quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:


Brevik is a Zionist. Look it up.

Apparently it's somewhat more complicated - or vaguer - than that, as one might expect of a fruitcake:

"Anders Behring Breivik insists, in his rambling 1,500-page manifesto released on the day of his confessed rampage that killed 76 Norwegians, that he’s no Nazi, despite expressing some sympathy for what Hitler had been trying to achieve. Instead he styles himself a latter-day warrior of the Knights Templar, vanguard force of the medieaval Christian Crusades that briefly claimed the Holy Land for Christendom and made Jerusalem’s streets run ankle deep with the blood of those they saw as usurpers. Even then, it’s worth remembering that the blood spilled by the Crusaders was both Muslim and Jewish.

Despite the Crusader lineage to which he aspires, however, Breivik has no intention of driving Jews from Europe, much less from the Holy Land. On the contrary, his manifesto hails Zionist Jews as a crucial ally in his battle between Christendom and Islam, proclaiming Israel as the frontline citadel in that war. Breivik’s Crusade would have Jews on board for an existential fight against Islam; the mirror image of the “Crusader-Jewish” alliance that Osama bin Laden vowed to drive out of what he defined as Muslim lands."

http://world.time.com/2011/07/26/norway-terror-accused-breivik-on-the-jewish-question/


It seems to be a general theme that mass killers, of any hue, have heads that are made up of lunacy bound together, albeit loosely, with some sort 'rationalisation(s)' provided by a whacky quasi-religious, or other, ideology - or a collection of them. Two parts lunacy with one part ideology; one part lunacy and two parts ideology - I'm not sure it makes much of a difference in the end. People still get maimed and slaughtered.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:


Brevik is a Zionist. Look it up.

Apparently it's somewhat more complicated - or vaguer - than that, as one might expect of a fruitcake:

"Anders Behring Breivik insists, in his rambling 1,500-page manifesto released on the day of his confessed rampage that killed 76 Norwegians, that he’s no Nazi, despite expressing some sympathy for what Hitler had been trying to achieve. Instead he styles himself a latter-day warrior of the Knights Templar, vanguard force of the medieaval Christian Crusades that briefly claimed the Holy Land for Christendom and made Jerusalem’s streets run ankle deep with the blood of those they saw as usurpers. Even then, it’s worth remembering that the blood spilled by the Crusaders was both Muslim and Jewish.

Despite the Crusader lineage to which he aspires, however, Breivik has no intention of driving Jews from Europe, much less from the Holy Land. On the contrary, his manifesto hails Zionist Jews as a crucial ally in his battle between Christendom and Islam, proclaiming Israel as the frontline citadel in that war. Breivik’s Crusade would have Jews on board for an existential fight against Islam; the mirror image of the “Crusader-Jewish” alliance that Osama bin Laden vowed to drive out of what he defined as Muslim lands."

http://world.time.com/2011/07/26/norway-terror-accused-breivik-on-the-jewish-question/


It seems to be a general theme that mass killers, of any hue, have heads that are made up of lunacy bound together, albeit loosely, with some sort 'rationalisation(s)' provided by a whacky quasi-religious, or other, ideology - or a collection of them. Two parts lunacy with one part ideology; one part lunacy and two parts ideology - I'm not sure it makes much of a difference in the end. People still get maimed and slaughtered.

So he did it because of his political beliefs, not for any religious believes.
Still not the same as someone screaming Allah Akbar as they murder people is it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx


ORIGINAL: Termyn8or


But the fact is some people are more prone to it because of their upbringing so they should stay the fuck out of White countries. They learn to live like animals, they should live WITH animals.

Which country has been at war continuously since 1789?

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:


Brevik is a Zionist. Look it up.

Apparently it's somewhat more complicated - or vaguer - than that, as one might expect of a fruitcake:

"Anders Behring Breivik insists, in his rambling 1,500-page manifesto released on the day of his confessed rampage that killed 76 Norwegians, that he’s no Nazi, despite expressing some sympathy for what Hitler had been trying to achieve. Instead he styles himself a latter-day warrior of the Knights Templar, vanguard force of the medieaval Christian Crusades that briefly claimed the Holy Land for Christendom and made Jerusalem’s streets run ankle deep with the blood of those they saw as usurpers. Even then, it’s worth remembering that the blood spilled by the Crusaders was both Muslim and Jewish.

Despite the Crusader lineage to which he aspires, however, Breivik has no intention of driving Jews from Europe, much less from the Holy Land. On the contrary, his manifesto hails Zionist Jews as a crucial ally in his battle between Christendom and Islam, proclaiming Israel as the frontline citadel in that war. Breivik’s Crusade would have Jews on board for an existential fight against Islam; the mirror image of the “Crusader-Jewish” alliance that Osama bin Laden vowed to drive out of what he defined as Muslim lands."

http://world.time.com/2011/07/26/norway-terror-accused-breivik-on-the-jewish-question/


It seems to be a general theme that mass killers, of any hue, have heads that are made up of lunacy bound together, albeit loosely, with some sort 'rationalisation(s)' provided by a whacky quasi-religious, or other, ideology - or a collection of them. Two parts lunacy with one part ideology; one part lunacy and two parts ideology - I'm not sure it makes much of a difference in the end. People still get maimed and slaughtered.

So he did it because of his political beliefs, not for any religious believes.
Still not the same as someone screaming Allah Akbar as they murder people is it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chaska

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:


Brevik is a Zionist. Look it up.

Apparently it's somewhat more complicated - or vaguer - than that, as one might expect of a fruitcake:

"Anders Behring Breivik insists, in his rambling 1,500-page manifesto released on the day of his confessed rampage that killed 76 Norwegians, that he’s no Nazi, despite expressing some sympathy for what Hitler had been trying to achieve. Instead he styles himself a latter-day warrior of the Knights Templar, vanguard force of the medieaval Christian Crusades that briefly claimed the Holy Land for Christendom and made Jerusalem’s streets run ankle deep with the blood of those they saw as usurpers. Even then, it’s worth remembering that the blood spilled by the Crusaders was both Muslim and Jewish.

Despite the Crusader lineage to which he aspires, however, Breivik has no intention of driving Jews from Europe, much less from the Holy Land. On the contrary, his manifesto hails Zionist Jews as a crucial ally in his battle between Christendom and Islam, proclaiming Israel as the frontline citadel in that war. Breivik’s Crusade would have Jews on board for an existential fight against Islam; the mirror image of the “Crusader-Jewish” alliance that Osama bin Laden vowed to drive out of what he defined as Muslim lands."

http://world.time.com/2011/07/26/norway-terror-accused-breivik-on-the-jewish-question/


It seems to be a general theme that mass killers, of any hue, have heads that are made up of lunacy bound together, albeit loosely, with some sort 'rationalisation(s)' provided by a whacky quasi-religious, or other, ideology - or a collection of them. Two parts lunacy with one part ideology; one part lunacy and two parts ideology - I'm not sure it makes much of a difference in the end. People still get maimed and slaughtered.

So he did it because of his political beliefs, not for any religious believes.
Still not the same as someone screaming Allah Akbar as they murder people is it.

Lunacy is "lunacy" anyway you cut it.

quote:

So he did it because of his political beliefs, not for any religious believes.
Still not the same as someone screaming Allah Akbar as they murder people is it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:


Brevik is a Zionist. Look it up.

Apparently it's somewhat more complicated - or vaguer - than that, as one might expect of a fruitcake:

"Anders Behring Breivik insists, in his rambling 1,500-page manifesto released on the day of his confessed rampage that killed 76 Norwegians, that he’s no Nazi, despite expressing some sympathy for what Hitler had been trying to achieve. Instead he styles himself a latter-day warrior of the Knights Templar, vanguard force of the medieaval Christian Crusades that briefly claimed the Holy Land for Christendom and made Jerusalem’s streets run ankle deep with the blood of those they saw as usurpers. Even then, it’s worth remembering that the blood spilled by the Crusaders was both Muslim and Jewish.

Despite the Crusader lineage to which he aspires, however, Breivik has no intention of driving Jews from Europe, much less from the Holy Land. On the contrary, his manifesto hails Zionist Jews as a crucial ally in his battle between Christendom and Islam, proclaiming Israel as the frontline citadel in that war. Breivik’s Crusade would have Jews on board for an existential fight against Islam; the mirror image of the “Crusader-Jewish” alliance that Osama bin Laden vowed to drive out of what he defined as Muslim lands."

http://world.time.com/2011/07/26/norway-terror-accused-breivik-on-the-jewish-question/


It seems to be a general theme that mass killers, of any hue, have heads that are made up of lunacy bound together, albeit loosely, with some sort 'rationalisation(s)' provided by a whacky quasi-religious, or other, ideology - or a collection of them. Two parts lunacy with one part ideology; one part lunacy and two parts ideology - I'm not sure it makes much of a difference in the end. People still get maimed and slaughtered.

So he did it because of his political beliefs, not for any religious believes.
Still not the same as someone screaming Allah Akbar as they murder people is it.

So then it was a false flag operation ?

That is the other possibility.

T^T

quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or
So then it was a false flag operation ?

That is the other possibility.

T^T

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or
So then it was a false flag operation ?

That is the other possibility.

T^T

Where are you getting your information about Breivik from?
And, just out of interest, why should an attack by a rightwinger with a chip on his shoulder about feminism and immigration on a group of people associated with the political party he described as leftist race traitors be a false flag for zionists? I know that Americans often have issues accepting that there's any such thing as a lone gunman, but Breivik fits that role very nicely.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

ORIGINAL: mythicalsex


These are the countries that enforce sharia.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/29/sharia-law-usa-states-ban_n_3660813.html


From your post you do not seem to have read the article you linked us to.

I am sure there are plenty of muslims who think this law is out dated or unnecessary. However, that is clearly not what is being sent to the cities where rape has sky rocketed through the roof.


Would you please validate this statement with some sort of citation or is this just your opinion?

quote:

ORIGINAL: PakiLadki

quote:

ORIGINAL: mythicalsex

quote:

ORIGINAL: PakiLadki

quote:

ORIGINAL: mythicalsex

I looked a few things up. Anybody can read what is public.

History is an interesting thing but I am not living in the past. The only prominent Muslim that I can agree with is Louis Farrakhan. He no longer sounds like the Farrakhan of the 80’s or 90’s. He sounds sensible.

The caliphate is what leads Islam. It is sharia law that they support and enforce. Sharia law allows a bunch of stuff that I find personally offensive and unacceptable. I am far from being an island on that one.

Sharia law allows the rape of children, gang raping of women, and female mutilation. No one, entity, creature, deity tells me what to do with women willing to claim me as owner or master. Don’t try it.

Sharia allows the beheading of open homosexuals. I am from L. A. and I may be straight as an arrow (I’m single and I’ll gladly take all your sistas and sister wives) but I am not interested in publicly funding (with tax dollars) any organization or individuals who do not accept religious freedom or orientation rights. The local LGBT community is just as important to me as my Catholic roots.

It is not Christian to bash gay people. I can prove it with the words of Jesus. Jesus saves. The caliphate loves tossing homosexuals off of roof tops. What kind of guy invites you to a gangbang but wants to kill you for not wanting a woman there? Caliphate.

I am not interested in using public funds for religions that I agree with. I certainly will not support public funds for sharia law enforcers.

Today, most Muslims support sharia law. Ask them.

Seriously, are you on crack? First of all, your use of terminology is completely wrong. If you're going to claim knowledge over a topic, at least learn the basics. So the "claiphate" is what leads Islam? Please tell me who this "caliphate" is that is leading Islam? Please tell me where you see that most Muslims support Sharia law? Please tell me any serious readings you have done on Sharia law? The only sharia law most Muslims 'somewhat' agree on (I say somewhat, because there is still an ongoing debate, disagreements and discussions going on among Muslim scholars - look up the word 'ijtihad) is family sharia law which mostly deals with legal family matters such divorce, custody etc. and even that is not practiced by Muslims because there is no major agreement on what these laws are, as the our religious texts doesn't clearly define them and there are major disagreements. The countries that do practice the so called sharia law such cutting off hands etc. is Saudi Arabia, and if you haven't talked to many Muslims, you might not know that most Muslims abhor the Saudi government for their strict wahabbism. Unfortunately, as I have said earlier, it's the US policy that supports the undemocratic saudi regime, NOT the Muslims.

No crack for me thanks.

Anyone can look up caliphate.

These are the countries that enforce sharia.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/29/sharia-law-usa-states-ban_n_3660813.html

I am sure there are plenty of muslims who think this law is out dated or unnecessary. However, that is clearly not what is being sent to the cities where rape has sky rocketed through the roof. Nor is it who is ruling all of those countries.

This is the problem with too much information through the internet and no real knowledge. Go read the link you provided yourself, and it counters the points you've been trying to make and supports the points I am making. Try to have an open mind when you having a discussion, we might learn a thing or two about each other instead of arguing just to prove someone wrong.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chaska

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:


Brevik is a Zionist. Look it up.

Apparently it's somewhat more complicated - or vaguer - than that, as one might expect of a fruitcake:

"Anders Behring Breivik insists, in his rambling 1,500-page manifesto released on the day of his confessed rampage that killed 76 Norwegians, that he’s no Nazi, despite expressing some sympathy for what Hitler had been trying to achieve. Instead he styles himself a latter-day warrior of the Knights Templar, vanguard force of the medieaval Christian Crusades that briefly claimed the Holy Land for Christendom and made Jerusalem’s streets run ankle deep with the blood of those they saw as usurpers. Even then, it’s worth remembering that the blood spilled by the Crusaders was both Muslim and Jewish.

Despite the Crusader lineage to which he aspires, however, Breivik has no intention of driving Jews from Europe, much less from the Holy Land. On the contrary, his manifesto hails Zionist Jews as a crucial ally in his battle between Christendom and Islam, proclaiming Israel as the frontline citadel in that war. Breivik’s Crusade would have Jews on board for an existential fight against Islam; the mirror image of the “Crusader-Jewish” alliance that Osama bin Laden vowed to drive out of what he defined as Muslim lands."

http://world.time.com/2011/07/26/norway-terror-accused-breivik-on-the-jewish-question/


It seems to be a general theme that mass killers, of any hue, have heads that are made up of lunacy bound together, albeit loosely, with some sort 'rationalisation(s)' provided by a whacky quasi-religious, or other, ideology - or a collection of them. Two parts lunacy with one part ideology; one part lunacy and two parts ideology - I'm not sure it makes much of a difference in the end. People still get maimed and slaughtered.

So he did it because of his political beliefs, not for any religious believes.
Still not the same as someone screaming Allah Akbar as they murder people is it.

Lunacy is "lunacy" anyway you cut it.

Yes it is, however we were discussing motivation.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chaska

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chaska

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:


Brevik is a Zionist. Look it up.

Apparently it's somewhat more complicated - or vaguer - than that, as one might expect of a fruitcake:

"Anders Behring Breivik insists, in his rambling 1,500-page manifesto released on the day of his confessed rampage that killed 76 Norwegians, that he’s no Nazi, despite expressing some sympathy for what Hitler had been trying to achieve. Instead he styles himself a latter-day warrior of the Knights Templar, vanguard force of the medieaval Christian Crusades that briefly claimed the Holy Land for Christendom and made Jerusalem’s streets run ankle deep with the blood of those they saw as usurpers. Even then, it’s worth remembering that the blood spilled by the Crusaders was both Muslim and Jewish.

Despite the Crusader lineage to which he aspires, however, Breivik has no intention of driving Jews from Europe, much less from the Holy Land. On the contrary, his manifesto hails Zionist Jews as a crucial ally in his battle between Christendom and Islam, proclaiming Israel as the frontline citadel in that war. Breivik’s Crusade would have Jews on board for an existential fight against Islam; the mirror image of the “Crusader-Jewish” alliance that Osama bin Laden vowed to drive out of what he defined as Muslim lands."

http://world.time.com/2011/07/26/norway-terror-accused-breivik-on-the-jewish-question/


It seems to be a general theme that mass killers, of any hue, have heads that are made up of lunacy bound together, albeit loosely, with some sort 'rationalisation(s)' provided by a whacky quasi-religious, or other, ideology - or a collection of them. Two parts lunacy with one part ideology; one part lunacy and two parts ideology - I'm not sure it makes much of a difference in the end. People still get maimed and slaughtered.

So he did it because of his political beliefs, not for any religious believes.
Still not the same as someone screaming Allah Akbar as they murder people is it.

Lunacy is "lunacy" anyway you cut it.

Yes it is, however we were discussing motivation.

We seem to have a different interpretation of motivation.

Motivation - The act or process of giving someone a reason for doing something

The act or process of motivating someone

The condition of being eager to act or work : the condition of being motivated

A force or influence that causes someone to do something

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

Look, the problem is not the liberal/moderate Muslim who does NOT act on certain dogma or doctrine. The problem is the lack of condemnation of the Muslim radicalism. What the west needs to see is more Muslim public condemnation of the goals and tactics of the radicals and such as the fatwas.

We have seen far too little from the Muslim leaders and influential speakers to vocally, publicly and much more vociferously go after those who would actually act on their radicalism.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MariaB

quote:

ORIGINAL: respectmen

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yAAq2EQLBkY

Islam is cancer. The lefties are too busy treating white guys as boogeymen when there is a far bigger threat.

Take a look at America and ask yourself this; If a white Christian commits an act of domestic terrorism, will all white American Christians condone what he did?