Posted on 07/27/2011 2:36:17 PM PDT by Syncro
Read More »
NEW YORK TIMES READER KILLS DOZENS IN NORWAY
July 27, 2011The New York Times wasted no time in jumping to conclusions about Anders Behring Breivik, the Norwegian who staged two deadly attacks in Oslo last weekend, claiming in the first two paragraphs of one story that he was a "gun-loving," "right-wing," "fundamentalist Christian," opposed to "multiculturalism."
It may as well have thrown in "Fox News-watching" and "global warming skeptic."
This was a big departure from the Times' conclusion-resisting coverage of the Fort Hood shooting suspect, Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan. Despite reports that Hasan shouted "Allahu Akbar!" as he gunned down his fellow soldiers at a military medical facility in 2009, only one of seven Times articles on Hasan so much as mentioned that he was a Muslim.
Of course, that story ran one year after Hasan's arrest, so by then, I suppose, the cat was out of the bag.
In fact, however, Americans who jumped to conclusions about Hasan were right and New York Times reporters who jumped to conclusions about Breivik were wrong.
True, in one lone entry on Breivik's gaseous 1,500-page manifesto, "2083: A European Declaration of Independence," he calls himself "Christian." But unfortunately he also uses a great number of other words to describe himself, and these other words make clear that he does not mean "Christian" as most Americans understand the term. (Incidentally, he also cites The New York Times more than a half-dozen times.)
Had anyone at the Times actually read Breivik's manifesto, they would have seen that he uses the word "Christian" as a handy moniker to mean "European, non-Islamic" -- not a religious Christian or even a vague monotheist. In fact, at several points in his manifesto, Breivik stresses that he has a beef with Christians for their soft-heartedness. (I suppose that's why the Times is never worried about a "Christian backlash.")
“This guy Breivik was as loony as Charles Manson, the fictional Hannibal Lecter, or any other NPD (Narcissistic Personality Disorder) type you care to mention. “
Is he as crazy as Barack Hussein Obama?
At first glance the terrorist murders in Norway would appear as a wet dream come true for the left. Finally! A real terrorist who says all the things the left despises and is clearly a real life embodiment of evil! Since the left cannot support its positions logically it excuses the inexcusable by personally smearing it's opposition with guilt by association. Most of those connections are made up or tenuous at best because real evil is usually caused by leftist beliefs, not those on the pro liberty side. Now the left has its golden evil boy , they can bang their drums throughout the land and loudly accuse all they oppose as the intellectual fathers of Breivik ! Glory be to Marx their shining Knight of hate has come to the rescue!
Before the left starts high fifing each other and Journolists start trading talking points on how to cash in on this fortunate (to them) carnage there are a few problems. The first being that Islam really is cancerous to civilization. In Norway it is illegal to disparage Islam. That presents a real problem because Mozlems in Norway are on 13 times more likely to be on welfare, 44 times more likely to be in jail and almost all the rapes of natives in Norway are done by Mozlems. In spite of this the ruling class insists on importing even more Mozlems in the glorious name of diversity (not to mention more votes for the ruling class ). In short in Norway an Infidel has plenty of reason to complain but it is illegal to do so!
Since he was denied the simple option of speaking out , this particular infidel golden evil poster boy of the left did adopted his enemies strategy and wipe out a whole bunch of opponents. Killing folks en mass who disagree with them has a long tradition with the forces of the left. (A few examples: National Socialists of Germany (Nazis), the Soviet Socialists of Russia and the Moslem Socialists of Iran). Of course Breiviks actions , despite the censorship , are entirely inconsistent with the pro liberty side. He could have done what Geert Wilders has done: said what had to be said anyways , win an election and face his accusers in court over the censorship. Wilders won his fight (so far).
The other problem for the left is other Golden evil boys waiting for their excuse to commit murder and mayhem. This guy is not going to be the last one. Rather than taking the risk of becoming the victim of the next crazy who likes to see the world burn (and is just looking for an excuse to do it) why not take that excuse away and address the underlying problem: censorship and the tolerance of the intolerance that is inseparable from Islam.
Bump!
“Dont always agree with her. But someone desperately needed to fire back, and she did.”
Don’t always agree with anyone, but she comes damn close to saying what I’m thinking most of the time. That is not a brag...(in fact it might be scary) but it’s true.
Don’t you wish Boehner or McConnell or Cantor or any Republican politician had 2% of Anne’s wit and abilty to communicate??
She makes everyone else look like a sluggish dullard.
(sigh)
Great pic & post!
They ARE sluggish dullards.
He seems to me to resemble a Phineas priest. Resentment is largely cultural and idealistic, he's a disappointed and rejectionist idealist, and he lashed out not at Moslems so much as his disappointing fellow-citizens who deviated from the true path. (Remember that Phineas priest Larry Ashbrook went after a Baptist Bible-study class in church.)
The main difference seems to be that Breivik did not commit suicide to complete his act. Phineas priests were said somewhere to do that in order to deprive police investigators of any opportunity to profile their methods and motives.
Almost. Steyn is right up there, too.
If you can't appreciate the pure beauty of the violin after hearing this, something's wrong with your ears.Or you can get raw with these strings. Either way, the violin is sweet yet lethal.
Do it!
"..he also cites The New York Times more than a half-dozen times"
Let me know if you'd like to be added to the Ann Coulter ping list.
Very interesting. I had never heard of Phineas priests before and I had to Google the term to find out about them. (You learn something new every day on FR!)
Yes, he sounds very much like them. I thought from the very start that his use of the term “Christian” was same as the use by these “Christian identity” groups, who have nothing to do with the religion per se but regard it as an ethnic marker.
And you’re right, he seemed particularly angry at the mixing of groups (following his unacknowledged mentor, Hitler, I guess) and wanted to punish his own ethnic group for mixing with them, exactly like those “Phineas priesthood” groups. He actually doesn’t seem to have had much objection to Islam itself; he just wanted all Muslims back in the Middle East, where he would have been perfectly happy to see them build their (racially pure) caliphate.
It's too bad Breivik wasn't a Muslim extremist open about his Jihadist views, because I hear the Army is looking for a new psychiatrist down at Fort Hood.
BADABING-BADABOOM!
Rush just followed along the same lines and said “If Breivik were a Muslim Norway would be asking him where he wanted to build his church right now.” So true!
“Ann Coulter is the premier wordsmith of our generation.
Almost. Steyn is right up there, too. “
This is a delicious competition. I normally go for Steyn as the better writer, but Steyn himself gave tribute to Ann concerning the “Jersey girls” the 9-11 widows stumping for Kerry, et al. He wrote about them in December 2001 and got no reaction. Ann wrote a paragraph about them in her book “Godless” (I think) “I never saw widows enjoying their husbands’ deaths so much” and got a year of discussion and they have not been heard from since.
In effect, Steyn said she was more effective at making a change.
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.