Particularly in an attack of such magnitude, the suspicion of involvement by al-Qaeda or a similar group was eminently reasonable: the majority of the terrorist attacks and counter-terror arrests in Europe in recent years have involved jihadist operations. The bomb was comparable not only to the Oklahoma City bomb, but also to those used in embassy bombings in Tanzania and Nairobi. The use of multiple attacks and a focus on symbolic targets are an al-Qaeda trademark, and deceit through the impersonation of military personnel or law enforcement has been a standard operating procedure particularly in Afghanistan and Iraq. Finally, a jihadist group did briefly claim credit, and that was newsworthy to report. When that fell through, it was also promptly reported.
But there is one other noteworthy angle to the period in which the attack was plausibly speculated to be the work of jihadists: When people thought it was Muslims, the rationalization mill went into overdrive. Comments sections on news reports were riddled with pleas and demands to consider “underlying causes,” such as Norway’s involvement in campaigns in Afghanistan and Libya that have resulted in the loss of Muslim lives. The implication was that Norway had done it to itself for its treatment of Muslims, and for allying itself with America.
By contrast, no one on whose behalf the bastard Breivik claimed to act has engaged in a comparable defense of or deflection of the blame for his crimes. There was no victim-hood narrative to act as an obstacle to condemning him and his actions properly and unequivocally. “Arab world outraged by Norway attack allegations,” by Roee Nahmias for YNet News, July 24:
Less than two days after the fact, everybody knows who carried out the shocking massacre that took place in Norway onFriday: Anders Behring Breivik, a Norwegian driven by extremist right-wing ideology. But before Breivik’s apprehension, the local and international media alluded to an extremist Islamists link for the double attack on Oslo and Utoya island — triggering the rage of many Arabs and Muslims worldwide.
The London-based Arabic newspaper Asharq Al-Awsat claimed Norway feared Islamist operatives much more than rightist extremists despite a significant growth of such groups in 2010. Another London-based international Arabic publication, Al-Hayat, added that the attacks were perpetrated by a Christian extremist who deplored Islam and Europe’s cultural pluralism.
Meanwhile, a short time after news of the attack spread, many Arab and Muslim web surfers claimed that it was Israel who was responsible: “A criminal operation of this magnitude is not carried out without the support and planning of a terrorist state, which stakes out opportunities to shuffle the deck. It is the Zionist state, in collaboration with the extremist Zionist Christians, that wants to hurt Islam in its allie, Norway,” a surfer named Omar Ali commented on Al Jazeera’s website. “It’s not al-Qaeda. The Zionists carried out the attack to punish Norway for supporting Gaza.”
Mossad behind operation’
Another web user accused the Israeli secret service for the attack, and explained why: “Before Europe and the US rush to blame us for terrorism, know that the body behind this operation is none other than the Mossad. And why the Mossad? Because Norway recognized the Palestinian state two days ago, and what does it mean when a gas- and oil-rich nation like Norway supports the Palestinians? Israel would never allow it.”
A third commentator said that it was clear to him that an intelligence agency, like the Mossad or the CIA — was behind the attack. Yet another surfer, from Jordan, accused the US, adding that “as usual, the American intelligence is pressing Norway to declare that Muslims carried out the bombing.”
Another theory attributed the act of terror to Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, in light of his threats to retaliate against the NATO strikes. Others yet blamed the Syrian regime for trying to divert attention from what is going on in their country.
Shortly after the extent of the tragedy became known, the Organization of the Islamic Conference, which counts 58 nations among its members, released a statement condemning the event, calling it a “terrorist attack.”
The OIC and other Muslim groups were probably just as likely gearing up for damage control on the same suspicion of jihadist involvement before word emerged of a non-Muslim attacker, just as Muslims were strategizing online for a so-called “sh*t-storm” they anticipated in the media in the event that the Virginia Tech shooter had turned out to be Muslim.