Norwegian Terrorist Predicts, “Europe Soon Will Burn Once Again”

4894-Anders_Behring_Breivik_(Facebook_portrait_in_suit).jpg

by Tina Grazier

Two days ago 92 people were murdered in Norway, most of them children, in a despicable act of terrorism..There were two separate attacks, one was a bombing attack on a government building and the second a shooting spree aimed children attending camp. The confessed suspect, Anders Behring Breivik, was heavily influenced by his concerns that a combination of increasing radical Muslimism coupled with Marxist multiculturalism would destroy the Judeo/Christian cultures of his country and all of Europe. He was convinced that a conflict of cultures would eventually result in inflamed fighting and chaos.

Information about his background gleaned from his “manifesto”, posted online, includes details about his broken family and teen encounters with Muslim gangs:

‘Even at that time, the Muslim gangs were very dominating in Oslo East and in inner city Oslo. They even arranged “raids” in Oslo West occasionally, subduing the native youths (kuffars) and collecting Jizya from them (in the form of cell phones, cash, sunglasses etc).

‘I remember they systematically harassed, robbed and beat ethnic Norwegian youngsters who were unfortunate enough to not have the right affiliations.

‘Muslim youths called the ethnic Norwegians “poteter” (potatoes, a derogatory term used by Muslims to describe ethnic Norwegians). ‘These people occasionally raped the so called “potato whores”.’

So far the Norwegian authorities aren’t rushing to claim this man has psycological problems stemming from his childhood. It is also worth noting that 21 years in prison is the maximum penalty he will get if found guilty of these murderous attacks. Tolerance and compassion, it seems, will save even him from receiving a death penalty.

4893-norway-attacks-oslo-explosion2011.jpg

CBS News is reporting that Breivik hoped his acts would inspire others:

“Any single patriot who wants to establish a cell and begin action can do so, and thus becomes a part of the organisation,” he wrote.

I have yet to read anything that offers a clue as to what motivated this man to make the radical leap from concerned or worried citizen to extreme terrorist. His writings make reference to a possible “Knights Templar” group but his attorney, Geir Lippestad, said his client wrote the manifesto alone, an indication that he acted alone in the attacks. CBS reports that parts of the manifesto seem to have been taken from the writings of the American Unibomber, Ted Kaczinsky.

I find it interesting that his victims have not been identified by either religion or race in reports I’ve read. I would think that if this man wished to strike back at Muslim extremists he would have targeted Muslims he suspected as having extreme views. As it is, it appears he may have attempted to target those he thought represented multiculturalism instead. If that is the case, what, pray tell, would have motivated him to murder innocent children rather than adults?

When push comes to shove people sometimes do incredibly stupid things even in tolerant societies that respect and live by the rule of law. Western societies are being challenged to find ways to deal with this problem and answers don’t come easily. Sadly, I tend to share this horrid man’s concerns that one day, in the not too distant future, even greater push will come to shove and a massive conflict will inevitably erupt in Europe. Official voices in London and elsewhere affirm these concerns:

Citing the WikiLeaks cables, the Guardian newspaper last week reported that the future U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron told an American official in April 2009 that the former Labour government had “let in a lot of crazies and did not wake up early enough” to the danger posed by Muslim extremists.

Danger is a strong word but it describes quite succinctly the insidiousness of the threat that Islamists pose to Europeans and the West. The one difference that might make some difference in America is our gun laws. If push comes to shove here, Americans will already be armed and our enemies know this. It is, in fact, a testament to Western tolerance and our inclusive culture that this type of extreme reactionary violence hasn’t occurred with greater frequency in America. Live and let live has been a large part of our culture, would that our enemies felt the same.

May God bless and comfort the families of the victims in Norway.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

19 Responses to Norwegian Terrorist Predicts, “Europe Soon Will Burn Once Again”

  1. Post Scripts says:

    This is a great article Tina and thank you for writing it. It needed to be said.

    You just know the far left with their Timothy McVey argument that rightwing nut jobs are every bit the same threat to us as the Muslims nut jobs has just gained a new example. We’re going to hear it over and over, ad nauseum.

  2. Toby says:

    How much comfort can the families have knowing this evil man will be a free man in 21 years? This guy should be dead right now.

  3. Libby says:

    I expect it is upsetting, having your political philosophy exposed, repeatedly, for the promulgator of sicko violence that it is, but …

    “Sadly, I tend to share this horrid man’s concerns that one day, in the not too distant future, even greater push will come to shove and a massive conflict will inevitably erupt in Europe.”

    There it is.

    And everybody’s concern with the 21-year max likewise exposes a greater concern with vengence that with justice. The fact is, Norway’s recidivism rate is less than half ours. Who’s to say the sicko won’t, during the course of the 21 years … embrace Islam?

    Giggle.

  4. Laughing says:

    Europe will burn. Proabaly the same thing will happen here as well.
    Your last paragraph is the clue.
    “Danger . . . describes quite succinctly the insidiousness of the threat that Islamists pose to Europeans and the West.”
    In a story about what ignorance has caused someone to do, you write of the “danger” of Islam.
    This fellow did not come with extreme right wing views on his own. He has been reading extreme right wing blogs and websites. Apparently he took them seriously enough to do something about it.
    Writing about the “danger” of Islam will only provoke more of the same reaction.
    Look, I know you are only joking, but some dumb individual may take you seriously, as this fellow did in Norway. In fear of Muslims, one of your readers could resort to violence.
    Please be more careful of what you say.
    Thank you

  5. Tina says:

    Libby: “I expect it is upsetting, having your political philosophy exposed…”

    By this logic your own political philosophy is responsible for the PLO.

    Libby, its time for all of us to be adult about this. It’s time to expose and differentiate between extreme views that openly call for the murder, destruction, or oppression of others through violence or through the political process and those who call for freedom and living under a rule of law that oppresses no one. It’s time to recognize lone wolf psycho’s for what they are rather than using them to condemn and demean people who express concerns and seek solutions.

    “There it is.”

    The alternative to exposing end defeating people with designs on taking your freedom is to surrendewr to them…are you really certain that is what you will do if push comes to shove? You will either become a practicing Muslim or pay the tax and wear the garb and play by the extreme rules? You who think it’s your job to legislate how everyone should live? I don’t think so.

    “And everybody’s concern with the 21-year max likewise exposes a greater concern with vengence that with justice.”

    How so? How do you make a destinction just distinction between this premeditated mass murder and other types of murder if not through severity of consequence? the man will be eliganle for weekend leaves within seven years. That’s justice for the people whose chilren were slaughtered by this nutbag?

    “The fact is, Norway’s recidivism rate is less than half ours.”

    And why not? The social services network will care for them forever.

    “Who’s to say the sicko won’t, during the course of the 21 years … embrace Islam?”

    What brand? In America it is more likely they would embrace the terrorist brand. Are you adult enough to recognize that or are you still playing at this like a child…

    “Giggle.”

    Never mind…you’ve already answered that one.

  6. Tina says:

    Laughing: “In a story about what ignorance has caused someone to do, you write of the “danger” of Islam.”

    No…I warn of the danger of the Islamist. This is a person/organization that has the express intent of supplanting our constitution and government with Sharia. If you were not insisting on being such an adolescent, stuck in some mythical Kumbaya nirvana, you would be able to make the distinction.

    “This fellow did not come with extreme right wing views on his own. He has been reading extreme right wing blogs and websites. Apparently he took them seriously enough to do something about it.”

    Just like any mentally disturbed Psycho nutjob would…Ted Kaczinsky was also his mentor for instance!

    the alternative you seek but do not speak is restricted, controlled speech. Are you ready to support that notion?

    Once again an adolescent blames the messenger instead of the perp who has distorted the message for his own psychotic purposes.

    If you were consistant you would take your twisted objections to heart and speak out in like fashion against all Muslims; you would condemn all Muslims for the acts of the terror organizations and their supporters.

    All of this nonesense for some silly idea that silence and tolerance will keep bad people from committing bad deeds…as I said, a childs view.

    “Please be more careful of what you say.”

    Please…grow up and be more conscious before you speak (write).

    “Thank you”

    No…thank you. I couldn’t have exposed the lunacy of liberal thought better myself.

  7. Libby says:

    “All of this nonesense for some silly idea that silence and tolerance will keep bad people from committing bad deeds ….”

    On the contrary, there is no keeping wicked people from doing wicked things. It’s how you react to the situation that determines whether you are running an enlightened shop or not.

    The Norwegians have had a jolt, but I doubt they are going to abandon their principles (or their very enlightened, prosperous and productive 20% recidivism rate) over it.

    And it makes ya squirm, don’t it?

  8. Libby says:

    “By this logic your own political philosophy is responsible for the PLO.”

    Alas no. By your illogic is how we get to this. The PLO is many things, but I don’t think you can call it a “leftist” organization, no.

    What we’ve got in Mr. Breivik is a fella blowing people up cause they do not believe what he believes. Which, as far as I’m concerned, puts the this radical Christian and the radical Muslims squarely in the same sicko category.

    And your insistence on tarring the whole of Islam with the “radical” brush sends you off to keep Mr. Breivik company. So I’d give the matter more thought.

  9. Chris says:

    Tina: “Danger is a strong word but it describes quite succinctly the insidiousness of the threat that Islamists pose to Europeans and the West. The one difference that might make some difference in America is our gun laws. If push comes to shove here, Americans will already be armed and our enemies know this. It is, in fact, a testament to Western tolerance and our inclusive culture that this type of extreme reactionary violence hasn’t occurred with greater frequency in America. Live and let live has been a large part of our culture, would that our enemies felt the same.”

    I almost can’t believe you can be this tone-deaf. A man just committed an act of extreme violence because of his paranoid delusions, and here you are encouraging others to pick up a gun in preparation of such delusions coming true.

    They won’t come true, by the way. Yes, radical Islamists have committed a huge number of attacks and murdered a horrific number of people. I am in no way trying to diminish this fact. However, the “insidious” threat you seem to be referring to is their goal of establishing world domination. This doesn’t stand a chance in hell of ever being realized. With every terrorist attack these monsters commit, their sick ideology is further marginalized and discredited. Countries where oppression and religious persecution have reigned supreme are seeing huge uprisings. Insiders who once served at the right hands of our most brutal modern dictators are now finding themselves having to paint themselves as moderates in order to appease the public. Some of these revolutions have been more successful than others so far, but in the end, what man wants is freedom, and that is the direction I see the world headed in. Maybe that makes me a naive idealist, but that’s preferable to sharing any kind of worldview with this sociopath.

  10. Tina says:

    Libby: “but I doubt they are going to abandon their principles (or their very enlightened, prosperous and productive 20% recidivism rate) over it.

    And it makes ya squirm, don’t it?”

    Actually, Libby I’m like a cat…it just made me curious. Some research and thought bring interesting ideas, statistics and differences that add to your shakey comparison to America.

    Norway’s big beautiful ultra humane prison (resort) with the low recidivism rate has not been operating long so its track record over time has not been established. More importantly, it does not house truly dangerous criminals. Those people are housed in other prisons where their sentencing can be increased by five years indefinitely (like forever)

    (In America I believe this prison might make a good model for a juvinile high school fascilities for difficult/soft crime students but I’d add a paternal dose of military style discipline to the soft maternal approach they take. Problem: this fascility is very expensive; I’ll get into taxes later)

    Norway is just slightly larger than the state of New Mexico. America not only has a much larger size and population but also much greater diversity. The Norwegian culture has not been challenged to as great a degree with differences that can spark animosity and crime. (The influx of foreigners has increased in recent years so that dynamic is rapidly changing.) Except for the government control of a few industries they are more business friendly than we are…much easier to become an entrepreneur in Norway due to less regulation.

    My next thoughts were about the adverse effect that the (progressive) welfare state has had on families in the US, particularly poor families in poor communities. A study in 1995 by CATO:

    http://www.cato.org/testimony/ct-wc67.html

    Last year, the Maryland NAACP released a report concluding that “the ready access to a lifetime of welfare and free social service programs is a major contributory factor to the crime problems we face today.”(1) Their conclusion appears to be confirmed by academic research. For example, research by Dr. June O’Neill’s and Anne Hill for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services showed that a 50 percent increase in the monthly value of combined AFDC and food stamp benefits led to a 117 percent increase in the crime rate among young black men.(2)

    A similar study by Heritage found the following contributed to high crime rates:

    Over the past thirty years, the rise in violent crime parallels the rise in families abandoned by fathers.

    And conversely they found:

    Neighborhoods with a high degree of religious practice are not high-crime neighborhoods.

    Even in high-crime inner-city neighborhoods, well over 90 percent of children from safe, stable homes do not become delinquents. By contrast only 10 percent of children from unsafe, unstable homes in these neighborhoods avoid crime.

    Many progressives not only do not believe in God they continually disparage and malign the Christian religion which was once a stabilizing factor in our poor communities (still are for many blacks and hispanics and they are more likely to be stable adult citizens> Progressives are also more likely to be super tolerant of “free love” and drug use, both of which undermine values that would create more healthy productive livestyles (and fewer criminals).

    So one could make the case that progressivism in America has undermined the values that once held this countries citizens in better stead and has, directly or indirectly contributed to our crime problems, including recidivism rates. (You guys can’t have it both ways)

    Finally I found an interesting comment as I serfed around from a Norwegian that included the following:

    http://www.dvorak.org/blog/2010/05/10/a-better-way-to-do-prisons/

    This particular prison has caused enormous uproar in Norway. Treating criminals serving time better than hard working people as housing goes has not gone down well. The money they spent on this hotel is ridiculous. Judging from the media exposure a majority think this i money very badly spent. ** Norway is still not Venezuela but heading in that direction without a self proclaimed lunatic leader taking over. Economically the country is energy and energy related; oil production and metals refineries (until they move out too). It is easy to have a welfare state when you pump money out of the ground, doing nothing. The dumbing of the population is frightening, the educational system is disintegrating while everybody, like it or not, has to do 12 years in school. The unemployment is correctly the official 3 -4 % however, count in all those hidden inside social benefits and the number is really bad +10% at least. On top of that, a relatively expansive immigration adds to the tension, crime rates escalating and safe guarded by a police with a clearing ratio of 5% of the crimes. Norway is a smorgasbord for Batlic and Russian crime gangs.
    More than 50% of the population is working for the central or local government, while 30% are school children, people on social benefit and retired people, leaving 20% to provide some sort of added value to society. ** it may seem rosy red on the surface, and in official statistics, but you dig just a little bit and it is rotten to the core. A non-sustainable society sucking on the straw of easy money as in oil until it stops. then Norway goes back to be the poorest country in Europe as it was in the late 1800s ** And taxes of course. Yes we love taxes; start with VAT of 25% on everything you buy and then income tax hitting 50% quicklytopping out at about 60%. And toll roads USD 4 per pass to go in out of Oslo And much more

    As the man said it all looks so good on the outside looking in…

    “Alas no.”

    I know those people are all “right wing”…thats why the radical Muslims loved Hitler so much and that’s why people like Hillary Clinton, William Ayers and a whole raft of lefties in America suck up and make friends with them…because they are so “right wing”. That’s why groups that have funded terrorists activities are now regularly courted by progressives in America.

    “I don’t think you can call it a “leftist” organization, no.”

    I didn’t call it a leftist organization. what I said is that blaming my ideology, my Christian conservatism, for the behavior and actions of this man would be like me blaming you and your ideology for the actions of the PLO. Many leftists openly support terror organizations to help the Palestinians…should you be held responsible for the bombings in Israel?

    “What we’ve got in Mr. Breivik is a fella blowing people up cause they do not believe what he believes. Which, as far as I’m concerned, puts the this radical Christian and the radical Muslims squarely in the same sicko category.”

    Mr Breivik has joined the Muslims in choosing terrorism as a means to an end. Mr. Breivik does not have any Biblical principles upon which he bases his choice…nor any law that requires him to subdue and takeover the world. Your prejudice and bias sees something there that does not exist, making you a complete jerk…should make you squirm but sadly it doesn’t.

    “And your insistence on tarring the whole of Islam with the “radical” brush sends you off to keep Mr. Breivik company.”

    Libby I have never done that. I have always made the distintion between those who have modernized and those who choose the radical path. What I haven’t been willing to do is pretend that there isn’t an element of that radical group who believes in soft jihad…using a countries laws and systems, working from within, to supplant that system and establish a caliphate ruled by sharia. Ypou are welcome to ignore the fact that these people exist and are just as serious as those who choose violent jihad…its still a free country. What you nare not free to do without rebuttal is accuse me of something for whi9ch I am nbot guilty…hence this long reply.

    “So I’d give the matter more thought.”

    I won’t ask the same of you; you’ve already shown a stubborn prejudice and bigotry that precludes actual honesty or thought.

  11. Tina says:

    Chris: I almost can’t believe you can be this tone-deaf. A man just committed an act of extreme violence because of his paranoid delusions, and here you are encouraging others to pick up a gun in preparation of such delusions coming true.

    How the hell do you think wars start, Chris? How many times since WWII have people said that the German people should have done something when they saw their Jewish neighbors being carted away, never to be seen again? How long did it take free nations to begin to react to the intentions, methods, and actual invasions of Hitler? Appeasement and complacency, denial in the midst of social pressures, and unresolved differences all added up, in the end, to world war. Heres something an Austrian woman wrote about her birth country, Austria, prior to the war:

    http://www.examiner.com/christianity-culture-in-fort-worth/america-truly-is-the-greatest-country-the-world-don-t-let-freedom-slip-away

    Totalitarianism didnt come quickly, it took 5 years from 1938 until 1943, to realize full dictatorship in Austria . Had it happened overnight, my countrymen would have fought to the last breath. Instead, we had creeping gradualism. Now, our only weapons were broom handles. The whole idea sounds almost unbelievable that the state, little by little eroded our freedom.

    I can’t find a reference but there is also the warning issued by someone at Tianimen Square: Tell the Americans, don’t give up your guns.

    Creeping gradualism; its happened before, Chris. It can happen again. Acknowledging that Muslims know Americans are armed does not encourage anyone to commit an act of violence! It might serve to remind that we Americans value our heritage, our Western values and our freedom and we are wiling to defend them!

    If Im trying to encourage anything, Im trying to encourage the American people to wake up and acknowledge the very real problems that face us. And frankly Im getting pretty sick of the moral equivalence game that you on the left play in order to avoid looking at the uncomfortable truth that a fairly large number of committed dangerous Muslimists are dedicated to one horrendous goaljust as Hitler was, and for a similar reason…and if we don’t face it squarely it could lead to all out war.

    However, the “insidious” threat you seem to be referring to is their goal of establishing world domination. This doesn’t stand a chance in hell of ever being realized.

    You are certain of that are you? Prior to WWII no one could imagine that seven million people would die in Hitlers ovens, but Id expect this attitude since the only threat you seem capable of recognizing is the one that comes when things suddenly blow up. You will not see or recognize the insidious plot, the soft form of jihad, now favored by many Muslims radicals; it will occur gradually unless you are willing to face it squarely now.

    in the end, what man wants is freedom

    I agree with this statementit is what GWB believed when he made the decision to invade Iraq to establish a democracy in the heart of the ME as part of Americas response to terror. It was the position Reagan took when he faced down the soviets.

    However appeasement and complacency are not avenues to take if your goal is to discourage radicals and encourage freedom, in fact appeasement and complacency encourages radicals. Peace through strength has proven to work and that requires wide-eyed acknowledgement ofnamingthe threat. It requires a standing firmly and clearly in opposition.

    Progressives seem to prefer to make fellow Americans who are not afraid to name and disclose the radical insidious threat their enemy and they do it in a monstrous waycreating a moral equivalent where none exists.

    but that’s preferable to sharing any kind of worldview with this sociopath.

    What person shares his world view? If he is truly a sociopath his world view wont resemble anything any sane person would share. The progressive press has made him a “radical Chritian” to try to establish the moral equivalence that supports their need to appease. Yet the man did not attend church and has no Biblical references to support his murderous acts, nor does he have Chritian nations willing to fund and support murderous or insidious plots. His notions about the Knights Templar create a picture of a man lost in delusion and romantic fantasy rather than cold reality.

    The lefts historical answer to all threats to freedom has been appeasement. What that means is that we must bend to include and accommodate. It isnt enough to be welcoming and friendly; we must bend!

    http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/content/beyond-minarets-europes-growing-problem

    The overarching challenge for European governments is to shift the focus from bans and restrictions on Islam and Muslims and instead try to forge a cohesive and inclusive society where all citizens including the continent’s Muslims feel at home. Building belonging, accommodation and acceptance, however, remain much too low on the agenda of most European Union governments.

    First of all bans and restrictions have come about following the failure by Muslimists to assimilate. It comes on the heels of a concerted effort on their part to take over and impose different cultural mores on local citizens (as some have in the streets in France). The learned authors of this piece seem to be (willfully?) ignorant of the progression of these things.

    Secondly, these people have chosen to come to a different country; why shouldnt they come expecting to bend and to adopt to their new countrys mores and laws? Why have they come if not to embrace the new country? Why not remain in their country of origin where they can practice their religion and live according to sharia amongst people who share their mores, views, and heritage.

    The idea that we must accommodate plays right into the hands of those who seek to undermine our country and our Western culture…it would behoove us to stand firm regarding the things that support our freedoms…sharia isn’t one of them to the degree that it supplants our heritage, our laws, and our social mores.

  12. Laughing says:

    “Laughing: “In a story about what ignorance has caused someone to do, you write of the “danger” of Islam.”

    Tina: “Once again an adolescent blames the messenger instead of the perp who has distorted the message for his own psychotic purposes.”

    You are not “the messenger.” You are the perp who is actually distorting the message for your own psychotic purposes. You are telling people to ‘pick up guns’ so we can shoot it out with ’em. You are a paranoid lunatic!
    There is not the threat you mention.
    This is why I will ask you again to please remove this hateful message.

    Thank you.

  13. Laughing says:

    I do believe Tina should be held in detention to keep our Muslim friends safe.
    She is paranoid.
    She is armed.
    She is a danger to society.

  14. Toby says:

    One thing that is being missed here is the difference between a European conservative and a United States conservative. In their eyes we would be moderates. You talk about people having skin in the game Europeans have had skin in the game for a thousand years. In the past 100 years they have had two major wars to overcome and the threat of the USSR. That is going to give the people of Europe a perspective those of us in the US can not possibly have. Anyway I am tired and going to take a nap.

  15. Tina says:

    Laughing: “you write of the “danger” of Islam.”

    Let’s try this another way, I don’t warn of the danger of Islam. Your comprehension skills are being compromised by your own prejudice. I warn of the danger of appeasing Islamists…there is a difference! I recognize the difference. Apologists like you behave as if all Muslims are the same…innocent…they are not all innocent! If you cannot name an enemy you cannot deal with it.

    No…I was saying that the Islamists can afford to be bold in other countries where gun laws prevent citizens from self protection…I was saying they know Americans have the right to bear arms and thus protect themselves. Once again your own prejudice, and bad attitude toward me, colored your perception and understanding.

    “There is not the threat you mention.”

    There is both the threat I mention and the threat of violent jihad from within. The following is from a national security study:

    http://shariahthethreat.org/

    This brief examination of American principles establishes that American principles are principles of liberty are rooted in mutual toleration. It follows that, in the United States, liberty was never intended to tolerate the intolerant and its citizens were never intended to tolerate totalitarian doctrines. Put differently, intolerant, totalitarian doctrines are in direct conflict with the stated purpose of American government to secure these rights [endowed by their Creator].

    Even a fairly superficial reading of the Quran and other primary source documents of shariah reveals that it is a political-military-legal doctrine, rather than a religion as defined by the American standards mentioned above. The prominent Islamic scholar Abdul Mawdudi concurs with this assessment, saying: But the truth is that Islam is not the name of a Religion, nor is Muslim the title of a Nation. In reality, Islam is a revolutionary ideology and program which seeks to alter the social order of the whole world and rebuild it in conformity with its own tenets and ideals.

    Shariah is, moreover, a doctrine that mandates the rule of Allah over all aspects of society. Specifically, in contrastand fundamentally at oddswith the Virginia Statute for Religious Liberty, shariah holds that God did not create the mind free, but in subservience to the will of Allah (as detailed in shariah). The condition of human beings is submission to Allah, not freedom.

    Under successive presidencies, the United States has failed to understand, let alone counter successfully, the threat posed to its constitutional form of government and free society by shariah. In the past, such failures were reckless. Today, they are intolerable.

    The preceding pages document shariahs true supremacist and totalitarian character. They make clear its incompatibility with the Constitution as the only source of law for this country. As we have seen, shariah explicitly seeks to replace representative governance with an Islamic state, to destroy sovereign and national polities with a global caliphate.

    If shariah is thus viewed as an alien legal system hostile to and in contravention of the U.S. Constitution, and as one which dictates both violent and non-violent means to a capable audience ready to act imminently, then logically, those who seek to establish shariah in Americawhether by violent means or by stealthcan be said to be engaged in criminal sedition, not the protected practice of a religion.

    And a further sampling of the recommendations in the report reflect the seriousness of the threat we face from an ideology that has covertly permeated our government institutions.

    While detailed recommendations for adopting a more prudential and effective strategy for surviving shariahs onslaught are beyond the scope of this study, several policy and programmatic changes are clearly in order. These include:

    U.S. policy-makers, financiers, businessmen, judges, journalists, community leaders and the public at large must be equipped with an accurate understanding of the nature of shariah and the necessity of keeping America shariah-free. At a minimum, this will entail resistingrather than acquiescing tothe concerted efforts now being made to allow that alien and barbaric legal code to become established in this country as an alternate, parallel system to the Constitution and the laws enacted pursuant to it. Arguably, this is already in effect for those who have taken an oath to support and defend the Constitution, because the requirement is subsumed in that oath.

    U.S. government agencies and organizations should cease their outreach to Muslim communities through Muslim Brotherhood fronts whose mission is to destroy our country from within as such practices are both reckless and counterproductive. Indeed, these activities serve to legitimate, protect and expand the influence of our enemies. They conduce to no successful legal outcome that cannot be better advanced via aggressive prosecution of terrorists, terror-funders and other lawbreakers. It also discourages patriotic Muslims from providing actual assistance to the U.S. government lest they be marked for ostracism or worse by the Brothers and other shariah-adherent members of their communities.

    In keeping with Article VI of the Constitution, extend bans currently in effect that bar members of hate groups such as the Ku Klux Klan from holding positions of trust in federal, state, or local governments or the armed forces of the United States to those who espouse or support shariah. Instead, every effort should be made to identify and empower Muslims who are willing publicly to denounce shariah. (further recomendations follow)

    The presidents own defense department reported this last year:

    http://www.voanews.com/english/news/usa/FBI-Chief-Al-Qaida-Unwavering-in-Efforts-to-Attack-US-103537289.html

    Top Obama administration officials told a Senate panel Wednesday that the threat of terrorism is increasingly diverse and often comes in the form of homegrown extremists based in the United States. The officials say terrorists now appear to be less focused on spectacular attacks and more on smaller-scale strikes. ** Department of Homeland Security Director Janet Napolitano agreed the threat of terrorism is becoming more diverse, making it even more difficult to detect and prevent attacks. “It is diversifying in terms of sources, it is diversifying in terms of tactics, it is diversifying in terms of the target being considered,” said Janet Napolitano. ** Homeland Security Committee Chairman Joseph Lieberman, a Connecticut independent Democrat pointed out that there was a marked increase last year in terrorist attacks and attempted attacks on the United States by Islamic extremists, including the shooting rampage at Fort Hood by Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan that left 13 people dead and 43 injured.

    You are wrong no matter how you look at it.

    “This is why I will ask you again to please remove this hateful message.”

    Sorry…you are obviously too imature to face this threat squarely. Please take a flying leap. Thank you.

    “I do believe Tina should be held in detention to keep our Muslim friends safe. She is paranoid.”

    Our Muslim FRIENDS are as threatened by Islamists as any other American…shame on you for refusing to do whatever it takes to protect them.

    “She is armed.”

    I have never shot a weapon and I don’t personally own one. You are a prisoner to your own prejudice, bias, and attitude…get some help!

    “She is a danger to society.”

    Seriously…you need help.

  16. Tina says:

    Toby: “One thing that is being missed here is the difference between a European conservative and a United States conservative.”

    Another is the difference between a Christian and a social christian:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Christian

    Christian socialism generally refers to those on the Christian left whose politics are both Christian and socialist and who see these two philosophies as being interrelated. This category can include Liberation theology and the doctrine of the social gospel. The term “Christian Socialism” is used in this sense by organizations such as the Christian Socialist Movement (CSM).

    Seems this guy might have more in common with American liberal progressives (and our president) than he does with Christians or conservatives.

  17. Quentin Colgan says:

    “Seems this guy might have more in common with American liberal progressives (and our president) than he does with Christians or conservatives.”

    Lemme see.
    Claims to be a Christian but believes in violence to achieve his ends.
    Which group in America claims to be Christian yet has no hesitation acting unChristian??
    Sound like an extremist TEAbagger!

    The leftists don’t act like Christians to be sure! But, they never claimed to be Godly!!!
    The point is: ANY extremist conservative needs to be watched!!

  18. Post Scripts says:

    Oh so now you are in favor of big brother watching us, maybe you would like us to get micro chips embedded to make it easier to track us?

  19. Tina says:

    Breivick said in his manifesto that he is not religious, has doubts about God’s existence, does not pray, but does assert the primacy of Europe’s “Christian culture” as well as his own pagan Nordic culture.

    On Charles Darwin: “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.”

    He also admitted he could find no support within either the Catholic or Protestant churches for his violent ideas.

    I don’t know any Christians or TPers that believe in violence to achieve “their ends”. The only similarity to Tea Partyers is an expressed desire to preserve the culture. What’s wrong with that? Isn’t that what assimilation is about?

    Q: “The leftists don’t act like Christians to be sure!”

    President Obama spent 20 years in a church that preaches Liberation theology. As long as you’re making asinine comparisons you might as well say this dirtbag is just like Obama. From wikipedia:

    Christian socialism generally refers to those on the Christian left whose politics are both Christian and socialist and who see these two philosophies as being interrelated. This category can include Liberation theology and the doctrine of the social gospel.

Comments are closed.