Wednesday, April 11, 2012

Circus Breivik

Circus Breivik

To understand the context of the image above, first pay a visit to Steen’s place. He has posted the promotional photos of Anders Behring Breivik’s legal defense team.

It’s for real. The original, that is. A breathtaking social cluelessness that must be labeled Only In Norway. (Or perhaps North Korea?) Could the gleam of avarice and opportunism show through the heavy-handed “Nordic Law and Order” grotesquerie any more clearly than it does in those pictures?

How ever could such an appalling display be considered seemly? These look like a publicity shots for a reality TV show. Congruent, really, since that is how degraded the Breivik “trial” has become. Think of some of the episodes so far:

The dramatic tension of the first team of forensic psychiatrists, as the whole country waits to hear their expert diagnosis. [Norway loves ‘experts’]. End of first episode: Perpetrator is insane. The mass murderer isn't like the rest of us.

Then, the infamous meeting between Fjordman and the police. The one that begins with several hours sitting in the police station with his lawyer while he is roundly ignored. The drama builds as they rush to Fjordman’s home and ransack the place. Looking for what? The clues in his socks? We never find out. End of second episode: Fjordman learns that the police don’t always tell the truth. His lawyer is shaken by the ‘just-this-side-of-the-law’ demeanor of the police.

Moving the story line along, the real clown star of the series (think Fellini here) knows what he wants. He is sane now, he was sane when he killed all those kids, and he demands a new diagnosis. It is shortly forthcoming as those-in-charge suddenly realize they can hardly put a crazy man in the dock for mass murder. The insane are, by definition, not fit to stand trial in compassionate, civilized countries. Thus, two other trained monkeys are quickly found to render a brand new study with the changed diagnosis necessary to carry the circus forward. Can you guess what the second team of psychiatrists found to be the perpetrator's mental condition?

Further episodes have included slow revelations of witnesses who will be called to testify at the circus. Gasps are heard in the audience as new names are revealed…

Look at that picture again. Either our version or the original — the expression in the eyes is the same in each; they haven't been photoshopped.

That’s what naked opportunism and avarice look like after you dress it up and have it posture for the camera.

These are legal professionals. Each is supposedly a trained representative of gravitas and probity; yet they can’t perceive how this looks to the outside world.

Meanwhile, the Outside World looks at this photo and murmurs:

  • Do they have an agent yet?
  • Are they lining up speaking engagements between the end of the trial and the beginning of the appeal?
  • What are they planning to charge for appearances?
  • Have they signed with a publisher for their book yet?

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

At this point, it’s difficult to say if those in charge of this trial are more to be pitied than censured. Perhaps it’s best to wait and see whether or not the judge makes his appearance, complete with coattails and long whip, while frenetic music plays in the background. Pass the peanuts. Oh — and a handkerchief, please. What was a national tragedy is devolving into a ludicrously sad and sleazy charade.


If you think this is exaggeration, look at this new shot. An homage to Fellini for sure. He loved circuses, but you probably need to be Italian to carry off such a fantasy. These people will never, ever be Mediterranean enough to make this work.

Please, someone put them out of our misery before the shutter snaps again…

23 comments:

Anonymous said...

In his 1,500-page document, Breivik claimed to be part of a secret right-wing militia modelled after the medieval Christian military order known as the Knights Templar. Its goal, he claimed, was to purge Europe of Muslim influence in a revolution that would target what he called "cultural Marxists" in the initial phase.

Investigators have found no trace of the group and say Breivik plotted and carried out the attacks on his own. A leaked copy of the initial psychiatric examination described his crusader fantasy as a token of the 'bizarre, grandiose delusions' of a sick mind.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2128087/Defending-Breivik-Get-ready-Scandinavias-newest-crime-drama-starring-mass-killer-s-deadly-legal-team.html#ixzz1rmCgXJoV

Anonymous said...

Lawyers? Bottom feeders with absolutely no conscience, willing to say or do absolutely anything to make themselves look good. You think any of those people are actually interested in Breivik (their client) or this case, or what it might mean to Norwegian society? Hardly. They're solicitors. They're out for themselves - rampant ego merchants every one of them.

Anonymous said...

It is worth saying again that Mr. Breivik carried out his plan alone. No one assisted him. No one knew what he was about to do.

And Breivik told no one of his plans because if he told anyone then:

1. They would have told him he was crazy.

2. They would have told him there was no way they would take part in such a heinous enterprise.

3. They would have grassed him up to the authorities immediately.

Breivik kept his plans secret precisely because he had no support from anyone else. And he knew it.

Anonymous said...

Talk about narcissism ...

A clash of egos, blotted mind obesity everything in their world is larger than Breivik's small world.

Jolie Rouge

Anonymous said...

But, I can't help wondering, how did the IRA get started? I mean Breivik is the crazy end of the wedge, but he represents the outlier perhaps of a broader undercurrent. That people are deciding that there is no political solution to European problems, and opting out of the process of citizenship.

Anonymous said...

The line between sanity and insanity is difficult to draw with exactitude. Breivik was sane enough to know that he could not bring anyone else into his scheme. Who would have signed on? Probably neither Kaczynski nor McVeigh--perhaps Manson.

To do great evil one must place wildly unrealistic value on one's goal, so that everything becomes permissible, or one must simply choose evil...like Macbeth, when he found himself stepped in too far to go back.

This can be seen as a form of insanity, because in neither case can the perpetrator gain either his purpose or any profit from the deed. But it's different from "normal" insanity.

The Norwegian authorities are right to separate out Breivik's "insanity" from that suffered by the truly deranged types such as Loughner, who are so far around the bend that they cannot cooperate in their own defense or understand what would be going on if they were brought to trial.

Any number of people walk around free men, making a living, who are wildly narcissistic and very much out of touch with the desperately modest extent of their talents. They think themselves mighty heroes or dashing lovers, and people just roll their eyes or stifle a laugh. That's not insanity.

Dymphna said...

Well, I'll step in with my own paranoia here...

I don't think this man was smart enough, nor did he have enough had enough stamina or information re bomb building, etc., to carry this out on his own. Someone who spends a whole year playing WoW is not capable of collecting 1,000 emails all by his own self.

Had it not been for the intervention of Wiki Leaks, and the sudden fleeing from Norway of a lot of questionable ppl, the original plan - to weaponize the lone white extremist and then just as he stepped out of the truck, to roll up the whole plan - went badly awry when his handlers were gone.

The island was his own idea...a nice little revenge plot against those who were going to be in charge...and the parents who were already in charge. Had his handlers stuck around, Utoya would never have happened, and Norway would be basking in their golden capture of a white nationalist loner...

Instead, they've had to settle for this circus and the kabuki call for 50 wittnesses they can persecute...

Do you get the sense that Norway's ruling class is tone-deaf? Socially clueless? Sans nuance? I do, too.

And this whole thing reeks.

When are they going to do some *real* evidentiary investigation - i.e., a lingustic forensic analysis of that "Manifesto"...how many of those American neo-conservatives 'named' by Breivik are known outside American political circles??

Norway may be rich in oil, but they are far too ideologically poverty-stricken to be able to afford clue bags for those in charge...even small, cheap clue bags made in China would be a start.

But what can you expect from a country which believes in and supports the terrorists in Hamas?

Dymphna said...

The Norwegian authorities are right to separate out Breivik's "insanity" from that suffered by the truly deranged types...

Right? Not hardly. It suited their political ends to find for one diagnosis and then when the winds shifted to find for another.

There is not "right" about this whole sleazy mess.

Mirco Romanato said...

@Dymphna
I think the remark against the lawyers team defending Breivik are disingenuous.
They are professionals, for sure, and they are doing what they think useful for their client and themselves.
This trial, like it or not, is a media circus and they are to play on the stage as much as they are to play in the justice halls.

I understand the finding of Breivik sane and fit to trial is inconvenient for a large component of the anti-islamization movement (Fjordman for sure). But disparaging his lawyers for doing their job as they think best is wrong.

Breivik could be mad, evil, or simply a (lesser) dikaios:

We must, indeed, not allow him to seem good, for if he does he will have all the rewards and honours paid to the man who has a reputation for justice, and we shall not be able to tell whether his motive is love of justice or love of the rewards and honours. No, we must strip him of everything except his justice, and our picture of him must be drawn in a way diametrically opposite to that of the unjust man. our just man must have the worst of reputations for wrong-doing even though he has done no wrong, so that we can test his justice and see if it weakens in the face of unpopularity and all that goes with it; we shall give him an undeserved and life-long reputation for wickedness, and make him stick to his chosen course until death…. the just man, as we have pictured him, will be scourged, tortured, and imprisoned, his eyes will be put out, and after enduring every humiliation he will be crucified. (361c-362a, Desmond Lee’s Penguin edition, p107)

What difference a dikaios from a madman? Very little. Sometimes he is "only" too late or too early in his doing. Surely he is not willing to compromise.

If someone killed eighty young adult at a camp of the Hitler-Jugend raising the new leadership of the party around 1930, would he be a madman, evil killer or a foreseeing dikaios? or both?

Hermes said...

"To do great evil one must place wildly unrealistic value on one's goal, so that everything becomes permissible"

Yes, that's right. just like the terrorists of 9-11.

Dymphna: Good photoshop. Now I SEE what you meant by ridicule :) They really deserve to be treated as the clowns they really are. Such a pathetic team...

Anonymous said...

Let's not ridicule lawyers?

Hah!

1. They're lawyers.

2. Look at those photos again.

Dymphna said...

I think the remark against the lawyers team defending Breivik are disingenuous.
They are professionals, for sure, and they are doing what they think useful for their client and themselves
...

Since when has "what is useful" become the guiding principle for moral action?

At the very least ANY judicial proceeding against a mass murderer requires careful deliberation and a sense of gravitas on the part of those who act as representatives of the larger community.

Scores of people died so they could take celebrity photos for dissemination by the MSM?

Not to mention the callous disregard for reality - replaced by the need of utility - as they paper over the whole thing with TWO diametrically opposed "diagnoses". Just as in the old USSR, it is psychiatry in service to the state.

I stand by my original response: Fellini lives.

Anonymous said...

Apropos, Dymphna, the old USSR

Specialist in psychiatri suggests that Breivik take some antipsychotic medicine to find out whether or not, he needs it.

- It will show whether or not, you are accountable, the specialist Kvakkestad writes in his letter to Breivik.

Anonymous said...

@Above - "Specialist in psychiatri suggests that Breivik take some antipsychotic medicine to find out whether or not, he needs it."


Absolute nonsense obviously has never heard of the effects of the likes of Seroxat (paroxetine).

Jolie Rouge

Anonymous said...

Jolie Rouge

The drug the specialist is referring to is called Abilify


0337 PM

Anonymous said...

Breivik is a puzzling monster in many ways. Once the plan was ready for execution, he did nothing to preserve his anonymity, unlike his fellow monsters Kaczynski, Manson and McVeigh. So he must have expected to end up, either dead or alive, in the hands of the authorities at the end of his killing spree. In almost any other country than Norway his life would have been ended by a police sniper. Then again he didn't actively seek "martyrdom" to the point of turning his weapons on the cops who finally arrested him, apparently without any resistance on his part. My sense though was that he was surprised to be taken alive and had to improvise from then on. As for Dymphna's van der Lubbe theory it has some inherent plausibility, but somehow doesn't quite seem to fit Breivik's profile. Would a madman as voluble as Breivik really fail to brag about real, live supporters and fellow warriors in his titanic battle to save Western civilization? You'd think he would at least have left some clues pointing to real, rather than imaginary allies in his massive manifesto. Perhaps he did - I tried to read the thing but quickly gave it up as too mind-numbing. And, pace Dymphna, if Breivik's putative handlers intended to abort the mission before it drew blood, how could they trust him not to give them away? To my mind the man is obviously mad but, like Manson and Kaczynski, not mad enough to benefit from an insanity defense. He did enormous damage, and knew he did, not only to his direct victims and those they left behind, but also to the Norwegian people. The collective loss of innocence and sense of immunity from evil is intolerable and will deform the country for a long time to come whether the court finds Breivik insane or not.

Cand.Jur

Mirco Romanato said...

@Dymphna
Since when has "what is useful" become the guiding principle for moral action?

Moral action is for individuals without responsibility to others.
But when you act as a professional, be it a judge in a court of law, a lawyer, a physician, a nurse, etc. you must act and follow not YOUR moral sense, but the ethics of the profession. If they conflict you can choose to leave the profession and follow your morals or leave your morals out of your profession.

A physician try to heal anyone at the best of his abilities. He don't judge the right of someone to live or the utility for society if he live or die. He has a public role and his role is to heal.

And the same is for lawyers. They must represent their part at their best inside the limits of the laws.

At the very least ANY judicial proceeding against a mass murderer requires careful deliberation and a sense of gravitas on the part of those who act as representatives of the larger community.

In fact, the lawyers of Breivik are not representing the larger community on trial. They are defending Breivik. Others could and will represent the larger community, from the public accuser, to the judge, the lawyers of the victims, the journalists, and so on.

I would ask you, the lawyers of Zimmerman must act as representatives of the larger community or only as representatives of Zimmerman?

Surrendering the individual to the will/interest of the community is simply wrong.

Not to mention the callous disregard for reality - replaced by the need of utility - as they paper over the whole thing with TWO diametrically opposed "diagnoses". Just as in the old USSR, it is psychiatry in service to the state.
I work in a Psychiatric Ward in a General Hospital, so I see many people admitted for various mental problems. Our diagnoses are often at odd with the diagnoses of the psychiatrists privately following these patients. So, from my prospective, it is not strange for psychiatrists to be wrong with their diagnoses. Longer the observation easier is to be right. Less you are able to observe a patient easier is to be fooled.

Anonymous said...

He's as mad as Dexter Morgan.

Mirco Romanato said...

@Anonymous
He's as mad as Dexter Morgan.

It is difficult to disagree on this.

Anonymous said...

The last soviet state

At a totally different occasion, in a different context, a Swedish - of all - politician concluded that Norway was the last soviet state.

That seems to be more an more true

Foregone said...

I am so far satisfied that Anders was caused to do as he did or was allowed to do as he did. I have to note that Anders is alive and well enough to tell the tale that was meant all along to be told: he is yet being caused or allowed. It is what will come from the telling that will point to who or what begun it and for why.

Anonymous said...

"he did nothing to preserve his anonymity"

Look at his motive, and you will see why.

Anonymous said...

Curious, I looked at the photograph of Breivik's four lawyers. Firstly, it is demeaning to the legal profession to have legal teams posing for publicity photographs: in order to maintain the gravitas and sobriety of judicial proceedings, especially criminal proceedings, lawyers should be most reluctant to even engage with the media on the doorsteps of the Court. Secondly, this photograph looks like a promo for a new courtroom TV series: the overt posing is laughable, the guy seated at the right has an expression on his face which says "Boy oh boy is this gonna boost my legal career, big bucks here we come - I'm gonna be a star!". The guy standing above him is not quite comfortable in the brand new suit and tie he has bought for the photo-op and is trying unsuccessfully to strike a serious-but-ruggedly handsome posture. The woman (why is there only one in the land of feminist quotas?) is almost smirking as she contemplates the boost to her career this case is going give her: Minister for Justice in not too distant future after she makes a pile in private practise over the next few years? The guy on the left is trying hard to strike a sombre pose but he's thinking of the kudos this case is going to bring him in the gay community. Appalling.

Julius O'Malley