The attack by a deranged Islamist radical in the sleepy Norwegian town of Kongsberg has again brought home the dangers of Islamist ideologies circulating in Western societies. On such a tragic occasion, one would expect opinion makers, journalists, and intellectuals to unite against religious fanaticism in support of the victims of such atrocities.

Instead, virtually the entire Western media have used the tragedy in which five people were killed to blame the anti-migration right-wing nationalist lobby.

As orchestrated as the Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra under the baton of legendary conductor Herbert von Karajan western media drew equivalents between the bow and arrow attack by a Muslim convert with the 2011 series of attacks by the left-wing extremist Anders Breivik.

The speed and coordination with this association between the Utoya Island attacks and the events in Kongsberg are simultaneously published in the world’s press.

From the American New York Times to the Washington Post, from the British Guardian to the French Le Monde, and the vast majority of German newspapers all over, all knew exactly what their task is even before the identity or motives of the attacker was known: to create a diversion from possible Islamist motives of the attack and channel them towards innocent right-wing, nationalist movements, just as they did with the Utoya Island attacks.

It is hardly credible to assume that almost all journalists globally make the same assumption. That the murderous rampage of Communist clenched-fist left-wing maverick Anders Breivik is somehow connected with the events in Kongsberg. It rather points to a liberal press bull horning a story in which all major media players understand the rules and expectations. In this case, the imperative is to divert attention from the dangers of radical Islam by pointing the finger of blame to White nationalism.

The ‘British’ newspaper, whose former owner Conrad Black used to dine with Conservative Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, has joined the chorus of international terrorism apologists by publishing the article of author Richard Orange, who also freelances for the far-left Observer newspaper.

In this article, Orange implicitly associates Scandinavian conservative political parties such as the Danish People’s Party or the Sweden Democrats, that both campaign against uncontrolled mass immigration, with the motives of the mass murderer Anders Breivik, and uses this assumption as a matter of course and a departure for his entire argumentation.

Never mind that there are literally no discernible parallels between the two attacks or attackers, apart from the fact that in both incidents people have lost their lives.

For any person with average intelligence and some semblance of a moral compass, it will remain a mystery as to why an incident in which a Muslim convert randomly shoots five innocent people with a bow and arrow would inspire people to show greater respect for Islam.

Furthermore, the association of guilt between conservative parties such as the Danish People’s Party with the ideology that led Anders Breivik to murder dozens of children is just another construct that should not be repeated in any self-respecting media, either.

In fact, the claim that Anders Breivik was a right-wing nationalist has always been a media-myth. There was never any evidence produced to show Anders Breivik was connected to any right-wing party.

The Kongsberg killer is a convicted criminal who should have been either behind bars or strictly supervised. He was also on the radar for his extremist religious views, the spread of which overburdened European security services are struggling to monitor.

Thus, the moral of the incident is not a need for a fight against conservative parties, governments, or politicians, but the fact that another five people have lost their lives and three grievously injured as a direct result of policy decisions by culturally and politically bankrupt governments propped up by Islamism apologist activist media. It’s probably just a coincidence that the comment section underneath the Telegraph article has been muted.