Monday, July 25, 2011

Toothless Norway and European inertness

We live to fight the hand of doom 
We got the pride to strike a fool
Vain glory be my wicked guide   
                                   (c) Edguy 

Many people asked me what my opinion on the recent events in Norway. So inspite I didn't want to write anything about it, I decided to devote some of my time to this issue. Basically there are only two things that worth of discussion:

  • What made this austere lunatic to perpetrate such ignominious and insolent crime
  • Why Norwegian police haven't been prepared to contest this

I would start from the second. According to the sources, the duratation of massacre on the island was about 90 min until the police arrived. Very nice isn't it? I'd say it is the world record. It takes about 10-15 min to get on the boat there, however, the closest police department which first received the signal about shootings decided to wait for the special Delta team. And their small boat couldn't take a lot of people like they claimed.  I'd like to ask, wtf? Why at least 3-4 armed policeman couldn't be instantly sent on the island? Scary to go without a crowd of soldiers? Then why do u fucking work in police? You thought you apply the kindergarten job or what? It reminds me this:

Well, alright, Norwegian police crapped their pants, but here goes another question, why this Delta team didn't have helicopter? Why they were going by car on the beach from Oslo, and only then took a boat? Is it a joke or? It's a fucking mess, and this mess in Norwegian police should be dealt as well, the reason why this loony managed to kill 90 people is the weak response of the Norwegian police and heads of the police should be at least fired for that, however I'd also bring an action of negligence against them. If you are a coward, then don't go in police, leave this work for those who can do it properly. Policeman is not just a uniformed man in smart sun-glasses, it's a society protector and people rely on him, and only fearsome and responsible people should be policemen.

Now let's talk about the first item. The guy had vinaigrette of different incompatible ideas, and many of them may be red in his 1500 manifest which he was writing for 9 years, obviously I can't discuss the whole manifest here in blog since it is too long and I don't want to discuss torn off quotes out of it omitting the full context. Therefore, let's watch the video instead which is made by Breivik and uploaded before he commited the massacre. Considering this video was made by him, it presents basic ideas which Breivik personally underlined as the main.

On the video he raises the problem of ascending Islamism in Europe, and accuses ''Multicultural Marxism''. It is already can be concluded that the guy has profuse cerebral affection. Only mentally deceased person can mix Marxism and Islam, needless to say that they are in different dimensions and not interrelated whatsoever. I don't want to discuss again all these blatantly implausible claims such as ''communist holocaust 100+ millions'' or stupid pointing with crusaders without having any grasp in this subject, because I've written much about it already. However, the person uses the Soviet symbolic and shows that the EU is in fact ''EUSSR''. I'd chuckle on it, but I can't afford it since such tragedy stands behind the author of the video. Breivik basically accuses Marxism not because he has precise understanding of its philosophy and ideas (he doesn't have them at all), but because he tries to compare the situation in the EU with the USSR and this is his biggest and most delusional mistake. Breivik doesn't see the reasons of multicultural societies in both countries and hasn't the foggiest how different cultures were co-existing in the Soviet Union.

In a nutshell, the main difference is that the USSR it is basically a successor of the Russian Empire, I hope needless to tell that Russia was and still remains the biggest country in the World's history, nobody ever had bigger territory, even Genghis Khan. Russia has different roots of multicultural society, in 13th centaury Russia was conquered by Mongolians leaded by Batu Khan and for 240 years, Russian principalities recognized the dependence on the Golden Horde until first Dmitriy Donskoy (watch battle of Kulikovo), then Ivan III (watch great stand on the Ugra river) didn't eliminate the dependence. But there were no direct occupation of Russia; Russian principalities remained to be sovereign. Mongolians were not interested in assimilating Russians, nor in total subduing them. All they were needed were money, and Russian principalities were paying contribution to the Golden Horde.

That was the first experience of Russia in multiculturalism, where Mongloians were living in on their territories, Russians on their territories and cultural exchange between Russia and the Golden Horde was not really tight (except for nobilities of course). Subsequently, Russia was unyoked and started to expand, unlike colonial superpowers (France, UK, Spain, Portugal, Netherlands) Russia was expanding only around its borders, and instead of genocide or assimilating other folks, they were just building infrastructure and military fortresses in order to protect from the common bordered neighbours. All nationalities in Russia were dwelling on their territories being united in the one country. They were not mixed in a one urban, rural area, of course since it was the united country, you could encounter non-Russian in purely Russian cities, but it was not that wide-scaled like in the EU. The analogous principle was implemented in the USSR, it was a Union of the Republics and despite the Soviet ideology was constantly praising ''friendship of nations'', the Soviets were very determined and solemn on national conflicts, they didn't call for tolerance, the laws were common for all without any national exceptions. They were providing to each nation equal job opportunities, 
worthy infrustructure and all goods they were needed instead of robbing them. And obviously it has never provoked mass immigrations even inside one country. And such multiculturalism was in Russia for centauries, it was building very carefully and gradually during the country's expansion.

In the EU it is opposite case. For centauries, the European countries were robbing other countries; there was a wide-scaled slavery application, ethnic concentration camps and worldwide colonisation. The wealth of these colonies was constantly moving to the metropolises leaving aborigines of these colonies with nothing. And now since the countries were robbed and basically continue to be plundered by the West (this time economically and with ''humanitarian bombings''). The West has become far more rich and prosper than most 
states , and backfire of its atrocities was imminent. All inhabitants from ex-colonized countries poured into the Western Europe, the process was very quick around 40-50 years after the WW II, and instant mix of the cultures engulfed the whole Europe. Former colonialists were trapped, like a trap in a trap, it was a some sort of revenge. The governments of the EU tempted by the profits from new cheap labour, instead of controlling aborigines/immigrants ratio, decided to walk the easiest path and endorsed the ideas of tolerance and integration, imposing it on every corner. The ideas of political correctness which are incompatible with Islamic values and lifestyle. With such approach, cultural dissonance was inevitable, and now it is sparking appearance of hundreds neo-nazi organizations in Europe.

Mr. Breivik is a typical neo-nazi of this new wave of European nationalism, he is an offspring of the European policy, and in fact, almost in every European currently lives his own personal Breivik, he is still somewhere deep inside and sleeps, but one little spark can arouse him. Futile attempts to artificially keep this inner Breivik inactive will not bring any yields, because it is impossible to make people believe in unfeaseble ideas, and this inflating balloon will blow eventually, the massacre in Norway was just the first portent. The governments of the EU should realize that it is incumbent on them to act, it is vitally important to at least put on hold the immigration process and thoroughly rethink their policy over multiculturalism and integration, and they ought to do it now, because in a short run it will be too late. Obtrusion of tolerance, political correctness and sweaping all ethnic problems under the carpet 
should be immediately ceased. Otherwise, each personal Breivik who is somewhere inside can awake in dozens of people further, and much more innocent blood will shed.


Q: Do you think Breivik's act was good, do you justify him?

A: I do not justify him. Killing innocent people, especially children can't be excused, regardless of how just and good were your intentions. I do not approve such vainglorious and wicked demeanor. In the internet, some people claim that he killed only immigrants, but I don't give a damn whether he was selectively shooting only Islamises or pure Norwegians as well as immigrants. He had seen the problem of Europe, his convictions are mutually contradictory, full of delirium in many parts. But the general conclusion was fair - the European cultural identity is in peril. However his action is not a solution of this issue, and if you think this is the solution, then your place is in a loony-bin but not among normal people. 

Q: Does he operated solely or has accomplices? 

A: It is more than likely that he has them, maybe not in Norway though, but somewhere in other countries. According to his manifest: 

Founding (re-founding) members:
Anonymous 1 - Nationality: English Protestant (Host)
Anonymous 2 - Nationality: English Christian atheist
Anonymous 3 - Nationality: French Catholic
Anonymous 4 - Nationality: German Christian atheist
Anonymous 5 - Nationality: Dutch Christian agnostic
Anonymous 6 - Nationality: Greek Orthodox
Anonymous 7 - Nationality: Russian Christian atheist
Anonymous 8 - Nationality: Norwegian Protestant (member and proxy for 9)
Anonymous 9 - Nationality: Serbian Orthodox (by proxy, location: Monrovia, Liberia)

Who is ''Christian atheist'' is it possible? Yes it's possible, a christian atheist, it is ones who doesn't believe in God but approves moral teaching of christianity, and also he can consider christianity as a cultural motivation mover against other cultures which are a threat to his culture, i.e. it's a ''diamond cuts diamond'' principle where one fire drives out another fireOf course he could write it in order to entangle investigation and spreading more panic. But this guy visited 25 counries and was obscessed with his ideas for 9 years, thus he had plenty of opportunities and time to establish contacts with other people who share the same ideas . He was prepairing his manifest, writing it conveniently in serviceable English for worlwide distribution.  He elaborated everything, he blasted the government building, he massacred the camp with pro-government youth organizations. He uploaded his manifest before the committal, so all the people would have been downloaded it since he got such famouse. In other words, he knew what he's doing and had a precise plan, and it seems that everything went exactly how he was reckoned. So possibly this is the thin edge of the wedge.

No comments:

Post a Comment