Oh ... so it's not just guys in turbans with Korans then?

[non sociopath skin]

The Norwegian daily Verdens Gang quoted a friend as saying he became a rightwing extremist in his late 20s. It said he expressed strong nationalistic views in online debates and had been a strong opponent of the idea that people of different cultural backgrounds can live alongside each other.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jul/23/norway-attacks

One presumes that the government and the plods will now be considering special measures to keep an eye on the likes of the EDL.

In yer dreams!

The Skin

[oldironside]

1. A loser with a gun and a grudge...

... is still a loser with a gun and grudge, whatever hat he is wearing or whichever tract he thinks holds all the answers to humanity's ills. It could happen anywhere (thinking Dunblane and Hungerford), but even so, the scale of it is impossible to take in.

[non sociopath skin]

2. However, invading busloads of losers (with or without guns) ...

... who share the Norwegian terrorist(s)' general world view should maybe be taken a little more seriously now?

The Skin

[oldironside]

3. I'm not sure I follow you.

I may have missed something in the UK. I only tend to read the stuff that makes me pontificate on a grand scale. Is this to do with the EDL?

[non sociopath skin]

6. Please feel free to pontificate ...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jul/23/norway-attacks-utoya-gunman

The Skin

[muriel_volestrangler]

7. Perhaps the confusion was whether 'invading' was an adjective or a verb

If it had been the latter, "invading ...losers... should be taken more seriously" would sound like a call to invade somewhere.

[non sociopath skin]

8. See what you mean. Mu.

I really need to be more grammatical when responding to Neo-Nazi mass murderers.

The Skin

[muriel_volestrangler]

9. Reuters managed "Man held after Norway attacks right-wing extremist"

as a headline. Very confusing.

[LeftishBrit]

4. It's just horrific

I find it hard to take in. I have some connections with Norway; have been there several times. As far as I've been able to find out, everyone I know is OK, but it's even more shocking to me because it always seemed to me such a lovely peaceful country. Of course, nowhere is safe from these nuts. And yes, it's important to keep an eye on homegrown nutters; we may also remember Tim McVeigh, and people like Copeland, the London nail bomber.

[oldironside]

5. The sheer scale of it defies belief.

How one man could do so much harm in such a way is impossible to take in. 91 is just a number. Imagine 91 people in a context you can relate to. For me (I'm a teacher, by the way) that's five complete classes of living, breathing individuals. Shocking beyond belief.

[T_i_B]

10. The news coverage of the Norway mass-killings was fact-free conjecture

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jul/24/charlie-brooker-norway-mass-killings?CMP=twt_iph

On Friday night's news, they were calling him something else. He was a suspected terror cell with probable links to al-Qaida. Countless security experts queued up to tell me so. This has all the hallmarks of an al-Qaida attack, they said. Watching at home, my gut feeling was that that didn't add up. Why Norway? And why was it aimed so specifically at one political party? But hey, they're the experts. They're sitting there behind a caption with the word "EXPERT" on it. Every few minutes the anchor would ask, "What kind of picture is emerging?" or "What sense are you getting of who might be responsible?" and every few minutes they explained this was "almost certainly" the work of a highly-organised Islamist cell.

When it became apparent that a shooting was under way on Utoya island, the security experts upgraded their appraisal. This was no longer a Bali-style al-Qaida bombing, but a Mumbai-style al-Qaida massacre. On and on went the conjecture, on television, and in online newspapers, including this one. Meanwhile, on Twitter, word was quickly spreading that, according to eyewitnesses, the shooter on the island was a blond man who spoke Norwegian. At this point I decided my initial gut reservations about al-Qaida had probably been well founded. But who was I to contradict the security experts? A blond Norwegian gunman doesn't fit the traditional profile, they said, so maybe we'll need to reassess . . . but let's not forget that al-Qaida have been making efforts to actively recruit "native" extremists: white folk who don't arouse suspicion. So it's probably still the Muslims.

Some remained scarily defiant in the face of the new unfolding reality. On Saturday morning I saw a Fox News anchor tell former US diplomat John Bolton that Norwegian police were saying this appeared to be an Oklahoma-style attack, then ask him how that squared with his earlier assessment that al-Qaida were involved. He was sceptical. It was still too early to leap to conclusions, he said. We should wait for all the facts before rushing to judgment. In other words: assume it's the Muslims until it starts to look like it isn't – at which point, continue to assume it's them anyway.

As more information regarding the identity of the terrorist responsible for the massacre comes to light, articles attempting to explain his motives are starting to appear online. And beneath them are comments from readers, largely expressing outrage and horror. But there are a disturbing number that start, "What this lunatic did was awful, but . . ."
These "but" commenters then go on to discuss immigration, often with reference to a shaky Muslim-baiting story they've half-remembered from the press. So despite this being a story about an anti-Muslim extremist killing Norwegians who weren't Muslim, they've managed to find a way to keep the finger of blame pointing at the Muslims, thereby following a narrative lead they've been fed for years, from the overall depiction of terrorism as an almost exclusively Islamic pursuit, outlined by "security experts" quick to see al-Qaida tentacles everywhere, to the fabricated tabloid fairytales about "Muslim-only loos" or local councils "banning Christmas".

[non sociopath skin]

11. And, of course, we can always rely on Murdoch's Faux News ...

... for the final reductio ad absurdum.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x603069

The Skin