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?