Oslo Bomber and Utoya Shooter's Manifest

The Oslo bomber and Utoya shooter's political manifest that he sent out before doing the deed.
I do not really want to spread it as that is his wish but it offers an insight into his mind.

He also sent out a ~1500 page long mainfest that can be downloaded here: http://www.2shared.com/file/M-s-2fBD/2083-AEuropeanDeclarationofInd.html
dystopianfuturetodaysays...

If you are worried about being called a fascist, then perhaps you should try to avoid murdering innocent people because they don't share your beliefs. If you are worried about being called a fascist, then don't put a power point presentation of your fascist live journal entries intercut with clip art on the fucking internet, you fascist fuck.

EMPIREsays...

not only is he a fucking fascist (and every single fascist should be locked up and the key thrown away), he's also an idiot, and a coward.

So... he's anti-islamic, and ultra-nationalist and goes on a killing spree of his own country-men? MORON

spoco2says...

He is a fucking loon, it's a pity he was a fucking loon with conviction who gunned down terrified kids on a camp.

@Pprt, you are a fucking loon as well.

There, personal name calling.

Someone who thinks that Islam is taking over Europe and must be stopped at all costs, including taking up arms is a fearful, racist bigot.

Pprtsays...

I'm sure you guys are smart enough to understand basic math, so here you go:

Population group A has a lower than replacement level reproduction rate.

Population group B has a higher than replacement level reproduction rate and benefits from an unlimited external source of replenishment.

The outcome is that over time, group A will cease to exist.

As it happens, some individuals in group A may be displeased about their upcoming extinction.

Stormsingersays...

>> ^Pprt:

I'm sure you guys are smart enough to understand basic math, so here you go:
Population group A has a lower than replacement level reproduction rate.
Population group B has a higher than replacement level reproduction rate and benefits from an unlimited external source of replenishment.
The outcome is that over time, group A will cease to exist.
As it happens, some individuals in group A may be displeased about their upcoming extinction.


Riiiight...he did it for the future of the Caucasian race.

Spoco was right on all points. He did it because he was a psychotic racist...and the same diagnosis holds for anyone who insists that he was right and that the only pity is that he set back the racist agenda.

You might want to reconsider your priorities in this case...I'd say the 90 murder victims are just a BIT more important than some theoretical (or more accurately, delusional) racial breeding race.

DerHasisttotsays...

>> ^Pprt:

I'm sure you guys are smart enough to understand basic math, so here you go:
Population group A has a lower than replacement level reproduction rate.
Population group B has a higher than replacement level reproduction rate and benefits from an unlimited external source of replenishment.
The outcome is that over time, group A will cease to exist.
As it happens, some individuals in group A may be displeased about their upcoming extinction.



Pprt, you are a racist.

Both Population A and B are humans. Therefore, there are no populations A and B, just population.

If A and B are distinguished by culture, B will not replace A: They will form, what non-idiotic people might call, AB + A + B.

See you next tuesday!

Pprtsays...

"Racist" is nothing more than silly name-calling. Its only effect is making the accuser seem unoriginal and intellectually lazy. Congratulations to anyone who uses that word for employing the debating tactics of a five year old.

Before Breivik's name was out there I expressed caution in not blaming anyone for the attacks. Unlike most media sources who immediately suspected Muslim involvement, I waited for more facts to emerge before making assumptions. That is not the action of a "racist" as you would define one.

Further, it is impossible to condone the recent events in Norway, nor would any sensible person defend these assassinations as a reasonable act. My admission is that his reasoning is sound, his concerns legitimate and his motivations worthy of study.

As for DerHasisttot's logical pretzel. I'm sure he is the type of fellow that would mobilize government in defense of an endangered species of duck, but yet finds the mild concept that a civilization wishes to maintain its existence is morally wrong. Shame on him.

DerHasisttotsays...

>> ^Pprt:

"Racist" is nothing more than silly name-calling. Its only effect is making the accuser seem unoriginal and intellectually lazy. Congratulations to anyone who uses that word for employing the debating tactics of a five year old.
Before Breivik's name was out there I expressed caution in not blaming anyone for the attacks. Unlike most media sources who immediately suspected Muslim involvement, I waited for more facts to emerge before making assumptions. That is not the action of a "racist" as you would define one.
Further, it is impossible to condone the recent events in Norway, nor would any sensible person defend these assassinations as a reasonable act. My admission is that his reasoning is sound, his concerns legitimate and his motivations worthy of study.
As for DerHasisttot's logical pretzel. I'm sure he is the type of fellow that would mobilize government in defense of an endangered species of duck, but yet finds the mild concept that a civilization wishes to maintain its existence is morally wrong. Shame on him.


It is not name calling if it is a true description. If you want to know the exact moment when libel ceased to be libel if the libelous statement was demonstrably true, look here.

GenjiKilpatricksays...

@Pprt

Just like Islam or Judaism isn't race. Neither is being a ginger.

Not to mention - Adult White Males have been the most privileged, self-entitled, killin' & manipulating "lesser" cultures type homo sapiens on the planet for a few centuries now, at least.

So what the hell are you talking about "civilizations going extinct"?

I pretty sure that dude used a frickin' computer to mock up this crazy ass diatribe, took an electric tram to the scene and used his iphone to call his nutbag friends before he went thru with it.

You should take an anthropology course before you go poppin' off at the mouth like that.

Pprtsays...

I'm not the one who even brought race into this discussion.. what are you both on about. I suspect you are projecting personal deep-seated insecurities onto someone else.

At any rate, thank you for demonstrating that when liberals are faced with information that doesn't fit their caricatural view of the world they go off into an infinite spiderweb of tangents.

DerHasisttotsays...

Ugh. Ok:



Population group A has a lower than replacement level reproduction rate.
Population group B has a higher than replacement level reproduction rate and benefits from an unlimited external source of replenishment.
The outcome is that over time, group A will cease to exist.
As it happens, some individuals in group A may be displeased about their upcoming extinction.



Human beings of whatever colour of skin can make babies with one another. Therefore: AB+A+B , not either A or B. This is not how it works. Also your group B cannot have unlimited external source of replenishment. Even with a huge outside source of replenishment, it will all work out as a nice intercultural mix, as it is right now: the letters we use are latin, the numerals arabic. Cultures are all already mixed.
It is not "us" versus "them", It is "us" with "them." What your ideological fear of a "civilisation going extinct" implies, is that you are a racist. Maybe just a cultural racist, but a racist nonetheless. Now to the really stupid stuff:

Unlike most media sources who immediately suspected Muslim involvement, I waited for more facts to emerge before making assumptions. That is not the action of a "racist" as you would define one.

Very good, had nothing to do with why I called you a racist, and you are right, it would not be a reason to call you a racist. But it does not negate your racist comments of basically agreeing with a mass-murderer that Muslims, or group B as you like to call them, will end our "civilisation."


My admission is that his reasoning is sound, his concerns legitimate and his motivations worthy of study.

His reasoning is not sound, his concerns are bonkers and his motivation is worthy of study for psychiatrists. If you like, present one of his mad theories you agree with and watch it being ripped apart by every kind of reasonable person (non-fascists and non-racists) there is. Now for the best bit:

As for DerHasisttot's logical pretzel. I'm sure he is the type of fellow that would mobilize government in defense of an endangered species of duck, but yet finds the mild concept that a civilization wishes to maintain its existence is morally wrong. Shame on him.


Let's reverse the roles ad absurdum and relish in the brilliant irony of your preface "logical pretzel": "I'm sure pprt is the type of person X, who would rather Z than Y! Shame on him!." So, you assume I am a specific type of person, assume how I would act in a certain situation, then assume how I would act in a different type of situation that goes against your ideology; and you follow with the (in your mind logical) conclusion that shame should be thrust upon me. Dude, you are shaming your own fiction.

But: Yes I would ask the nature conservatory of my government to protect an endangered species. The second part of your assumptional assault is of course: bonkers. I do not think it is ethnically wrong for anyone to remain alive. And I am not against museums, where one can look at relics of previous "civilisations." But: Cultures are in flux. Cultures are NOT static. Even North Korean culture cannot resist every western influence. In 200 years, no culture we know today will still exist. They will not have been killed by muslims like you want to believe in your racist mind. They will just evolve, move on, adapt and MIX. Every culture is mixed and NOT a homogenous entity.

hpqpsays...

You know what I find sadly amusing? All those "cultural supremacists" (most of which hide their xenophobia under a thin mask of concern about Islam's ethical failings) go on about how Judeo-Christian values are better, not realising that Islam is largely a rehash of the Bible/Torah they defend so ardently.

Sharia Law? Taken from the Torah/Old Testament.
Fire for the infidels? An exaggeration of Jesus' infernal invention.
Exterminating your "God's" enemies? Read the Old Testament already.

Pprtsays...

You've presented a thoughtful and considerate reply, DerHasisttot. Thank you.

The most basic argument I have presented is the erosion and eventual fading out of a particular population, and this is the crux of what I would like to focus on. The premise can be applied to any element of biodiversity.

The metaphor of an endangered species of duck is still apt.

My assumption was correct in that you, as most people, would find justification for mobilizing efforts in ensuring this particular population is given a chance to exist. For whatever reason, you have deemed this species of duck worth your concern and you do not hesitate to voice your consternation. Another assumption I will make is that the same can be said of any population that contributes to the precious diversity of our world and faces existential challenges. Whether it be a rare beetle, some exotic bush or the giant panda.

I like to think a noble feature of humanity is our desire for fairness and that we should not stand by while something is endangered. We both probably share this in common.

The above considered, I plead that because a particular civilization finds itself below replacement level it is in a perilous state and merits attention. This is a conclusion that, again, assumes an overreaching, unfettered respect for diversity.

Just as you should care for a particular duck, it would not negate your concern for other types of mallards, waterfowl or any other species. Your sense of justice would be shared equally.

You must extend your own desire to protect a unique given species to the right of a nation to maintain its own identifying characteristics. Realize that the desire for prosperity and sustained existence of a nation does not by definition mandate the impingement on another.

If you can not grasp this sympathy you display for a bird and apply it to another context, you are intellectually dishonest.

On the other hand, if like GenjiKilpatrick you harbour a sense that "whites" deserve to be eradicated because of who they are... you're barely human.

DerHasisttotsays...

The metaphor of an endangered species of duck is still apt.


No. It is not an apt comparison, you should stop using it, thinking in these brackets and stop listening to whomever told you this crap:


1. Human beings are at the top of the food chain, intelligent, social and able to make babies with one another, as previously stated.

2. Ducks can be saved by humans because humans can save ducks because: point 1. Ducks cannot form eco-departments of duck governments to save other ducks. Because they are fucking ducks. Certain species of ducks cannot breed with other species of ducks. Because they are actually different in more ways than colour. So saving a certain species of duck makes sense for biodiversity and etc. Also, plants and whatnot.

3. Now: Human beings of whatever colour, culture or other dividing feature your racist brain cooks up, are NOT DUCKS. They are all equally human. All. Equally. Let it sink in. Aaaalll. Eeeequaally. Not one single person is above another.

The above considered, I plead that because a particular civilization finds itself below replacement level it is in a perilous state and merits attention. This is a conclusion that, again, assumes an overreaching, unfettered respect for diversity.


There it is again, the racism. See point 3 for physical racism. Now to your cultural racism: "Civilisations," cultures, religions are NOT DUCKS. They are collective constructs. They diminish, they go inert. You can look at them in museums. Because there are almost always remnants and relics. But cultures are never dead. They are not murdered, driven away by evil muslims, outbred or dying off.

Cultures go on in the following cultures. They are absorbed. They are mixed. They are in flux. As I mentioned before. Cultures change. It is inevitable. A few hundred years ago, German was spoken on the British isles. It mingled with Scandinavian, Celtic and french languages and cultures --> English.

You must extend your own desire to protect a unique given species to the right of a nation to maintain its own identifying characteristics. Realize that the desire for prosperity and sustained existence of a nation does not by definition mandate the impingement on another.

Bullshit. Any nation's "identifying characteristics" did not exist 200 years ago and will not exist in 200 years time. It doesn't even need an outside influence to do it. It happens. "Nations" do not have a right to maintain characteristics. Those which tried, failed. We live in a globally connected world now in which ideas, culture, science and knowledge can be shared freely. Look at yourself being lectured at by a post-racial, post-fascist human being on the internet. Whatever culture you belong to, it changed a lot and it will keep changing a lot. This is called progress. Otherwise we'd all be talking a babylonian language.


On the other hand, if like GenjiKilpatrick you harbour a sense that "whites" deserve to be eradicated because of who they are... you're barely human.


As far as I can see here, he never said such a thing. This is your irrational fearful racist mind at work. Try to look outside your head. I guess you misread this: Not to mention - Adult White Males have been the most privileged, self-entitled, killin' & manipulating "lesser" cultures type homo sapiens on the planet for a few centuries now, at least.
He says that white men were basically "in charge." Nowhere does he call for an eradication.

And again you are calling a fiction of your own "barely human". I do not think it, Genji does not think it. This is your racist mind creating fictions you can lash out at. Try to see how your own fears are all without merit. Group B will not destroy anyone's culture. They will enhance it. As they have done before. And Group A will enhance them. As they have done before. In fact, there are no group A or B. Just humans with interchanging, intermingling cultures. Stop thinking in black and white. In every aspect.

Pprtsays...

DerHasisttot, I fear you've been totally consumed by two particularly devious and masochistic mental afflictions, counterproductive critical theory and cultural Marxism.

I have just read someone who honestly believes that a lowly bird is worth protection but would not lift a finger to defend human culture because "all cultures are equal and none is more worthwhile than another". Correspondingly, it does not matter if one of them disappears or if all of them disappear. Effectively, you believe in everything and nothing at the same time.

You are a destroyer of nations because you do not believe in nations.

My only advice is that you realize that we live in a world where Europeans are the ONLY people who are affected by these social ills. No other culture is masochistic, they are proud of themselves for who they are.. for better or for worse.

I can only hope that, through time and personal experience, you may come to realize that your own culture (and every culture) is worthy of conservation.

That's if it's still around you in old age.

DerHasisttotsays...

>> ^Pprt:

DerHasisttot, I fear you've been totally consumed by two particularly devious and masochistic mental afflictions, counterproductive critical theory and cultural Marxism.
I have just read someone who honestly believes that a lowly bird is worth protection but would not lift a finger to defend human culture because "all cultures are equal and none is more worthwhile than another". Correspondingly, it does not matter if one of them disappears or if all of them disappear. Effectively, you believe in everything and nothing at the same time.
You are a destroyer of nations because you do not believe in nations.
My only advice is that you realize that we live in a world where Europeans are the ONLY people who are affected by these social ills. No other culture is masochistic, they are proud of themselves for who they are.. for better or for worse.
I can only hope that, through time and personal experience, you may come to realize that your own culture (and every culture) is worthy of conservation.
That's if it's still around you in old age.


You have not understood how I thoroughly deconstructed your premise. Cultures are inconservable. I never said that all cultures are equal. I said they are enhancing each other. The best things stay, the others fall away.

You are either a troll or an enormous, racist ideological (maybe even Nazi) -asshole whose life would be best spend scrubbing sewers so your brainfarts do not stink up the place. I will not respond to you anymore.

Pprtsays...

Figures, you're German.

It's not your fault--Germans are the most aggressive purveyors of cultural relativism. You are simply a product of your mind-numbing upbringing. You fit into the New Europe perfectly and are a shining testament to the environmental corrosion of identity that is eating away at the very core of your civilization.

As I said, only personal experience can bring you out of your muck.

I won't assist you in devolving this discussion any further as it has reached a point where you have become too emotional to remain civil and have begun using infantile language.

Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists




notify when someone comments
X

This website uses cookies.

This website uses cookies to improve user experience. By using this website you consent to all cookies in accordance with our Privacy Policy.

I agree
  
Learn More