My answer to the question "Claire, do you admire the Oslo killer?"

It would appear that Breivik felt that there was no other way as all the anti-immigration parties in Europe are marginalised, despised and ignored. It would appear that he felt it was necessary to do what he did in order to get the attention, not just of the Norwegians, but the entire Western world and all the European peoples.

Being a former member of two anti-immigration parties, I am well aware of how hopelessly ineffective they are.

By the time BNP and UKIP get their acts together, there will be even more immigrants, more single mothers, and more useless jobless welfare-dependent bastards with a crap state education that no one wants to hire.

It may well be that Breivic felt that there was a certain urgency in being both dramatic and unignorable that could not wait till the next election.

You see, if something is agreed to be necessary, then it follows that it is moral.

Necessary for what, you ask.

Necessary to stop Europe becoming a part of an Islamic empire after it is finished being part of the EU liberal feminist empire.


I am glad he had the moral discernment not to take it out on the Muslims but instead targeted the people who are members of the party that led them in and won't stop letting them in no matter how much the locals complain. If you are going to kill people, you might as well kill the people who are most to blame for your troubles, and Breivik thought this was the liberal political establishment who have been pooh-poohing the concerns of ordinary people for decades now. Indeed, anyone expressing concern to them is automatically labelled a bigot and a racist, until people are afraid to discuss the subject or unless they don't mind being called evil, extremist, Nazi, Fascist bigots.

This means that while people, especially politicians, are afraid to discuss this subject properly, the problem gets worse and more intractable until the people are presented with a fait accompli.


Breivic only wanted Norway to operate an immigration policy similar to the South Koreans and Japanese, apparently, which sounds pretty moderate to me, unless we are to call the Japanese and South Koreans 'extremist'. 


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/norway/8657473/Norway-killings-Breivik-posted-hate-filled-video-on-YouTube-hours-before-attacks.html

Brievik says he wants to see a Europe modelled on the nations of Japan and South Korea, which he says represent a system “not far from cultural conservatism and nationalism at its best”.

Breivic only wanted Norway to operate an immigration policy similar to the South Koreans and Japanese, apparently. Perhaps these days that is considered 'extremist' by our demented liberal political classes?

'Admire' is perhaps a dangerous word to use in view of the violence used and the numbers killed, but if Breivic has by his actions made the liberal governments of Europe re-examine their policy of tolerating if not actively encouraging uncontrolled immigration while suppressing any criticism of this policy, and if it was the only way to make the governments of Europe re-examine this policy of encouraging social unrest, then perhaps his ruthlessness was necessary.   If this was indeed necessary, then perhaps it could be said that it is admirable.  Perhaps, then, the intransigence and arrogance of the liberal establishment in refusing to discuss topic properly and of vilifying those who dare to complain about immigration as evil and racist should take some of the blame for the violence Breivic felt was necessary to use in order to achieve his aim of having a full and frank debate about immigration.  It may be that the hypocritical and cowardly liberal establishment will even now continue to refuse to debate this matter and continue to demonise and suppress those who complain about immigration, but with even more illiberal ruthlessness than before.  


http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2084895,00.html#ixzz1T8KYj9PE

Around 2000, I realized that the democratic struggle against the Islamization of Europe, and European multiculturalism, was lost. It is simply not possible to compete with democratic regimes that import millions of voters. 40 years of dialogue with the cultural Marxists / multiculturalists had ended up as a disaster. It would now only take 50-70 years before we, Europeans, were the minority. So I decided to explore alternative forms of opposition. But the biggest problem then was that there were no options for me at all.