CNN: Giant blast hits government buildings in Oslo, Norway; shooter fires at youth camp

[IONTOP]

You do believe religion has caused most of the world's problems? So you have absolutely no idea of history, or no math skills. Show me all the wars/killings caused by PRIMARILY by religion, and then count all the wars/killings that were NOT caused PRIMARILY by relgion. Go ahead, Id do it for you, but you apparently need to do some basic self-education on history

Here's the ones just from the Bible:

http://dwindlinginunbelief.blogspot.com/2010/04/drunk-with-blood-gods-killings-in-bible.html

[oisn1]

The events in Norway is saddening and troubling on so many levels, from the car bomb in downtown Oslo to the young people people being helpless butchered by a gunman, followed by a peaceful nation shattered by these attacks. Make no mistake about it: these acts were political in motivation.

At first, when conservatives believed Muslims were involved, they were suddenly, "A terrible blow from Islamist terrorists!" Now, when it turns out that the attacker was a European, killing young members of a leftist Labour party, their tune has changed, widly, veering from one direction to another. Some conservatives deny that Anders Breivik is even a conservative, though he outlined a conservative agenda in his manifesto. (Regarding his religion, I personally think he is probably more anti-Islamic than Christian.) Victim-blaming, either on Norway, "socialism," or even the kids themselves, usually criticizing the youngsters idealism or naivete, is another response from some on the Right. While others claim that Breivik is a fake, a plant, a Zionist agent, or any number of other conspiracies that are being produced. Most of the outlandish conservative theories, though, basically arrive at this conclusion: The Left, who are the truly hateful people, are happy this happened, of they allowed/planned for this to happen, so they can crack down on conservatives and increase leftist power.

It's particularly sickening to think that, somehow, liberals and leftists are delighted these attacks happen.

But the worst responses I have read from right-wingers are the expressions of agreement or happiness over Breivik's actions, reading comments from various websites around the web. I knew conservatives hated the Left, of course, but I didn't realize it was so deeply rooted until now.

Anders Breivik isn't simply a madman -- these were long-calculated attacks, striking at the "Marxist multiculturalists" he sees as a threat to the West. Does that language sound familiar? It should, because it mirrors the same language we hear from American right-wingers, who also attack "Marxist multiculturalism" while proclaiming the Left as the gravest threat to the West, above and beyond anything else.

What if a right-winger decides that the "Marxist multiculturalist" Peace Corp members, which have been characterized as "Obama's thugs," need to be attacked at one of their camps? We've already had attacks or planned attacks against liberals or leftists here in the U.S., but the threat of copy-cat attacks on this magnitude is a bit frightening, especially one which would follow the single largest single gunman massacre in modern history and after I've read random online comments saying that Breivik is a hero and the revolution is "coming soon."

I don't know of this division between the Left and the Right can ever be truly healed or bridged, and I really do fear that, at this rate, with a feverish belief from some conservatives that an apocalypse or clash of civilizations, ideologies is coming, this is not going to end well at all. Over and over again, for years, I've heard the Right say that the various ideologies of the Left have to be "defeated" -- well, I see the final extension of these sentiments in the attack on the Labour party and Utoeya island.

I definitely agree with this. If you read Free Republic, they were ready to kill all Muslims when the reports were saying he was a Muslim. But then he turns out to be a right-wing guy and all of the sudden, they started saying this was a false-flag operation and such. Now, they are saying that the kids deserved it because they were "Marxists" and let Muslims into the country. It's sickening to see people condone murder and terrorism because their "side" might have been responsible. To me, that is worse than the NavyDave defense where he tries to steer the conversation to bad things liberals have done. At least he understands that there is no excuse or justification for killing close to a hundred people.

I just want to say that your post really highlights the language that gets bandied about in the media. It's no longer about the differences between the two parties, it's about the fact that one side needs to fight to destroy the other side.

[FanboyOf91]

This guy was clearly a follower of Pam Geller, Robert Spencer, Geeret Wieders, and that whole cabal. He is the result of the hate they have tossed around the internet the last decade

And it's going to get worse.

NYT: Norway Attacks Put Spotlight on Rise of Right-Wing Sentiment in Europe

A combination of increased migration from abroad and largely unrestricted movement of people within an enlarged European Union, such as the persecuted Roma minority, helped lay the groundwork for a nationalist, at times starkly chauvinist, revival.

Groups are gaining traction from Hungary to Italy, but it is particularly apparent in northern European countries that long have had liberal immigration policies. The rapid arrival of refugees, asylum seekers and economic migrants, many of them Muslims, led to a significant backlash in places like Denmark, where the Danish People’s Party has 25 out of 179 seats in Parliament, and the Netherlands, where Geert Wilders’s Party for Freedom won 15.5 percent of the vote in the 2010 general election.

Mr. Wilders famously compared the Koran, the holy book of Islam, to Adolf Hitler’s “Mein Kampf.” Both the Danish and Dutch right-wing parties are backing precarious minority governments while not directly participating by having ministers, and inching toward mainstream acceptance in the process.

Friday’s attacks were swiftly condemned by leaders from across the political spectrum in Europe. Germany’s Chancellor Angela Merkel was particularly sharp in speaking out against what she called an “appalling crime.” The sort of hatred that could fuel such an action, she said, went against “freedom, respect and the belief in peaceful coexistence.”

Yet some of the primary motivations cited by the suspect in Norway, Anders Behring Breivik, are now mainstream issues. Mrs. Merkel, President Nicolas Sarkozy of France and Prime Minister David Cameron in Britain all recently declared an end to multiculturalism. Multiculturalism “has failed, utterly failed,” Mrs. Merkel told fellow Christian Democrats last October, though stressing that immigrants were welcome in Germany.

[Koolblue13]

A lot of people have been harmed by religious groups seeking to eliminate other beliefs and non-religious seeking to eliminate religion. In every case people of the same religious belief of the aggressive faction disown it and claim "they aren't one of us" or "they didn't do it because of that belief". You can see the hostility of the non-religious and religious politically in the US. Atheists want a secular public with no mention of religious speech arguing that it imposes in them. Meanwhile the dominant Christians want the state recognized as a "Christian nation".

All groups will have extreme and moderate members. Opposition turns to hatred and people get hurt. This is a human condition that can't be avoided. Some people will always find a cause and a subset of those will want to turn to violence to advance that cause.

The key Is understanding that hate is not something that can be controlled. You can't hate something rationally forever. It grows And spreads like a disease until it finds a host it dominates. Oppose without hate. Make sure the goal is a better tomorrow and not simply the destruction of some other idea. Reject hate or you could be the next to do something stupid and end up wondering how your life got away from you. The moment you hate someone because of an association recognize you have a problem and put that fire out.

I completely agree with this post Des.

It's a shame we can't all hate violence, war, hunger, etc and put the fight against those types of things first and our religious, political, geographical leanings in a place they deserve to be, which IMO, is pretty much where sports is in the importance scale. Not very.

Although, to do that, we'd have to have a world fueled by love and not hate.

[Prosperity]

this is one of the more horrible things thats happened

[jpyaks3]

Well the Jerusalem Post seems to think the problem is immigration, and multi-culturalism, and the Muslims. Unreal, stay classy Jerusalem Post. I find it disturbing that the Post decides to use this to launch into an attack on Muslim immigration and multi-culturalism, with a yeah he didn't do it in the right way but he was right bull****.

http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Editorials/Article.aspx?id=230788

Perhaps Brievik’s inexcusable act of vicious terror should serve not only as a warning that there may be more elements on the extreme Right willing to use violence to further their goals, but also as an opportunity to seriously reevaluate policies for immigrant integration in Norway and elsewhere

......

The challenge for Norway in particular and for Europe as a whole, where the Muslim population is expected to account for 8% of the population by 2030 according to a Pew Research Center, is to strike the right balance. Fostering an open society untainted by xenophobia or racism should go hand in hand with protection of unique European culture and values.

Europe’s fringe right-wing extremists present a real danger to society. But Oslo’s devastating tragedy should not be allowed to be manipulated by those who would cover up the abject failure of multiculturalism.

[Thiebear]

Remove him from the public eye. Remove all articles pertaining to him. Do not give him a forum to allow others to see this and copy it.

The family(extended) will never be the same, don't allow this kind of thing to make him infamous.

side note:

the Godless laugh at your assertions and point to all of history as the rebuttle.

*PEOPLE* craving power kill other people, for no other reason than for 'more'. Does the reason really matter?

[NavyDave]

I don't speak NavyDave but is he saying Islamic extremists are leftists?

No he is saying that a significant portion of the religion not including the Terrorists is pushed to embrace an idealogy that leans left. And that part is not necessarily a bad thing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism_and_Islam

Islamic socialism is a term coined by various Muslim leaders to describe a more spiritual form of socialism. Muslim socialists believe that the teachings of the Qur'an and Muhammad are compatible with principles of equality and the redistribution of wealth.

---------- Post added July-25th-2011 at 08:18 AM ----------

The tragedy occurred in Norway yet on other sites you see the left and the Godless trying their darn best to paint USA conservatives and Christians as being a part of that loony mindset.

Could it be that they are still upset they couldn't pin the Arizona tragedy on Conservative talk radio or Fox News, earlier in the year?

[jpyaks3]

No he is saying that a significant portion of the religion not including the Terrorists is pushed to embrace an idealogy that leans left. And that part is not necessarily a bad thing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism_and_Islam

Islamic socialism is a term coined by various Muslim leaders to describe a more spiritual form of socialism. Muslim socialists believe that the teachings of the Qur'an and Muhammad are compatible with principles of equality and the redistribution of wealth.

---------- Post added July-25th-2011 at 08:18 AM ----------

The tragedy occurred in Norway yet on other sites you see the left and the Godless trying their darn best to paint USA conservatives and Christians as being a part of that loony mindset.

Could it be that they are still upset they couldn't pin the Arizona tragedy on Conservative talk radio or Fox News, earlier in the year?

Or perhaps its that the far right in America uses the exact same arguments and the exact same language to describe the situation in America.

[SkinsHokieFan]

http://warincontext.org/2011/07/23/from-pamela-geller-to-anders-behring-breivik-how-islamophobia-turned-deadly/

From Pamela Geller to Anders Behring Breivik — how Islamophobia turned deadly in Norway

by Paul Woodward on July 23, 2011

The Oslo killings, however, should be seen in a different light since there is a wealth of evidence to suggest that the perpetrator of this atrocity, even if it turns out he was acting alone, was very much part of a political movement — a movement whose leading ideologues regularly appear on Fox News and have high public profiles.

Anders Behring Breivik, the 32-year-old Norwegian man widely assumed to be responsible for the mass murder that took place in Oslo yesterday, is being referred to as a Christian fundamentalist in many press reports.

His comments appearing on the political website Document.no suggest however that this is a rather misleading description. His views, as revealed there, are ideological rather than religious with his preeminent focus being his opposition to multiculturalism. (Quotations of Breivik appearing below come from a translation provided by Doug Saunders.)

In the United States, one of the most prominent public faces of the movement to which Breivik belongs is that of the notorious right-wing, pro-Israel, Islamophobic blogger, Pamela Geller, whose principal mouthpiece is Atlas Shrugs.

The poster below shows a recent event which she backed, along with Robert Spencer who operates Jihad Watch.

The World War Two iconography they employ — battleships, tanks and squadrons of bombers — makes it clear that they regard their campaign against “Islamization” as a kind of war. One of the battles in that war played out in Oslo yesterday.

Click link for rest

[Boss_Hogg]

my god the comments from the Fox News audience are disgusting

[Destino]

SHF you should have included the lovely visual:

The right wing loves to use war imagery. Honest question though, how exactly does one tell the people putting the above image together and the Breivik's of the world apart BEFORE they commit an act of violence? Anders favored images from the middle ages over WWII but the concept is the same. Politics turned into a "war" that must be one as our very civilization hangs in the balance. That rhetoric is extremely violent but we always assumed they are just words. The anti-terrorist folks must be having an extremely busy day.

And lets all be honest. We assumed the terrorist was a Muslim (myself included). I always tell myself "when you think you have it figured out is when you're most likely to make a big mistake" to keep myself humble in business. That applies here because no one would have seen this guy and thought "terrorist":

Let's hope his claims to being part of a group prove to be delusions

[China]

Manifesto by Norway attacks suspect includes almost verbatim passages from Unabomber’s writing

DENVER — Parts of the manifesto written by the suspect in Norway’s terrorist attack were taken almost word for word from the writings of “Unabomber” Ted Kaczynski.

The passages copied by Anders Behring Breivik appear in the first few pages of Kaczynski’s manifesto. Breivik changed a Kaczynski screed on leftism and what he considered to be leftists’ ”feelings of inferiority” — mainly by substituting the words “multiculturalism” or “cultural Marxism” for “leftism.”

For instance, Kaczynski wrote: “One of the most widespread manifestations of the craziness of our world is leftism, so a discussion of the psychology of leftism can serve as an introduction to the discussion of the problems of modern society in general.”

Breivik’s manifesto reads: “One of the most widespread manifestations of the craziness of our world is multiculturalism, so a discussion of the psychology of multiculturalists can serve as an introduction to the discussion of the problems of Western Europe in general.”

Breivik did not cite Kaczynski, though he did for many other people whose writings he used in his 1,500-page manifesto.

Click on the link for the full article

[twa]

http://warincontext.org/2011/07/23/from-pamela-geller-to-anders-behring-breivik-how-islamophobia-turned-deadly/

Click link for rest

Typical fearmongering and suppression of ideas

from your link

Do any of the leaders of Stop Islamization of America (SIOA) and Stop Islamization of Europe (SIOE) advocate that their “freedom fighters” should adopt violent tactics such as those employed by Breivik? Perhaps not. Indeed, I have little doubt that in the coming days we will hear many vociferous disavowals of their having any association with the Norwegian. But have no doubt, while they might have a sincere revulsion for Breivik’s actions, they cannot so easily disassociate themselves from the ideas that drove him to murder almost a hundred innocent people.

Perhaps not is a cop out

[Destino]

Typical fearmongering and suppression of ideas

from your link

Do any of the leaders of Stop Islamization of America (SIOA) and Stop Islamization of Europe (SIOE) advocate that their “freedom fighters” should adopt violent tactics such as those employed by Breivik? Perhaps not. Indeed, I have little doubt that in the coming days we will hear many vociferous disavowals of their having any association with the Norwegian. But have no doubt, while they might have a sincere revulsion for Breivik’s actions, they cannot so easily disassociate themselves from the ideas that drove him to murder almost a hundred innocent people.

Perhaps not is a cop out

We both know the truth of that matter is the people advocating violence aren't going to say so publicly unless it is legal and safe to do so. For instance a "we should bomb mecca" when "we" means the US armed forces is a legal voicing of support for mass murder and bigotry by Tancredo. You will not however see him attend a rally and say "you guys in the audience should go plant bombs in mecca". I am not saying he supports terror, but I know he isn't stupid enough to support it openly if he did. It would open him up to investigation and prison. The lunatics aren't going to tell you unless they feel reasonably safe doing so.

Having said that no groups argument should be disqualified by the action of a violent person. Environmentalism and conservation has amongst it's supporters ELF, the horribly named terrorist group. The pro life group has in it's ranks some violent murderers. Does this mean wanting clean water and babies to be born is a violent ideology? Of course not! Such an argument is completely absurd.

Having said that if pro-life groups and environmentalists are marching under violent rhetoric and imagery. They are declaring war on the opposition and saying that they have to win this war at all costs etc etc and suddenly a lunatic emerges saying the same things but adding a violent and bloodly exclamation point - you have a real problem. How do you tell them apart before they act?!

Best to avoid rhetoric that makes you look crazy. You can support lower immigration numbers without warships and references to world wars. You can oppose abortion without crosshairs and hit lists.

[SkinsHokieFan]

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/25/us/25debate.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all?src=tptw

Killings in Norway Spotlight Anti-Muslim Thought in U.S.

The man accused of the killing spree in Norway was deeply influenced by a small group of American bloggers and writers who have warned for years about the threat from Islam, lacing his 1,500-page manifesto with quotations from them, as well as copying multiple passages from the tract of the Unabomber.

In the document he posted online, Anders Behring Breivik, who is accused of bombing government buildings and killing scores of young people at a Labor Party camp, showed that he had closely followed the acrimonious American debate over Islam.

His manifesto, which denounced Norwegian politicians as failing to defend the country from Islamic influence, quoted Robert Spencer, who operates the Jihad Watch Web site, 64 times, and cited other Western writers who shared his view that Muslim immigrants pose a grave danger to Western culture.

More broadly, the mass killings in Norway, with their echo of the 1995 bombing of the federal building in Oklahoma City by an antigovernment militant, have focused new attention around the world on the subculture of anti-Muslim bloggers and right-wing activists and renewed a debate over the focus of counterterrorism efforts.

In the United States, critics have asserted that the intense spotlight on the threat from Islamic militants has unfairly vilified Muslim Americans while dangerously playing down the threat of attacks from other domestic radicals. The author of a 2009 Department of Homeland Security report on right-wing extremism withdrawn by the department after criticism from conservatives repeated on Sunday his claim that the department had tilted too heavily toward the threat from Islamic militants.

The revelations about Mr. Breivik’s American influences exploded on the blogs over the weekend, putting Mr. Spencer and other self-described “counterjihad” activists on the defensive, as their critics suggested that their portrayal of Islam as a threat to the West indirectly fostered the crimes in Norway.

Mr. Spencer wrote on his Web site, jihadwatch.org, that “the blame game” had begun, “as if killing a lot of children aids the defense against the global jihad and Islamic supremacism, or has anything remotely to do with anything we have ever advocated.” He did not mention Mr. Breivik’s voluminous quotations from his writings.

The Gates of Vienna, a blog that ordinarily keeps up a drumbeat of anti-Islamist news and commentary, closed its pages to comments Sunday “due to the unusual situation in which it has recently found itself.”

Its operator, who describes himself as a Virginia consultant and uses the pseudonym “Baron Bodissey,” wrote on the site Sunday that “at no time has any part of the Counterjihad advocated violence.”

The name of that Web site — a reference to the siege of Vienna in 1683 by Muslim fighters who, the blog says in its headnote, “seemed poised to overrun Christian Europe” — was echoed in the title Mr. Breivik chose for his manifesto: “2083: A European Declaration of Independence.” He chose that year, the 400th anniversary of the siege, as the target for the triumph of Christian forces in the European civil war he called for to drive out Islamic influence.

Click link for rest

[Dan T.]

Manifesto by Norway attacks suspect includes almost verbatim passages from Unabomber’s writing

DENVER — Parts of the manifesto written by the suspect in Norway’s terrorist attack were taken almost word for word from the writings of “Unabomber” Ted Kaczynski.

The passages copied by Anders Behring Breivik appear in the first few pages of Kaczynski’s manifesto. Breivik changed a Kaczynski screed on leftism and what he considered to be leftists’ ”feelings of inferiority” — mainly by substituting the words “multiculturalism” or “cultural Marxism” for “leftism.”

So not only is he a mass murderer, he's plagarist too.

[Thiebear]

Some of you can't pass up even a tragedy to bash your political rivals.. simply amazing.

[Baculus]

No he is saying that a significant portion of the religion not including the Terrorists is pushed to embrace an idealogy that leans left. And that part is not necessarily a bad thing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism_and_Islam

.

So what's your point, ND? A bunch of youngsters are murdered in a secular, Western social democracy, and you try to equate it with "Islamic socialism"? What's your point?

BTW, I hear plenty of Islamic conservative thought (and that is what Islamists are -- conservatives), which mirror phislophies supported by the American Right, especially socially conservative philosophies, And both Islamic and American conservatives are anti-liberal, too.

BTW, social justice, i.e., "redistribution of wealth," is a also a tenement of many Christian sects, too.

[/color]The tragedy occurred in Norway yet on other sites you see the left and the Godless trying their darn best to paint USA conservatives and Christians as being a part of that loony mindset.

First of all, American conservatives are constantly trying to portray all liberals and leftists as anti-Americans, or terrorists sympathizers -- this would include YOU, too. Secondly, the Norwegian shooter has views that EXACTLY mirror American conservative thought, especially since he is a self-declared conservative, influenced by American conservatives. But no, that ain't good enough: You have to deflect blame from your ideology, anything to shift blame onto the belief system of the murdered youths instead of the killer and the views which drove his actions.

Could it be that they are still upset they couldn't pin the Arizona tragedy on Conservative talk radio or Fox News, earlier in the year?

What a hypocritical remark. Right-wingers CONSTANTLY blame liberals for all the world's woes, writing entire books on it, from Jonah Goldberg's Liberal Fascism, Glenn Beck's Arguing with Idiots, to Ann Coulter's various books, where liberals, against are blamed for society's ills. And daily, on talk radio and Fox News, liberals and the left, again, are heaped with blame. But, on my goodness, let the media suggest that an anti-government radical may have right-leaning views, and "Oh my gosh, we're under attack by the Left!"

Every problem on Earth, according to the Right, can be blamed on liberals, and that is why they must be defeated. You, yourself, espouse this view. The Norwegian shooter took your own philosophies to the next logical conclusion, and least to him -- kill liberals, kill leftists. Kill the traitors and the root cause of the world's ills.

Conservatives are thin-skinned: They can trash other people on a daily basis, but they're unable to deal with counter-criticism, especially after one of their number butchers some young people due to ideology.

No ideology is immune from criticism, because no ideology is perfect. Why? Because its practitioners, human beings, are flawed as it is.

[deejaydana]

Some of you can't pass up even a tragedy to bash your political rivals.. simply amazing.

Isn't that the truth. No specific party, religion or race has a primary stake in having a very few crazy, (potentially suicidal) people within their ranks. It's too bad we so quickly use the actions of a single person to be representative of the group in its entirety.

[Sticksboi05]

Some of you can't pass up even a tragedy to bash your political rivals.. simply amazing.

I know, it's pathetic.

[Bang]

Nevermind his politics are central to his motive.

I think it's a valid discussion. Whether any one party has a trademark on crazies is not the point. This one killed almost 100 people a couple days ago. And he's the story here.

So long as no one ever takes responsibility for their crazies, well, it enables the crazy to be crazy.

~Bang

[deejaydana]

Nevermind his politics are central to the story.

I think it's a valid discussion. Whether any one party has a trademark on crazies is not the point. This one killed almost 100 people a couple days ago. And he's the story here.

So long as no one ever takes responsibility for their crazies, well, it enables the crazy to be crazy.

~Bang

I think you mighta missed the point of my post.

[Bang]

I think you mighta missed the point of my post.

No, i get it.

But lets face it,, even though I know you and anyone else on here really can't do much to affect the overall (now global) discourse.. we can at least call a spade a spade.

This guy did this and has proudly mentioned his reasoning and influences.

Whether he's crazy or not.. there's almost 100 dead people.. as i said after the Arizona shooting,, the rhetoric is TOO high.. and all that seems to happen is one side gets it's back up and says "Well, what about THEIR side huff huff harumphharumph!"..

Just take responsibility for it. Everyone. Stop enabling the people who write the stuff that is stirring up the crazies to act with no social conscience.

I've always felt that an artist has a responsibility to their audience.

and unless causing mayhem and things that can literally be construed as acts of idiological war is what they're after, then it's their responsibility to have to examine how it got to this point, and what possible responsibility they may bear.

To continually just pass it off as just crazies being crazy.. there are roots to it, and we are simply denying it.

i have no problem with ideologies arguing or being polarized,, but the venom and vitriol in which the divide is being fostered has led to these things, and I think one would have to be truly ignorant to not come to that conclusion. Media affects people, and media is VERY persuasive and VERY pervasive. It's everywhere. And I believe it is being used without very little responsibility towards anyone.

~Bang

[Prosperity]

well, I guess now that it turns out the guy wasn't a muslim we can't talk about political motivations. At least these racist spit ****s are more of a European cancer, thankfully American society is a little bit more open and civilized.

The only take away I have from **** like this is that evil attacks from all directions and without mercy.