Terrorist Attack in Oslo, Norway

[jarofthoughts]

Do Europeans honestly believe that people are incapable of being responsible or having a conscience without being beneath the state's thumb?

Absolutely not.
But unlike certain factions in the US most Europeans do not see themselves separate from their government.
For instance, in Norway we have immense trust in the ability of our government to work in our best interest, and we view it as an extension of ourselves and as a necessary function, "we" here meaning the majority of the populace.
We do not see ourselves as being under the state's thumb.
We are the state, and the government, as a part of that state, is here to serve us and our needs.

 

[Kathryn]

Libertarianism is more associated as extreme personal freedom and anarchy in Europe. It is freedom with out social restraint, or social conscience.

Libertarians are classical liberals. Here's a good explanation of this term:

"In the 19th century, the term "liberal" generally meant someone who favored individual liberty and opposed the expansion of state power. In Europe and in much of the rest of the world, it still means that. But in America, the term "liberal" was adopted by people who favored extensive government intervention in the economy -- people who elsewhere in the world would have been called progressives, social democrats, or socialists. Meanwhile, "conservative" continued to refer to people who favored the use of state power for the preservation of certain religious and cultural practices. The original liberals were thus left without a label. People who still cleave to the ideal of individual liberty in all spheres of life, like the 19th century liberals, now usually call themselves either libertarians or classical liberals."

World's Shortest Libertarian FAQ

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Even with that wacky distortion, it's still incompatible with far right totalitarian and theocratic ideology.

Do Europeans honestly believe that people are incapable of being responsible or having a conscience without being beneath the state's thumb?

Most Politically aware Europeans do believe that people are by nature selfish.
That people do need incentives to look after the welfare of society as a whole.
We know we are not under the states thumb, as we are a democratic people who make our own laws, mostly without the limitations of a preconceived constitution.
We do not see the state as external to ourselves.
Laws are made by us all for the benefit of us all. when situations change we amend the laws governing our behaviour.

 

[Revoltingest]

You watch Fox News, don't you? (If not, then you should.)

Revoltingest's Law comes thru again. In all discussions, one will eventually be accused of watching Fox News.
I can't stand TV news at all.....Spongebob Squarepants is better. (Only slightly less real news, but much less annoying.)
When one is wearing agenda laden glasses, tis not to make such speculations.

Regarding news: Most "news" is merely gossip about politicians & partisan drama. On TV & radio, one is subject to a
continual barrage of mostly such drivel. I don't care about Dem vs Repub competition. So I prefer print because I can
focus on articles which interest me & skip the rest. If I want drama I'll watch Breaking Bad. (Great episode last nite.)

I have not called him a libertarian. You are confusing me with someone else.

You look so much like Terrywoodenpic.

 

[Revoltingest]

Do Americans honestly believe that the state is always out to get you?

For those of us who run businesses, our only interaction with the government certainly makes it feel that way.
But of course, governments are expensive things & capable of great evil &/or waste, eg, abusing other countries,
domestic thuggery, high taxes. This is why I prefer a smaller government than we currently have.

 

[kai]

Do Americans honestly believe that the state is always out to get you?

dont know about Americans but i beleive here in the UK the government is certainly out wring every last penny it can from you.

 

[jarofthoughts]

Update: The court has decided that the defendant will be held in custody for eight weeks without access to neither letters, visitors or media. He will also be held in isolation for the first four weeks of this period.

 

[lunakilo]

He went after those he considered a far worse enemy--liberal politicians and a liberal youth camp.

As far as I remember they are social democrats not liberal... but I guess that is another mess up of names of political parties and ideologies, and not really important anyway.

Thank you for starting this thread jarofthoughts.
I am very shocked by what has happened.

When I first heard about the bomb I was shocked, but it mostly seemd like "one of those things that just happen", bad, but not devastating (except for the people who are personally affected of couse). My oldest sister lives in Oslo with her family, and untill she checked in an told us that she and the family where all ok I was worried about them. They had been in the area about half an hour before, but they had left before the bomb went of.

But the shootings on Utøya really get me.
A person has to be ice cold to be able to look right into the eyes of children and then shoot them.

I think so far the people of Norway have handled this well.

I read in an earlier post that people where talking about how he managed to buy so much fertilizer. I have heard that anyone can buy fertilizer in Norway, even the kind you can make bombs of. He didn't actually need an excuse to buy the fertilizer, but the people who sell fertilizer often keep track of who they sell it to, and could potentially have allerted the police if he couldn't come up with a valid reason for buying that much fertilizer.

Does anyone know how he got hold of the guns and the police uniform?

 

[jarofthoughts]

As far as I remember they are social democrats not liberal... but I guess that is another mess up of names of political parties and ideologies, and not really important anyway.

I agree.
No-one is trying to point fingers at anyone at the moment and the kind of ideology he apparently adhered to is not shared by anyone in Norway, barring an extremely small minority.

Thank you for starting this thread jarofthoughts.
I am very shocked by what has happened.

Thank you.
Nothing like this has ever happened in Norway before, but in all the pain and madness I am actually relieved that this was not the result of some international terrorist group. It would potentially have led to a polarization of society that we really could do without.

When I first heard about the bomb I was shocked, but it mostly seemd like "one of those things that just happen", bad, but not devastating (except for the people who are personally affected of couse). My oldest sister lives in Oslo with her family, and untill she checked in an told us that she and the family where all ok I was worried about them. They had been in the area about half an hour before, but they had left before the bomb went of.

I'm glad your loved ones are alright.

But the shootings on Utøya really get me.
A person has to be ice cold to be able to look right into the eyes of children and then shoot them.

Yes... I keep asking myself how crazy you have to get before you think that the solution to your problem is to start gunning down kids in cold blood.

I think so far the people of Norway have handled this well.

I'm also very impressed by the manner in which our politicians and the police have handled this. Ironically this might lead to the Labor Party gaining more support and I expect they will have a very strong election next time around.

I read in an earlier post that people where talking about how he managed to buy so much fertilizer. I have heard that anyone can buy fertilizer in Norway, even the kind you can make bombs of. He didn't actually need an excuse to buy the fertilizer, but the people who sell fertilizer often keep track of who they sell it to, and could potentially have allerted the police if he couldn't come up with a valid reason for buying that much fertilizer.

The problem is that you can't really make artificial fertilizer without the reactive components, and if you want to grow anything on a feasible scale, you will need artificial fertilizer. It is true that if you buy large quantities without a valid reason, the police will come asking questions, but in this case he had already founded a company that he claimed was going to grow root vegetables, and thus had a valid reason for buying the fertilizer.

Does anyone know how he got hold of the guns and the police uniform?

The investigation is still ongoing, but both weapons that were used in the massacre, a Glock handgun and a Ruger semi-automatic rifle, are legal to own in Norway if you have the right permits.

 

[lunakilo]

The problem is that you can't really make artificial fertilizer without the reactive components, and if you want to grow anything on a feasible scale, you will need artificial fertilizer. It is true that if you buy large quantities without a valid reason, the police will come asking questions, but in this case he had already founded a company that he claimed was going to grow root vegetables, and thus had a valid reason for buying the fertilizer.

Yes, I know about his compamy, I was just commenting on that people seemed to think it was strange he got his hands on the fertilizer. I was just saying that it should be relatively easy to get hold on it, even if he didn't have a valid reason for having it (which he had)

The investigation is still ongoing, but both weapons that were used in the massacre, a Glock handgun and a Ruger semi-automatic rifle, are legal to own in Norway if you have the right permits.

And I am sure he could have gotten his hands on them illigally to...
I am actually more puzzled by the uniform. How does one get a police uniform if one is not a policeman?

 

[jarofthoughts]

Yes, I know about his compamy, I was just commenting on that people seemed to think it was strange he got his hands on the fertilizer. I was just saying that it should be relatively easy to get hold on it, even if he didn't have a valid reason for having it (which he had)

Indeed.

And I am sure he could have gotten his hands on them illigally to...

If someone really wants to, it's hard to prevent them from obtaining firearms considering how widespread they are.

I am actually more puzzled by the uniform. How does one get a police uniform if one is not a policeman?

It is possible that he made it himself.
The Norwegian police uniform is of a practical sort, consisting of cargo-like pants with reflective stripes on the legs, a shirt or a NATO-like sweater with distinctions and a hat similar to a baseball cap, also with distinctions. You can get fairly good matches in the stores and then it's just a matter of faking the distinctions and the tags saying "Politi" (Police). In this manner you can fake a uniform that looks good enough from a distance.
Of course, impersonating a police officer can get you in serious trouble, but somehow I don't think he was too worried about that.

 

[jarofthoughts]

Just a slight update:
If this cowardly psychopath wanted to make people afraid of walking the streets, he has most certainly failed miserably.
There are currently more than 150.000 people of all cultures and faiths, including central political figures, walking the streets of Oslo, carrying roses, being together and showing compassion with the victims.

Here is a direct feed: VGTV

This is our city.
And we're talking it back!

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Here is a direct feed: VGTV

This is our city. ... And we're talking it back!

It's good to see humanity ...

 

[Father Heathen]

Do Americans honestly believe that the state is always out to get you?

No one said anything of the sort. Terry implied that that Europeans see personal liberties as a frightening, dangerous prospect.

 

[Copernicus]

Oh, I wasn't arguing that he's not right-wing. I'm fairly certain that he is, and "his" so called "manifest" certainly indicates that.
I merely pointed out that we don't have a political party or movement of any notable size that even remotely corresponds to the views of this psychopath. Thus, his views are not represented anywhere in Norwegian politics.
We know for a fact that he has gathered inspiration for his nightmarish and delusional view of reality from many different sources.

But he clearly did start out in the "Progress Party", which he became disillusioned with. He was very much inspired by other right wing terrorists. Probably the most "leftish" of his idols was the Unabomber, Ted Kaczynski, whose manifesto he quoted from extensively. But where Kaczynski went on at length about the faults of "leftists", Breivik substituted the word "multiculturalists".

I suspect that you may be underestimating the number of Norwegians who feel resentful of the "socialism" in your government. There is probably a much larger subculture of fanatical right wingers than you are aware of, and they get a lot of support from the international community of like-minded paranoids. The power of the right wing in Europe has been growing over the past few years, especially as more and more immigrants have arrived to try to improve their standard of living. As Sunstone pointed out, right wing terrorists tend not to be called "terrorists". Rather, they are always deluded "loners" who were only incidentally inspired by right wing propaganda. The term "terrorist" seems to be reserved exclusively for foreign, rather than domestic, terrorists. To the extent that it is possible, we turn a blind eye to the connection between right wing hate speech and the extremists who tend to emerge from that poisonous social infrastructure.

 

[Father Heathen]

You Might expect it to be so... except I do not see the Far right as necessarily Totalitarian, or indeed usually so.

In that case It does indeed come close to anarchy.
Theocratic Ideology seems to appeal to people who take up all extreme positions.

Here, allow me to familiarize you with the political spectrum: The Political Compass

 

[jarofthoughts]

But he clearly did start out in the "Progress Party", which he became disillusioned with. He was very much inspired by other right wing terrorists. Probably the most "leftish" of his idols was the Unabomber, Ted Kaczynski, whose manifesto he quoted from extensively. But where Kaczynski went on at length about the faults of "leftists", Breivik substituted the word "multiculturalists".

I suspect that you may be underestimating the number of Norwegians who feel resentful of the "socialism" in your government. There is probably a much larger subculture of fanatical right wingers than you are aware of, and they get a lot of support from the international community of like-minded paranoids. The power of the right wing in Europe has been growing over the past few years, especially as more and more immigrants have arrived to try to improve their standard of living. As Sunstone pointed out, right wing terrorists tend not to be called "terrorists". Rather, they are always deluded "loners" who were only incidentally inspired by right wing propaganda. The term "terrorist" seems to be reserved exclusively for foreign, rather than domestic, terrorists. To the extent that it is possible, we turn a blind eye to the connection between right wing hate speech and the extremists who tend to emerge from that poisonous social infrastructure.

Like I said earlier, he is extreme right-wing, and he is most definitely a terrorist. What I was pointing out was that his views are not even close to being mirrored by any existing political party in Norway, including the Progress Party.
As for surveilance of extreme right-wing groups, we had a lot more of that in the mid to late nineties, but since many of the groups associated with that view more or less died out, there has been less focus on that side of the spectrum, even though they were always kept an eye on.
I think we can be reasonably sure that they will be closely watched after this incident, however, I am not at all convinced that this particular terrorist would have been discovered even if we had kept a constant watch on these groups. We're talking about a man without a criminal record (apart from a minor charge regarding 'tagging' in his teens), who does not have a violent past and who as far as we know never uttered any form of threat towards anyone neither in person or online.
As for dissent with the socialist approach towards immigration, we do live in a society where everyone is free to voice their opinion and where people are allowed to vote as they please. So unless one is categorically opposed to having a democratic society, violence should clearly not be an acceptable option.
I agree though that we cannot turn a blind eye towards these movements and statistically they and other nationalistic groups are clearly a larger threat than islamistic organisations, at least for the time being.

 

[Copernicus]

...As for dissent with the socialist approach towards immigration, we do live in a society where everyone is free to voice their opinion and where people are allowed to vote as they please. So unless one is categorically opposed to having a democratic society, violence should clearly not be an acceptable option.

I certainly agree with your point that it is hard to imagine how any type of surveillance, short of Big Brother watching everyone, could have foreseen what this guy was up to. The irony, though, was that Breivik himself has said what led him to his breaking point--the realization that he could not get what he felt was necessary political change by the normal democratic process. This is exactly the same message that has been resonating with a determined minority of right wing activists in the US--that drastic action might be necessary if their vision of necessary changes did not come out of the ballot box. During the last election cycle, there was a lot of extremist talk about a "revolution". Some took to quoting Jefferson's famous statement "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." It is no accident that Breivik at one point wanted to start up a copycat "Tea Party" movement in Norway. Unfortunately for him, though, he had no billionaire backers such as the Koch brothers to fund it and no domestic news propaganda mill such as Fox News to spread the alarmist rhetoric.

I agree though that we cannot turn a blind eye towards these movements and statistically they and other nationalistic groups are clearly a larger threat than islamistic organisations, at least for the time being.

In 2009, our Department of Homeland Security released a report on terrorism that focused a lot on the threat from right wing terrorist groups. Too much, apparently. Conservative politicians howled over its release, and the Obama administration (via Homeland Security Chief Janet Napolitano), ever mindful of howling from the right, immediately retracted it. Political correctness would not hear of such obviously "incorrect" reports.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Here, allow me to familiarize you with the political spectrum: The Political Compass

I have been involved in politics for some 60 of my 76 years. From door knocker to local Liberal party Chairman.
I am well aware of various forms of the " Political Compas"... very few of them work particularly well in the European context. Or between national Politics.
I am also aware of the political differences between UK and USA cultures.

As a life long Liberal I do understand the need for Personal freedoms, but these should never be put before the needs of others or Society as a whole.

 

[Reverend Rick]

Which makes me all the more curious. I think understanding the guy is important - how else can it be prevented in the future if you don't know where it began? I am of course upset that it happened, and it's a terrible thing to HAVE happened. But that doesn't make it any less important to understand him, to know where things need to be changed to prevent something like this from happening again.

But... but... I thought that kind of thing never happened in a country like Norway?

Crazy people are everywhere and laws do not stop these kind of folks.

My heart goes out to all involved.