The Norwegian killer of innocents lionises Hindu right wing activities against Muslims. July 26, 2011 The Catholic-Christian Secular Forum (CSF) strongly protests and condemns the Norwegian killings of innocent and injuries to many by Anders Behring, now come to be known for his anti-Islamic views. He must be punished with the maximum punishment possible under the law. Here below is how Anders Breivik claims the goals of Indian Hindu nationalists were identical to Justiciar Knights, which needs to be condemned by all secular-minded civil society citizens. Norwegian mass killer Anders Behring Breivik hailed India’s Hindu nationalist movement as a key ally in a global struggle to bring down democratic regimes across the world. ‘2080: A European declaration of independence’ lays out a road map for a future organisation, the Justiciar Knights, to wage a campaign that will graduate from acts of terrorism to a global war involving weapons of mass destruction — aimed at bringing down what Breivik calls the “cultural Marxist” order. India figures in a remarkable 102 pages of the sprawling 1,518-page manifesto. Breivik’s manifesto says his Justiciar Knights “support the Sanatana Dharma movements and Indian nationalists in general.” In section 3.158 of the manifesto, he explains that Hindu nationalists “are suffering from the same persecution by the Indian cultural Marxists as their European cousins.” Appeasing Muslims The United Progressive Alliance government, he goes on, “relies on appeasing Muslims and, very sadly, proselytising Christian missionaries who illegally convert low caste Hindus with lies and fear, alongside Communists who want total destruction of the Hindu faith and culture.” Even though Hindus who are living abroad “get an eagle’s view of what’s happening in India, Indian Hindu residents don’t see it being in the scene.” Breivik’s manifesto applauds Hindu groups who “do not tolerate the current injustice and often riot and attack Muslims when things get out of control,” but says, “this behaviour is nonetheless counterproductive.” “Instead of attacking the Muslims, they should target the category A and B traitors in India and consolidate military cells and actively seek the overthrow of the cultural Marxist government.” “It is essential that the European and Indian resistance movements learn from each other and cooperate as much as possible,” he concludes. “Our goals are more or less identical.” Lists Hindutva Websites Breivik lists the websites of the Bharatiya Janata Party, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, the National Volunteers’ Organisation, the Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad and the Vishwa Hindu Parishad as resources for further information. The manifesto pledges military support “to the nationalists in the Indian civil war and in the deportation of all Muslims from India.” This is part of a larger campaign to “overthrow of all western European multiculturalist governments” and evict “U.S. military personnel on European soil.” India is one of several countries — including Russia, the Philippines, China and Thailand — where Breivik hopes his successors will fight. He uses the work of historians K.S. Lal and Shrinandan Vyas to point to the threat posed by Islam to Europe, saying their work has established that millions of Hindus were killed in a genocide during 1000-1525 AD. N.S. Rajaram, another historian, is quoted as saying India’s “political class have been so debilitating that they continue to live in a state of constant fear.” Breivik’s manifesto envisages that this future organisation would hand out a “multi-cultural force medal,” which would be awarded for “military cooperation with nationalist Hindu, Buddhist, Jewish and/or atheist forces (non-European) on Hindu, Buddhist or Jewish territory. These efforts must be directed against Jihadi or cultural Marxist forces, personnel or interests.” The medals would include a “Liberation of India Service Medal,” which would be awarded for “assisting Indian nationalist forces to drive out Islam from Indian territory.” Breivik’s Indian-made combat badges, revealed by The Hindu as having been contracted to a workshop in Varanasi, were the first in this series of battle decorations. His manifesto acknowledges that lives will be lost in the war, and calls for the organisation to “provide and subsidise a standard edition of the Justiciar Knight tombstone” for those who fell in battle. Since a “European tombstone carver, preferably specialised in traditional tombstone architecture, is likely to charge more than 5000-10000 Euro in order to create the stone,” Breivik suggested that “producers in low-cost countries should be contacted for the task of creating one or multiple stones in the future.” He acknowledged that this “might sound hypocritical considering the fact that cultural conservatives in general oppose Indian or Chinese membership in [the] WTO and the fact that we generally prefer in-sourcing as many industries as possible. However, conserving our funds is a central part of our struggle.” Even though Breivik’s Knights would fight shoulder to shoulder with Hindu nationalists, his vision for their rights in a post-revolutionary Europe is limited. The manifesto envisages the creation of a “servant class,” made up of non-Muslim individuals from Bangladesh, Pakistan and India. “During their stay,” the manifesto envisages, “they will work 12 hours a day for the duration of their contracts (6 or 12 months) and are then flown back to their homelands.” “These individuals,” it goes on, “will live in segregated communities in pre-defined areas of each major city.”
