Ralph Peters: Norway Terror Suspect Is "Such A Godsend To The Liberal Media" Because He Calls Himself A Christian
July 26, 2011 9:59 pm ET
From the July 26 edition of Fox Business' America's Nightly Scoreboard:
Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.
Is it just me or are people scared to label this as an example of Christian Terrorism? That is what this is, like it or not. We have Christian Terrorists like we have Islamic Terrorists. Just as common, just as prevalent.
Denounce WHAT ! He is not Christian , Bill told me So ! He is just a NUT , all of theFox Talking Heads told me So !
Yuk .. yuk !
What theFox is not Denying is the the Shooter is Whiter than White, a Right-Winger, and LOVES GUNS !
D@MN good thing .. "He is NOT a Christian !"
I missed the part where this guy claimed to do all that killing "in the name of his God". Has anyone else heard or read that part of this terrorist action? The similarities stop there.
Should this seriously be a criteria for determining if he committed terrorist acts in the name of his religion (or for that matter should that criteria really hold for ANYONE of ANY religion under the same circumstances)?
He has all but confessed that he did it in the name of his religion, but did not invoke the name of his god or any god (Christians usually refer to god as "god" after all, they never really use his name).
They didn't kill in the name of Allah, they killed indiscriminately because of the policies of the US in the Middle East.
Guns! Oil! U!S!A!
Buddhism is the most reasonable among all religions. There is god save for what you see and feel. No violence there.
What he did was reprehensible. The reasons he did it have no place in a civilized society.
This killer deserves whatever punishment he gets.
It is also a FACT that the conservative media immediately presumed that the murders in Norway were the work of Muslim extremists.
In addition, it is a FACT that the killer is not a Muslim, but a blonde, blue-eyed Norwegian who espouses a radical, warped view of Christianity and nationalism, including calls for violence against immigrants and those who practice Islam.
It is a further FACT that this Norwegian killer not only espouses some of the same radical political views as the most extreme of the American right wing, in fact he cites them as role models and positive examples.
Those three FACTS mean that the conservative media establishment and pundit class are in some measure accountable for the killings in Norway -- you can't espouse violence and murder as acceptable courses of action, and then disavow the adherents who actually follow up on your words.
So, to Fox "News", Bill O'Reilly, Glenn Beck, Pam Geller, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and the rest of their ilk I say -- you're at least partly responsible for Anders Behring Breivik -- OWN IT.
I heard he only listened to left-wing AM radio and only watched left-wing TV and only read left-wing print media. Of course I have as much proof of who he listened to as you do. So, I can just as easily and accurately say this guy was motivated by Rachel Maddow, Ed Schultz, Stephanie Miller, Thom Hartmann, Randi Rhodes and the rest of their ilk. They need to OWN IT.
republic said: warped view of Christianity and nationalism,
What was his "warped view of Christianity"? I haven't read anything about his religious beliefs other than people saying he is Christian. Did he explain how he killed all those people 'in the name of his god'? or for the promotion of his god? So far I seemed to have missed those interviews. But, obviously, you have links to those, huh?
It's been in ALL the news . . . you, apparently, watch only Fox, so, of course, you wouldn't know that, would you?
You were wrong, Traveller. You're getting your "news" from a propaganda network whose job it is to lead followers like you around by your noses. You are being misinformed in an attempt to keep you uninformed. It appears to be working.
First, you provided no links to anything you said and you want links to what other people are saying, which is flagrantly hypocritical. Second, you're either so completely incompetent that you can't find basic information about Breivik, who openly claims to be a "Christian warrior" or you're so dishonest that you won't admit it. In either case, why should people treat you as if you were able to legitimately participate in a converation?
This is like U2 selling millions of records, selling stadiums for over 20 years and then Bono saying "We're not a mainstream band."
You are a part of the mainstream media, FOX. Just part that has a specific agenda and makes crap up.
But, of course, that was happening before they had discovered this particular monster shared many of the same hate filled thoughts and ideas that you might hear repeated quite frequently during a day of viewing Fox News.
So, just what was that you were saying about hypocrisy, Mr. Peters?
It seems that Fox's hatred of the media has crossed a line when you say that a mass-murderer is a "godsend".
29 "isolated incidents" of right-wing, Christian, anti-government terrorism in two and a half years. And that's just here in the U.S.A.
Even if they cite religious beliefs as a motivator for said actions?
....Well guess we need to wait for Breivik to get up on a podium and swear that, in the name of Yahweh that he did all those things.
The guy sounds more like a Nazi than a Christian, but there are some who feel the two are equal and/or the same.
This guy claims to be Christian and his manifesto indicates that he saw himself as a sort of Knight Templar defending the honor of the "Christian cultural heritage." Were his actions Christian? Nope, but then neither are the constant lies and distortions of O'Reilly who professes to be a devout Catholic.
Nobody's condemning Christians, Traveller. They're just condemning THIS Christian who killed a lot of innocent men, women and most importantly, children. He's a jerk.
And the Islamofascists in all of the fictional right wing emails I get always yell Allah Akbar as they kill people.
I'll guess that's the point Traveller is stuck on.
I'd like to add on, they are also condemning the basic principles which govern the motives behind terrorism: subscription to a rigid/absolute ideology which mandates/promotes intolerance and advocates violence in the pursuit of said ideals.
These ideals are not restricted to ANY religion, ideology or mindset, yet can arise in any religion, ideology or mindset should they be taken to the extreme.
Fox's hypocrisy is in tarring Islam with the brush of terrorism whereas sparing Christianity that same brush. That's a double standard right there, if they declare Islam a "terrorist religion" due to acts clearly attributed to said religion, so should they do the same to ANY religion that any terrorist act is attributed to.
Here they are trying their darnedest to deny this guy is a Christian or that his actions are "un-christlike" so he cannot possibly a Christian, conveniently ignoring that his own confession and manifesto attributes his religion as a motivator behind his actions. They've condemned the religion of Islam under the very same circumstances, why can't their either do the same now for Christianity or else admit they were wrong to ever tar Islam as religion of terrorism for those very same reasons?
What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander after all. Fox does not seem to realize that hypocrisy bites back.
Isn't that the same hypocrisy from other 'news sources' who focus on "tarring" Christianity? I'm sure looking up media outlets who prefer not to mention "Islam" when a terrorist act is committed by a Muslim would be quite easy. Do I need to do that?
As a Christian, I find THESE comments to be "tarring" Christianity.
However, since I was flagged for comments I made recently (even though they were along with the topic being discussed by the replied-to poster) I'm going to do the same for others who can't discuss on-topic.
For instance what part of your post has to do with Ralph Peters or this article mmfa has going now?
You sound more and more desperate. Whassamatta? Baby wants his bottle?
If you can't comment on-topic, which is Ralph Peters, then I'll continue to flag your comments. All you do is troll the posts looking for one of my posts to reply to without ever discussing on-topic (which is Ralph Peters this time). You're a troll and this site has no time for trolls like you. Keep up what you do and I'll have you removed from this site.
Since this site has no time for trolls, i would suggest you GTFO.
I think you're locked up in an erroneous mode of thinking where classifying someone necessarily dictates that it's the sole reason for the actions. It's not. At the very least, it's how the person rationalizes what they do. The same way you can find justification for violence in the Qu'ran, you can find it in the Bible. Why should people not get the full picture here?
Someone who commits terrorist acts motivated or determined by an ideology identified as having its roots in Christianity.
That would be a fair enough classification. Brievik indeed fits that description. No outright condemnation of the religion itself has been issued and in fact the "religion" he subscribed to is considered a "twisted version" of the mainstream religion itself.
I never stated the criteria as "calling oneself a religion = a terrorist of that religion", I was referring to how the ideology behind the act can be linked and attributed to a particular religion.
In Brievik's case, he has shown the links himself.
If your standard holds, then of course it's ridiculous. A Muslim man can commit an act of terror and then say it was in the name of Buddhism.
The fact still remains, any ideology ca be subjected to extremists interpretations which result in extremist acts. Despite what Fox declares to the contrary, Christianity is (and has been )in no way less susceptible to this than Islam.
He's notorious for creeping back to old threads with his gibberish and make-believe victory laps, but this defense of the phrase "fended horror" is priceless.
The "schooling" for teh dumb libs is based on words meaning nothing, and you using the word "horrified", which, unless I missed it, you didn't. Big laffs.
Remember that it was Joe who said he was "horrified" I made a harmless joke about the "free press".
Uh, no, Homer. I never said that. Not even close. My words are still there for all to see. I don't think Homer understands how question marks work.
None of it makes a lick of sense, but it was definitely good for a laugh, especially when he went into "I'm going to educate you dumb libs" mode. At long last, I know what Microsoft Word is! Hooray! I look forward to the next lesson, wherein ilovedoughnuts explains that 2 + 2 = eleventy billion.
Apologies to all for the OT post, but this was just too good to pass up.
Every news service in the world, that Rupert doesn't own, has correctly identified the right-wing, Christian, terrorist from Norway as a "right-wing, Christian, terrorist from Norway".
And for what? Right on the screen it says "Christian extremists". This is too easy. "Those people are not like the rest of us...they're extremists". Be a man and admit that your faith is actually a matter of faith, and it can be interpreted differently by crazy people bent on violence.
How the media mentioning that this particular guy was a Christian extremist in any way saying that we're waging a war against Christian terrorists like we are against Muslim terrorists? Is Fox honestly going to pretend that only Islamic terrorists exist? They often like to act like liberals are naive about defense but they're apparently the ones who completely dismiss the threat from everyone besides Muslims.
What troubles me as well is that Ralph Peters is that he is still on Fox even though not too long ago he said that the Taliban would be doing the U.S. a favor by executing a captured soldier.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xezi8wAGZZc
It's Fox, folks. What'd you expect?
When will we hear from Gafney?
Lie, cheat, and steal; and not tolerate those who don't.
Ema Nymton
~@:o?
.
But but but.... I thought Limbaugh and all you other wingnuts claimed McVeigh was a liberal. Do you forget all the twisted logic you morons spewed to convince your minions that McVeigh was either justified because of Waco and Clinton or that he was a liberal plant?
It's really not that hard to understand.