Oslo bombed

[Hauldren Collider]

Are you telling me the Norwegian cops don't have helicopters?

[Nikolai]

Are you telling me the Norwegian cops don't have helicopters?

I guess they didn't use them if they had.

[Hauldren Collider]

Incompetent and/or under-equipped.

[Nikolai]

The police is interviewed on the tv behind me as we speak. The spokeswoman says that it took ONLY one hour to apprehend him, which is what it had to take. Oslo were fifty km away, and they needed to assemble the people with the right expertice, which was situated there. I dunno whether that is an okay time span.

EDIT: And the police in Norway IS underequiped.

[Nikolai]

Seriously? The most this guy will get is 21 years?

The max time in jail is 21 years, but if he is deemed a danger to others, he can be sentenced to "forvaring"(safe-keeping) for up to 5(IIRC) years at a time. He can, and probably will, be kept from the rest of the world until he dies.

[Cort Haus]

This 'Cultural Marxism' thing is just a nonsense phrase made up by rightists to portray their liberal-left opponents as some kind of communists, and I don't believe there is any such thing.

Marxism can imply many things, including a historical analysis of production, class and economics, a labour-centric view of value, a praise and a critique of capitalism, with a secular, humanist and pro-science aspiration to develop productive forces, possibly achieved via the agency of the industrial proletariate through a dialectical struggle with the capitalist class blah blah ...

... but never have I come across a component of Marxism which consciously seeks to replace European Judeo-Christianity with Islamic rule via the policy of multi-culturalism, as our killer and perhaps Heraclitus (who is comfortable using the phrase) seem to see it.

[Nikolai]

Yep, this cultural marxism concept is just air.

[Hauldren Collider]

I think you can safely say that the ideology of anyone who just randomly slaughters 80+ children is just air.

[Heraclitus]

This 'Cultural Marxism' thing is just a nonsense phrase made up by rightists to portray their liberal-left opponents as some kind of communists, and I don't believe there is any such thing.

Marxism can imply many things, including a historical analysis of production, class and economics, a labour-centric view of value, a praise and a critique of capitalism, with a secular, humanist and pro-science aspiration to develop productive forces, possibly achieved via the agency of the industrial proletariate through a dialectical struggle with the capitalist class blah blah ...

... but never have I come across a component of Marxism which consciously seeks to replace European Judeo-Christianity with Islamic rule via the policy of multi-culturalism, as our killer and perhaps Heraclitus (who is comfortable using the phrase) seem to see it.

I used the cultural Marxist phrase when speculating about his state of mind because he employed it in his written material.

I don't think the cultural Marxist phrase is accurate or useful. But overall you can't deny that what its usually wrongly used to describe, is a real phenomena. Namely an anti-Western, anti-White bias in major media outlets, government institutions, the upper class and leftist parties.

Its observable even on the reporting on this incident, I've lost count of how many times I've heard the man refereed to as a blue eyed, blond haired far right activist. This either signals implicit racism (I mean of course its surprising that he's blue eyed and blond haired instead of brown eyed and kinky haired as we would expect!) or just bigoted (his appearance is relevant to his crime because he's stereotypical Nordic - yeah I mean what are the odds of a stereotypically Nordic guy going berserk in NORWAY, clearly his blondness caused him to be an evil Naziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews- even though he espoused a odd bigoted form of anti-racism and was pro-Israel).

[Heraclitus]

I think you can safely say that the ideology of anyone who just randomly slaughters 80+ children is just air.

teens =/= children

When I hear 80+ dead children I think of 6 or 10 or 12 year olds. 14 to 15 maybe. From what I understand most of the dead there are 17ihs or even in their early 20s.

[Nikolai]

teens =/= children

When I hear 80+ dead children I think of 6 or 10 or 12 year olds. 14 to 15 maybe. From what I understand most of the dead there are 17ihs or even in their early 20s.

Does it matter?

[OzzyKP]

The point is accuracy. Calling them children isn't accurate, since they aren't.

[Nikolai]

Commentary article on the impact this horrible act can/will have:

Short circuiting the political process
HANS RUSTAD 24.07.2011 kl. 08.39

Politcal violence is inimical to the political process and changes it outside of its normal civic parameteres, Hannah Arendt writes in the book by that very name: Political violence.

That is the awesome realization that comes to mind considering what Anderes Behring Breivik did. He not only committed a heineous crime, he will affect the political process in Norway and a lot of other countries. That is a sinister truth.

Realization of this threat may lessen its impact.

Behring Breivik resembles the jihadists he purportedly opposed. The methods are the message.

Like the 9/11 suicide bomber, who also saw themselves as knights, he takes history into his own hands, acting like a god and destroyer.

The powers that be, i.e. the media, commentators, politcians try to excorcise the demon by calling it hate. But Behring Breivik was dabbling in some of the fundamental questions of our time. Excorcising those questions will not make them go away.

Hate is a word that pales beside the enormity of what Behring Breivik did. He tried to change history, just like the 9/11-bombers, by extreme violence and gruesomeness.

What is striking in his writings is not first and foremost hate, which is usually connected to emotions. Feelings are not predominant, but plenty of cold logic. Behring Breivik has assembled a theory of history and feels obligated to act on its behalf. It is megalomania on an epic scale.

People are truly frightened by this spectacle and rightfully so. In the Middle East such persons wield state power and strive to acquire nuclear bombs.

Those persons and forces think of violence as a legitimate tool, not constrained violence, as executed by a legal state, but unrestrained violence, against civilians. That was what was let loose in Europe in the 20th century. Now modern terror are replicating this threat.

In an age of technology one person can destroy thousands of lives and communicate his acts to the whole world. What was lacking to conform to the jihadist picture was a testament and a video. Now we have both.

One should not be relieved that this act was committed by a Norwegian and not a islamist, in the sense that this is a see-saw, understanding it as a zero-sum game. That is a dangerous political construct.

Terror is threatening the political process whoever is perpetrating it. Any attempt to utilize this for political gain, by blaming political opponents and smearing them, is playing into the terrorists hands.

Violence and mass terror as Friday’s acts certainly was, will affect the politial process. But how? A heavy responsbility weighs on the shoulders of those who wield media and political power. There is already a tendency to play the blame game: accusing websites of fomenting hate crimes.

There certainly are a few hatedriven websites, but they have little traffic. People tire of them easily. Others have a wider audience because they present genuine, serious articles, news stories and give room for debate. Document.no has attempted to fill such a role in Norway.

One should not underestimate people’s common sense. It is simply not the case that hate draws an audience.

But there is a case to be made that a stifling climate in main stream media elicits frustration and anger amongst many. As one can easily observe this anger is spewing out from comments in online papers. The editors employ “professional” firms who vet their comments. Major Norwegian and Swedish papers are employing a company in Varberg, Sweden, who moderate their readers comments, thus placing an important part of their communication with readers in other people’s hands. To me that seems like a betrayal of the contract that implicitly exists between editors and public.

A lot of people can tell frustrating tales of being censored or having totally normal communication removed, simply because they contained some words or expressions that at the appropriate time were considered unacceptable.

There is every reason to fear that this paranoia will gain momentum after 22/7 in Norway. People are afraid and susecptible to what they are being told about who is dangerous.

But legitimate political debate cannot be banished without serious political repercussions.

USA and Europe are undergoing major changes, and are in the thick of a debt crises that will affect all of society. There are fundamental conflicts that need to be solved in a democratic way. That presupposes an open debate.

[Nikolai]

The point is accuracy. Calling them children isn't accurate, since they aren't.

I find semantics little important and to a degree insulting in the current situation.

[Heraclitus]

The point is accuracy. Calling them children isn't accurate, since they aren't.

+1

Does it matter?

Actually it does. Since this kind of language use causes people to impose insane laws that brand 22 year old guys who have 17 year old girlfriends as paedophiles.