Reading Anders Breivik's manifesto

I thought we could have a general political discussion while reading the Olso bomber/shooters 1500 manifesto in this thread.

The 2share manifesto download link was removed, so it was a bit hard to track it down. Hopefully we won't run out of mirrors.

I haven't read more than a few pages right now, but as I'm a LEFTIST anarchist/racist, I find myself disagreeing with the most basic rightwing concept:
What's so fucking special and holy about tradition and european identity? Defending things on the grounds that "it's the way it's always been" is just defending tradition against progress. It's not defending foreign immoralities, because then it would be just about those concrete things - it's defending stupidity in its purest sense. It would be like defending the NES for being "a traditional part of our country" against the Wii, to the point of wanting to ban the Wii.

>>39
>>>I'm against the inherent oppression of the state, so I'm an anarchist.
>>An anarchist is one who wants no state

That's what I said. However, I count people who wants "LESS of a state" as anarchists as well.

>>>I'm against the inherent oppression of the upper class, so I'm leftist.
>>A leftist is against class division. I hope you mean the oppression BY the upper class.

Again, that's what I said.

>>>I'm against the inherent rapes and thefts of the africans, so I'm a racist.
>>This is the most ridiculous thing I've seen on newpol for a while. Race doesn't make someone a thief or a rapist, but this post probably makes me in to a fool for trying to reason with a racist - one who has already forgone reason for an easy solution with an us vs them mindset based on phony and discredited biology.

...and you say you've never seen this on newpol before???

It says here in his manifesto that Anders Breivik expects to be DEAD within 12 months, as some chemicals he dealt with can be very cancerous. Otherwise he would have been out again after just 21 years or less.

>>36
Hardly. I have this thing called "a life". Ever tried it?

>>43
I see that being a troll here is part of your life.

>>30
There's a distinct difference between fighting for Christianity and fighting for Christian cultural traditions. He was not a fundamentalist Christian fighting out of religious motives - he was fighting to preserve his culture.

>>45
When ones culture stands for banning contraceptives, abortions, children outside wedlock and so on, it's conservative christian culture.

>>45
He even prayed to God to help him while he was making the bombs, to help keep his warrior alive in the fight against islam.

You can find the torrent to 2083: A European Declaration of Independence on PirateBay.

>>44
Very small one, if anything. And you?

>>49
"A very small one" where you waste time bickering with random people over off-topic things. Over 90 people have been murdered for a revolution against islam, but somehow this doesn't concern you in any way. You would rather call me stupid. I think you have nothing better to do than to hang here all day, talking shit.

For those who want to read his thoughts on Islam, he starts bringing it up for the first time on page 39. (I had to read through the whole history of the marxist conspiracy before this.)

In short, he says that historians falsified history by downplaying how (quote) "evil" and bloodthirsty the muslims were, while the christian crusades was merely a "defensive campaign not offensive". You have to be a very dedicated historian to check what's true here, but knowing that Breivik was involved in a templar cult, my guess is that he was essentially brainwashed by it into believing this. It could even be that the templars did like Charles Manson did, and brainwashed him into their tool, while staying clean themselves. It's hard to say, but very much worth looking into. (Yet, I think it was this order that the police recently raided, without charging anyone.)

>>5
>Against upper class
There will always be classes, deal with it.
Even if its just the majority vs minority.

>>53
...and you call yourself an anarchist with that attitude?

I'm on page 44.
I'm reading lists and lists of government programs to build relations between the western nations and islam, but I think his manifesto is very hollow without him describing what actually MAKES islam evil. Do you have to be a devout christian to take his words even remotely seriously?
Yes, there's been holy wars and probably genocides somewhere in history, but looking at christianity, it has changed considerably. What's missing is him bringing up some passages in the Quran and claim that these are very much practiced by the MAJORITY of all MODERN muslims, and he needs to do this in the very beginning of his manifesto.

He's a pro-Israel, homosexual-supporting, free market-supporting faggot. He's everything white nationalism is not.

>>54
Im against the state which is the basic definition of Anarchy, most left anarchists think otherwise but i could care less if they're anti Capitalism.

>>56

White nationalism isn't neo-nazism. White nationalism is supposedly 'racialist,' meaning they want a white only country for self-determination. That's all it is. Nothing about white nationalism implies hatred of homosexuals, jews, or capitalism. If anything, they're retardedly pro-capitalism.

Granted, most white nationalists DO run on hate and fear (especially xenophobia), but white nationalism itself isn't necessarily nazism.

Got a link to the manifesto?
All I get outa google is how evil it is
along with interpretations of what is
said in it. I want to read it for myself,
to judge whether I agree or disagree with
his points of view.

>>56
He's a what now?
Lying troll is obvious.

>>57
Really? You're wasting time trying to prove yourself more of an anarchist than me?

>>59
You could just search on the name "2083 - A European Declaration of Independence". The download at Pirate Bay has already been suggested, but there could be direct downloads as well. You could also use the direct quotes written here to locate if the entire manifesto is written on the net somewhere (but as it also contains detailed instructions on how to make bombs and do terrorism, don't count on that last option).

>>50
Projection much?

>>61
Go fuck yourself, troll. Bye-bye.

Page 46.
I think we're getting to the core of Breivik's beef with islam now:

Quote:
"What is called fundamentalism or Wahhabism is in fact the original Islam, as is proven by the fact that fundamentalists have existed since long before colonialism"

Say what? In what religion did the fundamentalists not come first?
While I don't think islam is a tame religion by any means *in the middle east*, at this point I'm thinking he assumes that the muslims are as fundamentalistic based on him being fundamentalistic about christianity.

I also think he's overlooking how atheism can be a strength. If marxism would somehow manage to destroy christianity and stuff, atheists will still protest if muslims would start weird things over here.

I have the manifest if any wants it

>>60
>More Anarchist
Whats that even supposed to mean? All im saying is that Ananrchy or "Anti-Statism" has many tenets to it and An Caps get flak for supporting free markets when they still follow the basic definition of being against the state.

>>62
So I'm the troll, now?
Interesting, since it's not me that started spouting racist bullshit on the thread. Nor was it me that had only more racism to come up with in the face of actual arguments.

Although I do have trouble resisting the urge to call down racist morons for the idiots they are, especially when all they can think to respond to criticism with, is blind denial and rabid name-calling.

people have been murdered
by a racist fuckface that couldn't even get his priorities straight. Which pisses me off royally for several reasons. So when another racist fuckface rears his ugly head here, I call him down for it.

And now more name-calling. First you make me feel I'm being trolled, then you're calling me a troll. That's textbook chutzpah.


And that is all I have to say to you.
Now fuck off.

>>66

There's no such thing as trolls. Trolling was a myth invented by the Soviet Union in 1983 to trick the Americans into spending tens of millions of dollars investing in troll-proofing their arguments and diplomatic efforts. A troll and an idiot are identical, because no matter how ironic a person thinks they were being, that only affects their own perception of the argument.

In other words, the stated argument is either good or it's retarded. If it's good, and you agree with it, let the poster know. If it's good and you disagree with it, then refute it. If it's retarded, ignore it. The problem isn't trolls, it's those who feed them.

Good posts generally get ignored, while the retarded 'trolling,' gets all the attention and replies. If you don't want to get dragged down into it, then don't fucking feed them.

>>59
On his Wiki page, I found this link:
http://unitednations.ispnw.org/archives/breivik-manifesto-2011.pdf

Does anyone have a mirror of his youtube video? It's taken down, which now makes it mandatory viewing for me.

(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQOfH8Dj1mw)

http://www.twitvid.com/EXJWW

The video. It's nothing special.

At Page 50.
I think I've arrived at the conclusion that Breivik is nuts at this point.

Apart from him going on and on about how there's a marxist-islamistic conspiracy instead of bringing up actual quotes from the Quran and its inplementation on todays society, islam is evil PER DEFINITION for him. If it's doing evil things, then it's showing its natural true self, but when it's doing good things, then this is suddenly a falsification and a deception, and there's a LOT of "deception" he brings up. Just listen to this.

Quote:
"Many nominal Muslims have outgrown Islamic values and developed a commitment to modern values, but their sentimental attachment to the religion imbibed in their childhood prevents them from formally breaking with Islam and makes them paint a rosy picture of it.

Among Muslim spokesmen, is certainly not the fundamentalists who are the most active proponents of negationism. It is liberals like Asghar Ali Engineer who deny that Islam ordains war on the infidels. It is those who are acclaimed by Europeans as being good "secular" Muslims. An Islam that wants to be secular cannot be and is therefore dishonest and untrue to itself. Unfortunately, a tolerant Islam is a contradiction, and the “creation” of a tolerant past for Islam to appease the position of liberal Muslims, is a lie."

I repeat:
"An Islam that wants to be secular cannot be and is therefore dishonest and untrue to itself. Unfortunately, a tolerant Islam is a contradiction, ..."

His own religion christianity has COMPLETELY broken its back while bending over backwards trying to become a peaceful religion, but Breiviks wishful thinking is that religion will always stay traditional. Personally I really wish it could, but that's not the case in the real world. Not for immigrants coming to the western countries.

When I wished for Breivik to detail his views on islam, I expected him to do so without just copying other sources. The final pages of "Book 1" (apparently out of 3) (page 51 to 278) provides numerous articles on why islam would be despicable and evil, but are from various other sources.
This does of course diminish the value of this (at first glace impressive) 1518 page long document, but can give us an idea about what (I'm assuming) he read. Personally I'm skipping it. (It's not written by people possession conviction enough to kill, so I'm not trusting their words.)

Book 2 - "Europe Burning" - begins on page 280. Of course, that it begins with yet another article written by Fjordman (that I think is someone he met at the norwegian site "Document.no", judging by the comments that Breivik posted there) gives the impression that this whole thing is more of a compendium of likeminded views, than a one person manifesto.

Book 3 starts on page 766, with a two page long legal disclaimer stating that the whole book, as well as parts of the previous book 2, is entirely FICTIOUS, and that it's written as a theoretical scenario by a sci-fi enthusiast. There's probably some legal reasons that Breivik wanted to get around when he tried(?) to publish the books, but it looks really insincere as part of a manifesto.

I found that not only does Breivik copy things from other sources, but on page 781 (book 3) he has copied sections from page 40 (book 1) in his own work.

Page 809 contains new rules for all muslims living in Europe (after the christian revolution has come, as led by the Templar Knights (PCCTS or "Pauperes commilitones Christi Templique Solomonici")), in short:

1. Convert to Christianity (Orthodox, Catholic or Protestant).
2. Name change (to a christian/european name)
3. Strictly prohibited to practice your ”mother tongue” or Arabic (The exception is people trying to learn english.)
4. All mosques and Islamic centers will be demolished or converted.
5. All Islamic and/or Arab-style or equivalent buildings/artwork will be demolished or modified (All traces of Islamic culture in Europe will be eradicated, even locations considered historical.)
6. Attempts to celebrate Islamic holidays, exercise or portray Sharia/Islamic codes/markers is strictly prohibited (This includes all cultural related rituals, dress codes, Islamic religious or cultural circumcisions, Islamic preparation of food, the use of any Muslim flag or identification (crescent moon), religious or cultural markings.)
7. Measures taken against attempts of demographic warfare (They can't have more than 2 children.)
8. Correspondence (electronically, telephonic etc.) with other Muslims (including ones family) abroad is strictly prohibited
9. All travel to Muslim countries/territories or to any country where Muslims make out more than 20% of the population is strictly prohibited

What he's essentially claiming here, is that the Templar Knights (which is a real organisation, of which I believe he was a member) is the new christian al Qaeda.

Concerning if Breivik had any moral intentions behind his attack, quote:
"In many ways, morality has lost its meaning in our struggle. The question of good and evil is reduced to one simple choice. For every free patriotic European, only one choice remains: Survive or perish."

As a traditionalist christian, he so fanatic that he thinks he will perish if christianity is marginalized any more, and the only thing he's satisfied with, is traditional christian european dominion, at any cost.

I have never heard a more fanatical preacher in my life. I would call him Bin Laden, but then Bin Laden wasn't the actual leader of al Qaeda, and there's a chance that he trumphs even al Qaeda in fanaticism.

Quote:
"Self-financed and self-indoctrinated single individual attack cells, is the backbone of the Knights Templar Europe. The importance of the ability for single cell commanders to be able to keep their spirits and morale up through self-indoctrination and motivation by using specific motivational techniques has been stressed on multiple occasions."

Unless Breivik is completely imagining the Knights Templar being (or having become) a secret terror organization, europeans may have a big problem on their hands.

Anonimous wrote:  "What's so fucking special and holy about tradition and european identity? Defending things on the grounds that "it's the way it's always been" is just defending tradition against progress."

---------------------

Actually european tradition (secular democracy based on Christian background that Breivik wants to protect) facilitates for progress, while Islam (brought to Europe with massive immigration) will ruin this  European tradition that is facilitating for progress and will  bring 100% reverse to progress and will establish middle ages' traditions  with sharia dictatorship... - thats is essential thought of Breivik's manifesto...Ofcource I condemn his methods and murders, but I consider him 100% correct in his analyses of situation in Europe today and blaiming it on ruling elites.

>>78
This may depend of your country, but the traditions that Breivik complains about being destroyed, are only christian values, and have so far mostly been destroyed to give way for flexible democratic rights.
Also, I'll dismiss your claims about islam as a political threat to democracy as paranoid delusions, until I see any western country starting to actually employ islamistic rules.
I also thought >>75 made it perfectly clear that his intended traditional christian rule would be more horrible and oppressive than even sharia laws.

Anonymous wrote:  "I'll dismiss your claims about islam as a political threat to democracy as paranoid delusions, until I see any western country starting to actually employ islamistic rules.
I also thought >>75 made it perfectly clear that his intended traditional christian rule would be more horrible and oppressive than even sharia laws."

-----------------------

Employing individual muslims in the Government (or even as rulers) may not show as for a while they will  not be that strict (to win time till muslim majority  help them to show their real face) - it is demographic majority of muslims that will show, not individual muslims in the government amid non-muslim majority. As for his personal "traditional christioan rule" as  oppressive one - ofcource it would be opressive, don't you forget that he is a mass-murderer after all - I am not talking about Breivik as a ruler (especially that I condemn his terrorist act) - I am talking about his analysis of nature of Islam and situation in Europe where political elites facilitate for muslim immigration and appeasement (that is surrender of  democratic values to Islam - like some parts of cities that were calm and safe 20 years ago,  are now already controlled by muslim gangs that collect jizya from weak european teens and police can do nothing  about that ...)