Some comments about the ideological background of the Oslo bomber and Utoya shooter.
Norwegian sources have identified the man who dressed up as a policeman shot perhaps as many as 80 or more innocent young people on the island of Utoya [Utøya] as the 32 years old Anders Behring Breivik. He is also alleged to stand behind the bomb in Oslo, which so far killed seven people.
The perpetrator was a regular poster on several Norwegian Internet media, notably the blog document.no, which is run by Hans Rustad1), a former left wing journalist. Hans Rustad is Jewish, and extremely pro-Zionist, and warns against islamization, violence and other problems connected with Muslim immigration. Many regular contributors on that blog naturally more or less share his views.
They represent an ideology where the importance of ethnicity is played down or dismissed completely, and the need for the preservation of Western cultural and democratic values is commonly used as the substitute key argument against immigration. Their rhetorics and activities are almost completely focused on Islam and Muslims; other immigrant groups such as Vietnamese, Chinese, non Muslim Africans and other groups are routinely painted as ‘harmless’, or even as ‘positive contributors to society’.
This is the currently most popular strain of the anti-immigration movements in Europe, as represented by Geert Wilders’ Freedom Party, the Danish People’s Party, the Sweden Democrats, and in Germany the so called ‘Pro-movement’, of which Pro-Cologne (Pro-Köln) is one of the most active, as well as several recently new established parties with a similar ideology . In England the EDL is connected to this ideology, together with groups such as SIOE and its local chapters, The Danish Free Press Society and their magazine Sappho, and some others. Note that the SIOE uses the slogan: ‘Racism is the lowest form of stupidity! Islamophobia is the height of common sense’.
Their American allies are people such as Pamela Geller, Robert Spencer, Daniel Pipes, etc. The dedication to the Zionist cause, and their rejection of classical nationalist ideas such as the importance of ethnicity, sets them apart from the sincere nationalist parties such ad the British National Party, Front National (France), Jobbik (Hungary), and NPD (Germany – and the only clearly National Socialist inspired movement of those mentioned).
Their heroes are mainly Jews such as German Henryk Broder, the French Zionist Bernard Henry Levy, British Melanie Philips, Bernard Lewis, to mention just a few, and many more. The Flemish Nationalists fall somewhere in between, and are mainly traditional Nationalists with no love for the US, Zionism or Israel, who are trying to adapt to a new pro-Zionist image, inspired by the success of Geert Wilders’ Freedom Party in Holland, and the Danish People’s Party in Denmark.
Members of the pro-Zionist groups and parties often paint their non philosemitic fellow nationalists as Nazis, anti-Semites and racists, copying the rhetorics the left wing PC-brigade uses against themselves, and try to present a more polished image towards the mainstream. They are also much better connected to mainstream politicians than the traditional nationalists, and at times are supported by mainstream newspapers, such as Jyllands-Posten in Denmark, as well as by right wing Jewish groups and individuals. The mainstream press usually judges these groups more favorably then traditional nationalists, who are invariably accused of being ‘Nazis’.
Anders Behring Breivik, the Norwegian bomber and gunman also pursued this line of thought:
Posted on 2009-09-14 10:57:20 as a reaction to post by ‘Caper’
Caper,
I didn’t see that the EDL as it is today is what we would have wanted. But it is essential that the intellectual conservative forces (unofficially) offer political and ideological schooling to our youth between 15 and 25. Who else is to do that?
We cannot despise the young in society and refuse to come closer to them only because they lack ideological training, since it is exactly OUR (culturally conservative intellectuals) responsibility to do so.
Bawer [referring to homosexual anti-islamist Bruce Bawer] is probably not the right person to work as a bridge builder. He is a liberal anti-Jihadist, and in many ways not a culturally conservative. I have my suspicions about him being TOO paranoid [with reference to his homosexuality). It could seem as though he fears that ‘cultural conservatives’ will become a threat against homosexuals in the future. Therefore he refuses to take his chance to influence them into a positive direction? That seems completely irrational.
It has to be said that many organizations such as VB [probably referring to the Flemish nationalist party Vlaams Belang] needs to go through many ‘reforms’, before they reach our level.
Anyway, we are not in a position where we can pick and choose our partners. That’s why we have to ensure that we influence other culturally conservatives to take our anti-racist pro-homosexual, pro-Israeli line of thought. When this direction has been taken we can take it to the next level.
The consolidation MUST continue, and people must contribute by influencing (in stead of isolating).
The above was translated from this page, where document.no has collected all posts by Anders Behring Breivik. So far it is not possible to read the seperate comments in the original thread; according to an announcement on the website, they changed IT-systems a few days ago, and are working on bringing the comments and the full posts back online. The URL to the article to which this comment belongs is here; maybe it will work later on.
http://blog.balder.org/?p=1241