Live Breathe and Die

The sheer ignorance and stupidity of liberals has been on display in recent days after the terrible tragedy in Norway.  Left-wing blogs and websites displayed screaming headlines declaring that the shooter in Norway was a “Christian” and “Conservative” and a “Right-Winger.”  All of their information was erroneous and un-researched or substantiated and smacked of the misuse of facts that liberals are known for.

The irony is that the shooters fears may have been borne out of the realities of cultural changes in Europe, but his misguided resolution was beyond sad.  He took the lives of children; lots of them.

The Reality versus the Wrong Reaction
Is Europe being taken over by Muslims and are those Muslims changing the laws and culture of the continent by force? Yes, this can be seen by the facts and the news reports over the  past decade.  Could this one Norwegian have found much different ways of enacting change and peaceful protest?  Obviously, the path he took was the worst possible outlet for his anger.

In England, Sharia law has been allowed by the government and the courts to usurp English law. Across Europe, the Muslims have been allowed to take political power and change cultures to their strict doctrine and nobody is putting the brakes on. This “religion” that is completely intolerant of Christians and Jews, and others who might practice a different religion, is slowly taking over every vestige of European culture and molding the laws to their liking.

This explains what drove Anders Behring Breivik to the terrible deeds he committed, but it doesn’t justify any one of them. Is there frustration among the people who are alert to what is transpiring before their very eyes? Is much of Europe asleep at the wheel and letting this sad transformation occur?  Unfortunately, they are and it is. The fact that innocent people were victims in the end is a horrific reminder that there must have been another way for this one man to enact change.  In his mind, it would take this massacre to call the world’s attention to the plight of Europe and his country. This level of frustration should never have been allowed to exist, but the acts he perpetrated should not exist either in a world that cherishes human life.

The Shooter was a Christian
The mistake that the liberal blog owners, website owners and writers make when they publish their 20-point headlines that the shooter was a “Christian,” “Right-winger” or a “Conservative” are many.  Obviously, a person who goes out and commits mass murder is not a Christian. The liberal blog writers assume that they can further their agenda of destroying Christianity throughout America and the world by broadcasting this assumption as fact. Christians oppose abortion because of their feelings that all life is sacred. Christians believe that every human life should be protected. Liberals support and advocate for abortion regardless of how many babies are murdered. It’s ironic that they draw no distinction between the two positions. How could this man be a Christian and what support is there for any claim that he was a practicing Christian in the days before he committed this atrocity?  There is none.

When he refers to the Knights Templar in his manifesto, he is drawing an analogy between people in medieval times who needed to be protected from Muslims and the people of modern Europe.  Because the people in medieval times happened to be Christians, the liberal blog writers in their narrow-minded world, see only the reference to Christians and by extension label this man a Christian.  They also relish any reference to the Crusades since this is a favorite liberal talking point when they are summarizing the evils of Christians. Never mind the millions of people annually around the world who Christians save by building hospitals and health clinics, through irrigation projects, helping battered women or feeding starving children.  We are supposed to forget about all the good because of something that happened in 1096 AD.

But, he was a Right Winger
There are few true extreme “right-wingers” in America and not many throughout the world.  The Nazi’s are an example of true “right-wingers,” but even in America, the Nazi’s have been relegated to small groups with little power of any kind. Any public gathering of Nazi’s has to include police protection because the Nazi’s are in danger of being killed or attacked wherever they congregate. In contrast, true left-wingers, like the anarchists in America and Europe number in the tens of thousands.  They are allowed to commit cyber terrorism, damage small businesses, turn over and burn police cars, burn Christian churches, plan marches and assemblies that result in millions in property crime and injury and the world only seems to care about the small number of “right-winger” extremists. To claim that the Norwegian shooters actions are characteristic of the actions of a typical “right-winger” are preposterous and idiotic. Liberals see themselves as the worlds intellectuals, but their gleeful reaction to this incident speaks otherwise.

If this man could be called a “conservative,” it would only be justified because he can’t be called a liberal. He see’s the problems in Europe resulting from Muslims and the liberals who empower them. Is the only label for someone who is not a liberal themselves to assume they are a conservative? He owned an organic farm at the time of committing his atrocities. Are there many conservatives who run organic farms? If some of his beliefs about food cross over into a favorite liberal pursuit, do we still have precedent to call him a pure conservative? Is a person, by virtue of their concerns about the Muslim impact on Europe automatically only a conservative? Most people in Norway and throughout the region, can be described best as liberals.

The Nobel Peace Prize generally recognizes famous liberals more than anything else. George W. Bush wanted to establish Democracies in the Middle East.  Since Democracies don’t go to war with each other, his hope was to end the bloodshed in the region permanently.  Why didn’t he receive the Nobel Peace prize?  He isn’t a war monger, but instead had a strategy for ending war forever in a place that has known war for decades.  He would never receive the award though and would never even be considered. Only liberals work for peace in the minds of the Nobel Peace Prize judges.
Barack Obama, Al Gore, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and Jimmy Carter are examples of winners from the past decade.

A familiar Manifesto
The latest reports compare the manifesto of the Norwegian shooter with that of Ted Kaczynski, the Unabomber. Both men were apparently loners and not part of any organized right-wing or conservative organization. Neither man could be considered classically conservative or right-wing just because they spoke out against the cultural impact of multiculturalism or leftism. The facts can support either of those two arguments but nothing supports the madness in the way either man acted out their anger. In a 1999 interview, Kaczynski talked about his subscriptions to The New Yorker, Los Angeles Times and New York Review of Books. Not exactly the reading list of a conservative. He despises law enforcement and believes their “crooked,” as most liberals like to claim.

In the end, both men were referring to very real problems in the world, but both were prone to an irrationality that caused them to strike out at innocent people. We have seen leftist ideas decimate American culture in dozens of ways and we are seeing the Muslim takeover of Europe usher in an open path for terrorists. The average American who see’s the toll liberal ideology has had on our way of life feel powerless to stop it. Those in Europe who are wise to the smoke and mirrors of “multiculturism” are frustrated. Without a large, strong movement with millions of adherents, neither problem will be reversed. The Norwegian shooter, as with Kaczynski, chose violence to call attention to their manifesto. Both were right in their concerns, but wrong in their actions.