I've just accessed & read this @Morgenbladet article - it's another crude anti-Schøyen hatchet job by Håkon Roland. Not a shred of actual evidence is produced to justify overriding the published opinion of the world-renowned Assyriologist Andrew George that the piece is genuine.

Professor George's published opinion is, per the article itself, supported by both the Swedish expert Olof Pedersén, professor emeritus at Uppsala University, and by Christopher Rollston at George Washington University, who is to put it mildly, no pushover when it comes to fakes.

Against this one has the informally proffered opinion of Stephanie Dalley, a 79 year old retired Assyriologist, who essentially has a 'funny feeling' about some aspects of the diagrams carved on to the stone. Fair enough, but does this seriously justify a front page news article?

Having been firmly slapped down by the Norwegian government, & with the increasingly likely prospect that the vast majority of the seized pieces will be returned to Martin Schøyen, Håkon Roland is simply using his journalistic contacts at @Morgenbladet to further defame Schøyen.