Now the AP is reporting that at least 80 were killed in the camp shootings and another 7 died in the Oslo bomb blast. An ethnic Norwegian is the prime suspect.
A METHOD TO HIS MADNESS: Why would this nutjob target a youth camp? This CNN profile includes a possible clue:
Another post in Breivik's name in October 2009 advises "Hans", described as the founder of Document.no, to "develop an alternative to the violent extreme Norwegian Marxist organisations Blitz, SOS Rasisme and Rod Ungdom" -- all left-wing movements in Norway.
"The conservatives dare not openly express their viewpoints in public because they know that the extreme Marxists will trump them. We cannot accept the fact that the Labour Party is subsidising these violent "Stoltenberg jugend", who are systematically terrorising the politically conservative," the post reads.
He is making a reference to the youth movement of Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg, who heads the Labour Party.
Obviuosly, left wing protestors have not been bombing Oslo and killing nearly 100 people. However, this US State Department travel advisory has this to say about Norway last May:
Civil unrest
Norway is an almost universally peaceful nation, with law abiding citizens. Exceptions can be found but always by special interest groups, such as the immigrant youth violence mentioned earlier. Also, far left wing protestors have attempted to disrupt high-level meetings, such as a NATO ministerial meeting in 2007 in which police had to respond with tear gas. Strikes, protests, and other labor actions are generally announced through the media ahead of time and are usually of limited duration.
To get from that to gunning down eighty kids is crazy, obviously, but he does seem to have thought that left-wing groups were violent.
He probably just ran out of ammunition.
Only one guy? Where did he get the money to buy the car that was one of the bombs? Who supplied the other? What stopped the Norwegian prime minister from showing up at the island?
What sorts of questions will Norwegians be asking each other, now?
Posted by: Carol Herman | July 22, 2011 at 11:48 PM
Eighty people at the camp! In a country that small, it is unbelievable the carnage he has created.
Posted by: Clarice | July 23, 2011 at 12:05 AM
Am seeing in the comments at HotAir that only American outlets (incl AP from Norway) are reporting the 80 figure. Euro outlets say single digits at the camp, 10 max, and 7 in Oslo.
FWIW
Posted by: Porchlight | July 23, 2011 at 12:06 AM
I take it back, BBC reporting 80. Just awful.
Posted by: Porchlight | July 23, 2011 at 12:10 AM
It appears for the time being that the guy was not a Muslim or Muslim influenced. However, re immigration law, which I've discussed at length here and here, Wikipedia has a brief entry which provides links to the most up to date discussions available that I'm aware of, including developments since 9/11. If you're interested, follow my link to Wikipedia and go to the footnotes:
The footnoted articles discuss the Zadvydas case, which appears to attack the plenary power to some extent, as well as the response of the political branches. Re DoT's claim of a 9-0 decision against this plenary power, it's worth noting the breakout of the justicies in Zadvydas:
Wrong side: Breyer, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Stevens, O'Connor, Souter, and Ginsburg, JJ.
Right side: Scalia, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Thomas, J., joined, post, p. 702. Kennedy, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Rehnquist, C. J., joined, and in which Scalia and Thomas, JJ.,
This was a 5-4 decision--a far cry from the 9-0 DoT claims. Importantly, Kennedy was with the good guys. Further, we now have Alito and Roberts replacing Souter and O'Connor. I'd say the plenary power doctrine is safe.
Posted by: anduril | July 23, 2011 at 12:27 AM
L A Times reporting 87 dead... the horror.
Posted by: matt | July 23, 2011 at 12:33 AM
This is really unbelievable. I think the campers are 15-16 year olds.
Posted by: Clarice | July 23, 2011 at 12:44 AM
Not to anduril, Matt. He is looking for an audience even if it means tromping on such a tragic thread topic.
Posted by: Threadkiller | July 23, 2011 at 12:44 AM
Shooter is ethnic Norwegian, and there are reports on FreeRepublic from a Norwegian poster that someone with his name posted frequently on anti-Islam websites.
Posted by: Porchlight | July 23, 2011 at 12:53 AM
If he was anti-Islamic how come he didn't blow up an Islamic neighborhood?
Posted by: Uncle BigBad | July 23, 2011 at 12:59 AM
A reminder that it pays to wait for the facts to come in...
It's going to be a grim morning in Norway. Condolences.
Posted by: huxley | July 23, 2011 at 01:33 AM
A possible reminder that AlQ are asshole opportunists, too.
They must subscribe to Rham's newletter.
Posted by: Stephanie | July 23, 2011 at 01:39 AM
There's a Norwegian presser going on right now. Total 91 now dead.
It's strange to listen to the speaker with the translator going on somewhat garbled. The language sounds so German or Dutch but it isn't. I can understand some German.
Posted by: glasater | July 23, 2011 at 03:09 AM
Hey guys, to those of you who know me, I've been tweeting up a storm about this here from Oslo the last 20 hours or so.
If you guys have any questions about all that is happening and has happened, just ask me there on Twitter. I've got to get some rest, been up all night, but I'll answer when I get up.
I'll be sure to check in here too.
Unimaginable, crazy circumstances.
Posted by: Seixon | July 23, 2011 at 04:27 AM
What's up Sexion. I actually checked immediately to see if you ever got your website up.
Keep us updated. I feel terrible for all those people and their families.
I was shocked to get through airport security (atlanta) in less than 10 minutes.
Posted by: donald | July 23, 2011 at 07:42 AM
"Re DoT's claim of a 9-0 decision against this plenary power"
The claim was made only with respect to a hypothetical law precluding ebtry into the US on the grounds of religious belief, and the result would indeed be 9-0.
The Zadvydas case held unconstitutional the detention of illegal aliens in certain circumstances. (So much for an untrammeled plenary power.)
Posted by: Danube of Thought | July 23, 2011 at 07:43 AM
What are Norway's gun control laws?
Posted by: peter | July 23, 2011 at 07:55 AM
A reminder that it pays to wait for the facts to come in...
Thanks. Very true and timely. Our friends on the left do not wait in these situations, however.
Posted by: Porchlight | July 23, 2011 at 08:49 AM
The guy is reportedly into violent video games, violent movies like Gladiator and 300, and Dexter..the tv show about a serial killer. Sounds like he wanted to create his own mayhem scenario where he'd be the "star". He's an evil psycho.
Posted by: DebinNC | July 23, 2011 at 09:18 AM
From Seixon's twitter, we come to this sample of his writing, run through Google Translate:
Is he really too stupid, to realize that he has set back any legitimate anti Salafi
criticism, back a generation:
http;www.document.no/anders.behring.breivik/
The problem is that it often does not help about 80% of Muslims are "moderates", ie they ignore the Quran. "It takes very few people to overthrow a plane."
What percentage is the Taliban of Pakistan's population? 1%, 3%, 5%? And how much chaos is there today?
In every society where Islam exists there will be a certain percentage of the Muslims who actually follow the traditional interpretations of the Koran.
And then we have the relationship between conservative Muslims and so-called "moderate Muslims".
There is moderate Nazis, too, that does not support fumigation of rooms and Jews. But they're still Nazis and will only sit and watch as the conservatives Nazis strike (if it ever happens). If we accept the moderate Nazis as long as they distance themselves from the fumigation of rooms and Jews?
Now it unfortunately already cut himself with Marxists who have already infiltrated-culture, media and educational organizations. These individuals will be tolerated and will even work as professors and lecturers at colleges / universities and are thus able to spread their propaganda.
For me it is very hypocritical to treat Muslims, Nazis and Marxists differ. They are all supporters of hate-ideologies. Not all Muslims, Nazis and Marxists are conservative, most are moderate. But does it matter? A moderate Nazi might, after having experienced fraud, choose to be conservative. A moderate Muslim can, after being refused to enter a club, be conservative, etc.
It is obvious that the moderate supporters of hate-ideologies, at a later date may choose conservatism.
Islam (ism) has historically led to 300 million deaths
Communism has historically led to 100 million deaths
Nazism has historically led to 6-20 million deaths
ALL hate ideologies should be treated equally.
2010-02-16 19:25:24
According to two studies supports 13% of young British Muslims between 15 and 25 Al Qaeda ideology. UK representative for Norway, so I would guess that at least 15-20% of Norwegian Muslims support murder of gays. There is certainly no fewer that supports the killing of gays than to support Al Qaeda.
2010-02-02 13:35:11
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.
The so-called anti-multiculti in the U.S. based their rhetoric on ethnocentrism alone which thus differs greatly from Europeans. This is the main reason that we must separate the American and European cultural struggle. I usually stay away from American issues as a result.
Regardless of whether we are in the U.S. or Europe, it is essential you have to ask about the following:
When was that multiculturalism ceased to be an ideology designed to deconstruct a European culture, traditions, identity and nation-states? If you support a leader who propagate multikulti (ideology as of this writing systematically deconstructs Western civilization), one can not then just as well stick to the class struggle or the MSM?
And if we then think that multiculturalism wonderful doctrines is the main cause of the ongoing Islamization of Europe and the U.S., one should not criticize multiculturalism while leading No. 1, the one Jesus Christ Obama for his fundamental principles?
Failure to criticize him, you have not then accepted the multiculturalism wonderful premise?
2010-01-25 05:20:24
Public Enemy, Carl Christian,
What you manages to come up with here is nothing but very nasty control techniques.
You claim that all Norwegians who do not follow landsmo (s) container Gro Harlem Brundtland definition, is racist:
"Everyone always holds a Norwegian passport is full Norwegians" ... Which means that even Somali coach (with a Norwegian passport) who chew qat all day, banks send the wife and half the benefit of al-Shabaab should be viewed as a full Doe.
If anyone in this country dared to look at the Somali coach as anything other than a full-Smith are the racists and need to burn marked public. And you say that everyone who disagrees with their extreme kulturmarxistiske world view - the utopian, global citizen definition are racists?
In that case, I think you have labeled 95% of the population that just this but it does just a minor role for you?
You are only committed to paralyze all the debate in society, to silence all those who are not of the same opinion as you, to exercise social control in line with the conservative Muslims in Greenland? Once a person takes off his "ideological veil" his is where you as soon as the troll you are.
Sorry, but it does not work anymore. More will be increasingly immune to rule techniques due to their massive inflation rhetoric.
I think the majority of Norwegians require full cultural assimilation (European culture) to calculate the second as full Norwegians. His his analysis is thus correct. Norwegian passport is irrelevant in this context. Get over it ...!
Posted by: narciso | July 23, 2011 at 09:21 AM
so far this makes no sense whatsoever. The shooter disliked Somali immigrants and was a member of the opposition party. He apparently purchased 6 tons of fertilizer, and owned a farm outside of Oslo.
He's more than middle class, it would seem, and definitely anti-immigrant, but so far there's not a lot of extremist data.
He apparently plotted and executed the plan in an utterly cold blooded manner. He was on the island shooting people for hours. When some victims tried to swim away, he shot them as well. His tools on the island were an automatic weapon of some sort and a pistol.
This is weird beyond Charles Whitman, the Texas Bell Tower shooter.
Posted by: matt | July 23, 2011 at 09:25 AM
narciso,
There is a clearer translation of the first comment at FreeRepublic:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2752667/posts?page=383#383
matt,
Part of the reason he had so much time is that (as least as it's being reported) it took 30 minutes for the police to arrive. However, once they got there, again this is just an initial report, they knew he might have explosives and decided not to venture further. There is a photo of them huddled behind their van on the beach. According to one report they were waiting for him to run out of ammo.
Dear Lord, I hope that report isn't true. Can you imagine American first responders not rushing right in?
Posted by: Porchlight | July 23, 2011 at 09:36 AM
At this point I am simply praying for those murdered and for their families. I suspect that there is far more to the story than a lone gunman, but, as CHACO cautioned in a prior thread, I am going to wait and see what comes out.
One thing I will try to avoid if friends bring this up to me is referring to the cold blooded killer as insane. As my late great Aunt Mary (who with a high school education understood more about human psychology than the army of credentialled therapy state mental health professionals) used to say, if they are insane, why didn't they kill themselves. When I refer to this individual at all, I will refer to him as a cold blooded murderer.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | July 23, 2011 at 09:41 AM
((so far this makes no sense whatsoever.))
he's a madman, mad in both the sense of angry and enraged and crazy out to lunch
Posted by: Chubby | July 23, 2011 at 09:45 AM
((I will try to avoid if friends bring this up to me is referring to the cold blooded killer as insane))
I posted in the very next post that he was insane. You call a killing spree like his a "rational" act? You have a different idea of rationality than I do.
Posted by: Chubby | July 23, 2011 at 09:48 AM
"Can you imagine American first responders not rushing right in?"
Columbine.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | July 23, 2011 at 09:50 AM
and like Janet, I believe that some forms of insanity deserve capital punishment.
along the same lines, I don't go for the idea that drunk rapists cannot be charged with rape because they were drunk.
Posted by: Chubby | July 23, 2011 at 09:52 AM
Can you imagine American first responders not rushing right in?
We don't have to imagine. We all watched it live at Columbine High School.
Posted by: DebinNC | July 23, 2011 at 09:53 AM
Alameda police, firefighters watch as man drowns
Posted by: Extraneus | July 23, 2011 at 09:56 AM
Columbine.
Yes. Ahhh. I should have remembered.
Posted by: Porchlight | July 23, 2011 at 09:56 AM
Alameda police, firefighters watch as man drowns
That, too. I was wrong.
It's so sad. Media helicopter photos and video of the guy killing kids, but nobody could get a sniper close enough to pick him off.
Posted by: Porchlight | July 23, 2011 at 09:59 AM
if laws that protect the insane who have committed reprehensible crimes from deserved punishment result in convoluting the acts of crazy people into rational acts -- just so they can be punished -- the laws are wrong in the first place.
Posted by: Chubby | July 23, 2011 at 10:01 AM
He's much more like the myriad school shooting killes, now, including Columbine, but also VTU. So much carnage,
Of course, the impulse over there will be to ban all 'politically incorrect'commentary and restrict firearms further, much like that DHS video, suggests, with
dovetails 'unexpectedly' with Gadahn's message, fancy that.
Posted by: narciso | July 23, 2011 at 10:05 AM
See LUN for some background on the insanity defense. In my opinion, the science underlying the insanity defense is on the same level of rigor as the "settled science" underlying climate change.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | July 23, 2011 at 10:06 AM
The SCOTUS has been OK with exclusion on the basis of race, national origin and political persuasion (Nazi, Commie). The reason they've been OK with that--and would be OK with religion as well--is because the Constitution recognizes that control over who enters a country is a basic attribute of sovereignty, and thus its exercise rests in the discretion of the political branches, not in the judiciary. DoT won't touch that. He thinks he's a bullshit artist, but he's just a bullshitter. The only time he tried to offer any authority for his statements they were totally irrelevant, having to do with treatment of people legally within the US.
Posted by: anduril | July 23, 2011 at 10:10 AM
He certainly didn't write like someone who was insane.
One can read far more irrational, vitriolic and extreme stuff in just about any lefty or righty blog's comment section.
One doesn't have to be insane to slaughter innocent people; just evil.
Posted by: Ignatz | July 23, 2011 at 10:12 AM
I lean toward TC's view. When the defense is framed as "only a crazy person could do X," then the conclusion "therefore the perp who did X must be crazy" is almost foregone.
We do not make sufficient allowance for the possibility of sane people committing evil acts.
Posted by: Porchlight | July 23, 2011 at 10:15 AM
--The reason they've been OK with that--and would be OK with religion as well--is because the Constitution recognizes that control over who enters a country is a basic attribute of sovereignty, and thus its exercise rests in the discretion of the political branches, not in the judiciary.--
I hope you're correct about that. It sure beats the Norwegian method.
Posted by: Ignatz | July 23, 2011 at 10:15 AM
One doesn't have to be insane to slaughter innocent people; just evil
Exactly. See DC sniper/s.
Posted by: DebinNC | July 23, 2011 at 10:15 AM
Tom C
thanks for that link.
The insanity defense was in an issue in the trial of Charles Guiteau as well.
Posted by: Chubby | July 23, 2011 at 10:19 AM
Reuters has it's talking point, and it will be 'off to the races':
Breivik had also been a member of the Progress Party, the second largest in parliament, the party's head of communications Fredrik Farber said. Breivik was a member from 2004 to 2006 and in its youth party from 1997-2006/
Posted by: narciso | July 23, 2011 at 10:29 AM
if evil is rational does that mean good is irrational? I always thought good and evil were opposites, and if opposites, they both can't be rational.
Posted by: Chubby | July 23, 2011 at 10:36 AM
Dressed in a police uniform. Ugh. I did not sleep well because of that one fact. What do I warn my kids to beware of? This is sick.
Posted by: Threadkiller | July 23, 2011 at 10:37 AM
OT, but you'll all be interested: Presidential Debt-Limit Deceptions.
Posted by: anduril | July 23, 2011 at 10:44 AM
I am reminded of the old saw, "looks can be deceiving."
Some LOOK insane, but may not be. To me, based on looks only, I think Al Gore looks insane. There are many times (whether still photos or live action), I think Obama looks insane.
Some LOOK benign, and are not. This Norwegian fellow - albeit in still photos only - looks benign. Maybe if we saw him speaking, in motion, he would appear less benign?
Posted by: centralcal | July 23, 2011 at 10:49 AM
KRAUTHAMMER: This is Obama at his most sanctimonious, demagogic, self-righteous and arrogant. And given the baseline it wasn't a pretty sight. Look, he started out by summoning the leaders of Congress -- summoning them -- at 11:00. Who does he think he is? In the American system, the executive and Congress are coequal. In a banana republic, the caudillo will summon the members of the Congress. The way he demanded their appearance in the Oval Office I thought was disgraceful. The branches are coequal.
Second, on this issue he said "We have set forth a plan." He has set forth nothing. Nor has the Democratic controlled Senate. The Republicans offered a detailed plan. The Ryan plan in the House, and they offered Cut, Cap and Balance this time around. The President has offered nothing except he says if you go in the back room now my staff will give you a tick-tock of everything I'm supposed to have given. He has never once spoken about real cuts.
And lastly, what was interesting is even at this late date where he says that the fate of the republic hangs on the debt ceiling extension, he said if given a short extension of, say, half a year I won't except it. Why? because he says I want this to go past election day. That is entirely self-serving and political, and he pretends he's the one who's not interested in politics.
Posted by: anduril | July 23, 2011 at 10:53 AM
Balance. Look this NYT op-ed up for a quite sympathetic look at Me, Michele and Our Migraines
By JUDITH WARNER
Posted by: anduril | July 23, 2011 at 10:59 AM
More to worry about from the Telegraph: China's spectacular real estate bubble is about to go pop
Posted by: anduril | July 23, 2011 at 11:01 AM
Has this been covered? Catching up..
"Breivik's Facebook page was blocked, but a cached version
describes a conservative Christian from Oslo.
The profile veers between references to lofty political philosophers and gory popular films, television shows and video games. The Facebook account appears to have been set up on July 17. The site lists no "friends" or social connections.
The profile lists interests including hunting, political and stock analysis, with tastes in music ranging from classical to trance, a hypnotic form of dance music.
Breivik had also set up a Twitter account recently, with a single post on July 17, a citation from 19th century thinker John Stuart Mill: "One person with a belief is equal to the force of 100,000 who have only interests."
The Norwegian daily Verdens Gang
Read more: http://www.theprovince.com/news/Police+seek+survivors+Norway+killing+spree/5149113/story.html#ixzz1SwOYvI4A
Posted by: Ben Franklin | July 23, 2011 at 11:02 AM
John Stuart Mill, conservative Christian??
Posted by: anduril | July 23, 2011 at 11:07 AM
--John Stuart Mill, conservative Christian??--
Heh.
Posted by: Ignatz | July 23, 2011 at 11:10 AM
"One thing I will try to avoid if friends bring this up to me is referring to the cold blooded killer as insane."
Especially for the narrow legal definition. But psychopath/sociopath is a form of insanity as when something is missing, like a 'conscience'.
"Two sandwiches shy of a picnic" as George Carlin would say.
He doesn't have all 'his marbles'. etc.
It is estimated that 1-2 percent of the general population fits in the above category. They, as the character 'Dexter' don't experience a broad array of human emotion, especially empathy.
But the smart ones have learned how to mimic emotion so they appear normal. Random thoughts..........
Posted by: Ben Franklin | July 23, 2011 at 11:12 AM
((They, as the character 'Dexter' don't experience a broad array of human emotion, especially empathy.))
and they have no feelings for the poor and don't want to spread their wealth around, eh?
you get a real malicious kick out of spitting in the faces of your benefactors don't you?
Posted by: Chubby | July 23, 2011 at 11:18 AM
if evil is rational does that mean good is irrational? I always thought good and evil were opposites, and if opposites, they both can't be rational.
Sure they can; good and evil are two extremes of the ranges of human behavior; other behavioral factors can be present in varying degrees because there doesn't have to be a direct correlation of them to good/evil. I guess you could say that doing good could be considered irrational in the sense if personal sacrifice is involved because that runs contrary to self-interest. But it's also rational in that the person consciously makes the choice because the desire to do good, whether it's considered rational or otherwise, is important to him/her and it doesn't negatively impact others.
Posted by: Captain Hate | July 23, 2011 at 11:20 AM
Wow ! That was revealing, Chubby. But don't worry, it seems you have a conscience........
Posted by: Ben Franklin | July 23, 2011 at 11:22 AM
He's a cold blooded murderer, Capt, and it looks like with a broken clock, the blind
squirrels have found their nut. Like with Baruch Goldstein, this will be used to curtail
any legitimate anti Islamist discourse, and worse to rationalize any Islamist violence
in the future. We know the bicycler, is already on that
path.
Posted by: narciso | July 23, 2011 at 11:27 AM
the issue with this kind of sociopath is that they cold bloodedly plan his monstrosity with every detail in mind. The isolated location, the timing, the uniform, the 6 tons of fertilizer, the weaponry.
Loughner fits the same category, and I wouldn't be surprised if his insanity is an act. After all, he was reported to have researched the insanity defense thoroughly.
There is a place in society for the removal of such vermin by judicial death. Now Norway will confront its inner demons and high minded morals. Reality is dirty and mean and sometimes expedient.
To hell with those cops. They are paid to put their lives on the line. When you take the job, you sign up to be the one running into the burning building when everyone else is running out.
Posted by: matt | July 23, 2011 at 11:28 AM
The Facebook account appears to have been set up on July 17.
If I hated Christians and nationalists, I'd associate myself with them on my Facebook page, knowing it would be closely scrutinized after my murder spree. I bet he's an anti-social loner who belongs to no group other than those in the fantasy world of his twisted mind.
Posted by: DebinNC | July 23, 2011 at 11:35 AM
Like with Baruch Goldstein, this will be used to curtail
any legitimate anti Islamist discourse, and worse to rationalize any Islamist violence
in the future. We know the bicycler, is already on that
path.
Yeah we've been down this road before. The only thing that could stop this train is if it turns out Steadman Shabazz supplied him with weapons; although he doesn't seem like one of "his people".
Posted by: Captain Hate | July 23, 2011 at 11:36 AM
"To hell with those cops"
Foiling plots is good but there needs to be better response options when foiling fails. As when the plot only exists in one nutball's noggin. An island full of kids with no armed citizens or officers capable of protecting them seems very misguided. Where does the idea that is a "safer" situation come from?
Posted by: boris | July 23, 2011 at 11:38 AM
To hell with those cops. They are paid to put their lives on the line. When you take the job, you sign up to be the one running into the burning building when everyone else is running out.
The efficacy of the blue helmeted UN "peace keepers" would make a better comparison; although there you have the ranges of raping people in the Ivory Coast to rounding up Bosnians so they make a more concentrated and obvious target.
Posted by: Captain Hate | July 23, 2011 at 11:40 AM
To hell with those cops. They are paid to put their lives on the line. When you take the job, you sign up to be the one running into the burning building when everyone else is running out.
Uh, no, cops don't sign up for kamikaze missions.
Posted by: anduril | July 23, 2011 at 11:46 AM
Good HH post: When Does The Public Get To See The Proposals?
Posted by: anduril | July 23, 2011 at 11:53 AM
anduril,
The shooter was a Freemason. What of that you cute little bigot,you? Secret society? Strange rituals? Work with me here.
Posted by: MarkO | July 23, 2011 at 11:55 AM
Loughner fits the same category, and I wouldn't be surprised if his insanity is an act. After all, he was reported to have researched the insanity defense thoroughly.
I don't agree with this. He had a history of acting nutty; the problem in his case is that his parents knew, or at least had a very good idea, what a threat he was and actively worked to suppress any reporting of it. Including working with the sheriff's department, the same one that the JEF (what, no hat tip?) praised in his Tucson
minstrel showmemorial appearance, to let his transgressions be ignored and him not receiving the attention he obviously deserved.Posted by: Captain Hate | July 23, 2011 at 11:55 AM
Why would I "work" with someone who, in the same breath, calls me names? Freemason doesn't = "a conservative Christian" any more than John Stuart Mill does. Grow up.
Posted by: anduril | July 23, 2011 at 11:59 AM
From FR, obviously no confirmation.
THE suspect in the twin attacks that killed at least 92 people in Norway was a member of a Swedish neo-Nazi Internet forum, a group monitoring far-right activity says. "He created a profile in 2009, with a pseudonym that can be traced back to his email address," Mikael Ekman, a researcher with the Stockholm-based Expo foundation, told AFP on Saturday.
Posted by: anduril | July 23, 2011 at 12:01 PM
Wishing to keep the US non-Muslim is hardly bigotry--it's little more than the instinct for self preservation. However, characterizing my views as bigotry is very revealing of where MarkO is coming from.
Posted by: anduril | July 23, 2011 at 12:05 PM
Nazis killed all the Freemasons they could find, btw. It seems there are a lot of seemingly contradictory details emerging, which points toward a nutter. Christian/Freemason/Nazi?
Posted by: anduril | July 23, 2011 at 12:08 PM
Well a little background about who was behind that group, is in order:
Larsson spent part of 1977 in Eritrea, training a squad of female Eritrean People's Liberation Front guerrillas in the use of grenade launchers. He was forced to abandon that work due to having contracted a kidney disease.[9] Upon his return to Sweden, he worked as a graphic designer at the largest Swedish news agency, Tidningarnas Telegrambyrå (TT) between 1977 and 1999.[8]
Larsson's political convictions, as well as his journalistic experiences, led him to found the Swedish Expo Foundation, similar to the British Searchlight Foundation, established to "counteract the growth of the extreme right and the white power-culture in schools and among young people."[10
Posted by: narciso | July 23, 2011 at 12:09 PM
anduril, I am sorry if you thought for even a fraction of a second that I really wanted you to work with me.
Posted by: MarkO | July 23, 2011 at 12:09 PM
((Loughner fits the same category, and I wouldn't be surprised if his insanity is an act.))
and then what? when he went on his rampage his "act" ended and his lucid sanity shone forth?
imo it's sad that due to the insanity defense, we have to twist crazy acts into being rational acts so as to guarantee appropriate punishment
Posted by: Chubby | July 23, 2011 at 12:12 PM
Janet-
I just sent you an email about someone in particular in Afghanistan.
He is also the one who lost his father last fall.
Posted by: rse | July 23, 2011 at 12:19 PM
Now witnesses are reported to have seen a second shooter. This might not be completely resolved yet.
Posted by: Mark Folkestad | July 23, 2011 at 12:35 PM
Ah one sees Clemons and Fallows, going after Rubin, for early second guessing the Utoya shooter, I'm sure she will correct like when
Sullivan apologized for miscaracterizing Tucson, crickets.
Posted by: narciso | July 23, 2011 at 12:54 PM
imo it's sad that due to the insanity defense, we have to twist crazy acts into being rational acts so as to guarantee appropriate punishment
Chubby,
I don't think anyone is saying that the act itself is rational. They are saying that it is possible for a sane person to have done it.
Sane people do irrational things every day, just as smart people do dumb things and good people do wrong things.
The key is to resist using the nature of the crime to draw conclusions about the mental state of perpetrator.
Posted by: Porchlight | July 23, 2011 at 12:55 PM
if evil is rational does that mean good is irrational? I always thought good and evil were opposites, and if opposites, they both can't be rational.
Not if rationality and good are independent.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | July 23, 2011 at 01:43 PM
What do I warn my kids to beware of?
People shooting at them. Never trust a man who just shot your friend.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | July 23, 2011 at 01:45 PM
The shooter was a Freemason. What of that you cute little bigot,you? Secret society? Strange rituals? Work with me here.
Mark, you know other Freemasons.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | July 23, 2011 at 01:46 PM
Wishing to keep the US non-Muslim is hardly bigotry
Perhaps, but it's utterly un-American. Go read the Virginia Statute:
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | July 23, 2011 at 01:50 PM
Nazis killed all the Freemasons they could find, btw. It seems there are a lot of seemingly contradictory details emerging, which points toward a nutter. Christian/Freemason/Nazi?
Well, it did say neo-Nazi. But a whole lot of Nazis were Lutherans. And a whole lot of the rest were Catholics.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | July 23, 2011 at 01:52 PM
Yeah, ChaCo, in 1786 Virginians were willing to go along with religious freedom, but it was a whole nother ball of wax for the previous 150 years...
Posted by: cathyf | July 23, 2011 at 01:58 PM
rse,
I got the email. It will be my privilege! Thanks.
Posted by: Janet | July 23, 2011 at 02:13 PM
God bless you rse. You and yours. God bless all of you.
Posted by: hit and run | July 23, 2011 at 02:42 PM
"Yeah, ChaCo, in 1786 Virginians were willing to go along with religious freedom, but it was a whole nother ball of wax for the previous 150 years..."
So, the circumstances changed, therefore we are free to amend?
Posted by: Ben Franklin | July 23, 2011 at 03:24 PM
Hey, Ben... exactly what transpired in 1786 that wasn't 'operable' in the prior years?
Hint: It might have a smidgeon to do with why they changed. And, there was no 'amendment' possible..
God, I hate gotcha commenting.
Posted by: Stephanie | July 23, 2011 at 03:30 PM
((Not if rationality and good are independent.))
if rationality is unpegged from good, then I have to accept that there is no moral distinction between the two following statements, nor any grounds to make moral distinction, and that both are equally rational:
murder is good
murder is evil
sure evil people rationalize their evil deeds, but their rationalizations (justifications) are not the same as being rational (of sound mind).
so how do you unpeg rationality from good?
Posted by: Chubby | July 23, 2011 at 03:31 PM
Charlie, of course I know other Freemasons. My next door neighbor, for one. Wasn't that the point?
Posted by: MarkO | July 23, 2011 at 03:38 PM
"God, I hate gotcha commenting."
Point taken. Just don't get drool on your blouse......
Posted by: Ben Franklin | July 23, 2011 at 03:47 PM
"DoT won't touch that. He thinks he's a bullshit artist, but he's just a bullshitter."
Those who are paying attention will note that, of all the forms of discrimination embodied in various immigration statutes over the years described by anduril, none is explicitly proscribed under the First Amendment. Neither the Establishment Clause nor the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment is in any way involved in any of the cases to which he refers.
On the other hand, he himself calls our attention to a case (Zadvydas) in which the Court, notwithstanding the "plenary power" afforded the political branches in immigration matters, held that the constitution does indeed constrain that power. In that case the Court struck down as unconstitutional a federal statute providing for the detention of an illegal alien awaiting deportation because of criminal activity.
Think carefully about that: the Court, on constitutional grounds, would not allow the government to detain an illegal immigrant criminal for an unreasonable length of time. Yet anduril asks us to believe that the Court would find no constitutional grounds for intervention in the case of a statute denying entry into the U.S. to 1.2 billion people on the basis of their religious faith.
Behold the mind of the zealot with tunnel vision.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | July 23, 2011 at 03:58 PM
No drool, just observation. Debate is not a series of gotchas but of elements that add to or detract from arguments previously made with well reasoned thought and consequences of the argument applied.
Gotcha commenting rarely includes either.
Posted by: Stephanie | July 23, 2011 at 04:07 PM
"No provision of the Constitution gives them a right to enter the US."
No provision of the constitution gave them a habeas corpus right, until the Supreme Court said that it did. It would not hesitate for an instant to strike down a cuckoo law of the kind this nutball proposes.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | July 23, 2011 at 05:18 PM
OT via FR. Looks like this guy is a nut. Probably a libertarian or something:
The offender let out the video and manifesto on the Web [Norway shooter]
Google Oversetter ^ | 7-23-11 | TV2 (Norway)
Posted on Sat Jul 23 2011 17:02:51 GMT-0500 (CDT) by Pharmboy
The video and the document should have been uploaded on the web a few hours before the bomb went off in downtown Oslo.
TV 2 know that the 32-year-old terror accused Oslo man has confessed to having published the material on the web. There are sources in the police confirming this to the TV 2
Anders Behring Breivik (32) Prior to the attacks, published a long manifesto and a video on the Internet, where he describes the attacks he was about to perform.
Both the video and the document is apparently published online on Friday 22 July - the day the attacks occurred.
"Marxist Hunter" It is about more than twelve minutes long video, which Behring Brevik compare themselves with Knights, and encourage a year-long war against Marxism and Islamism.
He has also published a manuscript of 1,500 pages which he explains very extreme political views. In addition, he describes in detail how an attack to be carried out. Everything from the use of the car bomb of the type of equipment to be used in an attack.
(Excerpt) Read more at translate.google.com ...
Posted by: anduril | July 23, 2011 at 06:32 PM
Hey, Clarice's wingnut claptrap hit the bullseye for once:
``I feel so sorry for the victims but I can't say people did not try to enlighten Norwegians to the scorpions to which they were giving a ride.''
Turns out the poisonous insects were wingnuts, but, hey, if you're right, you're right, unwitting or not...
Posted by: bunkerbuster | July 23, 2011 at 08:16 PM
bubu, let's wait and see. Was he alone? was someone planting this idea in his head? Was he driven to madness by the Norse nincompoopery about multiculturalism?
Posted by: Clarice | July 23, 2011 at 08:28 PM
((Turns out the poisonous insects were wingnuts, but, hey, if you're right, you're right, unwitting or not...))
wow, your expression of sorrow over the horrific events in Norway is quite underwhelming
and now here you are, perfectly on cue, making political points by dancing on the deaths of children
Posted by: Chubby | July 23, 2011 at 08:28 PM
According to a link on Drudge, it took the police 90 minutes to respond to the shootings. They probably had to go out and buy some guns first.
Posted by: Dave (in MA) | July 23, 2011 at 08:30 PM
Didn't Drudge link a story that said this guy bought huge amounts of fertilizer? I assume that was for his bomb? Since OKC you can't do that without attracting attention. What happened there?
Slow response? I'm guessing--don't know the timing--that the bomb was at least partly to distract attention, to get LE responding to Oslo, to give him time to maximize his killings at the camp.
Just guessin'.
Posted by: anduril | July 23, 2011 at 08:47 PM
--Hey, Clarice's wingnut claptrap hit the bullseye for once:--
--Turns out the poisonous insects were wingnuts--
Wow. Sickening conflation, even for boo-boo.
When can we expect your apologies for the Gulag, the Great Leap Forward and the present delights in North Korea, ding dong?
Posted by: Ignatz | July 23, 2011 at 08:54 PM
Anduril, Breivik operated a substantial vegetable farm, so no one would have paid any attention to his buying ammonium nitrate fertilizer.
Posted by: Mark Folkestad | July 23, 2011 at 09:03 PM