Posted on 03/18/2016 9:45:29 AM PDT by marthemaria
Far-right terrorist Anders Behring Breivik compared himself to anti-apartheid leader Nelson Mandela as he gave testimony in his lawsuit against the Norwegian state Wednesday.
Breivik, an ultranationalist who boasted of killing his victims to prevent the "Islamization" of his country, said the difference between himself and the revered South African statesman was that Mandela "ordered action," while he had been the one to "carry out the action."
The 37-year-old, who killed 77 people in a shooting rampage and bombing attack in 2011, is suing Norway over his treatment behind bars, alleging that it is a "sadistic" attempt by Norwegian authorities to kill him, and that it is in breach of the European Convention on Human Rights.
The mass killer's complaint centers mainly on his isolation in jail. Since his arrest, he has been separated from other inmates, and virtually his only visits have been with professionals, who meet with him separated behind a glass screen.
Addressing the court for the first time Wednesday, Breivik listed his complaints about his treatment, drawing scoffs from those in court when he complained about the quality of prison food.
His gripes included that he had to use plastic cutlery, had not been given an insulated container to keep his coffee warm, and was served microwaveable TV dinners up to four times a day, sometimes the same meal two days running.
This type of treatment was "worse than waterboarding," he said.
On the first day of the case, lawyers for the state pointed out that Breivik had access to three cells in prison, a television, a computer without Internet access and a PlayStation gaming console.
(Excerpt) Read more at edition.cnn.com ...
When muzzies go to Charles Hebbdo and kill the journalists there for writing things about Islam they don’t like are they acting in a sane or insane manner?
When muzzies go to Charles Hebbdo and kill the journalists there for writing things about Islam they don’t like are they acting in a sane or insane manner?
<><><><
Really? You are unable to see the difference between Breivik and the Charlie Hebdo murderers?
Let me help you out.
The illustrators were the ones who offended the murderers, so the murderers killed the illustrators. Pretty simple calculus.
What did the teens do? Nothing.
What would killing them do to halt the islamization he hated? Nothing.
Why were they killed? Because Breivik is nuts.
Do you start to get it now? There is nothing in his act that will stop the islamization he wanted to stop. His actions would never and could not possibly lead to his desired outcome.
But it was logical to him. Why? Because he is nuts.
You are taking a lot of flak for this comment, but I understand what you are saying.
You are not justifying Brevik's actions, but you are stating the rationale that he gave - and it does include a kernel of logic.
Brevik was/is an atheist. His starting point was all wrong, and the height of insanity ('The Fool has said in his heart, there is no God'). But given that starting point, he saw Islam as a threat (don't we all), and he took it upon himself to murder the 'future leaders' of the political progressives in his country. He took this as a 'rational' action against the Islam menace.
If there is no King in the land (God in your mind and heart) every man will do what is right in his own eyes - and Brevik followed his logic.
Of course his logic was fouled up, because his starting point was/is all wrong. God IS, and we need to remember that He is in charge, and vengeance belongs to Him.
If Brevik is fortunate he will open his eyes and repent and beg for forgiveness, because the Final Judgment by the King, for those unrepentant sinners not clothed in Christ's robes of Righteousness, is worse than anything man can do to him.
“Didn’t he kill a bunch of teenagers? How does that inhibit islamization?”
It was a camp where the most likely upcoming leaders of their liberal political party go every year to meet. These are children of their richest and most connected liberals who would definitely go on into leadership positions themselves to further the Islamization.
He felt wiping out the ENTIRE next generation of liberal politicians was the best way to fight Islamization and the eventual death of his country
Post 23 understands so go read that.
And post 24.
He didn’t kill just any random bunch of white teenagers. He killed a big chunk of future Swedish liberal leaders.
Post 23 understands so go read that.
<><><><><><
The problem appears to be that you don’t understand (or didnt read) post 23.
It reads in part “His starting point was all wrong, and the height of insanity”
The poster agrees with me, Breivik is nuts.
Stop. Read and educate yourself just a little bit about mental illness. Mentally ill people are NOT stupid, they are mentally ill.
He had reasons for doing what he did. We agree on that. His reasons, however, were not based in reality, they were based on his fantasies, his psychosis - that killing the children of the current leaders will stop islamization.
AFAIK Brevik wasn’t found to be insane and not that many people think he is insane. I’m sure the Norweigen government would like to have him declared insane. I suspect they don’t want other people to do what Brevik did and if Brevik is labelled a nutjob then he can just be written off.
He didn’t kill just any random bunch of white teenagers. He killed a big chunk of future Swedish liberal leaders.
<><><>
I gather, then, that you believe his approach was correct (although I’m sure you find it personally abhorrent).
To stop islamization today, kill the current leader’s children so they won’t become the leaders tomorrow.
Oh wait ... that doesn’t change ANYTHING.
Do you see the crazy yet? You can’t change the present by killing the future. In Breivik’s view, this obvious truth was a lie, which, wait for it, demonstrates his mental illness.
Brevik’s actions alone probably didn’t change much. He was probably hoping thousands of other people would do the same thing he did. That probably would change things.
must be a product of public education
Breivik did more damage to the anti-Immigration crowd than he could have ever imagined.
“...and was served microwaveable TV dinners up to four times a day, sometimes the same meal two days running.”
I knew a guy that spent two weeks in jail. Rather than moving him to the county jail, they just kept him in the town jail which was really supposed to be just for one or two days for guys to transition through.
Breakfast was always powdered eggs and toast. Both lunch and dinner were corn dogs. For one or two days that seems reasonable. For two weeks.....
He lost a lot of weight as he would only eat when he was starving. Put him off corn dogs for life!
Again, read up on this.
One team of shrinks found him to be paranoid schizophrenic, and psychotic at the time of the murders.
The other team found him to be less mentally ill, but still mentally ill, apparently only with a narcissistic personality disorder and possibly paranoid psychosis.
The courts went with the 2nd diagnosis, finding him sane and able to go to trial.
I stand corrected.
Substitute Indians with socialists. I wonder how Breivik will be judged 100 or 200 years from now.
Someone else said that in a hundred years Sweden will either be an Islamic country or their will be statues of Brevik in ever major city.
there
What Breivik did reminded me of the distopian crime fiction novel "A Bomb Built in Hell" by Andrew Vachss (used to be a free download). A disillusioned killer in the end wipes out a school catering to mafia and politician's kids. The seeds that would make the next generation of corruption.
http://www.vachss.com/av_novels/bomb.html
Yes, I think I mistakenly said Brevik was in Sweden it was actually Norway.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.