Sunday, July 31, 2011

Despite MSM "far right" red herrings, Anders Breivik has more in common with mainstream neocons and Zionists than anybody else

From:
Anders Breivik: Neo-Conned

(Foreign Policy Journal) -- by Dr. K R Bolton --

The news media has had a field day in headlining Anders Breivik’s actions as those of someone from the “far Right,” and as actions that are a consequence of Rightist ideology. Yet Breivik is an avid Zionist whose motives were predicated on Islamophobia. His ideological influences are libertarian and “neo-conservative.” He was playing his part, albeit as a loose cannon, in the “clash of civilizations.”

Although the news media has focused on his previous membership in the Progressive Party, his ideological commitment is to Zionism. Why then did not the news media headline Breivik’s atrocity as being that of a “Zionist,” and as a “stanch supporter of Israel”? As is often the case, the fictional “far Right” connection is a red herring. Headlines could have read “Zionist extremist on shooting spree,” “Israel supporter massacres youngsters at Labour camp in Norway,” and the like.

While Breivik advocates banning the Islamic religion from Europe, he seems to have been totally oblivious to the intrinsically anti-Christian nature of Orthodox Judaism,[1] and while he wrote at length on the supposed enmity between “Judaeo-Christianity” and Islam, he wrote nothing of the anti-Christian record of Israel,[2] including the demolition of Christian holy sites, and the common practice of spitting on Christian clergy in the Holy Land. Although he did recognize the historical predominance of Jews in Leftist movements, this is an acknowledgement of the rivalry within Jewry between liberals and leftists on the one side and “neo-conservatives” on the other, the latter being considered by Breivik to be his best potential allies in the fight against Islam. Breivik is Judaeophilic to the extent that he is Islamophobic, writing in his manifesto:
Regardless of what the Jewish communities motives are I think it’s imperative that they take a stance on multiculturalism and Muslim immigration as soon as humanly possible. They have to recognize that “multiculturalism” is the system that allows Europe to be Islamised and it’s obviously not in their interest to contribute to this. Jews will in a much larger degree start to support the ‘new right’ (just like everyone else), who oppose multiculturalism as a means to stop Islamisation, at least this is my hope. In the back of their minds they realize that a Muslim Europe will be more “anti-Semitic” than a Christian Europe. Muslims don’t have the guilt complex that Europeans have. Many Jews feel they are trapped between the ‘bark and the wood’, they are both skeptical of Muslim immigration on one side and of the nationalist far right wing movements on the other side. Nevertheless, time is off [sic] the essence and it is imperative that the European Jewish community without delay take a stance on the ongoing Islamisation. Neutrality on this issue is not an option. The only way of doing this is to back the new right wing (antimulticulturalism, pro-Israel) groups and political parties (also manifested through views such as by moderate Jewish writers such as Daniel Pipes and Bat Ye’or).[3]
Breivik’s opposition to Jewish leftists, as with his opposition to liberals and leftists of any type, is no more antagonistic towards Jews per se than the opposition of Jewish neo-cons towards Jewish leftists. The above passage from Breivik is in total accord with the pro-Zionist neo-con party-line.

Israel & Islam

The only “Right” that Breivik can be said to identify with is the Zionist extreme Right. This calls to mind the likes of the Jewish Defense League, Likud, the settler movement, etc. Breivik’s support for the expansion of Israeli borders north and south also reminds one of the “Greater Israeli Empire” that has always been a basis of the Zionist “extreme right.” He sees Israel as the vanguard in the fight against Islam, writing:
While most people refer to Israel’s security fence as a ‘wall’, the fact remains that less than 5 percent of the barrier is actually concrete slab. The rest is a network of fence and sensors. The fence has cut terrorism incidents by more than 90% since its completion. What was the reason for establishing the Security Fence Area? The Security Fence is being built with the sole purpose of saving the lives of the Israeli citizens who continue to be targeted by the terrorist campaign that began in 2000…[4]
His justification for the “security wall” is the same party line as that of other pro-Zionists, including the neo-con ideologues. The main difference is that Breivik is happy to call this situation ‘apartheid’, while the neo-cons recoil at the word.[5] Was Breivik inspired in his shooting rampage of Norwegian youths more by the example of the Israeli security forces than by the crusader knights whose legacy he claimed to be reviving, albeit only with a handful of members who included two atheists and an agnostic, by his own account?...MORE...LINK
-------------------------
Related:
"Liberal democratic" discourse promotes right-wing Judeofascist fanatics who inspired Breivik, but savages the non-Zionist Right; why is that?

No comments: