Is the Breivik right regarding the growing Muslim threat?

[earth_as_one]

The Oslo killer is back in the news because of his trial. His trial is covered in another thread:
http://forums.canadiancontent.net/canadian-politics/105577-right-wing-extremist-pleads-not.html

This thread isn't about his trial. This thread is about his motivations.

Anders Behring Breivik raises his fist as he arrives in the courtroom for the first day of his trial in Oslo
Anders Behring Breivik trial a culmination of years of preparation - Telegraph

"I acknowledge the acts," Breivik told Oslo central court when asked to enter a plea. "But I do not plead guilty and I claim that I was doing it in self defence."... Earlier, he announced that he did not recognise the Norwegian court – because, he said, it receives its mandate "from political parties who support multiculturalism".

Anyone who has read the Oslo killer's manifesto, (as I have), knows very well what motivated Breivik. You can find a link to the Oslo killer's manifesto here:
Anders Behring Breivik | 2083 A European Declaration of Independence | Manifesto | Kevin I. Slaughter

Breivik's opinions regarding Muslims are not original. The sources which inspired the Oslo killer are clearly described in detail in his 1500 page manifesto. Breivik was influenced by American bloggers and writers who have warned for years about the growing threat from Islam. His manifesto is filled with references to quotations from them. His manifesto quoted Robert Spencer, who operates the Jihad Watch Web site, Pamela Geller, who operates Atlas Shrugs web site Baron Bodissey (pseudo-name), who operates The Gates of Vienna web site, Daniel Pipes who operates the Middle East Forum, Bat Ye'or of Dhimmi.org... and a host of other authors and websites which promote the idea that Muslims are a threat to the Western way of life and our democratic values. These people believe that Muslims intend to take over western nations by immigration and breeding. Once they out number us, they will impose Sharia Law and enforced Dhimmitude on non-Muslims.

Breivik embraced these ideas completely. His motivation is to "save" Europe from Islam and punish Norway's current Labour coalition government for its treasonous welcoming of Muslims into Norway.

Many people share Breivik's opinions regarding Muslims and Islam. For example:

Pat Buchanan: "Breivik may be right"
A fire bell in the night for Norway

...That threat comes from a burgeoning Muslim presence in a Europe that has never known mass immigration, its failure to assimilate, its growing alienation, and its sometime sympathy for Islamic militants and terrorists. Europe faces today an authentic and historic crisis. With her native-born populations aging, shrinking and dying, Europe’s nations have not discovered how to maintain their prosperity without immigrants. Yet the immigrants who have come – from the Caribbean, Africa, the Middle East, South Asia – have been slow to learn the language and have failed to attain the educational and occupational levels of Europeans. And the welfare states of Europe are breaking under the burden. Norway, too, needs to wake up....As for a climactic conflict between a once-Christian West and an Islamic world that is growing in numbers and advancing inexorably into Europe for the third time in 14 centuries, on this one, Breivik may be right.

Many people here on this on this forum have regularly quoted the same sources as Breivik in support of their opinions regarding the Islamic threat.

Anyone else care to share their opinion regarding Breivik's opinions regarding the Islamic threat, Sharia law, enforced Dhimmitude, Muslim immigration and breeding?

Do you agree with Breivik that Islam is a threat to our way of life and democratic institutions?

 

[Colpy]

Okay, I'll bite.



EAO, if a madman told you the sky was blue, would that make you insist it was green?

 

[Dexter Sinister]

I think Breivik's a lunatic. Even if he's right about the threat Islam poses to the secular West--and I think that's too complex a question to give a simple yes or no judgment on--murdering your local leftist youth isn't a sane response.

 

[Spade]

The paranoid response of madmen to difference bears remarkabke similarity to the insanity that marked the persecution of Jews in the last century.

Simply look at the parallels of rhetoric that marked Nazi propaganda to the rhetoric that drenches the internet with hate.

 

[earth_as_one]

Okay, I'll bite.



EAO, if a madman told you the sky was blue, would that make you insist it was green?

In this case, I believe the madman claims the sky is green. I'm not going to concede the sky is green when I think the sky is blue. IMO, Muslims are not a threat to our way of life or our democratic institutions.

Breivik's perception of a Muslim threat is not the same as his actions. I'd support Breivik's right to speak his mind with the exception of information which is a threat to public safety (like instructions on how to make bombs). Having an open mind is the ability to consider an idea without embracing it. I read Breivik's manifesto and I believe I understand his rationale for fearing and hating Muslims. I completely disagree with his viewpoint. I suspect you agree with Breivik regarding the Muslim threat. I suspect your percpetions of Muslims come from the same sources that Breivik frequented and as a result you share many perceptions with Breivik regarding Muslims.

I read your opinions that you expressed with "Fed up with Islam" and I believe I can see many similarities between your viewpoint and Breivik's regarding the "Muslim threat". You also fear Muslims intend to undermine our democratic institutions, impose Sharia law on us, either by force or by immigration and multiculturalism. Your end line: "Democracy, immigration, multiculturalism. Pick any two." sounds just like something Breivik could have written. I believe millions of people share Breivik's fear and hatred towards regarding Muslims, even though they condemn his actions.

IMO, Breivik's fear and hatred towards Muslims are as irrational as his actions. I expect that millions of people including you would disagree with me and this thread is an opportunity for you to defend or condemn Breivik's perception of a threat. If you feel you have to condemn Breivik's actions first feel free, but that's not the point of this thread. I expect that very few people who agree with Breivik regarding the Muslim threat would agree with his actions.

I think Breivik's a lunatic. Even if he's right about the threat Islam poses to the secular West--and I think that's too complex a question to give a simple yes or no judgment on--murdering your local leftist youth isn't a sane response.

We all agree that Breivik's actions are criminal. But this thread is about whether or not Breivik is sane or his actions were justified or justifiable. This thread is about Breivik's believe that Muslims intend to use force, immigration and multiculturalism to subvert our democratic institutions and impose Sharia law and Islamic fundamentalism on us. Is this threat real or justified? That's a simple yes or no answer I would think...

The paranoid response of madmen to difference bears remarkabke similarity to the insanity that marked the persecution of Jews in the last century.

Simply look at the parallels of rhetoric that marked Nazi propaganda to the rhetoric that drenches the internet with hate.

Clarify? Are you referring to the websites frequented by Breivik?

Robert Spencer, who operates the Jihad Watch Web site, Pamela Geller, who operates Atlas Shrugs web site Baron Bodissey (pseudo-name), who operates The Gates of Vienna web site, Daniel Pipes who operates the Middle East Forum, Bat Ye'or of Dhimmi.org...

or some other sites?

 

[taxslave]

I don't think islam itself is a threat. Radical Islam, like Radical Christians OTH are a very real threat to the world.

 

[earth_as_one]

Do you believe that we should not allow more Muslims to immigrate to Canada and force those who are already here to adopt our culture? Should Muslims have to quit being Muslims in order to immigrate to Canada?

 

[Kreskin]

Do you believe that we should not allow more Muslims to immigrate to Canada and force those who are already here to adopt our culture? Should Muslims have to quit being Muslims in order to immigrate to Canada?

No, most people are just people who want to live in a peaceful society. Too many in our society jump to conclusions based on the actions of a few. It's like basing a theory on women solely from porn movies. Reality is much different from the actions of a small portion.

 

[karrie]

Do you agree with Breivik that Islam is a threat to our way of life and democratic institutions?

Islam is nowhere near as much a threat to our democratic way of life, as people who resort to terrorism to push a political agenda are.

That is not exclusive to Islam, it's common with zealots in general, this nutbag included.

 

[JLM]

Do you believe that we should not allow more Muslims to immigrate to Canada and force those who are already here to adopt our culture? Should Muslims have to quit being Muslims in order to immigrate to Canada?

No- you insist that immigrants to our country obey the laws of the land and support themselves...........period.

 

[skookumchuck]

We need a couple new polls.

How common is it for mainstream Christians to publicly reject fanatical Christians?
(1) very common
(2) D'uh
How common is it for mainstream Muslims to publicly reject fanatical Muslims?
(1) never heard of it
(2) i hope to hear it someday but won't hold my breath

Are the vast majority of terrorists
(1) Fanatical Christians
(2) Fanatical Muslims
(3) Left wing apologists

 

[petros]

There is always a labotomy...

 

[karrie]

We need a couple new polls.

How common is it for mainstream Christians to publicly reject fanatical Christians?
(1) very common
(2) D'uh
How common is it for mainstream Muslims to publicly reject fanatical Muslims?
(1) never heard of it
(2) i hope to hear it someday but won't hold my breath

Are the vast majority of terrorists
(1) Fanatical Christians
(2) Fanatical Muslims
(3) Left wing apologists

Hmmmm..... well, since the thread is discussing within our own democratic country..... my experience with terrorism has been with white Christians. And, it's been excused by fellow Canadians on the grounds of being 'environmentally heroic'. My Muslim neighbours on the other hand aren't very different from you or I in their views on the world. So, I'd have to say your first question is lacking the answer I've found, which is 'often'. And your second question lacks the answer I'd have to give of 'often'. And your third question would be a resounding 1.... Fanatical Christians.

 

[skookumchuck]

Hmmmm..... well, since the thread is discussing within our own democratic country..... my experience with terrorism has been with white Christians. And, it's been excused by fellow Canadians on the grounds of being 'environmentally heroic'. My Muslim neighbours on the other hand aren't very different from you or I in their views on the world. So, I'd have to say your first question is lacking the answer I've found, which is 'often'. And your second question lacks the answer I'd have to give of 'often'. And your third question would be a resounding 1.... Fanatical Christians.

I was thinking world wide karrie, not of Wiebo and a few other of his ilk but in the context of sheer numbers of people at risk of terrorist attack.
I will not diminish the evil that was Wiebo Ludwig, the potential for huge loss of life and suffering of innocents was very real but i suggest that in our society he is an anomaly as opposed to the apparently high percentage of occurrence in one religion, that being Islam.
Would you be concerned about having neighbors who ascribed to the same dogma as Wiebo did but claimed to be non violent? Thus my question about which group publicly and vociferously rejects fanatics which is answered quite well by yourself.

 

[earth_as_one]

We need a couple new polls.

How common is it for mainstream Christians to publicly reject fanatical Christians?
(1) very common
(2) D'uh
How common is it for mainstream Muslims to publicly reject fanatical Muslims?
(1) never heard of it
(2) i hope to hear it someday but won't hold my breath

Are the vast majority of terrorists
(1) Fanatical Christians
(2) Fanatical Muslims
(3) Left wing apologists

\

Most Muslims publicly reject fanatical Muslims who resort to violence or terrorism to further their agenda... Their statements typically don't make our news which explains your misinformed opinion regarding mainstream Islam's position regarding terrorism or acts of violence directed at civilians.

Here is a link of statements by leading Muslim Clerics and Imams publicly rejecting terrorism
Islamic Statements Against Terrorism – Charles Kurzman

I believe that your ignorance of mainstream Islam condemnation of violence and terrorism isn't an accident or an omission on your part. Instead I believe our MSM has deliberately created negative stereotypes of Muslims, so it easier for people like yourself to accept unprovoked wars with Muslim nations and the wholesale slaughter of innocent civilians, because they are Muslims (violent terrorists or violent terrorist supporters). If you percieved Muslims as ordinary people, trying to live peaceful lives, you might not support killing these people as easily as you do now. You might start asking questions that our leaders don't want to answer. But since Muslims aren't perceived to be innocent civilians but intolerant terrorist extremists, its easier for people like yourself to approve dropping bombs on apartment buildings full of innocent men, women and children.

BTW, Which kind of a terrorist was Breivik?

 

[petros]

BTW, Which kind of a terrorist was Breivik?

He's just a garden variety mass murderer.

 

[earth_as_one]

BTW, Can you find a statement by a Western leader which condemns the US for starting an unprovoked war with Iraq, even though they did not possess WMD stockpiles or links to the events of 9/11. That war has killed hundreds of thousands of innocent men, women and children and made millions more homeless refugees.

How do you think most Muslims feel about that lack of condemnation or even overt approval of the equivalent of @ 100 x 9/11 by American war criminals and their allies?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Iraq_War

 

[Goober]

BTW, Can you find a statement by a Western leader which condemns the US for starting an unprovoked war with Iraq, even though they did not possess WMD stockpiles or links to the events of 9/11. That war has killed hundreds of thousands of innocent men, women and children and made millions more homeless refugees.

How do you think most Muslims feel about that lack of condemnation or even overt approval of the equivalent of @ 100 x 9/11 by American war criminals and their allies?

How did I know this thread would go this way - next stop Israel, all aboard, flight is leaving on time.

 

[skookumchuck]

\

Most Muslims publicly reject fanatical Muslims who resort to violence or terrorism to further their agenda... Their statements typically don't make our news which explains your misinformed opinion regarding mainstream Islam's position regarding terrorism or acts of violence directed at civilians.

Here is a link of statements by leading Muslim Clerics and Imams publicly rejecting terrorism
Islamic Statements Against Terrorism – Charles Kurzman

I believe that your ignorance of mainstream Islam condemnation of violence and terrorism isn't an accident or an omission on your part. Instead I believe our MSM has deliberately created negative stereotypes of Muslims, so it easier for people like yourself to accept unprovoked wars with Muslim nations and the wholesale slaughter of innocent civilians, because they are Muslims (violent terrorists or violent terrorist supporters). If you percieved Muslims as ordinary people, trying to live peaceful lives, you might not support killing these people as easily as you do now. You might start asking questions that our leaders don't want to answer. But since Muslims aren't perceived to be innocent civilians but intolerant terrorist extremists, its easier for people like yourself to approve dropping bombs on apartment buildings full of innocent men, women and children.

BTW, Which kind of a terrorist was Breivik?

Nice dodge, "Their statements typically don't make our news" Referring to elsewhere? I could care less about elsewhere, it is my county and people that concern me.

I pay attention to Canadian news and have to dig deep to find any Muslims saying anything resembling condemnation of their fanatical bretheren. Some of it is fear of retribution, not much of that visible when anyone condemns a Christian dogma here.
If you do not condemn terrorism you are not innocent.

You live in a dream world EAO, come out on the sidewalk in mainstream Canada with me for a while, you will be even more worried that your carefully disingenuous agenda is for naught. Take heart though, you will find SOME D'himmis like yourself. Oh and btw, i am non religious.

Regarding Brevik, he is just another psycho, one of a tiny amount compared to confirmed Islamic terrorists, unless of course as usual you lump in everyone who has done formal military service in the west.

I really do not give a rats ass what you think of me, i just know that when push comes to shove, peeps like me will treat peeps you as a fifth columnist.

 

[DaSleeper]

I really do not give a rats ass what you think of me, i just know that when push comes to shove, peeps like me will treat peeps you as a fifth columnist.

I call him an apologist, because I too polite to call him anything else...