Many thanks to the PVV for sending this:

Statement of Geert Wilders concerning the massacre in Norway

The brutal murder of dozens of innocent Norwegian civilians several days ago has shocked the Freedom Party (Dutch PVV). We mourn and stand by the Norwegian people who suffer from a massive blow.

The manifesto of the perpetrator makes clear that this is a madman. He wants to work with Al Qaeda (which he cherishes great admiration for), craves the bombing of cities, dreams of knights that surgically mutilate themselves, and wants to meet his hero Karadzic.

Breivik also refers to the Netherlands. That the fight against Islam is violently abused by a psychopath is disgusting and a slap in the face of the global anti-Islamic movement. It fills me with disgust that the perpetrator refers to the PVV and me in his manifesto.

Neither PVV nor I are responsible for a lone idiot who twisted and violently abused the freedom-loving anti-Islamization ideals, no matter how much some people would like that. We are democrats at heart. The Freedom Party has never, ever called for violence and will never do. We believe in the power of the ballot box and the wisdom of the voter. Not bombs and guns.

We fight for a democratic and nonviolent means against the further Islamisation of society and will continue to do so. The preservation of our freedom and security is our only goal.

— Geert Wilders

Our Austrian correspondent Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff, whom regular readers know well, has been pulled into the controversy over the recent atrocities in Norway. In response to numerous media requests, Elisabeth has decided to make the following statement, which will be her only one.

Below is her own translation into English. The original German is below the translation.

In English:

APA Aussendung
Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff, M.A.

Statement

I condemn in the strongest possible terms the terror attacks that took place in Oslo and on Utøya island on July 23, 2011. There are no excuses for this wicked atrocity, nor can it be relativized. I extend my sympathies to the Norwegian people and especially to the relatives and friends of the dead. I mourn with the survivors.

I very much regret that this psychopathic killer believed he had to make reference to my beliefs in his 1,500-page manifesto. I can hardly defend myself against such wrongful exploitation, but those who know me and hear what I say in my public appearances know very well that I reject any form of violence.

However, if well-founded criticism is blamed for those attacks, aren’t the critics of Olof Palme to blame for his murder?

Did Mahatma Gandhi’s critics kill him, or did the killer himself bear individual responsibility?

Were the critics of the Austro-Hungarian monarchy to blame for the murder of the crown prince, and consequently responsible for the outbreak of World War I?

I am a woman of words, and I have nothing to do with violence, which I categorically reject.

In addition, I reject all worldviews that justify the use of violence. In this rejection, I do not care whether the ideology commands its power with the help of guns or swords.

Auf Deutsch:

APA Aussendung
Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff, M.A.

Erklärung

Ich verurteile aufs Schärfste die Terroranschläge von Oslo und auf ein Jugendcamp auf der Insel Utöya vom 23. Juli. Es gibt keinerlei Entschuldigung oder Relativierung für dieses infame Verbrechen. Meine Anteilnahme gilt dem norwegischen Volk und besonders den Angehörigen. Ich trauere mit den Hinterbliebenen.

Ich bedaure es sehr, dass der psychopathische Attentäter glaubte, sich in seinem 1.500-Seiten Pamphlet auch auf meine Ansichten beziehen zu müssen. Ich kann mich gegen solche falschen Vereinnahmungen leider nicht wehren, denn wer mich und meine Vorträge kennt, der weiß, dass ich jede Form von Gewalt anlehne.
Wenn fundierte Kritik Schuld an Attentaten ist, sind beispielsweise dann die Kritiker Olof Palmes für den Mord an ihn verantwortlich?

Haben die Kritiker Mahatma Gandhis ihn ermordet oder war es der Attentäter selbst in individueller Verantwortung?

Waren die Kritiker der Monarchie schuld am Attentat auf den Thronfolger und daher auch schuld am Ausbruch des Ersten Weltkriegs?

Ich bin eine Frau der Worte, habe mit Gewalt nichts zu tun und lehne diese kategorisch ab.

Ich lehne alle Weltbilder ab, die Gewalt rechtfertigen. Bei dieser Ablehnung ist es mir gleich, ob laut der Ideologie die Macht aus den Läufen von Gewehren kommt oder ob diese mit dem Schwert verbreitet wird.

Update: This post has been bumped to the top. The usual news feed is just below it.

For a complete Fjordman blogography, see The Fjordman Files. There is also a multi-index listing here.

Note: Fjordman has included both English and Norwegian versions of the text.

In English:

I am still getting many emails from journalists. Yes, if you send emails to this website I do normally get them. I may choose to answer a few journalists directly and have already done so, but some others will be answered indirectly via this website. I hope you understand that I do not want to make my email address public.

I was not involved in these senseless murders in any way, and have nothing to hide, but I am so swamped right now that I cannot promise that I will answer everybody. It’s beyond my personal capacity to do so. I will answer as many as I can in English or in Norwegian, the only languages I know well enough to write in.

I would like to thank those who sent me so many support emails, from Australia to Israel. I greatly appreciate it, and I am sorry that I cannot thank all of you directly. I hope we can eventually return to doing what this website normally does, which is to post essays on important subjects, some of them controversial, others not so much. But for right now the attention focused on this website is so unusual that we have to deal with that issue first.

Comments will still be closed for the time being. We apologize to regular readers for this, but hope you understand the situation.

I want to emphasize a few important points. According to what has been reported in the mass media, Anders Behring Breivik started planning his barbaric attacks as far back as 2002. That was before Robert Spencer had started his website Jihad Watch.

The very first post I ever wrote under the name Fjordman was in February 2005. It is still available online on my old blog and can be easily verified by anybody who wants to. This also means that this horrible man had been planning mass murder for years before he had read even a single word I had ever written.

I’d just like to point that out.

I would also like to point out that hundreds of thousands of people from Canada to India have read my essays over the years, and to my knowledge not a single one of them has killed so much as a sparrow as a result of doing so.

I have read about the unspeakable things Anders Behring Breivik did at Utøya. Any person doing such a thing is a monster. He murdered dozens of people in cold blood and injured countless others, mentally or physically. That’s bad enough, and it will take years for those wounds to heal, if they ever do.

It is irresponsible in this situation to try to expand his list of victims even further, from hundreds to hundreds of millions of people, by exploiting this atrocity to shut down vital political debates about immigration, Multiculturalism, or Islam in multiple countries. It cannot be allowed to happen.

That monster has already executed many people. He should not be allowed to execute political freedom in the Western world as well.

På norsk:

Jeg får fremdeles mange eposter fra journalister. Ja, his dere sender eposter til denne nettsiden vil jeg som regel motta dem. Kanskje kan dere merke dem med noe på engelsk, for eksempel “Questions from Norwegian journalist” pluss navn. Jeg vil sannsynligvis velge å svare noen journalister direkte mens andre vil bli svart indirekte via denne nettsiden. Jeg håper dere skjønner at jeg ikke ønsker å gjøre min epostadresse offentlig på det nåværende tidspunkt.

Jeg var ikke involvert overhodet i de sanseløse massemordene og har ingenting å skjule, men jeg er såpass overveldet akkurat nå at jeg ikke kan love at jeg vil svare alle. Det er rett og slett mer enn jeg har personlig kapasitet til å gjøre.

Jeg har mottatt en forespørsel fra NRK Dagsrevyen om å gjøre et intervju med kamera. Det velger jeg dessverre å takke nei til på dette tidspunktet. Jeg er blitt spurt om det samme fra TV2 og sa nei også da, men sa ja til et intervju per epost. Dersom NRK vil ha dette vil jeg sannsynligvis akseptere. Jeg har også akseptert intervju per epost fra Adresseavisen og VG. Av utenlandske journalister har jeg takket ja til et engelskspråklig intervju med Der Spiegel.

Jeg vil gjerne benytte anledningen til å takke for alle støtteepostene jeg mottar, fra Australia til Israel. Det setter jeg stor pris på, og jeg er lei for at jeg ikke kan takke alle direkte. Jeg håper vi kan før eller siden gå tilbake til å gjøre det denne nettsiden vanligvis gjør, nemlig å poste essayer om viktige temaer, noen av dem kontroversielle, andre mindre så. Men akkurat nå er fokuset såpass uvanlig at vi må håndtere det først.

Kommentarer vil derfor være stengt inntil videre. Vi ber om unnskyldning til faste lesere for dette men håper at de forstår situasjonen.

Jeg vil legge vekt på noen viktige momenter. Ut ifra det som er blitt rapportert i massemediene startet Behring Breivik planleggingen av sine barbariske angrep så langt tilbake som i 2002. Dette var før Robert Spencer hadde startet sin nettside Jihad Watch.

Den absolutt første posten jeg gjorde under navnet Fjordman var i februar 2005. Den er fremdeles tilgjengelig online på min gamle blogg og kan enkelt verifiseres av hvem som helst. Dette betyr også at denne forferdelige mannen hadde planlagt massemord i årevis før han hadde lest ett eneste ord jeg noensinne hadde skrevet.

Jeg vil bare poengtere dette.

Jeg vil også gjerne påpeke at hundre tusenvis av mennesker fra Canada til India har lest mine tekster i løpet av årene. Så vidt meg bekjent har ingen av dem drept så mye som en spurv på grunn av det.

Jeg har lest om de unevnelige tingene som Behring Breivik gjorde på Utøya. En person som gjør noe slikt er et monster. Han myrdet dusinvis av mennesker med kaldt blod og skadet talløse andre, mentalt eller fysisk. Det er ille nok, og det vil ta mange år for disse sårene til å leges, om de noen gang gjør det.

Det er uansvarlig i denne situasjonen å forsøke å gjøre hans liste over ofre enda lengre, fra hundrevis til millioner av mennesker, ved å utnytte disse grusomhetene til å stenge av nødvendige debatter omkring innvandring, multikulturalisme og islam i ulike land. Det kan ikke tillates å skje.

Det monsteret har allerede henrettet mange mennesker. Han bør ikke få lov til å henrette politisk frihet i den vestlige verden også.

An Italian soldier was killed in Afghanistan today, and the death has caused debate in Italy about the advisability of a continuing Italian military presence in Afghanistan. The leaders of Lega Nord have expressed their desire to reduce significantly the number of troops in Afghanistan by the end of this year.

In other news, initial reports that an accomplice of accused mass-murderer Anders Behring Breivik was arrested in Poland have now been denied by the Polish government. Earlier reports had indicated that the owner of a chemical company had been arrested for helping Breivik obtain materials he used in his explosives. Now the Polish authorities say no one was arrested.

To see the headlines and the articles, open the full news post.

Thanks to C. Cantoni, Caroline Glick, CSP, and all the other tipsters who sent these in.

Commenters are advised to leave their comments at this post (rather than with the news articles) so that they are more easily accessible.

Caveat: Articles in the news feed are posted “as is”. Gates of Vienna cannot vouch for the authenticity or accuracy of the contents of any individual item posted here. We check each entry to make sure it is relatively interesting, not patently offensive, and at least superficially plausible. The link to the original is included with each item’s title. Further research and verification are left to the reader.

Tommy Robinson, the leader of the English Defence League, just gets better and better at handling hostile media interviews.

Watch and listen closely as he makes mincemeat of this pompous fool of an interviewer, recorded earlier today on the BBC:

Many thanks to Vlad Tepes for uploading this video:

Update: Andrew Gilligan, a columnist for The Telegraph — whom I used to consider semi-friendly towards our cause — published an op-ed today entitled “The British far-Right is nothing but a rabble”. The column is not really worth excerpting from, but a comment left on the article is far better than anything Mr. Gilligan says.

The commenter, pjwholland, is referring to this sentence by Mr. Gilligan:

The English Defence League, although vile, shows the British far Right’s weakness, not its strength.

This was pjwholland’s comment:

I am not entirely sure why you describe the “English Defence League” as vile. I have just heard the leader of that organisation discharge himself extremely well on Newsnight. Faced with, arguably, the most aggressive of the BBC’s interviewers he resolutely argued a case in which he stated his organisation is a non-racist organisation. He was also able to produce evidence of a very clear separation between them and people of the ilk of the Norwegian (alleged) nutter. Indeed he was at pains to express his disgust at what had been done and to condemn violence and terrorism.

What is vile about that?

Of course you will say that is not what they really think.

Perhaps that is the fault of a legal system which has attempted to outlaw thought. However the law only allows us to hear what the law permits. As a member of the minority which is the most subjected to hate attacks I very much prefer to know the actual opinions of my adversaries rather than the opinion some badly drafted law allows them to state. Then I can take steps to protect myself. ie. avoid them!

The EDL leader expressed exactly the same sentiments that have repeatedly been expressed in the Telegraph columns. Is the Telegraph vile? Are its readers?

I have never been tempted to seek out the EDL nor to support it. However this straight talking young man seems to have a point. Yes indeed he does not talk your kind of language. He is a blunt (to the point of pugnacious), straight-talking working class man. None of the trivial small-talk of the chattering classes! He declared the problem is the stifling of debate. I agree. Democracy dies when opinions cannot be expressed.

Carl in Jerusalem has fisked another New York Times ‘report’. Accurately, he titles his post “A Boost for the Islamists”. Indeed it is.

Back in the day, the Times were also big boosters of the Big Lie. Their record has been blackened more than once since Duranty ruled in Moscow. Just google the search string [New York Times makes stuff up]; enjoy those 380 million hits, including gems like this. He traces the jornolist lies back to 1905, proving yet again the Old Grey Doxy has earned her sordid rep.

Carl says:

The Norwegian terror attacks have turned into an excuse to beat up on conservative, anti-Islamist bloggers. In a disgraceful piece written this morning, the New York Times all but blames Robert Spencer, Baron Bodissey and Pam Geller for the Oslo attacks.

Indeed. They smear us around like jelly on their toasted hate. As usual their fact-checkers were out to lunch (eating those hate burgers, no doubt) when their Jimmy Olsen jornolist put this up — and Carl quotes him:

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.”

Had they bothered to check, our “operator” is fully out in the open at Big Peace and has been for some time. In fact, he published a post there under his own name reporting the rape on the steps of Parliament in Oslo last Friday. Ironically, he was putting up that horror story (of the Norwegian girl whose rape was watched by Norwegian security guards) not long before those truck bombs were exploding.

Were this NYT reporter any less ignorant, he might have recognized the Baron’s nic from Jack Vance’s oeuvre. Were he any better-read, he might have known that the so-called “operator’s” avatar was Otto von Bismarck. Is the subtle irony over the heads of these big city jornolists? Too bad no one taught them basic research nearly as well as they learned advanced innuendo.

Carl sums it up well:

Breivik did not specifically target Muslims, but the opportunists who would force their way of life on all of us are attempting to use this case as an instance of ‘Islamophobia.’

None of the people cited in this article has ever called for or advocated violence. Unfortunately, others have used their writings as an excuse for it.

As Momma always said, “even the Devil quotes Scripture”. These MSM mandarins are adepts.

As most readers know by now, Gates of Vienna has experienced a massive surge of traffic in the last few days, thanks to the manifesto written by Anders Behring Breivik, the accused murderer of seventy-six people in Oslo and on the island of Utøya.

The increased traffic forced us to close our blog to comments, since they became too numerous and contentious to monitor. It also brought a vast flood of emails, the full quantity of which we are having difficulty reading, much less responding to.

Yesterday Fjordman welcomed new readers from Der Spiegel and Dagbladet. Later in the day he could have added Aftenposten to the list. Then late last night The New York Times surprised us by deigning to take notice of our existence.

The New York Times has traditionally been nicknamed “The Old Grey Lady”, but it seems the lady may be getting a bit long in the tooth, perhaps even moving into her dotage. Her reporting on the Oslo incident reflects what we have long come to expect from the paper: it gives a not-so-subtle push to help readers reach the conclusion that “anti-Islamic” websites and writers indirectly caused the carnage in Norway.

This is what one of her reporters, a man named Steven Erlanger, wrote about us yesterday:

Mr. Breivik was said by analysts to have been an occasional commenter on a blog, Gates of Vienna, which is topped by these words: “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.”

Well, at least he quoted our masthead right — I’ll give him that.

But the assertion that Mr. Breivik had commented here is, as far as I can determine, not true.

I don’t know who the NYT hires to be its “analysts”, but we have our own team, the guys I call “the Scandinavian Gang of Five” — Fjordman, Henrik, Reinhard, Kitman, and KGS. Collectively they are fluent in English, Norwegian, Danish, Swedish, Finnish, German, and several other European languages. Their own contacts give them an additional reach into events throughout Scandinavia.

All in all, I’d say that’s a pretty good team of analysts.

On Saturday morning I asked for their help in finding the customary screen names used by Anders Behring Breivik in his postings around various Scandinavian websites. There were four or five altogether, and I searched our comment archives for any instances of those names or their close variants. As far as I could tell, there were none to be found. If Mr. Breivik hung out here, he must have used a different nickname.

The fact that the Times’ “analysts” had said the purported killer had commented here prompted me to email the reporter and ask him for the screen name under which Mr. Breivik had commented at Gates of Vienna, and also the names and credentials of the “analysts” who determined this fact.

That was last night, and Mr. Erlanger has not replied to my email as of post time. What’s more, the Times’ article was updated this morning and reposted at a new URL for today’s edition, with the identical paragraph about GoV included intact.

Thus it is only proper to publish a copy of the email I sent to the NYT last night:

Subject: Your article on the Oslo killer

Mr. Erlanger,

In your article today at this URL:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/25/world/europe/25oslo.html

You state:

“Mr. Breivik was said by analysts to have been an occasional commenter on a blog, Gates of Vienna…”

and you include a link to our blog:

http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/

My wife and I are the proprietors of the blog “Gates of Vienna”. What you said is not true, as far as we can determine.

Yesterday, as soon as the information on Mr. Breivik became widely known, I consulted my Norwegian, Swedish, and Danish contacts to learn all the known screen names used by the killer in his postings on forums and blogs. Then I searched our comments archives, and there were no comments under any of those names.

I ask you to tell me:

(1)		The names and credentials of the “analysts” who said that Mr. Breivik was a commenter on our blog, and
(2)		What screen name he is alleged to have used to post those comments.

Then I can determine the factuality of the assertion made by those “analysts”.

If you cannot do this, I request that you withdraw the above-quoted statement, and post a public retraction.

If someone supplies me with the likely nick for Oslo berserker, and it turns out that he has in fact commented here in the past, I will not only not delete his comments, I will track them down and post at least some of them on the main page.

Our increased readership, gives us the good fortune to be able to publicize the way we do business here, which is different from the customary practices of the mainstream media. We acknowledge error, post retractions, and publish the truth, even if that truth might sometimes make us uncomfortable or unhappy.

Not so for “America’s Paper of Record” — which could be better described as “America’s Propaganda Organ for the Progressive Trans-Nationalists”.

Or, to paraphrase its own masthead: “All The News That Fits Our Agenda, We Print.”

For a complete Fjordman blogography, see The Fjordman Files. There is also a multi-index listing here.

Note: For readers who missed the announcement earlier today, this blog has been closed to comments until further notice.

Update: This post has been bumped. For regular readers, the July 24 news feed is below this post, in its normal place.

We have unusual traffic to this website right now because of the massacres that took place in the Oslo region this Friday, July 22. Apparently, the person who is currently suspected of having committed these atrocities and murdered nearly one hundred people in cold blood, Anders Behring Breivik, has quoted me and this website in a book he has published.

It is only fair in this situation that I publish some of my thoughts about this horrible weekend, one of the worst my small nation has experienced in a long time. I know there are journalists trying to get in touch with me at the moment, but I cannot answer everybody, nor do I want to. I may publish more texts in the coming week as well but let us start with this. I normally write for an international audience, but since this incident involved Norwegian victims and a Norwegian perpetrator I will also include the same text in Norwegian, after the English one.

In English:

No, I have never met Anders Behring Breivik in my life. He doesn’t even know what I look like.

No, I had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the massacres that took place on Friday in central Oslo and at Utøya. I was nowhere near the scene. I was planning to go and watch a movie at a local cinema with a family member when I got a message that a massive explosion had rocked central Oslo. From that moment on, I was liveblogging along with nearly a dozen different people at Gates of Vienna until after the assumed shooter had been caught at Utøya.

How did I react to the events I witnessed this afternoon? With absolute horror and disgust, just like everybody else did. I admit that I thought at first we were dealing with an Islamic Jihadist attack, which seemed to be confirmed by the claims of some Islamic organizations that they were behind it. But the shootings at Utøya did not seem to follow the usual Jihadist pattern, and as the evening went by it slowly became clear that we were dealing with something else, and possibly something even more horrifying. Whoever committed those unspeakable atrocities is a monster and deserves just as little pity as he gave to his innocent, unarmed victims.

How do I feel about knowing that the assumed perpetrator of these atrocities has quoted me in his much-talked about book? Absolutely terrible. What else can I say? I must stress that I have not yet read his very long book or manifest and I have neither the time nor the stomach to do so at the present time. I can only refer to the bits and pieces of it quoted in various news articles and what others keep telling me. He has apparently quoted a great many texts from a variety of public sources, one of them being me. His total lack of respect for human life is not, however, something he can have picked up from me, or from any of the other Islam-critical writers I know such as Robert Spencer or Bat Ye’or. Indeed, the lack of respect for human life is often one of the great shortcomings of Islamic culture that we have consistently pointed out.

I have also never called for violence in any of my essays, and I would estimate that I have published between one million and two million words under this name on the Internet. I honestly don’t know myself, I lost track years ago. These essays are not hidden. They are all out in the open on the Internet and can be found by anybody with access to a search engine. I have nothing to hide, as far as I am concerned. I write about subjects ranging from astrophysics to the history of chocolate and beer, but I also write about sensitive and controversial topics, and I know it. We cannot stop writing about charged but important issues. People like me have been warning against rising ethnic tensions for years, not creating them. They have been created by runaway mass immigration to Western countries, and as long as that runaway immigration continues, I fear that these tensions are going to continue to rise as well. I do not wish this; I am merely warning that this is likely to happen.

Am I an extremist? I admit that I have a strong dedication to truth. Of that, I am guilty. For instance, I notice that virtually nobody talked about “moderate Islam” versus “radical Islam” or “Islamism” until very recently. Why is that? And although nearly all the major newspapers, TV stations and leading politicians throughout the Western world assure us daily that there is a huge difference between moderate and radical Islam, few if any of them seem able to explain exactly what that difference consists of. I find that strange, and I’m not the only one.

Does pointing this out make me very extreme? Perhaps. But then how do you explain that Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the Prime Minister of NATO member state Turkey, has stated publicly that there is no such thing as a moderate Islam? After all, he’s a very, very moderate Muslim man in charge of a very, very moderate Muslim country where Adolf Hitler’s autobiography Mein Kampf was a bestseller as late as in 2005. I know how moderate Erdogan is because Western leaders always remind us of this fact. So if this exceptionally moderate man says that there is no such thing as a moderate Islam, surely he is worth listening to?

The most extreme thing I did this weekend was sleep barely at all for two nights in a row, first of all because of the horrible events I had just witnessed, which deeply affected me, but also because of false rumors that circulated in several countries for days that this man who massacred nearly 100 persons was me. I have been in the blogging business for a few years now and have been through some public fights along the way, but I have never before been accused of being the worst mass murderer in Scandinavian history. That’s a first even for me, and I sincerely hope there won’t be a second time. I’m a normal human being and did not particularly enjoy this. The second-most extreme thing I have done this weekend is watching an old movie, drinking Pinot noir red wine from New Zealand and reading a book about medieval history. This happens to be the most extreme thing I do on any average weekend.

På norsk:

Nei, jeg har aldri i hele mitt liv møtt Anders Behring Breivik. Han vet ikke engang hvordan jeg ser ut.

Nei, jeg hadde absolutt ingenting å gjøre med massakrene som fant sted i Oslo sentrum og på Utøya nå på fredag. Jeg var overhodet ikke i nærheten av åstedet. Jeg planla et kinobesøk med et familiemedlem da jeg fikk melding om at en kraftig eksplosjon hadde rystet Oslo sentrum. Fra det øyeblikk av liveblogget jeg med nesten et dusin ulike personer på Gates of Vienna resten av kvelden, helt frem til etter at den antatte gjerningsmannen var tatt på Utøya.

Hvordan reagerte jeg på hendelsene denne fredagen? Med absolutt skrekk og forferdelse, som alle andre. Jeg innrømmer at jeg først trodde det handlet om et islamsk Jihadistisk angrep, men skytingen på Utøya så ikke ut til å følge det vanlige Jihadistiske mønsteret. Ettersom kvelden gikk ble det langsomt klart at vi hadde å gjøre med noe annet og kanskje enda mer forferdelig. Hvem som nå enn gjorde de fryktelige handlingene på Utøya er et monster som fortjener akkurat lite like sympati som han gav til sine uskyldige, ubevæpnede ofre.

Hvordan føles det å vite at den antatte gjerningsmannen bak disse fryktelige forbrytelsene siterer meg i sin mye omtalte bok? Aldeles forferdelig. Jeg vet ikke hva annet jeg kan si. Jeg må imidlertid legge vekt på at jeg ennå ikke har lest hans meget lange bok eller manifest, og jeg har hverken tid eller mage til å gjøre dette på det nåværende tidspunkt. Jeg kan i dag kun forholde meg til de bitene og utdragene som refereres i massemediene og som andre har fortalt meg. Det virker som om han har sitert en lang rekke ulike, offentlig tilgjengelige tekster, hvorav enkelte er mine. Hans totale mangel på respekt for menneskeliv er derimot ikke noe han kan ha plukket opp fra meg eller fra noen annen islam-kritisk skribent jeg kjenner, som Robert Spencer eller Bat Ye’or. Tvert imot er mangel på respekt for menneskeliv en av de store svakhetene i islamsk kultur som vi konsekvent har påpekt.

Jeg har heller aldri tatt til orde for vold i mine tekster, og jeg vil anslå at jeg har publisert mellom en og to millioner ord under dette navnet på internett. Jeg vet ærlig talt ikke selv, jeg mistet tellingen for lenge siden. Disse essayene er ikke skjulte. De er alle åpent tilgjengelige på internett for enhver person som har tilgang til en søkemotor. Jeg har ingenting å skjule fra mitt synspunkt. Jeg skriver om temaer som spenner fra astrofysikk til historien om sjokolade og øl, men jeg skriver også om følsomme og kontroversielle temaer og jeg vet det godt. Vi kan ikke slutte å skrive om viktige, men vanskelige temaer. Folk som meg har advart mot økte etniske spenninger i mange år, vi har ikke skapt dem. De er blitt skapt av en voldsom masseinnvandring til vestlige land. Så lenge denne masseinnvandringen fortsetter frykter jeg at de etniske spenningene også vil fortsette å øke. Jeg ønsker ikke dette, jeg advarer mot det.

Er jeg en ekstremist? Jeg innrømmer at jeg har en sterk trang til å søke sannhet. Det er jeg skyldig i. For eksempel har jeg lagt merke til at nesten ingen snakket om “moderat islam” mot “radikalt islam” eller “islamisme” inntil ganske nylig. Hvorfor ikke? Og selv om nesten samtlige av de store avisene, TV-stasjonene og ledende politikerne over hele den vestlige verden forsikrer oss daglig om at det er en enorm forskjell mellom moderat og radikalt islam er det få eller ingen av dem som ser ut til å kunne forklare nøyaktig hva den forskjellen består i. Jeg finner dette merkelig, og jeg er ikke den eneste.

Er jeg veldig ekstrem for å påpeke dette? Kanskje. Men hvordan forklarer du da at Recep Tayyip Erdogan, statsministeren i NATO-landet Tyrkia, har sagt offentlig at det ikke finnes noe moderat islam? Han er tross alt en veldig, veldig moderat muslimsk mann i et veldig, veldig moderat muslimsk land der Adolf Hitlers selvbiografi Mein Kampf var en bestselger så sent som i 2005. Jeg vet hvor moderat herr Erdogan er fordi vestlige ledere alltid minner oss på dette faktum. Dersom denne eksepsjonelt moderate mannen sier at det ikke finnes noe moderat islam sa kanskje han kan være verdt å lytte til?

Det mest ekstreme jeg har gjort denne helga er å knapt sove i to netter på rad, først og fremst på grunn av de fryktelige hendelsene jeg nettopp hadde vært vitne til, men også på grunn av falske rykter som sirkulerte i flere dager i flere land om at denne mannen som massakrerte nesten 100 personer var meg. Jeg har vært i bloggebransjen i noen år nå og har vært gjennom enkelte offentlige krangler på veien, men jeg er aldri før blitt beskyldt for å være den verste massemorderen i skandinavisk historie. Det er første gang selv for meg, og jeg håper inderlig at det ikke blir en andre gang. Jeg er et normalt menneske og satte ikke spesielt stort pris på dette. Det nest mest ekstreme jeg har gjort denne helga er å se en gammel film, drikke Pinot noir rødvin fra New Zealand og lese en bok om middelalderhistorie. Dette er også det mest ekstreme jeg gjør i en gjennomsnittlig helg.

There are several interesting items from WorldNet Daily on the Oslo massacre that cast a new light on some of the events. It’s too early to tell for certain, but the initial media “narrative” may not hold up much longer.

In other news, the Egyptian military will not allow international election observers into the country for the September elections. Meanwhile, Islamic authorities in Malaysia have refused to allow the word “Allah” to be used by Christians as the word for “God”.

To see the headlines and the articles, open the full news post.

Thanks to C. Cantoni, Fjordman, Insubria, JD, Steen, and all the other tipsters who sent these in.

A reminder: Gates of Vienna is closed to comments for the time being.

Caveat: Articles in the news feed are posted “as is”. Gates of Vienna cannot vouch for the authenticity or accuracy of the contents of any individual item posted here. We check each entry to make sure it is relatively interesting, not patently offensive, and at least superficially plausible. The link to the original is included with each item’s title. Further research and verification are left to the reader.

Welcome to readers of Dagbladet and Der Spiegel!

The latter publication, however, falsely labels us a “hate blog.” This is not true: we are a love blog; we are lovers of truth.

I will try to respond to the best of my abilities to the rumors that are now spreading. The top rumor to kill, still being circulated in certain quarters by people who should know better, is that I am identical to the shooter.

I am not. Nor have I ever met him. I have not yet had the time or energy to read his alleged manifesto, but it I hear he has posted quotes from my work. I dislike that in the extreme, but there is little else I can do about it. All of my writings are made available for free on the Internet. However, I also hear rumors from others, which I cannot myself confirm at the moment, that he has posted references to Shakespeare, John Locke, Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mill as well.

I hope these writers will not be classified as “hate speech” from now on.

I would also like to point out that the latest information quoted in the mass media indicates that he planned this attack as far back as nine years ago. I did not exist under the name Fjordman back then, nor as far as I know did Robert Spencer’s website Jihad Watch. Please keep that in mind, as we all try to digest the unspeakable evil that we witnessed this past Friday.

Note from this blog’s owners: Due to the unusual situation in which it has recently found itself, this blog will be closed to comments until further notice.

Mark Humphrys, that rara avis — a libertarian, pro-American Dubliner — has fisked the Oslo murderer in a novel way: by comparing the killer’s views to his own (emphases in the original):

This sadistic, barbaric attack must be one of the strangest terror attacks ever. One would never think, from the killer’s online comments, that he was a mass murderer in waiting.

The killer was right-wing and anti-jihad, yes, but he was not a neo-Nazi (he was pro-Israel) or a white supremacist (he opposed the BNP because they are racist). He was Christian, but not a fanatic (he was pro-gay).

In fact he was apparently like me — liberal right. He was anti-racist, pro-gay and pro-Israel. So how on earth did someone like that become a terrorist against the West?

Perhaps he radically changed his politics since his last post to document.no in Oct 2010 (see below). Can we see any writings of his between Oct 2010 and July 2011?

Mark gives us some context for this latest atrocity:

• The Norway attacks, 22 July 2011.
• A right-wing, anti-jihad terrorist kills over 90 in Norway.
• Worst terror attack on the West since Madrid in 2004.
• Worst right-wing terror attack since Oklahoma in 1995.
• An anti-Islamic terrorist kills more people than in all Islamic terror attacks on the West since Madrid combined.
• It was sort of an attack on left-wingers, but a very strange one. It targeted children who had nothing to do with policy, and was incredibly sadistic, hunting them down and executing them close up. Even targeting the centre-left government is incredibly extreme — they support the Afghan War and the Libya War.
• Note there have been Islamic terror attacks on Norway: William Nygaard in 1993, and Oslo synagogue in 2006.

Mark then proceeds to list what he terms: “The killer’s mild, moderate, anti-jihad online comments”.

In some cases he shows the screen caps of these online comments, and then below his illustrations, Mark points out where he himself has linked to the same sites, the same bloggers, with the same kind of approval.

The fisk is disturbing. It’s one thing to say “yeah, he made noises like…” but Mark is an extremely rational, thorough man. He does not make appeals to feeling; he simply demonstrates with full links and credit the bizarre nature of this horror.

At one point he says:

One would expect a mass murderer to post more extreme comments. This is incredibly strange.

And that sums up the nightmare for me: it.will.not.compute.

Note: There is a place at the bottom of that page to leave feedback.

There’s not much in tonight’s news feed, but do pay attention to Europol’s planned task force, which is being designed by “experts” to deal with non-Islamic terrorism in Norway.

Rahm Emmanuel isn’t the only one who believes in never letting a crisis go to waste. The Europeans have definitely caught on.

To see the headlines and the articles, open the full news post.

Thanks to C. Cantoni, McR, Steen, Van Grungy, and all the other tipsters who sent these in.

Commenters are advised to leave their comments at this post (rather than with the news articles) so that they are more easily accessible.

Caveat: Articles in the news feed are posted “as is”. Gates of Vienna cannot vouch for the authenticity or accuracy of the contents of any individual item posted here. We check each entry to make sure it is relatively interesting, not patently offensive, and at least superficially plausible. The link to the original is included with each item’s title. Further research and verification are left to the reader.

This is from our Portuguese-American correspondent João, who lives in a major city on the West Coast. As Dymphna reported last month, he has educated himself in terrorism-related matters, and learned Arabic so that he could frequent a mosque and discover what was really going on inside.

His latest report concerns yesterday’s bombing and massacre in Norway, and what may possibly be gleaned from the available information:

Baron, this is truly a tragic event. My prayers go out to the Norwegian people. This man is obviously a monster.

Since yesterday I have been putting my analytical thinking cap on overdrive, and here are my personal thoughts.

1.		Nativist violence of this type is extremely rare — .01% if we look at the events of the past twenty years. Violent groups in my estimation may be arranged in the following in order of importance — Islamic, independence movements (Palestinians, ETA, Kurds, Tamil Tigers), leftist (Bader Meinhof, Red Brigades), and very rarely a Nativist. Norway has no violent groups of Native Norwegians. This recent event in Norway will fall into the rare one-off McVeigh category. There are no violent “anti-Muslim” groups in Norway. At the moment we cannot assign Anders Behring Breivik to any part of the counter-jihad. He is truly a “Lone Wolf”!
2.		From the open source material it appears that this man bought six tons of fertilizer to make the explosive vehicles he used in downtown Oslo. Ever since Oklahoma, merchants have been vigilant about reporting such purchases to the authorities immediately. Did this happen? And what did the security forces do with this info? With this kind of purchase he should never have left the store without someone asking him some questions. What did the Norwegian authorities know and how quickly did they act?
3.		My private observations about the level of sophistication in this plot are as follows: This would require sophisticated bomb-making training to pull off this kind of precision. Where was he trained? In a training camp, over the internet? This kind of knowledge requires hands-on training, not a correspondence course. Someone trained him, and why didn’t the authorities know about this? Did someone drop the ball and let a “Lone Wolf” develop under their nose? It’s hard to believe!

My overall view is that Anders Behring Breivik is what we might call a “weaponized madman.”

A weaponized madman is what happens when you take your run-of-the-mill homicidal man and weaponize him by giving him the ability and support to scale up his mayhem.

How and by who whom was he weaponized? These details should consume our energies till we expose the truth.

Since 9-11 we have seen 10,000 Islamic acts of terror, and now we have one mad white guy. Logic dictates that we put our resources into the greater threat.

Where is the greater threat? In a once-every-sixteen-years phenomenon, or the recurring act?

Good security professionals should use this logic.

Fjordman asked me to close the comments on his most recent post.

If the trollish behavior spills over to other threads, I will close them, too.

Needless to say, comments are closed on this post.