"The man has been living in recent weeks at an asylum center in northern Norway," Westgaard said, and added that terrorism was not an aspect of the attack.

Thats right, it must have just been an average everyday, normal, tongue in cheek , run-of-the-mill (anyone got anymore cliche's?) muslim psycopath, attacking the pilot with an axe.

But thank god it wasn't terrorism.

Posted by: Rikki at September 29, 2004 8:22 AM

A solution to this problem would be:

All muslims who board any plane going anywhere in Europe,America, Russia, China, Japan, Australia,or central+south Africa, should be forced into a cage and chained to it for the duration of the flight, any one of them who so much as gives a funny-look at an infidel, or even looks like he might be thinking anti-infidel thoughts, will be responsible for the entire cage being jettisoned from the plane from thousands of feet into the sea, or mountains below.

Posted by: Rikki at September 29, 2004 8:28 AM

The Aftenposten article has now been sanitised...

Posted by: Nannette at September 29, 2004 8:57 AM

Should muslims even be using infidel inventions such as airplanes anyhow...or have we just not gotten the news yet that it was in fact a muslim that invented air travel...

Muslims should not be allowed to use any form of public transportation instead should be limited to camel, donkey and cart or flying carpet. At least an 8x10 flying stainmaster would do little to no damage to a building should they decide a suicide mission has been called for by allah.

Posted by: USAgirl at September 29, 2004 10:10 AM

One concern that needs to be addressed . . .

Do all planes have axes on board for this purpose?

I shudder to think the implications of this possibility.

Posted by: justamomof4 at September 29, 2004 10:31 AM

I hope I understood this story correctly,a Muslim is witnessed by a planeload of people as
going "Lizzy Borden" and he's portrayed as "Allegedly" being violent since everyone on the plane must have chartered it for a "Islamophobe" conferrence,and the beheading victims are guilty of supporting Israel and the Iraq war against Islam by the "Christian" Bush.

So when Muslims attempt mass murder and get caught they're alleged to have done it,but infidels are guilty according to the Quran so the Islamists aren't really killing the innocent.
As for the claims of occupation,isn't that what CAIR endorses in America by demanding non-Muslim businesses to accomadate Muslim workers and Federal laws to exempt followers of Islam in certain laws.
Islam is the occupier in NorthAmerica but you don't see me wearing a C4 vest and blowing up Mosques or islamic businesses,CAIR will scream "Racism" for as long as they can milk it,when Muslims are the majority THAT'S when they'll make their move to dismantle the Constitution and install Quranic rule through Shariah law.

NO CAIR - KNOW FREE-SPEECH

Posted by: ala-sux at September 29, 2004 12:49 PM

I must ask....where is evidence that this man is a fanatic Muslim? I mean, at first I thought, terrorism..but it's unlikely that al-qeada would send operatives to commit such an act by himself. Aftenposten says that the motive was not terrorism, and that the man is recieving medical treatment. The man was probably mentally disturbed..until I see evidence that this was motivated by terrorism, I won't believe it. After all, we wouldn't want to jump to conclusions, would we?

Posted by: Linda at September 29, 2004 2:40 PM

"Shoe Bomber" Richard Reid and "Dirty Bomber" Jose Padilla weren't necessarily acting after receving marching orders from Al-Qaeda but they were certainly making their contribution to the jihad. It appears that the gentleman in question on the Norwegian flight is an "imam" which is irrefutable proof that he IS mentally disturbed and perfectly capable of the "alleged" attack. And then again, he is seeking asylum in Norway which indicates an ability to reason, as opposed to seeking asylum in, let's say, Russia or China.

Posted by: 3812Michelle at September 29, 2004 7:49 PM

Again with this type situation I do no understand as to why when the plane landed and this Gentlemen was handed over to the police it was not peace:)by peace:).

"YKWH AKBAR"

Posted by: Chuck at September 29, 2004 7:50 PM

The man was a muslim all right. As a matter of fact he was more than just an ordinary muslim, he served as imam in a local mosque. This was suicide terrorism. Simple as that. Had he managed to get hold of a dynamite belt he probably would have blown himself up a bus instead.

He has now been "forcibly admitted" to a hospital. Of course the PC scumbags are trying to explain it away by talking about mental disorder. In a way they are right. ISLAM IS A MENTAL DISORDER !

Speaking about "forcibly admitting", it would have been far more appropriate if the entire Norwegian Government, and most of the parliament, had been forcibly admitted - to the GRAVEYARD ! Its their reckless immigration policy and high treason through dhimmitude which created this incident today - and this is only the beginning.

Viking

Posted by: Viking at September 29, 2004 9:09 PM

I suppose the motive, strictly speaking, is unknown, but no Muslim is motivated by 'terrorism': 'Jihad', that is the likely the motive, i.e. violence against Infidels to defend and/or spread the faith. 'Jihad' is the obligation of every Muslim, as the Koran makes prefectly clear, and it has been practiced for 1340 years prior to the birth of al Qaeda. Furthermore, more than 50% of Muslims in Europe are sympathetic with the Jihad waged by al Qaeda, extrapolating from a BBC poll of UK Muslims last year (which one would expect to be skewed with pro-Islamic bias). In Muslim countries the percentage is certainly higher; and Muslims are perfectly aware of what Jihad is and that killing Infidels en masse can be considered justified: terrorism is irrelevant. For those who believe in the Jihad, there is no terrorism, only Jihad.

Why is this action probably Jihad? How many mentally ill Muslims (and it is a safe assumption this man is Muslim) have tried to attack pilots on a commercial air liner with axes because they had a 'mental breakdown'? I can't think of any.

How many Jihadists have either brought down airliners or tried to?

The presumption that this man is a Jihadist is not 'certain', it is merely 'probable' and utterly reasonable.

Posted by: JTF at September 29, 2004 9:11 PM

The comment above about not "rushing to conclusions" is absurd. There have been many cases where Muslims (and one need not be a "fanatic"), suitably prompted not because they received "marching orders from from al-Qaeda" but rather because they have read Qur'an and hadith, and know the biography of Muhammad, and were doing what therefore seemed to them to be perfectly consonant with, indeed encouraged by, the teachings of Islam and the example of Muhammad. That an imam at a mosque might take an axe to the pilots of a plane he was on -- thus hoping to crash the plane with all those Infidels aborad -- makes perfect sense. No "marching orders from al-Qaeda were necessary to prompt an Egyptian taxidriver to kill passengers at the Los Angeles Airport, or for an Arab to kill a yeshiva student on the Brooklyn Bridge, or for Infidels to be attacked (mainly Jews wearing recognizable garb) in Brussels, Paris, and Toronto, or for Hindus to be beaten to death by a mob in Bangladesh (pictures can be found on-line of one such example, a HIndu pleading for his life to a mob that had just come out of Friday Prayers, and was looking for an Infidel to kill -- he turned out to be the handiest Infidel to beat to death).

It would be amazing to discover that this man was not impelled by his religious faith. And speaking of faith -- one has no faith that the Norwegian police will allow the truth of the matter to come out, if it might in their view cause undue social disruption. Thus do the forces of order become collaborators in hiding the truth from the Infidel population -- instead of helping to protect them, and their futures, by letting them know the truth, the police and the governments of Western Europe (and perhaps at times of North America) prevent the full hideous truth to be known. It is a kind of collaboration with the unstated, and unnamed enemy within. Why has this method of dealing with the matter been selected? What good can possibly come of it?

What does not make perfect sense is, given such possibilities, permitting Muslims to board planes at all. Why? Is this a natural right that Infidels must accommodate without question? At a Los Angeles ticket counter, on the Brooklyn Bridge, on a street in Paris or Brussels, --

Posted by: Hugh at September 29, 2004 10:22 PM

Next time I am shopping for an airline ticket I am going to ask for a guarantee that I can have a flight with no muslims on board. I am chuckling just thinking about the reactions that I may receive.

Posted by: Truth at September 29, 2004 11:27 PM

Truth,

That won't work for me. Those of us who work in Saudi Arabia know that, coming or going, there WILL be Muslims on board.

jay

Posted by: jay at September 30, 2004 3:15 AM

To add to Hugh's list, don't forget the Egyptian pilot that downed a plane carrying 217 passengers.

Egypt Air, flight 990

Posted by: susan_b at September 30, 2004 4:25 AM

Linda,
The conclusion I've jumped to now is that he was trying to be a matyr like his 9/11 heroes, a planes full of dead infidels is sure to please allah, paradise here we come!!!

Posted by: Rikki at September 30, 2004 8:57 AM