Steve Hynd tweets “Counterjihadist blogger admits: ‘It is clear that Anders Behring Breivik is one of us.’”
The link went to a site of which I had never previously heard, Islam Versus Europe, and a blogger of whom I’d never previously heard calling himself Cheradenine Zakalwe and a Saturday post titled “Why the Left Shouldn’t Gloat about Anders Behring Breivik.”
Steve buried his lede. Admitting that Brievik’s “opinions are virtually identical to my own and those of most people in the Counterjihad movement. He accesses the same websites and information sources that most of us do, and he has exactly the same concerns about the Islamification of Europe” is damning but defensible. And can have all manner of views and think that the solution is enacting public policy changes through the democratic process and work towards that end using one’s powers of persuasion.
Instead, Zakalwe essentially says lefties gave Breivik little choice:
Reading through Anders Behring Breivik’s comments on the document.no website, it’s clear that he was on the verge of giving up on democracy. (Most of the comments were posted in late 2009, some in 2010; the latest was in October 2010.) That’s what drove him to despair and to an act of apocalyptic violence. He felt there was a conspiracy among the media and political elite to suppress any derogatory information about Muslims or mass immigration. And, of course, he was right. He dwelt on instances of Muslim rioting that were being ignored by the mass media. And he was right about that too. The media does tend to ignore Muslim wrong-doing for as long as humanly possible, then when it becomes too extreme to be ignored, describes the perpetrators as “Asians”, “Islamists”, “les jeunes”, etc. Breivik made the point that democracy only works in an information environment that is honest.
He was particularly struck by the Andrew Neather revelations about the Labour government’s conspiracy to flood Britain with immigrants in order to “rub the right’s nose in diversity.” The left rubbed Breivik’s nose in diversity and he rubbed theirs back in blood. Well done Neather. Well done Blair. Well done Rusbridger.
It is the left-wing that is responsible for this outrage, not the right-wing. This act of violence is the consequence of a deranged political elite attempting to demographic re-engineer an entire continent against the wishes of its people; exploiting imperfections in the democratic system so that the people are never allowed a real choice; passing laws to criminalise free speech so that honest discussion is scarcely possible any more; and a media conspiracy (embodied in laws or informal agreements like the NUJ Guidelines on Race Reporting) to systematically suppress information about the negative consequences mass third-world immigration, and particularly the Muslim component of it, is having on Europe.
Emphases mine.
If there’s such a thing as hate speech, this surely qualifies. In much of the developed world, including the UK, Germany, and Canada, it’s illegal. In the United States, it is not.
Naturally, I prefer the US approach. First, I’m leery of political leaders getting to decide what speech is permissible and what isn’t; the natural consequence is to outlaw speech that harms their own interests. Second, I’d frankly rather have this kind of thing see the light of day rather than take place underground.
But . . . damn.
