Norwegian Terror Attacks

[kalniel]

Erm yeah, I think it is ridiculous to say that those religious ideas didn't have anything to do with the motivation behind the attacks.

In most educated people they don't.

I should think it was obvious that it clearly does in the killers mind, this is one of the the problems with having bronze age myths interpreted by anybody.

Which says something either about someone's ignorance of the religions in question (and lack of education) or the fact that there are some nutters who are likely to use anything to justify their actions. Human history shows plenty of 'justifications' for extreme actions, there's no exclusive correlation with something like religion.

There's not a lot we can do about the nutters, but we could at least make sure that there is decent education about religions.

[redddraggon]

Pushing the crime and the horror aside and analysing the attack, you have to admire and respect how successful the operation was when you compare it to other ground terrorists attacks around the world and school shootings.

Point being, it just shows how deadly assault weapons are and an other reason why they shouldn't be so easy to obtain.

It also shows how in-ept the police was in responding to the attack as I believe the attack on the Island was only 13 miles from the closest police station and all helicopters was being used for the bomb attack instead, you have to ask why they needed to use them all and why they couldn't send one over when the first report came over.

90 minutes to respond is criminal, just think how many people they could had saved if they arrived sooner.

Ah~! well, an other day in the world.

Look what happened in Cumbria last year. Our police could have done no better.


A good read:
http://pcbloggs.blogspot.com/2011/07...-pointing.html

[shadowmaster]

Just to add the point I made earlier, was listening to LBC radio while driving today and from what I heard a lot of people do seem to think that "Islam is taking over the UK/Europe"!

[fuddam]

Erm yeah, I think it is ridiculous to say that those religious ideas didn't have anything to do with the motivation behind the attacks. I should think it was obvious that it clearly does in the killers mind, this is one of the the problems with having bronze age myths interpreted by anybody.

couldn't resist trying to get the boot in, eh?

If you used the slightest bit of objectivity, you'd admit that his actions are completely counter to anything Christ ever stated, or anything that was ever attributed to Christ. And I mention Christianity because that is what he claimed to believe.

Read this and try to get a little distance from a knee jerk reaction: http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standa...ot-politics.do

[G4Z]

In most educated people they don't.

Which says something either about someone's ignorance of the religions in question (and lack of education) or the fact that there are some nutters who are likely to use anything to justify their actions. Human history shows plenty of 'justifications' for extreme actions, there's no exclusive correlation with something like religion.

There's not a lot we can do about the nutters, but we could at least make sure that there is decent education about religions.

Oh yeah, of course. He just didn't read it right, his interpretation was wrong. That is really the trouble with all the mumbo jumo isn't it?

So far it appears his justification is not on religious grounds, however it is apparent that he considers himself a Christian. I am not saying it is the only factor however or indeed the primary factor.

[IronWarrior]

Look what happened in Cumbria last year. Our police could have done no better.


A good read:
http://pcbloggs.blogspot.com/2011/07...-pointing.html

Oh very true! See, history always repeats itself and no one ever learns. There is far too much red tape and health and safety, the Police should had stormed in there soon as they was geared up.

[Lucio]

Erm yeah, I think it is ridiculous to say that those religious ideas didn't have anything to do with the motivation behind the attacks. I should think it was obvious that it clearly does in the killers mind, this is one of the the problems with having bronze age myths interpreted by anybody.

The only religious idea involved was the hatred of other religions, which is an idea shared by even aethiests.

I don't think he has any real faith in Christianity, what he has faith in his own ideas and conclusions, to the point where he was willing to destroy as much as he could in their name.

Humanity will always throw up people like this and it's wrong to assume that the label given to their beliefs matters one jot. It is entirely possible that you could get someone like this who is a Pastafarian who insists there should only be 4 meatballs in the depections of FSM

[G4Z]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

[roachcoach]

People have a need to blame <something>, the fact that some people are just wired wrong is an abhorrent thought these days, one frowned upon by many people.

Filling in that blank <something> gives something people can talk about, try to 'prevent' and so forth.


Me, I still believe some people are just plain old fashioned nutters. There's a dark knight quote waiting to be attached, but I'm not going to

[peterb]

<---snip

I am not saying it is the only factor however or indeed the primary factor.

So why mention it at all?

What is clear was this person's intolerance of any other view than his own, and it seems to be that much of human conflict is based on that intolerance, whether religion is used as the excuse or not. Within religious groups there are fundamentalist/fanatics who cannot or will not tolerate another viewpoint, just as atheists will not tolerate the religious views of others, or make little effort to understand them.

Outside religion, there is intolerance that makes for conflict - cyclists and motorists for example - some fanataical cyclists seem to think that traffic laws don't (or shouldn't) apply to them and act selfishly. Equally, some motorists take the view that cyclists should be banned from the roads because they slow their journey time for a few seconds.

We see intolerance elsewhere - on HEXUS, there are the Apple/anti-apple factions; Andriod/Ios factions. Actually pointless arguments (in those cases) because ultimately it comes down to personal prefereance - as does religion, or otherwise.

The fact that someone with some form of mental problem (and I don't think that anyone would disagree that someone planting a bomb for indiscriminate killing, or murdering children at a youth camp has to be a few sandwiches short of a picnic) chooses to justify his action on some quasi-religious or cultural intolerance grounds is largely irrelevant. If that was the way he was wired, he'd find always some justification for his actions.

Ultimately he is no better than a spoilt child who didn't get what he wanted - being an adult, his temper tantrum had further reaching consequences, and manifested itself in the way we saw over the weekend.

So a little more tolerance all round wouldn't come amiss.

[MaddAussie]

So a little more tolerance all round wouldn't come amiss.

This!

We are all guilty of a little bit of this in one way or another.

[shadowmaster]

So a little more tolerance all round wouldn't come amiss.

Amen

[santa claus]

.......some fanataical cyclists seem to think that traffic laws don't (or shouldn't) apply to them and act selfishly.

You had to go and spoil an otherwise great post with this. Traffic laws don't apply to cyclists and especially when it infuriates a mug in a tin box .

[Lucio]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

You're missing the point, you're contending that following a belief system makes a person do these crazy things, I'm arguing that a person who would commit these acts will construct a belief system that fits.

[G4Z]

So why mention it at all?

What is clear was this person's intolerance of any other view than his own, and it seems to be that much of human conflict is based on that intolerance, whether religion is used as the excuse or not. Within religious groups there are fundamentalist/fanatics who cannot or will not tolerate another viewpoint, just as atheists will not tolerate the religious views of others, or make little effort to understand them.

Outside religion, there is intolerance that makes for conflict - cyclists and motorists for example - some fanataical cyclists seem to think that traffic laws don't (or shouldn't) apply to them and act selfishly. Equally, some motorists take the view that cyclists should be banned from the roads because they slow their journey time for a few seconds.

We see intolerance elsewhere - on HEXUS, there are the Apple/anti-apple factions; Andriod/Ios factions. Actually pointless arguments (in those cases) because ultimately it comes down to personal prefereance - as does religion, or otherwise.

The fact that someone with some form of mental problem (and I don't think that anyone would disagree that someone planting a bomb for indiscriminate killing, or murdering children at a youth camp has to be a few sandwiches short of a picnic) chooses to justify his action on some quasi-religious or cultural intolerance grounds is largely irrelevant. If that was the way he was wired, he'd find always some justification for his actions.

Ultimately he is no better than a spoilt child who didn't get what he wanted - being an adult, his temper tantrum had further reaching consequences, and manifested itself in the way we saw over the weekend.

So a little more tolerance all round wouldn't come amiss.

I dont disagree mate, except for the first line.

I didn't mention it, it was brought up by another poster who asserted that his religion had nothing to do with his motivation.

I am of the opinion that this is unlikely to be the case given that he describes himself as a Knights Templar.

[roachcoach]

You had to go and spoil an otherwise great post with this. Traffic laws don't apply to cyclists and especially when it infuriates a mug in a tin box .

Actually some do