The silly terms in my title annoy me.
Some asshole in Norway committed a sort of “terrorist act” to promote his world view.
I simply can’t make much more of the events in, and around, Oslo than that.
What possible difference does it make as to WHY? Well, there is something to be said for recognizing patterns IF one simply acknowledges them and uses them realistically. In our PC world recognizing a pattern appears to begin the process of making (and looking for) excuses.
The Lone Gunman… The Lone Gunman With an Agenda… The Lone Gunman With an Agenda From a Broken Home… Etc.
What I look at is the number of clearly terrorist acts, as defined thus :
violent or destructive acts (as bombing) committed by groups in order to intimidate a population or government into granting their demands.
Then I examine the frequency and source.
One Lone Gunman simply isn’t a group! But there IS a group out there…
The whole ‘defining the problem’ exercise seems lost.