When there was word of a bomb blast in Oslo, Norway, I figured it was probably Islamic terrorism. And why not? That's a very rational conclusion to make. Even the New York Times agrees. Over the past two decades, who is most often responsible for such incidents? To say this is a knee-jerk reaction is disengenuous, but it's a charge that is still made by many apologists for Islamic Jihad.
When the news hit that there was a man dressed as a policeman shooting up an island full of children, I had a feeling this wasn't quite what we thought. Jihadist will kill any innocents, but it still didn't seem like their MO. Now we find out that it was a Norwegian with apparent right-wing leanings behind these horrible acts. So, if this information holds true, he is essentially the Norwegian Timothy McVeigh.
This has led to crowing from many on the American Left. Charles Johnson is going after his favorite targets in Pamela Geller and Fjordman (even going so far as to speculate Fjordman was the shooter). What does this tell you? Why would the fact that the culprit is NOT Muslim give them joy? How can someone be so ideologically driven to take such a position? When I heard about the bombing I didn't say, "Gee, I hope this was done by Muslims!" My reaction was "I wish this hadn't happened."
Still amazed that one man did all this (won't be surprised if we find he had help), but just like many can't believe one man killed JFK, we have to accept that fact that one man can make a huge impact through violence. What's really amazing is that it doesn't happen more often. All it really takes is will.