8 replies to this topic

[Ash]

There's no fucking question as to his guilt. It's as clear, present and apparent as if he were right there in front of the courtroom committing the acts again.

Motivation or reason for doing something doesn't really come into it. It doesn't change the fact that he committed the offence. It can never be justified as necessary in the way I might be able to justify hitting someone with a baton who is going at someone with a knife. He's never going to show a shred of remorse (which, one would assume might attract clemency although in this case I doubt it), so why belabour the point?

The trial could never be 'fair'. There is never going to be a shred of impartiality with this one, nor should there ever be. A guilty-sane verdict is the only right one for this crime, and given how high-profile it is and what exactly he did any other verdict would result in the jurors and the judge getting lynched.

Everything the man does and says is contemptuous of the Court. He has even said that he doesn't acknowledge the authority of the Court. That begs the question of why he is nonetheless submitting to it, but in any case he clearly holds it in no regard.

Although they're only allowing selective televisation, any amount of documenting what happened will only give him the platform he wants to air his views, and also his defence counsel can prey on the idea of media censorship to further illustrate that the trial isn't fair, that the jury has already made up its mind (let's face it - there's no real question that it has).

Who the fuck would defend this man? I expect that legal team will fear for their safety for even keeping up the pretense of fighting his corner. If I were a lawyer I couldn't in all good conscience act as his defence counsel.

The state is paying for this. A man who massacred Norwegians is being paid for by Norwegians (and the families of the deceased, therefore) to go through this long, protracted process which will cost the country millions. Then there'll no doubt be an appeal process lodged by one or the other side whatever the outcome which will take months if not years, it'll go all the way to that group of forgive-and-forget quacks at the European Court of Human Rights who'll probably overturn or quash whatever decisions have previously been made on some spurious grounds of wording or context.

A better outcome would be to stick him in a cell and quietly leave him to starve to death, out of the public eye and gratefully forgotten.

[Pasidon]

Another topic on this? Duhhhhh... ok.

You should know that cultures who deem themselves 'civilized' can't just throw a man into a cage just because he committed an obviously dubious crime. If they did it to this guy, then they may find it in their authority to do it to another guy who didn't do as much, and so on. If they just put him in a court room and said, "Nehhhhh.... guilty as crap... ten billion years in Grimrock." then he could repel his verdict for not having the right to a lengthy trial... as I'm sure Viking Court has similar rules to America Court. Can't just change the rules for mass murderers since there are specific rules in place to make sure the rules aren't broken... you could start nagging at the rules if he gets out free, but this isn't quite an OJ trial...

[Pasidon]

I absolutely love your opinion, Kace. Immigration leads to murder... I really like that. I wish we had such people here in the US to put a similar threat on Mexicans to sway them back from whence they came. Really... Mexicans come over here since they were skill-less and poor in their country so they can be skill-less and poor in ours, and apparently there are similar issues in Viking land. Anders, apparently, acted out due to his country being over-ran by undesirable people overstaying their welcome in his country, so he took action. We need more people like that...

[duke_Qa]

Kacen.

He's a product of his own incompetence. He failed to create anything in proportion to his ego, so he instead indoctrinated himself to become a destroyer instead. Easier to break than to build.

He's no different than a school shooter. Frustrated kid wants to make his mark on history. Blame racism or bullying or 72 virgins in the sky, its all about putting your graffiti on the walls of history.

Kacen; I'm sure you are very open about your political opinions around those that know you by your true name . Immigration politics is never flawless, but its not a crime to try to change something the right way.

Norway and Scandinavia still has a pretty strict immigration policy. We can't accept 20% of our population size into our nation every year, and we don't either. 75% of our immigration is mostly European too, Polish, British, French, Dutch,Scandinavian, Baltics etc etc. People with few qualms about assimilating into Norwegian culture within a generation. Don't hear you complaining about those dirty immigrants.

Beyond that, stop flirting with the devil and get out of the racist echo-chambers of the internet. If you're American of European descent and complaining about immigration politics, you don't have much of an argument to say the least.

Pasidon. Yeah, I'd love to see some American gun-nut start killing democrats and local Americans in the name of stopping Mexican immigrants. Wonder how that will work out for the conservative side of things.

There's no fucking question as to his guilt. It's as clear, present and apparent as if he were right there in front of the courtroom committing the acts again.

Guilty or not, the system is there for all.

Motivation or reason for doing something doesn't really come into it. It doesn't change the fact that he committed the offence. It can never be justified as necessary in the way I might be able to justify hitting someone with a baton who is going at someone with a knife. He's never going to show a shred of remorse (which, one would assume might attract clemency although in this case I doubt it), so why belabour the point?

The trial could never be 'fair'. There is never going to be a shred of impartiality with this one, nor should there ever be. A guilty-sane verdict is the only right one for this crime, and given how high-profile it is and what exactly he did any other verdict would result in the jurors and the judge getting lynched.

Yeah, its hard to find impartial judges for such a case, they don't need to be either, he's pleaded guilty to the acts but not guilty for the accusations. The judges don't need much time on figuring out the time of the sentence, but they do need to log all the horrors he afflicted upon the victims and their families, so that they in the future can sue him for any drop of money he could earn on selling books and whatnot.

Although they're only allowing selective televisation, any amount of documenting what happened will only give him the platform he wants to air his views, and also his defence counsel can prey on the idea of media censorship to further illustrate that the trial isn't fair, that the jury has already made up its mind (let's face it - there's no real question that it has).

The defense have gotten sympathy from the population, even thanked by the survivors for the job they are doing. Geir Lippestad, the head defense lawyer, has made it clear that its not a case he enjoys, but that he will do as his title demands of him("I feel I have lost my soul in this case [...] I hope to get it back once it's over - and that it will be in the same condition as before."). Also, they are not there to grab every pathetic chance they get at reducing his sentence, but to guide and support the accused with their expertise.

The state is paying for this. A man who massacred Norwegians is being paid for by Norwegians (and the families of the deceased, therefore) to go through this long, protracted process which will cost the country millions. Then there'll no doubt be an appeal process lodged by one or the other side whatever the outcome which will take months if not years, it'll go all the way to that group of forgive-and-forget quacks at the European Court of Human Rights who'll probably overturn or quash whatever decisions have previously been made on some spurious grounds of wording or context.

A better outcome would be to stick him in a cell and quietly leave him to starve to death, out of the public eye and gratefully forgotten.

This case will probably last for another 3-5 years, with hundreds of individuals suing ABB for every penny he's ever going to make. I doubt the system will allow this to climb outside the Norwegian justice system, as I doubt the European court can find evidence of human rights abuse even if they wanted to. and any sympathizers looking for spurious grounds are going to get themselves lynched.

I would have liked this court to have been more closed, not giving this lunatic the soapbox he has gotten. But I think for the majority of people out there, it is apparent that he is a indoctrinated fanatic and his word is worth nothing. For the last 0.001%, well, if they try to repeat the acts, they'll ruin the lives of everyone halfway near them. ABB was a anti-social loner with very few like-minded friends, anyone not working in lone-wolf mode will not be able to get away with it the same way.

[Pasidon]

Pasidon. Yeah, I'd love to see some American gun-nut start killing democrats and local Americans in the name of stopping Mexican immigrants. Wonder how that will work out for the conservative side of things.

Less Democrats = more Republicans... sounds legit to me.

[duke_Qa]

The fact that he chose violence and direct attack rather than getting a job in politics is simply due to the fact he felt helpless and to some extant there was some truth to it. If I am not mistaken is not the Progress Party seen as a racist joke in Norway?

I think their economic policy is shit, randian garbage (I sympathize with state socialism/capitalism) but they are considered racist and whatnot, and a joke, so that shows if he had gotten a job in politics he wouldn't have gotten far.

Not just "simply". There has to be a pretty warped sense of justice in your head if you are willing to spend ten years planning an attack on your own nation to make a point instead of continuing on your own path. What I've heard from the people in contact with ABB during his political life was that he didn't seem competent and didn't speak up much. He probably understood that his opinions were even to radical for the progressive party.

It can be said that the left side of politics paint a dark picture of the progress party, and I believe yesterday ABB himself said he might not have done the deed if they weren't demonized as much in the 2009 elections, win or lose. The progress party has always been a bit of a "eh?" party with very economically neo-liberal(not the best of times for that ideology right now) and flip-flopping populistic attitudes to anything that was in the news that day. But they've been flirting a bit too much with half-racist immigration policies through the times. Not that it would have been a problem if they stood up to it and said "this was a bit of a bad move" or "I should have used different words on that". which they do, but they repeat the same rhetoric the next day, so nobody believes their apologies.

But, since the last leader(/"monarch", been the leader since the 70s) of the progress party retired, the new one has been smoothing out the worst wrinkles and hip-shooting rhetoric. Still happens sometimes, and this case has not been kind to them(11% now, was around 19% in the last election I think). The real hypocrisy is that labor actually have implemented much of the populist rhetoric that the progress party have been clamoring for the last 30 years the last 8 years they've been in power, but they smile and claim that they are being kind while they do it. So IMO progress party and labor party are pretty damn close these days.

Anyway, if ABB didn't make it in the progress party, he wouldn't have made it anywhere else either. NDL/EDL probably more his cup of tea then, but he understood that those groupings only get your put under surveillance with no influence, so "destroy".

Less Democrats = more Republicans... sounds legit to me.

hmm, normally I'd think for every democrat you kill, a hundred new joins their ranks from both independent and republican sides. Especially these days where the republican party is cracking up.

[Pasidon]

Still, we're criticizing him for his tactics since they're unfavorable to modern standards of problem solving while also stating he accomplished nothing. To me, that sounds like a lesson to modern mayhem participants to step it up from this guy and pick your targets more wisely. Mainly because the targets he chose really didn't make a strong point... but if there is some party ideology and rebellion against law in his tactics, he sure didn't show it in his spree but in his time of attention. I think that really is a lesson to the future mass murderers out there... make your point in your deeds, not using your deeds to get attention just so you can shout out a few opinions.

And Dukie, a mass killing spree would do nothing but win my attention. I would do Democrat tomorrow if Obama took a gun and started a spree. Apparently he eats dogs, so the guy is slowly earning my respect regardless. There is a division of people who support violence and inhumane methods to solve problems, and I do believe I'm with them.

Edited by {IP}Pasidon, 20 April 2012 - 07:06 PM.

[duke_Qa]

It also seemed that the island attack was not the main course of the show, he had hoped the bomb would blow up the government and kill everyone in there. Except he was kinda stupid and detonated it around 1530 last friday before summer vacation.

Anyway. One might rationalize that he stopped future enemies of the nation, but as the theory goes; for every single you kill, a hundred would take their place. No matter how competent they are, he has painted their cause with blood, and revitalized youth's interest in politics. There are two locals from my municipality that was on that island, with the leader of the youth-club. they got onto the ferry and bailed out pretty quickly, if they'd been near that ferry when he arrived he'd shot them there and then, so it was a flip of the coin I guess.

One of those guys are most likely going to become a 100% career politician, he looks the type(no fan of career politicians, more a technocrat myself). He's already chief of economics in that youth-party. I dunno if that would have been his path if it wasn't for this act. In fact, I'd claim he has been forever destined to dedicate his life to those that died in his stead.

ABB might have taken out some local talent, but all in all he created some of the most destined political candidates since the war. Hell, my election this fall wouldn't have happened if it wasn't for this guy's acts. In spite of both labor and extremists I guess.


also, nicotine tipped hollowpoints? what good does that do?

[duke_Qa]

An analytical mind indoctrinated into creating a second reality where black is white and white is black. Anyone not using critical thought to consider the facts on the table are building their own reality.

His views on immigration might be closer to the "truth" in mainland Europe, but they are still blown out of proportion, and his answer to it is beyond logic. I don't even care if he's 100% right at something, even Hitler ate sugar as they say. It is the act itself that was beyond the moral event horizon, and for that he will be forever reviled.

If you want to find sympathy for this man's opinions, I'd rather you take the topics he's discussed, wipe his blood-written name off it, and defend it without his acts giving it tainted power. For me the greatest success after this would be to continue as if it never happened, having his actions not change the course of history in any direction.


Beyond that, by anti-zionist I guess he's against those who criticize Israel for inhumane treatment of Palestinians, and supporting Afrikaners seems to be in the same vein.
He also claims to be isolationist as well to distance himself from Hitler/nazism who he says was more expansionist. Now for me those two points doesn't go together, since both the South-African apartheid and Israel's attitude towards Palestinians are both related to Hitlers expansionism and discrimination. How can he be pro-Israel/Afrikaner if he at the same time is isolationist?

Its just discriminating hypocrisy, he's isolationist when he discusses a nation with his preferred demographic, and expansionist when it's a preferred demographic is a minority in a nation. he's an inverted Saudi-Arabian Wahhabi fanatic. And I don't think taking up such perspectives on reality is good for anything but bloodshed.