http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/mobile/world-europe-14252515 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/mobile/world-europe-14252515)
Quote
Norway: Blast near prime minister's office in Oslo
22 July 11 15:09
A large explosion has hit near government headquarters in the Norwegian capital Oslo.
The blast is thought to have caused damage to the offices of Norwegian Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg and a number of other official buildings.
Mr Stoltenberg was unharmed, said local media, but witnesses said at least eight people were injured in the city centre explosion.
Pictures from the scene showed glass from shattered windows in the streets.
All roads into the city centre have been closed, said the NRK newspaper.
An NRK journalist, Ingunn Andersen, said the headquarters of tabloid newspaper VG had also been damaged.
"I see that some windows of the VG building and the government headquarters have been broken. Some people covered with blood are lying in the street," Associated Press news agency quoted him as saying.
I hadn't noticed any anti-Norwegistani stuff on the Islamic forums lately. Something I miss?
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 22, 2011, 09:19:06 AM
I hadn't noticed any anti-Norwegistani stuff on the Islamic forums lately. Something I miss?
I'd guess Norwegian troops in Afghanistan.
Don't worry Slargos will be along in a while to 'explain' it all to you.
An eyewitness reports a bomb exploded in the HQ of major newspaper.
Camera phone footage shows one building partially on fire and other building with gutted windows, looks like a 'block' wide area of damage, too much for a single suicide bomber or small package ?
Blast damage resembles what you used to see from a small-medium sized car bomb in Northern Ireland in the 'troubles'
This report suggests PM offices were target rather than newspaper VG:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/mobile/world-europe-14252515 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/mobile/world-europe-14252515)
Anyway I hope all Norwegian Languishites and their families are ok and the loss of life isn't too high.
retaliation for Lutefisk?
I heard a lot of sirens a while ago, an unusually copious lot. I was wondering what that was.
Oh, and fuck you, Mongo. Fuck you very much.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.aftenposten.no%2Farchive%2F01514%2F_SCC-AIPub_G-Titte_1514824x.jpg&hash=831678c845ee46d83803e3128c6f5c34d074ad8f)
Holy shit, that looks pretty big.
No details forthcoming yet, but an eyewitness reported bodies aside from wounded.
Interesting to see how the Norwads deal with this. :hmm:
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 09:34:53 AM
Holy shit, that looks pretty big.
Yes, looks like a car bomb, the camera phone footage has just show the carcase of a saloon on its side,which has been blown of the road towards an office building.
Do you know precidely were this was, as google earth isn't giving me any answers.
Holy ¤#"¤%, it's a huge area that has been hit and reports of more explosions is coming in...
Quote from: mongers on July 22, 2011, 09:39:08 AM
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 09:34:53 AM
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.aftenposten.no%2Farchive%2F01514%2F_SCC-AIPub_G-Titte_1514824x.jpg&hash=831678c845ee46d83803e3128c6f5c34d074ad8f)
Holy shit, that looks pretty big.
Yes, looks like a car bomb, the camera phone footage has just show the carcase of a saloon on its side,which has been blown of the road towards an office building.
Do you know precidely were this was, as google earth isn't giving me any answers.
I guess I could try finding it for you.
59.912735,10.734285
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 09:42:06 AM
I guess I could try finding it for you.
59.912735,10.734285
I'm guessing: centre of this picture:
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=newspaper+vg+oslo&hl=en&ll=59.915109,10.746372&spn=0.001447,0.006866&t=h&z=18 (http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=newspaper+vg+oslo&hl=en&ll=59.915109,10.746372&spn=0.001447,0.006866&t=h&z=18)
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 22, 2011, 09:19:06 AM
I hadn't noticed any anti-Norwegistani stuff on the Islamic forums lately. Something I miss?
Norway arrested some AQ guys a couple weeks ago.
Quote from: mongers on July 22, 2011, 09:45:20 AM
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 09:42:06 AM
I guess I could try finding it for you.
59.912735,10.734285
I'm guessing: centre of this picture:
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=newspaper+vg+oslo&hl=en&ll=59.915109,10.746372&spn=0.001447,0.006866&t=h&z=18 (http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=newspaper+vg+oslo&hl=en&ll=59.915109,10.746372&spn=0.001447,0.006866&t=h&z=18)
That's what they're saying. I'm a bit confused because it doesn't look like it.
No one's claimed responsibility, and no verification of a bomb device.
Looks like someone left aluminum foil in the office microwave again.
edit: Therefore, blame lies with that sinister Islamic global conspiracy, Al-Uminum.
:lol: :lol: :lol: Crack myself up sometimes.
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 09:55:05 AM
Quote from: mongers on July 22, 2011, 09:45:20 AM
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 09:42:06 AM
I guess I could try finding it for you.
59.912735,10.734285
I'm guessing: centre of this picture:
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=newspaper+vg+oslo&hl=en&ll=59.915109,10.746372&spn=0.001447,0.006866&t=h&z=18 (http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=newspaper+vg+oslo&hl=en&ll=59.915109,10.746372&spn=0.001447,0.006866&t=h&z=18)
That's what they're saying. I'm a bit confused because it doesn't look like it.
Right, this looks like a better candidate, a car bomb might have gone off at the location, where the white roofed car is shown in this sat. image:
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=newspaper+vg+oslo&hl=en&ll=59.915272,10.746576&spn=0.000723,0.003433&t=h&z=19 (http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=newspaper+vg+oslo&hl=en&ll=59.915272,10.746576&spn=0.000723,0.003433&t=h&z=19)
Then go to the street view and it seems to match the news footage.
The car wreckage appear to have ended up on the pavement in the middle of this image:
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=newspaper+vg+oslo&hl=en&ll=59.915134,10.746281&spn=0.000717,0.003433&t=h&layer=c&cbll=59.915275,10.746627&panoid=x8OUg1HcKRpFvAFgOp9uMg&cbp=13,297.54,,0,5.2&z=19 (http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=newspaper+vg+oslo&hl=en&ll=59.915134,10.746281&spn=0.000717,0.003433&t=h&layer=c&cbll=59.915275,10.746627&panoid=x8OUg1HcKRpFvAFgOp9uMg&cbp=13,297.54,,0,5.2&z=19)
Anyone know what the the tall building in the background is, appears to be the back/rear entrance of something quite significant.
Quote from: mongers on July 22, 2011, 09:58:48 AM
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 09:55:05 AM
Quote from: mongers on July 22, 2011, 09:45:20 AM
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 09:42:06 AM
I guess I could try finding it for you.
59.912735,10.734285
I'm guessing: centre of this picture:
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=newspaper+vg+oslo&hl=en&ll=59.915109,10.746372&spn=0.001447,0.006866&t=h&z=18 (http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=newspaper+vg+oslo&hl=en&ll=59.915109,10.746372&spn=0.001447,0.006866&t=h&z=18)
That's what they're saying. I'm a bit confused because it doesn't look like it.
Right, this looks like a better candidate, a car bomb might have gone off at the location, where the white roofed car is shown in this sat. image:
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=newspaper+vg+oslo&hl=en&ll=59.915272,10.746576&spn=0.000723,0.003433&t=h&z=19 (http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=newspaper+vg+oslo&hl=en&ll=59.915272,10.746576&spn=0.000723,0.003433&t=h&z=19)
Then go to the street view and it seems to match the news footage.
Yep. Looks like.
If I am to be so crass as to find something amusing in all this [and you know I am more than capable] it would be that Norway's largest daily Aftenposten reports "rumours" of a second blast in Stortingsgata.
I mean, what the fuck, you can't send ONE employee down there to TAKE A GODDAMNED LOOK?
It's not a very long street. You can cover it in 10 minutes even if you're a chubber in high heels.
Oh, and they've been VERY quick to interview a bunch of shocked foreigners. I can almost see the gears spinning in their heads, "FUCK! How can we prevent the racists from profiting off of this!" :D
Eh, our local newspaper used AP photos of a building that was less then six blocks from their office. It was the Missouri state capital and you can see it by standing in the newspaper's parking lot.
Quote from: Razgovory on July 22, 2011, 10:24:17 AM
Eh, our local newspaper used AP photos of a building that was less then six blocks from their office. It was the Missouri state capital and you can see it by standing in the newspaper's parking lot.
:blink: really ?
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 22, 2011, 09:19:06 AM
I hadn't noticed any anti-Norwegistani stuff on the Islamic forums lately. Something I miss?
TV is muttering that maybe its the opposite. The Slargos Patrol.
Or maybe Libya are coming through on their threats.
That major office block doesn't appear to have any worthwhile anti-vehicle defences, on the google image there's just a chain strung between posts with a sign hanging from it, presumably saying something like no parking.
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=newspaper+vg+oslo&hl=en&ll=59.915226,10.746576&spn=0.000717,0.003433&t=h&layer=c&cbll=59.915171,10.746507&panoid=TmNweyGnYHtiGp6_i9iyyQ&cbp=13,291.42,,0,-0.65&z=19 (http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=newspaper+vg+oslo&hl=en&ll=59.915226,10.746576&spn=0.000717,0.003433&t=h&layer=c&cbll=59.915171,10.746507&panoid=TmNweyGnYHtiGp6_i9iyyQ&cbp=13,291.42,,0,-0.65&z=19)
Quote from: mongers on July 22, 2011, 10:26:09 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on July 22, 2011, 10:24:17 AM
Eh, our local newspaper used AP photos of a building that was less then six blocks from their office. It was the Missouri state capital and you can see it by standing in the newspaper's parking lot.
:blink: really ?
Yep, I remember it because it was the some national politician was coming to speak at Capital (it might have been John Kerry in 2004). They did write their own story, but the photo of the capital was AP. Struck me was really lazy. Perhaps they had to use so many AP photos as per contract. I dunno.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 22, 2011, 09:57:26 AM
No one's claimed responsibility, and no verification of a bomb device.
Looks like someone left aluminum foil in the office microwave again.
edit: Therefore, blame lies with that sinister Islamic global conspiracy, Al-Uminum.
:lol: :lol: :lol: Crack myself up sometimes.
Bumped, because I'm still giggling.
Quote from: Tyr on July 22, 2011, 10:26:55 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 22, 2011, 09:19:06 AM
I hadn't noticed any anti-Norwegistani stuff on the Islamic forums lately. Something I miss?
TV is muttering that maybe its the opposite. The Slargos Patrol.
Or maybe Libya are coming through on their threats.
:lol:
Of course they are.
Aftonbladet speculated about gas leaks when the islamotards tried to blow shit up in Stockholm.
They are terrified of the native population drawing the "wrong" conclusions about the moon worshippers.
2 deaths confirmed so far.
Some of the TV talking head 'security experts' are getting a bit wound-up, one on Sky news has just said you can get 2000 lbs of explosives in a car, as big as the biggest NATO bomb. :hmm:
I think if it had been a nato bomb, one or two of those buildings would now be mainly rubble.
Norway would seems like such an odd place to attack. There's only 400 or so Norwegians in Afghanistan. I bet you could force them to leave with out resorting to a car bomb. A few acts of petty vandalism would probably be sufficient to scare the Norwegian government into leaving Afghanistan. It could be something else that makes no sense to us like a Norwegian comedian made an offensive joke or they sell the wrong type of butter. Attacks by Islamic extremists don't always make sense to Westerners.
Shitty news :(
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 22, 2011, 10:29:17 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 22, 2011, 09:57:26 AM
No one's claimed responsibility, and no verification of a bomb device.
Looks like someone left aluminum foil in the office microwave again.
edit: Therefore, blame lies with that sinister Islamic global conspiracy, Al-Uminum.
:lol: :lol: :lol: Crack myself up sometimes.
Bumped, because I'm still giggling.
I think you mean, Al Umin-e-Um
Quote
Norway would seems like such an odd place to attack
If it was over Afghanistan or Libya or wherever then that's why the chose it. Easier target than London or NYC.
Quote from: Tyr on July 22, 2011, 10:56:41 AM
Quote
Norway would seems like such an odd place to attack
If it was over Afghanistan or Libya or wherever then that's why the chose it. Easier target than London or NYC.
There are probably targets just as easy with more soldiers in Afghanistan. Is Norway even participating in the Libya thing?
At the police press conference they just urged the public to "leave the city center, mass transit is still working as usual" AND "avoid large crowds". :lol:
Quote from: Razgovory on July 22, 2011, 11:01:27 AM
Quote from: Tyr on July 22, 2011, 10:56:41 AM
Quote
Norway would seems like such an odd place to attack
If it was over Afghanistan or Libya or wherever then that's why the chose it. Easier target than London or NYC.
There are probably targets just as easy with more soldiers in Afghanistan. Is Norway even participating in the Libya thing?
Norwegian F-16 were among the most active participants in ground attack, at least a month ago.
Quote from: Razgovory on July 22, 2011, 10:38:32 AM
Norway would seems like such an odd place to attack. There's only 400 or so Norwegians in Afghanistan. I bet you could force them to leave with out resorting to a car bomb. A few acts of petty vandalism would probably be sufficient to scare the Norwegian government into leaving Afghanistan. It could be something else that makes no sense to us like a Norwegian comedian made an offensive joke or they sell the wrong type of butter. Attacks by Islamic extremists don't always make sense to Westerners.
One possibility is the cartoons. Again.
Anyway, looks like I was really, really forward thinking when I moved from St. Olav's Street back in 1998.
It was supposedly a car bomb. Chosen because during summer, everything slows to a halt and already relaxed security around high-profile targets is even more lax now.
From the place and timing, I'd have thought this was a decoy, more or less. It's the best time and place to block central Oslo. People leave work around that time during summer and by getting the East-West axis closed, it'd be really hard to route traffic efficiently in a city that was designed for around 10.000 cars.
New reports emerge that the central railroad station is being evacuated and there are yet unconfirmed reports of shooting at the Labour Youths' summer camp at Utøya several miles away near Tyrifjorden. I have no idea which of the Labour Party's bigwigs are there.
In any case, this is bound to change Norway in one way or the other.
:lmfao:
NRK reporter: "Has Oslo or Norway been afflicted by something like this before?"
Press officer: *long, pained, embarrassed silence* "Ehr... No."
Edit: Ah. Blonde. :lol:
Anarchy in Norway? Witnesses say a person has been shooting several rounds at people on an Island south of Oslo, at a meeting for social democrats.
Quote from: Liep on July 22, 2011, 11:20:59 AM
Anarchy in Norway? Witnesses say a person has been shooting several rounds at people on an Island south of Oslo, at a meeting for social democrats.
Actually that seems to be a summer camp for social democratic youths. Shooting a bunch of kids....yah I´m thinking towelheads.
Quote from: Cecil on July 22, 2011, 11:27:53 AM
Quote from: Liep on July 22, 2011, 11:20:59 AM
Anarchy in Norway? Witnesses say a person has been shooting several rounds at people on an Island south of Oslo, at a meeting for social democrats.
Actually that seems to be a summer camp for social democratic youths. Shooting a bunch of kids....yah I´m thinking towelheads.
Apparently a guy dressed as a police officer. Sounds like towel-head tactics indeed.
It would be a pretty amazing coincidence.
Fox popped on and did an unconfirmed report of an attack at a summer camp.
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 11:29:51 AM
Quote from: Cecil on July 22, 2011, 11:27:53 AM
Quote from: Liep on July 22, 2011, 11:20:59 AM
Anarchy in Norway? Witnesses say a person has been shooting several rounds at people on an Island south of Oslo, at a meeting for social democrats.
Actually that seems to be a summer camp for social democratic youths. Shooting a bunch of kids....yah I´m thinking towelheads.
Apparently a guy dressed as a police officer. Sounds like towel-head tactics indeed.
It would be a pretty amazing coincidence.
And the reports now say fatalities on the camp. Keeps getting better.
Quote from: Cecil on July 22, 2011, 11:38:51 AM
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 11:29:51 AM
Quote from: Cecil on July 22, 2011, 11:27:53 AM
Quote from: Liep on July 22, 2011, 11:20:59 AM
Anarchy in Norway? Witnesses say a person has been shooting several rounds at people on an Island south of Oslo, at a meeting for social democrats.
Actually that seems to be a summer camp for social democratic youths. Shooting a bunch of kids....yah I´m thinking towelheads.
Apparently a guy dressed as a police officer. Sounds like towel-head tactics indeed.
It would be a pretty amazing coincidence.
And the reports now say fatalities on the camp. Keeps getting better.
NRK just reported "continuous shooting". Mother fucker.
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 11:40:39 AM
Quote from: Cecil on July 22, 2011, 11:38:51 AM
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 11:29:51 AM
Quote from: Cecil on July 22, 2011, 11:27:53 AM
Quote from: Liep on July 22, 2011, 11:20:59 AM
Anarchy in Norway? Witnesses say a person has been shooting several rounds at people on an Island south of Oslo, at a meeting for social democrats.
Actually that seems to be a summer camp for social democratic youths. Shooting a bunch of kids....yah I´m thinking towelheads.
Apparently a guy dressed as a police officer. Sounds like towel-head tactics indeed.
It would be a pretty amazing coincidence.
And the reports now say fatalities on the camp. Keeps getting better.
NRK just reported "continuous shooting". Mother fucker.
That doesnt sound like a handgun then. Unless they are blowing it way out of proportion it must be some sort of semi/automatic rifle.
By all means do keep allowing Muslim vermin within our borders.
I wish the filth would pull something really big - so we can finally get rid of them all. <_<
G.
Automatic rifle according to TV2, and Aftenposten reports that the shooting went on for a period of 35 minutes. :O
Fox/Sky sez 4 dead at youth camp.
Quote from: Liep on July 22, 2011, 11:52:08 AM
Automatic rifle according to TV2, and Aftenposten reports that the shooting went on for a period of 35 minutes. :O
35 minutes? Was everybody just waiting until he ran out of ammo before going after him or something?
Quote from: Valmy on July 22, 2011, 11:54:25 AM
Quote from: Liep on July 22, 2011, 11:52:08 AM
Automatic rifle according to TV2, and Aftenposten reports that the shooting went on for a period of 35 minutes. :O
35 minutes? Was everybody just waiting until he ran out of ammo before going after him or something?
Mart would have tackled him if hadn't been sulking over his Languish banning.
Quote from: Ed Anger on July 22, 2011, 11:52:14 AM
Fox/Sky sez 4 dead at youth camp.
That doesn't stop those still there from using Facebook and Twitter.
And the parents are calling them as well. That's clever.
How big is this island?
Quote from: Liep on July 22, 2011, 11:58:02 AM
How big is this island?
Small.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FFb0xK.jpg&hash=a23300a32a5c43d66cecadc0e719647da5b82aa4)
Fuck this.
Two co-ordinated actions, one against the cabinet and the higher level of bureaucracy, and then another against the Labour Party youth camp, where the PM was scheduled to speak tomorrow. Somehow I doubt that's all there is.
<_<
I won't be eating kebabs for at least a week.
Scary stuff, can't imagine what is happening now. But I'd say screw twitter, swim the fuck away.
Quote from: Valmy on July 22, 2011, 11:54:25 AM
Quote from: Liep on July 22, 2011, 11:52:08 AM
Automatic rifle according to TV2, and Aftenposten reports that the shooting went on for a period of 35 minutes. :O
35 minutes? Was everybody just waiting until he ran out of ammo before going after him or something?
It's a small island. I doubt anyone but the gunman was armed. SWAT is there now though.
Shooter apprehended.
I expect there will be speculations about a plot from FRP within 24 hours. :D
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 12:05:23 PM
It's a small island. I doubt anyone but the gunman was armed. SWAT is there now though.
Yeah I guess nobody thought a tiny island used for a kids summer camp was going to come under armed attack.
Has the shooter been captured alive? If so good work Norwegian cops.
There'll be speculations of all kinds of plots within the next 24 hours and until more facts are available.
Personally, I expect most of the speculation will centre around Islamist terrorists.
Quote from: Valmy on July 22, 2011, 12:11:37 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 12:05:23 PM
It's a small island. I doubt anyone but the gunman was armed. SWAT is there now though.
Yeah I guess nobody thought a tiny island used for a kids summer camp was going to come under armed attack.
Has the shooter been captured alive? If so good work Norwegian cops.
No information yet. 4-5 wounded so far.
A summer camp run by a political party? Was this Putin's idea?
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on July 22, 2011, 12:17:49 PM
A summer camp run by a political party? Was this Putin's idea?
It's pretty common in Europe. About as common as, say, summer camps run by churches are in the US.
http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=no&sl=no&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aftenposten.no%2Fnyheter%2Firiks%2Farticle4180789.ece
Quote- From what I've seen at least four people were shot and killed. Now it's complete panic and we swim off to get to safety, said County Secretary Adrian Pracon Telemark AUF. According to AP, the person who fired, having been dressed as police and said that he was going to the island in connection with the bomb against the government quarter.
:huh:
So maybe the towelheads fucked this up? If the PM was scheduled to arrive to the island tomorrow, it's epic fail to attack it today.
Good job if the police indeed captured the fucker alive. Too bad Europe is way too civilized to waterboard people. [Slargos]he will probably receive political asylum and rape someone on the street in a month[/Slargos]
Quote from: Tamas on July 22, 2011, 12:24:43 PM
So maybe the towelheads fucked this up? If the PM was scheduled to arrive to the island tomorrow, it's epic fail to attack it today.
Good job if the police indeed captured the fucker alive. Too bad Europe is way too civilized to waterboard people. [Slargos]he will probably receive political asylum and rape someone on the street in a month[/Slargos]
Considering we're still keeping Krekar and he's made threats about terrorist acts in Norway several times since, it seems likely.
Barry needs to get it back into gear and book some more one way cruises for AQ guys.
Some guy on CNN was speculating about the mohamed cartoons perhaps being the CB.
Well if they turn out to be the excuse for these murders, I sure hope European papers will collectively re-publish them.
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 11:29:51 AM
Quote from: Cecil on July 22, 2011, 11:27:53 AM
Quote from: Liep on July 22, 2011, 11:20:59 AM
Anarchy in Norway? Witnesses say a person has been shooting several rounds at people on an Island south of Oslo, at a meeting for social democrats.
Actually that seems to be a summer camp for social democratic youths. Shooting a bunch of kids....yah I´m thinking towelheads.
Apparently a guy dressed as a police officer. Sounds like towel-head tactics indeed.
It would be a pretty amazing coincidence.
Muslim terrorists use that tactic?
7 dead confirmed to the bombing so far.
Quote from: derspiess on July 22, 2011, 12:44:02 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 11:29:51 AM
Quote from: Cecil on July 22, 2011, 11:27:53 AM
Quote from: Liep on July 22, 2011, 11:20:59 AM
Anarchy in Norway? Witnesses say a person has been shooting several rounds at people on an Island south of Oslo, at a meeting for social democrats.
Actually that seems to be a summer camp for social democratic youths. Shooting a bunch of kids....yah I´m thinking towelheads.
Apparently a guy dressed as a police officer. Sounds like towel-head tactics indeed.
It would be a pretty amazing coincidence.
Muslim terrorists use that tactic?
:huh:
Have you been hiding in a closet the last couple of years? :D
I have this feeling that this is a really, really bad plot from a really, really bad author for an airport bookstore thriller or B movie.
- Yeah, the attack on government offices is good, but predictable. We need something with more human interest.
- How about... er, an attack by a gunman against a group of kids on an isolated island? Like, ehm, Labour Party youths? Maybe some of them could be related to, like, the people in government?
- Yeah, yeah, cool, and then the PM jumps into a fighter jet and...
- I have to stop you right there, because since Norway decided to buy the JSF and send their remaining F-16 to Libya, there are no fighter jets left...
Quote from: Jacob on July 22, 2011, 12:22:46 PM
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on July 22, 2011, 12:17:49 PM
A summer camp run by a political party? Was this Putin's idea?
It's pretty common in Europe. About as common as, say, summer camps run by churches are in the US.
That still seems pretty bizarre.
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 12:45:05 PM
Have you been hiding in a closet the last couple of years? :D
Apparently I have. Seems like a pretty foolish disguise to use, unless you guys have a lot of middle-eastern-looking policemen.
Quote from: derspiess on July 22, 2011, 12:51:21 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 12:45:05 PM
Have you been hiding in a closet the last couple of years? :D
Apparently I have. Seems like a pretty foolish disguise to use, unless you guys have a lot of middle-eastern-looking policemen.
:lol:
:hmm:
Quote from: derspiess on July 22, 2011, 12:49:10 PM
That still seems pretty bizarre.
Lots of people have made politics their religion. Seems a logical substitution.
Quote from: derspiess on July 22, 2011, 12:49:10 PM
Quote from: Jacob on July 22, 2011, 12:22:46 PM
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on July 22, 2011, 12:17:49 PM
A summer camp run by a political party? Was this Putin's idea?
It's pretty common in Europe. About as common as, say, summer camps run by churches are in the US.
That still seems pretty bizarre.
You need to understand that the grooming of politicians in Scandinavia begins at a very early age. You don't become Social Democratic PM without having climbed the party ladder.
Speculations about the effect on the elections begins after 4 hours. Classy? :hmm:
Quote from: Grallon on July 22, 2011, 11:43:04 AM
By all means do keep allowing Muslim vermin within our borders.
I wish the filth would pull something really big - so we can finally get rid of them all. <_<
G.
A tall blond guy dressed like a police officer = a Muslim vermin? Wow, they are really successful with recruiting in Norway, apparently.
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 12:59:08 PM
Speculations about the effect on the elections begins after 4 hours. Classy? :hmm:
I hate that reflex.
Quote from: derspiess on July 22, 2011, 12:49:10 PM
That still seems pretty bizarre.
It used to be a way to recruit back in the 1950s and 1960s when most people couldn't afford to go on holidays in summer. You had the youth camps, some organised by political parties, some by religious organisations, some by teetotallers etc etc.
Today, the youth camp is mostly a workshop and breeding seminar where tomorrow's leaders are introduced to fucking in the bushes.
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 12:59:08 PM
Speculations about the effect on the elections begins after 4 hours. Classy? :hmm:
No. Not exactly. But there will be an effect.
Labour and the Progress Party have both had a fairly bad summer. They won't after this.
Quote from: derspiess on July 22, 2011, 12:49:10 PM
Quote from: Jacob on July 22, 2011, 12:22:46 PM
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on July 22, 2011, 12:17:49 PM
A summer camp run by a political party? Was this Putin's idea?
It's pretty common in Europe. About as common as, say, summer camps run by churches are in the US.
That still seems pretty bizarre.
In essence they've replaced any religious influence with political ones.
Quote from: Martinus on July 22, 2011, 12:59:42 PM
A tall blond guy dressed like a police officer = a Muslim vermin? Wow, they are really successful with recruiting in Norway, apparently.
They're all guilty of something - on principle.
G.
Quote from: Martinus on July 22, 2011, 12:59:42 PMA tall blond guy dressed like a police officer = a Muslim vermin? Wow, they are really successful with recruiting in Norway, apparently.
There's evidence that the shooter at the youth camp was a tall blond guy?
Quote from: Jacob on July 22, 2011, 01:04:42 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 22, 2011, 12:59:42 PMA tall blond guy dressed like a police officer = a Muslim vermin? Wow, they are really successful with recruiting in Norway, apparently.
There's evidence that the shooter at the youth camp was a tall blond guy?
Only description I've seen is "nordic looking". We'll see what gives.
Quote from: Jacob on July 22, 2011, 01:04:42 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 22, 2011, 12:59:42 PMA tall blond guy dressed like a police officer = a Muslim vermin? Wow, they are really successful with recruiting in Norway, apparently.
There's evidence that the shooter at the youth camp was a tall blond guy?
Well, just saw it on the news.
Incidentally, the starving Somalis really have shitty luck. First Murdoch-gate, now this. They will all die out before this blows over and someone pays attention.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fgfx.dagbladet.no%2Flabrador%2F174%2F174153%2F17415365%2Fjpg%2Factive%2F978x.jpg&hash=0eb6513e9ab22e945e7e42293dfae8f4dffd4833)
Those who know something about explosives are quite certain it was a car bomb outside here. 400-500 kgs of explosives. Mostly a whole shitload of shattered glass and debris. It could also indicate it was set off remotely rather than by "a motivated participant".
In retrospect, I think we should be grateful that it was a car bomb rather than a huge fucker inside one of the buildings.
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 01:06:11 PMOnly description I've seen is "nordic looking". We'll see what gives.
So if he turns out to be a white Norwegian of long term Norwegian stock, what are the likely motivations?
Some personal feud with someone on the island? Raving lunatic acting out? Convert to Islam, so still an Islamist terrorist plot? Right-wing terrorist of some sort? Some kind of criminal feud?
Any other theories?
Quote from: derspiess on July 22, 2011, 12:49:10 PM
That still seems pretty bizarre.
It's pretty common in Europe I think, and has been for a long time. I think most political parties have "Youth wings". The Hitlerjugend was only the most famous (communists had Pioneers). In the US we have Young Democrats and College Republicans and the like, but that's still aimed at young adults. I think this is more like a combination Boy Scouts and Summer camp (both religious and secular).
Quote from: Jacob on July 22, 2011, 01:13:15 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 01:06:11 PMOnly description I've seen is "nordic looking". We'll see what gives.
So if he turns out to be a white Norwegian of long term Norwegian stock, what are the likely motivations?
Some personal feud with someone on the island? Raving lunatic acting out? Convert to Islam, so still an Islamist terrorist plot? Right-wing terrorist of some sort? Some kind of criminal feud?
Any other theories?
There is probably more then one perpetrator. It would be difficult to plant the bomb and set it off at the same time you are some island shooting kids.
Around 30 killed at the camp. Though hopefully this is vastly exaggerated.
Quote from: Jacob on July 22, 2011, 01:13:15 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 01:06:11 PMOnly description I've seen is "nordic looking". We'll see what gives.
So if he turns out to be a white Norwegian of long term Norwegian stock, what are the likely motivations?
Some personal feud with someone on the island? Raving lunatic acting out? Convert to Islam, so still an Islamist terrorist plot? Right-wing terrorist of some sort? Some kind of criminal feud?
Any other theories?
I'm feeling far too sick to speculate right now.
Odd, Muslim terrorists don't normally attack political parties. Usually it's a more general attack on a populace. This sounds like an attack on the Labor party.
Quote from: Razgovory on July 22, 2011, 01:16:47 PMThere is probably more then one perpetrator. It would be difficult to plant the bomb and set it off at the same time you are some island shooting kids.
I was speaking only of the shooting.
Is there any evidence right now that the two incidents are linked, other than they happend around the same time?
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 01:17:11 PM
Around 30 killed at the camp. Though hopefully this is vastly exaggerated.
I hope so.
Quote from: Jacob on July 22, 2011, 01:20:45 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on July 22, 2011, 01:16:47 PMThere is probably more then one perpetrator. It would be difficult to plant the bomb and set it off at the same time you are some island shooting kids.
I was speaking only of the shooting.
Is there any evidence right now that the two incidents are linked, other than they happend around the same time?
The shooter used the bombings as excuse to get into the camp to do a security check.
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 01:17:55 PMI'm feeling far too sick to speculate right now.
Fair enough. I guess we'll likely find out soon enough.
Quote from: Liep on July 22, 2011, 01:22:23 PMThe shooter used the bombings as excuse to get into the camp to do a security check.
Fuck. That's pretty sick.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/23/world/europe/23oslo.html?_r=2&hp
A terror group, Ansar al-Jihad al-Alami, or the Helpers of the Global Jihad, issued a statement claiming responsibility for the attack, according to Will McCants, a terrorism analyst at C.N.A., a research institute that studies terrorism. The message said the attack was a response to Norwegian forces' presence in Afghanistan and to unspecified insults to the Prophet Muhammad. "We have warned since the Stockholm raid of more operations," the group said, according to Mr. McCants' translation, apparently referred to a bombing in Sweden in December 2010. "What you see is only the beginning, and there is more to come." The claim could not be confirmed.
That's mullah Krekar's old crew.
So, is the thing on the island still going on?
Quote from: Razgovory on July 22, 2011, 01:13:37 PM
Quote from: derspiess on July 22, 2011, 12:49:10 PM
That still seems pretty bizarre.
It's pretty common in Europe I think, and has been for a long time. I think most political parties have "Youth wings". The Hitlerjugend was only the most famous (communists had Pioneers). In the US we have Young Democrats and College Republicans and the like, but that's still aimed at young adults. I think this is more like a combination Boy Scouts and Summer camp (both religious and secular).
I don't know about Norway, but in Poland the "youth wings" are really for young adults too (usually college students and people until 30). I don't think Norway has "leftist boy scouts" but could be wrong.
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 01:17:11 PM
Around 30 killed at the camp. Though hopefully this is vastly exaggerated.
Oh fuck. :(
Quote from: Jacob on July 22, 2011, 01:20:45 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on July 22, 2011, 01:16:47 PMThere is probably more then one perpetrator. It would be difficult to plant the bomb and set it off at the same time you are some island shooting kids.
I was speaking only of the shooting.
Is there any evidence right now that the two incidents are linked, other than they happend around the same time?
Is the Labour party perceived as soft on Muslim immigration? Could it be some right wing nutjob enflamed to "revenge" by the bombings?
That looks exaggerated. I'm only seeing 4 dead at the camp.
From the article I posted, also:
QuoteThe explosions, which ripped through the cluster of modern office buildings around the Einar Gerhardsens plaza, occurred at a time when many Norwegians were on vacation and many more had left their offices early for the weekend.
Doesn't look like the attacks were designed to kill as many people as possible in a random fashion.
According to NRK.no reporter on scene Utøya camp shooter "tall, blonde and with Nordic appearance"
Quote from: Pat on July 22, 2011, 01:38:15 PM
According to NRK.no reporter on scene Utøya camp shooter "tall, blonde and with Nordic appearance"
Was he captured alive?
http://www.nrk.no/nyheter/norge/1.7723132
"Vitner som har klart å rømme fra øya, sier til NRKs reportere på stedet at gjerningsmannen hadde norsk utseende. Han skal være mellom 185 til 190 cm høy og ha blondt hår."
That's all that it says.
Quote from: Martinus on July 22, 2011, 01:34:22 PM
Is the Labour party perceived as soft on Muslim immigration? Could it be some right wing nutjob enflamed to "revenge" by the bombings?
Labour has been the architect of what is seen as a wave of immigrants. While there's been a full stop on free immigration from outside of Europe and North America since 1976, Norway has had a soft asylum and refugee policy, allowing thousands to enter still and there's also Slargos' pet culprit, the family reunions.
The past two-three years, Labour has been hardline on immigration, mostly to stop bleeding low-income, low-education voters to the Progress Party.
Since the police still seem to maintain there's a "connection" between the two incidents/acts of terrorism, my guess is as good as yours as to the motives of the shooter.
Witness accounts say 25-30 killed, shotgun, automatic rifle and pistol shots were fired by a tall blond man in police uniform.
Helicopter tv shots show bodies slumped in the water around the island.
Quote from: Norgy on July 22, 2011, 01:42:18 PMWhile there's been a full stop on free immigration from outside of Europe and North America since 1976,
Any particular reason why they left Canada and America (and possibly Mexico, geographically) in the free immigration pool?
Quote from: JonasSalk on July 22, 2011, 01:44:29 PM
Any particular reason why they left Canada and America (and possibly Mexico, geographically) in the free immigration pool?
I imagine technical expertise for the oil industry and multinational corporations' tendency to be predominantly North American.
Might just be some lunatic that held a grudge against someone for some unfathomable reason.
Looks like about a half kilometer swim to the shore. And the island isn't in Oslofjord. It's in Tyrifjord.
My bet is on some right-wing nutjob that hates politicians and the media.
edit: 1 person arrested alive
Quote from: Pat on July 22, 2011, 01:59:38 PM
My bet is on some right-wing nutjob that hates politicians and the media.
edit: 1 person arrested alive
If that's true it's going to disappoint a lot of people who were hoping add it to the list of crimes committed by Muslims.
Too bad nobody else on the island was armed.
CNN still hasn't mentioned a tall white dude
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on July 22, 2011, 02:06:03 PM
Too bad nobody else on the island was armed.
Yeah, then the assailant might end up with two guns.
Quote from: HVC on July 22, 2011, 02:08:43 PM
CNN still hasn't mentioned a tall white dude
The Beeb has.
And some seem to lean more towards homegrown terrorism.
It would be feasible to leave a car (especially when you're dressed in police uniform) in the area in question. It would also be feasible to use a timer. Yes, the car could be towed, but most likely not. There still would be time to make it to Utøya.
Just a theory, of course. And Slargos will say it's all whitewashing.
just because the suspect is a tall blonde doesn't mean he's unconnected to Islamists.
Quote from: Norgy on July 22, 2011, 02:21:32 PM
Quote from: HVC on July 22, 2011, 02:08:43 PM
CNN still hasn't mentioned a tall white dude
The Beeb has.
And some seem to lean more towards homegrown terrorism.
It would be feasible to leave a car (especially when you're dressed in police uniform) in the area in question. It would also be feasible to use a timer. Yes, the car could be towed, but most likely not. There still would be time to make it to Utøya.
Just a theory, of course. And Slargos will say it's all whitewashing.
Please. :rolleyes:
Is Vikernes accounted for? :hmm:
Quote from: citizen k on July 22, 2011, 02:21:38 PM
just because the suspect is a tall blonde doesn't mean he's unconnected to Islamists.
Indeed, I believe people convert to islam. :hmm:
Heck converts are usually the most fanatical.
But really we will not know for sure unless they capture somebody. If it was some sort of Islamic terrorism or neo-Nazi nutter they will eagerly announce the fact when given their chance.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zR5nGw1_QGU&feature=youtu.be
Certainly doesn't look good.
And yes, if it's a nazi, we will know very soon.
Would an islamist allow himself to be captured alive? And why attack the leftist youth?
Quote from: JonasSalk on July 22, 2011, 01:35:46 PM
That looks exaggerated. I'm only seeing 4 dead at the camp.
From the article I posted, also:
QuoteThe explosions, which ripped through the cluster of modern office buildings around the Einar Gerhardsens plaza, occurred at a time when many Norwegians were on vacation and many more had left their offices early for the weekend.
Doesn't look like the attacks were designed to kill as many people as possible in a random fashion.
I sometimes think Islamists are just bad at planning. Maybe I'm misremembering, but I recall something about how the September 11th hijackers could've killed tens of thousands more if they'd just taken slightly later flights.
Quote from: Pat on July 22, 2011, 02:31:03 PM
Would an islamist allow himself to be captured alive?
Everytime they have tried to attack the US since 2001 they have. You cannot give the public your message without your day in court and all that.
Why attack leftist youth? I figured it was a statement to the current government of Norway. Are Islamists big fans of Social Democracy?
But hey it may not be a Muslim thing at all. Just some Norwegian who finds mainstream and boring politicall parties worthy of murderous rage.
Quote from: Pat on July 22, 2011, 02:31:03 PM
Would an islamist allow himself to be captured alive? And why attack the leftist youth?
It's happened. Not all terrorist attacks are deliberate suicide missions. Or he could have run out of ammo and forgotten to save a round for himself, or been wounded and unable to resist capture.
Quote from: Valmy on July 22, 2011, 02:29:12 PM
Heck converts are usually the most fanatical.
But really we will not know for sure unless they capture somebody. If it was some sort of Islamic terrorism or neo-Nazi nutter they will eagerly announce the fact when given their chance.
You should watch Chris Morris' 'Four Lions', the best sort of satire:
http://m.imdb.com/title/tt1341167 (http://m.imdb.com/title/tt1341167)
QuoteFour Lions tells the story of a group of British jihadists who push their abstract dreams of glory to the breaking point. As the wheels fly off, and their competing ideologies clash, what emerges is an emotionally engaging (and entirely plausible) farce. In a storm of razor-sharp verbal jousting and large-scale set pieces, Four Lions is a comic tour de force; it shows that-while terrorism is about ideology-it can also be about idiots.
Quote from: Pat on July 22, 2011, 02:31:03 PM
Would an islamist allow himself to be captured alive?
They have before.
Maybe the Aluminum people plant a car bomb, then a Neo Nazi takes advantage of the confusion to mow down lefties?
Quote from: Razgovory on July 22, 2011, 02:11:48 PM
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on July 22, 2011, 02:06:03 PM
Too bad nobody else on the island was armed.
Yeah, then the assailant might end up with two guns.
That doesn't make any sense.
[ :tinfoil: ] A committed social democratic madman decides to take one for the team. He detonates a bomb knowing that FRP would eventually attempt to capitalize on it on their anti-islamic platform. He proceeds to murder a few dozen Red youth and later claims he did it in the name of Vigrid, the Norwad nazis. FRP takes a huge hit in the polls, and AP gets a massive sympathy vote. From an almost certain Blue victory in the coming elections to a guaranteed continued Red supremacy with the stroke of a detonator and a bunch of dead kids. [/ :tinfoil: ]
Quote from: Norgy on July 22, 2011, 02:21:32 PM
Quote from: HVC on July 22, 2011, 02:08:43 PM
CNN still hasn't mentioned a tall white dude
The Beeb has.
And some seem to lean more towards homegrown terrorism.
It would be feasible to leave a car (especially when you're dressed in police uniform) in the area in question. It would also be feasible to use a timer. Yes, the car could be towed, but most likely not. There still would be time to make it to Utøya.
Just a theory, of course. And Slargos will say it's all whitewashing.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/mobile/world-europe-14254705 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/mobile/world-europe-14254705)
Quote
2010
The man arrested after a shooting at the camp in Utoeyais has ties to the bombing in Oslo, police say.
Quote
1948
Eyewitness Andre Scheie told NRK: "There are very many dead by the shore... There are about 20-25 dead." Mr Scheie also said he saw people dead in the water at the camp.
He may have been watching people who were just trying to hide among the rocks, or wounded.
9 dead confirmed so far.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 22, 2011, 02:35:31 PM
Maybe the Aluminum people plant a car bomb, then a Neo Nazi takes advantage of the confusion to mow down lefties?
Bombman and shooter both wearing same police uniform according to police press conference live right now so according to police most likely same person but they don't know if he acted alone or had help. He is in custody and they are questioning him right now. Police will say nothing of how he looks or what his motives might be. They do know his identity and they say is not and has never been a real policeman.
Quote from: Norgy on July 22, 2011, 01:00:52 PM
Quote from: derspiess on July 22, 2011, 12:49:10 PM
That still seems pretty bizarre.
It used to be a way to recruit back in the 1950s and 1960s when most people couldn't afford to go on holidays in summer. You had the youth camps, some organised by political parties, some by religious organisations, some by teetotallers etc etc.
Today, the youth camp is mostly a workshop and breeding seminar where tomorrow's leaders are introduced to fucking in the bushes.
It just sounds like something you'd see either in totalitarian regimes or settings like Weimar Germany where you had right and left wing extremist organizations doing stuff like that.
As staunch as I am in my political beliefs, I'd feel odd sending my kid to a summer camp run by a political party or movement.
Quote from: Ideologue on July 22, 2011, 02:36:09 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on July 22, 2011, 02:11:48 PM
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on July 22, 2011, 02:06:03 PM
Too bad nobody else on the island was armed.
Yeah, then the assailant might end up with two guns.
That doesn't make any sense.
Made sense to me. Assailant kills other person with a gun, picks it up and now has two guns.
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 02:36:56 PM
[ :tinfoil: ] A committed social democratic madman decides to take one for the team. He detonates a bomb knowing that FRP would eventually attempt to capitalize on it on their anti-islamic platform. He proceeds to murder a few dozen Red youth and later claims he did it in the name of Vigrid, the Norwad nazis. FRP takes a huge hit in the polls, and AP gets a massive sympathy vote. From an almost certain Blue victory in the coming elections to a guaranteed continued Red supremacy with the stroke of a detonator and a bunch of dead kids. [/ :tinfoil: ]
Really?
Do you have any non- :tinfoil: theories?
Are all those people grouped on that one corner of the island dead in the helicopter footage? The SE corner.
Could be a convertite or whatever but my money is still on far-right extremists and that it happened during peak holiday season when most people are out of town to minimize "civilian" casualties and maximize evil politician, bureaucrat and media casualties who are running stuff that goes on at all times.
Scandinavian far-right movements are armed and dangerous and they have killed before (see for example http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bj%C3%B6rn_S%C3%B6derberg).
edit: but most likely it's a lone lunatic of course
Quote from: Pat on July 22, 2011, 03:00:30 PM
Could be a convertite or whatever but my money is still on far-right extremists and that it happened during peak holiday season when most people are out of town to minimize "civilian" casualties and maximize evil politician, bureaucrat and media casualties who are running stuff that goes on at all times.
I dont know about Norway but here the far right extremists dont have this sort of pull and havent had for decades no matter what acid trip Expo is most of the time. ´Tis strange if it were to be.
Well we had the recent serial killer (or whatever) in Malmö killing immigrants.
edit: well more like shooting at, I don't remember how many he actually killed
Quote from: Razgovory on July 22, 2011, 02:53:15 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on July 22, 2011, 02:36:09 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on July 22, 2011, 02:11:48 PM
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on July 22, 2011, 02:06:03 PM
Too bad nobody else on the island was armed.
Yeah, then the assailant might end up with two guns.
That doesn't make any sense.
Made sense to me. Assailant kills other person with a gun, picks it up and now has two guns.
That's like saying soldiers shouldn't be armed because enemies may capture their weapons. While what you assert is a possible outcome, it's not the only possible outcome; and in any event, the ability to acquire a subsequent firearm does not necessarily make an attacker already armed with a firearm appreciably more dangerous, and I'd imagine that a group that has come under attack by a man with a gun is likelier to survive if they also have guns themselves.
On the other hand, you were probably just making a little joke and I am: a humorous dick. -_-
Quote from: SlargosOnly description I've seen is "nordic looking". We'll see what gives.
I heard tall blonde guy too.
And shooting at socialists :hmm:
Could be a muslim convert of course but its a bit mad to yell 'muslims!' right away. Far right extremists seems just as likely at the moment.
I would have placed more money on it being Libyans than Islamofascists even if not for the blonde guy (more likely for him to be a convert than a Libyan and muslims largely support the rebels in Libya).
Quote from: Pat on July 22, 2011, 03:08:19 PM
Well we had the recent serial killer (or whatever) in Malmö killing immigrants.
edit: well more like shooting at, I don't remember how many he actually killed
Random wacko with a rifle running around is not this. This must be organized by something bigger and not a one man show.
BBC says the bombers/shooter were "foreign".
Did they ever catch the Malmo guy?
Could well be the same dude.
What happened to the tall blonde guy anyway? Did they take him down or he ran out of ammo and ran off or what?
Quote from: Pat on July 22, 2011, 03:00:30 PM
Could be a convertite or whatever but my money is still on far-right extremists and that it happened during peak holiday season when most people are out of town to minimize "civilian" casualties and maximize evil politician, bureaucrat and media casualties who are running stuff that goes on at all times.
Scandinavian far-right movements are armed and dangerous and they have killed before (see for example http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bj%C3%B6rn_S%C3%B6derberg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bj%C3%B6rn_S%C3%B6derberg)).
edit: but most likely it's a lone lunatic of course
Nigger please. You can't seriously compared that case to this. You are insane.
Quote from: Ideologue on July 22, 2011, 03:10:03 PM
That's like saying soldiers shouldn't be armed because enemies may capture their weapons. While what you assert is a possible outcome, it's not the only possible outcome; and in any event, the ability to acquire a subsequent firearm does not necessarily make an attacker already armed with a firearm appreciably more dangerous, and I'd imagine that a group that has come under attack by a man with a gun is likelier to survive if they also have guns themselves.
On the other hand, you were probably just making a little joke and I am: a humorous dick. -_-
Prison guards are often not armed with deadly weapons for this very reason. Nobody wants the prisoners to get a hold of firearms. And yes, certain weapons have been kept out of the hands of soldiers out of fear they might be captured. Case and point: US proximity fuses for artillery shells during the Battle of the Bulge.
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on July 22, 2011, 03:18:03 PM
BBC says the bombers/shooter were "foreign".
Well yes, foreigners start at Calais. :bowler:
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on July 22, 2011, 03:18:03 PM
BBC says the bombers/shooter were "foreign".
Hmmm. Slargos could be a suspect then. We'd better email his posts to the Norwegian authorities, just to be safe.
Quote from: Jacob on July 22, 2011, 02:55:27 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 02:36:56 PM
[ :tinfoil: ] A committed social democratic madman decides to take one for the team. He detonates a bomb knowing that FRP would eventually attempt to capitalize on it on their anti-islamic platform. He proceeds to murder a few dozen Red youth and later claims he did it in the name of Vigrid, the Norwad nazis. FRP takes a huge hit in the polls, and AP gets a massive sympathy vote. From an almost certain Blue victory in the coming elections to a guaranteed continued Red supremacy with the stroke of a detonator and a bunch of dead kids. [/ :tinfoil: ]
Really?
Do you have any non- :tinfoil: theories?
Not really, other than what you could come up with yourself.
McVeigh seems a possibility given that he's been described as "nordic looking" but frankly it would be stupid to theorize based on his appearance. We live in a world where whites can be muslims, and the darkest jigger-boo can be a staunch loyalist.
Islamic terrorism would make the most sense, but we obviously won't know for a while yet.
It would be my guess, however, that if it is indeed a home-grown terrorist (which would be nothing short of spectacular, I can't recall anything of this scale happening in Scandinavia the last hundred years or so, excepting the odd political murder here and there) we will know very soon. Media will certainly report it in a tone that will make it obvious they are all having collective multiple-orgasms while writing it.
For some, I believe the political ramifications of a nazi act of terrorism would be more than worth the price of a few lives.
Quote from: Tyr on July 22, 2011, 03:18:16 PM
Did they ever catch the Malmo guy?
Could well be the same dude.
What happened to the tall blonde guy anyway? Did they take him down or he ran out of ammo and ran off or what?
Yep. No. No information.
Quote from: Razgovory on July 22, 2011, 03:23:31 PM
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on July 22, 2011, 03:18:03 PM
BBC says the bombers/shooter were "foreign".
Hmmm. Slargos could be a suspect then. We'd better email his posts to the Norwegian authorities, just to be safe.
Please do, you little spitwad. Lord knows that if I ever got the chance to terror bomb your basement and get away with it, I wouldn't hesitate for a second.
I'm glad you feel better, Slargos.
Quote from: Jacob on July 22, 2011, 03:27:46 PM
I'm glad you feel better, Slargos.
:lol:
The worst shock is over.
Now, fuck you, too.
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 03:19:14 PM
Quote from: Pat on July 22, 2011, 03:00:30 PM
Could be a convertite or whatever but my money is still on far-right extremists and that it happened during peak holiday season when most people are out of town to minimize "civilian" casualties and maximize evil politician, bureaucrat and media casualties who are running stuff that goes on at all times.
Scandinavian far-right movements are armed and dangerous and they have killed before (see for example http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bj%C3%B6rn_S%C3%B6derberg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bj%C3%B6rn_S%C3%B6derberg)).
edit: but most likely it's a lone lunatic of course
Nigger please. You can't seriously compared that case to this. You are insane.
Yeah and your theory was what? Social democrats shooting themselves to get sympathy? :facepalm:
I'm not, I'm just saying they have killed before. We've also had several serial shootings of immigrants from lone loonies and - as I said - something similar is probably more likely. But we'll see soon.
Quote from: Pat on July 22, 2011, 03:30:21 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 03:19:14 PM
Quote from: Pat on July 22, 2011, 03:00:30 PM
Could be a convertite or whatever but my money is still on far-right extremists and that it happened during peak holiday season when most people are out of town to minimize "civilian" casualties and maximize evil politician, bureaucrat and media casualties who are running stuff that goes on at all times.
Scandinavian far-right movements are armed and dangerous and they have killed before (see for example http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bj%C3%B6rn_S%C3%B6derberg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bj%C3%B6rn_S%C3%B6derberg)).
edit: but most likely it's a lone lunatic of course
Nigger please. You can't seriously compared that case to this. You are insane.
Yeah and your theory was what? Social democrats shooting themselves to get sympathy? :facepalm:
I'm not, I'm just saying they have killed before. We've also had several serial shootings of immigrants from lone loonies and - as I said - something similar is probably more likely. But we'll see soon.
:lol:
You ARE a stupid mother fucker, aren't you?
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 03:30:00 PM:lol:
The worst shock is over.
Now, fuck you, too.
Obviously it must have been a profound shock for you to discover that the only captured suspect is a white guy. Luckily, you're resilient enough that you've quickly bounced back and been able to formulate reasoning as to why it's still Muslims and lefties who are the bad guys here.
From Aftenposten:
QuotePolitiet kjenner den pågrepne mannens identitet, men vil ikke oppgi flere detaljer rundt pågripelsen.
De har mistanke om at dette ikke er internasjonal terrorisme, men en lokal variant rettet mot det bestående politiske systemet, ifølge NTB. Politiet skal være kjent med miljøet mannen er knyttet til.
Major downer, Slargos.
Quote from: Tyr on July 22, 2011, 03:18:16 PM
Did they ever catch the Malmo guy?
Could well be the same dude.
They caught him.
QuoteWhat happened to the tall blonde guy anyway? Did they take him down or he ran out of ammo and ran off or what?
Haven't said how they caught him.
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 03:31:19 PM
Quote from: Pat on July 22, 2011, 03:30:21 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 03:19:14 PM
Quote from: Pat on July 22, 2011, 03:00:30 PM
Could be a convertite or whatever but my money is still on far-right extremists and that it happened during peak holiday season when most people are out of town to minimize "civilian" casualties and maximize evil politician, bureaucrat and media casualties who are running stuff that goes on at all times.
Scandinavian far-right movements are armed and dangerous and they have killed before (see for example http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bj%C3%B6rn_S%C3%B6derberg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bj%C3%B6rn_S%C3%B6derberg)).
edit: but most likely it's a lone lunatic of course
Nigger please. You can't seriously compared that case to this. You are insane.
Yeah and your theory was what? Social democrats shooting themselves to get sympathy? :facepalm:
I'm not, I'm just saying they have killed before. We've also had several serial shootings of immigrants from lone loonies and - as I said - something similar is probably more likely. But we'll see soon.
:lol:
You ARE a stupid mother fucker, aren't you?
And you seem considerably less upset now, don't you?
Quote from: Norgy on July 22, 2011, 03:33:51 PM
From Aftenposten:
QuotePolitiet kjenner den pågrepne mannens identitet, men vil ikke oppgi flere detaljer rundt pågripelsen.
De har mistanke om at dette ikke er internasjonal terrorisme, men en lokal variant rettet mot det bestående politiske systemet, ifølge NTB. Politiet skal være kjent med miljøet mannen er knyttet til.
Major downer, Slargos.
What's the gist?
Norwegian Nazis?? WTF is that? Didn't they anything from Quisling?
Quote from: Jacob on July 22, 2011, 03:32:44 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 03:30:00 PM:lol:
The worst shock is over.
Now, fuck you, too.
Obviously it must have been a profound shock for you to discover that the only captured suspect is a white guy. Luckily, you're resilient enough that you've quickly bounced back and been able to formulate reasoning as to why it's still Muslims and lefties who are the bad guys here.
Stay classy, fuckwad.
Quote from: Malthus on July 22, 2011, 03:37:45 PM
Quote from: Norgy on July 22, 2011, 03:33:51 PM
From Aftenposten:
QuotePolitiet kjenner den pågrepne mannens identitet, men vil ikke oppgi flere detaljer rundt pågripelsen.
De har mistanke om at dette ikke er internasjonal terrorisme, men en lokal variant rettet mot det bestående politiske systemet, ifølge NTB. Politiet skal være kjent med miljøet mannen er knyttet til.
Major downer, Slargos.
What's the gist?
The police suspect it is not an act of international terrorism but home-grown terrorism against the current political system. Police are familiar with the environment the man is tied to.
Quote from: Norgy on July 22, 2011, 03:33:51 PM
From Aftenposten:
QuotePolitiet kjenner den pågrepne mannens identitet, men vil ikke oppgi flere detaljer rundt pågripelsen.
De har mistanke om at dette ikke er internasjonal terrorisme, men en lokal variant rettet mot det bestående politiske systemet, ifølge NTB. Politiet skal være kjent med miljøet mannen er knyttet til.
Major downer, Slargos.
If they're alluding to what it sounds like, you're for damn sure. This kind of shit may be the last nail in the coffin. :hmm:
It doesn't really change the fact that this is a terrible tragedy. [although it may amplify it :P ]
Quote from: Pat on July 22, 2011, 03:34:26 PM
And you seem considerably less upset now, don't you?
Fuck you, you slimey fucking rapist. In a perfect world, you would've already been executed for your crimes. Instead we have to suffer you here.
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 03:39:46 PM
Quote from: Jacob on July 22, 2011, 03:32:44 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 03:30:00 PM:lol:
The worst shock is over.
Now, fuck you, too.
Obviously it must have been a profound shock for you to discover that the only captured suspect is a white guy. Luckily, you're resilient enough that you've quickly bounced back and been able to formulate reasoning as to why it's still Muslims and lefties who are the bad guys here.
Stay classy, fuckwad.
Everyone here have been having a mature approach to discussion except you. Not too happy about what your friends have been up to?
PM supposedly on tv right now.
Quote from: Pat on July 22, 2011, 03:42:42 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 03:39:46 PM
Quote from: Jacob on July 22, 2011, 03:32:44 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 03:30:00 PM:lol:
The worst shock is over.
Now, fuck you, too.
Obviously it must have been a profound shock for you to discover that the only captured suspect is a white guy. Luckily, you're resilient enough that you've quickly bounced back and been able to formulate reasoning as to why it's still Muslims and lefties who are the bad guys here.
Stay classy, fuckwad.
Everyone here have been having a mature approach to discussion except you. Not too happy about what your friends have been up to?
:lol:
Given I've had to suffer these kinds of bullshit remarks the entire thread, I think you are mistaken. But then, you are not very smart, we've alerady established.
Die in a fire.
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 03:41:33 PM
Quote from: Pat on July 22, 2011, 03:34:26 PM
And you seem considerably less upset now, don't you?
In a perfect world, you would've already been executed for your crimes. Instead we have to suffer you here.
Seems your view of a perfect world is similar to this terrorist's in more ways than one.
Getting back on track, there's now open speculation about right-wing extremists. :hmm:
Quote from: Pat on July 22, 2011, 03:46:31 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 03:41:33 PM
Quote from: Pat on July 22, 2011, 03:34:26 PM
And you seem considerably less upset now, don't you?
In a perfect world, you would've already been executed for your crimes. Instead we have to suffer you here.
Seems your view of a perfect world is similar to this terrorist's in more ways than one.
"Oh, u bikome jus like dem!"
You're so Swedish it literally hurts my brain.
DIAF.
So crazy Norwegians then?
Quote from: HVC on July 22, 2011, 03:48:15 PM
So crazy Norwegians then?
Speculations. No one with hard facts has said as much.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-14254705
Live
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 03:39:46 PMStay classy, fuckwad.
You told me to fuck off. I told you to fuck off; I just used more words to do so.
Isn't that the kind of tit-for-tat you consider reasonable?
Quote from: Jacob on July 22, 2011, 03:51:16 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 03:39:46 PMStay classy, fuckwad.
You told me to fuck off. I told you to fuck off; I just used more words to do so.
Isn't that the kind of tit-for-tat you consider reasonable?
And as usual, you started it. So cry me a fucking river you cunt.
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 03:53:00 PMAnd as usual, you started it. So cry me a fucking river you cunt.
Really? Where?
Quote from: Jacob on July 22, 2011, 03:55:24 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 03:53:00 PMAnd as usual, you started it. So cry me a fucking river you cunt.
Really? Where?
I'm not playing this game with you today.
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 03:56:37 PMI'm not playing this game with you today.
No seriously, I'm confused here. Did you take "I'm glad you're feeling better" as an attack?
Possible picture of the gun man (WANNING DO NOT CLICK ON THE LINK IF YOU DON'T WANT TO SEE DEAD PEOPLE)
http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=160139 (http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=160139)
Quote from: Mr.Penguin on July 22, 2011, 03:58:55 PM
Possible picture of the gun man (WANNING DO NOT CLICK ON THE LINK IF YOU DON'T WANT TO SEE DEAD PEOPLE)
http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=160139 (http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=160139)
Fuck, is he executing the wounded at close range? :mad:
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 03:26:18 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on July 22, 2011, 03:23:31 PM
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on July 22, 2011, 03:18:03 PM
BBC says the bombers/shooter were "foreign".
Hmmm. Slargos could be a suspect then. We'd better email his posts to the Norwegian authorities, just to be safe.
Please do, you little spitwad. Lord knows that if I ever got the chance to terror bomb your basement and get away with it, I wouldn't hesitate for a second.
Don't tempt me Hagman, I'm aware of how the Norwegian government views hate speech.
Quote from: Razgovory on July 22, 2011, 04:00:22 PM
Don't tempt me Hagman, I'm aware of how the Norwegian government views hate speech.
With slight disdain? Hate speech is ok. Porn isn't.
Quote from: Norgy on July 22, 2011, 04:01:23 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on July 22, 2011, 04:00:22 PM
Don't tempt me Hagman, I'm aware of how the Norwegian government views hate speech.
With slight disdain? Hate speech is ok. Porn isn't.
Norway is a country listed as having hate speech laws.
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 03:48:01 PM
Quote from: Pat on July 22, 2011, 03:46:31 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 03:41:33 PM
Quote from: Pat on July 22, 2011, 03:34:26 PM
And you seem considerably less upset now, don't you?
In a perfect world, you would've already been executed for your crimes. Instead we have to suffer you here.
Seems your view of a perfect world is similar to this terrorist's in more ways than one.
"Oh, u bikome jus like dem!"
You're so Swedish it literally hurts my brain.
DIAF.
If not killing those you have disagreement with is Swedish then I'm proud to be Swedish, I suppose. :huh:
http://www.vg.no/nyheter/innenriks/artikkel.php?artid=10080602
"Arrested man is Norwegian."
Quote from: Razgovory on July 22, 2011, 04:00:22 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 03:26:18 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on July 22, 2011, 03:23:31 PM
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on July 22, 2011, 03:18:03 PM
BBC says the bombers/shooter were "foreign".
Hmmm. Slargos could be a suspect then. We'd better email his posts to the Norwegian authorities, just to be safe.
Please do, you little spitwad. Lord knows that if I ever got the chance to terror bomb your basement and get away with it, I wouldn't hesitate for a second.
Don't tempt me Hagman, I'm aware of how the Norwegian government views hate speech.
Go for it.
Quote from: Norgy on July 22, 2011, 04:00:17 PM
Quote from: Mr.Penguin on July 22, 2011, 03:58:55 PM
Possible picture of the gun man (WANNING DO NOT CLICK ON THE LINK IF YOU DON'T WANT TO SEE DEAD PEOPLE)
http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=160139 (http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=160139)
Fuck, is he executing the wounded at close range? :mad:
Oh boy. That doesn't look good.
The only thing you've had to suffer from Slargos is your disappointment that it wasn't brown skinned. You were much more jocular about the whole incident until you found out the guy was white, at that point in the thread you took on a much more bitter viewpoint. I'm sorry you couldn't gloat about this particular incident.
Quote from: Razgovory on July 22, 2011, 04:10:06 PM
The only thing you've had to suffer from Slargos is your disappointment that it wasn't brown skinned. You were much more jocular about the whole incident until you found out the guy was white, at that point in the thread you took on a much more bitter viewpoint. I'm sorry you couldn't gloat about this particular incident.
Why would you lie like that? What do you have to gain from it? If you think you're pissing me off, you aren't. :huh:
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 03:41:11 PM
If they're alluding to what it sounds like, you're for damn sure. This kind of shit may be the last nail in the coffin. :hmm:
It doesn't really change the fact that this is a terrible tragedy. [although it may amplify it :P ]
I don't really care who did it. Not in the sense that I am emotionally invested in it, at least. I care that they apparently got the guy. The fact that he's a Norwegian national is to me triple scary.
We've seen a few gun nuts in the past go on and kill some bystanders and hole up with a hostage or two, but this kind of calculated murder spree is just incomprehensible. The sheer hatred behind would at least point towards a major religious or political conviction that would've manifested itself earlier in some way.
But, when I assess what has happened, there's one thing that really doesn't fit the Islamic jihad thing; they would maximise the kill count. In the middle of summer around Regjeringskvartalet, it's just amazingly quiet. And most employees were already gone home or on holiday. If I were a Jihadist, I'd go for the underground during the morning rush on a rainy or snowy day in, say, October to December, with the bomb going off on Stortinget or Nationaltheatret.
Seven killed at government quarters and considerable material damage, yes, but still, look at London, Madrid, Nairobi and New York. This is amateur hour compared to those. While I realise the jihadists may have lost significant edge the past few years, I'd still think they'd hit somewhere else.
On the other hand, I still can't fathom how anyone would do this.
And, it could be that it's by no means a right-winger, but a more Baader-Meinhof type leftist who thinks the Labour Party is a tool of bourgeoisie oppression. I know some of those.
Let's summarize:
The man is Norwegian. The police know what environments he is known to associate with and they say it is most likely not an act of international terrorism but rather a home-grown attack against the political system. The attack was against government, media and leftist youth. Sounds like right-wing extremism to me.
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 04:08:53 PM
Go for it.
If you really want me to, I found a webpage to report "racism on the internet" to the Norwegian Criminal Police. Is in English and everything.
So...they captured this dude alive right? Connection with the carbomb? This is some sort of weird anti-Socialist thingy?
Quote from: Norgy on July 22, 2011, 04:11:45 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 03:41:11 PM
If they're alluding to what it sounds like, you're for damn sure. This kind of shit may be the last nail in the coffin. :hmm:
It doesn't really change the fact that this is a terrible tragedy. [although it may amplify it :P ]
I don't really care who did it. Not in the sense that I am emotionally invested in it, at least. I care that they apparently got the guy. The fact that he's a Norwegian national is to me triple scary.
We've seen a few gun nuts in the past go on and kill some bystanders and hole up with a hostage or two, but this kind of calculated murder spree is just incomprehensible. The sheer hatred behind would at least point towards a major religious or political conviction that would've manifested itself earlier in some way.
But, when I assess what has happened, there's one thing that really doesn't fit the Islamic jihad thing; they would maximise the kill count. In the middle of summer around Regjeringskvartalet, it's just amazingly quiet. And most employees were already gone home or on holiday. If I were a Jihadist, I'd go for the underground during the morning rush on a rainy or snowy day in, say, October to December, with the bomb going off on Stortinget or Nationaltheatret.
Seven killed at government quarters and considerable material damage, yes, but still, look at London, Madrid, Nairobi and New York. This is amateur hour compared to those. While I realise the jihadists may have lost significant edge the past few years, I'd still think they'd hit somewhere else.
On the other hand, I still can't fathom how anyone would do this.
And, it could be that it's by no means a right-winger, but a more Baader-Meinhof type leftist who thinks the Labour Party is a tool of bourgeoisie oppression. I know some of those.
I don't know about that. The Stockholm bombings went atrociously wrong [for the bombers] and they were nominally jihadists.
But, yeah.
Quote from: Razgovory on July 22, 2011, 04:14:05 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 04:08:53 PM
Go for it.
If you really want me to, I found a webpage to report "racism on the internet" to the Norwegian Criminal Police. Is in English and everything.
I can't tell you what to do. I can tell you what I could do. But I can't tell you what to do.
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 10:09:11 AM
I can almost see the gears spinning in their heads, "FUCK! How can we prevent the racists from profiting off of this!" :D
So what are the racists thinking now that they know it was a good ole boy?
Quote from: Mr.Penguin on July 22, 2011, 03:58:55 PM
Possible picture of the gun man (WANNING DO NOT CLICK ON THE LINK IF YOU DON'T WANT TO SEE DEAD PEOPLE)
http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=160139 (http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=160139)
looks like the guy at the bottom left corner is pleading :(
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 04:16:58 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on July 22, 2011, 04:14:05 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 04:08:53 PM
Go for it.
If you really want me to, I found a webpage to report "racism on the internet" to the Norwegian Criminal Police. Is in English and everything.
I can't tell you what to do. I can tell you what I could do. But I can't tell you what to do.
don't tempt the crazy guy :lol:
Raz, relax
Quote from: crazy canuck on July 22, 2011, 04:19:27 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 10:09:11 AM
I can almost see the gears spinning in their heads, "FUCK! How can we prevent the racists from profiting off of this!" :D
So what are the racists thinking now that they know it was a good ole boy?
You seem to live under the illusion that I can answer that question.
Why don't you ask Garbon what the nigger community thinks about it.
Oh wait, that would be racist, assuming Garbon knows because he's black.
Quote from: HVC on July 22, 2011, 04:22:27 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 04:16:58 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on July 22, 2011, 04:14:05 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 04:08:53 PM
Go for it.
If you really want me to, I found a webpage to report "racism on the internet" to the Norwegian Criminal Police. Is in English and everything.
I can't tell you what to do. I can tell you what I could do. But I can't tell you what to do.
don't tempt the crazy guy :lol:
Raz, relax
You're assuming Raz is crazier than I am. :hmm:
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 04:22:32 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on July 22, 2011, 04:19:27 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 10:09:11 AM
I can almost see the gears spinning in their heads, "FUCK! How can we prevent the racists from profiting off of this!" :D
So what are the racists thinking now that they know it was a good ole boy?
You seem to live under the illusion that I can answer that question.
Why don't you ask Garbon what the nigger community thinks about it.
Oh wait, that would be racist, assuming Garbon knows because he's black.
You often express racist views and often seem to be proud you are racist so I thought you would give us a good indication of the Racist view now that your initial suspision this was done by a "towel head" seems to be incorrect.
Quote from: HVC on July 22, 2011, 04:22:27 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 04:16:58 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on July 22, 2011, 04:14:05 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 04:08:53 PM
Go for it.
If you really want me to, I found a webpage to report "racism on the internet" to the Norwegian Criminal Police. Is in English and everything.
I can't tell you what to do. I can tell you what I could do. But I can't tell you what to do.
don't tempt the crazy guy :lol:
Raz, relax
Yeah, I wouldn't do something like that. For one thing I don't believe Slargos actually believes that shit. And another, it's a Marty type thing to do. I did find it was possible though. Which is kinda creepy actually.
Apparently the guy is being interrogated now, and he's reportedly "very talkative" so we may get the whole story very soon.
Sounds like it is indeed domestic. Very disturbing.
It's a safe assumption. You play a racist slightly out there guy on the net for shits n giggles. Raz comes across as truly unbalanced and at times doesn't grasp where languish ends and reality starts. And he knows your real name and can do some rela
Damage if he so wishes
Quote from: crazy canuck on July 22, 2011, 04:27:16 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 04:22:32 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on July 22, 2011, 04:19:27 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 10:09:11 AM
I can almost see the gears spinning in their heads, "FUCK! How can we prevent the racists from profiting off of this!" :D
So what are the racists thinking now that they know it was a good ole boy?
You seem to live under the illusion that I can answer that question.
Why don't you ask Garbon what the nigger community thinks about it.
Oh wait, that would be racist, assuming Garbon knows because he's black.
You often express racist views and often seem to be proud you are racist so I thought you would give us a good indication of the Racist view now that your initial suspision this was done by a "towel head" seems to be incorrect.
Then ask my view. I'm not a spokesperson for "the community".
Quote from: HVC on July 22, 2011, 04:27:38 PM
It's a safe assumption. You play a racist slightly out there guy on the net for shits n giggles. Raz comes across as truly unbalanced and at times doesn't grasp where languish ends and reality starts. And he knows your real name and can do some rela
Damage if he so wishes
You're working under the assumption that I cannot. :hmm:
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 04:29:00 PM
Quote from: HVC on July 22, 2011, 04:27:38 PM
It's a safe assumption. You play a racist slightly out there guy on the net for shits n giggles. Raz comes across as truly unbalanced and at times doesn't grasp where languish ends and reality starts. And he knows your real name and can do some rela
Damage if he so wishes
You're working under the assumption that I cannot. :hmm:
you can steal his ashtray :P.
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 04:28:09 PM
Then ask my view. I'm not a spokesperson for "the community".
Ok, as a racist what is your view now that you have found it the alleged killer is someone you would consider racially acceptable. Should all racists now be expelled from your country as you have advocated for other undesirables?
Quote from: HVC on July 22, 2011, 04:31:00 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 04:29:00 PM
Quote from: HVC on July 22, 2011, 04:27:38 PM
It's a safe assumption. You play a racist slightly out there guy on the net for shits n giggles. Raz comes across as truly unbalanced and at times doesn't grasp where languish ends and reality starts. And he knows your real name and can do some rela
Damage if he so wishes
You're working under the assumption that I cannot. :hmm:
you can steal his ashtray :P.
Or go for the ultimate revenge.
Renovate his kitchen, and use substandard appliances.
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 04:27:30 PM
Apparently the guy is being interrogated now, and he's reportedly "very talkative" so we may get the whole story very soon.
Told ya. Most of the time these guys want everybody to know why they did it.
No waterboarding required.
"And, it could be that it's by no means a right-winger, but a more Baader-Meinhof type leftist who thinks the Labour Party is a tool of bourgeoisie oppression. I know some of those."
Single example of something similar to this for the reasons you describe?
Slarg takes too much pride in his work to do that. Hide raz's body in he wall, maybe, but it'd be a lovely patch and paint job :D
Quote from: crazy canuck on July 22, 2011, 04:31:50 PM
Ok, as a racist what is your view now that you have found it the alleged killer is someone you would consider racially acceptable when you.
The act itself doesn't change. What he (and his potential accomplices) has done is atrocious. And here I'm talking more about the attack on the camp than on the government building which can always be rationalized. The camp simply cannot.
If this is indeed a right-winger, the tragedy is certainly amplified by the potential political damage it could cause. Let's remember though that we still don't know.
QuoteShould all racists now be expelled from your country as you have advocated for other undesirables?
Now, see, this simply isn't possible to take seriously. The difference between a lone nutter and a mass movement of violence and crime is self-evident.
Quote from: Pat on July 22, 2011, 04:34:27 PM
"And, it could be that it's by no means a right-winger, but a more Baader-Meinhof type leftist who thinks the Labour Party is a tool of bourgeoisie oppression. I know some of those."
Single example of something similar to this for the reasons you describe?
Brigado Rosso. Baader-Meinhof. Carlos the Jackal. Granted, that's thirty odd years ago, and it looks more and more like this was a right-winger. The apparent close-range murder of at least ten youths indicate that the man in question had very personal issues with the Labour Party.
I'm going to hazard a guess that when all is said and done there's a chick involved.
Quote from: Pat on July 22, 2011, 04:34:27 PM
"And, it could be that it's by no means a right-winger, but a more Baader-Meinhof type leftist who thinks the Labour Party is a tool of bourgeoisie oppression. I know some of those."
Single example of something similar to this for the reasons you describe?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/april/24/newsid_2523000/2523095.stm
Jesus fucking christ you're stupid.
Not similar. Mass-killing of social democrats in this way?
Quote from: Norgy on July 22, 2011, 04:38:54 PM
Quote from: Pat on July 22, 2011, 04:34:27 PM
"And, it could be that it's by no means a right-winger, but a more Baader-Meinhof type leftist who thinks the Labour Party is a tool of bourgeoisie oppression. I know some of those."
Single example of something similar to this for the reasons you describe?
Brigado Rosso. Baader-Meinhof. Carlos the Jackal. Granted, that's thirty odd years ago, and it looks more and more like this was a right-winger. The apparent close-range murder of at least ten youths indicate that the man in question had very personal issues with the Labour Party.
Hell,
I have plenty of issues with the Labour party. :D
I think it takes a special kind of enthusiasm to butcher a bunch of children though.
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 04:38:29 PM
And here I'm talking more about the attack on the camp than on the government building which can always be rationalized. The camp simply cannot.
Why do you think an attack on a government building which kills people (or at least one person) can be rationalized whereas the attack on the camp which kills people cannot.
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 04:41:54 PM
I think it takes a special kind of enthusiasm to butcher a bunch of children though.
The Nazi kind would suffice. Nazis have a long and distinguished track record when it comes to butchering children.
Quote from: crazy canuck on July 22, 2011, 04:42:16 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 04:38:29 PM
And here I'm talking more about the attack on the camp than on the government building which can always be rationalized. The camp simply cannot.
Why do you think an attack on a government building which kills people (or at least one person) can be rationalized whereas the attack on the camp which kills people cannot.
Let me rephrase myself, since
anything can be rationalized.
An attack on a purely political target can be justified, even if tenuously, by the fact that it is an attack on agents of the government.
Butchering children for the shock factor can't. It's just murder.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 22, 2011, 04:43:19 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 04:41:54 PM
I think it takes a special kind of enthusiasm to butcher a bunch of children though.
The Nazi kind would suffice. Nazis have a long and distinguished track record when it comes to butchering children.
So do Communists. :hmm:
Police expect the death toll on the island to go higher. Judging from the pictures, in that one with the pleading kid in the the water alone it looks like a dozen corpses...
They also found explosives there. Why?
Assassination attempt planned tomorrow, then Blondie gets impatient and sets everything off today? :hmm:
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 04:46:48 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 22, 2011, 04:43:19 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 04:41:54 PM
I think it takes a special kind of enthusiasm to butcher a bunch of children though.
The Nazi kind would suffice. Nazis have a long and distinguished track record when it comes to butchering children.
So do Communists. :hmm:
That's your bet on this one? I don't even need to say you're stupid, it's already evident to everyone.
Quote from: Norgy on July 22, 2011, 04:50:49 PM
They also found explosives there. Why?
Assassination attempt planned tomorrow, then Blondie gets impatient and sets everything off today? :hmm:
It seems like such an elaborate plot to be able to pull off alone.
Quote from: Norgy on July 22, 2011, 04:50:49 PM
They also found explosives there. Why?
Assassination attempt planned tomorrow, then Blondie gets impatient and sets everything off today? :hmm:
You're hooked into the Norwegian blond community. What inside scoop can you provide us?
Quote from: Pat on July 22, 2011, 04:51:33 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 04:46:48 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 22, 2011, 04:43:19 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 04:41:54 PM
I think it takes a special kind of enthusiasm to butcher a bunch of children though.
The Nazi kind would suffice. Nazis have a long and distinguished track record when it comes to butchering children.
So do Communists. :hmm:
That's your bet on this one? I don't even need to say you're stupid, it's already evident to everyone.
Yes. My bet is actually Communist Martians attempting to destabilize the Norwegian government.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 22, 2011, 04:52:54 PM
Quote from: Norgy on July 22, 2011, 04:50:49 PM
They also found explosives there. Why?
Assassination attempt planned tomorrow, then Blondie gets impatient and sets everything off today? :hmm:
You're hooked into the Norwegian blond community. What inside scoop can you provide us?
:lol:
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 22, 2011, 04:40:12 PM
I'm going to hazard a guess that when all is said and done there's a chick involved.
Pussy terrorism is the worst kind.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 22, 2011, 04:52:54 PM
You're hooked into the Norwegian blond community. What inside scoop can you provide us?
I've heard mutterings about how the anti-blond policies of this government could have "serious consequences", but I always imagined we'd have to dye our hair.
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 04:46:16 PM
An attack on a purely political target can be justified, even if tenuously, by the fact that it is an attack on agents of the government.
Butchering children for the shock factor can't. It's just murder.
How old would a person have to be before an attack on them could be justified?
Quote from: Norgy on July 22, 2011, 04:38:54 PM
Quote from: Pat on July 22, 2011, 04:34:27 PM
"And, it could be that it's by no means a right-winger, but a more Baader-Meinhof type leftist who thinks the Labour Party is a tool of bourgeoisie oppression. I know some of those."
Single example of something similar to this for the reasons you describe?
Brigado Rosso. Baader-Meinhof. Carlos the Jackal. Granted, that's thirty odd years ago, and it looks more and more like this was a right-winger. The apparent close-range murder of at least ten youths indicate that the man in question had very personal issues with the Labour Party.
Or maybe he's just a wacko without any coherent political ideology, like the Arizona shooter. That would surely disappoint those already certain that it's a right-winger.
Quote from: crazy canuck on July 22, 2011, 05:00:28 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 04:46:16 PM
An attack on a purely political target can be justified, even if tenuously, by the fact that it is an attack on agents of the government.
Butchering children for the shock factor can't. It's just murder.
How old would a person have to be before an attack on them could be justified?
I don't know. How old would a person have to be before it's justified to drop a bomb on their wedding party?
Quote from: Norgy on July 22, 2011, 04:59:19 PM
I've heard mutterings about how the anti-blond policies of this government could have "serious consequences", but I always imagined we'd have to dye our hair.
I hope for you personally it never goes past the talking stage. :(
Quote from: derspiess on July 22, 2011, 05:00:38 PM
Quote from: Norgy on July 22, 2011, 04:38:54 PM
Quote from: Pat on July 22, 2011, 04:34:27 PM
"And, it could be that it's by no means a right-winger, but a more Baader-Meinhof type leftist who thinks the Labour Party is a tool of bourgeoisie oppression. I know some of those."
Single example of something similar to this for the reasons you describe?
Brigado Rosso. Baader-Meinhof. Carlos the Jackal. Granted, that's thirty odd years ago, and it looks more and more like this was a right-winger. The apparent close-range murder of at least ten youths indicate that the man in question had very personal issues with the Labour Party.
Or maybe he's just a wacko without any coherent political ideology, like the Arizona shooter. That would surely disappoint those already certain that it's a right-winger.
It might have been a coincidence it was the labour youth and not the boy scouts being attacked or it might not be a coincidence. What do you think?
Quote from: derspiess on July 22, 2011, 05:00:38 PM
Or maybe he's just a wacko without any coherent political ideology, like the Arizona shooter. That would surely disappoint those already certain that it's a right-winger.
Anyone who's butchering people at close range does lack a bit of coherence, ideologically and otherwise.
Quote from: Pat on July 22, 2011, 05:05:18 PM
It might have been a coincidence it was the labour youth and not the boy scouts being attacked or it might not be a coincidence. What do you think?
I think I would rather wait and learn about this guy before I blame his political ideology.
I'm off to a vigil. It'll hopefully help quell this feeling of utter helplessness despite not actually being helpful.
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 05:02:26 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on July 22, 2011, 05:00:28 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 04:46:16 PM
An attack on a purely political target can be justified, even if tenuously, by the fact that it is an attack on agents of the government.
Butchering children for the shock factor can't. It's just murder.
How old would a person have to be before an attack on them could be justified?
I don't know. How old would a person have to be before it's justified to drop a bomb on their wedding party?
I dont understand the question. You drew a distinction between killing people based on age. At what point is it no longer unjustifiable to kill a person according to your view?
Quote from: Norgy on July 22, 2011, 05:11:19 PM
I'm off to a vigil. It'll hopefully help quell this feeling of utter helplessness despite not actually being helpful.
I'm rooting for you to nail some lefty chick bro. :cheers:
Quote from: crazy canuck on July 22, 2011, 05:12:20 PM
I dont understand the question. You drew a distinction between killing people based on age. At what point is it no longer unjustifiable to kill a person according to your view?
Of course you don't. When is it justifiable to drop a nuke on a city, according to your view?
And so the inevitable medial masturbation about how people are talking about Norway starts. Fabulous. That's my cue to go to bed.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 22, 2011, 04:40:12 PM
I'm going to hazard a guess that when all is said and done there's a chick involved.
That, or levels of mental illness that makes any political rationale seem almost incidental - like the guy who shot the congresswoman (or was she a senator?) in Colorado.
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 05:20:05 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on July 22, 2011, 05:12:20 PM
I dont understand the question. You drew a distinction between killing people based on age. At what point is it no longer unjustifiable to kill a person according to your view?
Of course you don't. When is it justifiable to drop a nuke on a city, according to your view?
I am not taking the position that killing based on age is justified. You are making such a claim and I am afraid that my vieww regarding dropping a nuke on a city wont help me understand your view.
Quote from: Jacob on July 22, 2011, 05:37:14 PM
That, or levels of mental illness that makes any political rationale seem almost incidental - like the guy who shot the congresswoman (or was she a senator?) in Colorado.
Getting a police uniform and travelling to an island means planning. Random nut just shows up in a public place and starts banging.
Yes, this thing took a lot of planning and skill to pull off.
Quote from: derspiess on July 22, 2011, 05:00:38 PMOr maybe he's just a wacko without any coherent political ideology, like the Arizona shooter. That would surely disappoint those already certain that it's a right-winger.
To me that's the most likely possibility at this point.
That said, I think that likely also applies to some of the lone Islamist terrorists that have been caught on occassion. Even if there is nothing approaching a rational framework, I expect that those kind of people still grab bits and pieces from more extreme ideologies around them to fuel their own particular delusions - whether that's from the extreme right wing, the extreme left wing, millenial Christianity, revolutionary Islamism or similar.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 22, 2011, 05:40:04 PMGetting a police uniform and travelling to an island means planning. Random nut just shows up in a public place and starts banging.
Yeah... I'm thinking more a Unabomber or a Travis Bickle level of nuttiness.
To quote the PM, I'm alive and in a safe place, but not without annoyance that nobody mentioned the fact that I hadn't posted yet grrrrr....
I was at a family dinner and there were people crying as the news came in.
The best info I have as follows is
- single perpetrator
- ethnically Norwegian perpetrator (not just Norwegian citizen)
- car bomb was small (100kg TNT equivalent est.)
- the car bomb was place in the Government Block in Oslo including Premier, Justice, Agriculture, Fishing and Oil and Energy Ministries.
- the perpetrator then drove to Utøya gathered people there together to tell about the bomb, then started shooting
No motive has been leaked. The man is known to the police and known to travel in certain circles.
Strange circumstances include the bomb going off at 3:30 pm on friday during the vacation, one would expect the offices to be empty and casualties minimal in the Government Block itself.
Sounds like a man with a plan.
Quote from: Razgovory on July 22, 2011, 06:01:23 PM
Sounds like a man with a plan.
Definitely, but a somewhat opaque one at first view.
This is the guy, according to some dudes on pdox who got it from some other site, who got it from somewhere else...
http://nb-no.facebook.com/people/Anders-Behring-Breivik/100002651290254
Sounds to me like the camp was his primary target.
Someone with a personal grudge against the camp or the people there?
Sky confirms.
http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World-News/Explosion-In-Norwegian-Capital-Oslo---Police-Report-Deaths-And-Injuries/Article/201107416035628?lpos=World_News_Top_Stories_Header_0&lid=ARTICLE_16035628_Explosion_In_Norwegian_Capital_Oslo_-_Police_Report_Deaths_And_Injuries_
Quote from: derspiess on July 22, 2011, 05:09:36 PM
Quote from: Pat on July 22, 2011, 05:05:18 PM
It might have been a coincidence it was the labour youth and not the boy scouts being attacked or it might not be a coincidence. What do you think?
I think I would rather wait and learn about this guy before I blame his political ideology.
Then you're out of step with your Conservative brethren, some of whom may have jumped the gun and claimed it was Muslims. Oh well.
Quote from: Viking on July 22, 2011, 05:57:23 PM
To quote the PM, I'm alive and in a safe place, but not without annoyance that nobody mentioned the fact that I hadn't posted yet grrrrr....
.....
First page, I didn't feel the need to mention individual languishites, besides I thought you lived in Bergen/Tromso/Trondheim ?
Quote from: mongers on July 22, 2011, 09:26:23 AM
This report suggests PM offices were target rather than newspaper VG:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/mobile/world-europe-14252515 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/mobile/world-europe-14252515)
Anyway I hope all Norwegian Languishites and their families are ok and the loss of life isn't too high.
Anyway glad to hear you're ok and no family were harmed.
Quote from: Maximus on July 22, 2011, 06:04:34 PM
Sounds to me like the camp was his primary target.
Someone with a personal grudge against the camp or the people there?
If MIM has the right guy then this is political.
On another forum I frequent, word is that the most recent news is that it's a 32 year old man with ties to right wing extremist groups, and that he may be an individual who's previously been arrested for firearms offenses, while a police uniform and explosives were found at his appartment.
Charming.
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on July 22, 2011, 06:04:03 PM
This is the guy, according to some dudes on pdox who got it from some other site, who got it from somewhere else...
http://nb-no.facebook.com/people/Anders-Behring-Breivik/100002651290254
True Blood? Dexter?
Gay.
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on July 22, 2011, 06:04:03 PM
This is the guy, according to some dudes on pdox who got it from some other site, who got it from somewhere else...
http://nb-no.facebook.com/people/Anders-Behring-Breivik/100002651290254
Sounds like a Classical Liberal. In other words, a complete nut.
Googling him returns this twitter account
http://twitter.com/#!/conservatist
Bet they find a copy of Hearts of Iron or some other Paradox game in his home.
Norwegian Article about him: http://www.vg.no/nyheter/innenriks/artikkel.php?artid=10080610
Main points:
He feels there's no longer a conflict between Capitalism and Socialism, but between Internationalism and Nationalism. He's a Nationalist.
He feels that Swedish media is insufficiently critical towards Islam.
He started an agricultural firm in 2009, through which he could gain access to large quantities of fertilizer.
He likes the games Modern Warfare and World of Warcraft, and the TV shows Dexter and True Blood.
Make what you will from that.
Why does he care about the Swedish media if he lives in Norway?
Quote from: Razgovory on July 22, 2011, 06:28:51 PM
Why does he care about the Swedish media if he lives in Norway?
Good question. Maybe he hangs out with Swedish right wingers?
Thank God Puffin Boy is OK. :weep:
Quote from: Jacob on July 22, 2011, 06:33:36 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on July 22, 2011, 06:28:51 PM
Why does he care about the Swedish media if he lives in Norway?
Good question. Maybe he hangs out with Swedish right wingers?
Swedes who hate Muslims that live in Norway who believe the media there is insufficiently critical of Islam? Hmmm.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 22, 2011, 06:37:03 PM
Thank God Puffin Boy is OK. :weep:
I don't keep up with your nicknames. Who's Puffin boy?
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 22, 2011, 06:37:03 PM
Thank God Puffin Boy is OK. :weep:
Don't thank God for my safety. Thank the 600km separating me from Oslo.
Quote from: Viking on July 22, 2011, 06:43:27 PM
Don't thank God for my safety. Thank the 600km separating me from Oslo.
Weren't you just bitching that no one expressed concern for your safety? Or did I misconstrue?
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 22, 2011, 06:46:17 PM
Quote from: Viking on July 22, 2011, 06:43:27 PM
Don't thank God for my safety. Thank the 600km separating me from Oslo.
Weren't you just bitching that no one expressed concern for your safety? Or did I misconstrue?
I demand that you show irrational concern for my safety and happiness.
The guy watches Caprica, which is related to the new Battlestar Galactica. He is clearly unbalanced.
I have alerted the Sûreté du Québec. Grallon will soon be arrested. Berkut is next.
https://twitter.com/#!/AndersBBreivik
Quote
AndersBBreivik Anders B. Breivik
One person with a belief is equal to the force of 100 000 who have only interests.
Only one tweet. What two doofuses are following him?
Quote from: Neil on July 22, 2011, 07:17:20 PM
The guy watches Caprica, which is related to the new Battlestar Galactica. He is clearly unbalanced.
I have alerted the Sûreté du Québec. Grallon will soon be arrested. Berkut is next.
A wise precaution.
Quote from: Viking on July 22, 2011, 06:48:05 PM
I demand that you show irrational concern for my safety and happiness.
I do have irrational concern for you safety and happiness, but then I'm irrational in everything I do.
Quote from: Maximus on July 22, 2011, 06:04:34 PM
Sounds to me like the camp was his primary target.
Someone with a personal grudge against the camp or the people there?
Yeah, it almost sounds like the bombing was a diversion. And it seems like a pretty involved operation for one guy to pull off on his own.
Does seem odd that a 32 year old man would want to kill a bunch of teenagers on a small island. Well kill them other then stalking them individually wielding various bits of sharp equipment while wearing a hockey mask. I wonder if this was intended to kill the PM, but he just got his dates mixed up.
Maybe he just hates teens. Most people do, just not quite this much.
Quote from: Razgovory on July 22, 2011, 08:08:49 PM
I wonder if this was intended to kill the PM, but he just got his dates mixed up.
It would surprise me if he had organized this whole deal and learned about the AUF scheduled, and then fucked up the dates. Maybe it was Gro Harlem Brundtland he was after? I heard she was there just a few hours earlier.
Actually, maybe it wouldn't surprise me any more than this already has.
Quote from: Neil on July 22, 2011, 08:10:30 PM
Maybe he just hates teens. Most people do, just not quite this much.
He could have limited himself to female teens. Such a waste. *shakes head*
G.
Latest report says up to 80 killed in Utøya. What. The. Fuck. Batman.
Quote from: Liep on July 22, 2011, 08:21:56 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on July 22, 2011, 08:08:49 PM
I wonder if this was intended to kill the PM, but he just got his dates mixed up.
It would surprise me if he had organized this whole deal and learned about the AUF scheduled, and then fucked up the dates. Maybe it was Gro Harlem Brundtland he was after? I heard she was there just a few hours earlier.
Actually, maybe it wouldn't surprise me any more than this already has.
Is that an Orc name?
87 so for. Jesus Christ. I can't think of any shooting rampage that killed so many in the West (I seem to recall something in Japan or Korea).
The repairman fixes my connection and this is the first thing that I see. :(
It's official; at least 80 at Utøya and at least 7 in the bomb at Einar Gerhardsensplass. One man did that, on his own. Fuck.
Quote from: Razgovory on July 22, 2011, 09:43:05 PM
87 so for. Jesus Christ. I can't think of any shooting rampage that killed so many in the West (I seem to recall something in Japan or Korea).
Korea. Some army dude went nuts and shot a bunch of people. He killed half as many as this guy, if even that much.
Over 80 killed by a single guy in a rifle attack? That's just . . . wow. :blink: :(
Well, you're on an island where no one can really run and hide; your targets are "youth", which means they have no clue what to do come panic time.
Sounds more like fish in a barrel. Goddamned shame.
Unlike Swedes, who are snotty little shits, I'm rather quite fond of Norwegians. My prayers are with you guys tonight. :( :cry:
Quote from: HVC on July 22, 2011, 04:19:45 PM
Quote from: Mr.Penguin on July 22, 2011, 03:58:55 PM
Possible picture of the gun man (WANNING DO NOT CLICK ON THE LINK IF YOU DON'T WANT TO SEE DEAD PEOPLE)
http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=160139 (http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=160139)
looks like the guy at the bottom left corner is pleading :(
Looks more like chopper footage of the mop-up scene after the tactical guys landed.
According to Wiki, this should be the bloodiest kiling spree ever. :(
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_spree
Previous "record" holder was:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woo_Bum-kon#Uireyeong_massacre
QuoteWoo, a 27-year-old disgruntled police officer, killed 57 and wounded 35 people using two M2 carbines and hand grenades in an eight-hour rampage before committing suicide.
So sounds like this guy is like Slargos, but with balls to back up his racist beliefs, and not just spout them off on an Internet message board?
80 people? It's almost unbelievable that a single guy was responsible. [tasteless languish joke]Did no one think to tackle him?[/tasteless languish joke].
Quote from: Razgovory on July 22, 2011, 06:06:52 PM
Then you're out of step with your Conservative brethren, some of whom may have jumped the gun and claimed it was Muslims. Oh well.
You were wise not to accuse me of jumping to that conclusion; I was trying to make sense out of others' assumption that he was Muslim.
Quote from: katmai on July 22, 2011, 11:23:51 PM
So sounds like this guy is like Slargos, but with balls to back up his racist beliefs, and not just spout them off on an Internet message board?
:lol:
Thank you, Katmai. Sincerely.
Quote from: derspiess on July 22, 2011, 11:47:46 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on July 22, 2011, 06:06:52 PM
Then you're out of step with your Conservative brethren, some of whom may have jumped the gun and claimed it was Muslims. Oh well.
You were wise not to accuse me of jumping to that conclusion; I was trying to make sense out of others' assumption that he was Muslim.
Cards in hand, it was a wrong assumption. Was it an unreasonable assumption, however?
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.modulus.se%2Fphotos%2Fi-fV95Tjg%2F1%2FXL%2Fi-fV95Tjg-XL.jpg&hash=25dcac889ad8133f451aad96be5c4e349c9daf80)
Holy fuck. No wonder he was able to gun them all down. They had nowhere to go. Goddamn, that's awful.
The only connection is by boat. The boat used was gone.
This is beyond belief. The authorities report "at least 80 dead", so the death toll may well rise.
At least obscure website document.no has gotten so much traffic due to Anders Behring Breivik's posting that it's gone down.
Anyway, for the Scandiweenians:
http://www.document.no/anders-behring-breivik/
I see these kinds of posts every day in various comment sections in daily newspapers.
What a horrible business. I'm stunned that he managed to kill so many :(
Aren't you Europeans glad that you'll get to support this scumbag for the next 50 years in prison?
84 + 7
they are still finding bodies.
Absolutely tragic. There are no words. :(
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 04:46:48 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 22, 2011, 04:43:19 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 22, 2011, 04:41:54 PM
I think it takes a special kind of enthusiasm to butcher a bunch of children though.
The Nazi kind would suffice. Nazis have a long and distinguished track record when it comes to butchering children.
So do Communists. :hmm:
Not really. Nazis were more "nature than nurture" people, communists were the opposite. Nazis would murder parents and children, communists would murder parents and send children off to reeducation camps.
Quote from: Jacob on July 22, 2011, 05:37:14 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 22, 2011, 04:40:12 PM
I'm going to hazard a guess that when all is said and done there's a chick involved.
That, or levels of mental illness that makes any political rationale seem almost incidental - like the guy who shot the congresswoman (or was she a senator?) in Colorado.
What I don't get is, if it was a nutjob fundamentalist muslim or a group thereof, it justified the calls for "expelling the vermin" (well, it was from grallon, and he is not very smart but still), but if it is a white nutjob, his ideology suddenly becomes unimportant.
Quote from: Kleves on July 22, 2011, 11:45:42 PM
80 people? It's almost unbelievable that a single guy was responsible. [tasteless languish joke]Did no one think to tackle him?[/tasteless languish joke].
Jokes aside, it was just one guy. Sure, it takes some balls to rush at a guy with a rifle, but if it was actually a rifle and not an automatic weapon, he can only get off a certain number of shots if you Zerg rush him. I'd rather take my chances doing that than cowering behind a rock until he finds me.
If he had a fully automatic weapon, that changes things. Then I'd rather hit the water and swim for it.
Quote from: Neil on July 22, 2011, 07:17:20 PM
The guy watches Caprica, which is related to the new Battlestar Galactica. He is clearly unbalanced.
I have alerted the Sûreté du Québec. Grallon will soon be arrested. Berkut is next.
I think it is kinda funny, to be honest, that the guy kinda fits the profile of many Languishites. I bet if the police detained him over the gun/explosives thing before, Slargos would cry a river on how the police discriminates against good white people, while failing to capture black rapists or something.
Quote from: DGuller on July 23, 2011, 02:12:13 AM
Aren't you Europeans glad that you'll get to support this scumbag for the next 50 years in prison?
Maximum sentence is 21 I read.
The scumbag's mugshot:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fbi.gazeta.pl%2Fim%2F8%2F9995%2Fz9995548X%2CAnders-Behring-Breivik.jpg&hash=4fca38ab6d32a4f78c863082f3492e30214b2259)
So, Norvegians, what do you think? Should this prompt the police to increase vigilance against right winger nutjobs, perhaps by using the hate speech laws more aggressively?
Popped collar? Of course.
Quote from: Liep on July 23, 2011, 03:20:53 AM
Quote from: DGuller on July 23, 2011, 02:12:13 AM
Aren't you Europeans glad that you'll get to support this scumbag for the next 50 years in prison?
Maximum sentence is 21 I read.
It's slightly more complicated than that. In Norway there are two kinds of sentence prison (Fengsel) and "storage" (Forvaring). Prison is a max sentence while Storage is a suggested sentence. A person sentenced to Storage first suffers the Prison sentence and then continues to serve at "His Majesty's Pleasure". The storage sentence was added a few years ago as a reaction to murderers being released after 10 years of a 21 year life sentence. (1 prison year is 1 working year ~approx 8 months and good behaviour regularly reduces the sentence by 1/3)
Quote from: Liep on July 23, 2011, 03:29:15 AM
Popped collar? Of course.
It must be the international sign of asshattery. :P
Quote from: Viking on July 23, 2011, 03:30:13 AM
Quote from: Liep on July 23, 2011, 03:20:53 AM
Quote from: DGuller on July 23, 2011, 02:12:13 AM
Aren't you Europeans glad that you'll get to support this scumbag for the next 50 years in prison?
Maximum sentence is 21 I read.
It's slightly more complicated than that. In Norway there are two kinds of sentence prison (Fengsel) and "storage" (Forvaring). Prison is a max sentence while Storage is a suggested sentence. A person sentenced to Storage first suffers the Prison sentence and then continues to serve at "His Majesty's Pleasure". The storage sentence was added a few years ago as a reaction to murderers being released after 10 years of a 21 year life sentence. (1 prison year is 1 working year ~approx 8 months and good behaviour regularly reduces the sentence by 1/3)
Maybe there's more to that, but this seems wildly illiberal. It's curing one wrong (too short / lenient sentences) with another.
Anyway, I hope they send this guy to a prison with a lot of Muslims. With that angelic face he will be a treat.
After reading throught this guy's forum postings it seems that he would consider Slargos to be part of the Paki-Lubbin' Cultural Marxist cause of the problem.
http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=no&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aftenposten.no%2Fnyheter%2Firiks%2Farticle4181106.ece
I read document.no pretty regularly and they advocate a position similar to that of Mark Steyn. A Primarily Islamosceptic Christian Classical Liberal view, which Behring Breivik seems to take to extremes.
Quote from: Martinus on July 23, 2011, 03:32:12 AM
Quote from: Viking on July 23, 2011, 03:30:13 AM
It's slightly more complicated than that. In Norway there are two kinds of sentence prison (Fengsel) and "storage" (Forvaring). Prison is a max sentence while Storage is a suggested sentence. A person sentenced to Storage first suffers the Prison sentence and then continues to serve at "His Majesty's Pleasure". The storage sentence was added a few years ago as a reaction to murderers being released after 10 years of a 21 year life sentence. (1 prison year is 1 working year ~approx 8 months and good behaviour regularly reduces the sentence by 1/3)
Maybe there's more to that, but this seems wildly illiberal. It's curing one wrong (too short / lenient sentences) with another.
It's not as bad you might suggest, think of Storage a "At least 21 years" rather than the "At most 21 years" of normal prison. Basically it procludes early release and only starts to consider release or parole after the full period is served. This does mean that 5 Years Storage is much harsher than 10 Years Prison.
Quote from: Martinus on July 23, 2011, 03:11:56 AM
What I don't get is, if it was a nutjob fundamentalist muslim or a group thereof, it justified the calls for "expelling the vermin" (well, it was from grallon, and he is not very smart but still), but if it is a white nutjob, his ideology suddenly becomes unimportant.
It's not unimportant, but it's a rather small part right now after such a huge trauma.
One of the reasons I think it's being treated as a bit secondary right now is that it's very hard to fathom that someone went from spreading ideas that are repeated quite often both here and on various websites that aren't particularly extremist to massacring a bunch of teenagers by first felling them by one shot and then giving them the headshot with a shotgun afterwards.
I re-read some of the opinion pieces posted on multiculturalism from the likes of Christian Tybring-Gjedde and Kent Andersen from the Progress Party this past year, and the notion of the Labour Party as traitors to Norway is prevalent.
If there's one thing that can be realised from this murder spree, it's that fighting hate with more hate doesn't help. At all. 91 people who were in the wrong place at the wrong time learned that the hard way yesterday.
But shouldn't this actually prompt a kind of self-reflection and chilling effect on people who spout the anti-immigrant bullshit? I mean, it seems to me like people have been going on for years how evil immigrants are causing violence, raping women and this will all lead to a big terrorist attack in the end - but it turns out the guy who caused possibly the greatest tragedy in post-war Norway was one of the people who were saying that.
Shouldn't this make people feel at least a bit guilty? If an imam in London who argues for a global jihad in his sermons could be seen at least morally responsible for a terrorist attack by some jihadist, wouldn't a "progressive" party populist politician arguing against the evil immigrants and the soft leftist traitors be also at least morally responsible for this?
Also, why did you take the Toreador clan symbol as your logo, Norgy? :P
Quote from: Martinus on July 23, 2011, 03:53:43 AM
Also, why did you take the Toreador clan symbol as your logo, Norgy? :P
It's a Norwegian Labour Party logo.
Quote from: Viking on July 23, 2011, 03:59:35 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 23, 2011, 03:53:43 AM
Also, why did you take the Toreador clan symbol as your logo, Norgy? :P
It's a Norwegian Labour Party logo.
Doesn't that violate the Masquerade?
Quote from: Viking on July 23, 2011, 03:59:35 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 23, 2011, 03:53:43 AM
Also, why did you take the Toreador clan symbol as your logo, Norgy? :P
It's a Norwegian Labour Party logo.
Why would the Toreador infiltrate the Norwegian Labour Party? :hmm: Doesn't seem like their style.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on July 23, 2011, 04:01:39 AM
Quote from: Viking on July 23, 2011, 03:59:35 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 23, 2011, 03:53:43 AM
Also, why did you take the Toreador clan symbol as your logo, Norgy? :P
It's a Norwegian Labour Party logo.
Why would the Toreador infiltrate the Norwegian Labour Party? :hmm: Doesn't seem like their style.
Why not? The leftists are traditionally into arts, culture, the boheme and teh ghey.
If anyone needs a conspiracy theory, dude is a Freemason. :ph34r:
Quote from: Norgy on July 23, 2011, 04:10:55 AM
If anyone needs a conspiracy theory, dude is a Freemason. :ph34r:
Really? Polish news reported he "hates freemasons". But probably got it wrong.
Quote from: Martinus on July 23, 2011, 04:17:40 AM
Quote from: Norgy on July 23, 2011, 04:10:55 AM
If anyone needs a conspiracy theory, dude is a Freemason. :ph34r:
Really? Polish news reported he "hates freemasons". But probably got it wrong.
freemasonry was one of his likes on his facebook page, but importantly, the page (as well as his twitter account) was set up just recently and cannot be considered normal profiles, but rather are part of his communication strategy post massacre.
My deepest condolences. :(
So far I'm very impressed by the way the norwegians has handled things. Had it been in sweden the perp would still be at large, I'm sure of it.
Quote from: Vricklund on July 23, 2011, 04:27:54 AM
My deepest condolences. :(
So far I'm very impressed by the way the norwegians has handled things. Had it been in sweden the perp would still be at large, I'm sure of it.
The perp was stuck on a small island the size of 12 football pitches with 600 civilians without transport off the island. Once he started shooting his options were hypothermia, death by cop or arrest. I'm not impressed.
Quote from: Martinus on July 23, 2011, 04:07:08 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on July 23, 2011, 04:01:39 AM
Quote from: Viking on July 23, 2011, 03:59:35 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 23, 2011, 03:53:43 AM
Also, why did you take the Toreador clan symbol as your logo, Norgy? :P
It's a Norwegian Labour Party logo.
Why would the Toreador infiltrate the Norwegian Labour Party? :hmm: Doesn't seem like their style.
Why not? The leftists are traditionally into arts, culture, the boheme and teh ghey.
You make good points. My objection is withdrawn. -_-
Good grief that's terrible news. :(
Witness accounts from Utøya mention the possibility of two shooters, according to news websites, and the police are investigating whether one shooter still remains at large.
Quote from: Norgy on July 23, 2011, 01:52:14 AM
At least obscure website document.no has gotten so much traffic due to Anders Behring Breivik's posting that it's gone down.
Anyway, for the Scandiweenians:
http://www.document.no/anders-behring-breivik/ (http://www.document.no/anders-behring-breivik/)
I see these kinds of posts every day in various comment sections in daily newspapers.
Funny.
I don't see the rantings of a racist madman.
He comes across as strongly anti-islamic and pro-zionist, sure. But no racism.
This will not change the narrative in the media, of course, but it's interesting nonetheless.
Quote from: Martinus on July 23, 2011, 03:25:35 AM
The scumbag's mugshot:
So, Norvegians, what do you think? Should this prompt the police to increase vigilance against right winger nutjobs, perhaps by using the hate speech laws more aggressively?
From what I can tell, such an act wouldn't really catch this guy.
And Aftenposten has already started taking the first hesitant steps to abuse this politically. Classy.
Quote from: Slargos on July 23, 2011, 05:53:32 AM
Funny.
I don't see the rantings of a racist madman.
He comes across as strongly anti-islamic and pro-zionist, sure. But no racism.
Exactly. That's what really, really frightens me.
Quote from: Slargos on July 23, 2011, 05:58:17 AM
And Aftenposten has already started taking the first hesitant steps to abuse this politically. Classy.
For mentioning the fact that he's a former Progress Party member?
That's called "information".
I'm sure you'd have loved to read how the Moslem culprits all were on welfare and voted Labour and Socialist Left.
Quote from: Norgy on July 23, 2011, 06:08:33 AM
Quote from: Slargos on July 23, 2011, 05:58:17 AM
And Aftenposten has already started taking the first hesitant steps to abuse this politically. Classy.
For mentioning the fact that he's a former Progress Party member?
That's called "information".
I'm sure you'd have loved to read how the Moslem culprits all were on welfare and voted Labour and Socialist Left.
When interviewing Siv Jensen, the journalist asked her "what kind of signals" this [that he was a member of FRP] sends out. A very innocent question, I'm sure.
Aftenposten has been campaigning against FRP, and they apparently don't feel a need to make this event an exception. Tasteless.
I made the mistake of stumbling into the Flashback "humour about oslo" thread. Probably out of morbid curiosity.
People are sick, sick fucks.
Tragically hilarious, sick, sick fucks.
Breivik was a previously a member of the Progress Party (right wing populists) and the Progress Party Youth Organization (the equivalent organization to the one that organized the summer camp where the kids were slaughtered). The best information I have is that he was only a member for a short time and never held any formal posts.
It is fitting that the media examine the links between the PP (FrP) and the shooter; assuming that they do so honestly.
It seems that he actually founded a company to trade in agricultural goods to permit himself to buy tons of fertilizer to use in the bomb and this company has been operating for years, presumably this has been in planning for a long long long time.
Quote from: Norgy on July 23, 2011, 06:08:33 AM
Quote from: Slargos on July 23, 2011, 05:58:17 AM
And Aftenposten has already started taking the first hesitant steps to abuse this politically. Classy.
For mentioning the fact that he's a former Progress Party member?
That's called "information".
I'm sure you'd have loved to read how the Moslem culprits all were on welfare and voted Labour and Socialist Left.
That is a bit redundant since Muslims tend to be on welfare and vote Labour and Socialist Left much more than the population in general. While we are on the topic other information includes the Traitor and Spy Arne Treholt was a current Labour Party member when he sold his own nation's and allied nations' secrets and Vidkun Qvisling was a former Center Party (Farmers Party) member. That's a bit disingenuous Norgy.
The Sun got it as wrong as some of the rest of us:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.frontpagestoday.co.uk%2Ffrontpages%2FThe_Sun_newspaper_front_page.jpg&hash=2191dcfa19579c54bf1509868f44554192361db8)
Quote from: mongers on July 23, 2011, 06:50:00 AM
The Sun got it as wrong as some of the rest of us:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.frontpagestoday.co.uk%2Ffrontpages%2FThe_Sun_newspaper_front_page.jpg&hash=2191dcfa19579c54bf1509868f44554192361db8)
Well, there was a period of about 4 hours after the bomb that a self identified but previously unknown muslim group claiming responsibility for the bombing, before the shooting became well known. At that point everything was consistent with what Daniel Pipes calls Sudden Jihad Syndrom like 7/7 or the US somali plot or the times square bomber or the canadian truck bomb plot.
http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=no&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nettavisen.no%2Fnyheter%2Farticle3196608.ece
A journalist called one of the escaping survivors while he still was on the run on the island. A clear contender for the second biggest asshat of the day.
QuoteUtøya-sacrifice aimed strong criticism from the press after the massacre.
Tore Christensen (25) from Drammen is active in Buskerud AUF. He found himself in the middle of the drama that played out on Utøya Friday. On Saturday, dishes, he sharply criticized the media on his Twitter profile, and believe they were present at Utøya and tried to hide from the perpetrator, was put in jeopardy of journalists who tried to make contact with several of the participants there.
"I challenge Broadcasting Corporation who called me while I hid in Utøya to apologize for having put us under greater pressure and at risk. "He wrote on his Twitter profile Saturday.
A couple of hours before, he tweeted this:
"The police, volunteers, health workers and boaters deserve praise. It does not press. The press prevented escape and created hazardous conditions. "
- Called just after
He tells of a situation that was perceived as very dramatic
- I sat in the cafe building, and heard that a guy was shot 2-3 meters away. Soon after, it seemed at least as a very short time after called NRK. I had the silent and tried to be quiet as a mouse, says Tore Christensen Nettavisen.
- Provoked
He stressed that this criticism only applies to NRK.
- This is about the press in general. I am very angered when we know that there is an extraordinary situation, then they call the people who they know are on the island or not while they try to hide. I can understand that family members who may not think clearly rings, but I had some higher hopes for the profession's responsibility the press has, he says.
He says that he has talked with many who were called by different media.
- Quite a few of them I talked to afterwards had received a call from one or other form of media. In particular, VG was very insistent, he says.
And adds:
- I really hope no were revealed as they were called by the press.
Apologized
Christensen says that the journalist who called he has apologized.
- He has made contact, and I was told that NRK will go through their routines, they testified that they called me because they thought I was in the country side to be wary, he says.
Set inside the toilet
He says that he and four other people were sitting on the toilet in the café building the entire time the shooting took place.
- We tried to keep each other calm all the time.
- How were you saved?
- We heard the real police, who called out of command. I have never been so happy to see the police before, he said.
- He is now safely home with his mother in Drammen.
Quote from: Viking on July 23, 2011, 06:58:42 AM
Quote from: mongers on July 23, 2011, 06:50:00 AM
The Sun got it as wrong as some of the rest of us:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.frontpagestoday.co.uk%2Ffrontpages%2FThe_Sun_newspaper_front_page.jpg&hash=2191dcfa19579c54bf1509868f44554192361db8)
Well, there was a period of about 4 hours after the bomb that a self identified but previously unknown muslim group claiming responsibility for the bombing, before the shooting became well known. At that point everything was consistent with what Daniel Pipes calls Sudden Jihad Syndrom like 7/7 or the US somali plot or the times square bomber or the canadian truck bomb plot.
Not really as reports that an 'ethnic' Norwegian was responsible were circulating here at around 1930GMT and the Sun would only have been 'put to bed' around 2230-2300GMT, so they had time to ponder their lead, but chose to go with AQ tag.
Ah. The go-to Norwegian bullshit.
"We will look over our routines".
Fucking vultures.
Poor Norway, such a terrible thing.
Quote from: rufweed on July 23, 2011, 07:18:06 AM
Poor Norway, such a terrible thing.
Who the Fuck are You?
Rufweed! Long time no see!
Some horrible footage in this report
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYceJss9d78&feature=player_embedded#at=281
Quote from: rufweed on July 23, 2011, 07:18:06 AM
Poor Norway, such a terrible thing.
Holy shit, a manburger sighting.
Quote from: Viking on July 23, 2011, 06:38:29 AM
That is a bit redundant since Muslims tend to be on welfare and vote Labour and Socialist Left much more than the population in general. While we are on the topic other information includes the Traitor and Spy Arne Treholt was a current Labour Party member when he sold his own nation's and allied nations' secrets and Vidkun Qvisling was a former Center Party (Farmers Party) member. That's a bit disingenuous Norgy.
While I see why you would want to start a debate as to how "guilt by association" is wrong, I'll just abort that right away and say that's not what I meant at all. I think everyone, regardless of political stance is in shock today and it's hardly a respectful way to mourn the dead to start assigning blame.
Quote from: Norgy on July 23, 2011, 08:01:29 AM
While I see why you would want to start a debate as to how "guilt by association" is wrong, I'll just abort that right away and say that's not what I meant at all. I think everyone, regardless of political stance is in shock today and it's hardly a respectful way to mourn the dead to start assigning blame.
I'm not the one pretending that his previous political affiliation means that his previous political affiliates are culpable. He left the fucking FrP because they were not, in his view, ideological or radical. He left because they did not share his values, yet, you seem determined for what seems to be political reasons to try to suggest guilt by association. Hitler had facial hair, so do you. Breivik was a member of the FpU, Steklov has a KGB file etc.etc. That is all stupid an irrellvant. Don't pretend that me mocking your stupid analogy means that I agree with it's premise.
The newspapers are starting to attach labels to the guy.
"Nationalist", "Extreme Rightist" and "Moved in Extreme Rightist Circles".
Nothing about his suggests nationalist, if anything he was an Ideologue at war with different Ideology. From what I gather he doesn't see Norway as anything more than a place (based on his posts in the comments section at document.no). He was a Libertarian anti-Socialist and a Christian anti-Islamist. He was not a Nationalist, an Extreme Rightist or seems to have moved in Extreme Rightist Circles... unless you consider the Progress Party an Extreme Rightist circle. From what I can gather he left the Progress Party disgusted with their mainstream ways and conciliatory attitudes and went on a one man crusade against his imagined enemies.
I haven't seen a single "he seemed like a decent well behaved young man" that you usually get with other terrorists living among us. This guy seems to have opted out of society and radicalized himself rather than been a part of a group.
:hmm:
Like I said. They're going to milk these corpses dry.
Quote from: Viking on July 23, 2011, 08:35:49 AM
The newspapers are starting to attach labels to the guy.
"Nationalist", "Extreme Rightist" and "Moved in Extreme Rightist Circles".
Nothing about his suggests nationalist, if anything he was an Ideologue at war with different Ideology. From what I gather he doesn't see Norway as anything more than a place (based on his posts in the comments section at document.no). He was a Libertarian anti-Socialist and a Christian anti-Islamist. He was not a Nationalist, an Extreme Rightist or seems to have moved in Extreme Rightist Circles... unless you consider the Progress Party an Extreme Rightist circle. From what I can gather he left the Progress Party disgusted with their mainstream ways and conciliatory attitudes and went on a one man crusade against his imagined enemies.
I haven't seen a single "he seemed like a decent well behaved young man" that you usually get with other terrorists living among us. This guy seems to have opted out of society and radicalized himself rather than been a part of a group.
Didn't his Facebook profile say that there are two ideologies today, Internationalism and Nationalism, and he considers himself a Nationalist?
He was also apparently against race-mixing and religion-mixing. It's pretty right winger to me.
Also he played Alliance. QED.
http://eu.battle.net/wow/en/forum/topic/917102640?page=2#25
Polish news is reporting there was a second gunner. :huh:
Quote from: Martinus on July 23, 2011, 08:50:42 AM
Polish news is reporting there was a second gunner. :huh:
:hmm:
Quote from: Martinus on July 23, 2011, 08:41:21 AM
Didn't his Facebook profile say that there are two ideologies today, Internationalism and Nationalism, and he considers himself a Nationalist?
He was also apparently against race-mixing and religion-mixing. It's pretty right winger to me.
Also he played Alliance. QED.
http://eu.battle.net/wow/en/forum/topic/917102640?page=2#25
No, his facebook profile doesn't have him self identify as a nationalist, this link is a video of his facebook and twitter profiles.
I haven't found anything about rase in his available writings (from document.no)
http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=no&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.document.no%2Fanders-behring-breivik%2F
his only reference to race is where he accuses the cultural marxists (presumably what you and I call social democrats) of accusing Israel of waging a racist war against islam. He continually returns to the ideological divide, islam is an ideology in his mind just like cultural marxism is an ideology.
What I worry about here is that he will be labelled a mere racist who killed because he hated race mixing or other races. This man killed for ideological reasons which, based on what he wrote himself, had nothing to do with race.
If he get dismissed as a violent (but competent) race murderer then nothing will change apart from profiling including men of my age, height, politics and skin colour. If we don't figure out what happened in this guy's head then it will happen again.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KBKmHRZM-94&feature=player_embedded#at=234
Quote from: Viking on July 23, 2011, 08:57:36 AM
If we don't figure out what happened in this guy's head then it will happen again.
He played a female human mage. :contract:
Quote from: Martinus on July 23, 2011, 08:50:42 AM
Polish news is reporting there was a second gunner. :huh:
There have been reports of more gunmen, yes, but nothing corroborated. The other man that got arrested was arrested for carrying a knife at the hotel the survivors were moved to after the massacre. This guy was one of the survivors that was so frightened by what happened he decided to arm himself.
Quote from: Viking on July 23, 2011, 08:57:36 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 23, 2011, 08:41:21 AM
Didn't his Facebook profile say that there are two ideologies today, Internationalism and Nationalism, and he considers himself a Nationalist?
He was also apparently against race-mixing and religion-mixing. It's pretty right winger to me.
Also he played Alliance. QED.
http://eu.battle.net/wow/en/forum/topic/917102640?page=2#25 (http://eu.battle.net/wow/en/forum/topic/917102640?page=2#25)
No, his facebook profile doesn't have him self identify as a nationalist, this link is a video of his facebook and twitter profiles.
I haven't found anything about rase in his available writings (from document.no)
http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=no&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.document.no%2Fanders-behring-breivik%2F (http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=no&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.document.no%2Fanders-behring-breivik%2F)
his only reference to race is where he accuses the cultural marxists (presumably what you and I call social democrats) of accusing Israel of waging a racist war against islam. He continually returns to the ideological divide, islam is an ideology in his mind just like cultural marxism is an ideology.
What I worry about here is that he will be labelled a mere racist who killed because he hated race mixing or other races. This man killed for ideological reasons which, based on what he wrote himself, had nothing to do with race.
If he get dismissed as a violent (but competent) race murderer then nothing will change apart from profiling including men of my age, height, politics and skin colour. If we don't figure out what happened in this guy's head then it will happen again.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KBKmHRZM-94&feature=player_embedded#at=234 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KBKmHRZM-94&feature=player_embedded#at=234)
It is certainly interesting how little interest is placed in facts when an accusation of
WitchRacist is made.
Aftonbladet is already running the supremacist angle, and huffing about Nazis.
Quote from: Martinus on July 23, 2011, 03:52:35 AM
But shouldn't this actually prompt a kind of self-reflection and chilling effect on people who spout the anti-immigrant bullshit? I mean, it seems to me like people have been going on for years how evil immigrants are causing violence, raping women and this will all lead to a big terrorist attack in the end - but it turns out the guy who caused possibly the greatest tragedy in post-war Norway was one of the people who were saying that.
Not really. The argument that we shouldn't treat animals decently because Hitler was an animal lover doesn't really carry much weight. Their ideas about immigrants must stand or fall on their own merit.
QuoteShouldn't this make people feel at least a bit guilty? If an imam in London who argues for a global jihad in his sermons could be seen at least morally responsible for a terrorist attack by some jihadist, wouldn't a "progressive" party populist politician arguing against the evil immigrants and the soft leftist traitors be also at least morally responsible for this?
Is he arguing for people to take up arms against the left? If so, then he's part of the problem. Calls for violence are different from calls to organize or political speeches.
Quote from: Martinus on July 23, 2011, 08:58:54 AM
Quote from: Viking on July 23, 2011, 08:57:36 AM
If we don't figure out what happened in this guy's head then it will happen again.
He played a female human mage. :contract:
So he was gay? That explains it.
I just saw a car with newlyweds pass by. Strangely comforting on this day.
Also, if the husband ever forgets the anniversary = epic fail.
Quote from: Norgy on July 23, 2011, 09:50:26 AM
I just saw a car with newlyweds pass by. Strangely comforting on this day.
Also, if the husband ever forgets the anniversary = epic fail.
"I'd rather not remember that date" is a perfectly good excuse on his part.
I wonder if this will result in even crazier gun control laws similar to how the singular incident of the Port Arthur massacre in Australia essentially disarmed the entire country.
When I looked at the news this morning I was honestly dumb founded when I saw that 84 were dead on the island. The last I had read 5-6 were dead from the bomb in Oslo and the gunman had been apprehended. Most of these spree shootings are in the sub-20 dead range, with really big ones ranging from 20-40 and I think only 1 or 2 ever going over the 40 number into the 50s range.
In my job we've had meetings about "active shooter scenarios" (that's the security-jargon for this sort of thing) and while most contingency meetings are pretty long and uninteresting (this one was no exception in most respects) something I did learn from it was that most active shooters are not terribly effective in terms of racking up kills. Essentially a lot of active shooters discharge a huge number of rounds many of them missing (that isn't necessarily notable, in sustained fire situations even trained LEOs and soldiers will expend many rounds which are not hits on the enemy), many active shooters do not have the best understanding of firearms or how to kill someone and because of this they tend to focus more on "hits" than on "kills" so many active shooters just try to tag as many people as possible and aren't usually overly thorough in insuring those tagged are killed (many active shooter situations have many more injuries than deaths.)
The active shooter incidents where you have seen a far higher proportion of killed people versus wounded people have tended to be situations in which the shooter is operating at very close range (Cho at VT was working inside the halls of an academic building, so was at quite close range, for example), or a shooter who is willing to make sure his victims are killed (Martin Bryant at Port Arthur methodically pumped rounds into already prone victims.)
It looks like in this scenario the shooter had people who could not get away, and he was methodical in insuring those that he took down were killed outright by following up with close range execution-style shootings. That definitely sucks, and in the back of my mind I always thought we would have an active shooter scenario in which we had much higher death tolls than we have yet seen, just because even the ones with high death tolls (Port Arthur, Columbine, VTech) before had a potential to be much more deadly. I still haven't seen a count on how many persons were injured but not killed on the island.
AFAIK there's been around 30 wounded brought to the hospital out of which 20 are in critical condition, but from what I can tell that number also includes wounded from the bombing so it would indeed appear most of those shot were either killed instantly or methodically executed. Reports say he was indeed methodically going through his victims although several of them survived by playing dead.
Reading some of the stories the witnesses on the island have told and it's terrifying and so horrible. :(
Quote from: mongers on July 23, 2011, 07:07:07 AMNot really as reports that an 'ethnic' Norwegian was responsible were circulating here at around 1930GMT and the Sun would only have been 'put to bed' around 2230-2300GMT, so they had time to ponder their lead, but chose to go with AQ tag.
I was watching the news at work and thought it didn't seem terribly like other Islamist attacks that have succeeded or been foiled. This seemed very political, not aimed at a symbolic target or maximum number of casualties. Of course that was before the scale of the shooting became clear.
:hug: To the Norwegians here. It sounds like a mix of something like 7/7 and Dunblane in terms of emotions :(
So what kind of time is this guy looking at? Like 120 days of community service or something?
Quote from: Viking on July 23, 2011, 09:00:09 AM
There have been reports of more gunmen, yes, but nothing corroborated. The other man that got arrested was arrested for carrying a knife at the hotel the survivors were moved to after the massacre. This guy was one of the survivors that was so frightened by what happened he decided to arm himself.
Sad.
ABC radio just reported him as a "right wing christian fundamentalist".
Quote from: Kleves on July 23, 2011, 02:08:32 PM
So what kind of time is this guy looking at? Like 120 days of community service or something?
all of it
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on July 23, 2011, 02:11:25 PM
ABC radio just reported him as a "right wing christian fundamentalist".
From Norway.
If "right wing Christian fundamentalists" were going to strike, they'd be in the U.S.A., not Norway. He might be nominally a Christian, but I highly doubt it has anything to do with his killing anyone.
Why would you think that? I would think that fundamentalists will be more likely to strike in countries where they do not have power.
I know a lot of you are going to shit on it because of the source, but this is interesting:
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2011/07/who-added-christian-and-conservative-to-norway-shooters-facebook-page-yesterday.html
"Christian" and "Conservative" were added after the guy's name was released. Unless they let him check his Facebook while interrogating him....
Quote from: DGuller on July 23, 2011, 02:46:00 PM
Why would you think that? I would think that fundamentalists will be more likely to strike in countries where they do not have power.
Yeah, because we don't see calls of a "War on Christmas" and a "War on Christianity" and "expelling religion from the public sphere" every day here in America. We don't see Obama constantly called a Muslim or a Marxist or whatever by those retards.
FB profile is possibly fake?
http://www.solidprinciples.com/blog/anders-behring-breivik-facebook-profile-a-fake/
Quote from: JonasSalk on July 23, 2011, 02:46:26 PM
I know a lot of you are going to shit on it because of the source, but this is interesting:
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2011/07/who-added-christian-and-conservative-to-norway-shooters-facebook-page-yesterday.html
"Christian" and "Conservative" were added after the guy's name was released. Unless they let him check his Facebook while interrogating him....
Heh, I almost posted that blog yesterday when it was denouncing Muslims for the attack. Oops. And it said Christian and Conservative before the the name was released since it was posted on this site before his name was published by the media.
QuoteIf "right wing Christian fundamentalists" were going to strike, they'd be in the U.S.A., not Norway. He might be nominally a Christian, but I highly doubt it has anything to do with his killing anyone.
No true Scotsman.
So who were the victims? Any ideas? I don't quite get why a nationalist who hates Muslims would target a bunch of regular Norwegians and not go into a place where there's a lot of, you know, Muslims.
Quote from: JonasSalk on July 23, 2011, 03:03:26 PM
So who were the victims? Any ideas? I don't quite get why a nationalist who hates Muslims would target a bunch of regular Norwegians and not go into a place where there's a lot of, you know, Muslims.
Socialists, The victims were overwhelmingly socialists.
Quote from: JonasSalk on July 23, 2011, 02:43:11 PM
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on July 23, 2011, 02:11:25 PM
ABC radio just reported him as a "right wing christian fundamentalist".
From Norway.
If "right wing Christian fundamentalists" were going to strike, they'd be in the U.S.A., not Norway. He might be nominally a Christian, but I highly doubt it has anything to do with his killing anyone.
And they don't shoot kids; they shoot gynecologists and judges.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 23, 2011, 03:21:55 PM
And they don't shoot kids; they shoot gynecologists and judges.
And congresswomen. And kids.
Quote from: grumbler on July 23, 2011, 03:33:57 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 23, 2011, 03:21:55 PM
And they don't shoot kids; they shoot gynecologists and judges.
And congresswomen. And kids.
Touche', puddytat.
It appears that this entire act may have simply been a marketing stunt for his manifesto.
http://www.2shared.com/file/M-s-2fBD/2083-AEuropeanDeclarationofInd.html
I really don't know what to think.
Quote from: Slargos on July 23, 2011, 04:17:57 PM
It appears that this entire act may have simply been a marketing stunt for his manifesto.
http://www.2shared.com/file/M-s-2fBD/2083-AEuropeanDeclarationofInd.html
I really don't know what to think.
unbiased ex.sum, please.
Quote from: Slargos on July 23, 2011, 04:17:57 PM
It appears that this entire act may have simply been a marketing stunt for his manifesto.
The guy is a marketing graduate. These people would stoop to anything.
Quote from: JonasSalk on July 23, 2011, 03:03:26 PM
So who were the victims? Any ideas? I don't quite get why a nationalist who hates Muslims would target a bunch of regular Norwegians and not go into a place where there's a lot of, you know, Muslims.
You know, you could fucking read the articles posted or even the basic news on this.
Quote from: mongers on July 23, 2011, 04:30:04 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 23, 2011, 04:17:57 PM
It appears that this entire act may have simply been a marketing stunt for his manifesto.
http://www.2shared.com/file/M-s-2fBD/2083-AEuropeanDeclarationofInd.html (http://www.2shared.com/file/M-s-2fBD/2083-AEuropeanDeclarationofInd.html)
I really don't know what to think.
unbiased ex.sum, please.
Heh. I just found it 30 minutes ago. I have neither read it, nor seen much discussion of it. There's an ongoing thread on the subject on a Swedish forum but aside from talking about the diary of his preparations, there's not much yet.
The topic is the "islamic colonization" of Europe and some general rambling about cultural marxism.
Watch it while it's hot, they're removing them as they find them. :D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vLk1zv6u7_Q
Quote from: Slargos on July 23, 2011, 04:38:58 PM
Watch it while it's hot, they're removing them as they find them. :D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vLk1zv6u7_Q
It's pretty clear that the guy is neither a nationalist nor a conservative nor religious, nor he has any beef against the Left. :rolleyes:
Weeeel. Apparently he's not a nazi.
Quote from: mongers on July 23, 2011, 04:30:04 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 23, 2011, 04:17:57 PM
It appears that this entire act may have simply been a marketing stunt for his manifesto.
http://www.2shared.com/file/M-s-2fBD/2083-AEuropeanDeclarationofInd.html
I really don't know what to think.
unbiased ex.sum, please.
It is saying that the "cultural Marxism" (multiculturalism, liberalism, political correctness) is the true enemy which enables Islamic colonization of Europe, and as such should be "decimated" and the tree of European liberty should be watered with blood of cultural Marxists. It then goes on how cultural conservatives and nationalists are the only true saviours of Europe and they are being vilified by the "cultural Marxists" as "nazis". He proposes forming the new knights templar of Christendom under the Pope, to start a revolution.
I would like the idiots who claimed he is not a nationalist or a conservative or a Christian fundamentalist to eat their own hats now, please.
Quote from: Slargos on July 23, 2011, 04:52:09 PM
Weeeel. Apparently he's not a nazi.
Oh, I'm pretty happy if he is recognized as a Christian conservative nationalist instead. :)
Quote from: Martinus on July 23, 2011, 04:53:26 PM
Quote from: mongers on July 23, 2011, 04:30:04 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 23, 2011, 04:17:57 PM
It appears that this entire act may have simply been a marketing stunt for his manifesto.
http://www.2shared.com/file/M-s-2fBD/2083-AEuropeanDeclarationofInd.html (http://www.2shared.com/file/M-s-2fBD/2083-AEuropeanDeclarationofInd.html)
I really don't know what to think.
unbiased ex.sum, please.
It is saying that the "cultural Marxism" (multiculturalism, liberalism, political correctness) is the true enemy which enables Islamic colonization of Europe, and as such should be "decimated" and the tree of European liberty should be watered with blood of cultural Marxists. It then goes on how cultural conservatives and nationalists are the only true saviours of Europe and they are being vilified by the "cultural Marxists" as "nazis". He proposes forming the new knights templar of Christendom under the Pope, to start a revolution.
I would like the idiots who claimed he is not a nationalist or a conservative or a Christian fundamentalist to eat their own hats now, please.
Hey, don't look at me. I merely noted that there's no evidence to support the accusations of racism and nazism. :contract:
I know. I wasn't actually talking about you.
Quote from: Martinus on July 23, 2011, 05:01:27 PM
I know. I wasn't actually talking about you.
I know. I was just excersising my right to attention-whoring. :hmm:
Quote from: Martinus on July 23, 2011, 04:53:26 PM
It is saying that the "cultural Marxism" (multiculturalism, liberalism, political correctness) is the true enemy which enables Islamic colonization of Europe, and as such should be "decimated" and the tree of European liberty should be watered with blood of cultural Marxists. It then goes on how cultural conservatives and nationalists are the only true saviours of Europe and they are being vilified by the "cultural Marxists" as "nazis". He proposes forming the new knights templar of Christendom under the Pope, to start a revolution.
I would like the idiots who claimed he is not a nationalist or a conservative or a Christian fundamentalist to eat their own hats now, please.
Odd thing for a guy in a protestant country to say. I think those who were skeptical that it was a conservative can be somewhat forgiven, do information being unclear.
At the risk of sounding a bit callous (and I am greatly moved by this tragedy), it places the guy ideologically exactly right in the center of the broadly understood populist right wing that's so popular in Europe (including, in Poland). Which hopefully will wreck huge political damage on them.
Quote from: Slargos on July 23, 2011, 04:56:11 PMHey, don't look at me. I merely noted that there's no evidence to support the accusations of racism and nazism. :contract:
I know how much you value my opinion, so I'll just go on the record to say that vehement railing about the Islamification of Europe and a war between cultures where you have to pick your side is in fact evidence of straight up racism.
It is possible to be concerned about the problems that come from friction between members of different cultural groups on both an individual and societal level without being racist. But once you're in the territory of labeling entire ethnic and cultural groups as evil then you're racist.
So yeah... plenty of evidence of racism from what's been mentioned so far.
Quote from: Jacob on July 23, 2011, 05:08:19 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 23, 2011, 04:56:11 PMHey, don't look at me. I merely noted that there's no evidence to support the accusations of racism and nazism. :contract:
I know how much you value my opinion, so I'll just go on the record to say that vehement railing about the Islamification of Europe and a war between cultures where you have to pick your side is in fact evidence of straight up racism.
It is possible to be concerned about the problems that come from friction between members of different cultural groups on both an individual and societal level without being racist. But once you're in the territory of labeling entire ethnic and cultural groups as evil then you're racist.
So yeah... plenty of evidence of racism from what's been mentioned so far.
Yes, I value your opinion greatly.
Though frankly, that's a pretty broad definition of racism. But I guess the definition varies these days.
Quote from: Slargos on July 23, 2011, 04:38:58 PM
Watch it while it's hot, they're removing them as they find them. :D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vLk1zv6u7_Q
Hey, the uses an image that's almost identical to Hans's avatar. Nifty.
Quote from: Jacob on July 23, 2011, 05:08:19 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 23, 2011, 04:56:11 PMHey, don't look at me. I merely noted that there's no evidence to support the accusations of racism and nazism. :contract:
I know how much you value my opinion, so I'll just go on the record to say that vehement railing about the Islamification of Europe and a war between cultures where you have to pick your side is in fact evidence of straight up racism.
It is possible to be concerned about the problems that come from friction between members of different cultural groups on both an individual and societal level without being racist. But once you're in the territory of labeling entire ethnic and cultural groups as evil then you're racist.
So yeah... plenty of evidence of racism from what's been mentioned so far.
Actually, I kinda agree with Slargos that this is not your bread and butter racism. Maybe views like this guy's are not as popular in Scandinavia, but I have seen enough of it in Poland to know this is based in some weird "clash of religions" fundamentalist mania than a racist/biological thing.
Notice that he is not making any references to ethnic groups (nowhere in his "manifesto" did I notice any reference to skin colour) and the references to cultural groups are not overt either - he is talking about Christendom vs. Islam the whole time. I don't think that saying a religion is evil is racist. You are over-using the word in a typical modern fashion, which does not do it any good.
Quote from: Razgovory on July 23, 2011, 05:05:29 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 23, 2011, 04:53:26 PM
It is saying that the "cultural Marxism" (multiculturalism, liberalism, political correctness) is the true enemy which enables Islamic colonization of Europe, and as such should be "decimated" and the tree of European liberty should be watered with blood of cultural Marxists. It then goes on how cultural conservatives and nationalists are the only true saviours of Europe and they are being vilified by the "cultural Marxists" as "nazis". He proposes forming the new knights templar of Christendom under the Pope, to start a revolution.
I would like the idiots who claimed he is not a nationalist or a conservative or a Christian fundamentalist to eat their own hats now, please.
Odd thing for a guy in a protestant country to say. I think those who were skeptical that it was a conservative can be somewhat forgiven, do information being unclear.
I will never cease to be amazed at how you people can use this type of reasoning all the while loudly exclaiming how free of prejudice you are. :lol:
Quote from: Razgovory on July 23, 2011, 05:10:32 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 23, 2011, 04:38:58 PM
Watch it while it's hot, they're removing them as they find them. :D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vLk1zv6u7_Q (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vLk1zv6u7_Q)
Hey, the uses an image that's almost identical to Hans's avatar. Nifty.
Not, AFAIK, the original uploader.
Quote from: Martinus on July 23, 2011, 05:07:04 PM
At the risk of sounding a bit callous (and I am greatly moved by this tragedy), it places the guy ideologically exactly right in the center of the broadly understood populist right wing that's so popular in Europe (including, in Poland). Which hopefully will wreck huge political damage on them.
On Pdox, there was a guy who was complaining that this is really going to put back the Nationalist cause. I responded that this is one of the downsides of being a kook, other kooks make you look bad.
Quote from: Martinus on July 23, 2011, 05:11:04 PM
Actually, I kinda agree with Slargos that this is not your bread and butter racism. Maybe views like this guy's are not as popular in Scandinavia, but I have seen enough of it in Poland to know this is based in some weird "clash of religions" fundamentalist mania than a racist/biological thing.
The term in English is called "Religious bigotry".
Quote from: Razgovory on July 23, 2011, 05:12:42 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 23, 2011, 05:07:04 PM
At the risk of sounding a bit callous (and I am greatly moved by this tragedy), it places the guy ideologically exactly right in the center of the broadly understood populist right wing that's so popular in Europe (including, in Poland). Which hopefully will wreck huge political damage on them.
On Pdox, there was a guy who was complaining that this is really going to put back the Nationalist cause. I responded that this is one of the downsides of being a kook, other kooks make you look bad.
:D
Quote from: Slargos on July 23, 2011, 04:52:09 PM
Weeeel. Apparently he's not a nazi.
That must come as quite a relief for you.
Quote from: Slargos on July 23, 2011, 05:11:33 PM
Odd thing for a guy in a protestant country to say. I think those who were skeptical that it was a conservative can be somewhat forgiven, do information being unclear.
I will never cease to be amazed at how you people can use this type of reasoning all the while loudly exclaiming how free of prejudice you are. :lol:
[/quote]
That I find it odd that a man in a predominately protestant country thinks that Europe should be united under a crusading order overseen by the Pope? I find that odd. Perhaps he's Catholic, I dunno. If he's Catholic it would make a bit more sense, but if not, it seems strange.
Quote from: DGuller on July 23, 2011, 05:15:32 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 23, 2011, 04:52:09 PM
Weeeel. Apparently he's not a nazi.
That must come as quite a relief for you.
I don't see why you'd think that.
It won't matter to us anyway, since whether he's an actual nazi or not he will still be called it in the media.
Quote from: DGuller on July 23, 2011, 05:15:32 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 23, 2011, 04:52:09 PM
Weeeel. Apparently he's not a nazi.
That must come as quite a relief for you.
By Slargos's standards, the fact that the guy is "only" a nationalist Christian conservative makes him more liberal than Slargos and thus he can write it down to internal leftist infighting. :P
I wish I didn't make mistakes in quoting posts. :(
Quote from: Razgovory on July 23, 2011, 05:16:45 PM
That I find it odd that a man in a predominately protestant country thinks that Europe should be united under a crusading order overseen by the Pope? I find that odd. Perhaps he's Catholic, I dunno. If he's Catholic it would make a bit more sense, but if not, it seems strange.
Yes. You immediately assume that since X Xsson is from Country Y, he must have characteristics A, B and C.
And yet you complain about MY racism. :lol:
Quote from: Slargos on July 23, 2011, 05:16:51 PM
Quote from: DGuller on July 23, 2011, 05:15:32 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 23, 2011, 04:52:09 PM
Weeeel. Apparently he's not a nazi.
That must come as quite a relief for you.
I don't see why you'd think that.
It won't matter to us anyway, since whether he's an actual nazi or not he will still be called it in the media.
The Polish equivalent of the Guardian is calling him a "Christian fundamentalist". :P
Quote from: Martinus on July 23, 2011, 05:17:07 PM
Quote from: DGuller on July 23, 2011, 05:15:32 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 23, 2011, 04:52:09 PM
Weeeel. Apparently he's not a nazi.
That must come as quite a relief for you.
By Slargos's standards, the fact that the guy is "only" a nationalist Christian conservative makes him more liberal than Slargos and thus he can write it down to internal leftist infighting. :P
:yeah:
Quote from: Razgovory on July 23, 2011, 05:17:57 PM
I wish I didn't make mistakes in quoting posts. :(
Easily fixed by not posting. :hug:
Quote from: Slargos on July 23, 2011, 05:17:58 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on July 23, 2011, 05:16:45 PM
That I find it odd that a man in a predominately protestant country thinks that Europe should be united under a crusading order overseen by the Pope? I find that odd. Perhaps he's Catholic, I dunno. If he's Catholic it would make a bit more sense, but if not, it seems strange.
Yes. You immediately assume that since X Xsson is from Country Y, he must have characteristics A, B and C.
And yet you complain about MY racism. :lol:
That's not racism. Has nothing to do with race. It's not even bigoted, There are few Catholics in Norway.
Quote from: Razgovory on July 23, 2011, 05:21:48 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 23, 2011, 05:17:58 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on July 23, 2011, 05:16:45 PM
That I find it odd that a man in a predominately protestant country thinks that Europe should be united under a crusading order overseen by the Pope? I find that odd. Perhaps he's Catholic, I dunno. If he's Catholic it would make a bit more sense, but if not, it seems strange.
Yes. You immediately assume that since X Xsson is from Country Y, he must have characteristics A, B and C.
And yet you complain about MY racism. :lol:
That's not racism. Has nothing to do with race. It's not even bigoted, There are few Catholics in Norway.
Of course. As long as YOU are doing it, there's nothing wrong with it.
Norwegian media has been hinting that the police have refused to report how many people are missing. One (out or 23) provinces reports that it has 1 confirmed dead and 12 missing. My gut feeling says that the missing might significantly expand the number of dead. Kids floating around the lake dead from drowning or hypothermia. The local camping ground staff report saving at least 250 swimmers from the lake (I know it's called a fjord, but it's a lake).
When the police arrrested the guy he surrendered. The police refused to answer the question if the gunman had any ammo left when he surrendered.
I'm afraid that a hundred more kids which are missing might be dead as well.
Quote from: Viking on July 23, 2011, 05:33:22 PM
Norwegian media has been hinting that the police have refused to report how many people are missing. One (out or 23) provinces reports that it has 1 confirmed dead and 12 missing. My gut feeling says that the missing might significantly expand the number of dead. Kids floating around the lake dead from drowning or hypothermia. The local camping ground staff report saving at least 250 swimmers from the lake (I know it's called a fjord, but it's a lake).
When the police arrrested the guy he surrendered. The police refused to answer the question if the gunman had any ammo left when he surrendered.
I'm afraid that a hundred more kids which are missing might be dead as well.
Oh boy. :(
I wonder what kind of death toll we'd seen if an attempt had been made to overpower him instead of a stampede. I know it's wishful thinking.
Quote from: Slargos on July 23, 2011, 05:25:42 PM
Of course. As long as YOU are doing it, there's nothing wrong with it.
You think Protestant is a race?
Quote from: Slargos on July 23, 2011, 05:36:05 PM
Quote from: Viking on July 23, 2011, 05:33:22 PM
Norwegian media has been hinting that the police have refused to report how many people are missing. One (out or 23) provinces reports that it has 1 confirmed dead and 12 missing. My gut feeling says that the missing might significantly expand the number of dead. Kids floating around the lake dead from drowning or hypothermia. The local camping ground staff report saving at least 250 swimmers from the lake (I know it's called a fjord, but it's a lake).
When the police arrrested the guy he surrendered. The police refused to answer the question if the gunman had any ammo left when he surrendered.
I'm afraid that a hundred more kids which are missing might be dead as well.
Oh boy. :(
I wonder what kind of death toll we'd seen if an attempt had been made to overpower him instead of a stampede. I know it's wishful thinking.
it doesn't seem that any of the kids and young adults tried to charge him and take him out. Not even when he was reloading or any of the 600+ kids trying to get him from behind when he was reloading. It seems that of all the kids and young adults nobody tried to solve the problem themselves.
I'd say something about the philosophy regarding self reliance of social democrats, but that would be divisive and not kind.
Quote from: Viking on July 23, 2011, 05:33:22 PM
Norwegian media has been hinting that the police have refused to report how many people are missing. One (out or 23) provinces reports that it has 1 confirmed dead and 12 missing. My gut feeling says that the missing might significantly expand the number of dead. Kids floating around the lake dead from drowning or hypothermia. The local camping ground staff report saving at least 250 swimmers from the lake (I know it's called a fjord, but it's a lake).
When the police arrrested the guy he surrendered. The police refused to answer the question if the gunman had any ammo left when he surrendered.
I'm afraid that a hundred more kids which are missing might be dead as well.
This is just fucking bone-chilling. I am trying desperately not to even start imaging the whole thing.
Quote from: Razgovory on July 23, 2011, 05:39:37 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 23, 2011, 05:25:42 PM
Of course. As long as YOU are doing it, there's nothing wrong with it.
You think Protestant is a race?
I thought there was just one race. It's hard to keep track of the concept, since it's all over the place.
Jacob insists that considering muslims filthy bastards is racist. So I guess "muslim" is a race. By that logic, "Protestant" surely ought to be aswell.
I don't know, Raz. I really don't know.
Quote from: Slargos on July 23, 2011, 05:42:55 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on July 23, 2011, 05:39:37 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 23, 2011, 05:25:42 PM
Of course. As long as YOU are doing it, there's nothing wrong with it.
You think Protestant is a race?
I thought there was just one race. It's hard to keep track of the concept, since it's all over the place.
Jacob insists that considering muslims filthy bastards is racist. So I guess "muslim" is a race. By that logic, "Protestant" surely ought to be aswell.
I don't know, Raz. I really don't know.
I think your logical fallacy is to consider Jacob and Raz the same person. :)
Was he using a silencer? To be able to be so methodical without widespread panic...
G.
Quote from: Viking on July 23, 2011, 05:41:29 PM
it doesn't seem that any of the kids and young adults tried to charge him and take him out. Not even when he was reloading or any of the 600+ kids trying to get him from behind when he was reloading. It seems that of all the kids and young adults nobody tried to solve the problem themselves.
I'd say something about the philosophy regarding self reliance of social democrats, but that would be divisive and not kind.
It might be considered a bit callous.
But I can't but wonder if this is the society we've created, where physical intervention has become anathema to the point where we would rather take photos of an ongoing rape than perform what ought to be our moral imperative.
Jacob is attacking you because you made actual racist remarks. Examples:
When you go on about "mud people", that would be racism.
When grallon goes on about how Muslims are vermin, that would be religious bigotry.
See the difference?
Quote from: Viking on July 23, 2011, 05:41:29 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 23, 2011, 05:36:05 PM
Quote from: Viking on July 23, 2011, 05:33:22 PM
Norwegian media has been hinting that the police have refused to report how many people are missing. One (out or 23) provinces reports that it has 1 confirmed dead and 12 missing. My gut feeling says that the missing might significantly expand the number of dead. Kids floating around the lake dead from drowning or hypothermia. The local camping ground staff report saving at least 250 swimmers from the lake (I know it's called a fjord, but it's a lake).
When the police arrrested the guy he surrendered. The police refused to answer the question if the gunman had any ammo left when he surrendered.
I'm afraid that a hundred more kids which are missing might be dead as well.
Oh boy. :(
I wonder what kind of death toll we'd seen if an attempt had been made to overpower him instead of a stampede. I know it's wishful thinking.
it doesn't seem that any of the kids and young adults tried to charge him and take him out. Not even when he was reloading or any of the 600+ kids trying to get him from behind when he was reloading. It seems that of all the kids and young adults nobody tried to solve the problem themselves.
I'd say something about the philosophy regarding self reliance of social democrats, but that would be divisive and not kind.
You mean you are complaining that noone tackled him? Stop trying to steal my thunder! <_<
Quote from: Slargos on July 23, 2011, 05:42:55 PM
Jacob insists that considering muslims filthy bastards is racist. So I guess "muslim" is a race. By that logic, "Protestant" surely ought to be aswell.
Jacob merely bundles together racism with xenophobia - like so many others fed on the virtues of multiculturalism. And from there he indulges in what those like him usually do: moral grand standing.
G.
Quote from: Martinus on July 23, 2011, 05:43:52 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 23, 2011, 05:42:55 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on July 23, 2011, 05:39:37 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 23, 2011, 05:25:42 PM
Of course. As long as YOU are doing it, there's nothing wrong with it.
You think Protestant is a race?
I thought there was just one race. It's hard to keep track of the concept, since it's all over the place.
Jacob insists that considering muslims filthy bastards is racist. So I guess "muslim" is a race. By that logic, "Protestant" surely ought to be aswell.
I don't know, Raz. I really don't know.
I think your logical fallacy is to consider Jacob and Raz the same person. :)
Inarguably. I think it's unfair to hammer me like this though, when everyone uses their own definition of "racism". How am I supposed to answer?
Quote from: Razgovory on July 23, 2011, 05:45:53 PM
Jacob is attacking you because you made actual racist remarks. Examples:
When you go on about "mud people", that would be racism.
When grallon goes on about how Muslims are vermin, that would be religious bigotry.
See the difference?
Well, Jacob characterized the killer's views that Islam is evil as racist.
Quote from: Grallon on July 23, 2011, 05:47:59 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 23, 2011, 05:42:55 PM
Jacob insists that considering muslims filthy bastards is racist. So I guess "muslim" is a race. By that logic, "Protestant" surely ought to be aswell.
Jacob merely bundles together racism with xenophobia - like so many others fed on the virtues of multiculturalism. And from there he indulges in what those like him usually do: moral grand standing.
G.
Would you say Jacob is a cultural marxist?
Quote from: Razgovory on July 23, 2011, 05:45:53 PM
Jacob is attacking you because you made actual racist remarks. Examples:
When you go on about "mud people", that would be racism.
When grallon goes on about how Muslims are vermin, that would be religious bigotry.
See the difference?
No, I really don't. It's six of one, half a dozen of the other.
Am I being racist if I call
you a porch monkey?
Regardless, it's completely beside the point. Jacob insists that it's racism to villify a religion. [Or actually, he specified culture, so he sortof dodged it that way. But since no one was calling a culture evil, I guess his "argument" is a complete red herring. My bad.]
Quote from: Grallon on July 23, 2011, 05:44:26 PM
Was he using a silencer? To be able to be so methodical without widespread panic...
G.
There was widespread panic, its just that the island was the size of 12 soccer pitches. It's just that the water was so cold that hypothermia was a high risk. There were 600 kids on the island, est 50 kids per pitch. There was no place to hide, panic just means that the victims ran to the beach and cowered in fear until Bering Breivik came long and murdered them. Just imagine a school shooting where the kids cannot escape the building and it takes two hours for the police to show up.
What's better than a tardfight between Slargos and Pat?
A tardfight between Martinus, Grallon, Viking, and Slargos, with Raz throwing in some hand grenades! :w00t:
*pops popcorn*
Also, there is a difference between racial stereotypes (e.g. "black people run faster") and racism, although they are often confused. Racial stereotypes are beliefs (some of them ignorant) about reality, whereas racism is an ideology. You are not a racist if you think all Swedes are protestant.
Use of racial slurs also does not make you a racist, although, depending on the context, it may be a good indicator that you are a racist. Using a racial slur in an obviously joking manner and without an intention to offend is not racist.
Maybe this kind of incident will raise awareness that the proper response to a mass murder is to zerg rush someone, just like 9/11 taught as that the proper response to a hijacking attempt is for all the passengers to attack the hijacker at once. These kind of strategies are hard to learn, because they require many people at the same time to have the same idea and suppress the diffusion of responsibility, which is why it takes these kind of tragedies to instill the idea en masse.
Quote from: Viking on July 23, 2011, 05:50:49 PM
Just imagine a school shooting where the kids cannot escape the building and it takes two hours for the police to show up.
I don't want to imagine that. :cry:
Also, is there an objective reason why it took the police two hours to arrive or is there a suspicion of incompetence?
Quote from: grumbler on July 23, 2011, 05:52:48 PM
What's better than a tardfight between Slargos and Pat?
A tardfight between Martinus, Grallon, Viking, and Slargos, with Raz throwing in some hand grenades! :w00t:
*pops popcorn*
fuck you, lots of people are dead.
Quote from: grumbler on July 23, 2011, 05:52:48 PM
What's better than a tardfight between Slargos and Pat?
A tardfight between Martinus, Grallon, Viking, and Slargos, with Raz throwing in some hand grenades! :w00t:
*pops popcorn*
The kind of entertainment we enjoy says a lot about us as people.
I'll just let your gears grind for a while on that one.
Get back to me in a couple of weeks when you figure it out.
Quote from: Jacob on July 23, 2011, 05:08:19 PM
It is possible to be concerned about the problems that come from friction between members of different cultural groups on both an individual and societal level without being racist. But once you're in the territory of labeling entire ethnic and cultural groups as evil then you're racist.
How about a position in between those two, such as a belief that a certain group has a higher proclivity for evil? Racist or not racist?
Quote from: Viking on July 23, 2011, 05:56:23 PM
fuck you, lots of people are dead.
Fuck
you. Making asshat arguments has nothing to do with the dead. "You mean you are complaining that noone tackled him? Stop trying to steal my thunder! <_<" is about as callous a comment as I've seen since this tragedy started.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 23, 2011, 06:01:22 PM
How about a position in between those two, such as a belief that a certain group has a higher proclivity for evil? Racist or not racist?
Depends on what you mean by "a certain group." "People with certain beliefs have a higher proclivity for seeking violent solutions to their problems" sounds better, and avoids that dreadful "evil" tag.
Quote from: Martinus on July 23, 2011, 05:56:09 PM
Quote from: Viking on July 23, 2011, 05:50:49 PM
Just imagine a school shooting where the kids cannot escape the building and it takes two hours for the police to show up.
I don't want to imagine that. :cry:
Also, is there an objective reason why it took the police two hours to arrive or is there a suspicion of incompetence?
To begin with, there was this little thing about a terrorist attack in the capital. :hmm:
Then, there's the MO for shootings. Scandinavian police next to never goes in guns drawn and blazing. There's simply no culture of this kind of thing here, and the police acts in a methodical rather than impulsive manner. I can't even remember the last time a gunman was actually shot. Probably around the Malexander murders.
In addition, there's the tactical complexity. Cops don't have weapons available until given the access by the operational commander. There's also the little problem of a large body of water in the way.
Early on, we simply didn't know what was going on. There was "shooting" and "an armed man".
In hindsight, if we'd known all along that the guy intended to murder as many people as possible, would the police have acted sooner and in more haste? I would expect so.
There were assertions made that it was problematic to use helicopters "on account of the weather" but that sounds like horse shit because the weather was just fine.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 23, 2011, 06:01:22 PM
Quote from: Jacob on July 23, 2011, 05:08:19 PM
It is possible to be concerned about the problems that come from friction between members of different cultural groups on both an individual and societal level without being racist. But once you're in the territory of labeling entire ethnic and cultural groups as evil then you're racist.
How about a position in between those two, such as a belief that a certain group has a higher proclivity for evil? Racist or not racist?
Depends if the group in question is defined by race or not. If it is defined by ethnicity, creed, culture etc. but not race then it cannot be racist.
:lol: Trust grumbler to turn this into another pissing contest - this time about who can be more callous without appearing to be.
G.
Quote from: Martinus on July 23, 2011, 06:07:10 PM
Depends if the group in question is defined by race or not. If it is defined by ethnicity, creed, culture etc. but not race then it cannot be racist.
You're off the hook Slag.:cheers:
Quote from: Grallon on July 23, 2011, 06:08:03 PM
:lol: Trust grumbler to turn this into another pissing contest - this time about who can be more callous without appearing to be.
G.
I think it's between you, me, grumbler and Slargos.
Quote from: grumbler on July 23, 2011, 05:52:48 PM
What's better than a tardfight between Slargos and Pat?
A tardfight between Martinus, Grallon, Viking, and Slargos, with Raz throwing in some hand grenades! :w00t:
*pops popcorn*
It's not a real 'tard fight unless you join. We need at least one 'tard
Quote from: Martinus on July 23, 2011, 06:09:01 PM
Quote from: Grallon on July 23, 2011, 06:08:03 PM
:lol: Trust grumbler to turn this into another pissing contest - this time about who can be more callous without appearing to be.
G.
I think it's between you, me, grumbler and Slargos.
If I'd realized it was a contest, I would've started playing. :hmm:
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 23, 2011, 06:08:37 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 23, 2011, 06:07:10 PM
Depends if the group in question is defined by race or not. If it is defined by ethnicity, creed, culture etc. but not race then it cannot be racist.
You're off the hook Slag. :cheers:
I am so relieved. :sleep:
Quote from: DGuller on July 23, 2011, 05:55:23 PM
Maybe this kind of incident will raise awareness that the proper response to a mass murder is to zerg rush someone, just like 9/11 taught as that the proper response to a hijacking attempt is for all the passengers to attack the hijacker at once. These kind of strategies are hard to learn, because they require many people at the same time to have the same idea and suppress the diffusion of responsibility, which is why it takes these kind of tragedies to instill the idea en masse.
An ABC news report I saw said that the guy had a fully automatic weapon, which makes even a mass rush problematic. 600 people in one group, yeah, that's still a good option, but the 600 people in this instance were apparantly spread out in several groups.
Incidentally, are views about some races being inferior to others in certain aspects (e.g. evil, or stupid etc.) always racist, or only if such views are untrue?
E.g. would a belief that the uruk-hai are more evil than elves, or that hobbits are lazier than dwarves be considered racist?
Marty, I hate to break it to you, but orcs and elves aren't real.
Quote from: Slargos on July 23, 2011, 05:49:48 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on July 23, 2011, 05:45:53 PM
Jacob is attacking you because you made actual racist remarks. Examples:
When you go on about "mud people", that would be racism.
When grallon goes on about how Muslims are vermin, that would be religious bigotry.
See the difference?
No, I really don't. It's six of one, half a dozen of the other.
Am I being racist if I call you a porch monkey?
Regardless, it's completely beside the point. Jacob insists that it's racism to villify a religion. [Or actually, he specified culture, so he sortof dodged it that way. But since no one was calling a culture evil, I guess his "argument" is a complete red herring. My bad.]
Perhaps the problem is you don't know what words mean in the English language.
Quote from: Razgovory on July 23, 2011, 06:13:41 PM
Marty, I hate to break it to you, but orcs and elves aren't real.
According to some there is no such thing as a "race" either, so racism must not exist either, right?
Quote from: Martinus on July 23, 2011, 06:11:57 PM
Incidentally, are views about some races being inferior to others in certain aspects (e.g. evil, or stupid etc.) always racist, or only if such views are untrue?
E.g. would a belief that the uruk-hai are more evil than elves, or that hobbits are lazier than dwarves be considered racist?
You're only allowed to generalize negatively about white males.
Quote from: Martinus on July 23, 2011, 06:14:47 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on July 23, 2011, 06:13:41 PM
Marty, I hate to break it to you, but orcs and elves aren't real.
According to some there is no such thing as a "race" either, so racism must not exist either, right?
Because some people believe something doesn't exist, that actually make it cease to exist? Evolution exists despite the fact that some people believe the Earth is only 6,000 years old.
Quote from: grumbler on July 23, 2011, 06:03:59 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 23, 2011, 06:01:22 PM
How about a position in between those two, such as a belief that a certain group has a higher proclivity for evil? Racist or not racist?
Depends on what you mean by "a certain group." "People with certain beliefs have a higher proclivity for seeking violent solutions to their problems" sounds better, and avoids that dreadful "evil" tag.
What about "People with certain skin color are more likely to commit a violent crime than people with another skin color"? Racist or not?
Quote from: Martinus on July 23, 2011, 06:20:25 PM
Quote from: grumbler on July 23, 2011, 06:03:59 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 23, 2011, 06:01:22 PM
How about a position in between those two, such as a belief that a certain group has a higher proclivity for evil? Racist or not racist?
Depends on what you mean by "a certain group." "People with certain beliefs have a higher proclivity for seeking violent solutions to their problems" sounds better, and avoids that dreadful "evil" tag.
What about "People with certain skin color are more likely to commit a violent crime than people with another skin color"? Racist or not?
I'd say that if the implication is that a person is more likely to commit a violent crime
because of their skin color, it's racist. If it's that a person of a certain skin color is more likely to commit a violent crime because a person of that color is more likely to be a member of a social group with more of a social/cultural afinity for violence, it's not.
Quote from: Razgovory on July 23, 2011, 06:14:37 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 23, 2011, 05:49:48 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on July 23, 2011, 05:45:53 PM
Jacob is attacking you because you made actual racist remarks. Examples:
When you go on about "mud people", that would be racism.
When grallon goes on about how Muslims are vermin, that would be religious bigotry.
See the difference?
No, I really don't. It's six of one, half a dozen of the other.
Am I being racist if I call you a porch monkey?
Regardless, it's completely beside the point. Jacob insists that it's racism to villify a religion. [Or actually, he specified culture, so he sortof dodged it that way. But since no one was calling a culture evil, I guess his "argument" is a complete red herring. My bad.]
Perhaps the problem is you don't know what words mean in the English language.
No, I think the problem lies in the fact that you don't understand that Language is not permanent, and that the meaning of words can shift over time.
If you want to use the dictionary definition of racism, it's certainly not racism to call niggers "mud people".
Quote from: dps on July 23, 2011, 06:24:01 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 23, 2011, 06:20:25 PM
Quote from: grumbler on July 23, 2011, 06:03:59 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 23, 2011, 06:01:22 PM
How about a position in between those two, such as a belief that a certain group has a higher proclivity for evil? Racist or not racist?
Depends on what you mean by "a certain group." "People with certain beliefs have a higher proclivity for seeking violent solutions to their problems" sounds better, and avoids that dreadful "evil" tag.
What about "People with certain skin color are more likely to commit a violent crime than people with another skin color"? Racist or not?
I'd say that if the implication is that a person is more likely to commit a violent crime because of their skin color, it's racist. If it's that a person of a certain skin color is more likely to commit a violent crime because a person of that color is more likely to be a member of a social group with more of a social/cultural afinity for violence, it's not.
And yet, white collar immigrants in Sweden are more likely to commit crime than blue collar. Go figure.
Quote from: Razgovory on July 23, 2011, 06:13:41 PM
Marty, I hate to break it to you, but orcs and elves aren't real.
You beat me to the
grumbler. :lol:
QuoteThe idea here is to avoid a head on battle with a strong enemy, and instead
strike at his weakness elsewhere. The Prime Minister may have several armed body
guards. This however is not the case with regular ministers. As for static objectives, it
can be smarter to focus on less "armoured" targets. Instead of the Parliament building or
Royal Castle, other high value targets (with less security) should be targeted.
4. Make a sound in the east, then strike in the west
In any battle the element of surprise can provide an overwhelming advantage. Even when
face to face with an enemy, surprise can still be employed by attacking where he least
expects it. To do this you must create an expectation in the enemy's mind through the use
of a feint.
Say what you will about this guy, but he was certainly prepared.
He claims himself that he worked with this goal in mind for 9 years.
Quote from: Slargos on July 23, 2011, 06:25:01 PM
No, I think the problem lies in the fact that you don't understand that Language is not permanent, and that the meaning of words can shift over time.
If you want to use the dictionary definition of racism, it's certainly not racism to call niggers "mud people".
Using a racial slur isn't a racist statement? I know of no dictionary where that is true. Swedish education in the English language is not a good as we were led to believe.
Quote from: Razgovory on July 23, 2011, 06:40:50 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 23, 2011, 06:25:01 PM
No, I think the problem lies in the fact that you don't understand that Language is not permanent, and that the meaning of words can shift over time.
If you want to use the dictionary definition of racism, it's certainly not racism to call niggers "mud people".
Using a racial slur isn't a racist statement? I know of no dictionary where that is true. Swedish education in the English language is not a good as we were led to believe.
More prejudice? Will the litany never cease?
Quote from: dps on July 23, 2011, 06:11:27 PM
An ABC news report I saw said that the guy had a fully automatic weapon, which makes even a mass rush problematic. 600 people in one group, yeah, that's still a good option, but the 600 people in this instance were apparantly spread out in several groups.
The witneses appear to agree that he had an automatic weapon, so I think you are right. Plus, people don't tend to think too clearly under gunfire, even when trained. The Flight 96 people had a lot of time to consider their position, and didn't face gunfire, so their response probably has to be considered atypical. Nobody rushed the Va Tech shooter, and even at Fort Hood, fully trained military people didn't rush Hassan until several minutes after he started shooting.
Quote from: Slargos on July 23, 2011, 06:09:56 PM
If I'd realized it was a contest, I would've started playing. :hmm:
Only in grumbler's mind. For my part I haven't even stated my thoughts on this.
-----
At first I thought it was Muslims because that's what they're often prone to do and we are collectively stupid enough to allow them within our borders in vast numbers. Then it turned out it was a native with radical methods of enacting his beliefs/ideas.
If I really wanted to be callous I could say, from a purely detached intellectual standpoint, that one has to admire the determination and steadfastness of the man - to go through with this in a coldly methodical fashion - and then to allow himself to be captured. This tells me that he intends to use the trial, and its sure to be massive media coverage, as a platform - or pulpit - from which to go on preaching his own ideas.
Everyone say this is a tragedy - I suppose it is - but is it more so than 80+ people killed in a plane crash? Or the sinking of a ship? Personally I regret the death of so many youths (especially the boys), but do I mourn? Not really. It would of course be different if this had happened here, on my own turn, with people who could have/might have been friends, family and such. In other words, people I could have identified more... intimately with. Naturally the predictable human reaction to such an event is to try and 'make sense' of it by attributing the clear-cut 'good' and 'evil' labels on every pieces of the puzzle. However as most adults will know, life is gray, not black and white.
I imagine that many of those who died did so instantly, without foreknowledge, when the bullet hit them in the head or in the back. There are worse ways to die. Like being wounded and seeing the guy come up to you and knowing he will finish you off. Or like those fleeing and drowning. Or those in the blown up buildings being eviscerated...
I suppose that what I'm trying to say is that none of us value life in the same fashion or for the same reasons. And that death will find us wherever and whenever it will.
G.
I'm not going to throw stones.
I know I can come off as quite callous a lot of the time, but frankly I need it to stay alive. If I ever drop my guard I'm going to break into a million pieces.
Quote from: Martinus on July 23, 2011, 05:07:04 PM
At the risk of sounding a bit callous (and I am greatly moved by this tragedy), it places the guy ideologically exactly right in the center of the broadly understood populist right wing that's so popular in Europe (including, in Poland). Which hopefully will wreck huge political damage on them.
I don't think guys like him care.
Quote from: Slargos on July 23, 2011, 07:08:24 PM
I'm not going to throw stones.
I know I can come off as quite callous a lot of the time,
:hmm:
Quote from: Slargos on July 23, 2011, 07:08:24 PM
I'm not going to throw stones.
I know I can come off as quite callous a lot of the time, but frankly I need it to stay alive. If I ever drop my guard I'm going to break into a million pieces.
:hug:
Quote from: Slargos on July 23, 2011, 07:08:24 PM
I'm not going to throw stones.
I know I can come off as quite callous a lot of the time, but frankly I need it to stay alive. If I ever drop my guard I'm going to break into a million pieces.
EMOTIONAL BREAKTHROUGH. EXPLOITATION PHASE NOW. USE ARMOR UNITS FOR THE CRT SHIFT.
Oh jesus Meri is falling for it. Women.
Just seen on the BBC a powerful eyewitness account from Adrian Precon, he played dead amongst the bodies, but the gunman came up to him and shot him, just missing his head and injuring him the shoulder.
Quote from: mongers on July 23, 2011, 07:22:56 PM
Just seen on the BBC a powerful eyewitness account from Adrian Precon, he played dead amongst the bodies, but the gunman came up to him and shot him, just missing his head and injuring him the shoulder.
That was the same guy I saw interviewed by ABC.
Quote from: grumbler on July 23, 2011, 06:53:48 PM
Quote from: dps on July 23, 2011, 06:11:27 PM
An ABC news report I saw said that the guy had a fully automatic weapon, which makes even a mass rush problematic. 600 people in one group, yeah, that's still a good option, but the 600 people in this instance were apparantly spread out in several groups.
The witneses appear to agree that he had an automatic weapon, so I think you are right. Plus, people don't tend to think too clearly under gunfire, even when trained. The Flight 96 people had a lot of time to consider their position, and didn't face gunfire, so their response probably has to be considered atypical. Nobody rushed the Va Tech shooter, and even at Fort Hood, fully trained military people didn't rush Hassan until several minutes after he started shooting.
Yes, it's largely wishful thinking to say 14-19 year-olds should charge a gunman, especially as someone else has pointed out they were spread out across the island. Plus I think his initial deception of asking people to gather to explain what was happening and then gunning them down would have put the fear of god into the vast majority of people on this forum if in a similar situation, saving those who've had military training or experience of combat.
Quote from: mongers on July 23, 2011, 07:36:28 PM
Quote from: grumbler on July 23, 2011, 06:53:48 PM
Quote from: dps on July 23, 2011, 06:11:27 PM
An ABC news report I saw said that the guy had a fully automatic weapon, which makes even a mass rush problematic. 600 people in one group, yeah, that's still a good option, but the 600 people in this instance were apparantly spread out in several groups.
The witneses appear to agree that he had an automatic weapon, so I think you are right. Plus, people don't tend to think too clearly under gunfire, even when trained. The Flight 96 people had a lot of time to consider their position, and didn't face gunfire, so their response probably has to be considered atypical. Nobody rushed the Va Tech shooter, and even at Fort Hood, fully trained military people didn't rush Hassan until several minutes after he started shooting.
Yes, it's largely wishful thinking to say 14-19 year-olds should charge a gunman, especially as someone else has pointed out they were spread out across the island. Plus I think his initial deception of asking people to gather to explain what was happening and then gunning them down would have put the fear of god into the vast majority of people on this forum if in a similar situation, saving those who've had military training or experience of combat.
Probably the only poster on this forum that wouldn't be too shocked/scared/etc. to act would be Siege. He would kick the gunman's ass, then drop a diseased animal carcass down the gunman's family's well.
http://www.pccts.com/
Referenced in his writings.
This is getting weirder and weirder.
Quote from: HisMajestyBOB on July 23, 2011, 08:04:59 PM
Probably the only poster on this forum that wouldn't be too shocked/scared/etc. to act would be Siege. He would kick the gunman's ass, then drop a diseased animal carcass down the gunman's family's well.
I would brain him with a garden tool while he reloaded.
Quote from: Slargos on July 23, 2011, 08:05:22 PM
http://www.pccts.com/
Referenced in his writings.
This is getting weirder and weirder.
What in the Hell am I looking at?
Quote from: Razgovory on July 23, 2011, 08:15:04 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 23, 2011, 08:05:22 PM
http://www.pccts.com/
Referenced in his writings.
This is getting weirder and weirder.
What in the Hell am I looking at?
A website. Through a monitor.
I know that the one time I was exposed to live fire I got plowed over by a swabbie on the way to the emergency exit.
Quote from: HisMajestyBOB on July 23, 2011, 08:04:59 PM
Quote from: mongers on July 23, 2011, 07:36:28 PM
Quote from: grumbler on July 23, 2011, 06:53:48 PM
Quote from: dps on July 23, 2011, 06:11:27 PM
An ABC news report I saw said that the guy had a fully automatic weapon, which makes even a mass rush problematic. 600 people in one group, yeah, that's still a good option, but the 600 people in this instance were apparantly spread out in several groups.
The witneses appear to agree that he had an automatic weapon, so I think you are right. Plus, people don't tend to think too clearly under gunfire, even when trained. The Flight 96 people had a lot of time to consider their position, and didn't face gunfire, so their response probably has to be considered atypical. Nobody rushed the Va Tech shooter, and even at Fort Hood, fully trained military people didn't rush Hassan until several minutes after he started shooting.
Yes, it's largely wishful thinking to say 14-19 year-olds should charge a gunman, especially as someone else has pointed out they were spread out across the island. Plus I think his initial deception of asking people to gather to explain what was happening and then gunning them down would have put the fear of god into the vast majority of people on this forum if in a similar situation, saving those who've had military training or experience of combat.
Probably the only poster on this forum that wouldn't be too shocked/scared/etc. to act would be Siege. He would kick the gunman's ass, then drop a diseased animal carcass down the gunman's family's well.
Problem with Seigy is that some day, he's gonna be the gunman.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 23, 2011, 08:24:07 PM
I know that the one time I was exposed to live fire I got plowed over by a swabbie on the way to the emergency exit.
I was only dumbass not to hit the floor :lol:
21years in prison max for this guy?!?
Quote from: katmai on July 23, 2011, 08:35:09 PM
21years in prison max for this guy?!?
I read that too, but someone said Norway has 'forvaringsdomme' like Denmark, which means he'll be deemed unfit/dangerous for society and will probably serve more than the 21 years.
Should a human be condemned to life in prison over an hour long act? 21 years is a lot of time to reform.
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on July 23, 2011, 09:33:07 PM
Should a human be condemned to life in prison over an hour long act? 21 years is a lot of time to reform.
Surely the fact that he was planning this for 9 years must go in to consideration?
If 9 years of planning produces such a result, imagine what 21 years would do.
Quote from: Slargos on July 23, 2011, 05:49:48 PMRegardless, it's completely beside the point. Jacob insists that it's racism to villify a religion. [Or actually, he specified culture, so he sortof dodged it that way. But since no one was calling a culture evil, I guess his "argument" is a complete red herring. My bad.]
No, I don't insist that villifying a religion is racism. It is possible to villify a religion in a non-racist way, and it is possible to villify religion in a way that is racist.
When someone villifies a religion that is roughly contiguous with an external ethnic group, and they do so using rhetoric and methods that are indistinguishable from racist rhetoric then they're racist.
The rampant Islamophobia that is very common is, in my view racism. Similarly, the persecution of Jews through history is racist though occasionally it clothed itself as "mere" religious bigotry.
In any case, the exact taxonomy of xenophobic bigotry is frankly irrelevant; it's loathsome whether you call it racism or not.
Quote from: Liep on July 23, 2011, 08:44:43 PM
Quote from: katmai on July 23, 2011, 08:35:09 PM
21years in prison max for this guy?!?
I read that too, but someone said Norway has 'forvaringsdomme' like Denmark, which means he'll be deemed unfit/dangerous for society and will probably serve more than the 21 years.
Let's hope for 24 years then.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 23, 2011, 06:01:22 PMHow about a position in between those two, such as a belief that a certain group has a higher proclivity for evil? Racist or not racist?
Depends on how you define the group and what you mean by evil.
But frankly I'm not really up for using this incident as a springboard to go through the "what is racism" rhetorical argument yet again. Maybe later.
The fact of the matter is that this guy used xenophobic bigotry to justify murdering almost a hundred innocent people (if not more). Whether through rhetorical twists and turns his beliefs can be termed "racist" or not is not really that important. The people who subscribe to similar views, using similar reasoning ought to engage in a bit of self-reflection; ideally not focused on the ways the subtle shades of difference in their bigotry could be argued to make the glaring similarities irrelevant.
Quote from: Martinus on July 23, 2011, 04:54:20 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 23, 2011, 04:52:09 PM
Weeeel. Apparently he's not a nazi.
Oh, I'm pretty happy if he is recognized as a Christian conservative nationalist instead. :)
He's gay, so he's devastating to your cause.
Quote from: mongers on July 23, 2011, 07:36:28 PM
Quote from: grumbler on July 23, 2011, 06:53:48 PM
Quote from: dps on July 23, 2011, 06:11:27 PM
An ABC news report I saw said that the guy had a fully automatic weapon, which makes even a mass rush problematic. 600 people in one group, yeah, that's still a good option, but the 600 people in this instance were apparantly spread out in several groups.
The witneses appear to agree that he had an automatic weapon, so I think you are right. Plus, people don't tend to think too clearly under gunfire, even when trained. The Flight 96 people had a lot of time to consider their position, and didn't face gunfire, so their response probably has to be considered atypical. Nobody rushed the Va Tech shooter, and even at Fort Hood, fully trained military people didn't rush Hassan until several minutes after he started shooting.
Yes, it's largely wishful thinking to say 14-19 year-olds should charge a gunman, especially as someone else has pointed out they were spread out across the island. Plus I think his initial deception of asking people to gather to explain what was happening and then gunning them down would have put the fear of god into the vast majority of people on this forum if in a similar situation, saving those who've had military training or experience of combat.
We've all seen Sunshine, right? No, Money, not the one about the Goddamn sun going out.
Quote from: Razgovory on July 23, 2011, 06:40:50 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 23, 2011, 06:25:01 PM
No, I think the problem lies in the fact that you don't understand that Language is not permanent, and that the meaning of words can shift over time.
If you want to use the dictionary definition of racism, it's certainly not racism to call niggers "mud people".
Using a racial slur isn't a racist statement? I know of no dictionary where that is true. Swedish education in the English language is not a good as we were led to believe.
He said it is not "racism", not that it is not a "racist statement". Someone using a racist slur does not need to be a racist - and whether it is a racist statement or not depends on the context (one or two words are not a statement).
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 23, 2011, 07:08:38 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 23, 2011, 05:07:04 PM
At the risk of sounding a bit callous (and I am greatly moved by this tragedy), it places the guy ideologically exactly right in the center of the broadly understood populist right wing that's so popular in Europe (including, in Poland). Which hopefully will wreck huge political damage on them.
I don't think guys like him care.
Oh I know. It's just that his more rational ideological buddies will be tarnished by this, which is good.
Quote from: Grallon on July 23, 2011, 06:54:39 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 23, 2011, 06:09:56 PM
If I'd realized it was a contest, I would've started playing. :hmm:
Only in grumbler's mind. For my part I haven't even stated my thoughts on this.
-----
At first I thought it was Muslims because that's what they're often prone to do and we are collectively stupid enough to allow them within our borders in vast numbers. Then it turned out it was a native with radical methods of enacting his beliefs/ideas.
If I really wanted to be callous I could say, from a purely detached intellectual standpoint, that one has to admire the determination and steadfastness of the man - to go through with this in a coldly methodical fashion - and then to allow himself to be captured. This tells me that he intends to use the trial, and its sure to be massive media coverage, as a platform - or pulpit - from which to go on preaching his own ideas.
Everyone say this is a tragedy - I suppose it is - but is it more so than 80+ people killed in a plane crash? Or the sinking of a ship? Personally I regret the death of so many youths (especially the boys), but do I mourn? Not really. It would of course be different if this had happened here, on my own turn, with people who could have/might have been friends, family and such. In other words, people I could have identified more... intimately with. Naturally the predictable human reaction to such an event is to try and 'make sense' of it by attributing the clear-cut 'good' and 'evil' labels on every pieces of the puzzle. However as most adults will know, life is gray, not black and white.
I imagine that many of those who died did so instantly, without foreknowledge, when the bullet hit them in the head or in the back. There are worse ways to die. Like being wounded and seeing the guy come up to you and knowing he will finish you off. Or like those fleeing and drowning. Or those in the blown up buildings being eviscerated...
I suppose that what I'm trying to say is that none of us value life in the same fashion or for the same reasons. And that death will find us wherever and whenever it will.
G.
Ok, you fucking win the prize for callousness with this post. Incidentally, there is footage of many of the kids pleading for their lives. And yes, he was finishing off the wounded too.
I hope you burn in hell.
Quote from: Grallon on July 23, 2011, 06:54:39 PM
G.
I'm not sure which self-delusion I find more pathetic-your intellectual self-importance or pretense to cultural superiority. If it were up to me, you'd be permabanned for this post. Rarely have I agreed with Martinus more.
Quote from: Slargos on July 23, 2011, 08:05:22 PM
http://www.pccts.com/
Referenced in his writings.
This is getting weirder and weirder.
Well, for a nationalist, he certainly was a man with international connections.
I wouldn't say it's weird, more that it's a bunch of people that's previously been flying under the radar, mostly due to not beating up people or being loud lager louts. A new violent threat, like Baader-Meinhof-meets-Medieval-Fair.
Why didn't anyone tackle him? Obviously, that's a difficult question to answer, but given that there were people (locals) coming out with boats and rescuing some, I'd say the risk-reward analysis for the majority of the teenagers would be leaning to try and get themselves and their friends to the beach where the boats landed and a second option, hide and play dead. Since the gunman had not just an automatic rifle, but a shotgun and a Glock, tackling him when he was reloading would at least carry with it a degree of uncertainty. But I am sure any leftist organisation in Norway will have courses in how to act when under fire after this.
And Anders Behring Breivik is no nazi, nor a racist. He's a "national conservative", and wanted the Norwegian church to rejoin the Roman Catholic Church. He wanted a united Europe, it seems, but not under the "cultural marxists" of the EU. Hence the Templar stuff. The Templars never yielded to the Moslems.
Yeah, he was almost a classic clash of civilizations guy with a boner for middle ages. The kind that plays Paradox games and is a Byzanteen.
Edit: not sure why I keep writing about him in past tense. I guess it's because people like this usually do not get captured alive.
Quote from: Norgy on July 24, 2011, 03:41:35 AMBut I am sure any leftist organisation in Norway will have courses in how to act when under fire after this.
I hope it looks something like,"draw weapon, remove safety, aim center mass, fire, fire, fire".
The EU Commission has called for pan-European tightening of gun laws after this.
So, what happened?
Muslims killing good civilized people again?
The religion of peace spreading peace?
Quote from: Norgy on July 24, 2011, 03:41:35 AM
Well, for a nationalist, he certainly was a man with international connections.
I wouldn't say it's weird, more that it's a bunch of people that's previously been flying under the radar, mostly due to not beating up people or being loud lager louts. A new violent threat, like Baader-Meinhof-meets-Medieval-Fair.
It's good that we are getting back to sticking to reality rather than trying to make political hay vis a vis the FrP. This guy flew below everybody's radar. He intentionally and successfully avoided raising any red flags.
Quote from: Norgy on July 24, 2011, 03:41:35 AM
Why didn't anyone tackle him? Obviously, that's a difficult question to answer, but given that there were people (locals) coming out with boats and rescuing some, I'd say the risk-reward analysis for the majority of the teenagers would be leaning to try and get themselves and their friends to the beach where the boats landed and a second option, hide and play dead. Since the gunman had not just an automatic rifle, but a shotgun and a Glock, tackling him when he was reloading would at least carry with it a degree of uncertainty. But I am sure any leftist organisation in Norway will have courses in how to act when under fire after this.
I suspect that armed guards will be either present or nearby at all large gatherings of children in norway from now on; as well as an evacuation plan in case of armed attack.
After thinking about the issue for some time now I think the reasonable explanation is that the people on the island did not even conceive that there was a possibility of a columbine style attack on them at that place. In the same manner that before 9/11 passengers would have cooperated with hijackers, today they are happy to assist the cabin crew in any case of a disorderly passenger.
I think that the best explanation might be that the people on the island did not have the mentality to act because they did not consider that an attack of this nature could even happen to them, it follows that they did not have the mental presence to evaluate the possible consequences (being frightened makes that impossible) and, rugged collectivists that they were, they did not have the personality to act individually in the manner that charging and tackling an intruder of this kind would require.
Quote from: Norgy on July 24, 2011, 03:41:35 AM
And Anders Behring Breivik is no nazi, nor a racist. He's a "national conservative", and wanted the Norwegian church to rejoin the Roman Catholic Church. He wanted a united Europe, it seems, but not under the "cultural marxists" of the EU. Hence the Templar stuff. The Templars never yielded to the Moslems.
I think it is important for us to understand ABB's image of his enemy. To understand who he thought they were and how he thought they thought. He doesn't seem to have hated people for who they were, but for rather what they did and why they did them. He killed because his victims did not share his values. In such cases getting to know the "other" does not breed understanding and friendship, it just re-enforces and justifies the hatred. Like Sayed Qtub in '50s America and Vidkun Qvisling in '20 Russia. I think that if we wrongly identify his motives (racism, nationalism) we will attempt counter-productive solutions.
ABB and me agree on many of the things we are against; delegitimization of western culture and values; obfuscation of the nature of truth (basically we are both against multi-culturalism and post-modernism). Where me and him differ are on the issue we are for. He is a conservative christian I am a liberal atheist.
Quote from: Siege on July 24, 2011, 04:14:20 AM
So, what happened?
Norwegian Israel Friendly Christian Conservative massacres 90+ kids at labour party summer camp
Quote from: Siege on July 24, 2011, 04:14:20 AM
Muslims killing good civilized people again?
No. Christian Conservative Murdering Kids.
Quote from: Siege on July 24, 2011, 04:14:20 AM
The religion of peace spreading peace?
Christian spreading Mahem.
Quote from: Viking on July 24, 2011, 04:16:17 AM
I think it is important for us to understand ABB's image of his enemy. To understand who he thought they were and how he thought they thought. He doesn't seem to have hated people for who they were, but for rather what they did and why they did them. He killed because his victims did not share his values. In such cases getting to know the "other" does not breed understanding and friendship, it just re-enforces and justifies the hatred. Like Sayed Qtub in '50s America and Vidkun Qvisling in '20 Russia. I think that if we wrongly identify his motives (racism, nationalism) we will attempt counter-productive solutions.
ABB and me agree on many of the things we are against; delegitimization of western culture and values; obfuscation of the nature of truth (basically we are both against multi-culturalism and post-modernism). Where me and him differ are on the issue we are for. He is a conservative christian I am a liberal atheist.
I agree. Well, not with the last part, obviously, since I represent most of what you both are against, but on the solution.
Prime minister Stoltenberg said "to fight this with more democracy and more openness", and the first point of order would be to recognise criticism and alternatives to the current state of affairs as legitimate, as to avoid further cases of complete and utter alienation. No more underground activity and rejection of letters to the editor, but open and free exchange of views.
I fear the opposite will be the case.
Quote from: Martinus on July 24, 2011, 03:51:26 AM
Yeah, he was almost a classic clash of civilizations guy with a boner for middle ages. The kind that plays Paradox games and is a Byzanteen.
Edit: not sure why I keep writing about him in past tense. I guess it's because people like this usually do not get captured alive.
From his writings I think he might have planned to get arrested and is planning on using his trial as a soap box. Either that or he just ran out of ammo.
I think he might be demanding to be treated as leniently as say Souhaila Andrawes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Souhaila_Andrawes) or Mullah Krekar (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mullah_Krekar) who are both clear terrorists who the norwegian state has been very lenient on.
Quote from: Martinus on July 24, 2011, 04:10:11 AM
The EU Commission has called for pan-European tightening of gun laws after this.
Yeah, that's going to be really helpful.
Quote from: Siege on July 24, 2011, 04:14:20 AM
So, what happened?
Muslims killing good civilized people again?
The religion of peace spreading peace?
You mentioned at one point you want to increase your IQ. Well, whatever method you have been using, it doesn't work.
It's a pro-Israel Christian conservative killing socialist kids because socialists are soft on Islam.
Quote from: Norgy on July 24, 2011, 04:26:31 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 24, 2011, 04:10:11 AM
The EU Commission has called for pan-European tightening of gun laws after this.
Yeah, that's going to be really helpful.
600 people on the island and not one of them had a gun to fight back or any training on how to respond. Fucking irresponsible. <_<
Who is in charge of these camps anyway?
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on July 24, 2011, 04:34:59 AM
600 people on the island and not one of them had a gun to fight back or any training on how to respond. Fucking irresponsible. <_<
Who is in charge of these camps anyway?
Socialist Pacifists were in charge of the camp.
Quote from: Norgy on July 24, 2011, 04:24:26 AM
Quote from: Viking on July 24, 2011, 04:16:17 AM
I think it is important for us to understand ABB's image of his enemy. To understand who he thought they were and how he thought they thought. He doesn't seem to have hated people for who they were, but for rather what they did and why they did them. He killed because his victims did not share his values. In such cases getting to know the "other" does not breed understanding and friendship, it just re-enforces and justifies the hatred. Like Sayed Qtub in '50s America and Vidkun Qvisling in '20 Russia. I think that if we wrongly identify his motives (racism, nationalism) we will attempt counter-productive solutions.
ABB and me agree on many of the things we are against; delegitimization of western culture and values; obfuscation of the nature of truth (basically we are both against multi-culturalism and post-modernism). Where me and him differ are on the issue we are for. He is a conservative christian I am a liberal atheist.
I agree. Well, not with the last part, obviously, since I represent most of what you both are against, but on the solution.
Prime minister Stoltenberg said "to fight this with more democracy and more openness", and the first point of order would be to recognise criticism and alternatives to the current state of affairs as legitimate, as to avoid further cases of complete and utter alienation. No more underground activity and rejection of letters to the editor, but open and free exchange of views.
I fear the opposite will be the case.
I actually liked the PM's speech in response to this. Made me convinced that Norwegians are better people than, say, Poles.
It's official, he ran out of ammo. Nothing was done to stop him.
http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=no&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.vg.no%2Fnyheter%2Finnenriks%2Foslobomben%2Fartikkel.php%3Fartid%3D10080687
QuoteBreivik ran out of shots on Utøya
** Have a lot of hate against many
** Does even he is sane
** To be examined by a police doctor
Anders Behring Breivik (32) had run out of ammunition in the weapon he had available when he surrendered.
The terrorist accused oslo man explained that he would change the political Norway through violence.
- He has said that he went to Utøya to give Labor a notice of the doom to come if the party did not change its policy, says Lippe City.
He knew the program Utøya all week. He knew that Gro Harlem Brundtland was to visit the summer camp that day.
- He wanted to frame Labor and recruitment hardest possible. He calls the Labor-people for Marxists, says Lippe City.
Read also: Thorbjørn (22): - We were 30-40 when he started shooting. When he was finished was five to six again
He says that Behring Breivik appeared calm and balanced in the interrogation that lasted over ten hours.
- I think it has gone up to him. He believes he is the sane.
- Does he have remorse?
- I will not comment.
When he was arrested by personnel of the emergency squad, he was out of ammunition in the weapon he had available.
Read also: How was drama on Utøya - minute by minute
- He has explained that he capitulated to the Delta (the police emergency squad), says Lippe City.
Tomorrow the 32-year-old presented for incarceration.
- He would open doors. He will explain the background for their actions and why he has done for media, says Lippe City.
- He has a lot of hatred of many. This means all supporting social institutions, says Lippe City.
Breivik has an ambition to change society radically. He said he had no other options. He has tried with the pen. Post has been rejected, he explained.
Read also: made detailed terrorist manifesto before the attacks
32-year-old has worked politically, but said that change has not happened and that violent revolution is cruel but necessary.
- It was an attack on Labour. He believes he has a mission, says defense lawyer.
- Why has he used a method that has previously been associated with the Islamists?
- He says he has seen that there has been no way but to use violence. He has tried all other avenues. He has written letters to the editor in various newspapers about their thoughts, but have not received the letters in print, says the lawyer.
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on July 24, 2011, 04:34:59 AM
Quote from: Norgy on July 24, 2011, 04:26:31 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 24, 2011, 04:10:11 AM
The EU Commission has called for pan-European tightening of gun laws after this.
Yeah, that's going to be really helpful.
600 people on the island and not one of them had a gun to fight back or any training on how to respond. Fucking irresponsible. <_<
Who is in charge of these camps anyway?
These were kids. It was an event for teenagers (presumedly, with some tutors and staff but that's it). And they were pacifist socialists.
Quote from: Martinus on July 24, 2011, 04:37:12 AM
Quote from: Norgy on July 24, 2011, 04:24:26 AM
I agree. Well, not with the last part, obviously, since I represent most of what you both are against, but on the solution.
Prime minister Stoltenberg said "to fight this with more democracy and more openness", and the first point of order would be to recognise criticism and alternatives to the current state of affairs as legitimate, as to avoid further cases of complete and utter alienation. No more underground activity and rejection of letters to the editor, but open and free exchange of views.
I fear the opposite will be the case.
I actually liked the PM's speech in response to this. Made me convinced that Norwegians are better people than, say, Poles.
Thats pretty much what the then PM said about 9/11.
As a general rule please don't lay up softballs about poles being useless like that it makes me feel conflicted between being cruel and taking it and annoyed that I'm to nice to exploit it.
Quote from: Martinus on July 24, 2011, 04:38:31 AM
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on July 24, 2011, 04:34:59 AM
Quote from: Norgy on July 24, 2011, 04:26:31 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 24, 2011, 04:10:11 AM
The EU Commission has called for pan-European tightening of gun laws after this.
Yeah, that's going to be really helpful.
600 people on the island and not one of them had a gun to fight back or any training on how to respond. Fucking irresponsible. <_<
Who is in charge of these camps anyway?
These were kids. It was an event for teenagers (presumedly, with some tutors and staff but that's it). And they were pacifist socialists.
I do want to point out that the leader of these pacifist socialists legged it and jumped on the only boat off the island.
Well, they are better people than Americans, too. Happy?
Lippestad became Lippe City in Google translate? :lol:
Quote from: Norgy on July 24, 2011, 04:43:12 AM
Lippestad became Lippe City in Google translate? :lol:
Norwegian grammar ftl.
You don't put yourself in charge of 600 kids without the ability to protect them in at least the most minimal way. That's an abrogation of the most basic responsibility.
Question: How do these vehicles get to the island? Is there a causeway that they drive? I saw vans.
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on July 24, 2011, 05:12:28 AM
You don't put yourself in charge of 600 kids without the ability to protect them in at least the most minimal way. That's an abrogation of the most basic responsibility.
Question: How do these vehicles get to the island? Is there a causeway that they drive? I saw vans.
Yes, the next time I arrange a summer camp I'll hire mercenaries to do security.
Quote from: Viking on July 24, 2011, 05:18:58 AM
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on July 24, 2011, 05:12:28 AM
You don't put yourself in charge of 600 kids without the ability to protect them in at least the most minimal way. That's an abrogation of the most basic responsibility.
Question: How do these vehicles get to the island? Is there a causeway that they drive? I saw vans.
Yes, the next time I arrange a summer camp I'll hire mercenaries to do security.
Four or five $70 revolvers put somewhere the counselors can get them would do the trick.
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on July 24, 2011, 05:23:00 AM
Four or five $70 revolvers put somewhere the counselors can get them would do the trick.
Tell me, which is cheaper, the merc or the extra insurance cost of having stray guns lying about.
N.B. plus, I'd like to sell the parent that agrees to send it's kid to the summer camp with stray guns included a bridge in brooklyn.
Quote from: Viking on July 24, 2011, 05:30:20 AM
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on July 24, 2011, 05:23:00 AM
Four or five $70 revolvers put somewhere the counselors can get them would do the trick.
Tell me, which is cheaper, the merc or the extra insurance cost of having stray guns lying about.
Extra insurance costs. Funny. :P
They don't have to pay more because they are unarmed?
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on July 24, 2011, 05:37:18 AM
Quote from: Viking on July 24, 2011, 05:30:20 AM
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on July 24, 2011, 05:23:00 AM
Four or five $70 revolvers put somewhere the counselors can get them would do the trick.
Tell me, which is cheaper, the merc or the extra insurance cost of having stray guns lying about.
Extra insurance costs. Funny. :P
They don't have to pay more because they are unarmed?
The guns are much more likely to kill a random camper than prevent a death by a terrorist. So the insurance cost would be much higher since AUF would be liable for the consequences of any use of the gun.
We found somebody who actually did something to save lives.
http://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?hl=en&ie=UTF8&prev=_t&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=no&tl=en&twu=1&u=http://www.dagbladet.no/2011/07/24/nyheter/innenriks/terror/utoya/anders_behring_breivik/17436710/&usg=ALkJrhiu1OGY3BBiMUZJ1HL66_Bd4dqiYQ
QuoteHe saved 20 to 30 young people from terrorist on Utøya
Camping tourist with military backgrounds realized at once that it was shot with automatic weapons on the island.
Evolution CAMPING (Dagbladet): Marcel Gleffe was one of the very first to come out to Utøya after the terrorist Anders Behring Breivik began to shoot and kill young people on Friday. Gleffe on holiday at the campsite Utvika next Utøya family.
- We sat around the table on the outside of the caravan. The time was probably between five and six. We drank coffee and talked about Oslo, because the neighbors came running and told of the disaster there. Then we heard a single shot from Utøya. Then came a burst from an automatic weapon, said Marcel Gleffe says to Dagbladet.
Military Background
He lives to normal on Siggerud in Ski, but comes originally from Germany, has military background and has been on overseas missions in the past.
- I recognized the sound of automatic weapon away, he said.
The man took a pair of binoculars and ran to a vantage point from Utøya.
- Then I saw two youths who swam from the island. Then came a smoke grenade and several perfumes from automatic weapon. I looked through the binoculars that there were more people in the water, he said.
Gleffe ran back to the caravan and took the keys to his boat, a small pioneer 15
When Gleffe came to the first youths in the water shouted: "Are you the police, are you the police?". He explains that he threw lifejackets to them, before he drove towards the island.
- The young people I met told me that the perpetrator was a police officer. The first thing I picked up called "terrorist, terrorist, terrorist!".
- I took four to five trips
Gleffe began to take up as many as he could in the boat. He brought the boat close into the shore of the island, and came with the land with binoculars to look for mass killing her husband.
- I took between four and five walks. After the police asked me to stop, he said.
He estimates that he had with him 20 to 30 young people in the boats.
- The young people were good. They supported each other and were organized, and they told anyone who needed first aid and first had to be taken into the boat. "You must take with him, you must take with him, they said," says Gleffe.
Not afraid of life
Camping tourist think of the young people he picked up was badly injured.
- Did the young people something to you?
- They were happy to get help, but they were unsure whom they could trust.
- Did you fear for your life?
- No, I just did it on instinct. You do not get scared in such a situation, you just do what it takes. I know the difference between fireworks and gunfire. I knew what it was about, and that it was nonsense.
- Everything came too late
- Cooperation with the police and rescue crews afterwards was awesome, but it all came too late. The first time I was out I was all alone, he said.
There were several individuals who started the first emergency personnel. Dagbladet has talked with a resident was on the spot that says Gleffe shouted "we need more boats, disaster, disaster!".
- He was very focused. His effort must be commended. There were also others who made a great effort, said a resident told Dagbladet.
Altough MiM's take on the issue clearly shows he has no idea on how pussified Europe actually is (which is of course nice until someone, like this dude, decides to take advantage of it) and I am not calling for armed guards in youth camps, there are appaling things here.
They stuffed 600 young people to a tiny island, and either had no plans for evacuation, or were too in panic to even try and enact them, not sure which is worse. And if the camp leader indeed fled? Wow.
Quote from: Viking on July 24, 2011, 05:43:18 AM
He brought the boat close into the shore of the island, and came with the land with binoculars to look for mass killing her husband.
What?
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on July 24, 2011, 04:34:59 AM
Quote from: Norgy on July 24, 2011, 04:26:31 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 24, 2011, 04:10:11 AM
The EU Commission has called for pan-European tightening of gun laws after this.
Yeah, that's going to be really helpful.
600 people on the island and not one of them had a gun to fight back or any training on how to respond. Fucking irresponsible. <_<
Who is in charge of these camps anyway?
An island full of teenagers? Oh yeah, that's smart. I wouldn't trust them with sporks and fire extinguishers, let alone a shotgun case.
Quote from: Bluebook on July 24, 2011, 06:07:27 AM
Quote from: Viking on July 24, 2011, 05:43:18 AM
He brought the boat close into the shore of the island, and came with the land with binoculars to look for mass killing her husband.
What?
Google Translate, you're gonna have to use a bit of goodwill.
QuoteHan førte båten nært inn mot land av øya, og fulgte med mot land med en kikkert for å se etter massedrapsmannen
= He brought the boat close to the shore of the island and with a pair of binoculars to look out for the mass murderer.
I've already seen calls for more repressive measures against free speech, exactly the opposite of what is necessary.
This man writes in his diary that his original plan was getting his compilation (he didn't write all of it, or from the looks of it even the majority of it, himself.) published by ordinary means, and when this failed he went to "plan B".
Norwegians are by no means the worst offenders in this, and I'm surprised this act doesn't happen in Sweden before it does in Norway since Swedish media are almost on a North Korean level when it comes to obfuscation, lies and blanket omission.
It's simple reason: Put a lid on a boiling pot and you get a very predictable result.
Are you guys still accessing his writings and websites and shit?
Over here, we take that shit down macht schnell.
Quote from: Viking on July 24, 2011, 04:16:17 AM
ABB and me agree on many of the things we are against; delegitimization of western culture and values; obfuscation of the nature of truth (basically we are both against multi-culturalism and post-modernism). Where me and him differ are on the issue we are for. He is a conservative christian I am a liberal atheist.
The more I read what he has compiled, the more I come to the same conclusion. The man makes very good points. In light of his beliefs the attack itself can even become perfectly reasonable.
It is a disturbing thought.
Quote from: Slargos on July 24, 2011, 06:26:29 AM
Quote from: Viking on July 24, 2011, 04:16:17 AM
ABB and me agree on many of the things we are against; delegitimization of western culture and values; obfuscation of the nature of truth (basically we are both against multi-culturalism and post-modernism). Where me and him differ are on the issue we are for. He is a conservative christian I am a liberal atheist.
The more I read what he has compiled, the more I come to the same conclusion. The man makes very good points. In light of his beliefs the attack itself can even become perfectly reasonable.
It is a disturbing thought.
This is why we take that shit down. Morons like you.
My local newspaper says that there are still 4 people missing from Trondheim and 8 (including the four) from the region in total. Add that to the 12 missing from Nordland, that means South Trøndelag AUF, North Trøndelag AUF and Nordland AUF have together still 20 kids missing. Note, these provinces are some of the furthest from Oslo and not heavily populated. What a place like Oslo AUF might have of still missing I can only guess.
The police still are not releasing any info about the number of kids still missing. 3 out of 21 states have a total of 20 still missing.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 24, 2011, 06:21:41 AM
Are you guys still accessing his writings and websites and shit?
Over here, we take that shit down macht schnell.
It's on youtube and a bunch of filesharing sites. You can't take it down as quickly as it can be put up without employing some sort of adaptive robot, since people will "omg information wantz friidom".
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 24, 2011, 06:28:07 AM
Quote from: Slargos on July 24, 2011, 06:26:29 AM
Quote from: Viking on July 24, 2011, 04:16:17 AM
ABB and me agree on many of the things we are against; delegitimization of western culture and values; obfuscation of the nature of truth (basically we are both against multi-culturalism and post-modernism). Where me and him differ are on the issue we are for. He is a conservative christian I am a liberal atheist.
The more I read what he has compiled, the more I come to the same conclusion. The man makes very good points. In light of his beliefs the attack itself can even become perfectly reasonable.
It is a disturbing thought.
This is why we take that shit down. Morons like you.
Don't knock it until you've read it.
Quote from: Tamas on July 24, 2011, 06:04:17 AM
Altough MiM's take on the issue clearly shows he has no idea on how pussified Europe actually is (which is of course nice until someone, like this dude, decides to take advantage of it) and I am not calling for armed guards in youth camps, there are appaling things here.
They stuffed 600 young people to a tiny island, and either had no plans for evacuation, or were too in panic to even try and enact them, not sure which is worse. And if the camp leader indeed fled? Wow.
Yes, a quick check reveals that the homicide rate in Norway is 0.6 per 100,000 inhabitants compared to the USA's 5.0 per 100,000. Even with this massacre their rate for this year will still only be half that of the USA.
So the security situation is very different and issuing handguns to all and sundry could well lead to far more deaths on average.
This situation makes people pretty vulnerable when an armed person runs amok. We have an incident like this every few years or so in the UK, but the perpetrator usually gets taken out after a dozen killings or so. The island is not that far from Oslo, seems to me that the camp leaders could have phoned the cops and got a helicopter-full of armed police there pretty quick..................why didn't that happen?
Quote from: Norgy on July 24, 2011, 04:43:12 AM
Lippestad became Lippe City in Google translate? :lol:
Preposterous! (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lippe)
Quote from: Viking on July 24, 2011, 06:14:43 AM
Quote from: Bluebook on July 24, 2011, 06:07:27 AM
Quote from: Viking on July 24, 2011, 05:43:18 AM
He brought the boat close into the shore of the island, and came with the land with binoculars to look for mass killing her husband.
What?
Google Translate, you're gonna have to use a bit of goodwill.
QuoteHan førte båten nært inn mot land av øya, og fulgte med mot land med en kikkert for å se etter massedrapsmannen
= He brought the boat close to the shore of the island and with a pair of binoculars to look out for the mass murderer.
Ah, thanks.
By the way, did you guys see this from his journal?
I continued to synthesize acetylsalicylic acid from aspirin.
It's the Eurovision finale today. I just love Eurovision...!:-) It's a lot of crap music but I think it's a
great show all in all. I've seen all the semi finals and will take the time of to watch it later today,
online. My country has a crap, politically correct contribution as always. An asylum seeker from
Kenya, performing a bongo song, very representative of Europe and my country... In any case; I
hope Germany wins!
Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on July 24, 2011, 06:33:24 AM
Quote from: Tamas on July 24, 2011, 06:04:17 AM
Altough MiM's take on the issue clearly shows he has no idea on how pussified Europe actually is (which is of course nice until someone, like this dude, decides to take advantage of it) and I am not calling for armed guards in youth camps, there are appaling things here.
They stuffed 600 young people to a tiny island, and either had no plans for evacuation, or were too in panic to even try and enact them, not sure which is worse. And if the camp leader indeed fled? Wow.
Yes, a quick check reveals that the homicide rate in Norway is 0.6 per 100,000 inhabitants compared to the USA's 5.0 per 100,000. Even with this massacre their rate for this year will still only be half that of the USA.
So the security situation is very different and issuing handguns to all and sundry could well lead to far more deaths on average.
This situation makes people pretty vulnerable when an armed person runs amok. We have an incident like this every few years or so in the UK, but the perpetrator usually gets taken out after a dozen killings or so. The island is not that far from Oslo, seems to me that the camp leaders could have phoned the cops and got a helicopter-full of armed police there pretty quick..................why didn't that happen?
The same reason no one thought to tackle him. We as a society are not equipped to deal with these types of situations. This is both a wonderful thing and a terrible curse, since on the island of Dodos, there is peace and plenty for all. However, when you suddenly introduce predators, the sedate creatures have no defense against them.
17:27: Shooting on Utøya gets reported to the local police district.
17:30: Message relayed to the Oslo police operations center.
17:38: Oslo police district receives a request for support from Nordre Buskerud [local] police district.
17:52: First police patrol arrives in the area – has to wait for properly suitable boat.
18:03: Message that boat was on the way
18:09: SWAT is on the mainland
18:25: SWAT lands on Utøya
18:27: Perp apprehended.
I expect the problem lies somewhere around 17:52 where instead of going in with whatever piece of lumber that would float (and there would be plenty to go around) they waited for SWAT and gave him another 35 minutes to go around executing people. 25 minutes response time sounds a bit high, frankly, but it can probably be explained by the diversion attack.
I also don't know if there's a contingency plan for the insertion of SWAT via helicopter, but I would expect there isn't.
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on July 24, 2011, 05:12:28 AM
You don't put yourself in charge of 600 kids without the ability to protect them in at least the most minimal way. That's an abrogation of the most basic responsibility.
Question: How do these vehicles get to the island? Is there a causeway that they drive? I saw vans.
Ferries. I would expect the small kind with a loading capacity of 1-3 vehicles.
Quote from: Norgy on July 24, 2011, 04:43:12 AM
Lippestad became Lippe City in Google translate? :lol:
Didn't you notice that it also translates "Oslo" to "New York City" ? :D
http://sverigeidag.wordpress.com/2011/07/24/expert-say-multiculturalism-is-to-blame-for-227-in-norway/
Quote from: Slargos on July 24, 2011, 06:19:47 AM
I've already seen calls for more repressive measures against free speech, exactly the opposite of what is necessary.
It's simple reason: Put a lid on a boiling pot and you get a very predictable result.
For once, I am in complete agreement. De-legitimising criticism will lead to more alienation. And I don't think that's bending over for terrorists.
In a bit of a dick move, the Newspapers published ABB's name before his parents were informed. They learned through the media.
Missing update, it seems that Trondheim is overrepresented in the missing. A total of 25 people are still missing from Utøya.
There were two security guards on the island who are missing. Obviously unarmed and probably dead.
Quote from: Slargos on July 24, 2011, 07:11:09 AM
http://sverigeidag.wordpress.com/2011/07/24/expert-say-multiculturalism-is-to-blame-for-227-in-norway/
I fully respect the individual's need to express disgusting opinions through this blog that are hyperbolic and based on cherry-picking. :yeah:
Quote from: Norgy on July 24, 2011, 07:19:12 AM
Quote from: Slargos on July 24, 2011, 07:11:09 AM
http://sverigeidag.wordpress.com/2011/07/24/expert-say-multiculturalism-is-to-blame-for-227-in-norway/ (http://sverigeidag.wordpress.com/2011/07/24/expert-say-multiculturalism-is-to-blame-for-227-in-norway/)
I fully respect the individual's need to express disgusting opinions through this blog that are hyperbolic and based on cherry-picking. :yeah:
Great. :hug:
Did you actually watch the embedded video though? It's a newscast from RT featuring a guy supposedly from the Norwegian Institute for International Affairs.
Quote from: Slargos on July 24, 2011, 07:26:47 AM
Great. :hug:
Did you actually watch the embedded video though? It's a newscast from RT featuring a guy supposedly from the Norwegian Institute for International Affairs.
Yes. It was the rest of the blog that I found rather completely over the top.
Helge Lurås is indeed with NUPI. I agree that participation is important, and that extends to all areas of policy formulation, not just one isolated area like immigration/integration. The idea that there is an increasing gap between "the ordinary man" and the "elite" isn't exactly ground-breaking and was formulated by Michels as the Iron Law of Oligarchy already around 1910. What is surprising, is that Norway supposedly is such an example of the "elite" vs "the people", based on the fact the perceived distance between the grassroots and the elite traditionally has been very short.
There are numerous examples of grassroots movements gaining both political and organisational power, like the anti-EU movement, the early environmentalists in the 1970s, and indeed the early Labour movement and the Progress Party, not to mention the liberal movement in the later decades of the 19th century that eventually broke up the union with Sweden.
Maybe it's the taboo of immigration? Maybe the debate was hijacked on an early stage by racists on the one hand and rather doctrinarian leftists on the other back in the 1970s and 1980s, so that any view is inevitably construed as part of either this or that dogma?
I am not sure. But, strangely enough, the mass execution of several members of the party I've been a member of and voted for much of my adult life has made me question what could possibly lead to the Labour Party being a target. It could be that the open debate about immigration and integration that happened earlier this year just is too little, too late and too cosmetic.
I have no idea. I need to brood over this. That's what we do in Norway. Brood. Then we either write a letter to the editor or slaughter something. A moose. Or 8 dozen teenagers.
Quote from: Viking on July 24, 2011, 07:16:19 AM
In a bit of a dick move, the Newspapers published ABB's name before his parents were informed. They learned through the media.
Well, how many of the victims' parents learned through the media, too?
Quote from: Slargos on July 24, 2011, 07:11:09 AM
http://sverigeidag.wordpress.com/2011/07/24/expert-say-multiculturalism-is-to-blame-for-227-in-norway/
I haven't read the link, but you must be kidding me. I didn't expect anyone would go on a public record with the "blame the victim" routine.
Quote from: Slargos on July 24, 2011, 07:26:47 AM
Quote from: Norgy on July 24, 2011, 07:19:12 AM
Quote from: Slargos on July 24, 2011, 07:11:09 AM
http://sverigeidag.wordpress.com/2011/07/24/expert-say-multiculturalism-is-to-blame-for-227-in-norway/ (http://sverigeidag.wordpress.com/2011/07/24/expert-say-multiculturalism-is-to-blame-for-227-in-norway/)
I fully respect the individual's need to express disgusting opinions through this blog that are hyperbolic and based on cherry-picking. :yeah:
Great. :hug:
Did you actually watch the embedded video though? It's a newscast from RT featuring a guy supposedly from the Norwegian Institute for International Affairs.
NUPI is part of the "Marxist Multicultural Elite" and Lurås doesn't agree with ABB, but rather points out what reasons ABB gives himself for doing it. The title of the blog is very misleading. A better Title would be.
"Expert says multiculturalism is the excuse used to justify 227 in norway."
Quote from: Norgy on July 24, 2011, 07:43:34 AM
I have no idea. I need to brood over this. That's what we do in Norway. Brood. Then we either write a letter to the editor or slaughter something. A moose. Or 8 dozen teenagers.
Brooding's not good for you, especially not for you.
Quote from: Norgy on July 24, 2011, 07:43:34 AM
Yes. It was the rest of the blog that I found rather completely over the top.
Don't shoot the messenger. I've never seen the blog before, I just found the link.
Quote
I am not sure. But, strangely enough, the mass execution of several members of the party I've been a member of and voted for much of my adult life has made me question what could possibly lead to the Labour Party being a target. It could be that the open debate about immigration and integration that happened earlier this year just is too little, too late and too cosmetic.
I have no idea. I need to brood over this. That's what we do in Norway. Brood. Then we either write a letter to the editor or slaughter something. A moose. Or 8 dozen teenagers.
Taking things
to etterettning is I think the popular cliché I hate the most about Norway.
"Oh, so we built a tunnel that collapsed on someone? We must take this under serious consideration."
Haha, fuck you, we'd do it all over again because it was cheap. Now we will shuffle some papers and look very serious about the whole thing. We hope you will forget about it very soon, because we're already building another tunnel to the same specs.But yes, attempting to keep dissent down by suppression will only cause it to explode sooner or later. You reap what you sow.
Quote from: Viking on July 24, 2011, 07:50:32 AM
Quote from: Slargos on July 24, 2011, 07:26:47 AM
Quote from: Norgy on July 24, 2011, 07:19:12 AM
Quote from: Slargos on July 24, 2011, 07:11:09 AM
http://sverigeidag.wordpress.com/2011/07/24/expert-say-multiculturalism-is-to-blame-for-227-in-norway/ (http://sverigeidag.wordpress.com/2011/07/24/expert-say-multiculturalism-is-to-blame-for-227-in-norway/)
I fully respect the individual's need to express disgusting opinions through this blog that are hyperbolic and based on cherry-picking. :yeah:
Great. :hug:
Did you actually watch the embedded video though? It's a newscast from RT featuring a guy supposedly from the Norwegian Institute for International Affairs.
NUPI is part of the "Marxist Multicultural Elite" and Lurås doesn't agree with ABB, but rather points out what reasons ABB gives himself for doing it. The title of the blog is very misleading. A better Title would be.
"Expert says multiculturalism is the excuse used to justify 227 in norway."
:lol:
In that case he words himself very poorly.
Quote from: Slargos on July 24, 2011, 07:53:53 AM
But yes, attempting to keep dissent down by suppression will only cause it to explode sooner or later. You reap what you sow.
So in other words, the victims had it coming for not sharing the belief that Europe is under siege? :yucky:
Quote from: Norgy on July 24, 2011, 08:22:40 AM
Quote from: Slargos on July 24, 2011, 07:53:53 AM
But yes, attempting to keep dissent down by suppression will only cause it to explode sooner or later. You reap what you sow.
So in other words, the victims had it coming for not sharing the belief that Europe is under siege? :yucky:
Only if by "in other words" you mean "to rephrase your sentence in a way that makes no sense even by the most extremely unfriendly interpretation of what you actually said"
I think it is rather silly how opponents of multiculturalism fail to understand that it is not an ideology in itself, but rather an attempt to keep the lid on globalisation to prevent it from boiling over into some sort of global upheaval.
The West is not a victim of multiculturalism or even a besieged fortress. We are beneficiaries of globalisation, and it has progressed from the 19th century's raw material globalisation to the 20th century's goods and services globalisation to the 21st centuries's employment market globalisation. The world has changed - largely, differences similar to the old class divides are no longer vertical but geographical - we, in the West are the upper class, the "third world" is the working/lower class.
Any form of isolationism or autarky is simply unworkable in the modern world - and more importantly, the anti-immigration crowd would not be willing to pay the price for it, economically. And if we continue treating the third world as helots, slaves and serfs, without rights, we will have a revolution on our hands. So the question is not if we should let immigrants in, but how.
Japan seems to be working just fine.
Quote from: Norgy on July 24, 2011, 07:43:34 AM
I have no idea. I need to brood over this. That's what we do in Norway. Brood. Then we either write a letter to the editor or slaughter something. A moose. Or 8 dozen teenagers.
I think the letter to editor thing is a red herring. The guy's views, as expressed in his manifesto, are not non-violent. He has been posing with guns, causing for "decimating" his political enemies, or for a violent conflict with Muslims. Even by the most generous standards, this speech would be unlikely to be protected.
As I said in my previous post, we are going through a huge social and demographic shift, one similar to the great revolutions of ages past (only that now it is not happening within a single national or a group of nations, but rather it is global). People who are not able to deal with it rationally will react violently. There is no deeper background to it.
Quote from: Slargos on July 24, 2011, 09:07:01 AM
Japan seems to be working just fine.
Really? It is mired with an almost chronic stagnation, with highest suicide rate among the "civilized nations" and working hours and conditions that would be unacceptable not just to welfare state accustomed Norwegians, but pretty much anyone in Europe. As I said, if you want autarky, you need to pay a heavy price.
Quote from: Martinus on July 24, 2011, 09:10:23 AM
Quote from: Slargos on July 24, 2011, 09:07:01 AM
Japan seems to be working just fine.
Really? It is mired with an almost chronic stagnation, with highest suicide rate among the "civilized nations" and working hours and conditions that would be unacceptable not just to welfare state accustomed Norwegians, but pretty much anyone in Europe. As I said, if you want autarky, you need to pay a heavy price.
The price you pay for multiculturalism is going to be infinitely higher, you simply won't pay it all at once.
Quote from: Slargos on July 24, 2011, 07:53:53 AMBut yes, attempting to keep dissent down by suppression will only cause it to explode sooner or later. You reap what you sow.
Exactly. Which is exactly what the anti-multiculturalist crowd is proposing, only on a global scale.
I'm a strong advocate of immigration as I think it can be the fuel of a country's economy, especially if the country has low natural birth rate.
However, and I am biased, I prefer the melting-pot to multiculturalism. To me the viewpoint that immigrants should live in their own separate societies as part of the larger host country's culture is the worst kind of "-ism" (I won't say racism or nationalism or whatever because I don't want to get into a wank fest over what proper "-ism" it should be termed.)
To me thus multiculturalism says this:
1. The immigrants home culture must take precedence over the culture of their host country, for them personally it is extremely important they maintain their own distinct culture.
2. The host country's culture must not be diluted by mixing directly with the immigrants culture, otherwise it would "dilute" the host country's culture.
Instead, there is this desire to have a "patchwork" society in which there are multiple distinct cultures that do not significantly mix together. That to me is the worst way of doing things and I think it can lead to horrible results all around. It makes it harder for immigrants to become part of mainstream society and to succeed economically (many of multicultural Europe's immigrant groups have much higher unemployment rates than the country at large) and it also leads some in the "host culture" to feel that they are being slowly made into minorities in their own land, in essence it makes them feel as though they are being invaded and conquered by a thousand cuts. I am not talking about whether that actually happens or doesn't happen, only about how certain people feel--and I think that is how this Breivik fellow indeed felt. You shouldn't model your society based on the actions of a mad man, but it doesn't hurt to sometimes correctly recognize that the mad man was a result of a certain system. To me one loan gunman killing 100 or even 500 people isn't reason to change anything, so that is neither here nor there. But the two points I outlined above are to me, much more significant in the long term than a single person killing a lot of people.
In the United States our immigrants have not had their culture destroyed by the greater American culture. Instead, they adopted a culture that was foreign to their own, but in doing so they changed American culture itself and made American culture better for it. It also has meant that the children and grand children of these immigrants have essentially had no limits on what they can achieve in America.
Quote from: Slargos on July 24, 2011, 09:12:23 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 24, 2011, 09:10:23 AM
Quote from: Slargos on July 24, 2011, 09:07:01 AM
Japan seems to be working just fine.
Really? It is mired with an almost chronic stagnation, with highest suicide rate among the "civilized nations" and working hours and conditions that would be unacceptable not just to welfare state accustomed Norwegians, but pretty much anyone in Europe. As I said, if you want autarky, you need to pay a heavy price.
The price you pay for multiculturalism is going to be infinitely higher, you simply won't pay it all at once.
Conversely, the price Japan is paying is getting more and more insufficient to get them what they want. Eventually they will be left by the wayside by the fastest growing economies, such as the BRIC.
The situation of Europe is like that of landed, feudal nobles at the beginning of the industrial revolution. We have bold upstarts (the BRIC for example) which we tend to ignore (although more and more, we see kings begging for loans from the bourgeoisie - just see how our relationship with China has changed) and we have our serfs and workers who are becoming more and more "uppity" and want to get into the position we have (i.e. the poor, immigration-exporting countries). If we respond by closing ourselves off, we will end up on the guillotine.
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on July 24, 2011, 09:14:25 AM
I'm a strong advocate of immigration as I think it can be the fuel of a country's economy, especially if the country has low natural birth rate.
However, and I am biased, I prefer the melting-pot to multiculturalism. To me the viewpoint that immigrants should live in their own separate societies as part of the larger host country's culture is the worst kind of "-ism" (I won't say racism or nationalism or whatever because I don't want to get into a wank fest over what proper "-ism" it should be termed.)
To me thus multiculturalism says this:
1. The immigrants home culture must take precedence over the culture of their host country, for them personally it is extremely important they maintain their own distinct culture.
2. The host country's culture must not be diluted by mixing directly with the immigrants culture, otherwise it would "dilute" the host country's culture.
Instead, there is this desire to have a "patchwork" society in which there are multiple distinct cultures that do not significantly mix together. That to me is the worst way of doing things and I think it can lead to horrible results all around. It makes it harder for immigrants to become part of mainstream society and to succeed economically (many of multicultural Europe's immigrant groups have much higher unemployment rates than the country at large) and it also leads some in the "host culture" to feel that they are being slowly made into minorities in their own land, in essence it makes them feel as though they are being invaded and conquered by a thousand cuts. I am not talking about whether that actually happens or doesn't happen, only about how certain people feel--and I think that is how this Breivik fellow indeed felt. You shouldn't model your society based on the actions of a mad man, but it doesn't hurt to sometimes correctly recognize that the mad man was a result of a certain system. To me one loan gunman killing 100 or even 500 people isn't reason to change anything, so that is neither here nor there. But the two points I outlined above are to me, much more significant in the long term than a single person killing a lot of people.
In the United States our immigrants have not had their culture destroyed by the greater American culture. Instead, they adopted a culture that was foreign to their own, but in doing so they changed American culture itself and made American culture better for it. It also has meant that the children and grand children of these immigrants have essentially had no limits on what they can achieve in America.
I am pretty certain a lot of Europeans think of the melting pot concept when they talk about "multiculturalism".
People expect immigrants not only to feel loyalty to their new country here, but also to pretty much change their religion, customs, language etc. and even then they won't be the "true nationals" because this requires you to have a specific skin color and ethnicity.
Also, I think it is a bit disingenuous for Americans to look down upon Europeans and talk about their melting pot superiority. The melting pot doctrine developed when the majority of immigrants to the US were fellow Europeans (or, at most, Latinos, who are also pretty European - at least their are Christian). When non-European, non-Christian immigrants were coming - and not that many did - they were slaughtered, like the Chinese in California, or deprived of constitutional rights - like the Japanese during WW2.
You never had to deal with mass immigration from Muslim countries.
If I wanted the opinion of an infamously idiotic Polish faggot I would have said so.
America has by the way, done a fine job of integrating people from Asia. Yes, Japanese Americans suffered during WWII but now they are very integrated. We have lots of immigrants that come from Southeast Asia, especially Vietnam, the Philippines and we have significant immigration from India.
We do not have the same issues that Europe has had because our population is vastly larger, at the level of population of the United States - 300 million, it is essentially inconceivable that you would have a large enough mass migration as to constitute a significant portion of our population. Much of that is because the United States collected Europes excess people for 150 years and we continue to breed at a higher rate, so we are less susceptible to being put in the position of European countries. But that's a result of our historic melting pot society, it is because of that society we have such a large population.
Hate to burst your bubble, but the population of Europe is a bit higher than that of the US. :mellow:
I think we do need some definitions here, since everybody seems to have his own definition of multi-culturalism. The thing is that it is a word with alot of associations to it outside of it's definition. I'm going to make a stab at it..
Multi culturalism is a set of ideas and attitudes which include
- the idea that no culture is superior to another culture
- the idea that inherited culture is vital so self image and self worth and must be cultivated
- the idea that assimilation is an act of hegemonic cultural repression
- the idea that one's own successful; since non failed culture has developed multi culturalism in it's own sphere; seeks to impose hegemony on other cultures
This is very much a case of the ideas of the '68ers with their post-modernism and cultural relativism and rejection of truth and Truth as mere constructs surviving into today. Obviously I am against it.
The US melting pot works precisely because you can bring your own food, your own god and your own music, but you will damn sure adopt the american dream and the values of the enlightenment. Multi-culturalism and cultural relativism means that societies like Norway cannot insist that immigrants adopt the norwegian dream and cannot insist that immigrants adopt the values of the enlightenment because we cannot, as a society, assert that our values are better than theirs.
http://translate.google.no/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=no&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=no&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aftenposten.no%2Fnyheter%2Firiks%2Farticle4182373.ece
I don't know whether to :bleeding: or :XD: or :x
Quote from: Slargos on July 24, 2011, 09:33:59 AM
Hate to burst your bubble, but the population of Europe is a bit higher than that of the US. :mellow:
I'm talking about individual European countries, not Europe as a whole. If all of Europe's Muslim immigration was evenly distributed based on percentage of European total population cross all of geographical Europe (including European Russia) then this issue would not be nearly as notable.
Quote from: Martinus on July 24, 2011, 09:20:08 AM
I am pretty certain a lot of Europeans think of the melting pot concept when they talk about "multiculturalism".
People expect immigrants not only to feel loyalty to their new country here, but also to pretty much change their religion, customs, language etc. and even then they won't be the "true nationals" because this requires you to have a specific skin color and ethnicity.
Europeans do not think of the melting pot, or, if they do, they do not understand the melting pot.
The problem here is that Europeans (except england and possible also france) do not accept the concept of assimilation. They cheer multi-culturalism but if their neighborhood fills with pakis they move. They don't associate with them, join the same clubs, organisations or have immigrant friends (unless they are token). One of the results of this is that those who try to assimilate are rejected and are forced by society to be defined as the minority and thus will find themselves forced into a self image that includes the worst reactionary and oreo (from the US black on the outside white on the inside criticism of bill cosby) hating elements of society. A person can only take so much repetitive "whites hates us", "whites are racists", "we are oppressed" bs, validated by multi-culturalists, before they start believing it. Once they believe it they are lost to society.
So what was with some Islamicists apparently claiming responsibility for this when they caught the guy and he was actually a far right anti-muslim sort?
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on July 24, 2011, 09:29:02 AM
If I wanted the opinion of an infamously idiotic Polish faggot I would have said so.
Gee, nice ad hom. Go fuck yourself, cunt.
Quote from: Tyr on July 24, 2011, 09:47:27 AM
So what was with some Islamicists apparently claiming responsibility for this when they caught the guy and he was actually a far right anti-muslim sort?
It's pretty common but often falls under the radar. Anytime there is a major terrorist attack there almost always multiple groups that claim responsibility, all of the groups other than the actual perpetrators are just doing it to get attention. Typically the intelligence services know the real culprits within the first week or so and you quickly never hear about the other claimants again.
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on July 24, 2011, 09:38:37 AM
I'm talking about individual European countries, not Europe as a whole. If all of Europe's Muslim immigration was evenly distributed based on percentage of European total population cross all of geographical Europe (including European Russia) then this issue would not be nearly as notable.
Numbers of Muslims
France - 3.5 M
Germany - 4.0 M
Netherlands - 0.9 M
Britain - 1.6 M
USA - 2.4
Canada - 0.7 M
So, way many more immigrant muslims in many european countries than in the US.
Quote from: Martinus on July 24, 2011, 09:48:52 AM
Gee, nice ad hom. Go fuck yourself, cunt.
Not even close to insulting.
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on July 24, 2011, 09:31:58 AM
Yes, Japanese Americans suffered during WWII
Just some. Not all.
The ones on the east coast continued to live lifes of spiritual fulfillment.
Quote from: Tyr on July 24, 2011, 09:47:27 AM
So what was with some Islamicists apparently claiming responsibility for this when they caught the guy and he was actually a far right anti-muslim sort?
Islamists think that killing non-muslim innocents is a good thing.
Quote from: Viking on July 24, 2011, 09:49:54 AM
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on July 24, 2011, 09:38:37 AM
I'm talking about individual European countries, not Europe as a whole. If all of Europe's Muslim immigration was evenly distributed based on percentage of European total population cross all of geographical Europe (including European Russia) then this issue would not be nearly as notable.
Numbers of Muslims
France - 3.5 M
Germany - 4.0 M
Netherlands - 0.9 M
Britain - 1.6 M
USA - 2.4
Canada - 0.7 M
So, way many more immigrant muslims in many european countries than in the US.
I'm not sure how this directly relates to what I was saying. My point was that individual European countries have had issues with Muslim immigration because they have smaller populations and have low birth rates. So there is that concern of being "outnumbered" when you have increasing Muslim immigration combined with high birth rates of Muslim immigrants.
Your numbers basically are showing my point, is that your intention?
Obviously also some countries have large numbers of Muslims (Russia for example) but not necessarily all of that is due to immigration, Russia has had a large number of Muslims ever since various conquests in the 19th century.
Quote from: Viking on July 24, 2011, 09:36:48 AM
I think we do need some definitions here, since everybody seems to have his own definition of multi-culturalism. The thing is that it is a word with alot of associations to it outside of it's definition. I'm going to make a stab at it..
Multi culturalism is a set of ideas and attitudes which include
- the idea that no culture is superior to another culture
- the idea that inherited culture is vital so self image and self worth and must be cultivated
- the idea that assimilation is an act of hegemonic cultural repression
- the idea that one's own successful; since non failed culture has developed multi culturalism in it's own sphere; seeks to impose hegemony on other cultures
This is very much a case of the ideas of the '68ers with their post-modernism and cultural relativism and rejection of truth and Truth as mere constructs surviving into today. Obviously I am against it.
The US melting pot works precisely because you can bring your own food, your own god and your own music, but you will damn sure adopt the american dream and the values of the enlightenment. Multi-culturalism and cultural relativism means that societies like Norway cannot insist that immigrants adopt the norwegian dream and cannot insist that immigrants adopt the values of the enlightenment because we cannot, as a society, assert that our values are better than theirs.
Why is the EU accused of multiculturalism then? It seems like it may be the only institution/organisation in Europe that is actively striving for an American-style identity for Euros.
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on July 24, 2011, 09:53:43 AM
Quote from: Viking on July 24, 2011, 09:49:54 AM
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on July 24, 2011, 09:38:37 AM
I'm talking about individual European countries, not Europe as a whole. If all of Europe's Muslim immigration was evenly distributed based on percentage of European total population cross all of geographical Europe (including European Russia) then this issue would not be nearly as notable.
Numbers of Muslims
France - 3.5 M
Germany - 4.0 M
Netherlands - 0.9 M
Britain - 1.6 M
USA - 2.4
Canada - 0.7 M
So, way many more immigrant muslims in many european countries than in the US.
I'm not sure how this directly relates to what I was saying. My point was that individual European countries have had issues with Muslim immigration because they have smaller populations and have low birth rates. So there is that concern of being "outnumbered" when you have increasing Muslim immigration combined with high birth rates of Muslim immigrants.
Your numbers basically are showing my point, is that your intention?
Obviously also some countries have large numbers of Muslims (Russia for example) but not necessarily all of that is due to immigration, Russia has had a large number of Muslims ever since various conquests in the 19th century.
Is it possible that my intention was to show the data supporting your assertion? Russian, Bosniak and Albanian muslims are established populations and thus not really relevant to the assimilation issue.
Quote from: Martinus on July 24, 2011, 09:04:31 AM
I think it is rather silly how opponents of multiculturalism fail to understand that it is not an ideology in itself, but rather an attempt to keep the lid on globalisation to prevent it from boiling over into some sort of global upheaval.
The West is not a victim of multiculturalism or even a besieged fortress. We are beneficiaries of globalisation, and it has progressed from the 19th century's raw material globalisation to the 20th century's goods and services globalisation to the 21st centuries's employment market globalisation. The world has changed - largely, differences similar to the old class divides are no longer vertical but geographical - we, in the West are the upper class, the "third world" is the working/lower class.
Any form of isolationism or autarky is simply unworkable in the modern world - and more importantly, the anti-immigration crowd would not be willing to pay the price for it, economically. And if we continue treating the third world as helots, slaves and serfs, without rights, we will have a revolution on our hands. So the question is not if we should let immigrants in, but how.
Marty, how many times do we have to remind you, you are not a Westerner. Mono has a better claim of being a Westerner then you do.
Quote from: Viking on July 24, 2011, 09:49:54 AM
Numbers of Muslims
France - 3.5 M
Germany - 4.0 M
Netherlands - 0.9 M
Britain - 1.6 M
USA - 2.4
Canada - 0.7 M
Number of Jews, 2010
Austria 9,000
Belgium 30,300
Bulgaria 2,000
Czech Republic 3,900
Denmark 6,400
Estonia 1,800
Finland 1,100
France 483,500
Germany 119,000
Greece 4,500
Hungary 48,600
Ireland 1,200
Italy 28,400
Latvia 9,700
Lithuania 2,800
Luxembourg 600
Netherlands 30,000
Poland 3,200
Portugal 500
Romania 9,700
Slovakia 2,600
Slovenia 100
Spain 12,000
Sweden 15,000
United Kingdom 292,000
Yeah, I went there.
Quote from: Martinus on July 24, 2011, 09:53:49 AM
Why is the EU accused of multiculturalism then? It seems like it may be the only institution/organisation in Europe that is actively striving for an American-style identity for Euros.
I think all political authorities which are not actively opposing multiculturalism are the enemy in his view.
Furthermore, I don't consider the EU to be working successfully for a dominant culture in europe, or at least, when it does it fails or makes a fool of itself by advocating something the pope would agree with.
Why is Poland's Jewish population so low? I thought they had a really large Jewish minority historically.
Quote from: Viking on July 24, 2011, 09:59:43 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 24, 2011, 09:53:49 AM
Why is the EU accused of multiculturalism then? It seems like it may be the only institution/organisation in Europe that is actively striving for an American-style identity for Euros.
I think all political authorities which are not actively opposing multiculturalism are the enemy in his view.
Furthermore, I don't consider the EU to be working successfully for a dominant culture in europe, or at least, when it does it fails or makes a fool of itself by advocating something the pope would agree with.
Well, I don't think what we have as the "European identity" (as exemplified by the EU) now is significantly less than what Americans have if you think about it - it is an over-reaching if abstract "identity" which is not ethnicity-based, it is a flag, an anthem, a bunch of symbols and a set of principles (like the ones set out in the EU treaty and the chart of human rights). It's like with the joke about getting a great lawn - you just need to plant the grass, and then water it and trim, water and trim, for 200 years.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 24, 2011, 10:03:47 AM
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on July 24, 2011, 10:03:12 AM
Why is Poland's Jewish population so low?
I wonder...
Keep in mind though that Europeans never called no one [sic] a nigger and never had colored water fountains.
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on July 24, 2011, 10:10:03 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 24, 2011, 10:03:47 AM
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on July 24, 2011, 10:03:12 AM
Why is Poland's Jewish population so low?
I wonder...
Keep in mind though that Europeans never called no one [sic] a nigger and never had colored water fountains.
Look up Enoch Powell.
Quote from: Martinus on July 24, 2011, 04:10:11 AM
The EU Commission has called for pan-European tightening of gun laws after this.
What's the point? Aren't they already pretty tight?
Yeah, Norway already has decent gun laws AFAIK. Even with the most perfect laws in the world you'll still sometimes get the kind of crime they're trying to prevent popping up.
The only way to truly stop gun crime would be outright banning guns which of course, in Norway particularly, just isn't going to happen, nor would it be a great idea.
Quote from: Queequeg on July 24, 2011, 03:15:50 AM
Quote from: Grallon on July 23, 2011, 06:54:39 PM
G.
I'm not sure which self-delusion I find more pathetic-your intellectual self-importance or pretense to cultural superiority. If it were up to me, you'd be permabanned for this post. Rarely have I agreed with Martinus more.
Isn't intellectual self-importance and pretense generally your MO?
See, this is why I run the permaban machine, because I keep a cooler head that you guys. Anger management guys, seriously.
Quote from: Tyr on July 24, 2011, 10:32:21 AM
Yeah, Norway already has decent gun laws AFAIK. Even with the most perfect laws in the world you'll still sometimes get the kind of crime they're trying to prevent popping up.
The only way to truly stop gun crime would be outright banning guns which of course, in Norway particularly, just isn't going to happen, nor would it be a great idea.
And even then that won't stop gun crime because you can't uninvent the firearm, nor the EU's enormous weapons industry that makes guns available.
Quote from: Viking on July 24, 2011, 07:16:19 AM
There were two security guards on the island who are missing. Obviously unarmed and probably dead.
Ouch. I mean, I can see burning the kids down. They're at a young socialist camp, so they're obviously part of the group that you could define as his enemies. They were probably talking about how people like the gunman should be put in camps and killed, so he got them first.
The security guards, on the other hand, are just rent-a-cops that were doing a job. Shooting a guy doing a job just because he brings a flashlight to a gun fight is a bit cruel.
Quote from: Martinus on July 24, 2011, 09:04:31 AM
I think it is rather silly how opponents of multiculturalism fail to understand that it is not an ideology in itself, but rather an attempt to keep the lid on globalisation to prevent it from boiling over into some sort of global upheaval.
The West is not a victim of multiculturalism or even a besieged fortress. We are beneficiaries of globalisation, and it has progressed from the 19th century's raw material globalisation to the 20th century's goods and services globalisation to the 21st centuries's employment market globalisation. The world has changed - largely, differences similar to the old class divides are no longer vertical but geographical - we, in the West are the upper class, the "third world" is the working/lower class.
Any form of isolationism or autarky is simply unworkable in the modern world - and more importantly, the anti-immigration crowd would not be willing to pay the price for it, economically. And if we continue treating the third world as helots, slaves and serfs, without rights, we will have a revolution on our hands. So the question is not if we should let immigrants in, but how.
Except that your post has nothing to do with multiculturalism, and everything to do with immigration.
It's sort of sad that some people actually believe that you can only have immigration while accepting the cultures of the immigrants.
Quote from: Viking on July 24, 2011, 09:36:48 AM
...
The US melting pot works precisely because you can bring your own food, your own god and your own music, but you will damn sure adopt the American dream and the values of the enlightenment. Multiculturalism and cultural relativism means that societies like Norway cannot insist that immigrants adopt the Norwegian dream and cannot insist that immigrants adopt the values of the enlightenment because we cannot, as a society, assert that our values are better than theirs.
This is the crux of the problem. This self loathing attitude induced by multiculturalism and distilled though public institutions and discourse. It paralyzes to varying degrees those societies it affects and generates alienation among the citizenry. Recognizing this trend *does not* mean excusing or justifying what happened in Norway - but it certainly offers part of an explanation. The longer we remain in denial about it - the more likely other such events will occur. And I have to wonder if the outpouring we're seeing in this thread would have been as strident had the man slaughtered 100+ pakis instead of 100+ Aryan kids?
G.
Quote from: Grallon on July 24, 2011, 10:52:28 AM
Quote from: Viking on July 24, 2011, 09:36:48 AM
...
The US melting pot works precisely because you can bring your own food, your own god and your own music, but you will damn sure adopt the American dream and the values of the enlightenment. Multiculturalism and cultural relativism means that societies like Norway cannot insist that immigrants adopt the Norwegian dream and cannot insist that immigrants adopt the values of the enlightenment because we cannot, as a society, assert that our values are better than theirs.
This is the crux of the problem. This self loathing attitude induced by multiculturalism and distilled though public institutions and discourse. It paralyzes to varying degrees those societies it affects and generates alienation among the citizenry. Recognizing this trend *does not* mean excusing or justifying what happened in Norway - but it certainly offers part of an explanation. The longer we remain in denial about it - the more likely other such events will occur. And I have to wonder if the outpouring we're seeing in this thread would have been as strident had the man slaughtered 100+ pakis instead of 100+ Aryan kids?
Maybe, maybe not. Norwegian officials would certainly be even more strident, for fear that the already militant Muslim immigrants would take to the streets and burn the place down. If that had happened, Norway would have been an Islamic Republic inside a week.
:lol:
Never. Fucking. Mind.
Quote100+ pakis instead of 100+ Aryan kids?
Poor choice of words.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 24, 2011, 09:57:37 AM
Austria 9,000
I used to live near the Lauder Chabad Campus, so I saw quite a few Orthodox Jews in my area. And this month the Maccabi Games were held in Vienna.
But my main exposure is Israeli Falafel (http://www.maschu-maschu.at/) or Books & Bagels (http://www.booksnbagels.com/).
A co-worker recently attended a Brit Milah, though.
I was at a drift/racing event yesterday, and they had a moment of silence for the dead kids. So Norway has that going for them.
They're now claiming he still had "significant" amounts of ammo on him when he was arrested.
Still people missing, so it's expected the toll will rise. One died in the hospital today.
What a mess.
Quote from: Norgy on July 24, 2011, 04:24:26 AMI agree. Well, not with the last part, obviously, since I represent most of what you both are against, but on the solution.
Prime minister Stoltenberg said "to fight this with more democracy and more openness", and the first point of order would be to recognise criticism and alternatives to the current state of affairs as legitimate, as to avoid further cases of complete and utter alienation. No more underground activity and rejection of letters to the editor, but open and free exchange of views.
I fear the opposite will be the case.
Hmm... if I understand what you're saying (and Viking too) it's that "we should understand what ABB is saying, why he's so alienated and change our society to be more in line with what he wants to avoid alienating people like him further."
I'm not sure that sentiment sits that well with me, whether it's Muslim terrorists, people like ABB or anyone else.
Or did I misunderstand?
I understood it differently. I think what (at least Norgy) is saying is that people like him should be allowed to spout their bullshit without being muzzled. There is a fine line, however. As far as I understood, he was not being prosecuted in any way for his musings or manifestos - it's just that none of the mainstream newspapers wanted to print his letters. I think it is a rather extraordinary demand that a newspaper should be obliged to print ravings of a madman only because otherwise he would start shooting people up.
Pretty clearly, newspapers cannot print every letter to the editor. What makes the internet so powerful is that they can post every comment on their web site.
I fear that what ABB was asking for was not to be heard, but to be validated. He was going to be frustrated no matter what the papers and whatnot did.
Quote from: Martinus on July 24, 2011, 09:23:22 AM
Also, I think it is a bit disingenuous for Americans to look down upon Europeans and talk about their melting pot superiority. The melting pot doctrine developed when the majority of immigrants to the US were fellow Europeans (or, at most, Latinos, who are also pretty European - at least their are Christian). When non-European, non-Christian immigrants were coming - and not that many did - they were slaughtered, like the Chinese in California, or deprived of constitutional rights - like the Japanese during WW2.
Yeah, I think it is very fair to sum up the overall success of Japanese Americans in US society based on a singular incident spanning a couple years during the worst war that humanity has ever experienced.
As usual, Marty strikes at the core of what it is to understand America.
RIP Norwegians. :(
Quote from: Martinus on July 24, 2011, 01:10:34 PM
I understood it differently. I think what (at least Norgy) is saying is that people like him should be allowed to spout their bullshit without being muzzled. There is a fine line, however. As far as I understood, he was not being prosecuted in any way for his musings or manifestos - it's just that none of the mainstream newspapers wanted to print his letters. I think it is a rather extraordinary demand that a newspaper should be obliged to print ravings of a madman only because otherwise he would start shooting people up.
Norwegian papers are deliberately keeping anyone not conforming to multiculturalist dogma from expressing themselves. It's a very one-sided business in both Norway and Sweden.
90% of journalists in Norway vote for the Social democrats, the quasi-commies or the real commies. I'll source this if you wish.
Slargos gets to post from jail?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this the first truly political spree killing by an individual?
I want to compare this to Mumbai more than Columbine, but I can't help but feel that this is something very new; a spree killer who methodically planned and calmly went about mass murder to further his own, largely idiosyncratic ideology.
What concern me the most right now is that I don't know if there are a whole lot of ways to stop copy-cats. How are you supposed to apprehend a suspect who works alone, is well funded, avoids social contact, plans obsessively and comprehensively, is extremely well armed and wants to kill as many people as possible?
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on July 24, 2011, 09:14:25 AM
I'm a strong advocate of immigration as I think it can be the fuel of a country's economy, especially if the country has low natural birth rate.
However, and I am biased, I prefer the melting-pot to multiculturalism. To me the viewpoint that immigrants should live in their own separate societies as part of the larger host country's culture is the worst kind of "-ism" (I won't say racism or nationalism or whatever because I don't want to get into a wank fest over what proper "-ism" it should be termed.)
To me thus multiculturalism says this:
1. The immigrants home culture must take precedence over the culture of their host country, for them personally it is extremely important they maintain their own distinct culture.
2. The host country's culture must not be diluted by mixing directly with the immigrants culture, otherwise it would "dilute" the host country's culture.
Instead, there is this desire to have a "patchwork" society in which there are multiple distinct cultures that do not significantly mix together. That to me is the worst way of doing things and I think it can lead to horrible results all around. It makes it harder for immigrants to become part of mainstream society and to succeed economically (many of multicultural Europe's immigrant groups have much higher unemployment rates than the country at large) and it also leads some in the "host culture" to feel that they are being slowly made into minorities in their own land, in essence it makes them feel as though they are being invaded and conquered by a thousand cuts. I am not talking about whether that actually happens or doesn't happen, only about how certain people feel--and I think that is how this Breivik fellow indeed felt. You shouldn't model your society based on the actions of a mad man, but it doesn't hurt to sometimes correctly recognize that the mad man was a result of a certain system. To me one loan gunman killing 100 or even 500 people isn't reason to change anything, so that is neither here nor there. But the two points I outlined above are to me, much more significant in the long term than a single person killing a lot of people.
In the United States our immigrants have not had their culture destroyed by the greater American culture. Instead, they adopted a culture that was foreign to their own, but in doing so they changed American culture itself and made American culture better for it. It also has meant that the children and grand children of these immigrants have essentially had no limits on what they can achieve in America.
You know, I consider myself pro-multiculturalism and there's very little I disagree with in your post. I do, however, think the two points you use to describe multiculturalism are mischaracterizations. At least it's a mischaracterization of what I understand multiculturalism to be - and I think how it's understood by the people who actually believe in it (though quite possibly not by those who use arguments of "multiculturalism" to argue for their own cultural supremacy).
Multiculturalism is about freedom. Within a larger framework (respect for the rule of law, human rights and acceptance of the right of other people to pursue their life as they see fit etc), you can express your culture however you see. If your culture expects you to wear particular hats, only eat shellfish, speak a particular language and only marry people who're half your age - or whatever - that's fine. And if you want to mix that with elements of other cultures, that's your business as well. You are not to be treated as a lesser member of society because your culture differs from the mainstream's.
Quote from: Queequeg on July 24, 2011, 01:25:23 PM
How are you supposed to apprehend a suspect who works alone, is well funded, avoids social contact, plans obsessively and comprehensively, is extremely well armed and wants to kill as many people as possible?
They can be drawn out with references to maps that suck and Ottoman empires.
Quote from: Slargos on July 24, 2011, 01:22:46 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 24, 2011, 01:10:34 PM
I understood it differently. I think what (at least Norgy) is saying is that people like him should be allowed to spout their bullshit without being muzzled. There is a fine line, however. As far as I understood, he was not being prosecuted in any way for his musings or manifestos - it's just that none of the mainstream newspapers wanted to print his letters. I think it is a rather extraordinary demand that a newspaper should be obliged to print ravings of a madman only because otherwise he would start shooting people up.
Norwegian papers are deliberately keeping anyone not conforming to multiculturalist dogma from expressing themselves. It's a very one-sided business in both Norway and Sweden.
90% of journalists in Norway vote for the Social democrats, the quasi-commies or the real commies. I'll source this if you wish.
Ok but that's a pretty shitty argument, to be honest. Unless there is something about Norwegian press law that I don't know about, what stops those "not conforming to multiculturalist dogma" from starting their own newspaper? It's not like journalists (especially in this day and age of new media) are under some oath or duty to publish views they disagree with - people can always go to journalists who share their views. If there are no journalists with crazy right winger views (something I find it hard to believe), then you need to ask yourselves why. Where is a Norwegian Murdoch?
All in all, I'm not convinced. It sounds too much like conspiracy theory bullshit to me.
Quote from: Queequeg on July 24, 2011, 01:25:23 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this the first truly political spree killing by an individual?
I want to compare this to Mumbai more than Columbine, but I can't help but feel that this is something very new; a spree killer who methodically planned and calmly went about mass murder to further his own, largely idiosyncratic ideology.
What concern me the most right now is that I don't know if there are a whole lot of ways to stop copy-cats. How are you supposed to apprehend a suspect who works alone, is well funded, avoids social contact, plans obsessively and comprehensively, is extremely well armed and wants to kill as many people as possible?
Paradox forums. :secret:
Quote from: Slargos on July 24, 2011, 01:22:46 PM
Norwegian papers are deliberately keeping anyone not conforming to multiculturalist dogma from expressing themselves. It's a very one-sided business in both Norway and Sweden.
90% of journalists in Norway vote for the Social democrats, the quasi-commies or the real commies. I'll source this if you wish.
Perhaps you should do something about all this. It would seem the first logical step is to go into the agriculture business...
Quote from: Berkut on July 24, 2011, 01:18:07 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 24, 2011, 09:23:22 AM
Also, I think it is a bit disingenuous for Americans to look down upon Europeans and talk about their melting pot superiority. The melting pot doctrine developed when the majority of immigrants to the US were fellow Europeans (or, at most, Latinos, who are also pretty European - at least their are Christian). When non-European, non-Christian immigrants were coming - and not that many did - they were slaughtered, like the Chinese in California, or deprived of constitutional rights - like the Japanese during WW2.
Yeah, I think it is very fair to sum up the overall success of Japanese Americans in US society based on a singular incident spanning a couple years during the worst war that humanity has ever experienced.
As usual, Marty strikes at the core of what it is to understand America.
I want to know where all those Chinese mass graves are.
Quote from: Martinus on July 24, 2011, 01:26:40 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 24, 2011, 01:22:46 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 24, 2011, 01:10:34 PM
I understood it differently. I think what (at least Norgy) is saying is that people like him should be allowed to spout their bullshit without being muzzled. There is a fine line, however. As far as I understood, he was not being prosecuted in any way for his musings or manifestos - it's just that none of the mainstream newspapers wanted to print his letters. I think it is a rather extraordinary demand that a newspaper should be obliged to print ravings of a madman only because otherwise he would start shooting people up.
Norwegian papers are deliberately keeping anyone not conforming to multiculturalist dogma from expressing themselves. It's a very one-sided business in both Norway and Sweden.
90% of journalists in Norway vote for the Social democrats, the quasi-commies or the real commies. I'll source this if you wish.
Ok but that's a pretty shitty argument, to be honest. Unless there is something about Norwegian press law that I don't know about, what stops those "not conforming to multiculturalist dogma" from starting their own newspaper? It's not like journalists (especially in this day and age of new media) are under some oath or duty to publish views they disagree with - people can always go to journalists who share their views. If there are no journalists with crazy right winger views (something I find it hard to believe), then you need to ask yourselves why. Where is a Norwegian Murdoch?
All in all, I'm not convinced. It sounds too much like conspiracy theory bullshit to me.
Yeah. I'm sure starting a newspaper, especially in this economical climate, is easy as taking a crap in the woods. :D
Quote from: Viking on July 24, 2011, 09:36:48 AM
I think we do need some definitions here, since everybody seems to have his own definition of multi-culturalism. The thing is that it is a word with alot of associations to it outside of it's definition. I'm going to make a stab at it..
Multi culturalism is a set of ideas and attitudes which include
- the idea that no culture is superior to another culture
- the idea that inherited culture is vital so self image and self worth and must be cultivated
- the idea that assimilation is an act of hegemonic cultural repression
- the idea that one's own successful; since non failed culture has developed multi culturalism in it's own sphere; seeks to impose hegemony on other cultures
This is very much a case of the ideas of the '68ers with their post-modernism and cultural relativism and rejection of truth and Truth as mere constructs surviving into today. Obviously I am against it.
The US melting pot works precisely because you can bring your own food, your own god and your own music, but you will damn sure adopt the american dream and the values of the enlightenment. Multi-culturalism and cultural relativism means that societies like Norway cannot insist that immigrants adopt the norwegian dream and cannot insist that immigrants adopt the values of the enlightenment because we cannot, as a society, assert that our values are better than theirs.
Yeah, no.
That's not quite what multiculturalism means, IMO.
It means within a framework of basic liberal Western values (i.e. respect for individual rights, so no matter what your culture says, you don't get to abrogate another person's rights) the following applies:
- Your cultural identity has value and should only change at whatever pace you think appropriate (which includes not having to change at all).
- As a society, we respect different cultural identities (which may include support for various cultural functions, if that's how respect works in your particular society).
That's it, basically.
You want to go to church every Sunday morning, dress in distinctive garb from your culture's home region, enjoy entertainment from that same region, subscribe to a code of honour that doesn't quite make sense to anyone else but nonetheless doesn't break the law nor infringe on the rights of others, teach your kids your native language, try to convince them to marry "one of their own", use the political process appropriately to cater to your interests and so on? That's cool.
Do you want to limit other peoples' enjoyment of the rights, do you want to control members in your family through violence, do you want to impose change on society through violence or illegal acts, do you want to force other people to adhere to your particular cultural values? Not cool.
Going to church isn't "cool", Ned.
Quote from: grumbler on July 24, 2011, 01:15:32 PM
Pretty clearly, newspapers cannot print every letter to the editor. What makes the internet so powerful is that they can post every comment on their web site.
I fear that what ABB was asking for was not to be heard, but to be validated. He was going to be frustrated no matter what the papers and whatnot did.
Yeah, pretty much.
Quote from: Slargos on July 24, 2011, 01:30:35 PMYeah. I'm sure starting a newspaper, especially in this economical climate, is easy as taking a crap in the woods. :D
So the complaint is not so much that the views are muzzled, but that people who don't agree with those views don't spend their time and money promulgating them?
Quote from: The Brain on July 24, 2011, 01:40:12 PM
Going to church isn't "cool", Ned.
:lol:
Cool as in "that's alright, your business." Not cool as in "hottest new fashion, all the kids want to do it!" :P
Quote from: Jacob on July 24, 2011, 01:43:11 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 24, 2011, 01:30:35 PMYeah. I'm sure starting a newspaper, especially in this economical climate, is easy as taking a crap in the woods. :D
So the complaint is not so much that the views are muzzled, but that people who don't agree with those views don't spend their time and money promulgating them?
You're glossing over a very real problem.
I guess though that if people who shared my political views had a near total monopoly in the market of propaganda, I wouldn't be too concerned about it either. So I suppose you're off the hook.
Quote from: Jacob on July 24, 2011, 01:43:11 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 24, 2011, 01:30:35 PMYeah. I'm sure starting a newspaper, especially in this economical climate, is easy as taking a crap in the woods. :D
So the complaint is not so much that the views are muzzled, but that people who don't agree with those views don't spend their time and money promulgating them?
Indeed. It sounds like a bitch's complaint to me.
To quote Jacek Kuron, one of the leaders of the Solidarity movement, "Don't blow up committees. Start your own."
I'm shocked that the papers won't print that young innocent people should be mass murdered.
Quote from: Martinus on July 24, 2011, 01:49:39 PM
Quote from: Jacob on July 24, 2011, 01:43:11 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 24, 2011, 01:30:35 PMYeah. I'm sure starting a newspaper, especially in this economical climate, is easy as taking a crap in the woods. :D
So the complaint is not so much that the views are muzzled, but that people who don't agree with those views don't spend their time and money promulgating them?
Indeed. It sounds like a bitch's complaint to me.
To quote Jacek Kuron, one of the leaders of the Solidarity movement, "Don't burn down committees. Start your own."
I guess they should start their own universities then, aswell, huh?
Oh, wait. There's a monopoly there aswell.
Quote from: The Brain on July 24, 2011, 01:50:32 PM
I'm shocked that the papers won't print that young innocent people should be mass murdered.
Indeed. Maybe if they printed it, they would have caught the guy earlier.
Quote from: Slargos on July 24, 2011, 01:50:47 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 24, 2011, 01:49:39 PM
Quote from: Jacob on July 24, 2011, 01:43:11 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 24, 2011, 01:30:35 PMYeah. I'm sure starting a newspaper, especially in this economical climate, is easy as taking a crap in the woods. :D
So the complaint is not so much that the views are muzzled, but that people who don't agree with those views don't spend their time and money promulgating them?
Indeed. It sounds like a bitch's complaint to me.
To quote Jacek Kuron, one of the leaders of the Solidarity movement, "Don't burn down committees. Start your own."
I guess they should start their own universities then, aswell, huh?
Oh, wait. There's a monopoly there aswell.
You have a goddamn democracy. You are not a poor country. If your views are not represented, then either you are lazy or perhaps you are a fringe nut.
Quote from: Jacob on July 24, 2011, 01:37:39 PM
...
Do you want to limit other peoples' enjoyment of the rights, do you want to control members in your family through violence, do you want to impose change on society through violence or illegal acts, do you want to force other people to adhere to your particular cultural values? Not cool.
Are you disingenuous enough to believe that one doesn't proceed from the other? Or are you actually incapable of seeing it?
G.
Slargos should put manifestos in each of the cabinets he sells. That would be a good way to spread the message.
Quote from: Martinus on July 24, 2011, 01:52:04 PM
You have a goddamn democracy. You are not a poor country. If your views are not represented, then either you are lazy or perhaps you are a fringe nut.
I was going to elaborate more on the subject but frankly it's like beating my head against a wall, unconstructive and not very amusing.
Quote from: Slargos on July 24, 2011, 01:55:38 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 24, 2011, 01:52:04 PM
You have a goddamn democracy. You are not a poor country. If your views are not represented, then either you are lazy or perhaps you are a fringe nut.
I was going to elaborate more on the subject but frankly it's like beating my head against a wall, unconstructive and not very amusing.
Really? I find it strangely rewarding.
Quote from: Grallon on July 24, 2011, 01:53:44 PM
Quote from: Jacob on July 24, 2011, 01:37:39 PM
...
Do you want to limit other peoples' enjoyment of the rights, do you want to control members in your family through violence, do you want to impose change on society through violence or illegal acts, do you want to force other people to adhere to your particular cultural values? Not cool.
Are you disingenuous enough to believe that one doesn't proceed from the other? Or are you actually incapable of seeing it?
G.
That is certainly the million mohammedan question. Are they stupid, or are they just deluded?
Quote from: Grallon on July 24, 2011, 01:53:44 PMAre you disingenuous enough to believe that one doesn't proceed from the other? Or are you actually incapable of seeing it?
I don't see it, because it isn't actually the case. Your slippery slope fallacy is just that, a fallacy.
Quote from: Slargos on July 24, 2011, 01:55:38 PMI was going to elaborate more on the subject but frankly it's like beating my head against a wall, unconstructive and not very amusing.
You won't elaborate, but you'll still complain that people aren't listening?
Again, it sounds more like your complaint is that people aren't convinced by your arguments, rather than that you don't have an opportunity to voice them.
Apparently, the guy copy/pasted whole passages from Ted Kaczynski's manifesto.
Quote from: Jacob on July 24, 2011, 01:37:39 PM
Quote from: Viking on July 24, 2011, 09:36:48 AM
I think we do need some definitions here, since everybody seems to have his own definition of multi-culturalism. The thing is that it is a word with alot of associations to it outside of it's definition. I'm going to make a stab at it..
Multi culturalism is a set of ideas and attitudes which include
- the idea that no culture is superior to another culture
- the idea that inherited culture is vital so self image and self worth and must be cultivated
- the idea that assimilation is an act of hegemonic cultural repression
- the idea that one's own successful; since non failed culture has developed multi culturalism in it's own sphere; seeks to impose hegemony on other cultures
This is very much a case of the ideas of the '68ers with their post-modernism and cultural relativism and rejection of truth and Truth as mere constructs surviving into today. Obviously I am against it.
The US melting pot works precisely because you can bring your own food, your own god and your own music, but you will damn sure adopt the american dream and the values of the enlightenment. Multi-culturalism and cultural relativism means that societies like Norway cannot insist that immigrants adopt the norwegian dream and cannot insist that immigrants adopt the values of the enlightenment because we cannot, as a society, assert that our values are better than theirs.
Yeah, no.
That's not quite what multiculturalism means, IMO.
It means within a framework of basic liberal Western values (i.e. respect for individual rights, so no matter what your culture says, you don't get to abrogate another person's rights) the following applies:
- Your cultural identity has value and should only change at whatever pace you think appropriate (which includes not having to change at all).
- As a society, we respect different cultural identities (which may include support for various cultural functions, if that's how respect works in your particular society).
That's it, basically.
Then it is kind of meaningless, isn't it?
Is there anyone out there within the Western world that would actually disagree with that? You are just labeling pretty basic liberal western values as "multiculturalism". Is there some problem in the West with non-multicutluralists demanding that we force other cultures to change at some pace others do not feel is appropriate? How would that even manifest itself in a political sense?
Quote from: Jacob on July 24, 2011, 02:03:36 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 24, 2011, 01:55:38 PMI was going to elaborate more on the subject but frankly it's like beating my head against a wall, unconstructive and not very amusing.
You won't elaborate, but you'll still complain that people aren't listening?
Again, it sounds more like your complaint is that people aren't convinced by your arguments, rather than that you don't have an opportunity to voice them.
No, I have plenty opportunity to voice them. I do it right here, for instance. However, this is a platform that doesn't matter. Nor does a paper with a national circulation of 2000.
The argument "start your own newspaper" is disingenious, but you probably realize that and simply use it to mock or infuriate me.
This is pretty frustrating, and I can certainly see why this guy would snap like this.
You step on people often enough, you'd better make sure they're never in a position to step on you because it's going to get very ugly.
Why don't you buy a large wooden box of soap, empty the soap out, take the box to front of the parliament building, and expose your views. See how ugly things can get.
Quote from: Slargos on July 24, 2011, 02:08:03 PM
The argument "start your own newspaper" is disingenious
Why the hell is it disingenuous? The idea that newspapers are to be some sort of neutral hyde parks is outdated and simply does not hold water. They are businesses which cater to the expectations of their customers (i.e. readers) and sell them opinions they want to hear. Why should people who run them or work in them should spend their time and money on doing things they do not want doing nor their readers apparently want to read about? As long as they do not lie and do not break the law, they are within their right to print or refuse to print anything they want.
Quote from: Jacob on July 23, 2011, 10:32:55 PM
The people who subscribe to similar views, using similar reasoning ought to engage in a bit of self-reflection; ideally not focused on the ways the subtle shades of difference in their bigotry could be argued to make the glaring similarities irrelevant.
So by this logic, in 1859, in the wake of John Brown's raid, should abolishionists have re-evaluated their views and decided that human chattel slavery was OK?
Quote from: Berkut on July 24, 2011, 02:07:23 PM
Is there anyone out there within the Western world that would actually disagree with that?
Of course there is, and in Europe such people are, if not a majority, then a vocal minority. You have to understand that you Yanks have a very different view on this thing than a lot of Euros.
Quote from: dps on July 24, 2011, 02:13:58 PM
Quote from: Jacob on July 23, 2011, 10:32:55 PM
The people who subscribe to similar views, using similar reasoning ought to engage in a bit of self-reflection; ideally not focused on the ways the subtle shades of difference in their bigotry could be argued to make the glaring similarities irrelevant.
So by this logic, in 1859, in the wake of John Brown's raid, should abolishionists have re-evaluated their views and decided that human chattel slavery was OK?
Some probably did.
The Ottoman Empire was multicultural; in that Christians, Muslims and Jews lived under different jurisdictions. I would not describe a country such as the UK or USA as multicultural..............merely tolerant.
Quote from: dps on July 24, 2011, 02:13:58 PM
Quote from: Jacob on July 23, 2011, 10:32:55 PM
The people who subscribe to similar views, using similar reasoning ought to engage in a bit of self-reflection; ideally not focused on the ways the subtle shades of difference in their bigotry could be argued to make the glaring similarities irrelevant.
So by this logic, in 1859, in the wake of John Brown's raid, should abolishionists have re-evaluated their views and decided that human chattel slavery was OK?
John Brown. :wub:
Didn't Germany admit that multikulti was a failure???
Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on July 24, 2011, 02:20:59 PM
The Ottoman Empire was multicultural; in that Christians, Muslims and Jews lived under different jurisdictions. I would not describe a country such as the UK or USA as multicultural..............merely tolerant.
I think that what Jacob calls "multiculturalism" is what most Americans would simply call "tolerance". "Multiculturalism" generally means something else.
Quote from: The Brain on July 24, 2011, 02:24:09 PM
Didn't Germany admit that multikulti was a failure???
What about schwulenlesben?
Quote from: dps on July 24, 2011, 02:24:46 PM
Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on July 24, 2011, 02:20:59 PM
The Ottoman Empire was multicultural; in that Christians, Muslims and Jews lived under different jurisdictions. I would not describe a country such as the UK or USA as multicultural..............merely tolerant.
I think that what Jacob calls "multiculturalism" is what most Americans would simply call "tolerance". "Multiculturalism" generally means something else.
I think "multiculturalism" is a bogeyman, in the same way "political correctness" is often used. Sure, there probably are people out there who believe in it, but most people who are accused of it are rather closer to what you describe as tolerance.
Quote from: Jacob on July 24, 2011, 02:01:49 PM
I don't see it, because it isn't actually the case. Your slippery slope fallacy is just that, a fallacy.
We are the products of our environment. And when one's environment (family unit, local neighborhood, cultural community) tells one that it is acceptable, for example, to punish or ostracize or even kill one's female relatives should they misbehave, then it follows that one will feel justified to hold on to said beliefs. Now transplant this in the context of a host society that a) sacralizes cultural diversity and individual liberty, b) feels guilty about asserting its own cultural primacy and c) go through endless intellectual contortions to avoid the dreaded 'bigotry/racism' epithet - and you get a recipe for alienation.
G.
Quote from: Jacob on July 24, 2011, 01:26:32 PM
Multiculturalism is about freedom. Within a larger framework (respect for the rule of law, human rights and acceptance of the right of other people to pursue their life as they see fit etc), you can express your culture however you see. If your culture expects you to wear particular hats, only eat shellfish, speak a particular language and only marry people who're half your age - or whatever - that's fine. And if you want to mix that with elements of other cultures, that's your business as well. You are not to be treated as a lesser member of society because your culture differs from the mainstream's.
So what happens when you expect to wear a hat in your passport photograph, demand that every restaurant carry shellfish to satisfy your needs, demand service in your particular language, and marry someone half your age when you are 20?
Quote from: Martinus on July 24, 2011, 02:13:54 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 24, 2011, 02:08:03 PM
The argument "start your own newspaper" is disingenious
Why the hell is it disingenuous? The idea that newspapers are to be some sort of neutral hyde parks is outdated
was it ever "indated"? Afaik, newspapers have always been beholden to this or that paymaster with this or that ideology.
Quote from: Crazy_Ivan80 on July 24, 2011, 03:14:23 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 24, 2011, 02:13:54 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 24, 2011, 02:08:03 PM
The argument "start your own newspaper" is disingenious
Why the hell is it disingenuous? The idea that newspapers are to be some sort of neutral hyde parks is outdated
was it ever "indated"? Afaik, newspapers have always been beholden to this or that paymaster with this or that ideology.
Well, there was some truth (or at least, reason) to that idea when barriers of entry into the media market were simply impossible to surmount for ordinary people, and therefore they had to use the media empire outlets to be heard. These days when anyone can write a blog, they are even more so outdated.
He published Friday a 1,500-long manifesto in English called "2083 - A European Declaration of Independence".
It's all over the web now. You can also read it here: http://pt.scribd.com/doc/60739170/2083-a-European-Declaration-of-Independence
Basically, this guy thinks of himself as a Templar-like Christian Crusader. He wants to kill all Communists, Nazis, Social Democrats, Muslims and everyone that does not accept the dominance of Christianity in Europe.
Kind of what a 1100 AD Knight would think if he teleported to 2011 Europe.
He even has a very detailed list of all the "traitors" that we wants to kill. Over 400,000 in Europe, including about 10 609 in Portugal - a very precise number to be obtained by a foreigner, which means we was making stuff up*.
Basically, this guy is a complete loon that was born on the wrong era. He is the Christian version of the Bin Laden guys. And in all honesty, I don't classify pure religious nutters in the traditional political spectrum, as they are playing with another set of rules (Otherwise, we'd have to call Al-Qaeda as 'right wing').
What this does mean is that anti-muslim speech in Europe needs to be carefully monitored, as it seems that any Christian critical of Islam is a potential terrorist. And I won't go into the details of our local media, which - literally - opened the Eight o'clock News by saying "BLONDE HAIR, BLUE EYES" to describe the perpetrator.
*Also, the population numbers touted in this thread about Muslims and Jews in Europe are all off the mark.
For example, by 2005 the BBC put the number of Muslims in France between five and six million ( http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4385768.stm ), while the Telegraph recently revealed that 11% of the population of the UK is foreign-born ( http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/8451615/Almost-one-in-eight-people-living-in-UK-are-born-abroad.html ), the vast majority of which non-europeans. And that doesn't even take into account any Muslims already born in Britain, who are counted as natives.
And the Jewish community in my city alone counts over 2,000 members (not to mention the other Jewish communities in the other portuguese cities), so that 500 number was pulled out of thin air and has zero connection with reality.
So what was your impression of him when you met him at the ambassador's dinner?
A rough balance then, since about 11% of the British population chooses to live abroad.
About half the foreigners are white btw and many of the Asian immigrants are Hindu Indians and thus better Britons than half the natives of this benighted isle ;)
http://mighealth.net/uk/images/6/67/For.pdf
Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on July 24, 2011, 03:42:19 PM
A rough balance then, since about 11% of the British population chooses to live abroad.
About half the foreigners are white btw and many of the Asian immigrants are Hindu Indians and thus better Britons than half the natives of this benighted isle ;)
http://mighealth.net/uk/images/6/67/For.pdf (http://mighealth.net/uk/images/6/67/For.pdf)
You brits are the best argument against my position on race that I can think of. :P
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on July 24, 2011, 10:10:03 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 24, 2011, 10:03:47 AM
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on July 24, 2011, 10:03:12 AM
Why is Poland's Jewish population so low?
I wonder...
Keep in mind though that Europeans never called no one [sic] a nigger and never had colored water fountains.
:lol: No, no they didn't. Just a sveral centuries of legal niceties, the occasional state-sponsored village-razing pogrom and industrial mass extermination.
Slargos, you're really irking my sensibilities with your shenanigans in this thread.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 24, 2011, 03:58:05 PM
Slargos, you're really irking my sensibilities with your shenanigans in this thread.
Far be it for me to tickle your dingle berries, Seedy.
I'm done, anyway. I don't see how this is going to develop any further before it's time for a new thread.
The point is that race (as in skin colour) is of no great importance, but culture can be a problem. Which is why your typical western country does not have laws against skin-colour but does have laws that prohibit certain cultural practices (the obvious example, cutting off a pubescent girl's clitoris).
If Martin Bashir is the result of race-mixing in the UK, you people are fucked. Then you people send him over here. BAD BRITS. :mad:
Quote from: Slargos on July 24, 2011, 04:00:10 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 24, 2011, 03:58:05 PM
Slargos, you're really irking my sensibilities with your shenanigans in this thread.
Far be it for me to tickle your dingle berries, Seedy.
I'm done, anyway. I don't see how this is going to develop any further before it's time for a new thread.
That's good. It is unfortunate that, in light of all this horror, you've decided to carry on with all your "WELL HE HAD A POINT TEHY DESERVED IT IN A WAY"post-game analysis bullshit.
I fear the voices may command me to ban your moron ass soon.
Don't worry, it's not you. Well, yeah it is. You've managed--if I may paraphrase White Zombie--to be More Slargos Than Slargos with this.
The SS Wiking-wannabe schtick you've attempted to develop these last several months in an effort to fashion some semblance of a personality for yourself was amusing in a Hortlund-abandons-babies kinda way months ago, but now it's simply exhausting to read.*
And that's saying something.
*I mean, it would be much more interesting if you were, like, a pissed-off German or something relevant, but you're not.
Quote from: Ed Anger on July 24, 2011, 04:08:52 PM
If Martin Bashir is the result of race-mixing in the UK, you people are fucked. Then you people send him over here. BAD BRITS. :mad:
I'll see your Martin Bashir and counter with Neela Rasgotra, MD.
I can't even recall who Martin Bashir is :hmm:
I'll take your word for it though and praise the lord that he is off seeking the almighty dollar :D
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 24, 2011, 04:14:44 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on July 24, 2011, 04:08:52 PM
If Martin Bashir is the result of race-mixing in the UK, you people are fucked. Then you people send him over here. BAD BRITS. :mad:
I'll see your Martin Bashir and counter with Neela Rasgotra, MD.
*checks google*
You win this round.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 24, 2011, 04:11:57 PM
That's good. It is unfortunate that, in light of all this horror, you've decided to carry on with all your "WELL HE HAD A POINT TEHY DESERVED IT IN A WAY"post-game analysis bullshit.
Fucks sakes man, that's not what I said. I said that some of the observations he makes in his "manifesto" are quite apt, and considering the way he thinks the act itself is completely rational. The reason some of his observations are good, is mostly because they're not HIS observations.
By writing this guy off as a lone madman, you're effectively throwing your hands in the air and going "Well shucks, nothing we could've done".
Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on July 24, 2011, 04:17:21 PM
I can't even recall who Martin Bashir is :hmm:
I'll take your word for it though and praise the lord that he is off seeking the almighty dollar :D
Member of the Lamestream Media(tm).
Naturally, as he does not suck Murdoch cock, he is a devout communist and anti-American hater, determined to destroy America with all the power, faith and credit he can muster from his sinister lair at NBC News.
Quote from: Slargos on July 24, 2011, 04:21:16 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 24, 2011, 04:11:57 PM
That's good. It is unfortunate that, in light of all this horror, you've decided to carry on with all your "WELL HE HAD A POINT TEHY DESERVED IT IN A WAY"post-game analysis bullshit.
Fucks sakes man, that's not what I said. I said that some of the observations he makes in his "manifesto" are quite apt, and considering the way he thinks the act itself is completely rational. The reason some of his observations are good, is mostly because they're not HIS observations.
By writing this guy off as a lone madman, you're effectively throwing your hands in the air and going "Well shucks, nothing we could've done".
How is doing "what we could have done" different from Spain pulling out of the anti-islamist coalition after getting its metro bombed?
Quote from: Martinus on July 24, 2011, 04:24:50 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 24, 2011, 04:21:16 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 24, 2011, 04:11:57 PM
That's good. It is unfortunate that, in light of all this horror, you've decided to carry on with all your "WELL HE HAD A POINT TEHY DESERVED IT IN A WAY"post-game analysis bullshit.
Fucks sakes man, that's not what I said. I said that some of the observations he makes in his "manifesto" are quite apt, and considering the way he thinks the act itself is completely rational. The reason some of his observations are good, is mostly because they're not HIS observations.
By writing this guy off as a lone madman, you're effectively throwing your hands in the air and going "Well shucks, nothing we could've done".
How is doing "what we could have done" different from Spain pulling out of the anti-islamist coalition after getting its metro bombed?
I don't see what one has to do with the other. If the bombings in Spain were performed by crazed madmen with the only motive being getting their pictures in the paper, why pull out of the coalition?
If the Utöya murderer is just a crazy person, what's to be learned other than that we need to put him away for a very long time?
I think it's dangerous and stupid to write him off like that. THAT IS ALL THAT I AM SAYING.
So fuck it. Go ahead and ban me you nearsighted cunt.
You are essentially arguing that Norway should respond to the act of terror by accommodating the terrorist and his political brethren. I find it both foolish and morally repugnant.
You are no different than the people who, in the wake of 911, argued that America should change its evil ways or more tragedies like this will happen.
Instead, America got down and kicked the ass of the islamists - and lo and behold, it didn't have any major terrorist act ever since.
Norway should do the same, and kick the ass of radical nationalists.
Quote from: Martinus on July 24, 2011, 04:31:22 PM
You are essentially arguing that Norway should respond to the act of terror by accommodating the terrorist and his political brethren. I find it both foolish and morally repugnant.
Not in the slightest. But pretending like he's "just a crackpot" is moronic.
The mechanics in our society which provoked this course of action are very real, and unless we take a long hard look at ourselves, I don't think this is going to be the last one.
Quote from: Slargos on July 24, 2011, 04:32:29 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 24, 2011, 04:31:22 PM
You are essentially arguing that Norway should respond to the act of terror by accommodating the terrorist and his political brethren. I find it both foolish and morally repugnant.
Not in the slightest. But pretending like he's "just a crackpot" is moronic.
No, he is not just a crackpot. He is one of hundreds, perhaps thousands of crackpots who think like him. They should all be put away.
Quote from: Martinus on July 24, 2011, 04:31:22 PM
You are essentially arguing that Norway should respond to the act of terror by accommodating the terrorist and his political brethren. I find it both foolish and morally repugnant.
You are no different than the people who, in the wake of 911, argued that America should change its evil ways or more tragedies like this will happen.
Instead, America got down and kicked the ass of the islamists - and lo and behold, it didn't have any major terrorist act ever since.
Norway should do the same, and kick the ass of radical nationalists.
I guess you can always solve it like the Polish did, huh?
Quote from: Slargos on July 24, 2011, 04:32:29 PM
The mechanics in our society which provoked this course of action are very real, and unless we take a long hard look at ourselves, I don't think this is going to be the last one.
Of course not. Apparently Norway made a mistake by allowing such idiot to bring his plan to fruition for 9 years without reacting to his bullshit. It should learn to pick out such people before they go on a killing rampage, and neutralize them.
Quote from: Martinus on July 24, 2011, 04:34:06 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 24, 2011, 04:32:29 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 24, 2011, 04:31:22 PM
You are essentially arguing that Norway should respond to the act of terror by accommodating the terrorist and his political brethren. I find it both foolish and morally repugnant.
Not in the slightest. But pretending like he's "just a crackpot" is moronic.
No, he is not just a crackpot. He is one of hundreds, perhaps thousands of crackpots who think like him. They should all be put away.
And these people are your neighbours, co-workers, friends and family. You're not going to get rid of them by declaring another "War on X".
What is interesting, imo, is that lots of people think like him and do nothing..............they obey the law. I see no reason for jailing all crackpots.............the 20% incarceration rate would be far too expensive apart from anything else.
Are you guys familiar with the maxim "hard cases make bad law" ?
One of the problems of the past 20 years or so is that this maxim has been forgotten or disregarded. Norway is a lovely country, with excellent systems and laws that have made most people's lives there pretty good. What they need to do, imo, is change very little but just make sure that if this ever happens again that they have a more responsive SWAT team.
Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on July 24, 2011, 04:43:01 PM
Are you guys familiar with the maxim "hard cases make bad law" ?
One of the problems of the past 20 years or so is that this maxim has been forgotten or disregarded. Norway is a lovely country, with excellent systems and laws that have made most people's lives there pretty good. What they need to do, imo, is change very little but just make sure that if this ever happens again that they have a more responsive SWAT team.
I agree. There is just a temptation, when something like this happens, to try to find a cause and deal with it. But what I said was mostly to annoy Slargos, because he is annoying me.
Quote from: Jacob on July 24, 2011, 01:00:20 PM
Hmm... if I understand what you're saying (and Viking too) it's that "we should understand what ABB is saying, why he's so alienated and change our society to be more in line with what he wants to avoid alienating people like him further."
I'm not sure that sentiment sits that well with me, whether it's Muslim terrorists, people like ABB or anyone else.
Or did I misunderstand?
What we are saying is "Know thine enemy" and we should avoid engaging in comfortable delusions that allow us to merely get on with life again.
Ok, I know Polish jokes and all are kinda lame but sometimes my compatriots really get the cookie.
Massive headline on one of the biggest Polish news websites: "[Polish]Expert police psychologist: The probable motive was [him] being left by a woman"
:frusty:
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 24, 2011, 03:58:05 PM
Slargos, you're really irking my sensibilities with your shenanigans in this thread.
Overruled.
Quote from: Berkut on July 24, 2011, 01:18:07 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 24, 2011, 09:23:22 AM
Also, I think it is a bit disingenuous for Americans to look down upon Europeans and talk about their melting pot superiority. The melting pot doctrine developed when the majority of immigrants to the US were fellow Europeans (or, at most, Latinos, who are also pretty European - at least their are Christian). When non-European, non-Christian immigrants were coming - and not that many did - they were slaughtered, like the Chinese in California, or deprived of constitutional rights - like the Japanese during WW2.
Yeah, I think it is very fair to sum up the overall success of Japanese Americans in US society based on a singular incident spanning a couple years during the worst war that humanity has ever experienced.
As usual, Marty strikes at the core of what it is to understand America.
Don't forget the "slaughter" of almost 20 Chinese in California in the 1870s! Next to that, the Polish contributions to the Holocaust pale.
Quote from: mongers on July 24, 2011, 05:25:19 PM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/mobile/world-europe-14266815 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/mobile/world-europe-14266815)
Quote
Mr Breivik's lawyer Geir Lippestad told Norwegian media: "He thought it was gruesome having to commit these acts, but in his head they were necessary.
"He wished to attack society and the structure of society," Mr Lippestad said.
....
:hmm:
and that is his lawyer.... :yuk:
Quote from: grumbler on July 24, 2011, 05:23:17 PM
Quote from: Berkut on July 24, 2011, 01:18:07 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 24, 2011, 09:23:22 AM
Also, I think it is a bit disingenuous for Americans to look down upon Europeans and talk about their melting pot superiority. The melting pot doctrine developed when the majority of immigrants to the US were fellow Europeans (or, at most, Latinos, who are also pretty European - at least their are Christian). When non-European, non-Christian immigrants were coming - and not that many did - they were slaughtered, like the Chinese in California, or deprived of constitutional rights - like the Japanese during WW2.
Yeah, I think it is very fair to sum up the overall success of Japanese Americans in US society based on a singular incident spanning a couple years during the worst war that humanity has ever experienced.
As usual, Marty strikes at the core of what it is to understand America.
Don't forget the "slaughter" of almost 20 Chinese in California in the 1870s! Next to that, the Polish contributions to the Holocaust pale.
To be fair to Martinus, when you factor out his ignorant hyperbole (pretty much SOP with his posts), he does have a point. Chinese immigrants in particular were pretty severely legally discriminated against, and their plight didn't compare to the plight of Irish, Italians, or Eastern Europeans.
Quote from: DGuller on July 24, 2011, 05:40:41 PM
Quote from: grumbler on July 24, 2011, 05:23:17 PM
Quote from: Berkut on July 24, 2011, 01:18:07 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 24, 2011, 09:23:22 AM
Also, I think it is a bit disingenuous for Americans to look down upon Europeans and talk about their melting pot superiority. The melting pot doctrine developed when the majority of immigrants to the US were fellow Europeans (or, at most, Latinos, who are also pretty European - at least their are Christian). When non-European, non-Christian immigrants were coming - and not that many did - they were slaughtered, like the Chinese in California, or deprived of constitutional rights - like the Japanese during WW2.
Yeah, I think it is very fair to sum up the overall success of Japanese Americans in US society based on a singular incident spanning a couple years during the worst war that humanity has ever experienced.
As usual, Marty strikes at the core of what it is to understand America.
Don't forget the "slaughter" of almost 20 Chinese in California in the 1870s! Next to that, the Polish contributions to the Holocaust pale.
To be fair to Martinus, when you factor out his ignorant hyperbole (pretty much SOP with his posts), he does have a point. Chinese immigrants in particular were pretty severely legally discriminated against, and their plight didn't compare to the plight of Irish, Italians, or Eastern Europeans.
And so, that invalidates the melting pot process?
19th century people were raciss, film at eleven.
Quote from: DGuller on July 24, 2011, 05:40:41 PM
Chinese immigrants in particular were pretty severely legally discriminated against, and their plight didn't compare to the plight of Irish, Italians, or Eastern Europeans.
Remember that the first wave of Chinese immigrants were far different from the European immigrants when it came to the conditions and reasons for their immigration. They were brought in as temporary labor; neither they, nor their employers, expected them to settle. That's why over 90% of them were single males, and almost none of them families. When some decided to stay is when racism really reared its head, but even then the incidents of violence were rare (probably less than 200 victims all told, in a series of incidents all over the West). The racism was bad enough that the total number of Chinese-born and second-generation in the US actually declined.
I'd argue that the Italians at one point had it
almost as bad, but agree that no group was discriminated against as much as the Chinese, nor for as long.
Nor did any deserve it as much. The Chinamen were a plague (still are in fact), and were horrible monsters that spread opium addiction and various other horrible things throughout the American west.
Quote from: Neil on July 24, 2011, 05:17:01 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 24, 2011, 03:58:05 PM
Slargos, you're really irking my sensibilities with your shenanigans in this thread.
Overruled.
You have to sleep sometime.
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on July 24, 2011, 06:27:04 PM
Nor did any deserve it as much. The Chinamen were a plague (still are in fact), and were horrible monsters that spread opium addiction and various other horrible things throughout the American west.
Such as clean clothes. :weep:
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 24, 2011, 06:51:38 PM
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on July 24, 2011, 06:27:04 PM
Nor did any deserve it as much. The Chinamen were a plague (still are in fact), and were horrible monsters that spread opium addiction and various other horrible things throughout the American west.
Such as clean clothes. :weep:
Ancient Chinese secret, huh?
Whoa, that dated me badly. :(
Quote from: Ed Anger on July 24, 2011, 06:54:22 PM
Ancient Chinese secret, huh?
Whoa, that dated me badly. :(
YOU ARE NOT ALONE
Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on July 24, 2011, 04:43:01 PM
Are you guys familiar with the maxim "hard cases make bad law" ?
One of the problems of the past 20 years or so is that this maxim has been forgotten or disregarded. Norway is a lovely country, with excellent systems and laws that have made most people's lives there pretty good. What they need to do, imo, is change very little but just make sure that if this ever happens again that they have a more responsive SWAT team.
+1
I agree with this guy. I see this as an act motivated more by political ideology than religion. He's striking at the future ruling class of the party he opposes.
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2011/07/the-decline-of-political-terrorism-the-rise-of-religious-terrorism/#more-13117
QuoteThe media has been reporting a lot about Anders Breivik. I'm curious about the tendency of some to label Breivik a "Christian Extremist". Additionally, there is widespread repetition of the Norwegian official deeming him a "Christian fundamentalist." I think this is wrong on the specifics, but it also goes toward the general problem of our age where we attempt to fit everything into black-white religious dichotomies. For example, "moderate Muslims" vs. "Islamists." "Islamic extremists" vs. "Christian extremists." Because of the salience of notionally religiously motivated Islamic militant movements there has been a shift toward reinterpreting secular nationalist terrorist movements as religious ones. For example, the attempt to frame the Irish Republican Army as Catholic terrorists, or the Tamil Tigers as Hindu terrorists (in reality, both these are nationalist movements, often with a Leftist slant). Or consider the refashioning of Tim McVeigh into a Christian terrorist when he was a lapsed Catholic at best and probably irreligious by the time of his terrorist act. This religionization of all radical movements means that people have a really hard time today digesting the fact that 19th and early 20th century anarchists who committed what seem to be patently suicidal acts were generally atheists, motivated by politics and not religion! Similarly, the shocking raid on Harpers Ferry was executed by a cast of characters of diverse religious views. John Brown was famously Calvinist, but some of his followers, including one of his sons, were free thinkers who did not adhere to religion.
In our age it seems that consumer culture and post-materialism has totally vanquished the power of political religion, and the materialist messianism implicit in liberal nationalism and Marxism is barely recollected. Unfortunately forgetting the shape of the past seems to have coarsened our model of the present world, and I think a conception where religion motivates all extreme action leads to false inferences. If Christianity was the primary motivator of Anders Breivik's ideology one might presume he would favor the mass immigration of zealous African Christians to Norway to balance the waxing of the Muslim population. Do you think this is a plausible inference? No. Anders Brievik was a conservative nationalist, albeit an evil or crazy or unbalanced one. The attempt to emphasize Brievik's religious identity seems due to the need to inject parity and balance into the "religious clash" with Anders Brievik himself perceived in his political framework, and which is highlighted by Islamic radicals.
But we don't need to go that far back into the past to see the power of politics as opposed to religion in motivating acts of terror. And we don't even need to leave what we today often refer to as the "Muslim world". In the 1970s and 1980s there were a series of hijackings and other terrorist acts, often done in the name of Palestinian nationalism. The innovator who began the shift toward this mode of opposition to the Israeli state was a man of Arab Christian background, George Habash. Habash was a Leftist who was aligned with the Soviet Union, and despite his confessional origins in the Eastern Orthodox community he seems not have been a religious believer by adulthood. The audacious and shocking actions of his PFLP movement served to prod rival Palestinian outfits, Left nationalist movements all, to organize their own terror units. The most famous of these was Black September, which came into the spotlight during the 1972 Munich Olympics. I'm old enough to remember the tail end of this phase of the Age of Terror, and its explicitly nationalist and Leftist connections. Only these deep fundamentals could explain the collaboration between groups as distinctive as Habash's PFLP and the German Red Army Faction (which was being backed by the GDR, though that was not known at the time).
But this is all talk. As Michelle observes, I love charts. I plotted "Arab Terrorist," "Islamic Terrorist", and "Muslim Terrorist" in Google Ngram Viewer. Here are the results:
Chart
The secular phase of terrorism in the 1970s is rather clear. More recently you see that the terms "Islamic" and "Muslim" are starting to outpace "Arab" as modifiers. But Ngram is not always accurate after 2000. So I did some independent checks. I looked at these terms in Google Scholar and The New York Times archives, by decade. For the latter the period before 1981 is thrown into an aggregate pool. I log-transformed the y axis, but you can see the reported values on the plots. Yes, I got 0 hits for "Muslim terrorist" in The New York Times before 1981!
These results confirm the impression that the face of terror as a religious face is a relatively recent phenomenon. Less than a generation in fact. The collapse of Arab nationalism as well as the Soviet Union left the secular terror movements with fewer sponsors. Islamism's rise, and the more prominent role of religion generally in the Middle East, meant that politically motivated terror took on a religious cast. Robert Pape's work has shown that there's a surprisingly strong correlation between independent political variables and religiously motivated suicide terrorism. And scholars of religion who take a cognitivist vantage point have also illustrated how religious rationale is often integrated after the fact to scaffold and buttress actions which may have other proximate causes (e.g., Christian libertarian vs. Christian socialism). The human mind is a complex thing, and its incoherence is a structural feature, not an exceptional deviation.
And complexity and texture also apply to terrorists and terrorist movements. When it comes to men such as Anders Breivik, Tim McVeigh, and Nidal Hasan, who are de facto lone wolfs (in that they operationalized their ideology mostly as individuals, even if they felt they were part of a broader movement) there is a tendency toward incomprehension, and to push them into the category of inexplicable evil and insanity. But even insanity perceives its own sense. This is why Gore Vidal cautioned that we shouldn't view McVeigh as deranged.
When we ascribe purely religious motives toward people that amps up the tendency toward engaging in mysterianism when it comes to terror. Religion is a sensitive topic, and may people ascribe deep and sincere meaning to their religious beliefs. By connecting terror with religion one makes it harder to approach terror from a rational perspective because many resist decomposing and analyzing religion in a reductionist manner as if it was just another thing. In contrast, there are militant atheists who see in religion as the "root of all evil." The insanity of religious terror makes total sense to them. The root is poisoned after all. But by explaining everything, unfortunately they often explain nothing. Most religious people don't engage in terror.
And yet the broad family similarities between religious and secular terror remain. There is no hesitation in understanding the sense of Palestinian nationalist error, to the actions of the I.R.A. There are obvious proximate material causes. It is more difficult with religious terror, because terrorists such as Osama bin Laden who operate under the religious guise often elide the material causes of their actions and reframe it as an idealistic and metaphysical conflict. And yet of course we don't expect Islamic terrorists to attack arguably the most anti-God nation-state on earth, North Korea. Whatever metaphysical disagreement with North Korea they have, these terrorists have more serious material conflicts with a nation where most of the population adheres to a belief in what is notionally the same God of Abraham.
In regards to Anders Breivik there's a lot of esoteric material coming out. That's the noise. The reality is that Breivik had some political agenda, which seems to have been warped through a seriously unbalanced lens. In the short term confusing him for a genuinely religiously motivated terrorist, like Eric Rudolph, may seem harmless. But as we distort our map of reality one step at a time, the errors compound, and our coarse models may lead us to false inferences about the arc of the future. That's more than just abstract.
Quote from: Berkut on July 24, 2011, 02:07:23 PMThen it is kind of meaningless, isn't it?
Is there anyone out there within the Western world that would actually disagree with that? You are just labeling pretty basic liberal western values as "multiculturalism". Is there some problem in the West with non-multicutluralists demanding that we force other cultures to change at some pace others do not feel is appropriate? How would that even manifest itself in a political sense?
If it was meaningless, that'd actually be kind of nice but I don't think it is alas.
Some Moslems want to build a mosque in Tennessee. According to some US presidential candidates, that's a problem. It's not the only place in the Western world where building Moslem places of worship meets serious public opposition - sometimes enough to prevent the building taking place at all.
Jews want to eat meat that's slaughtered according to their customs. According to a number of Western liberal countries that's a problem.
Some women would like to wear scarves to cover their hair as according to their culture that's modest. That's enough of a problem in several Western liberal countries that they're outlawing the practice outright.
That's just off the top of my head.
So while I agree with you that the multiculturalism I advocate (and which I believe is what any government that actually has a policy of multiculturalism is pushing for in spite of the strawmen opponents set up) is clearly derived from and consistent with basic Western liberalism, the notion seems controversial enough that it needs its own label.
But yeah, if we could stop talking about multiculturalism but society actual tried to follow the notions I outlined I'd be more than content.
Quote from: Slargos on July 24, 2011, 02:08:03 PMYou step on people often enough, you'd better make sure they're never in a position to step on you because it's going to get very ugly.
That goes for people you disagree with and step on as well.
Quote from: dps on July 24, 2011, 02:13:58 PMSo by this logic, in 1859, in the wake of John Brown's raid, should abolishionists have re-evaluated their views and decided that human chattel slavery was OK?
I'm not familiar enough with American Civil War events to have that discussion in a useful way.
But when someone things an abstract political struggle* is important enough to start murdering innocents merely "to be heard" then I think the people should have a good long think about exactly what it is they're saying, what they want and how they're going about getting it.
*(and I think "cultural marxists vs nationalists" is much more abstract than "slavery yes or no")
Quote from: Jacob on July 24, 2011, 09:11:46 PM
Quote from: Berkut on July 24, 2011, 02:07:23 PMThen it is kind of meaningless, isn't it?
Is there anyone out there within the Western world that would actually disagree with that? You are just labeling pretty basic liberal western values as "multiculturalism". Is there some problem in the West with non-multicutluralists demanding that we force other cultures to change at some pace others do not feel is appropriate? How would that even manifest itself in a political sense?
If it was meaningless, that'd actually be kind of nice but I don't think it is alas.
Some Moslems want to build a mosque in Tennessee. According to some US presidential candidates, that's a problem.
I bet there are literally dozens and dozens of Mosques in Tennessee. There is no credible threat to the ability of Muslims to build mosques in America. The basic tenet that says they can build mosques in America is not "multiculturalism", it is freedom of religion, a principle we've had for quite some time.
Quote
It's not the only place in the Western world where building Moslem places of worship meets serious public opposition - sometimes enough to prevent the building taking place at all.
So there is intolerance in some places. So multuculturalism is simply the idea that tolerance is good? Why the need for a new term then? There has been this idea that tolerance is a good thing for quite some time now.
Quote
Jews want to eat meat that's slaughtered according to their customs. According to a number of Western liberal countries that's a problem.
So the definition of multicultaralism is that cultures get to to do whatever they like? I still don't see how this is differentiated.
Quote
Some women would like to wear scarves to cover their hair as according to their culture that's modest. That's enough of a problem in several Western liberal countries that they're outlawing the practice outright.
And if they were more multicultural, they would allow this? Funny that are your examples are specifically religious in nature. Why?
Quote
That's just off the top of my head.
But not one where there is any difference between your definition of multiculturalism and simple tolerance of religious differences.
Quote
So while I agree with you that the multiculturalism I advocate (and which I believe is what any government that actually has a policy of multiculturalism is pushing for in spite of the strawmen opponents set up) is clearly derived from and consistent with basic Western liberalism, the notion seems controversial enough that it needs its own label.
Well, no, not if it is just limited to what examples you have given. The labels for dealing with religious freedom and tolerance have been around for a long time and perfectly describe everything you've given so far.
Quote
But yeah, if we could stop talking about multiculturalism but society actual tried to follow the notions I outlined I'd be more than content.
For some reason I suspect that is not the case. I don't think there are too many people who argue that multiculteralism is simply tolerance of different religious views. If that is the case, we have that in spades in the US, for example, for quite some time. And yet people commonly refer to the term in a manner that implies that it applies more to Europe than the US. Why, if in fact it just means "Hey, lets let other people practice their religion without undue interference".
Your definition strikes me as similar to Republicans defining Conservatism as "Conservatism is about respect for core American values and love of the Constitution!"
Quote from: dps on July 24, 2011, 02:24:46 PMI think that what Jacob calls "multiculturalism" is what most Americans would simply call "tolerance". "Multiculturalism" generally means something else.
Maybe it does now in many place, due to the concerted strawman construction of the people for whom even "tolerance" is unacceptable.
I'm pretty certain that the idea of multiculturalism as a government policy - and the term itself - originated from Trudeau in Canada and it meant what I'm describing (and still does today). I don't think many other places even used the term in the 70s and 80s when the term was coined and the Multiculturalism act was implemented.
Furthermore, I challenge anyone here to provide examples of serious advocates of multiculturalism who advocate a position much beyond what you call "tolerance".
Yes, representatives of individual cultures will argue that "you should allow me to kill my daughter for shaming my family because of multiculturalism", but I don't think you will find anyone outside of that particular cultural group claiming that's how multiculturalism should work.
The argument that multiculturalism means "yes, you can beat your son for being gay; these guys over here get to burn down the houses of people who blaspheme against their god; and these other people are allowed to stab people who look at their daughters the wrong way" is a strawman pure and simple. No one advocates that in any serious fashion.
Quote from: Jacob on July 24, 2011, 09:11:46 PM
Some Moslems want to build a mosque in Tennessee. According to some US presidential candidates, that's a problem. It's not the only place in the Western world where building Moslem places of worship meets serious public opposition - sometimes enough to prevent the building taking place at all.
That's just right out.
When I hear the term multiculturalism I think of positive efforts made to encourage minorities to hold on to their culture and traditions. As opposed to the more laissez faire tolerance.
Quote from: Jacob on July 24, 2011, 09:19:44 PM
Quote from: dps on July 24, 2011, 02:13:58 PMSo by this logic, in 1859, in the wake of John Brown's raid, should abolishionists have re-evaluated their views and decided that human chattel slavery was OK?
I'm not familiar enough with American Civil War events to have that discussion in a useful way.
But when someone things an abstract political struggle* is important enough to start murdering innocents merely "to be heard" then I think the people should have a good long think about exactly what it is they're saying, what they want and how they're going about getting it.
*(and I think "cultural marxists vs nationalists" is much more abstract than "slavery yes or no")
Indeed. The only way John Brown could've been cooler is if he'd killed more people.
Quote from: Ideologue on July 24, 2011, 09:52:45 PM
Quote from: Jacob on July 24, 2011, 09:19:44 PM
Quote from: dps on July 24, 2011, 02:13:58 PMSo by this logic, in 1859, in the wake of John Brown's raid, should abolishionists have re-evaluated their views and decided that human chattel slavery was OK?
I'm not familiar enough with American Civil War events to have that discussion in a useful way.
But when someone things an abstract political struggle* is important enough to start murdering innocents merely "to be heard" then I think the people should have a good long think about exactly what it is they're saying, what they want and how they're going about getting it.
*(and I think "cultural marxists vs nationalists" is much more abstract than "slavery yes or no")
Indeed. The only way John Brown could've been cooler is if he'd killed more people.
Amen, brother.
Quote from: Berkut on July 24, 2011, 09:26:53 PM
I bet there are literally dozens and dozens of Mosques in Tennessee. There is no credible threat to the ability of Muslims to build mosques in America. The basic tenet that says they can build mosques in America is not "multiculturalism", it is freedom of religion, a principle we've had for quite some time.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/08/29/tennessee.mosque.site.fire/index.html I'd consider arson a credible threat.
Quote from: Ideologue on July 24, 2011, 09:52:45 PM
Quote from: Jacob on July 24, 2011, 09:19:44 PM
Quote from: dps on July 24, 2011, 02:13:58 PMSo by this logic, in 1859, in the wake of John Brown's raid, should abolishionists have re-evaluated their views and decided that human chattel slavery was OK?
I'm not familiar enough with American Civil War events to have that discussion in a useful way.
But when someone things an abstract political struggle* is important enough to start murdering innocents merely "to be heard" then I think the people should have a good long think about exactly what it is they're saying, what they want and how they're going about getting it.
*(and I think "cultural marxists vs nationalists" is much more abstract than "slavery yes or no")
Indeed. The only way John Brown could've been cooler is if he'd killed more people.
Disagree. He would have been cooler if he had lobbied to make slavery illegal, started up a private law enforcement agency, and then attacked the slaveowners for kidnapping.
As it stands, John Brown is the same is the Norwegian guy.
John Brown's cause was just but his actions were not. His victims were several towns people that mostly had nothing to do with slavery, including a train baggage handler who was actually a freed black man. If he had gone onto a few plantations and show up overseers and owners it would have been a different thing.
Quote from: Neil on July 24, 2011, 10:03:06 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on July 24, 2011, 09:52:45 PM
Quote from: Jacob on July 24, 2011, 09:19:44 PM
Quote from: dps on July 24, 2011, 02:13:58 PMSo by this logic, in 1859, in the wake of John Brown's raid, should abolishionists have re-evaluated their views and decided that human chattel slavery was OK?
I'm not familiar enough with American Civil War events to have that discussion in a useful way.
But when someone things an abstract political struggle* is important enough to start murdering innocents merely "to be heard" then I think the people should have a good long think about exactly what it is they're saying, what they want and how they're going about getting it.
*(and I think "cultural marxists vs nationalists" is much more abstract than "slavery yes or no")
Indeed. The only way John Brown could've been cooler is if he'd killed more people.
Disagree. He would have been cooler if he had lobbied to make slavery illegal, started up a private law enforcement agency, and then attacked the slaveowners for kidnapping.
As it stands, John Brown is the same is the Norwegian guy.
Allan Pinkerton vs. John Brown? Sounds like a prospective episode of "Deadliest Warrior".
Quote from: Neil on July 24, 2011, 10:03:06 PM
As it stands, John Brown is the same is the Norwegian guy.
Wrong, you flanneled faux-American.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 24, 2011, 10:43:20 PM
Quote from: Neil on July 24, 2011, 10:03:06 PM
As it stands, John Brown is the same is the Norwegian guy.
Wrong, you flanneled faux-American.
No, I'm absolutely right.
Quote from: Solmyr on July 24, 2011, 03:03:14 PMSo what happens when you expect to wear a hat in your passport photograph, demand that every restaurant carry shellfish to satisfy your needs, demand service in your particular language, and marry someone half your age when you are 20?
What's the big deal about wearing a hat in a passport photo? If the face is still visible and the person wears a hat every day as part of their religious conviction, wearing the hat in the photo seems potentially more accurate for identification purposes. So I don't see any reason to make an issue of it. Go ahead and wear the hat.
You can eat whatever you want, but you don't get to tell people what to sell in their restaurants. They might want to carry shellfish to court your business, but that's up to them. On the other hand, if you're dealing with a large institution of some sort that is responsible for feeding you (prison, the army, at a remote mining camp etc) then it's reasonable to demand that your dietary restrictions are taken into account (as I believe they are).
As for service in your language, it's not about you demanding it, it's about society respecting it. If there are significant groups of people who are better served in another language it makes sense to try to do so. This isn't controversial in Canada at all - at least not in implementation - when you go to a service canada office you can be served in French or English (as per the law). In addtion, there are signs advicing you if service is available in any other language (though you may have to wait longer until the relevant person is freed up). If your ability with the official languages are so limited that you can't be served in them, there are telephone translators available. So really, it's the inverse of how you posit the question: it's not about demanding anything, it's about the government serving the population to the best of it's ability, including in other languages where necessary. For private institutions, it's the same thing - it's often good customer service (though subject to customer service analysis). It's not uncommon at all, for example, to see banks with signs saying "service available in [Mandarin/ Tagalog/ Hindi/ Spanish/ whatever]" in their windows. Again, it's not about people demanding anything - it's about how best to service your customers.
Marrying someone who's 10 years old is not allowable, because children cannot give consent to that sort of thing. But if you want to marry an 18 year old when you're 70 because that's your culture, that's alright as long everybody involved consents.
... none of those questions were tricky at all :huh:
Consent is a cultural concept.
Quote from: Slargos on July 24, 2011, 04:29:32 PMI think it's dangerous and stupid to write him off like that. THAT IS ALL THAT I AM SAYING.
So fuck it. Go ahead and ban me you nearsighted cunt.
Much like it's dangerous and stupid to write off the legitimate grievances of the guys who flew planes in to the World Trade Center?
Quote from: Slargos on July 24, 2011, 04:32:29 PMThe mechanics in our society which provoked this course of action are very real, and unless we take a long hard look at ourselves, I don't think this is going to be the last one.
... and you apply the same analysis and arrive at the same response when it comes to Islamicist terrorism?
Quote from: Viking on July 24, 2011, 04:48:24 PMWhat we are saying is "Know thine enemy" and we should avoid engaging in comfortable delusions that allow us to merely get on with life again.
That's very reasonable.
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on July 24, 2011, 06:27:04 PM
Nor did any deserve it as much. The Chinamen were a plague (still are in fact), and were horrible monsters that spread opium addiction and various other horrible things throughout the American west.
Spreading opium addiction throughout the American West only seems fair given that Americans made lots of money from spreading opium addiction throughout China during the very same time period.
Quote from: Neil on July 24, 2011, 10:51:21 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 24, 2011, 10:43:20 PM
Quote from: Neil on July 24, 2011, 10:03:06 PM
As it stands, John Brown is the same is the Norwegian guy.
Wrong, you flanneled faux-American.
No, I'm absolutely right.
No, you're not. And you're Albertan, which makes you twice as full of shit.
Quote from: Berkut on July 24, 2011, 09:26:53 PM
I bet there are literally dozens and dozens of Mosques in Tennessee. There is no credible threat to the ability of Muslims to build mosques in America. The basic tenet that says they can build mosques in America is not "multiculturalism", it is freedom of religion, a principle we've had for quite some time.
~17 (http://islamicvalley.com/prod/entitySearch.php/t/09L/s/TN), but that also includes Muslim community centers.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 24, 2011, 11:04:59 PM
Quote from: Neil on July 24, 2011, 10:51:21 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 24, 2011, 10:43:20 PM
Quote from: Neil on July 24, 2011, 10:03:06 PM
As it stands, John Brown is the same is the Norwegian guy.
Wrong, you flanneled faux-American.
No, I'm absolutely right.
No, you're not. And you're Albertan, which makes you twice as full of shit.
Maybe you'll be an Albertan after President Bachmann gets done with America.
Quote from: Jacob on July 24, 2011, 11:04:35 PM
Spreading opium addiction throughout the American West only seems fair given that Americans made lots of money from spreading opium addiction throughout China during the very same time period.
?
Quote from: Neil on July 24, 2011, 11:29:15 PM
Maybe you'll be an Albertan after President Bachmann gets done with America.
:shudder: What a way to combine two terrifying thoughts in one sentence.
Quote from: Berkut on July 24, 2011, 09:26:53 PMI bet there are literally dozens and dozens of Mosques in Tennessee. There is no credible threat to the ability of Muslims to build mosques in America. The basic tenet that says they can build mosques in America is not "multiculturalism", it is freedom of religion, a principle we've had for quite some time.
Wonderful, and that's how it should be.
I mean, Herman Cain (presidential candidate for the GOP) is on record as being against a mosque being built in Tennessee: http://www.christianpost.com/news/herman-cain-mosque-could-lead-to-sharia-law-52357/
I don't have any serious issues with how you guys go about doing it in the US. The "melting pot" is doing just fine in broad strokes (much like Canadian multiculturalism). If you want to call it something else, that's fine, and if you want to defend it in the name of the basic American ideal of freedom then more power to you.
QuoteSo there is intolerance in some places. So multuculturalism is simply the idea that tolerance is good? Why the need for a new term then? There has been this idea that tolerance is a good thing for quite some time now.
The term multiculturalism is not particularly new, being coined at least no later than 1971 when Trudeau declared that Canada would adopt multicultural policy.
At the time, at least in Canada, the notion that cultural tolerance was a good thing to the point that it should part of the basic fabric of government was at least somewhat novel. I'm pretty sure that in most places outside of North America the notion was at best an obscure minority position.
The US has it's own thing going with how it deals with and essentially respects the cultures of its immigrants - placing it under the rubric of "as much freedom as possible, the government should stay the fuck out of everyone's business as much as possible." But that's a pretty American thing, isn't it? In places where the government is very much involved in issues of culture, the notion that the government should respect all cultures equally (within a basic framework of respecting human rights and freedoms, of course) rather than enforce the cultural norms of the majority is a relatively new thing I think - and that's what multiculturalism is.
If everyone had your attitude "yeah, so? Tolerance of other cultures, what's the big deal?" then that'd be brilliant. But the notion of tolerance of other cultures is apparently quite controversial in a lot of places still.
QuoteSo the definition of multicultaralism is that cultures get to to do whatever they like? I still don't see how this is differentiated.
Uhm... no.
Individuals get to do whatever they want as long as what they want doesn't infringe on anyone else's rights.
QuoteQuoteSome women would like to wear scarves to cover their hair as according to their culture that's modest. That's enough of a problem in several Western liberal countries that they're outlawing the practice outright.
And if they were more multicultural, they would allow this? Funny that are your examples are specifically religious in nature. Why?
Yeah, they would. I'm a bit surprised that you're arguing this, though. I'd have thought you'd be against outlawing people wearing whatever headwear they want, for whatever reason.
In any case, for some people wearing the scarf is due to cultural identification rather than religious purposes. Plenty of cultural expression overlaps with religious expression. I don't see why that should invalidate anything.
QuoteBut not one where there is any difference between your definition of multiculturalism and simple tolerance of religious differences.
Well, someone (dps, I believe) helpfully asked some questions about food and language elsewhere.
But yeah, in many cases cultural and religious tolerance overlap. It doesn't invalidate the need for either.
QuoteWell, no, not if it is just limited to what examples you have given. The labels for dealing with religious freedom and tolerance have been around for a long time and perfectly describe everything you've given so far.
Then we don't have much to argue about other than a label, apprently :hug:
However, I think that you'll find that upon closer examination 99% of multicultural policies in fact are just about that - religious and cultural freedom and tolerance - that and serving the population's needs better, in spite of what the many vehement critics decry.
If you want to strip the term "multiculturalism" out of everything (because apparently it's a failure, though it's working quite here in Canada where I'm pretty sure we coined the term for our own version of the US "melting pot" paradigm) but protected religious freedom and (non-harmful) cultural expression (individual and community based) while being committed to delivering government services in the most efficient way (which means taking into consideration the culture of the target demographics) then I'd be perfectly content.
But somehow I don't think most of the opponents of "multiculturalism" would be okay with that.
QuoteFor some reason I suspect that is not the case. I don't think there are too many people who argue that multiculteralism is simply tolerance of different religious views. If that is the case, we have that in spades in the US, for example, for quite some time. And yet people commonly refer to the term in a manner that implies that it applies more to Europe than the US. Why, if in fact it just means "Hey, lets let other people practice their religion without undue interference".
It's not just about religion, but also about things like language and identity. If somebody wants to wave some Mexican flags around to celebrate some holiday, for example, that shouldn't be a big controversy (as it sometimes is). And if a particular set of government services are better delivered by having a Tagalog speaker available in the office, then that's cool and shouldn't be a big controversy either.
QuoteYour definition strikes me as similar to Republicans defining Conservatism as "Conservatism is about respect for core American values and love of the Constitution!"
Ok :huh:
I'm not sure what you're really taking issue with, to be honest. It seems that in terms of actual substance we're pretty much on the same page.
I call it multiculturalism because that's what we call it in Canada where we coined the term (I'm pretty sure).
Now, there's the caricature of multiculturalism going as well - the one so many people are against - is the one where you can't stop honour killings or clitorectomies and so on. The thing is, I don't know of any advocates of multiculturalism who actually use that definiton (with the exception of people in favour of honour killings and clitorectomies trying to get people to leave them alone, but that doesn't make it so).
And since I don't believe that anyone - at least on a government level - has ever advocated that sort of multiculturalism at all, I believe that the very strong opposition to multiculturalism is mostly about being intolerant of those who are not of the majority culture.
That's certainly what Slargos, Grallon and their ilk are going on about. When they rail about the evils of multiculturalism, they bring up the strawman ("it's their culture to rape women and murder non-believers and we HAVE to allow it if we're multicultural") to justify the intolerant discrimination against their "cultural inferiors" that's so dear to their hearts.
If it's not, then it's about being against policies that aren't implemented. So what is there to roll back? Why get so up in arms about something that's not implemented, and which there is no serious push to implement?
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 24, 2011, 09:45:17 PM
When I hear the term multiculturalism I think of positive efforts made to encourage minorities to hold on to their culture and traditions. As opposed to the more laissez faire tolerance.
I think those are nice. I mean, if we accept that expressions of culture are fine (again, within the basic liberal respect of the rights of others framework) then it's a nice thing to encourage people to express and hang on to their cultures. But really, that primarily comes from the people of that culture than any outside agency. All it's really about in my view is that if the local parks board is going to build baseball diamonds for little league teams in the city, then they should consider to build a cricket ground as well if there are enough people in town who might use it; even if cricket grounds are kind of a new thing in the city.
As I've touched on elsewhere it's also about things delivering services in languages other than that of the majority. It could be framed as "encouraging people to retain their culture" but it could equally well be framed as "delivering services efficiently, with respect for the recipients."
That said, I'm happy with laissez faire tolerance. Unfortunately, even that seems to be a bit of a rearguard action in many places in Europe.
When multiculturalism means you can't say things like what Grallon and Slargos say, it's gone too far. You (Europe, not you, Jacob) ironically make their point for them: by eroding the freedom to say reprehensible things, you make the statement that freedom is only for things you like.
And when only the freedom to do things someone in power likes are allowed, sooner or later someone will come to power you do not like, and who does not like you, and freedom that has value to you will be trampled.
There's also the notion that by not--at least socially--compelling assimilation, eventually you may wind up with a separate, well-organized group that has the power to bend a democracy to its own ends. The Christian right in America is an egregious domestic example of this. To be honest, I can't think of an immigrant group that has done or is likely to do the same harm, at least to a democratic, modern country, but it is conceivably possible.
I strongly dislike Islam, for example, and would never want to see Muslims gain the same ascendancy as Christians in the United States. That is a ludicrous fear in America (and one exploited by far more dangerous Abrahamics); I do not know if it is a ludicrous fear in Europe. Given the folks who espouse it tend to be the same sort of rightist nutjobs with whom I am familiar with in my own cultural context, instead of the balls of light I know most Europeans to be, one suspects that it is, but geographically and demographically, it's a fear that has far more plausibility.
Quote from: Neil on July 24, 2011, 10:57:32 PM
Consent is a cultural concept.
Sure, if you say so. But it nonetheless falls within the broader rubric of "...within the context of respects for the rights of others" which all cultural expressions have to fall within in a multicultural society.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 24, 2011, 11:40:23 PM
Quote from: Jacob on July 24, 2011, 11:04:35 PM
Spreading opium addiction throughout the American West only seems fair given that Americans made lots of money from spreading opium addiction throughout China during the very same time period.
?
I wasn't aware of any American involvement in the Opium wars. Or the entire sordid history of European power games in China in the 19th Century.
Quote from: Ideologue on July 25, 2011, 12:01:30 AM
When multiculturalism means you can't say things like what Grallon and Slargos say, it's gone too far. You (Europe, not you, Jacob) ironically make their point for them: by eroding the freedom to say reprehensible things, you make the statement that freedom is only for things you like.
And when only the freedom to do things someone in power likes are allowed, sooner or later someone will come to power you do not like, and who does not like you, and freedom that has value to you will be trampled.
Eloquently put :bowler:
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 24, 2011, 11:40:23 PM
Quote from: Jacob on July 24, 2011, 11:04:35 PM
Spreading opium addiction throughout the American West only seems fair given that Americans made lots of money from spreading opium addiction throughout China during the very same time period.
?
While the British were the the driving force behind the Opium Wars and the trade of opium to China, there were many American traders willing to ride their coat tails.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opium#Recreational_use_outside_of_China_.2815th_to_19th_century.29
QuoteSome competition came from the newly independent United States, which began to compete in Guangzhou (Canton) selling Turkish opium in the 1820s.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Bennet_Forbes
Quote[Robert Bennet Forbes] was born in Jamaica Plain, near Boston, Massachusetts, the son of Ralph Bennet Forbes and wife Margaret Perkins, of the Perkins family, and brother of John Murray Forbes. "As a member of the Forbes family of Boston, much of his wealth was derived from the opium and China Trade and he played a prominent role in the outbreak of the Opium War. Despite the ethical problems of dealing in opium, he was known to engage in humanitarian activities, such as commandeering the USS Jamestown to send food to Irish famine sufferers in 1847."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prohibition_of_drugs
QuoteChina was defeated and the war ended with the Treaty of Nanking, which protected foreign opium traders from Chinese law. A related American treaty promised to end the smuggling of opium by Americans. It took until the next Opium War for the trade to be legalized.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_nanking
QuoteNevertheless, the treaties of 1842–43 left several unsettled issues. In particular it did not resolve the status of the opium trade. Although the American treaty of 1844 explicitly banned Americans from selling opium, the trade continued as both the British and American merchants were only subject to the legal control of their consuls. The opium trade was later legalised in the Treaties of Tianjin, which China concluded after the Second Opium War.
Quote from: Queequeg on July 25, 2011, 12:10:55 AMI wasn't aware of any American involvement in the Opium wars. Or the entire sordid history of European power games in China in the 19th Century.
Like I said, the Brits lead the charge but plenty of Western powers took advantage at the time. The general pattern was that whenever the Brits forced an unequal treaty on the Chinese or some concession, the other powers - including the Americans - soon got similar treaties or concession for themselves if they were not signatories to the original deal (the Brits occassionally liked to include other powers so they could frame their various actions as being about principles of free trade rather than mere self-serving ambition). One example is the Treaty of Tientsin.
There was some minor US involvement in the Second Opium War: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Opium_War
QuoteThe U.S. was involved in two campaigns however, the first in retaliation for a Chinese attack on a U.S. Navy officer. The resulting campaign was the Battle of the Pearl River Forts, near Canton. The second was in 1859 when a U.S. warship, the USS San Jacinto bombarded the Taku Forts in support of British and French troops on the ground.
That said, I don't think any opprobrium falls particularly on the US compared to any of the European powers at the time; certainly the Brits were the driving force.
My point was merely that American sold opium to the Chinese before the Chinese sold it to the Americans.
Quote from: Ideologue on July 25, 2011, 12:01:30 AMWhen multiculturalism means you can't say things like what Grallon and Slargos say, it's gone too far. You (Europe, not you, Jacob) ironically make their point for them: by eroding the freedom to say reprehensible things, you make the statement that freedom is only for things you like.
Which things that Grallon and Slargos say? That 'the other people' should all be killed because otherwise they'll destroy us?
QuoteThere's also the notion that by not--at least socially--compelling assimilation, eventually you may wind up with a separate, well-organized group that has the power to bend a democracy to its own ends.
Isn't that the point of democracy? For people to bend it to their own ends?
QuoteThe Christian right in America is an egregious domestic example of this. To be honest, I can't think of an immigrant group that has done or is likely to do the same harm, at least to a democratic, modern country, but it is conceivably possible.
... but that's hardly an immigration problem is it? I mean, those people are descended from immigrants, sure, but their immigrant ancestors were not members of the Christian Right, by and large, because no such thing existed when they immigrated.
QuoteI strongly dislike Islam, for example, and would never want to see Muslims gain the same ascendancy as Christians in the United States. That is a ludicrous fear in America (and one exploited by far more dangerous Abrahamics); I do not know if it is a ludicrous fear in Europe.
It is.
Quote from: Jacob on July 24, 2011, 11:48:41 PM
I mean, Herman Cain (presidential candidate for the GOP) is on record as being against a mosque being built in Tennessee: http://www.christianpost.com/news/herman-cain-mosque-could-lead-to-sharia-law-52357/
Herman Cain is on record of being against laws that are over three pages long.
Multiculturalism is retarded. Society cannot function well unless there is a dominant culture within it. Having several cultures side by side doesn't work well in a modern society. And by culture I mean the basic way you view and interact with other humans, not whether you go to a church or a mosque or how you choose to display your lack of dress sense or which ethnic dish you prefer.
Difference without clash: I say christmas, you say hanukkah
Difference with clash: people must never criticize my religion
Quote from: The Brain on July 25, 2011, 01:52:45 AM
Multiculturalism is retarded. Society cannot function well unless there is a dominant culture within it. Having several cultures side by side doesn't work well in a modern society. And by culture I mean the basic way you view and interact with other humans, not whether you go to a church or a mosque or how you choose to display your lack of dress sense or which ethnic dish you prefer.
Difference without clash: I say christmas, you say hanukkah
Difference with clash: people must never criticize my religion
:yes:
To elaborate on Jacob said, I think the sane multiculturalism is essentially eudaimonics applied to people of different cultures. It is the same argument as allowing gays to marry - as long as it makes people happier and does not harm anyone, why shouldn't the state allow it?
Quote from: Jacob on July 24, 2011, 11:48:41 PMNow, there's the caricature of multiculturalism going as well - the one so many people are against - is the one where you can't stop honour killings or clitorectomies and so on.
The thing is, the line is not as clearly drawn as you claim. The slaughter of animals thread proves that there is quite a division as to what people perceive to be "harmless" and "harmful" expression of different cultures. There is also an issue of circumcision of boys for example. Or arranged marriages. Or polygamy. A lot of cultural issues like this are in a grey area, and this creates conflicts.
I am not saying that your approach is wrong, just that you seem to draw this rosy, optimistic picture of these issues being a no brainer, but they aren't.
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 02:56:14 AM
To elaborate on Jacob said, I think the sane multiculturalism is essentially eudaimonics applied to people of different cultures. It is the same argument as allowing gays to marry - as long as it makes people happier and does not harm anyone, why shouldn't the state allow it?
for sure, altough in that specific example, it is only true while we are talking about the legal aspect of marriage. The state should have no reason to deny same-sex people to be legally considered married.
However, the state also should have no say in forcing gay couples down the throat of churches - if people have in their backward instruction manual for life that "ghey sex is teh evöl", they should be left free to deny church weddings to gays.
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 03:04:03 AM
Quote from: Jacob on July 24, 2011, 11:48:41 PMNow, there's the caricature of multiculturalism going as well - the one so many people are against - is the one where you can't stop honour killings or clitorectomies and so on.
The thing is, the line is not as clearly drawn as you claim. The slaughter of animals thread proves that there is quite a division as to what people perceive to be "harmless" and "harmful" expression of different cultures. There is also an issue of circumcision of boys for example. Or arranged marriages. Or polygamy. A lot of cultural issues like this are in a grey area, and this creates conflicts.
I am not saying that your approach is wrong, just that you seem to draw this rosy, optimistic picture of these issues being a no brainer, but they aren't.
well it should be fairly easy: everything goes as long as it does not go against the will of an other involved individual (with the added protection of minors)
Quote from: jimmy olsen on July 25, 2011, 12:12:21 AM
Quote from: Ideologue on July 25, 2011, 12:01:30 AM
When multiculturalism means you can't say things like what Grallon and Slargos say, it's gone too far. You (Europe, not you, Jacob) ironically make their point for them: by eroding the freedom to say reprehensible things, you make the statement that freedom is only for things you like.
And when only the freedom to do things someone in power likes are allowed, sooner or later someone will come to power you do not like, and who does not like you, and freedom that has value to you will be trampled.
Eloquently put :bowler:
Only that it's a strawman, or at least it is not relevant to the case at hand. As was already said, the guy was spouting his bullshit for a while now and at no point was he in any way prosecuted or persecuted for his views. His complaint is that newspapers wouldn't print his letters.
Quote from: Tamas on July 25, 2011, 03:06:11 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 02:56:14 AM
To elaborate on Jacob said, I think the sane multiculturalism is essentially eudaimonics applied to people of different cultures. It is the same argument as allowing gays to marry - as long as it makes people happier and does not harm anyone, why shouldn't the state allow it?
for sure, altough in that specific example, it is only true while we are talking about the legal aspect of marriage. The state should have no reason to deny same-sex people to be legally considered married.
However, the state also should have no say in forcing gay couples down the throat of churches - if people have in their backward instruction manual for life that "ghey sex is teh evöl", they should be left free to deny church weddings to gays.
Indeed. Which is about freedom of religion point Jacob made.
Quote from: Tamas on July 25, 2011, 03:07:24 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 03:04:03 AM
Quote from: Jacob on July 24, 2011, 11:48:41 PMNow, there's the caricature of multiculturalism going as well - the one so many people are against - is the one where you can't stop honour killings or clitorectomies and so on.
The thing is, the line is not as clearly drawn as you claim. The slaughter of animals thread proves that there is quite a division as to what people perceive to be "harmless" and "harmful" expression of different cultures. There is also an issue of circumcision of boys for example. Or arranged marriages. Or polygamy. A lot of cultural issues like this are in a grey area, and this creates conflicts.
I am not saying that your approach is wrong, just that you seem to draw this rosy, optimistic picture of these issues being a no brainer, but they aren't.
well it should be fairly easy: everything goes as long as it does not go against the will of an other involved individual (with the added protection of minors)
What about animals? Or environment? If I want to worship Quitzipotli by boiling a thousand dogs alive in molten lead and dump the proceeds to a nearby river, should I be allowed to do it?
Quote from: Jacob on July 25, 2011, 12:29:06 AM
Quote from: Ideologue on July 25, 2011, 12:01:30 AMWhen multiculturalism means you can't say things like what Grallon and Slargos say, it's gone too far. You (Europe, not you, Jacob) ironically make their point for them: by eroding the freedom to say reprehensible things, you make the statement that freedom is only for things you like.
Which things that Grallon and Slargos say? That 'the other people' should all be killed because otherwise they'll destroy us?
Yes!
QuoteIsn't that the point of democracy? For people to bend it to their own ends?
Yes, but when you have an organized group of a substantial size (such as a religious sect) they are capable of exerting far more power than their numbers alone would warrant. I suppose this is the danger of any organized group, and the major vulnerability of a democracy. However, as susceptible as the United States is to such organization, with European democracies, with their far less entrenched notion of invioable rights, it suggests an even higher degree of vulnerability.
And I don't mean that as a slam on Europe or anything.* But the United States, with the possible exception of the United Kingdom, does have a longer history of democracy, and a more "sacred" approach to rights than any European country, specifically freedom of speech and freedom of (and from) religion. I have had a thousand arguments with Europeans on the subject, and most of them don't even seem to understand how their current speech regime undermine their own rights.
Quote... but that's hardly an immigration problem is it? I mean, those people are descended from immigrants, sure, but their immigrant ancestors were not members of the Christian Right, by and large, because no such thing existed when they immigrated.
No, it's not an immigration problem. It is a problem with a highly disciplined, highly motivated, highly organized subculture that claims the loyalty or even the sympathy of comparatively few Americans but wields highly disproportionate political power.
QuoteQuoteI strongly dislike Islam, for example, and would never want to see Muslims gain the same ascendancy as Christians in the United States. That is a ludicrous fear in America (and one exploited by far more dangerous Abrahamics); I do not know if it is a ludicrous fear in Europe.
It is.
I hope so, and I don't necessarily share that fear, although at a point in American history the rise of an actively theocratic political movement would not have been a rational fear either. Just sayin'.
*It is, however, fun to turn the tables. You hear all sorts of shit about "Old Europe" and how they've got history, etc. But compared to us, Europe's present-day political landscape is actually the much younger brother. Not counting fake countries like the Vatican, only the British, the Swedes and the Danes have continuous governments older than America.
Quote from: Ideologue on July 25, 2011, 03:41:23 AM
But compared to us, Europe's present-day political landscape is actually the much younger brother. Not counting fake countries like the Vatican, only the British, the Swedes and the Danes have continuous governments older than America.
Don't disse der Swisse.
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 03:08:05 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on July 25, 2011, 12:12:21 AM
Quote from: Ideologue on July 25, 2011, 12:01:30 AM
When multiculturalism means you can't say things like what Grallon and Slargos say, it's gone too far. You (Europe, not you, Jacob) ironically make their point for them: by eroding the freedom to say reprehensible things, you make the statement that freedom is only for things you like.
And when only the freedom to do things someone in power likes are allowed, sooner or later someone will come to power you do not like, and who does not like you, and freedom that has value to you will be trampled.
Eloquently put :bowler:
Only that it's a strawman, or at least it is not relevant to the case at hand. As was already said, the guy was spouting his bullshit for a while now and at no point was he in any way prosecuted or persecuted for his views. His complaint is that newspapers wouldn't print his letters.
I may have misinterpreted something Jake said as advocating silencing such views through legal sanctions (which does happen, Mart, maybe not in Norway, but there are cases). However, as I cannot find whatever it was that got me on that line, and it is tangential, I'll happily drop it.
The main point was that it is not patently insane to believe that specific groups of people, whose coreligionists have a demonstrably theocratic bent, may be a dangerous addition to a society, once its demographic weight reaches a certain point; however that it may be a largely misplaced fear in the present case of Islam and Europe. It certainly is in the United States and Islam, but it is a present danger in the analogous case I illustrated.
Regarding the fear of islamotards in Europe. Sure, it looks to be blown out of proportions and 95% of it is good old xenophobia, but based on what I have read and saw, assimilation does appear to be quite low. This may be more the fault of the majority than the immigrants for all I know, but the fact is the same regardless of that, and blocking out any discussion on that as verboten racist talk will only escalate the situation.
Because you end up like we with the gypsies. The cultural clash between hungarians and gypsies has been a reality for decades, ever since the gypsies were literally forced to abandon their lifestyle and was force-settled. Yet, no political side took up to discuss the issue. All acted like it doesn't exist. Except for the nazis of course, who, as a result, dominate it, and are on the verge of escalating it beyond any hope of repair
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 25, 2011, 03:55:44 AM
Quote from: Ideologue on July 25, 2011, 03:41:23 AM
But compared to us, Europe's present-day political landscape is actually the much younger brother. Not counting fake countries like the Vatican, only the British, the Swedes and the Danes have continuous governments older than America.
Don't disse der Swisse.
Well, I looked it up, and the Helvetic Republic lasted a far shorter time than I thought it did. It may not still count as continuous, however. Almost twenty years of foreign influence, and striking differences even after the restoration of the Swiss Confederation and their return to sovereignty in 1814.
I did count Danes and Norwegians, because the Nazi occupation was relatively brief... I guess if I'm counting Norway with its puppet government, it might not be fair to discount Switzerland.
Quote from: Ideologue on July 25, 2011, 04:01:17 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 25, 2011, 03:55:44 AM
Quote from: Ideologue on July 25, 2011, 03:41:23 AM
But compared to us, Europe's present-day political landscape is actually the much younger brother. Not counting fake countries like the Vatican, only the British, the Swedes and the Danes have continuous governments older than America.
Don't disse der Swisse.
Well, I looked it up, and the Helvetic Republic lasted a far shorter time than I thought it did. It may not still count as continuous, however. Almost twenty years of foreign influence, and striking differences even after the restoration of the Swiss Confederation and their return to sovereignty in 1814.
I did count Danes and Norwegians, because the Nazi occupation was relatively brief... I guess if I'm counting Norway with its puppet government, it might not be fair to discount Switzerland.
You didn't count the Norwegians. I hope.
Quote from: Ideologue on July 25, 2011, 04:01:17 AM
Well, I looked it up, and the Helvetic Republic lasted a far shorter time than I thought it did. It may not still count as continuous, however. Almost twenty years of foreign influence, and striking differences even after the restoration of the Swiss Confederation and their return to sovereignty in 1814.
I did count Danes and Norwegians, because the Nazi occupation was relatively brief... I guess if I'm counting Norway with its puppet government, it might not be fair to discount Switzerland.
A couple of hiccups here and there shouldn't knock someone off the leaderboard.
Quote from: The Brain on July 25, 2011, 04:12:44 AM
Quote from: Ideologue on July 25, 2011, 04:01:17 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 25, 2011, 03:55:44 AM
Quote from: Ideologue on July 25, 2011, 03:41:23 AM
But compared to us, Europe's present-day political landscape is actually the much younger brother. Not counting fake countries like the Vatican, only the British, the Swedes and the Danes have continuous governments older than America.
Don't disse der Swisse.
Well, I looked it up, and the Helvetic Republic lasted a far shorter time than I thought it did. It may not still count as continuous, however. Almost twenty years of foreign influence, and striking differences even after the restoration of the Swiss Confederation and their return to sovereignty in 1814.
I did count Danes and Norwegians, because the Nazi occupation was relatively brief... I guess if I'm counting Norway with its puppet government, it might not be fair to discount Switzerland.
You didn't count the Norwegians. I hope.
I meant just Danes, oops.
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 03:11:37 AM
Quote from: Tamas on July 25, 2011, 03:07:24 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 03:04:03 AM
Quote from: Jacob on July 24, 2011, 11:48:41 PMNow, there's the caricature of multiculturalism going as well - the one so many people are against - is the one where you can't stop honour killings or clitorectomies and so on.
The thing is, the line is not as clearly drawn as you claim. The slaughter of animals thread proves that there is quite a division as to what people perceive to be "harmless" and "harmful" expression of different cultures. There is also an issue of circumcision of boys for example. Or arranged marriages. Or polygamy. A lot of cultural issues like this are in a grey area, and this creates conflicts.
I am not saying that your approach is wrong, just that you seem to draw this rosy, optimistic picture of these issues being a no brainer, but they aren't.
well it should be fairly easy: everything goes as long as it does not go against the will of an other involved individual (with the added protection of minors)
What about animals? Or environment? If I want to worship Quitzipotli by boiling a thousand dogs alive in molten lead and dump the proceeds to a nearby river, should I be allowed to do it?
It's okay if you use cats instead and clean up the mess rather than dumping it in a river.
Quote from: Ideologue on July 25, 2011, 04:01:17 AM
I did count Danes and Norwegians, because the Nazi occupation was relatively brief... I guess if I'm counting Norway with its puppet government, it might not be fair to discount Switzerland.
The Norwegians kept a government in exile during the German occupation, so should count. Likewise, the Danish government continued to exist during the war, though Parliament didn't meet between Aug '43 and May 1945 (a period of German martial law, though no replacement government).
QuoteBut the United States, with the possible exception of the United Kingdom, does have a longer history of democracy, and a more "sacred" approach to rights than any European country, specifically freedom of speech and freedom of (and from) religion.
You are quite wrong especially about the inviolable rights - in fact the UK is unique in that it does not have a written constitution where such rights are enshrined (and unlike the US, our constitutions are quite long and have many more rights enshrined in them than the US one for example). We do see freedom of speech and freedom of religion somewhat differently than you, but that's ignorant to believe this is because we do not have the concept of "sacred" rights.
Quote from: grumbler on July 25, 2011, 06:13:56 AM
Quote from: Ideologue on July 25, 2011, 04:01:17 AM
I did count Danes and Norwegians, because the Nazi occupation was relatively brief... I guess if I'm counting Norway with its puppet government, it might not be fair to discount Switzerland.
The Norwegians kept a government in exile during the German occupation, so should count. Likewise, the Danish government continued to exist during the war, though Parliament didn't meet between Aug '43 and May 1945 (a period of German martial law, though no replacement government).
By that token, both Polish and French government existed through the WW2.
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 06:23:49 AM
By that token, both Polish and French government existed through the WW2.
The Polish government, yes. The French government, no.
Quote from: grumbler on July 25, 2011, 06:41:32 AM
The Polish government, yes. The French government, no.
The French Vichy government was the legitimate government. Petain got called in before the capitulation.
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 06:20:42 AM
QuoteBut the United States, with the possible exception of the United Kingdom, does have a longer history of democracy, and a more "sacred" approach to rights than any European country, specifically freedom of speech and freedom of (and from) religion.
You are quite wrong especially about the inviolable rights - in fact the UK is unique in that it does not have a written constitution where such rights are enshrined (and unlike the US, our constitutions are quite long and have many more rights enshrined in them than the US one for example). We do see freedom of speech and freedom of religion somewhat differently than you, but that's ignorant to believe this is because we do not have the concept of "sacred" rights.
We may have the concept, but the actual acceptance of those in society as a whole? Surely not. I know Hungary doesn't and by that account I am fairly certain about Poland as well.
Do you know where you can measure this? The right wing nutcases. Our right wingers often not only want a firm hand authocratic, state capitalist (or downright communist) state, but a return to some golden age of kingdoms or similar ezoretic bullshit.
The American whackos, -almost all I think- translate their bigotry and racism into a stalwart defense of their Constitution, or at least their interpretation of it.
Quote from: Drakken on July 25, 2011, 06:47:07 AM
The French Vichy government was the legitimate government. Petain got called in before the capitulation.
The French Vichy government didn't last out the war. It was replaced before war's end (unlike Poland's, which was replaced after the end of the war).
Not that France was in the running anyway - they have had five republics, two empires, and two monarchies in power since the establishment of the US, and at least five of those changes in government were discontinuous.
Quote from: Tamas on July 25, 2011, 06:50:20 AM
The American whackos, -almost all I think- translate their bigotry and racism into a stalwart defense of their Constitution, or at least their interpretation of it.
Not really. They pick and choose the parts of their Constitution they like, but are pretty happy to ignore the ones they don't. DOMA, anti-abortion movement, Christianization of public institutions, opposition to mosque building, attempts to criminalize flag burning etc. all show they do not regard other people's "sacred rights" highly.
And conversely, our own right wingers are perfectly happy to cry foul and complain when their constitutional rights are being violated when they are told they can't spout bullshit about killing Jews, gypsies and gays.
Everything looks nice from the distance. Everything looks ugly when magnified.
Edit: The only difference is that American conservatives do not have the kings and knights of old to harken back to, so they mythologise the founding fathers and the minutemen, the Tea Party and the "Constitution" (however one that seems to have preciously little to do with the written document that forms the basis of the US government, if you actually hear what these people are saying, e.g. about the US being a "Christian nation under God as written in the Constitution" ;)).
BTW, just to make it official,
I am not Fjordman.
Quote from: Viking on July 25, 2011, 07:20:08 AM
BTW, just to make it official,
I am not Fjordman.
Me neither. :shifty:
Quote from: mongers on July 25, 2011, 07:21:29 AM
Quote from: Viking on July 25, 2011, 07:20:08 AM
BTW, just to make it official,
I am not Fjordman.
:huh:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fjordman
he is a anti-islamist blogger and writer that is my age, went to my university and lives in my town and has been associated with ABB by ABB's idiotic unabomber - cut and paste manifesto.
His name is not being released by the media (fortunately for him).
There was a military coup in Sweden in 1809 that removed Gustav IV Adolf and resulted in a new constitution.
Quote from: Jacob on July 24, 2011, 10:51:51 PM
Quote from: Solmyr on July 24, 2011, 03:03:14 PMSo what happens when you expect to wear a hat in your passport photograph, demand that every restaurant carry shellfish to satisfy your needs, demand service in your particular language, and marry someone half your age when you are 20?
What's the big deal about wearing a hat in a passport photo? If the face is still visible and the person wears a hat every day as part of their religious conviction, wearing the hat in the photo seems potentially more accurate for identification purposes. So I don't see any reason to make an issue of it. Go ahead and wear the hat.
You can eat whatever you want, but you don't get to tell people what to sell in their restaurants. They might want to carry shellfish to court your business, but that's up to them. On the other hand, if you're dealing with a large institution of some sort that is responsible for feeding you (prison, the army, at a remote mining camp etc) then it's reasonable to demand that your dietary restrictions are taken into account (as I believe they are).
As for service in your language, it's not about you demanding it, it's about society respecting it. If there are significant groups of people who are better served in another language it makes sense to try to do so. This isn't controversial in Canada at all - at least not in implementation - when you go to a service canada office you can be served in French or English (as per the law). In addtion, there are signs advicing you if service is available in any other language (though you may have to wait longer until the relevant person is freed up). If your ability with the official languages are so limited that you can't be served in them, there are telephone translators available. So really, it's the inverse of how you posit the question: it's not about demanding anything, it's about the government serving the population to the best of it's ability, including in other languages where necessary. For private institutions, it's the same thing - it's often good customer service (though subject to customer service analysis). It's not uncommon at all, for example, to see banks with signs saying "service available in [Mandarin/ Tagalog/ Hindi/ Spanish/ whatever]" in their windows. Again, it's not about people demanding anything - it's about how best to service your customers.
Marrying someone who's 10 years old is not allowable, because children cannot give consent to that sort of thing. But if you want to marry an 18 year old when you're 70 because that's your culture, that's alright as long everybody involved consents.
... none of those questions were tricky at all :huh:
See, that's where we disagree. IMO, if you move to live in a culturally different society, you are expected to adapt to it, not the other way around. Thus, you are expected to learn the official language of the country you live in, and if there are laws mandating wearing or not wearing a particular piece of clothing in a certain situation, you are expected to follow them instead of getting special treatment.
Quote from: Slargos on July 25, 2011, 07:25:35 AM
Quote from: Viking on July 25, 2011, 07:20:08 AM
BTW, just to make it official,
I am not Fjordman.
Me neither. :shifty:
Well do'h, you don't know norwegian.
Quote from: Viking on July 25, 2011, 07:43:06 AM
Quote from: Slargos on July 25, 2011, 07:25:35 AM
Quote from: Viking on July 25, 2011, 07:20:08 AM
BTW, just to make it official,
I am not Fjordman.
Me neither. :shifty:
Well do'h, you don't know norwegian.
No. That's right. :shifty:
I don't. :shifty:
Quote from: Solmyr on July 25, 2011, 07:33:50 AM
See, that's where we disagree. IMO, if you move to live in a culturally different society, you are expected to adapt to it, not the other way around. Thus, you are expected to learn the official language of the country you live in, and if there are laws mandating wearing or not wearing a particular piece of clothing in a certain situation, you are expected to follow them instead of getting special treatment.
I agree with Solmyr. There is nothing wrong with keeping some parts of your culture, but where the two cultures clash and require special accomodation, the host culture wins. It's simple, and it's fair. The host didn't beg you to come, typically you beg the hosts to let you come.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.aftenposten.no%2Farchive%2F01516%2F_SCC-AIPub_A-l_pet_1516126x.jpg&hash=f7e11bc5eb4b6fb0b9f6334b23d0394c89e523bc)
Is that a smug smile on his face?
I wonder what goes through the minds of the guys who's driving this fucker. They don't look particularly happy.
Quote from: Solmyr on July 25, 2011, 07:33:50 AM
See, that's where we disagree. IMO, if you move to live in a culturally different society, you are expected to adapt to it, not the other way around. Thus, you are expected to learn the official language of the country you live in, and if there are laws mandating wearing or not wearing a particular piece of clothing in a certain situation, you are expected to follow them instead of getting special treatment.
Well right. American cultural values (at least the good ones) are about freedom of religion and expression and basically letting people do their own thing. That is a good thing for people who want to preserve certain parts of their cultural traditions but first they must accept these basic tenents of our culture or they need to go someplace else.
Quote from: Jacob on July 24, 2011, 01:00:20 PM
Hmm... if I understand what you're saying (and Viking too) it's that "we should understand what ABB is saying, why he's so alienated and change our society to be more in line with what he wants to avoid alienating people like him further."
I'm not sure that sentiment sits that well with me, whether it's Muslim terrorists, people like ABB or anyone else.
Or did I misunderstand?
What I mean is that he and his ilk needs to be allowed in the public sphere where the sheer magnitude of their mistaken beliefs will be exposed. The situation today is that they are marginalised and radicalised further, and like most Norwegians, I know that trolls turn to stone in the sunlight. Fundamental rights to express opinions that are complete and utter bollocks should be reinforced, not trampled on.
Quote from: Valmy on July 25, 2011, 07:59:45 AM
Quote from: Solmyr on July 25, 2011, 07:33:50 AM
See, that's where we disagree. IMO, if you move to live in a culturally different society, you are expected to adapt to it, not the other way around. Thus, you are expected to learn the official language of the country you live in, and if there are laws mandating wearing or not wearing a particular piece of clothing in a certain situation, you are expected to follow them instead of getting special treatment.
Well right. American cultural values (at least the good ones) are about freedom of religion and expression and basically letting people do their own thing. That is a good thing for people who want to preserve certain parts of their cultural traditions but first they must accept these basic tenents of our culture or they need to go someplace else.
That's why I think America is doing much better with its immigrants.
Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on July 24, 2011, 04:43:01 PM
Are you guys familiar with the maxim "hard cases make bad law" ?
One of the problems of the past 20 years or so is that this maxim has been forgotten or disregarded. Norway is a lovely country, with excellent systems and laws vast oil deposits that have made most people's lives there pretty good.
FYP
Quote from: Norgy on July 25, 2011, 08:04:24 AMWhat I mean is that he and his ilk needs to be allowed in the public sphere where the sheer magnitude of their mistaken beliefs will be exposed. The situation today is that they are marginalised and radicalised further, and like most Norwegians, I know that trolls turn to stone in the sunlight. Fundamental rights to express opinions that are complete and utter bollocks should be reinforced, not trampled on.
But that seems to require
1) a "public sphere" (which is what, exactly, physically?) that does not function like an echo chamber like so many places on the web do. I fear our societies permit - because that seems to be one of their basic tenets - people to isolate themselves to such an extent that they need not engage with other people except on very superficial grounds.
2) An active debate where such ideas are debated rather than simply ignored or
3) A locus where such "ideas" are either mocked and their proponents shamed (that's basic social control) when there are not many points to be engaged, or when such "ideas" confront basic truisms or values, that in the process become reaffirmed. But that also requires a positive "affirmation" of whatever binds the society together.
Quote from: Oexmelin on July 25, 2011, 09:10:42 AM
1) a "public sphere" (which is what, exactly, physically?) that does not function like an echo chamber like so many places on the web do.
I don't know what you are talking about :ph34r:
Quote from: Solmyr on July 25, 2011, 08:08:22 AM
That's why I think America is doing much better with its immigrants.
Well we have the huge advantage of not being an ethnically based state. I just think it is nuts to allow large amounts of immigrants in if you ARE a state whose entire existance is based on being the homeland of some national group. I mean why exist at all then? It almost seems like an attempt to destroy what you are and recreate yourself as something else entirely but...I guess the question is what would that be exactly? And for such a radical plan I sure hope most of the population is on board. Otherwise you are bringing in people who are always going to be alienated from the basic mythology and purpose of the state. And in Euroland that historically has been a disastrous formula.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 25, 2011, 08:59:10 AM
Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on July 24, 2011, 04:43:01 PM
Are you guys familiar with the maxim "hard cases make bad law" ?
One of the problems of the past 20 years or so is that this maxim has been forgotten or disregarded. Norway is a lovely country, with excellent systems and laws vast oil deposits that have made most people's lives there pretty good.
FYP
Iran, Venezuela, Saud Arabia, heck even Lybia have massive oil deposits. Much good it did for their societies.
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 03:04:03 AM
-The thing is, the line is not as clearly drawn as you claim. The slaughter of animals thread proves that there is quite a division as to what people perceive to be "harmless" and "harmful" expression of different cultures. There is also an issue of circumcision of boys for example. Or arranged marriages. Or polygamy. A lot of cultural issues like this are in a grey area, and this creates conflicts.
I am not saying that your approach is wrong, just that you seem to draw this rosy, optimistic picture of these issues being a no brainer, but they aren't.
The conflict isn't caused by gray areas; it results from the fact that for all the rhetorical lip service individuals may give to the concept of tolerance, many people (most?) don't actyally practice it. The person who opposes the right of two gay men to enjoy the benefits of civil marriage can and does raise all sorts of harms like "undermining the sanctity of marriage" and "flaunting" a "degnerate lifestyle". But the reality is that the opposition is not based on any legitimate fear of tangible social harm but just on personal revulsion. It is illiberalism, pure and simple. Your own attitude towards what you refer to "bronze age" religious practice is exactly in this same illiberal mode of thought - you are tolerant, except for those practices that offend you.
What makes these issues difficult is not the inherent difficulty of figuring out what is truly "harmful" from what is not, but simply the unfortunate fact that all too many people - even those insist on how tolerant they are - are not.
Quote from: Tamas on July 25, 2011, 09:17:22 AM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 25, 2011, 08:59:10 AM
Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on July 24, 2011, 04:43:01 PM
Are you guys familiar with the maxim "hard cases make bad law" ?
One of the problems of the past 20 years or so is that this maxim has been forgotten or disregarded. Norway is a lovely country, with excellent systems and laws vast oil deposits that have made most people's lives there pretty good.
FYP
Iran, Venezuela, Saud Arabia, heck even Lybia have massive oil deposits. Much good it did for their societies.
Pure chance and the oppression of the white man, I'm sure.
Quote from: Tamas on July 25, 2011, 06:50:20 AM
The American whackos, -almost all I think- translate their bigotry and racism into a stalwart defense of their Constitution, or at least their interpretation of it.
I agree with Marti on this one. The Bachmans of the world invoke the constitution like televangelists invoke the Bible: selectively, sometimes inaccurately, and bereft of any real understanding. Their worldview is not based on the Constitution. Rather they have created a fantasy Constitution (and history) that conforms to their worldview.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 25, 2011, 09:19:30 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 03:04:03 AM
-The thing is, the line is not as clearly drawn as you claim. The slaughter of animals thread proves that there is quite a division as to what people perceive to be "harmless" and "harmful" expression of different cultures. There is also an issue of circumcision of boys for example. Or arranged marriages. Or polygamy. A lot of cultural issues like this are in a grey area, and this creates conflicts.
I am not saying that your approach is wrong, just that you seem to draw this rosy, optimistic picture of these issues being a no brainer, but they aren't.
The conflict isn't caused by gray areas; it results from the fact that for all the rhetorical lip service individuals may give to the concept of tolerance, many people (most?) don't actyally practice it. The person who opposes the right of two gay men to enjoy the benefits of civil marriage can and does raise all sorts of harms like "undermining the sanctity of marriage" and "flaunting" a "degnerate lifestyle". But the reality is that the opposition is not based on any legitimate fear of tangible social harm but just on personal revulsion. It is illiberalism, pure and simple. Your own attitude towards what you refer to "bronze age" religious practice is exactly in this same illiberal mode of thought - you are tolerant, except for those practices that offend you.
What makes these issues difficult is not the inherent difficulty of figuring out what is truly "harmful" from what is not, but simply the unfortunate fact that all too many people - even those insist on how tolerant they are - are not.
Are you seriously saying that all those who think that halal/kosher slaughter should be banned are really doing this out of hatred for islam or judaism and intolerance?
Quote from: Valmy on July 25, 2011, 07:59:45 AM
Well right. American cultural values (at least the good ones) are about freedom of religion and expression and basically letting people do their own thing. That is a good thing for people who want to preserve certain parts of their cultural traditions but first they must accept these basic tenents of our culture or they need to go someplace else.
As a general principle, people are more likely to show respect when they themselves are shown respect in return.\
That is one reason why the American approach re immigrants, for all its serious flaws, tends to have a better track for assimilation than those that take a more punitive, illiberal approach.
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 09:24:33 AM
Are you seriously saying that all those who think that halal/kosher slaughter should be banned are really doing this out of hatred for islam or judaism and intolerance?
Where did he claim this?
Quote from: Valmy on July 25, 2011, 09:15:33 AM
Quote from: Solmyr on July 25, 2011, 08:08:22 AM
That's why I think America is doing much better with its immigrants.
Well we have the huge advantage of not being an ethnically based state. I just think it is nuts to allow large amounts of immigrants in if you ARE a state whose entire existance is based on being the homeland of some national group. I mean why exist at all then? It almost seems like an attempt to destroy what you are and recreate yourself as something else entirely but...I guess the question is what would that be exactly? And for such a radical plan I sure hope most of the population is on board. Otherwise you are bringing in people who are always going to be alienated from the basic mythology and purpose of the state. And in Euroland that historically has been a disastrous formula.
Yup. What the conservatives and nationalists do not understand is that you cannot function without immigrants these days, at least not if you want to maintain the kind of quality of living that we have in the West. So either you will keep your precious Belgian or Norwegian uniqueness intact and keep an ever growing underclass which feels alienated, or you will allow your culture to change by adapting to the newcomers just as they adapt to you. Assimilation is a two-way street. Europeans do not understand this - they look at the US, but fail to appreciate that in, for example, Norway, if you are black and from Africa, you will NEVER be considered a true Norwegian even if you ate lutefisk every day, went to the local lutheran church and waved the flag every day - simply because you are of a wrong ethnicity (something that would be completely different in the US).
Quote from: Valmy on July 25, 2011, 09:29:06 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 09:24:33 AM
Are you seriously saying that all those who think that halal/kosher slaughter should be banned are really doing this out of hatred for islam or judaism and intolerance?
Where did he claim this?
Well, as I read his post, there are no grey areas on which people may disagree based on legitimate moral objections, but rather the areas where people disagree come from intolerance/bigotry of the anti-crowd.
Apparently, the mats the guy used to build his bomb were sold to him by a Polish businessman from Wroclaw(Breslau).
Poland! Poland! Poland! :showoff:
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 25, 2011, 09:28:15 AM
Quote from: Valmy on July 25, 2011, 07:59:45 AM
Well right. American cultural values (at least the good ones) are about freedom of religion and expression and basically letting people do their own thing. That is a good thing for people who want to preserve certain parts of their cultural traditions but first they must accept these basic tenents of our culture or they need to go someplace else.
As a general principle, people are more likely to show respect when they themselves are shown respect in return.\
That is one reason why the American approach re immigrants, for all its serious flaws, tends to have a better track for assimilation than those that take a more punitive, illiberal approach.
Many Europeans would love to have the American "no crap refugees" policy.
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 09:30:48 AM
Well, as I read his post, there are no grey areas on which people may disagree based on legitimate moral objections, but rather the areas where people disagree come from intolerance/bigotry of the anti-crowd.
You read poorly, don't you?
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 25, 2011, 09:19:30 AM
The conflict isn't caused by gray areas; it results from the fact that for all the rhetorical lip service individuals may give to the concept of tolerance, many people (most?) don't actyally practice it.
What he is saying is that conflict isn't caused by the existance of gray areas, but by the intolerance of people who
claim they are debating about "gray areas" but in reality are merely justifying their own bigotry.
The animal ritual slaughter debate was actually a pretty good example of that; there were people insisting that ritual slaughter shouldn't be allowed because it was somehow de facto horrid because "bronze age," there were those who insisted that it must be allowed no matter what because it was an issue of "religious freedom," and there were those who were debating the specifics of the issue without insisting on one outcome or the other
a priori. It is the former two types who create conflict, not the latter type.
And it's begun. Today in La Presse the chief editor labeled the man a 'madman' and wrote:
"...However there's no ideology at the root of the massacre. It's madness."
and also:
"There's no underlying cause explaining the tragedy."
As you can see: complete and utter denial about any potential systemic causes for such behavior. Unsurprisingly that newspaper is also known to be staunchly federalist and thus a vocal advocate of multiculturalism...
I hold these blind fools almost as responsible for this massacre, and all the others that will come in the future, as the actual killer(s). <_<
G.
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 09:24:33 AM
Are you seriously saying that all those who think that halal/kosher slaughter should be banned are really doing this out of hatred for islam or judaism and intolerance?
The issue of tolerance isn't simply about hatred of one group or another, but about justifying (or putting aside) that visceral reaction of "eeeeww!" when confronted with habits that do not match one's own.
Lots of people who are not gay are simply squigged out by homosexuality, particularly by those who practice anal sex, and justify that gut-reaction by adopting an anti-gay stance; they are all the more likely to view it as a public-heath risk, as "not normal", as "degenerate", etc. They may not be inherently gay-hating, but their unwillingness to set aside their gut feelings and attempt to examine matters objectively makes them so.
Similarly, lots of folks are squigged out by slaughter that involves slitting the throat (as opposed to driving a bolt through the brain). They are all the more likely to view it as "cruel" and "inhuman". They may have nothing in particular against Jews or Muslims, but again, their unwillingness to set aside their feelings and examine the matter objectively makes them so.
In both cases, one could if one wanted to justify the "ewww, yuck" reaction; in both cases, the justification is on its face weak and lame, and on its merits would not satisfy a neutral observer that restrictions on the practice are really justified. There is a lack of scientific evidence, for example, that animals killed by having their throats cut by ritual slaughterers actually suffer measurably more than animals being bolted. But scientific evidence isn't what that debate was about - it was more about the "eeeww" factor.
Quote from: Grallon on July 25, 2011, 09:57:57 AM
And it's begun. Today in La Presse the chief editor labeled the man a 'madman' and wrote:
"...However there's no ideology at the root of the massacre. It's madness."
and also:
"There's no underlying cause explaining the tragedy."
As you can see: complete and utter denial about any potential systemic causes for such behavior. Unsurprisingly that newspaper is also known to be staunchly federalist and thus a vocal advocate of multiculturalism...
I hold these blind fools almost as responsible for this massacre, and all the others that will come in the future, as the actual killer(s). <_<
G.
Yes that's pretty stupid. His politics are very clear.
Quote from: The Brain on July 25, 2011, 09:51:35 AM
Many Europeans would love to have the American "no crap refugees" policy.
So would some Americans, I am sure. Luckily, they haven't won out yet and, as a result, there are many fine Vietnamese, Afghan, and Middle eastern restaurants in the US.
The problem isn't crap refugees. The problem is that some countries (in Scandinavia especially) simply don't realize that, if they are going to be anti-entrepreneurial, they really shouldn't be taking in refugees. In Britain, say, the percentage of entrepreneurs who are immigrants is higher than the percentage of those who are not immigrants; in Scandinavia, it is the reverse (and, of course, much lower for native than in Britain for natives). The immigrant path to success is via entrepreneurship (either by the immigrant or by someone in his/her community), not factory jobs.
I am not saying that Scandinavia should become more entrepreneurial. It seems to be doing pretty well without that. I am saying that Scandinavia shouldn't be accepting many permanent refugees in the absence of entrepreneurial opportunities.
BBC: Norway gunman 'has accomplices' (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-14280210)
QuoteNorwegian police are investigating claims by Anders Behring Breivik, who has admitted carrying out Friday's twin attacks in Norway, that he has "two more cells" working with him.
Mr Breivik made the claim as he attended his first court hearing following the bombing in Oslo and a massacre on an island youth camp that killed at least 93 people in total.
Mr Breivik, 32, said his attacks were a "strong signal" to Norway's people.
He was detained for eight weeks.
Oslo police asked for Mr Breivik to be held in full isolation for the first four weeks.
Judge Kim Heger agreed, saying Mr Breivik could not receive letters or have visitors except for his lawyer.
Judge Heger said police must be able to proceed with the investigation into Mr Breivik's claims without the accused being able to interfere.
Mr Breivik had earlier said he had acted alone.
Mr Breivik has been charged under the criminal law for acts of terrorism. The charges include the destabilisation of vital functions of society, including government, and causing serious fear in the population.
The judge said Mr Breivik had admitted carrying out the attacks but had not pleaded guilty to the charges.
Judge Heger had earlier ruled that the hearing should be held behind closed doors.
He had said: "It is clear that there is concrete information that a public hearing with the suspect present could quickly lead to an extraordinary and very difficult situation in terms of the investigation and security."
There had been concern among many Norwegians that Mr Breivik would use the hearing to deliver a speech seeking to justify his actions.
Instead Judge Heger summarised Mr Breivik's words in his post-hearing statement.
The judge said Mr Breivik had argued that he was acting to save Norway and Europe from Muslim colonisation.
The gunman had said his operation was not aimed at killing as many people as possible but that he wanted to create the greatest loss possible to Norway's governing Labour Party, which he accused of failing the country on immigration.
The bomb in Oslo targeted buildings connected to the Labour Party government, and the youth camp on Utoeya island was also run by the party.
In addition to the seven people killed in Oslo and 86 on Utoeya, at least 96 people were injured in the attacks.
Political postponement
Separately, Norway's Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg, in his first interview with a British broadcaster, told the BBC's Jon Sopel that the attacks would change his country but that it would "still be open and democratic".
Click to play
Judge Kim Heger: "The accused believes he needed to carry out these attacks''
Mr Stoltenberg said he knew many of those who had died and now was the time to look after the wounded and the families that had lost loved ones.
He said he believed no country could ever fully protect itself from attacks such as these.
He also thanked the international community for its response.
Earlier at 1200 local time, Mr Stoltenberg, at Oslo University, declared one minute's silence in remembrance of the victims.
Thousands of people stood around a carpet of flowers at Oslo cathedral.
One Oslo citizen, Sven-Erik Fredheim, told Reuters: "It is important to have this minute of silence so that all the victims and the parents of the families know that people are thinking about them."
Meanwhile, Norway has postponed the start of party political campaigns ahead of the 12 September election, the Aftenposten newspaper reports.
The campaigning is now set to start during the second half of August.
Quote from: grumbler on July 25, 2011, 10:00:49 AM
Quote from: The Brain on July 25, 2011, 09:51:35 AM
Many Europeans would love to have the American "no crap refugees" policy.
So would some Americans, I am sure. Luckily, they haven't won out yet and, as a result, there are many fine Vietnamese, Afghan, and Middle eastern restaurants in the US.
Yes, especially Iraqi refugee-owned or operated restaurants. One Swedish town took in more Iraqi refugees than all of the US combined.
Russian immigrants seem to mainly get established by finding white collar jobs here in US. Then again, Russian immigrants tend to be very highly educated Jews, so they're probably not your typical example of a refugee.
Quoteclaims by Anders Behring Breivik, who has admitted carrying out Friday's twin attacks in Norway, that he has "two more cells" working
That would be his brain cells.
Quote from: The Brain on July 25, 2011, 10:10:23 AM
One Swedish town took in more Iraqi refugees than all of the US combined.
And I'll bet that one US town took in more Hmong refugees than all of Sweden combined.
Quote from: Grallon on July 25, 2011, 09:57:57 AM
And it's begun. Today in La Presse the chief editor labeled the man a 'madman' and wrote:
"...However there's no ideology at the root of the massacre. It's madness."
and also:
"There's no underlying cause explaining the tragedy."
As you can see: complete and utter denial about any potential systemic causes for such behavior. Unsurprisingly that newspaper is also known to be staunchly federalist and thus a vocal advocate of multiculturalism...
I hold these blind fools almost as responsible for this massacre, and all the others that will come in the future, as the actual killer(s). <_<
G.
If any responsibility lies with people expressing their opinions (which is debatable) it lies with the bigoted fools spreading their racist posion all over the internet and acting liek an echo chamber for idiots like these.
Of course your the kind of person who'd be blaming the lefty media after Kristalnacht for failing to recognise the inevitable consequences of alllowing the jews to mix with aryans.
Quote from: grumbler on July 25, 2011, 10:15:09 AM
Quote from: The Brain on July 25, 2011, 10:10:23 AM
One Swedish town took in more Iraqi refugees than all of the US combined.
And I'll bet that one US town took in more Hmong refugees than all of Sweden combined.
Yay?
Ah yes. I concur. We must strictly limit the capabilities of these monsters to communicate.
I would suggest setting up a system of servers that monitors all communication across the internet and censors hate speech. Furthermore, a system of quicker and easier identification of perpetrators. Probably a biometric login system mandatory on all terminals that connect to the internet. Phones, computers, gaming systems etc. Then everyone guilty of spreading hate speech can be rounded up and depending on the severity of their transgressions either imprisoned, executed or sent to re-education camps in those cases that there is a possibility of salvage.
What do you think, Gups?
Terrible idea. Like all of your other ones.
Though at least you leaven your hateful ideology with a bit of humour and self-awareness.
Grallon has nothing else going for him at all.
Quote from: Slargos on July 25, 2011, 10:23:27 AM
Ah yes. I concur. We must strictly limit the capabilities of these monsters to communicate.
I would suggest setting up a system of servers that monitors all communication across the internet and censors hate speech. Furthermore, a system of quicker and easier identification of perpetrators. Probably a biometric login system mandatory on all terminals that connect to the internet. Phones, computers, gaming systems etc. Then everyone guilty of spreading hate speech can be rounded up and depending on the severity of their transgressions either imprisoned, executed or sent to re-education camps in those cases that there is a possibility of salvage.
What do you think, Gups?
Can the system be used against anime?
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 09:32:59 AM
Apparently, the mats the guy used to build his bomb were sold to him by a Polish businessman from Wroclaw(Breslau).
Poland! Poland! Poland! :showoff:
Wow, Wroclaw is Breslau? I heard it's a nice place, my company has a new office there, my office might be closed because of them one day. :D
Quote from: Gups on July 25, 2011, 10:25:29 AM
Though at least you leaven your hateful ideology with a bit of humour and self-awareness.
Grallon has nothing else going for him at all.
If you can't laugh at all the insanity, what can you do?
I found a hilarious picture the other day, that I will repost here once the heat dies off. It was truly sublime.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 25, 2011, 08:59:10 AM
Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on July 24, 2011, 04:43:01 PM
Are you guys familiar with the maxim "hard cases make bad law" ?
One of the problems of the past 20 years or so is that this maxim has been forgotten or disregarded. Norway is a lovely country, with excellent systems and laws vast oil deposits that have made most people's lives there pretty good.
FYP
cause vast oil deposits worked so well for Nigeria and Venezuela.
Quote from: Slargos on July 25, 2011, 10:33:51 AM
Quote from: Gups on July 25, 2011, 10:25:29 AM
Though at least you leaven your hateful ideology with a bit of humour and self-awareness.
Grallon has nothing else going for him at all.
If you can't laugh at all the insanity, what can you do?
Now you just sound like a psychiatrist.
Quote from: Tamas on July 25, 2011, 03:07:24 AM
well it should be fairly easy: everything goes as long as it does not go against the will of an other involved individual (with the added protection of minors)
Exactly.
Though of course, as with anything involving law and people there will be confusion and disagreement at times, but the basic principles are pretty clear.
Quote from: Gups on July 25, 2011, 10:19:57 AM
If any responsibility lies with people expressing their opinions (which is debatable) it lies with the bigoted fools spreading their racist posion all over the internet and acting liek an echo chamber for idiots like these.
Of course your the kind of person who'd be blaming the lefty media after Kristalnacht for failing to recognise the inevitable consequences of alllowing the jews to mix with aryans.
I will quote this to you again when the next slaughter takes place, and again for each one following after. You want to be an ostrich, then be ready to watch the body count increase.
G.
Quote from: Grallon on July 25, 2011, 10:37:13 AM
Quote from: Gups on July 25, 2011, 10:19:57 AM
If any responsibility lies with people expressing their opinions (which is debatable) it lies with the bigoted fools spreading their racist posion all over the internet and acting liek an echo chamber for idiots like these.
Of course your the kind of person who'd be blaming the lefty media after Kristalnacht for failing to recognise the inevitable consequences of alllowing the jews to mix with aryans.
I will quote this to you again when the next slaughter takes place, and again for each one following after. You want to be an ostrich, then be ready to watch the body count increase.
G.
What should his position be instead?
Quote from: Grallon on July 25, 2011, 10:37:13 AM
Quote from: Gups on July 25, 2011, 10:19:57 AM
If any responsibility lies with people expressing their opinions (which is debatable) it lies with the bigoted fools spreading their racist posion all over the internet and acting liek an echo chamber for idiots like these.
Of course your the kind of person who'd be blaming the lefty media after Kristalnacht for failing to recognise the inevitable consequences of alllowing the jews to mix with aryans.
I will quote this to you again when the next slaughter takes place, and again for each one following after. You want to be an ostrich, then be ready to watch the body count increase.
G.
I agree in principle that we should jail all Christian Norwegians just to be sure, but practical considerations make it difficult.
Quote from: The Brain on July 25, 2011, 10:38:26 AM
Quote from: Grallon on July 25, 2011, 10:37:13 AM
Quote from: Gups on July 25, 2011, 10:19:57 AM
If any responsibility lies with people expressing their opinions (which is debatable) it lies with the bigoted fools spreading their racist posion all over the internet and acting liek an echo chamber for idiots like these.
Of course your the kind of person who'd be blaming the lefty media after Kristalnacht for failing to recognise the inevitable consequences of alllowing the jews to mix with aryans.
I will quote this to you again when the next slaughter takes place, and again for each one following after. You want to be an ostrich, then be ready to watch the body count increase.
G.
I agree in principle that we should jail all Christian Norwegians just to be sure, but practical considerations make it difficult.
You just don't get it do you Brain? It's the Federalist-supporting media in Queec which is responsible for this tragedy (almost as much as the guy who actually did the killing). If that's not obvious to you now, it will be when Grallon repeats himself the next time someone goes on a killing spree somewhere in the world.
Quote from: Norgy on July 25, 2011, 08:04:24 AMWhat I mean is that he and his ilk needs to be allowed in the public sphere where the sheer magnitude of their mistaken beliefs will be exposed. The situation today is that they are marginalised and radicalised further, and like most Norwegians, I know that trolls turn to stone in the sunlight. Fundamental rights to express opinions that are complete and utter bollocks should be reinforced, not trampled on.
Were they previously trampled on in Norwegian society? I trust your assessment of this more than Slargos'.
I got the impression that FrP says things that aren't too far off what this guy's been saying, and that anti-immigrant rhetoric et. al. isn't that hard to find; but it's just that, an impression. Are robust, culturally conservative views like those espoused by Viking and this Fjordman blogger really driven underground and rarely discussed in Norway?
Quote from: Valmy on July 25, 2011, 07:59:45 AM
Quote from: Solmyr on July 25, 2011, 07:33:50 AM
See, that's where we disagree. IMO, if you move to live in a culturally different society, you are expected to adapt to it, not the other way around. Thus, you are expected to learn the official language of the country you live in, and if there are laws mandating wearing or not wearing a particular piece of clothing in a certain situation, you are expected to follow them instead of getting special treatment.
Well right. American cultural values (at least the good ones) are about freedom of religion and expression and basically letting people do their own thing. That is a good thing for people who want to preserve certain parts of their cultural traditions but first they must accept these basic tenents of our culture or they need to go someplace else.
Exactly. Multiculturalism is just a slightly different way of expressing an ideal, similar to that American ideal, in the context of how different cultures interact.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 25, 2011, 09:19:30 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 03:04:03 AM
-The thing is, the line is not as clearly drawn as you claim. The slaughter of animals thread proves that there is quite a division as to what people perceive to be "harmless" and "harmful" expression of different cultures. There is also an issue of circumcision of boys for example. Or arranged marriages. Or polygamy. A lot of cultural issues like this are in a grey area, and this creates conflicts.
I am not saying that your approach is wrong, just that you seem to draw this rosy, optimistic picture of these issues being a no brainer, but they aren't.
The conflict isn't caused by gray areas; it results from the fact that for all the rhetorical lip service individuals may give to the concept of tolerance, many people (most?) don't actyally practice it. The person who opposes the right of two gay men to enjoy the benefits of civil marriage can and does raise all sorts of harms like "undermining the sanctity of marriage" and "flaunting" a "degnerate lifestyle". But the reality is that the opposition is not based on any legitimate fear of tangible social harm but just on personal revulsion. It is illiberalism, pure and simple. Your own attitude towards what you refer to "bronze age" religious practice is exactly in this same illiberal mode of thought - you are tolerant, except for those practices that offend you.
What makes these issues difficult is not the inherent difficulty of figuring out what is truly "harmful" from what is not, but simply the unfortunate fact that all too many people - even those insist on how tolerant they are - are not.
I think this is unfortunately very true.
Quote from: Jacob on July 25, 2011, 10:52:52 AM
Quote from: Norgy on July 25, 2011, 08:04:24 AMWhat I mean is that he and his ilk needs to be allowed in the public sphere where the sheer magnitude of their mistaken beliefs will be exposed. The situation today is that they are marginalised and radicalised further, and like most Norwegians, I know that trolls turn to stone in the sunlight. Fundamental rights to express opinions that are complete and utter bollocks should be reinforced, not trampled on.
I got the impression that FrP says things that aren't too far off what this guy's been saying,
The irony is so thick, you would have to cut it with an as of yet invented asteroid mining laser. :lmfao:
Quote from: Jacob on July 25, 2011, 10:55:03 AM
Quote from: Valmy on July 25, 2011, 07:59:45 AM
Quote from: Solmyr on July 25, 2011, 07:33:50 AM
See, that's where we disagree. IMO, if you move to live in a culturally different society, you are expected to adapt to it, not the other way around. Thus, you are expected to learn the official language of the country you live in, and if there are laws mandating wearing or not wearing a particular piece of clothing in a certain situation, you are expected to follow them instead of getting special treatment.
Well right. American cultural values (at least the good ones) are about freedom of religion and expression and basically letting people do their own thing. That is a good thing for people who want to preserve certain parts of their cultural traditions but first they must accept these basic tenents of our culture or they need to go someplace else.
Exactly. Multiculturalism is just a slightly different way of expressing an ideal, similar to that American ideal, in the context of how different cultures interact.
As far as I can see, the only difference between "multiculturalism" and the "melting pot" is aspirational: under multiculturalism, the notion appears to be that in the future every immigrant will be a good law-abiding citizen, but preserve their original folk dances, foods, etc.; in the "melting pot", the notion appears to be that in the future every immigrant will be a good law-abiding citizen and eat at McDonalds. ;)
Under both systems, you in fact get a bit of both.
Quote from: Slargos on July 25, 2011, 10:58:13 AMThe irony is so thick, you would have to cut it with an as of yet invented asteroid mining laser. :lmfao:
:lmfao:
This exactly illustrates the problem.
You've expressed your opinions time and time again. You bring it up incessantly. It's been argued ad infinitum. I think it's garbage.
You feel you're being oppressed and not listened to because people don't agree with you, not because you're not listened to or because people ignore the bullshit you spout.
Quote from: Jacob on July 25, 2011, 10:52:52 AM
Were they previously trampled on in Norwegian society? I trust your assessment of this more than Slargos'.
I got the impression that FrP says things that aren't too far off what this guy's been saying, and that anti-immigrant rhetoric et. al. isn't that hard to find; but it's just that, an impression. Are robust, culturally conservative views like those espoused by Viking and this Fjordman blogger really driven underground and rarely discussed in Norway?
Me and Fjordman are not of the same ilk, he is a conservative christian; I am a liberal atheist. The reason I posted that I was not him is that we share many similarites, these similaries are age, location and opposition to certain ideas (though from different positions, I attack from the modernist perspective, he attacks it from a pre-modernist perspective).
The FrP has been a party in change. In the 70s it was a one man libertarian party, in the 80s it was a hodge podge of homeless idealists (everything from flaming queens to racists), in the 90s it was reformed the wierdos kicked out and it is now a right populist party with a focus on generous welfare spending on the elderly, libertarian economic policies and un-PC attitudes towards foreigners. This has resulted in the party being labelled as brown racists. The reform process has been successful and the party has kicked out the wierdos and racists and is a normal political party.
Slargos is right, however, about un-PC attitudes and ideas being labelled as racist. Norgy is right when he observes that these un-PC racists feel rejected by society which condemns them.
Quote from: Grallon on July 25, 2011, 09:57:57 AM
G.
stop signing your fucking posts like that, your name is on the top of your post...
Quote from: Jacob on July 25, 2011, 10:55:03 AM
Exactly. Multiculturalism is just a slightly different way of expressing an ideal, similar to that American ideal, in the context of how different cultures interact.
The term multiculturalism suggests that different cultures can exist side by side. I think, at least my American in me feels, that that is just impossible. Both cultures will die (and rather quickly, in just a few generations) and be replaced by a new one with aspects of both. Multi-culturalism actually means the death of culture which, to me, is fine but it seems a bit disingenous to sell it otherwise. Our melting pot is honest and to the point. Yes your culture will be preserved but not as it entered this country and this country will be changed by your arrival and joining our colorful tapestry of American slobbery.
Quote from: Jacob on July 25, 2011, 11:04:05 AM
Quote from: Slargos on July 25, 2011, 10:58:13 AMThe irony is so thick, you would have to cut it with an as of yet invented asteroid mining laser. :lmfao:
:lmfao:
This exactly illustrates the problem.
You've expressed your opinions time and time again. You bring it up incessantly. It's been argued ad infinitum. I think it's garbage.
You feel you're being oppressed and not listened to because people don't agree with you, not because you're not listened to or because people ignore the bullshit you spout.
Nah, man. I'm laughing at the fact that you accuse ME of drawing conclusions without considering facts. :D
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 02:56:14 AM
To elaborate on Jacob said, I think the sane multiculturalism is essentially eudaimonics applied to people of different cultures. It is the same argument as allowing gays to marry - as long as it makes people happier and does not harm anyone, why shouldn't the state allow it?
Who is going to decide whether the act causes sufficient happiness and no harm and on what basis? Havent you just defined "sane" multiculturalism as things that make Marti happy.
Shouldn't there be a more basic recognition of cultural differences and values so long as they do not violate the general and criminal law. Why do you also require that cultural practices make people "happier" - a rather hedonistic and impossibly subjective requirement.
Quote from: Slargos on July 25, 2011, 11:15:44 AM
Nah, man. I'm laughing at the fact that you accuse ME of drawing conclusions without considering facts. :D
I would have thought the events of this weekend gave you sufficient facts to consider.
Quote from: Malthus on July 25, 2011, 11:02:32 AM
As far as I can see, the only difference between "multiculturalism" and the "melting pot" is aspirational: under multiculturalism, the notion appears to be that in the future every immigrant will be a good law-abiding citizen, but preserve their original folk dances, foods, etc.; in the "melting pot", the notion appears to be that in the future every immigrant will be a good law-abiding citizen and eat at McDonalds. ;)
Under both systems, you in fact get a bit of both.
I hate to point out the semi-strawman nature of this discussion, since the defenders of MC are arguing that it really just means not being nasty to people with other cultures and those attacking MC are arguing against what they see as an ideology which is part of a mentality which is destructive to to society and social cohesion. What Jacob and Norgy are defending is not what me and Slargos are criticizing.
Caveat: Slargos may be criticizing what Jacob and Norgy are defending, sometimes I can't tell if he is joking when he's had a few beers.
Quote from: crazy canuck on July 25, 2011, 11:17:18 AM
Quote from: Slargos on July 25, 2011, 11:15:44 AM
Nah, man. I'm laughing at the fact that you accuse ME of drawing conclusions without considering facts. :D
I would have thought the events of this weekend would have given you sufficient facts to consider.
About FRP? Not particularly, no.
Quote from: Valmy on July 25, 2011, 11:15:10 AM
Quote from: Jacob on July 25, 2011, 10:55:03 AM
Exactly. Multiculturalism is just a slightly different way of expressing an ideal, similar to that American ideal, in the context of how different cultures interact.
The term multiculturalism suggests that different cultures can exist side by side. I think, at least my American in me feels, that that is just impossible. Both cultures will die (and rather quickly, in just a few generations) and be replaced by a new one with aspects of both. Multi-culturalism actually means the death of culture which, to me, is fine but it seems a bit disingenous to sell it otherwise. Our melting pot is honest and to the point. Yes your culture will be preserved but not as it entered this country and this country will be changed by your arrival and joining our colorful tapestry of American slobbery.
Then I think that is a particularly American view. Come up to Vancouver or Toronto sometime and see various cultures living side by side as has been done for a number of generations now.
Quote from: Viking on July 25, 2011, 11:13:27 AM
stop signing your fucking posts like that, your name is on the top of your post...
I was educated to sign whatever I write.
G.
Quote from: Viking on July 25, 2011, 11:17:40 AM
Quote from: Malthus on July 25, 2011, 11:02:32 AM
As far as I can see, the only difference between "multiculturalism" and the "melting pot" is aspirational: under multiculturalism, the notion appears to be that in the future every immigrant will be a good law-abiding citizen, but preserve their original folk dances, foods, etc.; in the "melting pot", the notion appears to be that in the future every immigrant will be a good law-abiding citizen and eat at McDonalds. ;)
Under both systems, you in fact get a bit of both.
I hate to point out the semi-strawman nature of this discussion, since the defenders of MC are arguing that it really just means not being nasty to people with other cultures and those attacking MC are arguing against what they see as an ideology which is part of a mentality which is destructive to to society and social cohesion. What Jacob and Norgy are defending is not what me and Slargos are criticizing.
Caveat: Slargos may be criticizing what Jacob and Norgy are defending, sometimes I can't tell if he is joking when he's had a few beers.
I really don't know, I sort of space out on that kind of discussion because when everyone insists on their own definition of words, discussion becomes rather meaningless. Instinctively I would say that if Jacob is defending it, then yeah, I am probably dead set against it. The man could probably find ways to make puppies revolting.
Maybe if you could help me with some bullet points. I only like to passively consume information.
Quote from: Slargos on July 25, 2011, 11:21:09 AM
Quote from: Viking on July 25, 2011, 11:17:40 AM
Quote from: Malthus on July 25, 2011, 11:02:32 AM
As far as I can see, the only difference between "multiculturalism" and the "melting pot" is aspirational: under multiculturalism, the notion appears to be that in the future every immigrant will be a good law-abiding citizen, but preserve their original folk dances, foods, etc.; in the "melting pot", the notion appears to be that in the future every immigrant will be a good law-abiding citizen and eat at McDonalds. ;)
Under both systems, you in fact get a bit of both.
I hate to point out the semi-strawman nature of this discussion, since the defenders of MC are arguing that it really just means not being nasty to people with other cultures and those attacking MC are arguing against what they see as an ideology which is part of a mentality which is destructive to to society and social cohesion. What Jacob and Norgy are defending is not what me and Slargos are criticizing.
Caveat: Slargos may be criticizing what Jacob and Norgy are defending, sometimes I can't tell if he is joking when he's had a few beers.
I really don't know, I sort of space out on that kind of discussion because when everyone insists on their own definition of words, discussion becomes rather meaningless. Instinctively I would say that if Jacob is defending it, then yeah, I am probably dead set against it. The man could probably find ways to make puppies revolting.
Maybe if you could help me with some bullet points. I only like to passively consume information.
Precisely, when everybody gets to have his own culture and define his own words society crumbles. There is neither Truth nor truth. I've been trying to move the discussion onto defining MC before we argue about it but that seems to fail. Seeing Valmy and CC argue about how it is or isn't possible for MC to survive when one is talking about self ghettoizing immigrant tribes and the other is talking about exotic food.
Quote from: Grallon on July 25, 2011, 11:20:29 AM
Quote from: Viking on July 25, 2011, 11:13:27 AM
stop signing your fucking posts like that, your name is on the top of your post...
I was educated to sign whatever I write.
G.
You'know, you convinced me..
<snip>about 80 blank lines</snip>
V.
Quote from: crazy canuck on July 25, 2011, 11:19:08 AM
Then I think that is a particularly American view. Come up to Vancouver or Toronto sometime and see various cultures living side by side as has been done for a number of generations now.
Yeah that supposedly happens in New York and other big American cities. I think it is an illusion those cultures have been profoundly changed from their roots because of their interaction with the people around them.
Besides preserving those sorts of ethnic ghettos is not really a positive...just imo...and it needs fresh blood coming in to be sustainable which is only possible in cities that get constant flows of immigrants. If Italians were still pouring into New York 'Little Italy' (as something other than a tourist place) would still be around.
Quote from: Viking on July 25, 2011, 11:17:40 AM
Quote from: Malthus on July 25, 2011, 11:02:32 AM
As far as I can see, the only difference between "multiculturalism" and the "melting pot" is aspirational: under multiculturalism, the notion appears to be that in the future every immigrant will be a good law-abiding citizen, but preserve their original folk dances, foods, etc.; in the "melting pot", the notion appears to be that in the future every immigrant will be a good law-abiding citizen and eat at McDonalds. ;)
Under both systems, you in fact get a bit of both.
I hate to point out the semi-strawman nature of this discussion, since the defenders of MC are arguing that it really just means not being nasty to people with other cultures and those attacking MC are arguing against what they see as an ideology which is part of a mentality which is destructive to to society and social cohesion. What Jacob and Norgy are defending is not what me and Slargos are criticizing.
Caveat: Slargos may be criticizing what Jacob and Norgy are defending, sometimes I can't tell if he is joking when he's had a few beers.
That's the trouble isn't it. It's a virtually meaningless term.
Everyone sane is fine with there being ethnic restaurants and a Chinatown. So is that's all multiculturalism is almost everyone supports it.
Nobody sane wants Sharia law being introduced as an equal system of law in western societies. Nobody wants women to be forced to be married etc.
If that's multiculturalism hardly anyone supports it.
It's all the stuff in the middle that's difficult and proably defines whether you are a multiculturalist or not. Should Sikhs have to wear helmets if they ride bikes, is halal food cruel or OK etc etc.
Quote from: Viking on July 25, 2011, 11:26:32 AM
You'know, you convinced me..
And whats your point about this?
G.
Quote from: Valmy on July 25, 2011, 11:15:10 AM
Quote from: Jacob on July 25, 2011, 10:55:03 AM
Exactly. Multiculturalism is just a slightly different way of expressing an ideal, similar to that American ideal, in the context of how different cultures interact.
The term multiculturalism suggests that different cultures can exist side by side. I think, at least my American in me feels, that that is just impossible. Both cultures will die (and rather quickly, in just a few generations) and be replaced by a new one with aspects of both. Multi-culturalism actually means the death of culture which, to me, is fine but it seems a bit disingenous to sell it otherwise. Our melting pot is honest and to the point. Yes your culture will be preserved but not as it entered this country and this country will be changed by your arrival and joining our colorful tapestry of American slobbery.
But that is true of cultures in isolation - none simply continue unchanged. Cultures change all the time, whether one wants that or not.
Fact is though that some people don't seem to have much of a problem carrying on side by side with different folkways. See my own city as example.
Quote from: Grallon on July 25, 2011, 11:33:31 AM
Quote from: Viking on July 25, 2011, 11:26:32 AM
You'know, you convinced me..
And whats your point about this?
G.
he's just lashing out. And with his propensity to hate minorities he picked you :P
Quote from: Gups on July 25, 2011, 11:27:23 AM
Nobody sane wants Sharia law being introduced as an equal system of law in western societies. Nobody wants women to be forced to be married etc.
If that's multiculturalism hardly anyone supports it.
You might not be aware that the introduction of Sharia as a valid, parallel legal system was almost accomplished in Ontario a few years ago... I daresay there will more attempts in the future.
G.
Quote from: Valmy on July 25, 2011, 11:27:05 AM
Quote from: crazy canuck on July 25, 2011, 11:19:08 AM
Then I think that is a particularly American view. Come up to Vancouver or Toronto sometime and see various cultures living side by side as has been done for a number of generations now.
Yeah that supposedly happens in New York and other big American cities. I think it is an illusion those cultures have been profoundly changed from their roots because of their interaction with the people around them.
Besides preserving those sorts of ethnic ghettos is not really a positive...just imo...and it needs fresh blood coming in to be sustainable which is only possible in cities that get constant flows of immigrants. If Italians were still pouring into New York 'Little Italy' (as something other than a tourist place) would still be around.
Well, certainly cultures have changed in America, but then so what? I mean, it isn't like Italians back in Italy are still the same as Italians in 1910, right? ;)
Quote from: crazy canuck on July 25, 2011, 11:19:08 AM
Then I think that is a particularly American view. Come up to Vancouver or Toronto sometime and see various cultures living side by side as has been done for a number of generations now.
Yeah, their ghettos are side-by-side.
Quote from: Gups on July 25, 2011, 11:27:23 AM
That's the trouble isn't it. It's a virtually meaningless term.
Everyone sane is fine with there being ethnic restaurants and a Chinatown. So is that's all multiculturalism is almost everyone supports it.
Nobody sane wants Sharia law being introduced as an equal system of law in western societies. Nobody wants women to be forced to be married etc.
If that's multiculturalism hardly anyone supports it.
It's all the stuff in the middle that's difficult and proably defines whether you are a multiculturalist or not. Should Sikhs have to wear helmets if they ride bikes, is halal food cruel or OK etc etc.
Yes, and in these ethnic restaurants we expect clean water, clean toilets, valid food and health certificates ect. Chinatown is fun, but it is a form of disneyland, a day out. When you get home to your apartment or house you want it to be in the boring west, free from the baggage these various cultures bring with them to our neighborhoods and schools.
I agree that nobody sane wants sharia as an equal system of laws and forced marriages, but we don't have the will or the sense to say that out loud. We accept what we know is wrong because it is of another culture and that culture must be respected. There are routine attempts to deal with the symptoms like attempting to ban FGM or child marriages etc. without looking at the root causes. The root causes we dealt with in the west when we did away with misogyny, racism, sectarianism and all the other noxious baggage that our culture dragged with it from previous centuries.
Personally I think it is rather pointless to discuss what nobody is criticizing (The Peking Golden Lion Restaurant, the one with the clean toilets and the certificate certifying it clean) and to move on to what is being criticized and what ABB identified as the problem; not good quality indian food; but rather the rash willingness to abandon the bedrock of western society.
Quote from: Malthus on July 25, 2011, 11:34:46 AM
But that is true of cultures in isolation - none simply continue unchanged. Cultures change all the time, whether one wants that or not.
Fact is though that some people don't seem to have much of a problem carrying on side by side with different folkways. See my own city as example.
And even then it's not a static stratification. To an outsider it might seem that little Italy (or Portugal, or whatever) remains an unchanged section of town. But that's not true. Kids and grand kids move out to other parts of the city as they start to identify themselves as "Canadian" over what their cultural heritage is. As they leave they're replaced by new immigrants. They ("we" really, since I'm a kid of immigrants) join the mainstream culture soon enough. Multi Culturalism, as I see it, isn't permanent tribalism as some try to portray here, but more of a buffer between old and new with a constant turnover.
Quote from: Grallon on July 25, 2011, 11:36:21 AM
You might not be aware that the introduction of Sharia as a valid, parallel legal system was almost accomplished in Ontario a few years ago... I daresay there will more attempts in the future.
:rolleyes:
Opposing Islam is fine, but do it with facts rather than lies.
Quote from: Malthus on July 25, 2011, 09:59:40 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 09:24:33 AM
Are you seriously saying that all those who think that halal/kosher slaughter should be banned are really doing this out of hatred for islam or judaism and intolerance?
The issue of tolerance isn't simply about hatred of one group or another, but about justifying (or putting aside) that visceral reaction of "eeeeww!" when confronted with habits that do not match one's own.
Lots of people who are not gay are simply squigged out by homosexuality, particularly by those who practice anal sex, and justify that gut-reaction by adopting an anti-gay stance; they are all the more likely to view it as a public-heath risk, as "not normal", as "degenerate", etc. They may not be inherently gay-hating, but their unwillingness to set aside their gut feelings and attempt to examine matters objectively makes them so.
Similarly, lots of folks are squigged out by slaughter that involves slitting the throat (as opposed to driving a bolt through the brain). They are all the more likely to view it as "cruel" and "inhuman". They may have nothing in particular against Jews or Muslims, but again, their unwillingness to set aside their feelings and examine the matter objectively makes them so.
In both cases, one could if one wanted to justify the "ewww, yuck" reaction; in both cases, the justification is on its face weak and lame, and on its merits would not satisfy a neutral observer that restrictions on the practice are really justified. There is a lack of scientific evidence, for example, that animals killed by having their throats cut by ritual slaughterers actually suffer measurably more than animals being bolted. But scientific evidence isn't what that debate was about - it was more about the "eeeww" factor.
The difference of course is that gay men are born with a need to have sex with other men, but noone is born with a biological need to slit animals' throats.
Quote from: HVC on July 25, 2011, 11:35:37 AM
Quote from: Grallon on July 25, 2011, 11:33:31 AM
Quote from: Viking on July 25, 2011, 11:26:32 AM
You'know, you convinced me..
And whats your point about this?
G.
he's just lashing out. And with his propensity to hate minorities he picked you :P
I like him, If I didn't I'd be much more of a dick, see how I reply to grumbler when I actually do reply to him..
Quote from: Malthus on July 25, 2011, 11:37:44 AM
Well, certainly cultures have changed in America, but then so what? I mean, it isn't like Italians back in Italy are still the same as Italians in 1910, right? ;)
Yes they changed and became part of the mainsteam. The extent it exists at all are simply fond memories like Irish Americans on St. Patrick's day. As it should be. That is a tad more dramatic than the evolution of a distinct Italian-American culture.
Quote from: HVC on July 25, 2011, 11:41:53 AM
They ("we" really, since I'm a kid of immigrants) join the mainstream culture soon enough. Multi Culturalism, as I see it, isn't permanent tribalism as some try to portray here, but more of a buffer between old and new with a constant turnover.
Yep. Which is why I find the term a bit misleading. A society with multiple cultures is not really the outcome. Rather one with many more cultural bases.
Quote from: The Brain on July 25, 2011, 10:14:58 AM
Quoteclaims by Anders Behring Breivik, who has admitted carrying out Friday's twin attacks in Norway, that he has "two more cells" working
That would be his brain cells.
:D
Quote from: Grallon on July 25, 2011, 11:36:21 AM
Quote from: Gups on July 25, 2011, 11:27:23 AM
Nobody sane wants Sharia law being introduced as an equal system of law in western societies. Nobody wants women to be forced to be married etc.
If that's multiculturalism hardly anyone supports it.
You might not be aware that the introduction of Sharia as a valid, parallel legal system was almost accomplished in Ontario a few years ago... I daresay there will more attempts in the future.
G.
No matter how many times I read this, or variations on it, it always makes me laugh. :D
No, Grallon, it is not the case.
What happened is that some people freaked out about Sharia-based
arbitration. Cooler heads eventually prevailed, and the actual source of rational concern (the use of arbitration in family-law matters) identified, and limited; and life goes on.
You can, right now, do Sharia-based commercial arbitration in Ontario if you want to*. Oh noes!
*You can also do
Klingon-based commercial arbitration if you want to ...
Quote from: Tamas on July 25, 2011, 10:29:01 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 09:32:59 AM
Apparently, the mats the guy used to build his bomb were sold to him by a Polish businessman from Wroclaw(Breslau).
Poland! Poland! Poland! :showoff:
Wow, Wroclaw is Breslau? I heard it's a nice place, my company has a new office there, my office might be closed because of them one day. :D
Wroclaw/Breslau Languish Meet! They won the title of the "European Capital of Culture" recently for one of the upcoming years.
Quote from: Malthus on July 25, 2011, 11:46:22 AM
*You can also do Klingon-based commercial arbitration if you want to ...
Sweeeet!
Quote from: Malthus on July 25, 2011, 11:46:22 AM
*You can also do Klingon-based commercial arbitration if you want to ...
just think of all the personal safety waivers you'd have to sign. Lawyers would make a killing on paper work alone. You're sneaky bastards!
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 11:42:46 AM
Quote from: Malthus on July 25, 2011, 09:59:40 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 09:24:33 AM
Are you seriously saying that all those who think that halal/kosher slaughter should be banned are really doing this out of hatred for islam or judaism and intolerance?
The issue of tolerance isn't simply about hatred of one group or another, but about justifying (or putting aside) that visceral reaction of "eeeeww!" when confronted with habits that do not match one's own.
Lots of people who are not gay are simply squigged out by homosexuality, particularly by those who practice anal sex, and justify that gut-reaction by adopting an anti-gay stance; they are all the more likely to view it as a public-heath risk, as "not normal", as "degenerate", etc. They may not be inherently gay-hating, but their unwillingness to set aside their gut feelings and attempt to examine matters objectively makes them so.
Similarly, lots of folks are squigged out by slaughter that involves slitting the throat (as opposed to driving a bolt through the brain). They are all the more likely to view it as "cruel" and "inhuman". They may have nothing in particular against Jews or Muslims, but again, their unwillingness to set aside their feelings and examine the matter objectively makes them so.
In both cases, one could if one wanted to justify the "ewww, yuck" reaction; in both cases, the justification is on its face weak and lame, and on its merits would not satisfy a neutral observer that restrictions on the practice are really justified. There is a lack of scientific evidence, for example, that animals killed by having their throats cut by ritual slaughterers actually suffer measurably more than animals being bolted. But scientific evidence isn't what that debate was about - it was more about the "eeeww" factor.
The difference of course is that gay men are born with a need to have sex with other men, but noone is born with a biological need to slit animals' throats.
That's not a
significant diffence. If gay sex actually
was objectively harmful to society, the fact that gay men were born with such a sex drive would not be any sort of excuse: see pedophiles.
Quote from: Valmy on July 25, 2011, 11:15:10 AM
Quote from: Jacob on July 25, 2011, 10:55:03 AM
Exactly. Multiculturalism is just a slightly different way of expressing an ideal, similar to that American ideal, in the context of how different cultures interact.
The term multiculturalism suggests that different cultures can exist side by side. I think, at least my American in me feels, that that is just impossible. Both cultures will die (and rather quickly, in just a few generations) and be replaced by a new one with aspects of both. Multi-culturalism actually means the death of culture which, to me, is fine but it seems a bit disingenous to sell it otherwise. Our melting pot is honest and to the point. Yes your culture will be preserved but not as it entered this country and this country will be changed by your arrival and joining our colorful tapestry of American slobbery.
I think it really depends how you define "culture" - I think it means something else in America than it does in Europe. In Europe, culture is much more ethnically ingrained, in America it is more of an overall template, not like that of the Imperial Rome (where they would adopt foreign gods or give them Roman names and tell people to worship the Ceasar - the European approach to culture is more like that of crusaders who would kill anyone not worshipping their only god). ;)
Quote from: Malthus on July 25, 2011, 11:34:46 AM
Quote from: Valmy on July 25, 2011, 11:15:10 AM
Quote from: Jacob on July 25, 2011, 10:55:03 AM
Exactly. Multiculturalism is just a slightly different way of expressing an ideal, similar to that American ideal, in the context of how different cultures interact.
The term multiculturalism suggests that different cultures can exist side by side. I think, at least my American in me feels, that that is just impossible. Both cultures will die (and rather quickly, in just a few generations) and be replaced by a new one with aspects of both. Multi-culturalism actually means the death of culture which, to me, is fine but it seems a bit disingenous to sell it otherwise. Our melting pot is honest and to the point. Yes your culture will be preserved but not as it entered this country and this country will be changed by your arrival and joining our colorful tapestry of American slobbery.
But that is true of cultures in isolation - none simply continue unchanged. Cultures change all the time, whether one wants that or not.
Fact is though that some people don't seem to have much of a problem carrying on side by side with different folkways. See my own city as example.
I'd rather point out that what is being objected to is not the brown people living next door, it is the permissive attitude from his own society which permits the brown people next door to maintain an identity of otherness vis a vis the society around them meaning that they don't assimilate generation after generation assisted by the helpful social worker which assists them in not assimilating and the immigration system which permits them to import spouses for the legal residents each generation from pakistan (as happens in norway). These are not your 3rd generation american style immigrant that is 1/8 creol, 3/8ths japanese, 1/4 Irish and 1/4 Lebanese.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 24, 2011, 09:45:17 PM
When I hear the term multiculturalism I think of positive efforts made to encourage minorities to hold on to their culture and traditions. As opposed to the more laissez faire tolerance.
I agree. For example, there are calls to move away from teaching non-English speaking immigrants (and their children) English, and making education only available to them in their native languages. While I have no problem (within budgetary limits) with making some instruction available in other languages for those who haven't mastered English yet, making it tougher for them to learn English is just wrong IMO, not because they should be required to learn English, but because those who don't will be so badly economically disadvantaged in our society in most cases.
Quote from: crazy canuck on July 25, 2011, 11:16:16 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 02:56:14 AM
To elaborate on Jacob said, I think the sane multiculturalism is essentially eudaimonics applied to people of different cultures. It is the same argument as allowing gays to marry - as long as it makes people happier and does not harm anyone, why shouldn't the state allow it?
Who is going to decide whether the act causes sufficient happiness and no harm and on what basis? Havent you just defined "sane" multiculturalism as things that make Marti happy.
Shouldn't there be a more basic recognition of cultural differences and values so long as they do not violate the general and criminal law.
And who decides what violates the general and criminal law? You are talking as if law was immutable or a given - it is the expression of the will of the people. Surely, the law actually reflects what the majority sees as being harmful or beneficial - no?
QuoteWhy do you also require that cultural practices make people "happier" - a rather hedonistic and impossibly subjective requirement.
Happiness is not about hedonism - the principle of making as many people as possible as much happy as possible and as little people as possible as little unhappy as possible is the basis of the utilitarian ethics.
Quote from: HVC on July 25, 2011, 11:41:53 AM
Quote from: Malthus on July 25, 2011, 11:34:46 AM
But that is true of cultures in isolation - none simply continue unchanged. Cultures change all the time, whether one wants that or not.
Fact is though that some people don't seem to have much of a problem carrying on side by side with different folkways. See my own city as example.
And even then it's not a static stratification. To an outsider it might seem that little Italy (or Portugal, or whatever) remains an unchanged section of town. But that's not true. Kids and grand kids move out to other parts of the city as they start to identify themselves as "Canadian" over what their cultural heritage is. As they leave they're replaced by new immigrants. They ("we" really, since I'm a kid of immigrants) join the mainstream culture soon enough. Multi Culturalism, as I see it, isn't permanent tribalism as some try to portray here, but more of a buffer between old and new with a constant turnover.
This is the melting pot as I have seen it. This is what we want. What we don't want is the third generation immigrant who's primary identity is the old country because for three generations his family have been told that they are different, that they will never be like the society around them and their troubles are due to discrimination and hatred by the evil local culture.
Quote from: Valmy on July 25, 2011, 11:48:56 AM
Quote from: Malthus on July 25, 2011, 11:46:22 AM
*You can also do Klingon-based commercial arbitration if you want to ...
Sweeeet!
What about Ferengi-based commercial arbitration? Or would that be indistinguishable from Talmud law?
:P
Quote from: dps on July 25, 2011, 11:51:48 AM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 24, 2011, 09:45:17 PM
When I hear the term multiculturalism I think of positive efforts made to encourage minorities to hold on to their culture and traditions. As opposed to the more laissez faire tolerance.
I agree. For example, there are calls to move away from teaching non-English speaking immigrants (and their children) English, and making education only available to them in their native languages. While I have no problem (within budgetary limits) with making some instruction available in other languages for those who haven't mastered English yet, making it tougher for them to learn English is just wrong IMO, not because they should be required to learn English, but because those who don't will be so badly economically disadvantaged in our society in most cases.
OMG RACIST. :mad:
And yes writing what you just wrote would be enough to get that label flung at you over here.
Quote from: Malthus on July 25, 2011, 11:50:30 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 11:42:46 AM
Quote from: Malthus on July 25, 2011, 09:59:40 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 09:24:33 AM
Are you seriously saying that all those who think that halal/kosher slaughter should be banned are really doing this out of hatred for islam or judaism and intolerance?
The issue of tolerance isn't simply about hatred of one group or another, but about justifying (or putting aside) that visceral reaction of "eeeeww!" when confronted with habits that do not match one's own.
Lots of people who are not gay are simply squigged out by homosexuality, particularly by those who practice anal sex, and justify that gut-reaction by adopting an anti-gay stance; they are all the more likely to view it as a public-heath risk, as "not normal", as "degenerate", etc. They may not be inherently gay-hating, but their unwillingness to set aside their gut feelings and attempt to examine matters objectively makes them so.
Similarly, lots of folks are squigged out by slaughter that involves slitting the throat (as opposed to driving a bolt through the brain). They are all the more likely to view it as "cruel" and "inhuman". They may have nothing in particular against Jews or Muslims, but again, their unwillingness to set aside their feelings and examine the matter objectively makes them so.
In both cases, one could if one wanted to justify the "ewww, yuck" reaction; in both cases, the justification is on its face weak and lame, and on its merits would not satisfy a neutral observer that restrictions on the practice are really justified. There is a lack of scientific evidence, for example, that animals killed by having their throats cut by ritual slaughterers actually suffer measurably more than animals being bolted. But scientific evidence isn't what that debate was about - it was more about the "eeeww" factor.
The difference of course is that gay men are born with a need to have sex with other men, but noone is born with a biological need to slit animals' throats.
That's not a significant diffence. If gay sex actually was objectively harmful to society, the fact that gay men were born with such a sex drive would not be any sort of excuse: see pedophiles.
It is a significant difference, though, in terms of there being imo a stronger onus against allowing a practice that is based on learned behaviour than a practice that is based in inherent/inborn behaviour.
Incidentally, my main beef with halal/kosher slaughter is that, apparently, the society has decided that this kind of slaughter actually is harmful - by prohibiting it to anyone else except the Muslims and the Jews. I oppose exceptionalism - if the society decided that slittering animals' throats is fine, it should be allowed for everybody.
By way of example, a society which would allow anal sex, but only between two men (and not a man and a woman) would be equally silly.
Quote from: Viking on July 25, 2011, 11:54:48 AM
Quote from: HVC on July 25, 2011, 11:41:53 AM
Quote from: Malthus on July 25, 2011, 11:34:46 AM
But that is true of cultures in isolation - none simply continue unchanged. Cultures change all the time, whether one wants that or not.
Fact is though that some people don't seem to have much of a problem carrying on side by side with different folkways. See my own city as example.
And even then it's not a static stratification. To an outsider it might seem that little Italy (or Portugal, or whatever) remains an unchanged section of town. But that's not true. Kids and grand kids move out to other parts of the city as they start to identify themselves as "Canadian" over what their cultural heritage is. As they leave they're replaced by new immigrants. They ("we" really, since I'm a kid of immigrants) join the mainstream culture soon enough. Multi Culturalism, as I see it, isn't permanent tribalism as some try to portray here, but more of a buffer between old and new with a constant turnover.
This is the melting pot as I have seen it. This is what we want. What we don't want is the third generation immigrant who's primary identity is the old country because for three generations his family have been told that they are different, that they will never be like the society around them and their troubles are due to discrimination and hatred by the evil local culture.
The thing is, American identity is so nebulous, it actually can allow people to keep some sense of their "old country" identity. Just look at six/seven generation's Poles in Chicago. Or Ceedee donating to IRA. Or Latinos waving Mexican flags for Cinqo de Mayo. Or katmai being fat on buritos.
Noone considers them to be bad Americans.
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 12:02:43 PM
Noone considers them to be bad Americans.
Except when they root for the Mexican team against team USA in soccer. Treason trials are the only acceptable outcome :angry:
Quote from: Valmy on July 25, 2011, 12:06:01 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 12:02:43 PM
Noone considers them to be bad Americans.
Except when they root for the Mexican team against team USA in soccer. Treason trials are the only acceptable outcome :angry:
But they do. And Europeans seem to have this notion this is not the case. And in Europe indeed such behaviour is considered to prove that OMG ASSIMILATION FAILZ! WE NEED TO DEPORT ALL ARABZ!
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 12:02:43 PM
Quote from: Viking on July 25, 2011, 11:54:48 AM
This is the melting pot as I have seen it. This is what we want. What we don't want is the third generation immigrant who's primary identity is the old country because for three generations his family have been told that they are different, that they will never be like the society around them and their troubles are due to discrimination and hatred by the evil local culture.
The thing is, American identity is so nebulous, it actually can allow people to keep some sense of their "old country" identity. Just look at six/seven generation's Poles in Chicago. Or Ceedee donating to IRA. Or Latinos waving Mexican flags for Cinqo de Mayo. Or katmai being fat on buritos.
Noone considers them to be bad Americans.
Yes, that is precisely the point I'm trying to make here. When I was a kid growing up in Palo Alto California we had pinatas, wore green on st paddy's day, celebrated hanuka and christmas in school, learned stories about anansi the spider etc. While on the other hand we learned about the founding fathers and their values. The american approach to identity is not nebulous it is clear, if you adopt america's fundamental values you become an american. One of the problems that Europe is facing is that it's countries are not based on values, they are based on ethnicity. Europe's borders are where the invading armies were stopped and each side ethnically cleansed their side of the border.
Anyway, speaking of grey areas, what about old men with herpes giving the disease to baby boys by sucking their bloody dicks?
Harmless or harmful?
Quote from: Gups on July 25, 2011, 11:27:23 AM
Everyone sane is fine with there being ethnic restaurants and a Chinatown. So is that's all multiculturalism is almost everyone supports it.
:x
Most of the Chinatowns that I've been to were key examples of urban blight. I don't really support those sorts of conditions.
Quote from: Viking on July 25, 2011, 12:10:51 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 12:02:43 PM
Quote from: Viking on July 25, 2011, 11:54:48 AM
This is the melting pot as I have seen it. This is what we want. What we don't want is the third generation immigrant who's primary identity is the old country because for three generations his family have been told that they are different, that they will never be like the society around them and their troubles are due to discrimination and hatred by the evil local culture.
The thing is, American identity is so nebulous, it actually can allow people to keep some sense of their "old country" identity. Just look at six/seven generation's Poles in Chicago. Or Ceedee donating to IRA. Or Latinos waving Mexican flags for Cinqo de Mayo. Or katmai being fat on buritos.
Noone considers them to be bad Americans.
Yes, that is precisely the point I'm trying to make here. When I was a kid growing up in Palo Alto California we had pinatas, wore green on st paddy's day, celebrated hanuka and christmas in school, learned stories about anansi the spider etc. While on the other hand we learned about the founding fathers and their values. The american approach to identity is not nebulous it is clear, if you adopt america's fundamental values you become an american. One of the problems that Europe is facing is that it's countries are not based on values, they are based on ethnicity. Europe's borders are where the invading armies were stopped and each side ethnically cleansed their side of the border.
Yeah but the thing is the American cultural "template" is quite hole-y and sparse - it leaves a lot of room for Anasi the Spider, St. Patrick's Day and Hanuka. I have an impression that in most European countries this is not the case - the cultural "template" is very dense - it leaves very little room for external things like that.
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 12:12:59 PM
Yeah but the thing is the American cultural "template" is quite hole-y and sparse - it leaves a lot of room for Anasi the Spider, St. Patrick's Day and Hanuka. I have an impression that in most European countries this is not the case - the cultural "template" is very dense - it leaves very little room for external things like that.
That might be a reason why MC is so popular in europe. In one stroke you can happily ignore the immigrants and pretend they don't exist because they never get out of their ghettos because they don't assimilate and on the other hand you can be tolerant and multicultural when you bother to think about them while you get outraged at the racist patriachal hierachical society which discriminates these poor people forcing them into these ghettos where their criminal, violent and mysogynistic behavoir can only be explain as a reaction to racism and hegemonic oppression.
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 12:12:59 PM
Quote from: Viking on July 25, 2011, 12:10:51 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 12:02:43 PM
Quote from: Viking on July 25, 2011, 11:54:48 AM
This is the melting pot as I have seen it. This is what we want. What we don't want is the third generation immigrant who's primary identity is the old country because for three generations his family have been told that they are different, that they will never be like the society around them and their troubles are due to discrimination and hatred by the evil local culture.
The thing is, American identity is so nebulous, it actually can allow people to keep some sense of their "old country" identity. Just look at six/seven generation's Poles in Chicago. Or Ceedee donating to IRA. Or Latinos waving Mexican flags for Cinqo de Mayo. Or katmai being fat on buritos.
Noone considers them to be bad Americans.
Yes, that is precisely the point I'm trying to make here. When I was a kid growing up in Palo Alto California we had pinatas, wore green on st paddy's day, celebrated hanuka and christmas in school, learned stories about anansi the spider etc. While on the other hand we learned about the founding fathers and their values. The american approach to identity is not nebulous it is clear, if you adopt america's fundamental values you become an american. One of the problems that Europe is facing is that it's countries are not based on values, they are based on ethnicity. Europe's borders are where the invading armies were stopped and each side ethnically cleansed their side of the border.
Yeah but the thing is the American cultural "template" is quite hole-y and sparse - it leaves a lot of room for Anasi the Spider, St. Patrick's Day and Hanuka. I have an impression that in most European countries this is not the case - the cultural "template" is very dense - it leaves very little room for external things like that.
I dunno man - the British/English "cultural template" is similarily pretty dense, but has shown a great ability to incorporate new elements, particularly from India.
Quote from: Barrister on July 25, 2011, 12:19:01 PM
I dunno man - the British/English "cultural template" is similarily pretty dense, but has shown a great ability to incorporate new elements, particularly from India.
But, strangely enough, Anglo Saxon institutions survived all the way into the enlightenment.
When we say Europe we don't mean England.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 24, 2011, 09:56:42 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on July 24, 2011, 09:52:45 PM
Quote from: Jacob on July 24, 2011, 09:19:44 PM
Quote from: dps on July 24, 2011, 02:13:58 PMSo by this logic, in 1859, in the wake of John Brown's raid, should abolishionists have re-evaluated their views and decided that human chattel slavery was OK?
I'm not familiar enough with American Civil War events to have that discussion in a useful way.
But when someone things an abstract political struggle* is important enough to start murdering innocents merely "to be heard" then I think the people should have a good long think about exactly what it is they're saying, what they want and how they're going about getting it.
*(and I think "cultural marxists vs nationalists" is much more abstract than "slavery yes or no")
Indeed. The only way John Brown could've been cooler is if he'd killed more people.
Amen, brother.
See, Slargos isn't the only poster here who thinks murdering innocent civilians is fine as long as it's done for a political ideal you agree with.
Quote from: dps on July 25, 2011, 12:30:31 PM
See, Slargos isn't the only poster here who thinks murdering innocent civilians is fine as long as it's done for a political ideal you agree with.
Those who were silent in the face of the injustices of Slavery were complicit and thus guilty -_-
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 11:54:01 AM
And who decides what violates the general and criminal law? You are talking as if law was immutable or a given - it is the expression of the will of the people. Surely, the law actually reflects what the majority sees as being harmful or beneficial - no?
Do you really think the criminal law is based on what is beneficial so that anything not deemed beneficial is outlawed. Is that really how the law works in Poland?
Quote from: dps on July 25, 2011, 12:30:31 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 24, 2011, 09:56:42 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on July 24, 2011, 09:52:45 PM
Quote from: Jacob on July 24, 2011, 09:19:44 PM
Quote from: dps on July 24, 2011, 02:13:58 PMSo by this logic, in 1859, in the wake of John Brown's raid, should abolishionists have re-evaluated their views and decided that human chattel slavery was OK?
I'm not familiar enough with American Civil War events to have that discussion in a useful way.
But when someone things an abstract political struggle* is important enough to start murdering innocents merely "to be heard" then I think the people should have a good long think about exactly what it is they're saying, what they want and how they're going about getting it.
*(and I think "cultural marxists vs nationalists" is much more abstract than "slavery yes or no")
Indeed. The only way John Brown could've been cooler is if he'd killed more people.
Amen, brother.
See, Slargos isn't the only poster here who thinks murdering innocent civilians is fine as long as it's done for a political ideal you agree with.
When have I ever said that?
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 09:29:36 AM
Yup. What the conservatives and nationalists do not understand is that you cannot function without immigrants these days, at least not if you want to maintain the kind of quality of living that we have in the West.
I agree with the rest of your post, but I don't buy that argument at all. At least not in an American context--I can't say for sure about Europe, but I doubt it's true there either. The countries that depend on immigrants to maintain the native population's standard of living and lifestyle are the Arab oil states, where almost all the actual physical labor is done by immigrants.
Quote from: dps on July 25, 2011, 12:30:31 PM
See, Slargos isn't the only poster here who thinks murdering innocent civilians is fine as long as it's done for a political ideal you agree with.
I we don't think of it as murder, yeah, lots of us are willing to kill innocent civilians. We call it "collateral damage".
Quote from: Valmy on July 25, 2011, 12:31:56 PM
Quote from: dps on July 25, 2011, 12:30:31 PM
See, Slargos isn't the only poster here who thinks murdering innocent civilians is fine as long as it's done for a political ideal you agree with.
Those who were silent in the face of the injustices of Slavery were complicit and thus guilty -_-
Gee, that's about what Fred Phelp's bunch say about homosexuality. Didn't figure you as one to see things his way.
Quote from: dps on July 25, 2011, 12:48:10 PM
Gee, that's about what Fred Phelp's bunch say about homosexuality. Didn't figure you as one to see things his way.
You do realize we are talking about chattel slavery of millions of people over the course of centuries right? And the comparison you are making is homosexuality? :lol:
And any case I was joking. But still a nation that horribly mistreats millions of people can hardly expect to never see a violent reaction to its own violent oppression.
Quote from: HVC on July 25, 2011, 11:41:53 AM
And even then it's not a static stratification. To an outsider it might seem that little Italy (or Portugal, or whatever) remains an unchanged section of town. But that's not true. Kids and grand kids move out to other parts of the city as they start to identify themselves as "Canadian" over what their cultural heritage is. As they leave they're replaced by new immigrants. They ("we" really, since I'm a kid of immigrants) join the mainstream culture soon enough. Multi Culturalism, as I see it, isn't permanent tribalism as some try to portray here, but more of a buffer between old and new with a constant turnover.
That's not how it works in Europe, though. Here, permanent tribalism without possibility of joining the mainstream culture is the norm, and seen as the embodiment of multiculturalism.
Quote from: Slargos on July 25, 2011, 12:38:33 PM
When have I ever said that?
Near the beginning of the thread. You said that killing for a political purpose could be justified but you drew the line at killing kids. I asked you at what age someone becomes a valid target for murder. I dont think you ever gave me an answer.
Quote from: Solmyr on July 25, 2011, 12:57:36 PM
Quote from: HVC on July 25, 2011, 11:41:53 AM
And even then it's not a static stratification. To an outsider it might seem that little Italy (or Portugal, or whatever) remains an unchanged section of town. But that's not true. Kids and grand kids move out to other parts of the city as they start to identify themselves as "Canadian" over what their cultural heritage is. As they leave they're replaced by new immigrants. They ("we" really, since I'm a kid of immigrants) join the mainstream culture soon enough. Multi Culturalism, as I see it, isn't permanent tribalism as some try to portray here, but more of a buffer between old and new with a constant turnover.
That's not how it works in Europe, though. Here, permanent tribalism without possibility of joining the mainstream culture is the norm, and seen as the embodiment of multiculturalism.
Yep, its going to be a cold day in hell before you get the Fench/Germans, Swedes/Finns, Poles/anyone else thinking they are the same tribe.
Quote from: Solmyr on July 25, 2011, 12:57:36 PM
Quote from: HVC on July 25, 2011, 11:41:53 AM
And even then it's not a static stratification. To an outsider it might seem that little Italy (or Portugal, or whatever) remains an unchanged section of town. But that's not true. Kids and grand kids move out to other parts of the city as they start to identify themselves as "Canadian" over what their cultural heritage is. As they leave they're replaced by new immigrants. They ("we" really, since I'm a kid of immigrants) join the mainstream culture soon enough. Multi Culturalism, as I see it, isn't permanent tribalism as some try to portray here, but more of a buffer between old and new with a constant turnover.
That's not how it works in Europe, though. Here, permanent tribalism without possibility of joining the mainstream culture is the norm, and seen as the embodiment of multiculturalism.
Tell that to Sarkozy.
Quote from: crazy canuck on July 25, 2011, 12:57:43 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 25, 2011, 12:38:33 PM
When have I ever said that?
Near the beginning of the thread. You said that killing for a political purpose could be justified but you drew the line at killing kids. I asked you at what age someone becomes a valid target for murder. I dont think you ever gave me an answer.
I didn't say that
I could justify it [in fact, the very notion of murdering children is abhorrent to me], but that it could be justified from a rational standpoint. There is a subtle difference.
And I have to disagree with myself anyway. It's always possible to justify whatever you choose. Kids. Women. Wounded. It's just norms that protect them.
Would I choose the same victims if I decided to make a grand standing like this? I don't know. I hope not. But I can certainly see why he did.[/i]
Quote from: crazy canuck on July 25, 2011, 01:00:35 PM
Quote from: Solmyr on July 25, 2011, 12:57:36 PM
Quote from: HVC on July 25, 2011, 11:41:53 AM
And even then it's not a static stratification. To an outsider it might seem that little Italy (or Portugal, or whatever) remains an unchanged section of town. But that's not true. Kids and grand kids move out to other parts of the city as they start to identify themselves as "Canadian" over what their cultural heritage is. As they leave they're replaced by new immigrants. They ("we" really, since I'm a kid of immigrants) join the mainstream culture soon enough. Multi Culturalism, as I see it, isn't permanent tribalism as some try to portray here, but more of a buffer between old and new with a constant turnover.
That's not how it works in Europe, though. Here, permanent tribalism without possibility of joining the mainstream culture is the norm, and seen as the embodiment of multiculturalism.
Yep, its going to be a cold day in hell before you get the Fench/Germans, Swedes/Finns, Poles/anyone else thinking they are the same tribe.
Incidentally, that's why I support the EU's economic integration but oppose its political integration - a European multinational federal state will never work without a totalitarian centralized regime a la USSR.
Quote from: Barrister on July 25, 2011, 01:00:46 PM
Tell that to Sarkozy.
France is also a bit of an exception. They created a new ethnicity based on the ideals of the French revolution and then set about destroying the ethnicities that had existed before. This new concept of nationalism was remarkably open to anybody willing to accept those values and a bit histrionically hostile to those who did not.
But the old ethnic identities in France still flare up from time to time.
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 12:00:51 PM
It is a significant difference, though, in terms of there being imo a stronger onus against allowing a practice that is based on learned behaviour than a practice that is based in inherent/inborn behaviour.
Incidentally, my main beef with halal/kosher slaughter is that, apparently, the society has decided that this kind of slaughter actually is harmful - by prohibiting it to anyone else except the Muslims and the Jews. I oppose exceptionalism - if the society decided that slittering animals' throats is fine, it should be allowed for everybody.
By way of example, a society which would allow anal sex, but only between two men (and not a man and a woman) would be equally silly.
In your example, wouldn't you be agitating for allowing every consenting adult to have anal sex if they wish, rather than agitating to enforce the ban on gay men as well?
Seems to me your stance is that if there is a general rule, no matter how absurd, it ought to be enforced on everyone.
Of course this has an air of unreality about it, because as far as I know, the right to slaughter by throat-cutting isn't one that anyone else wishes to have.
Quote from: Solmyr on July 25, 2011, 01:03:48 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on July 25, 2011, 01:00:35 PM
Quote from: Solmyr on July 25, 2011, 12:57:36 PM
Quote from: HVC on July 25, 2011, 11:41:53 AM
And even then it's not a static stratification. To an outsider it might seem that little Italy (or Portugal, or whatever) remains an unchanged section of town. But that's not true. Kids and grand kids move out to other parts of the city as they start to identify themselves as "Canadian" over what their cultural heritage is. As they leave they're replaced by new immigrants. They ("we" really, since I'm a kid of immigrants) join the mainstream culture soon enough. Multi Culturalism, as I see it, isn't permanent tribalism as some try to portray here, but more of a buffer between old and new with a constant turnover.
That's not how it works in Europe, though. Here, permanent tribalism without possibility of joining the mainstream culture is the norm, and seen as the embodiment of multiculturalism.
Yep, its going to be a cold day in hell before you get the Fench/Germans, Swedes/Finns, Poles/anyone else thinking they are the same tribe.
Incidentally, that's why I support the EU's economic integration but oppose its political integration - a European multinational federal state will never work without a totalitarian centralized regime a la USSR.
I've brought up a couple of examples of multicultural success in Europe only to be told they are exceptions, and then am told how multiculturalism can NEVER work in Europe.
Sure it can. It has hardly been tried is the problem.
Quote from: Barrister on July 25, 2011, 01:00:46 PM
Tell that to Sarkozy.
In Sarkozy's case each immigrant generation married a frenchman/frenchwoman and assymilating. Anecdotes do not trends make. But, not all immigrants are equal. A Hungarian or a Greek (in Sarkozy's case) are much much easier to assymilate than a turk or a berber. In my case as and Icelander I'm pre-assymilated in Scandinavia as I'm considered one of "us". Europe has through history had a constant flow of people and refugees for centuries, usually moving to a polity more tolerant of their religion/politics. The Mayflower is just a continuation of an old tradition. This tradition is, however, a tradition of moving towards similarity rather than towards difference. Hugenot Protestants would move to Protestant England, English Catholics would move to France.
The concept of multi culturalism was invented in the 1960's in concert with post-modernism and cultural relativism and has a common set of assumptions (yes I know, post-modernism using meta-narratives, how droll). This happened at the same time as a new form of immigrant arrived in western europe, the guest worker. Never intended to be assimilated he was not and still has not.
Quote from: Valmy on July 25, 2011, 01:04:15 PM
Quote from: Barrister on July 25, 2011, 01:00:46 PM
Tell that to Sarkozy.
France is also a bit of an exception. They created a new ethnicity based on the ideals of the French revolution and then set about destroying the ethnicities that had existed before. This new concept of nationalism was remarkably open to anybody willing to accept those values and a bit histrionically hostile to those who did not.
But the old ethnic identities in France still flare up from time to time.
I'd consider the war of the Vendee a bit more then a "bit histrionically hostile". It was a act of Genocide that the would make the Soviets proud (and in fact they used it as an example of what a revolutionary regime should do).
Quote from: Viking on July 25, 2011, 01:14:47 PM
Quote from: Barrister on July 25, 2011, 01:00:46 PM
Tell that to Sarkozy.
In Sarkozy's case each immigrant generation married a frenchman/frenchwoman and assymilating. Anecdotes do not trends make. But, not all immigrants are equal. A Hungarian or a Greek (in Sarkozy's case) are much much easier to assymilate than a turk or a berber. In my case as and Icelander I'm pre-assymilated in Scandinavia as I'm considered one of "us". Europe has through history had a constant flow of people and refugees for centuries, usually moving to a polity more tolerant of their religion/politics. The Mayflower is just a continuation of an old tradition. This tradition is, however, a tradition of moving towards similarity rather than towards difference. Hugenot Protestants would move to Protestant England, English Catholics would move to France.
The concept of multi culturalism was invented in the 1960's in concert with post-modernism and cultural relativism and has a common set of assumptions (yes I know, post-modernism using meta-narratives, how droll). This happened at the same time as a new form of immigrant arrived in western europe, the guest worker. Never intended to be assimilated he was not and still has not.
Are you really arguing there's any meaningful difference between a Greek and a Turk? :lol:
Turks are generally more hard working.
Quote from: Razgovory on July 25, 2011, 01:22:59 PM
I'd consider the war of the Vendee a bit more then a "bit histrionically hostile". It was a act of Genocide that the would make the Soviets proud (and in fact they used it as an example of what a revolutionary regime should do).
Yes that was irony. It is quite intensly histrionically hostile. But still it is hardly characteristic of the process which took a long time to happen and was not, by and large, done in that fashion. The process I am talking about largely happened post 1870 not 1793.
Quote from: Barrister on July 25, 2011, 01:34:01 PM
Are you really arguing there's any meaningful difference between a Greek and a Turk? :lol:
A Greek is a Turk who's on our side.
I think the term multiculturalism takes on some added meaning when you consider that it was originally coined by the francophone leader of a majority English country.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 25, 2011, 02:18:50 PM
I think the term multiculturalism takes on some added meaning when you consider that it was originally coined by the francophone leader of a majority English country.
And was specifically designed to differentiate Canada from the Melting Pot of the US.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 25, 2011, 02:18:50 PM
I think the term multiculturalism takes on some added meaning when you consider that it was originally coined by the francophone leader of a majority English country.
You sure about that etymology?
Yeah, I think overall I cannot really accept Jacobs definition of multiculturalism. I think of it more as a subset of the tolerance he is talking about, or even a rejection that that tolerance is adequate.
MC suggests that more than just tolerance is needed - active accommodation to differing cultures, even at the expense of the "host" culture, is required. The host culture must not only tolerate the other culture, it must even adapt itself to the secondary culture to cater to it if necessary to accomdate those elements that the immigrant culture find important. After all, if all culture are equally valid, then why should Muslim immigrants be required to adapt to French norms? Rather France should actively shift their norms to make room for the secondary culture.
MC is, to me, not so much about allowing other languages, but rather *requiring* that signs be in both languages, even if one is a clear minority (for example).
The American ideal of tolerance is that you can come here, and hang onto whatever culture you like, to whatever extent you like, but you should have no real expectation that American culture will actively change to accommodate you. It might - because cultures are hardly static - but that change will be driven by cultural evolution, so to speak, nt by any active decisions on the part of political parties to protect or integrate portions. American culture will assimilate those things that America as a whole finds culturally useful or compelling, as opposed to those things that the immigrant culture might find important to them.
We love your food, so please open an Indian restaurant so we can eat it. However, that Hindu crap about castes? Yeah, that is stupid, so it is going to have to be left at the border. Beatles yes, boiling our meat, no.
The key is that it is American culture that picks and chooses what gets assimilated. We make no promises that what the immigrant culture finds important will be retained.
Quote from: Barrister on July 25, 2011, 02:26:58 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 25, 2011, 02:18:50 PM
I think the term multiculturalism takes on some added meaning when you consider that it was originally coined by the francophone leader of a majority English country.
You sure about that etymology?
Pretty sure it became widely used during the first Trudeau term - he may not have coined it but the Liberal Party certainly built it into their platform and enjoyed electoral success for decades because of it since I think most Canadian would view MC differently then how Berkut described it.
Quote from: Berkut on July 25, 2011, 02:35:28 PM
Yeah, I think overall I cannot really accept Jacobs definition of multiculturalism. I think of it more as a subset of the tolerance he is talking about, or even a rejection that that tolerance is adequate.
MC suggests that more than just tolerance is needed - active accommodation to differing cultures, even at the expense of the "host" culture, is required. The host culture must not only tolerate the other culture, it must even adapt itself to the secondary culture to cater to it if necessary to accomdate those elements that the immigrant culture find important. After all, if all culture are equally valid, then why should Muslim immigrants be required to adapt to French norms? Rather France should actively shift their norms to make room for the secondary culture.
MC is, to me, not so much about allowing other languages, but rather *requiring* that signs be in both languages, even if one is a clear minority (for example).
The American ideal of tolerance is that you can come here, and hang onto whatever culture you like, to whatever extent you like, but you should have no real expectation that American culture will actively change to accommodate you. It might - because cultures are hardly static - but that change will be driven by cultural evolution, so to speak, nt by any active decisions on the part of political parties to protect or integrate portions. American culture will assimilate those things that America as a whole finds culturally useful or compelling, as opposed to those things that the immigrant culture might find important to them.
We love your food, so please open an Indian restaurant so we can eat it. However, that Hindu crap about castes? Yeah, that is stupid, so it is going to have to be left at the border. Beatles yes, boiling our meat, no.
The key is that it is American culture that picks and chooses what gets assimilated. We make no promises that what the immigrant culture finds important will be retained.
This is certainly not how "multiculturalism' is viewed in Canada. There is no expectation that the "host culture" has to conform to the "immigrant culture".
Rather, there is an aknowledgement that people have a right to retain what they want from their own culture - so long as this conforms to the rule of law. It is non-intervention and reasonable accomodation.
Unlike, apparently, America, we have no public cultural enforcer who prevents one from boiling one's meat, if one wishes to do so. ;)
You do have public enforcers to require that signs and labels be in French, which strikes me as enforced multiculturalism.
Quote from: Malthus on July 25, 2011, 03:09:56 PM
This is certainly not how "multiculturalism' is viewed in Canada. There is no expectation that the "host culture" has to conform to the "immigrant culture".
Rather, there is an aknowledgement that people have a right to retain what they want from their own culture - so long as this conforms to the rule of law. It is non-intervention and reasonable accomodation.
Was there a period in Canadian history where people did not have this right?
Quote from: Berkut on July 25, 2011, 02:35:28 PM
The key is that it is American culture that picks and chooses what gets assimilated. We make no promises that what the immigrant culture finds important will be retained.
...yes, we do. But only for the religious points:
Quotea) In general
Government shall not substantially burden a person's exercise of religion even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability, except as provided in subsection (b) of this section.
(b) Exception
Government may substantially burden a person's exercise of religion only if it demonstrates that application of the burden to the person—
(1) is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and
(2) is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest.
That doesn't sound anything like a promise that what the immigrant finds important will be retained.
Quote from: Valmy on July 25, 2011, 11:27:05 AM
Yeah that supposedly happens in New York and other big American cities. I think it is an illusion those cultures have been profoundly changed from their roots because of their interaction with the people around them.
That's alright. Cultures change all the time.
Quote from: Razgovory on July 25, 2011, 03:16:40 PM
You do have public enforcers to require that signs and labels be in French, which strikes me as enforced multiculturalism.
That's not forced multiculturalism, that's french inferiority complex.
Quote from: Viking on July 25, 2011, 11:41:22 AM
Personally I think it is rather pointless to discuss what nobody is criticizing (The Peking Golden Lion Restaurant, the one with the clean toilets and the certificate certifying it clean) and to move on to what is being criticized and what ABB identified as the problem; not good quality indian food; but rather the rash willingness to abandon the bedrock of western society.
Who is arguing that we abandon the bedrock of Western society?
Quote from: Jacob on July 25, 2011, 03:29:24 PM
That's alright. Cultures change all the time.
Of course it is alright, it is a profound positive good. It is what the melting pot is all about.
Quote from: HVC on July 25, 2011, 03:30:09 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on July 25, 2011, 03:16:40 PM
You do have public enforcers to require that signs and labels be in French, which strikes me as enforced multiculturalism.
That's not forced multiculturalism, that's french inferiority complex.
Same thing in this case.
Quote from: Viking on July 25, 2011, 11:51:23 AMI'd rather point out that what is being objected to is not the brown people living next door, it is the permissive attitude from his own society which permits the brown people next door to maintain an identity of otherness vis a vis the society around them meaning that they don't assimilate generation after generation assisted by the helpful social worker which assists them in not assimilating and the immigration system which permits them to import spouses for the legal residents each generation from pakistan (as happens in norway). These are not your 3rd generation american style immigrant that is 1/8 creol, 3/8ths japanese, 1/4 Irish and 1/4 Lebanese.
We are agreed that the poor record of integrating immigrants in Europe is a significant social problem. One that should be addressed.
Where we differ seems to be in our analysis of the causes of the poor integration and the likely most effective solutions.
I'd expect we can also agree that killing nearly 100 innocent people to draw attention to your personal preference for solving social problems is an abomination, just as I expect we can agree that attempting to murder cartoonists for drawing unflattering images of your favourite religious figure is unacceptable.
Quote from: HVC on July 25, 2011, 11:41:53 AMAnd even then it's not a static stratification. To an outsider it might seem that little Italy (or Portugal, or whatever) remains an unchanged section of town. But that's not true. Kids and grand kids move out to other parts of the city as they start to identify themselves as "Canadian" over what their cultural heritage is. As they leave they're replaced by new immigrants. They ("we" really, since I'm a kid of immigrants) join the mainstream culture soon enough. Multi Culturalism, as I see it, isn't permanent tribalism as some try to portray here, but more of a buffer between old and new with a constant turnover.
Exactly.
Quote from: dps on July 25, 2011, 12:39:21 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 09:29:36 AM
Yup. What the conservatives and nationalists do not understand is that you cannot function without immigrants these days, at least not if you want to maintain the kind of quality of living that we have in the West.
I agree with the rest of your post, but I don't buy that argument at all. At least not in an American context--I can't say for sure about Europe, but I doubt it's true there either. The countries that depend on immigrants to maintain the native population's standard of living and lifestyle are the Arab oil states, where almost all the actual physical labor is done by immigrants.
Well, you could say that America is willing to spend a lot of money on its military/security (at the cost of stuff like free education, healthcare or social welfare) to "keep the darkies out" as it were - again, something Europe is not willing to do either.
The fact is that in the modern world, the "brown" immigrants are the previous ages' huddled masses who work for us and are kept outside - we can't do this indefinitely, unless we want to invest a lot in "police" forces, like you guys do (not to mention I am not sure it is a good idea).
Quote from: Valmy on July 25, 2011, 12:53:53 PM
Quote from: dps on July 25, 2011, 12:48:10 PM
Gee, that's about what Fred Phelp's bunch say about homosexuality. Didn't figure you as one to see things his way.
You do realize we are talking about chattel slavery of millions of people over the course of centuries right? And the comparison you are making is homosexuality? :lol:
And any case I was joking. But still a nation that horribly mistreats millions of people can hardly expect to never see a violent reaction to its own violent oppression.
Yeah. People forget that, all things considered, *sometimes* a violent response *is* morally justified.
Quote from: Jacob on July 25, 2011, 03:39:35 PM
Where we differ seems to be in our analysis of the causes of the poor integration and the likely most effective solutions.
I have a question for you that has puzzled me a bit wth regards to solutions to this Euro issue. If the purpose of Denmark is not as a homeland for the Danish ethnicity what is it? What sort of universal values of Denmark would I have to embrace to be a Dane?
Quote from: Malthus on July 25, 2011, 01:08:08 PM
Seems to me your stance is that if there is a general rule, no matter how absurd, it ought to be enforced on everyone.
Well, I'm kinda attached to that weird concept of people having equal rights. ;)
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 03:41:44 PM
Well, you could say that America is willing to spend a lot of money on its military/security (at the cost of stuff like free education, healthcare or social welfare) to "keep the darkies out" as it were - again, something Europe is not willing to do either.
We do not really strive to keep the darkies out...but we pretend to. Which is classic America really.
But I am not sure even in this charade our military and security forces are raised for that purpose. Where did you get this idea from? :hmm:
Quote from: Viking on July 25, 2011, 12:10:51 PMYes, that is precisely the point I'm trying to make here. When I was a kid growing up in Palo Alto California we had pinatas, wore green on st paddy's day, celebrated hanuka and christmas in school, learned stories about anansi the spider etc. While on the other hand we learned about the founding fathers and their values. The american approach to identity is not nebulous it is clear, if you adopt america's fundamental values you become an american. One of the problems that Europe is facing is that it's countries are not based on values, they are based on ethnicity. Europe's borders are where the invading armies were stopped and each side ethnically cleansed their side of the border.
I think this is a succinct summary of the problem. I'm unconvinced that the answer is along the lines of what ABB apparently proposes.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 25, 2011, 03:27:24 PM
That doesn't sound anything like a promise that what the immigrant finds important will be retained.
I don't see any such promise made under Canadian "multiculturalism".
The promise isn't that what is important to the immigrant will be retained - the promise is that the immigrant will be allowed, within the law, to do what he or she wants. If the culture is important to the immigrant, he or she can retain it his or herself. Or not.
I think to a large extent the current kerfuffle in Europe is about folks there fearing losing their own cultural uniqueness, and seeking some sort of government enforcement of that. Which is more or less the opposite of "multiculturalism".
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 25, 2011, 03:27:24 PM
That doesn't sound anything like a promise that what the immigrant finds important will be retained.
It's a promise that the federal government will not substantially burden religion - even through general laws - unless it is the least restrictive means of furthering a compelling governmental interest.
That's a pretty significant promise to allow the immigrant to retain their religion.
Quote from: Viking on July 25, 2011, 12:17:10 PMThat might be a reason why MC is so popular in europe. In one stroke you can happily ignore the immigrants and pretend they don't exist because they never get out of their ghettos because they don't assimilate and on the other hand you can be tolerant and multicultural when you bother to think about them while you get outraged at the racist patriachal hierachical society which discriminates these poor people forcing them into these ghettos where their criminal, violent and mysogynistic behavoir can only be explain as a reaction to racism and hegemonic oppression.
If that is what happens and that is how it's explained, that is pretty fucked.
That said, I haven't come across any Europeans who were, you know, actually in favour of multiculturalism the way you're describing it... but I could easily have missed them, being in Canada and all. Still, none of the European media I watch and read defend multiculturalism. The only time I'm come across it in European media it's inevitably when people say things like "multiculturalism is a failure".
Who are the staunch defenders of multiculturalism in Norway and Sweden? And what are their main platforms for propagating their views?
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 03:45:36 PM
Quote from: Malthus on July 25, 2011, 01:08:08 PM
Seems to me your stance is that if there is a general rule, no matter how absurd, it ought to be enforced on everyone.
Well, I'm kinda attached to that weird concept of people having equal rights. ;)
Even if the rule in question happens to be silly, you'd support it because of "equal rights"?
Another aspect you are missing is that creating a prohibition that only affects those who actually want to breach it isn't "equality". This sort of argument got trotted out during the gay marriage debate - that having marriage defined as one woman and one man was fully "equal" and did not offend against equality, because gay men and women could of course "get married" - they just had to get married to each other! A variant on the old "rich men and poor men are equally prohibited from living under bridges" sort of argument. ;)
Similarly, saying that animals may be slaughtered in only one way doesn't offend against equality - as long as you overlook the fact that only two groups routinely wish to slaughter in another way.
Quote from: Valmy on July 25, 2011, 03:43:44 PM
Quote from: Jacob on July 25, 2011, 03:39:35 PM
Where we differ seems to be in our analysis of the causes of the poor integration and the likely most effective solutions.
I have a question for you that has puzzled me a bit wth regards to solutions to this Euro issue. If the purpose of Denmark is not as a homeland for the Danish ethnicity what is it? What sort of universal values of Denmark would I have to embrace to be a Dane?
I'm not a Dane, and can't really answer for them. But what they might say is that Denmark is home not to the Danish ethnicity, but the Danish culture (no matter what your ethnic heritage is)? That as long as you, I dunno, love Hans Christian Anderson and eat rotten fish or whatever Danes eat, that you can consider yourself Danish?
It's not exactly multiculutalism, but it isn't racist either.
Quote from: Malthus on July 25, 2011, 03:48:23 PM
I think to a large extent the current kerfuffle in Europe is about folks there fearing losing their own cultural uniqueness, and seeking some sort of government enforcement of that. Which is more or less the opposite of "multiculturalism".
I think that's a massive understatement of the issue. I think it's mostly about fears of rising crime from a group of people who are hostile to the core values of the host culture, who are less than Lutheran in their efforts to become productive members of society, and who practice coercion on their own offspring in a way that is anathema to the host culture. It's not about Danes losing their dominance in team handball.
Quote from: Berkut on July 25, 2011, 02:35:28 PM
Yeah, I think overall I cannot really accept Jacobs definition of multiculturalism. I think of it more as a subset of the tolerance he is talking about, or even a rejection that that tolerance is adequate.
MC suggests that more than just tolerance is needed - active accommodation to differing cultures, even at the expense of the "host" culture, is required. The host culture must not only tolerate the other culture, it must even adapt itself to the secondary culture to cater to it if necessary to accomdate those elements that the immigrant culture find important. After all, if all culture are equally valid, then why should Muslim immigrants be required to adapt to French norms? Rather France should actively shift their norms to make room for the secondary culture.
MC is, to me, not so much about allowing other languages, but rather *requiring* that signs be in both languages, even if one is a clear minority (for example).
The American ideal of tolerance is that you can come here, and hang onto whatever culture you like, to whatever extent you like, but you should have no real expectation that American culture will actively change to accommodate you. It might - because cultures are hardly static - but that change will be driven by cultural evolution, so to speak, nt by any active decisions on the part of political parties to protect or integrate portions. American culture will assimilate those things that America as a whole finds culturally useful or compelling, as opposed to those things that the immigrant culture might find important to them.
We love your food, so please open an Indian restaurant so we can eat it. However, that Hindu crap about castes? Yeah, that is stupid, so it is going to have to be left at the border. Beatles yes, boiling our meat, no.
The key is that it is American culture that picks and chooses what gets assimilated. We make no promises that what the immigrant culture finds important will be retained.
Okay, fair enough.
My question to you then is: who is in favour of multiculturalism the way you define it?
I mean, I'm sure we can find a few radical academics and a handful of bright-eyed young activists somewhere. But are there any governments anywhere that have adapted multicultural policies along those lines? Are there any major political parties that have done so? Where have societies attempted to be multicultural according to the definition you're using?
Because from where I'm sitting that's not how we do it in the US or Canada, and it doesn't look like they've tried anything along those lines anywhere in Europe either in spite of all the wailing and gnashing of teeth - and now mass murder.
Quote from: Valmy on July 25, 2011, 03:45:54 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 03:41:44 PM
Well, you could say that America is willing to spend a lot of money on its military/security (at the cost of stuff like free education, healthcare or social welfare) to "keep the darkies out" as it were - again, something Europe is not willing to do either.
We do not really strive to keep the darkies out...but we pretend to. Which is classic America really.
But I am not sure even in this charade our military and security forces are raised for that purpose. Where did you get this idea from? :hmm:
Well, I think it is helpful to view modern cultural conflicts in terms of a class warfare. The sophisticated well-off "upper class" vs. the barbaric savage uncouth "lower class". The global City vs. the global Slum. You can keep the lower class down only for so long - you need force or you need to open the society otherwise. Seems like Europe is not willing to do either.
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 04:01:45 PM
Well, I think it is helpful to view modern cultural conflicts in terms of a class warfare. The sophisticated well-off "upper class" vs. the barbaric savage uncouth "lower class". The global City vs. the global Slum. You can keep the lower class down only for so long - you need force or you need to open the society otherwise. Seems like Europe is not willing to do either.
The American green card lottery doesn't really fit your narrative Marty.
I think we Americans were not aware what we doing was multiculturalism so I think that is part of confusion. When we hear the word it sounds like some sort of radical leftist thing people sneer at us for not doing.
If what we are doing is, in fact, what multiculturalism then we are for it!
Quote from: Valmy on July 25, 2011, 03:43:44 PM
Quote from: Jacob on July 25, 2011, 03:39:35 PM
Where we differ seems to be in our analysis of the causes of the poor integration and the likely most effective solutions.
I have a question for you that has puzzled me a bit wth regards to solutions to this Euro issue. If the purpose of Denmark is not as a homeland for the Danish ethnicity what is it? What sort of universal values of Denmark would I have to embrace to be a Dane?
That's the problem. With a few exceptions, most European nationalism must be lame. :P
Quote from: Valmy on July 25, 2011, 03:43:44 PM
I have a question for you that has puzzled me a bit wth regards to solutions to this Euro issue. If the purpose of Denmark is not as a homeland for the Danish ethnicity what is it? What sort of universal values of Denmark would I have to embrace to be a Dane?
Pickled herring, salt licorice, casual drunk sex in high school, an unshakeable faith that Denmark is in fact the best place in the world and Danes are the most tolerant people in the world whatever the facts might indicate.
... that might be a bit inaccurate now though. My Danish identity is a bit outdated, buffeted by the seductive winds of sweet multiculturalism here in Canada as I am.
Quote from: Malthus on July 25, 2011, 03:55:35 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 03:45:36 PM
Quote from: Malthus on July 25, 2011, 01:08:08 PM
Seems to me your stance is that if there is a general rule, no matter how absurd, it ought to be enforced on everyone.
Well, I'm kinda attached to that weird concept of people having equal rights. ;)
Even if the rule in question happens to be silly, you'd support it because of "equal rights"?
Another aspect you are missing is that creating a prohibition that only affects those who actually want to breach it isn't "equality". This sort of argument got trotted out during the gay marriage debate - that having marriage defined as one woman and one man was fully "equal" and did not offend against equality, because gay men and women could of course "get married" - they just had to get married to each other! A variant on the old "rich men and poor men are equally prohibited from living under bridges" sort of argument. ;)
Similarly, saying that animals may be slaughtered in only one way doesn't offend against equality - as long as you overlook the fact that only two groups routinely wish to slaughter in another way.
Yeah I guess you are right. :P
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 03:45:36 PM
Quote from: Malthus on July 25, 2011, 01:08:08 PM
Seems to me your stance is that if there is a general rule, no matter how absurd, it ought to be enforced on everyone.
Well, I'm kinda attached to that weird concept of people having equal rights. ;)
Exactly. It should be illegal for all people to sleep under bridges, whether they are rich or poor.
Similarly, it should be illegal for all people to have immoral sex, whether they are men or women.
... that sort of reasoning, right?
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 25, 2011, 04:03:19 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 04:01:45 PM
Well, I think it is helpful to view modern cultural conflicts in terms of a class warfare. The sophisticated well-off "upper class" vs. the barbaric savage uncouth "lower class". The global City vs. the global Slum. You can keep the lower class down only for so long - you need force or you need to open the society otherwise. Seems like Europe is not willing to do either.
The American green card lottery doesn't really fit your narrative Marty.
Well, I think you are doing both. Actually, historically, you have been quite open - it's only recently that you are moving into positions of more forceful "besieged fortress", as anti-immigrant sentiments demonstrate.
Quote from: Malthus on July 25, 2011, 03:48:23 PMI think to a large extent the current kerfuffle in Europe is about folks there fearing losing their own cultural uniqueness, and seeking some sort of government enforcement of that. Which is more or less the opposite of "multiculturalism".
I don't think it's quite that, actually. I don't see Europeans being worried about losing their own cultural uniqueness.
I think it's rather along the lines of what Minsky said earlier, that there are many people who are profoundly uncomfortable with seeing "the other" up close and having to accept them. Especially if that "other" isn't desperate to become just like the locals.
Quote from: Valmy on July 25, 2011, 04:03:35 PM
I think we Americans were not aware what we doing was multiculturalism so I think that is part of confusion. When we hear the word it sounds like some sort of radical leftist thing people sneer at us for not doing.
If what we are doing is, in fact, what multiculturalism then we are for it!
I think you have to remember that in the Western world you are quite unique because your national identity is a post-enlightenment construct, whereas pretty much everyone else in the West (including the Canadians, since they still have the Queen) is more or less still using the pre-modern elements to define their national identity. In a sense you got it easy (although it's because of your past choices so it is not undeserved easiness).
Quote from: Valmy on July 25, 2011, 04:03:35 PM
I think we Americans were not aware what we doing was multiculturalism so I think that is part of confusion. When we hear the word it sounds like some sort of radical leftist thing people sneer at us for not doing.
If what we are doing is, in fact, what multiculturalism then we are for it!
:hug:
We'll have a few beers.
Then tomorrow we can come back and figure out how best to blow minute differences in the underlying philosophy and implementation completely out of proportion and have a proper shit-flinging argument.
Quote from: Valmy on July 25, 2011, 04:03:35 PM
I think we Americans were not aware what we doing was multiculturalism so I think that is part of confusion. When we hear the word it sounds like some sort of radical leftist thing people sneer at us for not doing.
If what we are doing is, in fact, what multiculturalism then we are for it!
Pretty well, yeah. :lol:
Quote from: Viking on July 25, 2011, 01:14:47 PM
Quote from: Barrister on July 25, 2011, 01:00:46 PM
Tell that to Sarkozy.
In Sarkozy's case each immigrant generation married a frenchman/frenchwoman and assymilating. Anecdotes do not trends make. But, not all immigrants are equal. A Hungarian or a Greek (in Sarkozy's case) are much much easier to assymilate than a turk or a berber. In my case as and Icelander I'm pre-assymilated in Scandinavia as I'm considered one of "us". Europe has through history had a constant flow of people and refugees for centuries, usually moving to a polity more tolerant of their religion/politics. The Mayflower is just a continuation of an old tradition. This tradition is, however, a tradition of moving towards similarity rather than towards difference. Hugenot Protestants would move to Protestant England, English Catholics would move to France.
The concept of multi culturalism was invented in the 1960's in concert with post-modernism and cultural relativism and has a common set of assumptions (yes I know, post-modernism using meta-narratives, how droll). This happened at the same time as a new form of immigrant arrived in western europe, the guest worker. Never intended to be assimilated he was not and still has not.
I'd say the large numbers of Africans and West Indians who came to the UK in the 60s have done quite well, to the point that now, large portions of the white urban working class youth in London have adopted an accent closer to Jamaican than cockney, and listen to music with definite Afro-Carribean origin.
Most immigrant communities from the Indian subcontinent are well integrated too, yet remain distinct.
I don't think most people would complain about Chinatown either, even though the signs are in *gasp* Chinese and you can't find a steak and chips anywhere.
Quote from: Warspite on July 25, 2011, 04:17:41 PM
I'd say the large numbers of Africans and West Indians who came to the UK in the 60s have done quite well, to the point that now, large portions of the white urban working class youth in London have adopted an accent closer to Jamaican than cockney, and listen to music with definite Afro-Carribean origin.
Most immigrant communities from the Indian subcontinent are well integrated too, yet remain distinct.
I don't think most people would complain about Chinatown either, even though the signs are in *gasp* Chinese and you can't find a steak and chips anywhere.
Apparently that's terrifying enough that it can push someone to mass murder, and many others to sympathize with the motivation if not the action.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 25, 2011, 04:00:18 PM
Quote from: Malthus on July 25, 2011, 03:48:23 PM
I think to a large extent the current kerfuffle in Europe is about folks there fearing losing their own cultural uniqueness, and seeking some sort of government enforcement of that. Which is more or less the opposite of "multiculturalism".
I think that's a massive understatement of the issue. I think it's mostly about fears of rising crime from a group of people who are hostile to the core values of the host culture, who are less than Lutheran in their efforts to become productive members of society, and who practice coercion on their own offspring in a way that is anathema to the host culture. It's not about Danes losing their dominance in team handball.
Correct AFAICT. Certainly regarding Sweden.
I discovered proof today that America really hates mulitculturalism and immigration.
$15+ dollars/month per each -one- foreign language channel(excluding Spanish, of course) from the cable company? WTF?
Quote from: Tonitrus on July 25, 2011, 05:05:02 PM
I discovered proof today that America really hates mulitculturalism and immigration.
$15+ dollars/month per each -one- foreign language channel(excluding Spanish, of course) from the cable company? WTF?
Surely you can figure out a way to get Uncle Sam to pay that cost for you? :shifty:
Quote from: Barrister on July 25, 2011, 05:08:55 PM
Quote from: Tonitrus on July 25, 2011, 05:05:02 PM
I discovered proof today that America really hates mulitculturalism and immigration.
$15+ dollars/month per each -one- foreign language channel(excluding Spanish, of course) from the cable company? WTF?
Surely you can figure out a way to get Uncle Sam to pay that cost for you? :shifty:
Not likely.
I just had a horribly tasteless nerdish thought. :P :blush:
So, we have a crazy blond gay guy named Anders, who blows shit up, is a political terrorist and this has something to do with templars? :hmm:
I blame: Bioware. :nerd:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.xtra.ca%2FBinaryContent%2Fstories%2F10%2F24%2F10246%2Fweb%2FS1_DragonAge-Anders.jpg.jpg&hash=1c175eb96f93fee81538da6e57f913fae0b0a44d)(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.worldnewsco.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2011%2F07%2Fanders-breivik-behring.jpg&hash=3818216550ec241ae322e8862a34ba9552e00d22)
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 03:41:44 PM
Quote from: dps on July 25, 2011, 12:39:21 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 09:29:36 AM
Yup. What the conservatives and nationalists do not understand is that you cannot function without immigrants these days, at least not if you want to maintain the kind of quality of living that we have in the West.
I agree with the rest of your post, but I don't buy that argument at all. At least not in an American context--I can't say for sure about Europe, but I doubt it's true there either. The countries that depend on immigrants to maintain the native population's standard of living and lifestyle are the Arab oil states, where almost all the actual physical labor is done by immigrants.
Well, you could say that America is willing to spend a lot of money on its military/security (at the cost of stuff like free education, healthcare or social welfare) to "keep the darkies out" as it were - again, something Europe is not willing to do either.
The fact is that in the modern world, the "brown" immigrants are the previous ages' huddled masses who work for us and are kept outside - we can't do this indefinitely, unless we want to invest a lot in "police" forces, like you guys do (not to mention I am not sure it is a good idea).
I didn't say that we should keep "the darkies" or anyone else out. I said that I find the argument that we need immigrants to keep our economy and standard of living from collapsing to be a fallacy.
Personally, I think that we should allow pretty easy and open legal immigration because it's the right thing to do (and yeah, because it's generally worked out pretty well for us), but I don't think that we
need immigrants,
per se.
Quote from: ulmont on July 25, 2011, 03:48:24 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 25, 2011, 03:27:24 PM
That doesn't sound anything like a promise that what the immigrant finds important will be retained.
It's a promise that the federal government will not substantially burden religion - even through general laws - unless it is the least restrictive means of furthering a compelling governmental interest.
That's a pretty significant promise to allow the immigrant to retain their religion.
It's not limited to immigrants.
My point wasn't that you need immigrants. My point was that immigrants want to get in, and since you are living off their labour (due to the use of cheap labour by your corporations there), they will get eventually pissed off. So either you have to let them in or you have to build walls and man them with people with guns.
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 05:41:29 PM
So either you have to let them in or you have to build walls and man them with people with guns.
We do both.
Quote from: citizen k on July 25, 2011, 05:42:54 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 05:41:29 PM
So either you have to let them in or you have to build walls and man them with people with guns.
We do both.
Which is my point.
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 05:45:59 PM
Quote from: citizen k on July 25, 2011, 05:42:54 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 05:41:29 PM
So either you have to let them in or you have to build walls and man them with people with guns.
We do both.
Which is my point.
So what's the problem? We've got all our bases covered.
Quote from: Jacob on July 25, 2011, 04:08:02 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 03:45:36 PM
Quote from: Malthus on July 25, 2011, 01:08:08 PM
Seems to me your stance is that if there is a general rule, no matter how absurd, it ought to be enforced on everyone.
Well, I'm kinda attached to that weird concept of people having equal rights. ;)
Exactly. It should be illegal for all people to sleep under bridges, whether they are rich or poor.
Similarly, it should be illegal for all people to have immoral sex, whether they are men or women.
... that sort of reasoning, right?
If the interests protected were at all analogous, maybe.
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 05:41:29 PM
My point wasn't that you need immigrants.
Ok, but I specified that the part of your original post that I was responding to was the bit that said, "you cannot function without immigrants these days". I said that I agreed with the rest of your post.
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 05:41:29 PM
My point wasn't that you need immigrants. My point was that immigrants want to get in, and since you are living off their labour (due to the use of cheap labour by your corporations there), they will get eventually pissed off. So either you have to let them in or you have to build walls and man them with people with guns.
The part about people who want to immigrate being unhappy that they can't immigrate I can readily understand, as it's pretty tautological, but the thing about cheap labor making them pissed I don't get.
Are all those millions of Chinese who assemble iPads for us furious about it and desperately wish they were back on the farm planting rice?
Quote from: citizen k on July 25, 2011, 05:48:34 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 05:45:59 PM
Quote from: citizen k on July 25, 2011, 05:42:54 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 05:41:29 PM
So either you have to let them in or you have to build walls and man them with people with guns.
We do both.
Which is my point.
So what's the problem? We've got all our bases covered.
You do. We don't. That's the problem.
BTW Norwegians, local paper had a pic of Prince Harkonen coming out of the memorial service, and his wife looked pretty reasonable. Not up to Princess Tanning Bed standards, but pretty reasonable.
According to his journal, the guy loved Dragon Age.
I want my Islamist terrorists back. They are alien, savage, foreign. This guy is too close for comfort. He is "us".
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 25, 2011, 05:58:17 PM
BTW Norwegians, local paper had a pic of Prince Harkonen coming out of the memorial service, and his wife looked pretty reasonable. Not up to Princess Tanning Bed standards, but pretty reasonable.
Drug chick?
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 05:59:31 PM
According to his journal, the guy loved Dragon Age.
I want my Islamist terrorists back. They are alien, savage, foreign. This guy is too close for comfort. He is "us".
You are only realizing he is homo now? He likes Dexter and True Blood.
I think this calls for a gay crackdown.
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 05:59:31 PM
According to his journal, the guy loved Dragon Age.
I want my Islamist terrorists back. They are alien, savage, foreign. This guy is too close for comfort. He is "us".
I don't know. I kind of like being a radical extremist. I feel like playing Baldur's Gate now.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 25, 2011, 06:04:47 PM
Quote from: The Brain on July 25, 2011, 06:02:07 PM
Drug chick?
No, started with an M.
The Crown Prince marrying a drug-using single mom made Norwegians go "lolwtf" some years back.
Quote from: Valmy on July 25, 2011, 04:03:35 PM
I think we Americans were not aware what we doing was multiculturalism so I think that is part of confusion. When we hear the word it sounds like some sort of radical leftist thing people sneer at us for not doing.
If what we are doing is, in fact, what multiculturalism then we are for it!
Yes and no. It seems to me there are many factors that are different, and not very minute details - unless you consider minute details the actual interplay between an ideal, a rhetoric, a policy, and social behaviour. The United States has had a universalist narrative, an exceptionalist outlook on its own past, and a triumphalist tone over its present - at least when it comes to it being compared with "the rest of the world". Such a thing plays badly, and poorly, in many other countries, where exceptionalist narratives raise the suspicion of über-nationalism on the one hand, and where the adhesion to certain core values are deemed "universal" and therefore impossible to claim "nationally" on the other. People in this thread - and in many other threads - have already demonstrated how difficult it is to define culture and identity - and if such complex notion can only be reduced to "what you eat", then identity is a very superficial concept. The question in many countries is therefore how to integrate, how to make someone from outside "our own".
This is a question the US has had to struggle with in the past - namely with the treatment of the Natives, the end of slavery - and part of the answer was the American Dream. Regardless of its reality or success, it became part of the national narrative at a time when overseas immigrants could be shipped west, where the notion of human dignity or rights in the workplace was low. There is a reason why mafias and organized crime...organized around ethnic lines. Yet when these immigrants arrived, the US was already overwhelmingly an acculturation machine - because, to this day, the main source of population where the British Isles. Now, the US has to deal with a different situation, not necessarily because of the latinos themselves, but, I would contend, with the existence of mass media, different socio-economic context, etc. Yet, it has the historic resources of the reading of its own past.
Canada itself is also in a different situation. I am sure there are tons of reasons to be smug about various Canadian policies, but frankly, I would be prudent in setting it as an example, if only because, thanks to geography. immigration to Canada is highly selective, the problem of illegal immigrant very low, and a bigger magnet for immigration lies due south. In a sense, Trudeau's multiculturalism as a fancy version of "live and let live" served the same role as the inspiring "American values", or "American Dreams". It actually acculturates like the so-called melting pot (though it takes a longer time to do so - about a generation more) but serves as a somewhat unequal mobilizing device. That being said, the whole "reasonable accomodation" debates, however tame they may be, show that similar questions do show up in Canada as a country which can claim "immigrant background" but not really claim the same kind of universalist/exceptionalist vision of its own past (i.e., our debate on Canadian history being dull).
To pick a nit Ucks, I think The American Dream(c) was the marketing catch phrase in the post WWII era, whereas The Land of Opportunity(c) was more in vogue earlier while the west was being settled.
Quote from: Jacob on July 25, 2011, 04:21:32 PM
Quote from: Warspite on July 25, 2011, 04:17:41 PM
I'd say the large numbers of Africans and West Indians who came to the UK in the 60s have done quite well, to the point that now, large portions of the white urban working class youth in London have adopted an accent closer to Jamaican than cockney, and listen to music with definite Afro-Carribean origin.
Most immigrant communities from the Indian subcontinent are well integrated too, yet remain distinct.
I don't think most people would complain about Chinatown either, even though the signs are in *gasp* Chinese and you can't find a steak and chips anywhere.
Apparently that's terrifying enough that it can push someone to mass murder, and many others to sympathize with the motivation if not the action.
I think you both are still discounting the fact that Chinatowns are often scummy.
Quote from: Oexmelin on July 25, 2011, 06:10:53 PM
Yet when these immigrants arrived, the US was already overwhelmingly an acculturation machine - because, to this day, the main source of population where the British Isles. Now, the US has to deal with a different situation, not necessarily because of the latinos themselves, but, I would contend, with the existence of mass media, different socio-economic context, etc. Yet, it has the historic resources of the reading of its own past.
Is that accurate?
Quote from: garbon on July 25, 2011, 06:42:41 PM
Quote from: Oexmelin on July 25, 2011, 06:10:53 PM
Yet when these immigrants arrived, the US was already overwhelmingly an acculturation machine - because, to this day, the main source of population where the British Isles. Now, the US has to deal with a different situation, not necessarily because of the latinos themselves, but, I would contend, with the existence of mass media, different socio-economic context, etc. Yet, it has the historic resources of the reading of its own past.
Is that accurate?
Not even close. In fiscal year 2010, there were 1,042,625 people who became Lawful Permanent Residents (green card) in the United States. Of those, only 88,743 were from Europe generally, and they didn't even bother breaking it out into UK / Ireland immigrants.
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/publications/lpr_fr_2010.pdf
If you just mean "most USians are of British heritage, even now a couple hundred years later," that's wrong too. From the 2006 data, only 46 of 300 million people listed British or Irish as ancestry. Even if you throw in everyone who listed "American," "Scotch-Irish," or "Welsh," you're still well less than half.
http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/ADPTable?_bm=y&-geo_id=01000US&-ds_name=ACS_2006_EST_G00_
I did not mean today's main cultural "self-identifyer", which is what those census track. My guess here is people, when ask to identify themselves, especially when it comes to "German", or "Dutch", or "French" take only one saliant part of their own "identity memory", a very limited one in time, and conveniently forget all the other branches of the genealogic tree. Considering the fact that 65% to 70% of people of the US in 1790 were "British" (and that a not insignificant part of the rest were Africans and therefore not expected to mingle or participate to a large extent), the following years of immigration only represented a drop of foreign water in an already very British - or British-American - sea, which would itself grow mostly by natural growth until the begining of large-scale immigration in the 1840s. But even then, large-scale meant around 5% to 10% of the local population.
Quote from: Oexmelin on July 25, 2011, 08:24:06 PM
I did not mean today's main cultural "self-identifyer", which is what those census track. My guess here is people, when ask to identify themselves, especially when it comes to "German", or "Dutch", or "French" take only one saliant part of their own "identity memory", a very limited one in time, and conveniently forget all the other branches of the genealogic tree. Considering the fact that 65% to 70% of people of the US in 1790 were "British" (and that a not insignificant part of the rest were Africans and therefore not expected to mingle or participate to a large extent), the following years of immigration only represented a drop of foreign water in an already very British - or British-American - sea, which would itself grow mostly by natural growth until the begining of large-scale immigration in the 1840s. But even then, large-scale meant around 5% to 10% of the local population.
I think that discounts the tendency of non-British immigrants to form their own enclaves upon arrival. Acculturation machine couldn't have been too quick on working in those immigrant groups who established themselves in the Midwest for example.
Besides on the African front, is isn't that what this whole discussion is about - individuals that haven't mingled or participated but rather stick with/form their own cultural units that are different from the majority? I do think you can likely discount them though as population did remain relatively static in that group for a while and it is hard to have an effective, separate culture when you are kept as property. -_-
Quote from: Oexmelin on July 25, 2011, 08:24:06 PM
I did not mean today's main cultural "self-identifyer", which is what those census track. My guess here is people, when ask to identify themselves, especially when it comes to "German", or "Dutch", or "French" take only one saliant part of their own "identity memory", a very limited one in time, and conveniently forget all the other branches of the genealogic tree.
...and yet you want to take a different branch of the genealogical tree and call them all British now?
Quote from: ulmont on July 25, 2011, 09:25:56 PM
Quote from: Oexmelin on July 25, 2011, 08:24:06 PM
I did not mean today's main cultural "self-identifyer", which is what those census track. My guess here is people, when ask to identify themselves, especially when it comes to "German", or "Dutch", or "French" take only one saliant part of their own "identity memory", a very limited one in time, and conveniently forget all the other branches of the genealogic tree.
...and yet you want to take a different branch of the genealogical tree and call them all British now?
No, it is to take look at the majority of the branches of a tree and say, "hmm. This tree looks somewhat British".
Take it another way, if you do not like the genealogical approach, or if you want to quibble with my wording: at no time when immigrants came, except perhaps in the early 17th c., was there a "cultural threat" to British customs, English language, Common Law and the like. There always were high pressures -whether social or economical- for newcomers to fit in, and such pressures were borne out of the overwhelmingly British character of the initial colonies. The amount of people who assimilated into the French Huguenots of South Carolina, the Moravians of Pennsylvania or the Dutch of New York is close to irrelevance. The places where such integrations could have happened - mainly Louisiana or the Southwest borderlands - were quickly pressured into adopting what were then seen as the "national / rational / advanced" ways, which coincided with whatever the US was doing at the time. By the time the ideas of "melting pot", and later "multiculturalism" were coined, or invented, or gained popularity, the US could without any problem do away with any idea of genealogy, so entrenched, and thereby, so acculturating, were its own national characteristics. The difficulties of making the slaves "fit" (are they immigrants? are they "native-born"? are they "Americans"?) - and the schemes to "send them back to Africa" - show that this process did not go smoothly.
I am not saying it is a good or a bad thing, or a morally superior one, mind you.
Quote from: Jacob on July 25, 2011, 03:52:39 PM
Quote from: Viking on July 25, 2011, 12:17:10 PMThat might be a reason why MC is so popular in europe. In one stroke you can happily ignore the immigrants and pretend they don't exist because they never get out of their ghettos because they don't assimilate and on the other hand you can be tolerant and multicultural when you bother to think about them while you get outraged at the racist patriachal hierachical society which discriminates these poor people forcing them into these ghettos where their criminal, violent and mysogynistic behavoir can only be explain as a reaction to racism and hegemonic oppression.
If that is what happens and that is how it's explained, that is pretty fucked.
That said, I haven't come across any Europeans who were, you know, actually in favour of multiculturalism the way you're describing it... but I could easily have missed them, being in Canada and all. Still, none of the European media I watch and read defend multiculturalism. The only time I'm come across it in European media it's inevitably when people say things like "multiculturalism is a failure".
Who are the staunch defenders of multiculturalism in Norway and Sweden? And what are their main platforms for propagating their views?
Nobody is arguing for a system that works the way the system works today. Each side has it's own idealized solution that hasn't been tried properly. What matters is the actual effect of the policies of not only the government but of media and ngos as well. But, if I have to appeal to authority on this issue I appeal to Angela Merkel and Nicholas Sarkozy. This is not an attitude found in the socialist and social democratic echo chambers (there are liberal and conservative echo chambers as well).
The issues related to immigration and assimilation do not get discussed because the left calls the right racist in any such discussion. This is what norgy identified as the problem of exclusion. You can't have a discussion with someone who calls you a racist and you are excluded from society if everybody else is either calls you a racist or stands by in silence.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 25, 2011, 05:58:17 PM
BTW Norwegians, local paper had a pic of Prince Harkonen coming out of the memorial service, and his wife looked pretty reasonable. Not up to Princess Tanning Bed standards, but pretty reasonable.
Princess Party's step-brother was one of the dead security guards, so she gets to deal with it badly.
Interview with the dude's father. Sounds crushed. :(
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ct7TKf58sN0
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 04:10:21 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 25, 2011, 04:03:19 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 04:01:45 PM
Well, I think it is helpful to view modern cultural conflicts in terms of a class warfare. The sophisticated well-off "upper class" vs. the barbaric savage uncouth "lower class". The global City vs. the global Slum. You can keep the lower class down only for so long - you need force or you need to open the society otherwise. Seems like Europe is not willing to do either.
The American green card lottery doesn't really fit your narrative Marty.
Well, I think you are doing both. Actually, historically, you have been quite open - it's only recently that you are moving into positions of more forceful "besieged fortress", as anti-immigrant sentiments demonstrate.
We had anti-German, anti-Irish, anti-Asian, anti-Italian, anti-Slav immigration movements before, the current anti-Hispanic movement is just one in a long line and one be the last. 30-40 years from now Hispanics will be protesting the latest wave of immigrants from wherever.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on July 25, 2011, 11:48:18 PM
Interview with the dude's father. Sounds crushed. :(
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ct7TKf58sN0
Damn. Leave the poor guy alone. In some cases, you can't blame the parents.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on July 26, 2011, 12:05:37 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 04:10:21 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 25, 2011, 04:03:19 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 04:01:45 PM
Well, I think it is helpful to view modern cultural conflicts in terms of a class warfare. The sophisticated well-off "upper class" vs. the barbaric savage uncouth "lower class". The global City vs. the global Slum. You can keep the lower class down only for so long - you need force or you need to open the society otherwise. Seems like Europe is not willing to do either.
The American green card lottery doesn't really fit your narrative Marty.
Well, I think you are doing both. Actually, historically, you have been quite open - it's only recently that you are moving into positions of more forceful "besieged fortress", as anti-immigrant sentiments demonstrate.
We had anti-German, anti-Irish, anti-Asian, anti-Italian, anti-Slav immigration movements before, the current anti-Hispanic movement is just one in a long line and one be the last. 30-40 years from now Hispanics will be protesting the latest wave of immigrants from wherever.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.popgunchaos.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2011%2F04%2Fplanet-of-the-apes.jpg&hash=2912cc5bf2ae05481032b5b60e1f45cbdf172e67)
Quote from: Warspite on July 25, 2011, 04:17:41 PM
Quote from: Viking on July 25, 2011, 01:14:47 PM
Quote from: Barrister on July 25, 2011, 01:00:46 PM
Tell that to Sarkozy.
In Sarkozy's case each immigrant generation married a frenchman/frenchwoman and assymilating. Anecdotes do not trends make. But, not all immigrants are equal. A Hungarian or a Greek (in Sarkozy's case) are much much easier to assymilate than a turk or a berber. In my case as and Icelander I'm pre-assymilated in Scandinavia as I'm considered one of "us". Europe has through history had a constant flow of people and refugees for centuries, usually moving to a polity more tolerant of their religion/politics. The Mayflower is just a continuation of an old tradition. This tradition is, however, a tradition of moving towards similarity rather than towards difference. Hugenot Protestants would move to Protestant England, English Catholics would move to France.
The concept of multi culturalism was invented in the 1960's in concert with post-modernism and cultural relativism and has a common set of assumptions (yes I know, post-modernism using meta-narratives, how droll). This happened at the same time as a new form of immigrant arrived in western europe, the guest worker. Never intended to be assimilated he was not and still has not.
I'd say the large numbers of Africans and West Indians who came to the UK in the 60s have done quite well, to the point that now, large portions of the white urban working class youth in London have adopted an accent closer to Jamaican than cockney, and listen to music with definite Afro-Carribean origin.
Most immigrant communities from the Indian subcontinent are well integrated too, yet remain distinct.
I don't think most people would complain about Chinatown either, even though the signs are in *gasp* Chinese and you can't find a steak and chips anywhere.
I'm not sure we are being counted as typical Europeans in this discussion, which is probably correct.
Another group I could mention are the Poles. After WW2 there were 250,000 of them in the UK who did not return to Poland because of the communism. In my childhood there were Poles who were "Poles", but their children who went to school with me were already British............one only really became aware when you had to spell their surname. When I first came to Preston there was a Polish deli here; there was a little old lady who was Polish, her son was aware of his Polish heritage, his children were just English. When we returned to Preston in 2004 the Polish deli was gone and the WW2 Poles completely absorbed, but by then a fresh wave of Poles were coming in. By 2005 a number of Polish delis had sprung up and any corner shop with nous sold Polish beer.
Amazingly enough the tabloid press kicked up a fuss about these essentially trouble-free immigrants :hmm:
Quote from: ulmont on July 25, 2011, 06:53:09 PM
Quote from: garbon on July 25, 2011, 06:42:41 PM
Quote from: Oexmelin on July 25, 2011, 06:10:53 PM
Yet when these immigrants arrived, the US was already overwhelmingly an acculturation machine - because, to this day, the main source of population where the British Isles. Now, the US has to deal with a different situation, not necessarily because of the latinos themselves, but, I would contend, with the existence of mass media, different socio-economic context, etc. Yet, it has the historic resources of the reading of its own past.
Is that accurate?
Not even close. In fiscal year 2010, there were 1,042,625 people who became Lawful Permanent Residents (green card) in the United States. Of those, only 88,743 were from Europe generally, and they didn't even bother breaking it out into UK / Ireland immigrants.
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/publications/lpr_fr_2010.pdf
If you just mean "most USians are of British heritage, even now a couple hundred years later," that's wrong too. From the 2006 data, only 46 of 300 million people listed British or Irish as ancestry. Even if you throw in everyone who listed "American," "Scotch-Irish," or "Welsh," you're still well less than half.
http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/ADPTable?_bm=y&-geo_id=01000US&-ds_name=ACS_2006_EST_G00_
Ok, but now what is it? I'd wager Latin America, right? And it seems like it is causing you guys a major headache.
I guess what Oex is saying is that Europe is getting entirely different type of immigrants - we mostly get Africans and Middle Easterners.
Valmy's earlier point/question about European nation states and their reason to exist if they just let anybody in is a very valid one I think.
That is one of the reasons I want the EU to be more like a United States of Europe. Unless we develop a European identity which worth more to us than our national one, Europe's decline will continue.
The mass murderer's behaviour, manifesto and demand for being in uniform when he appeared before the judge yesterday leads me to lean more and more towards ideology being secondary to a massive narcissistic personality disorder and Messiah complex.
Yesterday, most of Norway protested against the violence by coming together at six pm. I think it's fair to say that the terrorist lost.
Quote from: ulmont on July 25, 2011, 06:53:09 PM
Quote from: garbon on July 25, 2011, 06:42:41 PM
Quote from: Oexmelin on July 25, 2011, 06:10:53 PM
Yet when these immigrants arrived, the US was already overwhelmingly an acculturation machine - because, to this day, the main source of population where the British Isles. Now, the US has to deal with a different situation, not necessarily because of the latinos themselves, but, I would contend, with the existence of mass media, different socio-economic context, etc. Yet, it has the historic resources of the reading of its own past.
Is that accurate?
Not even close. In fiscal year 2010, there were 1,042,625 people who became Lawful Permanent Residents (green card) in the United States. Of those, only 88,743 were from Europe generally, and they didn't even bother breaking it out into UK / Ireland immigrants.
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/publications/lpr_fr_2010.pdf
If you just mean "most USians are of British heritage, even now a couple hundred years later," that's wrong too. From the 2006 data, only 46 of 300 million people listed British or Irish as ancestry. Even if you throw in everyone who listed "American," "Scotch-Irish," or "Welsh," you're still well less than half.
http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/ADPTable?_bm=y&-geo_id=01000US&-ds_name=ACS_2006_EST_G00_
"Most" implies "greater than 50%" and I don't think that the majority of Americans are of English descent (though frankly I'm not 100% certain on that, and it becomes even more of a question if you expand it from "English" to "British"), but I don't think there's any doubt that more Americans have British ancestory than have any other national ancestory. Maybe not a majority, but definately a pluralarity.
The death toll on the island has been lowered to 68? How did that mistake happen?
Also, the guy apparently is a fan of Japanese xenophobia.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/07/26/us-norway-japan-idUSTRE76P1AO20110726
Quote from: jimmy olsen on July 26, 2011, 03:19:01 AM
The death toll on the island has been lowered to 68? How did that mistake happen?
Some victims got better.
Quote from: Martinus on July 26, 2011, 02:11:20 AM
Quote from: ulmont on July 25, 2011, 06:53:09 PM
Quote from: garbon on July 25, 2011, 06:42:41 PM
Quote from: Oexmelin on July 25, 2011, 06:10:53 PM
Yet when these immigrants arrived, the US was already overwhelmingly an acculturation machine - because, to this day, the main source of population where the British Isles. Now, the US has to deal with a different situation, not necessarily because of the latinos themselves, but, I would contend, with the existence of mass media, different socio-economic context, etc. Yet, it has the historic resources of the reading of its own past.
Is that accurate?
Not even close. In fiscal year 2010, there were 1,042,625 people who became Lawful Permanent Residents (green card) in the United States. Of those, only 88,743 were from Europe generally, and they didn't even bother breaking it out into UK / Ireland immigrants.
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/publications/lpr_fr_2010.pdf
If you just mean "most USians are of British heritage, even now a couple hundred years later," that's wrong too. From the 2006 data, only 46 of 300 million people listed British or Irish as ancestry. Even if you throw in everyone who listed "American," "Scotch-Irish," or "Welsh," you're still well less than half.
http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/ADPTable?_bm=y&-geo_id=01000US&-ds_name=ACS_2006_EST_G00_
Ok, but now what is it? I'd wager Latin America, right? And it seems like it is causing you guys a major headache.
I guess what Oex is saying is that Europe is getting entirely different type of immigrants - we mostly get Africans and Middle Easterners.
Mainly for ulmont: my understanding of what he was saying was that genes that arrived from the British Isles still constitute the majority of all genes in the United States. This strikes me as plausible, and likely true.
Is it possible to ascribe genes to a country?
Quote from: Gups on July 26, 2011, 03:29:01 AM
Is it possible to ascribe genes to a country?
Only if you take an arbitrary starting point for tracking them, as I am. ;)
Which is necessary; if you don't choose a starting point, we're all Congolese, or if you want to be really hard, we're from a tidewater somewhere lost to time.
Quote from: Norgy on July 26, 2011, 02:55:27 AM
Yesterday, most of Norway protested against the violence by coming together at six pm.
:mellow:
Quote from: Ideologue on July 26, 2011, 03:29:33 AM
Quote from: Gups on July 26, 2011, 03:29:01 AM
Is it possible to ascribe genes to a country?
Only if you take an arbitrary starting point for tracking them, as I am. ;)
Which is necessary; if you don't choose a starting point, we're all Congolese, or if you want to be really hard, we're from a tidewater somewhere lost to time.
Out of Africa: Complete Replacement has been disproved!
Paleoanthropoly hijack!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WP2_fGKHExk
Quote from: jimmy olsen on July 26, 2011, 03:19:01 AM
The death toll on the island has been lowered to 68? How did that mistake happen?
I wouldn't say that not shooting 20 people is a "mistake". :rolleyes:
Quote from: Martinus on July 26, 2011, 03:42:13 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on July 26, 2011, 03:19:01 AM
The death toll on the island has been lowered to 68? How did that mistake happen?
I wouldn't say that not shooting 20 people is a "mistake". :rolleyes:
^_^
Quote from: Gups on July 26, 2011, 03:29:01 AM
Is it possible to ascribe genes to a country?
Gene Hackman - USA
Gene Kelly - USA
Gene Roddenberry - USA
Gene Wilder - USA
etc.
:mellow:
All Genes seem to be American.
Quote from: Martinus on July 26, 2011, 03:42:13 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on July 26, 2011, 03:19:01 AM
The death toll on the island has been lowered to 68? How did that mistake happen?
I wouldn't say that not shooting 20 people is a "mistake". :rolleyes:
You know what I meant. <_<
Quote from: Martinus on July 26, 2011, 03:45:52 AM
Quote from: Gups on July 26, 2011, 03:29:01 AM
Is it possible to ascribe genes to a country?
Gene Hackman - USA
Gene Kelly - USA
Gene Roddenberry - USA
Gene Wilder - USA
etc.
:mellow:
All Genes seem to be American.
Gene Simmons - Israel
Quote from: Viking on July 26, 2011, 03:50:23 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 26, 2011, 03:45:52 AM
Quote from: Gups on July 26, 2011, 03:29:01 AM
Is it possible to ascribe genes to a country?
Gene Hackman - USA
Gene Kelly - USA
Gene Roddenberry - USA
Gene Wilder - USA
etc.
:mellow:
All Genes seem to be American.
Gene Simmons - Israel
So all genes are either American or Jewish. Figures.
Quote from: Norgy on July 26, 2011, 02:55:27 AM
The mass murderer's behaviour, manifesto and demand for being in uniform when he appeared before the judge yesterday leads me to lean more and more towards ideology being secondary to a massive narcissistic personality disorder and Messiah complex.
I get this impression, as well. There were a ton of rather well done headshots of him floating around within 48 hours of the massacre, and I read (somewhere, do not remember details) that he specifically sought these services out for just this occasion. Endless vanity and narcissism.
Quote from: Queequeg on July 26, 2011, 03:54:21 AM
Quote from: Norgy on July 26, 2011, 02:55:27 AM
The mass murderer's behaviour, manifesto and demand for being in uniform when he appeared before the judge yesterday leads me to lean more and more towards ideology being secondary to a massive narcissistic personality disorder and Messiah complex.
I get this impression, as well. There were a ton of rather well done headshots of him floating around within 48 hours of the massacre, and I read (somewhere, do not remember details) that he specifically sought these services out for just this occasion. Endless vanity and narcissism.
Well, he's gay. :ph34r:
Edit: Incidentally, was his sexuality confirmed? I have not seen it mentioned in any news, except in anonymous internet comments. I understand he also used to have a girlfriend at some point (they interviewed some Pole who used to work with him 8 years ago or so in some telecom company's office).
Quote from: Martinus on July 26, 2011, 03:52:42 AM
Quote from: Viking on July 26, 2011, 03:50:23 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 26, 2011, 03:45:52 AM
Quote from: Gups on July 26, 2011, 03:29:01 AM
Is it possible to ascribe genes to a country?
Gene Hackman - USA
Gene Kelly - USA
Gene Roddenberry - USA
Gene Wilder - USA
etc.
:mellow:
All Genes seem to be American.
Gene Simmons - Israel
So all genes are either American or Jewish. Figures.
Do Yevgeniys count?
Quote from: Martinus on July 26, 2011, 03:55:05 AM
Quote from: Queequeg on July 26, 2011, 03:54:21 AM
Quote from: Norgy on July 26, 2011, 02:55:27 AM
The mass murderer's behaviour, manifesto and demand for being in uniform when he appeared before the judge yesterday leads me to lean more and more towards ideology being secondary to a massive narcissistic personality disorder and Messiah complex.
I get this impression, as well. There were a ton of rather well done headshots of him floating around within 48 hours of the massacre, and I read (somewhere, do not remember details) that he specifically sought these services out for just this occasion. Endless vanity and narcissism.
Well, he's gay. :ph34r:
Edit: Incidentally, was his sexuality confirmed? I have not seen it mentioned in any news, except in anonymous internet comments.
:bleeding:
Quote from: Ideologue on July 26, 2011, 03:56:01 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 26, 2011, 03:52:42 AM
Quote from: Viking on July 26, 2011, 03:50:23 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 26, 2011, 03:45:52 AM
Quote from: Gups on July 26, 2011, 03:29:01 AM
Is it possible to ascribe genes to a country?
Gene Hackman - USA
Gene Kelly - USA
Gene Roddenberry - USA
Gene Wilder - USA
etc.
:mellow:
All Genes seem to be American.
Gene Simmons - Israel
So all genes are either American or Jewish. Figures.
Do Yevgeniys count?
Only because they have foreign name, it does not mean they are mathematically illiterate. :rolleyes:
Haw. Out of curiosity, is that also the Pole version of Eugene?
Quote from: The Brain on July 26, 2011, 03:57:20 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 26, 2011, 03:55:05 AM
Quote from: Queequeg on July 26, 2011, 03:54:21 AM
Quote from: Norgy on July 26, 2011, 02:55:27 AM
The mass murderer's behaviour, manifesto and demand for being in uniform when he appeared before the judge yesterday leads me to lean more and more towards ideology being secondary to a massive narcissistic personality disorder and Messiah complex.
I get this impression, as well. There were a ton of rather well done headshots of him floating around within 48 hours of the massacre, and I read (somewhere, do not remember details) that he specifically sought these services out for just this occasion. Endless vanity and narcissism.
Well, he's gay. :ph34r:
Edit: Incidentally, was his sexuality confirmed? I have not seen it mentioned in any news, except in anonymous internet comments.
:bleeding:
Are you doing a garbon? This morning your posts were:
:mellow:
^_^
and
:bleeding:
Quote from: Martinus on July 26, 2011, 03:58:48 AM
Quote from: The Brain on July 26, 2011, 03:57:20 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 26, 2011, 03:55:05 AM
Quote from: Queequeg on July 26, 2011, 03:54:21 AM
Quote from: Norgy on July 26, 2011, 02:55:27 AM
The mass murderer's behaviour, manifesto and demand for being in uniform when he appeared before the judge yesterday leads me to lean more and more towards ideology being secondary to a massive narcissistic personality disorder and Messiah complex.
I get this impression, as well. There were a ton of rather well done headshots of him floating around within 48 hours of the massacre, and I read (somewhere, do not remember details) that he specifically sought these services out for just this occasion. Endless vanity and narcissism.
Well, he's gay. :ph34r:
Edit: Incidentally, was his sexuality confirmed? I have not seen it mentioned in any news, except in anonymous internet comments.
:bleeding:
Are you doing a garbon? This morning your posts were:
:mellow:
^_^
and
:bleeding:
:hmm:
Quote from: Ideologue on July 26, 2011, 03:58:18 AM
Haw. Out of curiosity, is that also the Pole version of Eugene?
No. Polish is "Eugeniusz". If you want a Polish version of a name, you have to take an English name, mispspell it, and add a W or CZ or SZ somewhere. :P
Quote from: Martinus on July 26, 2011, 03:59:52 AM
Quote from: Ideologue on July 26, 2011, 03:58:18 AM
Haw. Out of curiosity, is that also the Pole version of Eugene?
No. Polish is "Eugeniusz". If you want a Polish version of a name, you have to take an English name, mispspell it, and add a W or CZ or SZ somewhere. :P
Sorry to ask a boring-ass followup, but do you guys have the "yeh" sound or is an E pronounced "eh" or "ee" (although in that case, however, I'd assume a long "u"?
I know that Polish isn't that closely related to Russian, so it's probably like assuming that Romanian is pronounced the same as French.
It's related closely enough that I can understand a lot of it knowing Russian. :P
Quote from: Ideologue on July 26, 2011, 04:04:33 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 26, 2011, 03:59:52 AM
Quote from: Ideologue on July 26, 2011, 03:58:18 AM
Haw. Out of curiosity, is that also the Pole version of Eugene?
No. Polish is "Eugeniusz". If you want a Polish version of a name, you have to take an English name, mispspell it, and add a W or CZ or SZ somewhere. :P
Sorry to ask a boring-ass followup, but do you guys have the "yeh" sound or is an E pronounced "eh" or "ee" (although in that case, however, I'd assume a long "u"?
I know that Polish isn't that closely related to Russian, so it's probably like assuming that Romanian is pronounced the same as French.
E is pronounced like "eh" - similar to the "e" in "bed".
We have the "yeh" sound but it's achieved by putting "e" behind "i" or "j" (e.g. "pies" - meaning a "dog" or "jechać" meaning "to ride"). The sound is slightly different between both, but in principle you get "ie" when it follows a consonant and "je" when it is at the beginning of a word or after a vowel (but sometimes there can be "je" after a consonant, when the word is built from another word with "je" at the beginning - e.g. "wjechać" meaning "to ride into" or "zjechać" meaning "to ride down" or "najechać" meaning "to ride onto" or "invade").
Oh tasteful and helpful. Glenn Beck has likened the Utøya youth camp to the Hitler Youth.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/jul/26/glenn-beck-norwegian-dead-hitler (http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/jul/26/glenn-beck-norwegian-dead-hitler)
Quote"There was a shooting at a political camp, which sounds a little like the Hitler youth, or, whatever. I mean, who does a camp for kids that's all about politics. Disturbing," said Beck on his syndicated radio show.
I suppose he missed the point about exactly who was armed and in uniform.
Breivik's public postings from document.no in english, translated by a professional.
http://passagenjerusalem.blogspot.com/2011/07/breivik-files.html
if anybody is interested.
Quote from: Brazen on July 26, 2011, 05:41:56 AM
Oh tasteful and helpful. Glenn Beck has likened the Utøya youth camp to the Hitler Youth.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/jul/26/glenn-beck-norwegian-dead-hitler (http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/jul/26/glenn-beck-norwegian-dead-hitler)
Quote"There was a shooting at a political camp, which sounds a little like the Hitler youth, or, whatever. I mean, who does a camp for kids that's all about politics. Disturbing," said Beck on his syndicated radio show.
:lol:
Meanwhile, a number of more crazy Polish pundits and bloggers associated with the Law and Justice party (Cameron's buddies from the EU Parliament) denounced the shooting as a case of "zionist freemason terrorism".
Polish rightwingers > Glenn Beck. :yeah:
Quote from: Norgy on July 26, 2011, 05:42:38 AM
I suppose he missed the point about exactly who was armed and in uniform.
He displays journalist integrity worthy of a Languish poster (i.e. misread, misinterpret and misunderstand facts and then say something outrageous). :P
Quote from: Martinus on July 26, 2011, 06:20:40 AM
Quote from: Brazen on July 26, 2011, 05:41:56 AM
Oh tasteful and helpful. Glenn Beck has likened the Utøya youth camp to the Hitler Youth.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/jul/26/glenn-beck-norwegian-dead-hitler (http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/jul/26/glenn-beck-norwegian-dead-hitler)
Quote"There was a shooting at a political camp, which sounds a little like the Hitler youth, or, whatever. I mean, who does a camp for kids that's all about politics. Disturbing," said Beck on his syndicated radio show.
:lol:
Meanwhile, a number of more crazy Polish pundits and bloggers associated with the Law and Justice party (Cameron's buddies from the EU Parliament) denounced the shooting as a case of "zionist freemason terrorism".
Polish rightwingers > Glenn Beck. :yeah:
Let's see.
Zionist? Yes. Check.
Freemason? Yes. Check.
Terrorist? Yes. Check.
:hmm:
Quote from: Slargos on July 26, 2011, 06:26:28 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 26, 2011, 06:20:40 AM
Quote from: Brazen on July 26, 2011, 05:41:56 AM
Oh tasteful and helpful. Glenn Beck has likened the Utøya youth camp to the Hitler Youth.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/jul/26/glenn-beck-norwegian-dead-hitler (http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/jul/26/glenn-beck-norwegian-dead-hitler)
Quote"There was a shooting at a political camp, which sounds a little like the Hitler youth, or, whatever. I mean, who does a camp for kids that's all about politics. Disturbing," said Beck on his syndicated radio show.
:lol:
Meanwhile, a number of more crazy Polish pundits and bloggers associated with the Law and Justice party (Cameron's buddies from the EU Parliament) denounced the shooting as a case of "zionist freemason terrorism".
Polish rightwingers > Glenn Beck. :yeah:
Let's see.
Zionist? Yes. Check.
Freemason? Yes. Check.
Terrorist? Yes. Check.
:hmm:
Still, it is rather disingenuous to mention this as the *only* descriptor of his political stances.
Oh, they also said he was pro-gay and anti-fascist. :P
Yes, and yes. :hmm:
"6 million Jews murdered by a radical vegetarian non-smoker". :P
Quote from: Slargos on July 26, 2011, 06:35:07 AM
Yes, and yes. :hmm:
You should come to live in Poland. You would be finally free to be true to your heart and be a lilly white bleeding heart liberal (the position you have here if you think Poles may have been indirectly involved in getting some Jews killed during Holocaust, for example). We also have about 20,000 Muslims (out of nearly 40,000,000 Poles), most of whom are assimilated ex-tartars who settled here in 18th century.
Sounds like a great prospect save for approximately 40 million reasons. :hmm:
Quote from: Martinus on July 26, 2011, 03:58:48 AM
Quote from: The Brain on July 26, 2011, 03:57:20 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 26, 2011, 03:55:05 AM
Quote from: Queequeg on July 26, 2011, 03:54:21 AM
Quote from: Norgy on July 26, 2011, 02:55:27 AM
The mass murderer's behaviour, manifesto and demand for being in uniform when he appeared before the judge yesterday leads me to lean more and more towards ideology being secondary to a massive narcissistic personality disorder and Messiah complex.
I get this impression, as well. There were a ton of rather well done headshots of him floating around within 48 hours of the massacre, and I read (somewhere, do not remember details) that he specifically sought these services out for just this occasion. Endless vanity and narcissism.
Well, he's gay. :ph34r:
Edit: Incidentally, was his sexuality confirmed? I have not seen it mentioned in any news, except in anonymous internet comments.
:bleeding:
Are you doing a garbon? This morning your posts were:
:mellow:
^_^
and
:bleeding:
:bleeding: was really the only appropriate response to that post of yours, if one felt compelled to respond.
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 04:10:21 PM
Well, I think you are doing both. Actually, historically, you have been quite open - it's only recently that you are moving into positions of more forceful "besieged fortress", as anti-immigrant sentiments demonstrate.
Yeah we had plenty of anti-immigrant sentiments back then to and rather shrill ones.
Nothing has really changed. I certainly have not noticed any "besieged fortress" stuff going on and I live in a state with the largest Latino population around.
Quote from: Martinus on July 26, 2011, 02:11:20 AM
Ok, but now what is it? I'd wager Latin America, right? And it seems like it is causing you guys a major headache.
Not sure I understand which question you're asking. The single largest ancestry people told the census in 2006 was "German."
If you mean, "where are the immigrants from now?"...as to Lawful Permanent Residents, the top 5 countries in 2010 (which, btw, was in the first link I posted) were Mexico, China, India, the Phillipines, and the Dominican Republic. Regionally, Asia, then North America, then Africa, Europe, South America, Oceania, and Unknown.
When illegal immigrants are tossed in (which makes the numbers somewhat more suspect), Mexico wins by several million.
Quote from: Martinus on July 26, 2011, 06:40:11 AM
"6 million Jews murdered by a mustachioed radical vegetarian non-smoking tee totaling dog lover". :P
fyp
I like the fact the guy drew up "Timmay maps". The Western part of Syria is given to "Assyrians". I'm assuming he's referring to Syriac Christians, but they live on the other side of the country. On part of the Middle East is awarded to "Various christian groups". Really weird.
Quote from: Razgovory on July 26, 2011, 08:18:18 AM
I like the fact the guy drew up "Timmay maps". The Western part of Syria is given to "Assyrians". I'm assuming he's referring to Syriac Christians, but they live on the other side of the country. On part of the Middle East is awarded to "Various christian groups". Really weird.
Are you hinting that the guy is not exactly what we call "sane"? :hmm:
Quote from: Razgovory on July 26, 2011, 08:18:18 AM
I like the fact the guy drew up "Timmay maps". The Western part of Syria is given to "Assyrians". I'm assuming he's referring to Syriac Christians, but they live on the other side of the country. On part of the Middle East is awarded to "Various christian groups". Really weird.
I suggest an immediate round-up of alt-history types. Better safe than sorry. :hmm:
Quote from: Solmyr on July 26, 2011, 05:17:34 AM
It's related closely enough that I can understand a lot of it knowing Russian. :P
:yes: If you know Russian and you know English, you can guesstimate a lot of what something in Polish says.
Quote from: Malthus on July 26, 2011, 08:23:53 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on July 26, 2011, 08:18:18 AM
I like the fact the guy drew up "Timmay maps". The Western part of Syria is given to "Assyrians". I'm assuming he's referring to Syriac Christians, but they live on the other side of the country. On part of the Middle East is awarded to "Various christian groups". Really weird.
I suggest an immediate round-up of alt-history types. Better safe than sorry. :hmm:
Indeed. Round up the usual suspects.
Quote from: Viking on July 26, 2011, 05:48:04 AM
Breivik's public postings from document.no in english, translated by a professional.
http://passagenjerusalem.blogspot.com/2011/07/breivik-files.html
if anybody is interested.
Not interested.
Committing mass murder is not a way to convince me that a person's ravings should hold any interest.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 26, 2011, 09:14:25 AM
Quote from: Viking on July 26, 2011, 05:48:04 AM
Breivik's public postings from document.no in english, translated by a professional.
http://passagenjerusalem.blogspot.com/2011/07/breivik-files.html
if anybody is interested.
Not interested.
Committing mass murder is not a way to convince me that a person's ravings should hold any interest.
Yes, but that's not to say they shouldn't be read for clues, indications of which might help foil future outrages ?
Or if an 'objective' view is possible of what outside opinions and forces influenced him, then these might be useful in challenging the hate that some spew into the public arena ?
Quote from: Razgovory on July 26, 2011, 08:18:18 AM
I like the fact the guy drew up "Timmay maps". The Western part of Syria is given to "Assyrians". I'm assuming he's referring to Syriac Christians, but they live on the other side of the country. On part of the Middle East is awarded to "Various christian groups". Really weird.
:lol:
Damn Timmays. :mad:
Quote from: Valmy on July 26, 2011, 07:48:39 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 25, 2011, 04:10:21 PM
Well, I think you are doing both. Actually, historically, you have been quite open - it's only recently that you are moving into positions of more forceful "besieged fortress", as anti-immigrant sentiments demonstrate.
Yeah we had plenty of anti-immigrant sentiments back then to and rather shrill ones.
Nothing has really changed. I certainly have not noticed any "besieged fortress" stuff going on and I live in a state with the largest Latino population around.
Well, the Arizona anti-immigrant laws, the ideas of building a wall across the Mexican border or the whole "minutemen" movement had me convinced it is something unusual or extraordinary, but I'd take your word for it.
Quote from: Tamas on July 26, 2011, 08:19:41 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on July 26, 2011, 08:18:18 AM
I like the fact the guy drew up "Timmay maps". The Western part of Syria is given to "Assyrians". I'm assuming he's referring to Syriac Christians, but they live on the other side of the country. On part of the Middle East is awarded to "Various christian groups". Really weird.
Are you hinting that the guy is not exactly what we call "sane"? :hmm:
Well, it was said he is sane in the sense of not being a raving lunatic. I think he suffers from severe psychopathy/narcissism, though.
Quote from: mongers on July 26, 2011, 09:19:31 AM
Yes, but that's not to say they shouldn't be read for clues, indications of which might help foil future outrages ?
Or if an 'objective' view is possible of what outside opinions and forces influenced him, then these might be useful in challenging the hate that some spew into the public arena ?
The authorities should read them, for evidence of possible collarborators and so on.
But whatever nutty ideology this guy is promoting is secondary. He is a killer. He wanted to kill and he enjoyed doing it and attention he gets for it. If his life had developed differently or at a different time he could have done the killing in support for any number of things.
Quote from: mongers on July 26, 2011, 09:19:31 AM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 26, 2011, 09:14:25 AM
Quote from: Viking on July 26, 2011, 05:48:04 AM
Breivik's public postings from document.no in english, translated by a professional.
http://passagenjerusalem.blogspot.com/2011/07/breivik-files.html
if anybody is interested.
Not interested.
Committing mass murder is not a way to convince me that a person's ravings should hold any interest.
Yes, but that's not to say they shouldn't be read for clues, indications of which might help foil future outrages ?
Or if an 'objective' view is possible of what outside opinions and forces influenced him, then these might be useful in challenging the hate that some spew into the public arena ?
Apparently, he mentions the three parties that ruled Poland during 2006-2007 as his "ideological allies". These are the guys who are David Cameron's allies in the EU Parliament.
Just sayin'.
I tend to agree that the guy's actual politics are immaterial. Although he seemingly stands for a lot of stuff I loathe, and the temptation to rub in guilt by association is high (hello, Slargos! ;) ), it ought to be resisted - he's a killer, he seemingly enjoys the attention that killing gave him, he could have been killing for any one of a number of different ideologies.
Quote from: Malthus on July 26, 2011, 09:39:25 AM
I tend to agree that the guy's actual politics are immaterial. Although he seemingly stands for a lot of stuff I loathe, and the temptation to rub in guilt by association is high (hello, Slargos! ;) ), it ought to be resisted - he's a killer, he seemingly enjoys the attention that killing gave him, he could have been killing for any one of a number of different ideologies.
You just say that to protect your freemason zionist brethren.
Quote from: Martinus on July 26, 2011, 09:41:57 AM
Quote from: Malthus on July 26, 2011, 09:39:25 AM
I tend to agree that the guy's actual politics are immaterial. Although he seemingly stands for a lot of stuff I loathe, and the temptation to rub in guilt by association is high (hello, Slargos! ;) ), it ought to be resisted - he's a killer, he seemingly enjoys the attention that killing gave him, he could have been killing for any one of a number of different ideologies.
You just say that to protect your freemason zionist brethren.
No such thing!
[*makes secret handsign*]
The biological father has stated that he feels "shame" in the interview.
Fucking attention whore.
If the information released so far is correct, the last time ABB even saw his biological father was 15-16 years ago, and the only thing this "father" should possibly feel any shame over is abandoning his children.
I don't get this whole "shame" hysteria. SD should feel "shame" because they are "also nationalists" according to Aftonbladet.
The security police in Norway should feel "shame" and take "self-criticism" because they didn't detect this guy. I saw the female chief of the PST attempt to defend herself with a low voice and some very clear hand-wringing. What the fuck is wrong with these people. "Oh, we are so sorry." Fuck you. Tell those fucking journalists where they can shove it. "self-criticism" indeed. "Oh, he bought chemicals for the grand total of $20 from a polish webstore. That should've popped up on someone's radar! Heads need to roll!"
FRP needs to feel shame over the fact that this guy was a member.
No one questions the race-biological institutes and forced sterilization programs the Social Democrats ran. Apparently that's nothing to be ashamed of.
Decades of physical, psychological and general rights abuse of the children of german soldiers? They're all dead anyway, so we don't need to talk about it.
Sometimes I wonder if they don't all deserve this and more.
Quote from: Slargos on July 26, 2011, 09:48:43 AM
Sometimes I wonder if they don't all deserve this and more.
Tell us how you really feel, Slarg.
Btw, his father said more. He said he should have killed himself instead. I thought it was very sad, not something to be angry about.
Quote from: Martinus on July 26, 2011, 09:51:02 AM
Quote from: Slargos on July 26, 2011, 09:48:43 AM
Sometimes I wonder if they don't all deserve this and more.
Tell us how you really feel, Slarg.
Btw, his father said more. He said he should have killed himself instead. I thought it was very sad, not something to be angry about.
What right does he even have to this attention whoring? If he hasn't spoken to his son since he was an adolescent, what fucking use is his insight?
Quote from: Slargos on July 26, 2011, 09:52:30 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 26, 2011, 09:51:02 AM
Quote from: Slargos on July 26, 2011, 09:48:43 AM
Sometimes I wonder if they don't all deserve this and more.
Tell us how you really feel, Slarg.
Btw, his father said more. He said he should have killed himself instead. I thought it was very sad, not something to be angry about.
What right does he even have to this attention whoring? If he hasn't spoken to his son since he was an adolescent, what fucking use is his insight?
It generates revenue & traffic for the journalist employers that tracked down the father & are now stalking him in his France country house.
Anyway, I think every culture needs some sort of self-cleansing ritual to deal with a situation like this. I guess just talking about shame and doing a lot of handwringing is still better than invading two countries. :P
Quote from: Slargos on July 26, 2011, 09:52:30 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 26, 2011, 09:51:02 AM
Quote from: Slargos on July 26, 2011, 09:48:43 AM
Sometimes I wonder if they don't all deserve this and more.
Tell us how you really feel, Slarg.
Btw, his father said more. He said he should have killed himself instead. I thought it was very sad, not something to be angry about.
What right does he even have to this attention whoring? If he hasn't spoken to his son since he was an adolescent, what fucking use is his insight?
The police is protecting his house in Southern France, because it is being swarmed by journalists and vigilantes. Hardly "attention whoring" on his part.
Quote from: Martinus on July 26, 2011, 09:57:42 AM
Quote from: Slargos on July 26, 2011, 09:52:30 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 26, 2011, 09:51:02 AM
Quote from: Slargos on July 26, 2011, 09:48:43 AM
Sometimes I wonder if they don't all deserve this and more.
Tell us how you really feel, Slarg.
Btw, his father said more. He said he should have killed himself instead. I thought it was very sad, not something to be angry about.
What right does he even have to this attention whoring? If he hasn't spoken to his son since he was an adolescent, what fucking use is his insight?
The police is protecting his house in Southern France, because it is being swarmed by journalists and vigilantes. Hardly "attention whoring" on his part.
The histrionics are.
"You know what? I haven't talked to him for 15 years. I abandoned him as a child. I have nothing to say." would've been a fine fucking answer.
Starting to blubber about how "it would have been better if he'd killed himself instead", my GOD. :rolleyes:
Apparently he was kicked out of the NDL (norwegian version of the EDL) for being too extreme.
Convicted terrorist Lars Gule (PFLP member who served prison in lebanon) managed to get on TV to criticize the guy. I didn't see the tv segment so I'm not sure he criticized him for killing innocent civilians or for not killing innocent israeli civilians.
Quote from: Slargos on July 26, 2011, 09:48:43 AM
The biological father has stated that he feels "shame" in the interview.
Fucking attention whore.
If the information released so far is correct, the last time ABB even saw his biological father was 15-16 years ago, and the only thing this "father" should possibly feel any shame over is abandoning his children.
He lost custody in a divorce. Not his fault.
Interesting take, not sure I buy it. :hmm:
http://www.realclearworld.com/articles/2011/07/26/consequences_of_a_moderated_far_right_in_europe_99603.html
QuoteConsequences of a Moderated Far Right in Europe
By Stratfor
Norwegian police indicated Monday that they believe Anders Behring Breivik, suspected of Friday's bomb attack in Oslo and shooting at a youth camp outside the city, acted alone. This is despite his claim to investigators that he is a member of a far-right network of "Crusader" cells across Europe.
The attack in Norway shocked Europe at a time when the Continent usually shuts down for a month due to holidays. Breivik's stated motive - to counter policies by the Norwegian Labor Party that favor multiculturalism - has prompted debate over whether the attack is a result of an anti-immigrant atmosphere that has permeated the Continent over the past decade and has intensified since the 2008-2009 recession.
Europe's turn toward anti-immigrant policies is not surprising and was forecast by STRATFOR three years ago. Europe has struggled to assimilate and incorporate religious and ethnic minorities. After World War II, and especially since the 1958 Notting Hill and Nottingham Riots in the United Kingdom, European populations have struggled to cope with the influx of non-European migrants. These tensions are exacerbated during times of economic pain, when anti-immigrant rhetoric becomes fair game for both center-right and center-left parties.
The post-2008 economic crisis has played out largely the same way. Leaders of France, Germany and the United Kingdom have in recent months repudiated their nations' multicultural policies. Anti-immigrant rhetoric has entered the mainstream. In many ways this is the result of the rise in popularity of parties from the far right of the political spectrum. Across Europe - in France, the United Kingdom, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Finland, Switzerland, Austria, Italy, Hungary and Greece - the far right has become an acceptable electoral choice for European citizens. As such, established political parties - especially the center-right parties most afraid of losing votes to the far right - have sought to adopt anti-multiculturalism rhetoric as their own. Furthermore, anti-immigrant rhetoric can be used to distract Europe's populations from necessary budget cuts and austerity measures.
Therefore, an anti-immigrant atmosphere prevails in Europe and far-right parties have undeniably entered the mainstream in a number of countries. This may have contributed to the attacks in Norway, but not because violence against immigrants or against center-left parties who favor multiculturalism is seen as acceptable, nor because the atmosphere itself somehow breeds extremism.
In fact, one of the greatest contributing factors to the attacks in Norway - aside from Norway's unique approach to law enforcement, combined with the attacker's capabilities - may very well be the process by which the far right attained legitimacy. During this process, many far-right parties in Europe made an attempt to become part of the mainstream. These parties did away with Holocaust denial and overt racism. They instead focused their commentary on economic issues, problems with the eurozone, EU encroachment on state sovereignty, and defense of Europe's liberal values against illiberal immigrants. Dutch politician Geert Wilders has provided a largely successful model for this transformation. He places his greatest emphasis on the idea that intolerant and illiberal Muslim immigrants have to be considered incompatible with preservation of a tolerant and liberal Dutch society.
Wilders is joined by leader of the French National Front Marine Le Pen, who has distanced herself from her father Jean-Marie, an overt anti-Semite. The younger Le Pen has instead penned white papers on the eurozone crisis and proven adept at debating economic and legal issues with mainstream center-right opponents. She is now a serious challenger to incumbent French President Nicolas Sarkozy in the 2012 elections.
As part of their makeover, many of Europe's most powerful far-right parties have had to clean up their rhetoric and act as members of the mainstream. They have also had to jettison their most extremist elements. This process has left many, including Breivik, the suspect in the Oslo attack, on the outside looking in. However extreme their notions, these parties had a moderating influence on their most extreme members, who are no longer allowed to participate in clubs, associations and parties because they would compromise far-right parties' efforts to gain political legitimacy. In this process, these individuals have been left without a group in which to belong.
This process is not unique. It occurred in Europe in the late 1960s when a slew of Marxists and Communists decided to eschew international revolution, mainly due to the combined effects of the 1956 Hungarian Uprising and the 1968 Prague Spring. The Soviet Union was revealed for what it truly was: a self-interested geopolitical hegemon looking to preserve its sphere of influence, not an altruistic socialist experiment. En masse, former committed Communists became center-left Social Democrats, moderating their demands and becoming committed liberals and socialists. Many of these former student revolutionary leaders are now prominent European statesmen, very much members of the political mainstream.
However, not everyone followed this transformation. The fringe element, ostracized by their less extreme left-wing counterparts, formed their own groups. Many of them are remembered for how violent and militant they became, including the Red Army Faction, Direct Action, November 17 and the Red Brigades.
The irony for Europe, therefore, is that the same process that brings the far right into the mainstream leaves its most extremist elements without the moderating influences of their now supposedly legitimate peers. Increase in anti-immigrant rhetoric is not creating an atmosphere that in some metaphysical way breeds violence. The process is far more mechanical. Left alone - or in restricted groups - extremists can concoct militant plans without being restrained by their mainstream far-right counterparts, who crave power and political success far more than they do ideological purity. On one end of the spectrum, this process produced Marine Le Pen, who is capable of framing a coherent policy stance on the negative consequences of monetary union in Europe without a single reference to a worldwide Jewish conspiracy. On the other end, it created potentially hundreds of Breiviks, who, lacking the moderating influence of belonging to these groups, are allowed to stew in their extremism and concoct militancy and violence. It would therefore be unsurprising if the attack in Oslo were followed by other attempts by far-right extremists, in Europe and beyond.
Thank God the Freemasons are there to take the brunt of conspiracy theories, while we Odd Fellows are able to fly under the radar, mixing mind-controlling chemicals into the apple butter we sell :menace:
Quote from: derspiess on July 26, 2011, 10:24:29 AM
Thank God the Freemasons are there to take the brunt of conspiracy theories, while we Odd Fellows are able to fly under the radar, mixing mind-controlling chemicals into the apple butter we sell :menace:
Besides, who could take seriously a secret cabal named "Odd Fellows"? :hmm:
Quote from: jimmy olsen on July 26, 2011, 10:20:36 AM
Quote from: Slargos on July 26, 2011, 09:48:43 AM
The biological father has stated that he feels "shame" in the interview.
Fucking attention whore.
If the information released so far is correct, the last time ABB even saw his biological father was 15-16 years ago, and the only thing this "father" should possibly feel any shame over is abandoning his children.
He lost custody in a divorce. Not his fault.
Yeah. I'm sure the divorce also stipulated he move to another country and completely cut off all contact.
Quote from: Malthus on July 26, 2011, 10:25:50 AM
Quote from: derspiess on July 26, 2011, 10:24:29 AM
Thank God the Freemasons are there to take the brunt of conspiracy theories, while we Odd Fellows are able to fly under the radar, mixing mind-controlling chemicals into the apple butter we sell :menace:
Besides, who could take seriously a secret cabal named "Odd Fellows"? :hmm:
Exactly :contract:
But underneath our cover of silliness, we have a militant wing: http://www.glmdioof.org/Patriarchs_Militant.htm
Quote from: Norgy on July 26, 2011, 02:55:27 AM
The mass murderer's behaviour, manifesto and demand for being in uniform when he appeared before the judge yesterday leads me to lean more and more towards ideology being secondary to a massive narcissistic personality disorder and Messiah complex.
I suspect that something similar can be said for most people who carry out terrorist acts like that.
QuoteYesterday, most of Norway protested against the violence by coming together at six pm. I think it's fair to say that the terrorist lost.
:hug:
Quote from: Slargos on July 26, 2011, 09:48:43 AM
I don't get this whole "shame" hysteria.
Sometimes I wonder if they don't all deserve this and more.
No, you really don't get it.
That's fairly obvious.
Quote from: Jacob on July 26, 2011, 10:57:50 AM
Quote from: Norgy on July 26, 2011, 02:55:27 AM
The mass murderer's behaviour, manifesto and demand for being in uniform when he appeared before the judge yesterday leads me to lean more and more towards ideology being secondary to a massive narcissistic personality disorder and Messiah complex.
I suspect that something similar can be said for most people who carry out terrorist acts like that.
Yeah, the idea that an act like this should make us (or anyone) examine how we conduct politics is utter tripe.
If it wasn't Muslim immigrants he was pissed about, it would be something else. He didn't kill a bunch of people because his voice was not heard, he killed a bunch of people because he is a psychopathic nutjob. Whatever the "manifesto" might be at this point has nothing, IMO, to do with his motivation. If you could create a world that exactly matched this guys supposedly desired cultural or political setup, he would just kill a bunch of people because THAT reality was not adequate, or because gays could not get married, or because they could get married, or because taxes were too high, or taxes were too low. There would be *something* for his crazy to latch onto, because the crazy comes before the ideology, not after it.
Quote from: Slargos on July 26, 2011, 09:48:43 AMSometimes I wonder if they don't all deserve this and more.
... ah. There it is.
Quote from: Norgy on July 26, 2011, 11:02:59 AM
Quote from: Slargos on July 26, 2011, 09:48:43 AM
I don't get this whole "shame" hysteria.
Sometimes I wonder if they don't all deserve this and more.
No, you really don't get it.
That's fairly obvious.
In what way is anything made better by crocodile tears?
Quote from: Jacob on July 26, 2011, 11:04:27 AM
Quote from: Slargos on July 26, 2011, 09:48:43 AMSometimes I wonder if they don't all deserve this and more.
... ah. There it is.
If it makes you feel better, when it comes to you I'm certain.
White guilt. It's a powerfull thing.
Btw, has anyone considered the Murdoch angle? The story made people stop talking about dismantling the Murdoch's media empire. Cui bono... :ph34r:
I read Slargos' posts to test my belief that free speech is an important value.
Quote from: Slargos on July 26, 2011, 11:08:54 AMIf it makes you feel better, when it comes to you I'm certain.
The way you post makes me think that it would be a public service for Raz to post the link for reporting death threats and terror threats to the authorities.
You come across as pretty unhinged. More so than the languish standard.
Quote from: Jacob on July 26, 2011, 11:14:49 AM
Quote from: Slargos on July 26, 2011, 11:08:54 AMIf it makes you feel better, when it comes to you I'm certain.
The way you post makes me think that it would be a public service for Raz to post the link for reporting death threats and terror threats to the authorities.
You come across as pretty unhinged. More so than the languish standard.
If you think you can threaten me into silence, you are mistaken. :hmm:
Quote from: Slargos on July 26, 2011, 11:17:47 AMIf you think you can threaten me into silence, you are mistaken. :hmm:
You're the one who's threatening murder and bodily harm, not me.
Quote from: Jacob on July 26, 2011, 11:18:46 AM
Quote from: Slargos on July 26, 2011, 11:17:47 AMIf you think you can threaten me into silence, you are mistaken. :hmm:
You're the one who's threatening murder and bodily harm, not me.
When did I do that?
You're delusional.
Slargos, what's your agenda here? I'm lost at what you are trying to achieve in this thread.
Quote from: Slargos on July 26, 2011, 11:08:28 AM
In what way is anything made better by crocodile tears?
This post fills me with shame :weep:
Quote from: Slargos on July 26, 2011, 11:19:46 AMWhen did I do that?
You're delusional.
Just because you preface a threat with "I hope this happens..." or "you deserve it if this happens..." or "someone should do this to you..." doesn't make it not a threat.
Quote from: Grey Fox on July 26, 2011, 11:20:31 AM
Slargos, what's your agenda here? I'm lost at what you are trying to achieve in this thread.
What's yours?
Quote from: Jacob on July 26, 2011, 11:21:11 AM
Quote from: Slargos on July 26, 2011, 11:19:46 AMWhen did I do that?
You're delusional.
Just because you preface a threat with "I hope this happens..." or "You deserve it if this happens..." doesn't make it not a threat.
:lol:
I hope you die of old age and senility. :menace:
Are you surprised? Grief is political.
Quote from: Slargos on July 26, 2011, 11:21:38 AM
Quote from: Grey Fox on July 26, 2011, 11:20:31 AM
Slargos, what's your agenda here? I'm lost at what you are trying to achieve in this thread.
What's yours?
Asking questions, understanding yours & others points, occassional attempt at a funny and social commentary.
Quote from: Grey Fox on July 26, 2011, 11:24:19 AM
Quote from: Slargos on July 26, 2011, 11:21:38 AM
Quote from: Grey Fox on July 26, 2011, 11:20:31 AM
Slargos, what's your agenda here? I'm lost at what you are trying to achieve in this thread.
What's yours?
Asking questions, understanding yours & others points, occassional attempt at a funny and social commentary.
Fair enough, my agenda consists of satisfying my whims.
Quote from: Jacob on July 26, 2011, 11:14:49 AM
Quote from: Slargos on July 26, 2011, 11:08:54 AMIf it makes you feel better, when it comes to you I'm certain.
The way you post makes me think that it would be a public service for Raz to post the link for reporting death threats and terror threats to the authorities.
You come across as pretty unhinged. More so than the languish standard.
Quit being a cunt. That's not a threat, that's an analysis.
Quote from: Jacob on July 26, 2011, 11:21:11 AM
Quote from: Slargos on July 26, 2011, 11:19:46 AMWhen did I do that?
You're delusional.
Just because you preface a threat with "I hope this happens..." or "you deserve it if this happens..." or "someone should do this to you..." doesn't make it not a threat.
:yes:
Canadian law is quite clear - a conditional threat is still a threat.
Quote from: Neil on July 26, 2011, 11:25:47 AMQuit being a cunt. That's not a threat, that's an analysis.
Not under Canadian law. Just ask BB.
Quote from: Neil on July 26, 2011, 11:25:47 AMQuit being a cunt. That's not a threat, that's an analysis.
An analysis that concludes "and thus you deserve to be killed" is still a threat.
Quote from: Barrister on July 26, 2011, 11:26:37 AM
Quote from: Jacob on July 26, 2011, 11:21:11 AM
Quote from: Slargos on July 26, 2011, 11:19:46 AMWhen did I do that?
You're delusional.
Just because you preface a threat with "I hope this happens..." or "you deserve it if this happens..." or "someone should do this to you..." doesn't make it not a threat.
:yes:
Canadian law is quite clear - a conditional threat is still a threat.
What about if I specifically tell him that I'm going to use my telekinetic powers to call down a meterorite on his house?
Is that a threat?
Quote from: Neil on July 26, 2011, 11:25:47 AM
Quit being a cunt. That's not a threat, that's an analysis.
Please explain the difference between a threat and an analysis in the statement that someone should be killed.
I'm going to punch Beeb in the nuts next time I'm in Canada. How is that?
Quote from: Gups on July 26, 2011, 03:29:01 AM
Is it possible to ascribe genes to a country?
Not genes, but genealogy. Unless you think countries / societies / collective entities reinvent themselves every generation or so.
Quote from: Barrister on July 26, 2011, 11:26:37 AM
:yes:
Canadian law is quite clear - a conditional threat is still a threat.
What about passive conditional threats of the kind "You deserve to die if you do this...."
Quote from: Ed Anger on July 26, 2011, 11:30:52 AM
I'm going to punch Beeb in the nuts next time I'm in Canada. How is that?
:thumbsup:
Quote from: Slargos on July 26, 2011, 11:08:28 AM
In what way is anything made better by crocodile tears?
We're not talking about "crocodile tears", but honest self-reflection and real tears of sadness, anger and frustration. We're not talking about journalists trying to shift the blame, but to inform the public. Janne Kristiansen explained well why the Westend Mass Murderer flew under the radar, and no matter how you see it or read it, there was no attempt to blame it on the security service. I notice Gates of Vienna and assorted other wingnut sites are spending most of their energy to distance themselves from the monster from Skøyen. Maybe they're even reflecting whether their collective mass psychosis is correct?
Self-reflection is what people tend to do in the aftermath of trauma, and at least to me, the events of Friday 22nd is a gaping trauma. Everyone wants to find some answers, if only to get some peace. I'd also say that mourning is a fairly human reaction.
Quote from: Barrister on July 26, 2011, 11:26:37 AM
Quote from: Jacob on July 26, 2011, 11:21:11 AM
Quote from: Slargos on July 26, 2011, 11:19:46 AMWhen did I do that?
You're delusional.
Just because you preface a threat with "I hope this happens..." or "you deserve it if this happens..." or "someone should do this to you..." doesn't make it not a threat.
:yes:
Canadian law is quite clear - a conditional threat is still a threat.
How is that even a conditional threat?
Quote from: Jacob on July 26, 2011, 11:27:19 AM
Quote from: Neil on July 26, 2011, 11:25:47 AMQuit being a cunt. That's not a threat, that's an analysis.
Not under Canadian law. Just ask BB.
Then call the cops, motherfucker. Beeb can try and prosecute me himself.
Nobody was prosecuted for saying that the US deserved 9/11, so I like my chances.
Besides, Canadian law (which is utterly retarded in all matters relating to free speech) doesn't have jurisdiction wherever Slargos is. I think that you would be performing a public service if you were to kill yourself today.
Quote from: Martinus on July 26, 2011, 05:18:14 AM
Quote from: Ideologue on July 26, 2011, 04:04:33 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 26, 2011, 03:59:52 AM
Quote from: Ideologue on July 26, 2011, 03:58:18 AM
Haw. Out of curiosity, is that also the Pole version of Eugene?
No. Polish is "Eugeniusz". If you want a Polish version of a name, you have to take an English name, mispspell it, and add a W or CZ or SZ somewhere. :P
Sorry to ask a boring-ass followup, but do you guys have the "yeh" sound or is an E pronounced "eh" or "ee" (although in that case, however, I'd assume a long "u"?
I know that Polish isn't that closely related to Russian, so it's probably like assuming that Romanian is pronounced the same as French.
E is pronounced like "eh" - similar to the "e" in "bed".
We have the "yeh" sound but it's achieved by putting "e" behind "i" or "j" (e.g. "pies" - meaning a "dog" or "jechać" meaning "to ride"). The sound is slightly different between both, but in principle you get "ie" when it follows a consonant and "je" when it is at the beginning of a word or after a vowel (but sometimes there can be "je" after a consonant, when the word is built from another word with "je" at the beginning - e.g. "wjechać" meaning "to ride into" or "zjechać" meaning "to ride down" or "najechać" meaning "to ride onto" or "invade").
Neat. Thanks. :)
Quote from: Oexmelin on July 26, 2011, 11:31:32 AM
Not genes, but genealogy. Unless you think countries / societies / collective entities reinvent themselves every generation or so.
In part, yes.
Quote from: Norgy on July 26, 2011, 11:33:01 AM
We're not talking about "crocodile tears", but honest self-reflection and real tears of sadness, anger and frustration. We're not talking about journalists trying to shift the blame, but to inform the public. Janne Kristiansen explained well why the Westend Mass Murderer flew under the radar, and no matter how you see it or read it, there was no attempt to blame it on the security service. I notice Gates of Vienna and assorted other wingnut sites are spending most of their energy to distance themselves from the monster from Skøyen. Maybe they're even reflecting whether their collective mass psychosis is correct?
Self-reflection is what people tend to do in the aftermath of trauma, and at least to me, the events of Friday 22nd is a gaping trauma. Everyone wants to find some answers, if only to get some peace. I'd also say that mourning is a fairly human reaction.
Maybe you're right.
I see a lot of scrambling to assign blame in every direction, though, when there's only really once place that blame can be assigned.
Maybe this is a necessary part of the healing process, I don't know. I just don't like it.
Quote from: Ed Anger on July 26, 2011, 11:30:52 AM
I'm going to punch Beeb in the nuts next time I'm in Canada. How is that?
I always wondered about that threat..
Are you a midget or something? I mean, punching him in the nuts would imply either you are on you knees, or that he is a towering giant, or that you are a midget.
Kicking his nuts, or punching his nose I can get, that would be on the level so to speak :D
V
Quote from: crazy canuck on July 26, 2011, 11:29:59 AM
Quote from: Neil on July 26, 2011, 11:25:47 AM
Quit being a cunt. That's not a threat, that's an analysis.
Please explain the difference between a threat and an analysis in the statement that someone should be killed.
Intent.
Quote from: Valdemar on July 26, 2011, 11:36:03 AM
Quote from: Ed Anger on July 26, 2011, 11:30:52 AM
I'm going to punch Beeb in the nuts next time I'm in Canada. How is that?
I always wondered about that threat..
Are you a midget or something? I mean, punching him in the nuts would imply either you are on you knees, or that he is a towering giant, or that you are a midget.
Kicking his nuts, or punching his nose I can get, that would be on the level so to speak :D
V
6 glorious feet. I'll hire a midget to do the work.
Quote from: Neil on July 26, 2011, 11:34:33 AMThen call the cops, motherfucker. Beeb can try and prosecute me himself.
Nobody was prosecuted for saying that the US deserved 9/11, so I like my chances.
:lol: For some reason Bon Jovi's "Blaze of Glory" comes to mind.
QuoteBesides, Canadian law (which is utterly retarded in all matters relating to free speech) doesn't have jurisdiction wherever Slargos is. I think that you would be performing a public service if you were to kill yourself today.
Well, according the Raz (and Slargos when the mood strikes him) Norwegian law is much more stringent than Canadian law in these matters. So the jurisdiction thing may not be the obstacle you think it is.
Quote from: Neil on July 26, 2011, 11:34:33 AM
Quote from: Jacob on July 26, 2011, 11:27:19 AM
Quote from: Neil on July 26, 2011, 11:25:47 AMQuit being a cunt. That's not a threat, that's an analysis.
Not under Canadian law. Just ask BB.
Then call the cops, motherfucker. Beeb can try and prosecute me himself.
Nobody was prosecuted for saying that the US deserved 9/11, so I like my chances.
Besides, Canadian law (which is utterly retarded in all matters relating to free speech) doesn't have jurisdiction wherever Slargos is. I think that you would be performing a public service if you were to kill yourself today.
Don't tempt me, Neil-o. You know you're in my jurisdiction now. :menace:
And an uttering threats charge could be prosecuted in both the jurisdiction where the utterer is, and where the receiver is.
Now I'm not saying anyone has committed a crime here. Hell I don't even know which particular unhinged comment of Slargy we're talking about. I'm just pointing out that some of the defense mentioned (like being a conditional threat, or differing jurisdiction) wouldn't fly.
Quote from: Jacob on July 26, 2011, 11:38:17 AM
Quote from: Neil on July 26, 2011, 11:34:33 AMThen call the cops, motherfucker. Beeb can try and prosecute me himself.
Nobody was prosecuted for saying that the US deserved 9/11, so I like my chances.
:lol: For some reason Bon Jovi's "Blaze of Glory" comes to mind.
QuoteBesides, Canadian law (which is utterly retarded in all matters relating to free speech) doesn't have jurisdiction wherever Slargos is. I think that you would be performing a public service if you were to kill yourself today.
Well, according the Raz (and Slargos when the mood strikes him) Norwegian law is much more stringent than Canadian law in these matters. So the jurisdiction thing may not be the obstacle you think it is.
:lol:
If I ever were to tell you, "I'm going to find you and rape your wife infront of you before I kill you" there might actually be some merit to the notion that it would be prosecutable. I really doubt there would be tremendous police efforts in tracking me down and prosecuting me, but I suppose it would actually be theoretically possible. Of course, being that the server isn't in Norway there's all sorts of iffy legal issues. I can't recall ever having read about any such case going to court in Norway.
Now, you'd need to piss me off a fair bit more for me to even make such a threat, and beyond that you'd have to work very hard to make me go through with it. :P
Quote from: Slargos on July 26, 2011, 11:42:47 AM:lol:
If I ever were to tell you, "I'm going to find you and rape your wife infront of you before I kill you" there might actually be some merit to the notion that it would be prosecutable. I really doubt there would be tremendous police efforts in tracking me down and prosecuting me, but I suppose it would actually be theoretically possible. Of course, being that the server isn't in Norway there's all sorts of iffy legal issues. I can't recall ever having read about any such case going to court in Norway.
Now, you'd need to piss me off a fair bit more for me to even make such a threat, and beyond that you'd have to work very hard to make me go through with it. :P
Way to burst my bubble :(
Quote from: Jacob on July 26, 2011, 11:43:52 AM
Quote from: Slargos on July 26, 2011, 11:42:47 AM:lol:
If I ever were to tell you, "I'm going to find you and rape your wife infront of you before I kill you" there might actually be some merit to the notion that it would be prosecutable. I really doubt there would be tremendous police efforts in tracking me down and prosecuting me, but I suppose it would actually be theoretically possible. Of course, being that the server isn't in Norway there's all sorts of iffy legal issues. I can't recall ever having read about any such case going to court in Norway.
Now, you'd need to piss me off a fair bit more for me to even make such a threat, and beyond that you'd have to work very hard to make me go through with it. :P
Way to burst my bubble :(
Whoa. Did you miss the fact that I implied there is a chance? :hmm:
It's a pretty small bubble, but it's intact. :hug:
The server is in Texas. Texas & US law have jurisdiction.
Quote from: Grey Fox on July 26, 2011, 11:45:29 AM
The server is in Texas. Texas & US law have jurisdiction.
In fact in this case Norway, Texas and Canada all have overlapping jurisdiction.
Isn't criminal law fun? :cool:
What I don't get, is that working on the stipulation that I am in fact "unhinged", why would you want to fuck with me like that? :P
Quote from: Grey Fox on July 26, 2011, 11:45:29 AM
The server is in Texas. Texas & US law have jurisdiction.
Correction, Texas is one of the possible places that may take jurisdiction in addition to the jurisdictions of the sender and the reciever. Now we start getting into the nuances of the conflicts of laws and really is Slargo worth all that bother.
Quote from: crazy canuck on July 26, 2011, 11:54:21 AM
Quote from: Grey Fox on July 26, 2011, 11:45:29 AM
The server is in Texas. Texas & US law have jurisdiction.
Correction, Texas is one of the possible places that may take jurisdiction in addition to the jurisdictions of the sender and the reciever. Now we start getting into the nuances of the conflicts of laws and really is Slargo worth all that bother.
Depends. Have I murdered anyone yet? :hmm:
Quote from: Slargos on July 26, 2011, 11:52:43 AM
What I don't get, is that working on the stipulation that I am in fact "unhinged", why would you want to fuck with me like that? :P
Because you wouldn't dare fuck with a servant of Her Majesty. :)
Quote from: Malthus on July 26, 2011, 09:39:25 AM
I tend to agree that the guy's actual politics are immaterial. Although he seemingly stands for a lot of stuff I loathe, and the temptation to rub in guilt by association is high (hello, Slargos! ;) ), it ought to be resisted - he's a killer, he seemingly enjoys the attention that killing gave him, he could have been killing for any one of a number of different ideologies.
Dismissing the importance of ABB's politics with "he's a killer" seems dangerous to me. All active terrorists of note are killers. To fight terrorism we must understand the terrorists, including the ideologies that build them. You need a lot of general sympathizers, passive supporters and active supporters for an actual terrorist to emerge.
Quote from: Barrister on July 26, 2011, 12:00:27 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 26, 2011, 11:52:43 AM
What I don't get, is that working on the stipulation that I am in fact "unhinged", why would you want to fuck with me like that? :P
Because you wouldn't dare fuck with a servant of Her Majesty. :)
In a scenario where I am "unhinged" and you've just slapped me with a severe nuiscance? :hmm:
Quote from: The Brain on July 26, 2011, 12:00:32 PM
Quote from: Malthus on July 26, 2011, 09:39:25 AM
I tend to agree that the guy's actual politics are immaterial. Although he seemingly stands for a lot of stuff I loathe, and the temptation to rub in guilt by association is high (hello, Slargos! ;) ), it ought to be resisted - he's a killer, he seemingly enjoys the attention that killing gave him, he could have been killing for any one of a number of different ideologies.
Dismissing the importance of ABB's politics with "he's a killer" seems dangerous to me. All active terrorists of note are killers. To fight terrorism we must understand the terrorists, including the ideologies that build them. You need a lot of general sympathizers, passive supporters and active supporters for an actual terrorist to emerge.
I agree. Simply saying he is a killer diminishes the political aspect of this act. Intolerance and racism and the effect they had on forming this man's view of the world are the real evils here.
Quote from: Slargos on July 26, 2011, 11:55:11 AM
Quote from: crazy canuck on July 26, 2011, 11:54:21 AM
Quote from: Grey Fox on July 26, 2011, 11:45:29 AM
The server is in Texas. Texas & US law have jurisdiction.
Correction, Texas is one of the possible places that may take jurisdiction in addition to the jurisdictions of the sender and the reciever. Now we start getting into the nuances of the conflicts of laws and really is Slargo worth all that bother.
Depends. Have I murdered anyone yet? :hmm:
I dont know - you have not claimed you have. The more relevant question is have you uttered a threat in a manner which anyone should take seriously?
Quote from: Jacob on July 26, 2011, 11:38:17 AM
Quote from: Neil on July 26, 2011, 11:34:33 AMThen call the cops, motherfucker. Beeb can try and prosecute me himself.
Nobody was prosecuted for saying that the US deserved 9/11, so I like my chances.
:lol: For some reason Bon Jovi's "Blaze of Glory" comes to mind.
QuoteBesides, Canadian law (which is utterly retarded in all matters relating to free speech) doesn't have jurisdiction wherever Slargos is. I think that you would be performing a public service if you were to kill yourself today.
Well, according the Raz (and Slargos when the mood strikes him) Norwegian law is much more stringent than Canadian law in these matters. So the jurisdiction thing may not be the obstacle you think it is.
How does that work? Does norway get jurisdiction, or the US? I mean Slargy is over there, but the server is in texas somewhere. Serious question.
*edit* nm answered
Quote from: HVC on July 26, 2011, 12:26:19 PMHow does that work? Does norway get jurisdiction, or the US? I mean Slargy is over there, but the server is in texas somewhere. Serious question.
*edit* nm answered
Presumably, should the Norwegian authorities be interested in this it wouldn't be because they thought Slargos was going to travel to Canada to murder me but more along the lines of "here's an individual who espouses an ideology of hatred and who regularly utters threats of violence; maybe we should keep an eye on him in case he decides to act rather than just talk."
Alternately, government authorized squads of PC Police may show up and brutalize him because he went against the Cultural-Marxist dogma of the ruling class. I'm not quite clear what the situation is in Norway these days.
Quote from: Ideologue on July 25, 2011, 03:41:23 AM
*It is, however, fun to turn the tables. You hear all sorts of shit about "Old Europe" and how they've got history, etc. But compared to us, Europe's present-day political landscape is actually the much younger brother. Not counting fake countries like the Vatican, only the British, the Swedes and the Danes have continuous governments older than America.
Do you mean continuous semi-democratic governments? I don't get it.
Quote from: Slargos on July 26, 2011, 09:48:43 AM
Sometimes I wonder if they don't all deserve this and more.
Felt rather dirty after wrestlig pigs the first time so I stayed out of this place. Guess some things just don't change. Let's see if I get some more calls for my death in Slargos' perfect world. I don't really care what he thinks, it's just a sad reaction to wish for more killing. I feel sad being right about this whole thing from the start of the thread, because I had been expecting something similar coming along sooner or later, and I expect it's not the last time something similar happends. Some people never learn.
Quote from: Barrister on July 26, 2011, 11:42:47 AM
Don't tempt me, Neil-o. You know you're in my jurisdiction now. :menace:
It's your life. :)
Quote from: Pat on July 26, 2011, 12:59:10 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 26, 2011, 09:48:43 AM
Sometimes I wonder if they don't all deserve this and more.
Felt rather dirty after wrestlig pigs the first time so I stayed out of this place. Guess some things just don't change. Let's see if I get some more calls for my death in Slargos' perfect world. I don't really care what he thinks, it's just a sad reaction to wish for more killing. I feel sad being right about this whole thing from the start of the thread, because I had been expecting something similar coming along sooner or later, and I expect it's not the last time something similar happends. Some people never learn.
Some people deserve far, far worse. Rapists for instance. :hug:
Quote from: Pat on July 26, 2011, 12:59:10 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 26, 2011, 09:48:43 AM
Sometimes I wonder if they don't all deserve this and more.
Felt rather dirty after wrestlig pigs the first time so I stayed out of this place. Guess some things just don't change. Let's see if I get some more calls for my death in Slargos' perfect world. I don't really care what he thinks, it's just a sad reaction to wish for more killing. I feel sad being right about this whole thing from the start of the thread, because I had been expecting something similar coming along sooner or later, and I expect it's not the last time something similar happends. Some people never learn.
You, of all people, have no reason to feel morally superior to anyone.
Quote from: The Brain on July 26, 2011, 12:00:32 PM
Dismissing the importance of ABB's politics with "he's a killer" seems dangerous to me. All active terrorists of note are killers. To fight terrorism we must understand the terrorists, including the ideologies that build them. You need a lot of general sympathizers, passive supporters and active supporters for an actual terrorist to emerge.
Unless and until we learn something different, there is no terrorist organization in which this man is embedded. We are not dealing with a political movement or party like ETA, Tamil Tigers, Al Qaeda, or even the Red Army Faction. It's one guy that cobbled together a pastiche of an ideology based on stuff he read in internet blogs in the like. Programatically it is the equivalent of Lettowism. To analyze his prolix "manifesto" in search for understanding some supposed underlying ideology of terror is to follow Alice down the rabbit hole. And there is some danger as well - by taking his program seriously, you reinforce his narcissism and sense of importance (as per norgy). No accident that this guy drew influence from the unabomber, another demented lone killer whose supposed program was given far more serious attention than it merited.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 26, 2011, 01:34:30 PM
Quote from: The Brain on July 26, 2011, 12:00:32 PM
Dismissing the importance of ABB's politics with "he's a killer" seems dangerous to me. All active terrorists of note are killers. To fight terrorism we must understand the terrorists, including the ideologies that build them. You need a lot of general sympathizers, passive supporters and active supporters for an actual terrorist to emerge.
Unless and until we learn something different, there is no terrorist organization in which this man is embedded. We are not dealing with a political movement or party like ETA, Tamil Tigers, Al Qaeda, or even the Red Army Faction. It's one guy that cobbled together a pastiche of an ideology based on stuff he read in internet blogs in the like. Programatically it is the equivalent of Lettowism. To analyze his prolix "manifesto" in search for understanding some supposed underlying ideology of terror is to follow Alice down the rabbit hole. And there is some danger as well - by taking his program seriously, you reinforce his narcissism and sense of importance (as per norgy). No accident that this guy drew influence from the unabomber, another demented lone killer whose supposed program was given far more serious attention than it merited.
Whichever way you turn it there is a segment of the population that agrees with ABB. It's not as unified as some other movements but it's still there. He is not the first Scandinavian terrorist to emerge from that ideological area and I doubt he will be the last.
I'm not sure what you mean by taking his program seriously. I don't suggest taking the Koran seriously but it still gives insights into Muslim terrorists.
You seem to know an awful lot about his ideology btw. You actually read his crap?
I doubt much of use can be deduced from this guy's rantings, except by the prosecutor, and giving them attention is exactly what he wants. Better to deprive him of that.
Quote from: crazy canuck on July 26, 2011, 11:54:21 AM
Quote from: Grey Fox on July 26, 2011, 11:45:29 AM
The server is in Texas. Texas & US law have jurisdiction.
Correction, Texas is one of the possible places that may take jurisdiction in addition to the jurisdictions of the sender and the reciever. Now we start getting into the nuances of the conflicts of laws and really is Slargo worth all that bother.
Fuck no.
Those who read the "manifesto", seem to be quite in agreement that it's a bit of a cut and paste job. He more or less cut and pasted and inserted "Cultural Marxists" in place of "leftists" the Unabomber's manifesto, according to document.no (one of his arenas for debate).
I'm not sure whether it actually turns out to be of any substance, but British police apparently is looking into this Lionheart character that's mentioned and this whole Templar order.
There are politics behind this, surely, but I am not at all convinced nowadays that ideology was a primary force. Obviously, the existence of the counterjihadist crowd with their dystopian prophecies gave him something to latch onto, but from the little that's been revealed about his past, he went from wigger to "entrepreneur" to politics to mass murder. Everything revealed about his background points towards an existence where very little has been denied him, except perhaps the right to rant and rave on a big stage.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on July 26, 2011, 03:37:00 AM
Quote from: Ideologue on July 26, 2011, 03:29:33 AM
Quote from: Gups on July 26, 2011, 03:29:01 AM
Is it possible to ascribe genes to a country?
Only if you take an arbitrary starting point for tracking them, as I am. ;)
Which is necessary; if you don't choose a starting point, we're all Congolese, or if you want to be really hard, we're from a tidewater somewhere lost to time.
Out of Africa: Complete Replacement has been disproved!
Paleoanthropoly hijack!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WP2_fGKHExk
Okay, I watched your video, which was long, but that's fine, and it doesn't contradict anything I said. Neanderthals came from Africa as well.
Quote from: Norgy on July 26, 2011, 01:54:45 PM
Those who read the "manifesto", seem to be quite in agreement that it's a bit of a cut and paste job. He more or less cut and pasted and inserted "Cultural Marxists" in place of "leftists" the Unabomber's manifesto, according to document.no (one of his arenas for debate).
I'm not sure whether it actually turns out to be of any substance, but British police apparently is looking into this Lionheart character that's mentioned and this whole Templar order.
There are politics behind this, surely, but I am not at all convinced nowadays that ideology was a primary force. Obviously, the existence of the counterjihadist crowd with their dystopian prophecies gave him something to latch onto, but from the little that's been revealed about his past, he went from wigger to "entrepreneur" to politics to mass murder. Everything revealed about his background points towards an existence where very little has been denied him, except perhaps the right to rant and rave on a big stage.
But you see, for some it is enough to witness inequality for others in order to be offended by it. :hmm:
Quote from: mongers on July 26, 2011, 02:05:24 PM
Quote from: Grey Fox on July 26, 2011, 11:20:31 AM
Slargos, what's your agenda here? I'm lost at what you are trying to achieve in this thread.
Don't worry you're not alone, even he doesn't know.
<_<
Why does everything have to have a purpose?
What's your purpose in this thread?
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 26, 2011, 01:34:30 PM
Unless and until we learn something different, there is no terrorist organization in which this man is embedded. We are not dealing with a political movement or party like ETA, Tamil Tigers, Al Qaeda, or even the Red Army Faction. It's one guy that cobbled together a pastiche of an ideology based on stuff he read in internet blogs in the like. Programatically it is the equivalent of Lettowism. To analyze his prolix "manifesto" in search for understanding some supposed underlying ideology of terror is to follow Alice down the rabbit hole. And there is some danger as well - by taking his program seriously, you reinforce his narcissism and sense of importance (as per norgy). No accident that this guy drew influence from the unabomber, another demented lone killer whose supposed program was given far more serious attention than it merited.
The suggestion that others do not share this guys exetreme racism and anti-muslim sentiments is rather hopeful.
Quote from: Slargos on July 26, 2011, 02:01:03 PM
But you see, for some it is enough to witness inequality for others in order to be offended by it. :hmm:
I thought "being offended and then killing someone" was why you people hate Islam so much.
Quote from: Norgy on July 26, 2011, 02:11:49 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 26, 2011, 02:01:03 PM
But you see, for some it is enough to witness inequality for others in order to be offended by it. :hmm:
I thought "being offended and then killing someone" was why you people hate Islam so much.
I've never said I approve of his act. I understand his anger, however.
Quote from: Slargos on July 26, 2011, 02:14:55 PM
I've never said I approve of his act. I understand his anger, however.
QuoteThe suggestion that others do not share this guys exetreme racism and anti-muslim sentiments is rather hopeful.
Quote from: The Brain on July 26, 2011, 01:44:03 PM
Whichever way you turn it there is a segment of the population that agrees with ABB.
Sure - there is a least one segment here on languish does. For that matter, a lot of people agreed with some of the things the unabomber had to say, at least the stuff he had to say that could be understood in english. But there was no wave of neo Luddite enviro-terrorist bomb attacks because there was nothing really inherent in the unabomber's program that logically entailed murdering people with mail bombs, and there was no organization that existed to pursue such a program. The unabomber's political program was just the tattered intellectual superstructure he built around his violent derangement. Same with this guy. I can see no reason to think that people who happen to share certain views are going to be equally prone to violence; on the contrary, the fact that many such people exist and have existed for years without similar violence suggests otherwise.
QuoteI'm not sure what you mean by taking his program seriously. I don't suggest taking the Koran seriously but it still gives insights into Muslim terrorists.
I mean taking seriously as a causal explanation of his behavior. I think for certain fundamentalist strands of Islam, their interpretation of the concept of the jihad does ineleluctably lead to forming an organizational capacity to commit coordinated and repeatable acts of violence. But even there I would question the degree to which analyzing the ideology gives one real understanding about how and why Muslim terrorists acts. Once a terrorist organization gets up and running, the dynamic of violence tends to follow its own destructive logic. Al Qaeda for example may have started out with a particular program and set of ultimate goals, but what is left of the organization is just a loose grouping with disparate individuals and factions pursuing various agendas, and united only by a brand name, some slogans, and sheer viciousness.
QuoteYou seem to know an awful lot about his ideology btw. You actually read his crap?
Only the snippets reported in the papers, don't need to hear anymore.
Quote from: crazy canuck on July 26, 2011, 02:09:45 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 26, 2011, 01:34:30 PM
Unless and until we learn something different, there is no terrorist organization in which this man is embedded. We are not dealing with a political movement or party like ETA, Tamil Tigers, Al Qaeda, or even the Red Army Faction. It's one guy that cobbled together a pastiche of an ideology based on stuff he read in internet blogs in the like. Programatically it is the equivalent of Lettowism. To analyze his prolix "manifesto" in search for understanding some supposed underlying ideology of terror is to follow Alice down the rabbit hole. And there is some danger as well - by taking his program seriously, you reinforce his narcissism and sense of importance (as per norgy). No accident that this guy drew influence from the unabomber, another demented lone killer whose supposed program was given far more serious attention than it merited.
The suggestion that others do not share this guys exetreme racism and anti-muslim sentiments is rather hopeful.
So saying he is not part of a terrorist organization or political movement is the same as saying nobody else shares his nutty ideas?
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 26, 2011, 02:26:39 PM
Quote from: The Brain on July 26, 2011, 01:44:03 PM
Whichever way you turn it there is a segment of the population that agrees with ABB.
Sure - there is a least one segment here on languish does. For that matter, a lot of people agreed with some of the things the unabomber had to say, at least the stuff he had to say that could be understood in english. But there was no wave of neo Luddite enviro-terrorist bomb attacks because there was nothing really inherent in the unabomber's program that logically entailed murdering people with mail bombs, and there was no organization that existed to pursue such a program. The unabomber's political program was just the tattered intellectual superstructure he built around his violent derangement. Same with this guy. I can see no reason to think that people who happen to share certain views are going to be equally prone to violence; on the contrary, the fact that many such people exist and have existed for years without similar violence suggests otherwise.
Except of course that it's not true. In Sweden the last 20 years we had at least two anti-immigrant terrorists who were systematically killing innocent people ("The Laserman" I and II).
Well when I started this thread, I didn't expect the news to turn out as it has; I even included a question mark in the title because I was half-expecting it to be a gas mains explosion.
I stand by calling him a terrorist, as it seem to me that's part of the intent of his action, to spread fear and stir up social tensions, which I'm willing to bet won't win out in Norway. I'm somewhat disappointed in the tone, if not the content of a couple of contributors posts, but hell that's free speech and I'm hoping the Norway doesn't throw out the baby with the bath water on that issue.
I hope Norway heals and doesn't become too concerned with the possible threat of further attacks from these sorts of very marginalised characters, who for the most part will only ever talk big on the internet and retreat into their sad, embittered view of the world.
Maybe we should have a Languish meet up in Oslo as a sign of solidarity ?
Quote from: The Brain on July 26, 2011, 02:49:24 PM
Except of course that it's not true. In Sweden the last 20 years we had at least two anti-immigrant terrorists who were systematically killing innocent people ("The Laserman" I and II).
"anti-immigrant" is more than a bit vague.
And I don't think you need to read a 1000+ page manifesto to grasp this guy is anti-immigrant, for whatever that fact is worth.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.aftenposten.no%2Farchive%2F01516%2F_SCC-AIPub_A-l_pet_1516587x.jpg&hash=16a0183b0cf0c8c4b23d5175d8417ad9bfd558c2)
Say what you will about the Norwads, but they know how to throw a parade. More than a third of the population of Oslo turned out yesterday.
Quote from: Valmy on July 26, 2011, 02:27:44 PM
So saying he is not part of a terrorist organization or political movement is the same as saying nobody else shares his nutty ideas?
What then constitutes a political movement - do you require it to be so formal as to have a political party or is a political movement one which has a particular goal in mind?
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 26, 2011, 03:11:47 PM
Quote from: The Brain on July 26, 2011, 02:49:24 PM
Except of course that it's not true. In Sweden the last 20 years we had at least two anti-immigrant terrorists who were systematically killing innocent people ("The Laserman" I and II).
"anti-immigrant" is more than a bit vague.
And I don't think you need to read a 1000+ page manifesto to grasp this guy is anti-immigrant, for whatever that fact is worth.
*shrug* If head-in-the-sand works for you then great.
It's quite obvious that dismissing the guy as a madman, because of what he did, allows the majority to dismiss all the concerns behind the gesture as well. Very convenient.
G.
Quote from: Grallon on July 26, 2011, 04:42:34 PM
the gesture
Interesting way of characterizing mass murder.
Quote from: mongers on July 26, 2011, 03:06:49 PMMaybe we should have a Languish meet up in Oslo as a sign of solidarity ?
If you want to fly me to Oslo, I'll be more than happy to go. :P
Quote from: Grallon on July 26, 2011, 04:42:34 PM
It's quite obvious that dismissing the guy as a madman, because of what he did, allows the majority to dismiss all the concerns behind the gesture as well. Very convenient.
G.
The "concerns" behind the "gesture" can stand or fall on their own merits. The actions of a psychopath have no relevance. He did not murder 100 people because of those "concerns", but because he is a psychopath.
Maybe it's me, but if someone mass-murdered a bunch of kids, ostensibly in the name of ideology that vaguely resembles my own, even if it wouldn't necessarily cause me to immediately reconsider my views, I would do my best to distance myself from the creep and try to show that either he was a madman who did not really espouse my ideology (and was rather motivated by his insanity) or that his ideology is quite different from my own for reasons a), b) and c). I would not try to argue that he made some good points, overall.
Quote from: Oexmelin on July 26, 2011, 05:13:10 PM
Gallicism. Read it as "his actions".
Got it. The English has a different connotation.
Quote from: Berkut on July 26, 2011, 04:58:25 PM
The "concerns" behind the "gesture" can stand or fall on their own merits. The actions of a psychopath have no relevance. He did not murder 100 people because of those "concerns", but because he is a psychopath.
And I was not talking about the man's mental health. As I and others have said before - eschewing the larger picture on the sole grounds that his recent actions are horrific is setting the table for more of the same.
G.
Quote from: Grallon on July 26, 2011, 05:21:43 PM
And I was not talking about the man's mental health. As I and others have said before - eschewing the larger picture on the sole grounds that his recent actions are horrific is setting the table for more of the same.
By larger picture, do you mean Muslim immigration?
And is the claim thus that not taking action to restrict Muslim immigration will inevitably lead to similar violence because the inherent quality of Muslim immigration is such that shooting Social Democratic youth auxiliaries logically follows?
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 26, 2011, 05:24:53 PM
Quote from: Grallon on July 26, 2011, 05:21:43 PM
And I was not talking about the man's mental health. As I and others have said before - eschewing the larger picture on the sole grounds that his recent actions are horrific is setting the table for more of the same.
By larger picture, do you mean Muslim immigration?
And is the claim thus that not taking action to restrict Muslim immigration will inevitably lead to similar violence because the inherent quality of Muslim immigration is such that shooting Social Democratic youth auxiliaries logically follows?
And on the flipside when there is an islamic terrorist attack, perhaps we should reconsider our views about western ideals.
Quote from: The Brain on July 26, 2011, 04:08:25 PM
Except of course that it's not true. In Sweden the last 20 years we had at least two anti-immigrant terrorists who were systematically killing innocent people ("The Laserman" I and II).
Don't forget the theft of the Arbeit Macht Frei sign, the sale of which was supposed to fund a grandiose nazi terror attack against the Swedish parliament (fortunately it grew out of control until too many people were involved so it never came to be). I would be very much suprised if we were not to see more of these things now after this. And they will learn to use cellular structures more efficiently, if anything it was surprising they hadn't learned that already by the time of the arbeit mach frei-plot.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/dec/30/auschwitz-sign-stolen-terror-plot
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 26, 2011, 05:24:53 PM
By larger picture, do you mean Muslim immigration?
And is the claim thus that not taking action to restrict Muslim immigration will inevitably lead to similar violence because the inherent quality of Muslim immigration is such that shooting Social Democratic youth auxiliaries logically follows?
FWIW there are material forces (which is to say not imagined forces) going on in Scandinavian societies that will readily supply you with a feedback-loop of reinforcement of belief were you to follow certain narrowly put axioms to their conclusion. Not talking about these issues is what breeds these types, I believe, because they feel they are shut out of the market of ideas. I really do think so even though I would politely state this is not the time or place to analyze these forces, but I think I have shown myself very willing to engage in constructive argument with Slargos in the past and not just put my head in the sand in front of concrete problems (however I don't get very much feedback, he still wants me to die, so I don't know what point there is really - it's similar to when I have tried engaging in constructive discussion on Motpol, the far-right blog network; there is none to be found; for example there is censorship by blog owners pre-viewing all posts and then only allowing the ones that fit in).
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 26, 2011, 05:24:53 PM
By larger picture, do you mean Muslim immigration?
And is the claim thus that not taking action to restrict Muslim immigration will inevitably lead to similar violence because the inherent quality of Muslim immigration is such that shooting Social Democratic youth auxiliaries logically follows?
The above is a textbook example of what is generally termed as 'loading the question' - nice work Counsel. ;)
-----
What the moral high-ground crowd seem to fail to understand (or more probably willfully ignore for the sake of posturing) is that there is the man's latent sociopathic/murderous impulses on one hand - and then there are the 'concerns' that (allegedly) motivated his actions on the other. Two different things altogether. The fact that both were conjoined in Friday's killing spree should not infringe on the potential validity of said concerns.
G.
Quote from: Grallon on July 26, 2011, 05:57:16 PM
What the moral high-ground crowd seem to fail to understand (or more probably willfully ignore for the sake of posturing) is that there is the man's latent sociopathic/murderous impulses on one hand - and then there are the 'concerns' that (allegedly) motivated his actions on the other. Two different things altogether. The fact that both were conjoined in Friday's killing spree should not infringe on the potential validity of said concerns.
Certainly, by the same token, this man's actions should not cause individuals to commence a discussion about the potential validity of said concerns. His actions are irrelevant.
Quote from: Grallon on July 26, 2011, 05:57:16 PM
The above is a textbook example of what is generally termed as 'loading the question' - nice work Counsel. ;)
Fair accusation, but the motivation here is to draw out more specifics. And your response retreats back into more vague generalities about "concerns"
You say I have strawmanned you, fair enough. Then explain how and exactly what you mean.
Quote from: Berkut on July 26, 2011, 04:58:25 PM
The "concerns" behind the "gesture" can stand or fall on their own merits. The actions of a psychopath have no relevance. He did not murder 100 people because of those "concerns", but because he is a psychopath.
I haven't seen a medical diagnosis that characterized him as a "Psychopath". I doubt I will, as the term is rarely used in medical context anymore. Even if we used the old terms, I'm skeptical that it is actually caused by Psychopathy.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 26, 2011, 06:03:04 PM
...
You say I have strawmanned you, fair enough. Then explain how and exactly what you mean.
How? By positing that I'm referring specifically to Muslims, considering my long stance about that specific ethno-cultural group.
Muslims are merely the proverbial 'tip of the iceberg' - because they're so often... visible themselves. What the man expressed in his recent actions (and his 'cut&pasting' writings before) is the distillation of a diffuse sentiment amongst large segments of western populations. A sentiment feeding off feelings of insecurity and alienation, both exacerbated by the twins of mass immigration and globalization.
You may chose to ignore, or worse, dismiss - at your own peril.
G.
Quote from: garbon on July 26, 2011, 05:50:11 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 26, 2011, 05:24:53 PM
Quote from: Grallon on July 26, 2011, 05:21:43 PM
And I was not talking about the man's mental health. As I and others have said before - eschewing the larger picture on the sole grounds that his recent actions are horrific is setting the table for more of the same.
By larger picture, do you mean Muslim immigration?
And is the claim thus that not taking action to restrict Muslim immigration will inevitably lead to similar violence because the inherent quality of Muslim immigration is such that shooting Social Democratic youth auxiliaries logically follows?
And on the flipside when there is an islamic terrorist attack, perhaps we should reconsider our views about western ideals.
It's never been a particularly popular idea, but I've never understood the animosity toward it. Shouldn't we be reconsidering our ideals, like, constantly?
Quote from: The Brain on July 26, 2011, 12:00:32 PM
Quote from: Malthus on July 26, 2011, 09:39:25 AM
I tend to agree that the guy's actual politics are immaterial. Although he seemingly stands for a lot of stuff I loathe, and the temptation to rub in guilt by association is high (hello, Slargos! ;) ), it ought to be resisted - he's a killer, he seemingly enjoys the attention that killing gave him, he could have been killing for any one of a number of different ideologies.
Dismissing the importance of ABB's politics with "he's a killer" seems dangerous to me. All active terrorists of note are killers. To fight terrorism we must understand the terrorists, including the ideologies that build them. You need a lot of general sympathizers, passive supporters and active supporters for an actual terrorist to emerge.
The article I posted earlier suggested the opposite, that it's the lack of general sympathizers to moderate their actions that cause the wingnuts to actually engage in violence. You disagree?
We should use this tragedy as an opportunity to discuss what's wrong with Islam, or else all those people have died in vain.
Quote from: Slargos on July 26, 2011, 03:26:35 PM
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.aftenposten.no%2Farchive%2F01516%2F_SCC-AIPub_A-l_pet_1516587x.jpg&hash=16a0183b0cf0c8c4b23d5175d8417ad9bfd558c2)
Say what you will about the Norwads, but they know how to throw a parade. More than a third of the population of Oslo turned out yesterday.
Don't these people have jobs?
Quote from: Neil on July 26, 2011, 06:59:15 PM
Don't these people have jobs?
Attention! You'll soon be reprimanded by the 'Callous' Police.
G.
Quote from: Neil on July 26, 2011, 06:59:15 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 26, 2011, 03:26:35 PM
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.aftenposten.no%2Farchive%2F01516%2F_SCC-AIPub_A-l_pet_1516587x.jpg&hash=16a0183b0cf0c8c4b23d5175d8417ad9bfd558c2)
Say what you will about the Norwads, but they know how to throw a parade. More than a third of the population of Oslo turned out yesterday.
Don't these people have jobs?
Why would they? :huh: Oslo is in Europe. :contract:
Quote from: Ideologue on July 26, 2011, 01:55:28 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on July 26, 2011, 03:37:00 AM
Quote from: Ideologue on July 26, 2011, 03:29:33 AM
Quote from: Gups on July 26, 2011, 03:29:01 AM
Is it possible to ascribe genes to a country?
Only if you take an arbitrary starting point for tracking them, as I am. ;)
Which is necessary; if you don't choose a starting point, we're all Congolese, or if you want to be really hard, we're from a tidewater somewhere lost to time.
Out of Africa: Complete Replacement has been disproved!
Paleoanthropoly hijack!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WP2_fGKHExk
Okay, I watched your video, which was long, but that's fine, and it doesn't contradict anything I said. Neanderthals came from Africa as well.
Going back before the emergence of
H. sapiens is too far.
I will note however that fossil hominins have never been found in the Congo basin.
Quote from: Grallon on July 26, 2011, 07:00:51 PM
Quote from: Neil on July 26, 2011, 06:59:15 PM
Don't these people have jobs?
Attention! You'll soon be reprimanded by the 'Callous' Police.
I rather doubt it.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on July 26, 2011, 07:05:19 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on July 26, 2011, 01:55:28 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on July 26, 2011, 03:37:00 AM
Quote from: Ideologue on July 26, 2011, 03:29:33 AM
Quote from: Gups on July 26, 2011, 03:29:01 AM
Is it possible to ascribe genes to a country?
Only if you take an arbitrary starting point for tracking them, as I am. ;)
Which is necessary; if you don't choose a starting point, we're all Congolese, or if you want to be really hard, we're from a tidewater somewhere lost to time.
Out of Africa: Complete Replacement has been disproved!
Paleoanthropoly hijack!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WP2_fGKHExk
Okay, I watched your video, which was long, but that's fine, and it doesn't contradict anything I said. Neanderthals came from Africa as well.
Going back before the emergence of H. sapiens is too far.
Is is not.
QuoteI will note however that fossil hominins have never been found in the Congo basin.
Well, fine, I just said Congo because it was the first place that came to mind (because it's where bonobos live, so thus it should be depopulated of humans and made the Bonobo Free State).
Have they not been found in Africa at all?
Quote from: Ideologue on July 26, 2011, 07:35:47 PM
Have they not been found in Africa at all?
They're all over the Great Rift.
Quote from: Ideologue on July 26, 2011, 07:35:47 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on July 26, 2011, 07:05:19 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on July 26, 2011, 01:55:28 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on July 26, 2011, 03:37:00 AM
Quote from: Ideologue on July 26, 2011, 03:29:33 AM
Quote from: Gups on July 26, 2011, 03:29:01 AM
Is it possible to ascribe genes to a country?
Only if you take an arbitrary starting point for tracking them, as I am. ;)
Which is necessary; if you don't choose a starting point, we're all Congolese, or if you want to be really hard, we're from a tidewater somewhere lost to time.
Out of Africa: Complete Replacement has been disproved!
Paleoanthropoly hijack!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WP2_fGKHExk
Okay, I watched your video, which was long, but that's fine, and it doesn't contradict anything I said. Neanderthals came from Africa as well.
Going back before the emergence of H. sapiens is too far.
Is is not.
QuoteI will note however that fossil hominins have never been found in the Congo basin.
Have they not been found in Africa at all?
Paleoanthropology fail. :angry:
Australopithicines ranged from South Africa to Ethiopa, and from their to shores of the once great Lake Chad.
Read "The First Human" or "Lucy's Legacy: The Quest for Human Origins" for a basic overview.
I was pretty sure there were plenty of finds in Africa, so what you said made me blink for a second. All a dude says is "Congo," and he gets all kinds of shit.
Quote from: Ideologue on July 26, 2011, 07:43:16 PM
I was pretty sure there were plenty of finds in Africa, so what you said made me blink for a second. All a dude says is "Congo," and he gets all kinds of shit.
Paleoanthropology is a pretty dull subject, so I can hardly blame you for not being especially conversant in it.
Quote from: Neil on July 26, 2011, 08:28:41 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on July 26, 2011, 07:43:16 PM
I was pretty sure there were plenty of finds in Africa, so what you said made me blink for a second. All a dude says is "Congo," and he gets all kinds of shit.
Paleoanthropology is a pretty dull subject, so I can hardly blame you for not being especially conversant in it.
Lies! :mad:
Sickening! :x
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43902300/ns/world_news-europe/
QuoteAnders Behring Breivik planned to inject poison into ammunition before launching his murderous assaults in Norway, British press reported Tuesday.
Norwegian authorities have not confirmed that the 32-year-old man behind Norway's worst post-World War II atrocity carried out the threat. At least 76 people died in Friday's attacks.
In a chilling 1,500-page manifesto emailed to recipients across Europe before the attack, Breivik mentioned his intent to inject lethal doses of liquid nicotine into bullets ensuring that every shot delivered a deadly blow, U.K.'s Daily Mail reported.
"I've now ordered 50ml — 99 percent pure liquid nicotine from a Chinese online supplier," Breivik wrote in his manifesto last year, the Mail reported. It included, "3-4 drops will be injected in hollow point rifle bullets, which will effectively turn it into a lethal chemical weapon."
QuoteLiquid nicotine
What is it?
* It's tasteless and odorless
* Used in anti-smoking products and pesticides
* Lethal dosage for humans: 40 to 60 mg; poisoning, however, can show up after consuming as little as 5mg (Source: The National Capital Poison Center)
Police believe Breivik acted alone when he set off a massive bomb in central Oslo and then hours later massacred 68 others on a nearby island, where up to 600 people — mostly teens —had gathered for a summer political camp. Authorities have not completely ruled out that he had accomplices.
Breivik emailed his manifesto to 1,300 people less than 90 minutes before detonating the bomb in Oslo, The Guardian reported. Breivik told authorities he didn't expect to make it out of alive from the city's center and believed he would have died before carrying out his murderous plot.
Breivik donned a police uniform as part of a ruse to draw young campers to him, appeared in total control during the island rampage, police official Odd Reidar Humlegaard said.
"He's been merciless," Humlegaard said.
Authorities say that in the island attack Breivik used two weapons — a pistol and an assault rifle both bought legally, according to his manifesto.
Story: Police begin to release IDs of Norway massacre victims
On the gun application, Breivik had claimed he wanted a rifle to hunt deer. "It would have been tempting to just write the truth; "executing category A and B cultural Marxists/multiculturalist traitors," just to see their reaction,'" according to his diary entry at the same time of her permit application.
The ammunition used was illegal "dum-dum"-style bullets designed to disintegrate inside the body and cause maximum internal damage, a doctor treating shooting victims confirmed to Reuters.
"We still have to find out whether he did use the nicotine, and toxicology tests on the victims will give us the answer," a police official told the Daily Mail. "But his planning appears so meticulous that we fear he may have used the chemicals in this way. We would not put anything past this man."
Many of the Utoya victims suffered injuries consistent with hollow-point expanding ammunition, The Daily Mail reported.
If convicted, Breivik faces 21 years in prison for the terrorism charges. He told authorities he expected to remain in prison indefinitely. A judge ordered he be held for eight weeks, including four in isolation.
QuoteThe ammunition used was illegal "dum-dum"-style bullets designed to disintegrate inside the body and cause maximum internal damage, a doctor treating shooting victims confirmed to Reuters.
Pretty much a description on how the NATO 5.56mm standard round works, even without being a hollow point round. He was using .223 remington hollow points, the civilian version of the 5.56mm NATO round designed for deer hunting...
A small caliber round like the 5.56mm/.223 rem is very likely to fragment in side a body, when it hits someone with in a range of 200m, this is due to it's high velocity. Some might say that it's a design feature, one of the main reason that NATO keep using the round...
Alternatively, they can be described as designed to prevent over-penetration and collateral damage. They stay in the target. They don't shoot through schools. Or the tree outside.
Quote from: Grallon on July 26, 2011, 05:21:43 PM
Quote from: Berkut on July 26, 2011, 04:58:25 PM
The "concerns" behind the "gesture" can stand or fall on their own merits. The actions of a psychopath have no relevance. He did not murder 100 people because of those "concerns", but because he is a psychopath.
And I was not talking about the man's mental health. As I and others have said before - eschewing the larger picture on the sole grounds that his recent actions are horrific is setting the table for more of the same.
G.
You are not listening.
It is not setting the grounds for anything. He was crazy. Ignoring his bullshit justification for his psychotic actions will not in any way contribute to the next crazy person doing something crazy.
Ignoring the larger picture, or not ignoring the larger picture will have no effect on the likelihood of the next crazy doing something crazy.
Quote from: Grallon on July 26, 2011, 05:57:16 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 26, 2011, 05:24:53 PM
By larger picture, do you mean Muslim immigration?
And is the claim thus that not taking action to restrict Muslim immigration will inevitably lead to similar violence because the inherent quality of Muslim immigration is such that shooting Social Democratic youth auxiliaries logically follows?
The above is a textbook example of what is generally termed as 'loading the question' - nice work Counsel. ;)
-----
What the moral high-ground crowd seem to fail to understand (or more probably willfully ignore for the sake of posturing) is that there is the man's latent sociopathic/murderous impulses on one hand - and then there are the 'concerns' that (allegedly) motivated his actions on the other. Two different things altogether. The fact that both were conjoined in Friday's killing spree should not infringe on the potential validity of said concerns.
G.
Nobody has said his concerns were infringed because he is nuts.
Just that his concerns have nothing to do with his being nuts, his violent actions, or the odds of some other whacko do something whacko in the future.
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on July 27, 2011, 12:03:33 AM
Alternatively, they can be described as designed to prevent over-penetration and collateral damage. They stay in the target. They don't shoot through schools. Or the tree outside.
Also true. My point is that he didn't shoot them with some kind of magic bullets like the media wants us to believe. It was standard ammunition that anyone with a hunting license can buy...
The police started to publish pictures and names of the victims. To be honest, I wish the media took cue and focused on them and not on the picture of the smug psycho, which seems plastered all over the media these days. As far as I am concerned, what these people wanted, their beliefs and views are much more valuable than his. Instead he is being given a pulpit for his idiocy.
What sucks especially about this that even unlike your random terrorist attack, these weren't random people who died - these was the elite, and in a fully positive sense of the word. These were kids with an interest in political and social work, something that's not so common in the modern world. I would much more like to hear what they (or their friends) would have to say, not some retarded idiot.
Quote from: Martinus on July 26, 2011, 05:15:02 PM
Maybe it's me, but if someone mass-murdered a bunch of kids, ostensibly in the name of ideology that vaguely resembles my own, even if it wouldn't necessarily cause me to immediately reconsider my views, I would do my best to distance myself from the creep and try to show that either he was a madman who did not really espouse my ideology (and was rather motivated by his insanity) or that his ideology is quite different from my own for reasons a), b) and c). I would not try to argue that he made some good points, overall.
yes
Quote from: Berkut on July 27, 2011, 12:06:32 AM
Quote from: Grallon on July 26, 2011, 05:21:43 PM
Quote from: Berkut on July 26, 2011, 04:58:25 PM
The "concerns" behind the "gesture" can stand or fall on their own merits. The actions of a psychopath have no relevance. He did not murder 100 people because of those "concerns", but because he is a psychopath.
And I was not talking about the man's mental health. As I and others have said before - eschewing the larger picture on the sole grounds that his recent actions are horrific is setting the table for more of the same.
G.
You are not listening.
It is not setting the grounds for anything. He was crazy. Ignoring his bullshit justification for his psychotic actions will not in any way contribute to the next crazy person doing something crazy.
Ignoring the larger picture, or not ignoring the larger picture will have no effect on the likelihood of the next crazy doing something crazy.
If anything, not ignoring it would prompt other psychos to do shit like this. The world owes the victims to completely ignore what this fucktard had to say about the state of things
I find it extremely preposterous that we should now reexamine our approach to the issues purportedly raised by this madman because this terrorist attack happened.
It is preposterous for at least two reasons. First of all, arguments should stand and fall on their merits, irrespective of whether a madman kills in their name or not. Second (and perhaps most importantly), taking a special care to address the concerns this nut allegedly had would mean terrorism wins - it would be like paying ransom to kidnappers - a dangerous precedent showing other nuts like him that their pet insane cause has a chance to get a better coverage if only they go out and shoot up a bunch of kids.
I think we should resist the temptation of giving the creep the soap box to spout his nonsense and the attention he craves. But doing what he did, he effectively removed himself from the polity. If anything, damnatio memoriae would be the most appropriate punishment.
Quote from: Martinus on July 27, 2011, 04:30:56 AM
Second (and perhaps most importantly), taking a special care to address the concerns this nut allegedly had would mean terrorism wins - it would be like paying ransom to kidnappers - a dangerous precedent showing other nuts like him that their pet insane cause has a chance to get a better coverage if only they go out and shoot up a bunch of kids.
You mean like how Spain pulled out of Iraq after the Madrid-bombings?
And ransom to kidnappers is paid all the time. What sort of rock have you been living under?
Quote
I think we should resist the temptation of giving the creep the soap box to spout his nonsense and the attention he craves. But doing what he did, he effectively removed himself from the polity. If anything, damnatio memoriae would be the most appropriate punishment.
Perhaps that is how things work in Poland. In Norway, they have the rule of law, and that requires, among other things, public and open trials. You cannot prevent him from speaking at his own trial.
Quote from: Bluebook on July 27, 2011, 04:35:07 AMYou mean like how Spain pulled out of Iraq after the Madrid-bombings?
Indeed. Which I think has been quite uniformly decried as an act of shortsighted cowardice.
QuoteAnd ransom to kidnappers is paid all the time. What sort of rock have you been living under?
Most of responsible countries (Italy is not one, btw) do not pay ransom to kidnappers or at least have a policy of not paying to kidnappers (whether they do so under the table or not is another matter). Such policy is quite uniformly held by the reasonable people to be sound and preferable to the alternative.
QuotePerhaps that is how things work in Poland. In Norway, they have the rule of law, and that requires, among other things, public and open trials. You cannot prevent him from speaking at his own trial.
I am not talking about his trial, I am talking about the media publishing excerpts from his manifesto, or quoting him, plastering the entire public sphere with the pictures of his smug face etc.
All in all, you seem to aggressively disagree. Any reason? Do you find his views sympathetic?
Quote from: Martinus on July 27, 2011, 04:42:23 AM
All in all, you seem to aggressively disagree. Any reason? Do you find his views sympathetic?
:lmfao:
Are you a communist?
Quote from: Martinus on July 27, 2011, 04:42:23 AM
Indeed. Which I think has been quite uniformly decried as an act of shortsighted cowardice.
Oh, really? On various internet forums by random anonomys people perhaps, but hardly anywhere else. And defintively not in the official world.
Quote
Most of responsible countries (Italy is not one, btw) do not pay ransom to kidnappers or at least have a policy of not paying to kidnappers (whether they do so under the table or not is another matter). Such policy is quite uniformly held by the reasonable people to be sound and preferable to the alternative.
Look at all the pirates in Somalia. They are getting ransoms practically all the time. "Never negotiate with terrorists" might sound like a catchy bumper-sticker slogan, but it is far far from the realities of this world. And if you were ever the victim of kidnapping, I rather think you would wish for negotiations, rather than some boneheaded principled absurdity ala Reagan.
Quote
I am not talking about his trial, I am talking about the media publishing excerpts from his manifesto, or quoting him, plastering the entire public sphere with the pictures of his smug face etc.
All in all, you seem to aggressively disagree. Any reason? Do you find his views sympathetic?
The logic of modern media is to publish stuff like that. Although I dont think any media has published his entire manifesto. He made sure to make the manifesto accessible, and that stuff has gone viral thanks to various internet forums. I dont think media could or should be blamed for that.
Do I find his views sympathetic? Dont be absurd, take your trolling elsewhere. Just because I "agressively disagree" with your idiotic ideas does not mean I am sympathetic to his idiotic ideas.
MSM's refusal to suppress ABB's views will force Mart to take lethal action. It's beyond his control.
Quote from: Martinus on July 27, 2011, 04:42:23 AM
All in all, you seem to aggressively disagree. Any reason? Do you find his views sympathetic?
For the record, after 9/11, most of us spent an outrageous amount of time trying to find out what the hell Al-Qaeda and bin-Laden were for and against, and new, interesting phrases like "islamofascism" came out of it. Some of us tried to find explanations in models used to explain other types of behaviour, like economic marginalisation. It did help us increase our understanding of how Islamic extremism has come into existence. Most of us, at least I, had no idea who Sayeed Qutb was before 9/11. We knew very little about the politics of the Mujahedin. From this came an understanding that not all Moslems were jihadists. And I would strongly suggest we extend the same courtesy to immigration sceptics as well, maybe even the counterjihadists. Sharing some common ground with the terrorist does not make you a terrorist. It may, on the other hand, make you a moron. The least we can do is not to fall into the same trap as the counterjihadist community and start imagining "an enemy within" ourselves. These invisible enemies have a way of manifesting themselves that makes societies collectively do rather terrible things, be it murdering Kulaks, Jews or your Serb or Bosniak neighbour.
The biggest punishment that Behring Breivik could suffer would be to be completely deleted and erased from all collective recollection and condemned to isolation for the remainder of his time. That will not happen. Mostly because that would be the complete opposite of what the rule of law and open society are.
It's easy to say, and probably mean, that we do not fight terrorism by becoming like them. I think actively acting in a different way is a better idea.
hmm... yes, Nome and Fugeli going all "all FrP are teh Facist" did give me a bit of a stuff is back to normal vibe.
I know I bitch alot about Norwegian collectivism, but in this case there is a strong feeling (apart from hacks like Nome and his ilk) that there is some need to understand before acting. I agree with the idea that a society that produces men like ABB needs to look at what created him.
I know Nome and Bush - 43 have been at ideological war for a decade now. Bush went on TV the day after 9/11 calling Islam a religion of peace (in a mosque of all places) and accusing Al-Qaeda of perverting that religion. Nome wrote in a newspaper op-ed two days after 22-7 (reverse dating schme FTC*) accusing FrP of causing the murders.
I score this round for Bush. I suspect Nome will resign from his job working for the Norwegian Association of Brewers (my next job).
*FTC is For The Confusion, keep up beeyotches
Really didn't take long.
Quote from: Viking on July 27, 2011, 05:45:01 AM
hmm... yes, Nome and Fugeli going all "all FrP are teh Facist" did give me a bit of a stuff is back to normal vibe.
I know I bitch alot about Norwegian collectivism, but in this case there is a strong feeling (apart from hacks like Nome and his ilk) that there is some need to understand before acting. I agree with the idea that a society that produces men like ABB needs to look at what created him.
I know Nome and Bush - 43 have been at ideological war for a decade now. Bush went on TV the day after 9/11 calling Islam a religion of peace (in a mosque of all places) and accusing Al-Qaeda of perverting that religion. Nome wrote in a newspaper op-ed two days after 22-7 (reverse dating schme FTC*) accusing FrP of causing the murders.
I score this round for Bush. I suspect Nome will resign from his job working for the Norwegian Association of Brewers (my next job).
*FTC is For The Confusion, keep up beeyotches
Who is Nome?
Quote from: Martinus on July 27, 2011, 05:54:34 AM
Quote from: Viking on July 27, 2011, 05:45:01 AM
hmm... yes, Nome and Fugeli going all "all FrP are teh Facist" did give me a bit of a stuff is back to normal vibe.
I know I bitch alot about Norwegian collectivism, but in this case there is a strong feeling (apart from hacks like Nome and his ilk) that there is some need to understand before acting. I agree with the idea that a society that produces men like ABB needs to look at what created him.
I know Nome and Bush - 43 have been at ideological war for a decade now. Bush went on TV the day after 9/11 calling Islam a religion of peace (in a mosque of all places) and accusing Al-Qaeda of perverting that religion. Nome wrote in a newspaper op-ed two days after 22-7 (reverse dating schme FTC*) accusing FrP of causing the murders.
I score this round for Bush. I suspect Nome will resign from his job working for the Norwegian Association of Brewers (my next job).
*FTC is For The Confusion, keep up beeyotches
Who is Nome?
katmai's neighbor.
Nome is
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petter_Nome
he among other things compared Bush to Hitler and is the far left multiculturalist that ABB hates.
Nome wrote
http://www.nyemeninger.no/alle_meninger/cat1003/subcat1040/thread162876/#post_162876
Gates of Vienna is blaming
Dexter.
QuoteThe appalling killing in Norway, and its purported justification via a 1500 page "compendium" by the mass murderer Anders Behring Breivik under the pseudonym "Andrew Berwick," has let loose a remarkably well-coordinated campaign against any intellectuals who have opposed Islamisation or jihadists in Europe, a campaign pursued with meticulous precision by the New York Times, the leftwing blogs and the European press, executed against political leaders (Wilders, Merkel, Cameron, Sarkozy et al), against authors of books and opeds and essays, against human rights activists, anyone who has written or acted against violent jihad or the imposition of the violent doctrines of Shariah in western nations.
Yes, I have also found the European press' attacks on Merkel, Cameron and Sarkozy distasteful. Wait. :huh:
Quote"Andrew Berwick" didn't just watch Dexter, he found it "hilarious." He wrote: "I am currently watching Dexter, the series about that forensic mass murderer. Quite hilarious. I'm also looking forward to watch the new movie-series about Carlos the Jackal (the Marxist-Islamist and Che wannabe scumbag)." He mentioned Dexter a second time in a list of other television programs he likes, a fanboy mixing explosives chatting about his viewing habits.
That's some excellent analysis there, Lou. :hug:
Never change, gov.
Quote from: Viking on July 27, 2011, 06:03:40 AM
Nome is
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petter_Nome
he among other things compared Bush to Hitler and is the far left multiculturalist that ABB hates.
Nome wrote
http://www.nyemeninger.no/alle_meninger/cat1003/subcat1040/thread162876/#post_162876
Uhm, so he is a pundit? Why the fuck are you comparing him to Bush then (who, after all, was a leader of a nation and had advisers to tell him what he should and shouldn't say)? It's comparing apples to oranges. Compare him to Glenn Beck or Ann Coulter (liberals are traitors, we should invade and kill all muslim leaders and force-convert the rest to Christianity) and then see who says more insane things.
Quote from: Martinus on July 27, 2011, 06:22:34 AM
Uhm, so he is a pundit? Why the fuck are you comparing him to Bush then (who, after all, is a leader of a nation and has advisers to tell him what he should and shouldn't say)? It's comparing apples to oranges. Compare him to Glenn Beck or Ann Coulter (liberals are traitors, we should invade and kill all muslim leaders and force-convert the rest to Christianity) and then see who says more insane things.
Calling him a pundit is overly generous. He is a non-party political activist. He is just so strongly associated with anti-Bushism that comparing the two fits. Especially since one of Nome's criticisms of Bush is that he is waging a war on muslims with 9/11 as an excuse.
I believe the point I was making is that he is behaving like Beck and Coulter rather than Bush or Stoltenberg.
Quote from: Viking on July 27, 2011, 06:27:49 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 27, 2011, 06:22:34 AM
Uhm, so he is a pundit? Why the fuck are you comparing him to Bush then (who, after all, is a leader of a nation and has advisers to tell him what he should and shouldn't say)? It's comparing apples to oranges. Compare him to Glenn Beck or Ann Coulter (liberals are traitors, we should invade and kill all muslim leaders and force-convert the rest to Christianity) and then see who says more insane things.
Calling him a pundit is overly generous. He is a non-party political activist. He is just so strongly associated with anti-Bushism that comparing the two fits. Especially since one of Nome's criticisms of Bush is that he is waging a war on muslims with 9/11 as an excuse.
I believe the point I was making is that he is behaving like Beck and Coulter rather than Bush or Stoltenberg.
I disagree. Expecting the same standard from an elected politician and a journalist activist is simply silly. You could just as well say that Nome is much better than Bush, because Nome never ordered anyone to drop any bombs and started no wars. :huh:
Quote from: Martinus on July 27, 2011, 06:30:16 AM
Quote from: Viking on July 27, 2011, 06:27:49 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 27, 2011, 06:22:34 AM
Uhm, so he is a pundit? Why the fuck are you comparing him to Bush then (who, after all, is a leader of a nation and has advisers to tell him what he should and shouldn't say)? It's comparing apples to oranges. Compare him to Glenn Beck or Ann Coulter (liberals are traitors, we should invade and kill all muslim leaders and force-convert the rest to Christianity) and then see who says more insane things.
Calling him a pundit is overly generous. He is a non-party political activist. He is just so strongly associated with anti-Bushism that comparing the two fits. Especially since one of Nome's criticisms of Bush is that he is waging a war on muslims with 9/11 as an excuse.
I believe the point I was making is that he is behaving like Beck and Coulter rather than Bush or Stoltenberg.
I disagree. Expecting the same standard from an elected politician and a journalist activist is simply silly. You could just as well say that Nome is much better than Bush, because Nome never ordered anyone to drop any bombs and started no wars. :huh:
As I see, Viking is only expecting the guy to act according to the behavior and values he poses to represent and demands on politicans. Is that really that outrageous?
Quote from: Martinus on July 27, 2011, 06:30:16 AM
I disagree. Expecting the same standard from an elected politician and a journalist activist is simply silly. You could just as well say that Nome is much better than Bush, because Nome never ordered anyone to drop any bombs and started no wars. :huh:
I'm comparing Nome's blaming of an entire political class for the attack to Bush's rather silly declaration that Islam is a religion of peace. Those are the apples I'm comparing.
Quote from: Viking on July 27, 2011, 06:33:12 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 27, 2011, 06:30:16 AM
I disagree. Expecting the same standard from an elected politician and a journalist activist is simply silly. You could just as well say that Nome is much better than Bush, because Nome never ordered anyone to drop any bombs and started no wars. :huh:
I'm comparing Nome's blaming of an entire political class for the attack to Bush's rather silly declaration that Islam is a religion of peace. Those are the apples I'm comparing.
And I'm saying that a politician (especially one who is also a head of state) takes a much greater responsibility for the words not just uttered by him but also his supporters than a single pundit.
A politician of the presidential rank simply will never say this kind of inflammatory things, and this has nothing to do with wisdom or tolerance - it is political marketing. The more extreme message is left to be uttered by people like Coulter or Beck (or Nome) and the objective is for the ordinary followers to get the message without it tarnishing the reputation of the politician directly.
Quote from: Tamas on July 27, 2011, 06:32:21 AMAs I see, Viking is only expecting the guy to act according to the behavior and values he poses to represent and demands on politicans. Is that really that outrageous?
I think it is silly. They serve a different purpose, their words carry a different weight. As I said, apples and oranges.
Quote from: Martinus on July 27, 2011, 06:47:26 AM
Quote from: Tamas on July 27, 2011, 06:32:21 AMAs I see, Viking is only expecting the guy to act according to the behavior and values he poses to represent and demands on politicans. Is that really that outrageous?
I think it is silly. They serve a different purpose, their words carry a different weight. As I said, apples and oranges.
So, a guy, whose PROFESSION is to write and say stuff, is absolutely free to preach water and drink wine? Is that what you say?
Btw, do you guys have right wing anonymous idiots in your internets writing comments on news sites too, or is it a Polish phenomenon? Sometimes when I read what these people write under articles about this guy (my favourite is that he was a socialist like Hitler) I want to shoot myself.
Quote from: Martinus on July 27, 2011, 07:15:24 AM
Btw, do you guys have right wing anonymous idiots in your internets writing comments on news sites too, or is it a Polish phenomenon? Sometimes when I read what these people write under articles about this guy (my favourite is that he was a socialist like Hitler) I want to shoot myself.
I have read a few guys pointing out how the killer looks like a Jew, making it "all too obvious" how he is a jew, part of the global conspiration :lol:
Also a guy said the fact that he never visited Israel indicates he is an agent of Israel
Priceless
Quote from: Martinus on July 27, 2011, 07:15:24 AM
Btw, do you guys have right wing anonymous idiots in your internets writing comments on news sites too, or is it a Polish phenomenon? Sometimes when I read what these people write under articles about this guy (my favourite is that he was a socialist like Hitler) I want to shoot myself.
I was going to say I wish you would go ahead and do it, but A) I have enough people reporting me to the police for death threats as is and B) I really don't. :hug:
Quote from: Martinus on July 27, 2011, 07:15:24 AM
Btw, do you guys have right wing anonymous idiots in your internets writing comments on news sites too, or is it a Polish phenomenon? Sometimes when I read what these people write under articles about this guy (my favourite is that he was a socialist like Hitler) I want to shoot myself.
Definitely not. Unmoderated news site comment sections are almost always overwhelmingly right wing cesspools. Some days, when I inadverently fail to stop reading the news page when the article ends, and keep going to the comments section, I start to think that comments sections in newspaper sites are a plot to discredit democracy.
Quote from: Martinus on July 27, 2011, 06:44:45 AM
And I'm saying that a politician (especially one who is also a head of state) takes a much greater responsibility for the words not just uttered by him but also his supporters than a single pundit.
A politician of the presidential rank simply will never say this kind of inflammatory things, and this has nothing to do with wisdom or tolerance - it is political marketing. The more extreme message is left to be uttered by people like Coulter or Beck (or Nome) and the objective is for the ordinary followers to get the message without it tarnishing the reputation of the politician directly.
Viking's objection seems to be that Nome's readers do *not* view him as a polemicist in the Coulter or Beck mold.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 27, 2011, 07:53:55 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 27, 2011, 06:44:45 AM
And I'm saying that a politician (especially one who is also a head of state) takes a much greater responsibility for the words not just uttered by him but also his supporters than a single pundit.
A politician of the presidential rank simply will never say this kind of inflammatory things, and this has nothing to do with wisdom or tolerance - it is political marketing. The more extreme message is left to be uttered by people like Coulter or Beck (or Nome) and the objective is for the ordinary followers to get the message without it tarnishing the reputation of the politician directly.
Viking's objection seems to be that Nome's readers do *not* view him as a polemicist in the Coulter or Beck mold.
I don't think Beck's viewers/listeners view him that way either. :mellow:
Quote from: Martinus on July 27, 2011, 07:54:58 AM
I don't think Beck's viewers/listeners view him that way either. :mellow:
Agreed. And now that we've established that Nome's readers are no better than Beck's viewers we can move on.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 27, 2011, 07:56:55 AM
Agreed. And now that we've established that Nome's readers are no better than Beck's viewers we can move on.
:P
G.
Quote from: Tamas on July 27, 2011, 06:32:21 AM
As I see, Viking is only expecting the guy to act according to the behavior and values he poses to represent and demands on politicans. Is that really that outrageous?
No. I agree with Viking. It's rare. But it happens.
Nome really made a fool of himself. Then again, he's been making a fool of himself punting beer as well.
I don't know why we named that town in Alaska after him. Big mistake. :(
Quote from: Martinus on July 27, 2011, 07:15:24 AM
Btw, do you guys have right wing anonymous idiots in your internets writing comments on news sites too, or is it a Polish phenomenon? Sometimes when I read what these people write under articles about this guy (my favourite is that he was a socialist like Hitler) I want to shoot myself.
That's the Daily Mail.
Quote from: Martinus on July 27, 2011, 07:15:24 AM
Btw, do you guys have right wing anonymous idiots in your internets writing comments on news sites too, or is it a Polish phenomenon? Sometimes when I read what these people write under articles about this guy (my favourite is that he was a socialist like Hitler) I want to shoot myself.
By all means, don't let us stop you.
Quote from: Grallon on July 26, 2011, 06:36:17 PM
How? By positing that I'm referring specifically to Muslims, considering my long stance about that specific ethno-cultural group.
Muslims are merely the proverbial 'tip of the iceberg' - because they're so often... visible themselves. What the man expressed in his recent actions (and his 'cut&pasting' writings before) is the distillation of a diffuse sentiment amongst large segments of western populations. A sentiment feeding off feelings of insecurity and alienation, both exacerbated by the twins of mass immigration and globalization.
You may chose to ignore, or worse, dismiss - at your own peril.
That is still rather vague. Insecurity and alienation are byproducts of modernity, period, as anyone who has read 19th century Russian novels can attest. Reversing globalization, even if feasible, would not reverse insecurity and alienation; it would alter slightly the way in which it manifests. The same is true for draconian restrictions of immigration - it exchanges the difficulties of integrating immigrants for the problem of facing a demographic decline accompanied by generous public pension and welfare schemes funded out of current tax money.
Mental pathology will always out one way or another. A person whose emotional fulfillment depends on belonging to a long defunct medieval knightly order is going to have serious problems in any modern society, no matter how configured. The notion that public policy should be calibrated in response to these kinds of pathologies is not one I accept.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 27, 2011, 09:13:21 AM
...
The notion that public policy should be calibrated in response to these kinds of pathologies is not one I accept.
Ignore or dismiss - not the loons - but the silent majority that is *not* acting out... At least not yet.
I reject the notion that everything is peachy and there's no problem at all. This guy's is symptomatic of something besides his apparent personal mental illness.
G.
What mental illness is that?
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 27, 2011, 09:13:21 AM
Mental pathology will always out one way or another. A person whose emotional fulfillment depends on belonging to a long defunct medieval knightly order is going to have serious problems in any modern society, no matter how configured. The notion that public policy should be calibrated in response to these kinds of pathologies is not one I accept.
Dont you think you are making this rather easy for yourself? This guy has opinions about immigration and islam that are shared by a not insignificant part of the population. His ideas are really not that far from the extreme-right/populist-political parties that hover around 5-20% of the votes, depending on which scandinavian country we are talking about.
To simply say that this is a result of a mental pathology, and that public policy should ignore it alltogether is rather...naive. I would even venture to say that such reasoning borders on the dangerously naive.
I know the trouble we have in Sweden, trying to combat these opinions and preventing the far-right party in parliament from getting any influence over policy. How easy it would be if we could just dismiss them as lunatics and pretend they dont exist. But alas, real life is not like that at all.
Quote from: Bluebook on July 27, 2011, 10:37:24 AM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 27, 2011, 09:13:21 AM
Mental pathology will always out one way or another. A person whose emotional fulfillment depends on belonging to a long defunct medieval knightly order is going to have serious problems in any modern society, no matter how configured. The notion that public policy should be calibrated in response to these kinds of pathologies is not one I accept.
Dont you think you are making this rather easy for yourself? This guy has opinions about immigration and islam that are shared by a not insignificant part of the population. His ideas are really not that far from the extreme-right/populist-political parties that hover around 5-20% of the votes, depending on which scandinavian country we are talking about.
To simply say that this is a result of a mental pathology, and that public policy should ignore it alltogether is rather...naive. I would even venture to say that such reasoning borders on the dangerously naive.
I know the trouble we have in Sweden, trying to combat these opinions and preventing the far-right party in parliament from getting any influence over policy. How easy it would be if we could just dismiss them as lunatics and pretend they dont exist. But alas, real life is not like that at all.
You really don't get it, do you, Hortlund?
Quote from: Bluebook on July 27, 2011, 10:37:24 AM
Dont you think you are making this rather easy for yourself? This guy has opinions about immigration and islam that are shared by a not insignificant part of the population. His ideas are really not that far from the extreme-right/populist-political parties that hover around 5-20% of the votes, depending on which scandinavian country we are talking about.
Well let's say that about 10% of Europeans support far right tendencies and parties. That gives us about 40 million people. I don't think there is much risk that 40 million people, if not dealt with either by chastisement and finger-wagging (the Pat solution) or appeasement (the Grallon/slargos solution) are likely to pick up rifles and start murdering their fellow citizens en masse.
What sets apart Breivik is not his general hostility to Islam or opposition to immigration, neither of which are that unusual, but rather the particular way he conceived of combatting these problems. Obviously I am not a fan of the European far right, but that doesn't mean I am prepared to say that inherent in their political stance is a commitment to horrific violence. the logic that says otherwise is the same logic that attacks environmentalism when the unabomber strikes, or socialism when the Red Brigades murder someone, or the concept of regional autonomy when ETA commits some atrocity.
There are plenty of controversial issues that seem to lead to no extreme solutions at all. Tax policy creates a lot of debate but very few deaths. That may have to do with the lack of bloggers painting tax policy change as the salvation of Europe and that anyone who is opposed to tax cuts or tax hikes is a traitor.
Quote from: Norgy on July 27, 2011, 05:28:47 AM
For the record, after 9/11, most of us spent an outrageous amount of time trying to find out what the hell Al-Qaeda and bin-Laden were for and against, and new, interesting phrases like "islamofascism" came out of it. Some of us tried to find explanations in models used to explain other types of behaviour, like economic marginalisation. It did help us increase our understanding of how Islamic extremism has come into existence. Most of us, at least I, had no idea who Sayeed Qutb was before 9/11. We knew very little about the politics of the Mujahedin. From this came an understanding that not all Moslems were jihadists. And I would strongly suggest we extend the same courtesy to immigration sceptics as well, maybe even the counterjihadists. Sharing some common ground with the terrorist does not make you a terrorist. It may, on the other hand, make you a moron. The least we can do is not to fall into the same trap as the counterjihadist community and start imagining "an enemy within" ourselves. These invisible enemies have a way of manifesting themselves that makes societies collectively do rather terrible things, be it murdering Kulaks, Jews or your Serb or Bosniak neighbour.
You know I think that's quite reasonable.
If after 9/11 you thought it worthwhile to examine the stated agenda of the terrorists as well as the cultural, economical and political pressures that brought the attack about; and you wanted to use that examination to help form your response - then it's very reasonable to use the same approach to ABB's actions.
Same with the inverse argument - if you wanted to dismiss any kind of analysis of motives beyond "they're the enemy and they hate us", there is no need to understand the roots of terror for 9/11 then I can understand a similar response to ABB.
It's the ones who have one response to one of the incident, but the opposite to the other I'm somewhat sceptical of.
So in view of that, I'll revise my position to saying that yes it is worthwhile to understand what ABB's complaints are and to understand the various pressures that caused him to act. That does mean examining what he said, though it doesn't mean taking it at face value. At the same time, it also means being vigilant against further attacks and putting the necessary resources into monitoring and controlling this threat vector that has proven itself more serious than previously thought. It also means not compromising on our basic values no matter how they may offend ABB or any other terrorist.
As for the whole "he's just a crazy guy, that was his motive so we don't need to consider anything else" - I'm not sure I buy it.
I expect that the 9/11 highjackers and other terrorists were crazy in similar ways. That does not mean that they, nor ABB, didn't have some complaints that were legitimately rooted in reality. Now, I think it's fair to choose to examine or choose not examine the merits of those complaints, but I don't think "they're just crazy" is an adequate explanation.
Similarly, while some of what caused these terrorists to act may in fact be a response to real issues, a fair bit of it is also a result of profound misunderstandings and thoroughly broken analytical framework. I can understand wanting to ignore the whole toxic thing, but I can also understand why someone might want to tease out what is actually based on actual issues - and whether it's possible to address them in a way that alleviates some of the pressure - and what is simply fantasy.
Personally, from what I can see ABB's framework is utterly perverse and I struggle to see where he points to anything that could be done better - but then, I'm not overly familiar with the situation in Norway.
Quote from: Viking on July 27, 2011, 06:03:40 AM
Nome is
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petter_Nome
he among other things compared Bush to Hitler and is the far left multiculturalist that ABB hates.
Nome wrote
http://www.nyemeninger.no/alle_meninger/cat1003/subcat1040/thread162876/#post_162876
Sounds like a better comparison for Nome is someone like Glen Beck (who's already come out and called the murdered Norwegians "Hitler Jugend") than Bush.
A more fair comparison would be Bush to Stoltenberg.
Quote from: Jacob on July 27, 2011, 12:29:33 PM
You know I think that's quite reasonable.
If after 9/11 you thought it worthwhile to examine the stated agenda of the terrorists as well as the cultural, economical and political pressures that brought the attack about; and you wanted to use that examination to help form your response - then it's very reasonable to use the same approach to ABB's actions.
Same with the inverse argument - if you wanted to dismiss any kind of analysis of motives beyond "they're the enemy and they hate us", there is no need to understand the roots of terror for 9/11 then I can understand a similar response to ABB.
It's the ones who have one response to one of the incident, but the opposite to the other I'm somewhat sceptical of.
The obvious difference between this guy and the 9/11 hijackers is that this guy, as far as anyone knows, acted alone like his hero the Unabomber and merely *fantasized* he was part of some mystic knights templar and the 9/11 hijackers *were*, in actuality, part of a group or movement.
To the extent that mass murderers are motivated or directed by some organization, it is worthwhile to understand the hallmarks of that organization - as it enables their detection, and hopefully, arrest. If a mass murderer is motivated or directed by a fantasy organization that he invented himself, knowing the details of that fantasy - such as the exact degrees of initiation into that (non existant) knighthood - are simply fodder for the morbidly curious, or possibly psychiatrists.
One would hope that knowing more about lone-wolf killers would lead to their detection, but sadly this appears not to be the case - no-one knows what creates such people. Certainly it isn't the mere issues that they latch on to, since different ones choose completely different issues even when they are (as in this case) apparently inspired by each other - the Unibomber was "all about" neo-luddism and environmentalism, and could not, as far as I know, have cared less about immigration.
On a somewhat related note, interesting article in the last Atlantic about brain function and crime.
The University of Texas gunman (the one mentioned in Full Metal Jacket) had a tumor in his frontal lobes and spoke and wrote repeatedly about his inability to control his own actions.
Quote from: Norgy on July 27, 2011, 12:10:40 PM
There are plenty of controversial issues that seem to lead to no extreme solutions at all. Tax policy creates a lot of debate but very few deaths.
Cornwallis begs to differ.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 27, 2011, 12:54:33 PM
Quote from: Norgy on July 27, 2011, 12:10:40 PM
There are plenty of controversial issues that seem to lead to no extreme solutions at all. Tax policy creates a lot of debate but very few deaths.
Cornwallis begs to differ.
I was about to say "apart from the American revolution", but it seemed somewhat demeaning to compare it to terrorism. I am not Neil.
There are certainly issues that are hot and emotionally laden that do tend to lead to extreme measures. Ecology and environmentalism, abortion. Probably more.
Quote from: Norgy on July 27, 2011, 01:09:44 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 27, 2011, 12:54:33 PM
Quote from: Norgy on July 27, 2011, 12:10:40 PM
There are plenty of controversial issues that seem to lead to no extreme solutions at all. Tax policy creates a lot of debate but very few deaths.
Cornwallis begs to differ.
I was about to say "apart from the American revolution", but it seemed somewhat demeaning to compare it to terrorism. I am not Neil.
There are certainly issues that are hot and emotionally laden that do tend to lead to extreme measures. Ecology and environmentalism, abortion. Probably more.
In the US, taxes are a hot and emotional topic - see for example the "Tea Party".
Quote
AP Exclusive: 'Knight Templar' says no Norway link
LONDON (AP) — A British right-wing blogger linked to the Norway gunman has confirmed the existence of an anti-Muslim group inspired by ancient crusaders that the killer claims he was a member of.
But in an interview with The Associated Press, the Briton denied Anders Behring Breivik belonged to his Knights Templar group and said he'd never heard of the Norwegian before the attacks.
Breivik said in his 1,500-page manifesto that he was mentored by a British man known as "Richard (the Lionhearted)" — and the leader of the far-right English Defense League has told AP that "Richard" is Paul Ray, author of the blog "Lionheart."
But Ray, who split with the EDL years ago, denied any connection to Breivik.
In a telephone interview from his home in Malta, Ray said he was not at a 2002 meeting in London which Breivik claims gave birth to a group called the Knights Templar of Europe, whose founders included himself and "Richard."
However, the 35-year-old Ray said he shares Breivik's views and has several apparent similarities with the "mentor" in the killer's manifesto, chiefly that he leads an anti-Muslim group called The Ancient Order of the Templar Knights. But Ray denied knowing Breivik and suggested the group had no formal structure. He refused to name any members or indicate how many it has.
"It's an idea," Ray said. "It's not like it's a massive organization. It's a belief."
But he denies he approved of Breivik's methods, which include killing innocents to draw attention to his philosophy.
"I'd like to express my deepest sympathy to the people of Norway and to the families who have lost children," Ray said. "It's a horrendous crime that has been committed by someone what goes beyond the realm of human understanding."
Breivik, 32, claims he committed Friday's massacre as the order's first blow in an apocalyptic war against Muslims, immigrants and leftists to prevent what he believes is an Islamic attempt to take over western Europe.
Ray said he fled England two years ago after being arrested for stirring up racial hatred, and settled in Malta. He plans to return next week to see his family even though he doesn't know if he will be arrested on outstanding charges.
"I'm willing to speak to anyone in authority and to be open about everything," he said.
Breivik has said the PCCTS, a Latin acronym for the Knights Templar, has several cells in Western countries and two more in Norway. In his manifesto, he claimed he sets the group's agenda.
"We have the right and a duty to temporarily seize political and military control of our country until all ... traitors have been hunted down and executed and all Muslims have been deported," he writes.
He also sought to detect links between the Knights Templar and the EDL: "I wonder sometimes if one of the EDL founders was one of the co-founders of PCCTS, I guess I'll never know for sure. EDL is a nonviolent protest organization though but I noticed they have copied a lot from the PCCTS."
The leader of the EDL, Stephen Lennon, said Tuesday he doesn't know Breivik and kicked Ray out shortly after the EDL was formed, on grounds he was bent on taking over the group with his own agenda.
Ray, who says he was born Paul Sonato but took his mother's maiden name, denied ever having heard of the Norwegian before Friday's massacres.
"Being implicated in this, I just want the truth to come out and it proven that I'm nothing whatever to do with this," Ray said.
Ray said the confessed killer appeared to have taken some of his ideas and used them as justification for his killing spree.
"This is getting bad. It's really pointing at us. All these things he's been talking about are linked to us," he said. "It's like he's created this whole thing around us."
Ray often shares views similar to Breivik's on his anti-Muslim blog, whose title is a reference to King Richard I of England, who led Christian crusades in the 12th century.
"My thoughts are the same as that Anders, that there is a threat to our way of life from Islam. I'm not going to say I don't think there is because I do," Ray said. "Me being a Christian, I do look towards the Templars throughout history and how they've defended us from the jihad."
The order, Ray said, was set up in response to "Muslims in our country (England) trying to take over our country. Let's not pretend it's not happening. They are actively declaring their vision to take our country over."
Ray's blog discussed establishing a Knights Templar order as far back as 2007: "Where are the 'original' Knights Templar's, Gods Army on Earth now, it is time you came out of the shadows and helped your fellow country men, the time of peace and security has passed."
Paisley Dodds contributed to this report from Luton, England.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 27, 2011, 12:54:33 PM
Quote from: Norgy on July 27, 2011, 12:10:40 PM
There are plenty of controversial issues that seem to lead to no extreme solutions at all. Tax policy creates a lot of debate but very few deaths.
Cornwallis begs to differ.
Then again, the american revoution along with the glorious one are the only two idealistic revolutions that did not eat it's children.
QuoteRay's blog discussed establishing a Knights Templar order as far back as 2007: "Where are the 'original' Knights Templar's Gods Army on Earth now, it is time you came out of the shadows
News flash Paul, they ran into a spot of trouble with the notorious jihadist Phillip the Fair a few years back.
No doubt a careful analysis of Mr. Ray's erudite blog will provide unique and powerful insights that will help prevent future terrorism.
Well, this whole Knights Templar business is very uneasy to see, as we all know they were secret Mohammedans. So I guess Slargos is right. It was the Moslems. :mad:
Quote from: Norgy on July 27, 2011, 01:55:40 PM
Well, this whole Knights Templar business is very uneasy to see, as we all know they were secret Mohammedans. So I guess Slargos is right. It was the Moslems. :mad:
Bahomet has a bone to pick with you ... ;)
This whole Templar business reminds me of the Da Vinci Code craze some years back.
What has Dan Brown wrought?
Quote from: Norgy on July 27, 2011, 01:55:40 PM
Well, this whole Knights Templar business is very uneasy to see, as we all know they were secret Mohammedans. So I guess Slargos is right. It was the Moslems. :mad:
Priory of the Zion.
Zion.
:hmm:
Muslim Zionists.
And what were templars accused of? Sodomy.
Gay Muslim Zionists. :contract:
Quote from: Norgy on July 27, 2011, 12:10:40 PM
There are plenty of controversial issues that seem to lead to no extreme solutions at all. Tax policy creates a lot of debate but very few deaths. That may have to do with the lack of bloggers painting tax policy change as the salvation of Europe and that anyone who is opposed to tax cuts or tax hikes is a traitor.
The whisky rebellion, for one. And I wouldn't be surprised if a Tea Party nut wouldn't go on a shooting spree if Obama found a way to hike the taxes.
Some ideologies are more violent than others (religion is a big deal here) but if there is a nut, there's a way.
Quote from: Jacob on July 27, 2011, 12:29:33 PM
Quote from: Norgy on July 27, 2011, 05:28:47 AM
For the record, after 9/11, most of us spent an outrageous amount of time trying to find out what the hell Al-Qaeda and bin-Laden were for and against, and new, interesting phrases like "islamofascism" came out of it. Some of us tried to find explanations in models used to explain other types of behaviour, like economic marginalisation. It did help us increase our understanding of how Islamic extremism has come into existence. Most of us, at least I, had no idea who Sayeed Qutb was before 9/11. We knew very little about the politics of the Mujahedin. From this came an understanding that not all Moslems were jihadists. And I would strongly suggest we extend the same courtesy to immigration sceptics as well, maybe even the counterjihadists. Sharing some common ground with the terrorist does not make you a terrorist. It may, on the other hand, make you a moron. The least we can do is not to fall into the same trap as the counterjihadist community and start imagining "an enemy within" ourselves. These invisible enemies have a way of manifesting themselves that makes societies collectively do rather terrible things, be it murdering Kulaks, Jews or your Serb or Bosniak neighbour.
You know I think that's quite reasonable.
If after 9/11 you thought it worthwhile to examine the stated agenda of the terrorists as well as the cultural, economical and political pressures that brought the attack about; and you wanted to use that examination to help form your response - then it's very reasonable to use the same approach to ABB's actions.
Same with the inverse argument - if you wanted to dismiss any kind of analysis of motives beyond "they're the enemy and they hate us", there is no need to understand the roots of terror for 9/11 then I can understand a similar response to ABB.
It's the ones who have one response to one of the incident, but the opposite to the other I'm somewhat sceptical of.
So in view of that, I'll revise my position to saying that yes it is worthwhile to understand what ABB's complaints are and to understand the various pressures that caused him to act. That does mean examining what he said, though it doesn't mean taking it at face value. At the same time, it also means being vigilant against further attacks and putting the necessary resources into monitoring and controlling this threat vector that has proven itself more serious than previously thought. It also means not compromising on our basic values no matter how they may offend ABB or any other terrorist.
As for the whole "he's just a crazy guy, that was his motive so we don't need to consider anything else" - I'm not sure I buy it.
I expect that the 9/11 highjackers and other terrorists were crazy in similar ways. That does not mean that they, nor ABB, didn't have some complaints that were legitimately rooted in reality. Now, I think it's fair to choose to examine or choose not examine the merits of those complaints, but I don't think "they're just crazy" is an adequate explanation.
Similarly, while some of what caused these terrorists to act may in fact be a response to real issues, a fair bit of it is also a result of profound misunderstandings and thoroughly broken analytical framework. I can understand wanting to ignore the whole toxic thing, but I can also understand why someone might want to tease out what is actually based on actual issues - and whether it's possible to address them in a way that alleviates some of the pressure - and what is simply fantasy.
Personally, from what I can see ABB's framework is utterly perverse and I struggle to see where he points to anything that could be done better - but then, I'm not overly familiar with the situation in Norway.
I get your point but well, I think this guy is a Herostratus.
And Greeks were right how to deal with ones like him.
Quote from: Jacob on July 27, 2011, 12:33:51 PM
Quote from: Viking on July 27, 2011, 06:03:40 AM
Nome is
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petter_Nome
he among other things compared Bush to Hitler and is the far left multiculturalist that ABB hates.
Nome wrote
http://www.nyemeninger.no/alle_meninger/cat1003/subcat1040/thread162876/#post_162876
Sounds like a better comparison for Nome is someone like Glen Beck (who's already come out and called the murdered Norwegians "Hitler Jugend") than Bush.
A more fair comparison would be Bush to Stoltenberg.
You used the same analogy as I did. Do you feel dirty? :P
Quote from: Martinus on July 27, 2011, 03:59:24 PM
You used the same analogy as I did. Do you feel dirty? :P
I take arguments on their own merits. What Hitler might have thought about heliocentrism is irrelevant for me, unless his arguments are good.
So the guy was a Mason.
Does this surprise anyone?
Masonry opens doors. In this case, with bombs.
Incidentally, do you think right winger idiots will use this as a reason to somewhat make their rhetoric less extreme and violent or will we still see such examples of fair and balanced speech as:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fecx.images-amazon.com%2Fimages%2FI%2F51WGRMWB35L._SS500_.jpg&hash=97fd32c8b9e9914df01316381f303aa6f27001b6)
or perhaps this:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lybrary.com%2Fimages%2F1594034958.jpg&hash=e009821543d33de27dd9c4d1b0e756db8f4dce1d)
Wow, it even has a blurb from Bernie Goldberg. You know it has to be good.
Martinus, did you plagiarize from The Daily Show from tonight?
How could you tell if someone sabotaged America?
Quote from: DGuller on July 28, 2011, 02:26:31 AM
Martinus, did you plagiarize from The Daily Show from tonight?
Yes, I just watched it. :D
Støre does the right thing
http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=no&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.vg.no%2Fnyheter%2Finnenriks%2Foslobomben%2Fartikkel.php%3Fartid%3D10080937
QuoteJonas Gahr Store goes out to the Progress Party accused
Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Store will not allocate blame for the terrorist tragedy of other political parties.
Now, Jonas Gahr Store strongly against critics who accuse FRP for spreading xenophobia.
- It is a time for everything, and this is not the time to point fingers at other political parties and their leaders, said Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Store to class struggle .
READ ALSO: Siv Jensen regrets killing comparison
Wednesday was former NRK-profile Petter Nome and Professor of Social Medicine, Per Fugelli, the attack on the Progressive Party to fuel more xenophobia and violent islamhat. Nome regretted later their statements.
Persons charged with terrorist Anders Behring Breivik was previously a member of both the FRP and the party's youth organization and expresses extreme-right views in his manifesto.
READ ALL ABOUT terror strikes HERE
Foreign Minister not like that the FRP is identified as a scapegoat.
- All parties have stood together and lined up in a dignified manner. It applies not least the youth parties, which are affected in a very special way. It is the story of a political system that demands respect, says Minister. He stressed that terrorist attacks will require a political debate about "hate speech" against Muslims.
Critical Progress Party mayor
At the same time the Progress Party mayor Knut Hanselmann in Askøy in Bergen that the terrorist attacks mean that the party must stop talking about the immigrants destroy the Norwegian culture. He would rather focus on resource issues.
READ ALSO: Knights Templar: - Breivik is not one of us!
He told Bergens Tidende that he believes the attacks and Breivik's manifesto will have lasting consequences for how the party stands.
- I think we will get a different type of talk when it comes to immigration. Not only in the campaign, but in years to come. Progress Party is the party that will have a minimum of immigration in Norway, and we will continue to hold. But the language used must be completely different and more objective, he said.
VGTV: Jens Stoltenberg: - It is important to cry
He believes it is wrong to focus so much on culture.
- We should focus on things that municipalities do not have the capacity to receive more when it comes to receiving apparatus, integration, child protection and the like. We can have a substantive discussion, as opposed to talking about culture and society is torn apart, he said. (© AP)
A bit of info about Immigration to Norway. Remember Norway only has 4.5 Million people.
http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=no&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.adressa.no%2Fnyheter%2Farticle1668982.ece
QuoteImmigration Skepticism
Over the past 20 years, there have been 420,000 immigrants to Norway from countries outside the region. 42,000 of them came in 2010. Approximately half of the immigrant population comes from non-western countries, many from Pakistan, Iraq, Somalia, Vietnam and Turkey.
Annual born between 50000 and 60000 children in this country. This means that the demographic landscape is now changing faster and more profound than in any previous historical period.
Integration and Diversity - IMDI - every year since 2005, a comprehensive intervjundersøkelse to survey the population's views on immigration and integration. With such a long time series, we get a pretty good picture of attitudes and how these have evolved. The main picture that emerges is twofold. On the one hand, characterized the attitudes of tolerance and equality. There is acceptance of diversity and difference, and high support for the view that immigrants should have the same rights as the majority population. On the other hand, the results show widespread restrictive attitudes towards immigration, and the majority respond affirmatively to the statement, "We should not let in more immigrants to Norway". The figures from year to year is relatively stable, but the trend is negative. When asked how one thinks the integration of immigrants into Norwegian society works, views very clear. Under one percent responded that this is very good, while half responded that it is fairly or very bad. The trend here is also negative. Unlike in many other studies, the attitudes small correlation with characteristics such as gender, age or residency.
Considered from a scientific point of view, many of the questions is problematic, because there is no distinction between different categories of immigrants. We know not whether those who respond negatively or positively think of Polish construction workers or African social clients, or whether they assume a kind of average consideration. Other questions in the survey may provide an indication of what the outcome would have been if the question was asked were more differentiated. While most people think immigration from Eastern Europe made a positive contribution to the Norwegian economy, there is widespread skepticism about Muslims and Islam.
Studies says in itself nothing about the reasons for that attitude to immigration is becoming more negative. Tentatively we can formulate three alternative hypotheses, which has to do with influence, knowledge and experiences.
Impact hypothesis says that the population's views are shaped by opinion leaders and politicians: This is Siv Jensen, Carl I. Hagen and the Progress Party's work. Knowledge hypothesis says that skepticism must be due to lack of knowledge, and that more information and more balanced representation in the media will eventually lead to more positive attitudes. Experience The hypothesis takes the opposite starting point: When the skepticism of (especially non-Western) immigrants is strong and growing, because it just more widespread knowledge of the problematic and negative aspects of immigration.
Impact hypothesis is weak. Politicians can NOK help bring issues up the public agenda, but their ability to shape public opinion is relatively limited, at least over time. And if it were true that politicians form attitudes, how reasonable is it to assume that the skeptics in the Progress Party has much greater influence than more liberal immigration politicians in other parties? Immigration skepticism is not much help from the second write and articulate participants in public debate. Rather the contrary.
If more restrictive attitudes due to lack of knowledge about immigration and immigrants, one would think that the consequences of lack of knowledge would decrease over time, as there are more immigrants and more exposed to people with different backgrounds, at work, school, neighborhood, through media and in public spaces. But IMDI studies do not indicate that there is no such effect. There is an increasing number of people who have more contact with immigrants, but without this leading to more positive views.
Thus we are left with the experience hypothesis. When developing trend in attitudes is negative, it must be because more people have negative experiences, and because knowledge of the problematic aspects of certain types of foreign cultural immigration becomes more widespread. One can also assume that many see the aggregate impact of changes in population composition, and that they do not want such a development.
Some unsourced reports from different newspapers with different bylines have claimed that ABB was radicalized in the '90s and this radicalization was initiated by muslim immigrants who cheered whenever americans suffered loss or were bombed by scud missiles.
:lol:
"If they would only get to know the immigrants and understand them better, their views would change."
Yes, I'm sure that why all those journalists and politicians live in the paki ghettoes. :D
Quoteviolent islamhat
:lol: Is this like a cross between "islamotard" and "asshat"?
Quote from: Slargos on July 28, 2011, 04:34:09 AM
:lol:
"If they would only get to know the immigrants and understand them better, their views would change."
Yes, I'm sure that why all those journalists and politicians live in the paki ghettoes. :D
Based on what I know about immigrants from Languish, I know I wouldn't want a Swede to move into my neighborhood. :P
Quote from: Martinus on July 28, 2011, 05:05:39 AM
Quoteviolent islamhat
:lol: Is this like a cross between "islamotard" and "asshat"?
islamhat = hate of islam
Quote from: Martinus on July 28, 2011, 05:06:53 AM
Quote from: Slargos on July 28, 2011, 04:34:09 AM
:lol:
"If they would only get to know the immigrants and understand them better, their views would change."
Yes, I'm sure that why all those journalists and politicians live in the paki ghettoes. :D
Based on what I know about immigrants from Languish, I know I wouldn't want a Swede to move into my neighborhood. :P
See, we agree more than we disagree. :P
Quote from: Martinus on July 28, 2011, 02:09:49 AM
Incidentally, do you think right winger idiots will use this as a reason to somewhat make their rhetoric less extreme and violent
You mean, will their opinions be affected in any way by facts? Don't count on it.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 28, 2011, 08:58:22 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 28, 2011, 02:09:49 AM
Incidentally, do you think right winger idiots will use this as a reason to somewhat make their rhetoric less extreme and violent
You mean, will their opinions be affected in any way by facts? Don't count on it.
Ehr. How does what this guy did in any way change the agenda for "right winger idiots"?
What new "facts" have arisen from this?
Quote from: The Brain on July 28, 2011, 02:27:29 AM
How could you tell if someone sabotaged America?
You would consider whether the country was near bankruptcy....
Quote from: A Cop
What will happen to your kid when attacked by an active shooter?
We law enforcement have and will continue to train for the active shooter. When it happens I can only hope that I am close and that I get there first. Cops like me can't stand not to be there and to not be there fast. Regardless, we can only get there so fast and people will die while waiting for us.
I don't find it surprising, just disappointing, that the Norwegian teenagers did not team up and stop this lone shooter from massacring over 80 people. I'm not so sure it wouldn't happen the same with American teenagers today. We saw what happened at Virginia Tech when grown college kids simple waited for their turn to die.
I was the keynote speaker a few weeks ago at a state organized school district law enforcement conference. I discovered that even after Columbine and all the active shooter incidents since that the schools may be having some lock down drills the students are still not being taught that they may have to defend themselves.
ADD is the acronym that we recommend the schools use and teach their student body. A) AVOID- get away, escape the situation to safety. D) DENY- if you cannot escape, deny the threat access to your location. Lock and barricade doors, cover windows. D) DEFEND- If avoid is impossible, and deny has failed and you are about to die...DON'T DIE! You must defend. Two or more full size students and/or teachers can overpower one individual with a firearm. One must attack the firearm while the other or others attack the shooter. Take him down and stop him from killing.
Apparently, it's not pleasant to discuss such things with students. It could scare them. Let's just do fire drills instead and tell the kids how smart they are, no kids left behind, just dead on the floor.
If you have children in school find out from the administration what the active shooter policy and plan is and what they are telling your children to do. Remember that YOU are the primary teacher of your children. It is your responsibility to see them succeed, achieve good grades, get into college, know how to stay safe and if necessary, defend themselves.
It's a great big beautiful world out there, but it just takes one nut to kill eighty people in short order and there are plenty of them out there too. Do not leave home without your equipment and your head on a spindle. If you feel like you haven't been training enough lately, then you haven't been, take care of it.
QuoteWhat will happen to your kid when attacked by an active shooter?
The new brochure found at the public library.
I hate how in this world panic > statistics. The chance of being confronted by a shooter is lower than a chance of falling out of your bathtub and dying.
Quote from: Martinus on July 28, 2011, 03:26:03 PM
I hate how in this world panic > statistics. The chance of being confronted by a shooter is lower than a chance of falling out of your bathtub and dying.
Yet people buy bath mats and install handles in the tub to prevent falling. :P
I notice Morrissey has been voicing his opinion.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/celebs/news/2011/07/28/morrissey-says-norway-massacre-is-nothing-compared-to-the-actions-of-fast-food-chains-115875-23301837/
QuoteMORRISSEY has sparked outrage after saying the tragedy in Norway was "nothing" compared to the actions of fast food chains.
The controversial singer, 52, made his remark while on stage at a gig in Warsaw on Sunday night.
Before launching into his hit Meat is Murder, the outspoken vegetarian made reference to the horrific events last Friday.
Referring to the death toll as thought at the time he said: "We all live in a murderous world, as the events in Norway have shown, with 97 dead. Though that is nothing compared to what happens in McDonald's and Kentucky Fried S*** every day."
I suppose he got a booger sandwich once.
Quote from: Norgy on July 28, 2011, 03:37:10 PM
I notice Morrissey has been voicing his opinion.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/celebs/news/2011/07/28/morrissey-says-norway-massacre-is-nothing-compared-to-the-actions-of-fast-food-chains-115875-23301837/
QuoteMORRISSEY has sparked outrage after saying the tragedy in Norway was "nothing" compared to the actions of fast food chains.
The controversial singer, 52, made his remark while on stage at a gig in Warsaw on Sunday night.
Before launching into his hit Meat is Murder, the outspoken vegetarian made reference to the horrific events last Friday.
Referring to the death toll as thought at the time he said: "We all live in a murderous world, as the events in Norway have shown, with 97 dead. Though that is nothing compared to what happens in McDonald's and Kentucky Fried S*** every day."
I suppose he got a booger sandwich once.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fthelifestream.net%2Fforums%2Fimages%2Fsmilies%2FImplied%2520Facepalm.jpg&hash=003c8167ccb16a2d215d0029e87593bac4a3294a)
There are no KFCs here in Norway, but last time I bought a milkshake at McDonald's, I couldn't help noticing all the corpses.
I'm sure that Martinus applauded wildly.
Quote from: Neil on July 28, 2011, 04:22:06 PM
I'm sure that Martinus applauded wildly.
Why? I am not an insane vegetarian. I would be outraged, had I known he was in Warsaw.
Quote from: Martinus on July 28, 2011, 04:28:07 PM
Quote from: Neil on July 28, 2011, 04:22:06 PM
I'm sure that Martinus applauded wildly.
Why? I am not an insane vegetarian. I would be outraged, had I known he was in Warsaw.
I don't know. That just seems like the kind of unthinking douchery that you'd go in for. And since it was in Warsaw, I assumed you'd be there. Besides, isn't Morrissey big into gay rights and stuff?
Quote from: Norgy on July 28, 2011, 03:56:49 PM
There are no KFCs here in Norway, but last time I bought a milkshake at McDonald's, I couldn't help noticing all the corpses.
Yikes. Isn't that unsanitary?
Not at all. The meat is fresh.
Quote from: Neil on July 28, 2011, 04:47:24 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 28, 2011, 04:28:07 PM
Quote from: Neil on July 28, 2011, 04:22:06 PM
I'm sure that Martinus applauded wildly.
Why? I am not an insane vegetarian. I would be outraged, had I known he was in Warsaw.
I don't know. That just seems like the kind of unthinking douchery that you'd go in for. And since it was in Warsaw, I assumed you'd be there. Besides, isn't Morrissey big into gay rights and stuff?
You have to remember Marty is concerned primarily with getting his rocks off. Since this had no real connection to possible legal limitations on sex acts (like the prosecution of sexual assault or child rape), it doesn't really show up on his radar.
You know, I'm actually getting really tired of this Martinus-bashing in every single thread. Especially by you, Raz.
Marty has flaws. I have a lot myself. And you've got a few yourself. People sometimes make emotional rants. No need go ahead and declare all-out jihad just because someone stepped on some toes.
Quote from: Norgy on July 28, 2011, 06:33:51 PM
You know, I'm actually getting really tired of this Martinus-bashing in every single thread. Especially by you, Raz.
Marty has flaws. I have a lot myself. And you've got a few yourself. People sometimes make emotional rants. No need go ahead and declare all-out jihad just because someone stepped on some toes.
I'm helping him. Marty suffers from Narcissistic personality disorder. By constant insults, and corrections I hope to break through his mental defenses, and eventually cure him.
Quote from: Norgy on July 28, 2011, 06:33:51 PM
just because someone stepped on some toes.
:face:
Quote from: Norgy on July 28, 2011, 06:33:51 PM
People sometimes make emotional rants.
I'm not sure sometimes accurately describes the frequency of Mart's outbursts. At any rate, I liked the toe bit.
Btw, the pictures and names of the victims that are being released suggest that there has been a disproportionate number of young people of ethnicities other than Norse - there are Asian, black, Middle Eastern etc. kids there (including many girls, wearing no burkhas or the like).
This seems to belie the thesis that has been advanced by Slargos and his ilk that the children of immigrants do not integrate with the society and espouse extreme religious idealogies of their cultures of origin. Rather it suggests something quite opposite - that a disproportionate number of these kids embrace liberal and leftist values of Norway.
Two Middle Eastern kids in this picture (have seen ones with more) but I just wanted to post it, because this is so goddamn sad. This was really the elite of the young people in Norway. :(
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fnationalpostnews.files.wordpress.com%2F2011%2F07%2Fvictims.jpg&hash=7761ae8cf42d4126318196f0e9f17b13fcf03b5f)
Political activism at 14? Eek.
Quote from: Martinus on July 29, 2011, 09:39:18 AM
Two Middle Eastern kids in this picture (have seen ones with more) but I just wanted to post it, because this is so goddamn sad. This was really the elite of the young people in Norway. :(
It is quite sad, even more so when you see the faces. But let's not overstate things-- the elite of the young people in Norway??
Quote from: Norgy on July 28, 2011, 06:33:51 PM
You know, I'm actually getting really tired of this Martinus-bashing in every single thread. Especially by you, Raz.
Marty has flaws. I have a lot myself. And you've got a few yourself.
Raz is doing the forum a public service. I know he saves me the trouble of antagonizing Marti.
QuoteMarti very often makes emotional rants. No need go ahead and declare all-out jihad just because someone stepped on some toes.
FYP LOL
Quote from: derspiess on July 29, 2011, 09:55:00 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 29, 2011, 09:39:18 AM
Two Middle Eastern kids in this picture (have seen ones with more) but I just wanted to post it, because this is so goddamn sad. This was really the elite of the young people in Norway. :(
It is quite sad, even more so when you see the faces. But let's not overstate things-- the elite of the young people in Norway??
Why not? Who would you consider to be elite, among the young, if not people engaged in social and community work?
Quote from: Martinus on July 29, 2011, 10:05:15 AM
Quote from: derspiess on July 29, 2011, 09:55:00 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 29, 2011, 09:39:18 AM
Two Middle Eastern kids in this picture (have seen ones with more) but I just wanted to post it, because this is so goddamn sad. This was really the elite of the young people in Norway. :(
It is quite sad, even more so when you see the faces. But let's not overstate things-- the elite of the young people in Norway??
Why not? Who would you consider to be elite, among the young, if not people engaged in social and community work?
That doesn't mean a god damn thing. They could be smartass busybodies or ambitious pricks. I am not more sorry for them than if it was a camp of an orphanage.
This reminds me of a story I once heard on the radio. There was a Jewish summer camp where on the last week several of the parents dressed up a Klan members and pretended to take the campers hostage. Terrified the kids, but I suppose it was meant to teach a lesson.
The lesson being your parents are assholes?
Quote from: HVC on July 29, 2011, 10:18:00 AM
The lesson being your parents are assholes?
A very important lesson, I'd have thought. ;)
Sic Transit Gloria Mundi
Quote from: Malthus on July 29, 2011, 10:20:35 AM
Quote from: HVC on July 29, 2011, 10:18:00 AM
The lesson being your parents are assholes?
A very important lesson, I'd have thought. ;)
Although i'm sure they knew that before going to camp. Plus now they have some new psychological trauma to go along with the standard bag you get from asshole parents lol
Quote from: HVC on July 29, 2011, 10:18:00 AM
The lesson being your parents are assholes?
:D
Quote from: HVC on July 29, 2011, 10:22:42 AM
Quote from: Malthus on July 29, 2011, 10:20:35 AM
Quote from: HVC on July 29, 2011, 10:18:00 AM
The lesson being your parents are assholes?
A very important lesson, I'd have thought. ;)
Although i'm sure they knew that before going to camp. Plus now they have some new psychological trauma to go along with the standard bag you get from asshole parents lol
I suppose after the events in Norway, if parents tried that, they would have got their ass kicked. Which would have been fun. :P
Quote from: Tamas on July 29, 2011, 10:09:52 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 29, 2011, 10:05:15 AM
Quote from: derspiess on July 29, 2011, 09:55:00 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 29, 2011, 09:39:18 AM
Two Middle Eastern kids in this picture (have seen ones with more) but I just wanted to post it, because this is so goddamn sad. This was really the elite of the young people in Norway. :(
It is quite sad, even more so when you see the faces. But let's not overstate things-- the elite of the young people in Norway??
Why not? Who would you consider to be elite, among the young, if not people engaged in social and community work?
That doesn't mean a god damn thing. They could be smartass busybodies or ambitious pricks. I am not more sorry for them than if it was a camp of an orphanage.
They were future members of parliament etc and could therefore be said to be part of the political elite. Many (most?) members of the elite are ambitious halfwits.
Quote from: HVC on July 29, 2011, 10:18:00 AM
The lesson being your parents are assholes?
It's a hostile world for Jews.
Quote from: Martinus on July 29, 2011, 10:05:15 AM
Why not? Who would you consider to be elite, among the young, if not people engaged in social and community work?
Top academic performers, musical prodigies, etc. Social & community work is fine & dandy (not sure how attending a political party summer camp qualifies as such but whatever), but I don't think that makes one part of the elite.
It's enough of a tragedy as it is.
Quote from: Razgovory on July 29, 2011, 10:45:58 AM
Quote from: HVC on July 29, 2011, 10:18:00 AM
The lesson being your parents are assholes?
It's a hostile world for Jews.
There are easier ways to do that - just have 'em read the collected wit and wisdom of Slargos. ;)
Quote from: Malthus on July 29, 2011, 11:29:54 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on July 29, 2011, 10:45:58 AM
Quote from: HVC on July 29, 2011, 10:18:00 AM
The lesson being your parents are assholes?
It's a hostile world for Jews.
There are easier ways to do that - just have 'em read the collected wit and wisdom of Slargos. ;)
or you know ththe whole snip snip thing. if that doesn't tell you you're going to lead a tough life nothing will :D
Quote from: Martinus on July 29, 2011, 10:24:42 AM
I suppose after the events in Norway, if parents tried that, they would have got their ass kicked. Which would have been fun. :P
They'd learn the lesson of what batons feel like :D
Quote from: Razgovory on July 29, 2011, 10:15:50 AM
This reminds me of a story I once heard on the radio. There was a Jewish summer camp where on the last week several of the parents dressed up a Klan members and pretended to take the campers hostage. Terrified the kids, but I suppose it was meant to teach a lesson.
Knowing a few Jewish moms, I'm sure they were a dead giveaway. But then again, their nagging might be more terrifying than a burning cross.
I don't have any hard numbers to work off of, but given that IIRC something like 50% of the children and adolescents in Oslo are of non-western origin and that they typically lean towards the left it looks more like they're very under represented.
But hey, Martinus may very well be correct.
I like [perhaps the wrong word, pretend it's dribbling with sarcasm] how they [the media] went out of their way to pick out the immigrant kids to interview after the event, btw.
Quote from: Martinus on July 29, 2011, 10:05:15 AM
Quote from: derspiess on July 29, 2011, 09:55:00 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 29, 2011, 09:39:18 AM
Two Middle Eastern kids in this picture (have seen ones with more) but I just wanted to post it, because this is so goddamn sad. This was really the elite of the young people in Norway. :(
It is quite sad, even more so when you see the faces. But let's not overstate things-- the elite of the young people in Norway??
Why not? Who would you consider to be elite, among the young, if not people engaged in social and community work?
Kids with money. Kids who aren't so lame as to have Mandela for a hero.
I counted 14 of the 76 having non-western names and thus presumably being non-western. I didn't count the Georgian who was visiting specifically for the camp, nor the girl who was quite obviously adopted given the Norweigan last names.
Higher than the % of immigrant population in the country, but lower than the % of immigrant population in Oslo. Much lower than the % of young "immigrants" [quotation marks since many of them are actually born in Norway, but you get the drift, ethnical deviants].
Given that the total amount of participants was somewhere around 700, and the relatively small sample size of the murdered, it may of course be that a disproportionate amount of the "immigrants" were either killed or spared thus skewing the numbers, but it gives a general idea I suppose.
Quote from: mongers on July 29, 2011, 11:31:36 AM
IMHO it doesn't matter a jot who the victims were, one victim of such an outrage is a just as much a tragedy as anyone else in society who might randomly be killed.
If a killer, perhaps a 'mad' eugenicist, had gone into a workshop or school run for adults with learning difficulties, say people we used describe as having downs syndrome, would that be any less of a tragedy because clearly they're never likely to be part of a country's 'elite' ?
edit:
That's not to say we shouldn't read their stories and empathies with the loss to their families and friends.
I don't know if you've read the particular story, but the one that made me come closer to tears than I've been in probably over a decade, was the 11 year old who inadvertently saved a guy by stumbling onto the scene of ABB busily reloading while a guy is pleading for his life [possibly the one pictured with a man in the water a couple of meters away from ABB, but I can't be sure] and saying, "Please. Don't shoot us anymore. You've already killed my father. Please stop shooting." And apparently ABB just walked away, sparing both the child and the man. Evidently not completely heart less.
Later, as the kid was swimming from the island together with a few others, and ABB was shooting at the group, he'd told the girl dragging him along, "I thought police officers were supposed to be nice."
This, more than anything else, chokes me up just thinking about it.
Quote from: derspiess on July 29, 2011, 11:23:27 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 29, 2011, 10:05:15 AM
Why not? Who would you consider to be elite, among the young, if not people engaged in social and community work?
Top academic performers, musical prodigies, etc. Social & community work is fine & dandy (not sure how attending a political party summer camp qualifies as such but whatever), but I don't think that makes one part of the elite.
I don't know - a musical talent is just something that you have - I find a personality that causes one to try to help others or take an active role in a society to make you much more of the elite than just having fast fingers and a good ear.
IDK.
To my mind, the "elite" are the people who are not easily replaced from a societal perspective. The kind of people you'd put on an Ark if the world was dying and you had limited space. On an individual level everyone is irreplacable to someone, but the loss to society of a gifted artist or a brilliant scientist is much greater than that of a salesman, no matter how caring and helpful he is.
These people may be [or have been, I suppose] part of the future political elite [and in case you've missed it, this type of activity is basically a plant school for the party], but in a broader sense they are all just nameless cogs.
Calling them the elite is a bit misleading.
These kids were on the political career track and among the kids on the island one would expect to find a few future ministers and possibly a prime minister.
This is a career track which starts in high school with school politics (student council, model UN etc.) Eventually the most successful drop out of uni and join leadership positions in the political parties and get fast tracked to the top of electoral lists by the central party. This is not a camp that indoctrinates otherwise innocent children, but rather an act of teambuilding for self selecting members. These kids are not the elite, being in high politics does not provide much caché or prestige in Norway.
All this talk about "ABB" is confusing. I keep thinking Percy Barnevik is to blame somehow.
Quote from: Malthus on July 29, 2011, 11:29:54 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on July 29, 2011, 10:45:58 AM
Quote from: HVC on July 29, 2011, 10:18:00 AM
The lesson being your parents are assholes?
It's a hostile world for Jews.
There are easier ways to do that - just have 'em read the collected wit and wisdom of Slargos. ;)
Few children are going to be awed or frightened by the Wit and Wisdom of Slargos.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 29, 2011, 02:21:55 PM
All this talk about "ABB" is confusing. I keep thinking Percy Barnevik is to blame somehow.
I keep reading it as "ABBA".
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 29, 2011, 02:21:55 PM
All this talk about "ABB" is confusing. I keep thinking Percy Barnevik is to blame somehow.
Percy isn't evil. Percy got rich or died trying. :wub:
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 29, 2011, 02:21:55 PM
All this talk about "ABB" is confusing. I keep thinking Percy Barnevik is to blame somehow.
I'm glad it wasn't just me :)
Quote from: Malthus on July 29, 2011, 11:29:54 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on July 29, 2011, 10:45:58 AM
Quote from: HVC on July 29, 2011, 10:18:00 AM
The lesson being your parents are assholes?
It's a hostile world for Jews.
There are easier ways to do that - just have 'em read the collected wit and wisdom of Slargos. ;)
That's a pretty quick read.
Quote from: Barrister on July 29, 2011, 05:31:47 PM
Quote from: Malthus on July 29, 2011, 11:29:54 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on July 29, 2011, 10:45:58 AM
Quote from: HVC on July 29, 2011, 10:18:00 AM
The lesson being your parents are assholes?
It's a hostile world for Jews.
There are easier ways to do that - just have 'em read the collected wit and wisdom of Slargos. ;)
That's a pretty quick read.
Is that a threat? :mad:
Quote from: Slargos on July 29, 2011, 05:44:07 PM
Quote from: Barrister on July 29, 2011, 05:31:47 PM
Quote from: Malthus on July 29, 2011, 11:29:54 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on July 29, 2011, 10:45:58 AM
Quote from: HVC on July 29, 2011, 10:18:00 AM
The lesson being your parents are assholes?
It's a hostile world for Jews.
There are easier ways to do that - just have 'em read the collected wit and wisdom of Slargos. ;)
That's a pretty quick read.
Is that a threat? :mad:
No, it's an insult. You need to learn to differentiate between the two. :)
For example:
"Slargos is so stupid, if we needed brains to breathe, he would suffocate" - Insult.
"I would suffocate Slargos with my own bare hands, while gouging his brains out with an axe" - Threat.
Quote from: Martinus on July 29, 2011, 06:01:07 PM
"I would suffocate Slargos with my own bare hands, while gouging his brains out with an axe" - Threat.
You should know that I have contacted the authorities about this. You should expect to hear from the police shortly. :)
Quote from: Slargos on July 29, 2011, 06:07:36 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 29, 2011, 06:01:07 PM
"I would suffocate Slargos with my own bare hands, while gouging his brains out with an axe" - Threat.
You should know that I have contacted the authorities about this. You should expect to hear from the police shortly. :)
The Polish police do not speak foreign languages. All they heard was bork bork bork.
Also, since 1650s it is considered legally desirable to kill a Swede in Poland.
Quote from: Martinus on July 29, 2011, 06:09:39 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 29, 2011, 06:07:36 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 29, 2011, 06:01:07 PM
"I would suffocate Slargos with my own bare hands, while gouging his brains out with an axe" - Threat.
You should know that I have contacted the authorities about this. You should expect to hear from the police shortly. :)
The Polish police do not speak foreign languages. All they heard was bork bork bork.
TOO LATE. You're going to lose your fake lawyering license over this. :mad:
Quote from: Martinus on July 29, 2011, 06:09:39 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 29, 2011, 06:07:36 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 29, 2011, 06:01:07 PM
"I would suffocate Slargos with my own bare hands, while gouging his brains out with an axe" - Threat.
You should know that I have contacted the authorities about this. You should expect to hear from the police shortly. :)
The Polish police do not speak foreign languages. All they heard was bork bork bork.
:lol:
An article about the reaction to so called extremism on the internet and with before (from google streetview) and after images of the bomb site.
http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aftenposten.no%2Fnyheter%2Firiks%2Farticle4184913.ece
note, the Lars Gule that is referred to in the article as criticizing extremism was
Quote from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lars_GuleIn 1977 Lars Gule was arrested in Beirut, Lebanon for carrying explosives, intended for an armed attack in Israel.[1] The explosives were meant for use in an action on behalf of Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (DFLP) in an operation timed to coincide with the tenth anniversary of the 1967 Arab-Israeli war.[2] He was convicted to half a year in prison in Lebanon for illegal possession of a weapon (i.e. explosives), but was not convicted on terrorism charges.
His association with the Norwegian Humanist association has permanently prevented me from joining, it seems, however, that murdering civilians is bad as long as the civilians are not joos.
Quote from: Viking on July 30, 2011, 10:56:53 AM
An article about the reaction to so called extremism on the internet and with before (from google streetview) and after images of the bomb site.
http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aftenposten.no%2Fnyheter%2Firiks%2Farticle4184913.ece
note, the Lars Gule that is referred to in the article as criticizing extremism was
Quote from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lars_GuleIn 1977 Lars Gule was arrested in Beirut, Lebanon for carrying explosives, intended for an armed attack in Israel.[1] The explosives were meant for use in an action on behalf of Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (DFLP) in an operation timed to coincide with the tenth anniversary of the 1967 Arab-Israeli war.[2] He was convicted to half a year in prison in Lebanon for illegal possession of a weapon (i.e. explosives), but was not convicted on terrorism charges.
His association with the Norwegian Humanist association has permanently prevented me from joining, it seems, however, that murdering civilians is bad as long as the civilians are not joos.
Not sure what your point here is.
Assuming he indeed intended to use this against the civilian population (unlike ABB, he did not put his plan into action), his association is as damning to the NHA as ABB's membership is damning to the PP. I thought you have been arguing against some Norwegian pundits who were trying to put collective blame on the PP because ABB used to be a member and committed mass murder a week ago - yet you were "permanently prevented from joining" the NHA because of a collective blame put on them for something their ex-member allegedly tried to do 33 years ago but did not succeed.
What gives?
Quote from: Martinus on July 30, 2011, 11:31:41 AM
Not sure what your point here is.
Assuming he indeed intended to use this against the civilian population (unlike ABB, he did not put his plan into action), his association is as damning to the NHA as ABB's membership is damning to the PP. I thought you have been arguing against some Norwegian pundits who were trying to put collective blame on the PP because ABB used to be a member and committed mass murder a week ago - yet you were "permanently prevented from joining" the NHA because of a collective blame put on them for something their ex-member allegedly tried to do 33 years ago but did not succeed.
What gives?
1 - Gule was leader of the NHA, not merely a low ranking payer of membership dues. He is still a member.
2 - Gule's arrest prevented an attack on civilians.
Quote from: Martinus on July 29, 2011, 06:09:39 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 29, 2011, 06:07:36 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 29, 2011, 06:01:07 PM
"I would suffocate Slargos with my own bare hands, while gouging his brains out with an axe" - Threat.
You should know that I have contacted the authorities about this. You should expect to hear from the police shortly. :)
The Polish police do not speak foreign languages. All they heard was bork bork bork.
:lmfao:
Quote from: Martinus on July 29, 2011, 06:09:39 PM
The Polish police do not speak foreign languages. All they heard was bork bork bork.
Bet most of 'em don't even read and right Polish, either.
Quote from: dps on July 30, 2011, 01:59:19 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 29, 2011, 06:09:39 PM
The Polish police do not speak foreign languages. All they heard was bork bork bork.
Bet most of 'em don't even read and right Polish, either.
:unsure:
They wrong Polish.
Quote from: dps on July 30, 2011, 01:59:19 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 29, 2011, 06:09:39 PM
The Polish police do not speak foreign languages. All they heard was bork bork bork.
Bet most of 'em don't even read and right Polish, either.
As a popular joke goes, Polish policemen always travel in twos, because one of them can read and the other one can write.
Back in communist days, I was told, the Czech police always travelled in groups of three. One to read, one to write and the third to keep an eye on the two intellectuals.
*groan*
"Unusually high amounts of traffic may have saved a lot of lives"
SV is going to milk that for all it's worth.
"What? Improve infrastructure? DO YOU WANT TO LET THE RACISTS WIN?"
Quote from: Martinus on July 30, 2011, 04:26:34 PM
Quote from: dps on July 30, 2011, 01:59:19 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 29, 2011, 06:09:39 PM
The Polish police do not speak foreign languages. All they heard was bork bork bork.
Bet most of 'em don't even read and right Polish, either.
As a popular joke goes, Polish policemen always travel in twos, because one of them can read and the other one can write.
Who screws in the lightbulb?
Quote from: Ed Anger on July 30, 2011, 05:04:04 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 30, 2011, 04:26:34 PM
Quote from: dps on July 30, 2011, 01:59:19 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 29, 2011, 06:09:39 PM
The Polish police do not speak foreign languages. All they heard was bork bork bork.
Bet most of 'em don't even read and right Polish, either.
As a popular joke goes, Polish policemen always travel in twos, because one of them can read and the other one can write.
Who screws in the lightbulb?
The German.
Quote from: citizen k on July 30, 2011, 05:21:31 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on July 30, 2011, 05:04:04 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 30, 2011, 04:26:34 PM
Quote from: dps on July 30, 2011, 01:59:19 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 29, 2011, 06:09:39 PM
The Polish police do not speak foreign languages. All they heard was bork bork bork.
Bet most of 'em don't even read and right Polish, either.
As a popular joke goes, Polish policemen always travel in twos, because one of them can read and the other one can write.
Who screws in the lightbulb?
The German.
Do they even make Germans that small?
Quote from: Slargos on July 30, 2011, 05:45:15 PM
Quote from: citizen k on July 30, 2011, 05:21:31 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on July 30, 2011, 05:04:04 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 30, 2011, 04:26:34 PM
Quote from: dps on July 30, 2011, 01:59:19 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 29, 2011, 06:09:39 PM
The Polish police do not speak foreign languages. All they heard was bork bork bork.
Bet most of 'em don't even read and right Polish, either.
As a popular joke goes, Polish policemen always travel in twos, because one of them can read and the other one can write.
Who screws in the lightbulb?
The German.
Do they even make Germans that small?
The Japs might. They are good at shrinking stuff.
Arbeiderpartiet is up 10% points in the latest polls. Quite the windfall. :hmm:
Quote from: Slargos on July 31, 2011, 01:53:28 PM
Arbeiderpartiet is up 10% points in the latest polls. Quite the windfall. :hmm:
Probably soft numbers though. Lucky for them the election isnt that far away well at least we on the other side of the border stand to benefit from the leftist usual overspending.
In other words about 100 syrians were shot to death during the last 24 hours. Think we´ll have a silent minute for them tomorrow? :lol:
I expect Reinfeldt to drop his vacation plans, dammit. :mad:
Ah, so I'm back in Iceland. My wife's sister lost one classmate and the Sami cultural festival I was at (Riddu riddu) got cancelled, largely due to the fact that the daughter of one of the main organizers was shot and is in intensive care. :( :mad:
Can't say I blame them.
The Norwegians have tremendously impressed me with their response to this act of terrorism.
Quote from: Legbiter on July 31, 2011, 09:19:23 PMThe Norwegians have tremendously impressed me with their response to this act of terrorism.
I know you've probably mentioned it in earlier posts, but it's always nice to focus on positives: how has the Norwegian response impressed you?
Quote from: Jacob on July 31, 2011, 11:33:42 PM
Quote from: Legbiter on July 31, 2011, 09:19:23 PMThe Norwegians have tremendously impressed me with their response to this act of terrorism.
I know you've probably mentioned it in earlier posts, but it's always nice to focus on positives: how has the Norwegian response impressed you?
Well initially they harrassed nearby muslims, then they demanded that peaceful immigration sceptics remove themselves from the political process, then they declared that norway would never be the same without suggesting what might change and then declared that what was needed was more democracy and more openness, naturally without suggesting that anybody before the massacre held the opinion that we could have more democracy and openness if we wanted but we didn't need it.
Basically norway has decended into tropes and have consistently sought emotionally satisfying reactions rather than analytically sound and constructive reactions.
Quote from: Viking on August 01, 2011, 12:24:47 AMWell initially they harrassed nearby muslims, then they demanded that peaceful immigration sceptics remove themselves from the political process, then they declared that norway would never be the same without suggesting what might change and then declared that what was needed was more democracy and more openness, naturally without suggesting that anybody before the massacre held the opinion that we could have more democracy and openness if we wanted but we didn't need it.
Basically norway has decended into tropes and have consistently sought emotionally satisfying reactions rather than analytically sound and constructive reactions.
Ah. So sarcasm.
Quote from: Jacob on August 01, 2011, 12:36:57 AM
Quote from: Viking on August 01, 2011, 12:24:47 AMWell initially they harrassed nearby muslims, then they demanded that peaceful immigration sceptics remove themselves from the political process, then they declared that norway would never be the same without suggesting what might change and then declared that what was needed was more democracy and more openness, naturally without suggesting that anybody before the massacre held the opinion that we could have more democracy and openness if we wanted but we didn't need it.
Basically norway has decended into tropes and have consistently sought emotionally satisfying reactions rather than analytically sound and constructive reactions.
Ah. So sarcasm.
well, the norwegian emotially satisfying reactions are really nice and fit into the typical norwegian attitude of niceism (snillisme)
Can't really find any factual fault with Viking's analysis.
Can you, Jacob?
Quote from: Slargos on August 01, 2011, 12:50:59 AM
Can't really find any factual fault with Viking's analysis.
Can you, Jacob?
stop agreeing with me, your support is an inbuilt reverse argument ad hitlerum. Your support weakens my argument.
What would be the correct response, according to you, Viking? What should have Norwegians done in the aftermath of the terrorist attack for you to consider they did a right thing?
Quote from: Viking on August 01, 2011, 01:01:45 AM
Quote from: Slargos on August 01, 2011, 12:50:59 AM
Can't really find any factual fault with Viking's analysis.
Can you, Jacob?
stop agreeing with me, your support is an inbuilt reverse argument ad hitlerum. Your support weakens my argument.
:lol:
Sorry. :blush:
Quote from: Martinus on August 01, 2011, 01:19:03 AM
What would be the correct response, according to you, Viking? What should have Norwegians done in the aftermath of the terrorist attack for you to consider they did a right thing?
I doubt he could come up with a response to such a poignant question. He IS rather stupid. You are a fabulous rhetorical machine, Martinus.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F1.bp.blogspot.com%2F-5CNkcolUO4I%2FThULCe5iK9I%2FAAAAAAAAADI%2F7AuznaKZa9k%2Fs1600%2Fwink.gif&hash=4097f90c7350896fb0851a8c8994606f257965ca)
Is that Mohammed?
It is Cornelis.
Quote from: Martinus on August 01, 2011, 01:19:03 AM
What would be the correct response, according to you, Viking? What should have Norwegians done in the aftermath of the terrorist attack for you to consider they did a right thing?
To be blunt, to go against type. Ultimately not response is perfect. The trope response in norway to any politically stressfull situation, they calls for unity and defiant declarations that the solution to the problem is more democracy and more openness. What I object to in that response is that it is fundamentally anti-analytical. It's almost as if the idea is that if society in general can express is disapproval of hatred then hatred will stop. Causes are not identified and solutions based on reason not proposed. Calls for more democracy and more openness are in effect calls for continuning without changing anything since before the massacre more democracy and more openness were precisely what we as a society were doing before the massacre.
That is what I object to the norwegian response so far. I'm not going to lay out the perfect response since all people are different and all people need to deal with events like this emotionally in different ways. What I object to is that our leaders let themselves be guided by the emotional response and (with few exceptions) re-enforce the emotional response rather that steer society to the rational one.
Calling for more democracy may or may not be the best response, but pretending that calling for more democracy is a change in policy is a bad response.
Now I have to disagree in earnest.
Now, it may just be victimization, but AP has come out of this as great winners, and I expect this has much to do with the teary-eyed speeches about "coming together" and "becoming even more open and democratic" [while not mentioning that the opposite is currently going on with debate forums being shut down and stores removing "violent" products from their shelves.]
Their response has served its political purpose to a tremendous effect.
I think the response is to go one doing exactly what you were doing before.
Why does anything need to change? Just because something bad happens doesn't mean the previous system was flawed. Bad stuff happens sometimes, there isn't always anything you can do about it, and often the "solution" to the bad shit is worse than the problem - I suspect in Norways case that may very well be true.
Given that, plenty of "more openness and democracy (which is what we were doing anyway)" seems rather appropriate. It is a way of reiterating what I am saying - that this tragedy is NOT indicative of a systemic problem, and Norway should not change anything systemically in response to it.
I agree with Berkut. As I said before, this guy should get the Herostrates treatment - he should be entirely and completely ignored, beyond being treated as a basket case. Frankly, I am surprised you people are even implying that the fact that a terrorist attack happened should prompt the society to do something at the political level (as opposed to the purely security level).
Is anyone pushing for "less democracy and less openness?"
Quote from: Razgovory on August 01, 2011, 04:40:01 PM
Is anyone pushing for "less democracy and less openness?"
Slargos.
doubtful. his opinions would be the first on the chopping block ;)
Quote from: Martinus on August 01, 2011, 04:42:01 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on August 01, 2011, 04:40:01 PM
Is anyone pushing for "less democracy and less openness?"
Slargos.
He doesn't seem to be on about that, he (like the terrorist), seems to think his opinion is being stifled by "cultural Marxists", or whatever.
Quote from: Razgovory on August 01, 2011, 04:51:38 PM
Quote from: Martinus on August 01, 2011, 04:42:01 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on August 01, 2011, 04:40:01 PM
Is anyone pushing for "less democracy and less openness?"
Slargos.
He doesn't seem to be on about that, he (like the terrorist), seems to think his opinion is being stifled by "cultural Marxists", or whatever.
Doesn't seem to prevent people from making shit up about me. :yawn:
Okay, maybe you are against it. Thank you for correcting me.
Quote from: Razgovory on August 01, 2011, 05:08:58 PM
Okay, maybe you are against it. Thank you for correcting me.
Did I? Or did you just make shit up again?
Quote from: Razgovory on August 01, 2011, 05:08:58 PM
Okay, maybe you are against it. Thank you for correcting me.
troll? :hmm:
Quote from: LaCroix on August 01, 2011, 05:17:25 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on August 01, 2011, 05:08:58 PM
Okay, maybe you are against it. Thank you for correcting me.
troll? :hmm:
What does he want for me. First I say he's not against it, then he criticizes me, then so I reverse and he still criticizes me. He's going to have to make up his goddamn mind.
Quote from: Razgovory on August 01, 2011, 05:51:51 PMWhat does he want for me. First I say he's not against it, then he criticizes me, then so I reverse and he still criticizes me. He's going to have to make up his goddamn mind.
i can't tell whether you're being willfully obtuse, or if you really don't understand his post. i suspect the former, as he's your latest target
Quote from: LaCroix on August 01, 2011, 06:01:18 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on August 01, 2011, 05:51:51 PMWhat does he want for me. First I say he's not against it, then he criticizes me, then so I reverse and he still criticizes me. He's going to have to make up his goddamn mind.
i can't tell whether you're being willfully obtuse, or if you really don't understand his post. i suspect the former, as he's your latest target
I'm pretty literal minded.
Quote from: Razgovory on August 01, 2011, 04:40:01 PM
Is anyone pushing for "less democracy and less openness?"
Most of Languish at one time or another-- particularly when there are election results they don't like.
Quote from: Razgovory on August 01, 2011, 06:02:38 PMI'm pretty literal minded.
then the bolding slargos provided should make it easy to understand his point, no?
Quote from: LaCroix on August 01, 2011, 06:13:47 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on August 01, 2011, 06:02:38 PMI'm pretty literal minded.
then the bolding slargos provided should make it easy to understand his point, no?
Nope, apparently not.
Slargos is nuttier than squirrel shit.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/02/world/europe/02iht-politicus02.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/02/world/europe/02iht-politicus02.html)
Quote
For Europe, Few Hints of Tolerance
By John Vinocur
AMSTERDAM — Surely, you could think, the Oslo mass murders might well bring some moderation to Europe's far-right populist parties in their unyielding denigration of Islam and their Armageddon-is-nigh vision of a future shared with Muslim immigrants.
At the same time, since Norway's massacre led to statements by populist leaders rejecting violence, you might also suppose that the European left could ease up on its resistance to the idea that multiculturalism has brought parallel societies, disrespect for national laws and traditions, and a threatened sense of identity to countries with hundreds of years of democratic history.
Neither assumption is hopeless. But each enters the area of very wishful, perhaps naïve surmise.
If you take the Netherlands (including Geert Wilders, the Dutch Freedom Party chief who is Europe's most abrasive anti-Islam voice) as a prime arena for Europe's kulturkampf concerning Islam's place in its midst, Norway's tragedy has not narrowed its divisions.
The Dutch have reason to think they have been a kind of pace car in the issue's development over the last decade.
Going back to 2001, they were the first Europeans to become involved in a wave of reaction, sometimes called a citizens' revolt, against state multiculturalism. They witnessed the murders of Pim Fortuyn and Theo van Gogh, two leading anti-Islamic figures. And they observed or participated in the rise of the Freedom Party to its current role at the edge of government policy.
Now the Dutch are dealing with the fact (and its potential political impact and manipulation) that Anders Behring Breivik, the confessed Oslo killer, spoke in his 1,518-page manifesto of his admiration for Geert Wilders.
Of course, alongside his stated hatred of multiculturalism and Muslim immigrants, Mr. Breivik also said confusedly that the Europeans he most wanted to meet were Pope Benedict and Vladimir V. Putin (whose vision of "democracy" appealed to him), that he read Homer, Kafka, John Stuart Mill and Winston Churchill, and liked Lacoste shirts and Chanel Platinum Egoiste cologne.
In any case, the reaction here, at its most shrill, was at screech level.
At one extreme, talking of Mr. Wilders in a radio interview, Gerard Spong, a lawyer, accused him of having "Norwegian blood on his lips."
"Wilders has full responsibility for this," Mr. Spong said of the murders. "He contributed to the development and the acts" of the killer. (An attempt supported by Mr. Spong and Islamic officials to bring defamation charges against Mr. Wilders for anti-Islam statements ended in his acquittal this year.)
In the Dutch context, and in some respects, a wider European one, Mr. Spong's remarks fit what opponents of multiculturalism see as an attempt to restore via the Norwegian tragedy a now diminished taboo on remarks critical of Islam.
Indeed, a canvass of Dutch opinion made after the killings by the Maurice de Hond polling organization showed that 52 percent did not think Mr. Wilders had to moderate his tone on Islam, while 44 percent said he should.
So hard vs. hard continues.
In these circumstances, how does movement occur? How does the heat get drawn out of a conflict that, mirrored Europe-wide at different degrees of intensity, reflects a growing sense of powerlessness and alienation?
With great difficulty. The multicultural issue is not a genteel discussion of diversity. In large part it's a conflict driven by both the traditional left's attachment to its convictions and a significant part of the white majority's reaction to the rapid growth of Islamic communities in Europe with their own varying loyalties and notions of the law.
In political terms, for the populist parties in the Netherlands, Norway, Denmark, Sweden and Finland, the issue is also about maintaining a handhold on power by dosing professions of democracy into apocalyptic visions of their countries' fate.
In turn, some conservatives, with less hysterical language, appear ready to track the populists.
For European Socialists, like the Dutch Labor Party, the problem is comforting its voters' beliefs at a time when right-of-center parties virtually run Europe (social democrats govern only in Norway, Spain and Greece), and leaders like David Cameron, Nicolas Sarkozy and Angela Merkel have pronounced state multiculturalism dead, failed or destructive of national unity and values.
Now, a "leaked e-mail" from a Labor political strategist, Pieter Paul Slikker, to party officials was reported over the weekend to have told them after months of focus group discussion, "To put it bluntly, we aren't going back to the time of 'multiculti' tea drinking."
In a new book, "Immigrant Nations," Paul Scheffer, a Dutch political scientist, has restated his opposition to multiculturalism in nonconfrontational terms that may have appeal to the left. He says that the reality of multiculturalism is that it is a doctrine of "avoidance," sustaining immigrant groups' focus "on what they've left behind," placing more emphasis "on heritage rather than openness" and tolerating pretty much everything "as long as cultures are spared all criticism."
At the same time, there may be trace indications that the populists' interest in finding respectable tonalities has actually come into play — Mr. Wilders says that "we are democrats through and through" and that he is "revolted" by the Oslo killings — in the Freedom Party's performance in Parliament. The party, on whose tacit support the Liberal Party's government leadership depends, has appeared to moderate its demands for the closure of Islamic schools, a halt to immigration from Islamic countries and a ban on the building of new mosques.
Instead, it did not oppose a government Integration Memorandum calling on immigrants to participate in a Dutch society requiring respect of freedom, equality and tolerance — no radicality there — but also one tightening standards for immigrants receiving social benefits, and creating stricter conditions for receiving Dutch nationality that specify new citizens must waive a previous nationality.
Obviously, that's hardly a Big Bang-type existential trade-off that could bring an end to a quasi-religious war. Conceivably, such a deal might offer Muslim and other immigrants a major affirmative-action program as a symbolic investment in their future in exchange for accepting a no-tolerance framework setting out their assimilation into Dutch life.
But a hint of change, just barely, involving the kulturkampf's opponents that goes beyond total inflexibility? In the context of reaction to the mass murders in Oslo, there are precious few other straws in the wind.
Quote from: Slargos on August 01, 2011, 12:50:59 AM
Can't really find any factual fault with Viking's analysis.
Can you, Jacob?
I don't know. I'm not in Norway, which is why I'm interested in Viking's perception.
Apparently the creep has asked for a Japanese expert (instead of Norwegian ones) to examine him, since they have a better understanding of the meaning of honor. :yuk:
I bet he is an anime fan. <_<
http://news.yahoo.com/norwegian-stores-withdraw-violent-video-games-attacks-170947313.html
QuoteNorwegian stores withdraw violent video games after attacks
Two video games used by far-right extremist Anders Behring Breivik in planning his July 22 killing spree have been withdrawn from a number of stores across Norway, one co-op chain said Tuesday.
Coop Norge, one of the country's major grocery store chains and its main co-op, said it took the decision "out of respect" for the families of the 77 people slain in the twin attacks.
The move was launched on July 24 "to spare people who, in one way or another, were affected by the terrorist acts," the chain's director for non-food items Geir Inge Stokke told AFP.
"We don't want them to stumble upon violent video games while buying milk and bread in our stores," he said.
In a 1,500-page manifesto posted online, Behring Breivik said he was a fan of "World of Warcraft" and "Call of Duty - Modern Warfare" and that he had played the games while preparing his rampage.
Coop told its locations which carried video games -- 50 of 900 stores -- to remove about 50 products from its aisles, including the games cited by Behring Breivik.
Norwegian media reported Platekompaniet, one of the country's leading movie-, video game- and music-selling chains had also pulled some games from its stores. The company did not respond to AFP's request for comment.
Some Norwegian gamers blasted the move.
"This type of logic is problematic when we think of the number of people who play these games without committing crimes or assaults," gamer Audun Rodem said in a July 29 post on his blog.
Stokke said Coop did not intend to stigmatise players, and that the chain would evaluate later if and when to reintroduce the games.
Behring Breivik killed eight people with a bomb he set off in Oslo's government quarter and he later gunned down 69 people, many of them teenagers, who were attending a retreat run by the Norwegian Labour Party's youth wing on the island of Utoeya.
He confessed to the attacks, saying he was waging a war on the "islamisation" of western Europe and on multiculturalism.
I hear they're withdrawing games after the shooting spree. Can anyone verify?
Are people that offended by seeing these games in the store? If so, why not just move them to a less conspicuous location (a la girlie mags here in US stores) for the time being? I guess doing so would prevent them from putting out a big press release telling everyone how sensitive they are by yanking the games from the shelves.
Quote from: derspiess on August 02, 2011, 01:01:00 PM
Are people that offended by seeing these games in the store? If so, why not just move them to a less conspicuous location (a la girlie mags here in US stores) for the time being? I guess doing so would prevent them from putting out a big press release telling everyone how sensitive they are by yanking the games from the shelves.
The very obvious heart of the matter.
For all the bluster about how fine a people the Norwegians are, they are not as a rule above exploiting tragedy for personal gain.
That's pretty retarded, especially with games like World of Warcraft. :D
Are they also withdrawing the shows he liked, like True Blood or Dexter?
Ok, Slargos, you sold me on the idea that the Norwegian populace deserves nothing but extermination. They are a bunch of idiots.
Quote from: Martinus on August 02, 2011, 01:09:09 PM
That's pretty retarded, especially with games like World of Warcraft. :D
Are they also withdrawing the shows he liked, like True Blood or Dexter?
Ok, Slargos, you sold me on the idea that the Norwegian populace deserves nothing but extermination. They are a bunch of idiots.
It's two opportunist chain stores. Not all of them.
A plumbing business [!] has also reportedly started selling "rememberance bracelets" for $30 a pop with the initial promise that $1 would go to the restoration of Utøya, later changed to $5 after they started getting death threats over the phone.
The Norwegians need to be exterminated for entierly different reasons. :P
Quote from: Martinus on August 02, 2011, 01:09:09 PM
That's pretty retarded, especially with games like World of Warcraft. :D
Are they also withdrawing the shows he liked, like True Blood or Dexter?
So far only Gates of Vienna has blamed Dexter.
What's double retarded is that the terrorist said he used WoW as a cover to explain his absence and withdrawal.
I don't see how these corporate policies reflect badly on "the people" of Norway, though, but I am sure Slargos can explain that.
The moral panic these days is reaching a frenzy.
Violence and bad language in visual and audio media has been a pet project for the Mothers Of Prevention everywhere for nearly three decades, and now that the overshadowing threat from subliminal messages on LPs has somewhat subsided, it's only natural to focus attentions to computer games. Surely some of the pixels are sending morse coded messages.
Quote from: Norgy on August 02, 2011, 01:20:34 PM
Quote from: Martinus on August 02, 2011, 01:09:09 PM
That's pretty retarded, especially with games like World of Warcraft. :D
Are they also withdrawing the shows he liked, like True Blood or Dexter?
What's double retarded is that the terrorist said he used WoW as a cover to explain his absence and withdrawal.
I don't see how these corporate policies reflect badly on "the people" of Norway, though, but I am sure Slargos can explain that.
It reflects badly on the companies, and the people who made the decisions in question.
I thought I made that clear. Can't you read good?
The fact that Norwegians in general have a disturbing tendency to pay enthusiastic lip service to humanistic and democractic values while actively abusing the rights of for instance guest workers whenever they have an opportunity [and in light of this, the opportunism of these companies is easier to understand] does speak volumes about Norwegians.
Quote from: Slargos on August 02, 2011, 01:31:56 PM
The fact that Norwegians in general have a disturbing tendency to pay enthusiastic lip service to humanistic and democractic values while actively abusing the rights of for instance guest workers whenever they have an opportunity [and in light of this, the opportunism of these companies is easier to understand] does speak volumes about Norwegians.
Agreed. My post was written without me having read yours.
Filipino au pairs? Nobody would ever abuse them! Surely? Or underpay Eastern Europeans? No way.
Anyway. Moral panic. I think we should ban keyboards, since so much hate obviously has been expressed through them.
Quote from: Norgy on August 02, 2011, 04:34:34 PM
Quote from: Slargos on August 02, 2011, 01:31:56 PM
The fact that Norwegians in general have a disturbing tendency to pay enthusiastic lip service to humanistic and democractic values while actively abusing the rights of for instance guest workers whenever they have an opportunity [and in light of this, the opportunism of these companies is easier to understand] does speak volumes about Norwegians.
Agreed. My post was written without me having read yours.
Filipino au pairs? Nobody would ever abuse them! Surely? Or underpay Eastern Europeans? No way.
Anyway. Moral panic. I think we should ban keyboards, since so much hate obviously has been expressed through them.
I'm not just talking about underpaying them, which is just free market at work. I'm talking about denying them basic rights, forcing them to work while sick by threatening them to have them deported, withholding pension payments, ignoring the regulations on over-time both in payment and amount. The list goes on, and it's a filthy, filthy behaviour.
Then Norwegians complain that going back to an 8 hour work day instead of 7.5 hours would be "like going back to the 19th century".
It's a fine show they've got going, and for all the
snillisme foreign labour is sometimes treated like animals.
Politicians and the departments act all
sjokkert and outraged, and a lot of
etterettning is taken. It doesn't take a lot of imagination to realize that this behaviour is done with the very good memory of the government.
All the while, Norwegians in general have to suffer shoddy quality in their food, broken pavement, trains that fall apart and mobile networks that break down like clockwork on friday evening.
I just wonder why the fuck you put up with it.
Man, Norway sounds like a hellhole.
Quote from: Berkut on August 02, 2011, 05:01:18 PM
Man, Norway sounds like a hellhole.
Far from it. It's simply not all lute-fisk, lusekofte and funny dances, however. :uffda:
Foreign labour works under conditions that the Norwads themselves would simply not stand, and they do it often for a pittance. Now, this would not in and of itself be a terrible thing. Every nation must decide how to treat foreigners themselves. What makes it obnoxious is that outwardly the Norwads pride themselves on being upstanding people who take the plight of the workers seriously [as long as they are Norwegian].
There is a stark contrast between pretense or wishful thinking and the reality.
Frankly, it's hard to describe to someone who isn't familiar with it.
The selection of brands and types of foodstuffs is extremely limited in Norway, mostly I would expect because of the tolls but also because Norwegians as a rule don't really want to pay for quality. After being in Norway for a while, and stepping into a Swedish supermarket it just feels like a stupid joke.
Picking out cheese for instance, in a Norwegian store is a matter of choosing which of the three available brands of bland, chemical tasting light yellow "can't-believe-it's-not-cheese" products you'd like. It doesn't really matter because they all taste the same. The government mandates that this cheese should be enough for everyone, and anything else is a luxury and luxuries are frowned upon in Norway.
In Sweden, you'll get at the very least several dozen types, shapes, brands and tastes in any averagely well stocked store.
And the pot holes. Jesus dear fucking lord, the pot holes. The shape of the infrastructure is what you'd expect from a former east-bloc country. Except I think they probably have better roads.
I reiterate my previous comment.
I'll just assume you're serious, and save myself the grinding of the teeth.
I'm confused at the appearance of Slargos, defender of the downtrodden guest workers. Can we expect to see more of him?
Quote from: Jacob on August 02, 2011, 05:59:53 PM
I'm confused at the appearance of Slargos, defender of the downtrodden guest workers. Can we expect to see more of him?
You are confused because you're not very imaginative, but rather rely on your vast capacity for prejudice and assumption to guide you.
Nothing I can help you with, I'm afraid. :console:
Thing is, Jake, that I think that I'm not really a person to you. I'm just a racist, and you assign motivation, beliefs and behaviour to me in order to fit your preconceived notion of what a racist is. Thus you're surprised that I find the treatment of polacks, pakis and niggers in Norway to be often reprehensible. I also find slavery to be an abomination. However, since I'm just a racist, this doesn't compute.
Is that a yes or a no?
I think it is a definite maybe, depending.
Quote from: Jacob on August 02, 2011, 05:59:53 PM
I'm confused at the appearance of Slargos, defender of the downtrodden guest workers. Can we expect to see more of him?
Slargos is a downtrodden guest worker. I however am an Icelandic-Norwegian.
I gotta agree with Berkut. Norway does sound like a hell hole. A typical Carrefour in Poland carries maybe 200 or more types of cheese, and Poles really do not eat that much cheese.
Quote from: Slargos on August 02, 2011, 06:05:33 PM
Quote from: Jacob on August 02, 2011, 05:59:53 PM
I'm confused at the appearance of Slargos, defender of the downtrodden guest workers. Can we expect to see more of him?
You are confused because you're not very imaginative, but rather rely on your vast capacity for prejudice and assumption to guide you.
Nothing I can help you with, I'm afraid. :console:
Thing is, Jake, that I think that I'm not really a person to you. I'm just a racist, and you assign motivation, beliefs and behaviour to me in order to fit your preconceived notion of what a racist is. Thus you're surprised that I find the treatment of polacks, pakis and niggers in Norway to be often reprehensible. I also find slavery to be an abomination. However, since I'm just a racist, this doesn't compute.
you would be more convincing as a defender of the opressed foreign workers in Norway if you weren't a foreign worker in Norway yourself. :lol:
Quote from: Martinus on August 03, 2011, 01:58:39 AM
I gotta agree with Berkut. Norway does sound like a hell hole. A typical Carrefour in Poland carries maybe 200 or more types of cheese, and Poles really do not eat that much cheese.
The typical Norwegian store carries 50 at most. Scandinavians eat alot of cheese. (Probable) ethnic scandinavian. (http://cltampa.com/imager/green-bay-packer-cheesehead/b/original/2117044/79f9/Green-Bay-Packer-cheesehead-195x300.jpg)
http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=no&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dagbladet.no%2Fdinside%2F2006%2F09%2F18%2F477026.html
QuoteNorwegian stores have the worst selection
Competition Authority warns measures.
Kamilla THORESEN
[email protected]
(Dagbladet.no): Norway is the worst in the Nordic countries when it comes to the selection of food shops. This comes from a survey conducted on behalf of the Nordic competition authorities. The Finns have the largest supply of their food stores, and Norwegian stores have less than half of Finns assortment on store shelves. Now, the Competition Authority increase competition and take action, writes Aftenposten .
Norwegian stores offer an average of 300 different products, while the Finns can play in almost 700 different items.
Monopoly
Norway stands out in several ways in the survey. Suppliers Tine, Gilde and Prior has near monopoly in the market. Dairy supplier Tine had, for example 94.4 percent market share of butter in 2005.
Another factor that makes Norway stand out is that about half of the grocery market consisting of low-price chains. The four largest are the Norway group, Coop, ICA and Rema 1000
- We have heard these claims before, but we feel a small degree turn in criticism, says Per Roskifte, executive director of the Norway team, told Aftenposten.
Norway group is partly behind the chains KIWI, Menu, Save, and Joker.
If competition
- Without being connected to one of the big chains' system can be difficult to get a foothold in the Norwegian market, said adviser Marianne Dahl of the Norwegian Competition Authority, told Aftenposten.
One of the government's measures to increase competition is that the big chains are required notification of agreements with market leading suppliers. This will, among other things, prevent the use of bonuses, discounts and one-time payments provide good shelf placement. 25 different vendors will be covered by this duty.
- How will we, among other things, prevent the smaller players are excluded from the market, says Dahl Aftenposten.
Require more quality
Chef and proprietor of the delicatessen shop Hotel Havana, Jan Vardøen, also imports foreign food. He believes that the Norwegians should demand more quality.
- We have a tendency to accept monopolies and take what we get, it's easier than dealing with much different. The disadvantage is that it gives a lot of power in few hands, he says to Aftenposten.
Vardøen believe that Norwegian consumers are exposed to public trustee.
- We live in the world's richest countries and the NOK to eat. To complain of limited range is a luxury problem, but we are subject to a public trustee as a result we get lower quality.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.folkets.info%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2011%2F04%2FQdU7EhS9wvCqIBU4PbezEwePb7wb1MSvN2HDy8CEelOw.jpg&hash=becd67a6af25f0f10b135015c6903861588842d5)
Comparison of diversity in products between norway and sweden.
Fresh Sausages
Eggs
Frozen Fish
Snacks
Pasta
Chocolate
Fresh Fowl
Milk
Fresh Bread
Cheese
Non-instant coffee
Soda
??
Rice
This is the difference that slargos sees when he travels back and forth.
Quote from: Berkut on August 02, 2011, 05:01:18 PM
Man, Norway sounds like a hellhole.
It is. It really is.
Norway reminds me of Sweden 30-50 years ago. THIS IS NOT A GOOD THING
Norway sounds as joyful as an Ingmar Bergman film.
Quote from: Syt on August 03, 2011, 02:33:50 AM
Norway sounds as joyful as an Ingmar Bergman film.
The really sad thing about norway is that despite "being one of the richest countries in the world" (an argument used every time welfare is increased) norway is a country where people are willing to accept mediocrity because they convince themselves that that is the cost of the welfare society.
The question is: what will happen when the oil wells run dry?
Quote from: Tamas on August 03, 2011, 02:51:59 AM
The question is: what will happen when the oil wells run dry?
I'll be dead by then, so I don't care. When the natural gas runs dry my grandchildren (or at least theoretical potential grandchildren) will be dead.
There is no need to worry for norway yet.
Quote from: Tamas on August 03, 2011, 02:06:31 AM
Quote from: Slargos on August 02, 2011, 06:05:33 PM
Quote from: Jacob on August 02, 2011, 05:59:53 PM
I'm confused at the appearance of Slargos, defender of the downtrodden guest workers. Can we expect to see more of him?
You are confused because you're not very imaginative, but rather rely on your vast capacity for prejudice and assumption to guide you.
Nothing I can help you with, I'm afraid. :console:
Thing is, Jake, that I think that I'm not really a person to you. I'm just a racist, and you assign motivation, beliefs and behaviour to me in order to fit your preconceived notion of what a racist is. Thus you're surprised that I find the treatment of polacks, pakis and niggers in Norway to be often reprehensible. I also find slavery to be an abomination. However, since I'm just a racist, this doesn't compute.
you would be more convincing as a defender of the opressed foreign workers in Norway if you weren't a foreign worker in Norway yourself. :lol:
Your prejudice at work.
I've never knowingly suffered from the things I describe here, other than a sometimes condescending attitude. Swedes are less vulnerable to it than other ethnicities. Although some agencies and employers are worse than others, granted.
And to be honest, it's not really all the bullshit that grates at me the most. So what if foreigners are treated differently from Norwegians? It's their country after all. But the holier-than-thou attitude and the constant lies really sets me off.
And, like Viking noted, the acceptance of mediocrity has me baffled.
Norwegians are pretty well travelled. IIRC, on average 7 out of 10 people have at some point been to Sweden specifically with the intent to buy basic goods and they must have noted the difference in quality and selection themselves. But the thing is, if you go to a store right across the border the selection typically almost mirrors that of the Norwegian stores
since this is what the Norwads want. Why do they accept having roads that are several yearly maintenance budgets behind on basic repairs? The "we are a mountainous country" excuse simply doesn't work because for one the roads in the parts that
aren't tricky to build in are in a dismal state aswell, and there are certainly countries with as much geographical difficulties that manage to build acceptable roads anyway.
In Stockholm, you might find the odd piece of pavement inside a small community, or some back road that is hardly used that has the odd pot-hole and other types of damage. In Oslo, the only routes that don't feel like driving across a wash board are the main arteries.
I simply cannot understand how they can live this way and keep electing the same, worthless politicians.
Quote from: Syt on August 03, 2011, 02:33:50 AM
Norway sounds as joyful as an Ingmar Bergman film.
:hmm: Maybe, but not like this one:
Smiles of a Summer Night/Sommarnattens Leende
http://uk.imdb.com/title/tt0048641/
I'm bailing on this thread.
Cheese dick-measuring? Really?
Quote from: CountDeMoney on August 03, 2011, 04:34:43 AM
I'm bailing on this thread.
Cheese dick-measuring? Really?
Yeah, I can see why an american would be uncomfortable discussing cheese quality. :P
300 items in the whole fucking supermarket?? :blink:
Am I reading that correctly?
Quote from: Slargos on August 03, 2011, 05:01:47 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on August 03, 2011, 04:34:43 AM
I'm bailing on this thread.
Cheese dick-measuring? Really?
Yeah, I can see why an american would be uncomfortable discussing cheese quality. :P
I don't know about the rest of the country, but here in New York there is a huge variety of awesome cheese, both domestic and foreign.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on August 03, 2011, 03:04:49 PM
300 items in the whole fucking supermarket?? :blink:
Am I reading that correctly?
I presume this specifically references food, and not the other types of products, but yeah it certainly sounds like the ballpark.
Quote from: Slargos on August 03, 2011, 03:12:01 PM
I presume this specifically references food, and not the other types of products, but yeah it certainly sounds like the ballpark.
I'm blown away. Here 300 gets you just to the types of breakfast cereal.
My local Wegmans (chain grocery store), according to their website has 356 items in their cheese department.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on August 03, 2011, 03:13:28 PM
Quote from: Slargos on August 03, 2011, 03:12:01 PM
I presume this specifically references food, and not the other types of products, but yeah it certainly sounds like the ballpark.
I'm blown away. Here 300 gets you just to the types of breakfast cereal.
That is what I'm trying to tell you. :D
But apparently I'm just a nut. :P
Quote from: Admiral Yi on August 03, 2011, 03:13:28 PM
Quote from: Slargos on August 03, 2011, 03:12:01 PM
I presume this specifically references food, and not the other types of products, but yeah it certainly sounds like the ballpark.
I'm blown away. Here 300 gets you just to the types of breakfast cereal.
Wegmans: 224 choices of breakfast cereal. :yeah:
OK, with this news I am withdrawing from my position that this is not a systemic issue.
Norway really needs to look closely at the choices they have made. A man cannot eat the same food every single day and stay completely sane.
If Norway serves up shitty meals, the terrorists win.
Canada has a fairly shitty selection of cheeses available.
Damn you, Dairy Commission of Canada. Damn you to HELL!
Quote from: Berkut on August 03, 2011, 03:19:51 PM
OK, with this news I am withdrawing from my position that this is not a systemic issue.
Norway really needs to look closely at the choices they have made. A man cannot eat the same food every single day and stay completely sane.
At the same time, there is such a thing as too much choice. Sometimes you just need some fucking cheese, and if you're not a big cheese expert, having 356 kinds of cheese to choose from isn't really helpful.
Quote from: DGuller on August 03, 2011, 04:00:19 PM
Quote from: Berkut on August 03, 2011, 03:19:51 PM
OK, with this news I am withdrawing from my position that this is not a systemic issue.
Norway really needs to look closely at the choices they have made. A man cannot eat the same food every single day and stay completely sane.
At the same time, there is such a thing as too much choice. Sometimes you just need some fucking cheese, and if you're not a big cheese expert, having 356 kinds of cheese to choose from isn't really helpful.
Sov-niet.
Quote from: DGuller on August 03, 2011, 04:00:19 PM
Quote from: Berkut on August 03, 2011, 03:19:51 PM
OK, with this news I am withdrawing from my position that this is not a systemic issue.
Norway really needs to look closely at the choices they have made. A man cannot eat the same food every single day and stay completely sane.
At the same time, there is such a thing as too much choice. Sometimes you just need some fucking cheese, and if you're not a big cheese expert, having 356 kinds of cheese to choose from isn't really helpful.
Wegmans has thought of that, actually.
If you just want your basic cheese, you go over to the cheese section by the dairy aisle. Maybe 30 choices (the standard fair - cheddar, sharp, mild, American, swiss, etc., etc.).
If you want to go gourmet, then you go to the Cheese Shop, and they will actually cut you cheese to order and such. I am always tempted to buy one of those 40 pound wheels of something, just to keep in the living room.
My God, is there anything that Wegman's *can't* do? :o
Quote from: DGuller on August 03, 2011, 04:00:19 PM
Quote from: Berkut on August 03, 2011, 03:19:51 PM
OK, with this news I am withdrawing from my position that this is not a systemic issue.
Norway really needs to look closely at the choices they have made. A man cannot eat the same food every single day and stay completely sane.
At the same time, there is such a thing as too much choice. Sometimes you just need some fucking cheese, and if you're not a big cheese expert, having 356 kinds of cheese to choose from isn't really helpful.
No, there really isn't. For you neurotic types maybe that's true, but I find the range of options simply wonderful. Walking into a supermarket in Sweden feels like it should be accompanied by angelic chords, every fucking time.
There is exactly one chain in Norway that even comes close to acceptable levels, and even they can just provide the very basic level of civilization.
Sure, I typically go for the Gouda, but there's simply a feeling of relief every time I go to the LANE of shelves (unlike your average Norwegian store with just one measily shelf) and pick out my favourite among hundreds. I am reassured that I'm not living in a communist country or the third world.
More choice is good. I do find it weird that the biscuit and fizzy drinks aisles are so extensive; but suspect that the people who appreciate that are mystified by the cheese and beer choices that I find so pleasing.
DGuller will not be getting a Christmas card from me this year......"Sometimes you just need some fucking cheese......."............I'm shocked by this barbarous outlook :mad:
Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on August 03, 2011, 04:46:40 PM
DGuller will not be getting a Christmas card from me this year......
-5 multiculturalism points. :wagsfinger:
Established religion here in the UK...................I was obliged to say it as I did as an ironic comment on British monoculturalism :hmm:
Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on August 03, 2011, 04:53:15 PM
Established religion here in the UK...................I was obliged to say it as I did as an ironic comment on British monoculturalism :hmm:
Penalty reduced to 3 points. :bureacrat:
Quote from: Berkut on August 03, 2011, 03:15:46 PM
My local Wegmans (chain grocery store), according to their website has 356 items in their cheese department.
Hell, I just checked and Alma (the grocery where I shop online) has over 300 types of cheese in their offer, not counting cottage cheese (fromage) and processed cheese. And that's fucking Poland.
Quote from: Berkut on August 03, 2011, 03:18:27 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on August 03, 2011, 03:13:28 PM
Quote from: Slargos on August 03, 2011, 03:12:01 PM
I presume this specifically references food, and not the other types of products, but yeah it certainly sounds like the ballpark.
I'm blown away. Here 300 gets you just to the types of breakfast cereal.
Wegmans: 224 choices of breakfast cereal. :yeah:
121 here. :P
Quote from: Martinus on August 03, 2011, 04:55:55 PM
cottage cheese (fromage)
You call cottage cheese "fromage?"
Quote from: Admiral Yi on August 03, 2011, 04:58:32 PM
Quote from: Martinus on August 03, 2011, 04:55:55 PM
cottage cheese (fromage)
You call cottage cheese "fromage?"
It's the French word for it. In Polish, it's called "white cheese" (as opposed to "yellow cheese" and "mold cheese"). Is "fromage" used in English too?
Quote from: Martinus on August 03, 2011, 05:00:15 PM
It's the French word for it. In Polish, it's called "white cheese" (as opposed to "yellow cheese" and "mold cheese"). Is "fromage" used in English too?
It's the French word for all cheese.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on August 03, 2011, 04:12:39 PM
My God, is there anything that Wegman's *can't* do? :o
There has to be something, I am sure.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on August 03, 2011, 05:02:50 PM
Quote from: Martinus on August 03, 2011, 05:00:15 PM
It's the French word for it. In Polish, it's called "white cheese" (as opposed to "yellow cheese" and "mold cheese"). Is "fromage" used in English too?
It's the French word for all cheese.
You are right. I must have been confused. :huh:
How can you keep all those 356 kinds of cheese fresh anyway, if you don't have 1,000,000 customers keeping down the turnaround times? Last time I visited a supermarket with a large selection of cheese, a lot of their cheese had mold all over it. :x
Quote from: DGuller on August 03, 2011, 05:06:19 PM
How can you keep all those 356 kinds of cheese fresh anyway, if you don't have 1,000,000 customers keeping down the turnaround times? Last time I visited a supermarket with a large selection of cheese, a lot of their cheese had mold all over it. :x
:D
:lol:
Quote from: Martinus on August 03, 2011, 04:57:16 PM
Quote from: Berkut on August 03, 2011, 03:18:27 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on August 03, 2011, 03:13:28 PM
Quote from: Slargos on August 03, 2011, 03:12:01 PM
I presume this specifically references food, and not the other types of products, but yeah it certainly sounds like the ballpark.
I'm blown away. Here 300 gets you just to the types of breakfast cereal.
Wegmans: 224 choices of breakfast cereal. :yeah:
121 here. :P
The space for the remaining 100 or so breakfast cereals is filled with different types of sausage.
Quote from: Berkut on August 03, 2011, 04:11:02 PM
Wegmans has thought of that, actually.
If you just want your basic cheese, you go over to the cheese section by the dairy aisle. Maybe 30 choices (the standard fair - cheddar, sharp, mild, American, swiss, etc., etc.).
If you want to go gourmet, then you go to the Cheese Shop, and they will actually cut you cheese to order and such. I am always tempted to buy one of those 40 pound wheels of something, just to keep in the living room.
I don't think that is specific to Wegmans. Most of the grocery store chains have the small section of cheaply priced nice every day cheeses by dairy, a section of gourmet cheeses and then the cheeses that you can get sliced behind the deli counter.
Incidentally, does anyone here regularly order groceries online? I started doing so about a year ago and never looked back.
I like the idea, but I want to buy at least fruit and vegetables and meat/fish cuts in person.
Obviously, since there's only one type of cheese and other stuff, I could order that with my local Party-run shop.
Quote from: Norgy on August 04, 2011, 03:30:18 AM
I like the idea, but I want to buy at least fruit and vegetables and meat/fish cuts in person.
Obviously, since there's only one type of cheese and other stuff, I could order that with my local Party-run shop.
Well, the products they deliver are fresh and I'm not one of the people who knock on melons or rub avocados before buying, so that's not a problem for me.
But for me the main benefit are products like bottled water, milk and other stuff you can buy in larger quantities - I don't own a car and it is a pain to carry all that back home from the store.
The shop I order online from has a section associated with a gourmet Polish food company (the shop is actually is a brick and mortar chain, they just have an online store too) so it is easy to order good food like meat or eggs or vegetable products from them too. They told me when you order from them, they do not collect that stuff from the warehouse but rather have some assistant pick them from an actual store before delivery.
Why would you buy bottled water?
Quote from: The Brain on August 04, 2011, 03:49:13 AM
Why would you buy bottled water?
I like sparkling water.
Quote from: The Brain on August 04, 2011, 03:49:13 AM
Why would you buy bottled water?
it's an east euro thing
Quote from: Tamas on August 04, 2011, 04:14:48 AM
Quote from: The Brain on August 04, 2011, 03:49:13 AM
Why would you buy bottled water?
it's an east euro thing
Yeah. They do not get that unboiled tap water here can make you sick (or at least could within the living memory and so people are wary to drink water from the tap).
Quote from: Barrister on August 03, 2011, 03:30:16 PM
Canada has a fairly shitty selection of cheeses available.
Damn you, Dairy Commission of Canada. Damn you to HELL!
I rather suspect it is an issue of demand rather than the Dairy Commission (though it does play a role). You can find tons of good cheese in Montreal.
Dick cheese doesn't count.
Quote from: Oexmelin on August 04, 2011, 08:10:28 AM
Quote from: Barrister on August 03, 2011, 03:30:16 PM
Canada has a fairly shitty selection of cheeses available.
Damn you, Dairy Commission of Canada. Damn you to HELL!
I rather suspect it is an issue of demand rather than the Dairy Commission (though it does play a role). You can find tons of good cheese in Montreal.
Lots of great cheeses in the European delis on Bloor street, in my neighbourhood. There are whole stores dedicated to, apparently, thousands of varieties of cheese.
Dear dairy,
Today the Canadians got into another internal tard fight on Languish. Stupid, eh?
http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aftenposten.no%2Fnyheter%2Firiks%2Farticle4191940.ece&act=url (http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aftenposten.no%2Fnyheter%2Firiks%2Farticle4191940.ece&act=url)
:bleeding: x infinity
Quote- Totally tasteless to find such a toy gun with Donald Duck magazine in your mailbox, while the whole of Norway is still in mourning after the terrorist attacks, says a mother of young children to Aftenposten.no. The family subscribed to the comic magazine and get it sent a few days before it is available for sale in the store. But this time do not get the kids enjoy the game that always comes with.
- I removed the gun and it can not see my kids, says the Oslo woman.
Toy gun is plastic. It is packaged and marketed as "spider-catapult". The magazine can be filled with the included black spiders, and the gun or catapult, sling the spiders towards the target. - Do not hack firearms Chief Svein Erik Søland in Egmont Serieforlaget understand that parents react right now, when these Toy dolls up unannounced in your mailbox.
- Every summer for more than 20 years, we sent out water pistols and other toy weapons with Donald Duck magazine. Of course we have discussed whether it is appropriate to send out such guns in the situation we are in now. But it was not possible to stop the broadcast, because of press time and distribution, he says to Aftenposten.no. May have been the last toy guns in Donald leaves He emphasizes that it certainly is not the publisher's intent to promote or hack firearms.
- I feel like Donald Duck stories is the prototype of a universe in which conflicts are resolved in a nonviolent way. So I hope that parents, if they respond, you can use this opportunity to talk with the children and make them aware.
- Are you going to have to send out toy guns with the comic magazine?
- No. This will be discussed thoroughly in publishing management. And I do not exclude that it may be necessary to put an end to future mailings of toy guns, says Svein Erik Søland.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.aftenposten.no%2Farchive%2F01520%2F_SCC-AIPub_A-l_pet_1520350x.jpg&hash=05e9b1db527ce62eb5435eb24c844a880a2f0d2f)
AFAIK all families in Norway have thrown away all their weapon-like toys.
Funny tidbit, btw.
I come into contact with people from wildly different social stratas in my work, and the last week the topic of conversation has naturally often drifted into the Utøya murders.
Frequently, the conclusion has been that "I can understand why he'd want to kill politicians, but going after children crossed the line."
An older man told me today, "I mean, we've often talked about bombing the entire [government building district] to hell."
It would appear that while extreme, Breivik's sentiments aren't exactly unique in Norway. :hmm:
The Jews told me that he is just a lone madman. Are you saying I cannot trust the Jews?
Quote from: The Brain on August 04, 2011, 03:07:18 PM
The Jews told me that he is just a lone madman. Are you saying I cannot trust the Jews?
I can only lay the facts out for you. You need to draw your own conclusions. :sleep:
Quote from: The Brain on August 04, 2011, 08:36:14 AM
Dear dairy,
Today the Canadians got into another internal tard fight on Languish. Stupid, eh?
:D
Quote from: The Brain on August 04, 2011, 02:43:43 PM
AFAIK all families in Norway have thrown away all their weapon-like toys.
Good Lord-- that's about half my son's toys.
Quote from: derspiess on August 04, 2011, 03:22:45 PM
Quote from: The Brain on August 04, 2011, 02:43:43 PM
AFAIK all families in Norway have thrown away all their weapon-like toys.
Good Lord-- that's about half my son's toys.
You will regret it when he murders a bunch of kids at a political indoctrination camp. :hmm:
Quote from: Malthus on August 04, 2011, 08:23:16 AM
Quote from: Oexmelin on August 04, 2011, 08:10:28 AM
Quote from: Barrister on August 03, 2011, 03:30:16 PM
Canada has a fairly shitty selection of cheeses available.
Damn you, Dairy Commission of Canada. Damn you to HELL!
I rather suspect it is an issue of demand rather than the Dairy Commission (though it does play a role). You can find tons of good cheese in Montreal.
Lots of great cheeses in the European delis on Bloor street, in my neighbourhood. There are whole stores dedicated to, apparently, thousands of varieties of cheese.
Well yes, if you hunt around you can find nice cheese. But the fact that any foreign cheese has (IIRC) a 100% tariff puts a big damper on having nice cheese more widely available.
Does Canadia have the same requirement as the US, that all cheese sold must be made with pasteurized milk?
Quote from: Admiral Yi on August 04, 2011, 03:35:00 PM
Does Canadia have the same requirement as the US, that all cheese sold must be made with pasteurized milk?
Just looked it up - no, if it's aged 60 days.
Quote from: Barrister on August 04, 2011, 03:26:20 PM
Quote from: Malthus on August 04, 2011, 08:23:16 AM
Quote from: Oexmelin on August 04, 2011, 08:10:28 AM
Quote from: Barrister on August 03, 2011, 03:30:16 PM
Canada has a fairly shitty selection of cheeses available.
Damn you, Dairy Commission of Canada. Damn you to HELL!
I rather suspect it is an issue of demand rather than the Dairy Commission (though it does play a role). You can find tons of good cheese in Montreal.
Lots of great cheeses in the European delis on Bloor street, in my neighbourhood. There are whole stores dedicated to, apparently, thousands of varieties of cheese.
Well yes, if you hunt around you can find nice cheese. But the fact that any foreign cheese has (IIRC) a 100% tariff puts a big damper on having nice cheese more widely available.
It's more complicated than that: at the risk of entertaining Martinus & the Brain ( :P), in Canada, if you have a valid import permit for cheese, you pay a very low tariff rate; but there is a national quota. If you can't get an import permit (prehaps because the quota is filled, or you are importing from a country to which the quota does not apply), you can import anyway, but you pay a whopping great tariff - something like 240%.
All your cheese-importing questions are answered here: http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/fssa/dailai/cdnreqe.shtml
Quote from: Malthus on August 04, 2011, 03:55:05 PM
Quote from: Barrister on August 04, 2011, 03:26:20 PM
Quote from: Malthus on August 04, 2011, 08:23:16 AM
Quote from: Oexmelin on August 04, 2011, 08:10:28 AM
Quote from: Barrister on August 03, 2011, 03:30:16 PM
Canada has a fairly shitty selection of cheeses available.
Damn you, Dairy Commission of Canada. Damn you to HELL!
I rather suspect it is an issue of demand rather than the Dairy Commission (though it does play a role). You can find tons of good cheese in Montreal.
Lots of great cheeses in the European delis on Bloor street, in my neighbourhood. There are whole stores dedicated to, apparently, thousands of varieties of cheese.
Well yes, if you hunt around you can find nice cheese. But the fact that any foreign cheese has (IIRC) a 100% tariff puts a big damper on having nice cheese more widely available.
It's more complicated than that: at the risk of entertaining Martinus & the Brain ( :P ), in Canada, if you have a valid import permit for cheese, you pay a very low tariff rate; but there is a national quota. If you can't get an import permit (prehaps because the quota is filled, or you are importing from a country to which the quota does not apply), you can import anyway, but you pay a whopping great tariff - something like 240%.
All your cheese-importing questions are answered here: http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/fssa/dailai/cdnreqe.shtml (http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/fssa/dailai/cdnreqe.shtml)
I stand corrected.
I was in the firm belief that only Norway had such insanity going on with dairy products.
Of course, this goes not just for cheese but for all foodstuffs in Norway, so I think we still win. :uffda:
Quote from: Slargos on August 04, 2011, 03:57:52 PM
Quote from: Malthus on August 04, 2011, 03:55:05 PM
Quote from: Barrister on August 04, 2011, 03:26:20 PM
Quote from: Malthus on August 04, 2011, 08:23:16 AM
Quote from: Oexmelin on August 04, 2011, 08:10:28 AM
Quote from: Barrister on August 03, 2011, 03:30:16 PM
Canada has a fairly shitty selection of cheeses available.
Damn you, Dairy Commission of Canada. Damn you to HELL!
I rather suspect it is an issue of demand rather than the Dairy Commission (though it does play a role). You can find tons of good cheese in Montreal.
Lots of great cheeses in the European delis on Bloor street, in my neighbourhood. There are whole stores dedicated to, apparently, thousands of varieties of cheese.
Well yes, if you hunt around you can find nice cheese. But the fact that any foreign cheese has (IIRC) a 100% tariff puts a big damper on having nice cheese more widely available.
It's more complicated than that: at the risk of entertaining Martinus & the Brain ( :P ), in Canada, if you have a valid import permit for cheese, you pay a very low tariff rate; but there is a national quota. If you can't get an import permit (prehaps because the quota is filled, or you are importing from a country to which the quota does not apply), you can import anyway, but you pay a whopping great tariff - something like 240%.
All your cheese-importing questions are answered here: http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/fssa/dailai/cdnreqe.shtml (http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/fssa/dailai/cdnreqe.shtml)
I stand corrected.
I was in the firm belief that only Norway had such insanity going on with dairy products.
Of course, this goes not just for cheese but for all foodstuffs in Norway, so I think we still win. :uffda:
I wasn't kidding when I damned the Dairy Commission to hell. <_<
How interesting.
While looking for the Norwegian cheese tarriffs, I found that in 2010 there were ongoing negotiations with the EU to reduce the tarriffs on "ornamental flowers" including Roses.
Why is this interesting?
Because during the Utöya crisis, the Socialdemocrats scored political points by graciously lowering the tarriffs on Roses in order to ensure a steady supply for the various demonstrations and ceremonies following the event.
Bloody goddamned convenient.
So this was a EU plot?
Quote from: Slargos on August 04, 2011, 03:57:52 PM
I stand corrected.
I was in the firm belief that only Norway had such insanity going on with dairy products.
Of course, this goes not just for cheese but for all foodstuffs in Norway, so I think we still win. :uffda:
It's the result of a combination of the desire to protect the (slowly fading, but emotionally evocative for family-farm-romantic reasons) dairy industry and the desire to meet international committments to free trade - creating a sort of frankenstien monster of bureaucracy. :D
Quote from: Martinus on August 04, 2011, 04:07:20 PM
So this was a KGB plot?
Not what I meant. It looks like Stoltenberg grabbed an already finished product and displayed it as an example of quick and magnanimous thinking in a time of crisis.
I smelt a rat when it happened, because Norwegian bureaucracy NEVER moves that quickly.
Quote from: Malthus on August 04, 2011, 04:07:46 PM
Quote from: Slargos on August 04, 2011, 03:57:52 PM
I stand corrected.
I was in the firm belief that only Norway had such insanity going on with dairy products.
Of course, this goes not just for cheese but for all foodstuffs in Norway, so I think we still win. :uffda:
It's the result of a combination of the desire to protect the (slowly fading, but emotionally evocative for family-farm-romantic reasons) dairy industry and the desire to meet international committments to free trade - creating a sort of frankenstien monster of bureaucracy. :D
I have no problem with the notion of protecting national food production given that it's going to be a bitch to rebuild it if the need suddenly arises.
What I have a problem with is that the result is that it's profitable to run a "farm" with one cow and six pigs under this subsidy system and there is little to no incentive (or even motivation from the government under the notion that small farms makes the country side vibrant and alive) to run a more efficient production chain. This means high cost production supported by tax Kronor and the consumers and up taking it in all holes.
Good cheese is already expensive, but a 240% tariff on top :bleeding:
...............for one of life's essential luxuries, I'm shocked :mad:
Good cheese is not a luxury, it's a basic necessity. You goddamned Norwegian. :P
Cheese faggotry. This place is full of idiots. :rolleyes:
The only thing left is for some smartass to make a cheesy pun.
A variety of cheeses is a gouda thing.
To brie or not to brie, that is the question.
I camambert this any longer.
Emmentaler, my dear Watson.
http://tundratabloids.com/2011/08/barry-rubin-the-oslo-syndrome.html (http://tundratabloids.com/2011/08/barry-rubin-the-oslo-syndrome.html)
Stay classy, you fucking kikes.
And another source just to be safe from the fucktards:
http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/Article.aspx?id=231838
Quote from: Slargos on August 05, 2011, 08:03:56 AM
http://tundratabloids.com/2011/08/barry-rubin-the-oslo-syndrome.html (http://tundratabloids.com/2011/08/barry-rubin-the-oslo-syndrome.html)
Stay classy, you fucking kikes.
And another source just to be safe from the fucktards:
http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/Article.aspx?id=231838
That's rich, even for a Jew.
RIP Folke Bernadotte. I guess we should destroy Israel so we don't support terror.
It's lovely to see right wingers trying to spin this story - whether they are zionist right wingers in Irael or neonazi right wingers in Europe or christian fundamentalist right wingers in the US - they come across as equally tasteless scum.
Quote from: Martinus on August 05, 2011, 08:44:59 AM
It's lovely to see right wingers trying to spin this story - whether they are zionist right wingers in Irael or neonazi right wingers in Europe or christian fundamentalist right wingers in the US - they come across as equally tasteless scum.
I thought you liked the taste of scum. Or was it something else?
"We're going to face this with more democracy and more openness" :lmfao:
http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aftenposten.no%2Fnyheter%2Firiks%2Farticle4192914.ece
I shouldn't be surprised, really. :D
Quote from: Slargos on August 05, 2011, 08:03:56 AM
http://tundratabloids.com/2011/08/barry-rubin-the-oslo-syndrome.html (http://tundratabloids.com/2011/08/barry-rubin-the-oslo-syndrome.html)
Stay classy, you fucking kikes.
And another source just to be safe from the fucktards:
http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/Article.aspx?id=231838
Actually he seems reasonable to me. There is some irony that these people were killed by a terrorist while taking part in a pro-terrorist rally, though that doesn't mean they deserved to die.
Quote from: Ancient Demon on August 06, 2011, 11:12:38 AM
Quote from: Slargos on August 05, 2011, 08:03:56 AM
http://tundratabloids.com/2011/08/barry-rubin-the-oslo-syndrome.html (http://tundratabloids.com/2011/08/barry-rubin-the-oslo-syndrome.html)
Stay classy, you fucking kikes.
And another source just to be safe from the fucktards:
http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/Article.aspx?id=231838
Actually he seems reasonable to me. There is some irony that these people were killed by a terrorist while taking part in a pro-terrorist rally, though that doesn't mean they deserved to die.
The problem is that the norwegian citics of Rubin did not read his article. They read the article in dagbladet.no which was re-interpreting the article. Rubin's argument that the terrorists useful idiots which have legitimized terrorism provided that it's objectives are legitimate (a sentiment that Rubin seems to think the Norwegian Ambassador to Israel has) has been re-authored (I don't know an english word for gjendikte - the re-composing of verse when translating poetry form one language to another) to suggest that the AUF camp was a terrorist training camp and that his observation of the irony of the situation (from his point of view) is re-authored to suggest that he thinks the victims deserved it.
Now that Fjordman has revealed himself he has been accused of inciting violence and calling for a holocaust of muslims. (neither sentiment can remotely be inferred from anything he writes). The Press' treatment of Peder Jensen has been atrocious and the largest tabloid "newspapers" (norwegian equivalents of the Daily Mail, The Sun and The Daily Mirror) have basically authored hatchett jobs on the guy authoritatively referring to amateurs for conclusions about his motivations and the true meaning of his otherwise peaceful but strident work.
Quote from: Ancient Demon on August 06, 2011, 11:12:38 AM
Quote from: Slargos on August 05, 2011, 08:03:56 AM
http://tundratabloids.com/2011/08/barry-rubin-the-oslo-syndrome.html (http://tundratabloids.com/2011/08/barry-rubin-the-oslo-syndrome.html)
Stay classy, you fucking kikes.
And another source just to be safe from the fucktards:
http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/Article.aspx?id=231838
Actually he seems reasonable to me. There is some irony that these people were killed by a terrorist while taking part in a pro-terrorist rally, though that doesn't mean they deserved to die.
Only that they didn't, and this attempt to demonize them by some neocon Jew is rather distasteful.
The people gathered on the island were there for many leftist causes, from rights of women, to GLBT issues, to anti-racism etc. The criticism of Israel for its treatment of Palestinian civilian populace is one of such causes.
Quote from: Martinus on August 09, 2011, 05:10:54 AM
The people gathered on the island were there for many leftist causes, from rights of women, to GLBT issues, to anti-racism etc. The criticism of Israel for its treatment of Palestinian civilian populace is one of such causes.
In Amerian politics, those young people would be considered almost as radical as the shooter.
Quote from: citizen k on August 09, 2011, 05:19:24 AM
Quote from: Martinus on August 09, 2011, 05:10:54 AM
The people gathered on the island were there for many leftist causes, from rights of women, to GLBT issues, to anti-racism etc. The criticism of Israel for its treatment of Palestinian civilian populace is one of such causes.
In Amerian politics, those young people would be considered almost as radical as the shooter.
I know you prefer your general public to be docile and tranquilized, while they stuff their guts with fructose corn syrup and trans fats. Fortunately, we do not live in the US here.
Quote from: Martinus on August 09, 2011, 05:25:52 AM
Quote from: citizen k on August 09, 2011, 05:19:24 AM
Quote from: Martinus on August 09, 2011, 05:10:54 AM
The people gathered on the island were there for many leftist causes, from rights of women, to GLBT issues, to anti-racism etc. The criticism of Israel for its treatment of Palestinian civilian populace is one of such causes.
In Amerian politics, those young people would be considered almost as radical as the shooter.
I know you prefer your general public to be docile and tranquilized, while they stuff their guts with fructose corn syrup and trans fats. Fortunately, we do not live in the US here.
Imagine how much better the world could be if more of it was like Poland...
Quote from: Berkut on August 09, 2011, 09:36:31 AM
Quote from: Martinus on August 09, 2011, 05:25:52 AM
Quote from: citizen k on August 09, 2011, 05:19:24 AM
Quote from: Martinus on August 09, 2011, 05:10:54 AM
The people gathered on the island were there for many leftist causes, from rights of women, to GLBT issues, to anti-racism etc. The criticism of Israel for its treatment of Palestinian civilian populace is one of such causes.
In Amerian politics, those young people would be considered almost as radical as the shooter.
I know you prefer your general public to be docile and tranquilized, while they stuff their guts with fructose corn syrup and trans fats. Fortunately, we do not live in the US here.
Imagine how much better the world could be if more of it was like Poland...
yep, with all that tolerance for atheism and gay rights and all other modern liberties
Quote from: Tamas on August 09, 2011, 09:37:51 AM
yep, with all that tolerance for atheism and gay rights and all other modern liberties
Well, tolerance for atheism is one area where Poland probably does have US beat.
Quote from: Berkut on August 09, 2011, 09:36:31 AM
Quote from: Martinus on August 09, 2011, 05:25:52 AM
Quote from: citizen k on August 09, 2011, 05:19:24 AM
Quote from: Martinus on August 09, 2011, 05:10:54 AM
The people gathered on the island were there for many leftist causes, from rights of women, to GLBT issues, to anti-racism etc. The criticism of Israel for its treatment of Palestinian civilian populace is one of such causes.
In Amerian politics, those young people would be considered almost as radical as the shooter.
I know you prefer your general public to be docile and tranquilized, while they stuff their guts with fructose corn syrup and trans fats. Fortunately, we do not live in the US here.
Imagine how much better the world could be if more of it was like Poland...
I'd rather not eat black bread and live in a thatched hut.
Quote from: Razgovory on August 09, 2011, 09:47:57 AM
Quote from: Berkut on August 09, 2011, 09:36:31 AM
Quote from: Martinus on August 09, 2011, 05:25:52 AM
Quote from: citizen k on August 09, 2011, 05:19:24 AM
Quote from: Martinus on August 09, 2011, 05:10:54 AM
The people gathered on the island were there for many leftist causes, from rights of women, to GLBT issues, to anti-racism etc. The criticism of Israel for its treatment of Palestinian civilian populace is one of such causes.
In Amerian politics, those young people would be considered almost as radical as the shooter.
I know you prefer your general public to be docile and tranquilized, while they stuff their guts with fructose corn syrup and trans fats. Fortunately, we do not live in the US here.
Imagine how much better the world could be if more of it was like Poland...
I'd rather not eat black bread and live in a thatched hut.
But how do you feel about exterminating Jews?
You can't just look at the negatives of living in a near-paradise like Poland.
Quote from: Martinus on August 09, 2011, 05:25:52 AM
I know you prefer your general public to be docile and tranquilized, while they stuff their guts with fructose corn syrup and trans fats. Fortunately, we do not live in the US here.
Yeah it looks like a veritable paradise.
Quote from: Martinus on August 09, 2011, 05:25:52 AM
I know you prefer your general public to be docile and tranquilized, while they stuff their guts with fructose corn syrup and trans fats. Fortunately, we do not live in the US here.
So the only two options are to embrace Nordic socialism or to be docile and consume trans fats?
Methinks there are some excluded alternatives here.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on August 09, 2011, 10:24:03 AM
Quote from: Martinus on August 09, 2011, 05:25:52 AM
I know you prefer your general public to be docile and tranquilized, while they stuff their guts with fructose corn syrup and trans fats. Fortunately, we do not live in the US here.
So the only two options are to embrace Nordic socialism or to be docile and consume trans fats?
Methinks there are some excluded alternatives here.
Hey, in Canada we can do *both*! :D
Quote from: Malthus on August 09, 2011, 11:05:20 AM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on August 09, 2011, 10:24:03 AM
Quote from: Martinus on August 09, 2011, 05:25:52 AM
I know you prefer your general public to be docile and tranquilized, while they stuff their guts with fructose corn syrup and trans fats. Fortunately, we do not live in the US here.
So the only two options are to embrace Nordic socialism or to be docile and consume trans fats?
Methinks there are some excluded alternatives here.
Hey, in Canada we can do *both*! :D
Oh Canada....
So what is the bottom line after all this talk of "more openness and more democracy"?
- Bloggers have been interrogated by the police simply for being mentioned by Breivik
- Calls have been made (by politicians and newspapers alike) to tighten the laws governing expression on the internet
- Stores have censored the games mentioned by Breivik
- FrP (Progress party, Euro-lib with an anti-immigration platform) has been persecuted over the fact that B. used to be a member
- Police has prevented legal meetings of political parties
- Planned rallies on unrelated issues have been forced to relocate or been shut down entirely
- A general attitude that this needs to quell the entire immigration debate has been pervasive both among journalists and politicians
Just a couple of points of interest in the debate I've caught the last few weeks.
So much for "more democracy".
Or rather, when they say "more democracy" they obviously mean the Newspeak definition of democracy which is humanism, multiculturalism and ironically less actual democracy given that dissenting voices more or less automatically constitute "hate speech".
http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=no&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aftenposten.no%2Fnyheter%2Firiks%2Farticle4197551.ece
Apparently Breivik called the Police and wanted to give himself up during the shooting, but he either wasn't believed or there was no Protocol to deal with that type of situation and so it wasn't followed up. I've complained about the Norwegian OCD-like insistance on the nearly natural law status Protocol has in this society, but I never thought it would get so bad that lives would actually be lost in this fashion to it.
http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=no&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aftenposten.no%2Fnyheter%2Firiks%2Farticle4197412.ece
The Norwegian police have come under heavy criticism the last few days over their handling of the situation, and they've actually been accused of going against Protocol when they waited for SWAT instead of sending in the first responding unit as is apparently the instruction for cases like these.
Additionally, there was a transport helicopter available which was not used, and the insistence on using their own boat to transport SWAT caused a 20 minute delay (after the engine broke down and the boat started sinking, at which point SWAT needed rescuing by civilians who were already busy risking their lives picking up swimmers under fire).
They are making the expected excuses and it's still far from clear whether any heads will roll. The fact that Breivik had already dropped his weapon before SWAT could get to him certainly doesn't look good in light of the decision to wait for SWAT before acting.
Knowing the Norwegians, nothing will come of it even if gross incompetence or negligence is concluded, but it's certainly going to be interesting to follow the investigation on the conduct of the Police.
Quote from: Slargos on August 10, 2011, 09:00:42 AM
So what is the bottom line after all this talk of "more openness and more democracy"?
- Bloggers have been interrogated by the police simply for being mentioned by Breivik
- Calls have been made (by politicians and newspapers alike) to tighten the laws governing expression on the internet
- Stores have censored the games mentioned by Breivik
- FrP (Progress party, Euro-lib with an anti-immigration platform) has been persecuted over the fact that B. used to be a member
- Police has prevented legal meetings of political parties
- Planned rallies on unrelated issues have been forced to relocate or been shut down entirely
- A general attitude that this needs to quell the entire immigration debate has been pervasive both among journalists and politicians
Just a couple of points of interest in the debate I've caught the last few weeks.
So much for "more democracy".
Or rather, when they say "more democracy" they obviously mean the Newspeak definition of democracy which is humanism, multiculturalism and ironically less actual democracy given that dissenting voices more or less automatically constitute "hate speech".
Yeah, when I finally Ragequite I'm totally giving your name over to the Norwegian Criminal police. It'll be so worth it.
Quote from: Razgovory on August 11, 2011, 09:15:41 PM
Quote from: Slargos on August 10, 2011, 09:00:42 AM
So what is the bottom line after all this talk of "more openness and more democracy"?
- Bloggers have been interrogated by the police simply for being mentioned by Breivik
- Calls have been made (by politicians and newspapers alike) to tighten the laws governing expression on the internet
- Stores have censored the games mentioned by Breivik
- FrP (Progress party, Euro-lib with an anti-immigration platform) has been persecuted over the fact that B. used to be a member
- Police has prevented legal meetings of political parties
- Planned rallies on unrelated issues have been forced to relocate or been shut down entirely
- A general attitude that this needs to quell the entire immigration debate has been pervasive both among journalists and politicians
Just a couple of points of interest in the debate I've caught the last few weeks.
So much for "more democracy".
Or rather, when they say "more democracy" they obviously mean the Newspeak definition of democracy which is humanism, multiculturalism and ironically less actual democracy given that dissenting voices more or less automatically constitute "hate speech".
Yeah, when I finally Ragequite I'm totally giving your name over to the Norwegian Criminal police. It'll be so worth it.
THIS is what pushed you over the edge? Listing all the ways in which Norwegian politicians and journalists are acting contrary to the message of "more democracy"? :lol:
Seriously. Stop fucking talking about it, and do it already. You don't have to ragequit first, you little cunt. You're getting tedious.
No. Of course not. I just like seeing how the Norwegian authorities crack down on free speech. I'd do it to be a dick. The problem is of course they might take down languish as part of an investigation. So I'd do it on the way out.
Quote from: Razgovory on August 11, 2011, 09:30:14 PM
No. Of course not. I just like seeing how the Norwegian authorities crack down on free speech. I'd do it to be a dick. The problem is of course they might take down languish as part of an investigation. So I'd do it on the way out.
You're delusional. Even if they had that kind of clout to get a closed forum (distinction being that anything said here isn't considered uttered in public since it's a private gathering) based on a US server shut down for an investigation, Languish would be up as soon as vM finds another way to host it.
So, you little dickless jackass, put up or shut up. Don't make excuses.
Not risking it.
Met a young Norwegian woman of Chinese ethnicity on the plane back to Korea. ^_^
Quote from: jimmy olsen on August 14, 2011, 08:28:57 AM
Met a young Norwegian woman of Chinese ethnicity on the plane back to Korea. ^_^
No, you met a young Chinese woman.
Quote from: Neil on August 14, 2011, 08:59:06 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on August 14, 2011, 08:28:57 AM
Met a young Norwegian woman of Chinese ethnicity on the plane back to Korea. ^_^
No, you met a young Chinese woman.
:rolleyes: Take you're outdated ethnocentric identity theories and shove them up your ass.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on August 14, 2011, 09:35:19 AM
Quote from: Neil on August 14, 2011, 08:59:06 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on August 14, 2011, 08:28:57 AM
Met a young Norwegian woman of Chinese ethnicity on the plane back to Korea. ^_^
No, you met a young Chinese woman.
:rolleyes: Take you're outdated ethnocentric identity theories and shove them up your ass.
I rather think not. Take your naiveté about Chinese spies and club yourself to death with it.
http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=no&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aftenposten.no%2Fnyheter%2Firiks%2Farticle4201022.ece (http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=no&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aftenposten.no%2Fnyheter%2Firiks%2Farticle4201022.ece)
Breivik's rights abrogated. Interesting development. :hmm:
QuoteThe Oslo District 25 July terror accused Anders Behring Breivik imposed complete isolation for four weeks, until 22 August. By law it is only possible to isolate a maximum of two weeks at the first prison meeting.
This means that the terrorist accused of 5 August has been illegally isolated in Ila prison and detention institution. Overall he got two weeks longer insulation than the law allows.
District Court judge who had the matter admits to Aftenposten that it committed an error during incarceration meeting, which went behind closed doors.
- It is true that the detention ruling contains an error after the Supreme Court practice that no one was aware of the hearing, said Judge Kim Heger.
In 2005, beating the Supreme Court determined that it is not possible to isolate some of the more than two weeks in detention the first meeting. The Supreme Court wrote that the wording of the insulation provision only open for four weeks of isolation "by extension of an already decided isolation."
The court therefore can not impose a four-week isolation until at least the second imprisonment meeting. Heger said he first became aware of the ruling of the Supreme Court a few days ago.
Strike #27 for "more openness and more democracy" :D
It'd be funny if he walked on a technicality. But then again, these are Euro courts. They'll overlook any improper procedures by the system, but at least he won't spend long in prison either.
Quote from: Neil on August 16, 2011, 06:15:24 PM
It'd be funny if he walked on a technicality. But then again, these are Euro courts. They'll overlook any improper procedures by the system, but at least he won't spend long in prison either.
If he ever gets out short of a weimar style regime change or escape (or said extremely unlikely technicality), I will consume a platter of something technically edible but extremely vile of your choosing.
No, he will get sentenced to
storage. Mark my words.
Quote from: Neil on August 16, 2011, 06:15:24 PM
It'd be funny if he walked on a technicality. But then again, these are Euro courts. They'll overlook any improper procedures by the system, but at least he won't spend long in prison either.
You really don't understand Norway. Here, if the consensus is that the final result is fair, then rules can be ignored. He won't be released because of this, his confession will not be tossed because of this and nobody will care that his rights have been breached. The reaction is "whoops".
The really bad problem is that if present rules are followed and he shows contrition and there is no risk for repetition he will be out in at little as 10 years.
Quote from: Viking on August 16, 2011, 06:21:35 PM
Quote from: Neil on August 16, 2011, 06:15:24 PM
It'd be funny if he walked on a technicality. But then again, these are Euro courts. They'll overlook any improper procedures by the system, but at least he won't spend long in prison either.
You really don't understand Norway. Here, if the consensus is that the final result is fair, then rules can be ignored. He won't be released because of this, his confession will not be tossed because of this and nobody will care that his rights have been breached. The reaction is "whoops".
The really bad problem is that if present rules are followed and he shows contrition and there is no risk for repetition he will be out in at little as 10 years.
Had this been an act of islamic terrorism, you might very well be correct but with this guy? No.
Quote from: Slargos on August 16, 2011, 06:24:24 PM
Quote from: Viking on August 16, 2011, 06:21:35 PM
Quote from: Neil on August 16, 2011, 06:15:24 PM
It'd be funny if he walked on a technicality. But then again, these are Euro courts. They'll overlook any improper procedures by the system, but at least he won't spend long in prison either.
You really don't understand Norway. Here, if the consensus is that the final result is fair, then rules can be ignored. He won't be released because of this, his confession will not be tossed because of this and nobody will care that his rights have been breached. The reaction is "whoops".
The really bad problem is that if present rules are followed and he shows contrition and there is no risk for repetition he will be out in at little as 10 years.
Had this been an act of islamic terrorism, you might very well be correct but with this guy? No.
you did notice my use of "if present rules are followed"
Quote from: Viking on August 16, 2011, 06:30:26 PM
Quote from: Slargos on August 16, 2011, 06:24:24 PM
Quote from: Viking on August 16, 2011, 06:21:35 PM
Quote from: Neil on August 16, 2011, 06:15:24 PM
It'd be funny if he walked on a technicality. But then again, these are Euro courts. They'll overlook any improper procedures by the system, but at least he won't spend long in prison either.
You really don't understand Norway. Here, if the consensus is that the final result is fair, then rules can be ignored. He won't be released because of this, his confession will not be tossed because of this and nobody will care that his rights have been breached. The reaction is "whoops".
The really bad problem is that if present rules are followed and he shows contrition and there is no risk for repetition he will be out in at little as 10 years.
Had this been an act of islamic terrorism, you might very well be correct but with this guy? No.
you did notice my use of "if present rules are followed"
As far as I'm aware, a
storage sentence is well within "present rules" although I guess if you stress recidivism there is of course the possibility that he is eventually judged rehabilitated. I seriously doubt it, however.
Quote from: Slargos on August 16, 2011, 06:37:35 PM
Quote from: Viking on August 16, 2011, 06:30:26 PM
Quote from: Slargos on August 16, 2011, 06:24:24 PM
Quote from: Viking on August 16, 2011, 06:21:35 PM
Quote from: Neil on August 16, 2011, 06:15:24 PM
It'd be funny if he walked on a technicality. But then again, these are Euro courts. They'll overlook any improper procedures by the system, but at least he won't spend long in prison either.
You really don't understand Norway. Here, if the consensus is that the final result is fair, then rules can be ignored. He won't be released because of this, his confession will not be tossed because of this and nobody will care that his rights have been breached. The reaction is "whoops".
The really bad problem is that if present rules are followed and he shows contrition and there is no risk for repetition he will be out in at little as 10 years.
Had this been an act of islamic terrorism, you might very well be correct but with this guy? No.
you did notice my use of "if present rules are followed"
As far as I'm aware, a storage sentence is well within "present rules" although I guess if you stress recidivism there is of course the possibility that he is eventually judged rehabilitated. I seriously doubt it, however.
Under the present rules he will be automatically eligible for early release after 2/3 term served, at that point the only considerations according to the law are contrition and chance of recidivism. The only real difference between prison and storage is that the prisoner must meet the terms for early release after the full term is served. Basically storage means that rather than being automatically released after the full term the prisoner must meet the terms for early release to be released after the full term. A contrite and well behaved prisoner can be released after 2/3 of the storage term, just like he could after 2/3 of the prison term. This being norway political considerations will be taken into account when the supposedly independent "Kriminalomsorgen" (criminal care service) decide if he is to get early release.
Quote from: Viking on August 16, 2011, 06:51:20 PM
Quote from: Slargos on August 16, 2011, 06:37:35 PM
Quote from: Viking on August 16, 2011, 06:30:26 PM
Quote from: Slargos on August 16, 2011, 06:24:24 PM
Quote from: Viking on August 16, 2011, 06:21:35 PM
Quote from: Neil on August 16, 2011, 06:15:24 PM
It'd be funny if he walked on a technicality. But then again, these are Euro courts. They'll overlook any improper procedures by the system, but at least he won't spend long in prison either.
You really don't understand Norway. Here, if the consensus is that the final result is fair, then rules can be ignored. He won't be released because of this, his confession will not be tossed because of this and nobody will care that his rights have been breached. The reaction is "whoops".
The really bad problem is that if present rules are followed and he shows contrition and there is no risk for repetition he will be out in at little as 10 years.
Had this been an act of islamic terrorism, you might very well be correct but with this guy? No.
you did notice my use of "if present rules are followed"
As far as I'm aware, a storage sentence is well within "present rules" although I guess if you stress recidivism there is of course the possibility that he is eventually judged rehabilitated. I seriously doubt it, however.
Under the present rules he will be automatically eligible for early release after 2/3 term served, at that point the only considerations according to the law are contrition and chance of recidivism. The only real difference between prison and storage is that the prisoner must meet the terms for early release after the full term is served. Basically storage means that rather than being automatically released after the full term the prisoner must meet the terms for early release to be released after the full term. A contrite and well behaved prisoner can be released after 2/3 of the storage term, just like he could after 2/3 of the prison term. This being norway political considerations will be taken into account when the supposedly independent "Kriminalomsorgen" (criminal care service) decide if he is to get early release.
Then my understanding of the
storage concept is more or less on the ball [and using the word "only" to describe the difference is a bit of an understatement], and I don't think anyone would ever dare decide on early release for this guy even discounting political pressure. Lord have mercy on the sitting government if he should be released.
Of course, this being Norway, it would quite probably be taken to strong
etterettning and promptly forgotten in 6 months time. So I guess I shouldn't be speaking in such certain terms. :D
Police are making the usual excuses, but they are taking some pretty heavy fire right now.
Apparently the initial response time was about 30 minutes, or three times as high as the regional average response time.
When the first patrol arrived, as I may have mentioned earlier, instead of following protocol which dictates moving in at once if there is a situation like this one they started directing traffic.
Additionally, apparently Breivik called the police several times to give himself up once the police helicopter started hovering over the island, but most of his calls didn't get through, and the one time it did he was apparently not believed nor did the dispatch follow up on it.
Today the frontpages feature a 15 year old girl who apparently called her mother some time after Breivik had talked to the dispatchers (attempting to surrender) and was later found dead.
Can't be much fun to be a press rep right now. :ph34r:
Edit: Frankly, it looks very bad for them. Travel time according to a map service between the local city center and Utøya is about 19 minutes driving at legal speeds. I wonder what kind of excuses they will make. Perhaps they needed to stop for donuts on the way. :bowler:
Wouldn`t a slow response time be expected given the shootings were on an island?
Quote from: Slargos on August 17, 2011, 07:43:46 AM
Additionally, apparently Breivik called the police several times to give himself up once the police helicopter started hovering over the island, but most of his calls didn't get through, and the one time it did he was apparently not believed nor did the dispatch follow up on it.
Today the frontpages feature a 15 year old girl who apparently called her mother some time after Breivik had talked to the dispatchers (attempting to surrender) and was later found dead.
That's just incredibly sad. :(
Quote from: Tyr on August 25, 2011, 11:41:34 PM
Wouldn`t a slow response time be expected given the shootings were on an island?
We are talking about the response time to the adjacent mainland. LTR.
Photos of some of the survivors
http://www.slate.com/blogs/behold/2013/07/30/andrea_gjestvang_one_day_in_history_looks_at_the_survivors_of_the_july_22.html
Ide is not impressed.
<_<
Either or?