The Norwegian Massacre: Is it Christian Terrorism

There's lots wrong here, to wit:

Western media haven't always labeled political acts of violence anywhere in the world with a religious tag... unless the perpetrators themselves have done so.

You and a few others with an agenda (promoting moral equivalence and excusing Muslim/Jihadist terrorism) may call Breivik's murder spree an act of Christian terrorism, but it's not; his own writings reveal the political nature of his motives.  Not to mention, for a Norwegian to slaughter innocent Norwegians as an 'anti-Muslim statement' betrays his psychotic and irrational thinking.

Timothy McVeigh could not possibly have been 'inspired' by fundamentalist Christian values... the 'value' of blowing people up is simply not one of them; no Christian leader advocates killing people* for any reason, let alone a political one.

You got one thing right - they both employed ammonium nitrate to make a bomb.  But that's where the similarity ends, it seems to me.

In my opinion, McVeigh is the wrong comparator.  Breivik is more Loughner writ large, unless & until involvement of others is confirmed.

You're only half right.  There is organized Islamic terrorism.  Why you seem to think otherwise, when the Islamic Jihadist terrorists themselves proclaim its existence and issue calls for other Muslims to join them in Jihad, with the help and encouragement of many Imams, is puzzling, to put it mildly.  Pretending moral equivalence here is willful disregard for reality and simply bullshit.

*There may have been a few nutjobs calling for the killing of abortionists over the years, so you got that if you want it, but none calling for the killing of people for 'insulting Jesus' or because they happen not to be Christian.

Christianity, like Islam has had a long history of violence and percecution in the name of religion. There is something in revealed prophetic religions that motivate people to act of violence. Having said that I must add that the cluster of beliefs that one finds in the 1,500 page msnifest writtten by Mr Anders shows that he bore values that resonate deeply in a consertvative, christian milieu. My point is that we should regard such acts as terrorist acts and not give it a religious tage. The fact that most of the terrorism we see happens in and by Moslems is due to the fact that there are unresolved political grievvances in that part of the world. They are political statements dressed in reigious gatb.

I do not believe it was motivated by religion at all. What statements that have come out seem to point to the lack of the  governments listening to the people. Most all "democratic governments" seem to avoid what the people want and do what is good for the elite in the country and people are waking up to that more and more and they are getting pissed off breeding the "extremist".

From what the 1,500-page manifesto says, Breivik appears to have been motivated more by an extreme loathing of European multiculturalism that has accompanied rapid immigration from the developing world, and of the European Union's growing powers, than by Christianity.
http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2011/07/25/understanding-christian-fundamentalist-label-for-norway-terror-suspect/

We no longer have religious terrorists, now the new threat is right wing extremists. Be prepared for TSA searches everywhere. Buses and trains are next then shopping malls. Your neighbour is the new enemy.

I disagree.  That's not how people settle 'unresolved political grievances'.  Jihad is apolitical, purely religious.

I'm going to assume your tongue was very far into your cheek when you wrote that.

Which has what to do with today?  Christianity gave that game up a long time ago.  Islam, not so much.

Actually, he is Canadian, so he does not care about TSA!

You said it.  Another waste of time reading Bahu.

I tried to get into the US in 2000 and was denied because of a "caught with a joint" charge (illegal search and tossed out of court) in high school and found it rather funny that a pot head with no convictions can't get into the US but every terrorist from the middle east had no problem in the same year. LMAO

Canada's airports use basically the same goose stepping pricks but on a much smaller scale. US, England and Canada are all almost the same crap. I just figured almost all here know TSA but who knows CANTSA.

TSA at Train station refuse to identify themselves!

Bahu,

NO, is the answer to the question the title of your article. 

And Daiwa has given several salient reasons why.

The Left media is attempting to make Christianity a part of this story is something O'Reilly discussed on his show. They want to make Christian fundamentalists a threat just like jihadists who actually commit violence and blow up things every day. 

Here's a news story to make this point...

Indonesia: prospect of ‘mass persecution’ of Christians in Bogor July 25, 2011

A mainline Protestant denomination in Indonesia is warning of the prospect of “mass persecution” in Bogor, a city of 950,000 located 35 miles from Jakarta, Indonesia’s capital.

The “intolerance and tyranny on behalf of the representatives of the government,” according to the Indonesian Christian Church, has prevented it from building a church in Bogor, as “Islamic militants seek to prevent church assemblies.” The denomination continues to hold services in the streets.

3% of the nation’s 228.5 million people are Catholic, according to Vatican statistics. 6% are Protestant, and 86% are Muslim.

....................................................................

Today, Pope Benedict and the Bishop of Oslo decried the attack and expressed profound sadness at the great loss of life.

I have very clearly said that terrorism does not have areligious tag and this Norwegian Masssacre, inspired by a mixture of Nazi philisophy, Nordic cutural strsnds, anti-immigration sentiment,Islamophobia and thelike is not an act of Christian Terrorism and as far as Islamic Terrorism is concerned, we can only say that the Middle East has some genuine concerns and if they are addressed we will see  a steep drawdown of political terrorism.

TRUE. Although the big, bad media is trying hard to make it seem that way.

Yes it does when it comes to Islam.

Bahu, You write: The suggestion that there is a Christian terrorism is just as wrong as the assertion that there is Islamic terrorism.

C'mon. It's not wrong to assert that there is Islamic terrorism. It's true and it's global.

Is it not radical Muslims who contribute to the majority of violence in the world today? While not all Muslims are terrorists, almost all terrorists are Muslims and most of these are Arabs. Arab countries train, fund, shelter and deploy Muslim terrorists against the West, the Jews, Christians, other non-Muslims, and even other Muslims who are not "Muslim enough".   

Why the Muslim propensity for violence, using force to handle problems and crisis?

Islam does not sanction violence and if some Moslems turn to Terrorism the individuals are to be blamed not the religion. The Clash of Civilization rhetoric has permeated so deep that we tend to reify religion. There are some real issues facing the Islamic parts of the world and countries like Pakistan and Afghanistan, failed states both, have developed a vested interest is fueling terror in the name of politics. Relion come in handy to motivte people and hence we have religion inspired violence. In Nrway the Labor Government was pursuing policies which the nationalists did not appreciate but the Lbor went on encouraging immigation for political reason as the new immigrants tended to vote left of centre.

Meaningless pap.  Only one party is interested in a 'drawdown of political terrorism'; the Middle East thugs cynically use the bogeymen (Israel, USA) for their own purposes & ends, with no interest in peace whatsoever beyond lip service.

To start, it must be pointed out there are people of peace and people of violence in all religions.

Yes, Islam sanctions violence. The sanctioning of violence goes back to Mohammed, Islam's founder. He was a warlord who during his lifetime conquered the Arabian peninsula. He produced the Qur'an which  is filled with commands to use violence in the service of Islam and Islamic nations.

Islam defines the entire non-Muslim world as the House of War (dar al-harb). It is acceptable to always lie and deceive non-Muslims.

World peace to a westerner means peaceful co-existence. World peace to a Muslim means "world Islam", in other words, the world submitting to the will of Allah. This can only happen if Islam sanctions violence.

Since Islam views itself as a pan-ethnic religion meant for all peoples in all countries, it's willing to employ violence on a massive scale as illustrated by the first century of its existence.

As far as the cause of Islamic hatred, violence and terrorist assaults all over the world. one can blame this and one can blame that, but in the end one must believe that terrorism is latent within Islam. It just is.

I agree with Robert Spencer who has argued that the whole notion of jihad was set in motion by Mohammed and the historic relegation of non-Muslims to dhimmi, or second class status all contain the seed of violence, which can sprout at any time.  

Concepts like darul-ul-Islam and Darul-ul-harb are rooted in the context , historical and intellectual in which they arise and hence have to be viewed aginst that horizon. Obviously you are very well read and so I do not want to give a mere answer. My views on this issue are informed by two very seminal works both by American historians (1) God's Crucible. I do not have the name of the author in my mind at this time and more importantly the University of Chicago masterpiece by Hodgson The Venture of Islam (vols I to III). As I have said revealed religions do have a tendency to believe that god is on their side and are therefore expansionist. Salvation and Empire perhaps are two sides of the same coin. But today's violence cannot be laid at the doorstep of Islam because even if we grant the extreme violence with which the religion spread, there is also the injunction of theProphet, do not convert by force. So we need a more nuanced perspective.

The Two State solution for the Palestine-Israle tangle has been suggested evenby the USA but you  know who is stalling. If this issue is settled there is one grievance less.

Ya don't say.  Just hit the Easy Button... Poof, Problem Solved.

What unresolved political grievances might that be? And why would they cause terrorism?

There is a place with lots of unresolved political grievances, sub-Sahran Africa. But Africans do not resort to terrorism (except for Muslim Nigerians and Muslim Somalis, apparently).

Terrorists are a product of failed cultures. People believe they are due a higher social status just because they are believers of the "true religion" or true ideology and when physics disagrees, they resort to violence to "rectify" the universe.

This applies to Muslim terrorists and it applies to the Norwegian nutter.

Yes, we know who is stalling. The Palestinians refuse to talk, they refuse to root out terrorism, they refuse to remain true to the peace treaty. They are, if you want to put it that way, "stalling".

The Israelis are ready to talk and have been waiting for years for the Palestinians to answer. But the Palestinians prefer to talk to everybody else, the Americans, the Europeans, other Arabs, the UN, everyone but the Israelis.

The funny thing is that everybody knows that. For all the talk about "Christian fundamentalists" and "violent Jews", it is still Muslims that are distrusted by everyone.

Just propose the following thought experiment to those who pretend their views were different.

Dress up as a Christian/Jew/Muslim/atheist and walk through a Christian/Jewish/Muslim/secular city. Which combination would you rather leave to your opponents?

The fact is that no Jew or Muslim fears Christian cities in the US. And no Muslim in Europe feels the need to hide his religion or ethnicity (they walk around in their traditional garb). Everybody knows this.

People distrust Muslims more than they must and are willing to admit it less than they should.

I think many who have jumped into the polemics between "Christian Terrorism" and "Islamic Terrorism" seem to have forgotten the history of the 20th century. The entire philosophy behind the Holocaust was rooted in Christianity. The anti semitism which was sanctioned by both Roman Catholic faith and Lutherern church (Martin Luther was a notorious anti semite) was the outcome of the alleged hand of the Jews in killing the Saviour. Now no one in his right mind will say that Holocaust was a Christian crime and tar the entire community of believers with the same brush. Yet Islam can be tarred and feathered without anyone raising as much as an eyebrow. If one person draws attention to certain inconvenient truths then he is an apologist for terror.

I do not think of the Norwegian as a Christian Terrorist and by the samr token the lateMr Osama Bin Laden, a terrorist he undoubtedly was, happened to be a Muslim'

The Holocaust was a gigantic failure of the Christian community. And boy would I blame Christians for it if not for the large number of Christians who very vocally speak up against fascism (and Islamism) today and support Jews and Israel with all their heart. Christians, especially American Christians, showed that the Holocaust was not a Christian crime.

Once a large number of Muslims speaks up likewise, without reservations, I will likewise accept that Bin Laden and all the others are not "Islamic terrorists".

You are not supporting your position very well by proposing absolutely ludicrous statements. The media are and have been full of articles explaining why terrorism is not Islam and why the terrorists are just "desperate" and "poor" and how Islam means "peace" (It doesn't) and is super-friendly and regards women highly and so on.

To claim that you feel that our society allows Islam to be "tarred and featered" is to admit that you don't read newspapers and never watch the news. It doesn't help your position at all.

Well, this is a nice way to call attention to an article. Disregard all calls of terrorist attacks based on Islamic religious beliefs and call what is obviously politically motivated, Christian terrorism. They say if you look hard enough you may actually convince yourself that there is really something there, looks like Bahu dug so deep he convinced himself of this.

Trying to change history again I see. Lets see some links to these MSM stories of "super-friendly and regards women highly and so on".

I am not to sure what was meant by "tarred and feathered" but I guess killing hundreds of thousands of civilians in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya and Palestine does not fit into that description for you. Almost every day on the news is filled with "civilians killed" stories by drones and bombs and nobody does bat an eye. Almost a hundred civilians in Norway and the MSM freaks out.

http://www.iraqbodycount.org/  102,008 – 111,498 CIVILIANS

http://cursor.org/stories/civilian_deaths.htm

March 2002

When U.S. warplanes strafed [with AC-130 gunships] the farming village of Chowkar-Karez, 25 miles north of Kandahar on October 22-23rd,killing at least 93 civilians, a Pentagon official said, "the people there are dead because we wanted them dead." The reason? They sympathized with the Taliban¹. When asked about the Chowkar incident, Rumsfeld replied,"I cannot deal with that particular village."²

93 civilians in 1 raid and not one bit of outrage by anyone, the story did not make the top news every day. Was that pilot a quack or a nut or a wack job? No way, they are heroes. LMFAO

You keep saying "revealed religions" as though there is more than one. 

Here is something for you to think about.

Granted there are many organized religions of the world, but only one religion can be the true religion of Almighty God. 

There is but one Infinite Holy God, hence there cannot be more than one religion of God's making. The very existence of two or three or two hundred are inferentially a denial of the Oneness of God. God is Absolute, Eternal and Truth Eternal and does not contradict Himself as do the varying religions claiming to be of God.

The world has only had one religion of God's making, That revealed religion was ancient Hebraic Judaism which contained the Promise, Christ, Who revealed Christianity. Therefore Catholics hold their religion with its Christ instituted priesthood and sacrifice to be anceint Judaism full blossomed.

Salvation and empire may be two sides of the same coin for those who practice Islam but they aren't for those practicing Christianity.

In Almighty God's salvation plan, we see salvation in convenantal terms which reveal a consistent pattern of how God deals with people of every age and the empires they build.

Before the end of the world, many empires will end. The Babylonian world ended. So did the world of Pharoahs. The ancient Hebraic Israelite empire ended as did the Second Temple Jews. The Roman Empire ended as did the Byzantine. All these great empires ended as will those in our present world come to an end.

Empires come and go however, salvation is all about Christ and His commands and He taught His everlasting Kingdom is not of this world.   

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/10/world/asia/10afghanistan.html

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2011-07-14-United-Nations-Afghanistan-Ban-Ki-Moon-Taliban-civilian-deaths_n.htm

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/01/15/taliban-cause-most-civilian-deaths-but-u-s-gets-the-blame/

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/07/14/501364/main20079401.shtml

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/09/afghanistan-insurgents-civilian-victims

http://www.conflictmonitors.org/countries/afghanistan/facts-and-figures/casualties/civilians

Of course it's a payday if the coalition can be held accountable for civilian deaths. The Taliban might send a sympathy card. The same held/holds true for Iraq and Pakistan. What don't people understand about war? How many tens of thousands were killed in individual bombing raids in WWII? If you ask me it's the lack of brutality that has these wars lasting longer than they should. The kinder gentler war that fails to horrify the enemy into demanding it's leaders to capitulate, prolongs the slow bleed and minimizes the urge to end the "terrible" conflict. Lack of sacrifice breeds apathy. People carry on their daily lives oblivious to a "war" in progress with exception of a few mentions on the news or in the paper. 

It's not difficult to understand Islam's traditional division of the human world into two houses. Here Islamic theology blends with political expectations. The "House of Islam,  is the God hallowed realm that embodies God's purpose on earth, and the "House of War" is composed of all those who have not yet submitted to Allah and his prophet, Mohammed. 

From there it's a small step to the Muslim conviction that as Bernard Lewis writes in Muslim Discovery of Europe, "The Islamic state [is] the only truly legitimate power on earth and the Islamic community the sole repository of truth and enlightenment, surrounded on all sides by an outer darkness of barbarism and unbelief."

Are you forgetting that prophet produced the Qur'an which is filled with commands to use violence in the service of Islam and Islamic nations?

The Qur'an says: Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and his messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of truth, from among the people of the book [the Bible], until they pay the jizyah [tribute], with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.

In other words, violence is to be used against Jews and Christians unless they are willing to pay a special tax and live in  subjection to Muslims. For them the choice is convert, die or live in subjection.

When we hear Islam is a religion of peace that means the peace that will come when everyone is Muslim or at least subject to the Islamic state. And to establish that peace Muslims must wage war.