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.
My condolences as well to the families of the slain. Perhaps it is too early to intrude upon Norway’s grief, but there is something they will need to thing about soon:
Every Jihadi in the world has now discovered that one man with a gun in Norway can kill 100 people completely unopposed, be arrested without violence, and be released after 21 years.
No need to die with your suicide bomb. No need to plant bombs which might not go off. No fear an incensed mob might tear you to pieces. No fear the police might shoot you.
Call it an unintended consequence. The blood of future murders will also be on this killer’s hands.
I do agree, this is a most bizarre massmurderer. But even more so, according to his manifesto, he planned this atrocity for nine (!) years.
Maybe Breivik is just what he appears to be: A Christian, a conservative, anti-jihad, pro-Israel, anti-marxist and a mass murderer. The evidence so far does point to that combination no matter how incongruous that last part may appear. If that does not compute (and is true) then the the fault is not with reality.
This indeed, doesn’t compute. What is also missing thus far are the public comments of the people who know him. It is strange, because we usually hear right away from family members and friends or co-workers. Nothing, nada. Perhaps that is by design, with the police urging silence while they try to piece together this crime scene.
Without doing a lot of research, I’d offer the following points.
I assumed it was right wing as soon as the bombs were targetting government buildings. That fits the deranged element of the right wing much more than islamist whackos who don’t understand government and focus on civilians (mass transit, commercial) and police/military targets in that order.
I’m wondering how far he may have been sent over the edge by sexual/family issues.
IINM he’s a bachelor who lived with his mother and I’m guessing wasn’t much of a hit with the ladies (though if the female psyche remains true to form he’ll gain a bunch of groupies now).
If he was unwillingly celibate he might blame the government for that state and want to go after the children of his perceived enemies, depriving them of what he thinks he’s they’ve deprived him of (like the unwilling bachelor violent freakouts in China targetting children).
Just a guess.
I’ve made my position sufficiently clear elsewhere at this web site whereby any repetition is unnecessary. However, this one item really rankled me a bit:
Per Mark Humphrys: Even targeting the centre-left government is incredibly extreme — they support the Afghan War and the Libya War.
There is a world of difference between the Afghan and Libyan conflicts.
Despite the incredibly misguided insanity of coalition forces going into Afghanistan only to supervise the establishment of another shari’a government, the Taliban’s sheltering of Osama bin Laden was adequate reason for such intervention.
The entire Libyan affair smacks of all too much convenience and bizarre Political Correctness. Europe’s Left continues to gush over the “Arab Spring” like it is some inevitable sea change with respect to democracy in the MENA (Middle East North Africa) region.
Every indication still points towards the ikwan gaining ascendancy all through the MENA region and doing so with nearly conscious effort on the part of Europe. Ghadaffi’s removal seems to be much more the case of Europe ridding itself of a perennial pest that has worn out his welcome. Certainly, there has been little to no hue and cry over this dictator for some time, even though there is much that links him to the Lockerbie atrocity and international terrorism.
Therefore, the connection being drawn between Afghanistan and Libya just doesn’t seem to hold water. They are birds of a rather different feather.
You can get more insight into his mindset here
I’d say he is some sort of schizophriniac, with his fantasizies of being a KT. (But like many schizophriniac still smart).
I don’t understand why it took the police 90 minutes to reach the island.
These tragic events have re-emphasised what Europeans have forgotten – that Muslims don’t have the monopoly on terrorism.
In the late twentieth century, left-wing groups such as ETA, the IRA and red-brigades were the major European terror organisations. Neverlethelss, in the modern world, nine out of ten terrorists now prefer Islam.
However our opponents will use this attack for all it’s worth to exonerate Muslims of everything. We counterjihadists must redouble our efforts to educate the public on how Muslims are insidiously undermining and destroying our civilization in many other ways that don’t involve massive attacks, using the information provided here.
It’s a tragedy. And a farse. My deep condolences to the families of the victims. This really shouldn’t have happened.
To me this also means another thing. It will be harder for people like us to prove our point. For people, who see the danger of islam in our countries.
Wheather we like it or not this guy just proved that some people are in it for the radicalism, are solving some kind of personal problems through political envolvement. He didn’t want to protect anyone from anything. He just wanted to kill people and find somekind of (sick) justification for it.
Just proves the Buddhist point that even if your views are right but you don’t have any compassion inside you are a big walking tragedy.
This comment has been removed by the author.
This comment has been removed by the author.
This comment has been removed by the author.
One extra thing to point out:
The terrorist has released a 1500-page manifesto in which he explains his political views and motives.
Most of the text in the manifesto have been taken directly from Fjordman, Gates of Vienna, Brusselsjournal etc etc
Think about that for a moment. A man has just murdered 100 children. And this man, the greatest mass murderer in Scandinavian history, responsible for the most violent act in the Nordic countries since the end of Word War 2 is a 100% ideological match with you people.
Am I saying that you are in anyway responsible for his actions? No, of course you are not.
But still I don’t think I need to explain why this will have enormous consequences for you and the entire so called “counterjihad” movement.
Once again, this man was not a Christian – “by their fruits shall ye know them” This does not look like the fruits of the spirit to me. (those being love, joy, peace, contentment and etc.)
And no, my saying this is not the same as muslims claiming that fundamentalist muslims are “radicals”. that’s because those folks are doing exactly what their religious texts instruct them to do. Nothing in the new testament instructs believers to do violence upon anyone beyond that of self defense.
What does concern me is that the new hate crimes laws in the US may be used against this site and others like it such as Atlas Shrugged to shut you down.
Eriksson, nowhere do any of those writings demand or even suggest we start killing people to achieve our goals. Unlike Islam, where conquest and murder are baked into the foundations, we (and I don’t feel it presumptions to use we in this instance) are not intent on the violent overthrow or death of everyone opposed to us.
The fact that he took calls for a peaceful resolution of our conflict with Islam and turned them into an excuse to butcher children means that he IS NOT on our side. By making the irrational leap from “we must solve this problem” to “I will murder children to make it happen” he demonstrates that he stands against everything we stand for.
Graham: There is no conflict with Islam. Our enemy is islamism, an insignificant political movement. We already have the adequate laws and law enforcement to deal with them.
Gates of Vienna is a blog dedicated to one single purpose: to spread the lie that ALL or at least a vast majority of muslim immigrants have hostile intent towards us, our way of life and our democratic values. This is untrue.
All “evidence” is anecdotal. When looking at the big picture there is no conflict between muslim immigrants and the rest of society. Heck, most of them aren’t even religious, just have muslim backgrounds.
There is no left-wing conspiracy aiming to destroy Europe. There is no political force trying to annihilate European culture.
When looking beyond the anecdotes you present, when looking at the bigger picture, it just isn’t there.
You are spending your days writing essays portraying millions and millions of good honest citizens as threats and enemies.
Sure, your words aren’t acts of violence. Nor have you ever advocated violence.
But your behaviour sure as hell aren’t promoting peace and good morals either.
What if you are wrong?
By the time you figure out that you are wrong, it’ll be too late for a heartfelt apology.
I continue to read through the mass murderer’s manifesto:
Gates of Vienna is cited as a source 88 times.
Fjordman is mentioned 111 times.
You guys are going to be famous.
Eriksson, There is no conflict with Islam. Our enemy is islamism, an insignificant political movement. We already have the adequate laws and law enforcement to deal with them.
Is that so? So my handy dandy copy of The Reliance of the Traveller, the ‘classic manual of islamic sacred law’ is totally irrelevant to those nice muslims who just want to fit in.
Pity about what happens when they decide to read their quran and learn the teachings properly.
I’ve found, as I study my catholicism properly, that it strengthens my faith and my love for God.
What if reading the quran and the hadiths does the same for muslims? What do they take home for that?
“Every Jihadi in the world has now discovered that one man with a gun in Norway can kill 100 people completely unopposed, be arrested without violence, and be released after 21 years.”
Norway has preventive detention. At least if he is still deemed to be dangerous after his prison sentence, he can be locked up for good.
“Wheather we like it or not this guy just proved that some people are in it for the radicalism, are solving some kind of personal problems through political envolvement. He didn’t want to protect anyone from anything. He just wanted to kill people and find somekind of (sick) justification for it.
How do you figure?
“Gates of Vienna is a blog dedicated to one single purpose: to spread the lie that ALL or at least a vast majority of muslim immigrants have hostile intent towards us, our way of life and our democratic values. This is untrue.”
No, it is you who is wrong. Studies like this one clearly prove our point that it is actually a majority of the Muslims living in the West (or in Britain for that matter) who are problematic and hold extremist views. This one study is just an example of many.
Eriksson: Perhaps Muslim groups didn’t commit this particular atrocity, but we have never been stupid enough to claim that any nation has a monopoly on either good or evil. It must be stressed, though, that the ONLY ONES who expressed delight over this attack, at least over the initial bombing, were Islamic Jihadist organizations. Nobody else did that I am aware of. Nobody. Christians? Certainly not. Freemasons? No. The Progress Party? No. The English Defence League? No. Geert Wilders? No. Me, Robert Spencer or Bat Ye’or? No.
Absolutely nobody in the so-called nationalist or Islam-critical Right anywhere has to my knowledge supported or gloated about this attack. All of them without exception were horrified. Contrast this with how popular Osama bin Laden and other violent Jihadists are in many Muslim countries, not despite of, but precisely because of, the fact that they are mass murderers. This kind of mentality is fortunately rare in the Western world, but it does exist, mainly within Marxist circles. Do you think you will see many coffee mugs, posters or t-shirts carrying the portrait of Anders Behring Breivik among members of the Progress Party, the Sweden Democrats or the Danish People’s Party in the future? I think not. Contrast this with how many left-wingers positively celebrate Marxist mass murderers such as Che Guevara. Marxists have been apologists for mass murderers for a good century, from Stalin to Hamas.
If one evil person does something terrible that is universally rejected by virtually everybody from his nation, this is supposed to be blamed collectively on the others. Yet if a Muslim group does something they enjoy wide popular and religious support for, we should never link this to Islamic culture. Why the double standard? What these people are actually saying is that although nobody, from Bat Ye’or to Robert Spencer, has ever called for anything remotely similar to mass murder, they should still be blamed for this. On the other hand, when the Koran and Islamic teachings are choke-full of incitement to violence, they should go free.
“Is a soldier defending his country a mass murderer?”
In this case, his opponents didn’t have guns, and they didn’t meet on a battlefield.
I was mid-way through writing something about this when I read the Vienna posting.
I’m not buying it.
I smell a rat. There may be problems in translation from Norwegian to English; I do not know…
My money is on him being a Left Loony sacrificing himself for the grand cause
“Just proves the Buddhist point that even if your views are right but you don’t have any compassion inside you are a big walking tragedy.”
Not just Buddhist. “Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal. And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing.”
The misdeeds and murders carried out by jihadists and marxists can never ever justify the counterjihadist position saying that muslim immigrants are our enemies.
Like all human beings on this planet I was born as an atheist and remain an atheist. Why anyone wish to seek guidance in life by reading ancient legends from the time of the Roman Empire is beyond me.
However, I am convinced that you do not follow your “sacred texts” to the letter. I have never met a religious person that did so (possible exception: Mormon missionaries from the United States).
Of course, there are religious fundamentalists in Europe today but they are an insignificant group. They have no influence upon our society and no means to change it. If they ever pose a threat we have sufficient police resources to deal with that.
We all do what we do for personal reasons. Look into his private life for what was driving him. Something was dramatically out of whack in his personal life. Perhaps he was a jilted lover? Perhaps he was unfulfilled in his professional life? Perhaps he was very lonely and finally snapped from the emptiness he faced alone? I do not know what motivated him, but anger at Islam was only part of it. Unless Muslims killed loved ones or threatened him personally, I do not see them as the sole motivation. Look at the rest of his life to figure it out.
The MSM and this writer keep repeating that “he targeted children”- but nobody has actually seen these ‘children’.
Whereas the MSM had no compunction to display the blood-splattered bodies of white Norwegians from the Oslo bomb attacks, there appears to be a strange timidity to display close-ups of the socialist indoctrination camp, where ‘children’ are taught to boycott Israel and other important multicultural stuff.
Al Jizz had quite a few video’s up, and they showed surviving witnesses.
One of them you can see here. It would be interesting to know why we are told that the victims are ‘children’ when they’re obviously not.
Samuel Muyizzi (30) is one of the surviving ‘children’ from the Marxist paradise island:
Alhamdullillah! At Long Last the Enemedia ‘s Got Their “Right Wing Christian” Terrorist!
Eriksson: Nobody, Muslim or otherwise, talked about “Islamism” and “moderate Islam” until quite recently. Recep Tayyip Erdogan has publicly stated that there is no such a thing as a moderate Islam. He is Prime Minister of Turkey. So by following your logic, Mr. Erdogan is partly responsible for this massacre by whipping up hatred against Muslims. Why don’t you go after him?
Anders Breivik and no one else is responsible for the massacre. At least as far as we know right now.
I don’t pay much attention to what middleeastern semi-dictators like Erdogan says. He says there are no moderate muslims, so what?
Does that mean that the kurds that fled from Turkey to avoid oppression and now live in Europe are secretly conspiring to turn Europe into Iran?
This blog was just mentioned by Der Spiegel:
This has a Bill Ayers stench to it.
If you had a loaded gun to my head and commanded me to choose–based on the BBC/CNN/FOX/Internet coverage + the Entirely Scripted Surreal Obama FRIDAY Press Conference in which he was Mute on the Oslo Event–…I choose Left Wing, balls-to-the-wall, Bill Ayers-inspired-type event. …Without hesitation.
Mark Humphreys – You must be joking. Next week he might be calling for the creation of a Soviet Republic in Ireland. Take him with a pinch of salt.
This could be backlash on an individual level. How many times have I thought to drive out Islamic nationalism? A great deal. How can this be done without violence? I do not believe that this is possible. You can’t repel jihad without violence any more than repel Hitler without violence.
I have personally chosen to take the path of encouraging my government to wage war against Islamic nationalism and other governments that support Islamic nationalists. He chose another path that I find repulsive. Not everyone can be so restrained. Particularly if you are close to the scene. It is much easier to be calm when you are watching from far away.
Well done to Erikkson for being scrupulously reasonable. I fear we’re going to miss your style in a few days.
” Nobody, Muslim or otherwise, talked about “Islamism” and “moderate Islam” until quite recently. Recep Tayyip Erdogan has publicly stated that there is no such a thing as a moderate Islam. He is Prime Minister of Turkey. So by following your logic, Mr. Erdogan is partly responsible for this massacre by whipping up hatred against Muslims. Why don’t you go after him?”
Quoted, not for Erikkson, but for many, many others.