Fatal Oslo bombing rocks government HQ
- Thread starter Flipmo
- Start date
Seb, I think this guy's reaction is normal. Like you mentioned, he isn't here often so he doesn't know what members are like here. So when someone posts an idiotic comment, even sarcastically, it comes off as simply idiotic to those who don't know the members here well.
If you keep engaging him, this thread will derail even further. Right now, it can be brought back by simply explaining to him what happened and moving on.
I agree with what Preach said too. I can see where this guy is coming from. But to counter that, and I paraphrase patchily here, that an Islamic cleric was deported or maybe extradited from Norway. He vowed revenge. Given the track record of terrorists recently (being Muslim and Angry at the "West") it naturally pops into one's mind that it was a Muslim. After the biggest attacks in history on the US and in London (Madrid too, right?) to be so naive as to not assume it was a Muslim would be...well, naive. And stupid. Those blasts in Bombay last...Wednesday? First thing that popped into my mind was the Muslims. You know...the ones who did something similar in 2008?
To say that you (yes, you) as a Muslim are responsible for the attack, that your uncle had a hand in it and your dad funded it, is ridiculous and needs to stop. But no one on here is doing that. You need to take that up with the media.
If you keep engaging him, this thread will derail even further. Right now, it can be brought back by simply explaining to him what happened and moving on.
I agree with what Preach said too. I can see where this guy is coming from. But to counter that, and I paraphrase patchily here, that an Islamic cleric was deported or maybe extradited from Norway. He vowed revenge. Given the track record of terrorists recently (being Muslim and Angry at the "West") it naturally pops into one's mind that it was a Muslim. After the biggest attacks in history on the US and in London (Madrid too, right?) to be so naive as to not assume it was a Muslim would be...well, naive. And stupid. Those blasts in Bombay last...Wednesday? First thing that popped into my mind was the Muslims. You know...the ones who did something similar in 2008?
To say that you (yes, you) as a Muslim are responsible for the attack, that your uncle had a hand in it and your dad funded it, is ridiculous and needs to stop. But no one on here is doing that. You need to take that up with the media.
I heard he was somehow connected to the Teaparty political movement in the USA.. is that true??
And, perhaps I've missed it.. but what was his overall "purpose"? I mean, did he, himself (not the ppl speculating) say anything to anyone about what he hoped to achieve with this? Just curious.
Either way, death is awful, murder is worst. It's sad to say, but it feels even worst when something like this happens in a relatively peaceful country. Don't get me wrong, i'm not saying any lives are more valuable than the other, etc.. but if a place tries to stay under the violence radar and then something like this happens.. it's just that much more awful to me.
And, perhaps I've missed it.. but what was his overall "purpose"? I mean, did he, himself (not the ppl speculating) say anything to anyone about what he hoped to achieve with this? Just curious.
Either way, death is awful, murder is worst. It's sad to say, but it feels even worst when something like this happens in a relatively peaceful country. Don't get me wrong, i'm not saying any lives are more valuable than the other, etc.. but if a place tries to stay under the violence radar and then something like this happens.. it's just that much more awful to me.
He did.
He considers participants in the Labour Party to be "cultural marxists". He sees cultural figures of authority as traitors to his ideology, which he obviously considers superior. He classified these figures into Type A traitors, and Type B traitors. Type A was made up of political, cultural and religious leaders with a "culturally inclusive marxist orientation", whereas Type B traitors consisted of teachers, journalists, editors, and other similar positions of public responsibility of the same "multicultural marxist" orientation. He wrote a 1500 page manifest which documents the ideologies he supports, as well as a detailed, dated journal of the events leading up to the attack. It documents all stages of planning and execution and the most recently dated post was dated a few hours before it all happened. He had done a risk assessment with extensive reasoning. He lists all the chemicals used, the amounts, etc. He has also specified that recrutation into the labour party is the "head of the beast", which is why he struck where he did. It would be the most effective way to set "cultural marxists" back.
The document is titled "2083. A European Declaration of Independence". It is a call to arms. It is written as a guide on how to start the revolution, or something along those lines. It encourages anyone who is planning a similar "operation" (it is the word he uses to describe his actions) to pay heed to his risk assessment. With a 30% chance of getting off, sustaining a belief that there is hope of freedom afterwards will lead to insecurities, hesitation, confusion, and thus it would be wiser to assume neither possible outcome (death/captivity or freedom) as likely. But rather, use this fact as a motivator to execute the operation with maximum efficiency. In other words, he specifies that his intention was to kill as many people as he possibly could.
It also consists of borrowed texts from research, political "experts", political leaders, dictators of the past, and he has copied a declaration from the UNA-bomber and edited it to fit his ideology. It's quite extensive and he had very specific reasons. He wants to share it with the world tomorrow, and has expressed so to his defense attorney who relayed it to the media. As a matter of fact, from his risk assesment, he reasons in his manifest that his only way out would be through convincing the world.
He considers participants in the Labour Party to be "cultural marxists". He sees cultural figures of authority as traitors to his ideology, which he obviously considers superior. He classified these figures into Type A traitors, and Type B traitors. Type A was made up of political, cultural and religious leaders with a "culturally inclusive marxist orientation", whereas Type B traitors consisted of teachers, journalists, editors, and other similar positions of public responsibility of the same "multicultural marxist" orientation. He wrote a 1500 page manifest which documents the ideologies he supports, as well as a detailed, dated journal of the events leading up to the attack. It documents all stages of planning and execution and the most recently dated post was dated a few hours before it all happened. He had done a risk assessment with extensive reasoning. He lists all the chemicals used, the amounts, etc. He has also specified that recrutation into the labour party is the "head of the beast", which is why he struck where he did. It would be the most effective way to set "cultural marxists" back.
The document is titled "2083. A European Declaration of Independence". It is a call to arms. It is written as a guide on how to start the revolution, or something along those lines. It encourages anyone who is planning a similar "operation" (it is the word he uses to describe his actions) to pay heed to his risk assessment. With a 30% chance of getting off, sustaining a belief that there is hope of freedom afterwards will lead to insecurities, hesitation, confusion, and thus it would be wiser to assume neither possible outcome (death/captivity or freedom) as likely. But rather, use this fact as a motivator to execute the operation with maximum efficiency. In other words, he specifies that his intention was to kill as many people as he possibly could.
It also consists of borrowed texts from research, political "experts", political leaders, dictators of the past, and he has copied a declaration from the UNA-bomber and edited it to fit his ideology. It's quite extensive and he had very specific reasons. He wants to share it with the world tomorrow, and has expressed so to his defense attorney who relayed it to the media. As a matter of fact, from his risk assesment, he reasons in his manifest that his only way out would be through convincing the world.
this is the manifest:
http://www.wupload.com/file/65239460/independence.pdf
it's a site similar to rapidshare, you click "regular download" and wait 20 secs. you only get 30kb/s though. if the link goes down:
http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/6560898/2083_A_European_Declaration_of_Independence
http://www.wupload.com/file/65239460/independence.pdf
it's a site similar to rapidshare, you click "regular download" and wait 20 secs. you only get 30kb/s though. if the link goes down:
http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/6560898/2083_A_European_Declaration_of_Independence
Wow. It sounds like he at some point in life became fascinated with the concept of martyrdom, and wanted to embrace the "strength" (in lack of a more universal and precise word to describe the idea) it takes to be so fearless and ideological, and that he spent years disciplining himself to reach that level of "fearlessness" (again, in lack of a better word to describe such an abstract and subjective concept). And that he now is pissed at everyone else who doesn't put themselves through what he did.
I am still surprised that he is alive. In most cases like this the killer is either shot or turns the gun on himself.
Think Columbine, Dunblaine or 9/11 or 7/7.
I guess there isn't a paradise for Christian Terrorists!
Everyone is saying kill him. But I don't agree with "an eye for an eye". I didn't think Saddam should have been hung either, and nor should Bin Laden have been killed. I like to think that we are too evolved for that. But I guess our governments disagree.
I would give him to Zed and let Zed have his way like he did with Marcellus Wallace.
Think Columbine, Dunblaine or 9/11 or 7/7.
I guess there isn't a paradise for Christian Terrorists!
Everyone is saying kill him. But I don't agree with "an eye for an eye". I didn't think Saddam should have been hung either, and nor should Bin Laden have been killed. I like to think that we are too evolved for that. But I guess our governments disagree.
I would give him to Zed and let Zed have his way like he did with Marcellus Wallace.
There's about 80000 muslims in Norway. Not a huge amount.
Why has he chosen Serbia? He probably wanted the slaughter of muslims to continue...
He is a Christian and his views are extreme. So that definitely makes him a Christian Extremist. The Holy Crusades belong in centuries past... Another nail in the coffin of religion....
I +1 Jokerman's earlier comments.
Why has he chosen Serbia? He probably wanted the slaughter of muslims to continue...
He is a Christian and his views are extreme. So that definitely makes him a Christian Extremist. The Holy Crusades belong in centuries past... Another nail in the coffin of religion....
I +1 Jokerman's earlier comments.
Donate
Any donations will be used to help pay for the site costs, and anything donated above will be donated to C-Dub's son on behalf of this community.
Members online
No members online now.