Anders Behring Breivik
-
It seems he has written and distributed a document called '2083 — A European Declaration of Independence', which according to him he spent the last nine years creating. The most immediately obvious mistake he made for a manifesto of this nature is to make it 1500 pages long, and so uninteresting as to deflect even the sturdiest and most stalwart of readers. But what insights can be obtained from it? He is obviously intelligent and extremely dedicated to what he believes, and meticulously documents how he planned out his operation. Worse still, he leaves a detailed set of instructions for anybody who wishes to carry out their own act of 'martyrdom' - his bomb-making instructions, for example, were demonstrated by him to work very effectively with both the attack in Oslo and the smaller bombs he used on Otoeya island. He is not insane, though, in my opinion - he understood perfectly well what he was doing; he just didn't consider it to be the most atrocious act that it was. But even after all this, his views are at their core enormously simplistic, rambling, and absurd, convincing only to those who already believe it - namely that the largely fanciful threats posed by Islam can be resolved through acts of extreme violence directed towards innocent and unrelated people. It is this that attracted him towards extreme right-wing nationalism, this idea of an absolute right and wrong that can be acted upon in a definite manner. He also disliked Feminism and hated women, which fails to shock me. I don't know how many times he references what he was planning to do, but the few I found are despicably callous: "All that, however, is barely noticeable compared to the sacrifices made in relation to the distribution of this book, the actual marketing operation;)" "First coming costume party this autumn, dress up as a police officer. Arrive with insignias:-) Will be awesome as people will be very astonished:-) Side note; imagine if law enforcement would visit me the next days. They would probably get the wrong idea and think I was a terrorist, lol :o)" "I grew tired of “the game”, which re-enforced my opinion that I should rather strive to become a better man. I grew from being a so called “arrogant self centered fuck” who didn’t care about anyone except myself, my family and friends to something better. I wanted to improve myself morally and seek a more responsible level so I became a better man. [...] I never burned any bridges though which might explain why many of them are still pressuring me to “co
-
GuyThiebaut wrote:
For this exact reason I flagged his youtube video that promoted his extremist views.
Shall we also ban Das Kapital and Mein Kampf? I say expose as many people as possible to his ideas so they can see what is wrong in them. The best way I know to insure that error becomes attractive is to ban it.
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
Oakman wrote:
Shall we also ban Das Kapital and Mein Kampf?
Have you read these books? Most probably not. And I guess you will not read Breiviks 1500 page manifest. This is all drivel and therefore harmless. But I still agree with Guy. Keep him off media and the net.
-
GuyThiebaut wrote:
For this exact reason I flagged his youtube video that promoted his extremist views.
Shall we also ban Das Kapital and Mein Kampf? I say expose as many people as possible to his ideas so they can see what is wrong in them. The best way I know to insure that error becomes attractive is to ban it.
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
Oakman wrote:
Shall we also ban Das Kapital and Mein Kampf?
I never mentioned those books and have not read them. I am being specific here in my desire to censure. I believe that this monster has removed himself so far from society that he no longer holds to right to have his views heard. From a genereal principial point of view I agree with you - with regards to this specific case I am not sure I want this monster to have a platform after the acts he has carried out.
Continuous effort - not strength or intelligence - is the key to unlocking our potential.(Winston Churchill)
-
Interesting piece on how what is left of Murdoch's media in the UK approached[^] the reasons behind the attack.
Every man can tell how many goats or sheep he possesses, but not how many friends.
ChrisElston wrote:
Interesting piece on how what is left of Murdoch's media in the UK approached[^] the reasons behind the attack.
Oh dear. If there's one thing guaranteed to arouse public outrage, it is Islamic terrorism, no matter how irrelevant. There's an interesting kind of irony in the fact that although he railed against Islam in the most emphatic way, his methods were such that he could not be distinguished from them. Too bad he failed to realise his hypocrisy and blast his own fucking head off before he did this.
-
He has most likely signed his own death warrant. Nobody, and I mean nobody (except for maybe his mother), will not jump at the chance of beating him to a bloody pulp. Norway has a lot of oil money, but I doubt they will build a prison just for him. I'm sure the fucker will be dead within a year.
-- Kein Mitleid Für Die Mehrheit
Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote:
Nobody, and I mean nobody (except for maybe his mother), will not jump at the chance of beating him to a bloody pulp.
Yes. I'd bleed him dry, given the opportunity.
Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote:
I'm sure the f***er will be dead within a year.
And not a tear will be shed for him.
-
GuyThiebaut wrote:
For this exact reason I flagged his youtube video that promoted his extremist views.
Shall we also ban Das Kapital and Mein Kampf? I say expose as many people as possible to his ideas so they can see what is wrong in them. The best way I know to insure that error becomes attractive is to ban it.
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
-
Oakman wrote:
Shall we also ban Das Kapital and Mein Kampf?
Have you read these books? Most probably not. And I guess you will not read Breiviks 1500 page manifest. This is all drivel and therefore harmless. But I still agree with Guy. Keep him off media and the net.
Haakon S. wrote:
This is all drivel and therefore harmless.
His philosophy was drivel (and even plagiarised from Theodore Kaczynski, it seems), but his instructions for weapon and armour acquisition and bomb manufacture are intricate and thorough and very useful for someone so inclined. That makes it far more dangerous, in my opinion, than Das Kapital or Mein Kampf.
-
Haakon S. wrote:
This is all drivel and therefore harmless.
His philosophy was drivel (and even plagiarised from Theodore Kaczynski, it seems), but his instructions for weapon and armour acquisition and bomb manufacture are intricate and thorough and very useful for someone so inclined. That makes it far more dangerous, in my opinion, than Das Kapital or Mein Kampf.
-
Bomb making instructions are already widely available, or are his instructions significantly better?
David1987 wrote:
Bomb making instructions are already widely available, or are his instructions significantly better?
Well, I have not read any others, but his seem to me to be very good. He combed through dozens of guides for all aspects of the process and documented precisely what he found to work. Obviously nothing that others couldn't have found for themselves, in theory, but I'm assuming a generous measure of laziness and stupidity for most of them. And, I mean, it's certainly not just bomb-making he documents, so I guess in a way it's more like a terrorist handbook. Finally, I think, this manifesto would less likely raise suspicion if one was found to possess it, considering its relation to a high-profile attack.
-
David1987 wrote:
Bomb making instructions are already widely available, or are his instructions significantly better?
Well, I have not read any others, but his seem to me to be very good. He combed through dozens of guides for all aspects of the process and documented precisely what he found to work. Obviously nothing that others couldn't have found for themselves, in theory, but I'm assuming a generous measure of laziness and stupidity for most of them. And, I mean, it's certainly not just bomb-making he documents, so I guess in a way it's more like a terrorist handbook. Finally, I think, this manifesto would less likely raise suspicion if one was found to possess it, considering its relation to a high-profile attack.
-
I understand that EU, and Norway, are in the process of implementing regulations to control distribution of fertilisers. The reason is that using it for bomb making is too easy. Whether it will prove efficient or not remains to be seen, though.
Haakon S. wrote:
Whether it will prove efficient or not remains to be seen, though.
Let's hope it is. Let's hope that the main contribution of Anders Behring Breivik to human society will be to make life miserable for those who dare try to continue his 'work'.
-
Oakman wrote:
Shall we also ban Das Kapital and Mein Kampf?
Have you read these books? Most probably not. And I guess you will not read Breiviks 1500 page manifest. This is all drivel and therefore harmless. But I still agree with Guy. Keep him off media and the net.
For someone who knows me not at all, you seem quite willing to drop me in a convenient category. We call that a strawman argument.
Haakon S. wrote:
Keep him off media and the net.
Would you like the entire world to read only what you personally approve of?
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
-
Oakman wrote:
Shall we also ban Das Kapital and Mein Kampf?
I never mentioned those books and have not read them. I am being specific here in my desire to censure. I believe that this monster has removed himself so far from society that he no longer holds to right to have his views heard. From a genereal principial point of view I agree with you - with regards to this specific case I am not sure I want this monster to have a platform after the acts he has carried out.
Continuous effort - not strength or intelligence - is the key to unlocking our potential.(Winston Churchill)
GuyThiebaut wrote:
From a genereal principial point of view I agree with you - with regards to this specific case I am not sure I want this monster to have a platform after the acts he has carried out.
Then you don't agree with me. But you do agree with those who shut down Galileo.
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
-
I understand that EU, and Norway, are in the process of implementing regulations to control distribution of fertilisers. The reason is that using it for bomb making is too easy. Whether it will prove efficient or not remains to be seen, though.
Haakon S. wrote:
I understand that EU, and Norway, are in the process of implementing regulations to control distribution of fertilisers.
They already have such regulations. Breivik owned a farm and therefore was permitted to buy fertilizer in large amounts. The purchase was, as required, reported to the government.
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
-
Haakon S. wrote:
Whether it will prove efficient or not remains to be seen, though.
Let's hope it is. Let's hope that the main contribution of Anders Behring Breivik to human society will be to make life miserable for those who dare try to continue his 'work'.
It won't help. The ban on ammonium nitrate just means people will switch to an other oxidizer, and there are plenty others available in useful quantities. Saltpetre also works great, along with many other nitrates. Aluminium nitrate is used for tanning, and should also work as oxidizer in a bomb. Sodium nitrate is used a food conservative (and is for sale in useful quantities at some butcheries), but also in solid rocket propellant and smoke bombs, and will probably work fine for a pipe bomb as well. There's also at least one brand of cleaning powder that works nicely as oxidizer. I forgot what brand I used. It was something green/eco brownish powder in a cardboard container. Worked great to get a nice big conflagration. I didn't try a pipe bomb configuration because that's just a bit dangerous..
-
It won't help. The ban on ammonium nitrate just means people will switch to an other oxidizer, and there are plenty others available in useful quantities. Saltpetre also works great, along with many other nitrates. Aluminium nitrate is used for tanning, and should also work as oxidizer in a bomb. Sodium nitrate is used a food conservative (and is for sale in useful quantities at some butcheries), but also in solid rocket propellant and smoke bombs, and will probably work fine for a pipe bomb as well. There's also at least one brand of cleaning powder that works nicely as oxidizer. I forgot what brand I used. It was something green/eco brownish powder in a cardboard container. Worked great to get a nice big conflagration. I didn't try a pipe bomb configuration because that's just a bit dangerous..
So you're saying that the next Anders Breivik will face as few obstacles as the current one?
-
So you're saying that the next Anders Breivik will face as few obstacles as the current one?
-
For someone who knows me not at all, you seem quite willing to drop me in a convenient category. We call that a strawman argument.
Haakon S. wrote:
Keep him off media and the net.
Would you like the entire world to read only what you personally approve of?
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
Oakman wrote:
For someone who knows me not at all, you seem quite willing to drop me in a convenient category. We call that a strawman argument.
I didn't categorize you. I made some assumptions - that you hadn't read Mein Kampf or Das Kapital. You are perfectly free to correct me if I'm wrong. The fact that you didn't makes me suspect that I was right. My assumption is solely based on statistics - very few people have read said books.
Oakman wrote:
Would you like the entire world to read only what you personally approve of?
Where on earth did I say this? As users we can give references to articles on the net, or we can choose not to. Newspapers can bring stories, or they chose not to. What I stated is that there are conflicting interests - we are curious about how this monster thinks, but by getting this information we are spreading his message. Which is what he wants.
-
Oakman wrote:
For someone who knows me not at all, you seem quite willing to drop me in a convenient category. We call that a strawman argument.
I didn't categorize you. I made some assumptions - that you hadn't read Mein Kampf or Das Kapital. You are perfectly free to correct me if I'm wrong. The fact that you didn't makes me suspect that I was right. My assumption is solely based on statistics - very few people have read said books.
Oakman wrote:
Would you like the entire world to read only what you personally approve of?
Where on earth did I say this? As users we can give references to articles on the net, or we can choose not to. Newspapers can bring stories, or they chose not to. What I stated is that there are conflicting interests - we are curious about how this monster thinks, but by getting this information we are spreading his message. Which is what he wants.
Haakon S. wrote:
I made some assumptions
My first sergeant taught me something perhaps you should learn: Assumption is the mother of all f**kups.
Haakon S. wrote:
The fact that you didn't makes me suspect that I was right
More assumptions: more f**kingsup. Knowing nothing is not an excuse for assuming the worse. The polite thing, the civil thing is to assume that the person you are talking to is at least as well educated, at least as intelligent, and at least as wise as you are.
Haakon S. wrote:
My assumption is solely based on statistics - very few people have read said books.
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." So saith Mark Twain, so saith Benjamin Disraeli. Statistically speaking, none of us were ever born. The odds are very much against conception, yet it happens time and again. ;) edit because the filter didn't catch f**kup, so I censored it
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
modified on Monday, July 25, 2011 10:32 AM
-
Oakman wrote:
For someone who knows me not at all, you seem quite willing to drop me in a convenient category. We call that a strawman argument.
I didn't categorize you. I made some assumptions - that you hadn't read Mein Kampf or Das Kapital. You are perfectly free to correct me if I'm wrong. The fact that you didn't makes me suspect that I was right. My assumption is solely based on statistics - very few people have read said books.
Oakman wrote:
Would you like the entire world to read only what you personally approve of?
Where on earth did I say this? As users we can give references to articles on the net, or we can choose not to. Newspapers can bring stories, or they chose not to. What I stated is that there are conflicting interests - we are curious about how this monster thinks, but by getting this information we are spreading his message. Which is what he wants.
Haakon S. wrote:
Where on earth did I say this?
For someone who makes assumptions over and over again, you seem to insist on a very different standard when someone tries to extrapolate from what you did say to what you might say. Are you saying that there are some things you disapprove of, that it is all right to read about on the web, and it is only political ideas that you wish to block?
Haakon S. wrote:
Which is what he wants.
So what? To choose to do anything because he wants it to happen or because he doesn't want it to happen is to give him a power over your life he doesn't deserve. If his ideas are suppressed, many people will assume that in and of itself means they must be correct. Indeed many conspiracy theorists point to suppression as proof that what they say is true.
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.