Also my sympathies to the victims here. Whatever the cause this is a horrible that something like this would happen to the people of Norway.
I think if there is anything that can be ruled out, it's that. It would just be too much of a coincidence.
how would clicking the link in the thread give me any more information than reading the article full of theories and suppositions? there was no real substance in the article besides a list of reasons why Islamists "may" or "could have been" or "might have been" involved is that the obvious conclusion these days? I certainly hope not. and I certainly hope militant Islamists/jihadists were not involved. a terrible day for Norway.
You were implying that I made up the thread title. I did not. It was just the headline of the article I copied and pasted, which was the first article regarding the incident on Google News. You could have seen that before you falsely accused me. Well, a jihadist group tried to "take credit" (probably falsely). So maybe the jihadists themselves think it is the obvious conclusion. Edit: It looks like the guy who was arrested is a right-wing extremist (latest reports). But I don't think one guy could have done this much damage, he must have acted together with others, probably other Neo-Nazis. Sounds more like a Norwegian version of McVeigh than anything with Islamism.
boy do i regret "implying" that those crazy jihadists making you copy and paste every article you see on google news... shame on them. I read the article like it was an op/ed piece and again I certainly hope the info is inaccurate.
Have you gone full r****d? Since when can we not discuss a developing story, while quoting articles that deal with it? Next time, we shall wait until the police has concluded their investigation and we have certainty with regard to the identity of the perpetrators before we start discussing! Apologies to across110thstreet for having posted an article on a developing story! The Guardian article wasn't the only one that assumed this could be a terror attack by Islamist terrorists. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/23/world/europe/23oslo.html?pagewanted=2 Almost all the initial articles discussed that possibility. So basically any article I would have copied would have included some speculation on that. Not sure why you are jumping on that detail. It seems like the police has quickly shot down that assumption.
really with the personal "dumbass" and "full r****d" comments ? yeah forget about introducing the story to the message board with some sort of "breaking news" tag. edit: I must admit I am new to this and am having difficulty keeping up with ATW's warp editing speed here we go, I'm all caught up now headline-17 Die in Norway Shooting and Bombing
This seems to be the sick b*stard that was involved with this: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...inked-Oslo-bomb-blasts.html?ito=feeds-newsxml Pictured: The blond Norwegian, 32, arrested over 'holiday island massacre' and linked to Oslo bomb blasts The 32-year-old Norwegian man arrested for gunning down children on the holiday island of Utoya has been named locally as Anders Behring Breivik. Described as 6ft tall and blond, he is reported to have arrived on the island of Utoya and opened fire after beckoning several young people over in his native Norwegian tongue. Reports suggest he was also seen loitering around the site of the bomb blast in Oslo two hours before the island incident - and also before the capital's explosion. More than 30 are believed to have been killed - seven in Oslo and between 25 to 30 on Utoya Island, 50 miles north of the capital. Police have said the attacks do not appear to be linked to Islamist terrorism. But initially It was not known what his motives were - whether he had been radicalised and was part of a militant Muslim group waging Jihad or was alternatively trying to further a home-grown political cause. The Oslo bomb blast was outside a government office, while the island of Utoya is reportedly owned by the Norwegian Labour Party, as is the boat he boarded in his white van to reach it. BBC's Newsnight security correspondent Gordon Corera said a youth rally was not a usual type of target for an Islamist terrorist. He added that this was a factor that suggested the attacks may have been carried out by someone with a national agenda.
Yes, because that is what they were. You were the one who made an unprovoked, snide comment first. Now don't whine like a little girl if you get the appropriate response. And if that tag had been there, then you would not have made your dumbass comment? Guess what, since more facts have come out that indicate this was not an Islamist attack, the media has changed their headlines. Surprise!
Why don't you go and research that and come back to us. Please do the same for all news media around the world. That should keep you busy for a while. Thanks in advance.
This cannot have been the headline this morning, as the number of casualties was undetermined (I believe 17 is actually incorrect as of now as well, the actual number of casualties sadly appears to be higher). At the time I posted the initial article, the news about the shooting on the island had not even come out yet, the articles were only about the bombing. I assume your point is that I could have picked some publication that had a less speculative headline and that did not indict Islamists. Sure. As I have already posted numerous times, I picked the first one I saw on Google News. At the time, most of the articles included speculation on Al Qaeda or related organizations having been involved, many in the headlines. These articles are quickly being retracted right now, as the facts seem to clearly contradict that speculation. Yours and ScamFisher's little victory dance because in this one instance, the perpetrators do not appear to have been Islamists is ridiculous. The terrorist attack is just as terrible, no matter who committed it. Right-wing extremists who kill people are not one iota better than Islamist extremists who kill people.
that is an accurate assumption. you got me on the headline though. I'll remember this incident in my life as the time I should have never been involved in an ATW thread based on pure speculation, supposition, and assumption.
It's amazing how people like you try to use news of a horrible incident like this to try and "gain points" on a message board. I was merely quoting one of the many articles that were reporting the incident and speculating on who could be behind it. http://muslimmatters.org/2011/07/22...-confirm-no-islamist-link-updates-background/ Stop acting like I am the one who made this up or like I am the one who was doing the speculation. I was merely posting a news link to a developing story. Most of the news reports at the time included that kind of speculation, it was not mine. I was in fact also the first person to relay the correction of that assumption through the police findings.
