Monday, August 13, 2012

Breivik Report Released - July 22 Commission is brutal in its treatment of Norwegian Security Apparatus

The Norwegian Prime Minister released the Report of the  22 July Commission today - in Norwegian of course.  Within minutes electronic editions of newspapers worldwide were displaying the same wire story written by  Bjoern H. Amland of the Associated Press, whom we must assume reads Norwegian and read the entire 500 page report. Among Canadian newspapers which ran the story, the TORONTO SUN headline was very typical - "Norway massacre could have been prevented, says commission".  The New York Times was,  as usual, very careful. The full report hasn't been published yet in English translation, so the paper chose to avoid claiming what the English version will contain. Instead the NYT ran a report on the Commission's press conference, but with the same basic headline as everyone else  "Norway Panel on Massacre Funds Litany of Government Failures".  What is available, for those who bother to look,  is a 26 page summary of the Commissions findings, translated to English.  You can download it here - SUMMARY.
The primary conclusions of the Commission: "The attack on the Government Complex on 22 July could have been prevented through effective implementation of already adopted security measures." More important, and this is something the Americans fail to understand - "The Commission realizes, among other things, that the democratic costs related to systems intended to eliminate every risk of terrorist attacks are too high. We have to live with a certain level of risk."

Only our local rag, the Vancouver SUN, chose to monkey with the AP story and attach a ludicrous headline -  "Norwegian commission criticizes police response to far-right fanatic's bomb and gun massacre".
As usual THE SUN simply cannot pass on any opportunity to turn up the volume on examples of "far-right"or  "extreme right" political violence, even if their sloppy headline hijacks another journalists story. If the SUN had even bothered to read the Summary of the 22  July Commissions Report (as NYT staff must have) they would have realized that the commission panel in Oslo  did not trouble itself with the motives of Anders Behring Breivik.  Page 9 - "We have foregone issues related to the perpetrators motive, childhood and state of health, and we have not explored the measures society puts in place for the early prevention of radicalisation."  (Thankfully the panel also disdained reference to the meaningless "Left-Right political spectrum" - something which Canadian journalism is incapable of doing.)   Fanatical Mr. Breivik certainly is, but his modus was not that of some beer swilling, racist skinhead of the "Far Right".  He did not target immigrants, but rather the ruling party of his country who initiated and administered Norway's immigration program. That is why his crimes are so remarkable and worthy of analysis.  Breivik chose to attack the apparatus of Norwegian State Power at its vulnerable core - the private island camp where Party Youth frolic and plan for future electoral victories.  Breivik's was the most significant terrorist attack in the Western democracies since 9/11 in New York because it spread terror among the ruling elite, as much as it did the general population. For that reason it will likely be the template for militant attacks in Western Europe all through this century.

I happen to live in the murder capital of Canada - In Vancouver we hold the record for every category of murder for which records are kept, with the exception of murders within the health care system. The gruesome list begins with terrorist murders - the AIR INDIA Flight 182 Bombing,  the serial killing of women, the serial killing of children, the serial murder of drug dealers, and on down to lesser known sprees, like the demon barber case (killing of native women by forced drinking of alcohol).  All murder involves hate of one form or another, and yet the SUN is extremely selective when it pins "hate crime" labels on its political targets.  The worst example are of course the Sikh butchers who blew an Air India Boeing jumbo jet out of the sky.  Racist the Sikh murderers certainly were.  Political they certainly were.  Fanatical they certainly were.  Untouchable they certainly were ... and still are, because they got away with it.    Were the Vancouver Sikh terrorists  "Far Right"  or "Far Left"?   Or is their hatred more racial than political?  Perhaps their hatred is religious inspired and their politics cynical?  Where should we turn for the answers?  In a multicultural Vancouver such discussions do not take place because they are taboo. Who constantly reminds us of what is taboo? The media.

Political Theatre - ridiculous posing with firearm's is common within the para-military subculture, but Breivik took it up a notch by wearing fanciful insignia like this "Marxist Hunter" shoulder flash.

No comments: