Now begins the last installment of my look at 2083. If you’re just now joining the discussion, this is the fourth in the series. You can click these links and go straight to Part One, Part Two and Part Three.
Throughout the previous three looks at Anders Behring Breivik and Fjordman, I did my best to remain on topic with the text only. I still will derive most of Part Four from the manifesto text, but I will also be using information from the news and other sources as I discuss what I think this text reveals about Breivik. If one reads the text closely, Breivik reveals a lot of answers to questions that are troubling people. I also think the text reveals a lot about Breivik’s motives in a way that gives lie to the idea that stopping Islamic immigration and ending what he refers to as cultural Marxism were his only goals.
In Part Three I mostly discussed the things that Breivik planned and the things he actually did. Because of the level of plagiarism that Breivik engages in throughout the manifesto, it is hard to look at his writing and know if the words are indeed his, but there are patterns that emerge, times when it seems like writing flows and when it seems like he is parroting ideology from others in an awkward manner. When he writes from a place of experience or a place of emotion, it flows smoother and simply feels more real. So I tell myself that there are times I know I am reading Breivik’s actual thoughts, as well as text that is not plagiarized.
I need to explain that I am looking at his manifesto the way I read any text. I am looking at the whole of the document – how it is arranged, how the writing appears, what Breivik considers important, what he does not. There is truth in this manifesto of lies. You know how it is when a seasoned poker player can judge the hands of the other players at the table? It is because the other players, even as they try to present a flat demeanor, have what are called “tells.” A finger twitches, eyes dart to the left, someone unconsciously clears his throat. And the experienced poker player knows. Breivik’s manifesto is littered with tells.
While I hope I am not sounding too arrogant, I am a reasonably good “poker player.” I’m no expert on literary construction. But I fancy that because of my time in the trenches of odd books, strange books, bizarre books, and the people who naturally accompany such books, I have a pretty good grounding in the unusual mind. I also had some excellent teachers and professors in my day who instilled in me a habit of engaging with words in a manner that, at times, makes reading very involved for me. So I fancy that I enter into Part Four with some skills for analyzing text.
But at the same time, I will be engaging in psychological analysis of Breivik that should likely be taken with a grain of salt. In a way, psychoanalyzing him will be no different than analyzing other literary characters because in its way, this manifesto is as much a piece of fiction as any novel. I don’t need a psychological degree in order to discuss the mental state of Emma Bovary, Gregor Samsa, or Catherine Earnshaw. But if I acknowledge that I am analyzing the text in the same way that I would a fictional novel, hopefully that will make it clear that this is just speculation. Once the professional psychological reports come back, I have no doubt large chunks of this entry will be proven completely off-base. As you read this, please keep in mind I am doing my best to discuss Breivik in relation to what I think his manifesto tells me about him, with some news articles to bolster the opinions I posit. I could be very wrong.
And all that having been said, I think I’m right on more than I am wrong. I wouldn’t have written all this out if I didn’t have some belief I was right.
So let’s look at the insight the manifesto text gives us into the mind of Breivik. Let’s look at how his text arrangement and emphasis show his priorities. Let’s talk about what some of his plagiarism really means. Let’s look at how so much of what he writes contradicts itself. Let’s see if some of the initial media responses to him are borne out in his manifesto. Let’s see if we can pin down the mind of a killer via the words that meant so much to him.When I began reading this manifesto, nothing in it seemed right, above and beyond the obvious. I mean, the manifesto left behind by this particular mass murderer is likely not going to be a source of that which makes a whole lot of sense to those who are not bigots, misogynists, and narcissists. But even within the paradigm of knowing that Breivik was a mass murderer who likely had delusional thoughts, there was much that was utterly discordant in this manifesto. Things that when looked at make it clear that Breivik presented information that was contradictory. His motives for killing 77 people, on an overt level seem clear – he is an Islamophobe and anti-Marxist who was encouraged to kill because of his hate, influenced at times by the hate of others. But there is more to the rampage he went on than just religious, right-wing bigotry. (And I cannot emphasize this enough – just because I think there are other motives at play with Breivik, that does not mean the crystal clear motives of hatred of Marxism and Islamophobia are lessened. They are definitely motives and I do not wish to suggest that any one of my suggestions replace them as his stated motives behind the massacre.)
Breivik’s sense of loss about the destruction of his family
In his manifesto, Breivik goes into depth about his loathing of Islamic immigration, reproducing article after article that showed his bigoted notions, as well as occasionally writing out some beliefs of his own. He begins his manifesto with what ostensibly is an example of a dystopia caused by cultural Marxism, and the implication that Muslim immigration has created crime. On its surface, he begins his manifesto by honoring the silly, bigoted, repressive and regressive ideas of Diana West, who would like nothing so much as to force society to move back 60 years into the past when women had fewer choices, when minorities knew their places and when the white, middle class society was the arbiter of all that is proper and decent. But there is more to it than that, I think.
In Breivik’s introduction to cultural Marxism, the social disease he thinks ushered in Islamic immigration, indeed on the second page of the real material in the manifesto, he is expressing a deep longing for a time in the past he thinks is a paradise lost. Of course, as you look at these passages, they will probably strike you as being ridiculous, overblown and hopeless in their advocacy of a time that didn’t exist except for a select few of upper-middle class families in the West. But pay attention to the ideas he is espousing.
From page 12, Breivik begins:
Most Europeans look back on the 1950s as a good time. Our homes were safe, to the point where many people did not bother to lock their doors. Public schools were generally excellent, and their problems were things like talking in class and running in the halls. Most men treated women like ladies, and most ladies devoted their time and effort to making good homes, rearing their children well and helping their communities through volunteer work. Children grew up in two–parent households, and the mother was there to meet the child when he came home from school. Entertainment was something the whole family could enjoy.
Of course, this isn’t how life was for most Europeans in the 1950s and I would wager there are a fair number of Norwegians who do not remember the 1950s so fondly, as a time when Mom was waiting after school for little Timmy and parents never divorced and ladies did volunteer work. It’s interesting to note that Breivik thinks that the world was an episode of Leave it to Beaver until cultural Marxism robbed us all of a place where no moms worked and the worst afflictions of school children were sass and tardiness.
This is the next full paragraph, also from page 12:
If a man of the 1950s were suddenly introduced into Western Europe in the 2000s, he would hardly recognise it as the same country. He would be in immediate danger ofgetting mugged, carjacked or worse, because he would not have learned to live in constant fear. He would not know that he shouldn’t go into certain parts of the city, thathis car must not only be locked but equipped with an alarm, that he dare not go to sleep at night without locking the windows and bolting the doors – and setting the electronic security system.
It’s hard to see that most men in Northern Europe live in a state of constant fear, and I am pretty sure there were bad sides of town where good people did not dare to venture even in the 1950s, but I reproduce this section mostly because it shows that Breivik is possibly a man who lived in constant terror (or he really absorbed the less-than-stellar thinking of Diana West and engages in her hyperbole and unfounded statements), but also because it helps segue neatly into the next paragraph, wherein the real strangeness begins.
If he brought his family with him, he and his wife would probably cheerfully pack their children off to the nearest public school. When the children came home in the afternoon and told them they had to go through a metal detector to get in the building, had been given some funny white powder by another kid and learned that homosexuality is normal and good, the parents would be uncomprehending.
Are there many schools in Norway that require metal detectors? Some in America require them but I don’t yet see metal detectors as being as common as Breivik seems to think. Who knows about funny white powder? Generally one does not see a lot of cocaine or powdered heroin freely given about to the new kids in public schools. And as for homosexuality being normal and good? Who knows. Clearly Breivik thinks he went to school in a system that is reminiscent of the set of the television show The Wire and a continual re-reading of Heather Has Two Mommies. Of course, he is presenting a very jaundiced look at the modern school experience, a very hysterical and frightened look that isn’t really borne out by his own experiences. This is pure Diana West here, this belief that the entire world is an open cesspit because of multiculturalism.
But here’s where it starts to get very interesting. Still on page 12:
In the office, the man might light up a cigarette, drop a reference to the “little lady,” and say he was happy to see the firm employing some coloured folks in important positions. Any of those acts would earn a swift reprimand, and together they might get him fired.
Breivik, like many other privileged white men who feel sorely aggrieved because they cannot shout epithets to women and people of color with cultural impunity, seems to think that not being able to refer to “coloured folks” is a great burden the modern man must carry. More to the point, I don’t know of any company that would fire a man for referring to a woman as “the little lady.” All extremist examples yet again but mostly comical if looked at in depth. And thank heavens no one can smoke anymore in the office place – again, the examples he uses to paint a picture of how terrible the modern world is are so ridiculous. Oh, how terrible the world is when white men cannot smoke at the office. Breivik’s view of the world sounds like he is worshiping Don Draper from Mad Men: a world of white, upper middle-class men. Note he did not discuss the words a man who worked on the docks would use. Nor the words of a garbage collector, of a butcher or a farmer. Just the man who sits at a desk in a suit, smoking.
Next paragraph, still on page 12:
When she went into the city to shop, the wife would put on a nice suit, hat, and possibly gloves. She would not understand why people stared, and mocked.
This is pure Diana West, with her insistence that modern dress is somehow indicative of a decline in morality and traditional ethics. “The wife” would be mocked because it would look like she was a character in a television show. People changing the way they dress is not an indicator of how terrible a society is. “The wife” would be just as derided if she went into town dressed in traditional Norwegian dress. And again, only the upper middle class wife dressed in a hat, suit and gloves to go into town, presumably to run errands and do the grocery shopping. Not in Norway, not in America. That sanitized view we have of how people looked and behaved, derived from movies and television, does not portray the mass of people from the 1950s.
We end with this, also from page 12:
And when the whole family sat down after dinner and turned on the television, they would not understand how pornography from some sleazy, blank-fronted “Adults Only” kiosk had gotten on their set.
Were they able, our 1950s family would head back to the 1950s as fast as they could, with a gripping horror story to tell. Their story would be of a nation that had decayed and degenerated at a fantastic pace, moving in less than a half a century from the greatest countries on earth to Third World nations, overrun by crime, noise, drugs and dirt. The fall of Rome was graceful by comparison.
Why did it happen?
By this point, we know that the answer to that rhetorical question is cultural Marxism and Islamic immigration. And there is no need to further dissect the whitebread alarmist nature of Breivik’s prose. Most of us don’t turn on the TV and find porn, and I think since the Industrial Revolution anyone who goes 60 years into the future would find the future strange and unsettling. But I think this beginning is mostly important because of the implications of it simply being the first thing Breivik writes about.
It is in the beginning of the section of cultural Marxism, and I think on one level that it is folly to discuss much about the order of this manifesto. It is a mess in terms of logical lay-out. But at the same time, this is the document Breivik left behind to influence people, to try to bring people around to his way of thinking. There are any number of ways he could have started the meat of his manifesto. He could have started by enumerating what he perceives as Muslim atrocities committed in Europe. That would be logical, as he committed the murders ostensibly with the goal of interrupting cultural Marxism recruitment because the cultural Marxists are the ones he blames for allowing Muslim immigration. He could have started off detailing why Muslim immigration is bad. He could have started off by explaining exactly what cultural Marxism is. He could have started off this manifesto in any number of ways.
So I think it is worth looking at his beginning and see what it represents. First of all, obviously he buys into the pearl-clutching ideas of Diana West that modernity is degenerate, despicable, violent and pornographic and that the 1950s were the halcyon days of innocence, happiness and decency. But he also discusses exclusively how the terrors of cultural Marxism play themselves out on the traditional family unit of a man, wife and children. Not the toll cultural Marxism has taken on society at large, but rather a close focus on the microcosm, the family that can no longer exist in the current atmosphere. And he placed this part first because it is the part that means the most to him, even above and beyond the Islamification of Europe.
I assert this is because Breivik is bitterly angry about his childhood. I know, I know, this is simplistic armchair psychology at its worst. It’s the first thing that comes up when discussing a killer – he must have had a bad childhood. But this idea is supported by other things he says throughout his manifesto, and that this discussion of an upper middle-class, white family that is horrified by the present and cannot live there with anything approaching peace, happiness and safety is the first real writing in the manifesto indicates it was in the forefront of Breivik’s mind as he wrote.
Breivik experienced a sense of loss about his childhood. His parents divorced when he was one-year-old. Both parents remarried and both subsequently divorced again. In his manifesto, he discusses how he felt he was feminized because he was raised by his mother, and this point will come up later when I discuss Breivik’s misogyny, but he makes it clear he would not feel so victimized by the world had he been raised by or with his father. This may not seem like the strongest of ideas on my part but as you read, you will see even more proof that shows that Breivik appears to be reacting to the destruction of what he wanted in a family. Breivik literally begins his manifesto bemoaning the lost family of the 1950s. In a novel, this would be a large symbol, leading off with the lost, doomed family of the past. Given Breivik’s opinions about the way he was raised, I think the opening of this manifesto is significant. At times I wonder if he was trying to destroy the futures of kids he saw as happier than him. In his eyes, if his family was destroyed, then other families needed to be destroyed, too. I genuinely feel as if he was trying to kill a generation that had far more happiness than he thinks he got to experience as a child.
On their face, the passages about the Knights Templar are ridiculous. The notion that Breivik is a part of a resurrection of a long defunct order of Crusaders set on releasing Europe from the grasp of Islam is laughable. It pains me that anyone believes it because Breivik had contact online with people involved in bigoted and racist groups. Having spoken to Paul May, attending a boot camp in Belarus and culling e-mails from a Facebook group do not an actual movement make. So given that I know the revived Knights Templar is not real, why did he create such an elaborate back story for his rampage?
Part of it comes from the notion that he was engaging in a sort of delusional game, a fantasy role-playing game, a topic I discussed ad nauseum in Part Three. Part of it is because Breivik wanted to instill that he wasn’t acting alone, that he was a single-cell in a larger organization. But it was also because, in my decidedly non-professional opinion, Breivik has some traits one associates with Narcissistic Personality Disorder. He has a need to appear as that which he is not – brave, chivalrous, and an important member of a larger group, a group that is destined by God to return Europe to its lost glory.
Narcissistic Personality Disorder isn’t just about being self-impressed. One is tempted to look at the pictures of himself he included in his manifesto, the ones released to the press of him in make-up and posing with a turned-up collar, and the ones of him in uniforms, and think, “Oh yeah, this guy’s a narcissist.” Add to it that Breivik is still carefully maintaining a specific image behind bars as he refuses to permit a mug shot and only appears in public in that damned red Lacoste sweater, and it seems like it’s an easy enough assumption to make.
But NPD goes beyond just vanity or excessive concern about one’s appearance. Of course, it will take a good evaluation from a psychiatrist to explain with any accuracy or believability whether or not Breivik suffers from NPD, but he certainly has some of the classic traits of the disorder.
One trait is excessive belief of self-importance. Breivik’s manifesto insists that he was selected to represent Norway in an international meeting with Knights Templar representatives, meaning of all the people in Norway, he was the most important person to represent his nation in a chivalrous military group. Out of all the men and women in Norway with classical educations and military experience, this man who never graduated from college and was exempted from Norway’s compulsory military service (and this also brings to mind the idea that perhaps the best reason to shoot kids was because they had not yet undergone their compulsory military training and would have been easier targets), was the best candidate. Breivik also, in his diary, gives several examples of how he thinks others admire his status. Take this from page 1462, emphasis mine:
After I had scraped out the yellow PA crystals and the brown DDNP crystals putting them in plastic boxes and placing them in the cold cellar I went to do some shopping in the northern town. There is a festival and there was a lot of things happening, a faire, various food stands, concerts etc. Since this town has a limited variety of fast food I decided to drive down to the southern town, eat and pick up some Chinese takeaway. There was a relatively hot girl on the restaurant today checking me out. Refined individuals like myself is a rare commodity here so I notice I do get a lot of attention in both the southern and the northern town. It’s the way I dress and look. There are mostly unrefined/un-cultivated people living here. I wear mostly the best pieces from my former life, which consists of very expensive brand clothing, LaCoste sweaters, piques etc. People can see from a mile away that I’m not from around here.
Again with the Lacoste. I wonder if the brand is going to take a hit the way Bruno Magli did after his shoes were associated excessively with the OJ Simpson murders. Note in the beginning of this paragraph he has been at work making his bomb but so convinced is he of his superior looks and refined tastes and how the villagers admire him, he can’t bring himself to keep a low profile as he plans his mass murder spree. In certain respects, he reminds me of the spree killer and murderer of Gianni Versace, Andrew Cunanan. I find that very interesting, his sense that the world is always looking at him admiringly.
Another trait of NPD is the need to exaggerate or lie about one’s accomplishments. Breivik stated that he had become a millionaire in his 20s, a claim that has since been completely debunked. After the horrific events of 7/22, the website document.no posted a collection of all the comments Breivik had left on the site. His interactions on the site are what appear to be a vainglorious attempt to promote his own image as a man who could help the site with a publishing venture (and forgive me if I am not specific enough because Google Translate gives me the big picture but sometimes smaller details get lost in the translation). Of course, we know now Breivik had no ties to any publishing company or any pull in the magazine industry. He was posturing to inflate the perception of how he hoped others would perceive him. Almost comically he chides the site for not taking his recommendations to heart, because failing to do as he suggested means the site will never achieve the success they could have had if they had just followed his advice.
People with NPD also have a tendency to run roughshod over others as they set out to achieve their goals. Other than shooting those children, I can imagine nothing more callous than the way Breivik discusses his family in this manifesto. I will not reproduce names because his family has suffered enough, but he took special glee offering up their lives in a very sanctimonious way. He trashes his sister, condemning her for living a life spent pursuing money. She evidently, along with her husband and children, lives on $150K a year, a relatively modest middle-class income for the place where she lives. But taking her to task over her greed in comparison to his own sacrifice was not enough – he took it one horrible step further. From page 1171:
My half sister, Xxxxxxxx was infected by chlamydia after having more than 40 sexual partners (more than 15 Chippendales’ strippers who are known to be bearers of various diseases). Her chlamydia went untreated and she became one of several million US/European women who were suffering from PID, Pelvic inflammatory disease caused by untreated gonorrhea and chlamydia which leads to infertility. As she lives in the US, costs relating to this were not covered by the state. She and her husband spent 40 000-50 000 USD on two IVF treatments (in vitriol fertilisation) a process by which egg cells are fertilised by sperm outside the womb. She was lucky compared to many as these treatments may cost upwards of 100 000 USD. Furthermore, as far as I know, due to her condition as a result of the untreated disease, she needed a caesarean section for both childbirths. The last c-section almost killed her due to complications and she needed blood transfusion of more than 5 litres of blood in total. It is unknown if her two children suffered from pneumonia and conjunctivitis and other problems in infants born with chlamydia transmitted from my sister during childbirth.
And in case you were wondering, this is filled with the “tells” of lying. How on earth would this man know his sisters’ sexual history to this detail. Perhaps his family is extraordinarily open about such things. Probably not. The Chippendales dancers bit is a “tell” that he is likely lying. It beggars belief that his sister slept with so many strippers, and it is not really a proven social fact that male strippers carry disease. I also find it interesting that he had no idea if the babies she was able to have were actually sick as a result of being born with chlamydia. Funny he doesn’t know such an important fact about the babies but knows his sister slept with 40 men. He made all of this up to aggrandize himself in comparison.
Why did he see fit to bring this up at all? Also from page 1171:
Under normal circumstances I would never reveal intimate details about my friends and my family’s personal lives due to societal taboos and shame, confidentiality issues and loyalty. However, how are we supposed to have a chance at changing our societies when we refuse to reveal the negative impacts surrounding the disintegrating moral?
How magnanimous of him, to offer his sister up as evidence of the “disintegrating moral.” Funny he didn’t discuss his own sexual details, especially the ones about using prostitutes as prepared for his rampage. One presumes he had no need to humiliate strangers – only those close to him. He goes on to discuss how some of his friends have diseases, how his mother has herpes and how she got it from his stepfather, who had over 500 sexual partners in his life. He also insinuates that brain damage from herpes that turned into meningitis left his mother brain damaged, with the intellectual capacity of a child. I could not find anything to bolster his assertions about his mother. He was scoring points off of his friends and family to make himself seem more like a hero, a man who can stand above all this sex and disease.
But don’t worry – he’s not telling us this because he is jealous of other people getting laid, also on page 1172:
I don’t blame them personally and it has absolutely nothing to do with envy. I could easily have chosen the same path if I wanted to, due to my looks, status, resourcefulness and charm.
Feel free to also file this last quote under inflated sense of self-worth.
Another symptom of NPD that Breivik has in spades is a preoccupation or fixation on ideas of success, control and power. The man created an entire delusional manifesto in which he hoped to lead people to believe that he was part of an elite group that was going to change the world. But more importantly, he is now the most talked about man in Norway. He is famous. He is infamous. He now has achieved his twisted idea of success.
There are other characteristics that fit Breivik. One characteristic is that people with NPD often feel as if they are somehow exalted or extraordinary in some manner. Breivik, who writes of how other people noticed his good looks, his good taste, felt he was above the rest of his fellow men. He even created a role for himself in an international but non-existent conspiracy to change the course of history. If he could not justify his self-absorption with reality, then he would create it from whole cloth.
While I could go on about this for a while, I will end this section on NPD with a look at one last characteristic: a demented belief that others should definitely follow his beliefs and instructions. Breivik, in his interactions on document.no, chided people several times for failing to follow his advice, as if the people who ran the site somehow were being derelict or stupid by not immediately engaging in his detailed publication instructions. When I take this manifesto into account, in addition to showing a man who was willing to worry to death every detail, I also see a man who thinks he has all the answers. One of the best examples I will discuss later in this article are his demented, detailed, excruciating instructions for what Europe should do if the birth rates among native Europeans do not improve. The level of attention was stupefying and, more to the point, it was written with an expectation that it would be lauded, perhaps found revolutionary. Either that, or my initial feeling that it was more game manual minutia was on point. In the case of Breivik, I am unsure if you have to pick – there are many motives to choose from.
Like his idol Fjordman, Breivik is no fan of women. It’s pretty safe to say that any man who finds it merry and fitting to trash his mother and sister in such a humiliating fashion is probably not going to be really fond of women in general. Since beginning this four part series, I have received a lot of e-mails from people, and a few of them claim to have irrefutable evidence that Breivik is a homosexual and that, of course, all male homosexuals hate women/their mother/the world. I have no idea where such ideas come from but I do wish they would stop. The logical inverse of this would be that all heterosexuals hate the sex to which they are not attracted. Life is not a Tennessee Williams play and if Breivik is indeed homosexual, I tend to think that should be the very last thing analyzed when looking at why he killed so many people. But people can be misogynists regardless of their sex, gender or sexual orientation, and Breivik is definitely a misogynist.
A desire to destroy the concept of mother
When I finished the manifesto and began writing about 2083, I was under the impression that the current Norwegian Prime Minister, Jens Stoltenberg, was Breivik’s intended target and as a result I had a hard time understanding why it was that he decided to kill so many teenagers who were not even on his traitor list. I wondered if perhaps his failure to kill the Prime Minister turned into impotent rage that he took out on the kids on Utøya. When I realized I wanted to read this manifesto, I decided to stop reading the news because what good is my interpretation if my thoughts could be contaminated by blogs, news reports that discussed his state of mind, etc. I really did want to stick to the words in the manifesto alone.
It was clear after Part Three that I was going to have to relent and read some news sources. Helpful comments I received to my entries made that clear. In the context of trying to assassinate Stoltenberg, much of what happened on Utøya seemed odd. But even taking into account that Breivik srtayed from his own dementedly detailed traitor categories and killed teenagers, the events of Utøya make far more sense when I understand who the real target was.
To those who followed the news carefully, the real intended target will be no surprise. Breivik wanted to assassinate former Prime Minister Gro Harlem Brundtland, a woman called “The Mother of the Nation” in Norway because of the length of time she spent as Prime Minister. And had there not been a traffic accident that delayed him, Breivik may have succeeded as she was on the island that day to give a speech. He only missed her by about an hour.
I know many people are unwilling to engage in armchair psychiatry and I can see the folly in it. But it is tantalizing, isn’t it, the notion of a man wanting to kill “The Mother of the Nation.” A man who demeans his own mother in his manifesto may have some issues with mothers, especially a Socialist mother who led the country. I do not think it is particularly far-fetched to think that Breivik looked at the teenagers on that island, knew when a matriarch in the Socialist movement was coming to speak, and decided to kill the mother and her children. This ties back into the idea of family as well. Breivik was wiping out a sort of Socialist family when he decided to kill “The Mother of the Nation” and the young people whom she had influenced.
But even if you don’t want to jump into the whole notion of a psychological desire to kill a type of mother and her children, it can’t be denied that wanting to assassinate a woman who led three Labor governments in Norway speaks to a certain level of misogyny. He could have planned to kill the current Prime Minister and that would have been as equally if not more attention-worthy, but he wanted to kill Gro Harlem Brundtland, a woman and a leader of the party Breivik thinks pushed the feminist movement and cultural Marxism in order to sell out Europe to the Muslims. Much like Fjordman, his first choice of victim shows how Breivik lays the blame for societal woes on women, and a woman who was the opposite of the woman in his intro, a 1950s, glove-wearing, dinner cooking, stay-at-home-wife and mother, would be an excellent target to drive home his point.
Patriarchy is the only way to save Norway
Just to show I did not cherry pick all of the anti-woman horrors in Breivik’s manifesto and ignored it when he took a middle ground, here’s a quote from page 1177:
I’ll be the first to admit that there are many sensible feminist policies. The goal should obviously not be to reverse ALL feminist policies just for the sake of it. Ignore these sensible feminist policies, and instead focus on the destructive policies.
But this is immediately followed by an assertion that due to cultural Marxism, all of Europe is now a matriarchy, also from page 1177:
The current matriarchy in Western European countries is partly the cause of the symptoms that have become increasingly prevalent. To counter the symptoms it is required to fix the underlying flaws of our systems. One of the primary flaws is the matriarchal supremacy we see in several arenas.
And since he wanted to kill Gro Harlem Brundtland, it is not too far out there to think politics is now a matriarchy. But he specifically names the areas which are now controlled by the matriarchy. One is divorce, and interestingly, he wants to do away with no-fault divorces because he feels it is a legal inconsistency not to punish a person who breaks a contract, and therefore doing away with no-fault divorces will ensure that spouses who did not want divorces will have a moral high ground. There’s a little jab at homosexuals at the end, whom he does not think want traditional marriage, only the “watered-down version” that is prevalent now, but he never comes out and make an assertion, as does Fjordman, that women are responsible for most divorces. It’s a curious paragraph to prove the presence of the matriarchy.
But the next paragraph does show it, and this links back to the idea that bringing back into existence the perfect 1950s family was possibly a motive. He feels that giving child custody to women in divorces must stop. From page 1179:
To truly reverse the decline of the family, the momentum must be carried forward to confront the current destructive matriarchal policies that have institutionalised “broken family” policies. Our current system produces broken families and prevents traditional norms based on discipline. The most direct threat to the family is “divorce on demand”. Sooner or later, if Western Europe is to endure, it must be brought under control. The father/patriarch must be given considerably more influence as this is the only way to ensure the survival of the nuclear family as it will enhance family integrity. The matriarchal supremacy within the modern households must seize to exist
As of now, the mother will always be awarded child custody rights unless she is mentally ill or a drug/alcohol addict. The system must be reformed so that the father will be awarded custody rights by default. This will ensure that that divorce rate will be significantly reduced (by up to 50-70%) and will contribute to uphold the nuclear family.
Yes, you read this correctly. He wants to return to the Victorian ideal wherein in the event of a divorce, the man always got the children. Worse, if one takes into account that Breivik wants to end no-fault divorce, this means that even if a man initiates a divorce, he is still going to benefit because he will always get the children. This serves to trap women into bad marriages on pain of losing their children, and one cannot help but remember my idea that part of Breivik’s motives are to reinstate the 1950s family he lost out on. If his mother had known she would lose him in a divorce, would things have been different for Breivik? Actually, he would not have existed as the marriage to his mother was not his father’s first marriage. But really, as self-absorbed as he is, I think he thinks his broken home was the primary home that was broken – that is the one he wants to retroactively restore. And he wants to restore it by eliminating a woman’s right to her children in a divorce.
And the matriarchy seems to have a stranglehold in the realms of abortion and birth control. Here are two quotes, also from page 1179:
Abortion should only be allowed in case of rape, if the mother’s life is in danger, or if the baby has mental or physical disabilities. The liberal zones may be exempt by this rule.
Contraceptive pills and equivalent methods will be severely restricted in conservative territories. The liberal zones may be exempt by this rule.
Fabulous. Nothing, and I mean nothing, will ensure a complete dearth of women in academia, the workplace and in politics better than removing women’s right to control their fertility. Stripping women of the capacity to determine how many children they want is the best way to control women and this is some high level misogyny here because Breivik understands this fact – women who cannot control their family size cannot assert their place in the world. It makes marriage a continual crap-shoot and given the youthful predilection for romantic love, it will ensure generations of women get married and forced out of the decision-making in Norway. I can sense some of the comments and e-mails I will receive, wherein men will say, “Is removing women from the decision-making a bad idea? Women can still influence via the home and how they raise their children. What about the idea that the hand that rocks the cradle rules the world?” If you pose that question and it is not rhetorical, you need to understand that you are engaging in misogynist thinking because what you are asserting is that women must never be able to assert power directly, but must do so via the male children they produce. You are diminishing women to their reproductive functions – only by ovaries can a woman shape her world. That is misogyny.
This is all also very likely to end poorly in Breivik’s misogynist utopia because he also goes on to ban sex education. I can just see fifteen year old girls all over Europe getting pregnant with no recourse but marriage. He also, as a virtual afterthought, bans quotas and female hiring preferences, as if that will be much of a concern in a place where the women have no choice but to remain single or be pregnant as often as their bodies will permit, like the worn-out women of the Quiverfull movement.
Brave New Norske
But what will happen if women cannot get their reproductive acts together and bring up the population numbers among the native Europeans? What happens if the white women do not breed to Breivik’s satisfaction? From page 1180:
Future national reproduction policies will rely on how we choose to reform women’s rights, media-government-social directives/the Church/drug-alcohol policies/sexualfamily ethics and moral. In order for women to be truly liberated, according to hardcore feminists, she must be free from the pressure of carrying offspring. But that is not really possibly or at least acceptable as humanity would be extinct within a generation.
Ensuring sustainable fertility rates does however not necessarily mean that we have to strip away women their rights as there are alternatives.
We need to increase our fertility rate from the European average (non-Muslim) of 1,5 to 2,1-2,3 (2,1 being a minimum).
This will to a certain degree involve encouraging many 3 child families.
It’s good to know that I am evidently a hard core feminist. I had always thought I was ardent but moderate but us hard core feminists like to control our reproductive rights so I’ll take the label. But if he has banned birth control and abortion, how is it he plans to fix this without completely stripping away women’s rights? Well, he enumerates his previous points of making abortion illegal and birth control hard to obtain and stripping away sex education. He also goes on to discourage women from seeking education because it only means they will want to work jobs, offer tax incentives for being a mother, and limit media so people will not want to have a Sex and the City lifestyle, which he mentions about as often as Fjordman mentions the Vagina Monologues. This he calls the 1950s solution.
But never fear, there is a “feminist/liberal” model and it reads like something out of a science fiction nightmare. Seriously, if you wanted to write a scenario for a zombie apocalypse game wherein the world must be repopulated quickly, you could do worse than Breivik writes in this section. From page 1182:
The following suggestion can only be applied in a highly pragmatical and rational society that isn’t bound by the paralyzing grasp of today’s cultural Marxist non-ethics.
An alternative which would prevent the need to restrict women’s rights and media rights would be to allow the state to play an essential role in national reproduction. This would mean allowing European Federation women to continue their current path toward liberating themselves from the pressure of carrying offspring.
Okay, despite the fact that I knew he thought he was throwing us women a bone by creating a world wherein we can still work, when I read the words “pragmatical and rational” I knew the idea was going to be outrageous and absurd (and in Breivik’s case, completely over-thought and full of strange details). He did not disappoint, from page 1182:
This would involve the creation of a network of surrogacy facilities in low cost countries and basically “outsource breeding”. A gestational surrogate carrier refers to a woman who carries a pregnancy created by the egg and sperm of two other individuals by using IVF.
He goes on to describe what IVF is and how it would work in his society, still on page 1182:
IVF or in vitro fertilisation is a process by which egg cells are fertilised by sperm outside the womb, in vitrio. IVF is traditionally a major treatment in infertility when other methods of assisted reproductive technology have failed. The process involves hormonally controlling the ovulatory process, removing ova (eggs) from the woman’s ovaries and letting sperm fertilise them in a fluid medium. The fertilised egg (zygote) is then transferred to the patient’s uterus with the intent to establish a successful pregnancy. The first “test tube baby”, Louise Brown, was born in 1978. IVF can also be used when parents want to have multiple births. The first pregnancy achieved with the use of donor eggs was reported in 1984. By using in vitro fertilisation (IVF) techniques, eggs are obtained from the ovaries of the donor, fertilised by sperm from the other donor, and the resulting embryo’s are placed into the surrogate’s uterus. If pregnancy is achieved, the resulting child will be genetically related to the two donors but not to the surrogate.
But wait, there’s a rub! Still on page 1182:
Who will care for these children? Career obsessed women who does not prioritise reproduction is not likely to have the will to care for these surrogacy babies either so there would not be enough foster parents.
So… The surrogacy is not to create babies for working women who do not want to pause to give birth? Nope. He goes on, still on page 1182:
The only alternative would be that the state, or state funded institutions take on the role for fostering these children.
He explains how this plan will work. Here’s the overview from page 1182:
This is how the arrangements could work:
A large facility or a so called “boarding home” is created which is divided into 5 separate areas:
– Kindergarden boarding home (age 0-6)
– Primary school boarding home (age 6-12)
– Secondary school boarding home (age 12-16)
– High school boarding home (age 16-19)
– College/university boarding home (age 19-25)
By boarding home, he means orphanage where school is taught.
More detail on pages 1182-1183:
6 babies, 3 boys – 3 girls, are delivered to the boarding home during the first 6 months of the year, 6 more babies, 3 boys – 3 girls, are delivered during the next 6 months. The first 6 are assigned a specific surname, f example Andersson and two full time “parents/guardians”, one male and one female. From now on, these 6 babies are considered brothers and sisters. Together with their two “parents/guardians” they are considered a unique family, and will not be separated for the rest of their lives. These two full time employees (one male, one female) who will act as their parents/guardians will follow them throughout their lives.
This setup will facilitate and encourage close bonding as they will do as many activities as possible together to ensure a stable and warm relationship allowing the development of trust, friendship and “family ties”.
A lot of thoughts ran through my brain reading this. I thought of the clones raised in a boarding school in Kazuo Ishiguro’s Never Let Me Go. I thought of Oliver Twist. I thought of all those children discovered in Romania when Ceausescu was finally killed, the evil bastard. I thought nothing good ever comes from assuming that all people are noble and will care for all children like they are their own. Breivik himself bitterly resents not being raised with his natural parents. That he wants to inflict this strange idea on children at all speaks of a depravity that I cannot fathom. There is nothing wrong with foster homes. There is nothing wrong with adoption. Some children need to be rescued and some people cannot have children or their hearts are open to children who are not theirs by birth. But this is setting up entire generations of children who are motherless and fatherless, being born by women who will not keep them but will presumably continue serving as an incubator for the state. Breivik’s own father rejected him because of chronic misbehavior in high school and he discusses the 1950s family enough that we can all agree that it plays in his mind somehow. Again, it seems like he wants to destroy untold generations because he never got the family he wanted.
He discusses the plan for all these IVF via surrogate children and the life he has set up for them in the predictable, game manual-like manner that I have come to expect from him and then also predictably it gets worse. If it occurs to you to ask where the European baby factories get their ova and sperm, he explains it, from page 1184:
This option is usually arranged through established egg/sperm donation programs. Existing European programs must be drastically increased to facilitate large-scale programs. Women in IVF programs may forward their excess eggs to other surrogates. One donor should however not donate more than 100 eggs/sperm doses to avoid potential future inbreeding effects. This number may be adjusted based on distribution area. All donors will be compensated financially for their expenses, time, risk, and inconvenience associated with the process.
But what is in it for the surrogates, other than pregnancy after pregnancy until their bodies wear out? Wouldn’t such a life wear thin even for the most Nationalistic woman. If she is healthy enough to be able to bear all these children, wouldn’t she like to have one of her own? Or what if she marries and wants a family of her own? Breivik has the solution on page 1187:
The development of advanced incubator machines/artificial wombs could become an alternative (or even a substitute) to using surrogates in low cost countries. This can be done by investing in and developing highly advanced neonatal intensive-care units (NICU) or by continuing the development of artificial uterus’s (ectogenesis).
Wow. Of course, this is dystopian science fiction, but the subtext is clear: Women are not doing what men like Breivik think they should, which is giving birth as much as possible. In order to assuage the women who want to have educations and careers, a frightening industry of IVF labs and surrogates, schools and orphanages will be set up. For all those women who want to work, women will have to give up their ova and another woman will have to carry babies that the state will raise in order to achieve a birth rate higher than the Muslims. Not only is it creepy and demented and cruel, but it gives the appearance of a false choice – have a family or see your society turn into a bad science fiction movie. False choices are the hallmark of the feminist critic. Women have been damned if we do and damned if we don’t since the beginning of time but never before have I seen the misogynist fallacy of choice played out so terribly.
Of course Breivik’s plagiarism is not a motive to the shootings, but rather, I think his plagiarism shows a lot about his motives, hence including it here.
In a way, the plagiarism is not unexpected. This is a 1518 page manifesto. I can see how a source might not be cited here or there, or an article reproduced without due attention to including the name of the author. But the wholesale plagiarism and reproduction of the works of others is puzzling when I think about Breivik’s nature.
In his own writing, he leaves no stone uncovered. He is thorough and spares no details. Consider his traitor list. Consider the above section about artificial wombs. They were exacting and precise. He tightly controlled his image before the attacks and is controlling it now. He set up his own lab, evidently experimented in various ways to commit mayhem. He controlled his actions, his words and his demeanor to the point that he completely slipped under the radar in front of his family, his friends and even to those who knew of him online. Does this sound like a man who would plagiarize the words of others?
In one respect, yes. I can see it. He is a cypher with little original philosophical thought of his own. But even within that knowledge, it makes little sense that he would do it, that he would spend years organizing and working and then undermine himself by looking intellectually and academically lazy.
I assert that he plagiarized because the sections of this manifesto wherein he cut and pasted Fjordman’s body of work and he plagiarized William Lind and the Unibomber are the parts that mean the least to him. The parts where he is angry at the modern world for making it impossible to be a 1950s family, the parts where he was creating his own bizarre little world with his game-like manual of rules for Breivik’s Europe, are what matter the most. The places where he exerted the most mental and physical energy – creating the world and planning and testing his mayhem, meant the most because those were the parts that resonated with hurt child, narcissistic personality. The passages about Islamification and cultural Marxism, while very important to him, did not require the extensive amount of work he put into his descriptions of how the Knights Templar are going to rebuild Europe and all the details of the fantasy world of his game. Islamophobia and cultural Marxism were someone else’s ideas and as a result, did not glorify Breivik.
Of course, Islamophobia and cultural Marxism are a huge part of why he ran amok but I genuinely think that Breivik lives in a world of his own logic, wherein shooting “The Mother of the Nation” and teenagers was an act meaningful on an emotional level and a political level. The politics are important but the emotional part, the fun part of creating his own world, his reactions to the world that deprived him of what he wanted, were the places where he put in his original thought.
Questions I have received and how the manifesto answers them
I’ve received e-mails from readers and have read others asking questions online and many of the questions, I think, are answered in the manifesto.
Did Breivik act alone?
People will disagree with me on this but I think he acted alone. Not just as a single-cell in a larger, unorganized Knights Templar structure, but utterly alone. He had contact with people, especially via Facebook. By now it is no secret there are Nationalist, racist and bigoted sites all over the Internet, all espousing virulent ideology. Some have even cheered on Breivik’s wholesale murder of children. But I don’t think sharing the same beliefs and having the same moral deficits means he acted in concert with others. I think the shallow connection to Paul Ray will be proven to be even shallower than some fear. Yes, Ray himself has some nefarious activities going on, it would seem, but he can’teven control his contrary nature and keep his profile down low enough to prevent himself from being expelled from a church in Malta two weeks before the murders. It seems unlikely a fiery man who is an exile even in the place where he was exiled would have been able to keep his nose clean well enough to prevent official scrutiny. And Fjordman, had he been a part of this, would not have gone on record cheering it on before he realized his name was all over the manifesto.
But that aside, there is evidence in this manifesto that shows, to me at least, that Breivik was completely alone. From the very beginning, I felt like he did this all on his own with nary a network to support him. Take this from page 5:
I ask that you distribute this book to everyone you know. Please do not think that others will take care of it. Sorry to be blunt, but it does not work out that way. If we, the Western European Resistance, fail or become apathetic, then Western Europe will fall, and your freedom and our children’s freedom with it… It is essential and very important that everyone is at least presented with the truth before our systems come crashing down within 2 to 7 decades. So again, I humbly ask you to re-distribute the book to as many patriotic minded individuals as you can. I am 100% certain that the distribution of this compendium to a large portion of European patriots will contribute to ensure our victory in the end. Because within these three books lies the tools required to win the ongoing Western European cultural war.
Why would a man who is a part of an international re-creation of the Knights Templar be reduced to begging those who are reading his manifesto to distribute it to Nationalists? This was sent out initially to Facebook members whose e-mails he had collected, but if even those people had known of what he planned, why would there not be a system in place to disseminate this information. A couple of proxy server e-mails and those who are a part of this cloak and dagger group could have sent this e-mail out to the members of the conspiracy and beyond. But Breivik had to get his word out there on his own, and in fact, killing people was a method of marketing to him. That is not really the mark of a man with the support of any sort of organized group.
I discuss in Part Three how it is that Breivik financed it. He did some job for a year or two, saved money by living with his mother, ramped down his lifestyle (note the mention in one of the above quotes about how he was wearing his designer clothes from his previous life) and committed credit card fraud. He details how he got the weapons, the ammunition, and all the supplies on his own. He describes how he built the bomb on his own. He details how he kept his spirits high working alone. He makes it very clear no one else knew about what he wanted to do. But that’s just what I have found in the manifesto and a few online news sources. I would like to think that if there was a larger group behind Breivik it would be apparent by now but I also think that until the trial, even I with all my conviction cannot say for sure that he was utterly alone. I just think that his need to be admired made him tell us all the details so we would know he indeed did all of this by himself.
Is Breivik a homosexual
I hit on this above, but it largely does not matter. He mentions in the manifesto, even in parts I have quoted, that he dislikes that homosexuality is being shown as normal and he makes little digs at gays, but were we to weigh his negative comments against gays with everything else, it is like splashing a teaspoon of water from a bathtub and calling it a spill. People make remarks about his appearance and vanity but plenty of heterosexual men are very appearance-oriented and vain. He comments on what he considers the feminization of men in cultural Marxism but that is a whole other kettle of fish. He is concerned about that not because he thinks it makes men gay but because he is convinced it makes men weak. So ultimately I do not know if he is gay but it doesn’t matter. All that matters is he is a delusional, strange, weird man who killed children.
Was Breivik a right-wing Christian or a Fundamentalist
I belong to a couple of fundamentalist Christian watch sites, and immediately after 7/22, snippets of the manifesto came out and the parts about essentially ending women’s rights as well as the Dominionist elements of Breivik’s ideas of reclaiming Europe under the banner of the Knights Templar rang a bit too close to some of the bizarre and harmful Dominionist ideas of American groups like the Vision Forum. But as I read this document I never got the feeling that Breivik was a fundamentalist or even that he was engaging in excessive Christianity.
Take, for example, the word “Jesus.” One would expect a 1518 page manifesto written by an American fundamentalist to contain the word so many times that one would need a program to count it. I counted the use in Breivik’s manifesto 62 times, and many of those uses were in Koran-Bible comparisons and many were not in articles that Breivik himself wrote. That in itself is interesting.
But most interesting is the idea that he really does have a William Lind idea of a Christendom, a unified white Europe that has a Christian identity rather than a strict Christian belief. For example, you are Christian first, a Dutchman second in the eyes of Lind, which puts you in automatic opposition to pagans, Jews and Muslims. Breivik has a wider net – he doesn’t mind Jews and pagans and even goes so far as to welcome Odinists into the Knights Templar. I think this quote as to who can be a part of the Knights Templar will explain a lot, and all emphasis is in the originals. From page 1361:
Q: Do I have to believe in God or Jesus in order to become a Justiciar Knight?
A: As this is a cultural war, our definition of being a Christian does not necessarily constitute that you are required to have a personal relationship with God or Jesus. Being a Christian can mean many things;
– That you believe in and want to protect Europe’s Christian cultural heritage.
The European cultural heritage, our norms (moral codes and social structures included), our traditions and our modern political systems are based on Christianity – Protestantism, Catholicism, Orthodox Christianity and the legacy of the European enlightenment (reason is the primary source and legitimacy for authority).
It is not required that you have a personal relationship with God or Jesus in order to fight for our Christian cultural heritage and the European way. In many ways, our modern societies and European secularism is a result of European Christendom and the enlightenment. It is therefore essential to understand the difference between a “Christian fundamentalist theocracy” (everything we do not want) and a secular European society based on our Christian cultural heritage (what we do want).
This is Christianity as it applies to a European identity, not the sort of individualized relationship I was encouraged to have with Jesus when I was a Southern Baptist. He is not a fundamentalist as we understand the word in the United State. He is not representative of the Tea Party, Christian-infused xenophobes we see in America. He’s got some strange ideas about God and the purpose of a Christian but those who see him as being in the same vein as Pat Robertson, Doug Phillips, or even Fred Phelps need to know he is a completely different brand of Christian hate.
Moreover, Breivik, while he is indeed a Christian, is not a man who communicates with God, though he would like to take strength from God if he can. He talks about this in his diary. From page 1459:
I prayed for the first time in a very long time today. I explained to God that unless he wanted the Marxist-Islamic alliance and the certain Islamic takeover of Europe to completely annihilate European Christendom within the next hundred years he must ensure that the warriors fighting for the preservation of European Christendom prevail. He must ensure that I succeed with my mission and as such; contribute to inspire thousands of other revolutionary conservatives/nationalists; anti-Communists and anti-Islamists throughout the European world.
From page 1344:
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. In the past, I remember I used to think;
“Religion is a crutch for weak people. What is the point in believing in a higher power if you have confidence in yourself!? Pathetic.”
Perhaps this is true for many cases. Religion is a crutch for many weak people and many embrace religion for self serving reasons as a source for drawing mental strength (to feed their weak emotional state f example during illness, death, poverty etc.). Since I am not a hypocrite, I’ll say directly that this is my agenda as well. However, I have not yet felt the need to ask God for strength, yet… But I’m pretty sure I will pray to God as I’m rushing through my city, guns blazing, with 100 armed system protectors pursuing me with the intention to stop and/or kill. I know there is a 80%+ chance I am going to die during the operation as I have no intention to surrender to them until I have completed all three primary objectives AND the bonus mission. When I initiate (providing I haven’t been apprehended before then), there is a 70% chance that I will complete the first objective, 40% for the second , 20% for the third and less than 5% chance that I will be able to complete the bonus mission. It is likely that I will pray to God for strength at one point during that operation, as I think most people in that situation would.
So really it seems to me as if most of his beliefs are not the evangelical, fundamentalist beliefs people in American associate with Christians who seek a repressive society for women, seek to oust all non-believers and practice Dominionism. While he mentions Christianity often as a counterpoint to all that he thinks is miserable with Islam, Breivik is not a Bible-thumper as many Americans have come to associate with fundamentalists. But even on a gentler note, as I am not a women who can stand much in the way of religion, Breivik’s ideas also show no resemblance to the ideas of my beloved late grandfather, a Southern Baptist. Breivik really did shape the invocation of religion around the beliefs of Lind and the notion of the Templars as a force for European, Christian identity.
Why did he take those ludicrous pictures
Well, they are ludicrous, I know, and given the e-mails I received, those pictures fuel about 90% of the belief that Breivik is gay. But he took them because he wanted to be in control of his image. He wanted to be perceived as a handsome, stylish man because otherwise he feared the media would use other images that would not reflect as well. A high school picture of Breivik that made the rounds shows him with a decidedly different nose, and while he still is recognizable, that is not what he wanted to be the common image of him. It goes hand in hand with what I consider to be his narcissism that he wanted to micromanage what others saw of him yet had no idea how those pictures might appear to others. The military uniform has received a lot of criticism that a murderer with no military training would don such a uniform. The picture of him holding the gun is chilling. Yet everyone seems fixated on that picture of him with the bifurcated soul patch and his popped collar.
But those pictures were what he wanted. He felt those pictures would help his image. Here’s his rationale from pages 1064-1065:
It is essential for all cultural conservative resistance fighters to understand that we are in the middle of a war of perceptions. Our objective is to portray our enemies in the worst possible light – as cultural Marxist traitors who wishes to sell their own peoples into Muslim slavery. They, on the other hand, have the exact opposite objective. They are doing everything to tell the people that they have no political opposition whatsoever and that the occasional attack is only committed by backwater, brain damaged and inbred freaks. They are effectively “selling” the perception that we are nothing more than a bunch of pedophile and criminal scum of society, who has somehow escaped from the local insane asylum. They ALWAYS illustrate their definition of heroic icons of society using all factors to improve their looks and appeal. And they ALWAYS illustrate the nationalist resistance fighters in the worst possible light, without makeup, in bad lighting, without editing, and often in unfortunate postures. And these often appalling photos correlate with the above description. This is not coincidental but a deliberate aspect of their psychological warfare against us. They deliberately portray us as the anti-thesis of the ideal person so that we achieve a minimum of impact when it comes to appealing to the average European. We must counter this psychological warfare campaign by making it harder for them to use this weapon against us.
So he wants to look good, not like a lunatic, inbred scum when the media tears him apart for killing kids. How did he ensure none of the pre-nose job pics got leaked, or at least not too many? He explains on page 1066:
It is essential that cell commanders and/or cell operatives budget at least a portion of their operational budget to photo sessions and remember to delete all other unfortunate photos from the past. This is to prevent the media/police from getting access to them and exploit them for their own propaganda. The police usually “leak” “retarded looking” photos to the press after raiding the cells apartment after an operation. By removing and deleting all “negative” photos, and by making available the professional, photo shopped photos prior to the operation; we make their job significantly harder.
So he probably scrubbed the Internet of all pictures he thought unfortunate. He then tells those who want to be a part of the Knights Templar how they should plan their photo shoots. From pages 1066-1067, emphasis in original:
– Use professional makeup artists and use make up on both female and male models. Yes, this sounds gay, but looking “attractive” will significantly benefit the impact of our messageas it will act as a force multiplier
– Use professional editing (photoshop) on all digital photos (You can hire a programmer on f example: www.scriptlance.com to photoshop your pictures for less than 50 Euro).
Preparations required before a photo shoot
As a Justiciar Knight you will go into history as one of the most influential individuals of your time. So you need to look your absolute best and ensure that you produce quality marketing material prior to operation.
Prepare for the photo session;
– Take a few hours in a solarium to look fresher.
– Train hard (work out) at least 7 days prior to photo session
– Cut your hair shave
– Visit a male salon if possible and apply light makeup. Yes, I know – this might sound repulsive to big badass warriors like us, but we must look our best for the shoot
– Use your best clothing – you can f example bring 3 different sets of clothing to the shot location – 1. Dress, tie etc. 2. Casual wear 3. Sporty wear 4. Militaristic wear (obviously, you can’t bring your guns or anything indicating that you are a resistance fighter). You should always order the photo session in a foreign country to avoid that the personnel alerts authorities. Always pay in cash and do not sign any receipt with your own name.
End note: Be very careful to have military shots lying around. Be very careful if you decide to use pictures with guns. People who see these photos might alert the authorities. Carefully consider the use of symbols as it might backfire. Cross of the martyrs is fine (St. George) but avoid any symbol associated with Nazism.
And it’s clear he took his own advice because we can see that he had a professional session with outfit changes, manscaping and make-up, as well as heavily photoshopped pictures of himself in the uniforms with the guns.
But yes, he thought this was a good idea, these strange glamor shots of him all over the web.
Was Breivik a Nazi
No, despite his decidedly fascist leanings that come out as one reads his manifesto, Breivik was not a Nazi nor did he have any sympathy for anti-Jewish causes. Rather, he felt that anti-Jewish sentiments caused people to align themselves with Muslims and does not like the pro-Palestinian stance of the Norwegian government. I think some people, when they read he was a rabid anti-Marxist and appalled by the Frankfurt school, jumped to the conclusion that he hated many of those involved because they were Jews. This is not the case. He is decidedly anti-Nazi. Take this from page 1097:
The badge of the Justiciar Knight illustrates a white skull, marked with the symbols of communism, Islam and Nazism
on the forehead, impaled on the cross of the martyrs. The background is black. The badge of the Justiciar Knight
illustrates our patriotic struggle/ opposition against all three primary hate ideologies of our time: Islam,
Multiculturalism (Communism) and Nazism.
There is a picture that goes along with this that was shown on a couple of sites with no explanation that the Swastika was there as an emblem of one of the Knights Templars’ enemies. I think fueled some of the Nazi identification. More from page 1163:
In any case; educate yourself and learn the difference. Today’s conservatives and want to-be Nazis are ignorant when they obsess so much over the Jews. There is no Jewish problem in Western Europe (with the exception of the UK and France) as we only have 1 million in Western Europe, whereas 800 000 out of these 1 million live in France and the UK. The US on the other hand, with more than 6 million Jews (600% more than Europe) actually has a considerable Jewish problem. But please learn the difference between a nation-wrecking multiculturalist Jew and a conservative Jew. Don’t make the same mistake that NSDAP did. Never target a Jew because he is a Jew, but rather because he is a category A or B traitor. And don’t forget that the bulk of the category A and B traitors are Christian Europeans. 90% of the category A and B traitors in my own country, Norway, are Nordic, Christian category A and B traitors.
There are many similar quotes in this manifesto. Breivik is not a fan of Nazism nor does he hate Jews. Though he makes a reference to the idea that race mixing is bad, I cannot recall the context and I lack the will to find it. Just rest assured he reserved most of his hate for cultural Marxists, Muslims, women and traitors.
Further muddying the waters, however, has been the reaction of actual Nazis, who claim Breivik was working for the Jews and that the events of 7/22 were a “false flag” operation meant to discredit Nazis and fascists, as well as further achieve the goals of Jews in their struggles with Muslims, especially the nation of Israel.
The conclusions I have reached
I began to read this manifesto because it was just another outre book, another look into a dark human soul, another chance for me to wallow in a strange, delusional mind. It’s not an intellectual trait I am proud of but this tendency of mine is not mine alone – lots of people are drawn to the dark, the strange, the simply odd.
But it became something more than just one of my regular exercises. In my 20s, I went down some interesting roads as I tried to find that which was truth for me and even as I tried on appalling mental hats, my inner ideology never changed. I could never find it in myself to hate people. I loathe religion but that is not the same as loathing a Christian, a Muslim or a Jew. And as an American I could never wrap my mind around racism and Nationalism in a land of immigrants. I just never could make that leap and because of it, I find those who made the leap more fascinating than I should. I think I am searching for an answer to the question of what makes me different from them. And I wonder sometimes why, as manifestly liberal and egalitarian as I am, I seldom take offense to mindsets I find horrifying. I may react and even overreact to ideas I find terrible but I often find myself in a strange mental position of being able to like people whose ideologies I think are terrible and I wish I knew why.
I found this manifesto absorbing in places because I thought I might finally find an answer to many questions about Breivik and those that I have about myself.
So I wrote and wrote and wrote and after my first entry it really did become a wholly different exercise. I met online a man who lost his cousin in Oslo, a woman who was just around the corner from where the bomb went off and is haunted by how close she came to severe injury if not death, and another woman whose daughter’s friend died on the island. Countless other e-mails flowed in, comments were left, and at the end of it, Breivik stopped being a curiosity. I needed answers. Maybe I searched too hard and found strange links that mean something only to me.
But even as I make assertions, I don’t really kid myself. Even after the psychiatrists are done with him I don’t think we will know the real mind of a man like Breivik to any degree so that we can make sense of what happened. Isn’t that why I read these horrible things? To be drawn to the darkness is to want to understand it? Possibly, but while I think reading this manifesto showed the strange contents and revealed some interesting things about Fjordman, I don’t think I really know that much about Breivik. I just know what he said in the manifesto and as I mentioned in Part Three, Breivik is a liar. I can piece all of this together with my knowledge of darkness, all the books I have read, all the psychology books, all the criminology books, all the books on intellectual racism, but all of that implies I had a place of firm ground when I was looking at Breivik’s words. I didn’t. His manifesto is a swamp and even though I engaged in this exercise knowing it was a swamp, I may have sunk into the mire even as I tried to avoid it.
So I have no answers, really. Just my beliefs from reading this manifesto. Hopefully the investigators and mental health workers will help everyone come to some understanding, but I fear that even if we understand Breivik, that means we just understand this one man after the fact. If there is a way to extrapolate this into a detection policy, a means of prevention, I cannot see it. Breivik is a monster and one cannot make policy out of a monster.
I cannot begin to tell you how happy I am to be finished with this for now. This was an oppressive read, and discussing it at times was even more oppressive. And while I like to think there are some answers we can reach about Breivik, if my conclusions are correct and he both acted alone and in terms of the motive mix is sui generis, what good did any of this reading and writing do any of us?
I mean, we know there are entire segments of the modern world who are unhappy, seething in hatred, willing to say all kinds of terrible things online against other races, religions and peoples. We know there are swathes of the Internet devoted to discussing how it is they can deprive other people of their civil rights, citizenship and dignity. Hell, a recent series on AmericanProgress.org spells out how it is that Islamophobia has been permitted to spread its roots in America. But I knew this before reading the manifesto and from my perspective, Breivik was among these people and organizations but he was different from them.
But can we really separate Breivik from organizations and political players who spread malicious hate? Is it specious of me to look at Diana West and Fjordman and Robert Spencer and that entire ilk of Islamophobic Marxist haters and maintain that they were not part of this? How about the people who give organizations money to spread hate? Did they play a role in the massacre on 7/22? Even if not a single person knew of what Breivik planned and didn’t offer him one thin dime to finance these murders, do the people who have made hate their mission in life have blood on their hands, too?
My American love of free speech forces me to say that Fjordman and Diana West and Pamela Geller all should be permitted to say any damn fool thing they want as long as it does not violate the most minor limitations put on free speech. A free and open society has to permit even the lousiest ideas to be expressed. And if the demagogues refuse to take responsibility for inspiring men like Breivik, for giving purpose to empty-souled Little Men who long to destroy the future in order to avenge their own sorry pasts, it should surprise no one. I fear there is no way for us to ever ensure the world is truly safe, but limiting basic human rights to communicate even nasty ideas will be a net loss for a free world.
That does not mean we should not read and watch these people. They don’t permit much opposition discussion on their sites, but we can watch and confront and make it clear that they stand alone, driving home to them that we know and the world knows their ideas will not stand up to even the mildest scrutiny. For every person like Fjordman and Daniel Pipes, there are many more of us who do not believe in conspiracy theory and who do not hate. Never forget that. In the wake of 7/22, it seems like there is an Islamophobe on every corner because we have suddenly been forced to reckon with them. That is what happened in the United States after the bombing in Oklahoma City. Suddenly it appeared as if there was a vast network of inter-related, anti-American, racist hate groups seething under the radar, noticeable only because Tim McVeigh forced us to see people we would never have noticed before.
That is not to say these people are not there. They are there and their rhetoric, to the right ears, can be fatal, though most racists and bigots never kill a single person. They just hate people. But even so, we outnumber them. And we can challenge them and make it clear that the protection they had as a result of our lack of awareness no longer exists. That doesn’t mean another Breivik won’t slip under our radars again. As I hope I have shown, a super-empowered person can and will slip under the radar. But it can’t hurt Pamela Geller to know that she is no longer preaching to the same Islamophobic crowd, that we are now in her audience. It would do her good to know the world knows she praised the deaths of children and that we find her despicable. It may feed her victim mentality but even in free speech there should be consequences and knowing you are under scrutiny that could leave you utterly marginalized just means that freedom of speech does not come without a price. That price is one we all could end up paying for speaking our minds and if attentiveness drives some bigots to stop speaking because they dislike the social consequences of free speech, that is not repression. It’s just cause and effect.
I’m sorry that I have no better answers, after expending so many words as I tried to understand this manifesto. I fear there may never be better answers as we deal with monsters and the people who inspire monsters than to simply be aware of them.
I wish the people of Norway peace as their monster goes to trial and I wish them recovery when he finally goes to prison. And if there are answers to be found, I hope they find them.
56 thoughts on “2083 by Anders Behring Breivik, Part 4: All About ABB”
Thank you! Takk!
Thanks for reading, KJ.
Even though I disagree with just about every proposition in your 4-part series on Anders Breivik, I do want to express my appreciation for all the work that you put into this analytic essay. Even though I am one of the anti-modernists & anti-progressives, I can still admire all your intellectual effort in the discussion of Breivik’s odd book.
Thanks, EG. You should read it, I think. Once you see the entirety of the scope of ABB’s distorted brain, it may be a different proposition for you. Not in terms of you anti-modern or anti-progressive ideas, but rather in terms of just rejecting ABB wholesale because he says soooooo much more than Islamification and Marxism Bad, Christian Europe Good. Even if he echoes some ideas you find palatable, the whole of his manifesto might make it clear he is not anyone’s idea of a sound, purposeful ideology.
But I also don’t think you should read it because despite the fact we are playing for completely different sociological teams, I still like you and don’t want to inflict this mess on anyone. Asking you to read it would be cruel and therefore anathema to my liberal sensibilities.
I am full of admiration for the sterling work you have devoted to the confounded Breivik and his manifesto. I have not yet read everything , but I would just as well like to ask you a small question.
Are you quite sure that he has written it / compiled it all by himself? Could it be a design in full or in part(s) by anyone else, or by Breivik in collaboration with others, or with somebody else who stands for the final version?
May I suggest that you watch his video. What would you like to say about it in comparison to the manifesto. There is a cold, emotionless, unengaged, perfection over the video that to me suggests that it has been made by a professional. I is neatly done but quite unpedagogical – none of the many texts can be read without pausing the video.
nere it is:
Hi, LN. Thanks for reading and thanks for commenting.
As for the manifesto, in a sense, ABB did have help writing it because he reproduced in full entire articles from other writers and plagiarized so much of it. Unwitting help and help that never endorsed the manifesto, but in that regard he had “help.” Until the final investigation is over it is impossible to say with 100% certainty that this is the work and compilation of one man, but I feel relatively certain based on my reading that it all comes from one man. Part of that is based on the fact that ABB claims he wrote it alone but since, as I say, he is a liar, it is certainly up for plenty of consideration as to whether or not he did it himself alone.
Is there something in the text that is giving you the feeling that two sets of hands were at work? If so and you feel comfortable sharing, I would love to hear what conclusions you are reaching as you read.
I saw the video twice and it, interesting to me at least, focuses so heavily on the Muslim immigration and Knights Templar romanticism that I was surprised when I got down into the depths of the manifesto. I agree that the video is cold and is exacting but I am unsure if that points to a professional having done it. ABB engages in large amounts of exacting experimentation in the manifesto, so didactic that he lists the equipment and the cost. He could easily have made this video. Youtube is cluttered with fan videos for pop music made by teens that rival the skill needed to have made ABB’s video. And I tend to think a professional would have known that the ornate font usage combined with red on a black background would have resulted in a visually difficult video, at best.
The video, with the music, the ornateness, the revel the fantasy of the Knights Templar fits in with what I think of ABB. But I am always cautious to make it clear that in these matters, my unprofessional guess is as good as any and worse than some.
I started reading the manifesto back in July. I skimmed through, and stopped reading after reading the part where he totally trashed his family and friends. These are real people, they are named and totally trashed in the manifesto. First and foremost, like you say, his mother and sister. Reading those passages in the text made it hard not to conclude that this person is a misogynist.
I wonder why he felt the need to trash his mother and sister?
I also wonder why he included that photo of himself with them in the “portfolio”?
Apparantly he is calm and cooperative in questioning with the police. He is willing to provide information and details, although unwilling to say anything about the cells he claim are part of this Knight Templar thing. Probably because you are right in your assessment – he didn’t have any accomplices. He has made silly demands like that the government needs to resign and hand over power to him, and 20 hours speech time on the biggest broadcasting channel, NRK. According to his lawyer he understands these demands cannot be met, but still makes dem.
Apparantly he wasn’t quite prepared for prison time and being denied contact with anyone. He called the isolation a sadistic torture-method. Should we feel sorry for him, is that the game? We feel a lot of things, but sorry for him because he’s isolated in prison is not one of them.
I believe the court appointed psychiatrists will have the hardest job ever figuring this man out.
Meanwhile, I think there is a lot of anger boiling under the surface her. Norway, from the Prime Minister down has met this with words of comfort and hope, and with hands full of roses. But the anger is there. I hope we as a society are able too meet that too. We’re not very outwardly emotional up here in the cold north, but something is simmering under the surface, I think. I’m afraid people have a feeling that it isn’t OK to be really angry, and anger is a natural feeling after this kind of incident.
The questions are still plenty, that’s for sure.
But thanks to you, we have an analysis which has made some of it more understandable. I have yet to see a thorough analysis of this in Norway, and perhaps that is understandable. It is too close in time and too painful still. So the work you did here (it must have been very time consuming and heavy in more ways than one) is greatly appreciated.
Oh, one more thing, since biker gangs were mentioned: Did you know that on July 26th bikers from Hells Angels, Bandidos and Outlaws drove side by side in a cortege from Oslo to Utøya to honor the victims along with other bikers? close to 1 000 bikes went to Utøya.
I think we can be pretty sure that the Terrorist is safest in prison, isolated. He does not have many, of any, friends in Norway. Including among other inmates. Very, very few people appriciate the slaughter of children.
You know, I had not thought of why he included that photo of them at his sister’s wedding in the manifesto (I assume it was her wedding). I now think it was in order to ensure that their faces were attached to every bit of shame he heaped upon them. I really do think there is a misogynist need in him to obliterate women, both symbols of women and the women themselves in his life who did not live up to his expectations.
When I speak of NPD, I do hope no one comes away with the conclusion that he is insane in any manner, but the delusions of grandeur that accompany NPD caused him to think that the murders of those teenagers – the marketing leg of 2083 was mass murder – would cause millions of people to read his manifesto and agree with him. The police and military would rush to join his imaginary Knights Templar and he would be regaled as a hero to Norway and Europe. So I am sure jail has come as a bitter surprise to him, that the police are not on his side, that he has to be held in isolation for his own safety. He sincerely did not think that this would end with him reviled.
I also think that is another reason he did not kill himself. Why be a dead martyr when he likely thought he would become a living saint.
Of course, sociologically I don’t know much about Norwegian culture but I have been struck by how calm and with dignity the Norwegian people have handled this. But I also think anger is a good reaction to have eventually because anger is the energy people use to change that which they find hateful. That simmering hatred, if channeled correctly, may be one of the best ways to ensure any nascent ABBs left out there know they face a country that has no use for them and will not treat them with anything approaching glory or kindness.
That is an amazing picture of the bikers traveling with the cortege.
Thanks for reading all of what I have written and thanks for your encouragement. Your experiences that day made this a far more human to me and I appreciate how you showed me pieces of the puzzle that made so much of what I was thinking click together. Thanks so very much.
A New Oslo Peace Process? by Fjordman
Posted at 4/24/2006 04:55:00 PM
Thorbjørn Jagland is a former Foreign Minister and Prime Minister of Norway from the Labor Party. He is now President of the Storting, the Norwegian Parliament, and thus technically speaking the highest ranking person in the country, next to the King. He recently wrote an essay to Aftenposten newspaper entitled Islamofobi vårt nye spøkelse? (Islamophobia our new ghost/specter?) where he warned against the dangers of Islamophobia.
According to Jagland, seemingly paraphrasing the Communist Manifesto, a specter is haunting Europe – the specter of Islamophobia. Between the lines, Jagland seems to hint that the situation in Europe is now similar to that of the 1930s: We are very close to a new world war and the downfall of European democracy, a conclusion I wholeheartedly support. This is also where our agreement ends. According to Mr. Jagland, “far too few people during the interwar period understood what a fateful time they were living in. While those who wanted peace were arguing, Fascism grew stronger. In the point of intersection between the Islamists and Islamophobia, a new type of Fascism could emerge.”
Jagland praises the way the Labor-led Norwegian government handled the crisis after a tiny Christian newspaper, Magazinet, reprinted the now famous twelve cartoons of Muhammad from Jyllands-Posten in Denmark. According to Bruce Bawer on his blog, “Velbjørn Selbekk, the editor of Magazinet, had firmly resisted pressure by Muslim extremists (who made death threats) and by the Norwegian establishment. But then Norway’s Minister of Labor and Social Inclusion hastily called a press conference at a major government office building in Oslo. There Selbekk issued an abject apology for reprinting the cartoons. At his side, accepting his act of contrition on behalf of 46 Muslim organizations and asking that all threats now be withdrawn, was Mohammed Hamdan, head of Norway’s Islamic Council.
In attendance were members of the Norwegian cabinet and the largest assemblage of imams in Norway’s history.” Although Jagland thinks we ended the cartoon controversy in a good way, he fears that there is still a lot of quiet Islamophobia in the general public because of “the perverted version of Islam promoted by the extremists.” The right-wing Progress Party, already the second largest in Norway, has been growing in the wake of the cartoons affair, and now seems to be in the process of replacing Jagland’s Labor Party as the largest party in the country, for the first time in 80 years.
Thorbjørn Jagland recommends time-tested Eurabian methods to combat “the rising racism.” He earlier lauded the EU’s decision to begin negotiations with Turkey as “just as important to Europe as the fall of the Berlin Wall,” of course without saying a word about the fact that this was strongly against the wishes of a majority of the people in nearly all EU countries. In particular, Jagland wants Norwegians to learn from the example of our neighbors in Sweden, which is not as “xenophobic” as our other Scandinavian neighbor, Denmark.
Is Jagland being serious? Sweden is probably the worst country in the Western world in dealing with these issues. Sweden has a 25% real unemployment rate. What happens if or when the Swedish welfare state collapses? Isn’t it likely that this will trigger a flood of “welfare tourists” to neighboring countries such as Norway? This question hasn’t even been asked, much less debated, by a single political leader in this country. The number of rape charges in Sweden has quadrupled in a generation, parallel to Muslim immigration. Resident aliens from Algeria, Libya, Morocco and Tunisia dominate the group of rape suspects.
Lawyer Ann Christine Hjelm found that 85 per cent of the convicted rapists in one court were born on foreign soil or of foreign parents. In a new Sociological survey, the wave of robberies the city of Malmö has witnessed during this past year is part of a “war against Swedes.” This is the explanation given by young robbers with immigrant background. “When we are in the city and robbing, we are waging a war, waging a war against the Swedes.” This argument was repeated several times. “Power for me means that Swedes shall look at me, lie down on the ground and kiss my feet.” The boys explain, laughingly, that “there is a thrilling sensation in your body when you’re robbing, you feel satisfied and happy, it feels as if you’ve succeeded, it simply feels good.”
“It’s so easy to rob Swedes, so easy.” “We rob every single day, as much as we want to, whenever we want to.” A high school teacher in Malmö discovered that about a dozen Arab students were laughing and shouting “Allahu Akbar!” while watching a DVD of infidel hostages being beheaded in Iraq. The headmaster didn’t think the incident was such a big deal. At least 139 schools in Sweden suffered arson attacks during 2002 alone. Björn Vinberg from the fire department in Kroksbäck in the Malmö area says it’s humiliating and degrading to put out fires again and again in the same immigrant areas, with school kids laughing at them and lighting a new one just afterwards. His colleagues have been to the same place no less than twenty times, all totally unnecessary. One of the schools in Malmö recently closed down an entire section because of rampant violence, something unheard of in Sweden only a generation ago.
Sweden is a semi-totalitarian country. It’s all about façade. On the surface, Sweden is a tolerant nation and peaceful democracy. In reality, there is massive media censorship by a closed elite that is scared of having a debate about immigration. There are even physical attacks on critics of immigration by Leftist extremists, something which has been largely ignored and thus quietly approved by the establishment, until it now even targets parties in Parliament. No dissent is tolerated. Opinion polls have revealed that two out of three Swedes doubt whether Islam can be combined with Swedish society, and a very significant proportion of the population have for years wanted more limitations in immigration.
Yet not one party represented in the Swedish Parliament is genuinely critical of the Multicultural society or the current immigration policies. The Swedish elite congratulate themselves that they have managed to keep “xenophobic” parties from gaining a foothold while the country is sinking underneath their feet.
No, Mr. Jagland, we have nothing to learn from Sweden except hypocrisy to perfection. We should study them only in trying to avoid letting them drag us down with them when they fall, which they will.
Curiously, at almost the same time as Mr. Jagland warned against rising “Islamophobia,” an article in newspaper Aftenposten warned that “youths” are in the process of destroying Norway’s capital city, Oslo. Upon closer inspection, it turns out that these “youths” bear a striking resemblance to the same “youths” with Muslim immigrant background that are destroying so many cities across Western Europe:
Youths Destroying Oslo
Criminal youths are in the process of destroying the social environment in Oslo, concludes the Oslo City Court. Young girls are raped and robbed. Schoolchildren are threatened with death, robbed and assaulted. The Stovner-police is now uncovering another violent gang in the Grorudvalley on the outskirts of Oslo. Four boys were robbed Sunday night, February 5. Eight youths, ranging from 15 to 18 years old, were arrested, and are now charged with the robberies. All suspects are of foreign origin. One of the suspects, a Somalian who turned 17 years old last week, appeared in court and was sent to jail in order to protect society. Only four days after being apprehended he was due to stand trial in another robbery case. To avoid letting the youth loose among his peers, he was sent directly to a jail in Oslo to serve time for several robberies, a rape, and assisting another rape.
The 17 year old Somalian has several serious crimes on his conscience, but the worst is probably the rape of a young girl at Hoybraaten (Oslo suburb) one year ago. Oslo Court states that the rape was unusually brutal, and lasted for several hours. The young girl was threatened with a knife and beaten. The Somalian choked the girl so brutally and for so long, that the medical doctor who afterwards treated the girl, said that she could have died. Her voice has changed. The girl is now suffering from severe psychological problems in the aftermath of the attack. The Youth was sentenced to four and half years in prison, where three years was made conditional, which means he will serve only one and a half years. The sentence also included another rape, where his Norwegian-Moroccan friend raped a 13 year old girl, whilst the Somalian helped to threaten her and keep guard. She was also brutally treated, and is experiencing serious problems after the experience.
The Court states that the girl was harassed by the family of the Norwegian-Moroccan and his friends. It went so far that the girl was angry at her own mother for giving the name of the rapists to the police. The girl wanted to pay the offenders to make them leave her alone. Her psychological condition became so bad she had to be forcibly sent to a psychological institution. Her schooling is destroyed.
Aftenposten should be commended for even printing this politically incorrect article, which is unfortunately rare in Norwegian media. The original article in Norwegian quickly got more than one hundred comments by readers. There were so many furious comments that the newspaper suddenly decided to remove them.
In general, my impression is that a rapidly increasing part of the population distrusts Muslims. Only massive media censorship conceals this fact, and I suspect the same goes for much of Europe. However, Aftenposten seem to have forgotten an article they printed five years ago. In 2001, two out of three charged with rape in Norway’s capital were immigrants with a non-western background according to a police study. Norwegian women were the victims in 80 percent of the cases.
A leading member of the Liberal Party (Venstre), Odd Einar Dørum, demanded all the numbers be put on the table: “A scumbag is a scumbag, regardless of skin color”. From 2001 to 2005, Dørum was Norway’s Minister of Justice, and nobody has seen these statistics since 2001. The number of rape charges in Oslo have continued to rise. There is ample evidence of brutal gang rapes, something that used to be rare in Scandinavia, being committed by immigrants against native girls.
Not only have the authorities done nothing to stop this trend of racist attacks against native Norwegians, they have taken steps to increase crackdowns on “racism” by the natives. In 2005 Stortinget, the Norwegian parliament, passed a new Discrimination Act, prepared by then Minister of Integration, Erna Solberg, who earlier called for the establishment of a sharia council in Norway.
The act says in pretty clear words that in cases of suspected direct or indirect discrimination based on religion or ethnicity, native Norwegians are guilty until proven otherwise. The immigration spokesman for the right-wing Progress Party, Per Sandberg, feared that the law would jeopardize the rights of ordinary, law-abiding Norwegian citizens. Reverse burden of proof is combined with liability to pay compensation, which means that innocent persons risk having to pay huge sums for things they did not do.
FOMI, a Norwegian anti-Islamic website, was recently charged with “racism and spreading Islamophobia” for translating one of several articles by Frontpage Magazine, with comments, about a Muslim rape wave in the West.
Bruce Bawer, author of recently published book “While Europe Slept: How Radical Islam is Destroying the West from Within,” devotes a good deal of space to European media in his writings, which is appropriate.
Norwegian Prime Minister and leader of the Labor Party, Jens Stoltenberg, has stated that “journalistic diversity is too important to be left up to the marketplace.” The government is still running two out of Norway’s four national TV channels, and three of its national radio channels. NRK, the Norwegian equivalent of the BBC or Burka Broadcasting Corporation in the UK, complete with the same anti-American, anti-Israeli and pro-Islamic bias, was the only national TV channel in Norway until 1992, three years after the fall of the Berlin Wall. Leader of the right-wing Progress Party, Mr. Carl I. Hagen, has labelled NRK “ARK,” or “Labor Party’s Broadcasting Company,” since until the 90s, most of its leaders were former leading members of the Labor Party.
In addition to this, something that would be unthinkable in the USA, Norwegian taxpayers actually subsidize commercial Norwegian newspapers. This is supposedly to ensure diversity of opinions. This system means that Norwegian taxpayers, whether they want to or not, subsidize the existence of Norwegian Communist newspaper Klassekampen (The Class Struggle), whose members in the 1970s strenuously denied any mass-murders done by Pol Pot and his comrades in Cambodia, denouncing these accusations as “capitalist lies” to slime a successful, Socialist nation. Norway’s only professor of journalism at the University level, Sigurd Allern, is a former leader of the Communist Party. He is today teaching critical thinking to aspiring journalists at the University of Oslo.
At the same time, Norway can hardly come up with a single decent conservative newspaper, the closest being business daily Dagens Næringsliv. The most rightist newspapers, such as Aftenposten or VG, could at best be described as centrist or even soft-leftist, with a few individual journalists as being centre-right. Diversity of media in Norway thus means the whole range from hard-leftist to soft-leftist, with the Norwegian equivalent of the New York Times being as far right as you get. As Bawer notes, when he first came to Norway, he was impressed by the number of newspapers the average citizen reads on a daily basis. Only later did he start to question what information they were actually presented in these newspapers.
Norwegians pride themselves in their sophisticated and informed view of the world, viewing Americans as somewhat simplistic and brainwashed by FOX News propaganda. The very word or concept of “Eurabia” has hardly been mentioned at all in Norwegian media. One prominent journalist, not a Leftist by Norwegian standard, told me that Eurabia is just another conspiracy theory, on par with The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion.
Kari Vogt, historian of religion at the University of Oslo and widely considered and quoted as the leading expert on Islam in the country, has stated that Ibn Warraq’s book “Why I am Not a Muslim” is just as irrelevant to the study of Islam as The Protocols are to the study of Judaism. A Norwegian NGO called the Freedom of Expression Fund supports the translation and publication of bin Laden’s speeches. They also awarded the editor of Communist newspaper Klassekampen with the Freedom of Speech award for his bravery in defence of free speech. He has shown sympathies for Islamic terrorists in his columns.
For some strange reason, Bruce Bawer’s book has so far been widely ignored by Norwegian media, despite the fact that Bawer lives in Norway and that his work is being read with interests by experts and laymen on both sides of the Atlantic. Could it be that Mr. Bawer has touched upon some sensitive issues that the sophisticated Norwegian press don’t want to talk about? Michael Moore’s books criticizing the USA were translated into Norwegian and sold very well. Any chance this will happen to Bawer’s book, criticizing Europe?
Mr. Jagland worries about the possibilities of a new kind of powerful Fascist movement in Europe, and quite frankly, so do I. But there is no need for this to happen if people feel that their elected leaders uphold their interests they way they are supposed to do. However, when a government can no longer guarantee, within reason, the safety of its citizens, that government’s days are numbered and that system of government’s days may also be numbered. It took centuries of hard and ingenious work to build our civilized Western society, yet judging from current events, it may take just a few short decades for this civilization to commit collective suicide. It is amazing to see such a rapid dissolution of centuries old European countries due to immigration without assimilation. I have read Norwegian historians and “experts” who claim that there is nothing to worry about over this massive immigration, since there has always been immigration and this situation is not new.
This is a clever form of lie. At the beginning of the 21st century, the total number of people on this planet is vastly larger than ever before in the history of the human race. Combined with modern means of communication, we get the largest and fastest population transfers ever recorded, large enough to destroy nations or, in the case of Europe, perhaps even entire continents. This is “the great extinction of peoples,” and small Scandinavian nations with a few million inhabitants, a drop in the sea of humanity, will be completely crushed by these processes unless they take strong steps to limit immigration.
That’s the simple truth. Yet all our so-called leaders can do is warn against “xenophobia.” Dr. Ole Jørgen Anfindsen, editor of HonestThinking.org, believes that Norwegian authorities have cheated with prognoses for the number of immigrants. According to his numbers, ethnic Norwegians will become a minority in their own country before 2050 if the current trends continue, in Oslo long before this. The number of Muslims in Norway over 15 years has quadrupled, meaning an annual growth of more than 9%.
Norway celebrated 100 years as an independent state last year. Judging from the new Discrimination Act and the runaway Muslim immigration, perhaps the anniversary should be called “From independence to colonization”. At the same time as their women are no longer safe in the streets because of immigrant gangs, the authorities respond by making Norwegians de facto second-rate citizens in their own country.
They use their own people as stepping stones for their personal careers in the UN bureaucracy, lecturing about how to create the perfect society while their own citizens find it increasingly hard to live in their major cities. We have no significant colonial history ourselves and denounce all forms of colonialism, but are supposed to smile when we are colonized ourselves. We were one of the poorest countries in Europe at the beginning of the 20th century, and one of the richest in the world at the beginning of the 21st. We managed this transformation entirely on our own, and didn’t “plunder” anybody for it. We don’t owe anything to anyone, except perhaps the British and the Americans for preserving our freedom during WW2 and the Cold War.
It is true that Norway is a special case, with its oil wealth since the 1970s, today the third largest exporter in the world after Saudi Arabia and Russia. But even wealth has to be managed. Norway is probably the only major oil exporting country on the planet that has managed to remain a stable democracy with low levels of corruption. By any standards possible, we’re one of the most successful cultures in the world, our largest flaw, which could eventually bury us, probably being our naivety.
So why on earth should we quietly watch while our country is subdued by the most unsuccessful cultures in the world? The most basic instinct of all living things, even down to bacteria level, is self-preservation. In 2006, you have a natural right to self-preservation if you are an amoeba, but not if you’re a Scandinavian. Maybe the solution then is to argue that Scandinavians are indeed a species of amoebas, and that we need special protection by the WWF. We could showcase some of our finest specimen of Leftist intellectuals and journalists to prove our point. Shouldn’t be too hard.
With current trends remaining unchanged, native Norwegians will be a minority in their own capital city within a couple of decades, a situation that has never happened before since the foundation of Oslo a thousand years ago. Judging from all experience with Muslims previously, non-Muslim Norwegians will be ruthlessly persecuted, either cornered into a civil war or forced to flee from what was once their country.
Newcomers move into an area and brutalize the natives who have become too soft to uphold themselves. There is nothing new about this scenario; it has been going on for thousands of years, as long as mankind has existed. It is the harsh law of nature. What is unique in this case is that the original inhabitants of this country are forced to fund their own colonization and eventual extinction by their own leaders, who portray this as an act of “tolerance.” I’m pretty sure that hasn’t happened before.
Thorbjørn Jagland, sticking to true, Eurabian form, also recommends increased pressure on Israel to solve the “Palestinian issue.” Why doesn’t he talk to his old friend from the Labor Party, Mr. Terje Rød-Larsen, a key player during the Oslo process, who has publicly admitted that “Arafat lied all the time and knew he was lying.” There never was an Oslo Peace Process, only a hudna, a temporary truce with the infidels to buy time and destroy the Israelis later, just as Muhammad did in the treaty of Hudaybiyya. The only peace process we will have in Oslo in the future will be when Israel sends special envoy Binyamin Netanyahu to negotiate a division of the country between Muslims and the native Norwegians that haven’t fled to the USA. Who knows, maybe the Norwegian Nobel Committee will award him the Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts.
This week, Olav Versto, political editor of the largest newspaper in Norway, VG, supported the decision to keep sending money to the Palestinian Hamas government. VG as a newspaper was created during the resistance to Nazi occupation during WW2. It is a sad day for this country and this continent when institutions that fought Nazi Germany end up appeasing the anti-democratic forces of our age.
Darkness is descending upon Europe when Europeans are no longer safe in their own cities from harassment by Muslim immigrants, and the only thing our so-called leaders do about this is recommending a 500% increase in the number of Muslims by letting Turkey into the EU, giving more money to Islamic terrorists and working to silence “Islamophobia” by their own people.
But remember, Eurabia is a conspiracy theory only American simpletons believe, and Fjordman is just a racist, right-wing nutcase. Our state-sponsored Leftist newspapers tell us so, so it must be true.
Close your eyes and think of Arafat, and everything will be fine.
Da Capo, I welcome your comment, but I am unsure what point you are making. I have no issue discussing Fjordman’s words but they need to be the words of his articles contained in 2083. This article is not a part of the manifesto.
Also, complete reproduction may violate fair use, so please just link to the articles next time. I’m okay with it, and if the article is caught up in my spam because it contains a link, I promise I will approve it.
And just for the record, I am not reading anymore. I got stuck in this ugly hate machine for weeks, struggling to digest this hateful shit. I will not read another word Fjordman wrote previous to the events of 7/22 until I have slept for a week and gone to the optometrist to get my eyes checked. So thanks for sharing but someone else is gonna have to wade through that if you wanna discuss it.
I sent you the Fjordman description of life in Scandinavia because i figured that his truthfully and exact portrayal of life in the former two brother-countries could be of interest to you and your readers. The conditions under which ABB lived his life!
The probabely reason why ABB made a miserable – for himself and others decision in his early life you find here:
The Fjordman description is 6 years old and the situation now is still worse. I dont remember where I picked it up, could have been the Brussels Journal, I had it on my harddisk and there are no copyright problems – Fjordman has always pointes out that anybody is free to use his writings as long as he was mentioned as the auther and no changes were made. BTW there exist on the web to excellent registers of all what Fjordman has published!
Your standpoint I do not understand. What do you detest the most: Fjordman or the “Eurabia-theory”? I guess it is EURABIA and therefore you hate this bl…y Fjordman for spreding knowledge about it – even if he is only a single cog in a very big gear-wheel. :-))
Why must EURABIA remain a secret? In this world of preconceived ideas and sheer deceit?
Eurabia = FALSE?
What if the case would be that Eurabia really does not and never has existed, just as all the various professors, pundits and now you Anita Dalton, together with all the credible and honest journalists say and write?
All those and perhaps even you, who are ready to put their reputation and credibility as deposit for telling us the truth about Eurabia: that it is a forgery and a conspiracy-theory made up by xenophobic, islamophobic right-wing extremists (in Sweden the epitets racist and nazi would not have been left out as I do here!).
For additonal support to the obove mentioned “eurabia-phobs” and their convincing claim that Eurabia is a myth, a fantasy, here follows some facts to substantiate that theory.
At a press conference on November 27, 1967, Charles de Gaulle openly declared that the French cooperation with the Arab world had become “the fundamental basis of French foreign polic”. Later, in January 1969,
at the ‘Second International Conference in Support of the Arab Peoples’, helt in Cairo, there was in Resolution 15 (of 23) a decision “… to form special promotional parliamentary groups, if not already existing,… and to use the parliamentary platform to the support of the Arab people and the Palestinian resistance.
The conferans documentet named: The Second International Conference in Support of the Arab peoples, Cairo 25-28 January 1969, en, 170 p. does officially exist only in three public copies at three different librarys in Sweden – and are never awailable because of always being lent out – which is an eufemism for ‘probabely stolen’.
Five years later in Paris, July 1974, the parliamentary basis for cooperation between Europe and Arab countries within the European-Arab Dialogue was created. “Eurabia”, the term, was introduced in the mid-1970s, as the title of a JOURNAL published by the President of the Association for Franco-Arab Solidarity: Lucien Bitterlein, and published jointly by the Groupe d’Etudes sur le Moyen-Orient (Geneva), France -Pays Arabes (Paris), and the Middle East International (London). In this journal various articles called for a common and joint Euro-Arab attitude and approach on every political level. The concrete proposals were not just reflections of isolated theorists, but it presented concrete proposals for policy decisions to be designed in collaboration with – and subsequently updated by – European heads of state and European parliamentarians.
The Arab states had at the Cairo Conference in 1969 made claims on Europe: (1) to get participations in Western science and technology, (2) that Europe should behave politically independent of (‘the great Satan’ =) U.S.A., (3) requirements for Europe to (A) adjust its Arab policy and (B) to demonize Israel and consider Israel to constitute a threat to world peace, and (C) take measures favoring Arab immigration – and the dissemination of Islamic culture in Europe. This coming cooperation should also contain (D) recognition of the Palestinians as a distinct people and the PLO and its leader Arafat as (the overnight created new country) Palestine’s representative. “Palestinians” were until 1973 known as “Arab refugees”, also by other Arabs and Arab states. The concept of “a Palestinian nation” simply did not previously exist.
The above policy agenda has been reinforced by the deliberate cultural transformations of Europe. “Euro-Arab Dialogue” symposia were held in Venice (1977) and Hamburg (1983) and have contained recommendations that have successfully been implemented. These recommendations, inter alia, entailed a deliberate, privileged influx of large amounts of Arab and other Muslim immigrants. The recommendations also covered mainly the following points:
-1 Coordination of the efforts the Arab countries are doing to spread the Arabic language and culture in Europe;
-2 Creation of joint Euro-Arab cultural centers in European capitals.
-3 Need to provide the European institutions and universities with Arab teachers specialized in teaching Arabic to Europeans.
-4 Necessity of cooperation between European and Arab specialists in order to present to educated Europeans a positive image of both the Arab-Islamic civilization and contemporary Arab issues.
The proud ship EURABIA under the new officiel name of “Euro-Mediterreanian Foundation” is steeming along under Swedish command. (Is there a pain in the ass on this planet it is the official Swedes!) After the historical occurrences and political changes in the North African region, the Arab League, the ‘Anna Lindh Foundation’ and the ‘UN Alliance of Civilizations’ together plan to put an end to the so called “clash of civilizations” and enforce the building of the European-Arab dialogue on Common Values. On April 6, 2011 in Cairo, Egypt, an international media forum was helt in the headquarters of the Arab League next to the Cairo Tahrir Square by the Foundation in cooperation with the ‘Anna Lindh Foundation’, ‘UN Nations Alliance of Civilisations’, ‘Media Tenor International’ and the ‘Swedish Institute in Alexandria’, focusing on the the consequences of the recent social changes in the region for the future dialogue between Arabs and Europeans. [www.euromedalex.org/news/roadmap-new-era-arab-west-relations-presented-international-forum-cairo]
More bogus facts can be found on the net!
Lastly, I would like to recommend everybody interested in the ABB-case to read Prof. Peter Dale Scott’s essaey:
Norway’s Terror as Systemic Destabilization: Breivik, the Arms-for-Drugs Milieu, and Global Shadow Elites – 2011-08-23
The Breivik Portfolio, Part Four: The Dot-Connection
on the blog GatesofVienna.
try this on too: [http://www.freeworldacademy.com/globalleader/europeanconstitution.htm]
Da Capo, I hope what I am about to say to you is not condescending, but I have learned the hard way that arguing with people who believe in conspiracy theory is a godless endeavor. Beating my head against a brick wall is actually more productive than trying to make a True Believer see sense because eventually, if I beat my head long enough, some of the bricks may crumble a bit. Not so with the mind of a conspiracy theory True Believer.
My reputation is not on the line (and god knows I appreciate that you lumped me in with journalists and such because I really am just a book blogger) because Eurabia doesn’t exist. I am putting my reputation on the line denying it as much as I am when I deny that 9/11 was an inside job, when I deny that the government is using vaccines as a mean to introduce nanotech chips into our bodies so we can be tracked, and when I deny that George H.W. Bush ran a pedophile ring and abused children at Bohemian Grove. It’s a slam dunk. It’s an easy-A. Denying conspiracy theory will always be a safe bet.
I could give you tons of proof to refute the “proof” you offer up and we would be off to the races. We would be engaging what would be called the “whack-a-mole” argument, wherein you offer proof, I refute it, you move on to a different point, I refute it, you claim my proof is bad but never admit that your sources are biased and on and on. There can be no resolution to such discussions so I have no intention of even trying. You wanna believe conspiracy theory, knock yourself out, but Eurabia has been debunked thoroughly by far better thinkers than me. Bat Ye’or’s credentials as a researcher and a historian have been called into question by actual historians. Over and over and over again.
And more to the point, I would really rethink alliance to any conspiracy that puts one in league with ABB. He killed children. He. Killed. Children. Aligning yourself with a man whose mindset permitted such atrocity should give you pause and that it doesn’t shows me that any argument is going to fall on deaf, fanatical, True Believer ears.
You can post your “proof” as long as it doesn’t become repetitive or so recursive that the banality makes my brain bleed. Please check out my comment policy and do your best to keep your comments to the manifesto. That is what we are discussing, not the greater existence of Eurabia as seen in evidence outside of the manifesto. Please be topical or I will have to limit your comments.
Oh goodness. So the french plans for establishing a mediteranean economic zone including the countries of the Maghreb and Egypt is a secret Eurabian plot to put us under the thumb of islam? And all attempts at creating threads of dialogue between people are also part of this nefarious plan, of course. Education about islam and muslim countries becomes attempts at converting the west. Rick Perry becomes a dhimmi for working with the Agha Khan (quote Geller).I guess that makes the Libya intervention so much more understandable, doesnt it? Its really weird to see a fullblown reactionary force emerge at this day and age.
Something is rotten also in the states of Norway and Sweden!
The ‘Verdens Gang’ has cleaned up in the cupboard.
The first link I gave you from 2002 – aprox when ABB made up his mind, is now redirected to the first page of Verdens Gang.
BUT, there is still life in Google Cache, so try this link:
And here is a adjusted Google translation of the article in question:
Want Norway as an Islamic state
Published 24.04.02 – 6:42, edited 02/25/03 – 1:26 p.m. (VG)
. Sheikh Omar Bakri Muhammad will make Norway an Islamic state, governed by Sharia law.
Fundamentalist: Sheikh Omar Bakri Muhammad controlling an extremist Islamic organization that aims to make Norway an Islamic state.
Insert Caption Photo:
The organization says bin Laden and his al-Qaida very close ideologically, is already established in the country.
– Within one year, we are strong enough to stand up in Norway, in public places, in streets, at universities, on the stands, said Muhammad told VG.
The famous Danish terrorism expert Lars Erslev Andersen warns against Hizb-ut-Tahrir:
– It is not the group itself that is dangerous, it is rhetoric. They have no formal ties to Osama bin Laden and says that they take away from what al Qaeda stands for. But ideologically, they are very close to each other, says Andersen told VG.
From his office in London Muhammad manages a network of extremist Muslim groups in Europe. Recently he made his mark by issuing fatwa against Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf.
The 44-year-old fundamentalist’s own chairman and founder of Al-Muhajiroum, pulling the strings in the sister organization Hizb-ut-Tahrir.
Cells in Norway
The extremist and militant groups are working toward the same goal – an Islamic world state – with different agents:
Al-Muhajiroum is the intellectual superstructure, the political leadership, while Hizb-ut-Tahrir is a more secret, militant recruitment group.
Muhammad claims that both groups have been established in Norway, that Al-Muhajiroum has “three to four cells” of 12-15 members, while Hizb-ut-Tahrir have “a dozen” members.
In Europe they are in the thousands, while most people in Norway are associated with the university in Oslo.
– We are in the initial phase in Norway. We must first build our strengths in order to build us more. It’s about educating our members intellectually in order to enable them to go out in society and influence, says Muhammad, a native of Syria.
He says that he has been in Norway “a few times” to support the political process. And religion researcher Kari Vogt confirmed that she knows that the two groups exist in this country.
Sheikh Omar Bakri Muhammad is convinced that Norway will one day become an Islamic state, “because it is God’s will.” Will his dream a reality, submitted to the Parliament down.
Conflict with Islam
“To vote is to participate in a democratic process that is contrary to Islam, for it is only Allah who can lay down rules for people,” it says to read on Hizb-ut-Tahrir Danish website.
– We believe that God is the only sovereign legislator. In the democracy I am talking about, people choose leaders, but they must carry out God’s orders. In the democracy you believe in, it is the leaders and the people who decide the laws. The fact that humans make laws, create disaster, according to Muhammad.
To introduce the strict religious Sharia law will short, turning the entire Norwegian society completely upside down. Stoning is an accepted means of punishment, homosexuality is prohibited and may be punished by death, and women can not have contact with men outside their own family, just to name a few.
– This is the mission of all Muslims. One day we will see Norway under Islamic law, under Sharia law, where Muslims, Jews and Christians live together, says Muhammad, who recently issued a fatwa on all those who support the U.S. anti-terror war in Afghanistan, including the Norwegians.
Will kill Jews
Muhammad is aimed not only to Muslims in Norway, but also to non-Muslims.
– To do what we have to convince people about their responsibilities and duties.
Our focus is to invite non-Muslims to Islam and to Muslims to submit to Islam. But also to use Islam as a political system to live by.
– Is not it a paradox that you can use the democratic system to fight it?
– It is the people’s choice. If people in the morning, choose to live under the rule of law, I believe no one has trouble accepting it as part of democracy. It’s about persuading people to choose the right system. We will not force anyone.
According to the Danish newspapers, both groups gained a foothold in Denmark. According to Hizb-ut-Tahrir, a transition made by the true believers have to steer away from anything that has to do with democracy, avoiding integration in society and live by the Koran to the letter, write the Jyllands-Posten.
Last week they shared out fliers in Copenhagen with incitement to kill Jews, referring to a quote from the Koran.
Sheikh Omar Bakri Muhammad says that the groups are recruiting members in Norway through study groups and home meetings. And soon to be out in the streets:
– We will discuss with people. In a small society like Norway, I think it is easy for us to penetrate intellectually, so people can see the message we have.
The Berlingske Tidende writes that a substantial part of the ideology of Al-Muhajiroum is to raise money and support for Jihad (holy war). To VG reject Muhammad that he supports the methods of al-Qaeda and Osama bin Laden, but he does not deny that he supports the “holy warriors”.
He believes that he will face strong resistance in Norway:
– We anticipate that we will be arrested, persecuted and attacked. It is part of your system, to reject people with a different view than their own, because you are fundamentalists.
– We are fundamentalists. . ?
– You might want to do this in a lawful manner, by saying that we are extremists and fundamentalists. You arrest people you intellectually disagree with, and uses power. It is called fundamentalism, says Sheikh Omar Bakri Muhammad.
for more information:
Let me get this straight, Da Capo, because this Sheikh Omar Bakri Muhammad back in 2002 said that he wants Norway to make an islamic state under Sharia law, that’s of course going to happen? The voters will flock to him, and there will be a landslide of votes coming his way so that he will have majority in the parliament and change the laws to Sharia?
Do you not see how incredibly silly a thought that is?
I’ll bet he would have a hard time getting even a tiny fraction of the muslim population to buy into that.
You and Fjordman describe a Norway and a Scandinavia that only exists in your own heads. It is pure fiction.
And Harold Camping said the world would end last May. Just because one specific person from a specific religion says some loony thing doesn’t make it true.
Additionally, this has nothing to do with the manifesto. Please stop posting information that has nothing to do with the manifesto. This is the last time I will ask you to remain topical to the discussion of 2083. I appreciate that you have these strong beliefs but I need you to discuss elements of the manifesto or stop posting comments. There’s plenty of information in the manifesto to allow you to make these points, so stick to the manifesto, please.
If you knew how to link then you would see that the article was still there:
But I guess that would not suit your utterly paranoid mindset.
Haven’t we had an interesting exchange of opinions? The first prize goes to you Anita, for your cocksure but thoughtless declaration out from somewhere in Texas, U.S.A., that my life and the life around me is pure fiction. I do wish it was that well! Living as I do, 18 km from, and having as my chief town, Malmö, famous in Northern Europe for its muslim ghetto Rosengård and for in a few years time gonna have an immigrant population from MENA and Subsahara of more tha 50%, I find life rather trying nowdays. And just you imagine the waitingtimes and calculate the costs to the taxpayers for hospital care of only all the cases of osteoporosis, femurfractures and, and, and and….., all unknown among the indigenous – and also to the deciding oligarks in the government.
In my opinion your conviction seems to be of a religious kind, but lacking the deity. You certainly are an adamant believer – I should have loved to make your aquentence – please note, this is not en offence, it is pure curiosity (‘reine wissensgier’ as they say in Germany) – in the role of being a psychologist or a shrink. I myself remain a sceptic until I know (almost) for sure. Probabilities play a role in my life.
If I may say so, I am west and you are east and newer will the twoo meet. At least our exchane has brought one good thing, in that it turned out that you blogsoftware can handle full url:s without hanging. Allow me therefore, please, to leave a few remains in the form of a some (only 8 tiny ones) url:s – that, if of no interest to you, might interest another reader of you interesting blog, which I will return to now and then, but NB, with a ‘sealed mouth’, I promise. Cheerio!
(last link removed as it refers to book burning)
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Your comment got hung in spam but anything with links does – I need to tinker and see if there is a way around it. But never fear, it is posted now. Good luck with your theories.
You might want to delete the last link with the burning of the Quran, if you have editing capacity.
Done. Thanks for the heads up, Martin. I should have checked all his links before I posted it. Sigh…
Some advice: If you would label yourself a sceptic, you should attempt to reign in your outwardly appearance of a raving conspiracy theorist. Here are some of the telltale signs: Accusing people with opposing views of religious conviction, massive info-dumps consisting of links to biased blogs, empathic depictions of a non-existing reality where everything was better before, and finally, the complete inability to stick to a topic as soon as one of your “trigger words” is mentioned. The forced joviality is a nice touch, though.
And obviously, my opinion will be more valid than yours, as I live 17.99 kilometers from the most terrible ghetto in Sweden that I have personally never visited, but will gladly dismiss as a wretched hive of scum and villainy as it fits my world view.
@anitadalton Your examination of ABBs manifesto is amazing, and should be required reading for all politicians and journalists who attempt to challenge the anti-muslim opinion. Your analysis and breakdown of Fjordmans writings and sources will help a LOT in deconstructing the Eurabia-myth that has been gaining ground in Scandinavia lately. Thank you!
Thank you so much for the praise. I’m glad my tendencies towards verbosity and over-thinking has served some good for once. 🙂
This is one of the best articles out there that specifically addresses the Eurabia myth: http://www.loonwatch.com/2009/09/anti-muslim-loon-with-a-crazy-conspiracy-theory-named-eurabia/
Some consider the above a personal attack on Bat Ye’or but she’s the one who created this bizarre theory and her “credentials” as an expert on Islam and a historian are suspect at best.
Thanks again for the praise. It means a lot to me that people read this and derived some value from it.
…je suis toujours sur le sujet!!
Anita, you should have brought this link (1) as well;
Sorry for giving you trouble with the spam filter – I really believed it could manage on its own – and then it was you yourself who happened to be the deus ex machina!
‘Sheikh Omar Bakri Muhammad’
is out of the picture, see:
it is new times in GB, new brooms and new chaps; here are but a few of them:
Mohammed (saw) said: “The whole earth has been shown to me until I saw the east of the east and the west of the west and I saw the authority of Islam ruled all that I saw” [Musnad-Imam Ahmed]
Sorry for the delay in approving your comment, Da Capo. The Deus Ex Machina was vacuuming the stairs.
Da Capo, I’m pretty sure I’ll never ever watch that Youtube clip because I don’t have that many spare hours laying about but it’s here in the event anyone is unconvinced that the Muslims are coming and all the proof they need are two British Muslim clerics going on at length.
I would like to add this reply #2 to my earlyer reply #1 that obviously is still prisoned in the spam filter.o
– – – – –
je suis encore sur le sujet!
Re anti-muslim-loon-with-a-crazy-conspiracy-theory-named-eurabia, that is an impressive piece of work that that Zebrafish Danios succeeded to put together while swimming around in the bathtub that also contained muslimmatters.org and americanmuslim.org, two impressive, objective and neutal sites specializing in the evils of homosexuality, the evils of kuffars, the bright glory of Allah and simultaniously being friends and defenders of slavery etc.
How do you say in the U.S.A. Anita, Give me a break?
I don’t know what to say, Da Capo. I am unsure what point you are making but I’ll just leave this here in case others find it informative.
Still, I don’t say give me a break. I think I would say, “What a load of pants!” which is borrowed from the British.
I just have to say that I’m really impressed with Mrs Oddbooks and her work on this manifest. Really fascinating to read, and also nice to know I don’t have to read the whole thing for myself… (I read some parts, and was horrified to find people I know by name in his manifest, NOT a nice feeling I can assure you)
I think I agree with your preference on Fjordman over ABB (in analysing I mean) as he is a more likely person to “communicate” with on some level. Like you mentioned in earlier posts, he has some kind of logic (although twisted) and I, for one, would very much like to see his response to some of the stuff you wrote (not likely in any event).
Praise is also due for having the patience and stamina to answer everyone that’s posting more or less constructive stuff as comments here. After the attacks in Norway that was discussed a lot: to counter the hate and bigoted nonsense we encounter everyday on various internet discussions we should engage in a dialogue. I see the appeal in that and that it maybe could lead to something as well. But I know in my heart that I am more likely turn away (in disgust, but also, and maybe more so) with a depressing feeling of intense boredom. I mean, I am very (curiously) interested in conspiracy theories (and btw, I liked your analysis of what that may come from, we’re all seeking human beings), but the thought of actually having to confront this enormous mountain of distorted facts and false correlations, well suffice to say, it seems like Sissyfus had a walk in the park comparing to that…
So I mostly turn away and let others (more likely to do a better job as well) to do the “debunking”. But I really admire the ones who does not.
As to the part of contrarian views, yes, they are needed, and I enjoy being the “devil’s advocate” in a lot of discussions, because it forces others to justify they’re view and come up with real arguments and actually think why they mean what they mean. Any discussion with people who all agree is not really a discussion. BUT I have to say just masturbating on the same thing over and over again, and calling other people you don’t know for vermin or rats or whatever, is, in my view not contrarian. It’s just stupid, bigoted shit, if may say so…
Again, as I mentioned on twitter, I really appreciate your work here. It is always interesting to listen to other peoples views on things you know very well, so for a Norwegian to read this has been most stimulating.
I too would like to talk with Fjordman and like you I don’t see it happening, but you never know. Perhaps one day I will send him an e-mail.
I am often at a loss at how to confront the belief in conspiracy theory. Years spent looking at bizarre ideas has shown me that for the most part, trying to debunk a True Believer is a pointless endeavor but now that we see graphically and horribly the results of such conspiracy in the right mind. I can’t begin to really assert that I understand ABB but I really do think there is just a hair’s difference between Fjordman and ABB, and that was the will to act to end the conspiracy above and beyond just blogging.
So clearly there has to be some societal confrontation. I just don’t know how to go about it. Because how can we really combat irrational beliefs? In the United States, the anti-science rhetoric would be funny were it not so horrific in its implication. If we cannot analyze facts and differentiate a scientific theory from a theological assertion, what hope is there in combating the strange beliefs people embrace about history, race and religion? People have been battling these bad ideas for a long, long time.
And yes, it is bigoted shit, calling people vermin. I guess I just have had the man who said it as a reader here long enough that I could tell he was pushing the envelope just to push it. If he thinks such people are indeed vermin, I would be surprised. And I’ve read so much worse that statements like that sort of roll off me. There’s a sort of danger exposing one’s self to this sort of thing. It can become hard to tell a provocateur from a dangerous person. But I very much sense the regular commenter who said what he did is a racist, but of the provocative kind, not the dangerous kind.
Thanks for reading, Jonas. And thanks for letting me know you found some value in this. I wish you luck as you deal with this. I can’t imagine your shock when you recognized names in the manifesto. What a complete and at times unrelenting horror show this has been.
Can you explain why it is you hate the Tea Party so much? I think they make sense most of the time but a few times I’ve seen you call them Teabaggers and make fun of them.
If this is off topic, please delete.
Hi, Angie. I mention the Tea Party in this entry so I consider this on-topic. No worries.
I am not a fan of the Tea Party because I have yet to see a Tea Party candidate who inspires much faith in me, and the entire Birther movement sprang from the Tea Party and I consider that the height of idiocy. There is a racist, xenophobic, very anti-intellectual (especially anti-science) element to the Tea Party that I really dislike.
But much of the same can be said of the Republican party. I think at times I engage in mental crutches when I write, crutches that don’t show the whole picture of what I think.
The Tea Party movement as a whole is not my cup of tea, so to speak, but at the same time I understand the appeal and don’t dismiss them as a group entirely. It is a mistake to label them all ignorant, racist rubes.
Politics in the USA is elitist at heart. The people at the top have made what seems like a policy to shit on the people at the bottom for about 30 years or so, destroying jobs and destroying communities. The Tea Party, while it contains a substantial number of people devoted to what I consider regressive religious beliefs and race hate, also consists of people who have had enough of being under the government’s social and financial boot. All that money people pay in taxes and it seems like they get so little back, even when they are in desperate need of help.
I can’t blame anyone for their suspicion towards the government. When my grandfather was my age, he would never have thought the government would steadfastly stand by corporate interests to the point that they destroyed jobs and entire industries. So had anyone said to him, “By the way, small farmers will be gone in the 1980s,” he would have considered it foolishness.
And it is a kneejerk reaction to consider much of what the Tea Party fears foolishness just because some of them think the President is a foreign-born, crypto-Muslim and that national health care means they will all have to get an RFID chip in their taints. Suspicion of a government that obviously does not give a shit about them is not foolishness. In times of chaos, bad ideas reign, but I suspect that the average person who has allegiance with the Tea Party is simply sick of the idea that elites can take their jobs and tell them they get no unemployment while giving billions to failing and criminally reprehensible banks. I suspect many of them are tired of being demonized as dumb because they have strong faith in God. But I suspect most of them are really frightened because entire ways of life in the USA are gone.
A man with a high school education can no longer get a really got job at a plant or a mill and support his family. He’s been laid off, his pension lost in bad investments and he’s scared and pissed off. America is still a strong nation but there are segments of this country who think that they have been left behind and given the shaft and they are correct. I just wish so many of them did not feed into the racist ideas that have kept those at the bottom at each others’ throats for so long. The elites benefit when we get lost in racism instead of facing classist ideas. The Tea Party has the two mixed up, I think.
I need to be more careful when I discuss them because while I find many elements of the Tea Party distasteful, I definitely understand why people are so fed up that they have turned to a reactionary party that serves as a point of defiance to the Washington elites who have shat on the lower-middle class for decades. In a way, Washington should thank their lucky stars there has been a pressure valve release in the form of the Tea Party because angry people with nowhere to turn eventually turn on their government.
I’ll try to be clearer in the future if I reference the Tea Party. I don’t like many elements but the people within the movement have different motives and don’t deserve to be tarred with the same brush that I reserve for Birthers, racists and anti-science fundamentalists.
This was nothing more than a “gladio” type covert op. The Norwegian Intell and Military were likely behind this, like all the other mass shootings are always inside jobs.
Definitely not the work of one shooter, at any rate.
It would be helpful if you explained why you think this was the work of more than one shooter, backed by the Norwegian Intel and Military. Because I wrote around 10,000 words explaining why it was the work of one man. I’m interested in your theory but I’m not willing to take it to heart on the basis of two sentences.
Surely you are aware of the ‘Gladio’ series of terrorist attacks in Europe back in the ’60s,’70s, and ’80s, which were committed by far right elements in the governments of the region.
This attack bears all the hallmarks of a “manipulated shooting event,” based upon studies of commonalities in these mass rampage attacks which I have studied since the Columbine attack of 1999. In this case they include:
-early reports of others involved
-unrealistically high casualty count blamed on a lone gunman exhibiting stunning marksmanship abilities
-lack of any believable motive
-evidence that the patsy was under the influence of mind control
-unexplored links between the patsy and police/military
-mysteriously delayed reaction by police in engaging the shooter
-quick reaction by the politicians to exploit tragedy to push more laws to control the people
I am aware of what gladios attacks are but failed to see how it applied to this. I see now the point you are making and I addressed that several times when I discussed how it is that a super-empowered individual can accomplish utter mayhem alone and without a conspiracy behind them to fuel their rampage.
And again, I do not wish to seem condescending, but I cannot and will not argue in depth with people who believe in conspiracy theory to explain that which can be far more easily explained by looking at the situation, examining the worth of panicked, on the scene accounts, and accepting that motives that make sense to sociopaths and the mentally ill may not make sense in the way we want them to. So yes, I reject the idea that 7/22 was a gladios attack.
I can, however, recommend that you read Columbine by Dave Cullen. He refutes with far more authority every point of concern you have with the Columbine attacks.
Thanks for clearing up why you think this was a gladios attack. But I am curious – what form of mind control do you think ABB was under? He never took any psychotropics. Caffeine, ephedrine and steroids are a far stretch to be considered mind control. Just wondering…
“I am aware of what gladios attacks are but failed to see how it applied to this.”
Cui bono, in a crime like this? Surely not Breivik or his anti-mulitkulti views. If anything, antipathy for his political stance is the only result of an action like this. And of course the police/security forces benefit, as new control measures will be implemented to ‘prevent’ more crimes like this. The specialists can say it better than I can:
‘You had to attack civilians, the people, women, [b]children[/b], innocent people, unknown people far removed from any political game,’ he said. ‘The reason was quite simple. They were supposed to force these people, the Italian public, to turn to the State to ask for greater security. This is the political logic that lies behind all the [b]massacres[/b] and the bombings which remain unpunished, because the State cannot convict itself or declare itself responsible for what happened.”
-Vincenzo Vinciguerra, a convinced Fascist who was a member of the extremist Ordine Nuovo organisation and had close links with Gladio
“Same s***, different day” as we say here in the US.
“….to explain that which can be far more easily explained…”
The ‘easiest’ explanation may not be the correct one.
“….examining the worth of panicked, on the scene accounts…”
The few publicized accounts by eyewitnesses were given hours after the assault had ended. Anyway, just because a witness is terrified does not necessarily mean their memories are wrong. Let’s see if the authorities ever release the rest of the witness statements by the Utoya survivors. I’ll bet they don’t, because too many contradict the official account.
“…motives that make sense to sociopaths and the mentally ill…”
There is no evidence that Breivik was either sociopathic or crazy BEFORE the attacks. Anyway even a crazy person has SOME kind of motive.
“…read Columbine by Dave Cullen. He refutes…”
Cullen refutes nothing. He is an administration mouthpiece. The eyewitness evidence in the Columbine case stands by itself.
“…what form of mind control do you think ABB was under?”
Beats me. But if he can’t even remember what happened, that’s good evidence he was ‘under the influence.’
“He never took any psychotropics.”
Well we don’t know that. Police DO lie. But I guarantee you this man was under the ‘care’ of some shrink at some point.
If you are going to dismiss the exhaustive research of Cullen because you think he is an establishment mouthpiece, there is nothing really we can discuss. The chasm between our beliefs is too wide. I really do make a sincere effort not to argue with True Believers because there is nothing I can do to persuade them to see my way of thinking and I’m pretty devoted to the idea of Occam’s Razor.
Conspiracies exist but this, for me, is just like OKC. Just a one man (or in the case of McVeigh, a handful of men) doing the unthinkable. It happens. Humans are capable of so much without needing reasons that make sense to the average, reasonably sane person.
The most conspiracy you will find with ABB is that he had a financial backer who had no idea that Breivik planned to kill kids with the money. But of course, if no conspiracy is proven, that just proves there’s a conspiracy. On and on.
However, I agree that police do lie, but Breivik is a very big liar, and a narcissist to boot. It would not surprise me that he may have been on psychotropics, but actually, I think he may have needed to be on some sort of psychotropic and refused since he has such a high opinion of his self-worth. Narcissists seldom seek mental health care. They never think they need it and they look down on those who suggest it for them. ABB worked so well maintaining his image that I suspect only his poor mother suspected the depths of his depravity. Even if those around him noticed his problems, I think Breivik’s high opinion of himself prevented him from seeking or engaging in therapeutic relationships.
Just my theory, however. I could very easily be proven wrong in months to come. It will be very interesting when the final reports come back from the investigators and psychiatrists.
Incidentally, the movie Shooter was on in the background as I typed this response. Conspiracy everywhere! I can’t escape it. 🙂
Hi Anita, just had to drop in to put some topical lugs on the fire.
(1a) in due time for the anniversary celebrations:
Italy Ex-President: CIA and Mossad ran 9-11 By the Staff of American Free Press 9-12-9
Former Italian President Francesco Cossiga, who revealed the existence of Operation
>Gladio<, has told Italy's oldest and most widely read newspaper that the 9-11 terrorist attacks were run by the CIA and Mossad, and that this was common knowledge among global intelligence agencies. In what translates awkwardly into English, Cossiga told the newspaper Corriere della Sera: "All the [intelligence services] of America and Europeknow well that the disastrous attack has been planned and realized from the Mossad, with the aid of the Zionist world in order to put under accusation the Arabic countries and in order to induce the western powers to take part in Iraq [and] Afghanistan."
(1b) just a tiny stick;
I still remember as if it had been last week, the facial looks of Bush Junior sitting there in the junior(?)school klassroom in Florida, when he was told what had happend i NYC. So can only someone react who know what is going on. Zero spontanity. BTW I spent the whole of that day in front of the TV, swapping between SE- and DK-News.
(3) a brainbleeder;
…said by brainy/braindemented (your shoise) Bat Ye’or – I fell over it the other day;
– Hate against Israel is hate against the true roots of the Quran. Why Israel? Given the immense territories conquered and Islamized over thirteen centuries of expansion and war, why would Muslim countries keep plotting to destroy Israel? Why does the immense oil wealth of Muslim nations nourish a flood of hatred that poisons the heart of humanity against such an insignificant nation? Why is Israel considered so alarming? What else but the Bible does Israel posess? It is essential to realize that Jewish and Christian Bible characters, from Abraham to Moses to Jesus, pop up in the Koran as Muslim prophets who actually preach Islam, not Judaism or Christianity. This is the time-wrinkling, religion-morphing way in which Islam repudiates what it regards as falsifications in both the first (old) and second (new) testaments. Given that the Jewish and Christian religious books long predate the Islamic religious book, it’s not surprising that in their Koranic guises the biblical characters wander, in uncertain space with no geographical or temporal references. Still, Muslims claim that these same Muslim characters lived in Palestine, on the basis of the Jewish and Christian scriptures that they reject. It follows from this highly unstable construct that Islam sees the biblical past as Islamic history “usurped” by Jews and Christians. Thus the land in which it took place — though … never mentioned in the Koran — is (considered) a Muslim land, and Jewish and Christian holy sites are all (considered) Muslim.
Everything you said above is a load of pants, Da Capo. All of it. 9/11 was not an inside job or a gladios attack. Bush was stunned because he was an ineffectual leader, not because he knew what was going to happen. And hatred of the Jews is not the at the core of Islam.
Your beliefs, while fun to look at and wonder about the sorts of minds that create this sort of drama when the actual truth is terrible enough, are dangerous. Get your need to comment like this out of your system in the next 48 hours because starting Tuesday I will probably disenvowel every comment you leave.
Why am I getting cranky? Well, you see, I’ve read the the manifesto, I’ve many of the sources quoted in the manifesto, including your Beloved Bat. I spent three weeks writing 50,000 words about this topic and I’m not only tired to death of the topic – it was deeply horrible reading into the mind of a man who killed children because he believes in conspiracy theory – but also because those who think it is a merry and sound idea to shoot children won’t even stay on topic with the manifesto. Plus at some point permitting odious ideas to be stated openly on my site weighs heavy on me.
So you’ve got until Tuesday evening to say whatever nonsense you want to say and then I will just disenvowel you. Not out of malice but out of tiredness and an unwillingness to permit bad ideas to be an ongoing part of this discussion.
Hallo Anita, I am back for the last time. I came in peace and I leave in
peace. A bracing experiance it has been to be the Jester of this thread.
“Getting you to laugh” at every my little contribution, all quotes actually, because I am too stupid to come up with something new and of my own in this affaire centered around the 2083-Manifesto. Of course you in reality must be tired to death of this influx of loads of pants and bad ideas. Why do you not just use the tool of Occham and swoosh, free yourself of them? – because deep down in the bottom of your soul doubts are harboured. It is also, my assumption, not my conviction, that you Anita like the very magnum majority have not yet discovered that the ’emperor is stark naked’. The political ‘nobility’ is not there for you and me – on the contrary.
Actually I should have finished long ago, but I changed my mind after having been told off – that is, having been attacked from outer space by the compatriotic ‘Galactic Empire’ (rymdimperiet) herself, one of the loonies that constitute 65+% of the Swedish population.
There will be no vulgar burning of the ‘Prophet’s Manifesto’ this last time,I promise. The pastor’s Manifesto-burning down in Florida was much more ellegant and tastful, was it not, old Norwegian chum Martin Knutsen? More sacrosanct – no mushy bacon bookmarkels! I do hope we will heare more
from the brave American woman Ann Barnhardt, probabely by now death-threatened by submitters to the peace religion.
BTW – and please notice that I am still clinging to the subject, have you
Anita considered the parallells between Anders Breivik and the Prophet
Mohammad? Both wrote a MANIFESTO, both plagieted, Anders was honest and stated his sources, which he did not distort or garble – so not the
Prophet, he stole assidously from the Bible – and without restrain he picked upp goodies that he heard from jews and christians along the camelrouts and included them in his book as his own words of genius. Yes, I know, if I am gonna cling >also< to truth, he did not do all the work himself – if any – his 'followers' up untill ca 850 did (compare New Testament). However, the Mohammed MANIFESTO was afterwards even said not to be original but a copy, a true copy to be sure, of Allah's own personal copy he keeps at his dwellings in Heaven. Mo's job was only the secretarie's or shall we say, that of a clerk's. Actually everything Mo & Mu(-slim) is Mushy; not even a high ranking imam can keep the things separate. See the Bat Ye'or quote that I sent you on Sunday, it illustrates the truth-twisting Mu-Mushiness in reasoning, and obviously you did not see it. Back to Anders and Mo, both were murderous, very much so, yet the Prophet became the holy prototype for all men and women on earth (you of course know, that we are all born as muslims?) but poor Anders was damned and put in prison for 21+ years.
Still being topical, I will NOT in this eleventh hour try to convince you that EU – the European Union, the heir of UdSSR, does not exist, neigher will I any more try to convince you that 'EURABIA' exists, because it does not – it never did; since its partus back in 1969 it was/is just a witty symbolic designation of a growing conglomerate of diverse Actions, Decisions, Cooperations, Conferences, Parnerships, Foundations, Processes, Associations, Bodies that thrive better on its taxmoney if not known by the public. See: THOUGHTS ON EURO-MEDITERRANEAN PARTNERSHIP PROBLEMS by Rachid Driss
Why does the synthetic name EURABIA evoke so much hate among all wise
guys, when the synthetic name 'The Third Reich' does not? Why not just
laugh at EURABIA – a stupid invention by a no less stupid jew-hag who has
written at least 7 or 8 stupid books on the same stupid theme?
Here some true OLD 'barbarious' English/European laughing medicine:
While I think of it, permit me to invite you to enlarge your knowledge of old EUROPE in the 21st century (a) by reading 'From Meccania to Atlantis' by Takuan Seiyo and (b) listening to a short 3-parts lecture:
(aitch-te-te-pe)(colon)//youtu(dot)be/EZG3pabfPRA and (c) enjoy the
festivitas of NewSweden when a Nobel laureate tells the 'trash at the top'
the truth they pretend(?) not to understand. [keywords: Political Correctness + Idiocracy].
Concerning (b) it was started in Sweden mainly by Gunnar and Alva Myrdal
(google/wiki these persons – the husband not being of unimportance to American life) and was effected when Olof Palme came into power. Today children in kindergarten (dagis/förskola), 98 % of all, from the age of 3, are deconstructed and gender-reconstructed because
male/femaleness are supposed to be socially conditionable. It is believed by the new strong female feminists that there is no limit to the nobel art of social engineering (compare Nazism: HJ/BDM). Special gender faculties exist at several universities.
Finally, as a 'thank you' for letting me shuffle in this comment thread, let me act as an intermediary in conveing to you a small book to read and I hope, write about; a book by a few authers of witch at least one has got fame: Umberto Ecco. The Titel is:
"Dialogue Between Peoples and Cultures in the Euro-Mediterranean Area" PDF. It is easy to find via Google.
God By Anita!
– – – – –
PS Google "Fraudman + Lionheart" and you will find a character murder
par preference of the evil Fjordman – will you love it?
– – – – –
*****Hell, what is all this?*****
I have to leave out all the url:s!
"La coopération avec ses voisins les plus directs, les pays arabes et méditerranéens, est essentielle pour l’Europe. Or, alors que l’Union Européenne se dote d’un nouveau Service d’Action Extérieure chargé
de renforcer la présence européenne dans le monde, la complexité
du monde arabe semble encore souvent lui échapper."
Administrative detention (in Israel or the Occupied Territories)
South Lebanon Army (SLA)
Winograd Report Annapolis : description and challenges of the conference Annapolis : International donors’ conference for the Palestinian state
Annapolis : results of the conference Annapolis : the EU’s role in the conference
Arab boycott of Israel-Arab Peace Initiative
Arab uprising (1916-1920) Ariel
Balfour declaration Deportation (by Israel of Palestinians from the Occupied Territories)
Economic Road Map (2004) EU,
Watch report by the European Union Consul General in Jerusalem: Settlements Watch First Intifada
Geneva Accord (2003)
Israel-Jordan Peace Treaty
Israeli-libanese conflict (2006)
Jerusalem (status of)
Jewish immigration (into Israel and the Occupied Territories)
KhyamMaale AdumimOrient House
Oslo peace process Palestine, recognition of the State of –Palestinians
Palestinians in Lebanon
Palestinians workers in Israel
PLO (Palestine Liberation Organization)
PLO Executive Committee
Pressure on Israel (by the Western World)
Programme of Assistance to the Palestinian People (PAPP)
Second IntifadaSecurity zone (Israeli in Lebanon)
Settlements (Israeli settlements in the Occupied Territories)
The Israeli-Palestinian peace process chronology
Transfer (of Arab population outside Palestine)
Unrecognized Arab villages in Israel
West Bank Barrier
Wye River Memorandum
WZO (World Zionist Organisation)
GATT (The Arab countries and -)
OIL (Theoretical background on reserves’ estimation)
Arab Free Trade Area (AFTA)
Arab Monetary Fund
COMESA (Common Market of East and Southern Africa)
GDP Per Capita for Arab and Mediterranean Countries
OAPEC (Organization of Arab Petroleum Exporting Countries)
OPEC (Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries)
The EURO and the Euro-Mediterranean Partners
The global crisis and the Arab countries
Euro-Mediterranean and Euro-Arab cooperation
Cooperation initiatives in the Mediterranean
Dialogue 5+5 (Western Mediterranean)
EU and Maghreb Countries: bilateral agreements
EU-GCC : 20th Joint Council and Ministerial Meeting (14 June 2010)
EU-MED, Association Agreements
EU-Morocco fishing agreement
EU-Palestinian exports, preferential arrangement granted unilaterally by the EU-PLO agreement
Euro-Arab Parliamentary Dialogue
Euro-Mediterranean cooperation (historical)
Euromed Civil Forum
High-Level Advisory Group on Dialogue between Peoples and Cultures
Mediterranean Solar Plan (MSP)
Union for the Mediterranean WEU
PPS In NewSweden the New Moderates (I guess you would call them centre-socialists) has created something called ARBETSLINJE (work(ing)line)
to create work for immigrants. If someone employs an immigrant 80% of the costs are repaid to the employer by the state – for two years.
A big immigration-industry-complex exists where ingenios Swedes are employed to take care of immigramts in distributing the usual form of womb2tomb wellfare. Who do you think would under such circumstances oppose the massimmigration?? The situation in Norway might be alike and must then have influenced Anders Breivik. So, Anita, I was topical to the bitter end!
Anita, my finale farewell comment you will find as #3 above this. It was ment to be here but the order was mucked-up of unknown reason.
I think I forgot to mention that the list at the end of last comment is today’s EURABIA – at least parts of it.
Pretty malign kind of cancer, that EURABIA – not just one tumefaction
but heaps of metastasis. Only massive radi…., I mean, a war can cure
Hi all, sombody wrote about Malmø.
Here some late news from that hole.
Why on earth was this a comment that needed to be left utilizing a proxy server?
Sterling sources, too. Andrew McCarthy is always worth a chuckle.
All you folks calling Malmø a hole and a pit and a sewer – I have to laugh. It’s still 70% native born, and of the immigrants who come there, a healthy percentage are from Denmark, Poland and Romania. I don’t meant to diminish the real problems that come when countries that were once homogeneous face immigration, but pull up your socks and stop being so overdramatic about it. If all the people complaining about Malmø had to visit Houston, they would collectively crap their whining little pants. They would never stop freaking out because they were in a place where they were not the racial majority. And Houston, while being very humid and with far too much traffic, is not a hole, a pit, a sewer, whatever. It’s just a very warm, crowded, ethnically diverse city. Malmø in comparison is a little paradise to those who want racial homogeneity. Stop acting like the world is over because some of the faces around you are darker than you would like and grow the fuck up. Stop creating conspiracy theories to support you feelings of fear as the world changes around you.
And further comments that use a proxy will be disenvoweled. Own your shit online or shut the fuck up.
“They’re going to rape all of our white women!”
Hmmm, where have I heard that before? (B.C. Before Capo) Well, that was a pretty common racist trope in America, for those of you in Norway/Europe, and it seems to appear in anti-Muslim rhetoric as well.
I spent six months in Scandinavia (all four countries) many years ago. I began to feel homesick for my multicultural home. At that time, I seldom saw a nonwhite face. Although it is difficult for some, a land with many types of people is ultimately a better place, in my opinion, as much as I dislike the imperial policies of the government that claims to represent the American people. Not that I am saying America is better than Scandinavia. America is still a pretty wild place and I miss the quiet fair-mindedness of the people and policies of Scandinavia. I wish them the best in their transition to a different mix of people.
But this is all by the way. Mostly, I want to thank you, Ms. Oddbooks, for taking the time to read this manifesto and explain it to those of us who don’t have the time or inclination to do so. I’m looking forward to reading some other thoughts on your site. I, too, am perversely curious about the thoughts of those who seem far different from the norm. I’m somewhat different myself, being a little bookish, radical and artistic, but manage to come across as pretty normal.
The current New Yorker has an interesting piece about a man (Derek Parfit) who is also a very strange man, due to his family circumstances, perhaps, but not in the serial killer kind of way. He is a philosopher at Oxford.
It is easy to blame modern society for the sociopaths and psychopaths, but, then, there have always been the village idiots, the crazy wise men, the shamans and the transgendered: the different. A compassionate society does not ignore these people.
Compassionate societies are pretty rare, though, aren’t they? “Burn the witches!”
“Compassionate” means agreeing with you, right?
Does it mean agreeing with you? Does it mean agreeing with the fuckers who send me savage e-mails that would make even your sphincter tighten? Jesus, you should see the e-mails I am still getting telling me those teenagers were training to take out the Mossad or Israelis and all deserved to be shot to death.
All I know is that we should agree that it always means not killing unarmed teenagers at summer camp en masse. Once we all agree with that, we can hammer out the details.
No one has ever accused The Evil Gringo of compassion, so I never had any desire for agreement. But if you get any more savage e-mail, you can forward such accusations to me: I like a tight sphincter.
Using the phrase “tight sphincter” has reaped me whirlwind. I’m such an idiot where SEO is concerned.
I’m torn. If I send you the crazies, will you recruit them? Because I can’t have that sort of thing on my conscience.
But it’s died down. Thank heavens. But if a really crusty one shows back up, I may forward it to you and see what happens.
Thank you for your comment, Gregg. I am late in replying but please know I found your comment interesting. And thanks for the praise. Often the purpose of this site is that I read things so you won’t have to.
I have not heard of Derek Parfit. I will definitely look him up. I always like being turned on to a different and strange mind.
Thanks so much for reading and for commenting.
spending half a day with abb and you mrs. oddbook left me weary, again. after the attack i read some of his scribblings, mostly what i decided was his own words. his universe is demented and dark, your reading of this is more impressive than most will know.
Thank you very much for telling me this, Ole. Thanks for reading and thanks for taking the time to leave a comment. This whole project took on a life of its own and I am very glad others found some merit in it.
A very interesting analysis indeed, but obviously from the point of view of a person with little or no life experience gained within the different cultures of Europe, especially in the Scandinavian countries.
Thanks for commenting, Gerald. Yeah, I have no experience living within the different cultures of Europe and made it clear in Part One that I am unqualified to discuss European immigration. Mexican immigration into the USA I can talk about like a champ but given the individual natures of each European country’s experiences with immigration, I would have been over my head and out of my depth pretty quickly.
As of yet, I have not seen anyone from the Scandinavian countries tackle all of 2083 and discuss it as a whole instead of picking and discussing whichever issue that resonates most to them. Perhaps one day someone will. I’m sure it would be very interesting.
Since you commented to part four, was there something in this part that particularly rang wrong to you? If there was, by all means, share. I heard from plenty of Norwegians but if your name is indicative of your nationality, I’d love to hear specifics from a Scotsman.
Again, thanks for commenting.