Articles

Sunday, July 24, 2011

Anders Behring Breivik and the High Cost of Muslim Immigration

There is very little to be gained from a study of Anders Behring Breivik. He was a loner who was alienated from the society he lived in, suffered from depression, played violent video games, used steroids, listened to angry music and was of above average intelligence. This profile describes half the spree shooters in the last two decades, right down to the Columbine Massacre.

It is not Breivik's politics that make him significant. He was an outsider who despised society and escaped into romantic fantasies of omnipotence fed by video games and popular culture. Breivik cultivated a detached attitude toward the people around him and was obsessed with violent exercises of his masculinity. All this is common to killers of all political stripes and of no political affiliation whatsoever.

His journal reveals a man who vacillated between crippling depression and grandiose plans. This manic-depressive behavior suggests Breivik may be bipolar. It is unknown if he was taking medication for it. He may have been self-medicating instead and rather than controlling his mood swings, it worsened them. Breivik's journal shows some awareness of his emotional instability, but his later entries are too caught up in his grandiose fantasy world to seek psychiatric help. 

Had Breivik not imagined himself a crusader, then he would have become an animal rights activist, an anti-capitalist terrorist, or just a random spree killer-- acting out scenarios from Modern Warfare 2, his favorite video game, in real life. There is no use in trying to apply some measure of consistency to his beliefs. And his choice of targets likely had a large element of personal grievance or resentment to it that he then dressed up in manifesto form.

Breivik, like so many modern young Western males, was a loner, a disaffected cynic looking for something to believe in. A man in a place without positive images of manhood. No decent path between the hyperviolence of the action hero and the submission of the citizen of the postmodern state. A favorite escape of his was into a fantasy past through role playing games. An identity that he tried to adopt in reality by calling himself a knight.

The combination of steroid use, isolation and violent fantasies made him a ticking social time bomb. But it was the system that lit the fuse and made it possible for him to transform personal dysfunction into a political statement. That convinced an intelligent man that he could exploit a social problem to bring down the authorities. It was Breivik who pulled the trigger, but it was the Norwegian authorities who created and then ignored the social problem of Islamic immigration, that enabled him to exploit it in a burst of horrifying violence.

The Oslo killings are a tragic reminder that conflicts rarely remain one sided. And it is foolish to expect them to. Violence begets violence and extremism creates extremists. Terrorism gives birth to more of the same. Throughout history this has often been the case. One atrocity being met with another until the whole bloody heap becomes indistinguishable and everyone is covered in blood. Such awful events are the mountain of which the history of nations is made of. Whether it is Europe, Africa or the Middle East-- this is the nature of our shared history. Once the lamp is opened and the genie of violence is unleashed, wishing will not put it back.

As human beings we crave a simpler narrative. That of victims and perpetrators. Good and evil. But the more complex dynamic of human affairs makes such simplistic stories difficult to sustain. There are of course victims and perpetrators, but there is often guilt and innocence on both sides. There were after all good Nazis and bad partisans, good Viet Cong and bad Americans. Such aberrations from the norm are difficult to sustain, but they exist. It is hard to be a good person in a bad cause or a bad person in a good cause, but it is certainly not impossible. And not so uncommon that they need to be classified with the Loch Ness monster or Bigfoot.

The Mai Lai massacre did not mean that Americans were no better than the Viet Cong. And the rape of German women by French soldiers did not mean that the Free French were no better than the Nazis. Such views too are unforgivably simplistic, and use individual incidents of unequal stature and accountability to mask the far larger moral gap between the two sides.

Oslo has become symbolic of pacifist idealism, which is why the bloodshed is so stunning, but also inevitable. Any ideal pursued to a far enough extreme gives birth to its opposite number. Violence attracts idealism and idealism attracts violence. Both pacifism and violence represent unbalanced extremes. And extremes often have a way of coming together in an explosive collision of opposites.

The search for blame in all the usual places is inevitable, but counterproductive. The Oslo killings are another item on the ledger of the high cost of Islam. The explosive rage on both sides fueled by a social instability created by aggressive immigration with no thought to its impact on the country as a whole. It was Brevik who spent nine years planning and carrying out the attacks, but it was the political authorities who had created a scenario that made it possible.

There are of course shootings carried out all the time with no larger political justification, and it is possible that Brevik would have acted regardless of any of the events of the past nine years. But it is far more likely that by giving him an antagonist to fight, the authorities brought those violent events into being.

Violence driven by social instability must be at least partly laid at the feet of those who caused the social instability. And that is not a handful of American critics of Islam, but the Norwegian authorities whose social and immigration policies created an explosive situation that had already exploded into violence before.

We cannot regard Brevik as an isolated phenomenon or as the creature of a handful of foreign pundits. He was a Norwegian whose views and attitudes echoed those of many of his countrymen. His violent response to social problems created by the authorities and aimed at the authorities should be deplored. But at the same time we must learn the lessons of not the act itself, but of the social instability that gave rise to it. It is the best chance of avoiding a repetition of it by those who would, like Brevik, exploit social instability as a means of promoting a violent solution.

Muslim violence, whether it is planes being flown into skyscrapers or women being raped with religious sanction, are likely to inspire answering acts of violence. Such acts should be condemned, yet so should the apathy toward the social instability created by Muslim immigration that gives rise to them.

When a woman is raped on the steps of the Norwegian parliament, it should be every bit as shocking as Brevik's massacres, not because their damage is equal, but because they are both wake up calls to a major social problem that cannot be swept under the rug.

Muslim immigration and its attendant violence gave Brevik his casus belli to take action against the authorities. It may inspire future Breviks as well. It is easy to blame the pattern of ideas that Brevik cited in his manifesto, but the manifesto and the ideas are the children of an existing social problem. A problem so severe that a woman can be raped on the steps of the Norwegian parliament with no one moving to intervene.

The European media will use the Oslo killings to argue against the regional trend of examining Muslim immigration. But they have it exactly backward. A social problem cannot be solved by refusing to examine it or by silencing all discussion of it. Social problems breed and worsen in silence. As do all things in the dark. Brevik's shootings should rather be a wake up call to seriously examine the impact of Muslim immigration on Oslo in particular, and Norway in general.

Brevik was not a Muslim, yet he was motivated by Islam, as surely as the most devout Jihadist. Islam defined his actions, as surely as it does theirs. The only difference is that they were acting for Islam, while he was acting against it. But the problem of both Brevik and the Jihadist emerges from a common source. Islam.

Violence rarely remains one sided. In Norway, Brevik has added a second side to a triangle, whose third side is politically correct apathy and nervous pacifism. That second side is as bloody as the first, and no more removable without addressing the first side and the third.

Whether it is the Madrid bombings or the Oslo rampage-- all these horrors are a reminder that Europe's current policies have failed. That integration has not worked and multiculturalism has given rise to hostile cultures living side by side. Brevik's actions and growing tension on the far right remind us that apathy and mouthing multicultural slogans can no longer substitute for a serious examination of the problem.

This latest horror warns us that violence will be exploited by the violent, and that the European equation is now in danger of having a third variable. We have had the Jihadists and the apathetic authorities, now there are the Breviks. Dangerous men looking for a cause and a reason to fight. And the social instability and violence created by Islamic immigration gives them a reason.

Talk of suppressing extremism will not prevent the Breviks, it will only encourage them by giving them a more definite enemy to fight. Anti-government violence in Norway and Sweden, countries which have repressed free speech the hardest, is no coincidence. Authoritarianism only feeds anti-government tendencies. It is impossible for Europe to rid itself of the Breviks, without also ridding itself of the social problems that make them possible.

The best way to stop the Breviks of the future, is to steal their thunder. To seriously examine the high cost of Islamic immigration, the failures of integration, the violence taking place under the shadow of multiculturalism-- and to honestly and seriously address these things.

Brevik would not have acted if he did not believe that the authorities would play into his hands. If the Norwegian government really wishes to defeat the ideas he championed, it must pull their claws, by addressing them as social problems, rather than by denying them and repressing their critics. Europe's history of domestic radicalism should provide ample reasons to show why such an approach is unwise and counterproductive.

As long as a social problem remains neglected and a source of social instability proliferates, then the violent tendencies of dangerous loners will be channeled into its path. That is how World War I began. It may be how World War III will begins. The duty of responsible authorities is to address the social problem, not with slogans, but with concrete and realistic measures. If a social problem is a swamp, then it must be drained. Oslo's social problem is Islamic immigration. The fever swamp of violence cannot be drained, until the immigration that feeds it is drained as well.

39 comments:

Anonymous said...

Most brilliant analysis I've seen so far. As always, your essays provoke thought and shine the light on truths no one else sees.

Anonymous said...

They, them, the present rulers dissuade counter views thru their control of the entire political and economic system. They, them, must have enforcers as their arguments do not pass the reality test and even cognitive dissonance has its' limits. Then it is an straight train of thought to the logical conclusion that Berviks attacked the wrong target. Soon the understanding that the state's enforcers must be persuaded to leave their jobs. After all they can not be home with their families all the time.

Anonymous said...

OK so, Why didn't he shoot muslims? Makes more sense.

Daniel Greenfield @ the Sultan Knish blog said...

He wasn't out to kill Muslims, his plan was to pave the way for some national uprising against the government.

I suspect targeting the camp was a personal issue, more than political anyway.

Keli Ata said...

Wonderful analysis.

This guy was a ticking time bomb.

Bipolar and using steroids? That would have definitely pushed him over the edge.

victoria said...

Bervik did not draw attention to the controling power behind this problem, and its not the government. This is a global problem for the EU and Americas. This is a sample of the One World Govt template deconstructing civilizations, controling the destiny of nation states. Purpose is total control under one entity.

Captain Marlow said...

Dear Daniel,

It made me proud to discover your post after posting mine (https://plus.google.com/100211417694760669717/posts/TyjSJ7gQ7oT) yesterday on G+. Yours of course is better written, but the underlying concept is the same. It was very comforting.

Thanks,

gplus.to/gmaciocci

kufar said...

Good post Daniel.

Brevik regards leftists/liberals to be worse than Moslems for allowing the immigration. That's his reason for targeting civilians, he is due in court now anyhoo.

Anonymous said...

Daniel, in a comment to your previous article, yesterday, you say: "Speak up, Stand up, Take Back the Government, and Fight Back as a Nation"

The problem is that the people now have become too much like sheep, there is worryingly spread lack of basic moral values, more people have a "PhD" but the education is devaluated, people don't feel any "evolutionary" pressure on them to perform and to fight for their own living. In Europe the society is very impersonal, and people have been grown to believe that state assistance is way better than taking care of yourself and your friends and families. When I try to put this dogma under discussion with people, most of them think I am not just conservative, but I want to regress back to middle age. They don't see (yet) that we have taken, as a society, a wrong path and we must go back. That's where I see Jews as better people at this point: they have learned that you can't hand over their life and their safety to the authorities. Our life is our own responsibility - and no one else. Same for our mistakes. In such a society, where Nanny State takes care of everything, it's not surprising that people become isolated and crazy, like Breivik. And this gets me to the next point... Fed.

Anonymous said...

Next point. Daniel you say: "It was Breivik who pulled the trigger, but it was the Norwegian authorities who created and then ignored the social problem of Islamic immigration"

Completely correct, but I would add: the norwegian authorities, and europeans alltogether, created such a situation of isolation throughout the whole society thanks to the Nanny State. This society, like i said in my previous comment, is highly impersonal. People meet in the bars, pubs and discos to get drunk even at ages where they are expected to get themselves an adult life - and in that way they think they are "social". In reality they are very detached. There is no community feeling anymore. People get their issues sorted out by State (welfare, subsidies) and insurance companies - but we are not able to support and help each other out anymore.

Fed.

Anonymous said...

This society has clearly big internal tensions and problems. These problems have been caused by the leftists in power that benefit from an underlying thick layers of childish "dhimmies". Whether this is islamic or leftist dhimmitude, the difference is nothing.

One half of the society like to live in an eternal state of childhood. They demand state assistance as basic human right. They don't want to take risks and have a hate/love relationship with the "authorities". If they make mistakes, it's always someone else fault. This is eternal teenage status.

The other half wants to grow up and get away from their mamma grips. In this process, they might make mistakes too. Those are risks of life. But this part of the society is getting more and more estranged, out-lawed, demonized.

It's not a surprise that the left sees the Muslims as perfect orphan and mistreated children, to adopt and exploit for their own mean scopes of power.

Anonymous said...

Daniel, sorry that I send so many comments today - but I find that in your article you touch so many deep and important points.

One more point I wanted to mention: people today think that they have infinite rights, so many that there is hardly any room for duties. This is eternal childhood. There are plenty of adult and highly educated people that think they have rights to vacations, rights to state welfare, right to pension, right to state subsidized child care, right to free education, right to equalities even when evidently all this makes no sense.
But these people don't understand something very simple: you rights are in your hands. Down to the most basic fundamental right, the right to live, if someone stabs you in the back and you die - you can appeal to any court you want, when you are dead you might realize that it was more useful to be able to see the attacker behind your back.

Fed.

Edward Cline said...

This is one of the most perceptive and hard-hitting essays on Breivik and on Norwegian (in fact, Scandinavian – Denmark and Sweden are also asking for trouble) dhimmitude we’re likely to read anywhere. And that dhimmitude can be symbolized by the incident Daniel reports in the essay, the rape of the Norwegian woman on the steps of the parliament building by a Somali, and no one going to her rescue, not even the building’s security guards. That was news to me. All of Europe is being raped by Islam, and if Europeans wish to preserve Western liberty and values, then they’d better begin checking their multicultural and toleration premises, before it’s too late, and they become outsiders on their own continent.

Then again, perhaps they don’t wish to preserve those things, or are afraid to. Perhaps they’ve been turned into passive nihilists. That certainly seems to be the educational policy of federal pedagogues here in the U.S., as well, to teach children from K1 on up through graduate school to deprecate their own country and its history of freedom.

HermitLion said...

The story will continue as expected: Brevik will be labeled a right-wing extremist, and used as an excuse to choke free speech and dissent even more, by the people in power, who fear - more than anything else - of losing their grip.

And by forcing their hold on the population this way, they will create more dissent.

No lesson would be learned. Not even a tiny fraction of a lesson, and so, the pendulum of history will swing forth.

Is that what this man wanted? If so, then perhaps he has succeeded in achieving his goals.

Cecilie said...

Very hard-hitting and correct analysis. Because I'm Norwegian I can't even mention the world muslim in my blog right now, as Norwegians are linking arms with the misunderstood and downtrodden minority so wrongly accused in the initial news reports.

Apart from the unfathomable and despicable atrocities carried out by this deluded creature, the worst thing is that he has set back the work of anti-sharia, pro free speech and anti-jihadist people by several decades. Clever as he must be, couldn't he see that Norwegians, always on the side of the perceived underdog, would now become even MORE politically correct? And that they will vote overwhelmingly for the Labour party again in September?

Here is my blog comment : http://www.chinadroll.com/?p=3307

Anonymous said...

Good writing again Daniel but I must disagree with you. I think the problem in Europe is cultural Marxism. It isn't just muslims that are destroying the west it is mass immigration and the destruction of national identity. All a part of the Marxist goal to destroy the west.

I believe they know full well what they are doing and that they want to create total chaos so as to seize absolute power.

It seems to me that this deranged man was motivated by a hatred for Marxism more than Islam. It is the Marxists who have betrayed us though, Islam is just one part of their attack on western civilization.

Proud Brit.

Anonymous said...

I agree with Proud Brit. The Muslims are only a consequence of the cultural marxism. The european left needs them - so they import them, whether we like it or not. Muslims could come to the "free world" (between too many quotes) to grow up, learn that only by taking their life in their hands they will not make the west a copy of their failed lands. But Muslims here will meet the Marxists, who, as i said above, need more dhimmies to replenish their vote ballots.

The "free world" is becoming less and less free, the society more and more estranged. Our identity is getting lost in leftist moralism, and we are becoming impotent to the Muslim ideology.

Fed.

Ciccio said...

It does takes a few generations of idealistic pacifists to produce a generation where 700 of them will let themselves be picked off one by one by a single man. These were not children, this was an indoctrination camps for the next generation of idealistic pacifists. The Muslims who keep threatening to take over Europe must be laughing when they see what only one man can do.

Irwin Ruff said...

It is interesting to read the article "Shocking Report of Norway's Anti-Semitism" on 6 July in Arutz Sheva, URL
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/145473#.Ti1142Etwsg

It makes one wonder what other sick ideologies are floating around in Norway. After all, Norway was well known as the homeland of Quisling!

kufar said...

Hermit Lion

I totally agree. This anders guy is very suspicious, and i'm sure he must have been aware he'd set back the anti Jihad movement. All is not what it seems. Maybe he is working for islamists. Where did he get his wealth from? He is said to be rolling in it.

All this is part of a larger plot.

mindRider said...

Excluding the horrible murder from the equation what is the truth about this youth camp, it was the breeding ground for the next generation of the Western way of life undermining leftwing future leaders of Norway as Ciccio mentioned. As deplorable as once the training camps in the Libyan dessert where once Europe's extreme left trained for their deeds of terror. These Norwegians are not idealistic pacifists but the party framework, neither idealistic nor pacifist in their political core only as the one side of their Janus mask shown to public.

Anonymous said...

Someone had posted a link to an article that proves (with statistics) that muslim terrorism is insignificant with respect to other motive terrorism, in europe and america. This might be true, and we don't need statistics for that - as we are not stupid.

But one can present true data, in mis-leading ways. The left is a master at this. The person that posted that link should be than really honest and scientific and post the statistics of muslim terror attacks in muslim countries, and in countries that share borders with muslim countries. Like Israel and India. He/she should mention the willingness of muslims in making peace with bordering non-muslim countries. And then he/she should post the statistics on muslim "integration" in europe/usa. And muslim rape in europe/usa.

Then maybe he/she would understand our concerns. Just concerns...I hope there still freedom to have doubts.

Fed.

Cecilie said...

http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/wanted_terrorists/@@wanted-group-listing

Anonymous said...

Ah hah! Cecilie, the guys in the link you post have funny beards... ;-)

Jokes apart, let's imagine that islamic terrorism is still statistically less common in europe and usa, compared to the record holders (the left-wing terrorists, oh surprise!) and the separatists.
The fact that islamic terrorism is plaguing the islamic countries and threatening the very existence of Israel, wouldn't be enough of a concern? Muslims have imported a number of "cultural aspects" in the west that do not really fit in our free (for how long not sure) world. Is it so crazy to be concerned about the fact that they could import their jihadist methods here too?

Fed.

TBS said...

Disagree slightly with one point.

Oslo's social problem is the agreement to despise their own people and let their Jewhatred allow them to betray their own people by agreeing to the EAD (EuroArab Dialogue) which stipulated the flooding of Muslims into Norway and allowing them citizens rights and rights over and above those of Norwegians, in ordewr to satisgy the EU's desiree to team up with Arabs in order to challenge the USA.

A stupid move that has hollowed out any good Europe ever had.

Muslim immigration, subject to normal regulatory preocedures like other forms of immigration, and with punishment of rogue Sharia -pushing, terrorist supporting Muslims would not have had such a devastating effect on Norway's Jews, women and homosexual and society as a whole, had its governemt not decided to effectively replace its own population with one allowed to ride roughshod over it.

THAT is Oslo's (and Europe's) social problem - to have its own set of slavedealers of its own people in favour of another.
And of course, those who orchestrated the deal? Generally get off - except possibly in this case - scot free.

Anonymous said...

The article below might shed some light on why Breivik targeted the youth camp.

"The campers at Utoya appeared to be the embodiment of his hatred.
Organized by the youth wing of the ruling Labour Party, the camp has become a kind of multicultural incubator in recent years. Many of the victims in Friday’s shooting were the children of immigrants from Africa and Asia who have begun to stake out a greater role for themselves in Norwegian society."
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/europe/attacks-turned-a-paradise-of-my-youth-into-hell/article2108036/print/

js

Paardestaart said...

I beg to differ Knish - Norway's - and everyone's social problem is cultural marxism. The islamic invasion is not in itself the problem: the refusal of western society to stand it's ground and draw a line in the sand is.
Cultural marxism has done far more damage than this disastrous immigration, all of which Breivik adresses in his manifesto, so maybe we should all read it, now that he so kindly has gathered the whole shebang to read for everyone who could not be bothered before.
Furthermore: I've read the same pages you did, but I would not diagnose Breivik as a depressive or a bi-polar, much less as an anti social loser.
You do not do the man justice if you refuse to understand that he sees the west heading for perdition - not by islam, but by our own pundits, and that democratic means will not save us anymore, because the powers that be simply will not listen.
They've deliberately done away with our identity, our culture, our institutions and now with our economic health.
Sooner or later all europeans will realise that a war is being waged against us - by our own people. Breivik was simply the first who has taken up arms.

Peace and freedom apparently still have to be fought over, especially if it's foes have taken to stealth, betrayal and deceit to kill it, as our leaders have..And in such conditions a fifth colonne of khilafa-dreamers ìs a menace. It's too late now.
Europe is sick, and maybe bloodletting is in order.

TBS said...

MOre about the youth camp here.
http://sheikyermami.com/2011/07/23/my-childhood-paradise/

One commenter notes that Fatah Youth have been invited to meet the Workers Youth - how sweet!
Lefties and terrorist yoof...

Anonymous said...

It would be very good if our """"leaders"""" would really take damn serious this tragical norwegian blood shed. But not because we european are violent neo-nazi, and more repression is needed. Rather because we don't recognize ourselves with our """leaders""" anymore, even less with the EU Soviet Superstate.

We also have enough of being tagged as nazi-racists (or psychos, like the anonymous above does) by the same mobsters that deny and downplay the Holocaust and the right of the Jewish people for their own country and identity. Just because we don't want to import even more dhimmies, as if there not enough among us already, and want to be free.

And this is a big problem: the dhimmies among us. The society is split and there are internal tensions. At the moment that the dhimmies will outnumber the free peoples, the last ones will have to go.

Fed.

Edgar Davidson said...

The hypocrisy of the Norwegian politicians and of the media here in the UK is quite incredible. I just heard a senior Norwegian government members on the BBC news claim that, with the 'possible exception of the Beslan massacre', the Norway attack was 'unprecedented because it was the only terrorist attack in history in which children were specifically targeted'. See here why this is nonsense:

http://edgar1981.blogspot.com/2011/07/norwegian-hypocrisy.html

Anonymous said...

Edgar, thanks for your link. Fed.

Anonymous said...

I notice your author is engaging in censorship. He deleted two of my posts. They weren't even particularly critical. You think you can trust this guy?

Anonymous said...

If the 2 posts are the ones I have read, your tone was rather unpleasant as you called all of us "psychos" without any good reason.

careyrowland said...

Muslim immigration is no excuse for what whatshitsname did.

Daniel Greenfield @ the Sultan Knish blog said...

Did I say it was?

It wasn't an excuse, it provided a pretext. And the way to deal with it is to address the social problem of Islamic immigration.

Edward Cline said...

Anonymous above accused Daniel of "censorship." He wrote: "I notice your author is engaging in censorship. He deleted two of my posts. They weren't even particularly critical. You think you can trust this guy?"

Regardless of whether or not your remarks were critical, Daniel did not engage in "censorship." This is his blog, and he may delete or retain posts as he sees fit. Because force or the threat of force is entailed in censorship, only governments may practice censorship. Daniel did not employ force, but exercised the propriety right of his site here. If you still believe he employed censorship, please show us your injuries.

Daniel Greenfield @ the Sultan Knish blog said...

Indeed.

For the record I deleted inappropriate comments from both sides.

Niklas Starow said...

One question.

Since you seem to blame the muslims end multi-cultur for the Utoya-massacre.
Do you blame the rape-victims for the rape aswell?

BobG said...

My response to these events is somewhat different. There has been much written about the power of various groups and ideologies to create havoc. I disagree. Individuals create havoc and in this case many deaths.

To me, it wasn't Muslim ideas, or lack of response to those ideas that caused the deaths. It wasn't left-wing or right-wing or any such bird-brained theories that caused the deaths. Check the autopsies. Anders bombs and bullets caused the deaths.

Anders Behring Breivik, an individual, researched how much fertilizer was necessary for the initial distracting bomb blast. He was careful not to kill himself while assembling this bomb, or while detonating it.

He had previously, over a significant period of time, secured a police uniform, and a wide variety of weapons.

To me, looking forward, I'd like to reduce the number of future Anders, hopefully to zero. My approach to this is to fully and as completely as possible UNDERSTAND what went on in Anders mind, so we can hopefully prevent any other individual from going down the same path, coming to the same conclusions, and performing similar actions.

Fortunately for us, he wrote out much of his thought processes in a long manifesto. I finally located & downloaded it. Hmm 1516 pages... I'm currently at p55. This will be a long effort but I hope it will be worthwhile. IF, and that's a very big IF we spent the time & effort to fully UNDERSTAND the killers at Columbine High School & Virginia Tech we might not be here today. But we didn't put in the effort and we are here today.

Bob

Post a Comment