PDA

View Full Version : Killings in Norway Spotlight Anti-Muslim Thought in U.S.



geomancer
07-25-2011, 02:59 PM
https://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/25/us/25debate.html?_r=1&nl=todaysheadlines&emc=tha22

July 24, 2011
Killings in Norway Spotlight Anti-Muslim Thought in U.S.
By SCOTT SHANE
The man accused of the killing spree in Norway was deeply influenced by a small group of American bloggers and writers who have warned for years about the threat from Islam, lacing his 1,500-page manifesto with quotations from them, as well as copying multiple passages from the tract of the Unabomber.

In the document he posted online, Anders Behring Breivik, who is accused of bombing government buildings and killing scores of young people at a Labor Party camp, showed that he had closely followed the acrimonious American debate over Islam.

His manifesto, which denounced Norwegian politicians as failing to defend the country from Islamic influence, quoted Robert Spencer, who operates the Jihad Watch Web site, 64 times, and cited other Western writers who shared his view that Muslim immigrants pose a grave danger to Western culture.

More broadly, the mass killings in Norway, with their echo of the 1995 bombing of the federal building in Oklahoma City by an antigovernment militant, have focused new attention around the world on the subculture of anti-Muslim bloggers and right-wing activists and renewed a debate over the focus of counterterrorism efforts.

In the United States, critics have asserted that the intense spotlight on the threat from Islamic militants has unfairly vilified Muslim Americans while dangerously playing down the threat of attacks from other domestic radicals. The author of a 2009 Department of Homeland Security report on right-wing extremism withdrawn by the department after criticism from conservatives repeated on Sunday his claim that the department had tilted too heavily toward the threat from Islamic militants.

The revelations about Mr. Breivik’s American influences exploded on the blogs over the weekend, putting Mr. Spencer and other self-described “counterjihad” activists on the defensive, as their critics suggested that their portrayal of Islam as a threat to the West indirectly fostered the crimes in Norway.

Mr. Spencer wrote on his Web site, jihadwatch.org, that “the blame game” had begun, “as if killing a lot of children aids the defense against the global jihad and Islamic supremacism, or has anything remotely to do with anything we have ever advocated.” He did not mention Mr. Breivik’s voluminous quotations from his writings.

The Gates of Vienna, a blog that ordinarily keeps up a drumbeat of anti-Islamist news and commentary, closed its pages to comments Sunday “due to the unusual situation in which it has recently found itself.”

Its operator, who describes himself as a Virginia consultant and uses the pseudonym “Baron Bodissey,” wrote on the site Sunday that “at no time has any part of the Counterjihad advocated violence.”

The name of that Web site — a reference to the siege of Vienna in 1683 by Muslim fighters who, the blog says in its headnote, “seemed poised to overrun Christian Europe” — was echoed in the title Mr. Breivik chose for his manifesto: “2083: A European Declaration of Independence.” He chose that year, the 400th anniversary of the siege, as the target for the triumph of Christian forces in the European civil war he called for to drive out Islamic influence.

Marc Sageman, a former C.I.A. officer and a consultant on terrorism, said it would be unfair to attribute Mr. Breivik’s violence to the writers who helped shape his world view. But at the same time, he said the counterjihad writers do argue that the fundamentalist Salafi branch of Islam “is the infrastructure from which Al Qaeda emerged. Well, they and their writings are the infrastructure from which Breivik emerged.”

“This rhetoric,” he added, “is not cost-free.”

Dr. Sageman, who is also a forensic psychiatrist, said he saw no overt signs of mental illness in Mr. Breivik’s writings. He said Mr. Breivik bears some resemblance to Ted Kaczynski, the Unabomber, who also spent years on a manifesto and carried out his mail bombings in part to gain attention for his theories. One obvious difference, Dr. Sageman said, is that Mr. Kaczynski was a loner who spent years in a rustic Montana cabin, while Mr. Breivik appears to have been quite social.

Mr. Breivik’s declaration did not name Mr. Kaczynski or acknowledge the numerous passages copied from the Unabomber’s 1995 manifesto, in which the Norwegian substituted “multiculturalists” or “cultural Marxists” for Mr. Kaczynski’s “leftists” and made other small wording changes.

By contrast, he quoted the American and European counterjihad writers by name, notably Mr. Spencer, author of 10 books, including “Islam Unveiled” and “The Truth About Muhammad.”

Mr. Breivik frequently cited another blog, Atlas Shrugs, and recommended the Gates of Vienna among Web sites. Pamela Geller, an outspoken critic of Islam who runs Atlas Shrugs, wrote on her blog Sunday that any assertion that she or other antijihad writers bore any responsibility for Mr. Breivik’s actions was “ridiculous.”

“If anyone incited him to violence, it was Islamic supremacists,” she wrote.

Mr. Breivik also quoted European blogs and writers with similar themes, notably a Norwegian blogger who writes under the name “Fjordman.” Immigration from Muslim countries to Scandinavia and the rest of Europe has set off a deep political debate across the continent and strengthened a number of right-wing anti-immigrant parties.

In the United States, the shootings resonated with years of debate at home over the proper focus of counterterrorism.

Despite the Norway killings, Representative Peter T. King, the New York Republican who is chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, said he had no plans to broaden contentious hearings about the radicalization of Muslim Americans and would hold the third one as planned on Wednesday. He said his committee focused on terrorist threats with foreign ties and suggested that the Judiciary Committee might be more appropriate for looking at non-Muslim threats.

In 2009, when the Department of Homeland Security produced a report, “Rightwing Extremism,” suggesting that the recession and the election of an African-American president might increase the threat from white supremacists, conservatives in Congress strongly objected. Janet Napolitano, the homeland security secretary, quickly withdrew the report and apologized for what she said were its flaws.

Daryl Johnson, the Department of Homeland Security analyst who was the primary author of the report, said in an interview that after he left the department in 2010, the number of analysts assigned to non-Islamic militancy of all kinds was reduced to two from six. Mr. Johnson, who now runs a private research firm on the domestic terrorist threat, DTAnalytics, said about 30 analysts worked on Islamic radicalism when he was there.

The killings in Norway “could easily happen here,” he said. The Hutaree, an extremist Christian militia in Michigan accused last year of plotting to kill police officers and planting bombs at their funerals, had an arsenal of weapons larger than all the Muslim plotters charged in the United States since the Sept. 11 attacks combined, he said.

Homeland Security officials disputed Mr. Johnson’s claim about staffing, saying they pay close attention to all threats, regardless of ideology. And the F.B.I. infiltrated the Hutaree, making arrests before any attack could take place.

John D. Cohen, principal deputy counterterrorism coordinator at the Department of Homeland Security, said Ms. Napolitano, who visited Oklahoma City last year for the 15th anniversary of the bombing there, had often spoken of the need to assess the risk of violence without regard to politics or religion.

“What happened in Norway,” Mr. Cohen said, “is a dramatic reminder that in trying to prevent attacks, we cannot focus on a single ideology.”

Speak2Truth
07-25-2011, 04:54 PM
The manifesto written by the assailant contradicts the claims in this posting.

The attacker's manifesto explained very clearly where his motivations lie. He attempts to remind the reader of true world history and the fact that last time Islam gained a foothold in Europe it got very ugly. Islam went about exterminating Christians and anyone who would not convert or submit, JUST AS IS BEING DONE TODAY IN MUSLIM CONTROLLED NATIONS.

"Muslim Controlled" means Muslims have built sufficient strength in the targeted nation to move to the final stage in the clearly defined process of Jihad.

The attacker reminds the world that the Crusades were a desperate attempt by non-Muslims to save their own lives and to protect themselves from Islamic oppression. His chosen symbols include the cross of the Knights Templar who fought to stop the systematic extermination of Christians by Islam.

The man's actions are unconscionable and horrific and he should pay the penalty. I would happily vote to lock him up and throw away the key.

However, the poster above clearly did not read the man's own explanation of his motivations, which are rooted in historical and current fact. Islam is doing to Europe what it did before, with the same objective. One need only visit YouTube to see many videos shot on the streets by Europeans desperately trying to call attention to this repeat of history.

Anti-American thought is a foundation of today's Islam and should be taken seriously. It's no secret the Muslim Brotherhood (systematically taking over nations overseas) has targeted "The Great Satan" for destruction. If you dismiss the seriousness of their intentions, perhaps you did not have a front row seat on 9/11 and you lack basic human empathy for those who did.

After the 9/11 attacks, the political Left in the USA jumped up and down and hollered that the attackers were Saudis and we should be attacking Saudi Arabia, not Iraq. Well, guess who finances and orchestrates the Muslim Brotherhood? Saudi Arabia. If there is any intellectual integrity among that crowd, it's time to connect some dots.

Again, the fellow in Norway did something truly horrific and counter-productive to his own purposes. Shooting innocent children, causing random death and injury with a bomb - these are the acts normally used by Islamists to intimidate tehir targeted society. It seems irrational to think they would bring sympathy to anyone trying to stop Islamists from succeeding. Hopefully, he will give us more insight as to why he chose that course of action. In the meantime, let's not allow folks like the poster above to falsely attribute motivations when the truth was so clearly explained by the attacker, in writing, for all to see.


Meanwhile...

The Muslim Brotherhood's origins in America go back more than four decades. In the 1960s, radical Muslim immigrants began organizing in America and developing a criminal underworld that largely escaped federal law enforcement scrutiny. They eventually incorporated nonprofit organizations with benign-sounding names, and told anybody who asked they were simply forming a social network or "cultural society" for Muslims.


But in the wake of 9/11, Washington allowed case agents to start connecting the dots, and they began to see a lot of overlap in the operations of the Muslim groups and their leaders – along with a lot of Saudi money and suspicious activity.

Read more: FBI: Muslim Brotherhood deeply rooted inside U.S. (https://www.wnd.com/?pageId=266725#ixzz1TACC746z) https://www.wnd.com/?pageId=266725#ixzz1TACC746z

Can anyone honestly claim that America and Europe have NOT been targeted for Islamic conquest?

13357

theindependenteye
07-25-2011, 10:03 PM
I guess if someone throws out enough worms, somebody's gonna take the bait. A coupla comments:

>>>The attacker's manifesto explained very clearly where his motivations lie. He attempts to remind the reader of true world history and the fact that last time Islam gained a foothold in Europe it got very ugly. Islam went about exterminating Christians and anyone who would not convert or submit...

My reading has painted a very different picture of many areas under Islamic control in their span of greatest power - for example that there was a high degree of tolerance in Spain prior to 1492, when they were finally expelled. When Spain came under Christian control, Jews were expelled, Moslems forced to convert or emigrate (but leaving their money and their children). Would anyone with a more detailed knowledge care to comment?

>>>The attacker reminds the world that the Crusades were a desperate attempt by non-Muslims to save their own lives and to protect themselves from Islamic oppression.

...Saving their own lives by invading the Middle East? The objectives of the Crusades were many — political, religious and economic — but I don't think a strong case can be made for the Crusades as *preventive* warfare. The greatest propaganda point was, "Win back the Holy Land for Christ."

>>>The man's actions are unconscionable and horrific and he should pay the penalty. I would happily vote to lock him up and throw away the key. However, the poster above clearly did not read the man's own explanation of his motivations, which are rooted in historical and current fact. Islam is doing to Europe what it did before, with the same objective.

I'm not understanding this post. If this poster agrees with the man's motives and factual accuracy, shouldn't he be commended for trying to save us all? Or was it just that the guy killed the wrong 90 people? Or, yes, that his action was too "Islamic." But if he was absolutely correct, and the danger was real, what should he have done instead? Posted on Wacco?

>>>Anti-American thought is a foundation of today's Islam and should be taken seriously. It's no secret the Muslim Brotherhood (systematically taking over nations overseas) ...

Does anyone recall how many countries we have military bases in? I think about a hundred, yes? Seems as if we're a bit ahead of them in the taking-over-the-world business.

>>>Shooting innocent children, causing random death and injury with a bomb - these are the acts normally used by Islamists to intimidate tehir targeted society.

I can recall similar methods being used by Irish terrorists, Israeli terrorists, German terrorists, Italian terrorists, Vietnamese terrorists, Japanese terrorists — just about anybody who didn't have a B-52 at his disposal. What's so special about Moslems?

>>>Hopefully, he will give us more insight as to why he chose that course of action.

I can't wait.

>>>Can anyone honestly claim that America and Europe have NOT been targeted for Islamic conquest?

Well, I've been wanting since my teen years to win the Nobel Prize in Literature. Thus far I'm nowhere close. But as far as I know, anti-American or anti-European feelings have been fueled mainly by neo-colonialism, support of dictatorships or monarchies during the Cold War and subsequently for secure access to those countries' resources, corruption and economic stagnation in those countries, etc. Are there Islamic fanatics? Of course, and no different from Christian fanatics who see themselves as the ultimate saviors/masters of the world.

Nuffa that. I took the bait. Too wormy for my taste.

-Conrad

Speak2Truth
07-26-2011, 04:17 AM
for example that there was a high degree of tolerance in Spain prior to 1492Muslims "tolerated" non-Muslims as "dhimmi" who did not have equal Rights to Muslims and who had to pay a special tax to be allowed to live. This was an interesting compromise by enterprising Muslims who realized they could become very wealthy by charging people a "protection" tax - protecting them from being killed by the folks imposing the tax. That is still Muslim Conquest and the Spanish people were unwilling to live as "dhimmi" - and I bet you would be equally unwilling.

Muslim Spain (711-1492)
Cordoba was center of rule imposing Dhimmitude on Christians and Jews
https://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/islam/history/spain_1.shtml

As a point of fact, desperation to escape Muslim domination was one of the driving forces behind Christopher Columbus's journey. He was a devout Christian who had witnessed the horrors inflicted on his people by the conquerors. Part of his mission, as a Crusader, was to seek another approach to reach the heart of the Muslim Empire by sea. Queen Isabella spent the royal treasury on trying to drive out the conquerors and Columbus's journey was part of that effort.


Saving their own lives by invading the Middle East?Yes. The second successor to Mohammed, the Caliph Umar, made it the mission of Islam to exterminate Christians. That began in the Middle East. Islam marched over the dead bodies of men, women and children to carry this agenda well into Europe. The war to put a stop to that went to the heart of the Islamic conquest - the Middle East - to break the back of the monster that was consuming the world. You know, kinda like we send our tanks to Baghdad to put an end to Saddam's regime rather than just fight his soldiers on the borders of Iraq. I hope that's obvious enough.


The greatest propaganda point was, "Win back the Holy Land for Christ."Right. It was Christian and Jewish land until the Muslims went on their extermination campaign. Once upon a time there were no "Muslim nations". They were carved out by the sword.


If this poster agrees with the man's motives and factual accuracy, shouldn't he be commended for trying to save us all?What part of killing a bunch of kids and setting off a bomb in a public place makes progress toward saving us all? No, he should NOT be commended!


Does anyone recall how many countries we have military bases in? I think about a hundred, yes? Seems as if we're a bit ahead of them in the taking-over-the-world business.We do not own the governments of those nations, do not dictate terms to them and do not fly our flag over their capitols. In fact, when we defeat a nation in war, we hand it back to them to elect their own government leaders and do things their own way. Iraq is a recent example. You must admit that's not what Muslims do to a nation they conquer.

Those nations ASK our military to be present because we have common defensive interests.


I can recall similar methods being used by Irish terrorists, Israeli terrorists, German terrorists, Italian terrorists, Vietnamese terrorists, Japanese terrorists — just about anybody who didn't have a B-52 at his disposal. What's so special about Moslems?Global Conquest. It's why nations are bending more and more to fear of Islam. It's why in America it is protected "free speech" to display a statue of Jesus in a jar of urine but Comedy Central cannot allow South Park to show Mohammed on TV. FEAR. That's early in the Jihad process. It's already working here.


Are there Islamic fanatics? Of course, and no different from Christian fanatics who see themselves as the ultimate saviors/masters of the world.Please refer to the Jar of Urine "artwork". Really, are Christians and Muslims the same? How many people will be murdered if someone burns a Bible? Please, think this through. The difference will bite you. Hard.

Here is something to consider. Islam has been at war to subjugate the United States since the Declaration of Independence was signed. The Islamic Empire had previously compelled England to pay the "jizya", to show its submission and to gain "protection" so that Muslims would not attack. After the DoI was signed, the British colonies in the US were no longer covered by England's "jizyah" and the Muslim Empire, based in Tripoli, demanded submission and payment from the USA. They got busy attacking US ships.

George Washington tried to get them to back off with the Treaty of Tripoli, saying all the things the Muslims would want to hear, and with a cash payoff. It only lasted a short time, then the Muslims resumed attacking US shipping.

Thomas Jefferson had a copy of the Koran, read it and came to understand the true agenda. He berated Congress, reminding them that Americans had just fought a war to escape submission to tyranny and it would be inconceivable to move right into submitting to Islamic tyranny. He proposed a Navy be built and Marine Corps be created to go kill the Muslims until they backed off.

That's what was done. It worked. So did the Crusades, for a while.

However, Muslims believe that once they have declared a land to be under submission to them, if they lose control of it, it is the obligation of all Muslims to participate in the process of Jihad to regain control. The process begins simply by moving a population into the targeted country with instructions to keep a low profile and give no reason for alarm - until there is sufficient strength to move to the next stage.

Here's the process that currently targets Europe and the USA. The end goal is the black flag of Islam flying over our capitols and... well, it would be a "fundamental transformation" of America all right.

Understanding Jihad - Dr. Israr Ahmad
https://www.institutealislam.com/understanding-jihad-striving-in-the-cause-of-allah-by-dr-israr-ahmad/