>Impending doom. As for the riots in London, I refer to this article:

Chomsky on demoralized societies – October 9, 2008

As for the American chaos, you may want to read this one:

The Crash, The Israel Lobby and The Change of Attitude – November 25, 2010

—

Now, let’s not forget about discussing who and what made Breivik a terrorist.

Here are two opposing views.

1. On the Radicalization of Anders Breivik by David Wood at Answering Muslims, who claims that ”none of the people being blasted by the media [Robert Spencer, Pamela Geller, Geert Wilders etc] had anything to do with Breivik’s extremism” and singles out mainstream media as the beast to blame.

2. Who inspired Anders Breivik? by Justin Raimondo at Antiwar.com, who in previous columns ”clearly assigned them [Spencer, Geller etc] their share of guilt” and now reexamines the issue ”in light of their vigorous denials”.

Watch and read them both.

The fact that David Wood is not even mentioning Fjordman (Peder Jensen) is very odd, since Fjordman’s influence on Breivik’s ideology is massive. Anyone who cares to read the manifesto (PDF) must see that, and anyone reading the manifesto should come to the conclusion that Breivik is an extreme narcissist with a Messiah complex. What he writes about himself and others has proven not to be trustworthy.

Hence, when David Wood speaks so eloquently about Breivik it’s all based on Breivik’s own words in the manifesto, which is also very odd. I’m not saying Breivik’s a complete liar, just that he’s lying. A lot.

The publishers of the Gates of Vienna blog (where Fjordman is a frequent contributor) encourage us to read their articles and check their links. Justin Raimondo did just that, and found some really sick stuff written by some freak named ”El Inglés”. Here are some quotes from an article entitled On Vigilantism – Part One, published on Gates of Vienna, April 5 2010. There are many more.

Altering the response of the apparatus of state to Muslim crime may well emerge as one of the most obvious motivations for vigilante activity. If one is concerned about Somali drug-dealing and the lack of effective response by the state, then executing a few Somali drug-dealers and then calling a national newspaper with a) the justification for the killing and b) the calibre of the handgun used in the executions (for purposes of establishing one’s identity) will be likely to focus a certain amount of attention on the problem. […]

In contrast, any group of European vigilantes intent on taking the law into their own hands vis-à-vis Muslim crime would not suffer this restriction. Exceptional brutality will always have the potential to repel supporters and potential supporters, but it stands to reason that vigilantes in, say, Denmark, visiting impromptu justice on Arab street thugs in Copenhagen will have a much higher threshold of violence they have to cross before such revulsion starts to work against them. Indeed, everyday Danes tired of the Muslim crime now contaminating their country may well look to such people as their saviours, affording them support of various types. This will open up the potential for exceptional violence. […]

The efficacy of non-lethal violence in persuading these people to behave themselves in a more civilized manner is likely to be close to be zero. This leaves vigilantes with only one obvious option, which is to kill off the people in question. This will have the twin effects of a) making it impossible for them to engage in further crime, and b) creating at least some possibility that others like them might decide on a change of career.

The first comment on this article is by Fjordman. He does not condemn the maiming, beating and killing, but rather:

A thought-provoking essay from Inglés, as usual. May I also suggest that we cultivate a form of pan-European ethnic solidarity when it comes to stopping and reversing Third World immigration and removing the Globalist traitor class. Perhaps we can call it “white Zionism.” Since European group solidarity appears to be what the powers-that-be fear the most, perhaps that’s what we should give them.

I’d like to see a video by David Wood where he discusses the influence of Fjordman and Gates of Vienna in relation to what Breivik actually did.

>In Sweden we have this blog named Politiskt Inkorrekt (Politically Incorrect), which is one of the most visited sites in our country. ”We tell it like it is, straight, without any kind of censorship.”

This blog is now being run by leading people of Sverigedemokraterna (SD, the Sweden Democrats), and it’s filled to the brim with hatred and lies. Lately they’ve been running this ”terrorism against Israel is more justified than terrorism against Norway” crap, for example.

Today they published an article entitled Något är ruttet i Norge – elitens anti-semitism (”Something is rotten in Norway – the Anti-Semitism of the elite”). In short, they praise the freaks in a Canadian TV-show who blame the people of Norway for being anti-Semitic. In other words, they sympathize with what Anders Behring Breivik did, saying that the young people who participated in the AUF summer camp at Utøya had themselves to blame for taking a stand for the suppressed people in Palestine.

This is not the stance taken by extremist underground Muslim-hating websites only (like David Horowitz’s Frontpage, to pick one of many examples). In many ways, this is the official Zionist stance. Jerusalem Post:
”The youth camp he attacked was engaged in what was essentially (though the campers didn’t see it that way, no doubt) a pro-terrorist program.”

It would be interesting to hear what the people who voted for and sympathize with Sverigedemokraterna think about this. Are you against your own people, all of a sudden? Are you against your fellow Norwegians? Because that’s what SD is all about these days.

>
Whoa, 500+ visitors on this blog yesterday, and all because of this one giant loser named Anders Behring Breivik. It’s sad, really.

Indeed, he got the attention he wanted, but hopefully not the way he wanted it, because I’ve yet to find one person of true relevance who seriously takes this loser’s side. That being said, Breivik is not stupid. He’s crazy, but not stupid.

His actions must be taken seriously, of course, but I believe it’s very important not to feed his ego. I’ve read a lot of comments saying he’s ”academic” and such, but when studying the manifesto it’s quite easy to distinguish his own personal writings from what is just plain copy/paste work (I’d say about 70%). He is nothing, yet thinks he is everything, therefore he must be ridiculed and exposed as a fraud. Also, he is everything but a deep thinker, and therefore the comparisons some people have made with Theodore Kaczynski, the Unabomber, are just plain silly.

Two lessons to be learned so far:

The Norwegian Minister of Foreign Affairs, Jonas Gahr Støre, made an important point early on:
We’ve seen in Europe in recent years that politicians have been jumping to conclusions about suspects before investigations have been conducted, and we will not commit that error.

Unfortunately, a lot of people were not that bright.
Yes, I admit, my very first thought was ”Fuck, I hope it’s not the Islamists!”… But I didn’t cry it out loud, making a complete fool of myself. Hence, the second lesson: Terrorists come in all sizes, heritages, shapes and skin colors. Or as Counterblast put it some 16 years ago: Terror has no shape.
Most of us already knew that, but it still was an important reminder, since our minds are clogged up by the war on terror. Jan Guillou writes about that here (in Swedish).

Until further information has been revealed I thought I’d gather some articles and websites that have helped me when trying to understand what’s going on. I hope you too find them helpful.

• Document.no – A complete list of comments Behring Breivik has left at Document.no (in Norwegian). Rough translations in English here and here.

• 2083 – A European Declaration of Independence (PDF, 8.1 Mb, 1518 pages) – The infamous manifesto. Bear in mind that at least 70% (my guess, Breivik himself admits to about 50%) is copy/paste work from other people’s writings. In my opinion, the most disturbing part is the diary, or Knights Templar Log as he prefers to call it (starting at p. 1413).
• Fjordman (the old blog) – Most of the well written texts in the manifest are written by Fjordman (Wikipedia), at least 35 of them (most of them between paragraph 2.50 and 2.99 in the manifesto). Fjordman is an anonymous extreme Zionist blogger and has obviously been a huge influence on Breivik. Perhaps there are several people using the Fjordman monicker. There have been claims that Breivik himself is Fjordman, but in my opinion that is highly unlikely.
  The Fjordman files – Everything written by this dude.
• Gates of Vienna – Fjordman resides here for now, alongside some other Islam-critical writers. Read his Thoughts on the recent atrocities.

• Norway, Islam and the threat of the West – Aljazeera is almost always on point.

• The irrelevance of the Knights in a global society – What Breivik says about the Knights Templar is in my opinion the most irrelevant topic in the manifesto, but Juan Cole still writes excellent about it. Maybe that Christian fantasy stuff is more important in America?

• Terrorn och den europeiska nyfascismen – A summary of Breivik’s mishmash of ideologies. (in Swedish)
• Åter till frågan om Europas två extremhögrar – Rasmus Fleischer’s take on the two European extreme right-wing ideologies, as he sees it. (in Swedish)
• EDIT
  Konsten att läsa statistik om brottslighet – It’s almost impossible to compare criminal statistics between countries, simply because what counts as a terrorist attack by ETA in Spain, for example, does not necessarily count as a terrorist attack in another country. It’s a matter of definitions. That’s why the link of statistics that’s been spreading (and seems to do so everytime there’s a terror attack) may be misleading. Read a discussion about that right here. (in Swedish)

Swedish site EXPO (“founded in 1995 with the aim of studying and mapping anti-democratic, right-wing extremist and racist tendencies in society”) is as hypocritical as always. To my knowledge, still nothing about Breivik’s own claim that ”the Jews/Israel” (p. 1373 in the manifesto) is his main ally, or his possible connections to and/or utmost inspiration from extreme Zionist websites. Absolutely nothing about Fjordman.

To be continued.