Norway Gunman Breivik Pleads 'Not Guilty' At Oslo Trial

[Scott]

An off-topic post has been deleted.

Edit: And a baiting post has now been deleted.

[Ulysses G.]

Fox News has pretty much the same news as every other major news source including on this issue. Some of their commentators have extreme views, but that is not uncommon these days in the news media.

[Colin Yai]

Yunla I am all for discussing any subject in a "logical way " problem is here as soon as I discuss my concerns about the inexorable rise of Radical Islam in Europe I am shouted down as a rabid racist fascist without any further discussion on the subject !!. and am quoted names like Pamela Geller ,Robert Spencer and Gert Wilders as some sort of right wing loonies who have wrote books on their fears of Muslim domination , maybe you could quote me a book written by a Westerner who says its exaggerated out of all proportion and European Country's have Nothing to fear .

Not wishing to "discount" your opinions, I would love to see the evidence you have for the forthcoming Eurabia and muslim takeover of Europe. if you wish to convert people to your views it would be really handy if you could produce a compelling case that supports your views.

If Brievik really is just the spear tip of a European movement affiliated with organizations such as the EDL it makes discussing the issue even more pressing.

I was hoping for a Comment about About Steely Dans Excellent link in his post #116, do you agree or totally refute it?

[Scott]

A post attempting to bait another poster into an off-topic reply has been removed.

Perhaps my message wasn't quite clear enough. The thread is a discussion, it is not a platform for either side.

Keep it civil, treat other posters with respect, even if you disagree.

[folium]

In decadent Europe, freedom of speech is dying. Loudly trumpeted as a ‘human right’ for any attacks on America, Israel, Christians or on the core values of the west, it is swiftly transformed into ‘hate speech’ and the shutters are slammed down on the speaker whenever Islam is in the frame.

Read more: http://www.dailymail...l#ixzz1sxX80yuU

Populist comics with dubious heritage and now the International Free Press Society (featuring a veritable who's who of anti-immigration lights, such as Geert Wilders, Robert Spencer, Bruce Bawer, Daniel Pipes et al)

Mr Hedegaard's actual comment that got him into trouble went as follows:

On 22 December 2009 Lars Hedegaard, gave an interview in which he declared that Muslims "rape their own children. It is heard of all the time. Girls in Muslim families are raped by their uncles, their cousins or their fathers." He also stated that "Whenever it is prudent for a Muslim to hide his true intentions by lying or making a false oath in his own or in Islam’s service, then it is ok to do it."

Even one of his supporters, Soren Krarup , MP with the anti-immigrant DPP, stated that while such views were "justifiable", they should have been more "carefully stated". The tightrope between free speech and hate speech indeed.

The fact that Hedegaard has been recently acquitted as the Court saw " no basis for convicting him of intentionally disseminating his remarks to a wider audience", hardly suggests a desire to extinguish free speech in Denmark.

Anyway getting back on topic, Brievik remains an acute embarrassment to the anti-immigration lobby, and all the obfuscation and issue-dodging cannot get over the fact that he is a spawn of the toxic environment promoted by many of the glitterati of the Free Press Society.

Care to discuss the demographics of Eurabia or the takeover of the non-muslim world by islamists as feared by Brievik?

[koheesti]

This thread has turned into a debate on overpopulation in the world which means

the insane man in Norway have made his voice heard and his arguments are accepted.

This is really the danger with media today that they report everything and people can

not sort out insane ideas from reality.

This man was Norwegian and the event took place in Norway. Norway is one of the least

populated country in the world (#164 of 193) with 15 persons per square km and have one of

the strongest economies in the world with it's natural resource of oil and is not a member of the EU.

So immigration is absolutely not a big problem in Norway. Period.

The persons per sq km really shoots up when you take the practically inhabitable areas out of the equation. In addition, immigrants are not spread evenly all over the country, are they? They likely live in concentrated pockets in the cities. Well, I know some immigrants aren't from 3rd world countries and actually go to live in the rural areas of Norway. Of course, they are far from innocent themselves...

(funny show btw. Much of it in Norwegian with subtitles but entertaining stuff and offers a great insight into Norwegian culture. He even goes to "prison" for a few days so watch if you want to get an idea what live for Breivik will be like)

Edited April 24, 2012 by koheesti

[Colin Yai]

In decadent Europe, freedom of speech is dying. Loudly trumpeted as a ‘human right’ for any attacks on America, Israel, Christians or on the core values of the west, it is swiftly transformed into ‘hate speech’ and the shutters are slammed down on the speaker whenever Islam is in the frame.

Read more: http://www.dailymail...l#ixzz1sxX80yuU

Populist comics with dubious heritage and now the International Free Press Society (featuring a veritable who's who of anti-immigration lights, such as Geert Wilders, Robert Spencer, Bruce Bawer, Daniel Pipes et al)

Mr Hedegaard's actual comment that got him into trouble went as follows:

On 22 December 2009 Lars Hedegaard, gave an interview in which he declared that Muslims "rape their own children. It is heard of all the time. Girls in Muslim families are raped by their uncles, their cousins or their fathers." He also stated that "Whenever it is prudent for a Muslim to hide his true intentions by lying or making a false oath in his own or in Islam’s service, then it is ok to do it."

Even one of his supporters, Soren Krarup , MP with the anti-immigrant DPP, stated that while such views were "justifiable", they should have been more "carefully stated". The tightrope between free speech and hate speech indeed.

The fact that Hedegaard has been recently acquitted as the Court saw " no basis for convicting him of intentionally disseminating his remarks to a wider audience", hardly suggests a desire to extinguish free speech in Denmark.

Anyway getting back on topic, Brievik remains an acute embarrassment to the anti-immigration lobby, and all the obfuscation and issue-dodging cannot get over the fact that he is a spawn of the toxic environment promoted by many of the glitterati of the Free Press Society.

Care to discuss the demographics of Eurabia or the takeover of the non-muslim world by islamists as feared by Brievik?

I was hoping for a straight answer to my question in my post#123 .

[folium]

Yunla I am all for discussing any subject in a "logical way " problem is here as soon as I discuss my concerns about the inexorable rise of Radical Islam in Europe I am shouted down as a rabid racist fascist without any further discussion on the subject !!. and am quoted names like Pamela Geller ,Robert Spencer and Gert Wilders as some sort of right wing loonies who have wrote books on their fears of Muslim domination , maybe you could quote me a book written by a Westerner who says its exaggerated out of all proportion and European Country's have Nothing to fear .

Not wishing to "discount" your opinions, I would love to see the evidence you have for the forthcoming Eurabia and muslim takeover of Europe. if you wish to convert people to your views it would be really handy if you could produce a compelling case that supports your views.

If Brievik really is just the spear tip of a European movement affiliated with organizations such as the EDL it makes discussing the issue even more pressing.

I was hoping for a Comment about About Steely Dans Excellent link in his post #116, do you agree or totally refute it?

The facts of the case seem simple enough. Free speech or hate speech is a massive topic in itself. Freedom to insult, to offend, to cause hurt? Every society handles the concept of "free speech" differently. In this country, the US, Europe and anywhere that has some pretence of allowing "free speech", the boundaries are all drawn in different ways and places.

Do I believe in some conspiracy to stifle debate about immigration? In the real world beyond extremist blogs, conspiracies are rarely found and poor policy is often more a case of screw ups and shortsightedness, rather than some cunning masterplan in the vein of some James Bond movie.

What concerns me far more are the extremist websites and blogs from whatever angle or belief that incite violence and extremist action. We don't need the Brevik's and Merah's of this world that they help generate.

[Steely Dan]

Ok, just to wrap up, I think everyone thinks Breivik's actions were vile and he will likely escape any punishment which will satisfy the bereaved. What has been demonstrated is the tendency of some to tar by association people mentioned as influences by Breivik, even though many of them are explicitly against violence. If some find it distasteful to discuss the social backdrop to this crime I would point out that the Norwegian government and left wing press had little compunction in trying to make political capital by hanging those they disapprove of out to dry. This is particularly ironic when truthful, yet uncomfortable facts are labelled hate speech. Meanwhile there are those explicitly condoning and organizing violence among immigrant communities and indeed on a worldwide scale leading to carnage on a scale orders of magnitude greater than Breivik, yet we even struggle to deport the worst of then as the UK found when the European court blocked such a deportation order.

[folium]

Ok, just to wrap up, I think everyone thinks Breivik's actions were vile and he will likely escape any punishment which will satisfy the bereaved. What has been demonstrated is the tendency of some to tar by association people mentioned as influences by Breivik, even though many of them are explicitly against violence. If some find it distasteful to discuss the social backdrop to this crime I would point out that the Norwegian government and left wing press had little compunction in trying to make political capital by hanging those they disapprove of out to dry. This is particularly ironic when truthful, yet uncomfortable facts are labelled hate speech. Meanwhile there are those explicitly condoning and organizing violence among immigrant communities and indeed on a worldwide scale leading to carnage on a scale orders of magnitude greater than Breivik, yet we even struggle to deport the worst of then as the UK found when the European court blocked such a deportation order.

The anti-immigration lobby is obviously mighty keen to "wrap things up", and the likes of Geller et al must be praying that Brievik is bluffing when he talks about his fellow pan-European "nationalists" waiting to strike. Another Brievik would do little to enhance their "good guys crying in the wilderness" stance. Also they will breathe a great sigh of relief if Brievik is found to be insane, rather than someone who acted out their philosophy in a calculated fashion.

What may appear to be an academic discussion amongst armchair chickenhawks can become something far deadlier in the hands of someone who seeks deeds not words.

Condemnation comes easy, but some people are able to see a "justification" for Brievik's actions.

Concrete evidence creates facts (at least based on the best current available knowledge). Selective use of evidence to advance an agenda at someone else's expense is hate speech and becomes incitement when it causes crimes to be committed. Again the line between free speech and hate speech does shift and varies from one place to another.

IMHO any extremist that indulges in incitement and moves into hate speech (as defined by that country) should face the full weight of the law. While summary application of "justice" may seem preferable, the more laboured and frustrating approach does mean that due process is carried out and miscarriages of justice minimized.

[Steely Dan]

Luckily for those you apologize for no 'sigh of relief' is ever necessary as the press and western governments go out of their way to see no elephant in the room, an elephant in size indeed compared to the mouse that Breivik is by comparison. But some people are on to this dishonest manipulative game, such as Paul Weston - British Freedom (not EDL) for any RT News fans.

http://paulweston101...-edl-islam.html

The BBC regards itself as a politically impartial organisation, but their behaviour in the fallout of the Breivik atrocity shows them to be nothing other than the unapologetic propaganda arm of the hard Left and Islam.

Edited April 25, 2012 by Steely Dan

[folium]

Luckily for those you apologize for no 'sigh of relief' is ever necessary as the press and western governments go out of their way to see no elephant in the room, an elephant in size indeed compared to the mouse that Breivik is by comparison. But some people are on to this dishonest manipulative game, such as Paul Weston - British Freedom (not EDL) for any RT News fans.

http://paulweston101...-edl-islam.html

The BBC regards itself as a politically impartial organisation, but their behaviour in the fallout of the Breivik atrocity shows them to be nothing other than the unapologetic propaganda arm of the hard Left and Islam.

Mouse or elephant, both represent a threat that needs to be addressed and extinguished. There's nothing appealing about extremists of any form, nor those that aid, direct and abet their campaigns.

The world sure ain't perfect but is only made worse and more dangerous by extremists of any part of the spectrum as their key aim is to provoke confrontation and antagonism in order to validate their stance.

[Steely Dan]

Luckily for those you apologize for no 'sigh of relief' is ever necessary as the press and western governments go out of their way to see no elephant in the room, an elephant in size indeed compared to the mouse that Breivik is by comparison. But some people are on to this dishonest manipulative game, such as Paul Weston - British Freedom (not EDL) for any RT News fans.

http://paulweston101...-edl-islam.html

The BBC regards itself as a politically impartial organisation, but their behaviour in the fallout of the Breivik atrocity shows them to be nothing other than the unapologetic propaganda arm of the hard Left and Islam.

Mouse or elephant, both represent a threat that needs to be addressed and extinguished. There's nothing appealing about extremists of any form, nor those that aid, direct and abet their campaigns.

The world sure ain't perfect but is only made worse and more dangerous by extremists of any part of the spectrum as their key aim is to provoke confrontation and antagonism in order to validate their stance.

Agreed, however what is extreme about wanting the law applied equally to all, to equal rights by gender, sexual orientation, religion. what is extreme about any of the provisions of the universal human rights declaration? Finally, if someone states facts then facts are not hate speech and 'incitement' should not be used as a post-hoc moving of goalposts to remove people who say things the government doesn't like - this however this does seem to be happening and shows a worrying trend funded from outside Europe as my link suggests.

Edited April 25, 2012 by Steely Dan

[Scott]

An off-topic post has been removed. I posted previous warnings about the content and direction of this thread. I am done advising you. Suspensions will start.

This thread is not about news sources and name-calling.

[folium]

Agreed, however what is extreme about wanting the law applied equally to all, to equal rights by gender, sexual orientation, religion. what is extreme about any of the provisions of the universal human rights declaration? Finally, if someone states facts then facts are not hate speech and 'incitement' should not be used as a post-hoc moving of goalposts to remove people who say things the government doesn't like - this however this does seem to be happening and shows a worrying trend funded from outside Europe as my link suggests.

Saudi bribing the Board of the BBC...nice try? Where's the evidence?

Mr Weston and his British Freedom Party (a spin off from the charming BNP, originally the fascist thugs of the National Front) hardly presents a very robust case (like none) to support his accusations. Most of his bile seems to be based around class hate as much as race hate, charming individual.

According to their official accounts the BFP had a grand total of 149 members as at 31 Dec 2010, thus representing approximately 0.000002% of the UK population. Their Facebook page has 650 members, perhaps they haven't all signed up and paid their subs.

Linked is an interesting set of maps showing location of BNP members, concentations of ethnic minorities and where they do/do not intersect. Interesting to note how substantial areas of ethnic populations see no BNP membership while areas with few minorities (East Anglia, SW, NE) have high numbers of BNP members, who appear to oppose a group of people they have little first-hand knowledge of.

http://sarahditum.com/2009/10/27/infographic-where-are-the-bnps-voters/

[koheesti]

http://news.yahoo.com/thousands-norwegians-sing-song-breivik-hates-085427702.html

Tens of thousands of rose-waving Norwegians gathered in central Oslo Thursday to deride mass murderer Anders Behring Breivikby singing a song he hates, viewing it as Marxist indoctrination.

Some 40,000 people, according to police, massed in the rain at a square near the Oslo district courthouse where Breivik is on trial for his July 22 attacks that killed 77 people, to sing "Children of the Rainbow" by Norwegian folk singer Lillebjoern Nilsen.

[GentlemanJim]

http://news.yahoo.co...-085427702.html

Tens of thousands of rose-waving Norwegians gathered in central Oslo Thursday to deride mass murderer Anders Behring Breivikby singing a song he hates, viewing it as Marxist indoctrination.

Some 40,000 people, according to police, massed in the rain at a square near the Oslo district courthouse where Breivik is on trial for his July 22 attacks that killed 77 people, to sing "Children of the Rainbow" by Norwegian folk singer Lillebjoern Nilsen.

Outstanding and quite moving.

[folium]

You can either accept Breiviks sanity or not, it's for the Courts and appointed experts to decide.

Legally, yes, But personally speaking, I don't need a court or some "expert" to tell me that Breiviks is insane. No more than I need an expert to tell me someone who is crawling around the park on all fours, barking like a dog and eating dog crap is insane.

Apparently just bad, not mad...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-17859499

[JemJem]

From my experiences, I have observed that the heavy majority of anti-multiculturalists throughout the world are racist/fascist.

Edited May 4, 2012 by JemJem

[folium]

From my experiences, I have observed that the heavy majority of anti-multiculturalists throughout the world are racist/fascist.

That would be to fall into the simplistic stereotypes so loved of the extremist "anti-multiculturalists" (ie all muslims are violent extremists out to destroy "our" culture and defile "our" womenfolk).

Brievik cannot be simply described as a racist as his loathing is focused on muslims and anyone who supports multiculturalism. Defining fascism can soon dissolve into semantics. Wikipedia's definition is as follows:

"a radical authoritarian nationalist political ideology. Fascists seek rejuvenation of their nation based on commitment to an organic national community where its individuals are united together as one people in national identity by suprapersonal connections of ancestry,culture, and blood through a totalitariansingle-party state that seeks the mass mobilization of a nation through discipline, indoctrination, physical education, and eugenics.Fascism seeks to purify the nation of foreign influences that are deemed to be causing degeneration of the nation or of not fitting into the national culture."

Brievik certainly ticks quite a few of these boxes. The label "fascist" today is highly emotive (hardly surprising) and widely and incorrectly used in most situations.

The extremist anti-multiculturalists, either the actual violent practitioners such as Brievik or their chickenhawk inciters, are probably better described as bigots.

Bigot: "a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially: one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance." Merriam-Webster dictionary.

Many such bigots have come from a classic racist background, but in today's environment where racism based on colour is unfashionable, illegal and counter-productive (as professional sports teams lose their whites only status), being "pro-indigenous" and anti multiculturalism is seen by such people as a suitable alternative, and a way to get around the law.

In the UK Brievik's favourite "anti-multiculturalist" organization, the English Defence League (EDL), ironically run by a self-appointed, ex football hooligan and convicted felon who comes from a family of immigrant Irish alleged republicans (ie pro-IRA), has a classic extremist background of street thuggery and racism. See article below from the Daily Mail:

http://www.dailymail...igh-Street.html

Edited May 5, 2012 by folium

[Scott]

I think we can do without a long discussion of definitions. People can be more than one thing. You can be racist, fascist and bigoted. I assume that many people have a level of suspicion about some groups they perceive as being different.

Edited May 5, 2012 by Scott

[Steely Dan]

From my experiences, I have observed that the heavy majority of anti-multiculturalists throughout the world are racist/fascist.

Now that's not very scientific is it now? If you go down the path of reductionism I could argue that most of the left wingers I have met are either naive useful idiots or openly treasonous to their own societies. Of course when it comes to concrete facts to back up positions such debate is ruled offside, whilst the true old school liberal arguments of equal rights for all under the law by gender, sexual preference or indeed the rights of children are quietly shelved so as to not rock the boat, and proponents of these ideals hitherto regarded as liberal are branded right wing bigots or racists.

For your info my father was a third generation immigrant who studied the history of the English language at Oxford. He passed on to me a love of British culture and ideals. His father and fathers father never depended on the state and worked hard all their lives to build a future. It is not heresy to argue that not all groups of immigrants will behave the same;- If you import the third world you become the third world unless such influxes are handled with great care.

Edited May 5, 2012 by Steely Dan

[Steely Dan]

The extremist anti-multiculturalists, either the actual violent practitioners such as Brievik or their chickenhawk inciters, are probably better described as bigots.

In the UK Brievik's favourite "anti-multiculturalist" organization, the English Defence League (EDL),

Snipped for brevity. Firstly, your attempts to conflate Breivik with people critical of Islam or against multi-culturalism in general are slanderous and dishonest when most explicitly condemn violence. To mutter incitement is just more mudslinging innuendo and is in any case for a judge to decide.

As for the EDL, they were not Breivik's favourite anti-multiculturalist organization as you put it, he concluded they were well meaning but naive. So not only are you wrong in this assertion but also betray your agenda, which is to lump all right wing oppinion with the actions of Breivik, why else single out the EDL when you could have cited links as diverse as MLK or Lincoln from his rambling 1400 page diatribe.

But in the absence of argument and to throw the hounds off the scent the left in general does tend to spin yarns and engage in thinly disguised ad hominim attacks..

[Credo]

From my experiences, I have observed that the heavy majority of anti-multiculturalists throughout the world are racist/fascist.

My experience has been similar. The vast majority of those people don't do anything about it except complain.

[folium]

The extremist anti-multiculturalists, either the actual violent practitioners such as Brievik or their chickenhawk inciters, are probably better described as bigots.

In the UK Brievik's favourite "anti-multiculturalist" organization, the English Defence League (EDL),

Snipped for brevity. Firstly, your attempts to conflate Breivik with people critical of Islam or against multi-culturalism in general are slanderous and dishonest when most explicitly condemn violence. To mutter incitement is just more mudslinging innuendo and is in any case for a judge to decide.

As for the EDL, they were not Breivik's favourite anti-multiculturalist organization as you put it, he concluded they were well meaning but naive. So not only are you wrong in this assertion but also betray your agenda, which is to lump all right wing oppinion with the actions of Breivik, why else single out the EDL when you could have cited links as diverse as MLK or Lincoln from his rambling 1400 page diatribe.

But in the absence of argument and to throw the hounds off the scent the left in general does tend to spin yarns and engage in thinly disguised ad hominim attacks..

"At the siege of Vienna in 1683 Islam seemed poised to overrun Christian Europe. We are in a new phase of a very old war."

Not an excerpt from Brievik's Declaration of Independence manifesto but as I'm sure you are well aware, the tagline for the front page of the Gates of Vienna blog site.

So if we are in "a new phase of a very old war" how will victory be achieved? If Europe is facing an existential threat similar to that of 1683 how will the threat be removed? Is all just chat or will something be done about this threat? What will be done about the 44 million muslims currently residing within Europe?

If Brievik is the unacceptable face of opposition to multiculturalism what is the alternative approach to solving this issue?

[Steely Dan]

Folium, As the joke goes when a motorist who was lost asked an Irishman for directions, the reply he received was 'Well I wouldn't have started from here'.

There are various universal truisms worth considering however. Firstly, a society has only got a finite capacity to accept new immigration before non-assimilation becomes a problem. The first thing I would do is slow down the rate of immigration until this is achieved. Note that some groups are more easily assimilated than others, the Poles obviously being better candidates than say Somalis for a variety of reasons.

Then there is education. I don't agree with segregated education or opt outs due to cultural sensitivities. I was hardly traumatized by singing onward Christian soldiers in school assembly and if I found the pork served up in school dinners offensive I could have opted for a packed lunch, as some of my class mates did in junior school.

Then there's indoctrination in beliefs or values that run contrary to the law of the land. The law is the common law shaped over hundreds of years and should not be replaced by foreign law or you are inviting separation of (ahem) communities.

Then there's geographic considerations - If you spread incoming groups evenly throughout the County it encourages them to learn the language and mix with the (ahem) indigenous population, which should also fight xenophobia according to the link you posted.

Finally, call a spade a spade, doing so does not generally result in lynch mobs but causes the government to address problems. Not doing so leads to festering resentment sometimes tragically manifesting itself in violence as was the case with Breivik.

[chops]

Why does Norway need immigrants? It is not a United States. He has every right to be outraged.

[chuckd]

Why does Norway need immigrants? It is not a United States. He has every right to be outraged.

Outrage is fine. Murder is not.

[chuckd]

The extremist anti-multiculturalists, either the actual violent practitioners such as Brievik or their chickenhawk inciters, are probably better described as bigots.

I notice you have used the term "chickenhawks" several times. Please advise your definition of this term.

Thank you for your time.

[folium]

The extremist anti-multiculturalists, either the actual violent practitioners such as Brievik or their chickenhawk inciters, are probably better described as bigots.

I notice you have used the term "chickenhawks" several times. Please advise your definition of this term.

Thank you for your time.

Brievik is the polar opposite of a chickenhawk.

"Chickenhawk" was originally used to describe US politicians, who while they had gone to some lengths to dodge the draft or any chance of getting in harm's way, were only too keen to send other people's sons and daughters into harm's way.

Rather contentious website linked below, which if accurate makes for interesting reading. Love Tom Delay's alleged comment ""So many minority youths had volunteered ... that there was literally no room for patriotic folks like himself."

http://www.awolbush.com/whoserved.html

In a broader sense "chickenhawk" is now used to refer to a person who talks a good talk about taking action but is/has been unwilling to actually do anything about it/more than happy to get someone to do the dirty work for them.