Two Swedish men arrested for the attempted murder of two South Asian men reportedly gained inspiration for their attacks from Norwegian terrorist Anders Behring Brevik.

The Local — a Swedish English language news website — reports that four days after Breivik’s attacks in Oslo and Utøya, a South Asian man sleeping on a bench in Västerås, a city in central Sweden, was attacked and seriously injured. In a second attack, two days later, a Sri Lankan man was stabbed while delivering newspapers.

Police reports obtained by the Dagens Nyheter daily and translated by the Local, say that one of the defendants sent the other attacker the following text message shortly after Breivik’s massacre on July 22:

A Norwegian ‘Nazi’ has killed like, around 84! From the left who, like, cheered on Islam. HAHAHA!! WHITE POWER!

The accused attacker reportedly screamed “Go home” and drew a swastika on the Sri Lankan man’s bag after stabbing him.

While the two suspects may have been motivated by a broader white supremacist ideology, Breivik appears to have served as an inspiration for them in their decision to attack South Asians. The text message indicates that they shared the same anger with left wing politics, and its supposed embrace of Muslim immigrants.

Both Sweden and Norway have growing white supremacist movements, but U.S. Islamophobes and European white supremacists appear to have found common ground in stoking fears about Muslim immigration into Europe. Indeed, Anders Breivik cited U.S. “counterjihad” bloggers, such as Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller, numerous times in his manifesto.

While European white supremacists have been implicated in hate crimes against numerous ethnic and religious minorities, the growing uptick in European Islamophobia is shedding new light on the overlapping ideologies of anti-Muslim advocates and white supremacists.

For more information on Breivik and his manifesto’s references to American Islamophobes, see the Guardian’s visualization of his citations and the Center for American Progress’ new report, Fear Inc.

Yesterday on his radio show, right-wing host Jordan Sekulow asked Mitt Romney how he would have handled the Palestinian bid for United Nations statehood recognition if he was president. Romney of course immediately jumped into to the standard, tired, old hat right-wing Obama-hates-Israel talking points but then he said something rather peculiar. Romney said the United States should reconsider its relationships with countries that vote in support of the Palestinian bid:

ROMNEY: Putting aside what’s already happened, at this stage the president should make it very clear that we stand with Israel, that this is very important to the United States of America and that any nation that votes against Israel and against the United States in the vote in the United Nations will recognize that America will very carefully reconsider our relationship with that nation.

I think that people who vote against us in significant ways have to understand that there are consequenses of that and we will see them in a different light and our support for the Palestinian people will be adjusted if they continue to pursue this desire to have a separate vote and to be established as having a quasi-state status within the U.N. This is something which will end our support in foreign aid to the Palestinian effort. It will at the same time reshape our policy with regards to nations that oppose us. People have to recognize that we’re nice but we’re not crazy. And when people oppose us, we’re not going to reward them for doing so.

So which countries would a President Romney “reconsider” America’s relationship with? As it stands right now, the Palestinian U.N. bid will be up for a vote in the 13-member Security Council (of which the United States, along with France, the U.K., China and Russia are permanent members with veto power). China, Russia, India, Brazil and South Africa have all said they would support the bid. France and the U.K. haven’t said either way, but the New York Times reported this month that they “might vote in favor.”

If the Palestinian bid goes to the General Assembly, which could elevate the Palestinian Authority’s status from nonvoting “observer entity” to “observer state,” the number of countries that the U.S. would have to reevaluate its relationship with, under a President Romney, would grow significantly. For example, the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), the 118-member U.N. bloc, announced that it supported the Palestinian U.N. membership move (although it is not certain if all member states would vote in favor). Members of the NAM include most African countries — including Egypt — Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Pakistan, Chile, and Peru.

So how exactly would Romney “reconsider” relationships with these countries — many of them close American allies — for supporting the Palestinians? The former Massachusetts governor didn’t expound on that point. But perhaps these nations would like to know what their punishment will be if Romney moves in to the White House in 2013.

Our guest blogger is Sarah Margon, associate director for Sustainable Security at the Center for American Progress.

Earlier this month the Famine Early Warning Systems Network (FEWSNET) released survey results indicating that yet another region in Somalia succumbed to official famine. Conditions throughout Somalia are expected to deteriorate even further in the coming months, particularly as the October rains approach. An increased prevalence of diseases like cholera and severe diarrhea means an already weakened population will be further debilitated.

According to the U.N.’s humanitarian agency, OCHA, an estimated 585,000 urban Somalis are projected to be in crisis by December if relief interventions are not scaled up. Worse still, the U.N.’s Food Security Analysis and Nutrition Unit for Somalia has officially announced that 750,000 people are at risk of imminent starvation and death in the coming four months.

These numbers are basically equivalent to every single person in Washington, DC — or almost everyone in San Francisco — facing starvation unless they begin receiving food, water, and medical attention from an outside source now.

In response to the lackluster international effort and the growing urgency, 20 aid organizations recently released a statement calling for an all-inclusive dialogue “to put people’s lives before politics in order to save thousands of lives.” This call for a diplomatic push is vital; the Somali population is on death’s doorstep.

A prime opportunity could present itself later this week as the international contact group for Somalia gathers in Denmark. Ironically, the cornerstone of this meeting is the recently agreed political reform Road Map, not the metastasizing crisis of epic proportions. As international donors, key regional actors, and Somali officials meet in Copenhagen, they will focus on priority tasks for reforming Somalia’s feeble Transitional Federal Government. They are likely to touch tangentially on the urgent humanitarian needs but there seems to be no plan for a robust diplomatic response. Certainly, immediate relief responses need to be linked to a more comprehensive approach if they are to be sustainable. But, crafting (yet another) governance plan for a functional Somali government just doesn’t make a ton of sense when the survival prognosis for much of the population is bleak.

The options to stop the worsening crisis are few and the likelihood of success is slipping away. The restrictions placed on aid groups — by all parties to the conflict — as well as the international donor community are significant impediments to accessing those in need. And while the United States is leading international community contributions with more than $600 million in assistance to the Horn of Africa, the U.N. appeal remains only 63 percent funded. Worse yet, with so many Somalis holding on by a thread, the increased drone attacks in Somalia create a perception problem about U.S. government priorities. Instead of rearranging the patio furniture tomorrow in Copenhagen, the first order of business at tomorrow’s meeting should be the creation of a diplomatic plan focused on enabling the unimpeded delivery of desperately needed aid.

Earlier this week, an Israeli settler and his 18-month-old son were killed when the man lost control of his car after being hit by stones thrown by Palestinians. This deplorable incident, however, has resulted in an irrational reaction from some Israelis, who are launching a grassroots “shoot to kill” campaign. The hardline Israeli pro-settler website Arutz Sheva reports:

A new campaign is calling on Israelis to shoot to kill if they encounter deadly Palestinian Authority Arabs throwing rocks at drivers [...] The grassroots group behind the campaign, SOS-Israel, claims similar words were said in the past by none other than Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu.

SOS Israel is an Israel-based organization supporting Israel’s illegal settlements in the West Bank. U.S. donors are directed to send their contributions via Machanaim Inc, a U.S.-based 501c3 nonprofit organization. This means that donations to SOS Israel — via Machanaim — are tax deductible, which means that American taxpayers are subsidizing them. SOS Israel explicitly states their mission as:

SOS Israel was founded in 5763 (2003) to oppose and fight the political accords with the Arabs that include land or security concessions. SOS Israel is against giving up any part of Eretz Yisroel – the Holy Land – or compromising the security of those that live there.

While SOS Israel tries to portray their vigilante campaign as a form of self-defense, settlers have for years committed acts of “price tag” violence against Palestinians and their property in response to efforts to constrain settlement growth. A recent analysis by Israel’s Shin Bet security agency concluded that “price tag” attacks by right-wing Jewish activists in the West Bank should be considered terrorist activity.

Settler communities across the West Bank also appear to be embracing more violent rhetoric against their Palestinian neighbors. Ma’an news agency reports that posters reading “We will slaughter Arabs” were displayed on the fence surrounding Efrat settlement.

Indeed, the extreme anti-Muslim sentiment is on full display in a video hosted on SOS Israel’s YouTube channel. The video offers a conspiratorial explanation for how Muslims, through a combination of immigration and high birth rates, plan to dominate the West. Watch it:

Disturbingly, SOS Israel is able to spread with their hateful message in Israel and offer assistance to settlements — whose construction runs counter to U.S. government policy and international law — while giving their donors the financial benefit of a U.S. tax deduction.