The Perfect Timing of Anders Behring Breivik, page 10
Pages: <<  7    8    9    10  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 58 times


reply posted on 27-7-2011 @ 08:45 AM by ontarff
Originally posted by Hilltaker
reply to post by Cythraul


Hi,

Most people in Norway, Denmark, Sweden and Finland is not armed.

In denmark you get 7 days in jail if you are unlucky enough to buy a kitchen knife and then forget to remove it INSTANTLY from your car the same day.

So the weapon law is very hard in the northern countries.

We actually enjoy a little that with all the gangs etc and all the killings that guns are just common to have in U.S. still. IT IS the WILD WILD WEST

Thanks,


Yes, we have a 2nd Amendment to our Constitution that allows citizens to have weapons to fight tyranny if the government tries to take our freedom from us like in other countries. It doesn't make sense that the bad guys who choose to break the law may have a gun and the police do not. That would place them in a bad spot. I would think the Norwegian police would always be ready to deal with someone who may be armed. I would not want to be a police officer in a country where I may be involved with criminals who are better equipped to kill me than I am to defend my life or someone elses.


reply posted on 27-7-2011 @ 08:51 AM by Tib50
Originally posted by ontarff
reply to post by Tib50


Wow! Nice list. I can not make a list like that for Christians. I'm impressed. I would have to get every database for people killed in the world by Christians. That would take awhile!


No, you cannot make a list like that for Christians, because CHRISTIANS DO NOT KILL PEOPLE FOR OPPOSING CHRISTIAN IDEAS !!!!!!!

You would have to list every terrorist attack committed by Christian terrorists trying to impose their relgious ideas on those they attack, trying to punish those they attack for opposing Christian religious ideas.

I suggest you read the list again, instead of twisting and turning desperately to defend the indefensible.


reply posted on 27-7-2011 @ 09:03 AM by Tib50
Originally posted by Pr0t0
reply to post by Tib50


You won't find a list of so-called 'christian' atrocities... how about we widen that net to include 'Western' atrocities - but we still have the same problem; one word: "Classified".


"Western" atrocities is irrelevant, because they could be committed by Atheists and Satanists. This was a list of "Islamic Terror Attacks For the Past TWO MONTHS" only.

"Atrocities" is not the right word, but "Christian Terror Attacks", to match this list of "Islamic Terror Attacks".

The differences in violence between Christianity and Islam are startlingly clear, and only a Globalist patsy would continue to try to compare them.


reply posted on 27-7-2011 @ 09:21 AM by ontarff
Originally posted by Tib50
Originally posted by ontarff
reply to post by Tib50


Wow! Nice list. I can not make a list like that for Christians. I'm impressed. I would have to get every database for people killed in the world by Christians. That would take awhile!


No, you cannot make a list like that for Christians, because CHRISTIANS DO NOT KILL PEOPLE FOR OPPOSING CHRISTIAN IDEAS !!!!!!!

You would have to list every terrorist attack committed by Christian terrorists trying to impose their relgious ideas on those they attack, trying to punish those they attack for opposing Christian religious ideas.

I suggest you read the list again, instead of twisting and turning desperately to defend the indefensible.


I am not arguing your point on the frequency of Christians killing specifically for religious differences. I agree with you on that point. My point was Christians killing someone for whatever reason that motivates them violating the commandment, "Thou shall not kill".

There have been homicides committed by Christians against Muslims for their religious beliefs, but I do not have access to every police database in the country to prove that point like you have. I am not trying to "twist or turn desperately to defend the indefensible". Do you have to be insulting to present your point?


reply posted on 27-7-2011 @ 09:33 AM by Cythraul
reply to post by thoughtprocess

Welcome!

Great first post. You're right about not all attacks being false flag, but the moment I saw those photos of Breivik, and learned about the convenient media blackout of his appearances, I knew something wasn't right about this.


reply posted on 27-7-2011 @ 09:48 AM by Aeons
reply to post by Tib50


Of for the ...

He attacked his real enemy - the people allowing immigrants in.

You guys wave "false flag" around like a drunk bannerman.


reply posted on 27-7-2011 @ 10:05 AM by Aeons
reply to post by RRokkyy


I would like to explain to you Rrokkyy, what most of the "save the whites" groups are doing wrong.

Your romantized and somewhat fetishized notion of women is a pathetic woman. Weak physically, fragile, hysterical, incapable, highly docile, and prone to sexual fetishes or lack of interest in sexuality. You guys look for these women to bolster your place as a "man." Then you get children on them.

Then those children you encourage to breed with other families who did exactly the same thing.

Weak women have weak children. Even if it doesn't start showing up for a few generations, of interbreeding with others who also are carrying these traits. They don't just pass these traits to their girls. They pass them to their boys.

These boys then take wives from families that have done the same thing. Having children with them. (the women are groomed to marry primarily for status.)

After a couple of generations, what you have is - boys that are FAR more likely to have traits that are weak, hysterical, docile, slightly stupid, and prone to sexual fetishism.

This is ONE problem. One glaring logic problem in the program of perfection. And it is self-correcting eventually. Either you quit it, or you go extinct from your extreme fetish.


edit on 2011/7/27 by Aeons because: (no reason given)



reply posted on 27-7-2011 @ 11:17 AM by Tib50
Originally posted by ontarff

I am not arguing your point on the frequency of Christians killing specifically for religious differences. I agree with you on that point. My point was Christians killing someone for whatever reason that motivates them violating the commandment, "Thou shall not kill".



No, that wasn't your point at all---you just changed it, slithering and sliding around to find some way to dismiss all those Islamic Terror Attacks. It's called "Moving the Goalposts".



I am not trying to "twist or turn desperately to defend the indefensible".




It's astonishing---when presented with a long list of atrocities and murders committed by Muslims for opposing Muslim ideas, you just brush it all aside, relentlessly trying to find some way to turn it all around against Christians. The deaths of all these people means nothing to you. You are indeed trying to twist and turn to defend the indefensible, just in order to carry out the Globalist programme to "De-Christianize" the west before Islamizing it, or Satanizing it, more like.

It's nothing whatsoever to do with whether or not Christians obey their own religious beliefs, but rather whether they KILL NON-BELIEVERS FOR NON-BELIEF IN CHRISTIANITY, and the answer is no. Since you are well aware of this, and can offer no list of "Christian Terror Attacks", I'm not going to continue arguing with you on irrelevant points.

While you're finding out more about Islam, you might want to read the latest Islamic "decree" in Somalia, where they have just BANNED SAMOSAS from all food shops, because their triangular shape reminds them of the Christian Holy Trinity. Talk about pathetic!


reply posted on 27-7-2011 @ 11:27 AM by Tib50
reply to post by RRokkyy


I don't know about "Royalty" or "Holy Descendants", nor do I believe that "white" people or their DNA are somehow "superior" to other racial groups.

It IS alarming, however, to discover that in the 1950s, about 25% of the world's population was "white", whereas today it is only 9% and falling. It will be down to only 5% within decades, which will mightily please the Cultural Marxists and their masters the Globalists, whose policies have deliberately targetted this particular racial group for destruction.

The only thing I don't understand is "Why?"


reply posted on 27-7-2011 @ 11:55 AM by Aeons
White Caucasians are primarily in countries that are controlling their fertility.

Therefore, the number of total white Caucasians is not plummeting.

The comparative ratio against a ballooning number of other groups is changing the RATIO.

White Caucasians total numbers have stabilized. Whereas in the same period of time China had Mao tell people to have many children, and they did. Where Muslim Clerics encourage their people to have many children, and they do. Where Hindus praise large families. Buddhists praise fertility over birth control. Africa's population has bloomed like algae.

In the same period of time that white Caucasians are living in places that have stabilized their population numbers, most of the other groups on the planet have actively encouraged fertility or done things to disallow women/girls to be able to control their fertility. Even actively making birth control illegal, or difficult to come by, or making it so that they may not leave to purchase it, are not allowed to stop men from having sex with them, and are prevented from jobs that might allow them to purchase fertility control for themselves, and limiting their rights outside ownership by a male (father, or husband), encouraging religious beliefs that make submission their only job, or making their bodies into public property a-la China.

Control women, control fertility. If you control women, you control men. Every control put on a woman, or every control moved from a woman to a male handler actually increases your control of the men. And the men are too stupid to see it.
edit on 2011/7/27 by Aeons because: (no reason given)


reply posted on 27-7-2011 @ 03:05 PM by thoughtprocess
I'm sorry, i didnt want to open a new thread solely for this information so im just gonna post it here, if there's a better place to post this info, be my guest and quote it.

Some interesting developments regarding this case:



3.71 Finding the right defence attorney/legal counsel for your trial

A Justiciar Knight must be prepared to actively search for a nationalistic oriented (patriotic) lawyer /legal counsel before his trial starts. DO NOT accept a random appointed public defender offered by the regime. Chances are too great that this individual will be either incompetent or not willing to work for you interests (which is to further the cause, and not provide the most optimal defence). The nationalistic orientated defence lawyer you are searching for should provide his services pro bono (free of charge as an investment in a good cause). If you managed to execute a relatively “spectacular” operation many so called “high profile” attorneys will contact you and offer their services discounted or for free. Understand that a large majority of these individuals will not be willing to cater for your demands but are only interested in the publicity surrounding the case. They are so called “legal prostitutes” who just wants their face on TV. Ignore these requests and continue your search for a patriotic oriented defence attorney who is willing to accept your three primary demands. You will be restricted from doing effective research from jail so you may have to ask anyone you know on the outside to assist you in searching for this candidate. Very few patriotic defence attorneys will be willing to flag their political views publicly as it may have devastating effects on their career so finding a good candidate may prove to be a challenging task. On the bright side, a defence attorney flagging his views may actually benefit that individual as well as he will literally have a monopoly on that niche market in future related cases.


-- taken from Breiviks Manifesto (p. 1111)

As you can see, Breivik explicitly discusses the lawyers profile he's interested in, in case he survives the attack.

Now, according to Reuters (af.reuters.com...), Breivik contacted a lawyer named Geir Lippestad for his services, which is his actual attorney. The interesting part is that this lawyer is affiliated member of the Labour Party, the same institution he claims he despises and consequently attacked in that Island.



Geir Lippestad (born 1964) is a Norwegian lawyer. He has been defence counsel in several high profile cases. In July 2011, he was appointed as defence counsel for Anders Behring Breivik, the admitted perpetrator of the 2011 Norway attacks.[1][2] Lippestad also represented Ole Nicolai Kvisler, who was convicted of the racially motivated murder of Benjamin Hermansen in 2002.[3] Lippestad is a member of the Norwegian Labour Party, and has been deputy chair of its Nordstrand local chapter.[4] [edit]


-- taken from wikipedia en.wikipedia.org...

Interesting, huh? What's your take on it, guys.

It should be also noted that Breivik makes himself absolutely clear on the fact that he doesn't want to be considered "Insane" during the trial, so its very strange that his own lawyer says that he might be insane. (english.aljazeera.net... tml)


edit on 27-7-2011 by thoughtprocess because: (no reason given)
edit on 27-7-2011 by thoughtprocess because: (no reason given)
edit on 27-7-2011 by thoughtprocess because: (no reason given)
edit on 27-7-2011 by thoughtprocess because: (no reason given)
edit on 27-7-2011 by thoughtprocess because: (no reason given)




reply posted on 28-7-2011 @ 04:12 AM by korathin
reply to post by Cythraul


I don't know, but my intuition tells me that this Breivik is a lefty who intentionally committed this atrocity to attack the enemies of the Marxist Matriarchy. Lefties always do this sort of thing. They do it online all the time. They pretend to be a moderate or right-winger, then engage in behavior to make moderates- right wingers look bad.

I suppose after a person has done that online for a long enough time it becomes second nature. Combined with an ego+obsession it isn't far of a stretch to imagine lefties doing this. After all the lefties political violence/genocides in the 20th century killed well over 100 million people.


reply posted on 28-7-2011 @ 10:10 AM by something wicked
Originally posted by Tib50
Originally posted by ontarff
reply to post by Tib50


Wow! Nice list. I can not make a list like that for Christians. I'm impressed. I would have to get every database for people killed in the world by Christians. That would take awhile!


No, you cannot make a list like that for Christians, because CHRISTIANS DO NOT KILL PEOPLE FOR OPPOSING CHRISTIAN IDEAS !!!!!!!

You would have to list every terrorist attack committed by Christian terrorists trying to impose their relgious ideas on those they attack, trying to punish those they attack for opposing Christian religious ideas.

I suggest you read the list again, instead of twisting and turning desperately to defend the indefensible.





edit on 28-7-2011 by something wicked because: The comments made by Tib50 really don't deserve a response, can't believe I nearly fell for it.

Pages: <<  7    8    9    10  >>    ^^TOP^^