Anders Breivik pleads not guilty. Really?

Scroll to see replies

Reply 80

Joinedup

I expect he's pleading guilty cos he's hoping to make political speeches from the dock and recruit followers.

Reply 81

JustAGoodLAD

Original post by justanotherindigo

The man who carried out bomb and gun attacks in Norway last year which left 77 people dead has pleaded not guilty at the start of his trial in Oslo.

Anders Behring Breivik attacked a youth camp organised by the governing Labour party on the island of Utoeya, after setting off a car bomb in the capital.

He told the court he "acknowledged" the acts committed, but said he did not accept criminal responsibility.

The prosecution earlier gave a detailed account of how each person was killed.

If the court decides he is criminally insane, he will be committed to psychiatric care; if he is judged to be mentally stable, he will be jailed.

In the latter case, he faces a sentence of 21 years, which could be extended to keep him behind bars for the rest of his life.

The 33-year-old Norwegian was found insane in one examination, while a second assessment made public last week found him mentally competent.

As said before, he denies criminal responsibility and claimed that he acted on behalf of self-defence. So killing innocent young lives is self-defence?

What are your thoughts on this?

I don't know the ins and outs of the court case, but did he have a defence lawyer? If so, how? Who in their right mind, whether it be their profession or not, could defend this man?

Reply 82

Dragonfly07

I like to believe that no sane person would be able to do something like that.

Reply 83

dgeorge

Original post by natchina

I posted a mainstream tv news segment that reported on official police data.

What has that got to do with your 88 page report? -- does poverty make non white rapists target white women for rape? is this the gist of the report or what?

( Btw, I agree this is a side issue concerning this thread. I posted the link in response to another posters comments about rape in Norway. Although, maybe these rapes were part of breiviks motivation? I have not read his manifesto so am not sure. )

The "official police data" used from the tv news segment is taken from THE SAME 88 PAGE REPORT that you later called marxist waffle.

Clearer now?

Again, I won't argue with the link between poverty and crime. If you want to argue this, start another thread doing so. I think we've already gone more than far enough off topic.

Reply 84

natchina

Original post by dgeorge

Ok, so the hard data and crime stats are lumped in with the social science mumbo jumbo about why the crimes are happening.

Obviously, the hard data is not quite what they wanted to hear. And so they have buried it in a pile of raw waffle --raw waffle that even refuses to come to honest conclusions. Example. All of the victims in Oslo were white. All of the rapists were not white.

If poverty was to blame, why did the rapists only target white women? Why were no non-white women raped? Why did poor white Norwegians not rape anyone in Oslo?

But even if poverty was to blame, which is is not. Then why should Norway invite into its country poor people from other countries if this is how they behave?

(edited 12 years ago)

Reply 85

dgeorge

Original post by natchina

Ok, so the hard data of crime stats is lumped in with the social science mumbo jumbo about why the crimes are happening.

Obviously, the hard data is not quite what they wanted to hear. And so they have buried it in a pile of raw waffle.

Waffle aside, what is your personal opinion about how relative poverty turns some people into violent and racist rapists?

It's not "social science mumbo jumbo" It was STATISTICALLY examined and found that economic conditions were consistent among the criminals across different races. The same HARD DATA that you trumpeted so loudly which was in the news report is the same HARD DATA that found this to be true.

Again, stop trying to devalue information SIMPLY BECAUSE YOU DONT AGREE WITH IT. You should simply admit that you are WRONG instead of trying to confuse the issue. It makes you look extremely immature that you are selectively picking and choosing from the SAME report from the SAME source only facts that corroborate your point of view while when viewed in its entire these "hard facts" invalidate your point.

And again, I will be only too happy to discuss the influence of poverty on crime in another thread. But not this one.

Reply 86

natchina

Original post by dgeorge

Just tell me, using your own personal logic and common sense, why poverty turns people into violent and racist rapists?

The link between shop lifting and poverty is clear.......

But rape?

Reply 87

dgeorge

Original post by natchina

Just tell me, using your own personal logic and common sense, why poverty turns people into violent and racist rapists?

The link between shop lifting and poverty is clear.......

But rape?

Accept that maybe, just maybe, that you are wrong, and that just because you disagree with a certain viewpoint doesn't instantly invalidate ALL of the evidence, then maybe I will

Reply 88

dgeorge

Original post by natchina

Just tell me, using your own personal logic and common sense, why poverty turns people into violent and racist rapists?

The link between shop lifting and poverty is clear.......

But rape?

And for the record, please stop exaggerating and misquoting me. I never, EVER said that poverty turns people into violent and racist rapists. If you are going to quote me, please do so correctly and factually. what I said was

people on the lowest socio-economic end are far more likely to engage in criminal activities, including violent crimes like rape

Nowhere did I ever say that poverty causes people to rape nor did I say that poverty turns people into rapists, as you are claiming I simply said that poor people are MORE LIKELY to engage in violent crimes, such as rape.

Reply 89

Nephilim

Original post by mevidek

Perhaps I am generalising, but the far-right - a lot more than the far-left - tend to not be creative, intelligent, or to understand society as a whole.

You're right, you are generalising :rolleyes:

. Most of the Classical music composers were right-wing, with people like Chopin and Bach being far-right. Society changes. More people were right-wing during those times, and now most people are left-wing. A person's political persuasion has nothing to do with their intelligence and especially has nothing to do with their level of creativity.

Reply 90

Gridiron-Gangster

Original post by Nephilim

You're right, you are generalising :rolleyes:

We can't really apply the morality etc of being right or left-wing to people like Chopin and Bach who by virtue of the fact they were from a completely different generation, time-period etc probably had no awareness of the concept of multiculturalism or the ethical issues it might pose etc. I doubt Bach knew his nigiri from his futomaki or had ever tried a falafel in a pitta.

Reply 91

Nephilim

Original post by Gridiron-Gangster

Well not really true, because 18th and especially 19th century Germany/Poland/Austria were very multi-cultural. Of course they didn't have a lot of people from central-asia living in their countries, but even people from Croatia and Italy seemed foreign to Germans/Pols (many Croatians and Italians lived in the Holy Roman Empire region).

Reply 92

Heavenly_Blues

He's just doing it to drag things out and disrupt proceedings, just trying to give as big a "**** you" to the government as possible.

Shame, really.

Reply 93

for_healing_only

What he did was not insane, it was the rational thought process of an idiot (albeit a well dressed one, all I could think from that picture was "where did he get that tie?")

For the most part to have done what he did he would have to have been completely rational and have persuauded himself that what he did was correct (because lets face it, the guys who listen to teh voices in their heads get caught a lot faster). But unfortunately the more air time he gets the more likely it will be an actual nut job will go out and do something 10x worse.

But for the most part his choice of action was as rational as people lets say burning down a danish embassy.

(also what the hell is up with his beard? It reminds me of the scragly beards religious lots have)

Reply 94

thunder_chunky

He'll probably be found guilty anyway. Either way it'll be interesting to see how the trial plays out.

Original post by RyanT

You are wrong to say they are innocent. These were people at a party political event. Politics is about control. I don't really consider their age to be that relevant either.

These people were legitimate targets in a war over the future of society.

He isn't insane either, having a killing instinct isn't the same as insanity. I don't agree with him, but attempting to label him as mentally ill is reminsicent of soviet tactics against dissidents.

So because they have political beliefs and were at a camp because of a political beliefs they weren't innocent?
They weren't legitimate targets they were just teenagers, (most of them anyway.) It's not that different from targeting a school so what you've said is absurd.
I agree he probably isn't insane though, he's been declared sane so he should be tried as such.

Reply 95

34253

Original post by Gridiron-Gangster

Why are you being so overtly simplistic in your view of equating right wing politics with fascism? Fascism is just popularism, and is just as left wing as it is right wing. Fascists, like Socialists, want to nationaise the means of production for instance. There isn't some right wing hand book that states you must be authoritarian or nationalisitic, and I think you will find that socialist countries have been just as racist and xenophobic throughout history (if not more so). It really is only a very new phenomenon that the lefties would cosy up to foreigners for their vote.

Historically speaking of course, 'multiculturalism' would never have been accepted in Britain. If, 100-200 years ago, 10-20% of our country descended from abroad within 1-2 generations there would have been outrage and very few from the left or right would have questioned how ethical this outrage was. They went mental enough that the Irish were coming over.