Pundits deploy retrocausality to blame Islam for Norway attacks

"It is not disputed that Breivik technically did it: the question, surely, is who is going to have made him do it? Europe awake. Yestermorrow there will was be going to have been Jihadi retrocausality to contend with."

From China Mieville's stirring rant about the pundits who declared that the Norway attacks must be the work of Islamic terrorists, then shamefully backpedaled and made excuses about how Breivik was a Paladin of the West, or was inspired by Islamic terrorists, or that in some way, Islam was to blame for Breivik's rampage.

• [ernunnos]

  He talked about working with Islamic terrorists himself.

  There might come a time when we, the PCCTS, Knights Templar will consider to use or even to work as a proxy for the enemies of our enemies.Under these circumstances, the PCCTS, Knights Templar will for the future consider working with the enemies of the EU/US hegemony such as Iran (South Korea is unlikely), al-Qaeda, al-Shabaab or the rest of the devout fractions of the Islamic Ummah with the intention for deployment of small nuclear, radiological, biological or chemical weapons in Western European capitals and other high priority locations. …

  But it really doesn’t matter what he actually believed, does it? Any more than it mattered what Jared Loughner believed. It’s not about motives, it’s about narrative. Someone should tell these guys that. You think anybody cares about your YouTube videos, or your 1500 page manifesto? It’s not about you, or what you think. Your explanations can be disjointed, or crystal clear. Before the bodies are even cold, they’ll be smearing themselves in the blood of your victims and accusing each other. And you and your ideas will be completely forgotten.

  Congratulations, motherfucker. You lose.

  • [chris jimson]

    “But it really doesn’t matter what he actually believed, does it? Any more than it mattered what Jared Loughner believed.”

    I don’t know if that is a fair analogy.  Nothing Jared Loughner said could really be traced to any politicians or pundits, nobody was saying “language is meaningless” or his community college was the site of a “genocide”, whereas most of what Breivik said in his manifesto is directly attributable to a great many pundits, bloggers, politicians, etc.  After Jared Loughner nobody said “well, his tactics were wrong but his message is accurate”– but that is exactly what a lot of right wingers are saying about Breivik.

    • [ernunnos]

      Nothing Jared Loughner said could really be traced to any politicians or pundits

      That didn’t stop anyone from talking about their influence anyway. And that’s exactly what these killers need to understand: you go to all that effort, put all that blood on your hands, and in the end, you don’t matter. You will be subsumed into the causes of others.

      And by the way, what is wrong with saying, “His tactics were wrong but his message is accurate”? Are we to assume that anyone who uses bad tactics is wrong? Might – or at least good tactics – makes right? God fights on the side with the most artillery and the best PR? The correctness of any given position is only tangentially related to the skill with which it is promulgated.

      • [chris jimson]

        The problem with saying “his tactics were wrong but his message is accurate” is that in this case his message is not accurate.  A long line of conservatives in Europe and America, whom he cites, have decided that all Muslims are the enemy, when in fact most Muslims live peacefully with Christians and Jews and have no interest in violent jihad. 

        Those public figures who have been saying for years that Islam is evil, and that there is no such thing as a moderate Muslim, enabled this man.  If conservatives are going to point at vitriolic and hateful Muslim clerics and say “they are promoting violence” then they should be willing to apply that same standard to themselves.

        I am personally OK with someone saying “Breivik alone is responsible for his actions”, I may disagree with it, but it’s a reasonable opinion, however if conservatives are going to say that then they should at least be consistent and apply that to Muslim terrorists as well, instead of painting all Muslims as terrorists.

• [Sana Souratha]

  Anti-Muslim Terrorism? How ironic. I wonder who are the real terrorists of the world.

  But I expected America to be the one to do something this huge since we already go around doing this stuff and celebrate fake deaths of Bin-Laden. And I still blame Bush for all the problems in the world.

• [fraac]

  Like Muslims could’ve executed a plan like that. I’ve seen Four Lions. 

• [poon hound]

  “”To get at the roots of terrorism is complicated. Dropping bombs is simple. It is an old response to what everyone acknowledges is a very new situation. At the core of unspeakable and unjustifiable acts of terrorism are justified grievances felt by millions of people who would not themselves engage in terrorism but from whose ranks terrorists spring.”"

  -Howard Zinn.

• [poon hound]

  “”To get at the roots of terrorism is complicated. Dropping bombs is simple. It is an old response to what everyone acknowledges is a very new situation. At the core of unspeakable and unjustifiable acts of terrorism are justified grievances felt by millions of people who would not themselves engage in terrorism but from whose ranks terrorists spring.”"-Howard Zinn.