Discussing Breivik on The Friday Show

I'll join Mike Conner and Matt Parrot on the Friday Show, live tonight at Voice of Reason, Friday, April 27th at 9PM ET.

In today's Breivik headlines, Anders Breivik: Unraveling Violent Crimes and Mental Illness, at ABC News:

“When people struggle to comprehend what lies behind the mass murder of adolescents gathered for a weekend of discussions and campfires, the simplest response is that the killer ‘must be mad,’” Dr. Simon Wessely, head of psychological medicine at King’s College London’s Institute of Psychiatry, wrote in the commentary published Thursday in The Lancet. “The inexplicable can only be explained as an act of insanity, which by definition cannot be rationally explained. The act was so monstrous, the consequences so grievous, that the perpetrator had to be insane.”

We can say the same for those who favor genocidal immigration and integration policies in spite of the monstrous, grievous consequences - all together far more destructive and widespread than what Breivik has taken responsibility for. The perpetrators of these genocidal policies should be on trial, compelled to explain their insanity.

UPDATE 12 May 2012: The Friday Show: Tanstaafl on Breivik (mp3)

Enemy Media: Breivik's Views Too Popular

In the wake of a very active first week, The Guardian's Anders Behring Breivik page is relatively moribund today.

Anders Behring Breivik loses front-page power in Norway, published Friday, provides a hint why:

Silje Gloppen, a teacher, said however abhorrent Breivik's views, lessons needed to be learned from him. "Norwegians and, I believe, the rest of the world have to consider the possibility that this man is speaking the truth when he says he believes our 'Norwegian culture and ethnicity' is threatened by multiculturalism," she said.

Breivik's outlook is shared by "too many", she argued, citing the comment fields under articles on Norwegian newspaper websites, and a battle on Wikipedia pages related to the case between moderators and extremist writers trying to take hold of "the truth" on the internet.

"I am afraid the left side in politics have for too long failed to grasp that there are challenges with the new society that need to be discussed," she added.

Paul Brennan (paulrbrennan) has been silent since court adjourned Friday.

Helen Pidd (helenpidd) twits today that she's back in London where she will find it tricky to report further on the trial. She redirects those who are interested to Lars Bevanger (lbevanger) and Trygve Sorvaag (trygvesorvaag). She also cites Chris Elliott's op-ed, Open door: The readers' editor on … the problems of tweeting the Anders Behring Breivik trial, which in turn provides a reporter's rationalizations about why reporting testimony directly from Breivik's trial is bad:

A tweet goes straight from event to air – and stays there. It is a discrete package that may later form a strand of a larger, more complex, story, but which will, nevertheless, exist of itself, shorn of context.

It is an effective form of digital journalism and is increasingly first with the news – whether that comes from a journalist or a well-informed tweeter. However, it is reductive by nature. When the Guardian was planning coverage of the trial of Anders Behring Breivik, the Norwegian extremist who has admitted killing 77 people, the Guardian's editorial team discussed whether tweeting was an appropriate tool.

Helen Pidd, the reporter who is covering the trial, was concerned beforehand that reducing "his justifications to a stream of 140-character soundbites" would be giving Breivik the platform he sought.

Pidd fingers the most important reason: Despite the reduction and distortion, she finds her enemy's position still too potent.

Pidd said: "I would say I have had far more comments from people thanking me for the 'grim but necessary' reports on Twitter than those complaining I was giving Breivik the platform he craved. Two followers tweeted me to say they were 'unfollowing' until I left Oslo because it was 'too much'."

She has gained almost 3,000 followers in four days, a number of whom were angry when she said she wasn't going to tweet everything on day one "because … they accused me of censorship".

She said she wasn't "completely comfortable with tweeting the trial", not least because so much of Breivik's ideology was formed online. But she felt it was important to engage readers, plus it does drive traffic to the website.

Breivik correctly identified the media and it's pundits as enemies. Those pundits are less forthright about it, but reading them closely it's clear they agree. They understand, at some level, that their multicult ideology is unpopular, that the verdict on it is already in. Now that they've gotten enough to reduce Breivik to "the Norwegian extremist who has admitted killing 77 people", that's the only context they want to provide.

Breivik Trial, Day Five

Courtroom twitterers:

Paul Brennan (paulrbrennan) on Twitter
Helen Pidd (helenpidd) on Twitter
Trygve Sorvaag (trygvesorvaag) on Twitter

Selected twits from 20 April 2012, in chronological order.

@helenpidd: Breivik: "I am not a racist, I am an anti-racist." Concerned with the "anti-European racism" in the Norwegian media.

@helenpidd: Breivik complains that "cultural conservatives" such as himself has no chance of having a letter published in a Norwegian newspaper.

@helenpidd: Breivik says he was influenced in a particular bomb making technique by Andreas Baader from the Red Army Faction/Baader Meinhof Gang.

@helenpidd: Breivik: "We consider the police our brothers, along with the military. if we are going to have a coup d'état, we are going to rely on them"

@paulrbrennan: "Starting point was not to kill as many as possible, but to send a message and ensure the compendium was distributed."

@paulrbrennan: "If the building had collapsed, Utoya would have been unnecessary, and I could have driven straight to the police station...

@paulrbrennan: "I cannot claim to comprehend the suffering I have caused. If I were to try to comprehend the suffering I have caused, I wouldn't

@paulrbrennan: "...have been able to sit here today, or even to *live* after July 22nd."

@paulrbrennan: lawyer: how can you say that, but you cried when you saw your own film the other day (in court)...?

@paulrbrennan: says "What I love is not the same thing you love."

@helenpidd: Breivik asked to describe Norwegian culture he wants to protect: "It's everything in Norway ranging from door handles, patterns, beer..."

@helenpidd: "...The way we speak, act... school disciple, politeness, the way we address each other." (Breivik's idea of what is Norwegian culture)

@paulrbrennan: is being asked about journalists, and the fact he groups all together, but he differentiates between politicians. why so?

@paulrbrennan: says he differentiates between news and sports journalists....

@paulrbrennan: #Breivik is asked how he found out that 44 of his victims held leadership positions. #Breivik: "my assumption was that more than half would"

@paulrbrennan: After lunch, #Breivik will be asked more about the 'categories of traitors' which he outlined yesterday.

@paulrbrennan: MT @mmayson: Are you aware it's Hitlers birthday today? Is that why #Breivik is dressed completely in black? Mike << I wasn't aware. Maybe.

@paulrbrennan: #Breivik says he's a third generation militant nationalist. Says he tried essays on internet, debate, "absolutely everything."

@helenpidd: Breivik: violence was last resort: previously tried "everything that was possible through peaceful means until I lost my faith in democracy"

@paulrbrennan: #Breivik now to be asked about Cat A-B-C traitors.

@paulrbrennan: #Breivik is being shown an image of the badge he photoshopped onto his uniform: "Marxist Hunter: Valid for Cat A,B,C only"

@paulrbrennan: #Breivik is told that about half of those he killed were less than 18 years old. #Breivik says he assumed they were older.

@paulrbrennan: #Breivik psychiatrist asks him why he thinks they are lying. #Breivik "That is a good question, maybe you can tell me...?"

@helenpidd: Breivik tells psychiatrists that his meditation dulls all emotions - "from happiness to sorrow, despair, hopelessness, anxiety, fear"

@TrygveSorvaag: Prosecutor takes over and moves over to Utøya.

@TrygveSorvaag: #Breivik asks people to leave the room if they do not want to listen to this.

[Much twittering conveying Breivik's recounting of the attack omitted.]

@paulrbrennan: #Breivik looked at his notes for a second there. Says he shouted "You are going to die today, Marxists!" at the tent site.

[More twittering conveying Breivik's recounting of the attack omitted.]

@paulrbrennan: #Breivik says when he reached Lovers' Path again he heard a helicopter in the trees above. Thought police must now be on island.

@paulrbrennan: #Breivik: "And I thought, do I really want to survive this? I will be the most hated man in Norway. And I looked over and saw my Glock..."

@paulrbrennan: #Breivik: "...and I thought about shooting myself in the head." Says he remembered his compendium and the plan to face judicial process.

@paulrbrennan: #Breivik: remembers helicopter was very close, and wondered why, because new police had thermal cameras and didn't need to be so close.

@paulrbrennan: #Breivik: said he thought 'my mission is over', had no intention of firing on the police because they are not the enemy.

The journalists covering the story are the enemy however. Here they are fretting about how twitting makes it harder to spin the proceedings their way.

Reporting the Anders Behring Breivik trial | Online Journalism Features | Journalism.co.uk:

As the court's live TV feed is subjected to a ban on broadcasting any of Breivik's, or his victims', testimonies, many people across the globe are likely to choose to follow the Twitter feeds of journalists inside the court room for updates.

But free speech blogger Daniel Bennett told Journalism.co.uk he believes substituting reporting Breivik for tweeting his quotes leads to coverage fraught with problems. He also blogged about the issue for Index on Censorship.

"The problem for live-tweeting journalists is that it is hard to do any more than simply relay what Breivik is saying," Bennett said.

"Live-tweeting is a time consuming exercise and it is difficult to consistently provide background information, context and challenge Breivik's unsavoury evidence."

He added that the "natural news instinct" is to repeat Breivik's "most shocking" comments, "potentially causing additional suffering or inspiring extreme right-wing nationalists."

As Bennett flagged up in his Index blog post, Guardian reporter Helen Pidd, tweeted on Tuesday: "Heading to Oslo today for the Breivik trial. Should I live-tweet proceedings? I'm thinking not. Loath to give Breivik the platform he craves".

And she went on to discuss the ethics of live-tweeting the trial with her followers and colleagues.

"@pollycurtis Well, I think with a report you have context. With tweets I'd feel I was publicising his warped soundbites without criticism."

Twitter users who replied to Pidd's comments were divided over whether she was justified in this self-censorship. However, Pidd disclosed that her colleagues at the Guardian had agreed that it was "not morally wrong to live tweet the trial" and went on to tweet the proceedings in its minutiae.

Bennett believes that the only way to overcome the ethical issues surrounding live-tweeting is incorporating the tweets into liveblogs, and longer articles where there is more space for additional analysis.

"But even then", he says, "there is a difficult balance to be struck between accurate reporting and providing a platform for an abhorrent ideology which led to the killing of 77 Norwegians."

Breivik Trial Begins

Norway mass killer deemed sane in new finding, Reuters, 10 April 2012:

"We're talking about psychosis, and we have found no evidence of it," psychiatrist Asgar Aspaas told reporters after submitting the 310-page report based on weeks of round-the-clock observation.

Aspaas was one of two experts appointed to provide a second opinion after a previous team using different methods found Breivik to be a psychotic who also suffered from paranoid schizophrenia. The initial finding caused a public uproar.

"It's a completely open question now," said Jo Martin Stigen, a University of Oslo law professor. "I don't think we can rule out that he will be considered legally sane in the end."

The dueling psychiatric teams are expected to defend their diagnoses in court, which is unusual in Norway. The final ruling will be made by a five-judge panel as part of its verdict at the end of the trial.

SATISFIED

Defense attorney Geir Lippestad told reporters Breivik was satisfied by the new report and that Norwegians should brace themselves for "tough and demanding" testimony by the killer who espouses far-right ideology.

"Not only will he explain (his actions), but he will also say he regrets that he didn't go further," Lippestad said.

"The background for the killings are his paranoid psychotic delusions that he is a participant in a civil war where he is responsible for deciding who lives and dies," the first report said. "His mission is to save the entire western world's culture and genes."

In a letter last week to news media, Breivik called the initial finding of psychosis a "humiliation" and said the experts seemed too traumatized by the killings to be objective.

Norway killer admits massacre, claims self-defense:

"I don't recognize Norwegian courts because you get your mandate from the Norwegian political parties who support multiculturalism," Breivik said in his first comments to the court.

"I admit to the acts, but not criminal guilt," he told the court, insisting he had acted in self-defense.

The key issue to be resolved during the 10-week trial is the state of Breivik's mental health, which will decide whether he is sent to prison or into psychiatric care. Anxious to prove he is not insane, Breivik will call right-wing extremists and radical Islamists to testify during the trial, to show that others also share his view of clashing civilizations.

Breivik also announced he doesn't recognize the authority of Judge Wenche Elisabeth Arntzen, because he said she is friends with the sister of former Norwegian Prime Minister and Labor Party leader Gro Harlem Brundtland.

The anti-Muslim militant described himself as a writer, currently working from prison, when asked by the judge for his employment status.

He claims he targeted the government headquarters in Oslo and the youth camp to strike against the left-leaning political forces he blames for allowing immigration in Norway.

Breivik wants to be judged as a sane person and will call radical Islamists, and extremists on the right and left to testify to support "his perception that there is a war going on in Europe," his defense lawyer, Geir Lippestad, told the court. Lippestad said Breivik wants to read a new document he's written at the start of his testimony on Tuesday.

While Norway has a legal principle of preventive self-defense, that doesn't apply to Breivik's case, said Jarl Borgvin Doerre, a legal expert who has written a book on the concept. "It is obvious that it has nothing to do with preventive self-defense," Doerre told The Associated Press.

Police sealed off the streets around the Oslo court building, where journalists, survivors and relatives of victims watched the proceedings Monday in a 200-seat courtroom built specifically for this trial.

Thick glass partitions were put up to separate the defendant from victims and their families, many of whom are worried that Breivik will use the trial to promote his extremist political ideology. In a manifesto he published online before the attacks, Breivik wrote that "patriotic resistance fighters" should use trials "as a platform to further our cause."

After he surrendered, Breivik had told investigators he is a resistance fighter in a far-right militant group modeled after the Knights Templar — a Western Christian order that fought during the crusades. Police, however, have found no trace of any organization and say he acted alone.

"In our opinion, such a network does not exist," prosecutor Svein Holden told the court on Monday.

In his manifesto, Breivik described the supposed group's initiation rites, oaths and the "clenched fist salute" that he used in court, symbolizing "strength, honor and defiance against the Marxist tyrants of Europe."

Norway killer admits massacre | Photo Gallery - Yahoo! News

Breivik may indeed suffer "paranoid psychotic delusions", especially concerning the organization he purports to represent. That doesn't mean Norway's indigenous population, and for that matter European populations all over the world, don't face demographic swamping, displacement and dispossession by alien immigrants, muslim and otherwise. Whites who speak out against any of this, never mind resort to violence, are demonized and pathologized just the same.

Speaking of delusions... According to multicultists their genocidal anti-White agenda is both a good thing, something we should all celebrate, and it's not happening, it's just a "psychotic delusion" that only exists in the minds of White "racists". I think they're just lying.

UPDATE 17 April 2012: Excerpts from Breivik’s statement in court April 17, 2012 « Attack On The Labor Party (based on a Google Translate of http://www.vg.no/nyheter/innenriks/22-juli/rettssaken/artikkel.php?artid=10065238):

A couple of questions that might be most important in our time and that all journalists, academics and politicians should ask about is the following:

Do you think it is undemocratic that the Norwegian people have never been asked through a referendum that was made into a multicultural state?

Is it democratic to do it without asking people about the law?

The second question is the following:

Do you think it is undemocratic that Norway welcomes as many African and Asian immigrants that they risk being made a minority in their own capital?

And then someone will say: No, there is no problem because there are free elections.

But then the next question: Do you believe that free choice is enough, and that the press has an obligation to communicate this to people? When the Norwegians, and Europeans have been displaced steering wheel, among other journalists.

That they will lose their culture, their land and traditions and Christianity. Many have seen on several occasions in Europe that (…) Our opinions are seen as inferior and we are seen as second-class citizens.

As it is now, there is no real democracy in Norway and Europe in the Marxist elite decide. The boycott democracy when they feel like it.

I’ll take an example from Austria a few years ago.
We can not allow a nationalist and cultural radical party takes power because their party is intolerant and inhumane.
National and international news agencies put much pressure on Austria, and called them racists and Nazis.

And the same happened when the Swiss voted against the conditions (…) Again, they spoke of them as intolerant and inhumane.

The same is happening now in Hungary, where the nationalist alliance is a victim of the same. (…) By calling them fascists and intolerant.

Swedish news agencies continue to do the same against Sweden Democrats and the Norwegian media has done the same for 20 years against the Progress Party. Here, too, boycotting the democracy and tries to push the Norwegians and Swedes by calling them racists, cruel and intolerant.

Norwegian and European politicians and journalists should ask themselves this question:

Have the Norwegian press ever driven campaign journalism against the Progress Party before the election? The answer is yes, they have been running a smear campaign against the Progress Party for 20 years and will continue to do so, and the same is in progress throughout Europe.

Norway can be called a democracy for 100 percent of the news agencies supporting multiculturalism and systematic censoring of individuals that support ethnic and cultural protectionism?

The answer is no. Norway can not be called a democracy as long as this systematic censorship is taking place.

More and more kulturkonsevartive realize that the democratic struggle is no point. It is not possible to win when there is no real freedom of speech. When more realize this in the coming decades is a short trip to the weapon.

When a peaceful revolution impossible done, a violent revolution, the only possibility.

All those who advocate multiculturalism and kulturmarxisme should expect to be liable in the future.
It is not difficult to foresee when Europe is controlled by multiculturalists. It is the price we pay.

You try to save your people, when the majority chooses propaganda and say that you are a murderer and terrorist. All this we know in advance, so we do not complain. I wrote in the compendium before the surgery that I would be demonized.

To die as a martyr for his people’s survival is the greatest honor in a man’s life.

This is not only our right but our duty. Knowing that I will not scare imprisoned. I was born in a prison and has lived all his life in a prison, where there has been freedom of speech.

A prison where there is no freedom of speech and where I have been forced to look at, but my ethnicity is being deconstructed by kulturmarxister.

In this prison are not allowed to resist, and it is even expected that I should applaud my people.

In this prison management has decided that if you criticize it is not that good.

Demonized ridiculed. This prison is called Norway. It does not matter if I’m locked in Skøyen or Ila.

This is as urgent matter where you live in Norway, because you’re sitting there with a certainty that the country will eventually be deconstructed to the multicultural hell we call Oslo.

And you sit there with the knowledge that democratic struggle is useless because it is controlled with the use of undemocratic methods. The latest report from Statistics Norway show that immigrants will be in the majority in 2040 is very misleading.

It tells very little about the relationship between ethnic Norwegians and non-Norwegian. The reason the report is worthless is that they have deliberately omitted a number of other immigrant groups.

They have also dropped 3 generation immigrants, illegal immigrants and children where one parent is from another non-Nordic area.

The report was commissioned from the multiculturalists, where they try to hide the fact that ethnic Norwegians will be a minority in Oslo in a few years.

This is going to happen. In addition, statistics from the (…) that 47 percent are born to Norwegian sykeshus non-ethnic Norwegian.

It is today’s Oslo and Oslo in 28 years. SSB should be renamed the Labour Party sentralbyrå.

Many have claimed that ultra-nationalists like me want to build a terrorist regime. It is a mistake. I support the Japanese and South Korean model.

Nothing more, nothing less. Is really Japan and South Korea as terrible regimes?

No, they are not. They are high-tech nations. And saying no to multiculturalism and mass immigration in the 70s. They are living besviser that no to mass immigration is successful.

Discipline, æreskodekser and the pride of their own heritage is essential in Japan and South Korea. Women have a secondary role in the workplace. It is therefore absolutely wrong that people like me would like to introduce a vicious terrorist regime.

Today’s most successful nations are Japan and South Korea, which has used ethnic protectionism.

This model is currently the most perfect of all political models. In Europe, the alliance between Marxists and liberals after World War II, in principle, destroyed Europe.

Ethnic Norwegians, and Europeans have been subjected to cruel acts, since our doors opened for immigration in the 60 – and 70-century.

Since Norwegian and European multiculturalists opened to immigration has poured in about 30 million Muslims into Europe. More than 90,000 of my Norwegian sisters have been raped since 1960 until today.

Against the people’s will. It is primarily Labor held responsible for my brothers and sisters.

More that these have been gang raped. More than 300,000 have been physically and mentally harassed, been beaten and robbed by Muslims since 1950 and 60

Several have committed suicide as a result of these atrocities. Hundreds of Norwegians have been killed by Muslims in recent years, including Martine was killed and raped by a Muslim in England.

All these atrocities are crimes against the Norwegian people and it is the Norwegian Labour Party including the AUF that are responsible for this because they’ve invited them here and continue to invite them here.

As a result, we see that ethnic Norwegians.

(If interrupted by the judge asking him to come to a conclusion)

Sitting Bull is and was a hero who was feireret of America’s indigenous peoples. He fought on behalf of his people against General Custer.

Crazy Horse and Chief Galen were other military leaders of the American indigenous people. Were they terrorists, or were they heroes?

Were they evil or were they heroes?

American history books describe them as heroes, not terrorists. Meanwhile, nationalists in Europe are described as terrorists.

Is not that hypocritical and very racist? An individual or group that fights against foreign colonization is not terrorists as history illustrates.

We are no more terrorists against the native Britons who fought against those who fasciliterte the Roman invasion. Norway has an indigenous population. Are Norway’s indigenous ethnic Norwegians?

Did the indigenous people lived here over the past 12,000 years?

The answer is yes, Norway has an indigenous and ethnic Norwegians are Norway’s indigenous people.

There is no difference between the battle being fought in the Soviet and autonomy in Bolivia, and between struggle for us who are fighting for nationalism in Europe.

In 2009, Parliament decided that the indigenous people in Bolivia should have autonomy if they wanted this. There is no difference between the Norwegian people and the Bolivian indigenous people.

Why be treated Nordic and European indigenous worse than other indigenous peoples. Why is the Norwegian Indigenous activists branded as rasisier and Nazis, while indigenous activists in other parts of the world will support and acceptance?

It is extremely unfair and it is unacceptable. Our ancestors have lived in this country for 12,000 years and we, as Norway’s indigenous people, do not accept that our country is colonized against our will.

We like all other indigenous peoples have special rights in this country, and this is something we will continue to fight for. I know that the information that I represent are difficult to understand. When one is taught to believe otherwise.

It is difficult to fight against the multi-cultural flow when the media pumps out to multicultural propaganda all the time.

Thomas Jefferson said: “Tree of Liberty must be watered from time to time with the blood of tyrants.” When national governments are destructive, the people have the right to abolish them.

It is their duty to overthrow such a government. And then to establish new guards for their future security.

It is 100 percent certain is that there is a war between nationalists and internationalists in Europe. We, the first militant nationalists, the first drops of water that realizes that there will be a big storm.

There will be a gradual escalation and polarization in society and we will see further attacks. The multukuluraismenn government is forced to fight an imagined against us on one side and militant islamsisker on the other side.

My European nationalist brothers and sisters will prevail, which will declare the end of a venstreekstremt board that has lasted since the Axis powers fall.

His conclusion:

Multiculturalism is an anti-Norwegian and European anti hatideologi. Multiculturalism is an evil ideology that pushed forward.

We, the indigenous people of Norway, is now in a situation where we are losing our capital and cities. We are about 5-10 years a minority in their own capital.

The political elites in countries stretcher is so brazen that they expect us to applaud deconstruction. And those who did not applaud, are branded as evil racists and Nazis.

This is what is the real madness – they should be subject carried a psychiatric evaluation and labeled as sick, not me.

But the Labour Party’s parliamentary group and all other social democrats in Europe. And why is this the real madness?

This is the real madness because it is not rational to work to deconstruct his own group, their culture, their own religion.

It is not rational to flood his country with the Africans and Asians, so that our culture is lost. This is the real madness. This is the real evil. The universal menneskerettightene allows for the ethnic Norwegians have the right to defense.

Responsible Norwegians and Europeans who feel morally obliged to not see that Norwegians are made to a minority in their own country.
They’re not going to see that we are made to the minority in their own country, we will fight against multiculturalism in the Labour Party and others working towards the same goal.

The attacks were preventatives attacks in defense of the Norwegian culture and my people. I acted with the principle of necessity on behalf of my people, my religion, my ethnicity, my city and my country.

I therefore demand that I be acquitted of these charges.

Where Jihad and Counterjihad Agree

Farha Khaled's Caroline Glick Cited As One of Israeli American Tipsters By Gates of Vienna Where Fjordman Appears To Be Back surveys and connects a good portion of counterjihadist dots, linking names with pseudonyms, blogs and photos.

Khaled describes herself as:

Freelance writer. Columnist for the Saudi based Arab News. My op eds focus on exposing Islamophobia.

Khaled begins her article by asserting that Gates of Vienna is a "white supremacist blog which published 'Fjordman'", "regularly publishing essays promoting white supremacism". The bulk of the article goes on to associate various counterjihadist ideologues with GoV.

Here is one of the more meaty, lucid portions (links preserved):

Far right Islamophobic activists have forged alliances of convenience with radical Zionists and regard Israel as an ally, not least because they see Israel's treatment of Palestinians as a role model for how Muslims should be treated. Hard line Zionists see it as an opportunity to lessen the growing Muslim influence in the USA or Europe which they see as detrimental to a greater Israel. Stooges like Geert Wilders are funded in the hope they can halt Muslim immigration and influence. Marginalised as they are, some European nationalist groups are willing to shed their traditional Jew hatred in an attempt to find allies, but as often happens in marriages of convenience, it doesn't take much for cracks to appear.

Pamela Geller's association with the EDL caused waves when Roberta Moore claimed they had Jew hating members and were not sufficiently pro Israel. In Europe, German newspaper Der Spiegel probed this alliance in 'The Likud Connection' showing how some marginalized right wing populists are going the Geert Wilders way. This bizarre coupling has split the far right movement in Europe which has traditionally been anti-semitic.

The counterjihadist network Khaled analyzes is a jewish movement. It is dressed up as Westerners concerned with a defense of the West, but it is in fact dominated by jews and others whose first and foremost concerns are for the best interests of Israel and jews. There are no prominent counterjihadists who defend the best interests of Whites as a people, separate and apart from jews. While they readily distinguish jews and muslims for special consideration, positive and negative, they regard other distinctions between people as wrong, especially if race or "white" is involved. They regard any distinction of Whites from jews as roughly comparable to the threat to jews they see coming from islamization - unthinkably evil.

Khaled engages in similar doublethink, but to a different end. She blithely conflates counterjihadist bigotry in favor of jews with "white supremacism". She carries on about "islamophobia" as if fearing or resenting being colonized and ruled by aliens is a mental disorder. Khaled has adopted and adapted characteristically jewish rhetoric. She paints her muslim Us as the helpless, blameless victims of a "hate"-filled Them, ascribing bizarre, pathological motives to Them, smearing Them collectively using guilt-by-association.

This rhetoric is fundamentally dishonest as well as bigoted. Counterjihadists see Us and Them as jews and their enemies, while Khaled sees the Us/Them divide being between muslims and their enemies. Both agree that Whites are not entitled to an identity of our own, much less to decide for ourselves who our enemies are.

Just as jews living amongst Europeans have done for centuries now, muslim intellectuals today excuse and direct attention away from their own group's transgressions by finding fault instead in someone else. As with the apologists for jews, apologists for muslims zealously defend their own group identity and interests while moralizing against "hate" and "racism", trying to guilt-trip Whites for expressing any kind of identity that excludes them.

Khaled finds it scandalous that Anders Breivik commented at Gates of Vienna. As it happens, Breivik took issue with Diana West's "anti-sharia" strategy and more generally with the unwillingness of counterjihadists to face the demographic threat posed by immigration:

Why havent you or any of the other current authors on the Eurabia related issues/Islamisation of Europe (Fjordman, Spencer, Ye`or, Bostom etc.) brought up the “D” word? I assume because it is considered a fascist method in nature, which would undermine your/their work? Why would it undermine their efforts when it is the only rational conclusion, based on the above argument? As far as I know, it’s not illegal in Europe to suggest deportation as a future method when discussing future hypothetical World Orders (correct me if im wrong though, Im not 100% sure, lol)!?

The answer, as unwilling as Breivik was to face it himself, is that counterjihadism is about serving the best interests of jews. Thus the concern to not appear "fascist", meaning "nazi", meaning anti-jew, takes priority over the identification with or concern for the best interests of Europeans as a people. Should Europe be lost, oh well, the struggle against islamic jihad (in defense of jews) will continue elsewhere.

When Baron Bodissey republished Breivik's comments he also linked Daniel Pipe's apologia, Norway's Terrorism in Context. To distinguish his position from Breivik's Pipes quotes a similar statement from Breivik's book:

The reason why authors on the Eurabia related issues/Islamisation of Europe — Fjordman, Spencer, [Bat] Ye'or, Bostom etc. aren't actively discussing deportation is because the method is considered too extreme (and thus would damage their reputational shields). . . . If these authors are to [sic] scared to propagate a conservative revolution and armed resistance then other authors will have to.

The portion omitted by Pipes is telling:

This would un-doubtfully undermine their work and probably disallowing them to publish any future books. However, the warning about Islam has been repeated for more than two decades and it is apparent that 40 more years of dialogue, without action, would have a devastating effect on Europe.

Indeed. Like the other leading lights of counterjihadism, Pipes doesn't care as much about the devastating effect on Europeans as he does about what's best for jews.

(Thanks to Flanders for the link.)

In a World Brimming with Non-White Hostility and Violence, Obama is Especially Concerned About White Resistance to the Anti-White Regime

Obama: 'Lone wolf' terror attack biggest concern, CBS News, 16 Aug 2011:

"The risk that we're especially concerned over right now is the lone wolf terrorist, somebody with a single weapon being able to carry out wide-scale massacres of the sort that we saw in Norway recently," he said. "You know, when you've got one person who is deranged or driven by a hateful ideology, they can do a lot of damage, and it's a lot harder to trace those lone wolf operators."

The term "lone wolf terrorist" is a codeword for disaffected Whites. The meaning is sometimes broadened to include non-Whites, but that's not who President Don't Jump to Conclusions is talking about. He's focused on Whites, like Breivik, "driven by a hateful ideology" - by which he means those of us who oppose the anti-White regime.

How many more Whites will be killed as a result of the regime's hostile, hateful anti-White ideology?

Genocide Excused, Opposition Blamed, Fjordman Out

A series of three articles from Views and News from Norway concerning Breivik, Fjordman, and the larger, longer-running, lopsided debate they're on the politically incorrect side of.

‘Fear of foreigners’ breeds extremists, 3 August 2011:

Anders Behring Breivik is by no means Norway’s first home-grown right-wing extremist. Concerns are rising that the country, with its relatively small population, has produced what some experts call a disproportionate amount of internationally known extremists, and some link it to a history of fremmedfrykt (fear of foreigners).

While Norwegian society generally has grown more tolerant and internationally oriented in recent decades, there’s long been a tradition of wariness among Norwegians regarding people they don’t know. While Norway has produced record numbers of its own emigrants, many haven’t been particularly welcoming towards immigrants who’ve arrived in Norway during the past few decades.

That’s given rise to criticism of asylum and immigration laws that some view as too liberal, and in turn a rise in some hateful rhetoric against foreigners in online debates. Fear of being branded a racist for criticizing immigration policies, however, has shut some out of the debate, leading to frustration when they can’t have their say.

Rational debaters withdraw

Author and journalist Øyvind Strømmen has followed the types of websites where Breivik, who has confessed to terrorist attacks that left 77 persons dead, was active in online debate. The extreme and hateful rhetoric found on many of the sites, Strømmen told newspaper Aftenposten this week, “is so uncomfortable that those wanting a factual and rational debate pull out. That leaves the debate to more and more extremists on the left and the right.”

Never mind the completely rational fear of social and even criminal sanction. Ironically, Fjordman has used the same disingenuous argument as Strømmen - anyone whose opinion he doesn't like is irrational, or just plain stupid. The fact remains that it's only one side that has to find the courage, or foolhardiness, to debate. There is no lack of fearless, rational people on the other side, arguing in favor of genocidal immigration and multiculturalism. They're just intelligent enough to pretend it isn't genocide. Instead of saying directly that they think indigenous Whites have a duty to abide and even accomodate their legal and demographic subordination, most characterize their position instead as favoring "tolerance" and "diversity". Instead of saying directly that they favor repression of indigenous White resistance to subordination, most simply pathologize and demonize it, painting it as something bad or even evil.

The debate is so lopsided that all the pro-genocide side has to do is sprinkle a few special words into their argument - "nazi", "racist", "xenophobe", "extremist" - to end any debate. Arguing against such rhetoric is taken as an affirmation that you are what they say you are.

Strømmen stressed to Aftenposten that he has no theory as to what’s really created the right-wing extremists in Norway like Vikernes, Breivik and Fjordman, while Anders Jupskås at the University of Oslo thinks the issue should be researched. Strømmen does think Fjordman spreads a dangerous ideology, though, because he indirectly inspires violence by indicating that armed resistance is the only alternative against Islam, and that western leaders have betrayed their people.

These intellects don't have a theory because the most rational theory - that foreigners are what breeds fear of foreigners, that genocide is what inspires anti-genocidal rhetoric and even violence - is unthinkable to them. At least where Whites are the victims, rather than the perpetrators. These are not the high-minded, neutral researchers they pretend to be, but partisans that either firmly believe that there is no such thing as Whites, never mind indigenous Whites, or that Whites have no legitimate cause to resist a regime - their government, media and academia - deliberately inflicting conditions that are bringing about their physical destruction.

Breivik police question ‘Fjordman’, 4 August 2011:

The anonymous blogger “Fjordman,” who is repeatedly referenced in the manifesto of Oslo and Utøya terrorist attacks suspect Anders Behring Breivik, was being questioned by Norwegian police on Thursday afternoon after authorities found out his real identity. The international links between Breivik and other far right groups have also continued to be revealed, as well as the suspect’s financial details and a number of other new facts about the case.

Spokesperson Pål-Fredrik Hjort Kraby told Norwegian Broadcasting (NRK) that “Fjordman” was seen as an “especially central” witness for the case given the influence he appears to have had on the suspect.

“Fjordman” had finished his own blog in 2005 but made a public statement on the Gates of Vienna website after the Oslo and Utøya attacks to reject claims that he was Breivik. The blogger said that he “extremely disliked” being mentioned in Breivik’s writings, claiming that he has “never” met the terror suspect. He had continued to contribute to such foreign far right websites after ending his own blog.

Fjordman's statement on Breivik is here: Thoughts on the Recent Atrocities.

‘Fjordman’ reveals identity, 5 August 2011:

36 year-old Peder Jensen has given an interview to Norwegian newspaper VG where he reveals that he is the man behind the “Fjordman” blog referenced repeatedly in the online manifesto of Oslo and Utøya attacks suspect Anders Behring Breivik.

After being identified by the police and subsequently questioned on Thursday afternoon, Jensen met reporters from VG at an Oslo café. He chose to use his real name after receiving advice from a lawyer, and has asked the media to leave him and his family alone. He also confirmed that he would never again use the pseudonym “Fjordman” because he does not “wish to be associated with Breivik and his horrible actions.”

Exchanged emails with Breivik

Jensen told VG that he had “warned” his family in advance about shedding his anonymity, adding that “because of my own safety, I’m now going into hiding.” He had felt it was his “duty” to cooperate with the police investigation and decided to be interviewed under his real name because it “eventually would have emerged anyway, resulting in a media frenzy.” Jensen commented, “it is also a way for me to clear my name.”

The blogger disclosed that he had exchanged a number of emails with Breivik in 2009 and 2010. Breivik told Jensen that he was writing a book and asked if they could meet. Jensen turned down the offer “not because of his extreme views, but because he didn’t seem very interesting – like a vacuum cleaner salesman.” “‘Pie in the sky,’ I thought to myself when I re-read the emails,” Jensen added. He confirmed investigators had confiscated his computer, stressing that “they won’t find anything on my computer regarding any criminal matters or Breivik.” VG suggests that Jensen “feels that the police are looking to implicate him.”

In further excerpts of the interview reported by news agency NTB, Jensen said, “I recognize that people need a scapegoat, and now that Breivik is behind bars, I can become a handy scapegoat, especially because I am the only Norwegian he referenced.” He added that he understood that he could be regarded as “a hate object.”

In terms of Jensen’s background, VG reports that he originally comes from the town of Ålesund on the west coast of Norway. He claims that while he has long voted for the Labour Party and voted for the Progress Party more recently, he has never been a part of a Norwegian political party, and has only handled a gun during military service, where he describes himself as “no good soldier.” He holds a masters degree in culture and technology from the University of Oslo, where he completed a dissertation on “censorship and blogging in Iran.” He also studied Arabic at the American University in Cairo and the University of Bergen.

Despite the significance of the issue, these articles make no mention of Breivik or Fjordman's professed love of jews and hatred of nazis. As Jensen himself has found it convenient to scapegoat "nazis", he speaks with authority on that subject.

At any rate, the sanction the media heaps upon simple writers like Fjordman, to which the government may eventually add, illustrates the point I made above. The idea that the responsibility for the crimes and violence committed by alien interlopers lies with them never comes up for debate, much less the indirect responsibility that belongs to their enablers and apologists. What gets the media spotlight instead is even more indirect - those bad, evil people who supposedly cause anti-immigrant crimes and violence with their "extremist" ideas and rhetoric against crime, violence and the supporters of genocidal immigration and multiculturalism who enable and defend it.

(Views and News from Norway link via a comment by Rollory on Kay on Breivik on "The Jew".)

Kay on Breivik on "The Jew"

The mainstream reporting on Breivik's thinking has so far neglected to dig into his opinions on "the jews". Perhaps that's because it would be difficult to describe that thinking faithfully without either embarassing or infuriating "the jews". Jonathan Kay at the National Post seems to think he has found a way.

Kay has skimmed Breivik's book, 2083 - A European Declaration of Independence, and sees similarities with the William Pierce's 1978 book, The Turner Diaries. Kay sums up the former as a "rambling and disjointed manifesto" whose "bigoted and paranoid worldview" seems to have originated with the latter, which he describes as "badly written and tedious". Never fear, you needn't read either work yourself. Kay is an expert in such things and he's very eager to explain how it's all about "the jew":

In a general sense, Breivik can be seen as a Norwegian, Islamophobic version of Pierce, McVeigh and the other right-wing hatemongers that populated the fringes of American life until the Clinton administration cleaned up the Midwest’s various White Supremecist quasi-Christian militia sects in the aftermath of the Oklahoma City bombing. But there is also something very new in Breivik’s attack.

For one thing, he represents the first mass-casualty post-9/11 terrorist attack purportedly committed in the name of stopping radical Islam. In this sense, it is Europe’s equivalent to the 1995 slaying of Yitzhak Rabin, whose perpetrator, extremist Orthodox Jew Yigal Amir, also imagined that he could protect his nation from Islamic encroachments by staging a murderous terrorist attack on his own government.

Breivik’s sick mythology also shows another new post-9/11 element: the changing role of the Jew in the narrative of the West’s right-wing extremists.

The Jew traditionally has been the primary target of such extremists because it was imagined that his evil hand lay behind those forces — capitalism, Marxism, globalization, financial speculation — once deemed to be most threatening to the traditional Western order that Breivik says he wants to defend. The creation of Israel in 1948 added a new excuse for anti-Semitism: The Turner Diaries are full of references to American foreign policy being controlled by Israel (an accusation that, of course, has now been taken up by the left).

With 9/11, that changed: The greatest cultural and military threat now is seen to be militant Islam, with the Jew — and Israel — now instantly cast as a defender of the established Western order. To quote something I wrote in my recently published book, Among The Truthers: “The Jew [is now seen as] the perfect anti-Islamist, whose zeal and reliability in the war on terrorism was hard-wired into his political DNA thanks to six decades of Israeli warfare against Islamic terrorists in the Middle East. For the first time in the history of Western civilization, the Jew’s ‘foreignness’ and mixed loyalties-to the United States, Israel, world Jewry- became a source of respect and trust rather than suspicion.”

Thus, in Section 2.93 of Breivik’s manifesto, we get the sort of words that, pre-9/11, no one could ever have dreamed would be typed by a right-wing hatemonger: “We demand that all financial support to the Palestinian Authority should cease immediately. It is proven beyond any doubt that this has in the past been used to finance campaigns of Jihad terrorism against Jews in Israel and against Christians in territories under PA control. A public statement in support of Israel against Muslim aggression should be issues, and the money that has previously been awarded to Palestinians should be allocated partly to Israel’s defence [and] partly to establish a Global Infidel Defence Fund.”

In any other context, a reduction in right-wing anti-Semitism would be an unreservedly welcome development. But as we mourn the innocent victims of Breivik’s attacks, we understand that evil minds inevitably will channel their hate somewhere — if not toward innocent Jews, then toward innocent Muslims, or members of the political party that represents them.

The senselessness and tragedy of that hatred: this hasn’t changed, and never will — for all time to come.

The passage Kay quotes from Breivik's book wasn't written by Breivik. Here it is in full context:

There have been hundreds of attempts to forward and distribute demands (on behalf of the indigenous peoples of Europe) to Western European governments, political parties and media organisations since 1955. As with all attempts for dialogue, every single one of them has been rejected, ignored or ridiculed. One of these pleas was written by Fjordman in March 2007:

A European Declaration of Independence

We, the citizens of the United Kingdom, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Finland, Spain, Portugal, Italy, Greece, Switzerland, Austria, Iceland, Malta and Ireland demand that the following steps are taken immediately:

We demand that our national governments should immediately and without delay pull their countries out of the European Union, which should be dismantled entirely. European citizens pay up to half of their salaries in direct or indirect taxes to their nation states. If these nations do not control their own borders nor their policies, and they don't as long as the EU exists, those taxes are a scam. National taxes require national borders. If our national borders are not enforced, we have no obligation whatsoever to pay national taxes.
 
We demand that all documents regarding the Euro-Arab Dialogue and the creation of the Eurabian networks for "Euro-Mediterranean cooperation" between European countries and Arab countries since the 1970s, as documented by Bat Ye'or's work on Eurabia, are published and explained in their full significance to the general public. Those chiefly responsible for this - one of the greatest betrayals in the history of Western civilisation - should stand trial, followed by a period of general de-Eurabification of our laws and regulations.
 
We demand that all financial support to the Palestinian Authority should cease immediately. It is proven beyond any doubt that this has in the past been used to finance campaigns of Jihad terrorism against Jews in Israel and against Christians in territories under PA control. A public statement in support of Israel against Muslim aggression should be issued, and the money that has previously been awarded to Palestinians should be allocated partly to Israel's defence, partly to establish a Global Infidel Defence Fund with the stated goal of disseminating information about Muslim persecution of non-Muslims worldwide.

We demand that the ideology of multiculturalism should immediately be removed from all government policies and school curricula, and that the state should adopt a policy of supporting the continuation of the cultural heritage and traditions of the indigenous populations. Multiculturalism has never been about tolerance. It is an anti-Western hate ideology championed as an instrument for unilaterally dismantling European culture. As such, it is an evil ideology bent on an entire culture's eradication, and we, the peoples of Europe, have not just a right, but a duty to resist it and an obligation to pass on our heritage to future generations.

We demand that all Muslim immigration in whatever form should be immediately and completely halted, and that our authorities take a long break from mass immigration in general until such a time when law and order has been re-established in our major cities. We will not accept any accusations of "racism." Many European nations have for decades accepted more immigration into our countries in a shorter period of time than any other people has done peacefully in human history.

We are sick and tired of feeling like strangers in our own lands, of being mugged, raped, stabbed, harassed and even killed by violent gangs of Muslim thugs, yet being accused of "racism and xenophobia" by our media and intimidated by our own authorities to accept even more such immigration.

Europe is being targeted for deliberate colonisation (see demographic warfare) by Muslim states, and with coordinated efforts aimed at our Islamisation and the elimination of our freedoms. We are being subject to a foreign invasion, and aiding and abetting a foreign invasion in any way constitutes treason. If non-Europeans have the right to resist colonisation and desire self-determination then Europeans have that right, as well. And we intend to exercise it.

If these demands are not fully implemented, if the European Union isn't dismantled, multiculturalism isn't rejected and Muslim immigration isn't stopped, we, the peoples of Europe, are left with no other choice than to conclude that our authorities have abandoned us, and that the taxes they collect are therefore unjust and that the laws that are passed without our consent are illegitimate. We will stop paying taxes and take the appropriate measures to protect our own security and ensure our national survival.

The above declaration was forwarded to many political parties of the so called “Multiculturalist Alliance” (MA100 political parties) and many “cultural Marxist/multiculturalist media organisations in 2007. As expected, no one ever bothered to comment on the demands as it was categorised as “right wing nonsense” and categorically ignored.

By the by, hate is one of Kay's specialties. In his Oct 2010 article, A hate reaching back 1,400 years, Kay reviewed the many reasons, stretching back centuries, justifying "the jew"'s hatred for muslims. And but of course, he hasn't forgotten European crimes against "the jew" either:

It goes without saying that Muslim civilization has no monopoly on violent and systematic anti-Semitism: Spasms of murderous Jew-hatred were common all across Christendom during the 14 centuries of Islam’s existence.

Anti-European Experts Driving Media Narrative on Breivik

Norway massacre exposes incendiary immigration issue, Reuters, 25 July 2011 (my emphasis):

Norwegian Anders Behring Breivik said he killed 93 people to spark a "revolution" against the multiculturalism he believed was sapping Europe's heritage, and experts say a frank debate about immigration may be the best way to prevent similar explosions of violence.

In some Nordic countries, and elsewhere in Europe, political parties have fed on rising public concern over immigration as economic conditions worsen and a drip-feed of Islamist attacks stokes fear and suspicion of new arrivals.

But experts argue overly aggressive political rhetoric and scare tactics have inflamed passions rather than address the many complex, underlying problems.

A crack in the anti-White regime! The "experts" are finally ready to listen to the rising public concern over immigration! Or are they?

"If the twin attacks in Norway fail to trigger an honest discussion of the issue, exposing often scare-mongering arguments used by the extreme right, this may marginalise the radical groups and worsen the situation, which in turn could bring more similar attacks in the future," said Lilit Gevorgyan, Europe analyst at the IHS Global Insight think-tank.

"This is not just an issue in Norway. Across Scandinavia and also in Western and Eastern Europe, you have a lot of people who are very frustrated by the lack of open debate," she added.

British Prime Minister David Cameron, Germany's Angela Merkel and France's Nicolas Sarkozy have all declared in recent months that multiculturalism has failed, in speeches that were otherwise careful to highlight the contribution of immigrants.

But critics say such statements at best do little to offer solutions to tackle the economic and societal pressures that stem from increasing immigration and globalisation, and do even less to harness the benefits of a multi-ethnic society.

At worst, they say such comments risk victimising often vulnerable immigrant communities and souring race relations.

Oh. This is no debate. The "experts" are "critics". They blame the radicalization multiculturalism is creating on "the extreme right", not on multiculturalism.

Anti-immigrant and anti-Islamic parties have gained traction in Nordic and Scandinavian countries in recent years, tapping public anxiety over the relatively recent phenomenon of mass migration, particularly of Muslims, to their region.

The anti-immigrant Sweden Democrats were last year elected to the Swedish parliament for the first time, despite the party having roots in neo-Nazi movements of the 1980s and 1990s. The party has criticised Muslims and Islam as being un-Swedish.

Swedish anti-fascism magazine Expo, where the late best-selling novelist Steig Larsson was highly active, says while there may be no direct link between violence and comments by politicians, the rhetoric creates a fertile environment for ethnically motivated attacks.

"It is very aggressive ideology that the Swedish Democrats are pushing towards Muslims ... it has become a more and more accepted way to speak about Muslims this way," said Expo reporter Johannes Jakobsson.

"Of course if you are in the Swedish parliament and point fingers at Muslims and say these people are dangerous, of course this is going to influence people to become more hostile towards them," he added.

Oh. The "expert" "critics" include pro-immigration Expo, who have for years been pointing fingers at indigenous nationalists, saying these people are dangerous. As it turns out, Breivik's book, 2083 - A European Declaration of Independence, has something to say about Expo:

The Swedish organisation Expo has demonstrated a willingness to “share information” with radical groups of “anti-Fascists” in Antifascistisk Action (AFA). The thugs of AFA in the spring of 2008 destroyed[11] the car of an elderly woman and wrote “nasse“ (Nazi) on top of it. As it turned out, they picked the wrong car. Yet years of such attacks against private citizens have not prompted the authorities to crack down on their activities.

Leading newspaper Aftonbladet has close ideological ties to the Social Democrats, the country’s dominant party for most of the past century. Helle Klein, its political editor-in-chief from 2001 to 2007, during a demonstration organised by Islamic and anti-racist organisations in December 2006 stood in front of a banner which read “A Sweden for all - Stop the Nazi violence“ and held a speech warning against Islamophobia in the media. Klein has voiced sympathy for terrorist organisation Hamas[12] in her editorials while warning against the threat posed to world peace by Israeli aggression and the Christian Right in the USA[13]. Hamas is a Fascist organisation openly calling for mass murder of Jews. Violent attacks against Jews in Europe in 2008 are to an overwhelming degree caused by Muslim immigration, which is encouraged by the EU and the national political elites. The irony of warning against “Nazi violence” while showing sympathy for an organisation that wants to finish what the Nazis started apparently doesn’t strike Ms. Klein.

One of Klein’s fellow columnists at Aftonbladet, the long-time Communist Robert Aschberg, is the publisher of Expo magazine. Leading Expo member Charles Westin in October 2007 published the book Brunt! (“brown,” as in “Fascist”), where he let members of AFA contribute some of their intelligence regarding “right-wing extremists,” among them people associated with the legal party the Sweden Democrats. In addition to Mr. Westin, the book was co-authored by Mats Deland, who is a journalist in Aftonbladet. Why is it considered OK that a representative of one of Scandinavia’s largest newspapers, with ties to the country’s largest political party, thus associates himself openly with an organisation known for physically assaulting members of a legal opposition party, even in their private homes?

Before the elections in 2006, the established parties cooperated in boycotting the Sweden Democrats and other “xenophobic” parties. In one of many similar incidents, which extreme Leftists bragged about on the Internet, around 30 members of the SD were attacked during a peaceful, private party outside the town of Växjö. The brave “anti-Fascists” threw tear gas into the building, forcing people outside where they were beaten with iron bars and axes. Open, aggressive and sometimes violent harassment of critics of the country’s immigration policies has been going on for years while the authorities have largely turned a blind eye to the problem. Seemingly encouraged by the silence from the establishment to political violence, extreme Leftists have stepped up their attacks to include mainstream parties. Sweden is witnessing the greatest explosion of street violence in its history, and a woman is raped every two hours. Expo, which is backed by the media and the major parties, has been campaigning against the Sweden Democrats for years. Daniel Poohl from the unelected organisation Expo states[14] that it’s “not undemocratic” to deny the SD access to political influence.

According to Jonathan Friedman, an American Jew working in Sweden for years, “no debate about immigration policies is possible, the subject is simply avoided. Sweden has such a close connection between the various powerful groups, politicians, journalists, etc. The political class is closed, isolated.” The elites are worried to see their power slip away and therefore want to silence critics, for instance the Sweden Democrats, a small party opposed to immigration: “It is a completely legal party, they just aren’t allowed to speak.…In reality, the basis of democracy has been completely turned on its head. It is said: ‘Democracy is a certain way of thinking, a specific set of opinions, and if you do not share them, then you aren’t democratic, and then we condemn you and you ought to be eliminated. The People? That is not democratic. We the Elite, we are democracy.’ It is grotesque and it certainly has nothing to do with democracy, more like a kind of moral dictatorship.”

Breivik copied these passages from a Fjordman essay posted by Pamela Geller, Fjordman At Atlas: Swedish Hypocrisy Regarding Israel and Muslims.

Anders Behring Breivik: Tunnel vision in an online world, by Thomas Hylland Eriksen, guardian.co.uk, 25 July 2011:

Anders Behring Breivik's world view seems to have been shaped by online fantasy games and the anti-Islamist blogosphere – a recipe for national fragmentation.

Every country needs some degree of cohesion. Just how much is a legitimate matter of dispute. Some believe that cultural pluralism is a recipe for fragmentation and the loss of trust. This may be the case, but not necessarily. So long as common institutions function impartially – education, housing, work etc – a society can live well with considerable diversity. However, the moment we cease to speak to each other, something serious is under way. This is exactly what happened with Breivik and many of his co-believers: they developed a parallel reality on the internet.

Breivik must willingly have allowed himself to be brainwashed by Islamophobic and extreme rightwing websites. However, had he instead been forced to receive his information through a broadsheet newspaper, where not all the stories dealt with Europe's loss of confidence and the rise of militant Islam, it is conceivable that his world would have looked slightly different. Perhaps one lesson from this weekend of shock and disbelief may be that cultural pluralism is not necessarily a threat to national cohesion, but that the tunnel vision resulting from selective perusal of the internet is.

Breivik's book also has something to say about Eriksen:

Europe is heading towards cultural and demographical suicide due to the absence of nationalistic doctrines. Nationalism is the anti-thesis of multiculturalism/internationalism. In order for nationalism to succeed, multiculturalism must be deconstructed and vice versa. The cultural Marxists/humanists/globalists will do EVERYTHING in their power to prevent nationalists from succeeding as we have witnessed now for several decades.

Campaigns of psychological warfare (anti-nationalism) have been integrated into the school curriculums and all intellectual public frameworks. Europeans have been psychologically conditioned into a state of denial and self contempt. A majority of Europeans are therefore in a permanent state of psychological trauma, some nationalities more than others.

The most severely affected are of course the Germans and the Nordic countries; Sweden, Norway, Iceland, Finland and Denmark. The justification for demonising their forefathers is a mixture of portraying the evil crusaders, the evil colonisers/enslavers and of course Nazi Germany’s policies of nordicism. The clear message from our cultural elites is that we are by definition evil and unworthy of life. And that we will do the world a big favor by contributing to our own extermination through third world colonisation. The self loathing runs deep through most aspects of society. To quote one of the most influential professors in Norway, Thomas Hylland Eriksen[1]:

“Our (the Marxist elites of Europe) most important task ahead is to deconstruct the majority, and we must deconstruct them so thoroughly that they will never be able to call themselves the majority again”.

Later quote

“This will contribute to understanding and liberation”

The problem in our societies isn’t primarily that individuals like Eriksen exists (and believe me, every country has their share of these highly influential anti-nationalist intellectuals) but rather that they are allowed unrestricted access to broadcasting networks, state channels, the main stream media in general to spread their hate-speech. They are allowed this access because 80% of politicians and 98% of journalists (category A and B traitors) are aiding and abetting them in the ongoing genocide. This while people like myself, who are trying to warn people of this extremist hate speech, are systematically ignored and demonised as, guess what; racist, fascist extremists… It is nothing less than insane and it borders to an advanced level of psychopathic absurdity. A majority of Europeans are still susceptible to this brainwashing although this is gradually changing.

Breivik appears to have written the passages above. He cites Håper på fem nye Culcom-år - Universitetet i Oslo. Google Translate can't handle the https URL.

Norway Attacks - Anders Behring Breivik

Police dismiss initial fears Norwegian terror attacks were work of Islamist organisations:

The massacre in Norway was the work of a man with extreme right wing views who hated Muslims, police said this morning.

Officers found a series of raving internet posts by 32-year-old Anders Behring Breivik, who was arrested for gunning down children on the island of Utoya yesterday.

National police chief Sveinung Sponheim told public broadcaster NRK that the suspected gunman's Internet postings 'suggest that he has some political traits directed toward the right, and anti-Muslim views, but if that was a motivation for the actual act remains to be seen'.

Six foot tall and blond Breivik is reported to have arrived on the island of Utoya and opened fire after beckoning several young people over in his native Norwegian tongue.

Reports suggest he was also seen loitering around the site of the bomb blast in Oslo two hours before the island incident.

Pictured: The blond Norwegian, 32, arrested over 'holiday island massacre' and linked to Oslo car bomb blasts:

Authorities now claim 91 people were killed - in Oslo and on Utoya Island, 50 miles north of the capital, it was claimed.

Norwegian police said at least 84 were killed at Utoya alone and described the killings as of 'catastrophic dimensions' and 'the work of a madman'.

Teenagers on the Norwegian holiday island of Utoya had to 'swim for their lives' and hide in trees when the gunman fired indiscriminately at them.

Around 700 had gathered on the island for a meeting of the youth wing of the ruling Labour party.

Apparently Breivik targeted Norway's treasonous elite and their children rather than muslim aliens.

2011 Norway attacks at Wikipedia:

Public broadcaster NRK and several other Norwegian media identified the suspected attacker as a blond and blue-eyed Norwegian who expressed right-wing and anti-Muslim views on the Internet.

National police chief Sveinung Sponheim told public broadcaster NRK that the gunman's Internet postings "suggest that he has some political traits directed toward the right, and anti-Muslim views, but whether that was a motivation for the actual act remains to be seen.

He is reported to have written posts on the anti-Islamic[41] website document.no (all his apparent and unconfirmed writings listed; available on this site only in Norwegian).

Via Google Translate:

2009-12-03 01:21:04

Hlund, Fjordman, Hårstad, Rust

I'm NOK much later in the game than him when I have only been politically active for 13 years. I førstegenerasjonsdhimmi (Generation Y). I was active Oslo FrP / FpU in the first 6-7 years (in the cultural conservatives + laissez faire capitalist / liberal camp) and contributed to the Progress Party's success before I stopped. I felt the time was more important to help develop / promote the political doctrines abroad especially British, German, French, American). I ran the business a few years while I studied and earned a few million so I could finance a inntektsløs politically active life. I now use these funds to be able to work full time to further develop / promote the Vienna Academy (Vienna school of thought) that Fjordman, Bat Yeor, Spencer + many others have already contributed so much till. The last three years I worked full time with a cultural conservative works that will help to further develop / promote these political doctrines further.

Anyway, I consider the future consolidation of the cultural conservative forces on all seven fronts as the most important in Norway and in all Western European countries. It is essential that we work to ensure that all these 7 fronts using the Vienna school of thought, or at least parts of the grunlag for 20-70 year-struggle that lies in front of us.

The book is called, by the way 2083 and is in English, 1100 pages).

To sums up the Vienna school of thought:

- Cultural Conservatism (anti-multiculturalism)
- Against Islamization
- Anti-racist
- Anti-authoritarian (resistance to all authoritarian ideologies of hate)
- Pro-Israel/forsvarer of non-Muslim minorities in Muslim countries
- Defender of the cultural aspects of Christianity
- To reveal the Eurabia project and the Frankfurt School (ny-marxisme/kulturmarxisme/multikulturalisme)
- Is not an economic policy and can collect everything from socialists to capitalists

Frankfurt School (kulturmarxisme) is a very ambitious unofficial ideology (and quite unknown to most) and they have succeeded in most areas (except to smash capitalism, European Christianity and European identity, traditions, culture). Vienna school is more a defense against this where we often use the Marxist 'own creations against them (sexual liberation, feminism, liberalism, anti-racism, anti-autoriære arguments).

Vienna school of thought is far from a complete ideology but consists of principles and ideas that are constantly under development. It is unofficial and does not necessarily ever to be recognized.

"Vienna school of thought" is Breivik's term for the milieu centered about Gates of Vienna.

Thanks to Chechar for calling attention to Breivik's comments here.

From For the Record, at Gates of Vienna:

I know Fjordman personally, I know exactly what he looks like, and he does not resemble the alleged murderer in the slightest.

Furthermore, I was in conversation with Fjordman all day today, starting before the shootings, during the slaughter, and afterwards. If he was shooting up Utøya, he was doing an amazing job of communicating with his friends the whole time, even after he was thrown in a jail cell.