BTW, Breivik may be crazy as a loon, but he’s absolutely right about Islam. There, I said it. Deal with it.
It is clear that this guy was a lone wolf nutjob.
His manifesto was all over the map.
Yes that is truly amazing. The Guardian, no less.
It might be an honest headline, but there is a reason they chose the strategic decision to be honest about it. It’s not politically advantageous for the Euro left to promote a Christian vs Muslim dichotomy.
They also try to claim that Islamic terrorists who actually follow the Koran to the letter have “hijacked” the religion, so it is more of a stretch than they can get away with to claim that Breivik was carrying out the “fundamentals” of the New Testament.
Gotta admit, that is funny...
What happens in Europe, stays in Europe.
"Paranoid ideology"?! I don't think so. Concerned or anxious? Especially since 9/11, Bali bombings, 7/7 in London, Madrid bombings? And a string of other related, ongoing events? Most definitely, Yes.
Core messages of Breivik's writings, presented by our own "illustrious" mainstream media starting on July 22, 2011, say he is anti-immigration, anti-multiculturalism, anti-Marxist & anti-Islam (for reasons he gave). -- Those ideas/beliefs have been shared by very many ordinary people too, I'd say, for over 15.
Though, most ordinary, yet concerned people, who share Breivik's political ideas would not agree w/ Breivik's actions & approach of dealing with the issues. Nor would they do what Breivik did. That's the BIG difference.
That said, it is hard to figure out who is "left-wing", or "right-wing", why, how come, etc.. with so much propaganda, spin, and 'opinions & speculations' going around, about Breivik himself too, since the events on Saturday July 22, 2011.
Consider Boris Johnson (a right-wing, monarchist, conservative Brit, who also was elected Mayor of London in 2008, was a member of Parliament for Henley, and editor of The Spectator magazine). In his July 25 article, he makes some very astute, apt (though not original) observations about Breivik. But, he also says:
It wasn’t about immigration, or Eurabia, or the hadith, or the Eurocrats’ plot against the people. It wasn’t really about ideology or religion. It was all about him, and his feeling of inadequacy in relation to the female sex. The same point can be made (and has been made) about so many of the young Muslim terrorists. The fundamental reasons for their callous behaviour lie deep in their own sense of rejection and alienation. It is the ideology that gives them the ostensible cause, that potentiates the poison in their bloodstream, that gives them an excuse to dramatise the resentment that they feel in the most powerful way – and to kill.
There is an important lesson, therefore, in the case of Anders Breivik. He killed in the name of Christianity – and yet of course we don’t blame Christians or “Christendom”. Nor, by the same token, should we blame “Islam” for all acts of terror committed by young Muslim males. Sometimes there come along pathetic young men who have a sense of powerlessness and rejection, and take a terrible revenge on the world. Sometimes there are people who feel so weak that they need to kill in order to feel strong. They don’t need an ideology to behave as they do.
As a rule, and politics aside, people don't usually fall into neat boxes or categories of left-wing or right-wing. Nor do their beliefs or actions. Breivik's ideas, whether he plagiarized, paraphrased, and/or added his own two cents worth, are Not original. Even most 'creative ideas' have what is called an incubation period, draw on previous ones, and gradually build on earlier ideas/beliefs, as actions do, and evolve.
Perhaps, a Key learning point for politicians, journalists, and bureaucrats (left or right wing) should be to improve their own IQ & devise strategies to effectively to address & deal with peoples' concerns (err.. 'paranoia') rather than label & dismiss Breivik as simply a lunatic.
Immigration, multiculturalism, & other related points have been & are very real social, economic & political issues & concerns.
But these ideas, however crazy, are part of a widespread paranoid ideology that links the European and American far right and even elements of mainstream conservatism in Britain.
In an argument on the rightwing Norwegian site Dokument.no, Breivik wrote: "Show me a country where Muslims have lived at peace with non-Muslims without waging Jihad against the Kaffir (dhimmitude, systematic slaughter, or demographic warfare)? Can you please give me ONE single example where Muslims have been successfully assimilated? How many thousands of Europeans must die, how many hundreds of thousands of European women must be raped, millions robbed and bullied before you realise that multiculturalism and Islam cannot work?"
Well, in typical Far-Left Lame Stream Media efforts at dismissing, dissembling and marginalizing those they oppose or who's philosophy they disagree with, this MORON, Moonbat, dismisses Brievik's challenge for anyone (to show "One ountry where Muslims have lived at peace with non-Muslims without waging Jihad against the Kaffir") as deranged, yet he does not (cuz he CAN NOT) point to even one, where this has not taken place.
These Fellow-Traveling, Leftist Tools, posing as "Jorn-0-Lists" are sooooo predictable; so sanctimoniously transparent; phony and disingenuous as to be a joke!
No doubt Andrew--like so many of his brethren Lib Loons--is obviously an Alinsky acolyte and well versed in using his "Rules for Radicals," which when all else fails, they trot out--if not the ol' tried and successful accusation of "Racist" or "Bigot"--the one that works best: Rule No. 5: "Ridicule is the most potent weapon."
bump
To the left of Ghingus Khan? And here we have the problem, how in the world is Ghingus Khan on the right of the political spectrum.
Personal freedom is to the right, no state power.
This knee jerk commentary is exactly why journalists jumped to the wrong conclusions.