JTF.ORG Forum
General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: Israel Chai on September 03, 2012, 12:34:51 pm
-
http://lionheartuk.blogspot.ca/
This guy has many posts with a unique take on the man. He never includes that the kids were neo-hitler youth, and this guy did an interview on al jazeera (although he talks about fighting against islam on it...) but he could be legit... I have no clue, but what does the forum think? On a side note, the first thought I had on the subject after hearing of it agreed essentially with this man's take, that this massacre did more harm to anti-jihad than helping it.
-
Breivik killed those people in order to get people to read his manifesto. Muslim criminals have killed far more Norwegians then Anders did. I read some of it and I like his ideas. Did he turn people away from counter-jihadism? I am not sure.
-
I think he was a crazy maniac who needed some medication... All the 'political' talk was a way to justify his insanity.
A real leader of a movement doesn't act like this. All he did was prove what an idiot he is. He should be executed but Norway is too wimpy to give the death penalty.
-
I think he was a crazy maniac who needed some medication... All the 'political' talk was a way to justify his insanity.
A real leader of a movement doesn't act like this. All he did was prove what an idiot he is. He should be executed but Norway is too wimpy to give the death penalty.
Agreed! They were kids right?
-
Agreed! They were kids right?
I did not follow the case too closely but I believe first he bombed a government building {which didn't go as planned} and then ran to an island where he killed a bunch of kids. While it is true that these kids were being indoctrinated with leftist propaganda I do not consider this a valid 'target' for any kind of political statement. While it may be required to kill enemies who are training their young to kill {such as arabs who teach children from youth to kill Jews} I don't think that what they were doing would constitute a deadly threat {such as arabs}.
All in all it was a bad thing for anti-jihadism in general. At least according to my opinion...
-
The man is a terrorist. I think he is not a hero, he has destroyed the cause against pisslam and multiculturalism. Now anyone who says Europe for the Europeans, Israel for the Jews, no more multiculturalism, and every Islamophobe, is now seen as a psycho terrorist willing to murder people like him. His ideas may be like ours but we cannot associate with him at all.
-
The man is a terrorist. I think he is not a hero, he has destroyed the cause against pisslam and multiculturalism. Now anyone who says Europe for the Europeans, Israel for the Jews, no more multiculturalism, and every Islamophobe, is now seen as a psycho terrorist willing to murder people like him. His ideas may be like ours but we cannot associate with him at all.
I'm done, you and your friend are trolls! YES, you are a troll!
-
I'm done, you and your friend are trolls! YES, you are a troll!
Why do you say that?
-
I'm done, you and your friend are trolls! YES, you are a troll!
Okay then, go away! And don't you complain to me since you started this! Stop being a baby, if you are actually "done", then stop replying to me! You respond "bullcrap!" without even being in a fight with me, and then I'm the troll for replying. I don't care if you call me a "troll", you are the same paranoid fool who accuse me of being a troll when I first joined, and you whine and complain about everyone being a "troll" because of past things. Get out of the past. Most of the fights in the past you whine about happened long before I joined, so get over it. I'm really sick of this crap.
If you are "offended" by anything I say, then just leave me alone, it's actually really easy, I don't know why you can't understand it.
-
Okay then, go away! And don't you complain to me since you started this! Stop being a baby, if you are actually "done", then stop replying to me! You respond "bullcrap!" without even being in a fight with me, and then I'm the troll for replying. I don't care if you call me a "troll", you are the same paranoid fool who accuse me of being a troll when I first joined, and you whine and complain about everyone being a "troll" because of past things. Get out of the past. Most of the fights in the past you whine about happened long before I joined, so get over it. I'm really sick of this crap.
If you are "offended" by anything I say, then just leave me alone, it's actually really easy, I don't know why you can't understand it.
STOP hinting at being a NAZI then!
-
STOP hinting at being a NAZI then!
When did ever I hint at being a nazi? because I like the Christian Phalange? And they are Phalange, not Phalangist. Phalange is just a military formation. They are not nazis at all, you can see it on their website. They even exposed Syrian nazis.
-
When did ever I hint at being a nazi? because I like the Christian Phalange? And they are Phalange, not Phalangist. Phalange is just a military formation. They are not nazis at all, you can see it on their website. They even exposed Syrian nazis.
Dude in case you haven't noticed, this gentleman has a rather itchy stick in a peculiar place that causes him great frustration. Well, Anyat least its jammed in there good when he talks to me...
Any ways, since clearly nobody went to the site to read, this chap who thinks he's a knight's Templar thingy (informal tone assumed so as to indicate I have no prior knowledge of this group) says that Breivek keeps trying to frame him as a co-conspirator, and that there were actual co-conspirators, that were involved for some purpose regarding oil in Norway (this part I can't understand, but my lie conspiracy meter hits red by that point).
Do you think Breivik is at enmity with the anti-jihad movement, and do you think Mr. Knight's templar is right too suggest co-operation and foul play involving Norwegian oil?
-
Dude in case you haven't noticed, this gentleman has a rather itchy stick in a peculiar place that causes him great frustration. Well, Anyat least its jammed in there good when he talks to me...
Any ways, since clearly nobody went to the site to read, this chap who thinks he's a knight's Templar thingy (informal tone assumed so as to indicate I have no prior knowledge of this group) says that Breivek keeps trying to frame him as a co-conspirator, and that there were actual co-conspirators, that were involved for some purpose regarding oil in Norway (this part I can't understand, but my lie conspiracy meter hits red by that point).
Do you think Breivik is at enmity with the anti-jihad movement, and do you think Mr. Knight's templar is right too suggest co-operation and foul play involving Norwegian oil?
Breivik is probably not wanting to be an enemy, but he disgraces the movement and must be considered an enemy for that reason. Any involvement with him is basically public relations suicide for our part.
-
Breivik is probably not wanting to be an enemy, but he disgraces the movement and must be considered an enemy for that reason. Any involvement with him is basically public relations suicide for our part.
It seems kind of off that he could have pulled that off by himself
-
It seems kind of off that he could have pulled that off by himself
I saw a comment from a leftist antifa retard on a Pat Condell video that said "Breivik destroyed your "cause"". The antifa pigs are exploiting this…
-
I saw a comment from a leftist antifa retard on a Pat Condell video that said "Breivik destroyed your "cause"". The antifa pigs are exploiting this…
The thing is he didn't really, because not really any mainstream people applauded this, but the libtards flash it like their special needs tags and think it gets them where they need to go in an argument, but it's really easy to debate, so anyone that cares to hear out a discussion on it will still come out islamophobic.
At least before they could have said of right wingers want innocent khmer rouge dead. Now they just have a Norwegian, which killed 88 kids, so it makes them kind of dirt bags to bring that up and exploit that.
-
Public opinion is not something one should care about.
When Jews get killed, nobody cares. When some socialist scum gets killed, all of a sudden its a tragedy and everybody get's out of his way to condemn it passionately. Even if you call these teenage fascists scum you will get attacked. Not that that matters, but it is obscenely pathetic.
Breivik killed some future socialist 'leaders', so concerning his strategy, he went straight to the rootcause of the problem. This socialist scum preaches death and violence every day. No one should complain that they got some.
-
Breivik killed some future socialist 'leaders', so concerning his strategy, he went straight to the rootcause of the problem. This socialist scum preaches death and violence every day. No one should complain that they got some.
Agreed. I'm not going to applaud or even suggest that this be done, but I feel no loose about those individuals that he killed.
From Psalms 137 of King Dawidh Alaw Hashalom
ח בַּת-בָּבֶל, הַשְּׁדוּדָה:
אַשְׁרֵי שֶׁיְשַׁלֶּם-לָךְ-- אֶת-גְּמוּלֵךְ, שֶׁגָּמַלְתְּ לָנוּ. 8 O daughter of Babylon, that art to be destroyed; {N}
happy shall he be, that repayeth thee as thou hast served us.
ט אַשְׁרֵי, שֶׁיֹּאחֵז וְנִפֵּץ אֶת-עֹלָלַיִךְ-- אֶל-הַסָּלַע. 9 Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the rock. {P}
-
The thing is he didn't really, because not really any mainstream people applauded this, but the libtards flash it like their special needs tags and think it gets them where they need to go in an argument, but it's really easy to debate, so anyone that cares to hear out a discussion on it will still come out islamophobic.
At least before they could have said of right wingers want innocent khmer rouge dead. Now they just have a Norwegian, which killed 88 kids, so it makes them kind of dirt bags to bring that up and exploit that.
Libretards will say "You sound just like the crazy Norwegian guy" when anyone points out statistics and how much of a problem is pisslam.
-
I have hate for children killers, rapist, and abortion doctors. Punishment for them should be the most severe one.
-
They were not children but teenagers and knew exactly what they were supporting. These were not some mis-guided hippies preaching love and understanding.
-
I don't agree that they merited being killed by a terrorist. Brevik is a terrorist, he was not executing judgement against people. He was not the hand of G-d nor was he a hero acting to save the world. He was completely misguided in his plan. I hope that most reading this will not side with the terrorist who has the blood of 'teenagers' on his hands.
It is possible to make everyone a target of terrorists. I remember shortly after 9/11 a friend of mine saying that the people who worked in the WTC were valid targets, making my brother a target for the mere fact that he had a meeting at his company in the building on that day. Many innocent people were killed on 9/11 and I am willing to bet that Brevik also killed a lot of innocent teenagers.
What he did was deplorable, and anyone who thinks he was a hero should get some counseling. The entire anti-Jihad movement must not resort to the same techniques that our enemies engage in, killing innocents. And Brevik even killed his own people, not the Muslims or Arabs for whom he was supposed to be crusading against.
This whole topic is obscene...
-
Without white socialists things wouldn't have gotten to this mess we are in now. They are the enablers, the cancer within.
-
Muman- sorry for your loss, but your comparing completely different things. It is the same argument against Israel striking back for example the terrorists in Gaza, some people argue well you are being just like them when firing back (and the whole "civilians" argument as well). Rav Kahane ZTL HYD used to say I would rather be at their level instead of 6 feet under.
Like it was pointed out they were teenagers. Old enough to think and reason. They were soldiers for their socialist cause. I can understand him for doing what he did because when you have armies and soldiers shooting at other soldiers you dont ask about each soldier and see what and who he is, one shoots the enemy soldiers in the battlefield indiscriminately as that is the only way to win.
In Tehillim King Dawidh praises those who dash the little ones of the enemies of the Jews (Babylonians) who did horrors towards the Jews, destroyed the Temple and murdered many. King Dawidh says that their little one's should be smashed against the rocks. Are you going to condemn king Dawidh Alav Hashalom (or one of the other writers because their are a number of writers for Tehillim).
-
Muman- sorry for your loss, but your comparing completely different things. It is the same argument against Israel striking back for example the terrorists in Gaza, some people argue well you are being just like them when firing back (and the whole "civilians" argument as well). Rav Kahane ZTL HYD used to say I would rather be at their level instead of 6 feet under.
Like it was pointed out they were teenagers. Old enough to think and reason. They were soldiers for their socialist cause. I can understand him for doing what he did because when you have armies and soldiers shooting at other soldiers you dont ask about each soldier and see what and who he is, one shoots the enemy soldiers in the battlefield indiscriminately as that is the only way to win.
In Tehillim King Dawidh praises those who dash the little ones of the enemies of the Jews (Babylonians) who did horrors towards the Jews, destroyed the Temple and murdered many. King Dawidh says that their little one's should be smashed against the rocks. Are you going to condemn king Dawidh Alav Hashalom (or one of the other writers because their are a number of writers for Tehillim).
See my first response to this post concerning when it is required to attack so-called children. I don't think these kids were soldiers being trained to kill Jews. Obviously if this was the case it may be argued it was justifiable. I fully support elimination of live threats to Jewish life but I fail to see such a need iin this case. Shooting up unarmed kids at a camp is a cowardly act intended to terrorize.
I maintain he was utterly wrong. If you feel he was justified please show how these victims posed a clear danger to Jewish lives.