ccs297 Wrote:
——————————————————-
> chickentikka, you’re not having very good luck
> these days, if you end up in Norway, make sure to
> spend plenty of time on the forum… will keep you
> safe
>
> Norway is a very pretty country… food and drink
> is expensive there
Indeed. I’ll just go skiing and kiteboarding all the time. Won’t need a job or a CFA thanks to the “progressive” system they have there. I cant wait!
Formerly ChickenTikka - Member of the Order of the Righteous Rusty Hacksaw
According to NYtimes, Jihadists have claimed responsibility. So it looks like it is a terror attack. I’m assuming it’s because Norway is a part of NATO. And NATO is in Afghanistan.
Being Born Wealthy > Being Jewish or WASPY > Born Pretty > Top 5 MBA > CFA > Avg MBA > Born middle class > Born lower class > Born in crack house > Working in IT but looking to switch to buyside
Zesty Wrote:
——————————————————-
> According to NYtimes, Jihadists have claimed
> responsibility. So it looks like it is a terror
> attack. I’m assuming it’s because Norway is a part
> of NATO. And NATO is in Afghanistan.
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/
Really, I heard it was a Finnish terror faction called “The Angry Birds.”
Formerly ChickenTikka - Member of the Order of the Righteous Rusty Hacksaw
^ why is progressive in quotes? Sarcasm? imo it seems like they actually have a pretty good thing going; solid middle class, strong GDP per capita ($52,013 per capita vs $47,284 in USA). Their debt per capita is a problem though ($454,768 per capita vs only $45,097 in USA).
Compared to most countries, it seems like the US still has all kinds of room to take on more debt
People give phone calls as they stand near a burning government building in Olso on July 22, 2011.
(Credit: THOMAS WINJE)
A group called “Helpers of Global Jihad” has taken responsibility for the bomb which ripped open buildings, including the prime minister’s office, in Norway’s capital, CBS News has learned.
It is apparently the same local shadowy extremist group that the Stockholm bomber in December 2010 had said he was connected to.
In the 2010 Stockholm blast, the bomb, in a backpack, went off prematurely and the bomber blew himself up. However, the bomber had left behind a video protesting the Afghanistan war and the killing of Muslims.
There is no confirmation that this group was indeed responsible. Investigators are also trying to determine if there are links to this jihadist group with the core al Qaeda organization. They are looking too to see if there may be a connection to three al Qaeda individuals recently arrested in Norway.
Traditionally on a Friday in Norway, government workers are allowed to leave early at 3 p.m. for the weekend – and investigators speculate that the bomb may have been intended to inflict big casualty damage at that time.
The bomb – an improvised explosive device – may have been contained in a vehicle. The size and type of bomb is unknown at this time. Though a powerful blast, the bomb didn’t bring down any buildings like the Oklahoma City bombing.
This Norway bomb was a significant blast but mostly glass and debris damage. There was no big crater immediately evident.
Being Born Wealthy > Being Jewish or WASPY > Born Pretty > Top 5 MBA > CFA > Avg MBA > Born middle class > Born lower class > Born in crack house > Working in IT but looking to switch to buyside
i still don’t understand why these guys refuse to come to a table to talk about these things and instead rely on mass killings to get their ‘message’ across
pimpineasy Wrote:
——————————————————-
> ChickenTikka Wrote:
> ————————————————–
> —–
> > Because we are infidels and must be killed.
> There
> > is nothing to negotiate.
>
>
> i keep on searching myself for another answer but
> alas
Rushing to blame fereners and muslims eh? Turns out to be quite the opposite.
That’s a good question and I am not sure if I have a great answer to it. There is clearly a media bias here. But I’ll try and at least address some of it.
I believe who we describe as a terrorist has to do with who is reporting the act: the perpetrator, the victim, the winner or the loser.
Let’s take Mandela for example:
History will most certainly not judge Nelson Mandela as a terrorist even though he very clearly was involved in terrorist activity leading up to his incarceration. If you were to speak to Dutch Afrikaanz from that era they would almost certainly consider him a terrorist and would have some legitimate gripe about that.
The people who won, are going to write history and Mandela’s revolution succeeded where Apartheid did not. So Mandela will be considered a hero and almost certainly not a terrorist.
Another example is John Brown:
John Brown was definitely a terrorist. His cause was the emancipation of slaves. To that cause he murdered brutally some farmers and then took over an armory and killed a whole bunch of other innocent civilians. For his crime was hanged, and justly so, according to Nathanial Hawethorne. Emerson, on the other hand compared him to Christ. Ultimately, his attack served as a catalyst for the Civil War and later the emancipation proclamation. The Battle Hymn of The Republic is an elegy to him. Had the South won the war, he would just be remembered as a terrorist.
So, depending on who you ask, people will call you a terrorist. I would call many great man terrorists objectively speaking, in their own right including Abe Lincoln who suspended habeus corpus and hung plenty of people for sedition. Jesus Christ probably also fits that bill.
However, to be an effective terrorist your revolution or change has to be the winner. And if it is not, then history will not be kind to you, because the people who will write it will of course just call you a terrorist whether your cause was just or not.
Our Norwegian friend is very clearly a terrorist and I would argue insane enough to see the ends justifying the means in his case. Will his cause win in the end? Doubtful, unless it is to make Norwegians more afraid of guns? History, will no doubt judge him the loser and deal with him accordingly. What I have learned from living all over the world is that some people can justify and rationalize almost any action no matter how perfidious.
Formerly ChickenTikka - Member of the Order of the Righteous Rusty Hacksaw
JOE2010 Wrote:
——————————————————-
> Just one question- How come the media are not
> calling this idiot a terrorist? Do terrorists have
> to be Muslim or Arabic? Mad man? Please.
They are basically working on establishing some kind of link between him and Pakistan before they call him ‘that’.
ChickenTikka Wrote:
——————————————————-
> That’s a good question and I am not sure if I have
> a great answer to it. There is clearly a media
> bias here. But I’ll try and at least address some
> of it.
>
> I believe who we describe as a terrorist has to do
> with who is reporting the act: the perpetrator,
> the victim, the winner or the loser.
>
> Let’s take Mandela for example:
>
> History will most certainly not judge Nelson
> Mandela as a terrorist even though he very clearly
> was involved in terrorist activity leading up to
> his incarceration. If you were to speak to Dutch
> Afrikaanz from that era they would almost
> certainly consider him a terrorist and would have
> some legitimate gripe about that.
>
> The people who won, are going to write history and
> Mandela’s revolution succeeded where Apartheid did
> not. So Mandela will be considered a hero and
> almost certainly not a terrorist.
>
> Another example is John Brown:
> John Brown was definitely a terrorist. His cause
> was the emancipation of slaves. To that cause he
> murdered brutally some farmers and then took over
> an armory and killed a whole bunch of other
> innocent civilians. For his crime was hanged, and
> justly so, according to Nathanial Hawethorne.
> Emerson, on the other hand compared him to Christ.
> Ultimately, his attack served as a catalyst for
> the Civil War and later the emancipation
> proclamation. The Battle Hymn of The Republic is
> an elegy to him. Had the South won the war, he
> would just be remembered as a terrorist.
>
> So, depending on who you ask, people will call you
> a terrorist. I would call many great man
> terrorists objectively speaking, in their own
> right including Abe Lincoln who suspended habeus
> corpus and hung plenty of people for sedition.
> Jesus Christ probably also fits that bill.
>
> However, to be an effective terrorist your
> revolution or change has to be the winner. And if
> it is not, then history will not be kind to you,
> because the people who will write it will of
> course just call you a terrorist whether your
> cause was just or not.
>
> Our Norwegian friend is very clearly a terrorist
> and I would argue insane enough to see the ends
> justifying the means in his case. Will his cause
> win in the end? Doubtful, unless it is to make
> Norwegians more afraid of guns? History, will no
> doubt judge him the loser and deal with him
> accordingly. What I have learned from living all
> over the world is that some people can justify and
> rationalize almost any action no matter how
> perfidious.
well said, only like to add check out the comments section on this economist blog
“The young campers at Utoya were everything Mr Breivik disliked, politically and racially. The New York Times reported that many victims were the children of immigrants from Africa and Asia who had begun to stake out a greater role in Norwegian society.”
So this was racist after all. I see this happening in the USA in the not too distant future.
JOE2010 Wrote:
——————————————————-
> “The young campers at Utoya were everything Mr
> Breivik disliked, politically and racially. The
> New York Times reported that many victims were the
> children of immigrants from Africa and Asia who
> had begun to stake out a greater role in Norwegian
> society.”
>
> So this was racist after all. I see this happening
> in the USA in the not too distant future.
pimpineasy Wrote:
——————————————————-
> JOE2010 Wrote:
> ————————————————–
> —–
> > “The young campers at Utoya were everything Mr Breivik disliked, politically and
> > racially. The New York Times reported that many victims were the
> > children of immigrants from Africa and Asia who had begun to stake out a greater
> > role in Norwegian society.”
> >
> > So this was racist after all. I see this happening
> > in the USA in the not too distant future.
>
>
> yes, the political rancour is truly depressing
If i remember well unabomber main idea was that technology was killing Mankind. I don t understand norvegian. Is this guy in oslo saying that non white people are killing mankind?
There is a real reactionary trend in that part of the world. It hit its peak inthe 1990s but is still there. All sorts of bizarre Satan worshiping, pagan, pseudo neo nazi, ant judeo Christian stuff.
If you want a just bizarre but interesting read check out Lords of Chaos.
Formerly ChickenTikka - Member of the Order of the Righteous Rusty Hacksaw
JOE2010 Wrote:
——————————————————-
> “The young campers at Utoya were everything Mr
> Breivik disliked, politically and racially. The
> New York Times reported that many victims were the
> children of immigrants from Africa and Asia who
> had begun to stake out a greater role in Norwegian
> society.”
>
> So this was racist after all. I see this happening
> in the USA in the not too distant future.
Yeah no kidding just take a look at the comments section on Fox News. This guy is a hero for them.
Studying With
Not sure. I was just thinking seriously about emigrating there. Something like 4 million people and 10 percent of the worlds oil reserves.
Formerly ChickenTikka - Member of the Order of the Righteous Rusty Hacksaw
chickentikka, you’re not having very good luck these days, if you end up in Norway, make sure to spend plenty of time on the forum… will keep you safe
Norway is a very pretty country… food and drink is expensive there
Studying With
still worth considering
http://hdr.undp.org/en/statistics/
Hope this helps
Studying With
ccs297 Wrote:
——————————————————-
> chickentikka, you’re not having very good luck
> these days, if you end up in Norway, make sure to
> spend plenty of time on the forum… will keep you
> safe
>
> Norway is a very pretty country… food and drink
> is expensive there
Indeed. I’ll just go skiing and kiteboarding all the time. Won’t need a job or a CFA thanks to the “progressive” system they have there. I cant wait!
Formerly ChickenTikka - Member of the Order of the Righteous Rusty Hacksaw
According to NYtimes, Jihadists have claimed responsibility. So it looks like it is a terror attack. I’m assuming it’s because Norway is a part of NATO. And NATO is in Afghanistan.
http://www.nytimes.com/
Being Born Wealthy > Being Jewish or WASPY > Born Pretty > Top 5 MBA > CFA > Avg MBA > Born middle class > Born lower class > Born in crack house > Working in IT but looking to switch to buyside
my boy is vacationing in Oslo right now, better give him a ring.
Studying With
Zesty Wrote:
——————————————————-
> According to NYtimes, Jihadists have claimed
> responsibility. So it looks like it is a terror
> attack. I’m assuming it’s because Norway is a part
> of NATO. And NATO is in Afghanistan.
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/
Really, I heard it was a Finnish terror faction called “The Angry Birds.”
Formerly ChickenTikka - Member of the Order of the Righteous Rusty Hacksaw
^ why is progressive in quotes? Sarcasm? imo it seems like they actually have a pretty good thing going; solid middle class, strong GDP per capita ($52,013 per capita vs $47,284 in USA). Their debt per capita is a problem though ($454,768 per capita vs only $45,097 in USA).
Compared to most countries, it seems like the US still has all kinds of room to take on more debt
CBS News
————————————->
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-31727_162-20082156-10391695.html
“Global Jihad” group says it’s behind Oslo blast
By Pat Milton
People give phone calls as they stand near a burning government building in Olso on July 22, 2011.
(Credit: THOMAS WINJE)
A group called “Helpers of Global Jihad” has taken responsibility for the bomb which ripped open buildings, including the prime minister’s office, in Norway’s capital, CBS News has learned.
It is apparently the same local shadowy extremist group that the Stockholm bomber in December 2010 had said he was connected to.
In the 2010 Stockholm blast, the bomb, in a backpack, went off prematurely and the bomber blew himself up. However, the bomber had left behind a video protesting the Afghanistan war and the killing of Muslims.
There is no confirmation that this group was indeed responsible. Investigators are also trying to determine if there are links to this jihadist group with the core al Qaeda organization. They are looking too to see if there may be a connection to three al Qaeda individuals recently arrested in Norway.
Traditionally on a Friday in Norway, government workers are allowed to leave early at 3 p.m. for the weekend – and investigators speculate that the bomb may have been intended to inflict big casualty damage at that time.
The bomb – an improvised explosive device – may have been contained in a vehicle. The size and type of bomb is unknown at this time. Though a powerful blast, the bomb didn’t bring down any buildings like the Oklahoma City bombing.
This Norway bomb was a significant blast but mostly glass and debris damage. There was no big crater immediately evident.
Being Born Wealthy > Being Jewish or WASPY > Born Pretty > Top 5 MBA > CFA > Avg MBA > Born middle class > Born lower class > Born in crack house > Working in IT but looking to switch to buyside
i still don’t understand why these guys refuse to come to a table to talk about these things and instead rely on mass killings to get their ‘message’ across
Studying With
Because we are infidels and must be killed. There is nothing to negotiate.
Formerly ChickenTikka - Member of the Order of the Righteous Rusty Hacksaw
They said they arrested the shooter, he was dressed as a police officer
Studying With
ChickenTikka Wrote:
——————————————————-
> Because we are infidels and must be killed. There
> is nothing to negotiate.
i keep on searching myself for another answer but alas
Hope this helps
pimpineasy Wrote:
——————————————————-
> ChickenTikka Wrote:
> ————————————————–
> —–
> > Because we are infidels and must be killed.
> There
> > is nothing to negotiate.
>
>
> i keep on searching myself for another answer but
> alas
Rushing to blame fereners and muslims eh? Turns out to be quite the opposite.
http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout...
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"USA troop is a public goods for American and World" ---Lord qqqbee, Sep 1, 2010
Studying With
thanks marcus, thank you
Hope this helps
Yeah, i heard the gunman was a big blond guy.
Cities teem with evil and decay, let’s give it a good shake and see what falls out!!
The turd killed 91 people RIP….what a f***ed up world we live in nowadays. Dont know who to trust.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"USA troop is a public goods for American and World" ---Lord qqqbee, Sep 1, 2010
The dude was a Christian fundamentalist, right wing and against multiculturalism. Sounds Tea Party or republican.
Here he is: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jul/23/anders-behring-breivik-norwa...
marcus phoenix Wrote:
——————————————————-
> The turd killed 91 people RIP….what a f***ed up
> world we live in nowadays. Dont know who to trust.
Actually it is 92 now.
Just one question- How come the media are not calling this idiot a terrorist? Do terrorists have to be Muslim or Arabic? Mad man? Please.
Studying With
That’s a good question and I am not sure if I have a great answer to it. There is clearly a media bias here. But I’ll try and at least address some of it.
I believe who we describe as a terrorist has to do with who is reporting the act: the perpetrator, the victim, the winner or the loser.
Let’s take Mandela for example:
History will most certainly not judge Nelson Mandela as a terrorist even though he very clearly was involved in terrorist activity leading up to his incarceration. If you were to speak to Dutch Afrikaanz from that era they would almost certainly consider him a terrorist and would have some legitimate gripe about that.
The people who won, are going to write history and Mandela’s revolution succeeded where Apartheid did not. So Mandela will be considered a hero and almost certainly not a terrorist.
Another example is John Brown:
John Brown was definitely a terrorist. His cause was the emancipation of slaves. To that cause he murdered brutally some farmers and then took over an armory and killed a whole bunch of other innocent civilians. For his crime was hanged, and justly so, according to Nathanial Hawethorne. Emerson, on the other hand compared him to Christ. Ultimately, his attack served as a catalyst for the Civil War and later the emancipation proclamation. The Battle Hymn of The Republic is an elegy to him. Had the South won the war, he would just be remembered as a terrorist.
So, depending on who you ask, people will call you a terrorist. I would call many great man terrorists objectively speaking, in their own right including Abe Lincoln who suspended habeus corpus and hung plenty of people for sedition. Jesus Christ probably also fits that bill.
However, to be an effective terrorist your revolution or change has to be the winner. And if it is not, then history will not be kind to you, because the people who will write it will of course just call you a terrorist whether your cause was just or not.
Our Norwegian friend is very clearly a terrorist and I would argue insane enough to see the ends justifying the means in his case. Will his cause win in the end? Doubtful, unless it is to make Norwegians more afraid of guns? History, will no doubt judge him the loser and deal with him accordingly. What I have learned from living all over the world is that some people can justify and rationalize almost any action no matter how perfidious.
Formerly ChickenTikka - Member of the Order of the Righteous Rusty Hacksaw
JOE2010 Wrote:
——————————————————-
> Just one question- How come the media are not
> calling this idiot a terrorist? Do terrorists have
> to be Muslim or Arabic? Mad man? Please.
They are basically working on establishing some kind of link between him and Pakistan before they call him ‘that’.
Studying With
ChickenTikka Wrote:
——————————————————-
> That’s a good question and I am not sure if I have
> a great answer to it. There is clearly a media
> bias here. But I’ll try and at least address some
> of it.
>
> I believe who we describe as a terrorist has to do
> with who is reporting the act: the perpetrator,
> the victim, the winner or the loser.
>
> Let’s take Mandela for example:
>
> History will most certainly not judge Nelson
> Mandela as a terrorist even though he very clearly
> was involved in terrorist activity leading up to
> his incarceration. If you were to speak to Dutch
> Afrikaanz from that era they would almost
> certainly consider him a terrorist and would have
> some legitimate gripe about that.
>
> The people who won, are going to write history and
> Mandela’s revolution succeeded where Apartheid did
> not. So Mandela will be considered a hero and
> almost certainly not a terrorist.
>
> Another example is John Brown:
> John Brown was definitely a terrorist. His cause
> was the emancipation of slaves. To that cause he
> murdered brutally some farmers and then took over
> an armory and killed a whole bunch of other
> innocent civilians. For his crime was hanged, and
> justly so, according to Nathanial Hawethorne.
> Emerson, on the other hand compared him to Christ.
> Ultimately, his attack served as a catalyst for
> the Civil War and later the emancipation
> proclamation. The Battle Hymn of The Republic is
> an elegy to him. Had the South won the war, he
> would just be remembered as a terrorist.
>
> So, depending on who you ask, people will call you
> a terrorist. I would call many great man
> terrorists objectively speaking, in their own
> right including Abe Lincoln who suspended habeus
> corpus and hung plenty of people for sedition.
> Jesus Christ probably also fits that bill.
>
> However, to be an effective terrorist your
> revolution or change has to be the winner. And if
> it is not, then history will not be kind to you,
> because the people who will write it will of
> course just call you a terrorist whether your
> cause was just or not.
>
> Our Norwegian friend is very clearly a terrorist
> and I would argue insane enough to see the ends
> justifying the means in his case. Will his cause
> win in the end? Doubtful, unless it is to make
> Norwegians more afraid of guns? History, will no
> doubt judge him the loser and deal with him
> accordingly. What I have learned from living all
> over the world is that some people can justify and
> rationalize almost any action no matter how
> perfidious.
well said, only like to add check out the comments section on this economist blog
http://www.economist.com/blogs/newsbook/2011/07/norway-attacks
Hope this helps
“The young campers at Utoya were everything Mr Breivik disliked, politically and racially. The New York Times reported that many victims were the children of immigrants from Africa and Asia who had begun to stake out a greater role in Norwegian society.”
So this was racist after all. I see this happening in the USA in the not too distant future.
Studying With
JOE2010 Wrote:
——————————————————-
> “The young campers at Utoya were everything Mr
> Breivik disliked, politically and racially. The
> New York Times reported that many victims were the
> children of immigrants from Africa and Asia who
> had begun to stake out a greater role in Norwegian
> society.”
>
> So this was racist after all. I see this happening
> in the USA in the not too distant future.
yes, the political rancour is truly depressing
Hope this helps
pimpineasy Wrote:
——————————————————-
> JOE2010 Wrote:
> ————————————————–
> —–
> > “The young campers at Utoya were everything Mr Breivik disliked, politically and
> > racially. The New York Times reported that many victims were the
> > children of immigrants from Africa and Asia who had begun to stake out a greater
> > role in Norwegian society.”
> >
> > So this was racist after all. I see this happening
> > in the USA in the not too distant future.
>
>
> yes, the political rancour is truly depressing
It says here he was inspired by the Unabomber Ted Kaczynski and basically copied and used TK’s manifest as his own but changed some words here and there.
Link here (untranslated): http://www.bt.no/nyheter/innenriks/Kopierte-Unabomberen-2542614.html
If i remember well unabomber main idea was that technology was killing Mankind. I don t understand norvegian. Is this guy in oslo saying that non white people are killing mankind?
Studying With
There is a real reactionary trend in that part of the world. It hit its peak inthe 1990s but is still there. All sorts of bizarre Satan worshiping, pagan, pseudo neo nazi, ant judeo Christian stuff.
If you want a just bizarre but interesting read check out Lords of Chaos.
Formerly ChickenTikka - Member of the Order of the Righteous Rusty Hacksaw
JOE2010 Wrote:
——————————————————-
> “The young campers at Utoya were everything Mr
> Breivik disliked, politically and racially. The
> New York Times reported that many victims were the
> children of immigrants from Africa and Asia who
> had begun to stake out a greater role in Norwegian
> society.”
>
> So this was racist after all. I see this happening
> in the USA in the not too distant future.
Yeah no kidding just take a look at the comments section on Fox News. This guy is a hero for them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"USA troop is a public goods for American and World" ---Lord qqqbee, Sep 1, 2010
Pages