By Kola Animashaun

“First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out because I was not a communist. Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out because I was not a socialist. They came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist,  Then  it was the turn of the  Jews  and  I  did  not  speak  out  because  I was  not  a Jew, Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak for me” – Martin Niemoller

On  July  22, 2011, the  world  watched  in  horror  as  a  heinous  crime  was   committed  by  one person to many others in Norway. While  the horror  was unfolding  with the   immediacy of the media, there were  many  voices  who lent their views to a culprit or culprits who could  be the Asian youths  in Norway or the usual suspect being the Al Qaeda. After all, it was a bomb in the  centre of town and there were fatalities. This person or persons then travelled  to carry out more massacres on Utøya Island. Utøya Island is situated in a lake about 26 miles north-west of Oslo where the Labour Party was   hosting its youth camp.

The  news   came that  it  was  a native  Norwegian, Breivik, who claimed to be a Christian fundamentalist,  starting  a  one-man revolution due  to  the  government’s  leniency on multiculturalism  and  pro-Islamisation.

Later on, a Norwegian website provided a link to a 1,500-page electronic manifesto and a book which Breivik was said to have written.  In it, he stated: “Once you decide to strike, it is better to kill too many than not enough, or you risk reducing the desired ideological impact of the strike”.
Breivik’s lawyer, Geir Lippestad, said: “He has said that he believed the actions were atrocious, but that, in his head, they were necessary.”

This is not  a mere protest that ordinary people will  seek as a dialogue  but a cold blooded massacre of the  country’s brightest,  youngest ,promising and socially conscientious youths who had taken their participation for  the  future of  Norway seriously. There was no justification  for what Breivik did. Breivik appears to have developed a pathological hatred for the Norwegian establishment and, particularly, the political class symbolised by the ruling Labour Party, whose youth camp on Utøya he attacked.

An ethnic Norwegian, he was strongly opposed to government policies favouring multiculturalism. Although an apparent racial supremacist and Islamophobe, he adopted the language of Muslim jihadists.  The 32-year old Breivik, at his court appearance, said his motive for the attacks was to save Europe from a Muslim take-over.

The gunman said his operation was not aimed at killing as many people as possible but that he wanted to create the greatest loss possible to Norway’s governing Labour Party, which he accused of failing the country on immigration.

In addition to the 76 killed, similar numbers were injured in the attacks.

The killer was  said    to  have  meticulously planned  his  attacks  over  nine  years,  for   what he  felt  was an intolerable  changes occurring in the Norwegian society. He did not accept the multicultural country that was emerging. It threatened his identity and he felt alienated from it. He was in contact with other extreme groups who increasingly saw Islam as a danger and the enemy.

Comparisons have been drawn with Timothy McVeigh, who killed 168 people with a truck bomb in Oklahoma City in 1995.

Like McVeigh,  Breivik saw his country’s political establishment as the real enemy. So the target that formed in his mind was not immigrant groups, but the government itself, and young people who were attached to the ruling left-leaning Labour Party.

Breivik appears to have been a loner with few friends. He was described by the Norwegian media as a right-wing fanatic. His father, once a diplomat, who lives in France, said he had had no contact with his son since 1995.

The judge said Breivik had argued that he was acting to save Norway and Europe from “Marxist and Muslim colonisation”.

In a society where anti-Islamic sentiment and isolation were tolerated naturally on the margins of society, there will be crazy people, who feel legitimized in taking harder measures.

It was difficult to comprehend that a trend towards xenophobia and nationalism in the region had fostered the attacks in Norway.

Norwegians have been one of shock that such a tragedy could occur in a traditionally peaceful country where crime rates are low – and that the perpetrator was one of their “own”. The sense of national disorientation increased when assumptions that Middle Eastern terrorists or Islamists were responsible proved wrong.

The prime minister, Jens Stoltenberg, said he was determined Norway would maintain its liberal and progressive traditions. “It’s too early to say how this will change Norwegian society,” he said. He added that he hoped Norway could maintain its open and democratic society. “Those who try to scare us shall not win.”

The consensus was overwhelming, the debates focused primarily on the best means for achieving the goals that had been agreed upon by everyone from the right-wing to the left.

Norway, prior to 22 July, 2011, was a nation of calm, idyllic place; a nation, up to 40  years  ago consisted largely of people of the same ethnic and cultural background. It embraced  multiculturalism, assimilated its new citizens  and made  provisions  including new places of worship, debates  on  wearing of Hijab and so on. This, it seems, was not to everyone’s ideal.

On 25 July, 150,000 of Oslo’s 600,000 citizens gathered in grief  clutching roses  and to pay their  respects  to the departed  and  the injured  and  to make  their  message  loud, clear and  plain: that  they  refused to be fearful  and  refused  to hate and  take heed of this  evil  man.  They all stand shoulder to shoulder across race, religion and creed.

The date, 22 July, 2011, will forever be etched in  the  minds of Norwegians just  like 9/11  and  others. The  attack is  not only  about Norwegians and their way of life  but  for  every  decent  human being working  towards  the  pursuits of  peace, stability  and  tolerance.

•Voice of Reason will be on Ramadan break, will be back in September.