The death toll from the savage attack in Norway has risen to 92 today. Anders Breivik, a radical rightist who posted regularly to a neo-Nazi internet forum, is the only suspect arrested so far in the killings. Electronic Intifada published excerpts of a 1,500 page magnum opus written by Breivik which portray his political philosophy. Here, CNN covers the story of manifesto from a slightly different vantage than the one below. For example, given the killer’s use of steroids and testosterone supplements, one speculates on the role they may’ve played in his rage-filled spree.
Chief among his enemies are Muslims and those non-Muslims who, in his mind, facilitate the triumph of Islam in the west. That’s why he specifically attacked the seat of national government and a youth camp sponsored by the ruling Labor Party. The Norwegian terrorist has an obsession with Marxism, and apparently equates the current left of center government with that ideology. Alex Kane notes that the day before the attack on the island camp, it held a Palestine solidarity rally (an event which would’ve repelled the killer). He viewed the country’s leaders as aiding and abetting Muslim terror, and multiculturalism as the poison by which Islam could spread itself throughout the west.
In his writings, he expresses the belief that one glorious act of terror could foment a huge Muslim counter-reaction which would allow a rightist coup to take over both Norwegian and European governments. The only problem with this scenario is that he attacked Norwegian targets and not Muslims ones. That’s what is most inexplicable about this incident. Given his hatred of Islam and his belief that it is at the core of the rot that affects the world, why wouldn’t he target Norwegian Muslims? That’s doubtless something the investigators have asked him during interrogation.
Breivik viewed Israel as an ally in the war against Islam. Alex Kane tweets that he wrote:
“Let’s end stupid support for Palestinians…start supporting our cultural cousin, Israel.”
He also wrote this:
Cultural conservatives believe Israel has a right to protect itself against Jihad…Sensible people should support Zionism (Israeli nationalism) which is Israel’s right to self-defence against Jihad.
More excerpts from his manifesto:
* If one acknowledges that Islam has always oppressed the Jews, one accepts that Israel was a necessary refuge for the Jews fleeing not only the European but also the Islamic variety of anti-Judaism.
* Since the break-up of the Islamic Empire following World War I, various jihads have been fought around the globe by the independent Muslim nations and sub-state jihadist groups. The most sustained effort has been directed against Israel, which has committed the unpardonable sin of rebuilding dar al-harb on land formerly a part of dar al-Islam.
* How can anyone delete the horror of Muslim oppression over Christians and Jews which lasted for centuries and stretched over continents?
* Western Journalists again and again systematically ignore serious Muslim attacks and rather focus on the Jews, [which] only adds to the stockpile of proof that all Western journalists support the EU’s Eurabia project, [and] their enemy (based on coverage) is the Israeli…government…
* Were the majority of the German and European Jews disloyal? Yes, at least the so called liberal Jews, similar to the liberal Jews today that oppose nationalism/Zionism and support multiculturalism. Jews that support multiculturalism today are as much of a threat to Israel and Zionism (Israeli nationalism) as they are to us. So let us fight together with Israel, with our Zionist brothers against all anti-Zionists, against all cultural Marxists/multiculturalists….So, are the current Jews in Europe and US disloyal? The multiculturalist (nation-wrecking) Jews ARE, while the conservative Jews ARE NOT. Aprox. 75% of European/US Jews support multiculturalism while aprox. 50% of Israeli Jews does the same. This shows very clearly that we must embrace the remaining loyal Jews as brothers rather than repeating the mistake of the NSDAP. Whenever I discuss the Middle East issue with a national socialist he presents the anti-Israeli and pro-Palestine argument. He always seem unaware of the fact that his propaganda is hurting Israeli nationalists (who want to deport the Muslims from Israel) and that he is in fact helping the Israeli cultural Marxists/multiculturalists with his argumentation.
Ali Abunimah notes he especially admires Avigdor Lieberman and his Yisrael Beitenu Party. Outside Israel, he also follows the writing of Pam Geller, Robert Spencer (referenced 46 times in the Breivik manifesto) and Daniel Pipes (11 times). Yesterday, I quoted a Norwegian website which claimed that Breivik had identified himself as Fjordman, a regular contributor to the anti-jihadi blogs mentioned above. Geller has denied a connection, as has Gates of Vienna, and it’s possible they are right. I haven’t seen definitive evidence that either proves Breivik and Fjordman are the same or that they aren’t. I will say though that Breivik’s writings under his own name show a much greater predilection toward violence; Fjordman’s, while equally radical, seem satisfied to remain in the realm of political theory, rather than action.
But even if they are not one and the same, the fact that Breivik’s intellectual-political philosophy is inspired by each of them is a sign of the cesspool of hate found there. Just as settler rabbis held apulsa di nura excommunicating Yitzhak Rabin before his assassination; just as Bibi Netanyahu fired up a crowd featuring pictures of Yitzhak Rabin dressed in an SS uniform shortly before the assassination, so did the intellectual content of these websites shape the world-view of the assassin.
I do not want to even think about what I would do if someone who’d praised or linked favorably to my work went on a murderous spree. I’d like to think that the very nature of my beliefs would militate against violence. But I sure as hell know I wouldn’t do what Geller’s done, which is to completely avoid any serious deliberation or reflection on the issue. She’s not responsible she writes in a post about mass murder which is rather inappropriately titled, Heads Explode. Rather “the left” is responsible for associating her in any way with the violence:
This is war. And the left is vicious, amoral and depraved. They mean to win, and that is the only way they know how.
Indeed, Anders Breivik couldn’t have put it any better himself. As for me, I’d certainly denounce the deed and its author if they praised me, something I doubt you’ll hear from the keyboards of Pam Geller, Spencer or Pipes.
To give you an impression of the depths of self-delusion such pathological types are capable of, note this self-portrait:
I consider myself to be a laid back type and quite tolerant on most issues. Due to the fact that I have been exposed to decades of multicultural indoctrination I feel a need to emphasise that I am not in fact a racist and never have been.
The “laid back, quite tolerant” mass murderer. A new personality type in the annals of deviant psychology.