Their headline: White Christian Fundamentalist Terrorism in Norway.
That the horrible terrorist attacks in Oslo on Friday that left some 90 persons or more dead– a bombing of the prime minister’s office and shootings at a Labor Party youth camp– were allegedly committed by a blonde, far right wing Norwegian fundamentalist Christian rather than by a radical Muslim group is being treated as a matter of surprise in some quarters. But if those journalists and analysts had been paying attention, they would not be surprised at all.and
Europol reports have long made it clear that the biggest threat of terrorism in Europe comes from separatist movements, then from the fringe left, then from the far right. In 2008, only one terrorist attack out of hundreds in Europe was committed by radical Muslims. In 2010, according to Europol [pdf], 7 persons were killed in terrorist attacks. Some 160 of these attacks that year were carried out by separatists. The number launched by people of Muslim heritage? 3. It would be silly to maintain that Muslim radicals do not pose a threat of terrorism; indeed, many plots were broken up by European police. But as an actually-existing phenomenon, terrorism in Europe is mainly the work of Christian-heritage people. For more on the Norwegian far right, see Firstpost.com.Cole addresses a topic I have written about on Penigma, the crisis in this country of Islamophobia, which is actively fear-mongered by the right wing of our politics. It is not a problem unique to Norway by any means. We have only to listen to presidential candidate hopeful Herman Cain, or look at the provisions of the Iowa pledge signed by Michele Bachmann and Ick, er, Rick Santorum, provisions which are promoted by Gingrich, Huckabee, Pawlenty and pretty much all of the other GOP hopefuls. We have only to look at the number of states which have passed incredibly stupid and unnecessary legislation about Sharia law, which is NOT in any way, shape or form a threat to our law, our autonomy, or our way of life, legislation which singles out and demonizes a legitimate religion for treatment that is different from any other religion.
The right uses all kinds of fears to gain support, mostly from low-information people who believe wildly inaccurate things about people they identify as different from themselves, as different from conservative, white, Christians. It is what that right will do, both legally and illegally, that threatens our life, liberty, pursuit of happiness and our very multi-cultural melting pot American way of life.
Quoting again from Cole:
The suspect, Anders Behring Breivik, is anti-multiculturalist and believes that the Qur’an commands Muslims to be extremists. His attack on the Labour Party appears to have derived in part from its insufficient hate of people of other cultures. Breivik’s discourse, about Islam and the Qur’an being *essentially* evil, is part of the Islamophobia promoted by some right wing forces in the west; and his actions show where that kind of thinking can lead.Read Professor Cole; his post is EXCELLENT. And then take another long hard look at the message of the right wing media, and the politicians who want to run for President (and governor, and senator or congressman). It will make you think, and it might even scare you a little. It should shake you up, because to be safe, we must focus proportionately on the actual, factual sources of potential terrorism, and not be distracted or diverted by Islamophobia, no matter how hard the right tries to make it an fake issue.
Internally, while Timothy McVeigh may a “face of domestic terrorism” that Americans recognize, there are others.
ReplyDeleteWhen asking the question, do others respond by questioning that the question was even asked.
Compare how Peter King’s Committee hearings on Muslims was portrayed versus how the April 7, 2009 report from Homeland Security containing intelligence analyses of domestic and international threats to the nation's borders and infrastructure.
In case you forgot, the HHS report drew sharp criticism from Republican lawmakers, conservatives and veterans groups, who said it unfairly targeted returning military veterans and gun rights advocates without citing specific threats. The report said the return of military veterans facing challenges with reintegrating into their communities "could lead to the potential emergence of terrorist groups or lone wolf extremists capable of carrying out violent attacks." Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano responded "Let me be very clear: we monitor the risks of violent extremism taking root here in the United States. "We don't have the luxury of focusing our efforts on one group; we must protect the country from terrorism whether foreign or homegrown, and regardless of the ideology that motivates its violence."
That was at the start of the Obama Administration and immediately become a radio talking point that Obama was going to take away your guns.
But who was talking about guns ... how about Michele Bachmann (R-MN-06) who wanted citizens to be “armed and dangerous” to fight the battle over healthcare reform.
What was the reaction to the arrest of the Michigan Militia members ... or when Governor Rick Perry (R-TX) suggested that Texas might secede from the union ... did this get the same treatment on the radio ?
While you think about that, suggested reading is Nick Kristof’s OpEd ... Republicans, Zealots and Our Security.
Here are some highlights :
national security is about protecting our people and our national strength — and the blunt truth is that the biggest threat to America’s national security this summer doesn’t come from China, Iran or any other foreign power. It comes from budget machinations, and budget maniacs, at home.
... House Republicans start from a legitimate concern about rising long-term debt.
... But on this issue, many House Republicans aren’t serious, they’re just obsessive in a destructive way.
... While one danger to national security comes from the risk of default, another comes from overzealous budget cuts — especially in education, at the local, state and national levels. When we cut to the education bone, we’re not preserving our future but undermining it.
It should be a national disgrace that the United States government has eliminated spending for major literacy programs in the last few months, with scarcely a murmur of dissent.
Consider Reading Is Fundamental, a 45-year-old nonprofit program that has cost the federal government only $25 million annually. It’s a public-private partnership with 400,000 volunteers, and it puts books in the hands of low-income children. The program helped four million American children improve their reading skills last year. Now it has lost all federal support.
Sidenote : In May, a MN Political Roundtable commentary entitled Did Kennedy and Bush Envision Fat Kids Who Cannot Read, Reading Is Fundamental funding cut was cited.