Breaking news: Blast hit Norwegian government building in Oslo

A danish tabloid has now questioned if there could be a connection between him being a gamer (played WoW, MW2, Dragon age etc.) and the shootings.

When did Jack Thompson move to Denmark?
 
Conservapedia is grumpy that the "Lamestream media" doesn't focus more on his Modern Warfare-gaming, and less on him being christian, which, obviously, was edited into his Facebook profile by "a liberal" after the fact.
 
Judging by the way most people play cod, the average cod player wouldn't be able to hit a barn door at 5 paces in real life. Why do people always blame video games?
 
Last edited:
Conservapedia is grumpy that the "Lamestream media" doesn't focus more on his Modern Warfare-gaming, and less on him being christian, which, obviously, was edited into his Facebook profile by "a liberal" after the fact.

It's the same thing that happens with Islam:

a terrorist act by some muslim nutcase happens, then countless muslims start defending their religion, the more they value the thing, the more vigorous their apologetic words.

Here, it simply happens with christians.

And, as usual, instead of condemning the violence, the hate, the extremism, instead of taking a distance from terror, these people are focused in -defending- their own beliefs, in showing they are not wrong. Why? Maybe because the terrorist words are so similar to what they say normally that that difference is not immediately apparent to anyone hearing both.

--Is this wrong?
--well, you see, my religion(/ideals/beliefs/whatever) doesn't teach violence...
--ok, but is this wrong?
--It's a different perspective: it's the other people's fault for misjudging us all.
--then we can say this is wrong?
--well, yes, but...

Is there anyone finding this strange?
 
WHAT was supposed to be a mass-murderer's legacy is about to be obscured forever on the internet.
Shortly before his horrific attacks, Norwegian killer Anders Behring Breivik published a 1500-page manifesto on the web outlining his motives and beliefs.
"I ask that you distribute this book to everyone you know," Breivik wrote in the introduction.
Now, a group of online activists are about to do just that - though perhaps not in the way the killer anticipated.
Anonymous has called on internet citizens to destroy Breivik's legacy by creating altered versions of the text which mock the author and promoting them as the real document.

Through an exercise titled "Operation UnManifest", the group hopes that, eventually, no one will be able to figure out which manifesto is the original.
"Anders Behring Breivik wants to use the cruel action of killing over 90 young people to promote his 1516-page manifesto," says a message posted online.
"Anonymous suggests:
"1. Find the manifesto of Anders Behring Breivik: '2083 - A European Declaration of Independence'.
"2. Change it, add stupid stuff, remove parts, shop his picture, do what you like to.
"3. Republish it everywhere and up vote releases from other people, declare that the faked ones are original.
"4. Let Anders become a joke, such that nobody will take him serious anymore.
"5. Spread this message around the internet and real life, translate it.
"6. Have a moment for the victims of his cruel attacks."
The note ends: "We all are anonymous, We all are Legion, We all do not forgive murder, We all do not forget the victims."

http://www.news.com.au/technology/a...eiviks-manifesto/story-e6frfro0-1226102267855
 
To even find that angle to the story is spectacular ... to sit down, look at this tragedy and come up with this. You really have to tip your hat to Fox News ... the bigot assholes that they are.

But they seem to have some problems recently when trying to tell who?s christian, and who?s not (skip to 4:44)
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/t...--survival-of-the-funded---king-of-the-jungle

But the general public shouldn?t be distracted by this ... this is merely cheap trolling in order to get the focus away from the topic itself.
 
It's the same thing that happens with Islam:

a terrorist act by some muslim nutcase happens, then countless muslims start defending their religion, the more they value the thing, the more vigorous their apologetic words.

Here, it simply happens with christians.

And, as usual, instead of condemning the violence, the hate, the extremism, instead of taking a distance from terror, these people are focused in -defending- their own beliefs, in showing they are not wrong. Why? Maybe because the terrorist words are so similar to what they say normally that that difference is not immediately apparent to anyone hearing both.

--Is this wrong?
--well, you see, my religion(/ideals/beliefs/whatever) doesn't teach violence...
--ok, but is this wrong?
--It's a different perspective: it's the other people's fault for misjudging us all.
--then we can say this is wrong?
--well, yes, but...

Is there anyone finding this strange?
Let's put it this way. No muslim cleric or important muslim has, to my knowledge, defamed christianity after this.
 
Let's put it this way. No muslim cleric or important muslim has, to my knowledge, defamed christianity after this.

Well, as a first thing I should say, and it's my fault for not having specified this thoroughly, that I was referring to those kind of people that don't fall in the liberal or openm-minded category. The specificity of metphysical beliefs is irrelevant.

As a second thing, I must say that you could make this comparison if a christian man had massacred dozens of muslim in a muslim country. That (and the (rational or irrational) fear of that) is what makes "our" ultra-conservatives explode of rage. This case is a bit different, is like Talibans putting a bomb in a market in Kandahar: people hardly notice things like that in western countries, even if they are quite common and similarly horrific.

What is similar is the tendency of people who are fanatic or bordering the fanatism to blame someone else and avoid looking in the mirror. Religion is not the point here, religion is just a different name behind which hide one's hate.
 
Last edited:
That's indeed true. But I don't think the average schmuck cares too much about why someone kill children, but focus on the fact children are killed.
 
Conservapedia is grumpy that the "Lamestream media" doesn't focus more on his Modern Warfare-gaming, and less on him being christian, which, obviously, was edited into his Facebook profile by "a liberal" after the fact.

When I first read that part about the FB profile, I thought you were being serious. Then I had a "Duh" moment.
If anyone really does believe that nonesense, they need help.

* * *

A story line just revealed here is that the Police boat* first used to get to the island was too small to carry the "SWAT" team causing the boat to take on water. The Police then used a civilian boat nearby and continued. (BBC source)

This alleged boat delay cost "ten minutes" and that is not good, if true.

Anyone have a clearer picture on this story line?
(It may be just media speculation or just BS.)


* The Police boat first used, was just a local boat and not one the "SWAT" team brought with them on the mission.
 
Last edited:
I call media bullshit. Germany's own Spiegel Online, once a reliable newssite, runs a world-exclusive piece titled "NORWAY DOUBTS IT'S LIBERAL JUSTICE SYSTEM" written by Julia J?ttner, well-known for tear-jerking courthouse stories, who reports from Hamburg.

Right now, I don't believe anything first posted by a foreign news site, even by the BBC.
 
Last edited:
I guess a liberal conspirator also edited in the hundreds of references to Anders seeing himself as a Knights Templar Justicar into his manifesto to make him look like a Christian.
 
Some are calling for his trial not to be televised.

I think it should, as it would be in the spirit of Norway, if not Scandinavia, the models of a free and open democracy.

Am I right or wrong?
 
Wow Glenn Beck redefines the meaning of monumental asshole. Court proceedings are usually (here) covered in audio only, with sketched artists impressions of the proceedings, if it's an open trial (you're free to attend in person though). If it's a sensitive case (sexual abuse of minors, national security etc) there can be barred doors, sometimes in combination with yppandef?rbud which means nobody inside is allowed to divulge any information whatsoever about what is said. Norway probably has something similar.

I think it'd be appropriate with a "audio resum?" coverage and written reports, I am very skeptical about some sort of "Live TV gimmickry".
 
Last edited:
When I first read that part about the FB profile, I thought you were being serious. Then I had a "Duh" moment.
If anyone really does believe that nonesense, they need help.

* * *

A story line just revealed here is that the Police boat* first used to get to the island was too small to carry the "SWAT" team causing the boat to take on water. The Police then used a civilian boat nearby and continued. (BBC source)

This alleged boat delay cost "ten minutes" and that is not good, if true.

Anyone have a clearer picture on this story line?
(It may be just media speculation or just BS.)


* The Police boat first used, was just a local boat and not one the "SWAT" team brought with them on the mission.
It's accurate to what I've been able to gather, however, I can't substansiate the claim about the boat taking on water. I really don't think it's important to focus on details to that extent, though.

I call media bullshit. Germany's own Spiegel Online, once a reliable newssite, runs a world-exclusive piece titled "NORWAY DOUBTS IT'S LIBERAL JUSTICE SYSTEM" written by Julia J?ttner, well-known for tear-jerking courthouse stories, who reports from Hamburg.

Right now, I don't believe anything first posted by a foreign news site, even by the BBC.
I haven't seen any signs of this other than on internet forums like this. There is probably some muttering at the lunch table around the country, but most people aren't dim enough to ignore the fact that he'll either be in psyciatric treatment for the rest of his life, or in prison for the rest of his life.

I guess a liberal conspirator also edited in the hundreds of references to Anders seeing himself as a Knights Templar Justicar into his manifesto to make him look like a Christian.
Well, obviously.

Some are calling for his trial not to be televised.

I think it should, as it would be in the spirit of Norway, if not Scandinavia, the models of a free and open democracy.

Am I right or wrong?
Neither. It's not for me to say, for my part, it could just as well be televised, as that would be more open. However, there is no tradition for televising court proceedings in Norway, it's not even alloved to film during them.
 
I call media bullshit. Germany's own Spiegel Online, once a reliable newssite, runs a world-exclusive piece titled "NORWAY DOUBTS IT'S LIBERAL JUSTICE SYSTEM" written by Julia J?ttner, well-known for tear-jerking courthouse stories, who reports from Hamburg.

Right now, I don't believe anything first posted by a foreign news site, even by the BBC.

The thing about SPIEGEL Online is, that you mustn't pick out single articles. Usually they cover a bigger topic with a variety of articles, often from different points of view. Regular readers notice that. For example they also brought something about how the Norwegians won't let this massacre change their country or their lifestyle.

I also think it's sometimes confusing, when SPIEGEL Online does that (writing one thing today and the opposite tomorrow) but in the end it is just representing the whole spectrum of views and opinions and lets the reader decide, which argument seems the strongest or most relevant for him. I think they usually cover all the facts and views rather well.

While I agree, that the Norwegians shouldn't let this tragedy change their country or judiciary, it must be allowed to question the fact, if the highest penalty should really be "only" 21 years in prison. That works nice, as long as you have to deal with "normal" murderers, who knifed their wife in a quarrel.

But in this case? How old would he be, when he'd be released in 21 years and what if he hasn't changed until then and doesn't show any remorse?

Also one thing I have been thinking about: He should be confronted with the relatives and friends of his victims. He should be forced to listen to them. So he knows in detail about every single person he killed. Show him private videos, pictures, let their friends and family tell him stories. He should know who he killed. His victims should be made known to him, so that he can relate to them emotionally.

And then let's see, if he really is as cool, as he pretends to be.
 
Last edited:
After 21 years he will get as many five-year-stretches of Sicherungsverwahrung as it takes to see him out.
 
It's accurate to what I've been able to gather, however, I can't substansiate the claim about the boat taking on water. I really don't think it's important to focus on details to that extent, though.

Ah thanks for that and agree with your second point.


Neither. It's not for me to say, for my part, it could just as well be televised, as that would be more open. However, there is no tradition for televising court proceedings in Norway, it's not even alloved to film during them.

Well, the BBC have got useless researchers then. The reporters implied it was normal practice for court procedings to be televised in Norway.
(Court TV coverage never happens here in England either.)
 
Top