Comments on: Anders Breivik’s disgusting sanity http://blogs.reuters.com/john-lloyd/2012/04/20/anders-breiviks-disgusting-sanity/ Wed, 13 Apr 2016 01:13:45 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: BajaArizona http://blogs.reuters.com/john-lloyd/2012/04/20/anders-breiviks-disgusting-sanity/#comment-441 Fri, 18 May 2012 05:12:47 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/john-lloyd/?p=264#comment-441 That his maximum sentence could be a mere 21 years is dumbfounding. I have evolved in my views to oppose the death penalty, but surely such a crime deserves a life of imprisonment with no chance of release? Anything less in incomprehensible. Keeping him locked up for as long as he lives achieves the goal of protecting the public and providing a punishment for an inexcusable crime.

What purpose is achieved by releasing him after 21 years?

]]>
By: tonygil http://blogs.reuters.com/john-lloyd/2012/04/20/anders-breiviks-disgusting-sanity/#comment-375 Thu, 26 Apr 2012 11:03:38 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/john-lloyd/?p=264#comment-375 the nuremberg trials only hung 10 nazis (of a convicted 12).

hard-core nazis like krupp von bohlen, architect of the use of slave labor and one of the chimney barons who started german re-militarization as early as 1921, staid less than 5 years in prison, being freed (and receiveing his 500 million US$ back) to help fight communism during the korean war.

thanks Ike! duhhhh, who’s crazy?

]]>
By: HalinOK http://blogs.reuters.com/john-lloyd/2012/04/20/anders-breiviks-disgusting-sanity/#comment-364 Mon, 23 Apr 2012 13:24:48 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/john-lloyd/?p=264#comment-364 Yes, he is sane.

He believes that allowing immigrants to enter his country without embracing its values requires direct action. His direct action killed many innocents but can you name a “just” war in the last one hundred years that didn’t do exactly that? If you disagree with my comment about direct action, I’ll answer with three words: Dresden, Hiroshima, London. There are many more examples I (and you) could name, those came first to my mind.

Do I approve of what he did? No. But we must, as nations, begin to think through what it is that we value as citizens of our nations and take action to preserve those values. Do we shoot Muslims simply because they are Muslims? No. But should we sacrifice our beloved national cultures in the name of some abstract concept of equality? Absolutely no!

]]>
By: matthewslyman http://blogs.reuters.com/john-lloyd/2012/04/20/anders-breiviks-disgusting-sanity/#comment-363 Mon, 23 Apr 2012 10:31:10 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/john-lloyd/?p=264#comment-363 Stimulating article. Thank you!

]]>
By: AnyOldFool http://blogs.reuters.com/john-lloyd/2012/04/20/anders-breiviks-disgusting-sanity/#comment-362 Mon, 23 Apr 2012 07:55:22 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/john-lloyd/?p=264#comment-362 I do not agree with what you have to say, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it.
Voltaire

]]>
By: justine184 http://blogs.reuters.com/john-lloyd/2012/04/20/anders-breiviks-disgusting-sanity/#comment-361 Mon, 23 Apr 2012 05:01:34 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/john-lloyd/?p=264#comment-361 I don’t believe the issue of whether or not he is insane makes much difference. What is best for Norway? That’s the question. Whichever option keeps him off the streets for the rest of his life is the one to take, and is he is judged sane, 21 years from now he could be stalking kids again with a rifle. I like the insane asylum option – no way those review boards will ever let him out (but that’s certainly a risk).

]]>
By: txgadfly http://blogs.reuters.com/john-lloyd/2012/04/20/anders-breiviks-disgusting-sanity/#comment-360 Sun, 22 Apr 2012 13:49:00 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/john-lloyd/?p=264#comment-360 First, on evil: Mao was right about Nixon, who was a genuine monster.

Second, why is thinking that immigration is bad policy evil in itself?

Third, is there a significant difference, really, between ethnic groups that take action to preserve themselves? It is great for Jews but evil in Vikings?

Fourth, is there any legitimate motive other than cultural and political dominance to systematically kill people by the tens, hundreds, thousands, millions? Is not the rest simply rationalization?

]]>
By: paintcan http://blogs.reuters.com/john-lloyd/2012/04/20/anders-breiviks-disgusting-sanity/#comment-358 Sat, 21 Apr 2012 17:06:06 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/john-lloyd/?p=264#comment-358 When the “Great Monsters of History” lived seems to have a great deal to do with what one can calls “sanity.” That is not a comforting thought.

If Breivik was still living in the days when “they could pillage a village and kill everyone – I still love Atilla the Hun”, (Dick Van Dyke show) he’d have been seen as one of “the boys”, a stout heroic youth, a good “moral” Viking and a tribute to his clan.

I saw a movie once years ago where Mao was supposed to have greeted Nixon, the first time they met, with “So now you are as evil as I am”? That’s not a comforting thought either.

I also draw scant comfort from assurances that right-minded people don’t think like Breivik. I think Breivik is a confession on the part of genetic instinct (for lack of a better word). All of humanity (as has been said of aristocrats) lives on the accomplishments of its less “enlightened” ancestors. There were ugly sounds of racial and or cultural chauvinism in anti-muslim/arabic rhetoric that preceded the two wars. I didn’t care what they thought about the western forces and didn’t hear much about that. The Arab world’s gripes were more moral and political.

I think that almost any crime can be packaged to fool our moral immune defense systems, so to speak. Hunger, pain and privation make the world look very different if you are feeling them. Moral imperatives look fey when they face real and pressing needs.

But maybe we’re improving: the two wars haven’t produced a slang term quite as “disgusting” as Gook!

]]>
By: steve778936 http://blogs.reuters.com/john-lloyd/2012/04/20/anders-breiviks-disgusting-sanity/#comment-357 Sat, 21 Apr 2012 16:05:54 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/john-lloyd/?p=264#comment-357 Each of the people you talk about, Stalin, Mao, Hitler and now Breivik, regardless of their sanity or insanity, shares a single characteristic. They are enormously dangerous to the rest of us. Each would (and in some cases did) slaughter millions to achieve what they wanted. Their view was always that somehow this was the lesser of the evils. Stalin and Mao made serious attempts to eliminate their own populations. One feels that Breivik would do the same; ‘We had to destroy the village in order to save it’. Humans have always had these tumors in our societies. We should recognize the fact and excise them rather than debating their philosophies or trying to apply psychological labels to them. Each time we fail to do this because we can’t quite bring ourselves to deal with reality, hundreds and thousands and sometimes millions die. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it’s a duck.

]]>
By: TobyONottoby http://blogs.reuters.com/john-lloyd/2012/04/20/anders-breiviks-disgusting-sanity/#comment-356 Sat, 21 Apr 2012 14:12:55 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/john-lloyd/?p=264#comment-356 You’d have to be crazy to try to define sanity. Here goes, then…

A completely sane person, regarding people, believes that:
1. You cannot live with them; and
2. You cannot shoot them.

A delusional humanitarian, regarding people, believes that:
1. You can live with them; and
2. You cannot shoot them.

A delusional misanthrope, regarding people, believes that:
1. You cannot live with them; and
2. You can shoot them.

A completely insane person, regarding people, believes that:
1. You can live with them; and
2. You can shoot them.

]]>