Breivik defiant as massacre trial opens in Norway

World Apr. 17, 2012 - 06:29AM JST ( 32 )

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

Order by Time Order by Popularity

32 Comments

0

yabitsApr. 17, 2012 - 11:06AM JST

“I acknowledge the acts, but not criminal guilt, and I claim legitimate defense,” the 33-year-old, who is accused of “acts of terror,” told the court at the start of his trial.

Legitimate defense? (Where does he think he is? Florida?)

This is so very typical of the right-wing: Attack liberals and then pretend that you're the victim. Only this guy literally attacked them.
1

Ben JackApr. 17, 2012 - 11:38AM JST

This is so very typical of the right-wing:

This loon has nothing to do with right or left wing. He is a murderer making excuses for his behavior.
1

yabitsApr. 17, 2012 - 11:54AM JST

This loon has nothing to do with right or left wing. He is a murderer making excuses for his behavior.

That can't be right. He purposely and carefully attacked government buildings and a youth camp that was associated with a political faction. The attacks were political in nature.

Four court-appointed psychiatrists sitting in the courtroom—who have drawn two contradictory conclusions about whether he is sane—observed Breivik to monitor his reactions.

The man is 33 years old. He has lived long enough to form opinions about what is right and what is wrong, about who his enemies are, and where his politics lie. To many, he might seem to be a person who was crazy all of his life and just suddenly went over the edge. That would be too easy and flies in the face of what is known about him.

Nevertheless, like a person immersing himself in the Manson Family, it is quite possible that a constant and steady diet of far right-wing hatred and diatribes against "multi-culturalism" and Islam would have a natural affect of leading a guy like Breivik to do what he did. More than a few far right-wingers in Europe consider him to be a kind of hero.
0

SuperLibApr. 17, 2012 - 12:23PM JST

I think Yabits is correct. Killing 56 children is definitely the work of a sane man.
0

Ben JackApr. 17, 2012 - 12:32PM JST

The attacks were political in nature.

The politics of the crazy. Yes, he excuses his murders with political reasons. However, reasonable people of any political persuasioni should see through it. I have met a lot of conservatives and not one would ever murder anyone.

The man is 33 years old.

There are lots of abnormal people who are older than this.

More than a few far right-wingers in Europe consider him to be a kind of hero.

In fact, they are probably in this group.

Respectfully, even if he was judged 'sane' by some, it merely means he 'knew' what he was doing. However, he believes what he did was right. That means he really cannot tell the difference between right and wrong. This leads me to the more logical conclusion that he is actually not sane.

I disagree with comparing this evil murderer with average people with different political opinions. It is like comparing an al-quaeda terrorist with an average muslim.
0

nandakandamandaApr. 17, 2012 - 12:54PM JST

If he is a member of the Knights Templar (which does not exist, according to the prosecution) what does that make him?
0

lostrune2Apr. 17, 2012 - 07:35PM JST

Breivik is against the liberalism of Europe.
0

NambyPambyApr. 17, 2012 - 07:59PM JST

I have met a lot of conservatives and not one would ever murder anyone.

But so many spout so much hate they seem to be praying for a cuss like Breivik to stand up and do it for them.

How many times have we heard Islam this and Islam that? How many times have we heard the us against them arguments, followed by the idea that you are with us or against us? How many times have we heard pleas for war, bombs and death for our enemies, and the death penalty for criminals? Support for gun culture and the need for violent self defense ala stand your ground laws, etc. etc. It was not people on the left making those arguments.

Breivik might not have done 100 percent precisely what so many on the right have pined for. For example, some my object because of the ages of the victims. But if I put all those typical and common righ of center arguments in a meat grinder I am pretty sure the resulting ground rhetoric would be at least an 80 percent match to Breiviks massacre and diatribes spewed in court.
0

Ben JackApr. 18, 2012 - 10:45AM JST

Comparing Breivik to average conservatives is akin to comparing the Unabomber to average liberals. It only adds hate speak. Breivik only represents the world of the crazy.
0

yabitsApr. 19, 2012 - 12:09PM JST

Comparing Breivik to average conservatives

I would compare Breivik to Ted Nugent.
0

Lieberman2012Apr. 19, 2012 - 06:55PM JST

I would compare Breivik to Ted Nugent.

Nah, the despicable neo-segregationist Louis Farrakhan would be the closest equivalent we have in America.
0

yabitsApr. 19, 2012 - 07:43PM JST

Louis Farrakhan would be the closest equivalent we have in America.

Farrakhan, a Muslim, is the equivalent to Breivik, an extreme right-wing anti-Muslim? Both do have their own version of extremely conservative nationalism in common. They both hate liberalism too. But Farrakhan has not called out for killing liberals as Breivik and Nugent have. Nugent's prediction of where he'll be in a year, more closely matches Breivik's fate.
0

yabitsApr. 19, 2012 - 10:28PM JST

Yeah, Breivik saw northern Europe as one big battlefield. At his trial today, it was revealed he wanted to decapitate Norway's prime minister.

Breivik and Nugent: I don't know who is channeling whom. "Ride out on the battlefield and chop off some heads!"
0

Ben JackApr. 20, 2012 - 07:42AM JST

I would compare Breivik to Ted Nugent.

Why? Did you see the point of my comparison? Breivik and the Unabomber represent the extremes of the right and left. They do not represent the right or left. That was my point. Nugent? Seems like a person on the road to losing it. However, you ignore my point that there are extremists of all kinds and they do not represent the norm. Breivik is one of these.
0

Ben JackApr. 20, 2012 - 07:48AM JST

By the way, Ted Nugent claims his statements were metaphors. Neither Breivik nor the Unabomber make such claims. Breivik is an extremist, as is the Unabomber and, again, do not represent mainstream society either on the right or the left.
0

yabitsApr. 20, 2012 - 07:55AM JST

Why? Did you see the point of my comparison? Breivik and the Unabomber represent the extremes of the right and left.

The "extreme left" represents a complete departure from liberalism. Extremism is the antithesis of liberalism.

Unlike the conservative strain which once declared "Extremism in the pursuit of liberty is not a vice," liberals reject all forms of extremism. This is important because we have one major political philosophy -- the conservatives -- who are willing to accept extreme measures to advance their goals.

So while Breivik waxes nostalgic about Joe McCarthy, we have to remember just who McCarthy was. (See Alan West.) You would think it was amazing that the people who claim to "love America" would be so willing to apologize for and hobnob with a guy who covered himself in his own excrement in order to avoid service in Vietnam. Yeah, that's Nugent. It goes to show how much some people are willing to overlook when the ideology fits.
0

Ben JackApr. 20, 2012 - 08:27AM JST

No, I am sorry. No matter how much you try to convince yourself. There is no denying Breivik no more represents the average conservative anymore than the Unabomber represents the average liberal. There are extremes on the left and right. They don't think they are extreme. They think they are correct. They are wrong. In this case, I believe you are, too. Claiming Breivik represents averageconservatives is incorrect. It just is.

Nugent? As I said, I think he is losing it. But, he has backed off his recent statements. Breivik and the Unabomber have not. Big, big difference there.
0

yabitsApr. 20, 2012 - 08:42AM JST

Claiming Breivik represents averageconservatives is incorrect. It just is.

Where did I "claim" that Breivik represents the "average conservative?" That was something you concocted yourself.

I distinguish the "right wing" from the traditional Eisenhower-moderate conservative -- a truly rare and endangered species. Also different from the "average conservative" is the ultra-conservative nationalist of the type that people like Breivik, Tim McVeigh, and others of that ilk represent. Calling them all "crazy" is what is not very helpful since the more that conservatism has swung towards the extreme, the more that kind of widespread malignancy is taking hold.
0

Ben JackApr. 20, 2012 - 01:07PM JST

Where did I "claim" that Breivik represents the "average conservative?"

Right here above in this discussion:

This is so very typical of the right-wing:

You made absolutely no distinction. You painted them all with the same brush. In most of your postings here, you make no distinction between what you call right wing and what you call conservative. I found it unhelpful to the discussion
0

Ben JackApr. 20, 2012 - 01:17PM JST

I just checked and one of the first to come up in a search of this case was when on July 25th 2011 you used right wing and conservative interchangeably. You never talked about extremes and you seemed to be claiming he represented conservatives and that conservatives would not be upset about the killings. Again, this kind of rhetoric not only is untrue, it is not helpful toward reaching mutual understanding.
0

yabitsApr. 20, 2012 - 09:35PM JST

You never talked about extremes and you seemed to be claiming he represented conservatives ...

For years prior to his rampage, Breivik was a big fan of right-wing sites and the writings of people like Mark Steyn and Melanie Phillips. Steyn and Phillips are considered right-of-center with especially strong views opposed to "multi-culturalism."

It would be inaccurate to say that Breivik, Phillips or Steyn "represent" conservatives. Phillips and Steyn represent an increasingly popular and accepted line of conservative thought. And their anti-Islamism is especially appealing to more radical right-wingers like Breivik. Breivik's reaction to make himself the victim in all of this is very typical of a right-wing extremist, and not just a crazy person.

conservatives would not be upset about the killings

Hard-line conservatives who are on the far right are no more upset about these killings than American right-wingers are about the killing of Trayvon Martin. (As evidenced by their many attempts to defame his character.) According to the article, Breivik has even attracted some female attention from a far-right wing German gal. Gee, she sure seems upset about his act, doesn't she?

Again, this kind of rhetoric not only is untrue

What I speak is the truth about the far-right and ultra-conservative rhetoric. Rhetoric that has gradually become a staple of mainstream conservatism. I find it more than just a coincidence that while Breivik speaks of his admiration of Joe McCarthy, a Republican congressman today claims that between 78 and 81 Democrats are actually communists. And while Breivik spoke of wanting to "decapitate" Norway's former leader, the darling of right-wing radio talk shows and Romney supporter, Ted Nugent, is encouraging conservatives to take to the battlefield (like "Braveheart") and "chop some heads."

And here you go telling people for pointing out the obvious that it's their rhetoric that is "not helpful."

toward reaching mutual understanding

I don't believe that anything will be gained trying to reach "mutual understanding" with the Limbaughs, the Alan Wests, the Ted Nugents, and the Breiviks of the planet. The best that can be hoped for is that those in whatever remains of "mainstream conservatism" reject the extremist rhetoric that so many on their side have adopted. By doing that, they will be demonstrating that they are interested in achieving this mutual understanding you seem to think is important.
0

Ben JackApr. 21, 2012 - 03:11AM JST

Bottom line, you tried to suggest Breivik represented right wingers and conservatives and he does not. He represents extremists. Sorry to say, there are also people who consider themselves leftist or liberal who would also be considered extremists. Breivik in no way shape or form represent average people of any political persuasion. It is an extremist viewpoint to suggest otherwise.

I believe in moderation. I believe in taking each issue and viewing it on its own and not how it should be considered with regard to a certain political viewpoint. I am not chained down.

I see plenty of hateful and violent rhetoric coming from what is considered the left, however I would never suggest it represents average people. I would also never do so with the right. Extremism is extremism.

This man is both an extremist and a nut. He in no way, shape or form represents any average people.

Sadly, in your posts, as I pointed out, you lump all conservatives and right wingers together in what you imagine them to be. You are wrong, though. Someday, hopefully you can come to see this.
0

Ben JackApr. 21, 2012 - 03:15AM JST

Limbaughs, the Alan Wests, the Ted Nugents, and the Breiviks of the planet.

Just to add, it is ridiculous that you put these people in the same category. You know for a fact they are not the same. One is a completely insane person who killed many innocent people. It is sad that you cannot managed to see the difference. There is a difference. The others? They are different shades of idiocy. However, they are not and never will be extremist murderers.
0

NinjaDaveApr. 21, 2012 - 04:16AM JST

Hopefully this poor man receives good therapy while inside that eventually allows him peace of mind and rids him of his demons. We can learn a lot from men like this and he should be studied by experts to help us understand what makes someone behave like this. We have learnt alot in the last few decades which type of person may become a serial killer or mass murderer. This type of spree killing is different and is not usually so well co-ordinated and well planned.
0

yabitsApr. 21, 2012 - 05:12AM JST

Bottom line, you tried to suggest Breivik represented right wingers

Breivik is a right-winger. The rhetoric and reasoning he uses is very typical of others on the extreme right.

Sorry to say, there are also people who consider themselves leftist or liberal who would also be considered extremists

I can't find a single example of someone who considers themselves a liberal who would also be considered an extremist. Perhaps you can supply one.

Breivik in no way shape or form represent average people of any political persuasion.

Really? How would you distinguish Breivik from your average SS concentration camp commander? Or were they not exercising a political viewpoint?

Just to add, it is ridiculous that you put these people in the same category.

In terms of the rhetoric they use, they are very similar.

The others? They are different shades of idiocy. However, they are not and never will be extremist murderers.

LOL! You would have been saying the same thing about Breivik prior to July of last year -- going only by his rhetoric. You aren't God, and therefore have no idea how many more Breiviks are out there being pushed and encouraged closer to the edge by extreme nationalist, right-wing rhetoric.
0

Lieberman2012Apr. 21, 2012 - 09:37AM JST

yabits:

For years prior to his rampage, Breivik was a big fan of right-wing sites and the writings of people like Mark Steyn and Melanie Phillips. Steyn and Phillips are considered right-of-center with especially strong views opposed to "multi-culturalism."

He was also a "fan" of Al Qaeda.

Breivik on Al Qaeda: "the most successful revolutionary movement in the world"

Breivik also said AQ should serve as an inspiration to far-right militants, even though their goals are different.

"I have studied each one of their actions, what they have done wrong, what they have done right," (Breivik said of al-Qaida.) "We want to create a European version of al-Qaida."

Sorry,Yabits. There are many definitions for "conservative", but the most basic includes the idea of an individual almost always opposed to revolutionary movements.

Ben Jack - - - Yabits' arguments on this issue are disingenuous. He knows very well that European notions of patria and their notions of a "man of the right" are fundamentally different than what is to be found in the US or Canada or Australia.
0

Lieberman2012Apr. 21, 2012 - 10:31AM JST

Breivik sounds alot like Farakkhan. Or maybe I should say Farakkhan sounds a lot like Breivik.

"Reverend" Louis Farrakhan at Lemoyne-Owen College in Memphis, Tenn., last Saturday:

"People tomorrow, maybe in a few days, are gonna kill their leaders who've been selling them out"
0

Ben JackApr. 21, 2012 - 06:12PM JST

yabits,

You are missing my point. I am aware Breivik is an extremist and his views represent extremists. However, you make no disctinctions between average, everyday conservatives and him. In fact, you have now on several occasions said he represents right wingers and you have also said he represents conservatives. He does not. He represents extremists.

Entertainers on radio and TV are purposefully trying to be edgy. However, when they go over the edge, they apologize. Breivik has no intention of apologizes. Your constant comparisons of him to conservatives fails.

You asked about an extremist liberal. I believe you fit into this category. You refuse to entertain the idea that there are a majority of conservatives who are good honest people. You attempt to paint them all as the same a Breivik. This is extreme and it is incorrect. I dislike Limbaugh, but I have heard him let liberals freely speak on his shows and let them get there points in. You say you would not like to discuss things with someone like him. I find that much more extreme.

On July 25, 2011 you made absolutely no distinction, as you generally do not here on JT. You write "conservatives are this and conservatives are that". On July 25, 2012 and here in this discussion, until called on it, you were prepared to leave the impression that Breivik represented average conservatives.

By the way, I am positive that most conservatives around the world were as shocked about the killings in Norway as you were. Please do not equate differences of political opinion with that of human emotion. When you do, your arguments fall flat to all but the people that saw things your way from the beginning.

How would you distinguish Breivik from your average SS concentration camp commander?

I would not. They are the same. I meant that he does not represent any normal person, be they conservative or liberal. I do not believe an average SS concentration camp commander was very normal. I also think you understood what I meant and are being a bit obtuse on this.

Again, you are wrong with you say things like Breivik represents conservatives (no distinction) or people in the right wing (with no distinction).
0

yabitsApr. 21, 2012 - 09:34PM JST

Breivik sounds alot like Farakkhan. Or maybe I should say Farakkhan sounds a lot like Breivik.

Not to defend Farrakhan, but a liar would not post 200 words leading to the quote, in order to mislead people into thinking that Breivik is similar. Farrakhan could have been referring to Kaddafi and now Syria's leader.

Breivik's supporters -- haters of liberals and liberalism -- have to depend on lies to advance their propaganda campaign. Breivik endorses staunch anti-communists like Joe McCarthy and wishes they would adopt the methods of Al Qaeda. Actually, there is very little difference between an Al Qaeda training camp and the training camps of various right-wing militia groups in the U.S. -- just differing goals, as Breivik points out.

And the McCarthian rhetoric that Breivik admires has most recently been refreshed by the Republican congressman, Allen West. West is one who fully endorses applying violence to achieve ends. The remark: "If ballots don't work, then bullets will," comes from his camp. Breivik no longer believed in ballots, so last July, he applied West's "solution."
0

yabitsApr. 21, 2012 - 10:02PM JST

I am aware Breivik is an extremist and his views represent extremists. However, you make no disctinctions between average, everyday conservatives and him. In fact, you have now on several occasions said he represents right wingers and you have also said he represents conservatives. He does not. He represents extremists.

You really have no point. Breivik's "fruits," which started as rhetoric, came from conservative, right-wing sources such as Joe McCarthy and Tim McVeigh. I believe that all forms of extremism are based on a lie, but honest people can't depend on liars to accurately convey what real extremism is.

Entertainers on radio and TV are purposefully trying to be edgy. However, when they go over the edge, they apologize.

So we are to look at anyone whose rhetoric has been "edgy" who has not apologized? And, of course, does an apology really mean anything if the person making it has no intention of changing direction from their "edgy" extremist rhetoric? And that's the problem with "edgy-ness" -- the envelope keeps having to be stretched out towards the extremes to be "entertaining." That is what you are excusing and apologizing for.

You asked about an extremist liberal. I believe you fit into this category.

I denounce violence as a means to achieve an end, and have stated that many times.

You refuse to entertain the idea that there are a majority of conservatives who are good honest people.

By their fruits they will be known. Would a "good honest person" tolerate lying and "edgy" extremist rhetoric? There are many decent and honest people who happen to think of themselves as conservatives -- and who also condemn the dishonesty and violence-tinged rhetoric of those who claim to speak for them. Those aren't the ones who hobnob with Ted Nugent or who would support an Allen West.

On July 25, 2011 you made absolutely no distinction, as you generally do not here on JT.

Since you do not supply any evidence other than a date, you are asking readers to take your word for it. I claim that -- then as now -- you either are unable or refuse to see any distinction. The concept that a person who continually uses violence-tinged rhetoric, and who may deliver insincere apologies from time to time and be excused for it, should be a dead giveaway. To call someone "extremist" who rejects violence who points out the similarities in rhetoric between Breivik and a right-wing which views violence in many forms (like torture) as appropriate, should provide readers with all they need to know. (Yes, today, many American conservatives endorse torture, whereas they never would have done so in the past.)
0

Lieberman2012Apr. 22, 2012 - 11:29AM JST

You really have no point. Breivik's "fruits," which started as rhetoric, came from conservative, right-wing sources such as Joe McCarthy and Tim McVeigh.

So many of my fellow Americans, on the right and the left, still thinks the world revolves us and us alone...
0

Ben JackApr. 22, 2012 - 01:18PM JST

yabits,

Breivik's "fruits," which started as rhetoric, came from conservative, right-wing sources such as Joe McCarthy and Tim McVeigh.

Yes, my point is that these people are extremists as is Breivik. Comparing them to Limbaugh is off the mark in my opinion. Yes, Limbaugh is a hypocrite, etc. However, I have not heard of him suggesting violence against the left/liberals. I admit I have not heard him much although we can hear him here. I am not particularly interested in that kind of fluff. Breivik rhetoric was and is much more extreme than the mainstream modern examples of Limbaugh, etc that you gave.

I denounce violence as a means to achieve an end, and have stated that many times.

Extreme does not necessarily mean violent. It means very. I would never suggest you support violence. You obviously do not. I meant and mean it as 'very'. You are extremely and, I would argue, unusually liberal. While I do disagree with the extremity with which you are describing conservatives, I do respect you consistency and honesty of opinion.

There are many decent and honest people who happen to think of themselves as conservatives -- and who also condemn the dishonesty and violence-tinged rhetoric of those who claim to speak for them.

Fair enough. I feel the same way. However, when you just write 'conservative', I feel it is misleading. You appear to be painting those very conservatives with the same brush you say above they do not want to be painted with. That has been what I have been trying to unsuccessfully communicate with you.

Since you do not supply any evidence other than a date, you are asking readers to take your word for it. I claim that -- then as now -- you either are unable or refuse to see any distinction.

Of course I see the distinction. I just assumed when I pointed it out, you would own up to it, explain it and avoid doing it in the future. I did not think I had to quote you. However, since you insist:

yabitsJul. 25, 2011 - 09:09PM JST He mentioned not Darwin, but "Darwinism," of the type that social conservatives apply to cultural and economic spheres: i.e., the survival of the fittest. As such, Breivik appears to draw heavily from the conservative, Samuel Huntington, and the clash of civilizations.

yabitsJul. 25, 2011 - 07:24PM JST Given the chance to tell his story, Breivik may even name some names of conservatives he was most influenced by.

In these posts you did not take care to make a distinction between decent and honest people who happen to think of themselves as conservatives and the extremism I assume you are referring to. I really wish you would do that in the future.