Anders Breivik arriving for detention hearing, Oslo, Norway, February 26, 2012
1,203 words
After the July 2011 bombing and shooting attack in Norway by Anders Behring Breivik, it was claimed by some newspapers and broadcasters, and in Internet comments by Leftists, conservatives, and certain white nationalists, that Breivik would serve only 21 years in prison because Norway is a “liberal” country.
The 21-year sentence in Breivik’s case is a myth.
The maximum determinate sentence in Norway is actually 30 years for “crimes against humanity”—or at least politically incorrect crimes against humanity—in accord with rules of the International Criminal Court.
Otherwise, 21 years is the longest determinate sentence in Norway for any crime.
There is no death penalty—unless you’re a victim of Mossad and Jewry’s unwritten “wink wink, nudge nudge” pact with European governments, including Norway’s. In that case the death penalty can be administered arbitrarily by Jews, without lawful trial or hearing, in broad media daylight or the press’s most sinister secret shadows, in the street, in hotel rooms, in cars, by any barbaric means the executioners choose.
There is an exception to the 21-year rule that will be applied in Breivik’s case. It is “forvaring” (detention, custody, containment), an indeterminate sentence that permits detention at the Norwegian government’s discretion by continuous periodic renewals. It can, and in Breivik’s case almost certainly will, result in an actual life sentence.
The Soviet Union employed a similar device for political prisoners. Determinate criminal sentences for “politicals” under the Communist system might be 5 years, 15 years, etc., but at the end of the period the System could add a new sentence at its discretion—extending detention indefinitely.
Solzhenitsyn described this common practice at various points throughout his three-volume The Gulag Archipelago. My recollection is that he called it a “collar,” but I can’t now locate that term in the volumes’ indexes or glossaries.
For example, the day Stalin issued a general amnesty for large numbers of Gulag criminals in celebration of the Communist victory over Germany in WWII, Solzhenitsyn, a political, had an additional 8 years tacked onto his own sentence.
Breivik was indicted March 7, 2012 in Oslo under a paragraph in Norway’s anti-terror law referring to violent acts intended to disrupt key government functions or spread fear in the populace. He remained “totally calm” when the charges were read to him, a police official said.
The 19-page indictment traced Breivik’s steps from parking a van with a 2,100-pound (950-kilogram) fertilizer bomb outside a high-rise building housing the prime minister’s office in downtown Oslo at 3:17 p.m. to his surrender to police on Utøya, a wooded, 26-acre island in Tyrifjorden Lake owned by the Workers’ Youth League (Arbeidernes ungdomsfylking, AUF), the youth wing of the Labor Party, three hours and 18 minutes later.
“He ignited a fuse with a burn time of some seven minutes and thereafter left the scene on foot to a previously parked getaway car,” the indictment read.
Downtown Oslo after the explosion, July 22, 2011
Ammonium nitrate fertilizer bombs are actually a political (or terrorist) innovation of the Left. They were first used in 1970 by student protesters at the University of Wisconsin–Madison. The ANFO car bomb was adopted by the Provisional IRA in 1972, and subsequently used in the 1993 Bishopsgate bombing in London.
Fertilizer bombs have been used by groups such as the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia, FARC—originally the military wing of the Colombian Communist Party), and the Basque terrorist group Euskadi Ta Askatasuna (ETA). Since 1968, ETA has been responsible for killing 829 individuals, injuring thousands and undertaking dozens of kidnappings.
Armed with a rifle and handgun—both semiautomatic—and disguised as a police officer in a uniform sporting homemade insignia, Breivik drove to Utøya, where the Labor Party’s youth wing was holding its annual summer camp.
The indictment did not mention reports in the Norwegian press that Breivik’s aim was to kill leading Labor Party figures, including former Prime Minister Gro Harlem Brundtland, Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Stoere, and Eskil Pedersen, head of the party’s youth wing.
Of the three, only Pedersen was on Utøya during Breivik’s attack, but escaped unharmed. One victim was Trond Berntsen, an off-duty police officer and step-brother of Mette-Marit, the Crown Princess of Norway.
Breivik has confessed to the July 22, 2011 attacks, but denies criminal responsibility, saying his targets were part of a treasonous element that is destroying Norway. Breivik rejects the authority of the Norwegian legal system, calling it a tool of traitorous Left-wing elites.
Investigators have found no evidence to support Breivik’s claim that he belongs to a secret anti-Muslim resistance movement plotting to replace European governments with patriotic regimes.
According to Wikipedia, citing news reports:
Six hours before the attacks, Breivik posted a YouTube video urging conservatives to “embrace martyrdom” and showing himself wearing a wet suit and pointing a Ruger Mini-14. He also posted a picture of himself as a Knight Templar officer in a uniform festooned with gold braid and multiple medals. In the video he put an animation depicting Islam as a trojan horse in Europe.
In prison Breivik does not have access to the Internet, but after the recent lifting of a ban does receive letters and devotes time to writing back to like-minded people. According to one of his attorneys, Breivik is curious to learn whether his manifesto, which was e-mailed to 1,000 addressees 90 minutes prior to the bomb blast, has begun to take root in society.
Breivik’s action was propaganda of the deed, often employed by the Left, including Jews and Zionists.
For example, the 1946 terror bombing of Jerusalem’s King David Hotel killed 91 people and injured 46, including many Jews. (Breivik killed 77.) The perpetrator of the attack, Menachem Begin, later became the Prime Minister of Israel. After the British hung three of Begin’s men, he had two captive British soldiers executed and left their booby-trapped corpses hanging upside down so that whites who retrieved them would be killed or maimed. In 1978 the Norwegian Nobel Committee, appointed by the Norwegian Parliament, awarded Begin the Nobel Peace Prize.
In the US in the 1980s, members of the outlaw group The Order expected, like Breivik, to spark a white revolution through violent anti-System actions.
Forvaring can be applied both to criminals and persons judged mentally ill. Court-appointed psychiatrists have diagnosed Breivik as a “paranoid schizophrenic.” The defendant has rejected the diagnosis, and is “disappointed” that it was included in the indictment.
For now, prosecutors are seeking a sentence of involuntary commitment to a psychiatric institution. But they are leaving the option open of charging him criminally instead.
Either way, there is little doubt that imprisonment for life is being contemplated and will be imposed.
“Regardless of the sentence, we have promised that we will do whatever we can to keep him away from society as long as the system allows us,” prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh told the press.
The head of a support group said he doesn’t care whether Breivik is sent to prison or a mental institution. “What is important is that he will never see the daylight again,” he told the Associated Press.
At present, Anders Breivik has been indicted, not sentenced. His trial is scheduled to begin in April.
But don’t be misled if the sentence, when handed down, sounds like or is publicly spun like something less than what it actually is.
35 comments
It is over simplistic to call or imply “Zionist” are of the left. I think they are actually “rightest” in that they believe in a Jewish “blood and soil” homeland, an opposer Muslims in Britain.
Breivik was associated with the British “English Defense League” which support Zionist agasint Islam.
Breivik also mention the Muslin threat to Jews in Europe.
The similar sound of EDL and the U.S. JDL is no accident.
Yes, “no accident,” since in both cases “DL” stands for “Defense League.” Google “Defense League.”
Yea I did some more research. Knew this stuff was out there already.
From wikipedia (have to be careful, wiki is a left Jewish source)
“The EDL originated from a group known as the “United Peoples of Luton”, which itself was formed in response to a March 2009 protest against Royal Anglian Regiment troops returning from the Afghan War[21] organised by the Islamist group Al-Muhajiroun and including members of the group Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamaah.[22] The EDL evolved from the football casual subculture and is loosely organised around figures in hooligan firms…..The Canadian Jewish Defense League has held a demonstration in support of the EDL,[152] saying that the two groups will “take a stand against the forces of political Islam”. The Canadian Jewish Congress has opposed the alliance.[153]”
End Wikipedia quotes
And this youtube viedo showing EDL demonstrators with an Israeli flag front and center. “EDL singing UK National Anthem using Israeli flag” (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUJhHL0dK7E)
It appears that what startaed as a grass roots English reaction to Islam provocations has been coopted and had it’s name changed to parallel the Jewish “rightist” JDL.
Its been my observation that Jews tend to split on left-right lines and left-right broad philosophical political differences.
Still and all probably 80% of Jews will take hypocritical oppsing stances depending if the issue in question serves Jewish interest better from a left or a right stance.
By this I mean 80% of Jewis will support Israeli exclusion of non-Jewish immigrants. (They’d kick the remaing Palestinians out it they could) and a left wing “Everyone is welcome to Europe and America” because diversity is
Jews when they aren’t talking about the Jewish homeland.
The left-right split only applies to the fathest left 10% and the farthest right 10%.
Thus Jews can claim they hold all kinds of opinions and aren’t “a monolithic community” (actually a National group.) But if it’s restrictive immigration to Israel or bombing the H E doulbe ll out of Gaza it will have 90% Jewish support.
It it’s keeping the diversity flood gates open in America again it will get 90% of Jewish support.
That’s the reality of Jewish “diversity of opinion.”
Mention of the Jewish Defense League reminds me that one of its members, Robert Manning, received the incredibly lenient sentence of three years probation in 1972 for bombing the house of an Arab-American activist. This could only have encouraged him. Manning would later become a prime suspect in the 1985 bombing which killed Alex Odeh, and was eventually convicted of the 1980 bombing which killed Patricia Wilkerson, for which he received a sentence of life imprisonment. Surprisingly, U.S. authorities succeeded in having Manning extradited from Israel, the “haven for convicted scoundrels” (Adolf Hitler) to which he had fled.
Needless to say, Ekkehard Weil didn’t receive a light sentence for bombing Simon Wiesenthal’s house.
I hate this man from the deepest bottom of my guts.
Why do you hate him so?
Being ruled insane is the worst thing that can happen to Breivik.
That means compulsory medication intake (with evident side-effects, some of them permanent), a life in hell (a psychiatric asylum is much harsher than a prison, especially when you’re in fact sane), and a successful character assassination.
I’d much, much prefer life in prison or the death penalty if I were in his case. At least you don’t suffer the risk of ending your days as a zombie or a vegetable.
As to his actions, the poor guy was rejected both by his theoretical friends and by his enemies. The Stormfront-type “WNs” did not approve of what he done because of his philo-Semitism, and the Islamophobics partly rejected him because he embarrassed them with the use of terrorism.
A sane, focused and relatively smart guy, but terribly misguided; his actions were useless and doomed to be so since the beginning. Neither a revolution attempt, nor a coup attempt, nor a martyr suicide that could be inspiring (not sure about that, but…)
“useless and doomed to be so since the beginning. Neither a revolution attempt, nor a coup attempt…”
We are told that White people are committing collective suicide. But, short of assassination there is little people can do to change the policy of their governments. Breivik managed to register his opposition to the race-replacement of his people. Most of us keep complaining ineffectively. Breivik showed that he meant business. I think that such an action tends to encourage those who oppose the race-replacement ideology, and to demoralize those who go along with it. At the same time, Breivik’s action probably has negative effects too, but it is hard to evaluate how strong are the positive and negative effects.
Of course, Breivik’s method is not the only way. It’s important for us to get organized to explicitly defend White people’s interests, and to explicitly oppose Jewish anti-White activism.
I’ve been wondering what would happen in the case of a civil war. If we take arms to defend our existence, what will our white enemies tell us: we have to kill you because you refuse to be enriched by the third-world diversity? I think Breivik was declared crazy because they don’t have any arguments for those who take arms against race-replacement.
Hamilton: “In 1978 the Norwegian Nobel Committee, appointed by the Norwegian Parliament, awarded Begin the Nobel Peace Prize.”
Even so, the Jews keep repeating that they have no influence at all in Norway (only 1500 Jews according to them), and that the Norwegians are doing it to themselves.
“the death penalty can be administered arbitrarily by Jews” (Lillehammer affair)
Another proof of the complete lack of Jewish influence in Norway!
THEIR GOAL IS GENOCIDE. OURS. WHAT’S YOURS?
Armor in blockquote, cites in italics:
“useless and doomed to be so since the beginning. Neither a revolution attempt, nor a coup attempt…”
The advocacy of targeted use of force/use of deadly force, is the sure road to pathetic failure. The government can be changed, to a degree, but governance can be effected, in more subtle, yet no less effective ways. Joining the extant political parties, for example, allows you to learn to organize with political effectiveness.
Andrew Hamilton wrote:
In the US in the 1980s, members of the outlaw group The Order expected, like Breivik, to spark a white revolution through violent anti-System actions.
If The Order had it to do over, they would have done most everything differently, all – I repeat, ALL – in an “apple-pie, strictly legal, sort of way.” (HT: Jim Giles)
The Order would have created ethnocentric organizations, with small businesses linked to form economic cooperatives, using their own credit unions rather than distant banks, home schooling cooperatives, ALL with an end to laying the foundation of a parallel ethnocentric government, leading to an ethnocentric state, in the Northwest.
Have I mentioned the name Harold Covington tonight?
No, it created martyrs for THEIR Cause, while doing nothing for ours, save to marginalize our policies as the policies of, literally, lunatics.
See above. “Breivik’s method is not only way.” All too true. It is the WORST way. The only way it could have been any worse would have been for him to wear a mismatched, ill-fitted, ununiform uniform like the members of the NSM. Clown costumes would be the next step. Oh, wait…
Of course, he COULD have sent some money to counter-currents.
He could have formed a think tank that would develop good analyses of racial political issues, and trained a national youth movement to carry The Plan forward.
If we have to take arms to defend our existence at the Racial level, it will have been too late. Demography would guarantee our failure. The use of force in legitimate self-defense is one issue. The last time arms were taken up against the Government, the South was reduced to Reconstruction, and economic impotence for about a century thereafter.
We can WIN, but we must deal with the issues intelligently. A Racial Homeland in the Northwest solves many issues along the way, and, in time, the greatest issue of all – fulfilling the Fourteen Words.
No, Breivik was declared crazy so he can be manipulated into being the poster boy for Our Cause, identifying us so as to further marginalize and delegitimize us.
It’s time we all heard what Bob Whitaker and Horus the Avenger have to say, and practice what THEY preach.
While we can.
What’s In YOUR Future? Focus Northwest!
There is PLENTY we can do.
STOP CONSUMING FOR THE SAKE OF CONSUMING. STOP TAKING OUT LOANS. MASS DEFAULT.
It is bloodless and would end this nightmare virtually overnight.
The only challange left, then, is organization and getting enough on board with it so that it snowballs. Use Rense.com. He gets plenty of traffic.
Breivik didn’t kill Jews. He didn’t kill Muslims. He killed c. 80 anti-Zionist WHITE teenagers. Need I say more? I don’t, but I will: he ought to be drawn and quartered.
I’m not particularly familiar with the politics of Norway, but is the group Breivik targeted equivalent to our liberal progressives?
Petronius, I don’t hate this man, but I felt yours. I am completely indifferent to him or perhaps have absolute contempt.
To kill children to punish adults just produces more guilt in parents and not enlightenment or comprehension. What did he expect the reaction would be? Did he really think people would say oh yes you are right, we need to stop immigration? Thanks for killing our children to let us know that? We now will change our ways.
The default mode in grief is numbness and the status quo. He has allowed the cultural marxists to now have more power and manipulate the situation in their favour. What an utter loser.
He is a very handsome Nordic man and he killed Nordic children who probably would have produced more Nordic children. In the olden days he would be culled and not pampered with stupid mental health labels. He killed the wrong people.
He did not kill the leaders he may have intended to kill. No, not smart enough for that. He killed kids who might have changed their minds about their parent’s political positions.
May the Goddess Nemesis have her way with him. May the washer women cackle. He is not going to Valhalla. Warriors are smarter than that.
“Did he really think people would say oh yes you are right, we need to stop immigration? Thanks for killing our children to let us know that? We now will change our ways.”
They won’t even know it has anything to do with Breivik, but I guess Norwegians by and large will now feel a stronger disgust for their government and its policy of race-replacement than they used to.
When we are abused by our governments, we don’t react angrily. People don’t know what to do. They become dejected and start feeling guilty for having healthy racial feelings. Beaten wives often have guilty feelings too. When Breivik killed eighty people near Oslo, it probably induced guilty feelings in leftists circles. Victims of violence always feel guilty.
We are told that White people are committing collective suicide. But, short of assassination there is little people can do to change the policy of their governments. Breivik managed to register his opposition to the race-replacement of his people. Most of us keep complaining ineffectively. Breivik showed that he meant business. I think that such an action tends to encourage those who oppose the race-replacement ideology, and to demoralize those who go along with it.
If he was determined to throw his life away (so to speak), it would have been a much better idea to have taken hostages. That would have afforded him a far greater opportunity to get his point across to society at large about the fundamentally, institutionally anti-white nature of the regimes that rule the western world. (Imo, ‘anti-white’ is far and away the most effective method of breaking through the programming and getting the racial extinction/survival issue on the table, though I doubt Breivik understood anything of this.) Even though Jewish media masters were able to spin them as “crazed terrorists,” Arab hostage-takers in the 70s and 80s surely opened a few eyes to Israeli oppression, human rights abuses and national double standards (especially in Europe, where the Jewish media grip isn’t as tight).
After the British hung three of Begin’s men
Hanged.
Hanged or hung. I used hung.
Either one is OK.
CompassionateFascist: “Breivik didn’t kill Jews. He didn’t kill Muslims. He killed c. 80 anti-Zionist WHITE teenagers.”
It makes no difference whether the victims were White or Jewish, old or young, Zionist or anti-Zionist, somewhat guilty or no more guilty than we are: we cannot publicly approve of what Breivik did. But the question remains whether his actions were useful or not against the race-replacement ideology. I think that such an action works better if the targets/victims are carefully chosen. But even if they are badly chosen, I still think that it will encourage people to associate race-replacement and mayhem. If so, people will become even less supportive of race-replacement. The other possibility is that they will come to associate white resistance with mayhem, and as a result, will start supporting the government’s race-replacement efforts. But I think that is very unlikely.
When white people start getting violent against their tormentors, I think that most of the white liberals who used to be anti-white will become more rational and less aggressive against us. For example, in a civil war, I don’t think that Bill Gates, who is anti-white, would decide to give his money to the anti-white forces so they can buy more weapons to kill us.
Fourmyle: “Breivik was declared crazy so he can be manipulated into being the poster boy for Our Cause, identifying us so as to further marginalize and delegitimize us.”
War is peace, Freedom is slavery, Ignorance is strength, and natural resistance to race-replacement is madness. I don’t think that our enemy’s message can work very well.
Our cause amounts before anything else to an opposition to race-replacement, and that is what prompted Breivik to take action. But the media won’t even say that white nationalists like Breivik are against race-replacement, like most people in every white country. Instead they call us loony right-wingers. How can they use Breivik to delegitimize the resistance if they won’t even say what we and Breivik are resisting?
THEIR GOAL IS GENOCIDE. OURS. WHAT’S YOURS?
Armor in blockquote:
Fourmyle: “Breivik was declared crazy so he can be manipulated into being the poster boy for Our Cause, identifying us so as to further marginalize and delegitimize us.”
So far, they seem to be ten for ten. The ability of people to accept cognitive dissonance has been enhanced by diversions, and a lot of prescription tranquilizers. Ten for ten. I think Bloomberg said the Republican debates about Immigration would not be about Race. Note ONE of the Republican candidates on stage did anything about this. A soft shifting of the topic, a de facto form of dynamic silencing, seems to have show the true colors of the Republican candidates.
No, to be politically effective, we MUST get Bob Whitaker’s Mantra out there, without the approval of the status quo. We must follow the examples provided by Horus the Avenger, and debate the issues on OUR terms, tying everything back to Race, one way or another.
As to what actually pushed Breivik over the line, we shall never know. I suspect it was strongly “Suggested” to him – see Horus the Avenger on the Consensus Trance – that THIS particular way was the best way to score points for The Cause. This leads one to ask, “What CAUSE?”
Shooting Nordic children accomplished exactly WHAT for the CAUSE?
It allowed our Opposition to define us, and our Cause, in terms they controlled, to their benefit.
Again, the timeless wisdom of Jim Giles:
“All we want to do can, and MUST be done, in an apple-pie, strictly legal, sort of way.”
They simply SUGGEST, and let our Mind play Fill-In-The-Blanks.
Watch a piece done by Derren Brown for Britain’s Channel 4 network called “The Heist.
See how easily he “suggests” to people – ordinary, middle class people – in a matter of a few weeks – to commit armored car robberies with with what they were told were toy guns, but believed they were as effective as real guns.
Let me repeat – armored car robberies, done solely by the power of suggestion, with nothing resembling a threat to them anywhere.
NOW you know how powerful the Consensus Trance can be, particularly with the masses of people. They won’t even have to link Breivik to words – simple pictures will establish the identification linkages they want, and will do so on an emotional level that is much more powerful than objective thought and reasoning.
What’s In YOUR Future? Focus Northwest!
I don’t think that Breivik strengthened the “consensus trance”. I’m sure you have heard about peer pressure studies. Here is a short description by J.Young :
I would expect Breivik’s spectacular action to have a similar effect.
THEIR GOAL IS GENOCIDE. OURS. WHAT’S YOURS?
Armor in blockquote:
There is not one scintilla of evidence he did anything BUT strengthen the “consensus trance” (HT: Horus the Avenger)
Have any financial contributions – nice, safe, anonymous financial contributions – been sent to Jonathan Bowden or counter-currents in the name of Brevik?
No.
No, much less have anyone identify themselves with him in public, much less identify with The Cause in his name.
He locked down the Consensus Trance. The control system will be basically nonverbal – the foundation of emotional control – with pictures of Brevik juxtaposed with pictures of the Children of the Elite, and a symbol showing how Brevik turned off the Light of New Enlightenment.
Breivik? A man who slaughters CHILDREN? A man who hands The Opposition the propaganda victory of a lifetime? Is this some idea of a joke?
The deeper issue is, we have trouble providing “that one person,” because we refuse to organize in even the most elementary way. “That one person” tends to find no support when he stands up, even from us. How many of us send money – nice, safe, anonymous money – to counter-currents? The Northwest Front? Jonathan Bowden?
Keep these fantasies of the inappropriate use of force/use of deadly force in a nice, safe place. Focus on making something of your Self, and being a Light to those around you. Start to develop home schooling, and home churches, starting with home Bible studies. Develop economic and social support systems. ALL of this can be done in an “apple-pie, strictly legal, sort of way.” (HT: Jim Giles)
Indeed, it must, I repeat, MUST be done that way. Greco-Roman Civilization led to empires that have turned back to sand (HT: Ozymandias), but the Roman Catholic Church and the Greek Orthodox Church have become spiritual homes to the nations of their families, trans-State Institutions that will do more in a day than the advocates of the inappropriate use of force/use of deadly force will, in a thousand years.
Why?
Breivik defined his acts as being AGAINST Something. That’s usually good for no more than one election cycle. All that will happen now is the further marginalization of Beivik, and those who are associated with his philosophy.
Breivik will die slowly, helplessly, at the mercy of the kindness of strangers, forever and increasingly marginalized.
As Harold Covington said, “We must given the them something worth LIVING for. Not worth dying for. Any fool can do that.”
Some of Breivik’s money could have gone to support counter-currents, and so should ours.
What’s In YOUR Future? Focus Northwest!
Fourmyle: “There is not one scintilla of evidence he did anything BUT strengthen the “consensus trance”
What is your evidence that people have become more accepting of race-replacement as a result of Breivik’s actions? Or that our enemies have become bolder?
“Have any financial contributions – nice, safe, anonymous financial contributions – been sent to Jonathan Bowden or counter-currents in the name of Brevik?”
Have any financial contributions been cancelled in the name of Breivik? I doubt you have any more evidence than I have, even though your opinion is more common than mine.
“much less have anyone identify themselves with him in public”
It makes sense not to advocate the killing of young people. That doesn’t mean that Breivik’s actions had a negative psychological impact.
“pictures of Brevik juxtaposed with pictures of the Children of the Elite”
… as a reminder that mass immigration is going to bring civil war, and that our children won’t be spared.
“Keep these fantasies of the inappropriate use of force/use of deadly force in a nice, safe place.”
How about one hundred Breiviks? Even though most people say that his stunt was counterproductive (they would be afraid to say anything else), there is another theory that says it cannot be effective if it remains an isolated action.
If it is any relief to you, I think it would be impossible to organize a hundred massacres in the Breivik style without getting arrested.
Armor in blockquote, cites in quotation marks
Fourmyle: “There is not one scintilla of evidence he did anything BUT strengthen the “consensus trance”
There is not one iota of evidence showing people are Less accepting of race replacement as a result of Breivik’s actions.” There is nothing but evidence that our enemies have certainly remain undeterred in their Plan, and are moving forward full speed ahead.
“Have any financial contributions – nice, safe, anonymous financial contributions – been sent to Jonathan Bowden or counter-currents in the name of Brevik?”
I do not see one iota of support for Brevik from the nominal victims, the people of the Norway. I see nothing but sympathy for his victims – CHILDREN! – as he abandoned the moral high ground required for David to defeat Goliath in 5G warfare.
Not one candlelight vigil for Brevik, that I can see. There’s a reason for that.
“much less have anyone identify themselves with him in public”
Wait. Wha..?
It makes more sense to not kill CHILDREN – juxtaposed against THAT, “advocacy” is the least of our concerns!
The “negative psychological impact” will apply to the already Converted, who hate us on principle. This will be channeled into further moral supremacy, and greater legitimacy for their Cause, and a dramatic reduction in the same for ours.
Question for the Student:
What could Breivik have done instead, for the Cause?
“pictures of Brevik juxtaposed with pictures of the Children of the Elite”
More likely, a “reminder” that, given the stunning degree of ineptitude displayed by such as Breivik, we will be about as effective in THAT “civil war” as the Confederacy was, in its. Again, I tell one and all that all we want to achieve can, and MUST be done, in an “apple pie, strictly legal, sort of way.” (HT: Jim Giles)
“Keep these fantasies of the inappropriate use of force/use of deadly force in a nice, safe place.”
And “if wishes were fishes, we would all cast nets.” (HT: Frank Herbert) Breivik essentially undercut all moral claims to legitimacy for his Cause, and, rather than building an effective organization, with organized actions like, say, study groups, stuff like that, his isolated action demonstrated why the slightest degree of organization beats disorganization, any day of the week.
Pyrrhic victories come at a very high price. One is all most can afford, and even then, the cost is too high.
See the Thought Exercise above. Listen and learn, Young Padawan.
In terms of 5G Warfare, what did Bull Connor’s use of force against schoolchildren have in common with Breivik’s use of force against schoolchildren?
Short answer – the total loss of moral legitimacy for one side, and the total transfer of political legitimacy, and moral authority, to the other.
I can not help but wonder if Breivik was somehow “suggested” into this very particular choice of methods, and targets. It makes no sense whatsoever from our metapolitical perspective. Quite the contrary, in fact, and almost as if it was “staged” that way.
Are we seeing a very clever counter-intelligence operation behind Breivik’s actions?
As Terrible Tommy Metzger, who has grown wise with the shattering of illusions only experience provides, said:
“When you are talking with someone and they proposed something remotely illegal, ask yourself why HE wants YOU to do this. Why doesn’t HE do it HIMSELF? You are being set up. WALK away from him immediately, and say, in a loud, firm, voice, “I don’t know what you are talking about! Leave me alone!” Then, WALK AWAY. If he follows you, say,”If you don’t leave me alone, I am going to the police.” If he still follows you, GO to the police.”
Remember: Jim Giles. Apple pie. Strictly legal. THAT is the Path to the thrill of victory.
But what if the one person who first picked the correct length line was called insane and racist? Also is mass murder “obviously the right answer?”
Thank you for repeating Young’s study. This is wonderful info.
For reasons I previously posted I think the application to Mr. Breivik’s case is not necessarily accurate.
Would the test subject in the line length case pick the correct length line if he was told the one person who previously did was Jeffry Dauhmer?
Is there a detailed timeline or summary of how he was actually able to prepare and carry out the attacks years prior to the actual event?
Who were Breiviks contacts when he was traveling across Europe?
This is the sort of question you can answer yourself with some online research.
Well there was talk of him training in military camps in Belarus under a shadowy former Belarusian KGB officer Valery Lunev who is a Muslim after marrying a relative of the first President of Chechnya Dudaev affiliated to the pan Turkic Gladio era Grey wolves organisation and a offshore company Far West Gulf LLC comprising of former KGB and GRU officials connected to various foreign intelligence services and companies like Halliburton conducting operations against Russia in the post Soviet sphere.
“Valery Lunev (cover name, b. 1960, in Kuliab, Tajikistan). Officer of the Soviet General Staff. In the 1980s took part in anti-COCOM activities in the Netherlands. Has Dutch passport. Major-General of Belorussian KGB, in active reserve since 2007. Served in Iraq (1990-1991). Converted to Islam after marrying a relative of President Dudaev . Pan-Turkist, connected to radical branch of the Grey Wolves underground. Fluent in Arabic and Farsi. Executive Director of Far West, LLC .
http://www.russiablog.org/2011/07/norwegian-terrorist-breivik-trained-in-belarus-yuri-mamchur.php
By a sheer coincidence the heroes of the Utøya massacre just happen to be 2 Chechen teenagers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Norway_attacks
Norway itself has a history of supporting groups involved in overseas conflicts like the charity front NGO’s accused of supporting Tamil Tigers.
“Norwegian NGOs like Red Barna was caught red-handed providing funds for Tiger organisations, Norwegian diplomats and peace monitors have equally been accused of being biased in the peace process led by Erik Solheim, who was a close buddy of the late Anton Balasingham. Solheim had on occasions even footed Balasinghams hotel bills. Norways role in Sri Lanka was on the approval of the Indian Government but the Sri Lankan public has continuously questioned its impartiality. Recently, it was revealed that a fleet of heavy vehicles belonging to the Norwegian Peoples Aid now with the LTTE – yet the news immediately went down as stolen by the LTTE yet raises the question why NPA did not report its theft immediately to the Govt. When we viewed the massive trenches dug by the LTTE in order to delay military advancement it was very clear that these NGO vehicles had been used over a considerable length of time to dig the trenches. Reasons to doubt The Norwegian Peoples Aid is not unfounded since it has been accused of smuggling arms, ammunition & landmines for the Sudanese insurgent group Sudan Peoples Liberation Army in 1986. Similarly, there is the Norwegian Government funded documentary titled “My Daughter the Terrorist” glorifying women suicide bombers (incidentally Sept 10 is World Suicide Prevention Day is suicide then a matter for glorification & to be funded by a Government?) We can blame these NGOs but the Government of the day which allowed these questionable NGOs to enter Sri Lanka must be equally accountable.”
http://www.asiantribune.com/?q=node/13213
As always Justin Raimando did a good piece on Breivik.
http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2011/07/28/anders-behring-breivik-mystery-man/
All the online stuff is filled with “Zionist false flag” nonsense or Zionist or pro-Zionist blogs trying to distance themselves from Breiviks actions.
Actually I found this by accident of two anti-Norwegian articles in the British press from 95 that describes Norway as “gloomy” and “Xenophobic” towards Europeans.
http://www.ingunn-roren.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=60&Itemid=67
Amor, the guilt I am talking about is specific to parents: the failure to protect your child, even though one probably could not have done that, even if you were there. That and the fact it was a fellow white countryman who did it, is a psychic blow that overwhelms reason or thinking things through. Breivek is to blame and it will stop there because he will be called insane by the PTB.
Which is why all revolutionary nationalists must read Covington’s Quintet —best FAQ on this subject— to see how even in vicious racial wars nationalists ought not target kids.
Armor, you hit it. Perfect reply. This makes the whole difference between “hero” or “madman”, between The One who will start the chain reaction or a poor psychopath in the people’s mind.
As to what Trainspotter said in another thread, that supporting Breivik is insane, I for one didn’t “support” the killing of teens. But keep in mind dissident articles such as this one by Sebastian Ernst Ronin (see also my extensive collection on the Breivik incident here).
Just to clarify, of the 69 victims on Utøya, the youngest victims (2 of them) were 14 years old.
14 were 15-16 years old.
The largest grouping, 34 people, were 17-18 years old.
The remainder (19)–28%–were older than 18.
I’ve recently been reading Daniel Byman’s paper for the RAND Corporation, “Understanding Proto-Insurgencies.” It includes the following passage (p. viii):
“To gain the size and capabilities of an insurgency, a . . . would-be insurgent movement must take several steps:
“First, proto-insurgents must create a politically relevant identity — a surprisingly difficult task. Success requires undermining rival identities put forward by the state or other groups and convincing people that the group comprises Muslims, Kurds, or whatever particular identity it champions. This identity is the basis for a group’s subsequent organization and expansion.
“Second, the identity must be linked to a cause that is popular beyond the . . . band of insurrectionists. Many causes championed by proto-insurgents have little inherent popularity, and governments can often co-opt the more popular elements of a cause. Nationalism is perhaps the most potent cause to harness.
“Third, the proto-insurgents must gain dominance over their rivals. The primary foe at this early stage is not the government, but the welter of rival organizations that compete for recruits and money. Many of these organizations seek to exploit the same cause as does the proto-insurgent, but they use a different identity or platform to do so. Not surprisingly, proto-insurgent energies are often consumed by fights within their own community.
“Finally, proto-insurgents need a respite from police, intelligence, and military services. Many groups thus find that a sanctuary or ‘no go’ zone is often essential for their survival.”
This is a good summary of some of the things an insurgent movement needs: a politically relevant identity, a popular cause, organisational hegemony, and security. We need metapolitical work directed towards animating and guiding a “culture of contestation.”
I deleted the references to “terrorists” in the passage cited above. There may well be a place for political violence — which covers a broader range of actions than terrorism — but even this may be premature. If violence is the last thing we need, metapolitics is the first. Creating a politically relevant identity and establishing some measure of popular support should be among our priorities.
We don’t need the approval or the aid of a majority to begin our work. But we do need to have some kind of social base which can sustain our work. “Popular support” doesn’t have to be defined in terms of entire states or societies, or the results of elections or opinion polls. “Popularity” and “support” are relative and contextual.
White Republican in blockquote:
It would seem the Constitution/Bill of Rights (Freedom of Association!) offers us an excellent, very legitimate foundation for temporal political activities. The Christian Separatist people (christianseparatist.org) have given us the necessary bridge between Freedom of Speech/ Freedom of Religious Expression, and Race in a metapolitical context.
Yet, the unifying theme of the Constitution/Bill of Rights – the corporate charter of the State, melded with the rights required for effective membership in the State – offers us all of the legitimacy we need, while working within the framewoprk tha makes White Nationalism remotely effective.
Preach It, Brother!
I suspect This Is Not By Accident.
In the age of drone attack craft, capable of killing from a world away, and intelligence systems that know ALL, this is simply not feasible.
Far better to be part of the Open Conspiracy, within a framework of Faith, Family, and the Constitution.
Home Bible studies would seem a good starting ground. Bob Whitaker has many useful ideas.
I deleted the references to “terrorists” in the passage cited above. There may well be a place for political violence — which covers a broader range of actions than terrorism — but even this may be premature. If violence is the last thing we need, metapolitics is the first. Creating a politically relevant identity and establishing some measure of popular support should be among our priorities.
Agreed.
We don’t need the approval or the aid of a majority to begin our work. But we do need to have some kind of social base which can sustain our work. “Popular support” doesn’t have to be defined in terms of entire states or societies, or the results of elections or opinion polls. “Popularity” and “support” are relative and contextual.
Faith, Family, and the Constitution.
Most people who reject race-replacement are afraid that Breivik may have harmed their cause rather than helped it. I think the Jewish media disagree with that point of view, since they didn’t dwell on the event as much as they could have.
I think it is interesting to ask oneself the same question about a recent incident in the French city of Toulouse, where an Arab shot and killed 4 people in a school for Jews only. The week before that, he had already killed 3 non-White and non-Jewish paratroopers.
Usually, the Jewish media will under-report interracial murders where Whites are the victims, and will hype any interracial offense committed by a White. Most interracial violence is committed against White people. The result of the media censorship is that White people are less likely to rebel.
In Toulouse, the mass media hoped they had a case of politically and racially motivated White on Jew violence, and they started blaming the violence on the anti-race-replacement movement.
In the end, they were disappointed as the attacker turned out to be an Arab born in France thanks to Jewish pro-immigration activism. Marine Le Pen felt greatly relieved. The Jews still thought they could take advantage of the attack to present themselves as victims, and maybe promote their next war against “Islamist” Iran.
If the murderer had been a White man motivated by his opposition to genocide by race-replacement, the mass media would have kept the story in the news until the next elections in April, May and June. Marine Le Pen would have got far fewer votes. In my opinion, how many votes she gets won’t make any difference anyway.
But I still think the Jews may miscalculate what is best for them. By advertising violence against Jews, they may encourage similar attacks against them in the future. And if the killer had been a White man, it would have made more people aware of the Jewish responsibility in race-replacement.
Jews, journalists, politicians, and the Left wanted the Toulouse killer to be white—they always do in such cases. It not only stokes their hatred, but “justifies” continued curtailment of basic civil liberties for whites. Most media sources, even after the killer was identified, continued to refer to him as “French,” thereby not-so-subtly insinuating white guilt. In the last analysis, everything is the fault of whites as far as they’re concerned.
Breivik was a phenomenon, a force of nature like a tornado, an earthquake, or a volcano. He performed an act, forcing others to respond to it or to remain silent. He didn’t ask anyone’s permission or opinion, least of all white racialists’.
He nevertheless presents an embarrassing problem for the Jewish/government/media elite in that his ideological influences are quite clear. They were anti-Islamic, Zionist, and pro-Jewish neoconservative, especially the writings of Fjordman (part-Jew), Robert Spencer (reportedly a Zionist Arab), and Jews such as Bat Y’eor, Pamela Geller, and Daniel Pipes. In contrast, his criticisms of white racialists were caustic. Jews and government therefore cannot quite as easily exploit Breivik’s actions to further genocidal or repressive measures as they otherwise could have.
Above in this thread I set forth the ages of Breivik’s victims on Utøya, since “children” is a much broader term than, say, “teenagers and young adults”—those who actually died. Of course, many of the victims were young enough to be considered children, but terminology is still important.
Another facet of the story I neglected to mention in the body of the article is that not all of Breivik’s victims were “Nordic” or white.
I have seen only a partial list of victims’ names published in the Norwegian press. The vast majority of those were Norwegian-sounding. Nevertheless, they were young, and it seems highly likely that some of them were non-white or part-white.
In addition, not all were European. Tamta Lipartelliani was from Georgia (in the Caucasus) and Gizem Dogan was Turkish.
Other names on the partial list were Ismail Haji Ahmed, Modupe Ellen Awoyemi, and Bano Abobakar Rashid.
All of these young people were “Norwegian” in terms of citizenship and residence, with the possible exception of the first, who was listed as “from Georgia.”
This should not be surprising. Norway is a multiracial society, and the ultimate objective of its elites is to eliminate the white population.
Fourmyle (March 18): “There is not one iota of evidence showing people are Less accepting of race replacement as a result of Breivik’s actions. There is nothing but evidence that our enemies have certainly remain undeterred in their Plan, and are moving forward full speed ahead.”
It must be difficult to produce any evidence one way or another. I’m sure the leftists are using Breivik as a way to intimidate common sense Norwegians, but Breivik’s action and the leftist reaction to it makes the left’s genocidal intention all the more obvious. That is not good for their recruiting efforts.
Most of our enemies are not real enemies at all. They are white people who have been brainwashed on the surface. But their interests are the same as ours, and their leftist positions don’t make any sense. That is also true of most of Breivik’s white victims. They were part of the nation that Breivik wants to save. Accepting their deaths is like accepting that people will get killed on our side, as in any war.
So far, apart from Breivik’s attack, the leftists have not suffered enough as a consequence of their craziness. They have not been hit by any backlash. But a civil war would probably snap them out of their leftist trance. They will realize that they are supporting the genocide of their own race, and it will become an unsustainable position. Jewish activists will remain anti-White, but they will no longer be in a position to do any harm once they lose the support of the White brainwashed minority.
After the Utøya massacre, I would expect Norwegian parents to be more reluctant to send their teenagers to mix with young socialist race-replacers. Normal people who would like to kick out the third-worlders will be more keenly aware of the anti-immigration feeling among their countrymen. They will feel more certain of the illegitimacy of the leftist anti-white dictatorship.
The use of violence tends to polarize the political forces and make the situation clearer. Normal people will now better understand that the degeneration of society is not due to a mysterious disease. They will more easily identify the left-wing political ideologues as the source of the problem. And they will know that the leftists are not invulnerable.
“Breivik’s use of force against schoolchildren” / “total loss of moral legitimacy”
As I see it, Breivik’s action is similar to the decision to resort to the nuclear bomb in order to preserve a nation’s existence. Of course, it was much less drastic than a nuclear bomb, but even so, you would expect that action to give pause to the genociders. The truth is that the fanaticism comes from the race-replacing left, not from Breivik.
Comments are closed.
If you have a Subscriber access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.