[Rat_Bag]

(Original post by Perseveranze)
The hate against Muslims is strong in this.

As is the hate against infidels in many cases of Islamic terrorists.

The psychology of Brevik is probably actually very similar with the Islamic terrorists; impeccably logical if you assume a few very flawed sets of values and objectives, which makes change from the usual right-wing nut jobs, who are often very unbalanced and inconsistent. It's interesting how the media first tried to label him as insane (and thus remove any sort of reason behind his actions and ignore and avoid his internal logic and the issue driving it), much like how it tries to do the same with Islamic terrorists (again, the powers that be not wanting to face up to the issues driving their internal logic).

(Original post by Perseveranze)
As for the BL porn facade, sorry but not everyone is going to believe that, and I'm not just talking Muslims here.

Erm, what does your source say? An unsubstantiated claim that the porn stash is "probably bogus", and that's it. The rest is just circumstantial conjecture that can be used to "disprove" anything. Just because the Americans have good reason to frame porn on bin Laden, doesn't mean that if porn is found on bin Laden, that the Americans put it there. Just because Mohammad had good reason to invent Islam to self-aggrandise himself, doesn't mean Islam is a human invention. Both the porn stash and Islam could be genuine, or they could be bogus. Their truth should be determined based on objective evidence, and not circumstantial conjecture rooted in self-appeasement.

[cgraham15]

I read somewhere that he has stated to being an athiest, and only culturally Christian. And he perhaps did crimes against Islam (in a non-direct way) because they're stricter on homosexuality? I don't know it's hard to try and attempt to think what a mad man was thinking. Being gay is no excuse, especially these days. Nobody cares if your gay, straight, or bi. No big deal.

[DJMayes]

I'll be honest; does it make a difference what sexuality he is? His crime was an atrocity and he should be dealt with in the strictest manner regardless of what gender he finds more attractive.

[Manitude]

In his diary he talks a bit about paying for prostitutes. He said he was going to spend a load on one shortly before the massacre in order to be 'satisfied'. I'm fairly sure he was referring to a female escort. Though I can't recall the exact wording he used...but I was reading this about a month ago and certainly wasn't looking to find out if he was gay or not.

[electriic_ink]

"Struggling with homosexuality". Wtf? I think if he was struggling with anything it was his Christianity.

[derangedyoshi]

Pure pointless speculation, and in the unlikely event that he is gay, it is irrelevant.

[Agenda Suicide]

Why does this matter? Is this some lame attempt at having a pop at gays?

[electriic_ink]

(Original post by Agenda Suicide)
Why does this matter? Is this some lame attempt at having a pop at gays?

I think it's more likely a lame attempt to convince us that he wasn't a proper Christian.

[Sheep]

fu

obvious propaganda from haters

Breivik is a hero

[Rat_Bag]

(Original post by cgraham15)
Being gay is no excuse, especially these days. Nobody cares if your gay, straight, or bi. No big deal.

Many Muslims seem to care an awful lot. In fact many Muslims are totally obsessed about what other people are getting up to in the privacy of their own bedrooms. And plenty of Christians (particularly in America and more recently in Africa) have this same obsession.

[Rat_Bag]

(Original post by DJMayes)
I'll be honest; does it make a difference what sexuality he is? His crime was an atrocity and he should be dealt with in the strictest manner regardless of what gender he finds more attractive.

I think understanding the cause of things (including atrocities) is very important to gaining and understanding for how they happened, and whether there is anything that can be done to reduce their number in the future.

[Rat_Bag]

(Original post by Agenda Suicide)
Why does this matter? Is this some lame attempt at having a pop at gays?

Probably

[The Socktor]

(Original post by Perseveranze)
No, I did not know this, it is indeed news to me. Is it a new culture/fashion that I'm missing?

Is this a sarcastic statement? in which case, you should use the sarcastic smiley or else we wont understand you.

If not, well, it sort of is. Though IIRC, it was historically common. It is also commonly used by male actors and is growing in popularity today.

Besides, even if it were undeniably a feminine thing to do, that still wouldn't necessarily say anything about his sexual orientation. Ironically, up until around the mid-19th century stereotyping held that being effeminate actually decreased the probability that a man was gay. In the Renaissance, being bisexual was considered very manly.

And even if he were gay, what's your point? that being gay causes you to go around killing people? I'm pretty there were a lot more straight mass murderers throughout history than gay ones, so I think being straight is a bigger cause, don't you?

[Spaz Man]

This is the same guy who thought that Call of Duty was so realistic that he treated it as a simulation type game that he use to "train" himself. Complete ignoramous and a nutjob.

[internetguru]

(Original post by Spaz Man)
This is the same guy who thought that Call of Duty was so realistic that he treated it as a simulation type game that he use to "train" himself. Complete ignoramous and a nutjob.

He got an 80 or so kill streak so it must have worked.

[Spaz Man]

(Original post by internetguru)
He got an 80 or so kill streak so it must have worked.

I really shouldn't laugh.

[Brutal Honesty]

(Original post by Suetonius)
Maybe this is true, but I don't think it can be said that this in itself propelled him to carry out the attacks. His boringly long manifesto details his wacko ideology quite clearly, and it's silly to say that someone would produce all that just because they were a homosexual. I personally think we need to scrutinize the motives of the OP. He's only making the most of this story (his link being a religious website) because he's a fanatical Islamist who detests gays himself, and wants to present homosexuality as impetus to murder.

What about Breivik's motive being Muslim immigration and multiculturalism? He claims there's other cells willing to carry out attacks in the future several years from now so what happens in the meantime? We deport the Muslims?

[j0hn]

(Original post by Perseveranze)
I think he's gay and it would explain a lot, especially comming from a Christian background (as he would have a lot to struggle with).

Due to depression etc. you usually find these people take it out on themselves, but I think in this case, Brievik took it out against Muslims, as they seem to be easy to blame. But, that's just a theory, it could be anything.

Would he potentially be the first gay terrorist?

I don't think you should assume that because he had a Christian background it came at odds with his supposed sexuality. Like the entire article, you're just speculating with no real evidence whatsoever making your entire theory on what you called 'these people' totally invalid. It comes from an unverified source, a biased newspaper, and its just pure opinion. How can he have possibly of known Brievik in the crucial run up to the attack if he became so secluded?

[Suetonius]

(Original post by Brutal Honesty)
What about Breivik's motive being Muslim immigration and multiculturalism? He claims there's other cells willing to carry out attacks in the future several years from now so what happens in the meantime? We deport the Muslims?

Er, no. "Muslim immigration and multiculturalism" didn't kill all those people. The lunatic who carried out the attack did, guided by an intolerant world view.

[Brutal Honesty]

(Original post by Suetonius)
Er, no. "Muslim immigration and multiculturalism" didn't kill all those people. The lunatic who carried out the attack did, guided by an intolerant world view.

His views are clearly not uncommon though, these attacks are merely the manifestation of a popular underlying viewpoint.