30 August 2012

Norway's Arctic gold rush

This week in Norway has been like something out of an old American boomtown gold rush, only this time the black liquid gold type of the 21st Century as it is now full steam ahead in Norway to exploit the oil riches in the Arctic region right up to the North Pole where they want to start drilling.

There has been high drama from all sides as the plot unfolds in plain site now.

It is funny how I wrote about ‘Operation Breivik’ being connected to the Norwegian international oil & gas industry as my conclusion to the event and as soon as the storm seems to have passed concerning Breivik and the Norwegian Governments complete failure to stop him and his attacks what is left is the new political drama that is about to unfold which is the norwegian oil & gas industry which has been playing out behind the scenes in those secret places the uninitiated cannot tread.

It is the same Government Breivik professed to be against who benefitted most from his terrorist attacks who are now disregarding the Norwegian political debate as they clamber like blood thirsty wolves for the riches on offer in the North pole under the direction of a Government minister.

Do not be surprised if next week the Arctic region is all over the international news with commentators and pundits discussing the moves North into this region and the geo-political players involved and the consequences considering there is a Cold War scenario taking place there out of sight and mind of mainstream society.

Maybe now it is time for it to be in the public psyche considering it has consequences for all of us and it is a matter of fact about what is going on in this region.

The curtains have been pulled back and the actors will now take to the stage as they position themselves for their own slice of the cake which is in their own National interests as it is part of their own territorial claim too, and there is not much left of the stuff either which makes this region ever more important. Norway has set the stage, and for some unknown reason has severed ties with the Russians in this rush even after signing the deals for access to the gas fields further south in the Russian/Norwegian border. They now claim the project is to costly.

Norway have placed Russia on the sidelines...I wonder how President Putin is going to take that one?

The most contentious issue within the Norwegian political scene is a faction within the ruling AUF-Labour Government’s insistence to drill into the North Pole contrary to the Prime Ministers wishes and voices of the opposition, with his Foreign Secretary claiming he is the boss of the North pole and what goes on there is under his control. This is the same oil man already getting rich from Norway’s inherited wealth and looks like it now places a direct confrontation within the very top of the Norwegian Government if my google translate is correct, with the same man tipped to be the next Prime Minister. He is only a front man to the big boys behind him so it will be interesting to see how this scenario is now played out in full view of the media.

Politics Power & Money...which ultimately ‘Operation Breivik’was all about, just covered up for the masses on their level to keep their minds occupied as right-wing extremism away from the real important political issues, with 69 innocent Norwegians kids expendable as part of their short to long term political project.

An opposition member put it bluntly with these few comments.

Quote: We have an oil extremist as minister. The Prime Minister should immediately, and within 24 hours, determine if this is the Government's view, said Frederic Hauge.

Quote: Borten Moe is starting a race that has major foreign and geopolitical consequences. Now, countries around the pole as Russia, Canada, Denmark and the United States just push northward, and show that Norway is going to do it, see Frederic Hauge.

Further reading: The new Arctic war-zone

They say that there is up to 20% of Earths remaining resources in the Arctic which means there is only another 80% left somewhere and means that at some point in the not too distant future mankind with its ever increasing population will of consumed all of the Earths natural energy resources.

What happens then when we reach beyond the precipice we are now at?

Hopefully there are new technologies behind the scenes to compensate for there being no oil left to run our industrial Nations which would mean a complete break down in society with us entering a new dark age where we have to come to terms with a complete dead and broken unfunctioning society where it is back to basics with us or the next generation living in a completely different reality to the one we are living now.

It is not far off now, and will be in our children’s and grandchildren’s lifetime, the only peace we can have is that the Americas are now on Mars which shows how far we have come so there must be a transition from fossil fuels to another more advanced type of technology.

A new race for mankind rather than a nuclear arms race to destroy each other.

Norway is the standard bearer of this new Arctic conflict for oil & gas with ‘Operation Breivik’ being central to someones politics, the question remains though as to whose patsy was he?

Considering the Norwegian AUF-Labour Government are the ones who have closed the case down with the “solo terrorist” connected to no one label, meaning they do not want anyone else connected to his crimes because of the story it could tell, you have to question why? Which answers the above.

It does not take a rocket scientist...just a little research.

There could be some very big things coming in the not too distant future as all sides now line up for the political confrontation concerning the North Pole.

I Hope that a neutral Government who has all the evidence surrounding Breivik will use that trump card if it is in their National interests so that we can be shown the full truth behind the whole event with other people then held to account for their complicity and then let them decide whether or not to unravel some more truth.

A new reality based upon truth and not lies which is Democracy in action against a small group of the corrupt Elite who see a group of innocent young Norwegians as a price worth paying for their evil schemes.

Breivik was the willing pawn in their game of espionage, and possibly MI6's Gareth Williams a victim.

Further reading: Nuclear terrorism in London

28 August 2012

Rachel Corrie death - Her own fault

Further reading: My time with the ISM (The ISM unmasked)

Israelseen: Lee Kaplan on the ISM and Rachel Corrie

Website: Stop the ISM

Daily Mail

Israel court rules army was not at fault in 2003 death of US activist killed by bulldozer during Palestine protest

Today a judge in Haifa, Israel, said her death was an accident that she had brought on herself by entering a closed military zone at the height of the second intifada.

The Israeli army said the buildings were being used to attack Israeli soldiers and as covers for entrances to weapons smuggling tunnels beneath the border.

Reading from his 162-page verdict, the judge told the Haifa District Court that Corrie’s death was a 'regrettable accident' but could have been avoided if she had obeyed warning signs and a travel ban on the Gaza Strip issued by the US to its citizens.

Continue reading: Rachel Corrie death - Her own fault

27 August 2012

Funder behind Swedish suicide bomber jailed

Further reading: Questioning the 'lone wolf' scenario

Daily Record

Algerian who funded Stockholm suicide bombing jailed for seven years

NASSERDINE MENNI was found guilty of transferring money to Taimour Abdulwahab who then blew himself up in the Swedish capital in December 2010.

AN Algerian national found guilty of funding terrorism following a suicide bombing in Stockholm has been sentenced to seven years in prison.

Nasserdine Menni was convicted of transferring money to Taimour Abdulwahab, who later blew himself up in the Swedish capital on December 11 2010.

He sent a total of £5725 to a bank account in Abdulwahab's name in the knowledge that it could be used for terrorism purposes.

Continue reading: Funder of Swedish suicide bomber jailed

Further reading: French terrorist was not a 'lone wolf'

Norwegian Government minister has broken the law concerning July 22nd


(AP) When Rigmor Aasrud ​​requested an internal investigation in Government Administration Services, they may have broken the law by assigning a former commander to investigate his wife's work.

As the AP wrote Monday has the internal evaluation of crisis management 22 July has been conducted by the former chief of the Government Administration Services, Ivar Herø. son-Monitoring center Heroes are not only long-standing boss, but also have private relationships with Government Administration Services (DSS). The heros wife and son are employed by DSS, respectively, archive and monitoring centers in the government building. law were also at work when the terrorist bomb went off 22 last July.

Jan Fridtjof Bernt is Professor of Law at the University of Bergen and expert on conflicts of interest. He believes Hero is incompetent. - One who is responsible for the evaluation and investigation, must be quite impartial to those he is investigating. If any aspect of this report or investigation approaching the work or the work of the people he has a private relationship, then it will be a unique relationship and you will be disqualified.

Continue reading: Minister may have broken the law

It keeps getting worse for the current Norwegian State in control of the Breivik case who currently hold the reigns of power in Norway.

You have a police Director and Government minister caught lying to cover-up the truth and mislead people, and now a Government minister who has gone one step further and broken the law in the case.

This is just the tip of the iceberg and what is known so far, imagine what has gone on that is unknown in this case.

With regards to this new serious revelation it concerns a Government minister appointing someone to carry out a review of her department with regards to the events of July 22nd 2011 but it turns out that the wife and son of the person writing the report both work in her department.

A clear cut case of corruption with the clear intent of having a biased report to present to the Norwegian public wrapped up as an 'official' report.

It is not very hard to think the conclusion the report came to is it? Which is in sharp contrast to what the July 22nd Commission came to when they did an independent review of the same department.

"DSS has handled the situation after the dramatic and catastrophic bomb explosion in a satisfactory manner, both in the acute phase and over time. All departments in the DSS from the moment of priority concern for the lives, health and security "

Krass criticism I 22 July Commission report (s 419-422) points out a number of weaknesses in the DSS 'emergency 22 July. ** There have been no large-scale exercise of the ministry staff with the car bomb or similar attacks against government officials that scenario. ** There were no guidelines, either orally or in writing, for how receptionists or security guards were acting in suspected car bomb. ** There was no notification procedures, procedures for evacuation or other measures should be taken against the employees.

Continue reading: The biased report

26 August 2012

Breivik: The English ‘mentor’ Reason & Motive

Updated below

If the truth was that Breivik had of been a paranoid schizophrenic ‘lone wolf’ who drove himself psychotic through reading right-wing websites and was inspired by my anti-jihad work on this blog then I could accept the accusation and rationale of being one of his inspirations and understood how I became entangled in the situation at the beginning, but that is not what happened contrary to media reports.

We now know the truth that “he was not” a paranoid schizophrenic who was psychotic before or after the time of his terrorist attacks contrary to the Norwegian State’s longstanding case against him which now lies in complete tatters before the World with very serious questions now surrounding it. They could have used the ‘insane’ label to cover-up the questionable lines of enquiry in the case if they had of secured the verdict they wanted, thus sweeping them under the carpet as the ramblings of a mad man. This cannot happen now and means Breivik was a fully functioning cognitive human being who knew exactly what he was doing and the reasons and motives for doing it.

Further reading: The Breivik judgement: "sane"

Breivik actually went one step further with me and attempted to have me arrested as his English ‘mentor’ the day after his planned suicide mission by placing subtle pointers in my direction and dressing up his planned terror group in the clothes of Templarism from which you can draw parallels from my blog which is completely different from being his inspiration. He even commented in police interview that he expected for someone to be arrested after the attacks which could only mean he was thinking about me because all fingers were pointed in my direction as the English ‘mentor’ in the outside World in the days after. He knew the potential results of his actions because it was part of his plan, so if the media thought I was the English ‘mentor’ then Breivik sitting in his prison cell knew beforehand what they were going to be thinking.

Why would Breivik want to have me arrested?

I do not know Breivik, have never met Breivik and knew nothing about him before July 22nd 2011, so what was his reason and motive behind attempting to have me arrested the day after his planned suicide mission?

Psychology is all about reason and motive because our actions are driven by reason and motive and we now know Breivik was a fully cognitive functioning human being so was thinking rationally and logically in the steps that he took in planning his terrorist attacks.

So what were his reasons and motives behind involving me?

Nobody has ‘officially’ explained this yet and the media still quote me as being a source of his inspiration.

There must be an explanation especially now we know he was not insane so it cannot just be dismissed, written off and swept under the carpet as the actions and ramblings of a mad man who was psychotic as the Norwegian Sate would have liked.

If I had of inspired Breivik through my blog then could he not have encouraged people to read my work through his manifesto like he did with his real ideological inspirations rather than attempting to have me arrested as the person who he actually met in 2002 who encouraged him go out and carry out his acts as part of a wider political agenda and terrorist campaign on-behalf of the group he says he belongs to?

I and my work are not mentioned inside the manifesto anywhere and unlike other sources directly linked to the investigation Breivik himself has not mentioned anywhere that he was inspired by my work. Not that has been reported in the media anyway, it is only journalists themselves through the media who have stated I was his inspiration without knowing the facts in the case. The only thing I have seen him say about me in themedia is that I am an ideologue and that was after he was read my writings during his time in prison and commented on one of my statements.

The Norwegian writer Fraudman was his main ideological inspiration but did you see anything from Breivik that could have resulted in him being arrested, except on his own part for hiding his computer from the police which is suspicious in itself and passing very questionable statements under the circumstances to an Aftenposten journalist. Also there is no one else in the manifesto that had the potential to be arrested either, it was only me or the real English ‘mentor’ and I took the blame as being the English 'mentor'.

That was a hostile act against me, a direct attack from Breivik to have me arrested as an accomplice.

I like to think I am a fully functioning cognitive human being too, so when I stood accused of being the English ‘mentor’ I had to take a step back and look to see and understand what was going on with the little evidence that was provided at that point.

My first question; why would Breivik want to have me arrested when I do not even know him?

What could be his reason and motive?

He was promoting the likes of Fraudman, Pamella Geller, and the English Defence League as his inspirations that other likeminded individuals to himself should follow who I was openly vehemently against, and on the other hand attempting to have me arrested.

For me it was not hard to see that this ideological strain of the Counter-jihad movement that I was against had something to do with it.

Promoting my enemies in his life’s work, the “2083” manifesto for which he sacrificed his life for, and in the process committed what can only be described as a crime against humanity to promote it to the World, and attempting to have me arrested at the same time which could have turned out very differently for me if the grace of God was not upon me.

It is not hard to see is it?

Then I think to myself; who amongst that strain had real reason and motive and could fit the profile of being directly connected to Breivik.

The only person was Alan Lake the director behind the hijacked EDL and key player in the U.S/European Counter-jihad movement linking the EDL.

Further reading: EDL & Street politics

He and his close associates had allot to lose, which was their control over their “European political project” using the useful idiots of the English Defence League (what is left of them) if he was taken out of the picture and that was a very real scenario they were facing.

Reason and Motive.

So Breivik commits the worst act of political terrorism in Europe of the 21st Century, promoting the Counter-jihad movement and people from within it that I was openly against, and at the same time attempts to have me arrested which could have seen me locked up in prison for many years if he was dead and I was the only one left to take all the blame in the days after.

What do you think?

You probably do not know the facts, but anyone who has studied the rise of the English Defence League or who comes from within the movement and knew about the inner politics of the English Defence League will know.

The English Defence League came from somewhere and as an organisation has its leaders at the front and behind the scenes like Alan Lake, along with the story behind it and people’s involvement with it, even if the leaders lie to cover up the truth across their online media platform. Presenting a false reality which those who have had anything to do with the movement over the past few years know is the truth and I could give you as many witnesses as you want to support that statement.

Alan Lake is the key point man behind the movement (I could go into allot more incriminating evidence here but I will save it for next time) linking the financial political ideological side of the Counter-jihad movement to the English Defence League.

Remove him and there is a missing link in their “European political project”.

He was going to be removed and it was only a matter of time.

He knew it, and had allot to lose, especially if he was connected to others in the intelligence services foreign or domestic, and I go with foreign for now but do not rule anything out considering the protection he has had up until this point which means they were working with him on a bigger project that I was a direct threat to.

He is also known to be a part of a group of European intellectuals with a political agenda, along with access to finances to further that agenda.

That agenda has just seen this Counter-jihad clique surrounding Alan Lake in the European parliament so do not dismiss anything I am saying.

He was also an employee within the EU controlled European Bank for Reconstruction & Development before he was sacked a couple of weeks ago, and has contacts in the British Government, Swedish Government and Norwegian Government.

Who is he, where does he come from and how has he been able to work his way into the position he has been in?

He had allot to lose and I and others at that point were a direct threat to him and his position.

Again, reason and motive.

How else was I written into ‘Operation Breivik’ other than by Lake as an attempt to have me removed from being a direct threat or at the very least completely discredited by always being directly associated with being Anders Breivik’s English ‘mentor’ the man behind the monster which deflects all blame and attention from anyone else because I knew nothing about Breivik before July 22nd 2011.

This means he is directly connected to Breivik and his terrorist attacks, and is in-line with his twisted rhetoric at the beginning when he said: “the chickens coming home to roost”. Yes Breivik did come home to roost after being sent out from Norway after being recruited there in 2002 and travelling the World as part of his training process but who sent him home “to roost” is the question, with that statement a potential ominous sign.

How this part adds into the equation I do not know yet but Lake is directly connected to someone who uses the alias ‘Richard the Lionheart’ online who was important enough for Lake to have been invited to the pre-founding EDL strategy and discussion meeting in his London Barbican flat before the EDL founding meeting which is where I was first introduced to Lake and there are 2 other independent witnesses who can verify this person’s identity along with an email.

Breivik claims that his English ‘mentor’ was called 'Richard the Lionhearted' and one of the people who founded the English Defence League and that he sent him ideological material at its start.

Breivik was 10 years in the planning and whoever was behind him had the future plan of a terrorist attack inside Norway and attempted future terrorist group and campaign already in their mind and was working towards that goal and recruiting others along the way and had their eye on the Counter-jihad anti-jihad ‘scene’.

This is all in-line with Lake’s ideology and political activism, especially now knowing via my ex-military sources that he is actively recruiting ex-British military personnel to join his political cause.

How hard would it be for Breivik to stick to the truth about his English ‘mentor’ but just wrap that truth up in other clothes and place a few subtle pointers in there so as to deflect attention and apportion blame upon someone else which is exactly what he did?

At the founding English Defence League meeting there was a military strategist professor present which has already been confirmed by the chief investigative journalist at the Sunday Times.

Coincidentally Breivik’s final countdown phase towards his terrorist attacks where he started his acquisition of weapons and related materials coincided with the start of the English Defence League too.


Breivik has also stated in police interview which was reported by the Norwegian newspaper Dagbladet that Lakes 4 Freedoms Community website was a source of his ideological inspiration and was the same thinking behind his supposed Knights Templar group.

There you have a known direct link connecting the 2 from Breivik himself that has been reported by the Norwegian media, that you do not have with me and this blog in any media reports anywhere.

Although Breivik an avid commentator on web forums that he respected even leaving a comment on the EDL forum leading up to his attacks, he did not leave an electronic footprint on Lake’s 4 Freedoms site even though it was a source of his inspiration and there was a Norwegian room on the website.

What was his reason and motive for not wanting to leave an electronic footprint on Lake’s website?

Not very hard to think is it.

All links point to Alan Ayling aka Alan Lake being Breivik’s English ‘mentor’ only no serious action has been taken against him or anyone else connected to him yet to determine whether or not he or they are directly connected to Breivik and the July 22nd 2011 attacks, only a mickey mouse interview by British detectives as part of protocol in the case, although that could be very incriminating against him in the future.

Considering the Norwegian police are said to still be trying to trace the English ‘mentor’ ‘Richard the Lionhearted’ which is 1 of 3 people (2 women) they have not been able to trace out of 55 people within the manifesto they have already traced you would think that ascertaining the identity of Lakes close trusted associate who was invited to that first meeting in Lakes flat would be a priority in the case to see how that could possibly link into the whole case of which Lake has already been interviewed over his possible role as the English ‘mentor’.

The Norwegian State have failed in their obligation in the Breivik case at every turn, with their response to the attacks as shown in the July 22nd Commission report, and their prosecution case in the court room in front of the Worlds media. The only thing left is to investigate the credibility of their ‘official’ police investigation that concluded Breivik was a “solo terrorist” connected to no one which means there is no one else to look for which on the face of it means Lake is not directly connected to Breivik because as far as the Norwegian State in control of the investigation is concerned Breivik is not connected to anyone else.

They have closed the case down from the top.

Based on the known evidence there can be no trust placed in that ‘official’ conclusion which means there are others directly connected to Breivik who at this moment in time have escaped their complicity in the terrorist attacks in Norway.

Why would the Norwegian State close the case down and cover-up the truth and allow others to escape their complicity in the event?

Alan Ayling aka Alan Lake has a contact in the Norwegian Government.

He also had a Norwegian secretary in one of his money funnelling companies which is 2 direct links into Norway prior to July 22nd 2011 on top of the direct links to Breivik himself.

There has to be an ‘official’ explanation as to how I ended up accused of being the English ‘mentor’, not least because Christian Halto stated that Breivik mentioned me himself which I cannot see anywhere (unless in police interview) other than the subtle pointers placed within the manifesto to apportion blame and suspicion in my direction.

That is not mentioning me himself, that is knowing people would point the finger and apportion blame upon me because of subtle pointers he placed inside the manifesto that even the police construed was me which is completely different and wrong and a slanderous statement that was used to smear my name all over the World news as the English ‘mentor’.

If those subtle pointers were placed inside the manifesto to apportion blame and suspicion then the question that has to be answered is; why?

What was Breivik’s reason and motive for doing that considering I do not know him?

This is my explanation behind the reason and motive based upon factual evidence which means that there are others directly connected to him and his terrorist attacks contrary to the Norwegian State’s ‘official’ conclusion of Breivik the “solo terrorist” connected to no one. The insane label has now been dismissed which leaves a level headed terrorist who knew his actions and the results of those actions, so questions like this cannot just be dismissed and swept under the carpet now.

Especially not because the Norwegian police have an official witness statement stating all of this which was been ruled out because of their State sanctioned ‘official’ conclusion claiming Breivik was/is a “solo terrorist” connected to no one.

All that is left is to now test the integrity of the Norwegian police investigation and if found that multiple lines of enquiry have been refused to be followed up on then you have the 3rd aspect of this State controlled case that has failed the Norwegian people.

This will then tell its own story or confirm a story and we already know in this case that Norwegian State ‘officials’ have been caught lying to mislead the public and opposition parties in that Country to cover-up the truth.


A thought came to me when thinking over this whole scenario surrounding my implication in the case at the very beginning where I was lined up as being the English 'mentor' behind Breivik as covered above.

The first set of psychiatrists who evaluated Breivik put his talk of Knights Templar down to delusions, they did not mention anywhere that Breivik could have taken anything from me and this blog and incorporated it into his thinking and then explained his reasons for doing that, they just dismissed it as delusions with no basis in reality.

The second set of psychiatrists put Breivik's talk of Knights Templar down to being a figment of his imagination, again not mentioning anywhere anything about me or this blog as an explanation behind his thinking and the reasons why and where it came from: Explaining context

The Norwegian police in court did not mention anywhere about Breivik taking anything from me and this blog either even though Christian Halto stated Breivik mentioned me himself, they just dismissed the Knights Templar as non-existence without explaining anything about me, this blog, and Breivik's claim of 'Richard the Lionhearted' etc etc etc and where this came from and why.

All 3 sets of professionals excluded in court the possibility to my knowledge that Breivik copied anything from me and this blog.

If that is the case then why was it a general consensus in the international media in the days after the terrorist attacks that Breivik copied me and this blog which made me out to be the English 'mentor' behind him who had inspired him?

Richard the Lionheart, Knights Templar, anti-moslem and a few other things does not sound like delusions or a figment of his imagination to me sitting here.

Seems very rationale and logical to me.

Every journalist who wrote an article claiming I was Breivik's English 'mentor' must be thinking that same thing if they are reading this now and be wondering what the explanation behind how I stood accused is.

Remember he is not a paranoid schizophrenic who was psychotic either so everything he did was rational within the framework of his terrorist attacks so can be explained logically on that basis and means that everything he did had meaning and purpose behind it.

Does it not beg the question as to why the psychiatrists and police did not explain Breivik's Knights Templar idea in the context of me and this blog by saying he copied me and then given the reasons why he did this?

Why has no explanation been given even though Breivik crafted it so perfectly to apportion blame in my direction the days after the attacks, expecting me to be arrested?

They just completely ignored me and this blog as if it played no part in anything within the context of the case.

If they had of mentioned me and this blog it would have opened up a whole different angle on the case that needed explaining and brought my 'official' evidence into play, and they obviously had not fully investigated my 'official' evidence to see whether or not it held up, they just dismissed it.

They completely excluded my explanation behind why I believed Breivik had set me up for arrest which explains the Knights Templar, Richard the Lionhearted and other pointers placed inside the manifesto directing attention my way and enlightened this aspect of the case. Why do you think I traveled to Norway at the height of blame upon my shoulders?

They just dismissed the Knights Templar as delusions and a figment of his imagination as if part of his 'madness' or lies without explaining where it came from and why even though it was a general consensus in the media that it was me, even though it was not me but a part of Breivik's plan that needs explaining.

I did hear my name mentioned by several reporters during the few snippets of the trial I saw when they posed questions after the days proceedings but cannot remember what was said.

To my knowledge nobody anywhere in the trial said that Breivik copied anything from me and this blog.

So why did I stand accused of being his English 'mentor' in the international media based upon Christian Halto's 'official' Norwegian police statement to the media, along with Breivik's pointers in my direction?

Does this angle on the case not warrant explaining, because if I am right it explains why Breivik attempted to set me up for arrest and means other peoples direct involvement with him.

Or is it another case of the Norwegian State closing the case down because they do not want the real truth to emerge for some reason so they just completely ignore this angle on the case as if it does not even exist?

I would like to know the full truth behind why I stood accused in the Worlds media of being Breivik's English 'mentor'.

I have come to my own conclusion and there is still outstanding evidence in the case that the Norwegian police have not investigated because the case has been shut down from the very top with the "solo terrorist"connected to no one 'official' conclusion which means as far as they are concerned there is nobody else to look for.

Is that the path of truth & justice Norwegian style?

What if Breivik is directly connected to others, should they not be held accountable for their complicity in the worst terrorist attack in Europe of the 21st Century that can only be described as a crime against humanity?

What does the memory of all those dead young Norwegian people think about that?

25 August 2012

Breivik's lawyer now working on UK extradition case

VG: Geir Lippestad working on UK extradition case

What are the chances of that in the scheme of things considering there is now the very real possibility that there are UK citizens who are directly connected to Anders Breivik and his July 22nd 2011 massacre and bombing, or who hold vital key information directly connected to the case and other peoples possible direct involvement. This would mean the potential for multiple extradition cases from the UK to Norway for them to undergo police interview under caution, if they were not willing to travel voluntarily that is, with them then standing trial in the Country if there is evidence against them and they are charged with conspiracy to commit terrorist acts.

Atleast Geir Lippestad will now know the intricate details of extradition law between the 2 Countries and even though he is a defence lawyer he knows what is right and what is wrong in this case that has affected his whole Country as he has played a central role as Breivik's lawyer from the beginning so knows whether or not their is scope for people to be interviewed under police caution.

If nobody has anything to hide then voluntarily offering up a witness statement in such a serious case that they are directly implicated in should be a matter or course, but to attempt to refuse and then go down the path of fighting extradition would tell its own story.

And we already know that individuals are already partial to using lawyers to lie on their behalf over this case so extradition might be the only option.

Will be interesting to see now considering there is still outstanding evidence in the Breivik case that this Counter-jihad clique along with others still posses.

Further reading: The eye of the storm - The investigation

Who is going to investigate the Breivik investigation?

There has been an investigation into the Civil State Security Apparatus's response to 'Operation Breivik' before and during the terrorist attacks which found a catastrophic number of errors led to the terrorist attacks not only being able to have been prevented before July 22nd 2011 but also not being as bad during the time of the event.

The Commission report that covered the investigation into the Emergency response to 'Operation Breivik' also highlighted a State appointed police Director lying when giving testimony to the media and political opposition along with a Government official (that we know of), and the Prime Minister refusing to secure the Government building when repeatedly being told to do so which means negligence in political office.

Misleading the public and political opposition concerning the truth surrounding 'Operation Breivik' which is an attempted cover-up and white-wash of the truth and facts in the case on State level.

We have now seen the State's prosecution case against Breivik played out in front of the World's media that has shown it to be a pre-planned concerted effort from the very top to influence the 'rule of law' towards their predetermined goal in the case.

To secure the 'criminally insane' label upon Breivik.

This is contrary to the belief of 9 out of 10 Norwegians following the trial, the psychiatric field in Norway and abroad, and the presiding judges who unanimously rejected the prosecutions case and heavily criticised all aspects of it in summing up.

What does that tell you about the State's prosecution case?

The only thing left now is to investigate the Norwegian police investigation into 'Operation Breivik' to determine whether or not their 'official' conclusion that Breivik was a "solo terrorist" connected to no one is actually a credible and fail-safe conclusion that can be trusted.

Based upon the Norwegian State's 'official' case so far and its complete and utter failings it is not very hard to perceive the outcome.

If there are others directly connected to Anders Breivik and his actions on July 22nd 2011 then should they too not be held to account for their complicity in his crimes?

Most importantly the mass murder and massacre of a group of innocent misguided teenagers on their summer camp in the name of politics.

We have to wait now to see whether or not the integrity and credibility of the 'official' Norwegian police investigation is going to be investigated to determine whether or not it is credible, and considering all aspects of this case must be anaylsed for the sake of Norwegian society to understand fully what happened on July 22nd 2011 then it is very hard to see how investigating the police investigation cannot now take place.

Or is the Norwegian police investigation into 'Operation Breivik' beyond reproach?

Norwegian commentary about court case


A convincing verdict in terror case

District Court judges and 22 July Commission members have faced many of the same challenges:

Expectations have been running high. The landscape is unclear and confusing. Well established power being challenged.

For the Commission was represented by a self-conscious governmental apparatus and concealing police.

For the district court had the form of a secure prosecution and a psychiatric oligarchy.

Both the District Court and the Commission had to find their own way through this. It is now done. With two clear and independent leaders, Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen and Alexandra Bech Gjørv, in the course of about two weeks, created an invaluable foundation that we as a nation can move forward with less trauma than we otherwise would have had.

This will place the two women central to the grand story that is now printed on July 22nd-place of tragedy in future national consciousness.

Heavy settlement
The five District Court judges takes a sharp confrontation with single-minded experts and an uncritical forensic commission.

Systematically throughout the forensic psychiatric canvas scrutiny. And just as systematically Husby / Sørheim report picked apart.

The main objection is crystal clear: The two psychiatrists have never been genuinely interested in other explanations of Anders Behring Breivik's life and actions than to place him safely in psychiatry solid - and at times - fixed terms.

Therefore, they have been consistently wrong. Anders Behring Breivik's violent extremism can not be explained away by morbidly do it. He's part of our time. This is absolutely central perspective Thurs the 1st expert totally have disregarded. Therefore, they have not understood the man they observed, but consistently misinterpreted him.

It's brutal, but it's true.

Scandal Commission
Just as true as when the court notes that the forensic commission has not done its job.

Completely uncritical has left the weaknesses of the first report pass, while doing his best to brace legs for the other. The court said it directly, but it's in the cards: This Commission has made prestige trump academic honesty.

Right Psychiatry is many years called judges without cap. With good reason, it is argued that the court often abdicates in the face of this little verifiable expertise. So it was not in the courtroom 250

Rather, it reeks of common sense and legal common sense when the court considers the various reports against each other. Equally important, the court sees the whole picture where many have only seen bits and pieces. For it is the overall presentation of evidence which has convinced Anders Behring Breivik five judges that he is beyond a reasonable doubt can be held accountable for the accident he staged.

It was a misjudgment when prosecutors asserted in its argument that the evidence was not strong enough to convict the accused to 21 years' detention. Equally wrong was it to build criminal allegation so heavily on an expert report an earlier could be seen not measure up. And it would have been a disaster for the matter of prosecution and the defendant is successful in its strong and unanimous opposition that it would appoint new experts.

As we now know: There was an independent law who insisted on more experts. Today we know that the rock matter from a judicial scandal.

Both the Attorney General and the defender must today be a sobering thought that they had gotten their way in the winter, yes, then we will have a completely wrong verdict. Without the two new experts - Agnar Aspaas and Terje Tørrissen - would Anders Behring Breivik now been on the road to compulsory psychiatric care.

Such must invite introspection with prosecutors. And already the evening news last night was attorney general Tor-Aksel Busch commendable clear in its self-criticism on this crucial point. It was important for the credibility of the prosecution.

The sample consisted
Yesterday tingrettsdom is clear, direct and logical.

At the same time it's open final word on the future of democracy a judgment that is deeply rooted in our society's shared values.

Full article: Norwegian commentary about court case

24 August 2012

Questioning Norway’s State Prosecution

VG: 9 of 10 Norwegians believe verdict is correct

How could they have gotten their case so wrong.

First there was the court ordered State sanctioned psychiatric report that deemed Breivik to be a paranoid schizophrenic who was psychotic at the time of his actions which meant he was criminally insane.

There was uproar over this diagnosis by most concerned parties in the case which challenged the court to order another evaluation to take place.

The State prosecutors challenged this and argued in court against another evaluation taking place as they were happy with the first reports diagnosis of Breivik.

The judge had no alternative but to overrule this challenge due to the seriousness of the case before the court and allow for another independent evaluation to take place.

The second evaluation came to a completely different conclusion to the first and stated that Breivik was criminally sane during the time of his actions and was not schizophrenic or psychotic as the first report concluded.

The psychiatric commission charged with overseeing the debate in court over Breiviks mental health had no comments to make against the first report which meant they fully supported its findings. Instead they challenged the integrity of the second report by passing negative comments on it which meant they did not fully endorse it.

The State prosecutors then prosecuted Breivik based upon the first evaluation seeking to have him found criminally insane.

The first report was undermined by all leading health care professionals in the field of psychiatry in the court room including a specialist team who dealt with Breivik in prison around the clock who found no signs of schizophrenia or psychosis in him.

It was also heavily criticised by most leading experts in the field of psychiatry externally who were following the legal proceedings remotely.

The State prosecutors ignored all leading witnesses and continued to uphold the first report in their prosecution case and then left it to the judge to determine the verdict hoping that the law of doubt would be enough to gain the conviction of ‘criminally insane’ against Breivik.

After 2 months deliberations the judge ruled against the prosecution and passed the criminally sane verdict on Breivik. This verdict was a unanimous decision from all the judges sitting over the case which meant there was no doubt from them about their verdict.

In summing up the judge also heavily criticised the work of the first set of psychiatrists who wrote the first State sanctioned report.

The Attorney General who sat above the whole State’s case against Breivik only now states that they should have allowed for the second evaluation to have taken place at the beginning, after the State’s prosecution case has now been completely exposed as an attempt to secure a verdict contrary to the ‘rule of law’.

The question is; why contrary to the evidence did the State seek to secure the criminally insane label against Breivik at all costs?

The Norwegian State’s prosecution case against Breivik has been shown to be fundamentally flawed to the point that the Attorney General should have stepped in and directed his State appointed prosecutors to accept that the first psychiatric report was wrong and misleading. He did not do this, instead the State sanctioned psychiatric commission under his authority upheld that report and undermined the second independent report in an attempt to tip the scales towards the States favour and prosecution case in the eyes of the judges.

Is that not perverting the course of justice?

But this is the Norwegian Attorney General doing it who is above the law because he is sits on the throne of Norwegian law.

The question is; why have the Norwegian State been so desperate to secure the criminally insane label on Breivik contrary to the professional evidence and contrary to public opinion who were following the evidence remotely and could see for themselves?

I have my opinion about why.

This means that the State’s prosecution case against Breivik has been completely exposed as a farce, raising very serious questions about what the State were up to in the court room with the evidence now plain as day for anyone to look upon to draw a conclusion from, although it will all be wrapped up in nice clean clothes for the public perceptions. And the State’s Civil Security Apparatus concerning Breivik was also shown to be a complete farce that has made Norway look like a failed State in the eyes of all outside observers via the July 22nd Commission report that showed a catalogue of errors that allowed ‘Operation Breivik’ to be as successful as it was.

People have got to be thinking now that there is something seriously fundamentally wrong with the Norwegian State’s handling of the whole terrorist attacks inside Norway, even to the point that there has been a hidden hand at work behind the scenes orchestrating things.

All that is left now is to determine whether or not the ‘official’ police investigation into ‘Operation Breivik’ that concluded he was a “solo terrorist” connected to no one is actually a credible conclusion that can be trusted. Based upon the known evidence about the case the answer is no.

This is on top of now knowing that the police response was completely flawed with a catastrophic catalogue of errors based upon the commission report, and now their prosecution case being shown to be completely flawed with very serious questions now arising as to what went on in the court room in front of the Worlds media.

Does the evidence not point to the fact that the Norwegian State in control of the whole case have been working towards a pre-planned agenda which is to cover-up and white-wash the whole thing?

Then you look for reasons why, for which I have come to my own conclusions upon even if they do sound to be unbelievable on the face of it. The evidence is now starting to point to the fact that there might be substance to what I am saying.

The credibility of the police investigation into ‘Operation Breivik’ will now confirm or deny my claims. That is if it is investigated which it should be for the sake of those young Norwegian lives lost on July 22nd 2011 where their memory deserves for truth & justice to prevail along with other accomplices to the event held to account for their complicity.

I can only continue to wait and hope and there is still a whole investigative track outstanding surrounding my ‘official’ witness statement voluntarily given to the Norwegian police after I stood accused of being Breivik’s English ‘mentor’.

The Breivik judgement: “sane”

To support that judgement in no way means supporting Breivik or his actions, it means supporting the integrity of the Democratic judicial process of which Norway has hit a crisis under their old school political Establishment that has been exposed as a political Dictatorship in the heart of Europe who control the functioning of State contrary to the Democracy they so openly espouse across their control of the media platform to their Norwegian public and their wider international audience concerned about what is happening in Norway.

75% of Norwegians agree with the ‘sane’ verdict along with and most importantly the overwhelming majority of survivors and their families which says all you need to know about today’s verdict.

In my personal opinion it is another catastrophic blow to the AUF-Labour Governments control over their reins of power in Norway because it clearly shows that there has been something fundamentally flawed from start to finish with their handling of the Breivik case.

This poses more questions than answers, only it is taboo to ask the real challenging questions in the mainstream media.

Breivik might have claimed his target was the AUF-Labour party but not is all as it seems with something of this scale that has far wider political ramifications, and when you start pulling back the layers in search of the truth a completely different story emerges. One story that is strikingly clear is that the AUF-Labour Government who control the Norwegian State Apparatus have systematically at every opportunity attempted to cover-up the truth behind Breivik, which leaves the biggest question of all; WHY? After it was supposed to be an attack against them?

I have my interpretation that sits well with me and my perception, and there is still outstanding evidence in the case which will determine whether I am right or wrong.

With regards to today’s ruling that Breivik is ‘sane’, the questions is, how could the Norwegian State in control of the case have got it so catastrophically wrong for there not to be questions now surrounding this?

Their State prosecutors fought tooth and nail to secure the insane verdict on Breivik completely contrary to the majority of the Norwegian population including the health care professionals in the field of mental health who testified during the trial.

The first set of State sanctioned psychiatrists appointed by the court to judge Breivik’s sanity concluded he was a paranoid schizophrenic who was psychotic at the time of his actions, thus criminally ‘insane’. This same medical partnership have concluded the same clinical analysis on 12 of 15 cases brought before the courts. They even mislead the court in the Breivik trial by saying they had worked on 15 cases together when in fact they had worked on 51 cases together which is another example of State actors lying to the public and opposition political parties over this case to hide from the truth.

The diagnosis of insane worked well for the State’s media story surrounding Breivik, of the lonely “solo terrorist” connected to no one who drove himself insane after playing computer games and reading right-wing websites in his bedroom at his mother’s home which meant there was no bigger story surrounding him and no one else to look for, he was just a lonely insane crazy man. This was then spread around the Worlds media outlets and formed the public perception over Breivik.

Due to the fact that there was uproar from all quarters except the State’s quarter over this medical diagnosis the court was forced to allow a second evaluation to take place. This second evaluation came to a completely contradictory conclusion to the first and stated that Breivik was not a paranoid schizophrenic who was psychotic at the time of his actions but that he was in fact criminally sane during the totality of his actions, although he did have mental deficiencies of which I am sure we all have in some regard if we sat down to analyse ourselves, but Breivik more so which is why he did what he did.

This second evaluation was supported by the fact that there was a team of prison psychiatrists who dealt with Breivik in prison around the clock on a daily basis with experts on schizophrenia who also concluded that he was not schizophrenic or psychotic which again completely contradicted the first psychiatric report.

In court there was the psychiatric commission charged with overseeing the debate over Breivik’s mental state of mind. The commission found no fault in the first report that found his schizophrenic and psychotic, instead they criticised the integrity of the second report which attempted to damage its credibility in the eyes of the public via the media.

At trial I believe there were 37 psychiatrists who gave testimony about Breiviks mental state of mind, and only 2 concluded he was criminally insane, and the 2 who found him criminally insane were the first 2 State appointed psychiatrists who wrote the first report and have a history of both agreeing together on that exact same conclusion for the courts.

How could the State appointed psychiatric commission charged with overseeing this aspect of the trial support and endorse the first report finding no faults yet criticise the second report that was eventually supported by pretty much all medical professionals testifying in court?

Does that not point to the fact that there is something wrong in this situation?

Criminal in fact when you actually analyse it.

It then turns out that one of the writers of the first psychiatric report that nobody agreed with except the psychiatric commission was herself the head of that exact commission prior to the Breivik trial and most of the people sitting on the commission were her intimate friends and work colleagues.

There is your answer.

Can you see the States hand seeking to enforce the ‘insane’ label on Breivik? They were all State actors dancing around that first report on-behalf of their State masters after all so that tells you the story surrounding the first and second reports and now the judges final conclusion that upholds the second impartial report forced through by the families of the dead and injured.

The judge is not playing along with the States game in this case and has ruled in-line with common sense when faced with the evidence in court, which is why she has now deemed Breivik to be criminally sane and passed judgement, not only that, the verdict was a unanimous verdict supported by all the trial judges meaning no disagreement on the verdict.

Nobody agrees with the States case against Breivik accept the State actors themselves who played their parts in front of the Worlds media on-behalf of the State and a few state lackies for media purposes.

Does this not tell you something is seriously fundamentally wrong with the whole situation? And then you look at the evidence surrounding the prosecution’s case concerning Breivik’s mental health as covered here in this short blog post and you can clearly see there has been a concerted effort to secure the ‘insane’ label in court for some reason.

What could that reason be?

The insane label would have continued to endorse the ‘official’ State sanctioned conclusion and story surrounding him in the media for the benefit of public perceptions, meaning their cover-story of the insane “solo terrorist” connected to no one who drove himself mad in his bedroom ‘alone’ which then becomes an accepted fact in the public conscience and nobody goes looking for the real story behind ‘Operation Breivik’ because as far as the Norwegian State is concerned there is no other story other than the ‘official’ story they have presented to the World.

And they control the whole State Apparatus so how will the 'full truth' ever be known if they have covered it up?

The July 22nd Commission report is another glaring example of the State lying and misleading the public and opposition parties over the polices emergency response to Breivik, which has shown that the government under Jens Stoltenberg’s direct leadership have blood on their hands due to their negligence but you do not see them taking any steps to clean those hands in front of the Norwegian people who they profess to represent.

It is another example of an attempted State sanctioned cover-up in this case.

My question is; How can the public have any confidence in the State’s ‘official’ conclusion that Breivik was a “solo terrorist” connected to no one?

Based upon what is public knowledge so far concerning their handling of the case, there can be absolutely no confidence placed in their ‘official’ conclusion, and that is without going into all the evidence here.

That means if there were/are others involved with Breivik then they escape justice, sanctioned by the Norwegian State.

How can that be in the interests or truth & justice in a Democracy?

The only thing left is for there to be a full and thorough investigation into the polices investigation into the case surrounding ‘Operation Breivik’ to determine whether or not the ‘official’ State sanctioned conclusion of “solo terrorist” connected to no one is correct or not.

Are there multiple lines of enquiry that have not been pursued?

I can name several just based upon newspaper reports into the case over the last year.

Who is there to investigate the States case other than the State themselves?

Lets hope an external force now holds key evidence in this case for the sake of the dead, injured and their families in Norway as they seek for the full truth to be known for the sake of their loved ones memories.

I support Democracy until it fails...