Alibi for Oslo maniac

[bjorn]

No surprise that we're still in shock and grief after the massmurders in Norway friday. Almost impossible to imagine anyone killing so many people in such a cold and cynical way.

A bit more surprising is his 1500 page book ("2083") put on the net just hours before the bomb to rationalise his atrocities.

He provides both an ethical, political and cultural alibi (e.g. "defending Christendom" while rejecting the present weak inverted Christian morality (quoting Nietzsche) in favor of strong "cultural christians" as well as "cultural christian agnostics" and "cultural christian atheists" becoming crusaders) - and a recipe for similar operations.

It is far from the most shocking aspect, still it may be important for this forum to note that he in one part leans extensively on a Norwegian right wing ideologist who makes use of Grant, Lindberg and Huff on the merit of Medieval science and on how "Islam destroyed science". Which is one of the reasons we need to defend Christendom by any means necessary...

It would not surprise if this is brought up in media in the days ahead and that it may give new reasons for not taking God's Philosophers, Grant, Lindberg etc. seriously.

It may even make someone labeling people coming to the same conclusions as right wing revisionists and supporters of similiar crazy ideas, guilt by association and all that...

[merkavah12]

There's actually a heavy discussion of this over on "Get Religion"

www.getreligion.org/2011/07/the-atlantic-has-the-terrorist-all-figured-out/

www.getreligion.org/2011/07/waiting-for-facts-in-norway-bloodshed/

[elephantchang51]

Of course now he will be labelled a Christian terrorist,and all those who regularly talk of Muslim terrorists will be outraged...it's a slippery slope.

[endrefodstad]

Considering the amount of labels he has put on himself and the sometimes contradictory nature of those labels, and the overall mess his document is...I think that would be pretty difficult, once the case straightens out, to blame this on any clearly established group or ideology. The only thing he consistently seems to identify himself as is an islamophobe and a strident opponent of multiculturalism.

I mean, he claims to be a libertarian, a christian, an anti-nazist, anti-racist, anti-fascist, anti-communist, the new grand master of his own private military order etc, ad nauseam. Any argument trying to pin this on the many diverse ideologies he claims to espouce will be severely weakened by the fact that they all seem secondary to the two above. In his deluded mind, the cowardly attacks on the Labour youth on Utøya were a rallying call for all these viewpoints to support his main message.

I think that the thing this nutjob wanted was to make his actions a political statement. Everybody would be better served by identifying them as an attack on our open society as a whole rather than a representative of any ideology within it, thus making his actions the political statement he inteded them to be.