24 July, 2011
Here we go
At the Grauniad, E I Addio, our man in the stands with the full bladder and the rolled-up Footie Echo, types breathlessly,
What exactly are "conversations" in this context?
So a nutter, to use the technical term, posts in the comment threads of activist blogs and talkboard fora. He is probably quite plausible and, up to a certain point, is engaged with sympathetically. He then fantasizes (projects) this interaction into a more significant engagement and influence.
I could do that. I've never, as far as my ageing brain can recall, commented at any of the SIOE blogs, but I have spoken on a couple of occasions on the EDL forum, and have been replied to civilly. Hey, guys, I have "links to the EDL".
So a newspaper report which quotes from a report in another newspaper which quotes a comment by an unidentified "friend" of the madman — friend? I though he was supposed to be a friendless loner — who remembers some vague waffle and boasting about on-line interactions with SIOE and EDL. Breivik, apparently, wrote of his UK contacts "two years ago". Clearly in on the ground floor, then: the EDL was set up in June 2009.
And this airy-fairy nonsense justifies the headline,
Note the particularly unambivalent subtitle.
(Incidentally, folks. Please stop using the phrase, "Norway attacks". Every time I see it I automatically think of this.)
While we're here, I'm curious about the tense in the phrase,
The Mail and Express talk in similar, if more excitable, terms. The Express's headline borders on the libellous.
Nice bandwagon rolling here, eh? Ketlan's little army of semi-literate commenters at Lancaster Unity are, to use that phrase again, creaming their pants, while Theresa May will no doubt be carefully considering the manifold opportunities offered by these developments.
Hypothetical situation, my arse.
Afterthought:
Blogger/Google processed my post and, having uploaded it, showed me this advertisement alongside the confirmation message,
You're 'avin' a giraffe, in't yer?
The Norwegian daily VG quoted one of Breivik's friends, saying that he had become a rightwing extremist in his late 20s and was now a strong opponent of multiculturalism, expressing strong nationalistic views in online debates.
Breivik had talked admiringly online about conversations he had had with unnamed English Defence League members and the organisation Stop the Islamification of Europe (SIOE) over the success of provocative street actions leading to violence.
"I have on some occasions had discussions with SIOE and EDL and recommended them to use certain strategies," he wrote two years ago. "The tactics of the EDL are now to 'lure' an overreaction from the Jihad Youth/Extreme-Marxists, something they have succeeded in doing several times already."
Contacted by email, the EDL had not answered.
What exactly are "conversations" in this context?
So a nutter, to use the technical term, posts in the comment threads of activist blogs and talkboard fora. He is probably quite plausible and, up to a certain point, is engaged with sympathetically. He then fantasizes (projects) this interaction into a more significant engagement and influence.
I could do that. I've never, as far as my ageing brain can recall, commented at any of the SIOE blogs, but I have spoken on a couple of occasions on the EDL forum, and have been replied to civilly. Hey, guys, I have "links to the EDL".
So a newspaper report which quotes from a report in another newspaper which quotes a comment by an unidentified "friend" of the madman — friend? I though he was supposed to be a friendless loner — who remembers some vague waffle and boasting about on-line interactions with SIOE and EDL. Breivik, apparently, wrote of his UK contacts "two years ago". Clearly in on the ground floor, then: the EDL was set up in June 2009.
And this airy-fairy nonsense justifies the headline,
Note the particularly unambivalent subtitle.
(Incidentally, folks. Please stop using the phrase, "Norway attacks". Every time I see it I automatically think of this.)
While we're here, I'm curious about the tense in the phrase,
Contacted by email, the EDL had not answered.The pluperfect (reported perfect) form "had" suggests that, per the "friend's" report, Breivik had emailed the EDL, who in turn ignored him. Not as many will no doubt be only too keen to read it, that the EDL are currently unwilling to discuss the matter.
The Mail and Express talk in similar, if more excitable, terms. The Express's headline borders on the libellous.
Nice bandwagon rolling here, eh? Ketlan's little army of semi-literate commenters at Lancaster Unity are, to use that phrase again, creaming their pants, while Theresa May will no doubt be carefully considering the manifold opportunities offered by these developments.
Hypothetical situation, my arse.
Afterthought:
Blogger/Google processed my post and, having uploaded it, showed me this advertisement alongside the confirmation message,
You're 'avin' a giraffe, in't yer?
# posted by Edwin Greenwood @ 10:05 
Comments:
<< Home
Was the BNP banned after David Copeland's bomb attacks? Copeland had left the BNP by then and reportedly some party memners didn't want him around anyway.
Nonetheless the link was made public and seized upon by those opposed to the BNP. But there was no BNP ban.
Your hypothetical situation is a diversionary tactic. You want to shift attention from what Breivik has done because it's inconvenient and it's got you worried.
Quick! Don't look here, look over there.
Nonetheless the link was made public and seized upon by those opposed to the BNP. But there was no BNP ban.
Your hypothetical situation is a diversionary tactic. You want to shift attention from what Breivik has done because it's inconvenient and it's got you worried.
Quick! Don't look here, look over there.
# posted by 
: 24 July, 2011 12:10
: 24 July, 2011 12:10
Why should the actions of a loony spree killer 'frighten' anyone? It's as rare an event as lightning strikes, in fact, much rarer.
I am probably in the minority here, but something strikes me as very odd about this lunatic and the events in Oslo. Something doesn't quite add up.
Did he want to get caught? If so, why? You would have thought he would have preferred to go in a 'glorious' shootout, or taken his own life with point made. No doubt he could have left telling messages to that effect.
If he wanted a public platform for his views, whatever they may be, he would have had that with the killing of one person. If he was so anti-islam he could have used the bomb on a mosque... as it was a Friday I presume the Oslo mosques would be jammed full of believers. If he had an agenda, there were other anti-islam things he could have done.
Yet he attacked what may have been predominantly western Norwegians (I have no idea if the summer camp was full of bearded males and headscarf wearing girls). He faces a long jail term and no doubt while there are right wing nutjobs in clink in Norway to chat with there will be fervent muslims in there too. So he wants to spend time in that environment? I presume a few speeding fines not paid may have had the same effect.
Forgive me for conspiracy thoughts, but it is almost as if his blond, Norwegian looks and his rather obvious public profile was all deliberately chosen. Now as far as I know Oslo may be full of such looks, but then again... maybe not.
Hmmm...
Did he want to get caught? If so, why? You would have thought he would have preferred to go in a 'glorious' shootout, or taken his own life with point made. No doubt he could have left telling messages to that effect.
If he wanted a public platform for his views, whatever they may be, he would have had that with the killing of one person. If he was so anti-islam he could have used the bomb on a mosque... as it was a Friday I presume the Oslo mosques would be jammed full of believers. If he had an agenda, there were other anti-islam things he could have done.
Yet he attacked what may have been predominantly western Norwegians (I have no idea if the summer camp was full of bearded males and headscarf wearing girls). He faces a long jail term and no doubt while there are right wing nutjobs in clink in Norway to chat with there will be fervent muslims in there too. So he wants to spend time in that environment? I presume a few speeding fines not paid may have had the same effect.
Forgive me for conspiracy thoughts, but it is almost as if his blond, Norwegian looks and his rather obvious public profile was all deliberately chosen. Now as far as I know Oslo may be full of such looks, but then again... maybe not.
Hmmm...
# posted by : 24 July, 2011 12:34
: 24 July, 2011 12:34
"Conspiracy or not". Aye. It all seems to "tailored" to me. Esecially considering the almost hysterical way it was repeated, that it was a "blond Norwegian", every thirty seconds or so.
I also refuse to believe he was acting alone.
I also refuse to believe he was acting alone.
'Did he want to get caught? If so, why?'
1. The trial (assuming we don't get a Jack Ruby event in the interim) will give Breivik a platform to air his views to a global audience.
2. The maximum sentence allowed under the Norwegian penal code is 21 years. The alleged perp is 32 years old- do the maths.
3. I doubt if the regime in a high security nick in Norway is particularly oppressive. If Breivik buckles down & does his porridge (and while so doing avoids getting his throat cut by a muslim fellow prisoner) he'll point out yet another internal contradiction in the great liberal world view, to which he is so violently opposed- Breivik 2, Liberal Multiculturalists 0
1. The trial (assuming we don't get a Jack Ruby event in the interim) will give Breivik a platform to air his views to a global audience.
2. The maximum sentence allowed under the Norwegian penal code is 21 years. The alleged perp is 32 years old- do the maths.
3. I doubt if the regime in a high security nick in Norway is particularly oppressive. If Breivik buckles down & does his porridge (and while so doing avoids getting his throat cut by a muslim fellow prisoner) he'll point out yet another internal contradiction in the great liberal world view, to which he is so violently opposed- Breivik 2, Liberal Multiculturalists 0
# posted by : 24 July, 2011 15:01
: 24 July, 2011 15:01
@Anon at 12:10,
Copeland is a red herring. His BNP involvement was transient. His atrocities were committed in 1999, when the BNP was insignificant and of no interest to the establishment. Had Copeland been well established and senior in the BNP in 2008/09 and gone on his bombing campaign then, when TPTB were bricking it at the prospect of BNP MEPs, he might have been of more interest.
Currently the BNP are again of no interest, destroyed by relentless propaganda attacks, by legal attacks and by Griffin's hubris, mismanagement, and/or possible crookedness.
EDL, however, are an ongoing and growing thorn in the side of the authorities. Personally I believe that the government would be very interested in opportunities to curtail the EDL and to clamp down on anti-Muslim or anti-immigrant dissent in general, provided they can get public buy-in.
If you are correct that my fears are ill-founded then none will be happier than I. As I have said elsewhere, there are genuine issues that need to be addressed, not denied yet again.
As to your suggestion, however, that my motive is to divert attention from the seemingly embarrassing Breivik atrocity, that would be be a pretty impressive achievement for an insignificant blog on the outer fringes of the blogosphere, like this one. Perhaps I ought to feel flattered.
But what is it that you think that I hope to gain? What is it that is that is so "inconvenient" or "worrying" for my "agenda", presumed or even acknowledged, which arises from the Breivik episode? Apart from the dismay and disgust at the enormity of his actions that most people feel, what impact do you believe those actions have on my political views in the UK that I might be remotely concerned about?
I am genuinely puzzled. You make no sense.
To put it bluntly, Sunshine, what the fuck are you on about?
Copeland is a red herring. His BNP involvement was transient. His atrocities were committed in 1999, when the BNP was insignificant and of no interest to the establishment. Had Copeland been well established and senior in the BNP in 2008/09 and gone on his bombing campaign then, when TPTB were bricking it at the prospect of BNP MEPs, he might have been of more interest.
Currently the BNP are again of no interest, destroyed by relentless propaganda attacks, by legal attacks and by Griffin's hubris, mismanagement, and/or possible crookedness.
EDL, however, are an ongoing and growing thorn in the side of the authorities. Personally I believe that the government would be very interested in opportunities to curtail the EDL and to clamp down on anti-Muslim or anti-immigrant dissent in general, provided they can get public buy-in.
If you are correct that my fears are ill-founded then none will be happier than I. As I have said elsewhere, there are genuine issues that need to be addressed, not denied yet again.
As to your suggestion, however, that my motive is to divert attention from the seemingly embarrassing Breivik atrocity, that would be be a pretty impressive achievement for an insignificant blog on the outer fringes of the blogosphere, like this one. Perhaps I ought to feel flattered.
But what is it that you think that I hope to gain? What is it that is that is so "inconvenient" or "worrying" for my "agenda", presumed or even acknowledged, which arises from the Breivik episode? Apart from the dismay and disgust at the enormity of his actions that most people feel, what impact do you believe those actions have on my political views in the UK that I might be remotely concerned about?
I am genuinely puzzled. You make no sense.
To put it bluntly, Sunshine, what the fuck are you on about?
Mark, I made the point that he would have his platform for a lesser though eqaully terrible crime. He went to enormous lengths to create the biggest outrage he could, and then get caught. On an island where I presume he could be trapped easily. On the run, maybe he could have done more atrocities before being caught. if ever.
All a bit too quick, a bit too convenient, some might say.
There are questions too how he got his police uniform (unless Oslo fancy dress shops have plenty) and certainly there is a more relevant question of how did he acquire six tons or so of weedkiller without anyone noticing?
Unless Tesco of Oslo sells it in handy bags and he was buying it for years, of course.
All in all, quite a scoop for the lefties, him being so obvious and lunatic and so very right wing.
All a bit too quick, a bit too convenient, some might say.
There are questions too how he got his police uniform (unless Oslo fancy dress shops have plenty) and certainly there is a more relevant question of how did he acquire six tons or so of weedkiller without anyone noticing?
Unless Tesco of Oslo sells it in handy bags and he was buying it for years, of course.
All in all, quite a scoop for the lefties, him being so obvious and lunatic and so very right wing.
# posted by : 25 July, 2011 13:06
: 25 July, 2011 13:06
He acquired the explosive material quite innocently; he is reported as having owned a horticultural company.
Presumably realistic (or sufficiently realistic) police uniforms are available from theatrical costumiers. I don't suppose the shops run any checks that they are not going to be put to nefarious use.
XX There are questions too how he got his police uniform (unless Oslo fancy dress shops have plenty)XX
You new to this internet thingy then?
Any one can get the full, and latest uniform of any police force in the world sent right to their door.
Badges CAN be a problem. But three weeks haunting the larger flea markets, or army surplus stores can sort that one out in a jiffy.
Post a Comment
You new to this internet thingy then?
Any one can get the full, and latest uniform of any police force in the world sent right to their door.
Badges CAN be a problem. But three weeks haunting the larger flea markets, or army surplus stores can sort that one out in a jiffy.
<< Home
