2083 - A European Declaration of Independence

[quote]kaaleppi wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

Actually it’s been going on for centuries. Oswald Spengler’s ‘The Decline of The West’ is the best book I have read on the subject and I would highly recommend it. 1916 was the year that the Victorian era really came crashing down. You could argue that was really the end of Western civilisation and that everything else since was its death throes.
[/quote]

Actually we, the occident, today have a lesser chance of dying because of haphazard or organized violence than ever before in history, same goes for diseases, childbirth and hunger. Please expand what made the Victorian era the pinnacle of the golden era and the world that ensued a decaying one.[/quote]

This is ‘off thread’ and VERY complicated. Let’s just say that despite its faults the British empire deserved third place after ‘the glory that was Greece and the grandeur that was Rome’.

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

This is ‘off thread’ and VERY complicated. Let’s just say that despite its faults the British empire deserved third place after ‘the glory that was Greece and the grandeur that was Rome’.[/quote]

Ok.

Wow, reading about him I learned:

  1. He’s a fundamentalist Christian, but believer Protestant Christianity should be banned and the Roman Catholic Church should be the official religion. Possibly in favor of a Catholic monarchy.

  2. He’s pro-gay, and possibly gay himself, while professing No. 1, which is 100% in conflict.

  3. He’s pro-Israel, while being a member of Nazi web forums and against “Jewish social influence.”

  4. He’s a member of the Knight’s Templar, which is a Crusader organization, and wants Christendom to regaom control of Israel/The Holy Land (also in conflict with support of No. 3), and yet, the Knight’s Templar are Masonic (who are generally Protestant) and thus forbidden to be joined by Roman Catholics (which is in conflict with No. 1)

  5. He’s a conservative, yet spouts socialist stuff.

In sum, I think he’s offically a nutter.

[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
Wow, reading about him I learned:

  1. He’s a fundamentalist Christian, but believer Protestant Christianity should be banned and the Roman Catholic Church should be the official religion. Possibly in favor of a Catholic monarchy.

  2. He’s pro-gay, and possibly gay himself, while professing No. 1, which is 100% in conflict.

  3. He’s pro-Israel, while being a member of Nazi web forums and against “Jewish social influence.”

  4. He’s a member of the Knight’s Templar, which is a Crusader organization, and wants Christendom to regaom control of Israel/The Holy Land (also in conflict with support of No. 3), and yet, the Knight’s Templar are Masonic (who are generally Protestant) and thus forbidden to be joined by Roman Catholics (which is in conflict with No. 1)

  5. He’s a conservative, yet spouts socialist stuff.

In sum, I think he’s offically a nutter.[/quote]

He’s doesn’t even consider himself a believing christian, either. He calls himself a cultural christian.

Just an update after reading a bit of his Manifesto, apparently the Anders Berwik was on a steroid cycle during the shooting.

I sincerely hope this isn’t turned into a moral crusade against roid rage.

“When I started my armour acquisition phase I
overestimated the weight and volume a person can
carry without severely hampering mobility and
combat readiness. I thought: �¢??hey, I can wear 50
kg of armour, transforming me into a human tank
as long as I train hard enough and use a suitable
steroid cycle�¢??. Wrong�¢?�¦ It is very important that you
try out your gear along the way and test it while on
the move to ensure that you are in fact able to
move relatively comfortably in it for up to two
hours. Take a walk around your flat for 15-30 mins
and ensure that the items are in place after all
types of bodily motions.”

“- Myself: 91 kg (75 kg standard weight, + 3 kg of surplus fat (hey, chocolate is good for
morale!:P), + 5 kg of pre-steroid muscle mass + 9 kg of muscle mass acquired from test
steroid cycle last 4 weeks using danabol alone. And yes I know: I would have managed to
gain +5 kg of lean”

Some quotes, I’m sure there are far more.

[quote]Rohnyn wrote:
Just an update after reading a bit of his Manifesto, apparently the Anders Berwik was on a steroid cycle during the shooting.

I sincerely hope this isn’t turned into a moral crusade against roid rage.

“When I started my armour acquisition phase I
overestimated the weight and volume a person can
carry without severely hampering mobility and
combat readiness. I thought: �?�¢??hey, I can wear 50
kg of armour, transforming me into a human tank
as long as I train hard enough and use a suitable
steroid cycle�?�¢??. Wrong�?�¢?�?�¦ It is very important that you
try out your gear along the way and test it while on
the move to ensure that you are in fact able to
move relatively comfortably in it for up to two
hours. Take a walk around your flat for 15-30 mins
and ensure that the items are in place after all
types of bodily motions.”

“- Myself: 91 kg (75 kg standard weight, + 3 kg of surplus fat (hey, chocolate is good for
morale!:P), + 5 kg of pre-steroid muscle mass + 9 kg of muscle mass acquired from test
steroid cycle last 4 weeks using danabol alone. And yes I know: I would have managed to
gain +5 kg of lean”

Some quotes, I’m sure there are far more.[/quote]

Joy.

Well on top of D-bol use (and hating muslims and liking Israel and Nazis and disliking Jews), he wanted to help muslims establish Islamic Caphate spanning all of the Middle East to have someone to fight.

Complete loony.

I am not sure I could leave the house with all the mutually-exclusive ideologies he had in his head.

it’s not that mutually-exclusive imo.

he identify himself as a defender of the european identity.
It’s not a christian fondamentalist, nor a white supremacist.
it’s “just” a cultural differentialist. Like many other “new” right-wingers in Europe.

Too “rationalist” to be a christian believer, but too culturally european to deny the catholic root of Europe.
Not racist enough to dream about a muslim genocide, but euro-nationalist enough to want them out of Europe.

It’s some kind of crusader, with an “ally or ennemy” mindset.

Islam : the main ennemy.
the Left (ie “cultural Marxism”) : a trojan horse on the european soil : ennemy

Israel is a natural ally because “the ennemy of my muslim ennemy is my ally”.
Neo-nazis are natural allies because “the ennemy of my marxist and/or muslim ennemy is my ally”.

it’s not incoherent.
It’s childlike.
But anyway, most “lone soldiers” are childlike. They see the whole world as a wargame.

[quote]kamui wrote:

it’s not that mutually-exclusive imo.

he identify himself as a defender of the european identity.
It’s not a christian fondamentalist, nor a white supremacist.
it’s “just” a cultural differentialist. Like many other “new” right-wingers in Europe.

Too “rationalist” to be a christian believer, but too culturally european to deny the catholic root of Europe.
Not racist enough to dream about a muslim genocide, but euro-nationalist enough to want them out of Europe.

It’s some kind of crusader, with an “ally or ennemy” mindset.

Islam : the main ennemy.
the Left (ie “cultural Marxism”) : a trojan horse on the european soil : ennemy

Israel is a natural ally because “the ennemy of my muslim ennemy is my ally”.
Neo-nazis are natural allies because “the ennemy of my marxist and/or muslim ennemy is my ally”.

it’s not incoherent.
It’s childlike.
But anyway, most “lone soldiers” are childlike. They see the whole world as a wargame.

[/quote]
YOU’RE A SYMPATHIZER!

[quote]kamui wrote:

it’s not that mutually-exclusive imo.

he identify himself as a defender of the european identity.
It’s not a christian fondamentalist, nor a white supremacist.
it’s “just” a cultural differentialist. Like many other “new” right-wingers in Europe.

Too “rationalist” to be a christian believer, but too culturally european to deny the catholic root of Europe.
Not racist enough to dream about a muslim genocide, but euro-nationalist enough to want them out of Europe.

It’s some kind of crusader, with an “ally or ennemy” mindset.

Islam : the main ennemy.
the Left (ie “cultural Marxism”) : a trojan horse on the european soil : ennemy

Israel is a natural ally because “the ennemy of my muslim ennemy is my ally”.
Neo-nazis are natural allies because “the ennemy of my marxist and/or muslim ennemy is my ally”.

it’s not incoherent.
It’s childlike.
But anyway, most “lone soldiers” are childlike. They see the whole world as a wargame.

[/quote]

wery good post kamui.

[quote]kamui wrote:

it’s not that mutually-exclusive imo.

he identify himself as a defender of the european identity.

[/quote]

Yet he murdered 90 European kids.

His actions don’t indicate a ‘rationalist’. Neither does his fantasy knights templar guerrilla army and much of the other lunacy his manifesto speaks about.

A lot of ‘culturally European’ people have been denying the ‘Catholic root of Europe’ for a very long time. There was this thing called ‘the reformation’ I believe. It was quite a while ago but I’ve heard that these dudes called Protestants are still around today.

Race?

Yet he kills Norwegian children not Muslims.

Actually he’s not REALLY a crusader. Truly. His ‘mindset’ is batshit.

Yet he kills Norwegian kids not Muslims. Batshit.

Yet he kills Norwegian kids who should also be the ‘enemy of (his) enemy’ and therefore his friend. Again, batshit.

Neo-Nazis and Islamists are allied with each other, disseminate the same propaganda and hold conferences together on the ‘international Jew’ and the ‘mythical’ gas chambers and so forth. Batshit.

Quote on how the ‘Knights Templars’ should conduct its guerrilla against a NATO conventional invasion of European territory held by the non-existent knights:

‘Cuba would later show again its masterful grip on guerrilla warfare when it defeated
American invaders at the Bay of Pigs (Playa Gir�??�?�³n) in 1961. In less than 74 hours guerrillas
defeated over 1500 armed, trained invaders from the United States. In addition to being a
profound victory for the working class, it shattered the myth of the imperialist United
StatesÃ??Ã?¢?? invincibility.’

Lots of this sort of Marxist/anti-capitalist and anti-American stuff throughout. His work is a mish mash from all over the political spectrum. His ideology is ‘incoherent’…because he’s batshit.

Very.

This guy is not a ‘soldier’. He’s not a guerrilla fighter either. He’s a batshit insane, coward and mass murderer.

no. he murdered 90 internationalist, and therefore nationless, kids.

[quote]
His actions don’t indicate a ‘rationalist’. Neither does his fantasy knights templar guerrilla army and much of the other lunacy his manifesto speaks about.[/quote]

hence the quotation marks.

he kills cultural marxists old enough to engage themselves in politics, and old enough to actively destroy his country.

neo-nazis are diverse.

[quote]
Lots of this sort of Marxist/anti-capitalist and anti-American stuff throughout. His work is a mish mash from all over the political spectrum. His ideology is ‘incoherent’…because he’s batshit. [/quote]

anti-americanism, anti-capitalism and “working class” rhetoric belong to the european far right since the early 20th century.
fascism and nazism were (non-marxist) socialisms, the populist movments of the 1930s were anti-capitalist too. Christian radicals are often “solidarists” and advocate a “third path” between capitalism and socialism.

Far right movements, espiecally youth movements, have been “inspired” but the Ultra-Left (Che Guevara included) since the 1960s.

Nothing new, and nothing special here really.

[quote]
This guy is not a ‘soldier’.[/quote]

He just think he is.
Hence the quotations marks, again.

[quote]
He’s a batshit insane, coward and mass murderer.[/quote]

a coward : yes.
a mass murderer : yes.

batshit insane : no.
a fanatical far-right activist. period.

and, alas, he is NOT the only one.

When i was a student (and an anarchist activist) i have met (and fought) a few other “wannabe knights” who prepared themselves to an imminent “ethnic war”.
most were “lefebvristes” (french catholic traditionnalists), some were neo-pagans.

granted, none of them commited mass murder.
Maybe because the more violently inclined have engaged themselves with the serbian army, to “defend the West”…

Now, i really hope they are under surveillance.

I’m aware of the ideology of Communism and Fascism throughout their stages. You don’t mention Nazism though. Nazis also used the class warfare cliches a great deal prior to the SR/SA snuff job.

I think you’re very brave to admit that you were once an ‘anarchist activist’. I hope you have completely recovered now.

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]Edevus wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]Edevus wrote:
I don’t believe society is degenerating. I think we are exactly the same, in essence, as we were 2000 or 3000 years ago, but now we have media and an easier access to information, material, etc.

[/quote]

There is so much wrong with this I wouldn’t know where to begin. My only advice; study history.[/quote]

History will prove me right.

http://www.pompeiana.org/Resources/Ancient/Graffiti%20from%20Pompeii.htm

Or would you prefer a very old quote?

“The young people of today think of nothing but themselves. They have
no reverence for parents or old age. They are impatient of all
restraint. They talk as if they alone knew everything and what passes
for wisdom with us is foolishness with them. As for girls, they are
forward, immodest and unwomanly in speech, behaviour and dress.”

[/quote]

There is a lot more to morality in antiquity than brothel graffiti preserved in Pompeii from the first century. I’ve seen it myself.

Your quote from Aristotle is in reference to the decline in morality that began after the end of the Peloponnesian war and the rise of a large Greek mercenary class that held no allegience to any citystate. Fortunately ‘immorality’(much to do with ‘impiety’) began to decline when Aristotle’s pupil decided to eat Thebes as a lesson to the citystates, unite them(except Sparta) and conquer the entire known world before he was 30. Interesting chap.[/quote]

Then read about the Romans and tell me again about morality. Really.

We have been around for millions of years. Do you think we have changed so much in a few centuries? No, we haven’t. Our core, our essence, remains exactly the same.

[quote]Edevus wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]Edevus wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]Edevus wrote:
I don’t believe society is degenerating. I think we are exactly the same, in essence, as we were 2000 or 3000 years ago, but now we have media and an easier access to information, material, etc.

[/quote]

There is so much wrong with this I wouldn’t know where to begin. My only advice; study history.[/quote]

History will prove me right.

http://www.pompeiana.org/Resources/Ancient/Graffiti%20from%20Pompeii.htm

Or would you prefer a very old quote?

“The young people of today think of nothing but themselves. They have
no reverence for parents or old age. They are impatient of all
restraint. They talk as if they alone knew everything and what passes
for wisdom with us is foolishness with them. As for girls, they are
forward, immodest and unwomanly in speech, behaviour and dress.”

[/quote]

There is a lot more to morality in antiquity than brothel graffiti preserved in Pompeii from the first century. I’ve seen it myself.

Your quote from Aristotle is in reference to the decline in morality that began after the end of the Peloponnesian war and the rise of a large Greek mercenary class that held no allegience to any citystate. Fortunately ‘immorality’(much to do with ‘impiety’) began to decline when Aristotle’s pupil decided to eat Thebes as a lesson to the citystates, unite them(except Sparta) and conquer the entire known world before he was 30. Interesting chap.[/quote]

Then read about the Romans and tell me again about morality. Really.

We have been around for millions of years. Do you think we have changed so much in a few centuries? No, we haven’t. Our core, our essence, remains exactly the same.
[/quote]

‘Morality’ is merely the word I chose. I’m talking about much more than that. I also pointed out that by ‘immorality’ Aristotle and others were referring as much to ‘impiety’ as anything else. Here is what is missing today; obedience to duty, honour, stoic endurance of hardship, sacrifice, cohesion in society, agreed standards of behaviour/codes of conduct, agreed moral standards etc.

[quote]kamui wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

Yet he kills Norwegian children not Muslims.

Actually he’s not REALLY a crusader. Truly. His ‘mindset’ is batshit.

Yet he kills Norwegian kids not Muslims. Batshit.

Yet he kills Norwegian kids who should also be the ‘enemy of (his) enemy’ and therefore his friend. Again, batshit.

This guy is not a ‘soldier’. He’s not a guerrilla fighter either. He’s a batshit insane, coward and mass murderer.[/quote]
[/quote]

I just wanted to interject on this. I have been mulling over why someone with such deep seated political beliefs against Eurabia, and obviously so well researched in his ‘insurrection,’ would have chose the targets he did.

Let me explain why I think he did so.
I don’t think the man is bat shit insane, any more than a suicide bomber in 9/11 is. He’s politically inflammed and projecting internal struggles and anger into it. If that is abnormal, then more or less anyone involved in any sort of political protest is also insane. Our murderer here however, took it to the nth extreme, in the same way Osama bin laden or any other has.

To continue on topic;

In his situation of trying to make a ‘political statement’ for his ideology he has three choices.

  1. Attack Muslims.
  2. False-flag operation on right-wing group.
  3. Attack state and political party responsible for this ‘Eurabia Project’ he speaks of.

If he attacked Muslims, the outcome would be backlash by Muslims perhaps, however this backlash would be seen as justified by those ‘lefists’ he opposed and further the propaganda of ‘victimization’ that they play up. This would not trigger a civil war, but rather result in some incidents, but ultimate be politically taken advantage of to further multiculturalism. I mean, did the Danish cartoon controversy change these ‘marxists’ mind he speaks of? I think he has realized that initiating said attack would be a lost cause.

If he did a false-flag operation, it would have been effective only if he were not caught, and no more effective than those that have already occurred. The Madrid Bombings, Van Gogh assassinaton and 9/11 did not sway the European governments to disallow Muslim immigraton so why would his, probaby lesser attack, do any more damage?

An effective attack perhaps on a right wing party headquarters, could stir the sentiment he wished to incite but the only problem woudld be, as stated in his manifesto, that being revealed or caught is an 80-90% probablity…thus, any attack would ultimately backfire, and essentially do nothing but alienate those of his political persuasion.

The final choice, attacking the political party that is ‘Marxist’ is what he chose. If you’ll notice, he blew up the building on a holiday, intentionally avoiding casualities in that blast. This youth camp was several days, so he could have intitiated this attack on a day when the building was occupied. This was either for logistical or ideological reasons. I am leaning towards ideological as his delivery was not something particularly intensive. He wanted to destroy the building without killing people of the right wing persuasion.

Now his opus sanginarius that followed was difficult to figure out, but I do believe there was quite a bit of thought behind it. I think I’ve got it figured out. He attacked the political party because it was more direct than attacking the Muslims. The Muslims will be Muslims, they do as they do, but the political party is an accountable construction that has enabled an created their presence, thus from his point of view, they are to be held responsible.

He targeted an island full of ONLY people of that political persuasion. The fact they were teens was probably not taken into consideratio by himbecause the age demographic he is trying to reach for his ‘revolution’ are teens and 20 year olds. They have yet to have kids and near to that age group, so don’t view these people as ‘children.’

The man is not trying to appeal to those at large to join his cause, but rather draw out those in the gradients of his hateful mindset that harbour the same discontent for the young foreigners, and ‘traitor’ Norwegians that he himself despises. He is appealing to a School Shooter demographic, not the one at large.

His choice of attacking the youth was also politically advantageous because it moved this from a week news clip, to something into the international spotlight, as the fact these kids were around 15-19 makes this so much more shocking to the world at large…thus spreading his ideology to the demographic, who doesn’t care that they were that age.

I think more thought went into this, than those of you who simply think this man was loopy loopy loony toons think.

When is mass murder never insane? I don’t think chocking this off as mere madness is analyzing it properly. The man put real thought into this. I think 1500 pages, half of which are very will researched statistics and facts indicated this.

^^Keep this in mind:

‘Justiciar Knight Commander for Knights Templar Europe’

The Knights Templar have not been extant for 700 years. There is no ‘Knights Templar’ to command outside of this guy’s mind. And anyone who thinks that this action could inspire a guerrilla in Europe is in fantasy land. His prophecy of knights fighting a guerrilla campaign in Europe against NATO forces and democratic governments is Walter Mitty horseshit. Add to that the massacre of kids and I call ‘batshit’ on this guy.

[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
3. He’s pro-Israel, while being a member of Nazi web forums and against “Jewish social influence.”
[/quote]

That part is easily explained. He doesn’t see Jews as a “problem” in Europe as there are so few of them - as apposed to the ‘Muslim hordes’ - he’s “pro” Israel because that means Jews will have some place to go.

He’s also very much anti Nazi. Pissed at Hitler for his “overreaching”…

[quote]Carl_ wrote:

[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
3. He’s pro-Israel, while being a member of Nazi web forums and against “Jewish social influence.”
[/quote]

That part is easily explained. He doesn’t see Jews as a “problem” in Europe as there are so few of them - as apposed to the ‘Muslim hordes’ - he’s “pro” Israel because that means Jews will have some place to go.

He’s also very much anti Nazi. Pissed at Hitler for his “overreaching”… [/quote]

If I could find something that started with “n” and made sense with “nuanced Nazi” I would have an alliteration on my hands.

Alas…

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]Edevus wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]Edevus wrote:
I don’t believe society is degenerating. I think we are exactly the same, in essence, as we were 2000 or 3000 years ago, but now we have media and an easier access to information, material, etc.

[/quote]

There is so much wrong with this I wouldn’t know where to begin. My only advice; study history.[/quote]

History will prove me right.

http://www.pompeiana.org/Resources/Ancient/Graffiti%20from%20Pompeii.htm

Or would you prefer a very old quote?

“The young people of today think of nothing but themselves. They have
no reverence for parents or old age. They are impatient of all
restraint. They talk as if they alone knew everything and what passes
for wisdom with us is foolishness with them. As for girls, they are
forward, immodest and unwomanly in speech, behaviour and dress.”

[/quote]

There is a lot more to morality in antiquity than brothel graffiti preserved in Pompeii from the first century. I’ve seen it myself.

Your quote from Aristotle is in reference to the decline in morality that began after the end of the Peloponnesian war and the rise of a large Greek mercenary class that held no allegience to any citystate. Fortunately ‘immorality’(much to do with ‘impiety’) began to decline when Aristotle’s pupil decided to eat Thebes as a lesson to the citystates, unite them(except Sparta) and conquer the entire known world before he was 30. Interesting chap.[/quote]

So when did morale peak? During the times of the Roman law and slavery? During the dark ages of Europe with church controlling everything and everyone? Feudal lords times? Industrial revolution with people working 16 hours in a dirty dark factory with no salary? Modern times with black people slaved, women with no rights and worldwide wars?

[quote]Edevus wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]Edevus wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]Edevus wrote:
I don’t believe society is degenerating. I think we are exactly the same, in essence, as we were 2000 or 3000 years ago, but now we have media and an easier access to information, material, etc.

[/quote]

There is so much wrong with this I wouldn’t know where to begin. My only advice; study history.[/quote]

History will prove me right.

http://www.pompeiana.org/Resources/Ancient/Graffiti%20from%20Pompeii.htm

Or would you prefer a very old quote?

“The young people of today think of nothing but themselves. They have
no reverence for parents or old age. They are impatient of all
restraint. They talk as if they alone knew everything and what passes
for wisdom with us is foolishness with them. As for girls, they are
forward, immodest and unwomanly in speech, behaviour and dress.”

[/quote]

There is a lot more to morality in antiquity than brothel graffiti preserved in Pompeii from the first century. I’ve seen it myself.

Your quote from Aristotle is in reference to the decline in morality that began after the end of the Peloponnesian war and the rise of a large Greek mercenary class that held no allegience to any citystate. Fortunately ‘immorality’(much to do with ‘impiety’) began to decline when Aristotle’s pupil decided to eat Thebes as a lesson to the citystates, unite them(except Sparta) and conquer the entire known world before he was 30. Interesting chap.[/quote]

So when did morale peak? During the times of the Roman law and slavery? During the dark ages of Europe with church controlling everything and everyone? Feudal lords times? Industrial revolution with people working 16 hours in a dirty dark factory with no salary? Modern times with black people slaved, women with no rights and worldwide wars? [/quote]

When did morals ‘peak’? I already explained that I mean a lot more than what today is considered ‘morality’. This is a thread about the manifesto/motivation of a loon. I don’t want to get into comparing the merits and flaws of our civilisation and the civilisations of Greece, Rome and Europe at different eras and their ‘morality’.