Norway’s Amazing Pro-gay, Pro-choice, Anti-racist, Masonic, Big Government, Zionist, Agnostic, Breakdancing, “Conservative Christian” Terrorist!
Ben Johnson, The White House Watch
A deluded Christian leader predicted the world would end on May 21, but this weekend’s Norwegian terrorist attack has raptured the liberal media into the third Heaven. They exulted that the terrorist, who killed at least 76 people, is a “Christian fundamentalist” and possible “neo-Nazi” with (they repeatedly pointed out) blue eyes. Anders Behring Breivik appears to be precisely the white conservative the Department of Homeland Security has spent two years warning us is the “most likely source of terrorism” in the United States. There’s just one problem: Breivik states he does “not necessarily have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ or God,” questions “[i]f there is a God,” defines Christianity as as a cultural construct to oppose Islam, favors a “secular” society, supports abortion in many circumstances, describes himself as “pro-homosexual” and “pro-Israeli,” wants to transfer child-rearing from the family to the government, hates Adolf Hitler, belongs to the Freemasons, supports a “New World Order,” wants to rebuild the Jerusalem Temple…and has a soft spot for breakdancing.
As he was about to unleash his deadly assault, Anders Behring Breivik released his 1,500-word manifesto 2083 — A European Declaration of Independence under the pen name Andrew Berwick. Unlike many of the mass media “journalists,” this author has read nearly all of it. It paints a picture of Breivik that shatters the mainstream media template of an angry Christian yokel.
The Rise of the “Christian-Atheist” and “Christian-Agnostic”
To begin with, he does not appear to be a Christian. He insists atheists and agnostics “are cultural conservative Christians without even knowing it.” He then asks:
So what is the difference between cultural Christians and religious Christians?
If you have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ and God then you are a religious Christian. Myself and many more like me do not necessarily have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ and God. We do however believe in Christianity as a cultural, social, identity and moral platform. This makes us Christian (p. 1307).
The Cross, he writes, “should serve as the uniting symbol for all Europeans whether they are agnostics or atheists” (p. 1307).
To facilitate the new Crusades, Breivik and a group of others refounded the Knights Templar in April 2002. On page 817 of his tome, he notes that the 12 founding members included an “English Christian atheist,” a “German Christian atheist,” a “Russian Christian atheist,” a “Dutch Christian agnostic,” and three people with no religious description. That is, seven of the 12 founders do not feign any religion whatsoever.
The Knights’ ranks would be open to atheist recruits, whom he said would fight for secularism:
Being a Christian can mean many things; That you believe in and want to protect Europe’s Christian cultural heritage….European secularism is a result of European Christendom and the enlightenment. It is therefore essential to understand the difference between a “Christian fundamentalist theocracy” (everything we do not want) and a secular European society based on our Christian cultural heritage (what we do want).
So no, you don’t need to have a personal relationship with God or Jesus to fight for our Christian cultural heritage. It is enough that you are a Christian-agnostic or a Christian atheist. (pp. 1361-2, Emphases in original).
For a “Christian fundamentalist,” Breivik skirted the definition of Christianity and diminished the importance of its practice. When describing his preparations for the attack he wrote, “If praying will act as an additional mental boost/soothing it is the pragmatical thing to do. I guess I will find out…If there is a God I will be allowed to enter Heaven as all other martyrs for the Church in the past” (p. 1345).
However, he seems on thin ice for this belief. On page 1324, he introduces his “Christian justification of the struggle.” It consists of one verse from the Book of Psalms. In a later section on “self-defense” (pp. 1327-1334), he cites a series of Old Testament passages — and the verse in which Christ tells St. Peter to put his sword away, “for all those who take the sword shall perish by the sword” (St. Matthew 26:52-54).
Paganism may have played a greater motivating role than the religion of the Crucified One. Breivik writes, “Odinism is still and will always be an important part of my culture and identity” (p. 1360).
Despite his lack of faith, he has no timidity in planning to transform Christianity — or kill its leaders. Finding the faith of his fathers too passive and “suicidal,” he and his fellow knights “will rejuvenate” the Christian Church “by implementing our reforms” (p. 1307). The Church will always take a second place to secular learning, saying it is “essential that science takes an undisputed precedence over biblical teachings.” Later he says, since Pope Benedict XVI has not called for military coups in Europe, he “has abandoned Christianity” and is “a cowardly, incompetent, corrupt, and illegitimate pope…we will take the necessary steps to eradicate the corruption which is continuing to plague the Church” (p. 1327).
“Church leaders” who disagree with the Knights are listed as “Class B traitors” who will incur the “death penalty and expropriation of property/funds,” although he graciously allows, “Punishment can be reduced under certain circumstances.” He courteously tallied the exact number of Class A and B traitors in each EU country from the most (Germany at 82,820) to the least (Malta at 417).
Although he intends to kill at least some of the Church’s leaders, he does not target many of the issues held as vital by most Christians.
Pro-Gay, Pro-Abortion, Anti-Family “Christian Fundamentalism”?
Traditional Christianity opposes abortion, promiscuous sexual activity, and the homosexual agenda, but Breivik finds himself on the other side of these cultural issues. In an online post, he wrote, “we have to ensure that we influence other culturally conservatives to take our anti-racist[,] pro-homosexual, pro-Israeli line of thought.” Elsewhere, he says we must “Support Israel’s fight against Jihad” (p. 1243).
He assures us the sexual revolution “is not a Marxist concept but rather a liberal one,” and thus one we have to preserve. “So how do we preach chastity to a mob that wants unlimited access to free sex? The answer is that we don’t.” He added it was important not to “ram a puritan and deeply conservative way of life down the throat of everyone” (pp. 1168-9). Instead, he envisions the development of autonomous “liberal zones” similar to Las Vegas, where anything goes.
He allows for abortion ‘in the case of rape…or if the baby has mental or physical disabilities. The liberals zones may be exempt [from] this law” (p. 1179). A “ban on abortion,” he writes, would “strip women or basic rights” (p. 1181).
Many of Christianity’s cultural opponents have sought to redefine marriage. So does Breivik. “Marriage must be based on a specific agreement between a man and a woman who creates [sic.] an advanced pact which must have a limited validity of at least 20 years” (pp. 1176). These contracts fit into his plan to transfer child-rearing from the family to the State.
“Outsource Breeding” for the State
Similar to other totalitarians, Breivik the alleged “Christian fundamentalist” would destroy the family. He proposes what he calls “outsource breeding” by women in “low cost countries,” who would produce babies on demand. The parents could select sex traits via “reprogenics” (pp. 1192-4). Once the engineered babies arrive on shore, Breivik would have “the state, or state funded institutions take on the fostering [of] these children.” This will begin with “kindergarden boarding school” at “age 0,” where they will be “assigned a specific surname,” and continue through college at age 25 (p. 1182-3). The “parents” assigned to them would follow them for at least 25 years and be paid based on “performance” (p. 1196). To ease matters, schooling will be replaced with a “Brain-Computer Interface,” which loads “15-30 years” of learning “from an external device to the brain” (p. 1199).
If Breivik values few Christian conservative issues, he has strong convictions that there are too many people on earth — approximately three billion too many.
Anders Breivik: The John Holdren of Terrorism
Breivik wrote that “Overconsumption, pollution, and overpopulation are the three problems that threaten the future of life on earth” while calling for “global population control” (p. 1200-1). “We should create population capacity guidelines for continents or countries. If starvation threatens the countries who have failed to follow our guidelines, we should not support them…or send them any kind of aid.” “Our planet should not exceed 3 billion individuals so radical policies will have to be implemented” (p. 1202).
An environmentalist campaign of population control hardly sounds Christian or fundamentalist. However, it closely echoes the writings of current Science Czar John P. Holdren, who envisioned a similar scheme in his book Ecoscience.
Breivik appears to be an economic centrist. He wrote, “To my left you will find a socialist, to my right you will find a social democrat” (p. 1355). He favors the “development of alternative energy” to “save the environment” (p. 1199) and argues it is “essential” that “national states have a controlling stake in” multinational corporations (p. 1196).
The Breakdancing Zionist “Neo-Nazi”
The media intimated Breivik may be a neo-Nazi, based on his concern for Europe and, apparently, his blue eyes….
Video: The Obama Legacy
Video: Democrat’s Ad, “We Minorities Should Stick Together”
Cartoon of the Day: Red Ink Proves You’re Racist!
A Progressive “Explains” Why Dems Lost in 2010: White Racism
Kevin “Coach” Collins, FloydReports.com
“Progressives” are odd self-absorbed people, but they’re good at creating a supporting argument for their predetermined conclusions. Lee Drutman is just such a progressive.
To Drutman “All horses are animals,” means all animals are horses. His stupefying “analysis” of the results of the 2008 and 2010 elections proves this.
He examined the sharp drop in state by state Democrat self-identification reported by Gallup and concluded since Whites have largely retreated from the Democrats the shift in political allegiance proves Whites are racists because he can’t account for the switch using any other measurements.
Video of the Day: Black Panther Rallies for 18 Men Accused of Gang-Raping 11-Yr-Old
Quanell X Stages Rally in Cleveland: MyFoxHOUSTON.com
The Tea Party vs. NPR
Dr. Paul Kengor, FloydReports.com
“The current Republican Party, particularly the Tea Party, is fanatically involved in people’s personal lives and very fundamental Christian,” said NPR’s Ron Schiller to two undercover reporters. “I wouldn’t even call it Christian; it’s this weird evangelical kind of [movement].”
Not knowing he was being videoed, Schiller continued: “The current Republican Party is not really the Republican Party, it’s been hijacked by this group; that is, not just Islamo-phobic but really xenophobic. I mean, basically, they are, they believe in sort of white, middle-American, gun toting—I mean, it’s scary. They’re seriously racist, racist people.” (Click here for transcript and here for video.)
Schiller is being heavily criticized for these comments, as is NPR and elite liberal thinking in general. Schiller, NPR Foundation president and vice president for development (until these comments), is the Left’s latest exhibit in smearing the Tea Party movement as bigots, racists, fascists, Hitler-ites, followers of Attila the Hun, Torquemada, Genghis Khan, or whatever other handy demon.
Yet, what’s telling about Schiller’s comments is their lack of factual basis, an even greater sin from a man whose business, and erstwhile employer, is the reporting of facts. His comments are a PR problem for NPR, furthering the perception that NPR is not about unbiased reporting but primarily about opinion—a leftist opinion camouflaged as objective news.
As evidence for my perspective, I’d like to share some statistical information on the Tea Party movement. This information was widely published and is easily available to anyone, least of all a major news organization like NPR.
In March 2010, Gallup did a comprehensive survey of the Tea Party (click here). Gallup is the most respected polling firm on the planet, and not conservative. The headline Gallup chose to highlight its study speaks for itself, “Tea Partiers Are Fairly Mainstream in Their Demographics.”
Obama/Holder Set to Force Minority Democratic Redistricting Plan on “Racist” States
Hans A. von Spakovsky, National Review
The redistricting process for congressional and state-legislative seats will soon begin in earnest. All redistricting plans must meet the “one person, one vote” equal-protection standard established by the Supreme Court, which means that districts are supposed to be as even in population as possible.
But redistricting also must comply with the Voting Rights Act, and the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division just released its new “Guidance Concerning Redistricting Under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.” This guidance, which affects redistricting in all or parts of 16 states, is almost guaranteed to cause problems for Republicans.
When the Voting Rights Act was enacted in 1965, Section 5 was supposed to be a temporary, emergency provision. It prohibits certain jurisdictions from implementing any change in their voting laws unless those changes are pre-cleared by the Justice Department or approved by a three-judge panel in federal court in Washington. This 45-year-old “emergency” provision has been renewed four separate times, most recently in 2006. That renewal gave the section 25 years of new life, despite a complete lack of evidence that the type of systematic discrimination that led to its initial passage still exists. Indeed, Congress even changed the Section 5 legal standardto make it easier for the Justice Department to cause mischief.
And as we see in the new guidance memo, DOJ seems intent on doing just that. Jurisdictions covered under Section 5 — all of Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, Texas, and Virginia, and parts of California, Florida, Michigan, New Hampshire, New York, North Carolina, and South Dakota — now have the burden of proving that their redistricting plans were adopted “free of any discriminatory purpose” and will not have any “discriminatory effect.”
Historically in U.S. jurisprudence, the government has the burden of proving guilt. But Section 5 has always had a different requirement…
How will this play out in the real world? Here’s my prediction. Democratic-drawn redistricting plans will nearly always be rubber stamped by this Justice Department, unless local black or Hispanic Democrats don’t like how their white Democratic colleagues have sliced the pie. Republican-drawn plans, meanwhile, will run into a buzz saw of Voting Section opposition based not on the legal standards set forth under Section 5, but on whether the Section’s lawyers think the plan will hurt or help Democratic candidates. As the Fort Worth Star-Telegram reports, “Democrats are looking toward the Justice Department in President Barack Obama’s administration to serve as a counterweight” to Republican control of the redistricting process in Texas. Doubt this will happen? Just look at how Justice blocked Kinston, N.C., from switching from partisan to nonpartisan city-council elections. Justice’s rationale? Minorities wouldn’t know whom to vote for if candidates’ Democratic-party affiliation didn’t appear next to their names on the ballot…
Even worse is the fact that the guidance memo says that Justice will develop its own “illustrative alternative plans for use in its analysis.” In other words, the Democratic political appointees who run the Justice Department will draw up their own redistricting plans. They’re certainly prepared to do that. Sam Hirsch, who was once the Democratic party’s main redistricting lawyer, is now a deputy associate attorney general.
The guidance says that if a state submits a plan that’s not (in the opinion of Justice lawyers) as good as the plan concocted internally at Justice, then “the Attorney General will interpose an objection.” In other words, the Justice Department will use its law-enforcement power under the Voting Rights Act to force states to implement the redistricting plans drawn up by the Obama administration, despite the fact that nothing in the law allows them to do this…
The bottom line is this: The Holder Justice Department’s opposition to race-neutral enforcement of the law over the last two years suggests that redistricting may touch off contentious court battles over the rule of law. Unless states opt to bypass DOJ and go straight to federal court, the Left’s effort to exploit the Voting Rights Act for crass political purposes may reach a degree of success once thought unimaginable.
Video: Al Sharpton Tries to Kick Rush Off the Air, as Obama Caters to Islamists
This interview discusses articles you first read on FloydReports.com. You can read them here and here. Al Sharpton fanned the flames of racial resentment in the Tawana Brawley case, the Crown Heights Riots of August 1991 (which resulted in the death of Yankel Rosenbaum, the “rabbinical student” referenced in the video), and at Freddy’s Fashion Mart in 1995 (which resulted in eight deaths). For a complete profile of Sharpton, see this.
And as always, if you enjoy this interview, please thank “Nothing But Truth” host Crane Durham and the folks at American Family Radio for having me on. (And tune in to their other broadcasts; they are doing great work.)
The “Justice Department” Man Behind the Panthers Dismissal and the Black Farmer Scam
J. Christian Adams, BigGovernment.com
At the Justice Department, one man has played a central role in two of the most controversial racialist policies of the Obama administration – Associate Attorney General Thomas Perrelli. This bundler of huge campaign contributions for the Obama campaign is now the second highest ranking presidential appointee at the Justice Department. Perrelli is best known for his central role in dismissing the slam dunk voter intimidation case brought and dropped against the New Black Panther Party. But the leftist Perrelli has outdone himself.
This week, the House passed a $4.6 billion payout to American Indians and black farmers as part of a settlement of alleged race discrimination claims. BigGovernment.com has reported extensively, on the “Pigford II” settlement and how it promotes fraud. Worse than fraud, it represents a race-driven political payoff by the Obama administration to a favored political constituency.
Nothing happens in Washington like the Pigford settlement without the Justice Department. The DOJ, acting as the nation’s law firm, was intimately involved in piloting the Pigford settlement through Congress and reaching similar settlements with other identity politics plaintiffs. Perrelli ran the show at Justice in all of these efforts.
In fact, a large portion of the settlement windfall escapes Congressional approval entirely because Perreilli’s shop at DOJ also approved a similar but separate settlement with Hispanic farmers. Instead of a Congressional appropriation, Hispanic farmers will be paid out of an existing “judgment fund.”
