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...