarming contradiction between his conduct and the very principles these institutions were established to uphold.

Such conduct represents a disturbing exploitation of values of tolerance and ethical responsibility, turning principles intended to protect dignity and social trust into tools that can be misused to conceal harmful actions and digital abuses.

The Fall of the Masks and the Return of the Claws of Cross-Border Bullying

The Fall of the Masks and the Return of Cross-Border Bullying

It was not merely a slip of the tongue, nor a momentary mistake made behind the screen of a social media account on the X platform in a moment of anger. Rather, the evidence points to a systematic digital intimidation campaign, documented through more than 120 posts and statements containing allegations of defamation, blackmail, threats, and sexual, racial, sectarian, and religious degradation.

In the conduct and public discourse of the (SV) party candidate, democratic principles appeared to be reduced to nothing more than a mask a fragile cover concealing a pattern of alleged misconduct, including defamation, manipulation, and actions that caused harm and distress to individuals.

This cover was shattered during the first investigative confrontation, exposing what can be described as a pattern of "cross-border bullying." As his ability to withstand independent journalistic scrutiny weakened, he resorted to increasingly aggressive methods of defence, methods incompatible with the ethical standards expected in public life.

The dignity of families did not escape this pattern of hostility, nor did the sanctity of the deceased, as statements were directed toward individuals and their relatives in ways that crossed lines of respect and human dignity. Innocent third parties were also drawn into conflicts in which they had no involvement, with threats targeting their reputation and privacy, alongside the use of digital surveillance methods and account intrusion.

All of this occurred amid what has been described as a lack of effective institutional response, leaving behind statements filled with primitive street language that reduces human beings to their origin, family background, sectarian identity, and personal honour.

Among this extensive collection of more than 120 documented statements, we present examples that speak for themselves statements published publicly by the candidate himself before public opinion.

The First Post (Exporting the Poisons of Sectarian and Tribal Contempt):

"The Ameli clan of Jabal Amel are a group of [insulting term] gypsies from India to Iran to Lebanon, a bunch of thieves who lived in the mountain because no one wanted them to live near them, and then they were named after this mountain because they had no clan or religion. Then they went to Najaf because there was good money in studying religion, and they are all [insulting term]."

Documents of Dishonor: Selected Statements from a Documented Record of Digital Abuse, Threats, Defamation, and Hate Speech

Among more than 120 public statements collected from the candidate’s public accounts a candidate who serves as a deputy member of the Fredrikstad Municipal Council, a member of Dialogforum Østfold, and a representative of the Socialist Left Party (SV) are statements ranging from blackmail, threats, cyber-piracy, and sexual harassment targeting individuals and families, to blatant ethnic and sectarian degradation. We present this publicly available post as a documented example. This post reflects the nature of a continuing pattern of conduct that has notably received questionable protection and administrative facilitation from local police elements, providing him with a shield against accountability:

The text of the post as publicly broadcast on the X platform:

"Jabal Amel, or the mountain of shit, a bunch of thieving gypsies and scumbags from India to Iran to Lebanon. They settled in the mountain because no one likes to live near them, and were named after this mountain because they have no tribe or religion. Then they went to Najaf because there is good money in studying religion, and they are all crooks and losers."

In this post, the candidate who continues to hold membership in the Fredrikstad Municipal Council, the (SV) party, and Dialogforum Østfold explicitly targets the Amili community and clans with connections to Iraq and Lebanon through severe hate speech. He turns his political position into a platform for spreading cross-border hostility and vilification under the attention of local authorities.

The Second Post (Hollow Racial Narcissism to Intimidate Opponents):

"Hey Ba'arour, you louse... you fart-maker, look at my great-grandfather Sahl bin Saad Al-Sa'idi, the authentic Arab who lived during the time of the Prophet and Hussein. You are of unknown origin, and if you had an origin they would not have named you after a mountain. Gypsies who came from India, then to Iran, then to Lebanon, and then to Najaf. While we are from Mecca to Medina to great Iraq."

From the perspective of Forensic Linguistics and Sociopolitical Analysis, this public comment published via the handle of the candidate, a deputy municipal council member, and a representative in the Dialogue Forum (Dialogforum) for the Socialist Left Party (SV) serves as definitive evidence of systemic hate speech.

The text can be deconstructed into the following critical dimensions:

The Legal & Forensic Dimension (Hate Speech and Discrimination)

From a legal standpoint, and specifically in reference to Section 185 of the Norwegian Penal Code (Straffeloven § 185) concerning hate speech, this text falls squarely within criminal thresholds for several reasons:

• Ethnic Vilification Based on National Origin: Utilizing the term "gypsies" as a derogatory tool for ethnic denial, and systematically stripping an entire population of their geographic and national identity by fabricating an migratory trajectory of displacement ("from India to Iran to Lebanon to Najaf"), is a textbook attempt to dehumanize individuals based on their perceived lineage.

• Incitement to Group Hatred: The text does not merely assault an individual in a private dispute; rather, it broadens into an attack on entire social, cultural, and geographic hubs (Jabal Amel and Najaf). This elevates the conduct from personal defamation to public, collective incitement against specific ethnic and sectarian demographics.

The Psycho-Social Dimension (Ethnocentrism and Tribal Narcissism)

The text exposes a deeply rooted cognitive framework of Ethnocentrism and primitive social tribalism:

• The Hierarchy of Ancestry and Lineage: The writer relies on a defensive mechanism of "ancestral supremacy," weaponizing historical associations ("my great grandfather Sahal bin Saad Al-Saadi", and linking himself to Mecca, Medina, and Great Iraq) as a tool to establish biological and human superiority over the victim, who is labeled as having "unknown origins."

• Direct Contradiction with Socialist Ideology: This rhetoric represents an absolute moral and ideological betrayal. While the writer represents a Norwegian leftist party (SV) whose foundational platform fights against classism, racism, and ethnocentrism, the comment proves that the writer harbors a rigid, tribal consciousness that evaluates human worth based on family trees and geography, rather than citizenship and human dignity.

The Institutional & Political Dimension (Breach of Public Trust)

Given his role as a member of the official Dialogue Forum (Dialogforum Østfold), whose core mandate is to counter hate speech and promote social cohesion:

• Undermining Social Order: The resort to street-level, vulgar profanity (" بعرور قملة / louse-ridden dropping", "يالضارطي / you flatulent one") by a public dialogue official marks a severe degradation of public discourse. It provides objective proof of his utter disqualification from facilitating community integration or social dialogue.

• The Illusion of Immunity: Broadcasting such severe, documented racism openly on a global platform like (X) reflects a dangerous sense of impunity. It demonstrates that the council member operates under the assumption that his connections or procedural links with certain local police elements shield him from the legal and political consequences of his actions.

Article 185 Under the Microscope of Complicity: Who Grants the Candidate Immunity?

Before these lines loaded with primitive racism, Norwegian law stands firmly against them; Article 185 of the Norwegian Penal Code (Straffeloven § 185), which concerns "hate speech and discrimination," clearly criminalizes any public statement that contains an insult (forhåne) or promotes contempt and degradation (ringeakt) against any individual or group based on their race, national origin, religion, or beliefs, with penalties reaching up to 3 years of imprisonment.

Since the perpetrator here is a political candidate, Article 77 (paragraph j) requires the punishment to be aggravated to the maximum extent due to a breach of special trust and the shock caused to society (brudd på en særlig tillit).

However, the greatest shock and the blatant flaw do not lie in his personal conduct, but rather in the strange security umbrella that was secretly woven around him to exempt him from punishment by parties within the police apparatus!

Linda Tengesdal’s Leap Over the Law: When Hate Speech Becomes "Mere Linguistic Analysis

Here, the true face of administrative and legal negligence within the Eastern Police District (Fredrikstad politidistrikt ) emerges. In the decision issued on 30 June 2026 under case number 17229053, the police prosecutor and legal counsel "Linda Tengesdal" (Linda Tengesdal) coldly bypassed the provisions of the law in order to close the case under the justification of the absence of "sufficient reason to initiate an investigation" pursuant to Section 224 of the Criminal Procedure Act!

In her reply memorandum dated 2 July 2026, Tengesdal justified her disregard for the blatant evidence by stating:

"It is difficult to follow up on the victim's report... much of the content appears to be merely personal linguistic analyses! The content is also not of a nature that would constitute threats punishable by law!"

How did the eye of the law, through prosecutor Tengesdal, fail to see clear statements that insulted honor and accused an entire sect of theft, inferiority, and ignorance? How did explicit hate speech criminalized under Article 185 become merely "personal linguistic analyses" in the mind of the police prosecutor?!

The matter did not stop there; rather, the documents revealed a suspicious security loophole inside the Fredrikstad Police Station. When the journalist proved that the candidate had hacked his accounts, as the accused himself had admitted, Tengesdal defended him coldly, stating:

"The accused was granted access to the case file (Saksinnsyn), and personally attended Fredrikstad Police Station on 1 July 2026 to read the file, and from there he became aware of the speech!"

This admission proves that the police apparatus itself provided the accused with rapid facilitation; while the journalist was under the pressure of digital threats and blackmail, the police corridors were opened for the alleged blackmailer to access the victim's files and security-related actions, before he fled again to continue his threats!

Preserving Integrity and Protecting Society: Journalism Will Not Submit to Bargaining

This series of successive security decisions places profound questions before the people of Fredrikstad, its citizens, and voters: How can the Eastern Police District grant unwritten immunity to a person who publicly expresses some of the most degrading forms of sectarian racism and racial contempt? And has Article 185 of the Penal Code become frozen and filed away under the category of "linguistic analyses" when it concerns a person benefiting from questionable institutional facilitation?

Fredrikstad Municipality, as a public institution governed by values of integrity and responsibility, must not be left as a shield behind which those who borrow street language to blackmail and defame others can hide. Exposing the legal complicity of the Eastern Police District, its police lawyer "Linda Tengesdal", and the police officer complicit with her is not merely a defense of a victim; rather, it is a necessary step to protect the public sphere and preserve the integrity of public service and municipal institutions from the poisons of blackmail and verbal bullying.

Throughout life, a person repeatedly stands before tests that do not only measure his ability to endure, but also reveal the true nature of his principles. Faces skilled in blackmail may cross his path, others who practice fraud, and a third group that sees the law merely as a tool used when it serves its interests and disabled when it restricts its desires. In such decisive moments, people divide between those who surrender to fear and lose their freedom, and those who make steadfastness their position and truth their weapon, causing conspiracies to collapse before their patience and faith.

As for me, my profession in investigative journalism has placed me in confrontation with complex files and networks of influence, and has required me to engage in legal and ethical battles that were not easy. Throughout that journey, I was subjected to repeated attempts to damage my reputation, pressure me, and distort my work through various means. However, the allegations raised against me did not withstand the measure of fair justice, and the law, whenever it was allowed to operate independently, remained the decisive factor that dispelled claims and restored rights to those entitled to them.

Ignoring a blackmailer may, in some circumstances, be more powerful than entering into an argument with him that grants him the attention he seeks. But the matter goes beyond the limits of a personal dispute when serious questions arise about the performance of institutions that are supposed to protect the law, or when public status, political position, or complicit administrative and security influence are used as tools to pressure those who hold opinions or to undermine the independence of journalism.

At this point, the discussion is no longer related to a personal disagreement, but becomes a public matter affecting the essence of the rule of law. Trust in public institutions is not preserved through slogans, but through transparency, accountability, and equality before the law. The exploitation of any public position to influence freedom of expression or intimidate journalistic work does not harm individuals alone; rather, it threatens the trust upon which the entire social contract is built.

Throughout this journey, I have faced attempts that I considered violations of my rights and the independence of my position, and all forms of cheap bargaining were rejected, because journalism, in its essence, is not a profession managed through the logic of deals, but rather a mission built upon independence, integrity, and commitment to the truth. Therefore, I stand today holding firmly to my right to tell the facts as they are, free in the face of every attempt at intimidation, and to demand accountability wherever its grounds exist, believing that a word supported by evidence remains stronger than influence, and that the truth, no matter how long it is concealed or how much those complicit attempt to bury it, ultimately finds its way into the light.

"An official correspondence from Fredrikstad Municipality confirms that Salah Hassan Al-Saadi remains a deputy member of the Fredrikstad Municipal Council (Bystyret) for the 2023–2027 term, and also serves as a deputy member of both the Health Committee (Helseutvalget) and the Planning Committee (Planutvalget). The municipality confirms that this status remains valid as of today."

Hello!
We can confirm that Salah Hassan Al-Saadi was elected as a deputy member of the Fredrikstad Municipal Council (Bystyret) for the period 2023–2027.
He is also a deputy member of the Health Committee (Helseutvalget) and the Planning Committee (Planutvalget).
This status remains valid today.
Furthermore, we have no further comments regarding this matter.

Kind regards,
Atle Kjøge Jansson
Communications Advisor
Fredrikstad Municipality

The Expelled Candidate’s File

Fredrikstad Police Files

Fredrikstad Files V