The Norway Terrorist

Pages: 1 2

But the tragedy won’t end at the lives lost in Norway. Bruce Bawer, the author of Surrender: Appeasing Islam, Sacrificing Freedom who lives in Norway, notes the broader concern that “legitimate criticism of Islam, which remains a very real threat to freedom in Norway and the West, has been profoundly discredited by association with this murderous lunatic.” As the European anti-jihad blogger Fjordman puts it, Breivik

has scored a major victory for his opponents. An agent provocateur seeking to discredit the right-wing conservative sliver of the European political spectrum would have a hard time doing a better job… It is the perfect excuse to persecute and silence opposing voices… We’re heading for dark days.

The Left – including the mainstream media, and stealth jihadists themselves, like the ubiquitous Muslim Brotherhood legacy group CAIR, the Council on American-Islamic Relations – won’t even bother to contain its collective glee over the fact that Breivik is a “right-wing Christian.” The narrative is already being constructed that will use him to tar everyone on the Right, particularly vocal critics of Islamic fundamentalism. This is the same Left that hijacks any and all discussions of Islamic terrorism by jumping up to insist that all Muslims must not be smeared because of the actions of a “tiny minority of extremists,” that not all terrorism is committed by Muslims and not all Muslims are terrorists. Of course, no responsible anti-jihadist has ever made such claims, but the Left never bothers to concede this. By contrast, instead of living by the standards they demand of the Right,lLeftists will now be perfectly happy to politicize Breivik’s terrorism and use him to tar everyone on the Right – Christians, conservatives, anti-jihadists, the Tea Party – everyone. And in fact, they have already begun attempting to link the Norway terrorist to Sarah Palin, of all people.

Breivik is a terrorist. His targeting of helpless schoolchildren makes him no better than the slaughterers at Beslan. But that doesn’t make everyone concerned about unfettered Islamic immigration, jihad, or the rapid disintegration of Europe’s cultural heritage a terrorist or even a sympathizer. There is no connection between the legitimate, courageous, lawful work of notable anti-jihadists and such evil. No true Christian, conservative, or responsible critic of jihad would condone Breivik’s despicable, cowardly acts or deem them to be in accordance with our beliefs and values. Much less would we celebrate those acts, unlike our Islamist counterparts. But denouncements of Breivik will be purposefully ignored by the Left.

Nor does it make Islamic terrorism any less of a threat. But the Left will use Breivik to divert attention from worldwide jihad, to advance their cultural Marxism, and to demonize the defenders of freedom. To echo Fjordman, we are facing dark days. We must face them with the truth.

Pages: 1 2

  • Black Eagle

    Islamic jihad killers had exterminated 100 persons in the one week before the Norway massacre of innocents. In the month of June 2011, 930 were sent to early graves by angry murdering Muslims. Over 17000 killed by murdering Muslims since 911 alone. But the same people foaming at the mouth about the neo-Nazi killer Breivik, have remained deaf and mute to those other deaths. Maybe they care more about blonde Norwegian children than the larger number of brown or black colored people who are more typically the victims of Islam? Or maybe, if a Muslim mass-murder event cannot be fashioned into weapon against conservatives, they are simply not interested.

    • Fred Dawes


    • White Eagle

      Dear Black Eagle,

      Your comment, although very expressive, lacks sharpness. Could you be more concise, and please tell us who are those angry murdering Muslims as you please to call them?And where have you gotten such statistics?

      White Eagle

  • Kinda lol

    Terrorism is very well defined as the resort to violence to further political, religious, or ideological causes. It is an oversimplification to beleive Al Qaeda attacked the West for purely religious purposes. Most of their reasons were actually quite political – Bin Laden viewed western influence in Arab states as a corruption of those states politically, in addition to the perceived negative religious effects. It might also be pointed out that even these “religious” issues were more to do with social behaviours than actual religious doctrine. There are plenty of Christians who take issue with short skirts, and there was a time in the church’s past where pretty severe punishments were handed out to people who didn’t meet these religiously defined codes of dress. Was that really a religious issue, or people taking something too seriously? In today’s society we say the latter, so why do we accuse others doing the same as falling into the former?

    There is such a thing as legitimate criticism of Islam and of Christianity. Both have in their holy books doctrines that are totally out of sync with today’s society. Christians have started to view many of these as allegories rather than taking them literally. This is an ongoing process. For instance, Christians still vastly oppose homosexuality as a concept. It is selective reading however to take that part of the bible literally but ignore that part which tells you never to cut your hair in a bowl shape (curse those beatles!)

    Likewise, I can legitimately criticise Islam for its insistance on patriarchal relationships in family life. But, I must recognize that the Bible does this very same thing, and it is only through social progression that this issue can be addressed in the muslim population.

    What ISN’T legitimate criticism however, is to say that Breivik did what he did because he was christian. There is no evidence of that. It’s clear that he indoctrinated himself with the most vile and extremist thoughts available on the political right, and used violence as a means to achieve some end he felt would benefit his beliefs.

    What strikes me is that many on the right, while voicing their legitimate indignation at the (not terribly common but still out there) accusation that Breivik did this because he was christian are failing to realize that this highlights the fallacy they commit when they make the claim that a terrorist committed violence because he or she was muslim.

    It is happenstance that some of the most violent regions in the world, with some of the most impoverished people who are willing to do some of the most radical things to try and better their lot in life, are predominantly muslim. I can undertand the mistake though. These places with violence are mostly muslim, therefore muslims are violent. It makes some sense. But, the fallacy is to think, “are ALL the muslims in these violent places?” The answer is no, they are not. Those muslims who have committed violence represent a small minority of the entire muslim population. Those who are properly termed terrorists is even smaller. I make that distinction because a number of the people fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq are doing so because a foreign army invaded their home or was responsible for killing someone they knew, not because of their religious beleifs. Even if you felt your own government had done something terribly wrong, if another state invaded yours you would probably feel the desire to protect your country.

    Christians, for the most part, are quite nice people. Muslims, for the most part, are also quite nice people. In fact, most of humanity is quite nice. However, if someone tells the world what a terrible threat a group of people represents, someone, somewhere, will take them seriously, will believe their society is in imminent danger, and will take radical action. Disaffected Germans listened to Hitler and let themselves beleive the Jews were destroying society. Disaffected Arabs listened to Bin Laden and beleived America was destroying their society. Breivik listened to the Ann Coulters and others like her of the world and beleived Muslims were destroying his society.

    They were all wrong.

    • PhillipGaley

      It is not mere happenstance that, in the larger picture, while no Christians will applaud this injury to Norway, many Moslems do applaud the equivalent injuries to many individuals and nations.
      Nor is it mere happenstance that, Moslem women are constrained to accept subjugation, are kept secluded, uneducated, fed a diet of fatalism, and to end as forever the handmaidens and chattels of bad men.
      It was not happenstance that, the peoples of the Moslem nations became so deeply inbred from frozen centuries of time in 1st cousin marriage, producing triple the rate of b. defects and low IQ with emotional instability, like a cult, and necessarily parasitic to the host society.
      Anyone can be charming for 20 minutes; and beside which, between being a mere nice person and being a representative of logical thought, there may be some remove, . . . and yes, "Kinda lol" does write like quite a nice person, . . . but, . . .but, in the face of these things—and, many other such, including wide-spread use of acid and stones, and the many inculcating violence in their own children, forsooth! And beyond the surety that, most Moslem so-called moderates are simply waiting in the wings—my question to such as "Kinda lol", would be: Just when will there have been sufficient record of anti-social and criminal activity—the world round—to have the G0D d_ed thing recognized in law as criminal / terrorist—assets seized, WIRETAPS, etc., the damnable thing stamped out, with every mosque an ash pit no less than five feet deep, and this to include that big one in Spain, . . . you know, do our part to make the world safe for women and children, . . . but when?

    • tkellybal

      You're blaming Ann Coulter?

    • Chezwick_mac

      KINDA: "It is happenstance that some of the most violent regions in the world, with some of the most impoverished people who are willing to do some of the most radical things to try and better their lot in life, are predominantly muslim."

      You are ascribing patently false motives to people you obviously don't understand. Muslims don't blow themselves up in order to "better their lot in life"…the premise is absurd. They do it to please their God and achieve paradise, as ascribed to in their religion.

      Typical clueless liberal.

      • Supreme_Galooty

        Two thumbs up. +

    • Sandy

      thank you. nice to see there are others who read this site that are intelligent.

    • Chris

      Shariah law is not a threat to modern society? Are you a muslim?

    • ObamaYoMoma

      Dude that is the most convoluted crock of crap I’ve ever read. Not only do you not have the first clue about Christianity, but you also don’t have the first clue about Islam as well. In fact, Islam masquerades as being a religion to dupe the societies it intends to subjugate into a very draconian form of totalitarianism via the imposition of Sharia. Thus, you couldn’t be more oblivious and your post could be a bigger crock of crap.

      Finally, if you are an example of the majority mindset of the Left, then you moonbats couldn’t be any more mentally incompetent.

      By the way, my dog writes better than you.

      • Questions

        Christian terror is real. Uganda's Lord's Resistance Army, an avowed Christian paramilitary group, is but one example. Or am I a "Leftist" for pointing that out?

        • Supreme_Galooty

          Christ and the subsidiary writings attributed to "Christianity" called for love of neighbor and love of God. Islam, Mohamed, the quran, hadiths, and other scribblings of those jolly Musselmen call for killing. While it is possible that Christians can commit terrorist acts, it is NOT possible to attribute those acts to "Christianity." Your comment is without merit.

        • ObamaYoMoma

          Christian terror is real. Uganda's Lord's Resistance Army, an avowed Christian paramilitary group, is but one example. Or am I a "Leftist" for pointing that out?

          Well…I don’t know if you are a "Leftist" but a lot like "Leftists" you are incredibly ignorant of Christianity, since if you knew one iota about Christianity, you’d know that the instant ones resorts to killing, unless it is in self-defense, that person then ceases being a Christian.

          Now, I don’t know anything about Uganda's Lord's Resistance Army, but given the level of strife caused by Muslims in that region of the world, it sounds to me like it is a Resistance Army established in self-defense against Muslim aggression, but then again that is only conjecture on my part.

          Nevertheless, a lot like "Leftists" today you are obviously incredibly ignorant of both Islam and Christianity, and that is not conjecture. Hence, if I were a guessing man, I would have to guess that you are a delusional leftist.

        • One World vs God

          Hey this looks like fun.

          Can I also put the words "avowed Christian" in front of various nouns and then make semi-informed commentary on distant conflicts?

          Yours truly,
          An Alleged Cultural Conservative

      • White Eagle

        Your last comment is so false and irrelevant that we wonder who is the dog here.

        You claim to know about Islam, but do you realize that those who impose severe regimes like Saudi Arabia and Iran only represent 5% of the Muslim population?

        Let us over exaggerate here and suppose that there are 100 000 Muslim terrorists out there. That would represent a percentage of 0.006% of the entire Muslim population. Is that then a reason enough to associate Islam as a whole with terrorism? I'm sure your mental capabilities can, with some efforts, answer that.

        Islam has never promoted terrorism, nor encouraged the killing of innocents. Don't believe the false assumptions and stereotypes about Islam , but rather search for yourself, and read the Quran.

        I feel the sudden urge to congratulate you. Saying "crap" in every other sentence can only show the irrevocable creativity and perspicacity of someone who claims to have strong writing skills.

        • ObamaYoMoma

          Hey Moonbat….I tried really hard man to respond to your reply, but I have to apologize because it is just too dumb and stupid. Please relay my condolences to your family.

    • seeker

      "It is an oversimplification to beleive Al Qaeda attacked the West for purely religious purposes."

      It's an oversimplification to believe Al Qaeda attacked the West for purely political or social purposes! Quit trying to look at Islamic terrorists through the Western mindset and you will see that Islam is a complete social, political, economic, militaristic, and religious system of control. Striking terror in the hearts of the unbelievers comes straight from the Islamic holy book. Wake up, and quit trying to define everyone according to your own narrow point of view!

      The small minority of militant Muslim jihadists who are creating murder and mayhem around the world today needs to be exposed for what it is. The greater Muslim majority that is supporting the work of the militant branch of Islam needs to be exposed for what it is as well. Muslims are only getting away with their goal of concurring and subduing the non Muslim people of the world because they are hiding behind the cloak of the “religion of peace”! The religion of peace is a lie. Islam is really out to kill, steal and destroy just like its true founder.

    • One World vs God

      Wow. You blathered yourself into a very nutty place in that last paragraph…

      Ann Coulter? You really lost me by the end. "Nice" don't mean doodly squat…
      People like you need to stop thinking you know anything about Christianity.

      You need to get saved. By the Savior. Yes – indeed you do.

  • crackerjack

    Interesting to now see those who have for years kept up a constant drum beat of anti-Islam, anti-multicultural, anti-Leftist, anti -appeasement propaganda now wash thier hands in innocence when someone puts their ideology into practice.

    Breivik is not a Christian. His mindset originates not from the Bible, but from Robert Spencer, Daniel Pipes, Pam Geller, Glenn Beck, Henryk Broder and Mark Steyn. They talk and write, Breivik acted.

    • mikidiki

      Time for morning prayers, isn't it?

    • Bob the Aussie

      You are obviously on a CRACK crackerjack. Only a drug addict like yourself could concoct such a nonsensical rant.
      It deserves in response nothing more than a laughter, a belch and a fart.

      • a12iggymom

        I don't know where crackhead lives but America has a little thing called 'free speech'. Unlike his Hitleresque mind, we do not burn books or people for their writings, speeches or thought.

        • crackerjack

          Strange. didn't this site rejoyce at the burning of the Quaran? And as I remember, the USA once even burnt Beatles LP's.

          • sancmom

            Interesting to those who jumped all over crackerjack use such elevated responses liked "drug addict..belch and fart" or "crackhead…Hitleresque" Perhaps they pulled them out of their Mark Steyn/Glenn Beck manifestos.

    • Phantom II

      You are quite correct, crackerjack, I share your view. I totally approve of Breivik's behavior and I hope this act marks the beginning of the crusade against Islam and liberals.
      No one speaks ill of Norway's FM, Gahr Store and the AUF leader, Eskil Pederson who organized this Nazi indoctrination camp. These people are pure evil as are the leaders of this Marxist global take over. The meeting between Netanyahu and Obama at the White House is a portrait of good and evil. The useful idiots, such as yourself are oblivious to evil. The milady of the ignorant is that they are ignorant of their ignorance.

      • crackerjack

        I understand your mindset. Bleivik's manifest is your manifest. Untill now, this new looser ideology, a mixture of nationalism, religious supremacy and xenophobia, could spread unhinderd and almost become political mainstream.
        This will change now.

    • Mickey Oberman

      None of the philosophies or parties you condemn in your ill conceived tirade have ever advocated murder, let alone mass murder or murder of children.
      Your warped interpretation of what they stand for indicates a severely warped and bigoted mind.

    • Chezwick_mac

      You ignorant dolt! I challenge you to produce a single sentence from any one of the writers you've named above where they even remotely hinted for the murder of innocents as a response to Jihad.

      What you seem to be saying is that Robert, Pamela, etc have no right to expose to the world the daily episodes of religiously-inspired violence, tyranny and misogyny emanating from the Islamic world…because somewhere, some lunatic might respond with violence.

      You're very deep.

    • lbinvegas

      This moron has most likely been an apologist for year, making excuses for the mass murder committed by Islamists. How gleeful he is that there is one one non-muslim to point to.

  • myomy

    The code of conduct required of muslims by their Quran promises terrorist jihadis the hightest honor and rewards. The code of conduct requred of Christians by the Bible promises eternal damnation and torment to evil doers. Big difference. There is nothing Christian about what Breiviik has done. It goes against Christian doctrine. On the other hand muslim terrorists are in complince with Islamic doctrine. Breivik claiming he's a Christian doen't make it true, he's not. Muslims admire their jihadis and martyrs and name streets after them, bring gifts to the families, herald them as martyrs, bury them in sacred grounds, designate their mosques as holy grounds and give them highest respect. On the other hand Christians condemn, punish and abhor people like Breivik. BIG DIFFERENCE.

    • Jim

      Anyone can put anything on their web sites, blogs or whatever. For instance I could put on my profile and in a blog I am 22 years old and a multimillionaire! I wish I was! Just saying it doesn't make it so.

  • A Norwegian

    Norway's psycho killer, Anders Behring Breivik, is not a devout Christian .

    According to his manifesto "2083 – A European Declaration of Independence", p. 1341.

    "I'm not going to pretend I'm a very religious person as that would be a lie. I've always been very pragmatic and influenced by my secular surroundings and environment".

    • PhillipGaley

      . . . . nice "hit", . . .

  • Mickey Oberman

    You needn't be alarmed at the "Christian Terrorist" sobriquet. It wont last long, especially in Norway.
    In short order the Jews and Israel will be found responsible, as usual.

  • Mickey Oberman

    Norwegians are not great cultivators of beards.
    Muslims are.
    Breivik has a beard that looks strangely like the crescent moon.

  • waterwillows

    Most serial killers are movitated by delusion and hatred. This one seems no different. Any attempts to 'twist' this into a Christian action will be exposed for the lie it is.
    We will know when the Christians pick up the sword because they will do so in large numbers.

    • annie

      That is true, and the motivation will be self defense, not heavenly reward.

  • Brujo Blanco

    This Noweigian puke is just a total whacko. His motivations are now a matter of academic/forensic interest. His acts cannot be associated with any relifious group without evidence. Until proven it should be considered that he acted alone.

    • a12iggymom

      There where arrests yesterday of six associated with this…yet only one report from the news…agenda? oh yes…

  • Jim

    Floating about in liberal mythology is the blame shifting all purpose " The Christians made
    made the Muslims do it" or the ever popular "the Jews made the Muslim do it do it" and even the incantation "American Imperialism made the Muslim do it"

    May I offer anew Blame Shifter to the mix "The Multiculturalists made him do it"

  • CAROLE63

    I don`t think he is using the faith of Chritianity to justify what he did!
    He is a murderer!
    I don`t believe he is anymore than a nominal Christian!
    For one thing he is connected to freemasonry, which is anti-God and another question is why would he attack his own people if he hated multiculturalism and was very anti-Islam!
    The whole thing does not make sense!
    The only thing I can say is, he is a mad man who has been possessed by an evil demon to be able to carry out such horrendous acts on young, innocent people!

    • Jim

      Freemasonry is not Anti God. Some of our founding fathers were freemasons. We had a friend – a very staunch CHRISTIAN who was a freemason. If it was anti God he would not have joined

      Candidates for regular Freemasonry are required to declare a belief in a Supreme Being.[28] However, the candidate is not asked to expand on, or explain, his interpretation of Supreme Being. The discussion of politics and religion is forbidden within a Masonic Lodge, in part so a Mason will not be placed in the situation of having to justify his personal interpretation.[29] Thus, reference to the Supreme Being can mean the Christian Trinity to a Christian Mason, Allah to a Muslim Mason, Para Brahman to a Hindu Mason, etc. While most Freemasons would take the view that the term Supreme Being equates to God, others may hold a more complex or philosophical interpretation of the term.

      • CAROLE63

        I think you should investigate Freemasonry further as many in the lower orders/levels do not understand the dangers!
        They have pretty bloodcurdling oaths said over them and they are definitely not godly!
        It is so easy for people to be deceived by the devil`s schemes!
        Try getting hold of Barry Smith`s teachings on freemasonry which is also connected to the NWO! He has video teachings on this subject which will enlighten you!

  • antileft

    Whatever this person´s ˝reasons´, he remains a blood-thirsty murderer, a sociopath,a humen genetic refuse, someone whose morality has never really existed, and is in the same group of monsters as Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, Tito, Pot Pol, and the saddest list goes on and on… There are simply no reasons, only the calculating logic of sadism… And this happened in one of the most liberal countries in the world. God, please, deliver me from the clutches of disease called liberalism. I will pray for the families of the innocent children… God help us all !!!

  • voted against carter

    ' TAQIYYA '
    Do your own research about it if you don't know what this means.

    Islam IS EVIL. PERIOD.

    Islam strives for world domination.

    The Quran commands Muslims to exercise jihad.

    The Quran commands Muslims to establish shariah law.

    The Quran commands Muslims to impose Islam on the entire world.

    Islam is NOT a religion, it IS a totalitarian ideology.

    Islam wants to dominate all aspects of life, from the cradle to the grave.

    Shariah law is a law that controls every detail of life in a Islamic society.

    From civic- and family law to criminal law.

    It determines how one should eat, dress and even use the toilet.

    Oppression of women is good, drinking alcohol is bad.

    The core of the Quran is the call to jihad.

    Jihad means a lot of things and is Arabic for battle.

    Islam means submission, there cannot be any mistake about its goal.

    Islam and freedom, Islam and democracy are not compatible.

    They are opposite values.

    Mohamed's "wife" was six years old.

    That makes Mohamed a PEDOPHILE!!!

    And you want to base a "Religion" on this a z z -holes rantings?

    Are you INSANE?

    • White Eagle

      Mohammed's wife was so young because he decided to take her under his protection, give her a shelter and a place where she can eat. He did not have any sexual relation with her whatsoever and has expressively said so.

      Shariah Law is only imposed in Iran and Saudi Arabia, and these two only represent 5% of the entire Muslim population. Stop generalizing.

      Mohammed, you cannot deny, was one of the most disciplined, respectful and generous people of all times. Give me one instance where he has been otherwise.

  • jon stoneback

    A point I have not seen broached by anyone is the question of just what group is served by this Norwegian atrocity? Certainly not the European Christian community – such that it might still exist. The Islamic community must now be overjoyed. Might we soon learn that this was a clever Islamic ploy? It would certainly serve their purposes.

  • Joseph F, McNulty

    If Brivik was a Christian, where did ne go to church? Where is his profession of faith? How does he square shooting teenagers face-to-face with the Prince of Peace who did not even respond againt those who mocked and persecuted Him? There is something deep and dark here.

    • One World vs God

      Of course he was Christian.
      He was a faithful member of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Nitrate Fertilizer.

      I teach pistol shooting to the children there in sunday school so I should know.

  • Joseph F. McNulty

    If he is really a "Christian" fighter, why did he do what he did, which is so discrediting to the cause he claims to support? Wouldn't it have made more sense — if he is really is what he claims to be — to pose as a Muslim convert killing "infidels"? Either he is not really a Christian, or he is a lunatic.

  • Joseph F. McNulty

    As others have said, this incident has delivered a great blow to the anti-Islamic cause. Now, anyone opposing Islam and Muslim immigration will be seen as a potential sympathizer with a mass murder who shot down defenseless children. This was an intelligence op — done by what mechanism, we cannot know — or incredibly bad luck, Being a disbeliver in coincidence, I suspect this was an intelligence op by . . . someone, either the Islamists or the political ruling class. No proof? Of course, it was set up that way. But think of who benefits from this — not the anti-Islamic movement. I can't help but think ths is a way to discredit Gert Wilders since his trial turned out wrong.

  • Sherry Peyton

    Now that is some chutzpah dude. YOU’RE the real victims? Damn I didn’t think anybody could outwhine Sarah.

    • MarkTapson

      I didn't say we were the real victims. It's very simple, though I guess I'll have to walk you through it. It's the Left who will shove the real victms aside to politicize this act of terrorism to smear and blame the very people who condemn Breivik and his actions.

      • Supreme_Galooty

        One commends your effort, Mark, but as the saying goes, "Ye jist cayn't fix stupid."

        • MarkTapson

           <DIV>Thanks, Supreme. I shouldn't have bothered to reply, because leftist trolls aren't interested in rational debate.I've found that the laziest, stupidest ones just pop into try to make a Sarah Palin reference,'cause that's all they're capable of.</DIV> <DIV style=”FONT: 10pt arial”>

  • susan

    The Norwegian was not a terrorist, any more than the Columbine shooters were terrorists. Not every mentally ill mass murderer is a terrorist. Reserve the term for those who deserve the title.

    • MarkTapson

      Look up the definition of terrorism. If he's not a terrorist, who is?

      • trickyblain

        Muslims. Only Muslims.

  • flyingtiger

    Good posts, everybody! I had an idea of what I wanted to say about this incident, but others have expressed it better.

  • A Norwegian

    Norway is a pseudo-democracy. After the shooting incident our Prime minister, Jens Stoltenberg, proclaimed that Norway will respond to the terror with "more democracy". Unless you are a Norwegian you will not be able to understand what he actually is meaning.

    "More democracy" means MORE public funding to the violent thugs in organizations like SOS rasisme (SOS racism), Antirasistisk senter (the Norwegian Center against racism) and other pro-multiculturalism, pro-socialist, pro-Labour party groups.

    More direct public funding to the newspapers, ALL of them more or less social-democratic. The transfer of public money to newspapers is rigged in such a way that labour-newspapers get a vast and disproportional part of the funding.

    Further, more money to our hard-left national public broadcaster. Nearly all of the former national broadcaster (NRK) bosses have been politicians from the Labour Party, Norway's dominant party since World War II.

    He does NOT mean that we can finally vote on important topics through referendums. He knows perfectly well that the majority of Norwegians do not want to be a minority in their own country within just a few decades. Referendums, in Norwegian labour party's new-speak, is an undemocratic instrument that will be misused by crude, anti-democratic populist forces, and must be avoided by all costs.

    • ObamaYoMoma

      "More democracy" means MORE public funding to the violent thugs in organizations like SOS rasisme (SOS racism), Antirasistisk senter (the Norwegian Center against racism) and other pro-multiculturalism, pro-socialist, pro-Labour party groups.

      In other words, the Labor Party is predictability digging in its heals and is more determined than ever to push multiculturalism down Norway’s throat and at the same time to destroy Norway from within.

    • skulldiggerin

      That 's the spirit !

    • MoreSmart

      gee, Norwegian, I was hoping you would write the word "more" just one extra time! Just to show what an educated man you are. You are a coward and a jerk!!! FY! Take care of yourselves and stand on your own two feet!


      Lea Moore

  • Bob

    Someone played with the Norways shooters facebook page. They added a few things .. like him being Christian.


    • ObamaYoMoma

      Interesting. Thanks for the link.

  • Another Norwegian

    I support the views posted by "A Norwegian" 50 minutes ago. He is right. Unfortunately.

  • ObamaYoMoma

    frankly, most terrorism carried out worldwide today is at the hands of jihadists.

    Frankly, that’s incorrect, as terrorism and jihad are entirely two different thing altogether. In fact, you are conflating what is jihad with terrorism.

    Terrorism always involves extreme violence only, is usually directed against civilian non-combatants for any number of political causes, and is always perpetrated by political extremists.

    However, in stark contrast to terrorism, jihad can be both violent and non-violent, is always directed against unbelievers, either civilian non-combatants or military combatants, is always committed in the cause of Allah and only by MAINSTREAM ORTHODOX MUSLIMS as opposed to extremists, as is in the case of terrorism.

    Indeed, the sixth and most important pillar of which Islam stands makes it an obligatory duty in Islam for each and every Muslim to fight jihad in the cause of Allah.

    The sixth and most important pillar of Islam doesn’t make it an obligatory duty only for extremists to fight jihad in the cause of Allah or an obligatory duty only for radicals to fight jihad in the cause of Allah. Instead, the sixth and most important pillar of Islam makes it an obligatory duty for ALL MUSLIMS to fight jihad in the cause of Allah, no exceptions.

    Therefore, in stark contrast to terrorism and per the sixth and most important pillar of Islam, only MAINSTREAM ORTHODOX MUSLIMS fight jihad in the cause of Allah, as terrorism and jihad are two entirely different things altogether that more often than not are conflated together as being the same thing.

    In addition, the most important difference between jihad and terrorism is that jihad, in stark contrast to terrorism, can also take place via non-violent means. In fact, the non-violent varieties of jihad relative to the violent varieties of jihad take place exponentially far more prevalently. Indeed, it’s not even close.

    However, because jihad and terrorism are conflated together as being the same thing, especially the violent varieties of jihad, the non-violent varieties of jihad, on the other hand, take place completely undetected and unopposed, and this manifestation is analogous to the West being oblivious to Soviet espionage during the Cold War. Had the West been oblivious to Soviet espionage during the Cold War the same way it is to the non-violent varieties of jihad, today the West would be a slave to the Communist State and most people would be worked to death in Soviet gulags.

    A few examples of non-violent jihad that takes place completely undetected and unopposed would be mass Muslim immigration to the West for the purpose of demographic conquest, the bribing of thousands of college and university Middle East Studies Departments throughout Europe and the USA via large financial donations in order to whitewash Islam and to keep the truth hidden, the invention of Islamophobia as a new kind of political correctness to silence and marginalize anyone and everyone trying to expose the truth about Islam, raising millions of dollars in the West via Islamic charities under false pretenses for the purpose of financing violent jihad, and fomenting hatred and violence via lies, libels, slanders, and innuendos against Israel, America, the West, and all unbelievers.

    Meanwhile, there are no examples of non-violent terrorism since terrorism as opposed to jihad doesn’t employ non-violent means.

    Finally, for every terrorist attack that takes place somewhere in the world, roughly 15,000 violent jihad attacks take place. Meanwhile, our DHS is blowing hundreds of billions of dollars focusing 100 percent only on preventing terrorism while eschewing racial profiling like the plague, as it conflates terrorism with violent jihad, at the same time the non-violent varieties of jihad in the USA takes place completely undetected and unopposed.

    • MarkTapson

      To say that terrorism is carried out by jihadists is not the same as conflating the two. I'm well aware that jihad is both violent and non-violent.

      • ObamaYoMoma

        To say that terrorism is carried out by jihadists is not the same as conflating the two. I'm well aware that jihad is both violent and non-violent.

        Really, can terrorism be perpetrated by non-violent means similar to jihad? Can jihad be perpetrated not in the cause of Allah? Is terrorism like jihad always perpetrated against non-Muslim unbelievers in the cause of Allah? Can jihad in the cause of Allah be perpetrated for any number of political causes?

        The Noble Koran published in Saudi Arabia by the “King Fahd Complex for the Printing of the Holy Qur’an, Madinah, K.S.A. says the following about jihad and the sixth pillar of Islam:

        “Al-Jihad (holy fighting) in Allah’s Cause (with full force of numbers and weaponry) is given the utmost importance in Islam and is one of its pillars (on which it stands). Allah’s Word is made superior, (His Word being Lailaha illallah which means none has the right to be worshipped but Allah), and His Religion (Islam) is propagated. “By abandoning Jihad (may Allah protect us from that) Islam is destroyed and the Muslims fall into an inferior position; their honour is lost, their lands are stolen, their rule and authority vanish. Jihad is an obligatory duty in Islam on every Muslim, and he who tries to escape from this duty, or does not in his innermost heart wish to fulfill this duty, dies with one of the qualities of a hypocrite.”

        Notice the sixth and most important pillar of which Islam stands makes it an obligatory duty in Islam on EVERY MUSLIM to wage jihad in Allah’s Cause. It’s not an obligatory duty in Islam only on extremists and it’s not an obligatory duty in Islam only on radicals, but on EVERY MUSLIM. Thus, jihad is always waged only by MAINSTREAM ORTHODOX MUSLIMS, in stark contrast to terrorism, which is always perpetrated by political extremists.

        Hence, do MAINSTREAM ORTHODOX MUSLIMS perpetrate terrorism for any number of political causes? Do political extremists perpetrate jihad in Allah’s cause? Only if you are in the habit of conflating jihad with terrorism could you believe that is so?

        Finally, as I said, for every terrorist attack that takes place somewhere in the world, roughly 15,000 violent jihad attacks take place. It’s time to stop conflating jihad together with terrorism, as there are already far too many political correct myths inhibiting our efforts to combat the global jihad.

        • MarkTapson

           <DIV>So you're saying that violent jihadistsare not committing acts of terrorism, and terrorists cannot be jihadists. Got it.</DIV> <DIV style=”FONT: 10pt arial”>

          • ObamaYoMoma


  • LindaRivera

    The filthy murderer is the spawn of hell. One of the devil's children.

    Please G-D, heal the wounded. Comfort the families who lost their loved ones.

    G-D commanded:

    YOU SHALL NOT MURDER. G-D – the Holy One, will punish all murderers on the Day of Judgment.

    Jesus, the Jew, taught in the synagogues and in the famous Jewish temple on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, Israel.

    G-D's requirement for ALL humanity is KINDNESS:

    Bible, Micah 6:8 And what does the L-RD require of you but to do justice, to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your G-D.

    Jesus said in the Bible in Matthew 7:12 Treat people the same way you want them to treat you for this is the Law and the Prophets.

    Almighty G-D – Creator of the Universe – our HERO forever. G-D's forgiveness is astonishing. His love is amazing. G-D's kindness and mercy are beyond words to express.

    • tarleton

      The real problem is religious FundaMENTALism…..Islam is just the most malignant and aggressive form of it …it's clearly some type of psychosis or mental illnesss
      I wouldn't DARE have any of you creeps for neighbors as you're all deranged

      Islam is christianities deviant little brother who has failed to mature and grow up ……if you cast your mind back 450 years those christian fanatics were not too much better
      The Tudor Queen Mary was a true xian fanatic and heretic burner and those xian fanatics in France fought gruesome religious wars resulting in monstrous pogroms like the St Bartholomu's day massacre in 1571…you fundies are all cretons

  • LindaRivera

    In 2008, two polls showed the vast majority of Arab Muslims support terror attacks.

    One Palestinian Authority poll showed that 84 percent of Palestinian Authority Muslims approved of the massacre at Merkaz HaRav Yeshiva in Jerusalem, where eight students were murdered and ten wounded.

    This is very, very terrible.

    Americans will never forget that some Muslims in America and Muslims around the world celebrated the murder of our 3,000 innocents.

    Americans will never forget that THOUSANDS of Palestinian Authority Muslims celebrated with great joy and delight the mass slaughter of our cherished 3,000. They danced in the streets, passed out sweets and fired into the air. They are inhuman.

  • ObamaYoMoma

    This is the same Left that hijacks any and all discussions of Islamic terrorism by jumping up to insist that all Muslims must not be smeared because of the actions of a “tiny minority of extremists,” that not all terrorism is committed by Muslims and not all Muslims are terrorists.

    That argument could be neutralized altogether if the Right changes the dynamics of the debate by pointing out that terrorism and jihad are being conflated together, but that the two crimes against humanity are really two entirely different things altogether.

    For instance, jihad is always perpetrated only by MAINSTREAM ORTHODOX MUSLIMS and only against unbelievers, either civilian non-combatants or military combatants, is always committed in the cause of Allah to make Islam supreme, and can be both violent and non-violent.

    While terrorism, in stark contrast to jihad, always involves extreme violence only, is usually directed against civilian non-combatants for any number of political causes, and is always perpetrated by political extremists.

    Specifically, in Breivek’s case, his acts of terrorism were directed against Leftists and motivated by extreme hatred of the Left. In other words, it wasn’t in the cause of Allah and Breivek wasn’t a MAINSTREAM ORTHODOX MUSLIM because he was a political extremists and a Christian.

    In addition, violent jihad relative to terrorism takes place roughly at a rate of about 15,000 violent jihad attacks for every 1 terrorist attacks. Hence, violent jihad is an exponentially far greater threat relative to terrorism.

    Finally, jihad can also take place via violent means and non-violent means, while terrorism always only involves extreme violent means.

  • Joseph F. McNulty

    NOTE TO SHERRY PEYTON: I never said that I was a victim. Where did you get that? I only asked the question of who benefitted? One would imagine that any thinking person would do that, or are you so credulous as to think that certain news coverage just happens, like the weather. The existence of many apparently posed pictures of the shooter, showing on the worldwide internet within hours of the shooting, raises the question of where they came from (along with his apparently false "Christian" Facebook page). He is no Christian and neither was Tim McVey, who was a proud atheist,

  • Elan-tima

    A conundrum to contemplate is if this Norwegian cannot be a Christian because of his brutal act then were all the Crusaders of the past, from Jerusalem in the east to Spain in the west not really Christians for their violent acts to protect the faith of their church? Was El Cid a evil man or a saviour of the Christian people and culture of Spain? Obviously this Norwegian has not named or identified any sect or strain of Christianity that he believes he belongs to so it must be assumed that he means Christian in a historically cultural way. That begs the question whether one can be a Christian by individual pronouncement or does one have to have a documentary membership in a Christian organization to be a Christian? Christians always quote passages in the bible about how one needs to "turn the other cheek" or "those who live by the sword will die by the sword" but I know for a fact that in the book of Matthew Jesus instructs his Apostles to "carry swords for their will be bandits on the roads you travel".

    I can't condone the brutal acts of this Norwegian person or say I believe he is a modern day Christian Soldier but I will proudly say every time I use technology like a computer or listen to music or need the use of what western science and medicine has developed I thank those "Monks of War" the Crusaders for fighting and saving Christian Europe and culture from the degenerating plague that Islam and its adherents have wrought.

  • tagalog

    Oh well, sooner or later some lunatic sole-actor mass murderer would come along, proclaiming himself to be a Christian conservative. And of course inevitably the left would fasten that concept to itself with hoops of steel and proclaim in their own right that a Christian conservative is just as likely to kill mass numbers of innocent people as Muslim terrorists are. And of course the great majority of people will recognize the difference between an obvious lone actor, whose atrocity will revolt the very people he claims to be part of, and those murderers who are cheered on by those who believe as they do, in mass numbers.

    • Jim_C

      True, and tomorrow it will be some lefty kook. And the day after that…

    • Smart


      Well, I am aliberal, and I certainly would never be so immmoral as to use the actions of this psychopath for any benefit to me or any political or political ideology I might personally support. Give us some credit, please! I wouldn't support this gut in any way, shape or form, for any reason!

  • Piera Prister

    The Norway terrorist is only a Nazi and I remind you that the Islamists fought in Europe in World War II under Nazi Insignia. They are allies. Who orchestrated the bombings in Argentina? Nazis and Iranians. Nazism is still alive!

  • Ghostwriter

    This man in Norway deserves whatever happens to him. He deserves to be hung.

  • Joseph F. McNulty

    NOTE TO ELAN-TIMA: Are you really arguing that the DEFENSIVE Crusades, in which Europeans tried to recapture former Christian lands, such as Byzantium, from Muslim military invaders, is somehow comparable to the methodical slaughter of young people (as young as 10) who were unarmed and defence-less? In fact, if you read much about it, you will find that the Muslims who fought the Crusaders admired them because they were "strong in their religion, like the Muslims."

    • Elan-tima

      Nope. I'm not saying that this brutal act is the equal to what the Crusaders did for Europe. But I'm offering the chance for everyone to take a objective view of whom can be considered a Christian based on their behaviours, specifically non pacifistic. If you can't really be a Christian unless your peaceful, then you should a posteriori condemn the Crusaders because whether defensively or not, they killed in the name and defence of the Christian faith. Is killing always wrong? In my opinion I think not. As I said, I'll proudly admit thanks to the Crusaders of old who killed and died, the result of which is the priceless advancements and opportunities that many take for granted in the present. I have read much about it and enjoy doing so though I could care less what Muslims in the past or present think.
      I repeat I don't condone the brutal act committed in Norway but do condone and celebrate what the Crusaders did, ergo I don't think they can be equated.

  • Jim_C

    Remember: tomorrow, it will be a left winger. Ask yourself: what will you say, then?

    This guy is crazy enough. Out of the several billion people in this world, there's a handful of truly insanely dangerous people. Let's not all be crazy.

  • ApolloSpeaks


    This psychotic mass murderer in Oslo was more anti-Norwegian than anti-Moslem. His hatred for Norwegians was greater than his hatred of Moslems. If not he would have car bombed a Moslem mosque followed by a shooting spree of believers in a Moslem neighborhood..

    Breivik was poisoned with deadly hatred against his own people because he believes they're dangerously asleep to a lethal enemy within hell bent on destroying Norwegian culture in particular, and Western/Christrian civilization in general. Brivik was driven to mass murdering his fellow citizens because he refused any longer to be ignored and wanted their full and undivided attention and that of the world. That about sums up this terrible twisted man.

    • skulldiggerin

      He attacks whom he perceived to be the enablers of the Islamic parasitic filth
      creeping all over Europe and Norway.
      The Islamic vermin parasiting Norway and the Scandinavian("There are no Islamic rapes ! No, it's all calumnies by RWE !")countries would be nothing were it not for the
      quislings like Stoltenberg & Olaf Palme !

  • Asher

    This is all designed to make Christians look like Terrorists. Anders just demonstrated the terrorism Tactics of Islam too and they are now recruiting other nationalities to throw off the police and the FBI. Where is the proof he studied the bible or believed in it. You aren't a Christian until you accept Jesus as your savior and obey his commands. Breivik just demonstrated his allegiance is to Satan!

  • madsatyrist

    Sigh. Actually, if you care to check the FBI terrorism database, environmental and animal rights terrorism is by far the most common in the US. Many of those groups self identify as either Wiccan or Christian. Defining Christian as non violent, and then saying there are no violent Christians is logically ridiculous, but if that bit of foolish circular reasoning lets you sleep better at night, have fun with it. I hear exactly the same thing from some Muslims, that a violent Muslim is not a "real" Muslim, but whatever. I suppose the abortion clinic murderers who universally self identify as Christian and are inspired by websites and news letters that are published by churches which have "Christ" in their names aren't really Christians either, they just fake it. Funny how these are always "white supremacists" in the news and reports, could there be some pandering going on there? Of course, the KKK was never associated with any churches either – except that it's a fact that it was deeply involved in a great many, with KKK members walking up the aisle to make the "Klan contribution" after the offering plate was passed in a very public way. That's history, look it up.

    • MarkTapson

      Sigh. I never wrote that there were no violent Christians. I never even wrote that there was no such thing as Christian terrorism. I also didn't write that most acts of terrorism that have been carried out in the U.S. were Islamic – I said "worldwide." So I don't know who it is you think you're lecturing, but it isn't me, And if you think that environmental or animal rights terrorism is a greater threat to this country that Islamic fundamentalists, and that bit of foolish reasoning helps you sleep better at night, then have fun with it.

  • Fred Dawes

    This madness will eat us all alive and that has alway been the plan.

  • skulldiggerin

    When there is a left, there is bound to be a right.
    When there is an extreme left, there is bound to be an extreme right.
    And in between there is plenty of space for false flags.

    Hey quisling Stoltenberg, do u hear the screams of the
    Islam-raped Norwegian women ?
    No, u 're too busy holding them down and putting rags in their
    mouths for yur Islamic pals to get their daily ration of Islamic bliSS,
    while howling yur slyly hateful rants against Norwegian patriots.

    With such a religion promising the pleasures of rape in the here and the hereafter
    and with a paradisiac bordello to boot, unprincipled traitors like u will convert readily !
    If it's not already done.
    And what was taught at this leftard youth camp with plenty of Islamic spawns there ?
    The Koranic principles of divinity-sanctioned mass murder under the cover of
    multiculturalism ? It had been done before during the red-ideology-terrorist-war.
    Now the envy-green-ideology-terrorist-war is using exactly the same methods.

    Either executing his act under his real self-proclaimed flag, or under a false one,
    the targets were well chosen.

    And what about some reports of another shooter ?
    Amazing marksmanship for a lone gun !

  • nina

    This is ridiculous. You have all swollowed the leftist point of view hook, line and sinker. What sane person would ever blame a whole movement for the deeds of one demented person? No, a sane prson woudn't. But as the leftists have nothing much to put against the people who love freedom except for repeating again and again the same name calling of : racist, nazi, etc. Now, at last they have something to scare their antagonists with. And we are shivering in our boots. Evidently they are better with words than the people who fight for freedom of speech. This brough out the hand wringers and the panic makers. The Oslo affair will set back our cause, they say. In whose eyes? As I said, rational people will not judge truth speakers because some demented person decided to do a dastardly dead and agreed with one of their arguments. If a murderer quoted Shakespeare, would the writer be to blame? Or if he quoted the Bible, oh, wait, if he quoted the Bible, the leftists would shurely blame the Bible.

  • fmobler

    Note to Elan-tima:

    Matthew does not say anything remotely like this about carrying swords in case there are bandits. The only thing close is when Jesus mocks his captors for coming after him with swords as if he were a bandit.

    The only thing even remotely close in the Gospels is Luke 22:36 "And he said unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise a wallet; and he that hath none, let him sell his cloak, and buy a sword." No direct word about protection.

    In fact, after the disciples produce two swords, Jesus says that's enough. This is immediately before the episode in which one of the disciples (traditionally Peter) uses one of th swords to cut off the ear of one of the captors in defense of Jesus, after which Jesus tells him to put it away. The bit about Jesus instructing them to buy swords is not easy to figure out because we don't get much more context. I've heard it discussed mainly in terms of prophecy fulfillment. I've never heard it discussed in terms of Jesus telling the disciples to arm themselves. But I suppose someone somewhere has tried to make that case.

  • fmobler

    Should have included the next verse: Luke 22:37 "For I say unto you, that this which is written must be fulfilled in me, And he was reckoned with transgressors: for that which concerneth me hath fulfilment." You can see why most commentary concentrates on prophecy fulfillment.

  • Mike

    I am really impressed how many racists are in this world.

  • Diana

    The attacks from Muslims, were not because of the religion, or because of God. It happens to be Muslims fighting the government, and media and the government want people to believe it's because of the religion. People need to start understanding that. People need to remove the word Muslim, or Islam religion from these attacks. Example: Afghanistan they are Muslims, but first they are Afghanistan, same as in India, they are fighting amongst each other not because of religion, but because of government and land. People need to stop stereotyping Muslims. No one likes to be stereotyped so stop doing it to Muslims. It's all about government NOT religion.

  • Kymberly Bosshardt

    Great blog, thanks for sharing. I will for sure visit once again

  • crackerjack

    It's called incitement to violence. A simple scheme, often used by anti-Semites.