No, of course not. Where did you derive that? I think it's terrible, and I also have no clue how that guy would arrive at the conclusion that slaughtering a bunch of Norwegian kids would advance that cause. However, I think that it's clear that he took the actions which he did as some sort of protest to multiculturalism. I think that violence, from the native side and from the "minority" side can be expected with multiculturalist policies. Even when there's not violence or friction, it reduces society to the lowest common denominators of values and culture and produces neurotic traits. Civilization slowly becomes more primitive because it's based more and more on lowest common denominators and it's really worse for everyone.
Well thats brilliant logic on your part, That would mean that the U.S. is to blame for 9/11, Bin Laden said it, it must be true, Gabrielle Giffords was to blame for Jared Loughner, he said so, it must be true, and Jodie Foster is to blame for the attempted assasination of Reagan. Also a talking dog was to blame for all the son of sam murders. If you cant trust a homicidal maniac on who is to blame for their murderous rampage then just who can you trust... The fact that you would take a mass murdering terrorists word for what was to blame for his attacks, just because it supports your views shows how sick your mind is. Do you blame the jews when the palestinians lob a bunch of rockets into israel? Cause thats who they blame.
Also using your brilliant logic, that would mean that the jews were to blame for their own massacre during world war 2, because thats who hitler blamed.
These are all so far from being analogous that it's really hard to respond. Bin Laden said that US foreign policy was why he facilitated 9/11. Do you think he was lying? I don't. You can agree or disagree with his position on it, but I don't think anyone in their right mind would say that US foreign policy was NOT the reason that Bin Laden facilitated 9/11. Many people in fact AGREE with bin laden's cause/purpose but disagree with his actions. The Norway killings are no different. Loughner was a crazed lunatic which had no coherent logic in his actions. So was the son of sam. You can't compare crazed lunatics with deliberate, coherently planned attacks. This is just reductio ad absurdum and is not comparable for the most part. I think that the killers motives were apparent. I think bin laden's motives were apparent. Whether or not you agree with the person's motives are an entirely different issue from whether or not you agree with their actions. You're trying to falsely intertwine the two. Unless of course you're suggesting that the killer lied about his motives, which I disagree with.