Posted on 07/24/2011 7:17:35 AM PDT by Amerisrael
The parsing of the writings and conversations of the Norway shooter begins. He is a murderer, a mass murderer. Period. He's not anything else. He is sick, sick to death and he has aided the enemy in so many ways it defies comprehension. Anyone who would kill children is insane. And if he's a right winger who hates Muslims, how does that translate into killing a bunch of political youth party Workers’ Youth League. He could easily have found Muslim children to kill if that had been his intention.
I despise savagery and inhumanity in any all instances. Period. This abject loser lowered himself to sub-human status. And he has done this wholly on his own. Nowhere does Christianity or the counter jihad movement call for violence of any kind. Whatever he says doesn't square. He's a bloody murderer. Period. He is responsible for his actions. He and only he. There was no "ideology" here. No mandate for murder, and all the leftists, Islamic apologists and Islamic supremacists and media hounds won't make it so. Watching CNN and BBC coverage about Norway, I found very disturbing to hear the number of times they use the word "Christian." They would never dare refer to religion when it is jihad, and this attack had nothing to do with Christianity. It is outrageous.
The pity, of course, is that Norway does not have the death penalty. Because Anders Behring Breivik so richly deserves it.
More from the cannibal (thanks to Armaros via Harry's)
An alliance with the Jihadists might prove beneficial to both parties but will simply be too dangerous (and might prove to be ideologically counter-productive). We both share one common goal. They want control over their own countries in the Middle East and we want control of our own countries in Western Europe. A future cultural conservative European regime will deport all Muslims from Europe and isolate the Muslim world. As a result, the Islamists will gain the necessary momentum to retake power in several countries: Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Jordan, Syria, Yemen, Oman, Algeria, Morocco and a few others.
The Jihadists know this very well. An Islamic Caliphate is a useful enemy to all Europeans as it will ensure European unity under Christian cultural conservative leadership.
How this type of scenario could play out:
Approach a representative from a Jihadi Salafi group. Get in contact with a Jihadi strawman. Present your terms and have him forward them to his superiors:
1. Ask for “hudna” (temporary truce) during the discussions/proposal and demand assurances not to be harmed if they reject our offer. Ask if this is acceptable to them.
2. If they accept, try to meet at a neutral place (not like there is a neutral place on Muslim territory) or at least a relatively public place (which will make it harder for them to betray your arrangement) and present your offer. They are asked to provide a biological compound manufactured by Muslim scientists in the Middle East. Hamas and several Jihadi groups have labs and they have the potential to provide such substances. Their problem is finding suitable martyrs who can pass “screenings” in Western Europe.
More insanity: Lawyer: Norway shooting suspect believed his actions were 'atrocious' but 'necessary'; He's willing to explain himself in court - Reuters
Totally true. As the initial reports on the Fort Hood massacre came in, reporters wouldn't even consider the possibility that the killer was a Muslim. Then, when they had an obvious Middle Eastern name of the killer, many wouldn't even broadcast that name until many hours later. And then the usual, to this day, denials that the massacre was in any way an act of Islamic terrorism.
But this killer in Norway is being constantly referred to as a "Christian fundamentalist" when his main identification with Christianity appears to be cultural rather than any matter of religious faith. He identifies with "Christendom" and Western Civilization more than any specific religious beliefs.
Is the Oslo Gunman Really Right-Wing?
Posted on July 23, 2011 at 1:25pm by Jonathon M. Seidl
It’s also important to note that the terms of American politics are not easily transferable to European politics. Often, the extremes in Europe are communists on the left and fascists on the right. In America, “extreme right wing” has been hijacked to label conservatives who adhere strictly to the Constitution, or who fight for legal immigration. (Some on the American left have even succeeded in making “extreme right wing” synonymous with the Tea Party.) In Europe, however, the term could mean zealous nationalists and militant fascists.
So, an “extreme right wing” individual in Europe is not always an “extreme right wing” individual in America. That’s important to note, as the designation will undoubtedly make the rounds in the attack’s aftermath.
Considering what we know about Breivik, then, could it be that the term “extreme right wing” is a misnomer? Especially considering that when you start dealing with extremist groups and individuals who fall well beyond the fringe, their beliefs often blur — they handpick a tenant from the right and bastardize it, grab an ideology from the left and skew it, and then create their own belief system.
Breivik’s beliefs — and the actions he implemented — may show he and his ideology are as fuzzy as they come.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/is-the-oslo-gunman-really-right-wing/
Bravo, Pamela. You're sounding like me. BTW, I am beginning to think of this loser as an Anarchist.
A "useful enemy?" Mmmmm, where have I seen that used before?
“He identifies with “Christendom” and Western Civilization more than any specific religious beliefs.”
Yes, Christendom but post-Martin Luther, making him actually anti-Christian/Catholic thus can’t fit him into that box.
He’s a Nazi. They used Christian words and symbols occasionally, too, because they were useful.
His agenda was ethnic and ideological cleansing through violence. The closest historical parallel we have, if we’re in search of a label, is “Nazi”.
The worst fit, on the other hand, would be “Christian”.
He claims this was a Christian crusade and he is not islamic. Strange that he killed Christians and that he was out to change Norway to be more open to others. Methinks this is just another incident of a jihadist lying to infidels.
But "Christendom" also refers to Europe before many of the nations that now makeup Europe were established. Geogaphically, it was basically pre-Europe during one period of history.
Although this sounds weird, it has been remarked that the face of the shooter looks computer generated. Image after image look like they were produced by a computer as a “typical male Norwegian face”, age mid-30’s. And not a particularly good cut and paste on different costumes, especially of the one of him holding a rifle.
And the best way to describe his writings are as “homogeneous”.
Interesting observation.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2753128/posts?page=15
Anders Breivik Copied the Unabomber’s Manifesto
I’m trying to see if anyone knows how much of ABB’s manifesto was actually his own writing. IIRC Ted Kazinsky’s (I know it’s spelled wrong...) manifesto was very long.
“As atheists and antitheists, we need to be quick in spreading the word about the fact that although he defines himself quite clearly as “non-religious”, he is charged by god on this mission. He is anti-catholic, anti-protestant, anti-evangelical and basically anti-all world religions because they are all so corrupt and far away from the origins of what Christianity is all about, patriarchal. The true heros of Christianity being, of course, people like Richard the Lion Heart, who completed “defensive” crusades in god’s name. This will be another point that religious zealots will use, much like they do Hitler and Stalin, to point out how “evil” we are. Religiots.”
http://www.thebritishatheist.com/2011/07/anders-behring-breivik-2083-european.html
I found this on a British Atheist’s site and would like to know where he got the information. I also saw it in a comment in the Huffpo. They’re desperate to hide it.
He killed Christians? I thought he killed Labor Party participants. Why would we think they are Christians any more than we would Breivik?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.