Is it at all possible that an individual acting alone carried out a violent and senseless attack. These misguided agenda typically arise post attack.
yes it is but he had an agenda which he has clearly stated we need to wake up and he decided to be the alarm clock
If multiculturalism is not acceptable to some people is there a palatable compromise...they obviously rely on violence as a means to their ends.
Let's assume he was on his own, that still doesn't mean we ignore what led to his violence, his manifesto makes it clear he hates the multicultural West and loves apartheid Israel, so what does he do? He decides to start a new Zionism to bring Israel to Europe. He arms himself, goes to an an occupied Island, kill it's inhabitants, then calls for others to do the same in an attempt get this neo-zionism going, by 2083 he wishes to achieve his goal of re-claiming Europe as his homeland, does that sound familiar? Yes to not giving attention to his propaganda, No to ignoring what influenced him.
very true but to some extent all human beings are capable put in the right situation whether sane or not i know the reports about him but imo he is sane and should never walk free again
What we are capable of is choice. Choosing wrong from right, choosing to kill or not, choosing to respect life or not. No one agenda is to blame for the choices made.
correct so if a madman is holding a knife to your daughters throat and is definently going to kill her and he is distracted you have the chance to rescue her but it means you have to kill him if you dont act she is dead for sure this is choice but you only have one choice you are going to kill whats right or wrong does not come into some things the preservation of yourself and others you love is a strong incentive he was not put in any danger he chose to act it was entirely his decision he planned and calculated every move played it out in his mind then acted it out for real even down to a policemans uniform an insane person does not think like this he saw no other choices in his eyes that would get the results he wanted. we are all capable of choice but sometimes that choice is taken away from us
There's no comparison between self defense and murder. The "choice" in this case leaves one with no choice. I fail to see how this analogy is even remotely similar to a guy that just murdered 68 people.
self defence is when one is protecting themselves theres nothing in that analogy saying anyones life other than the girl would be in danger hence if you choose not to act she dies you live,you choose to act you may save her or you might just die due to your choice. you have a choice not a good one but you have the choice these poor people didnt have any choices he made a claculated choice he wanted to act in this way he planned it down to the very fine details he left nothing to choice for all his victims,he made sure there would be a massacre he is not insane and i would stake my rep on that without even ever meeting the guy i dont have to
He is not insane, this was suggested by his lawyer who is obviously trying to help his client. He is also seen as insane by everyone who this guy was motivated by, they all want to distance themselves from him.
he didnt want to become a martyr type or be killed as he needed to get his word out and being shot dead etc wouldnt help he didnt believe he was doing it because of religious beliefs he is not insane no voices told him to do it hell yeh this guy needs locked up for the rest of his life without ever having the chance of being released with restrictions on what he gets to read and do. very dangerous guy no wonder they want to distance themselves theres more to come from this guy if he is allowed the chance they dont have to be associated with him he can do it all on his own while they sit back and watch
GWorld, I'm on extremely limited time this week and don't have time to read your link. My definition may be too simplistic (or perhaps you think it's completely wrong), but it is what I believe. If you don't, that's okay too (I don't mean that in a snippy way). Don't you believe the Islamofascist in this thread was referring to Israel and supporters when he said, "rise up against Zionism and put an end to to it" ?
If you don't bother reading at least some pages of his manifesto, then what are you relying on for speaking about him? Only what he did and the explanation of the media? OK, so you understand nothing, you just get the media propaganda. In his manifesto he evaluated he had 80% of being killed before or after completing his mission. He is not intending on spending time in prison, he will kill himself or be killed in prison, he has written something about that (suicide being a sin) in his manifesto and so suicide (self termination) is not a problem since he already sacrfyied his life for his cause. Also, I don't know what the debate is about being mad or not. Come on, what do you say when muslims launch suicide attacks too? Do you say they're mad? It's the same, both are acting for a good cause in their opinion, it only depends on the point of view. Also when you say those young people are innocent, well it's not like he killed people in a commercial center or on a beach, he killed them on an island reserved for a socialist (left wing / labour party) gathering, so all people killed in this attack (not the bombing) are involved in socialism at various degrees (young leaders, leaders wanabees). So in my opinion, for his argumentation, these victims are very targeted. You could say, well if he's against islamization of Europe, why not kill muslims in a mosque? It's because muslims are invading Europe because some people let them do it. And those people are the elites of which the socialists are at the front, so the need is to fight against the source of the problem, not against the consequences, at least at the beginning of a problem solving. It's simple logic. Attacking muslims would serve no purpose just yet. Most of all, his self-imposed mission is more of a marketing coup, in order to awake some people in Europe. That's also why he spent time on his manifesto to advance it a lot (1500 pages is not nothing). And what choice did he have? If he killed himself jumping from a tower in Norway, with his manifesto as a suicide note, you'd never have heard about it, ever. So this guy is logical, you might not like his ideas or his means, but he's been successful, just like muslims are when they bomb someplace. Not more not less. But muslims are guided by a book, have a community of sort. Him he acted more or less alone, on his own. Of course he could discuss via the internet, but he kept his plans secrets until the end. And it's not so easy to do, you can read towards the end of his manifesto there is a log of the days before the attack, and how he planned everything, quite an interesting read. You can find easily some copies of his manifesto, search for his name and 2083 on google. It comes as a PDF or a DOC file.
When a Muslim does it, he is not mental, he is called an Islamist, this guy is Christian, therefore they called him a Christian fundamentalist amongst other things. It's wrong to give terrorists these titles because they are not engaging in terror because of religion, that's something that should be learned from this. What!? You think he was right to kill those young socialists!? "Muslims are invading Europe because someone let him do it" Who can blame them for playing by the rules? This guy is logical yup, killing 70 innocent people is logical, great, we have someone already infested by this dangerous Brevik's ideas.
"who can blame them playing by the rules" Nobody, that's why the muslims are not the problem here, but the political elite of european countries who let and encourage this islamist invasion. That's why I find it more intelligent to attack people from the political elite (ok youth socialist is not exactly elite, but they are part of it, given time) than to attack muslims who are only the consequence of the problem, not the cause. Hope you can understand that if you take one step above, not look at it simply. -- When I say he is logical, it is because I've read some of his manifesto and you can read that he is logical. He set himself up on a mission and really did it well, carefully planned and executed. No-one did it for him. Well after if you ask if I am ok with it, if I would do it myself, of course not, I'm amongst the ones who are aware of the problem, don't like it, but I'm not going to do anything about it, because firstly I don't believe in the supernatural and secondly since I don't believe in afterlife, I know I have only one life and I want to selfishly live it to the fullest, that's one reason why I don't live in Europe anymore, because I'm enjoying some life time in Thailand, and don't want to live with the shit that the multiculturalism is doing in europe. I have the opportunity so I do it. This guy should have done it also, he had earned a lot of money, but he used it for his "mission", well I would have used it to retire in another country. Like his step father is doing, his step father is now living in Thailand and enjoying the prostitutes, more power to him, his step son should have done the same. But he prefered to do something else, well not me, thanks!
Well why don't you sacrifice your life and kill these politicians and their supporters instead of being an ugly coward that is all the way in Thailand with his second hand pc inciting others to kill politicians? You sick twisted moron. Good riddance, enjoy Thailand.
Yes I understand that, I didn't know that you were like that. I'm not complaining at all, I know people who like to insult others do exist, it's just that it's not written on their avatar, now I'll know better not to talk with you if I don't feel like being insulted. That's all there is to it really, bye.