Tag Archives: norway

Enemy Media: Breivik’s Views Too Popular

In the wake of a very active first week, The Guardian’s Anders Behring Breivik page is relatively moribund today.

Anders Behring Breivik loses front-page power in Norway, published Friday, provides a hint why:

Silje Gloppen, a teacher, said however abhorrent Breivik’s views, lessons needed to be learned from him. “Norwegians and, I believe, the rest of the world have to consider the possibility that this man is speaking the truth when he says he believes our ‘Norwegian culture and ethnicity’ is threatened by multiculturalism,” she said.

Breivik’s outlook is shared by “too many”, she argued, citing the comment fields under articles on Norwegian newspaper websites, and a battle on Wikipedia pages related to the case between moderators and extremist writers trying to take hold of “the truth” on the internet.

“I am afraid the left side in politics have for too long failed to grasp that there are challenges with the new society that need to be discussed,” she added.

Paul Brennan (paulrbrennan) has been silent since court adjourned Friday.

Helen Pidd (helenpidd) twits today that she’s back in London where she will find it tricky to report further on the trial. She redirects those who are interested to Lars Bevanger (lbevanger) and Trygve Sorvaag (trygvesorvaag). She also cites Chris Elliott’s op-ed, Open door: The readers’ editor on … the problems of tweeting the Anders Behring Breivik trial, which in turn provides a reporter’s rationalizations about why reporting testimony directly from Breivik’s trial is bad:

A tweet goes straight from event to air – and stays there. It is a discrete package that may later form a strand of a larger, more complex, story, but which will, nevertheless, exist of itself, shorn of context.

It is an effective form of digital journalism and is increasingly first with the news – whether that comes from a journalist or a well-informed tweeter. However, it is reductive by nature. When the Guardian was planning coverage of the trial of Anders Behring Breivik, the Norwegian extremist who has admitted killing 77 people, the Guardian’s editorial team discussed whether tweeting was an appropriate tool.

Helen Pidd, the reporter who is covering the trial, was concerned beforehand that reducing “his justifications to a stream of 140-character soundbites” would be giving Breivik the platform he sought.

Pidd fingers the most important reason: Despite the reduction and distortion, she finds her enemy’s position still too potent.

Pidd said: “I would say I have had far more comments from people thanking me for the ‘grim but necessary’ reports on Twitter than those complaining I was giving Breivik the platform he craved. Two followers tweeted me to say they were ‘unfollowing’ until I left Oslo because it was ‘too much’.”

She has gained almost 3,000 followers in four days, a number of whom were angry when she said she wasn’t going to tweet everything on day one “because … they accused me of censorship”.

She said she wasn’t “completely comfortable with tweeting the trial”, not least because so much of Breivik’s ideology was formed online. But she felt it was important to engage readers, plus it does drive traffic to the website.

Breivik correctly identified the media and it’s pundits as enemies. Those pundits are less forthright about it, but reading them closely it’s clear they agree. They understand, at some level, that their multicult ideology is unpopular, that the verdict on it is already in. Now that they’ve gotten enough to reduce Breivik to “the Norwegian extremist who has admitted killing 77 people”, that’s the only context they want to provide.

Breivik Trial, Day Five

Courtroom twitterers:

Paul Brennan (paulrbrennan) on Twitter
Helen Pidd (helenpidd) on Twitter
Trygve Sorvaag (trygvesorvaag) on Twitter

Selected twits from 20 April 2012, in chronological order.

@helenpidd: Breivik: “I am not a racist, I am an anti-racist.” Concerned with the “anti-European racism” in the Norwegian media.

@helenpidd: Breivik complains that “cultural conservatives” such as himself has no chance of having a letter published in a Norwegian newspaper.

@helenpidd: Breivik says he was influenced in a particular bomb making technique by Andreas Baader from the Red Army Faction/Baader Meinhof Gang.

@helenpidd: Breivik: “We consider the police our brothers, along with the military. if we are going to have a coup d’état, we are going to rely on them”

@paulrbrennan: “Starting point was not to kill as many as possible, but to send a message and ensure the compendium was distributed.”

@paulrbrennan: “If the building had collapsed, Utoya would have been unnecessary, and I could have driven straight to the police station…

@paulrbrennan: “I cannot claim to comprehend the suffering I have caused. If I were to try to comprehend the suffering I have caused, I wouldn’t

@paulrbrennan: “…have been able to sit here today, or even to *live* after July 22nd.”

@paulrbrennan: lawyer: how can you say that, but you cried when you saw your own film the other day (in court)…?

@paulrbrennan: says “What I love is not the same thing you love.”

@helenpidd: Breivik asked to describe Norwegian culture he wants to protect: “It’s everything in Norway ranging from door handles, patterns, beer…”

@helenpidd: “…The way we speak, act… school disciple, politeness, the way we address each other.” (Breivik’s idea of what is Norwegian culture)

@paulrbrennan: is being asked about journalists, and the fact he groups all together, but he differentiates between politicians. why so?

@paulrbrennan: says he differentiates between news and sports journalists….

@paulrbrennan: #Breivik is asked how he found out that 44 of his victims held leadership positions. #Breivik: “my assumption was that more than half would”

@paulrbrennan: After lunch, #Breivik will be asked more about the ‘categories of traitors’ which he outlined yesterday.

@paulrbrennan: MT @mmayson: Are you aware it’s Hitlers birthday today? Is that why #Breivik is dressed completely in black? Mike << I wasn't aware. Maybe. @paulrbrennan: #Breivik says he’s a third generation militant nationalist. Says he tried essays on internet, debate, “absolutely everything.”

@helenpidd: Breivik: violence was last resort: previously tried “everything that was possible through peaceful means until I lost my faith in democracy”

@paulrbrennan: #Breivik now to be asked about Cat A-B-C traitors.

@paulrbrennan: #Breivik is being shown an image of the badge he photoshopped onto his uniform: “Marxist Hunter: Valid for Cat A,B,C only”

@paulrbrennan: #Breivik is told that about half of those he killed were less than 18 years old. #Breivik says he assumed they were older.

@paulrbrennan: #Breivik psychiatrist asks him why he thinks they are lying. #Breivik “That is a good question, maybe you can tell me…?”

@helenpidd: Breivik tells psychiatrists that his meditation dulls all emotions – “from happiness to sorrow, despair, hopelessness, anxiety, fear”

@TrygveSorvaag: Prosecutor takes over and moves over to Utøya.

@TrygveSorvaag: #Breivik asks people to leave the room if they do not want to listen to this.

[Much twittering conveying Breivik’s recounting of the attack omitted.]

@paulrbrennan: #Breivik looked at his notes for a second there. Says he shouted “You are going to die today, Marxists!” at the tent site.

[More twittering conveying Breivik’s recounting of the attack omitted.]

@paulrbrennan: #Breivik says when he reached Lovers’ Path again he heard a helicopter in the trees above. Thought police must now be on island.

@paulrbrennan: #Breivik: “And I thought, do I really want to survive this? I will be the most hated man in Norway. And I looked over and saw my Glock…”

@paulrbrennan: #Breivik: “…and I thought about shooting myself in the head.” Says he remembered his compendium and the plan to face judicial process.

@paulrbrennan: #Breivik: remembers helicopter was very close, and wondered why, because new police had thermal cameras and didn’t need to be so close.

@paulrbrennan: #Breivik: said he thought ‘my mission is over’, had no intention of firing on the police because they are not the enemy.

The journalists covering the story are the enemy however. Here they are fretting about how twitting makes it harder to spin the proceedings their way.

Reporting the Anders Behring Breivik trial | Online Journalism Features | Journalism.co.uk:

As the court’s live TV feed is subjected to a ban on broadcasting any of Breivik’s, or his victims’, testimonies, many people across the globe are likely to choose to follow the Twitter feeds of journalists inside the court room for updates.

But free speech blogger Daniel Bennett told Journalism.co.uk he believes substituting reporting Breivik for tweeting his quotes leads to coverage fraught with problems. He also blogged about the issue for Index on Censorship.

“The problem for live-tweeting journalists is that it is hard to do any more than simply relay what Breivik is saying,” Bennett said.

“Live-tweeting is a time consuming exercise and it is difficult to consistently provide background information, context and challenge Breivik’s unsavoury evidence.”

He added that the “natural news instinct” is to repeat Breivik’s “most shocking” comments, “potentially causing additional suffering or inspiring extreme right-wing nationalists.”

As Bennett flagged up in his Index blog post, Guardian reporter Helen Pidd, tweeted on Tuesday: “Heading to Oslo today for the Breivik trial. Should I live-tweet proceedings? I’m thinking not. Loath to give Breivik the platform he craves”.

And she went on to discuss the ethics of live-tweeting the trial with her followers and colleagues.

“@pollycurtis Well, I think with a report you have context. With tweets I’d feel I was publicising his warped soundbites without criticism.”

Twitter users who replied to Pidd’s comments were divided over whether she was justified in this self-censorship. However, Pidd disclosed that her colleagues at the Guardian had agreed that it was “not morally wrong to live tweet the trial” and went on to tweet the proceedings in its minutiae.

Bennett believes that the only way to overcome the ethical issues surrounding live-tweeting is incorporating the tweets into liveblogs, and longer articles where there is more space for additional analysis.

“But even then”, he says, “there is a difficult balance to be struck between accurate reporting and providing a platform for an abhorrent ideology which led to the killing of 77 Norwegians.”

Breivik Trial Begins

Norway mass killer deemed sane in new finding, Reuters, 10 April 2012:

“We’re talking about psychosis, and we have found no evidence of it,” psychiatrist Asgar Aspaas told reporters after submitting the 310-page report based on weeks of round-the-clock observation.

Aspaas was one of two experts appointed to provide a second opinion after a previous team using different methods found Breivik to be a psychotic who also suffered from paranoid schizophrenia. The initial finding caused a public uproar.

“It’s a completely open question now,” said Jo Martin Stigen, a University of Oslo law professor. “I don’t think we can rule out that he will be considered legally sane in the end.”

The dueling psychiatric teams are expected to defend their diagnoses in court, which is unusual in Norway. The final ruling will be made by a five-judge panel as part of its verdict at the end of the trial.


Defense attorney Geir Lippestad told reporters Breivik was satisfied by the new report and that Norwegians should brace themselves for “tough and demanding” testimony by the killer who espouses far-right ideology.

“Not only will he explain (his actions), but he will also say he regrets that he didn’t go further,” Lippestad said.

“The background for the killings are his paranoid psychotic delusions that he is a participant in a civil war where he is responsible for deciding who lives and dies,” the first report said. “His mission is to save the entire western world’s culture and genes.”

In a letter last week to news media, Breivik called the initial finding of psychosis a “humiliation” and said the experts seemed too traumatized by the killings to be objective.

Norway killer admits massacre, claims self-defense:

“I don’t recognize Norwegian courts because you get your mandate from the Norwegian political parties who support multiculturalism,” Breivik said in his first comments to the court.

“I admit to the acts, but not criminal guilt,” he told the court, insisting he had acted in self-defense.

The key issue to be resolved during the 10-week trial is the state of Breivik’s mental health, which will decide whether he is sent to prison or into psychiatric care. Anxious to prove he is not insane, Breivik will call right-wing extremists and radical Islamists to testify during the trial, to show that others also share his view of clashing civilizations.

Breivik also announced he doesn’t recognize the authority of Judge Wenche Elisabeth Arntzen, because he said she is friends with the sister of former Norwegian Prime Minister and Labor Party leader Gro Harlem Brundtland.

The anti-Muslim militant described himself as a writer, currently working from prison, when asked by the judge for his employment status.

He claims he targeted the government headquarters in Oslo and the youth camp to strike against the left-leaning political forces he blames for allowing immigration in Norway.

Breivik wants to be judged as a sane person and will call radical Islamists, and extremists on the right and left to testify to support “his perception that there is a war going on in Europe,” his defense lawyer, Geir Lippestad, told the court. Lippestad said Breivik wants to read a new document he’s written at the start of his testimony on Tuesday.

While Norway has a legal principle of preventive self-defense, that doesn’t apply to Breivik’s case, said Jarl Borgvin Doerre, a legal expert who has written a book on the concept. “It is obvious that it has nothing to do with preventive self-defense,” Doerre told The Associated Press.

Police sealed off the streets around the Oslo court building, where journalists, survivors and relatives of victims watched the proceedings Monday in a 200-seat courtroom built specifically for this trial.

Thick glass partitions were put up to separate the defendant from victims and their families, many of whom are worried that Breivik will use the trial to promote his extremist political ideology. In a manifesto he published online before the attacks, Breivik wrote that “patriotic resistance fighters” should use trials “as a platform to further our cause.”

After he surrendered, Breivik had told investigators he is a resistance fighter in a far-right militant group modeled after the Knights Templar — a Western Christian order that fought during the crusades. Police, however, have found no trace of any organization and say he acted alone.

“In our opinion, such a network does not exist,” prosecutor Svein Holden told the court on Monday.

In his manifesto, Breivik described the supposed group’s initiation rites, oaths and the “clenched fist salute” that he used in court, symbolizing “strength, honor and defiance against the Marxist tyrants of Europe.”

Norway killer admits massacre | Photo Gallery – Yahoo! News

Breivik may indeed suffer “paranoid psychotic delusions”, especially concerning the organization he purports to represent. That doesn’t mean Norway’s indigenous population, and for that matter European populations all over the world, don’t face demographic swamping, displacement and dispossession by alien immigrants, muslim and otherwise. Whites who speak out against any of this, never mind resort to violence, are demonized and pathologized just the same.

Speaking of delusions… According to multicultists their genocidal anti-White agenda is both a good thing, something we should all celebrate, and it’s not happening, it’s just a “psychotic delusion” that only exists in the minds of White “racists”. I think they’re just lying.

UPDATE 17 April 2012: Excerpts from Breivik’s statement in court April 17, 2012 « Attack On The Labor Party (based on a Google Translate of http://www.vg.no/nyheter/innenriks/22-juli/rettssaken/artikkel.php?artid=10065238):

A couple of questions that might be most important in our time and that all journalists, academics and politicians should ask about is the following:

Do you think it is undemocratic that the Norwegian people have never been asked through a referendum that was made into a multicultural state?

Is it democratic to do it without asking people about the law?

The second question is the following:

Do you think it is undemocratic that Norway welcomes as many African and Asian immigrants that they risk being made a minority in their own capital?

And then someone will say: No, there is no problem because there are free elections.

But then the next question: Do you believe that free choice is enough, and that the press has an obligation to communicate this to people? When the Norwegians, and Europeans have been displaced steering wheel, among other journalists.

That they will lose their culture, their land and traditions and Christianity. Many have seen on several occasions in Europe that (…) Our opinions are seen as inferior and we are seen as second-class citizens.

As it is now, there is no real democracy in Norway and Europe in the Marxist elite decide. The boycott democracy when they feel like it.

I’ll take an example from Austria a few years ago.
We can not allow a nationalist and cultural radical party takes power because their party is intolerant and inhumane.
National and international news agencies put much pressure on Austria, and called them racists and Nazis.

And the same happened when the Swiss voted against the conditions (…) Again, they spoke of them as intolerant and inhumane.

The same is happening now in Hungary, where the nationalist alliance is a victim of the same. (…) By calling them fascists and intolerant.

Swedish news agencies continue to do the same against Sweden Democrats and the Norwegian media has done the same for 20 years against the Progress Party. Here, too, boycotting the democracy and tries to push the Norwegians and Swedes by calling them racists, cruel and intolerant.

Norwegian and European politicians and journalists should ask themselves this question:

Have the Norwegian press ever driven campaign journalism against the Progress Party before the election? The answer is yes, they have been running a smear campaign against the Progress Party for 20 years and will continue to do so, and the same is in progress throughout Europe.

Norway can be called a democracy for 100 percent of the news agencies supporting multiculturalism and systematic censoring of individuals that support ethnic and cultural protectionism?

The answer is no. Norway can not be called a democracy as long as this systematic censorship is taking place.

More and more kulturkonsevartive realize that the democratic struggle is no point. It is not possible to win when there is no real freedom of speech. When more realize this in the coming decades is a short trip to the weapon.

When a peaceful revolution impossible done, a violent revolution, the only possibility.

All those who advocate multiculturalism and kulturmarxisme should expect to be liable in the future.
It is not difficult to foresee when Europe is controlled by multiculturalists. It is the price we pay.

You try to save your people, when the majority chooses propaganda and say that you are a murderer and terrorist. All this we know in advance, so we do not complain. I wrote in the compendium before the surgery that I would be demonized.

To die as a martyr for his people’s survival is the greatest honor in a man’s life.

This is not only our right but our duty. Knowing that I will not scare imprisoned. I was born in a prison and has lived all his life in a prison, where there has been freedom of speech.

A prison where there is no freedom of speech and where I have been forced to look at, but my ethnicity is being deconstructed by kulturmarxister.

In this prison are not allowed to resist, and it is even expected that I should applaud my people.

In this prison management has decided that if you criticize it is not that good.

Demonized ridiculed. This prison is called Norway. It does not matter if I’m locked in Skøyen or Ila.

This is as urgent matter where you live in Norway, because you’re sitting there with a certainty that the country will eventually be deconstructed to the multicultural hell we call Oslo.

And you sit there with the knowledge that democratic struggle is useless because it is controlled with the use of undemocratic methods. The latest report from Statistics Norway show that immigrants will be in the majority in 2040 is very misleading.

It tells very little about the relationship between ethnic Norwegians and non-Norwegian. The reason the report is worthless is that they have deliberately omitted a number of other immigrant groups.

They have also dropped 3 generation immigrants, illegal immigrants and children where one parent is from another non-Nordic area.

The report was commissioned from the multiculturalists, where they try to hide the fact that ethnic Norwegians will be a minority in Oslo in a few years.

This is going to happen. In addition, statistics from the (…) that 47 percent are born to Norwegian sykeshus non-ethnic Norwegian.

It is today’s Oslo and Oslo in 28 years. SSB should be renamed the Labour Party sentralbyrå.

Many have claimed that ultra-nationalists like me want to build a terrorist regime. It is a mistake. I support the Japanese and South Korean model.

Nothing more, nothing less. Is really Japan and South Korea as terrible regimes?

No, they are not. They are high-tech nations. And saying no to multiculturalism and mass immigration in the 70s. They are living besviser that no to mass immigration is successful.

Discipline, æreskodekser and the pride of their own heritage is essential in Japan and South Korea. Women have a secondary role in the workplace. It is therefore absolutely wrong that people like me would like to introduce a vicious terrorist regime.

Today’s most successful nations are Japan and South Korea, which has used ethnic protectionism.

This model is currently the most perfect of all political models. In Europe, the alliance between Marxists and liberals after World War II, in principle, destroyed Europe.

Ethnic Norwegians, and Europeans have been subjected to cruel acts, since our doors opened for immigration in the 60 – and 70-century.

Since Norwegian and European multiculturalists opened to immigration has poured in about 30 million Muslims into Europe. More than 90,000 of my Norwegian sisters have been raped since 1960 until today.

Against the people’s will. It is primarily Labor held responsible for my brothers and sisters.

More that these have been gang raped. More than 300,000 have been physically and mentally harassed, been beaten and robbed by Muslims since 1950 and 60

Several have committed suicide as a result of these atrocities. Hundreds of Norwegians have been killed by Muslims in recent years, including Martine was killed and raped by a Muslim in England.

All these atrocities are crimes against the Norwegian people and it is the Norwegian Labour Party including the AUF that are responsible for this because they’ve invited them here and continue to invite them here.

As a result, we see that ethnic Norwegians.

(If interrupted by the judge asking him to come to a conclusion)

Sitting Bull is and was a hero who was feireret of America’s indigenous peoples. He fought on behalf of his people against General Custer.

Crazy Horse and Chief Galen were other military leaders of the American indigenous people. Were they terrorists, or were they heroes?

Were they evil or were they heroes?

American history books describe them as heroes, not terrorists. Meanwhile, nationalists in Europe are described as terrorists.

Is not that hypocritical and very racist? An individual or group that fights against foreign colonization is not terrorists as history illustrates.

We are no more terrorists against the native Britons who fought against those who fasciliterte the Roman invasion. Norway has an indigenous population. Are Norway’s indigenous ethnic Norwegians?

Did the indigenous people lived here over the past 12,000 years?

The answer is yes, Norway has an indigenous and ethnic Norwegians are Norway’s indigenous people.

There is no difference between the battle being fought in the Soviet and autonomy in Bolivia, and between struggle for us who are fighting for nationalism in Europe.

In 2009, Parliament decided that the indigenous people in Bolivia should have autonomy if they wanted this. There is no difference between the Norwegian people and the Bolivian indigenous people.

Why be treated Nordic and European indigenous worse than other indigenous peoples. Why is the Norwegian Indigenous activists branded as rasisier and Nazis, while indigenous activists in other parts of the world will support and acceptance?

It is extremely unfair and it is unacceptable. Our ancestors have lived in this country for 12,000 years and we, as Norway’s indigenous people, do not accept that our country is colonized against our will.

We like all other indigenous peoples have special rights in this country, and this is something we will continue to fight for. I know that the information that I represent are difficult to understand. When one is taught to believe otherwise.

It is difficult to fight against the multi-cultural flow when the media pumps out to multicultural propaganda all the time.

Thomas Jefferson said: “Tree of Liberty must be watered from time to time with the blood of tyrants.” When national governments are destructive, the people have the right to abolish them.

It is their duty to overthrow such a government. And then to establish new guards for their future security.

It is 100 percent certain is that there is a war between nationalists and internationalists in Europe. We, the first militant nationalists, the first drops of water that realizes that there will be a big storm.

There will be a gradual escalation and polarization in society and we will see further attacks. The multukuluraismenn government is forced to fight an imagined against us on one side and militant islamsisker on the other side.

My European nationalist brothers and sisters will prevail, which will declare the end of a venstreekstremt board that has lasted since the Axis powers fall.

His conclusion:

Multiculturalism is an anti-Norwegian and European anti hatideologi. Multiculturalism is an evil ideology that pushed forward.

We, the indigenous people of Norway, is now in a situation where we are losing our capital and cities. We are about 5-10 years a minority in their own capital.

The political elites in countries stretcher is so brazen that they expect us to applaud deconstruction. And those who did not applaud, are branded as evil racists and Nazis.

This is what is the real madness – they should be subject carried a psychiatric evaluation and labeled as sick, not me.

But the Labour Party’s parliamentary group and all other social democrats in Europe. And why is this the real madness?

This is the real madness because it is not rational to work to deconstruct his own group, their culture, their own religion.

It is not rational to flood his country with the Africans and Asians, so that our culture is lost. This is the real madness. This is the real evil. The universal menneskerettightene allows for the ethnic Norwegians have the right to defense.

Responsible Norwegians and Europeans who feel morally obliged to not see that Norwegians are made to a minority in their own country.
They’re not going to see that we are made to the minority in their own country, we will fight against multiculturalism in the Labour Party and others working towards the same goal.

The attacks were preventatives attacks in defense of the Norwegian culture and my people. I acted with the principle of necessity on behalf of my people, my religion, my ethnicity, my city and my country.

I therefore demand that I be acquitted of these charges.

Genocide Excused, Opposition Blamed, Fjordman Out

A series of three articles from Views and News from Norway concerning Breivik, Fjordman, and the larger, longer-running, lopsided debate they’re on the politically incorrect side of.

‘Fear of foreigners’ breeds extremists, 3 August 2011:

Anders Behring Breivik is by no means Norway’s first home-grown right-wing extremist. Concerns are rising that the country, with its relatively small population, has produced what some experts call a disproportionate amount of internationally known extremists, and some link it to a history of fremmedfrykt (fear of foreigners).

While Norwegian society generally has grown more tolerant and internationally oriented in recent decades, there’s long been a tradition of wariness among Norwegians regarding people they don’t know. While Norway has produced record numbers of its own emigrants, many haven’t been particularly welcoming towards immigrants who’ve arrived in Norway during the past few decades.

That’s given rise to criticism of asylum and immigration laws that some view as too liberal, and in turn a rise in some hateful rhetoric against foreigners in online debates. Fear of being branded a racist for criticizing immigration policies, however, has shut some out of the debate, leading to frustration when they can’t have their say.

Rational debaters withdraw

Author and journalist Øyvind Strømmen has followed the types of websites where Breivik, who has confessed to terrorist attacks that left 77 persons dead, was active in online debate. The extreme and hateful rhetoric found on many of the sites, Strømmen told newspaper Aftenposten this week, “is so uncomfortable that those wanting a factual and rational debate pull out. That leaves the debate to more and more extremists on the left and the right.”

Never mind the completely rational fear of social and even criminal sanction. Ironically, Fjordman has used the same disingenuous argument as Strømmen – anyone whose opinion he doesn’t like is irrational, or just plain stupid. The fact remains that it’s only one side that has to find the courage, or foolhardiness, to debate. There is no lack of fearless, rational people on the other side, arguing in favor of genocidal immigration and multiculturalism. They’re just intelligent enough to pretend it isn’t genocide. Instead of saying directly that they think indigenous Whites have a duty to abide and even accomodate their legal and demographic subordination, most characterize their position instead as favoring “tolerance” and “diversity”. Instead of saying directly that they favor repression of indigenous White resistance to subordination, most simply pathologize and demonize it, painting it as something bad or even evil.

The debate is so lopsided that all the pro-genocide side has to do is sprinkle a few special words into their argument – “nazi”, “racist”, “xenophobe”, “extremist” – to end any debate. Arguing against such rhetoric is taken as an affirmation that you are what they say you are.

Strømmen stressed to Aftenposten that he has no theory as to what’s really created the right-wing extremists in Norway like Vikernes, Breivik and Fjordman, while Anders Jupskås at the University of Oslo thinks the issue should be researched. Strømmen does think Fjordman spreads a dangerous ideology, though, because he indirectly inspires violence by indicating that armed resistance is the only alternative against Islam, and that western leaders have betrayed their people.

These intellects don’t have a theory because the most rational theory – that foreigners are what breeds fear of foreigners, that genocide is what inspires anti-genocidal rhetoric and even violence – is unthinkable to them. At least where Whites are the victims, rather than the perpetrators. These are not the high-minded, neutral researchers they pretend to be, but partisans that either firmly believe that there is no such thing as Whites, never mind indigenous Whites, or that Whites have no legitimate cause to resist a regime – their government, media and academia – deliberately inflicting conditions that are bringing about their physical destruction.

Breivik police question ‘Fjordman’, 4 August 2011:

The anonymous blogger “Fjordman,” who is repeatedly referenced in the manifesto of Oslo and Utøya terrorist attacks suspect Anders Behring Breivik, was being questioned by Norwegian police on Thursday afternoon after authorities found out his real identity. The international links between Breivik and other far right groups have also continued to be revealed, as well as the suspect’s financial details and a number of other new facts about the case.

Spokesperson Pål-Fredrik Hjort Kraby told Norwegian Broadcasting (NRK) that “Fjordman” was seen as an “especially central” witness for the case given the influence he appears to have had on the suspect.

“Fjordman” had finished his own blog in 2005 but made a public statement on the Gates of Vienna website after the Oslo and Utøya attacks to reject claims that he was Breivik. The blogger said that he “extremely disliked” being mentioned in Breivik’s writings, claiming that he has “never” met the terror suspect. He had continued to contribute to such foreign far right websites after ending his own blog.

Fjordman’s statement on Breivik is here: Thoughts on the Recent Atrocities.

‘Fjordman’ reveals identity, 5 August 2011:

36 year-old Peder Jensen has given an interview to Norwegian newspaper VG where he reveals that he is the man behind the “Fjordman” blog referenced repeatedly in the online manifesto of Oslo and Utøya attacks suspect Anders Behring Breivik.

After being identified by the police and subsequently questioned on Thursday afternoon, Jensen met reporters from VG at an Oslo café. He chose to use his real name after receiving advice from a lawyer, and has asked the media to leave him and his family alone. He also confirmed that he would never again use the pseudonym “Fjordman” because he does not “wish to be associated with Breivik and his horrible actions.”

Exchanged emails with Breivik

Jensen told VG that he had “warned” his family in advance about shedding his anonymity, adding that “because of my own safety, I’m now going into hiding.” He had felt it was his “duty” to cooperate with the police investigation and decided to be interviewed under his real name because it “eventually would have emerged anyway, resulting in a media frenzy.” Jensen commented, “it is also a way for me to clear my name.”

The blogger disclosed that he had exchanged a number of emails with Breivik in 2009 and 2010. Breivik told Jensen that he was writing a book and asked if they could meet. Jensen turned down the offer “not because of his extreme views, but because he didn’t seem very interesting – like a vacuum cleaner salesman.” “‘Pie in the sky,’ I thought to myself when I re-read the emails,” Jensen added. He confirmed investigators had confiscated his computer, stressing that “they won’t find anything on my computer regarding any criminal matters or Breivik.” VG suggests that Jensen “feels that the police are looking to implicate him.”

In further excerpts of the interview reported by news agency NTB, Jensen said, “I recognize that people need a scapegoat, and now that Breivik is behind bars, I can become a handy scapegoat, especially because I am the only Norwegian he referenced.” He added that he understood that he could be regarded as “a hate object.”

In terms of Jensen’s background, VG reports that he originally comes from the town of Ålesund on the west coast of Norway. He claims that while he has long voted for the Labour Party and voted for the Progress Party more recently, he has never been a part of a Norwegian political party, and has only handled a gun during military service, where he describes himself as “no good soldier.” He holds a masters degree in culture and technology from the University of Oslo, where he completed a dissertation on “censorship and blogging in Iran.” He also studied Arabic at the American University in Cairo and the University of Bergen.

Despite the significance of the issue, these articles make no mention of Breivik or Fjordman’s professed love of jews and hatred of nazis. As Jensen himself has found it convenient to scapegoat “nazis”, he speaks with authority on that subject.

At any rate, the sanction the media heaps upon simple writers like Fjordman, to which the government may eventually add, illustrates the point I made above. The idea that the responsibility for the crimes and violence committed by alien interlopers lies with them never comes up for debate, much less the indirect responsibility that belongs to their enablers and apologists. What gets the media spotlight instead is even more indirect – those bad, evil people who supposedly cause anti-immigrant crimes and violence with their “extremist” ideas and rhetoric against crime, violence and the supporters of genocidal immigration and multiculturalism who enable and defend it.

(Views and News from Norway link via a comment by Rollory on Kay on Breivik on “The Jew”.)

Norway Attacks – Anders Behring Breivik

Police dismiss initial fears Norwegian terror attacks were work of Islamist organisations:

The massacre in Norway was the work of a man with extreme right wing views who hated Muslims, police said this morning.

Officers found a series of raving internet posts by 32-year-old Anders Behring Breivik, who was arrested for gunning down children on the island of Utoya yesterday.

National police chief Sveinung Sponheim told public broadcaster NRK that the suspected gunman’s Internet postings ‘suggest that he has some political traits directed toward the right, and anti-Muslim views, but if that was a motivation for the actual act remains to be seen’.

Six foot tall and blond Breivik is reported to have arrived on the island of Utoya and opened fire after beckoning several young people over in his native Norwegian tongue.

Reports suggest he was also seen loitering around the site of the bomb blast in Oslo two hours before the island incident.

Pictured: The blond Norwegian, 32, arrested over ‘holiday island massacre’ and linked to Oslo car bomb blasts:

Authorities now claim 91 people were killed – in Oslo and on Utoya Island, 50 miles north of the capital, it was claimed.

Norwegian police said at least 84 were killed at Utoya alone and described the killings as of ‘catastrophic dimensions’ and ‘the work of a madman’.

Teenagers on the Norwegian holiday island of Utoya had to ‘swim for their lives’ and hide in trees when the gunman fired indiscriminately at them.

Around 700 had gathered on the island for a meeting of the youth wing of the ruling Labour party.

Apparently Breivik targeted Norway’s treasonous elite and their children rather than muslim aliens.

2011 Norway attacks at Wikipedia:

Public broadcaster NRK and several other Norwegian media identified the suspected attacker as a blond and blue-eyed Norwegian who expressed right-wing and anti-Muslim views on the Internet.

National police chief Sveinung Sponheim told public broadcaster NRK that the gunman’s Internet postings “suggest that he has some political traits directed toward the right, and anti-Muslim views, but whether that was a motivation for the actual act remains to be seen.

He is reported to have written posts on the anti-Islamic[41] website document.no (all his apparent and unconfirmed writings listed; available on this site only in Norwegian).

Via Google Translate:

2009-12-03 01:21:04

Hlund, Fjordman, Hårstad, Rust

I’m NOK much later in the game than him when I have only been politically active for 13 years. I førstegenerasjonsdhimmi (Generation Y). I was active Oslo FrP / FpU in the first 6-7 years (in the cultural conservatives + laissez faire capitalist / liberal camp) and contributed to the Progress Party’s success before I stopped. I felt the time was more important to help develop / promote the political doctrines abroad especially British, German, French, American). I ran the business a few years while I studied and earned a few million so I could finance a inntektsløs politically active life. I now use these funds to be able to work full time to further develop / promote the Vienna Academy (Vienna school of thought) that Fjordman, Bat Yeor, Spencer + many others have already contributed so much till. The last three years I worked full time with a cultural conservative works that will help to further develop / promote these political doctrines further.

Anyway, I consider the future consolidation of the cultural conservative forces on all seven fronts as the most important in Norway and in all Western European countries. It is essential that we work to ensure that all these 7 fronts using the Vienna school of thought, or at least parts of the grunlag for 20-70 year-struggle that lies in front of us.

The book is called, by the way 2083 and is in English, 1100 pages).

To sums up the Vienna school of thought:

– Cultural Conservatism (anti-multiculturalism)
– Against Islamization
– Anti-racist
– Anti-authoritarian (resistance to all authoritarian ideologies of hate)
– Pro-Israel/forsvarer of non-Muslim minorities in Muslim countries
– Defender of the cultural aspects of Christianity
– To reveal the Eurabia project and the Frankfurt School (ny-marxisme/kulturmarxisme/multikulturalisme)
– Is not an economic policy and can collect everything from socialists to capitalists

Frankfurt School (kulturmarxisme) is a very ambitious unofficial ideology (and quite unknown to most) and they have succeeded in most areas (except to smash capitalism, European Christianity and European identity, traditions, culture). Vienna school is more a defense against this where we often use the Marxist ‘own creations against them (sexual liberation, feminism, liberalism, anti-racism, anti-autoriære arguments).

Vienna school of thought is far from a complete ideology but consists of principles and ideas that are constantly under development. It is unofficial and does not necessarily ever to be recognized.

“Vienna school of thought” is Breivik’s term for the milieu centered about Gates of Vienna.

Thanks to Chechar for calling attention to Breivik’s comments here.

From For the Record, at Gates of Vienna:

I know Fjordman personally, I know exactly what he looks like, and he does not resemble the alleged murderer in the slightest.

Furthermore, I was in conversation with Fjordman all day today, starting before the shootings, during the slaughter, and afterwards. If he was shooting up Utøya, he was doing an amazing job of communicating with his friends the whole time, even after he was thrown in a jail cell.