Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Mr. T

Terrorist Shoots and Kills 80 in Norway

Recommended Posts

POTGIESSER said:

Such a document would be seen as a religious intolerance, and human rights shit storm.


The basic idea behind such a document would be that tolerance must be either a totally mutual affair, or otherwise a totally mutual acknowledgement of incompatibility, and everybody stays on his turf at the end of the day. Middle ground is VERY dangerous.

OK, so you can wear a burqa in my country. Can I go around in a mini skirt and free-flowing hair in yours without everyone throwing a fit and calling me a dirty infidel and stoning me? I guessed not.

And no, I don't see any need for the West to prove that we are morally superior or more tolerant/condescending of this asymmetric attitude, or something. So for me, they either resign ANY expectations of special treatment due to their religion or ethnicitiy, or nada. Just to be on the safe side.

Share this post


Link to post
POTGIESSER said:

Such a document would be seen as a religious intolerance, and human rights shit storm.

Tolerance and human rights don't apply to intolerant human rights abusers.

Share this post


Link to post
Maes said:

Can I go around in a mini skirt and free-flowing hair in yours without everyone throwing a fit?

You can in mine so long as it's during the hours of daylight. I think there's still a quaint old by-law that forbids men from walking the streets at night in women's clothing.

Share this post


Link to post

Isnt this just sick?
Appearently Anders Breivik listened to Requem For a Dream(epic music from the LordOfTheRings) while he was killing all those people on the island.

http://www.metro.se/nyheter/musiken-som-breivik-kan-ha-lyssnat-pa-under-massakern/EVHkgB!nQU17fvwklG/

(google translate, the site is in Swedish)

Now i will always be reminded of him everytime i hear that music, that fucker!

Share this post


Link to post

Just food for thought: last night I watched a documentary on Pakistan (supposedly a "moderate" Islamic country, ally of NATO and the USA against the war on terror etc.) and they get 500 terrorist attacks per year, with over 8000 victims. Per year. And let's not speak about the -almost daily- bomb blasts in Iraq, which are purely cases of internal terrorism.

Are "their" dead somewhat less exceptional/less memorable than ours? (If we judge by the 9/11 vs Iraq death toll, then 1 US citizen life must be worth at least 500 Iraqi lives, since none seems as concerned about the fact that the US-led invasion there lead to a million deaths so far, and counting).

Are "our" terrorists deserving of more attention? Sure, a "western" terrorist would prefer a shooting over a suicide bombing, if "famous" cases are to be believed, perhaps due to a difference in baseline mentality or to have a chance to have a say over their deeds (like it seems to be the case with Breivik).

Or do our societies think that they are above such acts, and that Pakistan, Iraq, India etc. are just 3-rd world shitholes populated with little, brown, expendable subhuman creatures whose lives are worth nothing anyway, so blasting 10 or 100 or 1000 makes no difference?

Share this post


Link to post

Well, disregarding the rest of your sentence, they are third-world shitholes. Precisely because the people over there keep massacring each other so much we end up being desensitized to their plight. Even if our own countries are partly to blame for that.

Share this post


Link to post
Gez said:

Precisely because the people over there keep massacring each other so much we end up being desensitized to their plight.


What emerged from this documentary, is that they also were pretty desensitized to it. As in "shit happens". Perhaps we also need to grow a thicker skin, if anything, because it will make all those anti-terror laws seem less legitimate.

Come to think of it, in Greece alone we get an average of 6 deadly car accidents per day, yet it's nothing short of the infamous elephant in the room. Give it two weeks time, and we "balance" the Norway body count.

Sure, it's easier to sympathize with victims of one particular accident that has a beginning, an end, and a recognizable perpetrator with a face rather than a nameless "fate" or "entity", but still sayin'....

Share this post


Link to post
datadanne said:

Isnt this just sick?
Appearently Anders Breivik listened to Requem For a Dream(epic music from the LordOfTheRings) while he was killing all those people on the island.

http://www.metro.se/nyheter/musiken-som-breivik-kan-ha-lyssnat-pa-under-massakern/EVHkgB!nQU17fvwklG/

(google translate, the site is in Swedish)

Now i will always be reminded of him everytime i hear that music, that fucker!


Isn't this just sick?
Apparently Hitler ate vegetables. Now I will always be reminded of him every time I eat vegetables, that fucker!

In other words, no, it's not 'sick'. Every person who commits a crime is going to have some habit, some hobby, some music preference, etc. Does that mean that the habits/hobbies/music is forever tainted? No, and you shouldn't let yourself feel that it is tainted.

Share this post


Link to post
stewboy said:

Isn't this just sick?
Apparently Hitler ate vegetables. Now I will always be reminded of him every time I eat vegetables, that fucker!

In other words, no, it's not 'sick'. Every person who commits a crime is going to have some habit, some hobby, some music preference, etc. Does that mean that the habits/hobbies/music is forever tainted? No, and you shouldn't let yourself feel that it is tainted.


hahaha you are right, I didnt think about that :P

Share this post


Link to post
hervoheebo said:

The vast majority of the shooters seem to be young male introverts, actually I don't recall ever hearing of a female school/public killer. Why's that?

Males are more aggressive.

Share this post


Link to post
stewboy said:

Apparently Hitler ate vegetables. Now I will always be reminded of him every time I eat vegetables, that fucker!


Hitler had two legs, two arms, two eyes, a nose and a mouth. HOLY CRAP SO DO MOST OF THE 6 BILLION PEOPLE ALIVE TODAY! KILL THOSE HITLERS-IN-THE-MAKING BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE!!!

Isn't reason a wonderful thing?

Share this post


Link to post
printz said:

Males are more aggressive.

Because they don't get laid enough.

A Finnish newspaper said:

If Auvinen, Saari [Finnish school shooters] or Breivik had even sometimes got laid and if they had even occasionally had a girlfriend, none of them would have become spree killers.

Sex, or the lack of sex, is a major driving force in a young man's life. If you do not get any your mind easily starts to fill up with obsessions of extending your own misery into the whole surrounding society.

For a lonely person the welfare state is a dismal, anti-communal place, that is easy to start to hate, and you can find peer support for any kind of hate on the Internet. Nothing else helps against this coldness but an other person's physical intimacy, sex and love.

(machine translated source)

Share this post


Link to post
Jodwin said that a Finnish newspaper said:

Sex, or the lack of sex, is a major driving force in a young man's life. If you do not get any your mind easily starts to fill up with obsessions of extending your own misery into the whole surrounding society.


Then again there's this man who not only slaughtered hundreds of thousands (or even millions) but also fucked their brains out and chances are that he's partly your daddy ;-)

But I guess it's simply a case of "good old times" where men achieved way more, way earlier and in a way classier way than today. E.g. Napoleon and Alexander the Great both commanded great armies and founded empires at barely 20 years of age. Today at most a 20 yo with an attitude problem can aim at becoming a school shooter.

P.S.: yesterday I saw another film/documentary on the RAF or Baader-Meinhof Group. Now these guys meant business, and achieved way more and were much better organized and effective than any modern self-proclaimed terrorist cell. They also had an idealism unmatched by Breivik's ridiculous mixture of ZOG manipulated freemason bullshit.

Today's pointless shootings attributed to lack of sex or whatever are simply a reflection of the lack of real ideals and political education to direct the would-be revolutionaries. School shooters in particular let their personal problems overwhelm their judgements and fail to see where flaw in the system is, which led to their misery in the first place. That's why their actions, in the end, appear void and incomprehensible, as opposed to those of a political terrorist.

Even modern "politically" motivated violect acts seem pretty weakly rooted: I can't help but compare oldschool extremist left-wing groups such as the RAF or the Italian Red Brigades with the modern so-called "urban guerilla" which cite just a vague ideology of anarchical generalized disobbedience or opposition for the sake of opposition, at best, or, in the case of Breivik, just said messianic ZOG mongol freemason bullshit.

Share this post


Link to post

So basicly this is what o expect when our envoriment that we live gets more and more unnatural by diverse social ideas/behaviours, schemes/techs, since we're not made for all this bullshit that goes around how to be or behave or dress or talk and even fucking walk no wonder some one gets mad and sees no fun/posetive with life in this community, ofc this person will try to change it in some degree.

now that this ddue shot this many people, is fucking brutal
but would it give any impact like this if he shot less? might be so
and imagine all the maniacs that hide inside someones different personalities ... the best sulution for all of this would be to get tha fuck back to the forrest and dump all silly dreams about living on the moon or drive to work in a ferrari or drug yourself up on some disco with girls rubbing thier butts against your dick, you see its much fucking easier to live by survival of the fittest instead of hearing shit like this INFACT this is what we would quote:"well shit happens." because this is one of the products of peoples social missunderstanding and lack of thought, then you may wonder why this? well because each and one of us are raised with all the litter TV and radio fills our head with Every Fucking Day and that makes us look at only one single dot on the ground wile someone dont have any friends, never laughs, have no attention at all not even by his/her fucken teacher in school and are socialy frozen out and also probably classed as some goth wierdo by the local "wannabe machos" or "sugar top girls" and slowly this person grows hate to do all this shit we've heard about for some week now.
this social fuck up is the reasn for peoples lack of all that is deffied as love.

and if this isnt simple enough to understand, well then you could consider yourself not in condition to read/understand this yet

I count with that we here on doomworld understands everything we write

Share this post


Link to post
printz said:

Males are more aggressive.

Nope. They are more brutal when aggressive, however. E.g., just from randomly clicking a handful of names here, I saw poison, poison, poison, poison... When it's not poison, their victims were generally elderly or toddlers -- easy preys. Men are more likely to directly resort to direct, intense physical violence and that makes them more dangerous.

Share this post


Link to post
Maes said:

OK, so you can wear a burqa in my country. Can I go around in a mini skirt and free-flowing hair in yours without everyone throwing a fit and calling me a dirty infidel and stoning me? I guessed not.

Don't you like the idea of a free progressive country where you are allowed to express yourself? Would you rather your country to progressively go backwards to laws, attitudes, and to a government more representative of darker days of oppression?

It starts with the acceptance of alienation and unjust laws. It's more than what can be merely defined as morally superiority.

There was an issue here in Canada about Sikhs being ticketed for biking/motorcycling without a helmet. Naturally to wear one would require them to remove their Turbans. A violation of their religious freedom. So they're exempt and are allowed to bike and motorcycle wearing their Turbans without fear of being ticketed. I don't see a problem with it.

Share this post


Link to post
POTGIESSER said:

There was an issue here in Canada about Sikhs being ticketed for biking/motorcycling without a helmet. Naturally to wear one would require them to remove their Turbans. A violation of their religious freedom. So they're exempt and are allowed to bike and motorcycle wearing their Turbans without fear of being ticketed. I don't see a problem with it.

There is actually an issue with that. It's positive racism, where a minority is given unjustified privileges over the rest of the populace. If the law requires you to wear a helmet while biking then the law needs to be followed. End of story. If someone else comes to live in your country they need to abide by your country's laws, regardless of what their personal beliefs say. If they don't like your laws, well, they're free to go somewhere else.

Banning the turbans would be one thing, but making sure that everyone is equal when it comes to the law should be a priority. Giving the Sikh a right to not use a helmet puts them above everyone else in this case, and that is not cool.

Share this post


Link to post

They should just design some gizmo that lets them attach their turban to their helmet. Wear the helmet with the turban above it. There you go.

Share this post


Link to post
POTGIESSER said:

Don't you like the idea of a free progressive country where you are allowed to express yourself?


Yes, but not one where a foreigner can come and tell me how not to express myself.

For example, I would tolerate the Sikh not wearing a helmet because he can bring harm to none but himself.

But I would not tolerate being told not to cook pork this weekend because "our Muslim brothers are observing a religious fast, and we should not provoke them". That's where my proposed agreement would come in play. Sure, it would not stop the Muslims from fasting. But it would stop them from lobbying against my cooking of big, greasy, smokey pork whenever I please without having to answer to them in any way.

FIY, the whole pork incident is real and has happened in Italy, where the Muslim community felt bold enough to advance such demands (and more pressing ones, like the Crucifix removal ones).

In Greece, where we actually do have a native Muslim minority, they know better than to try and pull shit like that just to yell to our faces that they are different (also because there are political stability issues with their presence here, and because they are more moderate than the ones that emigrate in the rest of Europe).

Share this post


Link to post
Jodwin said:

There is actually an issue with that. It's positive racism, where a minority is given unjustified privileges over the rest of the populace. If the law requires you to wear a helmet while biking then the law needs to be followed. End of story. If someone else comes to live in your country they need to abide by your country's laws, regardless of what their personal beliefs say. If they don't like your laws, well, they're free to go somewhere else.

Banning the turbans would be one thing, but making sure that everyone is equal when it comes to the law should be a priority. Giving the Sikh a right to not use a helmet puts them above everyone else in this case, and that is not cool.

I'd be okay with it if everyone (whether Sikh or not) was allowed to wear a turban and not a helmet (not the case here in the UK, where the Highway Code states (IIRC) that the exemption applies only to Sikhs.)

Share this post


Link to post
finnw said:

I'd be okay with it if everyone (whether Sikh or not) was allowed to wear a turban and not a helmet

Yeah, me too, the question isn't what the law is like, but who it applies to. Laws should apply to everyone equally regardless of race, nationality and religion. No such exceptions should be allowed, as they only make the people living in the same country unequal.

Share this post


Link to post

Would it really be considered so inhumane to have a "no positive discrimination" clause somewhere in the law? Or at least, one that prevents applying positive discrimination to anyone who merely professes being special or unique because of religion etc? What prevents one from making up his own religion, setting up his own rules, and pretend to be pampered by the state or playing the "oppressed minority" card?

For all the problems my country has, I applaud the fact that crap like that would not fly here: if someone behaved like that he would get a big kick in the butt and be told to STFU and behave like anyone else. In the USA he could maybe sue for millions of $$$. Go figure.

Share this post


Link to post
Maes said:

What prevents one from making up his own religion, setting up his own rules, and pretend to be pampered by the state or playing the "oppressed minority" card?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-14135523

The next step, Mr Alm told the Austrian news agency APA, is to apply to the Austrian authorities for pastafarianism to become an officially recognised faith.

Share this post


Link to post

Well even that can be "countered" at least by countries that have a limited list of recognized religions and/or restrictions on how much state assistance they can receive. E.g. in Greece any religion other than Christian Orthodox has to struggle a) to be recognized and b) not to be negatively discriminated/persecuted.

Even if you do get past a) and b), getting any positive discrimination on top of that is near impossible. I don't say it's fair (in fact, it favours the Orthodox Church a lot) but it DOES spare us from religious lobbies and interest groups.

Share this post


Link to post
Maes said:

Yes, but not one where a foreigner can come and tell me how not to express myself.

For example, I would tolerate the Sikh not wearing a helmet because he can bring harm to none but himself.

But I would not tolerate being told not to cook pork this weekend because "our Muslim brothers are observing a religious fast, and we should not provoke them". That's where my proposed agreement would come in play. Sure, it would not stop the Muslims from fasting. But it would stop them from lobbying against my cooking of big, greasy, smokey pork whenever I please without having to answer to them in any way.

FIY, the whole pork incident is real and has happened in Italy, where the Muslim community felt bold enough to advance such demands (and more pressing ones, like the Crucifix removal ones).

In Greece, where we actually do have a native Muslim minority, they know better than to try and pull shit like that just to yell to our faces that they are different (also because there are political stability issues with their presence here, and because they are more moderate than the ones that emigrate in the rest of Europe).

Having dined on pork with an old Jewish man who had issues with his so called defined "faith" telling him what do, I can empathize. But it is with the moderates or progressives, that slowly kill off the traditions of the fundamentalists. It is where they are offered true freedom, that they are able to evaluate and define the future.

Younger generations will reject the traditions of old, simply because they have the freedom to do so. There are those that face adversity. There are many more that enjoy the freedoms offered. By that logic I should go to church every Sunday and be a dirty Catholic abhorring everything I've ever encountered. Do I give a fuck? Fuck no. For every fundamentalist there are those that reject fundamentalist beliefs. As the old die off, the new generation of moderates are born, that are more accepting and progressive.

I can count many of those that realize they aren't subjugated to the beliefs of their parents. By offering true freedoms, can they realize truths and make real changes not only to themselves but generations to come. But it's probably more effective to shove them off in a corner and hope one day they masturbate to Nietzsche instead of their book of faith imposed upon them from birth.

Share this post


Link to post

But now it doesn't help that immigrants are generally not first-class material, culturally and educationally speaking, not even in their own countries, so those that end up in the streets of Europe, Canada, USA and Australia are not exactly la creme de la creme de la creme, not part of their country's more progressive or intellectual elite, but rather, part of the most uneducated, underprivileged, superstitious and bigoted underclasses.

How long do you think it will take them to assimilate, throw that religious mumbo-jumbo out of the window and/or realize that when in Rome, you'd better do like the Romans?

It doesn't help that activists are running rampant and causing backlash such as the one e.g. vs the Muhammad drawings, or lobbying for the "right" to take mugshot photos with a burqa on.

Unless those fanatics don't get opposition and counter-lobbying from within their own communities (perhaps with the help of a government psy-op), things ain't gonna get more level, and rather than a melting pot that cancels out differences you'll have a sort of invasive external dominant trait that will one day take over.

Share this post


Link to post
POTGIESSER said:

As the old die off, the new generation of moderates are born, that are more accepting and progressive.


Yes and no. Because that movement can also happen in reverse, with intolerant young men replacing their moderate parents.

Ander Breivik isn't exactly an old geezer, for example.


In immigrant communities, it's mostly the second and third-generation that tend to fall into extremism. The first generation migrants kinda remember why they moved to a foreign country in the first place. But their children don't; and all they see is that they feel accepted neither here nor there, so they lash out and create their own little community based on the rejection of everyone else; and especially the rejection of compromises, which their weak parents adopted only to remain second-class citizens.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×