Sunday, July 24, 2011

Lessons From Oslo. . .

As is often the case, a tragedy provides us with various lessons to consider. Some good, some bad, some obvious, some not. Sadly, for political reasons, many of these lessons will be ignored and others will be wrongly interpreted. But we aren’t afraid of the truth. So let’s talk about the Norway killings and see what lessons we should draw from this tragedy.

Lesson No. 1: Guns Control Does Not Work

Gun ownership in Norway is heavily regulated, though you will hear the contrary from the MSM. Automatic weapons are completely banned as are most large caliber pistols. To acquire a gun, you must have a clean police record and you must demonstrate a use for it. This can include hunting or sport shooting. However, you may only own one gun in each caliber in which you compete. To own a handgun, you must be 21. To own a shotgun, you must be 18. The police may inspect your guns in your home at any time and the amount of ammunition you may own is limited.

None of this stopped the Oslo killer because laws do not stop people who intend to break them.

Lesson No. 2: Guns Save Lives

It took the police 90 minutes to respond from the moment the shooting began. In that time, the Oslo killer methodically killed 85 people (19 more were wounded). He shot them with an MSM-described "machine gun" (banned in Norway if true) and then walked around shooting the fallen in the head with a shotgun. Clearly, he had to reload many times and knew he was in no danger the entire time.

If anyone at this camp had been armed, they could have stopped him almost immediately -- especially seeing as how he surrendered the moment police arrived. The fact the public was disarmed by its government put them at his mercy and needlessly cost 70+ people their lives.

Lesson No. 3: Guns Do Not Cause Crime

The possession of a gun did not motivate this killer, nor did it cause his crime. His beliefs about the collapse of society motivated this crime. And if he hadn't used a gun, he would have used something else -- like the explosives he used on the government buildings.

There are 250 million guns in the United States. Think about it. If guns “caused” crimes, then there would 250 million murders a year. Even if only one in ten people fell under the evil spell of these guns, we would still be dealing with 25 million murders a year. Even one percent means 2.5 million. But less than 10,000 people are killed annually in the United States by guns. That works out to less than 0.004% of guns being used to kill someone. . . 40 out of every million. Guns do not cause crime.

Lesson No. 4: Leftists Are Biased

It is fascinating that the first instinct of leftists when there is a terrorist attack is to tell everyone not to assume the terrorism was the result of Islamic terror groups. “Stay calm, don’t jump to conclusions,” we are told, even after we learn the perpetrators are Muslims. Yet, this time, once we heard the killer was white, the MSM immediately assumed he was a right-winger.... just as they did with the left-winger who shot up the Holocaust museum and the left-winger who shot Giffords. This time they were apparently right, every other time they’ve been wrong.

Moreover, the difference in treatment is stunning. With the left wingers, the media (1) assumes they are right wingers, and (2) dismisses evidence to the contrary, before (3) reluctantly reporting the “alleged evidence” they are leftists after much soul searching about evil right wingers, (4) immediately before switching to the “crazy loner, not really ideologically driven” talking points. They also keep referring to them as “alleged” long after it's clear they're guilty.

This time, the media jumped on the idea that he is a right winger the moment they heard he wasn't a Muslim. They immediately launched into trying to find every website he's ever visited to toss blame their way (some leftist have even blamed Palin). They've also made no pretense of calling him "alleged", nor have they suggested he's a crazed loner.

What’s more, compare his treatment to Muslim killer Maj. Nidal Hasan? LONG after all the evidence came in that Hasan attacked and killed American soldiers in the name of Islam, the administration and their MSM buddies kept saying “alleged killer” and claimed they had no idea what motivated him. Yet this Oslo killer isn’t even in handcuffs and the same people are declaring his motives solved?

Lesson No. 5: The Wrong Lessons Will Be Draw

Naturally, the wrong lessons will be drawn.

Crazy people are crazy. By definition, they do crazy things. You cannot stop them because they are unpredictable. Restricting the rights and freedoms of hundreds of millions of innocent people in an impossible effort to stop the next nutjob is an obscenity. It also will only encourage the next nutjob to seek their own moment of fame. Any attempt to pass laws "to prevent this from happening again" is sheer, cynical political opportunism.

What’s more, it is a mistake to draw a comparison between Islamic terrorists and this idiot. This guy was crazy. He had one arrow to fire and he's done that. His day is done. But Islamic terrorists like al Qaeda are not crazy. They may be goat-molesting retards, but they are not crazy. They are at war. Their goal is a very rational one: to damage and destabilize the West so that it withdraws from territories they have claimed and that it becomes unwilling to fight back when they try to spread Islam across the world. To dismiss them as akin to this idiot would be like dismissing the first wave of German soldiers in Poland in 1939 as nothing more than rowdy tourists.

Lesson No. 6: Our Media Culture Is Corrupt

Finally, our media culture is corrupt. No sooner were huge photos of this shooter spread across the newspapers of the world and radio and television started spouting his name than crackhead Amy Winehouse died. Suddenly, a woman who was dead for years but just hadn't stopped moving until yesterday became the world's most important story.

Our media is sick.

51 comments:

Tennessee Jed said...

very nice post. I have had this argument with the local paper's editorial staff before. At the time, I was mainly drawing comparisons between the treatment of the shootings in Arizona and at the army base. I agree with everyone of your conclusions. The only question in my mind is to what extent a particular media type actually believes what they right vs. the extent they are just consciously trying to push gun control.

AndrewPrice said...

Thanks Jed.

On your question, I honestly don't know. I assume it's probably a little bit of both. Most of the reporters I've seen (and met) are neither bright people nor well-informed people. In fact, they are quite stupid. So I doubt they have much of an ability to grasp the truth amidst the garbage.

On the other hand, as we've seen with the Journolist, many are clearly pushing an agenda and are actively coordinating with each other to spin the news -- have you noticed how quickly (overnight in fact) the word "tax" has vanished from the debt debate to be replaced with "revenues".... as if the government would actually earn anything.

I suspect these people drive the others like sheepdogs push sheep. They probably lay out the "facts" and arguments for the others to follow and the others aren't smart enough to see that they are repeating lies.

Take the issue of the "machine gun." I have been unable to find out what kind of gun he used, but it's beeing reported to be a "machine gun." I seriously doubt that. But no one has bothered to ask because they take "machine gun" at face value. And it suits the left to scare people about "machine guns" when no one in the US has been killed with an automatic in 50 years. . . it's just a good scare tactic to suggest it.

LawHawkRFD said...

Andrew: Simply put, and despite all the attempts of the MSM to say otherwise, there is no vast right wing conspiracy, but there is a clear, palpable and vast (REALLY vast) Islamic conspiracy. This mass murderer is indeed a right wing nutcase (much like Timothy McVeigh). Look behind his murderous rampage, and you find nobody standing with him. Look behind the “alleged” Muslim attacks, and you find millions of people standing with the perpetrators, cheering them on.

As you pointed out so well, there’s nothing so tempting to a potential mass murderer than a wealth of helpless victims. Add mental instability and a “cause,” and you have what is almost inevitable. The victims are tragic, in large part because this mad wolf smelled a pack of helpless sheep. No shepherds with guns to kill or deter the rabid wolf. How comforting can it be to the friends and loved ones of the victims that the gun law-abiding victims were killed by a nutcase wielding illegal weapons?

The left in America wants the same kind of gun confiscations that they have in Norway. Norway’s saving grace for now is that despite its welfare-state socialism and “tolerance” (particularly of Muslims), it is a benevolent government. But looking beyond that, gun bans for entire nations can turn political leaders into that wolf that smells victims. What if Norway had a Hitler, a Mao, or a Stalin in waiting? How would the Norwegians defend themselves when that benevolent government turned malevolent?

You couldn’t be more correct about the shameful state of the American mainstream media. They couldn’t be more delighted that this mass-murdering madman is a reactionary and anti-Muslim. It will create more pleas for “tolerance” and “understanding,” not to mention a renewed effort to confiscate American’s guns. But wait—Amy Winehouse is dead!

Great article, and perfectly timed. The mainstream media may be the death of us yet. On the other hand, if Obama and the left fail to get control of it, the Internet may be our salvation. Somehow, I don’t think we’d see your article on the front pages of the New York Times or the Washington Post or hear it from the talking heads on CBS, ABC, and NBC.

AndrewPrice said...

Thanks Lawhawk, and yeah, I wouldn't hold my breath to see this one on the front page of the Times!

I agree on all point. I think that our media delights in having someone on the right they can attack. They go out of their way to explain away or excuse almost all scandals involving leftists, but will never stop exploiting a scandal involving someone on the right. And this isn't even a scandal, they are just trying to turn it into one.

This guy is crazy. He doesn't represent anyone on the right. Yet they want to make him out that way because our "unbiased" media want to use this tragedy to slander their political opponents.... who just happen to be about 60% of the public.

Absolutely right about the vast right wing conspiracy too. There is no such thing. But there is an Islamic terrorist movement who are blowing things up and assassinating people every single day in dozens of countries. Yet, the only one that genuinely concerns the media is their fantasy right-wing conspiracy. It's ridiculous.

But yes.... let us focus on Amy Winehouse, that's the real tragedy. ** rolls eyes **

JG said...

Great post. Every point is spot-on. And kudos for using the word "retard." You're now on major blacklists around the world. The Amy Winehouse thing was probably the biggest for me. I couldn't believe the lack of response among my online social networks to Norway in comparison to the outpouring of grief over Amy Winehouse. Boggles the mind.

AndrewPrice said...

Thanks JG!

It is a useful word and I do like to get myself blacklisted! :-)

Yeah, I couldn't believe how quickly people went from "oh what a tragedy" to "Amy Winehouse died? Oh my God! The horror, the horror!" It's stunning sometimes how skewed our priorities can be.

In any event, I'm glad you agreed with the other point too. The Nadal thing still ticks me off. Obama should have been a little more concerned with the deaths of US troops than he was with the rights of the killer. Grrrrr.

DUQ said...

Excellent article Andrew. Like everyone else, I agree on all points.

A lot of leftists (like at Huffpo) are trying to spin this as vindication of Muslims. That's insane. The fact that everyone assumed it was probably a Muslim and then it wasn't doesn't mean Muslims didn't do all the other bombings. It just means this one time it wasn't a Muslim.

AndrewPrice said...

Thanks DUQ, I agree. This is not vindication of anything regarding Muslims. At best, it's a reminder that non-Muslims too can commit terroristic acts -- but then, we knew that.

AndrewPrice said...

Here's an interesting twist. It turns out that much of this idiot's manifesto was stolen from left Unabomber Theodore Kazinski. All he did was swap out worlds like "leftist" for "multicultural."

Here's the intro to the story:


DENVER (AP) — Parts of the manifesto written by the suspect in Norway's terrorist attack were taken almost word for word from the writings of "Unabomber" Ted Kaczynski.

The passages copied by Anders Behring Breivik appear in the first few pages of Kaczynski's manifesto. Breivik changed a Kaczynski screed on leftism and what he considered to be leftists' "feelings of inferiority" — mainly by substituting the words "multiculturalism" or "cultural Marxism" for "leftism."

Kaczynski wrote: "One of the most widespread manifestations of the craziness of our world is leftism, so a discussion of the psychology of leftism can serve as an introduction to the discussion of the problems of modern society in general."

Breivik wrote: "One of the most widespread manifestations of the craziness of our world is multiculturalism, so a discussion of the psychology of multiculturalists can serve as an introduction to the discussion of the problems of Western Europe in general."

DUQ said...

Andrew, That is interesting. Do you think that makes him a leftist or just confused?

AndrewPrice said...

DUQ, No I don't think crazy people have ideologies. I think they just have grievances. And their grievances are just expressions of personal failures that they try to spin into vast political conspiracies.

I think they are simply attracted to ideology because it gives them a way to shift blame for their lives. But I don't think they genuinely understand or care about the ideology itself, just it's ability to excuse their own failures.

Ed said...

Andrew, Great point about the number of gun crimes compared to the number of guns.

On the bias, I don't know if they are all actively biased or not, but I would say most are. The liberals I have met have all been biased and all believe liberal BS no matter how much proof you provide to the contrary.

AndrewPrice said...

Ed, Thanks. It makes sense. If guns really did cause crime, then you would expect the number of guns floating around the country to CAUSE crime. But since only 40 in a million guns will be used to kill someone (and that doesn't exclude suicides or police shooting) apparently, guns aren't that strong a pull after all.

In fact, I'll bet the death rates of many other things we don't worry about are probably a lot higher.

Ed said...

Thanks Andrew. Also, I just read that the maximum sentence this guy can get in Norway is 21 years and he is likely to be out in 14 and he could qualify for weekend release after 7!!!

So not only are people prevented from protecting themselves, but "the system" doesn't even bother doing anything serious about it afterward.

AndrewPrice said...

Ed,

Thanks?

Yeah, I read something earlier about the low sentences, but I didn't see the parole numbers. I knew it was 21 years. How ridiculous! And if he does get out early, he won't even be 50 when he gets releases. That's shameful.

Ed said...

Sorry, it was a typo. I had a longer sentence but deleted part of it and missed the beginning.

AndrewPrice said...

I gotcha.

Joel Farnham said...

Andrew,

The meme is Norway has a substantial amount of guns. The Narrative doesn't let anyone know the extent of the control of those guns.

Disgusting.

AndrewPrice said...

Joel, That's what I'm seeing too and it's exactly what you would expect from a leftist, anti-gun, anti-freedom MSM.

Of course, that also raises a serious contradiction. If it's true that Norway is awash in guns, then how do they explain the low gun crime rate -- about as low as Switzerland, which has no virtually no restrictions? Could it be that guns are not the problem at all? Hmmm.

Joel Farnham said...

Andrew,

Just like the liberals can never explain the high rate of crime in guns and drug free zones. Deliberate and extensive use of the three monkeys where the narrative doesn't match the reality.

Liberalism does kill. It just doesn't always do it directly. It also condones death as long as it moves the narrative along.

AndrewPrice said...

Joel, That's true. I don't recall if it was a book or an article I read, but way back, someone outlined a lot of things liberals had done that had gotten people killed -- like the number of people who died from malaria when they banned DDT.

Gun control is definitely one of those. The biggest truism about gun control is that the only people it controls are the innocent -- it never stops the bad guys, it just keeps people from defending themselves.

As for turning a blind eye to the facts, that's an MSM speciality. Anything that doesn't fit the liberal narrative gets ignored, shouted down, or scoffed at.

DCAlleyKat said...

"Our media is sick."

And a person just has to wonder, how much of an ingredient is a sick media in the crazy making process.

AndrewPrice said...

DCAlleyKat, You know.... I have to lay a LOT of the blame on the media. They sensationalize everything and they make heroes of out monsters and give fame to anyone willing to do something crazy, stupid or monstrous. They are the ones feeding the beast.

They have also made our culture so combative and disrespectful and I think that affects people too. When you're told that the winner of any debate is the person who screams the loudest, and when you see an MSM feeding you lies with a smile, it doesn't take long for people to feel like the only way to change things is violence.

T-Rav said...

Andrew, I think you make a lot of good points. On the gun issue, it's just hearsay I picked up from the blogosphere, but I read that in Norway it's virtually impossible to purchase a handgun for self-defense purposes. Even for someone whose job is security-related, getting a personal firearm is extremely difficult. So yeah, that gives freaks like this guy a total advantage in these situations.

I also read that some of the people at the youth camp at first walked up to the guy and tried to tell him this wasn't the way to express his grievances, before getting thanked with lead in the face. It just goes to show that idealism is youth's greatest strength and greatest weakness.

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, "Self defense" is not one of the reason that constitute "need" in Norway. So you're right about that. Basically, you can get a gun if you're a competitive shooter or you can get a shotgun if you hunt. That's about it.

I hadn't heard the second part, but it doesn't surprise me. In my experience, the Europeans have lost touch with reality and can no longer spot someone who wishes them harm. They really think they can rationalize with crazy people and murderers.

I also read that when he showed up in a uniform and asked them all to get into a big group, they all did it because "he looked like a police officer, so we trusted him." Frankly, I think the situation sounds so suspicious that I can't see Americans falling for it .... a lone cop who now wants everyone in a large huddle? No way. But again, in my experience, Europeans trust authority figures implicitly and do what they are told. In fact, it's downright creepy to see how easily the Germans do what they are told.

T-Rav said...

Andrew, after posting that, I actually came across a study saying that Norway, in fact, has one of the higher rates of gun ownership in Europe--something like a third of the population has a gun. I'm just spitballing, but I suspect that's because Norway is largely mountain wilderness, which make sporting and hunting rather important. At any rate, I bet it's much lower in a large city like Oslo, and even more so among a demographic like young Labour Party members.

On the authority thing, it's kinda ironic that Europeans accuse us of being ready-made fascists, and yet they seem all too willing to blindly follow anyone with a uniform. I don't know that much about Norway, but in the case of Germany, it's largely due to historical factors in the evolution of the German nation-state itself. Prussia and Bismarck and all that--it's a very long and sordid tale.

Incidentally, as far as Amy Winehouse goes, I'm disgusted but not surprised how fast she became big news. Honestly, for those who kept up with her at all, was there anyone who did NOT see this coming?

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, On Winehouse, like I said, she's been dead for years, she just hadn't stopped moving. I think it was obvious this was coming. Her whole history pointed to it.

But I have to admit being a little shocked at how her death got 100% of the attention. It really completely pushed the Oslo story (and the debt crisis) right off the papers.

On the Germans, yeah, I have relatives in Germany and I'm very familiar with the history. But even beyond the history, it's just cultural -- you do what the group tells you. If everyone started painting their doors purple, you would too.

When I was in college, a couple of psych majors did an interesting study where they put up two signs over some public pay phones. One said (in German) "men only" and the other said "women only." Sure enough, the Germans lined up accordingly -- men in one line, women in the other. And when one of the researchers got in the wrong line, they were told by all the Germans in line that they were in the wrong line. When they refused to change lines, the Germans got rude(r).

People like that have no room to talk about other people being fascists -- especially about Americans who are the most opinionated and independent people on the planet.

T-Rav said...

Andrew, that's also the reason I get so irritated when oh-so-knowledgeable liberals talk about Nazism and so on and then add, sarcastically, "But of course, 'it can't happen here.'" Well, the fact is it can't, at least not in the way it did. We could certainly wind up with some kind of brutal autocratic regime if we're not careful--some might say we have one right now--but it would have to be radically different in some ways from what happened in Germany, because the culture is radically different.

I don't know for sure, but I would suspect that the following orders thing gets worse the farther north and east you go in Germany; partly because the western regions are moderated by French, Dutch etc. influence, and also because the east has been more subject to that sort of rule--most recently Communism, for example. A professor of mine once showed us a map of Germany, with various political sub-units color coded according to how citizens valued personal responsibility versus government protection/control. The lighter the color, the more you valued the latter, and vice versa. The area that made up the former East Germany (this was from a survey a few years ago) were uniformly white or off-white.

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, Your suspicions about the Germans are correct. My family lives in Bavaria (good Germans... beer, parties, not big on war). But the family got stuck in East Germany after the war. So I've been in both areas and gotten to know people in both areas. I've also gotten to meet a lot of northerners. The further north and east you go, the more lockstep they become and the more enthralled they become with authority.

I also agree that Nazism/communism couldn't happen here. For one thing, Americans are too independent minded and too contrarian to accept the kinds of policies that are needed for a dictatorship to take hold. Just try seizing my land.

Indeed, other key is that in addition to being opposed to authority on principle, Americans are armed and willing to put up a fight to defend their rights with force if it comes to that. In fact, I think Red Dawn was way too generous to the Russians. They would need 500,000 soldiers just to hold Colorado Springs and they would lose most of those in the process. We are not a people you can mess with. (At least outside of liberal college towns.)

darski said...

QUOTE: In fact, I'll bet the death rates of many other things we don't worry about are probably a lot higher./QUOTE

in both Canada and the US, more people die of abortion than any other cause. One less citizen to defend our freedoms.

That's from my Free Dominion days.

AndrewPrice said...

darski, Now now, you know abortion isn't killing... at least that's what the left says. And they would know -- they've killed tens of million of people.

As an interesting aside, the same left that thinks abortion is fine are the same people who used to engage in Eugenics until it wasn't popular to believe that openly anymore. Actually, I guess that's wrong. They never really changed their beliefs, they just changed their wording.

AndrewPrice said...

By the way, if anybody wants to read a really interesting discussion of this guy's background, the Washington Examiner has a fascinating piece: LINK.

Some highlights -- he was apolitical until a Muslim friend of his cheered a missile attack on US troops during the First Gulf War.

His parents are both leftists. They divorced when he was 1 year old and he had no relationship with his father.

He considers himself center-right and a moderate Christian. He despises neoNazis and racists.

His manifesto is apparently a collection of ideas from other people.

He has mother-issues, like all these guys.

And some of his past is fabricated -- like his supposedly joining a populist party and running for a city counsel spot.

He also formed a group (apparently in his head) who planned to take over Europe in 2083 after a series of coups.

He took steroids and visited prostitutes.

CrispyRice said...

Good post, Andrew, as usual!

I'm so saddened by this, and I'm even more sickened by the reaction in our media. I was online most of Friday and it seemed like "Oh, a shooting, but it wasn't in the US, so don't worry about it, lalala..." It does show how little the MSM thinks we care about the rest of the world, except when they can push their agenda with it. And it is really sick how that's the one thing the MSM seems to want to use this tragedy for. Blah.

AndrewPrice said...

Thanks Crispy. I think Americans as a rule aren't overly interested in what is going on overseas, but our media definitely feeds that by ignoring stories beyond out borders - unless they involve celebrities.

T-Rav said...

Andrew, wow that's bizarre. So much for him being a "Christian fundamentalist." Once this story gets out there, though, I expect the media to quickly stop using that term to describe him.

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, Yeah, he's a strange one -- as they all are. And no doubt he'll be associated with everything the left doesn't like, even though makes it very clear that he's a "center-right" and "moderate Christian" -- his own words.

Koshcat said...

Good article with one error - Amy Winehouse was a crackwhore. It is important to be accurate in these things.

The whole Norweigen event upsets me. People are arguing his ideology but forgetting he was insane. He had lost touch with reality and understanding right from wrong. I don't know much about the court system in Norway, but does anyone know how long they can hold someone found to be clinically insane? Sometimes that is a sentence without a specific end.

I often wonder about episodes like these and am amazed that they are able to kill so many. I understand you might be scared to death. But if everyone is being killed what do you have to lose with rushing the guy? If 10 or 20 would have rushed him, he couldn't have shot them fast enough unless he truly was behind cover with a machine gun. Especially if he had to reload. How do we teach our children that sometimes the cavalry isn't coming and you may have to defend yourself with whatever you have handy?

AndrewPrice said...

Koshkat, I don't understand it either how people can let themselves be killed so easily. It used to be the same thing with hostage takers on airplanes -- if a passenger tried to stop them, other passengers would literally try to stop the one guy trying to save them. There is something very wrong within human nature.

In fact, I saw an interesting thing about plane crashes once. They said that when a plane crashes, the passengers split into 3 groups. The first 10% of passengers will do everything they can to get off the plane (like go over the seats) -- they survive. The next 80% will try to get out, but won't do more than line up and hope they make it out. The other 10% are the problem -- they will do "inappropriate things" like block the aisles or stop to grab luggage. Some will just sit there or will actively grab at other people to stop them. It was an interesting, disturbing study.

On his insanity, I agree entirely. You can't judge a crazy person according to their "ideology" because they don't have one -- they are crazy. To the extent they have cobbled together a coherent ideology (left/right/center/space cadet/etc.) it's just a manifestation of their craziness. In other words, they use the ideology to explain their own crazy behavior, it is not the ideology that drove them to be crazy. If they had turned left instead of right, they would be using an entirely different ideology with the identical results. It's just a pretext.

And to use their conduct to slander an ideology is as wrong as saying "he watched HBO, so HBO caused this."

On Winehouse, I have to say that as long as I've heard about her, it's been nothing but drugs, jail, violence, etc. This was inevitable.

Patti said...

this entire episode will be another reason the left will come after my guns. i wrote a piece on this that left libbies, who oppose guns, with the question: would you have wanted a weapon if you were in his pathway? if they say no: they're liars. if they say yes: they're hypocrites. either way, their convictions need some work.

AndrewPrice said...

Patti, So true -- they would be lying if they claim the wouldn't have wanted a weapon.

USS Ben USN (Ret) said...

Bravo Zulu Andrew, outstanding post!

There is a lot of information and questions the leftist rags, anchors and bloogers ain't mentioning or asking, as they gleefully lie about this maniac and compare him to right-wingers and Christians, such as:

1. If he hated muslims so much why didn't he bomb a mosque and shoot muslims?

2. There have been over 20,000 islamic terrorist attacks around the world since 9/11 and that's just what is reported (most likely thousands more not reported in muslim countries, particularly against Christians and protesters who want liberty).

3. An islamic terrorist organization initially took credit for this attack and several islamic forums joyfully approved of the attacks.

Based on 2 and 3 there's no reason for anyone to not initially suspect that islamic terrorists did this so there's certainly no reason to apologize to so-called "moderate" muslims since those muslims claim the jihadists don't represent them.

Good call on the gun control issue!
I wasn't surprised that no one had a gun to stop this demonic scumbag in light of Norways gun "control" laws that helps criminals and hurts the innocent like you mentioned.

I think it was 4 or 5 years ago some armed thieves hit one of Norway's big museums and none of the guards were armed.

I told my wife at the time how insane it was to have a no gun policy at a museum of priceless art, and infinitely more so to not defend children and unarmed adults.

I concur this subhuman monster is insane but I also think he is evil incarnate.
Anyone who would murder innocent people and especially children is not human in any sense of the word.
This murderer is a psychopath without a concience!

Meanwhile, I'm not surprised that many on the left are trying to paint this guy as a conservative Christian, because there are no depths they won't sink to if they think it will help their cause to create a leftist tyranny.

These self-described "reporters" see everything through their narrow, ideological lens and are no different than any other leftist shill.

I believe there's a new Journolist (sociolist?) these lefties are tapping into to get on the same lyin' page.
How else to explain how they all happened to have the same deceptive propaganda...I mean talking points?

These are irony deficient lefties so they can't possibly see the irony of their hypocrisy filled screeds.

Grrr!

AndrewPrice said...

Thanks Ben!

I'm 100% sure there is a new Journolist. They don't think for a minute that they were doing anything wrong. And you're right, it's amazing how all the leftists (i.e. MSM) instantly start with the same talking points as if they had all just come from a meeting.

I agree that he's evil. I am using crazy just in the sense that he's not rational in terms of finding an ideology and deciding to kill because of that ideology. He has decided to kill people and he uses the ideology for his cover. Beyond that, I think he's a psychopath who is looking to cover up his own personal defects or failures by inflicting pain upon the world. And those guys usually go for the soft targets.

What? 20,000 Islamic terrorist attacks... why I never heard such an outrageous lie... you must be one of them hard-core right wingers who wants to make Muslims sound bad. I hate the MSM. I've heard the 20,000 figure too and I have to wonder, how in the world can anyone with a brain not hear that and realize that something is wrong with Islam? How in the world can they overlook that to keep selling the lie that this is just a couple "extremists"? The MSM is absolute crap.

Joel Farnham said...

Everything reported about this guy from Oslo is suspect. His facebook page had been updated immediately after the attack. Unless the guy had access to a computer connected to the internet while under immediate arrest, that makes whatever is written on his page suspect. Some basic information is correct. His name. His picture. But the rest?

AndrewPrice said...

Joel, That's interesting. I hope someone investigates.

darski said...

I heard an interesting "Breakpoint" by chuck colson this am. He visited Oslo a few years back and of course visited prisons. He discovered an inordinate number of psychiatrists on staff.

he asked if many of the prisoners were mental cases and the response was "All of them!" It seems in a leftard world only sickness can cause a person to make a wrong choice. no mention of Jeremiah 17:9

Jeremiah 17:9
The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?

darski said...

found the link for Breakpoint...

http://www.breakpoint.org/bpcommentaries

if you guys work your magic for links that would be nice. :)

Title... The Terror of Evil and Sin

AndrewPrice said...

darksi, In the liberal world, all criminals are mentally insane because (1) liberals believe that everyone thinks like they do and (2) they would never commit crimes. Thus, criminals must either be forced into a life of crime by economic circumstances or they must be insane. Since no one in Norway could be poor (because of state benefits) they must be insane.

Liberals never have grasped the fact that some people are just pure evil. It's really a twisted mentality if you ask me. And frankly, if they spent any time actually talking to criminals, they would learn that most criminals are just lazy and don't want to work, and they really don't care about the effects of what they do on other people.

Thanks for the link: The Terror of Evil and Sin

USS Ben USN (Ret) said...

Anmdrew:

In their hateful glee to blame the Norway murders on conservative and Christians in general, the leftist media has now proven they are far worse than despicable by blaming individual conservatives like Robert Spencer:

NY Slimes Try To Assassinate The Good Character Of Robert Spencer

Why? Because they can't have folks like Spencer telling the truth about Islam and it's violent, jihadist followers (who are doing what Mohammed, their pedophile, rapist, murdering prophet told them to do).

I've followed Jihad Watch for several years now and I have never once read anything by Spencer that even implies he supports or encourages violence against anyone.

Apparently, simply telling the truth equals encouraging murder in leftist newspeak. IF you happen to be a conservative.

Of course, they won't use the same standard on idiots like Noam Chomsky who actually has advocated violence against the west and has openly supported (verbally and in writing) Al Qaida, Hamas and Hezbollah.

The fact is these murders in Norway had nothing to do with conservatives, Christians or Islam, particularly since those that were murdered weren't muslim, but even if they were muslim we should only blame the evil lunatic responsible, not good folks like Robert Spencer who are warning us of the dangers of other (greater) evils such as Jihadists.

Only in the leftist media (and Islamic countries) does the mere mention of 20,000 plus Islamic terrorist attacks in ten years considered hyperbole and inciteful hatred to commit murder against Norwegians.

The only difference is that Islamic terrorists know better and are playing the victim card now.
Yeah, as if Muslims are the true victims here.
But you wouldn't know it by watching MSNBC, CNN, or reading the NYSlimes.

USS Ben USN (Ret) said...

Andrew, good point on why the liberal lefties consider all criminals to be sick people who only need rehab and our understanding (unless they are conservatives, then they are evil nazis, but only if they turn down reprogramming).

It's yet another hypocritical view of the left since their very ideology requires that truth and morality always be relative in order to survive.

AndrewPrice said...

USS Ben, I think the truth is that the left has no shame and will exploit any tragedy to tar and feather their enemies. They don't care how big or awkward the lie, they will keep repeating it. And they know that their own people will simply accept it as true because they want to believe it, and that a sizable portion of the rest of the public will buy into it. So it's worth their time to say these things, no matter how stupid they may seem.

The left doesn't care if this is the truth or not, they only want the advantage that comes from saying it's true.

AndrewPrice said...

Ben, I've long marveled at the ability of liberals to apply their beliefs selectively. It's amazing how all criminals are wrongly accused victims of society with mental illnesses. . . except the people they don't like, who are pure evil. It's all just more liberal doublespeak.

Post a Comment