It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Anders Behring Breivik and the hidden hate of ATS.

page: 8
30
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 27 2011 @ 03:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Helmkat
 


i was personally attacked for citing the quran (in context) i was 'being ignored' for it- nice.

edit on 27-7-2011 by ZIPMATT because: whence they went down in ignominy




posted on Jul, 27 2011 @ 03:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Revenant
...whether or not he was motivated by fundamentalist Christianity...


He wasn't. He was religious enough to believe there was a God out there, but not religious enough to belong to any domination. At least that's what the Norwegian news papers claim. (VG.no, Nettavisen.no, Dagbladet.no)

Other then that, I can agree with what you're saying. I see a lot of us have a ton of hatred deep down inside us for whatever we're against. Another reason why we desperately need places like ATS so we can discuss with like minded individuals. For Anders Breivik, I don't think anyone reached his hatred though, so no matter where he went, EDL, Stormfront etc. he never found anyone like minded. If he did, maybe he wouldn't gone postal and shot up Utøya and the government buildings.



posted on Jul, 27 2011 @ 03:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Frontkjemper
 


That cannot be so. He says that he's a Protestant, who votes for the more Conservative candidates in his Churches elections.

Some Church has him on the roles.

Pointing this out in no way indicates that I believe he was acting on any denomination's behalf.



posted on Jul, 27 2011 @ 03:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Aeons
 


Well, I read on VG.no yesterday that said that he wasn't religious but believed in God. Remember, everyone in Norway is placed as a Lutheran by birth.



posted on Jul, 27 2011 @ 03:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Frontkjemper
reply to post by Aeons
 


Well, I read on VG.no yesterday that said that he wasn't religious but believed in God. Remember, everyone in Norway is placed as a Lutheran by birth.


And he attended a Protestant church where he voted for the most conservative members in hopes for reuniting with Rome.

He's got a section on it in his manifesto.

He's not religious, but he believes in God. He prefers and accepts himself as Cultural Christian.

His exact relationship to being "saved by Jesus" is really the point that people who are looking to distance themselves from him should be going after.
edit on 2011/7/27 by Aeons because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 27 2011 @ 03:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Aeons
 


I really don't care to read this murderous fools manifesto, I can only go by what our newspapers have said.



posted on Jul, 27 2011 @ 03:59 PM
link   
Having spent the last few days reading much of his 1500-page manifesto, I am convinced that he is not particularly religious, although he does believe in God. He sees his war as a kind of "cultural war," and for him the value of Christianity seems to be in its cultural aspects...shared tradition, sense of dignity and purpose, shared aesthetic, etc etc. What I find most interesting is that he speaks favorably of "Christian Agnostics" and "Christian Athiests" (terms I've never heard before). I gather from context that these are expressions meaning "people who value the cultural and emotive aspects of Christianity but who aren't particularly religious in the fundamentalist sense." And I gather this would be the way he'd probably describe himself.



posted on Jul, 27 2011 @ 04:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by silent thunder
What I find most interesting is that he speaks favorably of "Christian Agnostics" and "Christian Athiests"...


I've heard of them, it's when you yourself have no interest in religion (Christianity in this case) but believe that Norway should maintain a strong Christian identity. It's sprung up after Norway rid itself of "stat kirken" (state church).



posted on Jul, 27 2011 @ 04:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Frontkjemper
 


These exist in many religions. There are non-deistist Pagans, and Satanists and Muslims, and Hindus.

These are pretty much people who subscribe to the "Bells, Smells, and Family Dinner" ritual, cultural, symbolic / shared archetype symbology of their religion.



posted on Jul, 27 2011 @ 04:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Aeons
 


Isn't that basically what I said?



posted on Jul, 27 2011 @ 04:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Frontkjemper
reply to post by Aeons
 


Isn't that basically what I said?


Yes, I was just expanding on it. It exists outside Norway as an influence too.



posted on Jul, 27 2011 @ 04:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Aeons
 


I'm sure it does, it's just that it's becoming very popular here. That and the fact that people are born and automatically members of the Lutheran church, so instead of going against it, they embrace Christianity although they do not believe in it.



posted on Jul, 27 2011 @ 05:01 PM
link   
reply to post by The Revenant
 


I do find your post interesting and hold a similar view..

Im currently working on formulating a new topic in my head about some of the.. We'll call them emotions I witness here on ATS.

And they aren't good.



posted on Jul, 27 2011 @ 05:18 PM
link   
reply to post by indigothefish
 


Yeah!...that post was starred!
Can I copy that picture?





reply to post by Asktheanimals
 


Well said.
Star for you.


Finding common ground is the only solution to the extreme polarization that seemingly both governments and the media are leading the charge for. As people our common needs are many and differences few. Both governments and the media endlessly push stories that emphasize our differences in order to push their left/right agendas that do little but put the people at odds with each other.

Best paragraph I've read in a while.
We fight, they rake in the money.
What is it going to take in order to stop the madness?
Take away the money.








posted on Jul, 27 2011 @ 05:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by something wicked
reply to post by Ozscot
 


"America rescued the world twice and underwrote the costs involved when Europe (and in particular Germany) couldn't get it's act together and started wars which threatened to destabilise the world. America said 'NO MORE'. "

Well if that was correct then it's a shame it took several years to say it. Sheesh, why does it always have to come around to absolute nonsense statements like this?

Yes, Marshall plan existed, no the EU is not a direct consequence of it. What on earth has such an opinion have to do with this thread apart from prove its point?


Then quite clearly your understanding of history is shallower than necessary to be informed. - Go study the EU's origins, go study EURATOM and ECSC and go read what Marshall's recommendations were - I could cite you a bibliography of several hundred books on the subject but instead I'll make it simple - I'll just copy and paste a quote from the European Union's own website and a link to it - you may get your '60 years of understanding in five seconds' then Ok?




The European Union is set up with the aim of ending the frequent and bloody wars between neighbours, which culminated in the Second World War. As of 1950, the European Coal and Steel Community begins to unite European countries economically and politically in order to secure lasting peace. The six founders are Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Luxembourg and the Netherlands
.

European Union

Edited to add - if you had read the thread in its entirety you would be fully aware of its relevance to the topic as more than five of us were discussing it in terms of 'hate' and how hate arises out of ignorance and ignorance arises out of not 'being informed' - funny that eh?

Oz
edit on 27-7-2011 by Ozscot because: typo

edit on 27-7-2011 by Ozscot because: addition

edit on 27-7-2011 by Ozscot because: typo



posted on Jul, 28 2011 @ 04:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ozscot

Originally posted by something wicked
reply to post by Ozscot
 


"America rescued the world twice and underwrote the costs involved when Europe (and in particular Germany) couldn't get it's act together and started wars which threatened to destabilise the world. America said 'NO MORE'. "

Well if that was correct then it's a shame it took several years to say it. Sheesh, why does it always have to come around to absolute nonsense statements like this?

Yes, Marshall plan existed, no the EU is not a direct consequence of it. What on earth has such an opinion have to do with this thread apart from prove its point?


Then quite clearly your understanding of history is shallower than necessary to be informed. - Go study the EU's origins, go study EURATOM and ECSC and go read what Marshall's recommendations were - I could cite you a bibliography of several hundred books on the subject but instead I'll make it simple - I'll just copy and paste a quote from the European Union's own website and a link to it - you may get your '60 years of understanding in five seconds' then Ok?




The European Union is set up with the aim of ending the frequent and bloody wars between neighbours, which culminated in the Second World War. As of 1950, the European Coal and Steel Community begins to unite European countries economically and politically in order to secure lasting peace. The six founders are Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Luxembourg and the Netherlands
.

European Union

Edited to add - if you had read the thread in its entirety you would be fully aware of its relevance to the topic as more than five of us were discussing it in terms of 'hate' and how hate arises out of ignorance and ignorance arises out of not 'being informed' - funny that eh?

Oz
edit on 27-7-2011 by Ozscot because: typo

edit on 27-7-2011 by Ozscot because: addition

edit on 27-7-2011 by Ozscot because: typo


No, I'm fairly happy with the education I have in this area. You stated that the Marshall plan indirectly led to formation of the EU - it didn't. Not that your post had anything to do with the actual thread but you are aware that the American consulate for England advised the President against supporting England aren't you? His actual words were that there will 'soon be Swastikas in Downing Street'. Yeah, Joe Kennedy was a huge supporter of England and democratic Europe.



posted on Jul, 28 2011 @ 04:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Frontkjemper
reply to post by Aeons
 


I really don't care to read this murderous fools manifesto, I can only go by what our newspapers have said.


it is the very newspapers that will lead you and most down the garden path

been down there, not all it is cracked up to be.

Understanding his manifesto is a good way to understand him.

That is assuming that the manifesto is not a fabrication, which it probably is

See the catch? What really is the truth?
edit on 28-7-2011 by guessing because: spelling correction



posted on Jul, 28 2011 @ 05:45 AM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Jul, 29 2011 @ 06:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Ozscot
 


Oh well - manners and decorum you say were the reason my post was removed - I'll save you any difficulty in the future - Bye.

Guess the loonies win then


Enjoy

Oz



posted on Jul, 29 2011 @ 06:50 AM
link   
reply to post by Ozscot
 


With you shortly.



new topics

top topics



 
30
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join