Kevin Marshall's America
Professional, clean, and calculating. The facebook profile photo of a man who blew up a dozen and gunned down eighty.
There were two attacks yesterday in Norway. In one, an all too familiar disruption of civic operation and organization that took the lives of nearly a dozen and counting in downtown Oslo. Then, just hours later, a different kind of terror altogether, one that seems unfathomable: a lone gunman opening fire on a youth sumer camp on a nearby island, killing over 80.
Both two very different faces of terror committed by the same man and, presumably, for the same reasons.
Those reasons aren’t yet clear and they may never be. Many of his online writings have been compiled by journalist Doug Saunders. The writings reveal a man expressing nationalistic and right-wing beliefs with a very toxic rhetoric and nasty tone that he attempts to veil with polite, yet dark, sarcasm. Though they may in retrospect provide a clearer picture of the man that shook the world and compromised the feeling of safety and well-being held by the people of Norway, they do not scream “terror.” Many of the words and ideas expressed are ugly, but none even provide a hint of the possibility that the author could be capable of single-handedly gunning down over eighty children (an act that I can’t even wrap my head around).
Terror manifests itself for a variety of reasons. Over the course of the last four decades we have seen murder and mayhem used as discourse for extreme left Marxists, anarchists, Islamic fundamentalists, nationalists, government separatists, and a myriad of others up, down, and across political spectrums. They are people of varying shades, creeds, tones and temperament. The one common thread – the only one – is a chilling disregard for human life and, perhaps, a deep-rooted disdain for all things other.
So while we explore and examine the reasons behind this tragedy, we should ask every question but be careful not to ascribe too much to one area or another. Such has been the fault in the past of society, media, and governments, with embarrassing and at times disastrous results. We should avoid this folly, because unlike terrorists, terror itself has no bias.
Related articles
Share it!
21 Responses to Mayhem in Norway: Terror, unlike its perpetrators, doesn’t discriminate
Leave a Reply
STALK ME
“So while we explore and examine the reasons behind this tragedy, we should ask every question but be careful not to ascribe too much to one area or another.” Exactly.
What I thought was really wonky, was that right after it happened, the internet was in a blaze about how it was clearly done by Muslims, and it was a suicide bombing at the PM office (not a car bomb). It was ridiculous, the vast bulk of people seemed to just have painted by number the whole situation to fit their own mythos on terrorism.
Tying it all together, Rupert Murdoch’s Sun Newspaper in the UK showed off the high News Corp accuracy standards and went to press with a front cover declaring, “Al QUAEDA MASSACRE – NORWAY’S 9/11.” I don’t think anyone should hold their breath for an apology or a correction.
So many did just that. I even saw a long and lengthy editorial from left-leaning The New Republic on what al Quaeda’s problem is with Norway.
What’s amazing is that they all ran with it so hard so quickly. It’s a statement on the misplaced energies that result from the pressure and intensity of a twenty-four hour news cycle. Particularly when it comes to a group like al Quaeda. Know how I knew al Quaeda probably wasn’t responsible? Because when they are behind an attack, the discovery of their involvement doesn’t come through a police investigation or hard-hitting journalism. They actually tell you they did it .
The worst part of it, is that this man is basically the equivalent of an American teabagger that decided for some reason to go on a murder spree. He spent his time worried about the creeping influence of Muslims in Europe, along with Marxists, etc.
http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/07/anders-behring-breiviks-online-comments
So not only was he in no way related to any Muslim group, he was the type of person that people who slaver over any opportunity to trash Muslims agree with.
I hit FoxNews right after the two events occurred, and sure enough, all the comments focused the blame on Muslims, claiming such an act clearly proves Islam is a “religon of death” (the commentators’ words, not mine). Naturally, anyone pointing out that the actions of a single individual are not reflective of an entire religon was quickly identified as a muslim-loving traitor, and not a real American.
Then curiously, when it turned out it was an aryan, evangelical, conservative Christian, all the FoxNews neo-cons then began taking the position that we can’t judge Conservative Christianity based on the actions of a single individual, which is exactly the position they argued against just the previous day. And no, no one acknowledged the hyprocrisy of that position.
What is even more amazing is that conservatives are trying to figure some way to blame this on liberals, President Obama, the Democratic Party, non-christians, everyone, but themselves.
when I first heard about it, I simply looked it up on the net and nowhere was it attributed to a Muslin. They knew who did it but didn’t put his name out. It’s much like when you hear a hit and run
accident you assume it’s a drunk driver, when you heard Amy Winehouse died you assume it was an overdose, etc etc etc…
it also should be obvious that for Americans it’s logical to think a Muslim group was responsible for terrorist acts when they occur. How many times in the past 15 or so years has American interests been attacked by Muslim terrorists? How many have been thwarted? How much do we spend in homeland security, why? The media reports all these attacks with great detail. You really expect the first thought that comes to mind is, oh, it must be that violent wicked tea party that did that. REALLY?
http://super-economy.blogspot.com/2011/02/islamists-caus-overwhelming-majority-of.html
Every major news agency went with the al Qaeda angle, including but not limited to Reuters, the AP, Fox News, etcetera.
Amy Winehouse was an individual with a long drug history, bouts of rehab, and previous overdoses and medical emergencies. To compare assuming her death was drug-related to assuming that ANY terrorist attack was performed by a Muslim is ignorance and intolerance, don’t try to justify your own bias.
When it happened, Norwegian security were mot saying it was foreign terrorists, they had the guy and weren’t releasing any
info on him. Whether or not the media jumped the gun and every dummy that believes everything they read without ever researching anything it’s the MEDIA’s fault. My first thought was to a Muslin terrorist attack and left me wondering if Norway was helping us in the war on terror. I find it interesting you and others think it’s odd when we;ve had so many Muslim terror attacks on our government, civilian and military. What’s the first thing that comes to your mind when you heard soemthing like this or an attack on Isreal, of those darn Christians are at it again? REALLY?
“I noted the disparity between the FT. Hood killer and the current one in the Times’ coverage. Blaring headline level. And jumping right in to link the nut-case killer to the “right wing,” and we know who they are, both in Europe and at home.
There is a wonderful book, The Tyranny of Guilt: An Essay on Western Masochism, by Pascal Bruckner. He examines just about every ramification of this tendency (what Hitchens in a blurb to the book calls this “morbid addiction to self blame”) to condemn the West while glossing over the real, much more serious threats to civilization. And can you believe it?–The book was written first in French. The English translation came out last year.”
http://pajamasmedia.com/instapundit/124951/
Jakester, perhaps I have a different view on Muslims, because I was raised in a Muslim home, and am actually aware of what Islamic scripture consists of, actually have a pretty good notion of history and culture of a number of Muslim peoples, and actually know real, live Muslim people personally. I don’t see them as boogeymen due to my extreme ignorance of them, like most Americans.
When I heard about what happened, my personal guess was some sort of ultra-nationalist, because I personally saw very little motive for an Islamic extremist group to attack Norway, nor did there seem to be any other group likely to do it.
I am an atheist, but I was raised in a Muslim household. I have respect for all religions when practiced moderately and not forced upon others. But justify your bias as you will, you are clearly alright with it.
You also clearly aren’t aware of any number of terrorist attacks by American, white, non-Muslims? The murder of George Tiller perhaps? Abortion clinic bombings? Oklahoma city? Plenty of school shootings? The Unabomber? White man that flew a passenger plane into an IRS building? You simply see what you want to see through your bias-tinged glasses. Just because you repeat yourself, doesn’t make you correct.
It is my understanding he won’t be prosecuted nearly enough for what he has done in Norway. That’s really tragic.
No Cihan, please don’t attempt to put your words into my mouth…
of course I’m aware of other murders/terrorists, never said I wasn’t.
The fact remains that for all Americans some of the attacks that resulted in the highest number of killings were performed by Islamic radicals. You’re in dennial, again. Look at the link in 11.
” A Statement signed by many Islamic Jihad Leaders from most Muslim countries, first by Sheikh Osamah Bin-Ladin: “…In compliance with God’s order, we issue the following fatwa to all Muslims:
The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies–civilians and military–is an individual duty for every Muslim who can, in any country in which it is possible… We — with Allah’s help — call on every Muslim who believes in God and wishes to be rewarded, to comply with Allah’s order to kill the Americans and plunder their money wherever and whenever they find it. Unless you go forth, Allah will punish you with a grievous penalty, and put others in your place.”
You’re not going to see anything like this issued by a Christian nut case…
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1993321/posts
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/09/28/mumbai-style-terror-attack-thwarted-europe/
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/target/etc/modern.html
you expect Americans to NOT think about Islamic terror?
If you can read the last link and still believe you can compare an sick individual(s) act to state and religion sponsored terrorism… be my guest.
Post all the information you want Jakester, it will never.justify.bias. The fact of the matter is that many an American assumes far too much about Muslims, all Muslims, and that it isn’t right. Jumping to conclusions about the Norway incident is an expression of that. Denying that this kind of sentiment has negative effects for millions of good and honest people by saying that Americans are justified in such bias, is not acceptable.
Also, I hope you realize the Norway bomber wrote a manifesto himself, with similar calls for conservatives to rise up and so on and so forth. Who’d have think, that extremist nutjobs write manifestos and put out demands for help in their causes. It’s just that when you see Anders’ manifesto, you think to yourself well no one would answer his call (although certainly some would). What if Anders went out and murdered some Muslims instead of Norwegian teengagers, would he have gotten more support then? But when you see a Muslim-written fatwa statement, you can envision in your minds eye the hordes of Muslims ready to bomb you and your country and its allies.
And your state-supported terrorism comment is interesting, considering how many in other countries would like to call the US imperialistic ventures overseas just that. But I suppose our state is more legitimate in your eyes, so when we murder civilians and call it collateral damage, or torture prisoners, it’s cool beans.
I have to agree with Jakester… There is a reason why the phrase “the usual suspects” was coined.
In this case, it wasn’t the usual suspects, but soon enough it will be.
Investigations are often started on theories or sometimes even a hunch.
The Islamic extremists that are well known and listen to, have a political strategy with particular intentions, as organized or semi-organized bodies tend to do. The strategy is a bit more nuanced than death to America, or death to non-Muslims, or how ever you would like to frame it.
It’s the usual suspects if I am a police officer, and have reports of drug activity in an area, and go check on the local drug dealers that have a history in that area. I do not call it the usual suspects when you are stretching the political motives of a group to fit any use case that you are presented with. If the shoe didn’t fit, don’t try to make it fit, you’ll catch more criminals that way.
I didn’t recall Global Lutheran Jihad or The Presbyterian Caliphate taking credit for the attacks.
This was posted by Abu Sulayman al-Nasir to the Arabic jihadi forum, Shmukh, around 10:30am EST (thread 118187). Shmukh is the main forum for Arabic-speaking jihadis who support al-Qaeda. Since the thread is now inaccessible (either locked or taken down), I am posting it here. I don’t have time at the moment to translate the whole thing but I translated the most important bits on twitter.
Update: Abu Sulayman has now issued a retraction, stating clearly that “Helpers” was not involved in the operation and that his statement was not an official statement. He says those who carried out the attacks “must surely be known to all.”
http://www.jihadica.com/alleged-claim-for-oslo-attacks/
Can’t understand why the Tea Party Blog won’t approve my constructive comments. Boehner is an orange tinted cry baby clown. Limbaugh is an impotent, drug addicted, moron. Beck is an alcoholic anti semite. Fox is run by criminal phone hacking bafoons. Michelle Backman’s husband is himself every thing he purports to be against. If you understand the truth, you understand these facts to be true. Tea party all the way!
Jeff – Is that what you consider “constructive,” though? Because it’s not.
Jeff-It’s because the Tea Party can dish it out, but they can’t take it.