Difference between revisions of "Talk:Anders Behring Breivik"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(→To Daniel: new section) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
I removed the accusations that the whole thing was a setup for false flag type reasons because the guy admitted to the crime, there is no evidence to doubt this admission, and I understand that Savage has retracted his earlier statements. Lets deal with facts not unhelpful speculations. --[[User:DamianJohn|DamianJohn]] 01:59, 26 July 2011 (EDT) | I removed the accusations that the whole thing was a setup for false flag type reasons because the guy admitted to the crime, there is no evidence to doubt this admission, and I understand that Savage has retracted his earlier statements. Lets deal with facts not unhelpful speculations. --[[User:DamianJohn|DamianJohn]] 01:59, 26 July 2011 (EDT) | ||
:I agree, the version before this one was bizarre and fringe. [[User:TerryB|TerryB]] 08:54, 26 July 2011 (EDT) | :I agree, the version before this one was bizarre and fringe. [[User:TerryB|TerryB]] 08:54, 26 July 2011 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | == To Daniel == | ||
| + | |||
| + | I'm trying to clean up the grammar and punctuation on this article, and I can't make out just what you're trying to say in this sentence: | ||
| + | |||
| + | *While the manifesto contains a legal disclaimer, (p. 766-68) yet Breivik details how Islam invaded Europe in the past and was defeated, and expresses plans to combat, by an "armed indigenous rights movements/resistance movement" (p. 668), the latest Islamic invasion/attack in which they employ "demographic warfare." (p. 816) | ||
| + | |||
| + | What does the legal disclaimer have to do with the rest of the sentence? Were you trying to say something about the disclaimer and got distracted? Please clarify this section. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Thanks! --[[User:SharonW|SharonW]] 22:48, 30 July 2011 (EDT) | ||
Revision as of 02:48, July 31, 2011
I removed the accusations that the whole thing was a setup for false flag type reasons because the guy admitted to the crime, there is no evidence to doubt this admission, and I understand that Savage has retracted his earlier statements. Lets deal with facts not unhelpful speculations. --DamianJohn 01:59, 26 July 2011 (EDT)
- I agree, the version before this one was bizarre and fringe. TerryB 08:54, 26 July 2011 (EDT)
To Daniel
I'm trying to clean up the grammar and punctuation on this article, and I can't make out just what you're trying to say in this sentence:
- While the manifesto contains a legal disclaimer, (p. 766-68) yet Breivik details how Islam invaded Europe in the past and was defeated, and expresses plans to combat, by an "armed indigenous rights movements/resistance movement" (p. 668), the latest Islamic invasion/attack in which they employ "demographic warfare." (p. 816)
What does the legal disclaimer have to do with the rest of the sentence? Were you trying to say something about the disclaimer and got distracted? Please clarify this section.
Thanks! --SharonW 22:48, 30 July 2011 (EDT)