Reading Anders Breivik's Manifesto, Part II

There is nothing objectionable about this in isolation, but in the context of a determined attack on the legitimacy of the university system – with the attack itself centering on the degenerative effect that subjective textual analysis has had on the truth – it seems a bit contradictory.

However, the criticisms made of the content of the Koran and the Hadith cannot simply be dismissed. The plain facts are that the document calls for the killing and/or subjugation of non-believers at dozens of different points.

In fact, Breivik’s criticism of Islam raises some questions that, although deeply uncomfortable, are also unavoidable if one wishes to honestly evaluate the likely outcomes of Muslim culture expanding into the West.

If Muhammad was the perfect man who all Muslims should emulate, what do we make of the hadith that describes him as consummating his marriage to a nine-year old? Likewise, what do we make of his admonitions to kill adulterers and apostates? Or his decree to have a poet killed for mocking Islam?

“The entire Islamic moral universe devolves solely from the life and teachings of Muhammad,” Breivik contends.

So what do we do about the fact that some of these actions, believed by Muslims to have been undertaken by the perfect man in total accordance with the Will of God, are grossly incompatible with what Western culture considers to be good order?

Surrounding these very pertinent questions are long, paranoid expositions about the supposed Islamic sanctioning of lying and deceit, especially when speaking to unbelievers. Breivik certainly appears to believe that lying to non-believers is an inherent part of the Islamic religion and culture.

In some ways, the general criticisms of the unwillingness of Muslims to peacefully coexist sound entirely plausible, because we know of the history of the previous waves of Abrahamism to Europe. Christians also came to Europe professing a desire to live in peace, and they nevertheless found plenty of scriptural support for their efforts to terrorise the locals for centuries.

In other ways, things are less clear. It’s obvious that the other Abrahamisms – in particular Judaism and Christianity – are no longer as mindlessly bound in ancient tradition as they once were, but is this true of Islam? And if so, to what extent?

Breivik would evidently answer in the negative. He would have it that Islam has not changed at all since those early days of caravan raiding, and that even if it has, it’s liable to regress back into violence on account of the precedent set by Muhammad himself.

It’s certainly a very dark and dire perspective – but is it wrong?

Original: http://vjmpublishing.nz/?p=3746

File: 1356070489474.jpg (550KB, 1311x1305px) Image search: [Google]

550KB, 1311x1305px

Breivik is a Zionist freemasonic agitator.

File: 1497927499145.jpg (167KB, 682x911px) Image search: [Google]

167KB, 682x911px

>>135158298
>Consumating marriage with a nine year old
Now I won't defend Islam, but Jews do the same thing in their talmud, but instead of a nine year old they're fine with a child as young as THREE.

If he was truly Christian, then he'd call out the Jews for what they are instead of supporting them.

Breivik denounced it saying it was just so the media couldnt use "Muh 6 million" and that (((they))) would be blamed. He is pagan now.

>>135158373
see >>135158554

>>135158237
He plagiarized Ted Kazinski and replaced "leftist" with "cultural Marxist". Literally plagiarized

>>135158602
His mother's surname, Behring, is literally Jewish.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anders_Behring_Breivik

http://www.avotaynu.com/csi/csi-result.html?page=previous

Behring is here and so is the surname Brevik, which is cohencidentally too close to the surname Breivik.

Is there an online repository of manifestos from people like Breivik, Kaczynski, etc?

This one's good for the online repository needs

https://publicintelligence.net/anders-behring-breiviks-complete-manifesto-2083-a-european-declaration-of-independence/

>>135158892
So what, he did the right thing, he killed traitors

>>135158522
>The Gemara asks: With regard to what principle do Rav and Shmuel disagree? The Gemara answers: Rav holds that any halakha that applies to one who engages in intercourse actively applies to one who engages in intercourse passively, and any halakha that does not apply to one who engages in intercourse actively does not apply to one who engages in intercourse passively. Therefore, just as one who engages in intercourse actively is not liable if he is less than nine years old, as the intercourse of such a child does not have the halakhic status of intercourse, so too, if a child who is less than nine years old engages in homosexual intercourse passively, the one who engages in intercourse with him is not liable.

https://www.sefaria.org/Sanhedrin.54a-54b?lang=bi

>>135158358

>He would have it that Islam has not changed at all since those early days of caravan raiding, and that even if it has, it’s liable to regress back into violence on account of the precedent set by Muhammad himself.

This is accurate, for very simple reasons which almost everyone is too retarded to understand.

The core of the religion says: God is almighty. God is all-knowing. God is all-powerful. God is timeless. This is repeated over and over.

Now, God has written a book, personally, in his own hand (through the angel Gabriel possessign Muhammad's body like a shell), full of commandments. Fairly clear commandments, even.

How the fuck can anyone credibly justify deviating from that book?

Sure, you can try to twist wording somewhat. ULTRA-GOD has written in sura 4:34 that unruly wives should be beaten with a stick.

And you can play word games and quibble about the details of this - How large a stick? Maybe a small stick, maybe a baseball bat, maybe a symbolic stick. Maybe she should be beaten at the first sign of being unruly, or be beaten as a last resort.

But when FUCKING ULTRA-GOD OF ALL PERSONALLY AND CLEARLY wrote that unruly wives should be beaten with a stick, HOW THE FUCK do you justify interpreting in a complete opposite way, that no wife should ever be beaten with a stick whatsoever under any circumstance?

Then there's also Hadith. Muhammad was perfect, and Hadith is the stories of his life. What would Muhammad do, they ask, just like "What would Jesus do". And Muhammad did enormously bad things.

But back to the Quran. Of course you can't deviate too much from the FUCKING PERSONAL COMMANDMENTS OF PERFECT ULTRA-GOD HIMSELF WRITTEN CLEARLY ON THE PAGE.

Christianity is very different. The Bible was not written by God personally, but by fallible humans. Also, it contains enough verse to be able to claim credibly that Jesus abrogated the Old Testament laws. This lack of clarity opens for a humane development of Christianity.

>>135158237
Breivik is right you know?

>>135158800
nobody will top Teddy K's manifesto

nobody

>>135158237
I didn't even know breivik wrote a manifesto. It must be pretty accurate if it's given so little attention. Elliot Rodgers retard incel manifesto was spammed relentlessly

File: 1497928269000.png (86KB, 1153x545px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 1153x545px

>>135159236
>Traitors
They didn't support Israel so they were killed.