Breaking News - Major Terrorist Attack In Oslo, Norway

[Viking]

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.

[The Minsky Moment]

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 

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.

[Norgy]

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. 

[Malthus]

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. 

Bahomet has a bone to pick with you ... 

[FunkMonk]

This whole Templar business reminds me of the Da Vinci Code craze some years back.

What has Dan Brown wrought?

[Martinus]

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. 

Priory of the Zion.

Zion.



Muslim Zionists.

And what were templars accused of? Sodomy.

Gay Muslim Zionists.

[Martinus]

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.

[Martinus]

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.

[Martinus]

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?

[Viking]

You used the same analogy as I did. Do you feel dirty?

I take arguments on their own merits. What Hitler might have thought about heliocentrism is irrelevant for me, unless his arguments are good.

[Scipio]

So the guy was a Mason.

Does this surprise anyone?

Masonry opens doors.  In this case, with bombs.

[Martinus]

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:



or perhaps this:

[Razgovory]

Wow, it even has a blurb from Bernie Goldberg.   You know it has to be good.

[DGuller]

Martinus, did you plagiarize from The Daily Show from tonight? 

[The Brain]

How could you tell if someone sabotaged America?