New Norwegian Killing 120


Last night two masked men in military uniform shot dead a 27 year old man in his home in Sandnes, Norway. Nowhere in the mainstream media can I find anybody wondering whether this is related to the massacre in Norway the day before – even though both were killings with guns, (very rare in Norway), and either this guy really was assassinated by soldiers, or both were carried out in false uniform.

Have I turned into a crazed conspiracy theorist, or is this lack of curiosity a little bit strange?

UPDATE
Can this second incident the same weekend in Norway of armed killers in uniforms relate in any way to the “two other cells” of which Breivik spoke in court? I am not claiming to know the answers, but there seem to me obvious questions here and I don’t understand why the media is not asking them.


120 thoughts on “New Norwegian Killing

1 2 3 4
  • Clark

    Canspeccy/Alfred likes to start futile arguments that he can win.
    .
    The core argument that he will defend this time is that immigration is unpopular with a majority, so if it isn’t curtailed, we can expect more atrocities such as this.
    .
    Alfred, be straight, use less words, gain respect – time is valuable.

  • Duncan McFarlane

    Martin – you either aren’t familiar with CanSpeccy’s views (which include the belief that immigration to Europe is “uncontrolled” (it’s not, there are detention centres and deportations across Europe) and that immigration to Europe is “genocide” of the “indigenous peoples”) , or else you share his bizarre beliefs.

    In the context of his previous posts in other threads and the ones in this one in which he says “This is why it seems necessary to consider the possibility that Breivik is exactly what he says he is: a crusader fighting a Muslim takeover of Europe that will mean not only the extinction of Christianity in Europe but of the European peoples”, there’s no reasonable interpretation other than that CanSpeccy/Alfred shares Breivik’s paranoid beliefs about how the 6% of Muslims living in Europe are going to outbreed and outnumber us (even though even the Pew research says their birth rate is falling faster than that of other Europeans) and then impose Sharia law on us.

    That’s just an updated version of 1930s anti-semitism applied to Muslims and immigrants rather than Jews.

    Your implication that we don’t understand the subtleties of Alfred’s point is not convincing – there are no subtleties. He believes the Muslims are going to impose Sharia law on all of us in Europe based on dodgy statistics and dodgy assumptions.

    People with his beliefs are far more dangerous than Al Qa’ida are to the majority of Europeans who believe in democracy, tolerance and the continued co-existence of different cultures, races and religions (nothing new in that). They’re more dangerous because there are more of them and they influence the policies of the big parties towards condemning “multiculturalism” (their new code-word for people with different skin colours or religions and marriages between them and white Europeans).

  • Clark

    Duncan, watch it; you’re inviting an avalanche of “I never said blah blah blah, show me where I wrote blah blah blah” from Alfred. That’s what he does.

  • Richard Robinson

    “an avalanche of “I never said blah blah blah, show me where I wrote blah blah blah” from Alfred. That’s what he does.”
    .
    Well, plus he starts by saying “it is said that blah blah blah”, rather than “blah blah blah”.

  • Jon

    Hi Suhayl,
    .
    I agree with all of that.
    .
    > I think it best that people are open about what they think and are challenged, equally
    > openly, on this. I don’t think, however, that a political blog is a therapeutic service
    .
    This raises the important point – which odious views in general ought to be “openly discussed” versus denying them the oxygen of publicity. I am in quandary on that, I suppose. I engage here with one or two folks even though I think their views are potentially dangerous – for the reasons already stated – since I think some understanding between liberal/left and their right-wing positions might genuinely come about. There is also the possibility that one can try to encourage another person to see what logical tests their views pass or fail.
    .
    On the other hand, getting the EDL or the BNP on Question Time may be a mistake, since such nationalist groupings get an electoral fillip regardless of how badly the panel member fares during the debate. I can see why the British socialist left generally adopts the No Platform policy (though interestingly I went to a national SWP meeting some years back, and found that central committee members shut down any attempts to discuss it).
    .
    So yes, what views should be engaged at blog level is a difficult call. Certainly, my conjecture that Breivik might have been positively influenced had he engaged outside of his warped part of the internet is an extremely long shot. It is more likely that a man capable of shooting so many people is very ill indeed, and no amount of exposure to moderate perspectives would dissuade him from his terrible intent.

  • macky

    When I read that Breivik was said to have been active on the blog, Gates of Vienna, it rang a bell with me; about three years ago I posted a pro-Palestinian comment on a YouTube clip, and I received a nasty personal message in my YouTube in-box as a result;

    “thegatesofvienna (3 years ago)
    You disgusting anti-semite pile of shit.
    Take your foul mouthed Jew hating Hitler arselicking carcass and go spew your filthy vomit elsewhere.
    There’s no place for repulsive anti-semite trolls like you on this site.”

    As you can see the message was from somebody called “thegatesofvienna”, and having just check, this account is still online;

    http://www.youtube.com/user/thegatesofvienna

    I am somewhat relived to note that this person is registered as being in Austria rather than Norway, as it would be quite disquieting to think that I had attracted the attention of a future mass murdering psycho.

    Apparently the Website that Breivil is said to have been an occasional commenter to, appears to be this one;

    http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/

  • Canspeccy

    Someone said: “The perverse ‘logic’ employed by Breivik, that the mass-slaughter of members of one’s own ‘tribe’ would somehow act as a wake-up call to rest of the tribe, and alert them to the bigger threat posed by the powerful Muslim menace within, is a bizarre and dreadfully conceited fallacy.”
    *
    Which is why, my initial assumption, which I am still inclined to, is that the Breivic atrocity was a psyop intended to intimidate and discredit the 50% of Norway’s population who oppose immigration.
    *
    However, I also considered whether the crime was in fact exactly what the perpetrator claimed it to be, and if so, what that meant.
    *
    I concluded with this:
    *
    “If Breivik acted alone, he is a madman with a warped genius of the highest order. If his action was a state crime, Europe is surely headed for a very dark age of tyranny.”
    *
    But perhaps Dreoilin and the other big brains here have a better explanation like, maybe, “the Jews did”. If so let’s hear it.
    *
    But in any case, there is absolutely nothing I have said here or elsewhere to justify targeting me with cretinous and obscene abuse. But then for some people here, a reason appears not to be a necessity.
    *
    As to those who cannot understand that if you destroy a nation as a hereditary, religious and cultural entity, you are undertaking precisely what Raphael Lemkin, who coined the term, called genocide, I cannot help them. I have provided an explanation (http://canspeccy.blogspot.com/2011/05/europes-new-genocide.html), I cannot provide an understanding.

  • angrysoba

    Deepgreenpuddock,
    .
    Yes, indeed you are right about Tarpley. The perennial presidential candidate you refer to is Lyndon LaRouche who believes that Obama is an agent of the Queen of England whose sinister scheme is to flood the US with drugs as revenge for the war of independence. Tarpley is typical of a lot of conspiracy theorists in that making wrong predictions and having his analysis shown to be completely false never stops him from being believed every time he writes a new bit of nonsense. He reminds me of those preachers who declare the world will end soon and yet still manages to go back to full congregations even after the prophecy doesn’t come true.
    .
    And yes, Wayne Madsen appears to be very similar.

  • angrysoba

    So CanSpeccy admires this piece of shit terrorist garbage, Breivik, and gushes about him being a “true crusader”. Well, he certainly had similar delusions in calling himself a Templar knight. It certainly doesn’t surprise me that CanSpeccy would be on the same page as it seems Breivik went after a frequent target of Canspeccy’s rages – liberals and he was also concerned with the destruction of the “indigenous race” of Europe. I wonder if Glenn has any comment on his erstwhile ally as I repeatedly warned him of Alfred’s politics even as Glenn raged against “teabaggers”.

  • Richard Robinson

    I know that sticking to the original subject isn’t very fashionable round here, but what the hell … I thought a translation of the Norwegian article from up top might be helpful.
    .
    start with the httpcolonforwardslash bit that’s liable to get you into ohnomoderation, then follow it with
    translate.google.co.uk/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.vg.no%2Fnyheter%2Finnenriks%2Fartikkel.php%3Fartid%3D10080716
    .
    Well, allright, a shorter link might have been helpful, too, but these things only go so far, y’know.
    .
    It’s astonishingly (to me) good, but still only a stupidmachine job. What I mean is, “He was shot by the police unknown persons, said Føyen” is probably not the sense of what was actually written, and maybe isn’t even a transparent admission of foul conspiracy … (*evil grin*). On the other hand, it amused me enough to make me decide to post it.
    .
    Good night

  • Youri Carma

    At least two terrorists behind Norwegian youth camp massacre – Witnesses http://translate.google.co.uk/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.vg.no%2Fnyheter%2Finnenriks%2Fartikkel.php%3Fartid%3D10080716

    Witnesses of Friday’s mass killings in the Norwegian youth camp say there were two terrorists as the shootings were coming from “two different places on the island at the same time ,” Norwegian VG paper reported on Saturday.

    Several young people who survived Utoya’s massacre, told VG paper that the shootings were coming from “ two different places on the island at the same time .”

    “ I believe that there were two people who were shooting ,” VG quoted a 23-year old Alexander Stavdal.

    The witnesses described the second man as a 180-centimeter tall, dark-haired man with Nordic appearance with “a pistol in his right hand and a rifle on his back .”

    – ‘ The shooting came from all different directions ,’ she added. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2017709/Anders-Behring-Breivik-arrested-holiday-island-massacre.html

  • ingo

    Thanks Jon for your eloquent rebuttal os the smear directed at Duncan, I also very much value his excellent research and articles here and on his own site. I absolutely reject the labels the media is using for an organised rightwing terrorist, until they have done their work and laid open the connections and allegiances and and, its all reaction, nothing else.
    Instead the EDL’s top man is getting lots of publicity, on Newsnight, on Radio 5 live just now, just as Nick Griffin got half an hour for his unopposed non ballanced rants some years back, they are actively helping to spread these outrageous racist views, call it for what it is.

    Why has our media forgotten to balance these protagonists who, like canspeccy/Alfred, answer with platitudes and skirt around the issue?
    After years of letting rabid footbal supporters organise themselves into the EDL, their combined criminal record in years must be bigger than their membership, there is still no police officers countering their arguments, answering questions as to their efforts on the righwing spectrum, to the poiont that these terrorist supporters,imho thats what you are canspeccy, are allowed to issue veiled threats on Newsnight and get away with doey eyed references to the Crusades.

    ‘this could happen here in five or ten years time’, he said, he clearly felt special, like a puppy following his runt brother who daren’t be associated with his incontinent behaviour.
    Norways 22% that vote for rightwing parties is also an indication as to how protracted and skewed the investigations are likely to be, more like pulling worms.
    I think his masonic connections will be hushed up by the intentions here, there and everyhwere to call this the actions of a madman, a psychopath,loon.
    Thats a soppy response and I hope the parents who lost their children will do their own digging, come together and demand that the state opens up these creepy crawlies amongst them.
    We have been far too soft with these knuckle draggers, under the disguise of democratic discourse, this european terror virus has flourished and turned into a disease.

    The peculiarity is that they have a lot of support by the MSM and christsians, as they call themselves, but they daren’t say so at this time, still waiting for Prince Phillip to open his mouth defending freemasonry.

    Thanks for all the excellent links, we have a great team here.

    Now lets think progressive, because the combined story is hopefull, Murdochs demise and a newfound realism, coupled with falling tabloid sales, as expected, leaves britain with a window of political opportunity, for the next ten years or so chances exist for alternatives to flourish, its beginning to look like the mistrust and suspicion of Government police and politicians could translate into a new political dawn.

    The EDL has recognised this and we should too.

  • dreoilin

    “But perhaps Dreoilin and the other big brains here have a better explanation like, maybe, “the Jews did”. If so let’s hear it.” — Canspeccy/Alfred
    .
    Don’t you dare try to smear me, you coward. You have never seen me write “the Jews did it” on this blog, or anywhere else, about anything. Including nine one one. So go stuff your anti-semitism smear. Along with your talk of genocide, which is patent nonsense in the context in which you use it. I live in a country where every effort was made to wipe out the culture of the indigenous people. We have never termed it genocide or attempted genocide, for obvious reasons. And for you to be sitting over there in Canada (or anywhere else) walloping on about the potential genocide of the British people via immigration (as you have done in the past, and as you are doing now about Europeans) is nothing short of daft.
    .
    I question your sanity. But for now I’m done with you.

  • Jon

    @Canspeccy/Alfred, your suggestion that Dreoilin might be anti-Jewish is entirely baseless, as you know. Play fair.
    .
    I made a lot of reasonable points above – and without any abuse at all! – so would be pleased to hear your response. In brief:
    .
    The use of the word “genocide” given the context in which most people understand it, regardless of who coined the term; the use of fire-n-brimstone language about race that lacks suitable sensitivity and necessary nuance; the dilemma of accepting anti-immigration sentiment without taking into account race-based propaganda in the media, particularly Islamophobia; and why the media is taking an opposing stance on race given the pro-immigration views that you maintain the elite hold.

  • Richard Robinson

    re:translations from the Norwegian, and Craig’s piece upstream on media laziness – it only takes a couple of clicks from the given starting point to see a piece on how Gro Harlem Bruntland (sp ?) was on that island that morning, and how the killer had intended to get there earlier … I’m a little suprised it wouldn’t have been thought worth at least a mention.

  • mary

    Dreoilin You said to Can Speccy/Alfred (Why did he change his name btw?)
    I question your sanity. But for now I’m done with you.

    The latest on Alfred’s site –
    .
    How Big Pharma Is Driving People Mad
    .
    Drugs and Madness: Image source.
    .
    According to the US National Institute for Mental Health, at any one time, approximately 5% of Americans suffer from a serious mental illness, while Mental Health America estimates that 54 million Americans suffer from some form of mental disorder in a given year. Thus, during their lifetime, one may assume that a large proportion and perhaps a majority of Americans suffer some form of mentally illness. This is a startling realization and suggests that in America, and most likely other Western nations also, mental illness is now epidemic.
    …….
    Just joking Alfred!

  • evgueni

    Jon,

    direct democracy looks very attractive to *minority* political groupings precisely because they realise that through issue politics is how they can realistically have the best chance of achieving their aims, an overall majority being out of reach. A limited alliance of left- and right-leaning groups as well as religious groups and environmentalists is how the initial introduction of DD could come about.
    .
    The reason these disparate groups of people can all imagine that DD would be beneficial to their causes may be routed in human psychology. It has been shown that people over-estimate how representative their views are of the majority views. CanSpeccy, I think, believes that DD in the UK would lead immediately to blunt anti-immigration policies being introduced because he believes this is the will of the majority in the UK. You also think there is a danger of this. I think the danger is overstated, for the following reasons.
    .
    In our current political reality, the only political tool available to us is to vote for one party or another, with associated broad policies. Small details of policy are not discernable in elections for practical reasons, in effect this is an extremely crude political tool. We can only talk about simple things like that party is broadly pro-immigration and this party is anti-immigration and so on. As they say, if your only tool is a hammer, everything starts to look like a nail. People who are not racist or nationalist are nevertheless left with a difficult choice – if they are concerned about the effects of immigration, they must choose a pro-immigration or an anti-immigration party, depending on how concerned they are overall in the context of everything else that is going on. This is polarising, there is no room for subtlety. Arising directly from this is a frustration that is felt by many at being unable to express their preferences at the ballot box directly. People rebel against this impossibility by adopting more extreme views than would otherwise be the case.
    .
    But the situation is radically changed under DD because a lot more fine detail can be debated and balloted. A crude yes/no to immigration is not the only question that can be balloted. People are not blind to this and consistently reject blanket immigration bans, preferring instead more sophisticated approaches. The positive effects of open debate that precedes the ballot also must not be underestimated.
    .
    I think the effects of media bias can be profound, but not in the way you suggest. People in the main appear to be very resilient to openly displayed bias in favour or against a position (a fact noted by Chomsky amongst others). The far more dangerous type is the bias by omission of views or topics from discussion altogether. This is how the incredibly unfair status quo is really maintained – land property a sacred ‘right’, money supply in private hands OK, no democracy in the workplace ‘good for business’, UK government ‘democratic’… So long as these things are not questioned prominently, they remain ‘true’. This is another discussion, but for now I just wanted to say that probably the papers exploit the polarisation on the immigration issue rather than create it in the first place. Whatever sells more copies, without upsetting the sponsors, right? To analyse further, some of the elite structures will be very much in favour of immigration – those benefiting from cheap labour, those benefiting from increased demand for housing and services, those benefiting from increased demand for money supply. Undoubtedly some policy-makers will be hoping that immigration will prove at least a partial solution to the problems of aging population and public pension liabilities. None of these people will feel threatened by immigration in their exclusive neighbourhoods and in their places of work.
    .
    Finally, some satisfying mental imagery – for every misguided Ayn Rand preaching right-wing person there would be a misguided left-utopian person and together they would cancel each other out at the ballot box. Given the chance, the people of the UK as a whole, in their collective wisdom, would continue the unbroken record of conservative (small ‘c’) voting patterns as evident in other places around the world where democracy has already advanced beyond the purely representative.

  • Jon

    Thanks evgueni. My purpose in referencing our discussion wasn’t to attack DD, or you, but to put it to Alfred that the ‘majority views’ of which he speaks are influenced by propaganda, and accordingly he cannot claim that they have been arrived at entirely democratically. That important point still stands regardless of how the deliberate or accidental biases are injected.
    .
    Your view that DD would be a much more subtle mechanism for espousing ones views democratically makes complete sense, I agree.
    .
    I concur also on the dangers of bias by omission, a powerful source of confounding the ideal of providing a perfect set of information by which the electorate can form their views. But I struggle to agree with the suggestion that people in the main are resilient to (say) newspaper editorials, which can either confirm an already selfish-world view, or lead one to it (depending on one’s character). Today the Sun has a leader on supporting Osbourne’s “getting the economy back on track” which of course is right-wing for “carry on cutting”. For the Sun’s target socio-economic and class readership to support that, which in varying amounts I think they would do, demonstrates the extent to which the corporate media deliberately uses false consciousness to achieve its political aims.
    .
    Still, I am open to challenge on it – I realise I haven’t provided a source for what I believe. Would you happen to know of any items of research that look into this sort of thing?
    .
    Anyway, I don’t want any of this valuable discussion to distract from the fact that Alfred has not yet replied. I still eagerly await his response to my questions!

  • evgueni

    Jon,
    I was not reflexively jumping to the defence of DD. I thought this was a chance to continue our earlier discussion without appearing too off-topic 🙂
    .
    My point about ineffectiveness of open bias in the media was in part from personal experience of living in the USSR. Most people had a healthy distrust of the Soviet press and TV/radio broadcast stations. People talked amongst themselves. The other reason for doubting the effectiveness of propaganda is a consistent theme in Chomsky’s writing where he contrasts the results of public opinion polls in the USA with the predominant message in the US media on specific points of foreign and domestic policy. The US public appears to be consistently and overwhelmingly anti-war, for a two-state solution in Palestine, for universal medical care etc. This despite the propaganda.. Sorry I cannot give a more specific reference than that right now.

  • Jon

    Ah, yes – I’d read somewhere (similarly, no reference) that the ordinary person’s view in the USSR was that the press cannot be trusted. I sense that that feeling was much stronger given the overt media control than it is here, where the control is a bit more subtle and much more indirect.
    .
    Yes, you’re right on Chomsky, and Michael Moore says much the same: the two business parties are consistently offering politics well to the Right of the views of ordinary Americans. Good point.

  • Lucy

    This turned up on NRK a few hours ago

    http://www.nrk.no/nyheter/distrikt/rogaland/1.7730120

    Roughly, this article says that the police are now looking for a man in his 30s with alleged links to a bikers’ gang called Bandidos.
    A man in his early 20s has already presented himself to the police, but denies any guilt.
    Police now fear retaliatory action from the criminal circles to which the murdered 27-year-old belonged.
    The report is cited as coming from the Stavanger evening paper.

  • Jalaluddin Morris

    Now let’s put things in perspective:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Norway_attacks : The 2011 Norway attacks were two sequential terrorist attacks against the civilian population, the government, and a political summer camp in Norway on 22 July 2011.

    http://www.iraq-war.ru/article/253286 : “Another vehicle used by Breivik to reach the island following the bombing, was meanwhile registered as having passed a road toll the next day.”

    http://www.presstv.ir/detail/190629.html : New Norway violence critically injures 1 (Sun Jul 24, 2011 11:40PM GMT)
    “Reports say two men in military fatigues knocked on his door, broke into the house and carried out the shooting. Police are looking for the two suspects.”

1 2 3 4

Comments are closed.