**Terror in Oslo** UPDATE: Anders Breivik gets 8 weeks of custody

[RelexCryo]

What kind of a gun did he use? A pistol?

According to police, it was a pistol and a "two-handed automated firearm" or something.

He has also published a 1500 pages (yes, one thousand five hundred) long manifesto which, in great detail, explains why and how he committed his crimes. In the manifesto, he explains that he has used the last two years to make the manifesto, the bomb and to plan the attack. All in all, the most thoroughly documented massacre I have ever heard of.

He has supposedly also uttered "It is better to be hated than to be forgotten". I stand by my previous statement when I say, please do not let him get what he wants. He deserves oblivion, not martyrdom.

So it was a pistol and an Assault Rifle?

Does it really matter what kind of guns he used? I think the bottom line here is that this was an unqualified tragedy and a senseless act of violence not only against a civilian population but against kids for christ's sake. I don't care how he did it, how is the most basic and the most irrelevant question that can be asked. If you really want to understand, ask why, like so many other people have been doing.

The question of why has already been answered. I am just wondering where he got an Assault Rifle in a place which has strict gun control. That doesn't really seem to be a pointless question.

 

[Kair]

Q: When is a religious fundamentalist mass murderer just a madman?
A: When he's a white christian fundamentalist.

The sheep started crying terrorism right away, trying to unify the herd through religion and nationalism.

Then after some time, it was known that the perpetrator was a white christian nationalist nutbag, just like the sheep.

As if it was only white Christian nationalists crying Islamic terrorism.

I was not crying terrorism. But neither am I a part of the herd.

Nationalism, religion, xenophobia and prejudice are all symptoms of the same mental illness. There are many more symptoms.

I didn't say you were. That still does not mean that you're not implicitly blaming only some of those that are guilty.

And lol, no they are not a mental illness even if you dislike them or even if there is good reason to dislike them.

I diagnose them with a mental illness because of the consequences brought on by their mindset, not because of my personal taste or (dis)affection. Just like Schizophrenia is an illness because of its negative consequences, the unenlightened mind is also an illness because of the negative consequences. Though it is an extremely common mental illness as opposed to Schizophrenia.

Many people will not call it an illness, just like in a hypothetical world where the vast majority of people had Multiple Personality Disorder, MPD would not be called an illness.

In other words you don't like the consequences and therefore you say they're mentally ill. No good reason, just your dislike. You should stop raping psychology.

And you should stop being severely incapable of communication.
There is no reason to try to talk to you if you only hear what you want to hear.

I'm quite capable. Your reason to consider it mental illness was 'negative consequences'. You failed to provide a good reason based in psychology to consider them negative consequences. Instead there's only your word. Also, it's not just 'negative consequences' that make things considered mental disorders.

Yes, a mental disorder needs to be a mental state that is different in a negative way compared to a mental state that is positive.Most mental disorders are based in physical damage to the brain, some are (as far as we know) internal. As far as I know the unenlightened mind is not physical damage.
I compare the unenlightened mind to the enlightened mind. The unenlightened mind is a simple print of its surroundings. It is incapable of (close to) true sentience. The enlightened mind is a much more advanced print of its surroundings, much more independent as a result of it. It is quite ironical that the surroundings shape a mind that is independent of its surroundings, but it is the best we can hope for today.

If you do not think the unenlightened mind is a disorder, you must not have seen the world as it truly is, or are just too entangled in it to view it objectively. One has to be a naive fool to deny that the world is full of animals. I know that I used to be an animal, before my mind was healthy. This is enough to call the unenlightened mind a mental disorder, just like a recovering mental patient can identify a mental illness.

 

[Jonluw]

Erm what is there to debate? I'm more worried about the Norwegian security, an island which is not too far away from the capital, has to wait what an hour and a half before police can move in and capture the shooter? In that time the shooter killing nearly 100 people? Nevermind the mind blowing-ness it is for one guy to kill that many, like just imagine assuming you went through classes of 30 kids in school, 3 of your classes just dead by one guy. I mean they could barely stop this guy from killing so much, imagine if a country invaded if there would even be a battle? Nevermind that post pointing out the poor quality of European militaries. I mean at the very least 9/11 was done by planes, of which is rather inefficient to put police on all with guns equipped.

Of course there would be a battle if the country was invaded.
We have a military, but that has nothing to do with this case at all.

The reason it took so long for police to arrive is owing to a few factors:
1)It took some time before the police at all got calls about what was happening. And when they got to the fjord, it was clear that they would need the contingency platoon.
2) The contingency platoon was already deployed in Oslo. (Personally, I think they should have held back some troops in reserve, but oh well.)
3) Utøya is nearly 40 km (25 miles) away from Oslo.
4) Weather conditions meant that they initially couldn't reach the island by helicopter.
5) And for some reason, they had a hard time getting a hold of boats.

As I see it, the police made two mistakes:
Not holding some contingency troops in reserve, and not pulling out with a boat immediately when they heard there was something going on on an island.

 

[razerdoh]

apparently mutch of his manifesto was ripped from the Una-Bombers manifesto...

 

[mip0]

He was a leftie? I heard he was a Nationalist...
Anyway, he used to play WoW, so our favorit art might take another hit...

"extreme leftist"?? He's an extreme rightist ffs!

As I was told immediately upon pointing out the same thing: It's a typo. They shooter is an extreme rightist but it has not yet been fixed because the OP is currently asleep. It will hopefully be fixed as soon as he comes back, in the meantime the post will continue to proudly announce the shooter's fictional affiliations to the exact opposite of what he actually believes.

Ok, thanks! and sorry

 

[mip0]

"extreme leftist"?? He's an extreme rightist ffs!

That's almost the same anyway.

ok, it was what I read and heard on the news. Sadly I don't know a lot about politics, it'd be great if you could explain how they're almost the same.

 

[mip0]

(...)

"extreme leftist"?? He's an extreme rightist ffs!

Left or right, the issue with this statement is the extreme part, as that's what leads to these horrible events, extremists and extreme actions.

Yeah ok. I think Voltaire said something like that, right? Did he right a small book about it too?

 

[Jazoni89]

OMG! these deaths have nothing on Amy Winehouse!!!...yeah. -_-

See what I did there.

 

[Kair]

Q: When is a religious fundamentalist mass murderer just a madman?
A: When he's a white christian fundamentalist.

The sheep started crying terrorism right away, trying to unify the herd through religion and nationalism.

Then after some time, it was known that the perpetrator was a white christian nationalist nutbag, just like the sheep.

As if it was only white Christian nationalists crying Islamic terrorism.

I was not crying terrorism. But neither am I a part of the herd.

Nationalism, religion, xenophobia and prejudice are all symptoms of the same mental illness. There are many more symptoms.

I didn't say you were. That still does not mean that you're not implicitly blaming only some of those that are guilty.

And lol, no they are not a mental illness even if you dislike them or even if there is good reason to dislike them.

I diagnose them with a mental illness because of the consequences brought on by their mindset, not because of my personal taste or (dis)affection. Just like Schizophrenia is an illness because of its negative consequences, the unenlightened mind is also an illness because of the negative consequences. Though it is an extremely common mental illness as opposed to Schizophrenia.

Many people will not call it an illness, just like in a hypothetical world where the vast majority of people had Multiple Personality Disorder, MPD would not be called an illness.

In other words you don't like the consequences and therefore you say they're mentally ill. No good reason, just your dislike. You should stop raping psychology.

And you should stop being severely incapable of communication.
There is no reason to try to talk to you if you only hear what you want to hear.

I'm quite capable. Your reason to consider it mental illness was 'negative consequences'. You failed to provide a good reason based in psychology to consider them negative consequences. Instead there's only your word. Also, it's not just 'negative consequences' that make things considered mental disorders.

Yes, a mental disorder needs to be a mental state that is different in a negative way compared to a mental state that is positive.Most mental disorders are based in physical damage to the brain, some are (as far as we know) internal. As far as I know the unenlightened mind is not physical damage.
I compare the unenlightened mind to the enlightened mind. The unenlightened mind is a simple print of its surroundings. It is incapable of (close to) true sentience. The enlightened mind is a much more advanced print of its surroundings, much more independent as a result of it. It is quite ironical that the surroundings shape a mind that is independent of its surroundings, but it is the best we can hope for today.

If you do not think the unenlightened mind is a disorder, you must not have seen the world as it truly is, or are just too entangled in it to view it objectively. One has to be a naive fool to deny that the world is full of animals. I know that I used to be an animal, before my mind was healthy. This is enough to call the unenlightened mind a mental disorder, just like a recovering mental patient can identify a mental illness.

For someone so enlightened you sure seem to be missing rather simple points. Duh, it needs to be negative. Did I say it didn't? No, I said a negative consequence is not enough to make it a mental disorder. Being slightly afraid of children is negative and has no good reason behind it. That does not make it a mental disorder. So to recap, it's necessary, but not sufficient.

You're using vague terminology. Enlightened and unenlightened are not clear descriptions. What one person considers enlightened is not what another person considers enlightened. Further, 'true' sentience? Utter nonsense. You sound like some new age demagogue.

You're just spewing bullshit. You make accusations, you never back them up. You make claims about the world, you use vague terminology and still fail to back it all up.

Vague terminology is the only thing keeping apathetic cynics from cutting down anything that is good. Now you cut down on the vague terminology instead of focusing on the real message. You are doing just the same thing as you would if I was precise. There is no way for me to tell you the truth. I call it an illness because it is curable. Being afraid of children is an illness, and you should cure it. Illness simply means a state that is negative. If that is far too vague for you, you are a metadiscusser.

 

[Polite Sage]

<youtube=rAwp2FnRmsE&skipcontrinter=1>

In case anyone is wondering, this is the manifesto the killer posted on youtube and was reupped by someone. Last one was removed.

What a racist asshole. He's acting like muslims are some kind of spawn of the devil himself. Calls them killers and peace haters. Then he himself glorifies the crusaders who were all just pathetic murderers (they killed/tortured even more civilians).
And then he goes to kill non muslim children. GJ troll. We need death penalty for people like these.

 

[Stublore]

<youtube=rAwp2FnRmsE&skipcontrinter=1>

In case anyone is wondering, this is the manifesto the killer posted on youtube and was reupped by someone. Last one was removed.

What a racist asshole. He's acting like muslims are some kind of spawn of the devil himself. Calls them killers and peace haters. Then he himself glorifies the crusaders who were all just pathetic murderers (they killed/tortured even more civilians).
And then he goes to kill non muslim children. GJ troll. We need death penalty for people like these.

And another strike for ignorance!
Islam as I am sooooo tired of saying IS NOT A RACE, any more than Catholicism,Buddhism,Hinduism,Scientology, Mormonism etc etc are races.
It's a bloody religious ideology.
It's a choice you make, or have forced upon you, it is not a physical characteristic, there is no islamic gene or genes, it is not genetically inheritable.
The lack of basic biological understanding on this forum is depressing

 

[Kair]

Q: When is a religious fundamentalist mass murderer just a madman?
A: When he's a white christian fundamentalist.

The sheep started crying terrorism right away, trying to unify the herd through religion and nationalism.

Then after some time, it was known that the perpetrator was a white christian nationalist nutbag, just like the sheep.

As if it was only white Christian nationalists crying Islamic terrorism.

I was not crying terrorism. But neither am I a part of the herd.

Nationalism, religion, xenophobia and prejudice are all symptoms of the same mental illness. There are many more symptoms.

I didn't say you were. That still does not mean that you're not implicitly blaming only some of those that are guilty.

And lol, no they are not a mental illness even if you dislike them or even if there is good reason to dislike them.

I diagnose them with a mental illness because of the consequences brought on by their mindset, not because of my personal taste or (dis)affection. Just like Schizophrenia is an illness because of its negative consequences, the unenlightened mind is also an illness because of the negative consequences. Though it is an extremely common mental illness as opposed to Schizophrenia.

Many people will not call it an illness, just like in a hypothetical world where the vast majority of people had Multiple Personality Disorder, MPD would not be called an illness.

In other words you don't like the consequences and therefore you say they're mentally ill. No good reason, just your dislike. You should stop raping psychology.

And you should stop being severely incapable of communication.
There is no reason to try to talk to you if you only hear what you want to hear.

I'm quite capable. Your reason to consider it mental illness was 'negative consequences'. You failed to provide a good reason based in psychology to consider them negative consequences. Instead there's only your word. Also, it's not just 'negative consequences' that make things considered mental disorders.

Yes, a mental disorder needs to be a mental state that is different in a negative way compared to a mental state that is positive.Most mental disorders are based in physical damage to the brain, some are (as far as we know) internal. As far as I know the unenlightened mind is not physical damage.
I compare the unenlightened mind to the enlightened mind. The unenlightened mind is a simple print of its surroundings. It is incapable of (close to) true sentience. The enlightened mind is a much more advanced print of its surroundings, much more independent as a result of it. It is quite ironical that the surroundings shape a mind that is independent of its surroundings, but it is the best we can hope for today.

If you do not think the unenlightened mind is a disorder, you must not have seen the world as it truly is, or are just too entangled in it to view it objectively. One has to be a naive fool to deny that the world is full of animals. I know that I used to be an animal, before my mind was healthy. This is enough to call the unenlightened mind a mental disorder, just like a recovering mental patient can identify a mental illness.

For someone so enlightened you sure seem to be missing rather simple points. Duh, it needs to be negative. Did I say it didn't? No, I said a negative consequence is not enough to make it a mental disorder. Being slightly afraid of children is negative and has no good reason behind it. That does not make it a mental disorder. So to recap, it's necessary, but not sufficient.

You're using vague terminology. Enlightened and unenlightened are not clear descriptions. What one person considers enlightened is not what another person considers enlightened. Further, 'true' sentience? Utter nonsense. You sound like some new age demagogue.

You're just spewing bullshit. You make accusations, you never back them up. You make claims about the world, you use vague terminology and still fail to back it all up.

Vague terminology is the only thing keeping apathetic cynics from cutting down anything that is good.

Which essentially translates to you being scared that being more precise will allow me to more easily point out how your beliefs are riddled with flaws. You'd get along fine with certain evangelists.

Now you cut down on the vague terminology instead of focusing on the real message.

Your 'real message' has no substance behind it because of the vague terminology. I have no reason to agree with it when 'enlightened' is undefined in this context.

You are doing just the same thing as you would if I was precise.

Well if you really want to admit your argument is still just as bad when precise, not my problem.

There is no way for me to tell you the truth.

Because you don't know the truth, you only have BS.

I call it an illness because it is curable. Being afraid of children is an illness, and you should cure it. Illness simply means a state that is negative. If that is far too vague for you, you are a metadiscusser.

Wrong, that is not what illness is when it comes to how it is defined by the medical community.

If that's too much for you to understand then you're unenlightened. Hey look I can toss around meaningless accusations too.

So many things you say are just so terribly moronic, still I do not comment on it because I am not a metadiscusser. Discussion is not a game for me, as it is to you. I comment on the things you say that have some meaning, and do not resort to nitpicking. I waste my time with this two-sided argument, one party squabbling the other trying to discuss.

 

[Octorok]

Only a very small percentage of people think that way. Some people like that certainly exist- out of hundreds of millions it is inevitable that some will feel that way- but the ones who do think that way are minority.

You try having one as a parent. These people are dangerous, damn it, the kind of stupidity it takes boggles the mind.

Maybe to you it's a "small percentage", but to me, the loonery is on my doorstep, and like I said, it's impossible to fully comprehend the mind behind someone who genuinely believes that all Muslims are evil people.

Yes, they are a minority, but nonetheless, they exist and that is a bad thing.

 

[imnot]

I paid $32.67 for a XBOX 360 and my mom got a 17 inch Toshiba laptop for $94.83 being delivered to our house tomorrow by FedEX. I will never again pay expensive retail prices at stores. I even sold a 46 inch HDTV to my boss for $650 and it only cost me $52.78 to get. Here is the website we using to get all this stuff, PennyOrder.com

Wow your the 50th person I have seen this week saying exactly that!
Seems legit!

Typical Islamic terrorists! This is what happened when you preach a religion of hate, it only inspires all your followers to be violent!
Wait he was a White Christian?
......
Now I think it would be unfair to judge all of Christianity on the actions of one man...

Um...everybody knows that muslim extremists have as much in common with the average Muslim as the Ku Klux Klan has with the average American. You are arguing with an almost non-existent strawman.

Almost everybody- and I mean almost everybody- already knows the average muslim is a decent human being. You are arguing against the idea that all muslims are bad when almost no one holds that opinion. Especially here on the Escapist.

I think the post was sarcasm

 

[razerdoh]

New info out: Perp. used Hollow-Point ammo and in interrogations he claims to be a member of The Knights Templars...

 

[Kair]

Q: When is a religious fundamentalist mass murderer just a madman?
A: When he's a white christian fundamentalist.

The sheep started crying terrorism right away, trying to unify the herd through religion and nationalism.

Then after some time, it was known that the perpetrator was a white christian nationalist nutbag, just like the sheep.

As if it was only white Christian nationalists crying Islamic terrorism.

I was not crying terrorism. But neither am I a part of the herd.

Nationalism, religion, xenophobia and prejudice are all symptoms of the same mental illness. There are many more symptoms.

I didn't say you were. That still does not mean that you're not implicitly blaming only some of those that are guilty.

And lol, no they are not a mental illness even if you dislike them or even if there is good reason to dislike them.

I diagnose them with a mental illness because of the consequences brought on by their mindset, not because of my personal taste or (dis)affection. Just like Schizophrenia is an illness because of its negative consequences, the unenlightened mind is also an illness because of the negative consequences. Though it is an extremely common mental illness as opposed to Schizophrenia.

Many people will not call it an illness, just like in a hypothetical world where the vast majority of people had Multiple Personality Disorder, MPD would not be called an illness.

In other words you don't like the consequences and therefore you say they're mentally ill. No good reason, just your dislike. You should stop raping psychology.

And you should stop being severely incapable of communication.
There is no reason to try to talk to you if you only hear what you want to hear.

I'm quite capable. Your reason to consider it mental illness was 'negative consequences'. You failed to provide a good reason based in psychology to consider them negative consequences. Instead there's only your word. Also, it's not just 'negative consequences' that make things considered mental disorders.

Yes, a mental disorder needs to be a mental state that is different in a negative way compared to a mental state that is positive.Most mental disorders are based in physical damage to the brain, some are (as far as we know) internal. As far as I know the unenlightened mind is not physical damage.
I compare the unenlightened mind to the enlightened mind. The unenlightened mind is a simple print of its surroundings. It is incapable of (close to) true sentience. The enlightened mind is a much more advanced print of its surroundings, much more independent as a result of it. It is quite ironical that the surroundings shape a mind that is independent of its surroundings, but it is the best we can hope for today.

If you do not think the unenlightened mind is a disorder, you must not have seen the world as it truly is, or are just too entangled in it to view it objectively. One has to be a naive fool to deny that the world is full of animals. I know that I used to be an animal, before my mind was healthy. This is enough to call the unenlightened mind a mental disorder, just like a recovering mental patient can identify a mental illness.

For someone so enlightened you sure seem to be missing rather simple points. Duh, it needs to be negative. Did I say it didn't? No, I said a negative consequence is not enough to make it a mental disorder. Being slightly afraid of children is negative and has no good reason behind it. That does not make it a mental disorder. So to recap, it's necessary, but not sufficient.

You're using vague terminology. Enlightened and unenlightened are not clear descriptions. What one person considers enlightened is not what another person considers enlightened. Further, 'true' sentience? Utter nonsense. You sound like some new age demagogue.

You're just spewing bullshit. You make accusations, you never back them up. You make claims about the world, you use vague terminology and still fail to back it all up.

Vague terminology is the only thing keeping apathetic cynics from cutting down anything that is good.

Which essentially translates to you being scared that being more precise will allow me to more easily point out how your beliefs are riddled with flaws. You'd get along fine with certain evangelists.

Now you cut down on the vague terminology instead of focusing on the real message.

Your 'real message' has no substance behind it because of the vague terminology. I have no reason to agree with it when 'enlightened' is undefined in this context.

You are doing just the same thing as you would if I was precise.

Well if you really want to admit your argument is still just as bad when precise, not my problem.

There is no way for me to tell you the truth.

Because you don't know the truth, you only have BS.

I call it an illness because it is curable. Being afraid of children is an illness, and you should cure it. Illness simply means a state that is negative. If that is far too vague for you, you are a metadiscusser.

Wrong, that is not what illness is when it comes to how it is defined by the medical community.

If that's too much for you to understand then you're unenlightened. Hey look I can toss around meaningless accusations too.

So many things you say are just so terribly moronic, still I do not comment on it because I am not a metadiscusser.

Cop out because you have no real argument.

Discussion is not a game for me, as it is to you.

Funny since you're the one incapable of making a clear point, only dealing in vague unproven assertions.

I comment on the things you say that have some meaning, and do not resort to nitpicking.

Sure thing, metadiscusser!

I waste my time with this two-sided argument, one party squabbling the other trying to discuss.

Well thanks for admitting to petty squabbling. Because considering that I'm the one that wants a cessation to vagueness I'm pretty sure I'm the one looking for the real discussion.

If you really wanted to hear what I have to say, you would not have been as offensive. I also know you do not want to hear what I have to say because very few people like what I have to say.
Your comments are only attacks, but I expect no less. The truth hurts, and many people respond by retaliating.

 

[UnknownGunslinger]

HELP - Reuters has been linking the Murders with on-line gaming:

"The manifesto posted by Breivik, a self-styled founder member of a modern Knights Templar organisation, hints at a wider conspiracy of self-appointed crusaders and shows a mind influenced by the fantasy imagery of online gaming."

Reuters:[link]http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/07/24/us-norway-idUSL6E7IN00C20110724[/link]

I hope you could join me at mailing Reuters concerning this unfounded statesment:
[link]http://reuters.zendesk.com/anonymous_requests/new[/link]

I also started a thread at [link]http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.302617-HELP-REUTERS-LINKS-NORWAY-MURDERS-WITH-ONLINE-GAMING[/link]