Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Anders Breivik decries 'inhumane' prison


Still Waters

Recommended Posts

Facts -

1. A Percentage of our immigrant population is currently in prison for plotting acts of terror.

2. Muslim extremist groups have been banned whose members openly promote the murder of British troops.

3. People always have cowards who agree with them but dont have the courage to do it themselves.

I'm not going to be ignorant of the fact we have a small percentage of immigrants in this country who think terrorism is acceptable. To blind myself to such facts as you are doing is as evil as the people who try to commit the acts of terror.

you are promoting extremism.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We live on different planets!

Mine has a unit 731 lol.

The prison officers should turn a blind eye in the shower room lol.

we cant and wont turn a blind eye because that would be really unprofessional .we are not there to pass judgement just to carry out the will of the courts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you are promoting extremism.

How so?

I'm not saying we should do anything to normal Muslims. I'm talking about removing the fundies. Is it extremist to remove a fundy? Not in my book.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

we cant and wont turn a blind eye because that would be really unprofessional .we are not there to pass judgement just to carry out the will of the courts.

So if you had Jimmy Saville in one of your cells you wouldnt do anything to him or turn a blind eye?

Maybe thats why I'm not a prison officer.

Edited by Mr Right Wing
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How so?

I'm not saying we should do anything to normal Muslims. I'm talking about removing the fundies. Is it extremist to remove a fundy? Not in my book.

And how to find out who is one and who not?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And how to find out who is one and who not?

1. Monitor their emails, texts, phone calls and collect intelligence on suspects.

2. Require immigrants to sit a Britishness qualification where they are taught tolerance to other ideologies and faiths. Use it as a way of spotting those who need investigating.

3. Require Mosques to preach tolerance towards westerners and close down those that dont.

The slightest hint someone is a potential terrorist, agrees with terrorism or supports terrorism and they should be kicked out of the country. If they want do in Rome as the Romans do they have no place in our society.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. I guess that infringes many British rights. Where does the needed work force come from? What happens to those with suspicous content in their mails, etc.? Deportation to a camp for further investigation? Or should they better be shot around the corner? You suggest kicking them out at the slightest hint; that won't work. But it would be easier for you to get rid of your neighbour.

2. Will they learn the same tolerance you are showing?

3. They preach Islam, not tolerance towards westerners. Who draws the line to what is not "tolerance towards westerners" anymore? Who is checking on that?

It's not as easy as you'd like it to be. You live in a democracy, that means all citizens should be treated equally.

Edit: How many threads have you hijacked so far? I lost count.

Edited by FLOMBIE
Link to comment
Share on other sites

He's a political prisoner and commited those killings for a reason, not out of a whim. Although I haven't read the full maniphesto, I have read plenty of it. He had planned it for nine years and thus have had a lot of time to think through it. What he did was a protest against multiculturalism and the islamization of the western civilisation as such. He found it pointless to joina political party as it only would have been a dead end street. He realized he could have wasted 20-30 years without not really getting anywhere because of the powerful forces behind the destruction of our independent national states and the christian identity. I too reacted much like you the first few months afterwards until I started to read more thoroughly about his thoughts and causes for the whole action. And I didn't perceive it in any way that he was complaining about petty things, mainly about the forced isolation. Although I will not condone murder and terrorism, I consider those traitors who willingly destroys their own nation and thus betrays their own people, are far worse than Breivik will ever be. They are like Breivis states, cultural marxists and a such they have a very malevolent agenda that has been going on for decades. If they win, Hitler, Stalin and Mao's genocides during the 20the century, will seem like a sunday walk in the park with family, compared to the hellish nightmare they have in store for us.

It really does not matter if his underlying beliefs were valid or not. He killed 77 people. He did not chain himself to a Statehouse, or government office, in protest... he killed people. There is a difference between, say, the Occupy Wall Street people, and someone rigging the NY Stock Exchange with dynamite and killing Brokers on the Floor. The OWS people are protesters, and the other is a murderer.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So if you had Jimmy Saville in one of your cells you wouldnt do anything to him or turn a blind eye?

Maybe thats why I'm not a prison officer.

no i wouldnt i have met far worse. normaly i try not to know why they are in but even if i do i treat them all the same thats the job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally think Brevik is correct.

I know some Muslims who are quite nice people and have no problems being tolerant towards Christains. However I also realise some are fundies who will try and spread their faith to us by the sword if they ever get the chance. I also suspect, and this is my personal opinion, that behind closed doors there is more support for the Jihadists than the state acknowledges. I think when the fundies have enough power Jihad will come to our streets as they try to force their faith onto Western peoples.

However Brevik is suffering from narcissistic personality disorder from which he has justified the murdering of quite a lot of people. If his purpose is to convince people of the potential threat he has sadly harmed his cause. The reason why nothing is being done about immigration is because the only parties saying they will stop it are riddled with nazis, extremists and nutters who think going around massacring the opposition is acceptable. Brevik needs making an example off as he is just as bad as those would be Jihadists.

We need a normal party who oppose immigration yet respect the human rights of immigrants. We dont need a one eyed, slimey, holocaust denying, embezzling, gay hating (yes he did that last month), HItler loving looney as a future PM. The far-right are their own worst enemy.

God I find myself in agreement. Miracles do happen :tu:

Br Cornelius

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Except for Mr Right Wing not repecting the (human) rights of immigrants in his later post.

From my comments its clear the only rights I think should be violated are ones of terrorists.

If you have a problem with that maybe MI5 needs to check you out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the subject of Breivik hating gays:

This was his view. More or less in line with my opinion - and I'm a fag myself.

Ah, the "Some of my best friends are gay" argument.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From my comments its clear the only rights I think should be violated are ones of terrorists.

If you have a problem with that maybe MI5 needs to check you out.

Lol.

Sure. MI5 should check out everyone who told you that you can’t sit at two chairs at the same time. (Your crystal clear statement “I personally think Breivik is correct” being the first and sugar coating you tried to stick on it being the second chair.)

Well, you can’t sit at two ****en chairs at the same damn time, no matter how huge you think your ass is. Gigantic asses are great for politics, but you still have to make up your mind sometimes.

By the way, here’s some good read for you:

http://listverse.com...s-we-all-abuse/

it may help you troll a little bit more convincing in the future.

Edit: I'd say you jumped on Flombie with fallacy no.6 but might as well be no.9, so if you don't feel like reading the whole article, skip right to them.

Edited by Helen of Annoy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lol.

Sure. MI5 should check out everyone who told you that you can’t sit at two chairs at the same time. (Your crystal clear statement “I personally think Breivik is correct” being the first and sugar coating you tried to stick on it being the second chair.)

Well, you can’t sit at two ****en chairs at the same damn time, no matter how huge you think your ass is. Gigantic asses are great for politics, but you still have to make up your mind sometimes.

By the way, here’s some good read for you:

http://listverse.com...s-we-all-abuse/

it may help you troll a little bit more convincing in the future.

Edit: I'd say you jumped on Flombie with fallacy no.6 but might as well be no.9, so if you don't feel like reading the whole article, skip right to them.

Brevik is corrent in my opinion.

However just because I agree with my neighbour that Joe Bloggs across the street is a dangerous imbicile doesnt means I agree with him bombing his car then massacring him and his family with a machine gun. Even if he is a member of the Labour Party!

This is a Democracy and everybody has the right to compete in elections should they wish too. No one has the right to kill the members of a party they dont agree with under any circumstances. Doing so violates the Democractic rights of those people who want to vote for them as well as the right to life of the victims.

Edited by Mr Right Wing
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brevik is corrent in my opinion.

However just because I agree with my neighbour that Joe Bloggs across the street is a dangerous imbicile doesnt means I agree with him bombing his car then massacring him and his family with a machine gun. Even if he is a member of the Labour Party!

This is a Democracy and everybody has the right to compete in elections should they wish too. No one has the right to kill the members of a party they dont agree with under any circumstances. Doing so violates the Democractic rights of those people who want to vote for them as well as the right to life of the victims.

So you think Breivik was correct in something but wrong about massacring unarmed kids...

Digression: unarmed, Jesus, kids, Christ, couldn’t he storm a mosque full of grown up men and women? There would be at least one person that would manage to keep their presence of mind and whack the psycho over his plastic surgery altered head.

So he went for kids, damn coward that he is.

Kids that might have become politicians? Sure. But what did he know what their political inclination would be later in life? Was he also psychic besides psychotic? Exposure to certain ideology in your youth sometimes results in rabidly contrasted views later in life. Just saying, in case some other idiot like him is reading this.

Back to you.

This what you claim to be correct is not democratic.

The reason why we don’t go around killing people we don’t like is not the democracy but the basic human compassion. Democracy is here today and tomorrow it might be lost, even through pristinely democratic process, due to Breivik fans being more diligent at voting than sane people.

If that happens, you will experience firsthand that what you claim to be correct.

Great, huh? There’s only one catch. They might not like you. Maybe your eyes won’t be blue enough, maybe you’ll fart during memorial service for Breivik. And then what? Will you die like Fegelein did, praising your führer that had you killed with your last breath? (Happened a lot in communism too, mostly to save your family from further persecution. Didn’t work. Only made you look really stupid to posterity.)

And the most important of all, the massacre Breivik committed was direct consequence of his ideology, his ideology put to practice, not some fringy “oopsy” detail. He didn’t spill a beer while leading a putsch, he killed 77 children.

Stop sugar coating the Breivik turd of ideology.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you think Breivik was correct in something but wrong about massacring unarmed kids...

Digression: unarmed, Jesus, kids, Christ, couldn’t he storm a mosque full of grown up men and women? There would be at least one person that would manage to keep their presence of mind and whack the psycho over his plastic surgery altered head.

So he went for kids, damn coward that he is.

Kids that might have become politicians? Sure. But what did he know what their political inclination would be later in life? Was he also psychic besides psychotic? Exposure to certain ideology in your youth sometimes results in rabidly contrasted views later in life. Just saying, in case some other idiot like him is reading this.

Back to you.

This what you claim to be correct is not democratic.

The reason why we don’t go around killing people we don’t like is not the democracy but the basic human compassion. Democracy is here today and tomorrow it might be lost, even through pristinely democratic process, due to Breivik fans being more diligent at voting than sane people.

If that happens, you will experience firsthand that what you claim to be correct.

Great, huh? There’s only one catch. They might not like you. Maybe your eyes won’t be blue enough, maybe you’ll fart during memorial service for Breivik. And then what? Will you die like Fegelein did, praising your führer that had you killed with your last breath? (Happened a lot in communism too, mostly to save your family from further persecution. Didn’t work. Only made you look really stupid to posterity.)

And the most important of all, the massacre Breivik committed was direct consequence of his ideology, his ideology put to practice, not some fringy “oopsy” detail. He didn’t spill a beer while leading a putsch, he killed 77 children.

Stop sugar coating the Breivik turd of ideology.

I hate socialism but I dont think killing its supporters is acceptable. Why?

1. I realise everybody has their own ideas about what is right.

2. I respect everyones right to make their own mind up and Democracy for all.

3. Just as I wouldnt like someone to come eliminate me for being a Conservative I dont think its acceptable eliminating them.

4. I dont have a mental illness such as narcissistic personality disorder where I think I have the right to take others lives.

Brevik has that dangerous mentality where if a guy cuts him off on the road he thinks its acceptable to go fill him full of lead. In essence it isnt ideology that made him do what he did its psychopathy. He has an abnormal way of thinking because most people have empathy towards others. And just for the record if David Cameron tried to establish himself as dictator I would oppose it despite having the same Conservative tendancy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hate socialism but I dont think killing its supporters is acceptable. Why?

1. I realise everybody has their own ideas about what is right.

2. I respect everyones right to make their own mind up and Democracy for all.

3. Just as I wouldnt like someone to come eliminate me for being a Conservative I dont think its acceptable eliminating them.

4. I dont have a mental illness such as narcissistic personality disorder where I think I have the right to take others lives.

Brevik has that dangerous mentality where if a guy cuts him off on the road he thinks its acceptable to go fill him full of lead. In essence it isnt ideology that made him do what he did its psychopathy. He has an abnormal way of thinking because most people have empathy towards others.

So, you agree that Breivik was wrong; in his actions, mentality and his motives?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You think I should be supportive of insecure sexual degenerates representing me by protesting in the street half naked like freaks?

no one should.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No not really. I think it is quite childish to think hating gay pride = hating gays. In any case, I don't feel the need to be associated with such degenerate crap, so I have a problem with gay pride.

You think I should be supportive of insecure sexual degenerates representing me by protesting in the street half naked like freaks?

Oh, I was referring to Breivik, not you. Though it is all a bit tiresome, i do agree with you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't really see any reason to think Breivik really hated gays - generally political extremists are bluntly honest about their views, or at the very least if he was willing to justify violence then I doubt he'd be unwilling to admit he hated homosexuals if he really did.

No, perhaps that was one of the lesser things he could be accused of. There were plenty of others, though.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.