Archive for Utoya

Anders Behring Breivik Trial: Norway Gunman Complains Of Being ‘Subjected To Racism’

Posted in Loon Politics, Loon-at-large with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , on April 23, 2012 by loonwatch

 

Defendant Anders Behring Breivik in court prior to the opening of day 6 of the trial in Oslo, Monday April 23, 2012. Breivik has admitted setting off a car bomb outside the government headquarters, killing eight, before unleashing a shooting massacre at the governing Labor Party's youth camp on Utoya. (AP Photo/Lise Aserud, POOL)

Defendant Anders Behring Breivik in court prior to the opening of day 6 of the trial in Oslo, Monday April 23, 2012. Breivik has admitted setting off a car bomb outside the government headquarters, killing eight, before unleashing a shooting massacre at the governing Labor Party’s youth camp on Utoya. (AP Photo/Lise Aserud, POOL)

Breivik’s delusional fantasies continues. The victim card will not work for him.

Anders Behring Breivik Trial: Norway Gunman Complains Of Being ‘Subjected To Racism’

OSLO, Norway — Anxious to prove he’s not insane, confessed mass killer Anders Behring Breivik told a court Monday that questions about his mental health are part of a racist plot to discredit his extreme anti-Muslim ideology.

Breivik, who has admitted to killing 77 people in a bombing and youth camp massacre, said that no one would have asked for a psychiatric examination had he been a “bearded jihadist.”

“But because I am a militant nationalist, I am being subjected to grave racism,” he said. “They are trying to delegitimize everything I stand for.”

Breivik rejects criminal guilt for the rampage on July 22, saying the victims had betrayed their country by embracing immigration.

Even the defense admits there is virtually no chance of an acquittal, so the key issue to be determined in the trial is whether Breivik is criminally insane.

Two psychiatric examinations reached opposite conclusions on that point. In a statement to the court, the Norwegian Board of Forensic Medicine asked for additional information from two pscyhiatrists who found Breivik sane, saying their report was incomplete.

Breivik himself insists he is sane, and accuses the prosecutors of trying to make him look irrational.

“I know I’m at risk of ending up at an insane asylum, and I’m going to do what I can to avoid that,” he told the court.

Breivik became defensive as prosecutors quizzed him about sections of the 1,500-page manifesto he posted online before the attacks. It describes uniforms, medals, greetings and codes of conduct for the “Knights Templar” militant group that he claims to belong to. Prosecutors don’t believe it exists.

In one section, read by prosecutor Svein Holden, Breivik speculated that in his future society, the loyalty of potential knights might be tested by asking them to undergo surgical amputation and castration. Breivik chastised the prosecutor for what he called “low blows” and said the segment was taken out of context.

Breivik, 33, showed no remorse as he continued his shocking testimony about his shooting spree at the annual summer youth camp of the governing Labor Party.

Calling the rampage “necessary,” Breivik compared being shunned by those close to him to the grief of the bereaved.

“The only difference was that for my part it was a choice,” he said.

The self-styled crusader apologized to the family of a pub owner who was among the eight people killed in the blast outside the government offices in Oslo, saying it was not his intention to kill “civilians.”

Holden asked him if he wanted to express a similar apology to the families of the other victims, including the 69 killed on the youth camp on Utoya island.

“No I don’t,” Breivik said. “Utoya is a political indoctrination camp.”

“I see all multicultural political activists as monsters, as evil monsters who wish to eradicate our people, our ethnic group, our culture and our country,” he said.

Jon Hestnes, who heads a support group for victims’ families and survivors, told The Associated Press it was “gruesome” to listen to Breivik’s apology.

“It’s an insult to the 76 other people who actually died because of that man,” Hestnes said.

“He’s not in our world. He isn’t, and he doesn’t have humanity at all. The way I slap little mosquitoes in the summer, that’s how he is about human lives,” Hestnes said.

Speaking calmly, Breivik said he used a handgun to kill victims if the distance was less than 10 meters. Otherwise he used his rifle.

Asked why he spared one man who survived the shooting spree, Breivik said he thought it was because the man’s appearance made him look “right wing-oriented.”

“When I looked at him I saw myself,” Breivik said. “I think that was the reason that I didn’t fire shots at him.”

If found sane Breivik would face 21 years in prison, though he can be held longer if deemed a danger to society. If sentenced to psychiatric care, in theory he would be released once he’s no longer deemed psychotic and dangerous.

Norway’s Mass Killer Breivik Declared Sane

Posted in Loon People, Loon Violence with tags , , , , , , , , on April 10, 2012 by loonwatch

Anders Behring Breivik, a right-wing extremist who confessed to a bombing and mass shooting that killed 77 people on July 22, 2011, arrives for a detention hearing at a court in Oslo, Norway, Monday, Feb. 6, 2012. About 100 survivors and relatives of the victims of the July 22 massacre attended the hearing in Oslo's district court - expected to decide to keep Breivik in jail until his trial begins in April. (AP Photo/Heiko Junge, Scanpix Norway) NORWAY OUT

Anders Behring Breivik, a right-wing extremist who confessed to a bombing and mass shooting that killed 77 people on July 22, 2011, arrives for a detention hearing at a court in Oslo, Norway, Monday, Feb. 6, 2012. About 100 survivors and relatives of the victims of the July 22 massacre attended the hearing in Oslo’s district court – expected to decide to keep Breivik in jail until his trial begins in April. (AP Photo/Heiko Junge, Scanpix Norway) NORWAY OUT

This may get Breivik less years, but terrorist-inspirers will have a harder time trying to deflect the influence their writings had on Breivik:

Norway’s mass killer Breivik declared sane

(BBC News)

A second psychiatric evaluation of Norwegian mass killer Anders Behring Breivik has found him sane enough to face trial and a jail term.

The findings contradict a previous evaluation, published in November, that found him legally insane.

Breivik is due to stand trial on Monday over a bomb attack and shooting spree last July that killed 77 people.

The 33-year-old, who insists he is mentally stable, was “pleased” with the new assessment, his lawyer said.

Geir Lippestad told reporters his client would defend his actions during his 10-week trial, adding, “he will also regret that he didn’t go further”.

Both reports will be considered by the court when it decides, at the end of the trial, whether he should be sent to a psychiatric ward or jail.

If Breivik is deemed to have been sane at the time of the killings then he could face 21 years in prison with the potential for indefinite extensions to his term as long as he is considered a danger to the public.

‘Crusade’

Continue reading the main story

“Start Quote

His first reaction was that he was pleased with the conclusion”

Geir LippestadBreivik’s lawyer

The second evaluation was approved by a court in January following widespread criticism of last year’s assessment that concluded he was psychotic at the time of the attacks and diagnosed him as a paranoid schizophrenic – meaning he would most likely be detained in psychiatric care.

Many of his surviving victims believed he was sane, and that the only proper punishment would be a prison sentence.

“Our conclusion is that he is not psychotic at the time of the actions of terrorism and he is not psychotic now,” psychiatrist Terje Toerrissen, who carried out the second assessment with fellow psychiatrist Agnar Aspaas, told the Associated Press.

The full report is confidential, and the two psychiatrists will give their reasons for arriving at a different conclusion to the first team of experts when they testify during the trial, AP reports.

Breivik was charged with terror offences last month.

Prosecutors said at the time they were prepared to accept that he was criminally insane and would therefore seek compulsory psychiatric care, but they reserved the right to alter that view if new elements emerged about his mental health.

Update: (H/T: Jai)

Source: http://news.sky.com/home/world-news/article/16205754

Extract:

“Anders Behring Breivik, who killed 77 people in Norway last year, plans to tell his trial he regrets “not going further”.

The 33-year-old is accused of committing the terrorist attacks on July 22, 2011, and will face court in Oslo on Monday.

“This will be extremely difficult, an enormous challenge to listen to his explanations,” his lawyer Geir Lippestad told reporters. “He will not only defend (his actions) but will also lament, I think, not going further.””

Norwegian Black Metal Band Nominated for Music Prize Despite anti-Muslim Lyrics

Posted in Loon-at-large with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , on January 12, 2012 by loonwatch

Norwegian Black Metal Band Nominated for Music Prize Despite anti-Muslim Lyrics

A black metal band nominated for Norway’s top music prize has rejected claims that lyrics on its latest album go too far in their criticism of Islam.

Taake’s nomination for the Spellemann Prize in the Best Metal Album category has sparked a strong reaction from listeners who find some of the band’s lyrics objectionable, newspaperAftenposten reports. In the song Orkan (“Hurricane”) on its latest album, Noregs Vaapen, the band sings: “To hell with Muhammad and the Mohammedans” and their “unforgivable customs”. It ends with the line: “Norway will soon awaken”.

Marte Thorsby, chairman of the prize committee’s board, denied any assertion that the jury must not have listened to the album properly before announcing the nomination. “We enjoy full freedom of expression in Norway and a Spellemann jury is not going to censor content in any way,” she told Aftenposten.

Søderlind said the lyrics were presumably written prior to last summer’s terror attacks in Norway, “and in the aftermath of July 22nd they’re completely over the edge”. “I’d imagine Taake aren’t particularly proud of these lyrics after Utøya,” he said, referring to the massacre of 69 young people at a summer camp by anti-Islam extremist Anders Behring Breivik.

In a written response to the newspaper, Taake front-man Ørjan Stedjeberg said his sole intention with the contentious lyrics was to criticize religion. “Our view, in the name of freedom of expression, is that it is shameful to adhere to Christianity or Islam. Incidentally, Christianity is mentioned in the same lyrics, but that doesn’t seem to have been given any emphasis,” he wrote. “Taake has never been a political band, and we do not encourage either violence or racism.”

Stedjeberg previously landed himself in hot water in 2007 when he appeared onstage with a swastika painted on his chest in Essen, Germany, where any use of the former Nazi symbol is strictly prohibited. In a statement released after the incident, Stedjeberg said: “Taake is not a political Nazi band, etc. We certainly didn’t expect the current threat reactions, as everyone should know by now that our whole concept is built upon provocation and anything evil- and death-related.”

The Spellemann Prize winners will be announced at a ceremony on January 14th.

The Local, 6 January 2011

Via Islam in Europe

According to the Wikipedia entry on Taake, after subsequent concerts on the band’s German tour were cancelled due to the Essen incident Stedjeberg posted a statement on the Taake website in which he wrote: “we truly apologize to all of our collaborators who might get problems because of the Essen swastika scandal (except for the Untermensch owner of that club; you can go suck a Muslim).”

Jeff Sparrow: The Long, Long Road to Utoya

Posted in Anti-Loons, Loon-at-large with tags , , , , , , , , on December 16, 2011 by loonwatch
Robert Spencer and his biggest fan: Anders Behring Breivik
Robert Spencer and his biggest fan: Anders Behring Breivik

Jeff Sparrow, one of the authors of the book On Utoya puts to rest the feeble attempts by Geller and Spencer to separate themselves from Anders Breivik.

He also links to us quite a few times:

The long, long road to Utoya

by Jeff Sparrow (ABC)

On the Drum last week, Chris Berg attacked the book On Utoya (to which I’m a contributor) for suggesting a link between Islamophobic rhetoric and Anders Breivik’s anti-Muslim rampage.

“There is,” Berg said, “an enormous moral leap between believing multiculturalism is a bad policy and systematically slaughtering 77 members of the Norwegian Labour Party, some as young as 14 years old. To suggest they are on the same continuum is to obscure how anybody could make that leap.”

I wonder if Berg actually read the book.

On Utoya’s not about people who believe “multiculturalism is a bad policy”. Rather, it discusses rightwing commentators who, like Breivik, see multiculturalism as a cover for what they generally call “Islamicisation”.

As it happens, one of the more extreme and repellent of these Islamophobic pundits was just in Australia.

A few weeks ago, the Q Society hosted an Australian tour by the American writer Robert Spencer.

Spencer runs a website called Jihad Watch, in which he publicises whatever slurs about Muslims that Google sends his way. Recently, he launched an “Action Alert” over a nefarious plot to force halal birds upon innocent Americans. Butterball turkeys represent, you see, the latest gobbling incarnation of the “stealth jihad” by which Islam enslaves the West and its people. He also helped initiate an ad-boycott against a reality TV-show All American Muslim: the Florida Family Association, with whom Spencer has allied himself, claims the show about average Muslim families is actually “propaganda that riskily hides the Islamic agenda’s clear and present danger to American liberties and traditional values”.

Spencer works closely with the blogger Pamela (‘Barack Obama is Malcolm X’s Son’) Geller, another big name in the so-called “counter jihadi” milieu. Together, they run the group Stop the Islamization of America, an outfit described by the Anti-Defamation League as “consistently vilifying the Islamic faith and asserting the existence of an Islamic conspiracy to destroy ‘American’ values.”

Both featured repeatedly in Breivik’s manifesto.

“About Islam,” he wrote, “I recommend essentially everything written by Robert Spencer.”

As you would expect, in the aftermath of the Oslo massacre, Geller and Spencer hastily condemned their Norwegian admirer (though Geller couldn’t resist pointing out that the teenagers he murdered were “future leaders of the party responsible for flooding Norway with Muslims who refuse to assimilate”, nor posting a picture with a caption about how the camp attendees had “faces which are more MIddle [sic] Eastern or mixed than pure Norwegian”).

For his part, Spencer noted that Breivik had explicitly criticized the non-violent orientation of Jihad Watch, a criticism that meant, he said, any connection between his work and Breivik’s actions was ludicrous.

It’s true that Spencer and Breivik disagree about how to fight Islamicisation.

But they don’t disagree that its happening. Spencer’s Melbourne talk concluded like this:

“This is an unconventional war. We are in a war, we are in a clash of civilisations. The thing I want to leave with you in closing is that we are the soldiers. The soldiers are not in uniform. There are no armies on the field. The armies on the field are there, they’re doing noble work but that’s only one small part. The main struggle is right here. And we are it. This is a battle for the soul of Australia, for the soul of Europe, for the soul of America, for the soul of the west. And it’s outcome is not at all decided, as dire as it may look, because we have not yet begun to fight. It is up to us.”

Breivik, too, thinks a war with Islam is already underway.

His disagreement with Spencer and Geller, then, isn’t about the diagnosis. It’s just about the nature of the cure.

That’s the real jump – from accepting rhetoric about war, to taking up the gun to fight it.

Naturally, the vast majority of those who attended Spencer’s lectures won’t embrace violence (and nor did he urge them to).

In that sense, the debate about Breivik’s sanity is moot. By definition, if you commit mass murder, you’re not normal, simply because normal people aren’t mass murderers.

On the same tautological level, Berg’s correct to say no-one’s responsible for Breivik’s actions except Breivik. He’s the one who pulled the trigger – not Spencer, not Geller, and not anyone else.

Yet Berg refuses to acknowledge what Breivik himself was perfectly clear about – ideas and actions are related.

Spend some time on the big anti-Islam websites, and you’ll read over and over and over again that Muslims are violent, dangerous and determined to destroy everything the West holds dear. On Spencer’s page, for instance, commenters refer to Muslims as “subhuman barbarians”, “parasites”, “savages”, “people infected with the musloid faith”, “vermin” and so on.

LoonWatch noted one thread that contained

thirty-five comments by JihadWatch readers, and not a single one who opposed the idea of ethnic cleansing of Germany (or the entire non-Muslim world) and the nuking of Mecca on ethical grounds (with the notable exception of Ronald who thought that it would mean losing the oil reserves and another user who thought there are more creative ways to deliver “pure insult and humiliation” upon Muslims).  Not a single commentator on the thread opposed either of these two ideas on moral grounds.

Geller’s blog is the same: almost every post descends into overt eliminationism.

Oh, of course, Spencer says he’s not responsible for his readers and their desires for racial murder. He doesn’t, his blog says, necessarily endorse their comments. But where, we might ask, do they get these ideas? Why do advocates of mass slaughter feel so comfortable around him?

Spencer and Geller also work together on another hate group called the American Freedom Defense Initiative. One of its original board members is a certain John Joseph Jay. Back in 2008, Jay explained on Pamela Geller’s blog how this war against Muslims should be conducted:

“We should declare war on iran, syria, egypt and saudi arabia, as well as libya and the sudan and somalia, and we should kill people by the scores. no science. no precision bombing. no shock and awe designed to ‘impress’ and send ‘signals’, but old fashioned war with wholesale slaughter including indiscriminate death of innocents and babes. down to the last muslim, if necessary.”

“Old fashioned war with wholesale slaughter including indiscriminate death of innocents”: that’s pretty much what Breivik provided a few years later.

Like Breivik, Jay’s enthusiasm for murder extends beyond Muslims to a Left that he says facilitates “stealth jihad”. That’s why, on his own blog, he urges readers to

buy guns. buy ammo. be jealous of your liberties. and, understand, you are going to have to kill folks, your uncles, your sons and daughters, to preserve those liberties.

Yes, there’s a difference between Spencer denouncing liberals as traitors and Jay declaring they should be exterminated, just as there’s a gap between Jay preaching mass murder and Breivik actually carrying it out.

But it shouldn’t be difficult to understand how the constant shared rhetoric about existential war breaks down Berg’s “enormous moral leap” and makes it far more likely that a keyboard warrior will creep out from behind his PC, believing, as he lifts his rifle, that he’s saving Christian civilization, that he’s finally doing what all his friends just talk about.

Chris Berg says that Breivik was a “shocking outlier”, indicative of nothing.

It’s a ludicrous argument.

With their epic struggle against the Mooslamic turkeys, Geller and Spencer might seem like fringe nutters. But they’re not. They’re both widely published (two of Spencer’s books have been New York Times best-sellers); they appear regularly on the circuit of right-wing radio and Fox News.

Together, they wrote the 2010 book The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration’s War on America, in which they argued a line almost identical to Breivik’s manifesto:

Transformational issues facing this nation and the world at large—the world at war, creeping Sharia, the perversion of the rights of free men—hang in the balance during the Obama administration as never before. The stakes could not be higher. On foreign policy, Europe has lain down. The political elites have capitulated to Islamists and to multiculturalists. Europe is committing slow cultural and demographic suicide. It seems unclear that they could hold up their end even if America did the heavy lifting.

That book appeared with a glowing foreword by former ambassador to the UN John Bolton – a man who Newt Gingrich has recently announced will be Secretary of State under a Gingrich presidency. Indeed, Gingrich himself seems on-side in this lunatic crusade. The frontrunner for the Republican nomination recently announced that “sharia is a mortal threat to the survival of freedom in the United States and the world as we know it”.

Meanwhile, in Europe, far-right groups, many with histories stretching back to the fascist era, are re-orienting to exploit anti-Muslim sentiment – and, as a result, they’re growing.

Mattias Gardell, a Swedish expert on the far right, provides the following list of what he calls “redesigned brown [ie fascist] parties”:

Fremskrittspartiet, (Progress Party, Norway), Sverigedemokraterna (Sweden Democrats), Dansk Folkeparti (Danish People’s Party), Sannfinländarna (True Finns), Partij voor de Vrijheid (Party for Freedom, Netherlands), Vlaams Belang (Flemish Interest), Front National (Belgium), Front National (France), Mouvement pour la France, British National Party, Lega Nord (Northern League, Italy), Futuro e Libertá (Italy), Schweizerische Volkspartei (Swiss People’s Party), Nationaldemokratische Partei Deutschlands (Germany), Pro Nordrhein-Westfalen (Germany), Freiheitliche Partei Österreichs (Freedom Party of Austria), Bündnis Zukunft Österreich (Alliance for the Future of Austria) and Laikós Orthódoxos Synagermós (People’s Orthodox Rally, Greece).

Gardell notes:

Some of these have been remarkably successful. Dansk Folkeparti gained nearly 14 per cent of the votes in Denmark’s 2007 election; Fremskrittspartiet – of which Breivik was once a member – received 23 per cent of the vote in Norway’s 2009 election; and Partij voor de Vrijheid – whose leader Geert Wilders seeks to ban the Koran – became the third largest party in parliament, with 17 per cent in the 2010 election. In Sweden, Sverigedemokraterna – whose ideologue Kent Ekeroth believes that Sweden and Europe are cast in an apocalyptic war with Islam and Muslims, and who co-funds the anti-Muslim network out of which Breivik emerged – became the first brown party in the country’s history to enter parliament, with close to 6 per cent in the 2010 election. In Finland, True Finns – whose ideologue Jussi Halla-aho says that Europeans have but two options when confronted with Muslim immigration: war or surrender – gained 19 per cent in the 2011 election, just 1 per cent away from becoming the largest party.

There are no adequate statistics on hate crimes in Europe, since few countries collect information about violence against Muslims. Nonetheless, the latest OIC Islamophobia Observatory report documents disturbing incidents from May 2010 through April 2011.

In one instance in Norway, where the massacre also took place, vandals desecrated a mosque in August, 2010, with spray-paint writings saying “oink” and “Allah is a [picture of a pig]“. In another 2010 Mosque attack, this time in the Netherlands, a dead sheep was found hanging in the place where a mosque was to be built. In a similar incident in Normandy, France, inscriptions reading “Islam get out of Europe”, “No to Islam and to burkas”, along with swastikas, were discovered on 15 July, 2010, which the report suggests might be encouraged by a law banning women from wearing the full-face Islamic veils in public, since the timing of the events coincide.

A few months ago, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon warned: “A dangerous trend is emerging, a new politics of polarization. Some play on people’s fears. They accuse immigrants of violating European values. Europe’s darkest chapters have been written in language such as this. Today the primary targets are immigrants of the Muslim faith.”

Most of the rebadged far-right organisations have retained their old-school anti-Semitism even as they choose, for strategic reasons, to campaign against Islam (and, often, support Israel). Indeed, the tropes of traditional anti-Semitism generally reappear in the new discourse of anti-Islam bigotry. Gardell explains how:

anti-Muslim conspiracy theory comes complete with its own version of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Evoking a Manichean vision of a struggle between the forces of light and darkness, it tell us that for 1300 years the Western world has been locked in an apocalyptic conflict with ‘Islam’, which is depicted as an animated being with a sinister agency, which tirelessly seeks the eradication of Christian Europe, the last outpost of freedom.

The journalist Colm Ó Broin has produced a neat demonstration of the relationship between the old hate and the new hate, with a close comparison of Spencer’s writing on Muslims next to the propaganda of Julius Streicher, the editor of the notorious anti-Semitic magazine from the Nazi era, Der Stuermer.

Here are the first nine of his parallels.

Muslims/Jews have a religious duty to conquer the world.
Islam understands its earthly mission to extend the law of Allah over the world by force.” Robert Spencer.
Do you not know that the God of the Old Testament orders the Jews to consume and enslave the peoples of the earth?” Julius Streicher.

The Left enables Muslims/Jews.

The principal organs of the Left…has consistently been warm and welcoming toward Islamic supremacism.” Robert Spencer.
The communists pave the way for him (the Jew).” Julius Streicher.

Governments do nothing to stop Muslims/Jews.

“FDI* acts against the treason being committed by national, state, and local government officials…in their capitulation to the global jihad and Islamic supremacism.” (Freedom Defense Initiative, Robert Spencer/Pamela Geller organisation).
The government allows the Jew to do as he pleases. The people expect action to be taken.” Julius Streicher.

Muslims/Jews cannot be trusted.

“When one is under pressure, one may lie in order to protect the religion, this is taught in the Qur’an.” Robert Spencer.

“We may lie and cheat Gentiles. In the Talmud it says: It is permitted for Jews to cheat Gentiles.” From The Toadstool, children’s book published by Julius Streicher.

Recognizing the true nature of Muslims/Jews can be difficult.

There is no reliable way for American authorities to distinguish jihadists and potential jihadists from peaceful Muslims.” Robert Spencer.
Just as it is often hard to tell a toadstool from an edible mushroom, so too it is often very hard to recognize the Jew as a swindler and criminal.” From The Toadstool, children’s book published by Julius Streicher.

The evidence against Muslims/Jews is in their holy books.

What exactly is ‘hate speech’ about quoting Qur’an verses and then showing Muslim preachers using those verses to exhort people to commit acts of violence, as well as violent acts committed by Muslims inspired by those verses and others?” Robert Spencer.

“In Der Stuermer no editorial appeared, written by me or written by anyone of my main co-workers, in which I did not include quotations from the ancient history of the Jews, from the Old Testament, or from Jewish historical works of recent times.” Julius Streicher.

Islamic/Jewish texts encourage violence against non-believers.

“And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter… — 2:191.” Koranic verse quoted by Robert Spencer on Jihadwatch.org.

“And when the Lord your God has delivered them over to you and you have defeated them, then you must destroy them totally: men and women and children, even the animals. (Deuteronomy 7:2.).” Biblical verse quoted by Julius Streicher in Der Stuermer.

Christianity is peaceful while Islam/Judaism is violent.

There is no Muslim version of ‘love your enemies, pray for those who persecute you’ or ‘if anyone strikes you on the right cheek turn to him the other also’.” Robert Spencer.

“The Jew is not being taught, like we are, such texts as, ‘Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself’, or ‘If you are smitten on the left cheek, offer then your right one’.” Julius Streicher.

Muslims/Jews are uniquely violent.

(Islam) is the only major world religion with a developed doctrine and tradition of warfare against unbelievers.” Robert Spencer.

“o other people in the world has such prophecies. No other people would dare to say that it was chosen to murder and destroy the other peoples and steal their possessions.” Julius Streicher.

It’s pretty remarkable stuff. But then we come to the tenth point, and it’s the real kicker.

The final parallel is a shared insistence that such criticism has no relationship to violence.

“There is nothing in anything that I have ever written that could be reasonably construed as an incitement to violence against anyone,” says Robert Spencer.

In a strict sense, that’s probably true. Spencer himself, unlike his associates, knows to watch his mouth. In Orwell’s terms, he’s the kind of person always somewhere else when the trigger gets pulled.

Then again, so was Streicher.

For that was his defence at Nuremberg – he’d never personally incited violence.

“The contents,” Streicher argued, “of Der Stuermer as such were not [an incitement to violence]. During the whole 20 years, I never wrote in this connection, ‘Burn Jewish houses down; beat them to death’. Never once did such an incitement appear in Der Stuermer.”

Streicher didn’t burn houses down himself. Nor, he claimed, did he encourage others to do so.

But if you publish article after article claiming that a particular minority group is a deadly menace, a violent, existential threat to the nation and its citizens, can you really claim surprise if others take you seriously?

Which brings us back to Berg and the IPA.

If someone toured Australia peddling Streicher-style slurs against Judaism, the Jewish community would be rightly outraged, precisely because of the relationship between talk about war against a minority and actual physical violence against them.

Would Australian conservative thank tanks argue they had nothing to worry about? Would they tell them that rhetoric about “war against Jews” was merely a suggestion that multiculturalism was a bad policy? Would he reassure them that past examples of deadly violence were the result of an apolitical lunacy for which no-one other than the direct perpetrators were responsible?

If not, wherein lies the difference. During his Australian sojourn, Robert Spencer was invited onto ABC Queensland to discuss his theories. Would a peddler of hatred against any other minority have been treated that way?

That’s the thesis of On Utoya: that bigotry against Muslims has been consistently downplayed in the mainstream, thus creating an environment in which violence becomes more likely.

Unfortunately, the argument seems more relevant than ever.

Jeff Sparrow is the editor of Overland literary journal and the author of Killing: Misadventures in Violence. He Tweets @Jeff_Sparrow.

Debbie Schlussel: Oslo Victims Were Terrorists Not Victims, Their Deaths Was Karma, Child Victims Were Bitches

Posted in Feature, Loon-at-large with tags , , , , , , , on August 9, 2011 by loonwatch
 

In previous articles we’ve highlighted the hideous things Pamela Geller said about the victims of the Oslo terrorist attack, calling them anti-Semites, socialists, Communists, Nazis, pro-Islamists, jihad-enablers, and rape-enablers.  They had it coming.

But lest you think that Pamela Geller is the only one from the right-wing that has issued such insensitive and atrocious comments, let it be known that she is certainly not alone.  Glenn Beck, for instance, referred to the victims as Nazis, claiming that they are the equivalent of the Hitler Youth.  Another well-known personality and conservative blogger is also trying to grab the spotlight with her outrageous comments: Debbie Schlussel.

Remember how Pamela Geller included a racist caption saying that the victims were mostly “Middle Eastern” or “mixed” and not “pure Norwegian?”  Seems like Schlussel wanted to top that, and so she had a similar picture but with a caption provocatively asking:

“Victims” or Perpetrators?

By the very fact that she asked the question–and that she placed the word “victims” in quotations and “perpetrators” without quotations–we can safely say that she is saying that the victims of the Oslo terrorist attack were actually perpetrators of terrorism–they were terrorists.  At minimum, “they sided with Islamic terrorists.”  Schlussel goes on to say (emphasis is mine):

Again, you must read Zalmi’s important piece on this, which provides far more detail on these “victims” of terrorism who celebrated terrorism against other victims.

Please savor the morbid nature of that statement: imagine, just for a minute, if some Muslim blogger wrote that the victims of 9/11 were in fact terrorists not victims.  Can you imagine the outrage?

Schlussel also says that their deaths was just a result of “karma,” i.e. it was the universe giving them what they justly deserved.  Opines Schlussel:

And I don’t get too upset when they face the karma that is their fate.

She goes on:

Karma is a bitch . . . especially for Jew-haters who were Fatah’s bitch.  You hang out with snakes, you get bitten.

Oh, dozens upon dozens of children were shot and killed?  Well, karma is a real bitch, suck it up.  That’s the way the cookie crumbles, tough luck, bitches.

Schlussel agrees with Glenn Beck’s statement that the victims were equivalent to the Hitler Youth, saying:

More proof that Glenn Beck was spot on when he compared Norway’s Utoya Island political camp, shot up by Anders Breivik, to a Hitler Youth camp.

Aside from labeling them Nazis, Schlussel mocks the victims, calling them “spoiled airheaded kids” and “hateful, privileged brats.”

The delusional Schlussel calls the Oslo victims “would-be assassins,” saying:

I can’t feel sorry for those who support my would-be assassins.

What the smurf is she talking about?  Basically, Schlussel has equated the Oslo victims with Hamas.  Her proof for this amazing juxtaposition?  Apparently, some of those on the island supported boycotting Israel for its apartheid policies towards Arabs.  This “divest from Israel” campaign utilizes the methods used to pressure apartheid South Africa, and is in fact supported by none other than Nelson Mandela and Archbishop Desmond Tutu.  Are Mandela and Tutu also a part of Hamas then?  Are they anti-Semites and Jew-haters?

Schlussel also takes issue with supporting the Freedom Flotilla, shrieking that the children were playing a game

re-enacting of the HAMAS flotilla in which terrorists tried to murder Israeli soldiers

The Freedom Flotilla attempted to give humanitarian aid to the starving people of Gaza, who have been the victims of an inhumane and illegal blockade by Israel.  It has nothing to do with Hamas.

Another image that Debbie Schlussel takes offense to shows a tee-shirt that says “tear down this wall,” which refers to the illegal Wall of Separation–more properly called the Apartheid Wall.  Well, that’s the same decision that the United Nations and the International Court of Justice came to, namely that Israel must tear down the wall.

We could debate Israel and Palestine all day long, but regardless of that, is this really the time to be worrying about the Oslo victims’ political viewpoints?  Perhaps we can just mourn their deaths as decent human beings are supposed to?  No, not Debbie Schlussel.  She calls the children “HAMASniks,” saying:

And I shed no tears for these HAMASnik campers with a Scandinavian dialect. Perpetrators are not victims. Sorry. HAMAS collaborators don’t get my pity. They never will.

Debbie Schlussel summarizes her cold-hearted and depraved position by saying:

For me, this is like Alien v. Predator.  I’m not sad for either side.  And I make no apologies for it.  Now these kids’ families know what it feels like to be victims of the Islamic terrorists whose Judenrein boycotts and terrorist flotillas against Israel they support.  We don’t live in a vacuum.  I can’t feel sorry for those who support my would-be assassins.  And I don’t get too upset when they face the karma that is their fate.

Sad for either side?  What is the other side?  There are the more than seventy victims–the majority of which were children–who were killed in this terrorist attack.  And then on the other side is Anders Behring Breivik, the terrorist.  Who in their right mind is feeling sad for Breivik that this even needs to be said?  Is Schlussel equating Breivik to his victims?  How absolutely sickening.

Debbie Schlussel calls the children “Fatah’s bitch.”  I don’t know about that, but I do have some thoughts about who is a complete ….

Pamela Geller’s Racist Comments: Oslo Victims Weren’t “Pure Norwegians,” Just “Middle Eastern” or “Mixed”

Posted in Feature, Loon-at-large with tags , , , , , , , , , , , on August 2, 2011 by loonwatch

Yesterday, I wrote the following:

Instead of mourning the dead, Pamela Geller–Breivik’s “spiritual benefactor”–is now bad-mouthing the innocent dead.  She calls the victims of the terrorist attack “anti-semites,” arguing that the summer camp is an “antisemitic indoctrination center” where they play “antisemitic war games.”  Blares the insane and lunatical Pamela Geller:

Utoya Island is a Communist/Socialist campground, and they clearly had a pro-Islamic agenda.

Aha! So, Pamela Geller’s comrade-in-arms Robert Spencer was just blowing smoke when he claimed that Breivik’s choice of victims just didn’t jive with the “counter-jihadist” ideology.  In reality, these dirty communists/socialists “had a pro-Islamic agenda.”  They were communists and pro-Islamists–that’s a two-for-one bag of hate for right-wingers.

And just like any good right-winger, Geller transitions swiftly between Communist references and Nazi/Hitler references, likening the victims to Hitler youth:

Glen Beck was not far off when he compared it to the Hitlerjugend or Young Pioneers.

The Young Pioneers was the youth organization for the Soviet Union, once again exhibiting how crazy right-wingers like Pamela Geller can move from Islamists to Nazis to Communism all in one breath.

More disgustingly, Pamela Geller mockingly and sarcastically refers to the young kids (who were the victims of the Oslo attack) as “little dearies:”

I saw at least one article that had photos of previous summers with the little dearies and their handlers assembling Israel-bashing displays.

Then she mentions something about “red diaper[s]” (wtf?)–I guess a reference to raising kids as communists.

And then we have Pamela Geller coming dangerously close to justifying the shooting, saying:

Breivik was targeting the future leaders of the party responsible for flooding Norway with Muslims who refuse to assimilate, who commit major violence against Norwegian natives, including violent gang rapes, with impunity, and who live on the dole… all done without the consent of the Norwegians.

Don’t you get it?  Anders Breivik killed people who were enabling violent gang rapes!  He killed rape-enablers!  Is that even a crime?  Shouldn’t he get a medal for that?

Can anyone imagine the reaction had Norwegians (or Muslims!) mocked the victims of 9/11 in this way?

I neglected to mention one of the most disturbing parts of Pamela Geller’s post, something which she had written but then had deleted before I viewed her site.  Some of our readers did point this out to me, but it was only yesterday night that I got a chance to read comments.  Apologies for the delay in posting this.

So, for those of you who haven’t read about it yet, Geller included the following caption under a picture of the youth camp:

Note the faces which are more MIddle [sic] Eastern or mixed than pure Norwegian.”

Realizing that her caption would (rightfully) be seen as unadulterated racism, Geller quickly deleted it. Luckily, a screenshot was saved (available on ThinkProgress.com):

Do you notice the Darkies and the Sand-Niggers in the photo?  I think I even see a Raghead in the front row.

So, you see, these weren’t “pure Norwegians” or pure whites that were targeted and killed–they were just Darkies, Sand-Niggers, and Ragheads.  They were budding terrorists–they were at minimum terrorist sympathizers.  They had it coming.

ThinkProgress notes that it was within 24 hours of the attack that Pamela Geller made this disturbing comment.  Can you imagine the depravity and bigotry of this lady that she had the morbid nature to say such of the dead even before they were laid to rest?  I don’t know about you, but I don’t do a race check when I read news of people dying.

Although I was not at all surprised that Pamela Geller would say something like she did (after all, her anti-Muslim views are just racism by another name), I am always impressed by her impetuous nature: she has no filter and just posts whatever comes to her sick mind, and then curses herself as she tries to delete and cover up what she said just a few hours earlier.  Pam, here’s a tip: think before you type.  Remember: you can’t be so obvious about your racism.

In any case, all of this shows that Geller is coming dangerously close to justifying Anders Behring Breivik’s terrorist attack: in her mind, the victims were socialists, Communists, rape-enablers, jihad-enablers, pro-Islamists, Hitler Youth, Middle Eastern, and mixed race (and thus impure)–so they really just had it coming.

A Crazed and Unstable Pamela Geller Bad-Mouths Victims of Oslo Terrorist Attack

Posted in Feature, Loon-at-large with tags , , , , , , , , on August 2, 2011 by loonwatch

Anders Behring Breivik, the self-confessed Norwegian terrorist who killed over seventy-five innocent civilians, was a huge fan of anti-Muslim bloggers such as Jihad Watch‘s Robert Spencer and Atlas Shrug‘s Pamela Geller.  In fact, Breivik cited Robert Spencer and Jihad Watch dozens upon dozens of times in his manifesto.

Meanwhile, Pamela Geller reproduced an “email from Norway” that sounds like it came from Breivik (or somebody linked to him)–an email with an ominous warning:

We are stockpiling and caching weapons, ammunition and equipment. This is going to happen fast.

Geller specifically stated that she hid the identity of the emailer in order to prevent his arrest or prosecution.  After the Oslo terrorist attack, Geller had the same theory we did: the “email from Norway” sounds like it could be from Anders Behring Breivik.  And so, Geller stealthily removed the offensive line (about stockpiling weapons) from the “email from Norway.”  The question we asked yesterday was: could Pamela Geller have prevented the Oslo bloodbath by reporting the Norwegian emailer to authorities?

When news of the terrorist attack broke, the mainstream media–along with the anti-Muslim blogosphere including Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller–quickly blamed Muslims.  They called it “Norway’s 9/11” and stressed that it was the “worst terrorist attack in Norwegian history.”

But when it was revealed that the actual perpetrator was a white, blond and blue-eyed Christian–and an anti-Muslim right-winger to boot–then suddenly their tone quickly changed.  When it became known that the terrorist was in fact one of their own fans, suddenly they called for nuance and discretion: don’t rush to judgment, they implored.

Robert Spencer wrote an article entitled “The Blame Game,” whining that people were unjustly linking the terrorist to “counter-jihadists” like himself.  Funny how Spencer makes a living off of six degrees of association when it comes to Muslims, but suddenly cries foul when he is on the receiving end.

In that article, Spencer argues that it simply doesn’t make sense to link Breivik to the “counter-jihad movement.”  Fumed an irate Spencer (emphasis is ours):

1. Freedom fighters preach free speech, freedom of conscience and equality of rights for all people, against Sharia and Islamic supremacism that denies those rights, advocating only legal means of protest and dissent.

2. Some nutcase who allegedly expressed allegiance with the freedom fighters kills people, none of whom are preaching Sharia or Islamic supremacism.

3. Media assumes that #1 caused #2 and blames freedom fighters.

We had issued a response to this article, pointing out that Breivik was targeting people deemed to be “jihad-enablers:”

The obvious problem with Spencer’s logic is that it does not include his and other anti-Muslim loons’ consistent denunciations of “leftists” as jihad-enablers. This is a key tenant of the so-called anti-jihadist movement. They hate the left, or more specifically, anyone who treats Muslims with a smidgen of fairness and tolerance. Spencer and Geller consistently and constantly portray the left as those who would sell out the West to the scary Mooslems. Spencer’s hate site Jihad Watch is filled with posts denouncing the “Leftist/Jihadist alliance,” warning his readers of how the left will happily allow the Mooslem hordes to overthrow the West and “dhimmify” its population.

Breivik adopted this view of the left.  Paul Woodward notes that Breivik argued “that cultural conservatives should not identify their main opponents as Jihadists, but instead should focus their attention on those he regards as the ‘facilitators’ of Jihadists, namely, the proponents of multiculturalism.” It was these liberals and “multi-culturalists” that were the target of his rampage.

If a Neo-Nazi targeted and killed white people, this doesn’t mean that his killings weren’t related to his Neo-Nazi ideology if the targets were “race traitors” (white people who married black people, etc.).  Similarly, Anders Breivik was targeting non-Muslims who were “jihad-enablers” or “facilitators of the jihad.” (For the record, LoonWatch itself and other “leftist websites” have been accused of this.)

Proof that this was indeed the case can be found in the fact that Anders Breivik chose Utøya island as the target of his terrorist attack.  The island is owned by the Workers’ Youth League, the youth wing of the Labour Party, which is affiliated with Socialist International.  Apparently they were also sympathetic to the Palestinian cause.  These were left-leaning people who were targeted by Breivik, who in his mind were not only were socialists but jihad-enablers!

The Oslo terrorist chose to attack during the youth summer camp, which explains why an overwhelming majority of his victims were teenagers.  To make his attack even more grotesque, Breivik dressed up as a police officer, fooling children into coming out of hiding by claiming he was there to help them–only to shoot them when they did come out.

This was a truly heinous act.  Instead of mourning the dead, Pamela Geller–Breivik’s “spiritual benefactor”–is now bad-mouthing the innocent dead.  She calls the victims of the terrorist attack “anti-semites,” arguing that the summer camp is an “antisemitic indoctrination center” where they play “antisemitic war games.”  Blares the insane and lunatical Pamela Geller:

Utoya Island is a Communist/Socialist campground, and they clearly had a pro-Islamic agenda.

Aha! So, Pamela Geller’s comrade-in-arms Robert Spencer was just blowing smoke when he claimed that Breivik’s choice of victims just didn’t jive with the “counter-jihadist” ideology.  In reality, these dirty communists/socialists “had a pro-Islamic agenda.”  They were communists and pro-Islamists–that’s a two-for-one bag of hate for right-wingers.

And just like any good right-winger, Geller transitions swiftly between Communist references and Nazi/Hitler references, likening the victims to Hitler youth:

Glen Beck was not far off when he compared it to the Hitlerjugend or Young Pioneers.

The Young Pioneers was the youth organization for the Soviet Union, once again exhibiting how crazy right-wingers like Pamela Geller can move from Islamists to Nazis to Communism all in one breath.

More disgustingly, Pamela Geller mockingly and sarcastically refers to the young kids (who were the victims of the Oslo attack) as “little dearies:”

I saw at least one article that had photos of previous summers with the little dearies and their handlers assembling Israel-bashing displays.

Then she mentions something about “red diaper[s]” (wtf?)–I guess a reference to raising kids as communists.

And then we have Pamela Geller coming dangerously close to justifying the shooting, saying:

Breivik was targeting the future leaders of the party responsible for flooding Norway with Muslims who refuse to assimilate, who commit major violence against Norwegian natives, including violent gang rapes, with impunity, and who live on the dole… all done without the consent of the Norwegians.

Don’t you get it?  Anders Breivik killed people who were enabling violent gang rapes!  He killed rape-enablers!  Is that even a crime?  Shouldn’t he get a medal for that?

Can anyone imagine the reaction had Norwegians (or Muslims!) mocked the victims of 9/11 in this way?