Norway attacks: what happened and the implications (new title)

[TDB]

These events really won't help with the conspiracy theories surrounding the Free Masons with him rambling out about becoming a Knight Templar. It seems he was won over by this romatic idea himself. The question which will be raised now will be "could it happen here?!". I think if you look at it in a serious way, it would be unlikely to happen in the UK even with the existence of a thriving black market in arms. The bomb could be made but with the tight restrictions on the perchase of fertiliser it would raise suspicions, and in the aftermath of this people are more likley to alert the authorities to strange behaviour. Furthermore we are likely to see an adverse reaction to what Breivik had wanted. Groups such as the English Defence League will have to keep a low profile, does anyone know if they have released a statement about this?

[davidbfpo]

TDB,

Groups such as the English Defence League will have to keep a low profile, does anyone know if they have released a statement about this?

Yes they have and is on their website. There are two statements condemning the murders and denying any links to the suspect. This is he latest statement:http://englishdefenceleague.org/offi...nders-brievik/

For non-UK readers the English Defence League (EDL) are:

..a far-right street protest movement which opposes what it perceives as the spread of Islamism, Sharia law and Islamic extremism in England. The EDL uses street-based marches to protest against Islamic extremism.

From:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_Defence_League

[AnalyticType]

It's even in english...

http://motherjones.com/politics/2011...nline-comments

[davidbfpo]

Understandably the press have started let's say more thoughtful, reflective pieces and having read through a pile I've picked out four IMHO of value.

Breivik's Swamp: Was the Oslo killer radicalized by what he read online? From FP Blog by Tony Archer, a Brit who has lived in Finland and watched the CT scene:http://www.foreignpolicy.com/article...swamp?page=0,0

The NYT looks at Norway's immigrant population:http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/26/wo..._r=2&ref=world

Which cites an Eritrean refugee:

The most important thing is what the majority thinks and the majority is fine with us.

A Norwegian professor's article notes half the immigrants are from Poland and Sweden ends with:

..we doubtless woke on Saturday morning to a slightly more paranoid, slightly less pleasant society. A society where we have become aware of our fundamental vulnerability.

Link:http://www.opendemocracy.net/thomas-...d-consequences

Finally the 'Five Remedial Lessons from the Norwegian Tragedy' by Paul Pillar;Only the opening line for each

1. Don't jump to quick conclusions about responsibility for an attack, let alone spin out instant analysis based on such conclusions. 2. The threat that gets the most attention is not the only threat. 3. Individual incidents are not necessarily indicative of larger trends. 4. Open societies are inherently vulnerable to terrorist attack and ultimately unprotectable. 5. That a previously unknown individual (possibly with some help) could inflict so many casualties (more even than the 7/7 transit bombings in London) should put into perspective the limits of detection and prevention.

Link:http://nationalinterest.org/blog/pau...n-tragedy-5659

[Old Eagle]

I was both concerned and amused at some of the initial conclusion jumping "analyses" that accompanied the early reports from NO. STRATFOR did a better job of laying out various possible explanations, and then analyzed the impact of each on greater Europe.

[JMA]

Thanks to Wikileaks we learn that the Norwegians failed to take the threat of terrorism seriously.

WikiLeaks files show Norway unprepared for terror attack

It seems that it always takes a tragedy before a country (the politicians, security services and the people) starts to get serious about the diverse terrorist threat it faces.

[Dayuhan]

Useful comment, from Foreign Affairs:

http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articl...unter-jihadism

http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articl...lims-of-norway

Don't really need Wikileaks to see that Norway wasn't taking terrorist threats very seriously, as public documents make it clear that the authorities saw very little risk. Cited in the above:

The PST -- the Norwegian Police Security Force, somewhat comparable to the British MI5 -- concluded in its most recent publicly available risk analysis, published in February, that right-wing extremists posed “no serious threat.”

[Fuchs]

Thanks to Wikileaks we learn that the Norwegians failed to take the threat of terrorism seriously.

Really?

Even after this, safety measures on one of the many, many Norwegian ferries are more important than CT.

Resources (including attention) need to be allocated rationally, not based on fear.