It appears the Norwegian mass murderer was influenced by conservative American blogger Robert Spencer, the author of Jihad Watch.
I love "Countdown With Keith Olbermann" - he always talks about the important stuff and he concisely points out the shocking comments from the right wing media. Tonight there was much to talk about, and some shocking comments to point out. Glen Beck was featured as Worst Person in the World because on his radio show today he said the island youth camp in Norway sounded to him like the "Hitler youth or whatever". Wow. Also watch that clip to see examples of people on FOX News blaming Muslims for the attack.
The clip below shows one of tonight's guests, who calls the extremist writing on the internet one of the "unintended consequences" of the first amendment, of free speech. It is the same with right wing Islamist rhetoric. Free speech cannot be denied, even if it is hate speech.
I watched some MSNBC earlier and I'm watching again now. They are all focused on the debt ceiling debate and the President's speech. It is important news, and it shows how much the President is compromising, and how much the Republicans are not. I was a bit surprised to see no coverage of the tragedy in Norway on MSNBC. Maybe I missed it.
Keith Olbermann talked about the Consequences of No Budget Deal, the tragedy in Norway and FOX News' reaction to it, the continuing grilling of the Murdochs, and he even had time to interview Maysoon Zayid. Incredible.
13 comments :
This post is not you. If this was my first time on your blog, it would have been the last, too. This is why:
http://hurryupharry.org/2011/07/26/exploiting-dead-children/
To be fair, your post is not as bad as others'. And yes, I think Glen Beck screwed up really bad with this one. And no, I don't blame Spencer for the murders.
Have to go, late for work.
So we shouldn't talk about Glen Beck's reaction, because that would be exploiting dead children? A laughable argument, lol. But I haven't read the article on hurry up harry yet.
"leftist intellectual hegemony" LOL!
I never alleged Robert Spencer is linked to terrorism. But Robert Spencer is linked, at least ideologically, to Anders Breivik. Anders was a huge fan!
I'm sure Robert is not proud of Anders, and I am sure Robert is sickened by the crime. But Robert Spencer, Pam Geller, and other right wing bloggers cannot separate themselves from Breivik's thoughts. He was a client, in a way. A militant one who would kill innocent people for his cause. Of course conservatives would want to distance themselves from that murderer. I don't blame them!
The guy sort of reminds me of the Pinochet model of reform. Line up all the communist and fire.
Almost all your points are valid, Iraqi Mojo, but something's missing. Some quality I know you have because it's in your posts about Iraq. Some kind of deeper understanding that's amazingly absent when you deal with your ideological opponents.
Linking Breivik's crime to conservative ideology is a mistake. You write "Robert Spencer, Pam Geller, and other right wing bloggers cannot separate themselves from Breivik's thoughts". Then what do you think about this: leftist bloggers cannont separate themselves from communists's crimes. Or this: religious bloggers cannot separate themselves from theocracies crimes.
No, it's never that simple. Breivik was not driven by ideology only, but also by an ardent desire to make his corner of the world a better place, and ultimately to save humans from themselves. His choice of victims reminds me of a british muslim who killed his wife and children because they were becoming too westernized and he was afraid they'll go to hell, so he decided to send them to paradise before it's too late. In both cases we have acts of salvation, not revenge. You don't find this kind of crap on Pam Geller's or Spencer's sites.
You can link Breivik only to extreme ideologies like communism, islamism, nazism - he's neither, but the modus operandi is the same. Save the world from itself, even if it will destroy it.
"But Robert Spencer, Pam Geller, and other right wing bloggers cannot separate themselves from Breivik's thoughts."
That's like saying Mohammed can't seperate himself from bin Ladens' thoughts. Bin Laden did quote the Quran more than anything else, after all.
The truth is, Richard Ramirez was drawn to Satanism because of his desire to rape and murder, not the other way around. Bin Laden was drawn to Al Qaida because he was a sociopath looking for a stamp of approval for his murderous desires. He tortured and killed animals in front of his children long before joining Al Qaida.
I think Anders grew up in a Muslim neighborhood, and harbored resentments towards Muslims even as a child. He went looking for anything that would reinforce that hatred. Spencer is uber rigid. I'll never forget an e-mail exchange we had. I was trying to make the point that passages from virtually any book can be lifted and distorted to present views the author never intended. He accused me of being a liberal apologist...LOL. Spencer is hardcore. But, he'd never condone something like this. No more than Allah would condone 9/11.
Just read this:
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/07/26/norway-terrorism-and-double-standards/
"Then what do you think about this: leftist bloggers cannont separate themselves from communists's crimes. Or this: religious bloggers cannot separate themselves from theocracies crimes."
But I did not say that Robert Spencer cannot separate himself from the crime. I said he cannot separate himself from Breivik's thoughts. That's an interesting article you linked to by Michael Rubin. He makes a good point - Usama bin Laden read Stephen Walt, John Mearsheimer, Tony Judt, Jimmy Carter, and John Perkins. So those authors cannot separate themselves from bin Laden's thoughts. And Maury made a good point too - the prophet Muhammad cannot be separated from bin Laden's thoughts. But the authors can be separated from Uusama bin Laden's crimes, because none of them encouraged their readers to murder people for their cause.
Rubin wrote "No single madman’s actions should justify muzzling intellectual or policy debate."
Is anybody trying to justify muzzling intellectual or policy debate?
Maury, you corresponded with Robert Spencer, and he called you a liberal apologist?? LOL! That's awesome.
I used the word "crimes" because in these particular cases thoughts lead to crime. Oh, and for the dramatic effect, of course.
The idea that writers or bloggers cannot separate themselves from the thoughts of their readers doesn't make sense. Truth is in the eye of the beholder. Look no further than your own holy book. Every muslim believes it to be the ultimate truth, yet there are sunnis, shia, salafis, wahabis - same book, many interpretations.
Like Maury said, "passages from virtually any book can be lifted and distorted to present views the author never intended". It's being done a lot with the Talmud :(
Look at your own blog. Statements that look trivial to you trigger never-ending comments like mine. I even agree with you once in a while ;). Your blog has a certain influence on my thought processes, but can you say that you cannot separate yourself from my thoughts?
Breivik chose what he wanted to believe. Like picking up black socks only from a drawer full of colorful undergarments.
Is anybody trying to justify muzzling intellectual or policy debate?
Academic boycott of Israel?
Sorry, couldn't resist it.
It's almost midnight here. Only evil never rests, so it's good night for now.
hmmm..........
Post a Comment