First things first. All decent people will be horrified at what has happened in Oslo last evening. The atrocious terrorist act is beyond words and the loss of so many lives devastating. And now I turn to the BBC coverage.
Within hours of the breaking news the BBC was very quick to repeat comment that the culprit was a “tall blonde man” perspective, followed this morning by “fundamental Christian” and “far-right.” The words “Timothy McVeigh” also have been repeated on every news loop. Now, I don’t think there is anything WRONG per se with providing us with this information so promptly but I contrast this with those OTHER acts of terrorism where the culprits were Islamists and the BBC were extremely reluctant to provide us with similar backgrounds preferring to use euphemisms. As someone who professes a Christian faith, I also vehemently dispute BBC use of “fundamentalist Christian” to describe the killer. There is a commandment all Christians are instructed to follow – “Thou shalt not kill”. Anyone carrying out this sort of savagery is a lunatic in flagrant denial of Christian values. Of course the BBC hates Christians, it loathes anything vaguely “right-wing” and so in a sense it is feeding of this atrocity and advancing its own hateful meme. Thoughts?
Opps seem to have posted twice-sorry folks. One more point however. The BBC and Guardian as usual will try and spin that anyone who is right politically somehow likes or condones such acts. The irony is many of us are increasingly sickened by growing crime and violent behaviour in our society which is directly caused by left wing policies and their attitude to people who do bad things when most of us right of centre want to see capital punishment returned. However the BBC won’t stop blaming right wing politics for murderous behaviour
I remember how the BBC played down the shootings by Major Hassan, in fact read this piece by the BBC to see how sympathetic this religious murderer was.
“A devout Muslim” the BBC call him
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8345944.stm
Indeed. I remember commenting on here about it, as no doubt did many others.
This is getting wierder and wierder, indeed.
The BBC tells us that:
“Mr Breivik was a member of a Swedish neo-Nazi internet forum called Nordisk, according to Expo, a Swedish group monitoring far-right activity.”
Went to the Expo site and found the reference.
They make the claim but only quote what they claim another poster stated. They did not illustrate anything that the suspect actually posted.
Then I looked up EXPO.
http://www.mynewsdesk.com/uk/pressroom/expo/news/list
And who was their funding inspiration….Stieg Larson.
The Guradian helps me get an angle.
“Stieg Larsson ‘spent year training Eritrean guerrillas’
The Swedish crime writer went to Africa to teach female guerrillas how to use grenade launchers, a friend has revealed”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2010/oct/15/stieg-girls-with-grenade-launchers
Read his CV and it makes any normal person quite ill.
This group, guarsdians against anti-democratic forces, is firmly in the hands of some very iffy people.
AND THE BBC QUOTES THEM VERBATIM:
Commie and Trot (but a good writer) sums it up nicely
One thing is clear from the BBC reporting of this tragedy. The BBC are determined to make as much political capital out of this human tragedy as they possibly can.
Here we have a human tragedy and a multi billion pound world media giant utterly determined to use and exploit this tragedy as a platform from which to smear and abuse its political enemies. What kind of people would seek to exploit the deaths of innocents to gain petty political advantage? Have they no decency or honour or integrity?
But that is the left in a nutshell, everything is political and everything that can be used to progress their rancid ugly narrative will be used. Mothers, brothers,sisters,fathers will carry a nightmare in their hearts for the rest of their lives. The BBC are attempting to use the grief and heartbreak of a nation, to turn that grief into a thirst for revenge against the political enemies of the left and the BBC.
A single person is to blame for the killings but the BBC will make sure that millions of totally innocent people will carry the stigma and blame forever simply for the heinous crime of being a political enemy of the left.
‘The BBC are determined to make as much political capital out of this human tragedy as they possibly can’
Fool us once, shame on you…
At least Milly’s name will be remembered by some.
Out in the garden early, as the entire MSM’s output unworthy of any time.
A bunch of peroxide sinks and bouffants and ‘experts’ now demanding to know ‘how the authorities could let this happen?’
Unless there was an extensive criminal conspiracy and unusual purchases patterns that could be detected, I’d say 20:20 hindsight and ratings outrage after the event.
If a more individual psychological aspect, maybe the media might look at itself, as it readies for him presenting his manifesto at prime time tomorrow, if it can tear away from helicopter shots of mayhem.
Personal tradegy aside, actions never justifiable, my guess is the Beeb-hive sees this man as “Geet Wilders with a machine gun”: Europe’s Liberal Left MultiCulti Club hegemony is beginning to feel its collar nervously, like in The Downfall.
I find these deatils of the island intersting – from Time magazine:
‘The guests on the island had particular reason to be rocked by the events in Oslo’s government quarter. Each year for as long as anyone can remember, the youth wing of the Norwegian Labor Party has gathered here. Founded in 1887, Labor is Norway’s largest political party and has been the major force in the country since the Second World War, giving up power for only brief periods to the Conservative Party. Gathered at the retreat of the Labor Party’s youth wing were the country’s future leaders, the teenage children of the ruling elite.’
Absolutely. This is an attack on the liberal left establishment. The island was theirs and many alumni of the youth wing moved directly after university into the party machine and some moved to high office.
Gro Harlan Brundlandt had just left before the shooting. Prime Minister Stoltenberg and other ministers emerged from the ranks. He was due to speak. Other speakers included ‘activists’ who were advocating boycotting Israel. eg Stine Renate Haheim (a BBC witness and Labour Party MP)
That is why Luciana Berger (Lab) twittered we have lost ‘comrades’.
I was quite surprised to discover that these 30s-style political ‘youth-wing’ camps for (what? indoctrinating?) teenagers should still exist at all in western Europe. Although the BBC doesn’t appear too bothered, an obvious and unprotected target for a heavily-armed nutter with a grudge, I’d have thought.
Unprotected, I imagine, becuase they never thought those evil Nazis would do such a thing …
This is a very sad situation but is both predictable and very unpredictable.
The absolute intolerance of anyone or any organisation that fails to sign up to liberal socialist policy is denigrated, maligned and deemed to be on a par with Nazism. This is a standard left wing tactic.
The word “disenfranchised” is mentioned several times. So Norwegians, like many in Britain that fail to meet the criterion of the liberal socialist establishment are vilified and mocked and denied access to democratic platforms to express their feelings or beliefs.
I am willing to bet that this man is highly intelligent, a loner, and a social misfit. Because people like him have been driven to the fringes by the media and the system they become frustrated. Because of his personal situation he became paranoid. Unable to link or join with people of his own kind that “understand” his feelings and frustration, in his isolation he has taken it upon himself to lash out at the people that he perceives to be the source of his anguish, the Liberal Left Labour Party. His targets were politicians of this party and the youth camp held for youth supporters (indoctrination of youth).
Such a situation cannot be prevented from a law enforcement position unless close friends or family are aware of his paranoia and alert the authorities.
Norwegian society has to accept a large portion of the blame because they are denying people with different beliefs in a democratic society a platform to express themselves. There is so little respect for democracy and there is only room for people who have beliefs that align themselves with theirs. Hence this situation is predictable.
My heart goes out to the families of the people that lost their lives. Perhaps this tragedy will engender greater openess and democracy in their society.
I’ve started looking at the shooter’s Documenta posts now available on line in norwegian.
http://www.document.no/anders-behring-breivik/
This is the sort of thing that turns up at random.
“Jeg er helt enig i at Obama er en brilliant retoriker og kommunikator, en av de beste vi har sett de siste 30 årene.
Men for det første; man kan ikke og bør ikke sammenligne kulturkampen i US med den i Europa. Retorikken må og bør være annerledes. Den gjennomsnittlige “høyrevelger” – Republikaner i US er en “libertarian” (anti-sosialistiske men pro multikulti) mens den gjennomsnittlige konservative i Europa er i mye større grad anti-multikulti men baserer argumentene på ”
Trans:
“I completely agree that Obama is a brilliant retoriker and communicator, one of the best we‘ve seen over the past 30 years.
But firstly, we can not and should not compare the cultural struggle in the U.S. with that in Europe. Rhetoric must and should be different. The average “right click“ – Republican in the U.S. is a “libertarian“ (anti–socialist but pro multikulti) while the average conservative in Europe is much more anti–multikulti but arguments based on cultural resistance against Islamization.”
or (without the Norwegian)
“Globalization and modernity are irreversible phenomena.”
Classic multiculturalism propaganda. What is globalization and modernity to do with mass Muslim immigration?
And you may not have heard and Japan and South Korea? These are successful and modern regimes even if they rejected multiculturalism in the 70‘s. Are Japanese and South Koreans goblins?
Can you name ONE country where multiculturalism is successful where Islam is involved? The only historical example is the society without a welfare state with only non-Muslim minorities (U.S.).”
I’m finding it very hard to find far right extremism just on sampling.
But the BBC tells me it is there.
Nonetheless the events are quite horrendous and unjustifiable.
The Norwegian police have him and apparently he is talking freely.
We should have opportunity to achieve a cool and balanced picture free of bias and hasty stereotyping in due course, I hope.
Oh, dear, he’s a bit off message, isn’t he?
I’m finding it very hard to find far right extremism just on sampling.
I’m surprised you write this: to the BBC that IS far right.
I’m finding it very hard to find far right extremism just on sampling.
I’m surprised you think this: to the BBC what he has written IS far right.
I see now that the mass murderer wrote about his stance against Marxism. That’s all the Beeboids need to know in order to label him a far-right enemy.
Still waiting for the BBC to wheel in some talking head to bitch about Norway’s lax gun-control laws, the way they do when something happens in the US.
Me too!
Who added “Christian” and “Conservative” to Norway shooter’s Facebook page yesterday?
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/07/who-added-christian-and-conservative-to-norway-shooters-facebook-page-yesterday.html
And the word ‘religion plus’ to his qualifications when the Oslo school of Management (exchange students with Berkeley in California) is a private business college with no religion on its curriculum.
I noted last night that not only “Christian” and “Conservative” but also “bodybuilding”… therefore 3 of the 4 things mentioned by the BBC (the other was fremasonry) in their ‘profile of the killer’ were things added recently.
Who said that the BBC don’t rush to conclusions, they wait for evidence first? Has this murderer appeared in court? Has the Norwegian police told the press what he has said in their interviews with him? (If so is that legal in Norway) I hold no tack with bloody murderers and I hope he rots in hell. But this blog is about BBC bias and like others I cannot stand double standards.
I await John Simpson to call him a “misguided criminal” and not a cold blooded killer who has wrecked the lives of hundreds of people.
Who said that the BBC don’t rush to conclusions, they wait for evidence first?
‘Watertight oversight’ is a very fluid concept.
I really do think that people might want to re-evaluate what is the percieved threat. I picked this up from an Islamic extremist website called “Islamic Awakening” dated 2006.
It would appear that while there are clearly problems with each group co-operating with each other-the idea has been discussed, and with increased monitoring of host communities, in Western Europe and the United States and Canada-and with the American Adam Yahiye Gadahn taking a more active role in both distributing anti-Jewish/Western propaganda-and his insights in to the West- this possibility may well be an indication of future trends.
http://forums.islamicawakening.com/f17/cooperation-with-the-disbelievers-2023/
http://forums.islamicawakening.com/f18/why-are-jews-so-powerful-839/index2.html#post5119
“However, some progress does seem to have been made, as witness, for example, Aryan Nations under the leadership of August Kries, and the acceptance, among some modern adherents of National Socialism, that that belief system involves personal honour and a respect for other ways of life. That is, some of these adherents have at last come to understand what honour means – it means racism and racial prejudice, and the assumption of racial superiority, are dishonourable – as they have come to accept that the Mujahideen are honourable warriors who are actually fighting their main enemy, the Zionists, and the so-called New World Order which the Zionists and their lackey, Amerika, desire to create. This honour, and an understanding of Deen Al-Islam, is slowly, it seems, gaining ground, and I have heard it said by more than one of these National Socialists that Sheikh Usama Bin Muhammad Bin Ladin (hafidhahullah) is a modern outlaw, a kind of Muslim “Robin Hood”.
“There are a number of right-wing writers and activists who admire Islam and the Muslims. These individuals admire not only the achievements, but also the Jihad of the Mujahideen and are ashamed they don’t have fighters like ours. These individuals despise the Jews and Zionism with every fiber of their being, and support every group – including Muslims – which are fighting the Jews. Some have begun to have a more complex view of immigrants, and believe it is dishonorable and would serve only the Zionist/Globalist elite to go attack them.”
This is frightening stuff.
Read it yourselves-but the fact that the Islamic Group “Helpers of the Global Jihad” claimed to carry out the attack in the first place (and have been active in Scandinavia over the last year), that the police are giving few details regarding the suspect, and it was the Government that was the target-not Muslims community, suggests that this is more complex.
As of tonight Sweden is still on a high state of alert-and the police are still carrying out additional enquires.
Seems like the BBC has given-up on trustworthy methods of data collection, and now just uses FB, Twitter and Wiki verbatim. This isn’t surprising and is probably a reflection of UK undergraduate education where reading widely and finding primary sources are seen as too much like hard work.
Damn right there about undergraduate education, a lot of them seem to have skipped grammar and spelling as well at junior and senior level too, not to mention arithmetic.
JHT
That YouTube commentary is excellent.
I have heard nil reports on the BBC about the huge influx of Muslim immigrants into Norway, and the adverse social effects in areas like East Oslo.
I object strongly to the adverse effects of excessive immigration on East London. Like Many people in this country, I am nominally Methodist. Does that make me a Christian fundamentalist ?
Oh yes, have you ever said “God” or “Jesus” in normal conversation? Has your family ever owned a Bible? Ahha! Clear Christain fundalmentalist, probably right wing and we knopw East London is a hive of neo Nazis, where were you when Stephen Lawrence was murdered?
Sorry…but you get my point.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/norway/8657141/Norway-attacks-police-investigate-fears-main-suspect-was-part-of-a-larger-terror-group.html
For BBC-NUJ:
“Norwegian Killer Admired Obama.”(by Adrian Morgan, The Editor)
http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.10011/pub_detail.asp
The best quote from that link George, down near the end:
“It is not the role of any journalists to attempt to “define” the mindset of a mass-killer by trying to score political points against groups and people they dislike.”
The odd thing about this supposed Christian fundamentalist is that he paraphrases liberal atheist John Stuart Mill in his final tweet. He also cites his favourite books as On Liberty by John Stuart Mill and the Consequences of Pragmatism by Richard Rorty. Both these authors are atheistic and utilitarian thinkers who tackle the question on how to be good without God. Why hasn’t the MSN picked this up, or is there a case of willfull blindness.
Every nature, culture, country, religeon has its share of maniacs and extremists. The important distinction is whether those insane people have more general support. Muslim extremists clearly do have a degree of support – how much is hard to say. But they certainly have well organised groups behind them, some cleriks who support them, and a some – but hopefully not widespread – sympathy from some of the faithful. I think the BBC will struggle to find support among Christians for thse terrible actions. They will no doubt try but hopefully they will fail.
Exactly!
Not the BBC, but.
One of the eyewitnesses ( quoted elsewhere by the BBC) used an analogy that demonstrates a worrying constant in the mindset of Norwegian Socialism.
“Some of my friends tried to stop him by talking to him. Many people think on the island that it was a test … comparing it to how it is to live in Gaza. So many people went to him and tried to talk to him, but they were shot immediately.” – Adrian Pracon”
If he believes that the situation is like Gaza, it shows the depth of group think deriving from the Socialist view of the Mid-East.
So an action experience, launched to highlight a fictitious Gaza experience (feel like a Palestinian agit prop) turned out to be something very different.
These elite socialists cadres thought they were role-playing ‘Gaza’.
What pernicious nonsense for a “paradisical” youth camp.
Life never ceases to amaze me.
An extract from the terrorist’s purported 1,500 page internet book:-
“Saturday June 11 – Day 41 I prayed for the first time in a very long time today. I explained to God that unless he wanted the Marxist-Islamic alliance and certain Islamic Takeover of Europe…he must ensure that the warriors fighting for the preservation of European Christendom prevail.”
If this is authentic, there is basis for at least reporting he considered himself a Christian. Not someone most Christians would consider a brother in the faith, trying to dictate terms to the Lord, basically praying, ‘thou shalt do my will’. An extreme narcissist.
We’re very well aware of the various steps the Gramscian Left have taken to criminalise free speech about its totalitarian ally Islam in the last few years. Does this justify this type of response? IN NO WAY SHAPE OR FORM.
We saw in the States in the 60’s how Martin Luther King led the civil rights movement to uphold the rights of black people in the South. Civil disobedience is the route we must entertain to defend our democratic rights if necessary.
This guy is just a narcissistic nut who should be tried then strung up from the nearest tree.
OH DEAR!
The Marr Show ends Sun, ends with wait for it……….
W Vague this morning stressed, to everyone that
it is Al Queada that still poses the biggest threat to our
national security????……..(no Londonistan?)
& that is……DESPITE the recent shootings in Oslo, the connection of the gunmen to…..FAR right …..blah de blah de blah…..followed by a of pics, blue eyed narcissist
im-moral equivalence lobby??
Oh, and I would add, is a ‘Christian Fundamentalist’ someone who only prays rarely?
Given the fact that Christianity in England is more honoured in the breach than the observance, their are, per capita, more Muslim fundamentalists in the UK than Christian.
How many times a day do Muslims pray…often requiring prayer rooms in offices, schools and other public places. Or even in the street en masse
Logic suggests to associate prayer with an unbalanced mind is a rather risky path to take given the role of public prayer in Islam
How many fundamentalist Christians do you know who haven’t prayed in a very long time? He uses it as window dressing, and is clearly not deeply involved in his faith.
Apparently the lunatic killer faces a maximum of 21 years in prison under Norwegian law.
http://dailycaller.com/2011/07/23/police-alleged-norwegian-mass-murderer-faces-just-21-years-in-prison/
Maybe a death sentence policy would be a somewhat greater deterrent ?
But any such notion is way off the BBC’s agenda.
Huge problem for the liberal establishment. Caught in the dilemma. Would the death penalty have acted as a deterrent.? Remember that all criminals are really some kind of victim of some social or economic injustice. Muslims act criminally because of ‘colonialism’ or because (Fort Hood), the murderer didn’t want to go to Afghanistan.
The Left Liberals even ‘approve’ of suicide murder because of the ‘occupation’ See Jenny Tonge and , sadly,many, many others.
What is the ‘social’/economic injustice in this case?
Tricky. (For them).
The death penalty would not have acted as a deterrent for this guy. However it would be a fitting punishment.
Regards
Mailman
The death penalty is never a deterrent. It just keeps mass murderers from becoming cult celebrities for the rest of their lives, causing regular intervals of pain to the families of their victims.
I would delight in their moral dilemma.
I’ve been wondering about this, unable to believe the worst. Is it not 21 years per act of terrorism, yielding a sentence of 1900 years, and not 21 years total prison time for these acts of mass murder?
Good point. It doesn’t answer that specific question but wiki does say here that more than 21 years can be given:
[planned murder] is a murder committed with the intention of taking the life of another, by a person fully sane and aware of what he or she is doing, and having planned the act of murder ahead. Planned murder is punished with up to 21 years of imprisonment. Under special circumstances, like a murder of severe cruelty, or if there is reason to believe the offender may commit murder again, additional years of imprisonment can be given.[1] This usually takes place at a court hearing near the end of the sentence.
Oops! I forgot the link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_(Norway)
Thanks for the info. It’s got to be per act, and he’ll get a couple millenia.
You’re thinking like an American!
He’ll get a life sentence, no parole. He didn’t commit his crimes for a Left-wing cause, so no lenience.
Have the BBC reported that he’s going to be tried for ‘militancy’?
BBC have dropped the Christian Fundamentalist but can’t lety it go completely, this from 11:15 24/7/11
‘The document and the video repeatedly refer to multiculturalism and Muslim immigration; the author claims to be a follower of the Knights Templar – a medieval Christian organisation involved in the Crusades, and sometimes revered by white supremacists.’
It’s in their DNA
The BBC will be using thes 90-100 victims of this nut in exactly the way they`ve been waving the shroud of poor Milly Dowler of late-to make their own point!
So today on BH I hear of Muslims queueing up to pay their respects in Oslo Cathedral. The reporter feeds a passing Muslim the line about the enemies of the Eurodream leaping to conclusions that it might have been a Muslim to blame( good how many Professors of Social Cohesion willing to give us a soundbite on a Sunday isn`t it?)…the BBC of course NEVER leaps to conclusions or accepts AQ boasts as reason to think them responsible…that will be old Ruperts redtops again!
Can we expect JSM, Churchill, Orwell to be banned now?…or were they just identity badges like Christian or conservative?
Maybe he wanted increased investment in the welfare budget there-in which case he`ll be a Left wing fanatic a la Bader-Meinhoff then eh?
quite interesting few minutes here.
collates available info concisely
http://youtu.be/Pi3yn33s308
Bias alert!
I’ve been listening to R5L and the World Service covering the Norwegian terrorist attacks, and basically, no complaints .. till now.
@ about 13:40 James Mendes interviewed Hans Rasdat of http://www.document.no and spent a lot of time basically trying to pressurise him to concede, in that drawly, morally superior tone that is so grating, that their opposition to multiculturalism is responsible for such terrorism.
When he opened up this line of questioning he first asked what the purpose of the magazine is. The answer to raise the issues of the United States and Israel because there is a lot of bigotry and anti-Semitism in Norway. This stalled Mr Mendes in his tracks a bit. Not what he wanted to hear to pursue his line of attack, but he pursued it nonetheless asking the same question about 4-5 times in different ways with the import ‘there’s no difference between you and him, is there?’. He eventually gave up his repetitiousness when his interviewee proved more than a match for the game he was playing.
James Mendes – for anti-American bigotry and anti-Semitism, not happy if someone wont accept Thought Policing on multi-culturalism. New bigot – new BBC through and through.
Yes, was going to ask when the re-education camps would start, set up to handle anyone who expresses a thought against multiculuralism. Unless they speak out against Jews, in which case it’s okay. It’s acceptable in Sweden, and government officials approve, so it’s only natural to expect the same in Norway.
James Mendes,was corrected at least 3 times, by Rasdat, but laughably still snootily pushed his blind alley, in the end he
pressed that it might be bad taste for the site to continue.
Rasdat stated it was needed because the increase in anti israel rheotoric, instances of anti-semitism increasing, a geniune democratic deficit in objective discourse brought about by political correctness, Mendes grates on
but what is the aim of your website?…hmmm what is the aim of J Mendes more like 🙂
The whole Thought Policing in its glory can be heard below (36:36):-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p00hybcf/Newshour_24_07_2011_(1200_GMT)/
Beeb coverage of this event seems to have been all over the place.
I first heard the news as I travelled home on the train on Friday evening when it sounded like another Islamo Fascist outrage. The Beeb obvously thought so also also because while it was the lead item on the Radio 4 6PM news it only lasted a couple of minutes and it was quite obvious they didn’t even want to think about who had done it. So they couldn’t wait to move on to the next item which happened to be Murdoch related ! By Saturday when it was clear the event wasn’t Islamo Fascist related the Beeb were all over it with endless “analysis” and heavy mention of the dodgy Facebook page. Much mention of fundanmentalist Christians the Tea Party etc etc they were have a field day really.
Today (Sunday) though I sense a change with the Beeb wanting to move on and not wanting us to think to deeply about the events in Oslo. I have a feeling the trial isn’t going to be reported in much depth.
If the Beeb’s wanting to move on as you say, then is it because they have heard something that doesn’t fit their narrative, I wonder? For instance, is it true that his facebook page has been doctored trying to make him out to be a “Christian Fundamentalist” when in fact he’s just a crazy who dislikes the Norwegian Workers Party?
All speculation on my part of course, but something may have triggered another change of pace at the Beeb.
Funny isn`t it?
It is seen as a sign of mental illness to be Christian…but this by the Campbells, Frys, Bremners and the like…who actually do “have issues”, unlike most of the shiny happy people that were in church this morning!
Does crying over a rose by Amys kebab shop illustrate the same weakness in praying to anyone but the DG of the BBC?
It is also a sign of being an extremist to be religious…yet I`d be more scared of Dawkins, Porritt than any of the softies that get the religious spots on thought for the day!
Strange world!
Well, yes. Dawkins comes across like someone with the light of fanaticism in his eye, while proclaiming the cause of rationality and intelligence. The trouble with him is that he doesn’t understand people. Ironically, his rage manages to negate much of his own argument. Steve Jones, with his raging at “deniers” – surely a curiously abusive, intemperate and inflammatory word to use in a supposedly measured and informed report on a serious subject – is beginning to look just as fanatical. People like that can be dangerous if given credence and power.
I am an atheist. I call myself a “moderate atheist”. In as much that I don’t believe in God (or if he exists I’ve got a lot of bones to pick with him) but I am quite happy for other people to believe in anything they like as long as it doesn’t affect others, or is violent in any way. In fact I love looking in churches, and last year in synagogues in Krakow. I have also looked inside mosques and find it all interesting.
Now here’s what often surprises some people, although I am definitely an atheist I can’t stand what Dawkins gets up to and I would trust nearly all genuine Christians before I would him.
There are some Christians like the Weirdy Beardy of Canterbury who I would put almost on a par with Dawkins but, on the other hand, the Archbishop of York is a very intelligent and decent man as far as I can tell.
Steve Jones is a nazi, pure and simple. The man is utterly discredited by his narrow, bigoted view. The BBC love him for it. ‘ If you refute what i say then you are wrong and i will destroy your means to do so ‘ is his creed and aim. My words, his thoughts.
The materialist concensus…shared by the ‘religion is the opium” brigade, is that religious people are easy to define. One of the most pernicious stereotypes and judgmental views of our times.
Harvard Medical School Continuing Medical Education program, has found:
People who regularly attend church service, pray individually, and read the Bible are 40% less likely to have diastolic high blood pressure than those who seldom participate in these religious activities.People who attend religious services regularly may have stronger immune systems than their less-religious counterparts. People who attend church regularly are hospitalized less often and leave the hospital sooner than people who never or rarely participate in religious services. The deeper a person’s religious faith, the less likely he or she is to suffer depression during and after hospitalization for physical illness.. Religious people tend to have healthier lifestyles. People who attend church at least weekly have about one-third the rate of alcohol abuse and are about one-third as likely to smoke as those who seldom participate in congregational worship. Religious youth show significantly lower levels of drug and alcohol abuse, premature sexual involvement, and criminal delinquency than their non-religious peers. They also are less likely to express suicidal thoughts or make actual attempts on their lives.
Dawkins once famously dismissed religion as a ‘virus’. An extreme position even within the atheist community.
I, for one, will continue to be blissfully silly whether Richard D. likes it or not.
See that Dawkins has been ripped off by thousand in the USA but can`t win his case(Sunday Telegraph today).
If you see a rabid weirdo showing up round your church and a bit too keen to do the collection…you`ve been warned!
The creep seemed happy enough to spout his drivel in church halls for a consideration a few years back before the Temple to Tedium beckoned with our licence fees in its back pocket!
Charity fun run to restore Dawkins faith in human nature anyone?…
“If you see a rabid weirdo showing up round your church and a bit too keen to do the collection…you`ve been warned! “
I was only trying to be helpful. No need to throw around hurtful names.
R. Williams Esq.
I believe that Rowan had a carer to do such things for him, but should have said “clean shaven” to avoid any confusion!
sorry about that!
Dawkins does annoy me. He’s a biologist, so he should stick to Biology. When he starts on about religion it’s best to ignore him
When his “God Delusion” book came out, quite a few people I spoke to got more confident with claims that “religion is responsible for all wars”, “no good has come from religion” etc. Rubbish.
There remain this set of people who are so rabidly opposed to patriotism and the values that used to define this country, that they wind up explaining to us how understandable Islam’s grievances against the west are (after 9/11), and then seething with anger when the BBC report that a “blonde, extreme right wing, Christian fundamentalist” is responsible for ths atrocity.
Just what they think their values actually are I don’t know. But the anti-religion stuff dovetails with this to a certain extent
Late on parade here, but a few thoughts…
The acting Oslo police chief Roger Andresen’s words ‘kristent, fundamentalistisk’ (Christian, fundamentalist) were applied to the websites which the terrorist is said to have posted on. I may be wrong but the BBC – and by no means only the BBC (much of the MSM were also at it) – latched onto this term and made hay with it but failed to wonder aloud whether someone commenting on a site necessarily means that that person shares all or most of the views expressed by the owners of that site, or only some of their views. Posting on a ‘Christian fundamentalist’ site doesn’t necessarily make you a ‘Christian fundamentalist’.
As we’ve learned more, for many of the reasons mentioned above (by Hippiepooter and several others), it looks as if Brievik was not a Christian fundamentalist in any recognisable sense. He was apparently so disappointed by his own protestant church that he hoped for a mass conversion to Catholicism in Norway and sounds more like a cultural Christian than a theological one.
Despite that, the BBC’s Steve Evans asserted on this morning’s Sunday that “his beliefs are Christian in the extreme.”
CJ, of course ,it is right to exercise caution in accepting information as stated.
The quotation from a BBC eyewitness should be looked at very carefully.
“Some of my friends tried to stop him by talking to him. Many people think on the island that it was a test … comparing it to how it is to live in Gaza. So many people went to him and tried to talk to him, but they were shot immediately.” – Adrian Pracon”
Why should Pracon say that. In the shock and confusion that came to dominate their reality,to make sense of threat which they surely felt , where, people naturally try to make sense of their bewilderment in the absence of other information, they choose the most familiar to seek assurance.
It is all a game. He is an actor. It must be a drill.
“Many”. he said, “think that it was a test…comparing how it is to live in Gaza”
Why should that notion be grasped at. The full horror of reality was not yet clear. People went up to talk to their murderer.
They thought, (or could only think) it was a drill to act out repression. Role play. Like some acted out fire drill. A game.
Israeli. Soldier. Gun. Authority
Palestinian. Victim, casualty, subject to arbitrary terror.
A good look at the event programme for the political youth camp, should confirm the political themes. Free Gaza will certainly be there.
Indeed it wasn’t only the BBC. ABC America’s Christiane Amanpour made particularly strong comments, though it does seem to me she has a bit of a track record in this regard.
In the current spirit of “not letting a good crisis go to waste”, I hope that IF there was any attempts to simulate the plight of the Palestinians on Uetoya Island-in any role play exercise either real or proposed-then we get to hear of it.
The very idea that victims might have thought the psycho to be part of a PLO/Hamas/Hizbollah/Fatah exercise-if true-would suggest that the Left really ought not to be striking fatuous poses that may have tragic consequences.
Given the slanted tripe we`ve been putting up from the MSM/BBC in regard of Murdoch as well as the endless anti-Israel slurry that passes for “comment and news”-forgive my opportunistic hopping on a passing bandwagon in order to make my point!
The BBC seem to be teaching me all I need at the moment!
Sorry CJ. I replied to Craig. It was meant as a reply for you. See above.
Jane Little (this morning’s Sunday) seemed reluctant to accept the view of Jens Petter Johnsen, director of the Church of Norway national council, that Breivik doesn’t appear to have been a “conservative Christian” – surely a false conflation, on her part, of two distinct words – one relating to politics, the other to religion – found on the mass murderer’s very recently set-up Facebook page.
Rev. Johnsen mentioned Brievik’s cultural concerns about Islam and said that there’s no evidence that the murderous scumbag belonged to a “conservative Christian group.” Jane Little pressed on though, asking “But he clearly, you know, described himself as a conservative Christian…Is there a problem of Christian fundamentalism in Norway?” Mr Johnsen said there isn’t.
Alarm bells were raised with me though by a later feature on the U.S. Republican presidential race. Jane Little set up the report by talking about how “conservative Christians”…that term again…are influential in picking a candidate.
Just a coincidence? Or a bit of subliminal mischief at the expense of the American Right?
Demonize, isolate. Alinsky 101.
Meanwhile, you will search in vain to find anything, anywhere in the BBC News empire that covers this sickening story of the Taliban HANGING a boy of 8 in Afghanistan:
http://edition.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/asiapcf/07/24/afghanistan.militants.hang.boy/index.html?eref=ft
The Religion of Peace in action, once again.
An ethnic Norwegian deliberately killed other ethnic Norwegians. What did the BBC miss?
1) The Jews did it.
Swedish-Algerian Journalist Yahya Abu Zakariya: Mossad Responsible for Norway Attacks
2) They did it because the Norwegians support the Palestinians
Norway youths discussed Palestine prior to attack
Is the politics of the victims important? Probably not but had a group of Israelis been shot up would the BBC have been so reticent in describin their activities?
In general the Norwegians showed us how this should be done; don’t go throwing labels around until you know the facts. This is not quite Arizona proportions, but it hasn’t made the BBC look that great.
I think everyone, including many on the right mind you, needs to stop trying quite so hard to use guilt by association and broad generalisations and even inaccuracies to defeat one’s political opponents. The BBC, though they perhaps didn’t go as far as they might, have clearly tried to do this in this instance(though whether this by design or it is simply their unconscious assumptions and worldview playing out — or a bit of both — it is hard to say.). But the right, and even some here(even in this very comments thread!), do this as well. It is important we try and better ourselves while we’re criticising others; let’s be better than the BBC.
‘don’t go throwing labels around until you know the facts’
Indeed. Most of what I have seen so far seems to be ‘any old guessitmate’ journalism, with some gratuitous helicopter shots, whatever an ‘expert’ found in a cupboard in the green room ‘thought’ and… that’s about it.
Until the latest ratings soars subject gives his ratings whores conference I doubt any will be much wiser, and even then not so sure we’ll be much further ahead.
But the ‘analysis’ will continue, unabated.
This at least offers some intriguing insights, if not as to the mindset of the perpetrator, but surely those that ‘comment’ on others’ actions.
The moral equivalence aspects have and will be interesting.
Will this person’s actions, though decried, be seen as ‘daring’ and ‘audacious’, as I have found previous terrorist atrocities described.
Certainly if solo, one must acknowledge some logistical planning expertise. Plus, unlike the old men elsewhere often lauded for their skills in sending younger folk to do their dirty work, this chap has participated up close and personal, as it were.
However, it is hard to see much to admire in secret assaults without warning on unarmed civilians as a means of ‘getting one’s message across’.
I also ponder to what degree his motivations will be discussed, seeking understanding with a view to future prevention, or ‘understanding’ due to misplaced empathy.
Pretty clear this cove was angry and frustrated, and hence managed to turn lack of engagement to a level he demanded into a more direct, deadly protest.
Will media cheerleaders be as keen to ‘explain’ his motivations in such terms as one can often find with other such events?
I hate to use the term, but ‘evil genius’ springs to mind. The duration and extent of his planning (what was his day job?) seems incredible.
And, so far, he seems to have played ‘the establishment’, political and media, like a violin.
Anders Breivik was evidently a keen listener to the BBC World Service, a fact which the BBC would evidently want kept quiet, as he went to Praguie in August 2010 based on its reputation “as possibly the most famous transit point for illegal guns and drugs.” in order to furnish himself with a large-scale armoury.
However when he arrived he found that Prague was exceptionally well-behaved and law-abiding and he felt safer there “than he did in Oslo”. The only recipients of his largesse proved to be the local prostitutes. When he returned to Norway he lamented that Prague was nothing “like what the BBC described it”. It must have been very dispiriting to find that the real world and the BBC description of it don’t always tally. Who’d have thunk it? Still it’s pleasing to hear that the BBC has such a wide audience.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Norway_attacks
You`re onto something here Allan!
If the World Service does not emply more DLTs and less Jeremy Bowens then we end up with Norwegian killing sprees.
Obviously with us all being raw over that Newslight/ Marbles tragedy(not a word I overuse of course!) we need an enquiry into whether the World Service is indeed inciting extremism.
Sure as hell won`t be the Christians-no-one would have been awake after Clifford Longley had spoken!
Will now amend the facebook to include “World service” for conservative or christian in any future rants from Mad Auntie!
Something from Guido about the “palpable relief” on the left when it turned out this wasn’t the work of an islamist:
http://order-order.com/2011/07/25/quote-of-the-day-498/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+guidofawkes+%28Guy+Fawkes%27+blog+of+parliamentary+plots%2C+rumours+and+conspiracy%29&utm_content=Twitter
Turns out the shooter was basically an agnostic. From his manifesto……
“As for the Church and science, it is essential that science takes an undisputed precedence over biblical teachings. Europe has always been the cradle of science, and it must always continue to be that way. Regarding my personal relationship with God, I guess I’m not an excessively religious man. I am first and foremost a man of logic. However, I am a supporter of a monocultural Christian Europe.”
“‘Logic’ and rationalist thought (a certain degree of national Darwinism) should be the fundament [sic] of our societies. I support the propagation of collective rational thought but not necessarily on a personal level.”
“I’m not going to pretend I’m a very religious person, as that would be a lie,” he says. “I’ve always been very pragmatic and influenced by my secular surroundings and environment. In the past, I remember I used to think: ‘Religion is a crutch for weak people. What is the point in believing in a higher power if you have confidence in yourself!? Pathetic.’ Perhaps this is true for many cases. Religion is a crutch for many weak people, and many embrace religion for self-serving reasons as a source for drawing mental strength (to feed their weak emotional state [for] example during illness, death, poverty etc.). Since I am not a hypocrite, I’ll say directly that this is my agenda as well. However, I have not yet felt the need to ask God for strength, yet.”
I wondered why he was quoting John Stuart Mill.
Thankfully, a small mercy, I have my mother living with us and therefore pay no licence fee.
I am, however, a tall blond Christian and therefore, de facto, a potential mass murderer……….. according to the BBC.