'Feeling of Hopelessness' Behind Norway Shooter's Motivations

Read the essay at Saber Point, "Norway Shooter Felt Democracy Offered 'No Hope,' Advocated Armed Struggle."

And of course folks should read the manifesto as well. I don't know how much was plagiarized --- could have been the bulk of it, actually --- but many sections weren't unreasonable at all. These are things most people won't consider (as Breivik's actions were supremely evil), but Stogie nevertheless lets the chips fall where they may:

After Timothy McVeigh blew up the federal building in Oklahoma, his violence was blamed on "right wing rhetoric." However, his violence was really based on leftwing, governmental extremism at both Waco and Ruby Ridge. This is not to justify his evil act, but to provide an accurate description of his motivations.

Now we have Anders Behring Breivik, another individual of McVeigh's ilk. His violence will again be blamed on "right wing rhetoric," but once again his actions are based on leftist political activities and a feeling of hopelessness in bringing change through democratic processes. Breivik's huge crime was largely caused by Gramscian leftist political strategy, which has been highly successful in undermining western culture and institutions over the past 75 years. Now, in response to that crime, we can expect more Gramscian propaganda and a continued feeling of alienation by conservative nationalists, who will be vilified once again for resisting the death of the West, and again painted as mad men bent on violence.

Norway Shooter Plagiarized 'Unabomber'

Actually, most of the manifesto was cut-and-paste with some personal commentary thrown it. Anders Behring Breivik was simply rounding up information to pull together some kind of program of resistance and revolution. It was fascinating reading. I spent a couple of hours looking over that thing. And that was just skimming, stopping to read passages, and then skimming some more. It's a huge paper. In any case see Telegraph UK, "Norway shooting: Anders Behring Breivik plagiarised 'Unabomber'."

The 32 year-old appears to have quoted verbatim large sections from the preaching of Theodore Kaczynski in his 1500 page online rant.

Breivik had “copied and pasted” almost a dozen key passages from the 69 year-old’s 35,000 manifesto, only changing particular words such as “leftist” with “cultural Marxist”.

It remains unclear what his motivations were, but experts said it appeared he had taken “inspiration” from Kaczynski whose two decade parcel-bomb terror campaign killed three people and 29 injured others.

Despite meticulous university thesis-style referencing through the manifesto, Norwegian bloggers discovered that passages quoting Kaczynski were not credited.

RTWT at the link.

PREVIOUSLY: "Anders Behring Breivik's Manifesto."

Anders Behring Breivik's Manifesto

Here's the pdf file: "2083 – A European Declaration of Independence."

I'd say my previous analysis, which I posted prior to reading Breivik's full manifesto, holds up well. See: "Anders Behring Breivik — No Clear Ideological Program." But I can speak with more authority now. Note first that Richard Starr has read parts of the manifesto and has a response, at Weekly Standard, "The Manifesto Behind the Horror in Norway." I'm going to disagree a bit, though, for example:

The author is listed as "Andrew Berwick," which seems to be an anglicized pen name for Anders Breivik. but Mein Kampf may be a better analogy that the Unabomber manifesto. The man is a mass-murdering sociopath, responsible for a horrific bloodbath yesterday. He is an extremist, but he is not incoherent.

Actually, Breivik states a passionate loathing of Adolf Hitler and the Nazi program of the Third Reich, much of which was outlined in Hitler's early writings. (See the specific quotations appended below.) Also, while Breivik is obviously sociopathic, I disagree about his coherence. The guy's a criminal mastermind whose "program," as written, wouldn't fit a single major established party. He's explicitly "ethno-nationalist" but rejects the racial supremacy theories of Europe's historical hard-right parties. And Breivik hopelessly romanticizes an earlier time that is simply not coming back. He's crazy in that sense. A loner, rejecting intimacy and relationships that might jeopardize his "cause." He is conservative, but again the idea that he's "far right" is ridiculous in the European context. Nazis hated Jews. He loves them as preserving the crusading anti-Islamic history of the Medieval West. Most of all, the manifesto lays out a program of terrorism using all manners of paramilitary resistance, including deployment of weapons of mass destruction (and yes, nuclear and radiological weapons). We'll have to see upon further investigation, but if he's not acting alone then folks should be worried about what's ahead. But so far no larger movement has claimed alliance with or responsibility for the horrendous and evil carnage befallen Norway. We can both learn and remain vigilant, and of course pray for the families of those killed.

And it must be said, but obviously Breivik's crimes deserve complete condemnation, and no modern conservative should be sympathetic to what has happened. It's pure evil and Breivik's violence has no place in modern democratic societies. I won't hold my breath waiting for progressives to produce one mainstream conservative who backs it, although they're surely attempting so.

And the MSM's sticking to their ideological witch hunt, for example, at New York Times, "Norway Attacks Put Spotlight on Rise of Right-Wing Sentiment in Europe."

Anyway, here's some a few passages in chronological order:

Consolidating our forces in phase 1, 2 and 3

We must work hard in the coming decades to create and develop Anti-Jihad or other forms of Cultural conservative movements. Our objectives will be to recruit the youths of our society (15-30) whom will be the bulk of the physical defence of our cultural conservative ideology.

The cultural conservatives vs. the racial conservatives

Whoever manages to attract the youths of a society will have the best possibility to secure power and implement the changes of the given political ideology.

If racist organisations succeed where we have failed, then we know what will happen. Unfortunately for us, the intelligence agencies of Europe are currently doing everything they can to prevent the creation of any type of militia, that being CC’s or RC’s. The media on the other hand will go to great lengths to put us, the cultural conservatives (anti-Jihad movements etc.) in the same category as the racial conservatives. To them it’s black and white; According to them, everyone who is not considered “politically correct” must by default be racists or Nazis…

*****

Organisational work in Phase 1 (2009-2030)

We must spend the next 20 years wisely and continue our work on creating a pan European conservative consolidation, a new conservative political ideology (a political ideal) which has the potential to appeal to a MINIMUM of 20-35% of Western Europeans, including the bulk of our youth. The creation of cultural conservative student organisations in Universities all over Europe must be a priority.

In order to do this we have to agree on a consensus for creating a modern, “un-tainted”, cultural conservative, patriotic youth movement which will prevent our youths from joining NS or WN movements. This movement should be somewhat like the equivalent of Russias Nashi movement (Putins youth movement - 120,000 members aged between 17 and 25). They are anti fascist/anti Nazi, but still patriotic conservatives.

*****

The word "race", “white”, “ethnic” or "nationalist" for that matter should never be used in modern debates with adversaries or individuals who may have been subject to severe indoctrination. These words are so stained by history and post-war media coverage that you are basically just undermining yourself and the message you seek to communicate by actively using them. It’s wise to limit the use of all words that has stigma attached as well as or the cultural Marxist/multiculturalist mainstream media will attempt to label you as a bigot. If you use the word "race" you are basically contributing to committing character assassination of yourself or will contribute to self-defeat of the organisational goals you are representing. You need to understand the following; the modern European man/women has been indoctrinated or conditioned in a way that he is likely to run for the hill or active subliminous mental defensive blocks if you use rhetoric containing these words in your attempt to reach out to him or her. Ill try to explain this more throuroughly [sic] as this applies to me as well. In a world where the absolute arch sin is to be a Nazi, words who are associated with Nazis must be avoided at all costs, regardless of the justification for associating them with given ideology.

*****

3.4 Why armed resistance against the cultural Marxist/multiculturalist regimes of Western Europe is the only rational approach

It is counterproductive, even lethal to waste another five decades on meaningless dialogue while we are continuously losing our demographical advantage. We have never and will never be allowed to ever exercise any influence. The cultural marxist/multiculturalist elites nationally and in Brussels have for the last five decades created a resilient system whose objective is to ridicule, persecute, harass and silence us. They will continue to systematically marginalise us until the day when we are no longer a threat to them. The following arguments will further underline why any democratical or peaceful cultural conservative victory of significance is impossible ...

It is expected that native Europeans shall humbly watch and applaud their own annihilation and extinction. The fact that we are persecuted and harassed in our own countries does not violate our human rights because we are white Christians and therefore evil by default.

It is a pretty terrifying prospect that the prevailing ideology that dominates Western Europe long term will result in the extermination of people like me and you.

Nevertheless, it is the only plausible theoretical explanation of the current development. As such, multiculturalism is an inversed form of Nazism where white European Christians ends up at the bottom of the food chain instead of on top. Exactly how the Jews according to National Socialist doctrines automatically were blamed for everything that went wrong in society. Multiculturalisms doctrine teaches that “white racism” is the cause of all problems in our societies. The indigenous peoples of Europe are increasingly exposed to more violence, ridicule and persecution in cities all over Western Europe. This does not result in any sympathy whatsoever. The multiculturalists become increasingly hateful in their rhetorical attacks against us the more we are humiliated by Muslims, groups they mass import to our countries. This tells us everything we need to know about their real intentions.

*****

There have already been thousands of preemptive strikes from brave Europeans all over Europe. However, the majority of attacks have been impotent “poop in mailbox” operations with zero to little ideological effect. In order to successfully penetrate the cultural Marxist/multiculturalist media censorship we are forced to employ significantly more brutal and breath taking operations which will result in casualties. In order for the attack to gain an influential effect, assassinations and the use of weapons of mass destruction must be embraced. When employing such methods the Justiciar Knight becomes a force multiplier, he becomes a one-man army. The continuation of these “humiliating strikes” on the Multiculturalist system will contribute to destroy the cultural Marxist hegemony in Europe.

*****

The true definition of racism vs. the Marxist definition

Don’t let the multiculturalists define what racism is or isn’t. Keeping an African againsthis will in your basement as a slave is racism. Loving your extended family/your ethnic group and fighting for ethnic and/or indigenous rights does not make you a racist, quite the opposite in fact. It makes you a civil rights activist. Creating a pro-indigenous and/orpro-ethnic movement does not make it a “white supremacy” movement but rather an Indigenous rights movement or even a civil rights movement. Anyone who calls you a racist due to these reasons proves very clearly that HE is the real racist, as he obviously ONLY attacks European rights movements. He is therefore an anti-European racist supporting the anti-European hate ideology known as multiculturalism. The cultural Marxists/multiculturalists have gone to great lengths to change the very definition of the word; racist. Europeans having African slaves on a plantation WAS racist, the apartheid system WAS racist (deportation and a two state solution would have been the right way to go). However, loving your ethnic group and fighting for the interests of your tribe is NOT and will never be racist. Nevertheless, the cultural Marxist systems would have everyone think otherwise.

*****

Race-mixing and interracial relations; necessary to create the global utopia lead by the Marxist-Islamic UN or the ultimate crime?

The PCCTS, Knights Templar, obviously, does not have any pre-defined specific policies or principles concerning race-mixing. The following are my own views concerning the theme. I have for a long time dreaded the thought of writing an essay about this subject. Primarily because it is considered politically incorrect by even many of the most dedicated conservatives and it is considered an efficient way to commit character suicide for individuals who have ambitions to appeal to the bulk of the masses in this early stage of the European civil war. On the other hand, if you’re Arab, Pashtun, Kurd, Pakistani, Japanese, South Korean or belong to any other non-European tribe then it’s a completely different matter. Then it’s all about showing cultural tolerance and respecting their customs. But if you’re a European and say the same thing, God forbid, then you’re a monster. This double standard effectively shows us the anti-European nature of multiculturalism. A large amount of the current multiculturalist elites in the EU/US, the category A and B traitors specifically, are focused on the destruction of European culture, Christendom, European identity and there is not a more efficient way of destroying the core of everything European than facilitating the gradual deconstruction of the European ethnic groups. The norm and practice for adopting non-European babies has more or less been institutionalised, bio-laws have been restricted, mass non-European immigration has been encouraged along with allowing and even subsidising the non-European explosive birth rates. The sum of these deliberate genocidal practices when mixed with Marxist procreation policies (feminism) is equal to the demographical annihilation of European ethnic groups if they are allowed to continue.

*****

The great Satan, his cult and the Jews

Whenever someone asks if I am a national socialist I am deeply offended. If there is one historical figure and past Germanic leader I hate it is Adolf Hitler. If I could travel in a time-machine to Berlin in 1933, I would be the first person to go – with the purpose of killing him. Why? No person has ever committed a more horrible crime against his tribe than Hitler. Because of him, the Germanic tribes are dying and MAY be completely wiped out unless we manage to win within 20-70 years. Thanks to his insane campaign and the subsequent genocide of the 6 million Jews, multiculturalism, the anti-European hate ideology was created. Multiculturalism would have never been implemented in Europe if ithadn’t been for NSDAPs reckless and unforgivable actions. Eastern Europe would have remained free, the US and Russia would never have risen up as super-powers. The balance of power would have remained in Europe. And it would be a beautiful Europe with beautiful cultural conservative policies – very similar to the ones you now find in Japan and South Korea. Hitler almost destroyed everything with his reckless and unforgivable actions and he will forever be known as a traitor to the Nordic-Germanic tribes.

*****

3.153 Interview with a Justiciar Knight Commander of the PCCTS, Knights
Templar

The following interview was conducted over three sessions. It might be considered irrelevant to many people. However, I decided to add it as I personally would enjoy reading a similar interview with another resistance fighter. The interview covers politics, society and the struggle: the Western European civil war, the PCCTS, Knights Templar and other armed pan-European and National Resistance movements. It also covers personal reflectations and information. ...

Q: If you were to coin a word for the ideology or movement you represent, what
would it be?

A: Cultural conservatism or a nationalist/conservative direction known as the Vienna school of thought. As for the political movement; I would describe it as a National Resistance Movement, an Indigenous Rights Movement or perhaps a Conservative Revolutionary Movement. Justiciar Knights are not an ideologically homogenous group. Many Justiciar Knight Commanders would probably reject some of my personal views as I would with theirs. Some are deeply Christian while some are Christian agnostics or even atheists. Some are individualists while others not so much so, some puritans. The primary factors that unites us is that we are all nationalists, anti-Marxist, anti-Islam(isation), we support indigenous rights and we are revolutionary, willing to martyr ourselves.

Lawyer's Statement From Anders Behring Breivik

At Reuters:

In his first comment via a lawyer since his arrest, Anders Behring Breivik, 32, said he wanted to explain himself at a court hearing on Monday about extending his custody.

"He has said that he believed the actions were atrocious, but that in his head they were necessary," Geir Lippestad said.

The lawyer said Breivik had admitted to Friday's shootings at a Labour party youth camp and the bombing that killed seven people in Oslo's government district a few hours earlier.

However, "he feels that what he has done does not deserve punishment," Lippestad told NRK public television.

"What he has said is that he wants a change in society and in his understanding, in his head, there must be a revolution."

Added: From New York Times, "Police Say Oslo Suspect Admits ‘Facts’ in Massacre" (via Memeorandum).

Booman Tribune Endorses Norway Massacre in Demands for Economic Redistribution

This is a really convoluted take on the diabolical massacre mounted by the fundamentally crazed criminal madman Anders Behring Breivik.

See Booman Tribune, "Remembering History." There's a discussion of the rise of fascism in the twenties and thirties, then Booman shifts over to a psychotic rationalization for the violence, and suggests the left may adopt the same murderous tactics if the rich don't relinquish their wealth:

The horrible tragedy in Norway appears to have been carried out by one man. But his political beliefs are widespread and can lead quite naturally, and almost logically, to murder or even genocide. Similarly unrestrained reactions from the left can lead to violence against elites or even, in their view, confiscatory tax policies.

Rich people would be well served to remember that people will not stand by while they're living the high life if they have no jobs and are losing their homes. Our people are pretty well hypnotized by our televisions, so complacency has worked in our elites' favor even during this economic recession. But there is a snapping point. Like popcorn, at first it's just one or two kernels exploding. But the first kernels to pop are a precursor of what's to come.

Rather than grabbing their wallets, they ought to, you know, spread the wealth around. We'd all be better off in the long run.

This is frankly deranged.

I'm currently reading Anders Behring Breivik 1,500-page manifesto. I'm about a third of the way though, but Breivik's comments on capitalism are so far culturally anti-globalist and anti-transnational. Yet, Breivik's also fairly libertarian on markets (but still reading, so we'll see). But most of all is the fanatical hatred of progressivism and multiculturalism. There's literally nothing so far I've read that would lend itself to conclusions Booman's making. Folks can interpret this as they wish. The Norway murders were simply those of a criminal mastermind who'd had it with Europe's long march to multiculturalism. I'm seeing little similarities to the kind of economic disillusionment that gave rise to the specific ideological extremism in post-WWI Germany, or to European fascism in general. Breivik's responding to developments in post-WWII cultural Marxism. So while the Norway killer attacks leftism and identifies as culturally conservative, it's not the case of a coherent ideological program of Nazi-derived Aryanism or a more general tendency to brown-shirt politics. No doubt there are fine lines, but if someone leaned one way or the other reading this, it'd unlikely be toward the kind of command totalitarianism Booman champions. The dude (Booman) is sick.

PREVIOUSLY: "Anders Behring Breivik — No Clear Ideological Program." AND: "Just Awful: Progressives Ecstatic Over Anders Behring Breivik Alleged Ties to Right-Wing Extremism."

Key Quotes From Anders Behring Breivik's 1500-Page Manifesto

At Telegraph UK, "Norway shooting: quotes from Anders Behring Breivik's online manifesto":

"However, since I manifest their worst nightmare (systematical and organized executions of multiculturalist traitors), they will probably just give me the full propaganda rape package and propagate the following accusations: pedophile, engaged in incest activities, homosexual, psycho, ADHD, thief, non-educated, inbred, maniac, insane, monster etc. I will be labeled as the biggest (Nazi-)monster ever witnessed since WW2."

Also at Document.no, "Behring Breivik Copies From Unibomber" (in English and Norwegian).

PREVIOUSLY: "Anders Behring Breivik — No Clear Ideological Program." AND: "Just Awful: Progressives Ecstatic Over Anders Behring Breivik Alleged Ties to Right-Wing Extremism."

Anders Behring Breivik — No Clear Ideological Program

I linked previously to the New York Times's report: "Right-Wing Extremist Charged in Norway." The Times altered the headline at the newspaper's website, "Christian Extremist Charged in Norway" (and Memeorandum, at 7:50pm, had "Death Toll Rises to 92 in Norway Attacks"). And now it's altered it again, "Oslo Suspect Wrote of Fear of Islam and Plan for War." The Old Gray Lady is notorious for altering its news reporting, without citing changes, in furtherance of its progressive political agenda, so that's a glimpse on the witch hunt reporting that we're already seeing. FWIW, here's this from the introduction at the report:

OSLO, Norway — The Norwegian man charged Saturday with a pair of attacks in Oslo that killed at least 92 people left behind a detailed manifesto outlining his preparations and calling for a Christian civil war to defend Europe against the threat of Muslim domination, according to Norwegian and American officials familiar with the investigation.

Also, the Wall Street Journal has this, "Suspect Identified With Far Right." After a boilerplate lede, the report indicates:

While Oslo police have remained largely silent about Mr. Breivik's possible motives and background, the 32-year-old described himself on a now-shut down Facebook page as a Christian conservative with hobbies in hunting and body-building. He also had at one time been a member of the youth movement of the Norwegian Progress Party, which is widely considered as a right-wing populist party.

Populist parties are generally oriented toward elite opposition and economic injustice. Outright racist appeals are generally secondary or a function of economic dislocation. And in the European context "far-right" parties conjure images of the Nazis or the French National Front under Jean-Marie Le Pen. And for that matter, Norway's Progress Party has been shifting toward a moderate neo-liberal economic program for over a decade, attempting to downplay party schisms over immigration. So for all the media reporting, it's not definitely accurate to cite Behring Breivik as a "right wing extremist." He doesn't evince a coherent or systemic ideological program. I've read through portions of his Internet postings, translated from Norwegian. See: "This is a complete list of comments Anders Behring Breivik has left at Document.no." Positions that would normally be considered extreme right wing, especially in the traditional European context, aren't in evidence:

Anyway, we are not in a position where we can pick and choose our partners. That's why we have to ensure that we influence other culturally conservatives to take our anti-racist pro-homosexual, pro-Israeli line of thought. When this direction has been taken we can take it to the next level.

That's interesting, especially the anti-racist and pro-gay statements, and of course historic European right-wing ideologies were implacably anti-Semitic. And get this, at Telegraph UK:

Eyewitness reports from the island of Utoya, where the shootings took place, have also described a tall, blond haired, blue-eyed Norwegian man dressed as a police officer.

On the Facebook page attributed to him, Mr Breivik describes himself as a Christian and a conservative. It listed his interests as hunting, body building and freemasonry. His profile also listed him as single. The page has since been taken down.

The odd point is Behring Breivik's identification with freemasonry, which would contradict the media claims of him being at Christian zealot. New York Daily News also stresses freemasonry, "Who is Anders Behring Breivik? Norway shooting suspect's profile emerges."

All in all, most media reporting is lazy and incoherent. And to top it off, James Alan Fox, a criminology professor at Northeastern University, identifies Behring Breivik as a clinical mass murderer rather than an ideological terrorist. See, "Norway massacre fits the mold":

As details surface in the days and weeks ahead about Friday's massacre in Norway and about Anders Behring Breivik, the man believed to have perpetrated the bloodbath, we will hopefully be able to make some sense of what now seems so unfathomable. However, even with the sketchy information uncovered in the immediate aftermath of the shooting/bombing, the crime and the accused fit the mass murder mold in many respects. ...

Mass murderers do not typically see themselves as criminal, but instead as the victim of injustice. They often consider themselves as a heroic champion for right over wrong and their crimes as absolutely justified.

RTWT.

In sum, while no doubt Anders Behring Breivik dabbled in conservative politics and social movements, it's not the case that he had a clear cut ideological agenda. He identified as culturally conservative, but he did not attach his beliefs to classic racial supremacy theories or historic anti-Jewish movements of genocidal purity ("right-wing" by definition). He combined a frustration with the growth of Norway's multiculturalism with what would normally be seen as tolerance toward social and religious minorities. The latter points are tendencies that are championed by progressives. For Behring Breivik to exhibit these things, along with expressions of freemason beliefs, and a "hatred" of the modern institutional church, indicates a more complex pyschological profile than MSM outlets have portrayed. We saw a similar pattern of conclusion-jumping almost immediately upon the Jared Loughner shooting in Tuscon early this year.

RELATED: See the interesting discussion from Dana Loesch, at Big Journalism, "A Quick Lesson for Media on the Definition of “Right Wing”."

Also, from Mike McNally at Pajamas Media, "Can the Left Resist the Temptation to Exploit the Norway Attacks?"

Just Awful: Progressives Ecstatic Over Anders Behring Breivik Alleged Ties to Right-Wing Extremism

I had a brief Twitter exchange yesterday with Ruwayda Mustafah and Hena Zuberi. As information on Oslo's terrorism was still coming in --- and reports were going back and forth over a possible Islamist connection --- Mustafah tweeted: "@HenaZuberi @hindhassanmany Oh so there's still hope for bigots?" That's a dead link to @hindhassanmany, but Hena Zuberi was also going on about how bigoted it was to even consider Islamist jihad as the movement behind yesterday's attacks.

And now here's progressive Leah McElrath on Twitter, cheering a New York Times report that links to a video manifesto credited to Anders Behring Breivik, which as later uploaded to YouTube. And notice McElrath's good night tweet:

Well, that actually wasn't McElrath's last tweet. She took time to block JoannaOC in Minneapolis, who called her out for distributing progressive propaganda. McElrath gets angry for being called out, and claims she's saving lives. JoannaOC is trying to focus on the miracle of life and God's grace of survival. Leah McElrath is spreading left-wing propaganda and hate.

In any case, here's the main story at New York Times, "Right-Wing Extremist Charged in Norway" (via Memeorandum). Also trending today is James Fallows' attack on Jennifer Rubin, "The Washington Post Owes the World an Apology for this Item."

Michelle Malkin responds, "No, James Fallows, the Washington Post doesn’t owe “the world” an apology":

The death toll has risen to a staggering 90-plus in the Norway massacre.

It is evil in its most unfathomable depths. There are now reports of a possible second gunman/accomplice, according to CBS News and VOA. Howie at the Jawa Report says it well: “As a Christian I have to say I condemn his actions in the strongest terms. In fact the only praise I’ve seen of the attacks were not by Christians. This is cold blooded murder and no true follower of Christ could do such a thing. We pray for the victims, their families and for those who are injured to recover.” Here is a beautiful prayer for the people of Norway.

Here in America, many on the Left have reserved their greatest outrage not for the perpetrators of the crime, but for conservatives who — like many counterterrorism watchers and mainstream media outlets around the world — initially raised the entirely reasonable possibility that the gunman was a jihadist and who pointed to recent, specific death threats and plots against Norway and Norwegian government officials by Islamic militant groups and individuals.

Those initial assessments were wrong. I was wrong. As I noted yesterday and will reiterate again today for the reading comprehension-challenged:

…the context and timing most definitely suggested jihad and there should be no apology for reading the signs and connecting several large, obvious dots.

Unlike those who speculated that the Giffords’ shooter was a Tea Party activist and held onto the assumption even after it was disproved, I will not continue to insist that jihadists bear blame for this heinous attack if it turns out they played no role.

I will continue to be vigilant in thoroughly covering the global jihadist threat — and in condemning this heinous attack in Norway whoever is responsible.
Prayers for all the innocents. Standing with Norway.

Over at the Washington Post, Jennifer Rubin yesterday afternoon published a blog post mentioning some of the same information I brought to light yesterday morning as the news of the terrifying attacks broke — namely, that bloodthirsty Norwegian-based Muslim cleric Mullah Krekar was founder of Ansar Al-Islam and that jihadists have implanted themselves in every corner of the globe. She goes on to argue for continued, vigilant war against the global jihadists who remain at centuries-old, systemic war with us.

Atlantic editor James Fallows — in a prominent rant — is now clamoring for the Post to “apologize to the world” for Rubin’s post and fumes that the post has not been updated. There may be any number of reasons for her not updating yet and being offline — family obligations, Sabbath, etc. I’m pretty sure the reason is NOT that she’s purposely ignoring or misleading her readers or intentionally insulting/smearing “the world,” as Fallows seems to suggest. (In a similar meme, Twitter libs somehow have accused me of “falling silent” about the Norway horror despite the constant updating of my blog post throughout the day and night, in addition to day-and-night-long tweets as news developed.)

Check Michelle's blog for all the links. I wanted to quote at length. I linked yesterday to Jawa Report and The Other McCain, both of whom continued updating with reports on where the evidence was leading. In contrast, people like Charles Johnson used the attacks to score points on political enemies, posting a series of blogs attacking Pamela Geller and other counter-jihad bloggers, alleging their responsibility for terrorism in Norway. In fact, Anders Behring Breivik had no clear ideological agenda, and didn't appear to be an ideological or religious extremist.

I'll update with more, but I want to reiterate one of Michelle's key points:

Unlike those who speculated that the Giffords’ shooter was a Tea Party activist and held onto the assumption even after it was disproved, I will not continue to insist that jihadists bear blame for this heinous attack if it turns out they played no role.

I will continue to be vigilant in thoroughly covering the global jihadist threat — and in condemning this heinous attack in Norway whoever is responsible.

And that's the vital difference. Conservatives are anti-terror, no matter the source. Progressives are anti-conservative and turn a blind eye to terrorism unless it comes from the right.

That's evil and gets more people killed.

Anders Behring Breivik — Suspect in Norwegian Terror Attacks

There's a report at Britain's Sky News, "Norway Camp Shooting: 'As Many As 30 Dead'."

And Montse Gimferrer on Twitter links to Anders Behring Breivik on Twitter, and an identical message at a "Bild" feed.

Updates forthcoming ...

522pm PST: Okay, more at Sky News, "Suspect Held After Twin Attack In Norway."

Also, Bruce Bawer at Pajamas Media, "Norway’s Oklahoma City, or Its 9/11?"

6:55pm PST: London's Daily Mail has this, "Police dismiss initial fears Norwegian terror attacks were work of Islamist organisations." (At Memeorandum.)