1 Corinthians 3:7-9 So then neither he who plants is anything, nor he who waters, but God who gives the increase. Now he who plants and he who waters are one, and each one will receive his own reward according to his own labor. For we are God’s fellow workers; you are God’s field, you are God’s building.
With such a serious criminal trial taking place where the battle in the court room between the prosecution and the defence is over the 'state of mind' of the accused which determines whether or not he is criminally responsible for his actions the Psychiatric Commission is expected to take a neutral impartial position above the 2 sides to make sure justice prevails in the court room.
The judge in Breivik's trial has today accused the Psychiatric Commission of discrimination against the second psychiatric report.
That is the diplomatic way of saying the Psychiatric Commission have attempted to 'pervert the course of justice' in a legal case during trial.
The Norwegian State in control of the Breivik case want the 'insane' label placed upon Breivik because then their 'official' story surrounding him is much more acceptable to the public mind.
This is why the Psychiatric Commission have discriminated against the second impartial psychiatric report, with not one single criticism by them of the first State sanctioned report.
That is a clear cut case of attempting to 'pervert the course of justice' in a criminal trial.
What would happen to one of us mere mortals if we were caught 'perverting the course of justice' in a criminal trial?
Don't pass go...
The Psychiatric Commission have only now claimed they made a mistake this late on in the proceedings after being challenged over their professional misconduct.
Quote:We should have written: "We take note of the report, but still disagree." That's what we thought, but not what we wrote, he said.
Due to the seriousness and gravity of the case would you not expect better from the Psychiatric Commission charged with overseeing the criminal proceedings?
If this had not been challenged by the psychiatric and legal experts then no one would be none the wiser and their declarations would stand, even though they were false.
Quote:After Tørrissen and Aspaas delivered its report, sent the Oslo District Court a remarkable letter to the Forensic Medicine, who wrote the report "was taken into consideration," while the Commission "did not have major objections" to the first report of psychiatrists Husby and Sørheim.
All professional witnesses have diplomatically undermined the findings of the first State sanctioned psychiatric report, yet the Psychiatric Commission did not have any objections to it.
Quote:Is not this discrimination?Armed Forces and aid lawyers hammered away at the head of the psychiatric group in the forensic commission.
Lawyer says Frode Sulland shortcomings of the forensic psychiatric commission. - This is nothing new, and it is good that politicians are seeing the problem, says Sulland.
It has now emerged that contrary to the 'official' declaration of the Psychiatric Commission that there was complete agreement amongst its members over upholding the first State sanctioned report and completely undermining the second which was spread around the World news, there was actually 3 members who did disagree.
That means whoever made the 'official' statement on-behalf of the Commission was lying to the public and to the court which re-enforces the criminal proceedings against whoever it was once a thorough investigation of their professional misconduct has taken place.
With 3 independent witnesses and a phone recording to back it up.
It turned out that NRK were accidentally listening into the meeting which probably means that not all was well within the secret walls of the Psychiatric Commission, with not all of its members being willing State tools attempting to cover up the truth behind the massacre of a group of innocent Norwegian children on their summer camp in the name of politics.
The biggest battle in the court room over Breivik which was his sanity has turned out to be a completely corrupt charade on-behalf of the Norwegian State, that is well and truly operating in the realms of criminality with members of the Psychiatric Commission "perverting the course of justice".
What more proof do you need that not all is as it seems in Norway?
Next will be the Norwegian police in charge of the investigation once evidence emerges.
Quote:If Breivik think he has had meetings he has had, and think he has talked to people who are not, he has a psychosis. But if Breivik boasts of a network and secret meetings to appear larger and more dangerous than he is, or to give meaning and importance to his unsuccessful expedition diamond is not Breivik psychotic. When he is just a phony, or a person with a need to inflate his importance and success - or an image-busy "selling" of fascist ideology.
I liked that one it was a good assumption that covered both bases. Firstly it gave the first set of State sanctioned psychiatrists a get out clause for their report that nobody believes in and Secondly it endorsed the Norwegian police’s ‘official’ claim of Breivik the “solo terrorist” connected to no one line.
It is only a professional assumption though, and it is completely contradicted by another psychiatrist who does believe that Breivik is connected to other people which is what I agree with.
Quote:Defense Geir Lippestad asked IPS about her thoughts on the Knights Templar, the organization Breivik said to belong to. Police do not believe that the organization exist. - I have drawn the conclusion that he met some people. Some guys have met and there has been a kind of mixed blood, so many guys are doing.
Simple logic says that over the space of 10 years and an international itinerary that spanned several continents Breivik met like minded people along the way, the question is whether or not he is connected to anyone behind his terrorist attacks either mentally or physically though.
The Norwegian police have stated that nobody helped Breivik mentally or physically which is endorsed by the first psychiatrist above and propagated through the media for the benefit of public perceptions.
First bit of logic.
Breivik actively sought out physical contact with his Norwegian comrade Fraudman who he named his “2083” manifesto after which is a fact.
If Breivik sought out contact with Fraudman because he was ideologically aligned with him then what are the chances based upon that fact, that Breivik sought out other like minded individuals over the space of 10 years?
Considering he actively sought out Fraudman then it is logical to say he sought out others which contradicts the ‘official’ conclusion.
Second bit of logic.
Breivik boasted in his manifesto that he had 600 EDL and BNP supporters in one of his Facebook accounts, and he posted comments on the EDL forum just before his attacks.
That means he sought out other like minded individuals even if it was only online which agrees with the first bit of logic.
Did he meet any in person is the question that needs answering though.
He also claimed in police interview that Alan Lake’s website Four Freedoms Community is ideologically identical to his planned Knights Templar organisation which links in with the EDL because Lake is the director behind the EDL. The timeline for the countdown to the attacks also coincides with the founding of the EDL.
Alan Lake is the other alleged English ‘mentor’ who has been interviewed by the Norwegian police over his possible role behind Breivik.
Did Breivik attend any EDL demonstrations?
Third bit of logic.
Is it not the Norwegian police who can confirm or deny the existence of any accomplices due to their investigation and not a psychiatrist who does not know the evidence with which to form an opinion over?
A psychiatrist is only forming an opinion based upon conversations and not factual evidence and here you have 2 completely different psychiatrists giving completely contradictory opinions after conversations with Breivik.
Who is right and who is wrong?
I say the one who based their conclusion on basic logic that fits in with their conversations which then calls into question the professional integrity of the first psychiatrist above who has based his professional integrity on the Norwegian polices fundamentally flawed ‘official’ conclusion.
The first one looks good for the Norwegian State media story surrounding Breivik that they want the World to believe though.
Breivik the son of a Norwegian Government diplomat, step son of an Army Major and best friend of a Norwegian Ministry of Defence Lawyer who is connected to no one and was recruited, radicalised, trained and financed from the confines of his bedroom in his mother’s home whilst he was ‘insane’ and playing computer games.
Only the ‘insane’ label has not been upheld by 12 out of 14 court witnesses within the field of psychiatry, with the only 2 upholding that label being the State sanctioned ones who wrote the first report on him which is endorsed by a completely biased Psychiatric Commission that has been perverting the course of justice. Also there are 16 out of a team of 17 who dealt with Breivik in prison who have also stated they saw no sign of psychosis or schizophrenia in him.
That is called a general consensus against the first State sanctioned report and the State sanctioned Psychiatric Commission.
No psychiatrist dealing with Breivik can base any professional opinion on the investigative angle of the case based upon the Norwegian police’s ‘official’ conclusion due to the facts.
After 10 months they could not trace Breivik’s Liberian contacts to pursue that critical line of investigation, in the end it was the Norwegian newspaper VG who traced them in a matter of days. In 10 months they did not know Breivik’s cover name whilst in Liberia which only emerged yesterday when Breivik told them himself. In 10 months they have not looked through all of his email accounts either which includes the one he used for his Liberia trip.
How can you come to an ‘official’ conclusion about something without knowing the evidence?
That is only one line of investigation the Norwegian police have failed to pursue before stating their ‘official’ conclusion.
Breivik has stated that he has 2 Facebook accounts that contain around 8,000 contacts and within them they will find a link to an accomplice, only the Norwegian police have ruled out looking because they say “it would be like looking for a needle in a haystack”.
Another critical line of investigation completely dismissed.
Where did Breivik learn to create a bomb big enough to blow up his Government building?
Or are we meant to believe that he was completely successful first go after downloading an internet recipe that was able to do the large scale damage that it did?
The PST under its old leadership are culpable for Breivik’s attacks because he was flagged by Norwegian Customs after purchasing chemicals for his bomb from Poland but the PST did not do any checks on him after being told to do so.
If they had of done their jobs properly July 22nd 2011 might have been averted and 69 young people would not now be dead with many more injured for life, this also includes the 8 people killed at the Government building.
We all make mistakes, only some not as bad as others.
Fourth bit of logic which calls into question the Norwegian State’s case against Breivik.
Breivik was very active online within the Counter-jihad and Right-wing movement over the space of 10 years which is the whole basis behind his actions and why he is now sitting on trial.
So why has there not been one single person from this political environment who he has been in direct communication with over that space of time now giving evidence in court?
You have players from his online World of Warcraft game he was in communication with giving evidence.
You have personal friends outside of his political World giving evidence.
But not one single person from the political environment he was involved in over the space of 10 years who he was in direct communication with.
Why?
He must have been in direct communication with someone (plural) because look at how active online he was, but that completely contradicts the ‘official’ conclusion of the “solo terrorist” connected to no one line which is why nobody he has been in communication with from his political environment online has been called to testify in court.
Instead they want to call players from WoW because that helps endorse through the media the ‘official’ conclusion in the mind of the public of Breivik the “solo terrorist” connected to no one who was ‘insane’ and went out and committed his murderous terrorist acts after playing computer games in his bedroom.
Case closed.
State sanctioned trial by media that is nothing more than a kangaroo court with a predetermined goal in sight with all functions of State controlling the case via the "secret group" working towards that goal which then makes you question everything (I have anyway), but those in control of the Breivik case currently control the bigger media platform and nobody wants to seriously criticise the Norwegian State’s case surrounding Breivik even though the evidence is in plain sight.
Fifth piece of logic.
This is the most important piece for me because it is integral to me.
How did I end up being smeared all over the World news by the Norwegian police as being the English ‘mentor’ behind Breivik?
Either Breivik was inspired by me which was the part written for me by those behind ‘Operation Breivik’ with them dressing up his actions in the ideology behind me and this blog with intelligent pointers then placed inside the manifesto pointing to me or I was the actual person he met in London in 2002.
I have never met or had any contact with Breivik in my life so I am not the person he met in London in 2002 which rules that out, and the accusation was not that I was his inspiration it was that I was his actual English ‘mentor’. His ideological inspiration is his Norwegian comrade Fraudman who he mentions inside his manifesto 111 times who he named his manifesto after but you never saw their photos next to each other in the papers, and the only ones who claimed I was his inspiration were journalists through the media because that was how those behind Breivik wanted the script to go.
The media story surrounding Breivik for mass public consumption.
All media attention deflected from the real source and reason behind him in the days after the events centering on me with the very real prospect of me being arrested under the prevention of terrorism act and charged with directing or inciting terrorism which they hoped would kill two birds with one stone.
Breivik is a godless militant Nationalist who claims to be upholding Christian values and not a Christian fundamentalist although he professes the clothes of Templarism which is based solely on the Christian faith.
I do not believe that his Knight’s Templar organisation exists in the form he first claimed, what I do believe is that he is connected to “individuals” as part of a secret financially and politically motivated group who are connected to a larger network and they are the ones behind him and the events in Norway and are now using the name Knights Templar.
They are just using the name for the benefit of public perceptions which ties in with them wanting to remove me from being a threat to their continued political agenda by apportioning blame for Breivik upon me based upon the clothes they dressed Breivik up in.
Wolves in sheeps clothing as any Christian will tell you when they look at Breivik who actual says himself he is not a Christian.
Using the name makes the group look bigger than they are when in reality it is a small secretive group attempting to start a much larger organisation and terrorist campaign on the back of ‘Operation Breivik’.
There are untold terrorist groups all over the World today from all different religious and ethnic backgrounds who all have their well established networks in place so why is it out of the realms of possibility that Breivik is part of an already established network who trained him, with him then attempting to start a new terrorist group called Knights Templar with his small secretive group directed by his real English ‘mentor’ which is in-line with everything he says and has done?
Because I knew I was not the English ‘mentor’ from 2002 and I knew I was not accused of being his inspiration (only in the media) I had to think logically about how and why Breivik would carry out a hostile act towards me considering he does not know me personally.
Who had reason and motivation enough to want me removed from being a threat and was part of the same ideological network as Breivik?
The only person is Alan Ayling aka Alan Lake the director behind the EDL who has a political agenda throughout Europe which would mean he is the real English ‘mentor’ behind Breivik.
I gave the Norwegian police a voluntary 15 hour interview over 3 days stating my belief and the reasons for it.
This is another line of investigation completely ignored by the Norwegian police because if proven it would conflict with their ‘official’ conclusion that the Norwegian State controllers of the Breivik case are now stating to the World and means that Breivik is connected to other people, and then a completely different story about Breivik would start to emerge.
They do not want this for some reason.
All evidence that has emerged about Alan Lake over the past 10 months proves that there is suspicion enough to warrant a full and thorough police investigation on him as part of the massacre of a group of innocent young children on their summer camp in the name of politics but up to this point that has not been carried out and the ‘official’ conclusion in Norway prevents that from being carried out because they have closed the doors on other possibilities.
They have not even investigated the case properly so it is no wonder this line of investigation has been completely ruled out too, it is as if they do not want to know the full truth which is why they have covered everything up and attempted to white-wash the whole event, using the media to create the story in the public mind that they want the public to believe.
There are 2 seriously incriminating pieces of evidence that could link Ayling directly to Breivik himself and the Norwegian Government or at least people from the political class.
You can read the background profile on Alan Ayling here: Food for thought
Considering I was an integral witness at the start of the Breivik case and the Norwegian police smeared me all over the World news as the alleged English ‘mentor’ with me voluntarily traveling to Norway to give them an ‘official’ witness statement explaining things from my perception you would have thought it only courtesy in the interest of ‘truth & justice’ that they would have called me as a witness to the trial.
I have been mentioned on numerous occasions from different witnesses in the trial and parts of my writings have been shown to Breivik during interviews pre-trial.
So why has my witness statement not been used in the court room as part of the evidence in the case?
Because my witness statement completely conflicts with the ‘official’ conclusion and would leave many questions that need answering and it would be in full view of the Worlds media so my angle on the Breivik case has been completely shut off from the public trial.
My witness statement is a whole line of investigation that has been completely ignored and would have been completely ignored if I had of not spent the last months writing about it here on this blog. My media might not be as big as their media but it is not about size it is about quality and who reads it. There is enough evidence on this blog that shows a whole investigative track with supporting evidence which means that it cannot be ignored forever.
Trial by media…
It would be interesting to know the logic of the first psychiatrist above behind how I became involved in this case although I know the answer already.
“He took parts from different sources”.
But that is not based upon factual evidence other than how the manifesto itself was written.
My witness statement is based upon factual evidence, and it is factual evidence you should form professional opinions over and not baseless assumptions.
The reputations of many people are on the line now because this case is well documented in the media. They only have their professional reputations to think about; I have the accusation of being behind the massacre of a group of innocent children to think about although I am not written inside the manifesto.
The manifesto is named after one of Fraudman's essays which is war like in name and content based upon the name used by the Americas when declaring Independence at the start of the civil war.
See the parallels?
If there is evidence to substantiate my witness statement over the Breivik case then do the police not have a duty to thoroughly investigate it to determine whether or not it is true?
Breivik says he is connected to other people, the Norwegian police say they are still trying to trace the English ‘mentor’ ‘Richard the Lionheart’ and there is a whole body of evidence pointing towards Alan Ayling only absolutely no action has been taken against him.
If you look at the background to his personal and professional life and the people he is involved with it is no wonder no action has been taken.
How damaging would it be and to who if he is directly connected to Breivik.
For starters the EU controlled bank he works for that now has a mandate in several Arab Countries where they have just had an Arab spring with 1 billion investment going into those Countries.
Financially and politically motivated.
What are the financial and political repercussions of Breivik and who stands to gain?
If Ayling is the English ‘mentor’ then he should be charged with his complicity in the crimes and then let him tell his side of the story. Breivik has told the World his side of the story only the Norwegian State does not believe him which in turn forces the public not to believe him either because they control the media story surrounding him.
What would Ayling’s story tell?
Looking at 10 – 15 – 20 years in a Maximum Cat A British prison awash with Islamic terrorists for being behind a massacre of a bunch of innocent Norwegian children on their summer camp in the name of anti-Islam is a very heavy burden to face.
Not one single criticism of the first State sanctioned psychiatric report and the complete undermining of the second through the media for the benefit of public perceptions.
"Perverting the Course of Justice"
12 out of 14 expert witnesses in the field of psychiatry disagree with the findings of the first report, with the only 2 upholding it being the 2 who wrote it.
Endorsed by the completely biased and criminal Psychiatric Commission.
There is also 16 out of a team of 17 who dealt with Breivik on a daily basis in prison who have stated they saw no signs of schizophrenia or psychosis.
What does the situation say other than it is criminal in nature?
That is taboo to say and not very diplomatic though...
Only 2 out of 14 professional witnesses testifying about Breivik's state of mind believe he is 'insane'.
The 2 who do believe he is 'insane' are the first 2 State sanctioned psychiatrists who wrote the first report on him that was based upon misleading information given to them from the Norwegian police which completely undermined their whole diagnosis of him.
They seem to disregard that vital piece of information though which made their report legally unsafe.
The State sanctioned Psychiatric Commission presiding over the case have not thought so and have done their utmost to undermine the second impartial report carried out on Breivik that declared him 'sane' and uphold the first report at all costs with not one single criticism of it.
You could argue why have the State's Psychiatric Commission carried on in such a way when presiding over such a serious case when they should be impartial?
Because the 'insane' label makes the Norwegian State's media story surrounding Breivik sound more convincing to the public mind so the State have fought to uphold that label against him at all costs which is very clear to any observer of the facts, even at the cost of its own professional integrity which moves it into the realm of clear criminality when confronted with the evidence.
12 out of 14 credible health professionals is evidence enough to show that there is something seriously wrong with the current Norwegian State's Psychiatric Commission presiding over the Breivik case that needs to be fully investigated by an impartial investigating team and charges brought against the one in charge of it for professional misconduct in public office and attempting to pervert the course of justice because it is a "clear cut case" of perverting the course of justice staring everyone in the face.
I wonder if they are all paid up AUF members?
One thing is for sure is that one of the State sanctioned psychiatrists who wrote the first report on Breivik used to be the boss of the Psychiatric Commission with 6 of the 7 current members of the Commission working under her.
That is in no way impartial and clearly shows that there is something seriously wrong with the State's case over Breivik's mental state of mind, just like the State controlled Norwegian police's investigation that has concluded that Breivik is a "solo terrorist" connected to no one when they are still investigating now as you are reading this which is a paradox in itself.
So that is a Psychiatric Commission acting criminal, 2 State sanctioned psychiatrists writing a report based upon misleading information that undermines the whole report which is proven by the fact that 12 other professionals in the field of psychiatry contradict it, and a Norwegian police investigation making official conclusions about the case that has then been propagated in trial by State prosecutors when they have not even done their jobs properly.
And all controlled by a "secret group" behind the scenes too...
What conclusion do you come to when looking at these facts?
Breivik is guilty of his crimes but what about those connected to him who the current completely corrupt Norwegian State want the World to believe do not exist?
What more evidence do you need of a completely corrupt Norwegian State in control of the Breivik case?
The only thing next is for some seriously damaging evidence to emerge to prove beyond doubt that the Norwegian controllers in control of the Breivik case have conducted an attempted State sanctioned cover-up and white-wash of the truth behind Breivik.
Breivik the "solo terrorist" connected to no one who was recruited, radicalised, trained and financed from the confines of his bedroom in his mother's home whilst playing computer games who became the most successful "solo terrorist" of all time in the history of international terrorism.
or
Breivik the son of a Government diplomat, step son of an Army Major and best friend of a Ministry of Defence Lawyer being a recruited agent into a secretive group with political and financial motivations and trained for July 22nd 2011?
Which is more believable? Watch the video and draw a conclusion...
The Norwegian State controllers of the Breivik script would like you to believe the former and they have successfully used the media to secure this story in the minds of the public so far by covering up the truth, but for me based upon the evidence the second is far more likely and there is still outstanding evidence.
Why has the outstanding evidence not been revealed to the public?
What would the identities of Alan Ayling's (Alan Lake) friends 'Richard the Lionheart' and the one from Norway who lost friends at both Utoya island and the government quarter in Oslo tell us? How incriminating would this evidence be?
The real story behind the arrest and expected deportation to America of Abu Hamza one of the commanders of the Jihad against the West living and operating in the UK.
1. Even before 9/11 I had started to take a keen interest in the activities of Abu Hamza, the imam of Finsbury Park mosque and his organisation Supporters of Shariah. Soon after 9/11 I started a sting ‘honey pot’ web-site called www.islamic-news.co.uk with the help of a friend based in America
3. The web-site published radical Islamic web links that led the user straight onto other terrorist sites. I used the pseudonym Pervez Khan to contact Abu Hamza, the notorious cleric of Finsbury Park mosque both by email and on the phone. I contacted the operators of other extremist web sites like the Kashmir Media Service http://www.kmsnews.org/ and was soon placed on their press list. When the press statements arrived I would copy and paste them into an email and post onto to Abu Hamza at Finchley Park mosque. The idea behind my sting web site was to gain an insight at what the extremist Islamic world were plotting against the non Islamic world.
4. The sting was already making good progress as I had given the FBI access to the web-stats of my site www.islamic-news.co.uk (now offline). Abu Hamza's web master had placed a link from his Supporters of Shariah web-site to mine and I had given the passwords to an American diplomat in Mexico who forwarded the information to the New York office of the FBI. They monitored everyone who logged onto Islamic-news from Abu Hamza's www.SupportersOfShariah.com web site. http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://supportersofshariah.org
5. What many people never knew at the time and still do not know is firstly the FBI requested the Anti Terrorist Squad in London to visit my home and get a written statement giving them permission to monitor my web site traffic; and secondly that James Ujamaa Abu Hamza's web-master was based in America. He was the first person to click on the link between the two sites after he placed it to check it was working. In doing so he revealed his I.P. address, which enabled the FBI to track him down and arrest him.
6. I produce as exhibit GJ 1 true copy of the statement that I had given to Anti-Terrorism branch for FBI. Abu Hamza contacted for jihad recruitment videos
7. I heard nothing for a bit so I made several phone calls to Abu Hamza at the Finsbury Park mosque. I spoke with him several times. He must have been on hands free? But during the calls with my limited Arabic I made it clear to him that I wanted Jihad training tapes to show other Muslims in the south of England who I could recruit and send to his mosque and to Pakistan to fight Jihad in Kashmir and Afghanistan. I would say: "as salaamu alaikum – Can I speak to SheikhAbu Hamza. It's Pervez Khan, from Islamic news. I need to speak in private". I would be put on hold and then Abu Hamza would come on the phone. I would say again "as salaamu alaikum Sheikh, I'm the owner and editor in chief of www.islamic-news.co.uk as you can see we think you are doing great work we have placed your website link on our front page and we thank you for placing our link at the top of your links page. We want to help you but to do so we need your help to recruit people for the mujahideen. We want to run several local meetings in my brother’s house and invite a group of hand picked friends from the local mosques. We want to play your video lectures and recruitment tapes to help recruit brothers for both you and my brother’s work in Kashmir with the mujahideen.
8. Hamza was very strange. He prayed down the phone in a manner that made me think he was quite mad. He thanked me for being a good Muslim and supporting the Jihad. Hamza was not there every time I rang Finchley Park mosque. A couple of times I rang to see where the video tapes were and a much younger person with better English spoke to me.
9. This is how the process of Abu Hamza trial in the USA started. A few weeks went by and a box of audio tapes arrived and a week later a package with video tapes came via the Royal Mail.
Arrest of Hamza’s web master
10. Another few weeks went by and Abu Hamza's webmaster James Ujaama was arrested on terrorism charges. At this time I did not know he was the man sat next to Hamza in one of the videos Hamza had sent me. Ujaama in the video was taking about his leader Osama bin Laden. He also talked about Dr Azzam who was bin Laden's spiritual leader, who was killed in a car bomb in Pakistan. Ujaama appeared in the video as an angry coloured American guy that shouted support for jihad as he sat next to Abu Hamza. Ujaama was also taking about jihad in Afghanistan and was claiming the FBI had got it all wrong and he had done nothing wrong and had never been to Afghanistan. In the video Ujaama says''When I was in Afghanistan - when I was in Afghanistan'' twice! It was clear from the tape in James Ujaama's very own words he had been to Afghanistan and he was clearly saying al-qaeda leaders past and present were his leaders.
11. It was to be several months before I could help the FBI turn the case on Ujaama and force him to plead guilty and become a supper grass for the American government. The tapes I had handed over to the American embassy in London and to the UK police had not been passed on to the FBI in Seattle USA.
The story makes the Sunday Mirror front page
12. I then contacted a few weeks later a British newspaper about Abu Hamza and a senior reporter came to my house. The story made the front page of the Sunday Mirror. It was the first real anti Abu Hamza story in my campaign to rid the UK of Abu Hamza. The police came again for another statement after the video story went out in the Sunday Mirror. Intense diplomatic interest in tapes, but not the police
13. I had these films but for some reason the British police did not want them. So I sat on them only sharing copies with diplomats of a number of embassies in London.
14. Another contact I made who was extremely helpful at the time was the Ambassador for the Yemen. He was interested in the Aden bombers and other British jihadis who had been sent by Abu Hamza to bomb and kidnap in his country.
http://www.al-bab.com/yemen/hamza/intro.htm Yemen: The Islamic Army - "bomb plot" and kidnapping
15. After watching the videos whilst I was still stood in the ambassador’s office a formal complaint was made to the Foreign Office and Robin Cook , the Foreign Secretary. Cook never knew who was behind this complaint from the Yemen embassy. The videos showed Hamza with two of the Britons arrested for terrorist offences in the Yemen. Yet the British government demanded they be released due to Yemen's unfair legal system. The video showed them all talking about terrorism before they left for Yemen. Time and again I was appalled that the UK authorities just did not want act on terrorism being discussed and planned in the UK.
16. The Egyptian military attaché was after Abu Hamza and his followers. In one of the videos Hamza and his radical followers can be seen protesting outside the Egyptian embassy.
Yemen: The Islamic Army - "bomb plot" and kidnapping
17. Abu Hamza and the Supporters of Shariah. The USA, India, Russia, Yemen, Serbia, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Israel all took an interest and expressed real concern about Hamza and Supporters of Shariah. THE ULTIMATE JIHAD CHALLENGE
18. Abu Hamza, Omar Bakri and Omar Brooks (aka Abu Izzadeen and Trevor Brooks) were all associated with a former Security Company called Sakina Security Services. This unusual organisation claimed to provide training improvised explosive devices and Jihad training. Their star product was a two week jihad training course in America. Web archive provides information on their website.
19. Meanwhile James Ujaama was due in court in Seattle. The FBI did not seem to have much of a case so my American friends started asking me questions about the American jihadi sat next to Abu Hamza in the videos. Could it be James Ujaama? From looking a file photographs of him I could not be sure. The only way to be certain was for the FBI in Seattle who had not been given access to the videos by the American embassy in London to see for themselves.
20. The day before James Ujaama was due in court I up-loaded the videos onto the web for everyone and anyone interested to view. With-in two hours my friend Dr Jeremy Reynalds who worked on the sting confirmed that it was indeed James Ujaama. Here is a copy of the page. http://johnathangaltfilms.com/movie.html [Dead link.][Available on 4 July 2009: http://web.archive.org/web/20021119090722/http://johnathangaltfilms.com/movie.html
21. The story he wrote about the videos going on line was posted all over the web. The Seattle Times soon got hold of the story and put two and two together and come up with James Ujaama like Jeremy Reynalds had.
22. Only Mrs Galt, my webmaster based in America, Khalid in India and Johnathan and Jeremy Reynalds knew where to find the videos. The tip off to the newspapers and FBI came only after we all had downloaded each film onto our computers just in case the site went down. This did happen as we got too much traffic for the web server to handle.
23. This was the first time the FBI had seen the Ujaama video even after 9/11. This was one year after 9/11 and we have evidence that USA security agencies were still not sharing intelligence. I soon shipped off the tape to the Seattle Times for them to share with the FBI. The tape took two days to get there by UPS. Ujaama changes plea and agrees to testify
24. Ujaama soon had a change of heart once he was shown the video in court. This was the start of Hamza's downfall. The FBI asked him to change his plea in return for a light sentence. Ujaama agreed only because he knew the video would convict him and he faced twenty years in jail. Part of his agreement with the FBI was that he had to now give evidence against Abu Hamza in any future trial and help FBI officers build a case. With-out the Ujaama video a case might never of been built against Abu Hamza But this was only one of six video and 20 audio tapes.
25. Another video tape was dated two days after the bombing of the American embassies in Tanzania and Kenya. Hamza was talking about going to jihad and was sat next to two of the Britons who would be arrested in Yemen 6 months later. They were caught trying to bomb British and American interests in Aden. One member of the group was Abu Hamza's own son, Mohammed Kamel Mostafa. Abu Hamza talks about kidnapping, bombing embassies and how much money the people at the meeting should leave their wives when they go abroad for jihad. This video directly linked Abu Hamza to the Yemen. It was bagged up with the others later by the police and shipped to the FBI in New York to build a case against Abu Hamza. The press join in the campaign against Hamza
26. We now had new partners in the form of the press in the campaign to get rid of Hamza from the UK in 2000. They were doing a much better job than either the police or the intelligence services.
27. When I first came across Hamza and started complaining not many newspapers were interested but as the years went by the press got more and more interested and made Hamza one of the most hated people in the UK.
28. I heard some good reports via the Indian High commission from their counter parts in America about the Hamza case. The senior officer I knew at the Indian high commission was good friends with the American senior officer and was told there will be movement soon. I was asked if I could keep feeding the press with Hamza stories via my group of on-line spies. We used a freelance reporter who made quite a bit of money from our information to make sure the American embassy in London had all the tapes. I took a train to London and went in person to the American embassy to hand copies of the tapes to the secretary of the legal attaché.
Hamza’s arrest
29. In the end the news broke about Abu Hamza. He was arrested in London by the police on an American arrest warrant as a direct result of the tapes that I had supplied. The arrest warrant came from New York as it was the port of entry of Ujaama, another of Hamza's followers into America when they tried to set up a jihad training camp in Bly Oregon (see ultimate Jihad training above). My role in Hamza’s arrest was reported on CBS News on 16 August 2004. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/08/16/eveningnews/main636344.shtml
30. Everyone was happy the British police were forced to act on Abu Hamza, but then came the interesting stuff. When the police raided Hamza's home with the American warrant they tripped over loads of boxes of videos and audio tapes just like the ones I handed to them 3 years before and like the ones the Americans were using in New York for the arrest warrant.1000's of tapes in total. It was only when they found the tapes that the Police and CPS acted and charged Hamza in the UK.
When all the commotion was going and there were calls for action to be taken against Hamza very few people aware that the Police had the evidence all the time but failed to investigate properly what they had and take action. Hamza is due in court next month to face the extradition charges to the USA. Sooner or later the truth about the Hamza tapes and the embarrassing fact that the Police had evidence on Hamza, all along but failed to act will come out.
31. The truth was the UK police and Crown Prosecution Service failed to act on Hamza even when they had been given the information in the form of video and audio tapes to convict him. Abu Hamza or his son in the end helped the FBI build a case against him by posting me the videos showing him together with James Ujaama. These same tapes have already helped in the conviction of James Ujaama, who will be a key witness if Hamza is extradited to the USA and is put on trial.
There is now a third conflicting evaluation of Breivik which means that Norwegian psychiatry is currently going through its own psychosis observed by all international professionals in the field of psychiatry looking on from afar and documented in the media.
First the State sanctioned report that concluded Breivik was a paranoid schizophrenic and psychotic at the time of his actions so was criminally insane.
Then the second independent report concluded that Breivik was not a paranoid schizophrenic or psychotic at the time of his actions so is criminally sane, instead he suffers from a narcissistic personality
Now we have a third conclusion that completely goes against the former 2 conclusions which means there are now 3 different conclusions upon Breivik's mental state of mind.
The third conclusion states that Breivik suffers from Asperger's syndrome or Autism.
It seems that the Norwegians want to explain away Breivik's terrorist acts as mental illness rather than just accept the fact that he is a political terrorist who planned his attacks over a lengthy period of time and has logical reason and explanations for them within the framework of extreme right-wing political terrorism.
How many other Countries in the World want to explain political terrorism within the context of mental health?
Mental health is one thing and Political terrorism is another.
The horrors of what he inflicted upon the children of Utoya island was part of his terrorist mission that can be explained within the context of everything else. The shock and horror was for maximum effect which he says himself and is the art of terrorism taken from the Beslan school siege and its psychological effects on Russia and the wider world who watched from afar.
If he was trained by ex-KGB agents and Former Soviet Colonels who learned the science of terrorism from the Chechen conflict then it makes complete sense.
Unless you believe he is a "solo terrorist" connected to no one who was recruited, radicalised, trained and financed from the confines of his bedroom in his mother's home then you have to have some psychiatric terminology for his mental state of mind so that you can legally send him to a specially built psychiatric unit.
He was a recruited and trained terrorist who carried out a terrorist mission how hard is that to understand and explain?
Very hard if you believe the Norwegian State's story surrounding Breivik.
If the first State sanctioned psychiatric report done on Breivik is fundamentally flawed based upon the evidence then why has the Psychiatric Commission not passed one single negative comment on it?
Probably because one of the psychiatrists who wrote the report was head of the Psychiatric Commission and is good friends and work collegues with 6 of the 7 psychiatric professionals now presiding over over the Commission who worked under her during her time there.
It explains why the first State sanctioned report has not been criticised at all and has been upheld by the Commission in stark contrast to the second report and all leading psychiatric professionals opinions.
The first report that is based upon false information from the Norwegian police states that Breivik is a paranoid schizophrenic who was psychotic at the time of his actions so is criminally insane which fits with the “solo terrorist” connected to no one profile that the Norwegian State controllers in control of the case want the World to believe.
The second psychiatric report carried out on Breivik on-behalf of the families of Utoya and other leading professionals in the field of psychiatry who criticised the findings of the first report found that Breivik is not a schizophrenic and was not psychotic at the time of his actions so is criminally sane but this report has been completely undermined by the Psychiatric Commission through the media.
The only conclusion is that the Psychiatric Commission wants Breivik to be declared ‘insane’ which is why they are supporting the first flawed report and damaging the integrity of the second report through the media for the benefit of public perceptions ready for their predetermined verdict upon Breivik.
They have their State sanctioned psychiatric team in place with the former head of the Commission overseeing the the State's case against Breivik, writing the first psychiatric report declaring him 'insane' which fits with the 'official' story the Norwegian State controllers want.
If he is declared ‘insane’ through the media then everything else they have said about him fits together perfectly in the mind of the public and nobody will ask any probing questions.
The Norwegian Government have even built him his own psychiatric unit in a secure hospital under complete secrecy and declared whatever the outcome of the trial he will be going there for the rest of his life.
That goes against the ‘rule of law’ and completely undermines the judicial process and means the current Norwegian Government is above the law.
Why is the Norwegian State going against the ‘rule of law’ and attempting to cover-up the truth surrounding Breivik?
That is a question you have to ask yourself.
The ‘official’ Norwegian story in the media is that Breivik is a “solo terrorist” connected to no one who woke up one day psychotic whilst being a paranoid schizophrenic (that nobody saw) and became the most successful political “solo terrorist” of all time in the history of international terrorism.
He created a massive bomb on his farm with absolutely no help, prior training or test detonating of his deadly creation anywhere (if you believe the ‘official’ Norwegian police line of him having no physical help in his attacks) that was capable of blowing up his Government building on his first ever attempt at bomb making. He then had the composure to travel to an island and carry out a massacre against a group of innocent children, and he wrote a 1500 page manifesto in picture perfect English explaining his reasons behind his actions with absolutely no physical help (if you believe the Norwegian police line), even though they say he was a failure and high school dropout.
That has got to be hard for any ardent terrorism expert to swallow but all the ones wheeled out in the media propagate the “solo terrorist” connected to no one line without a hint of criticism which suits the Norwegian State controllers story for public perceptions.
The general public who have no real knowledge believe this because the Norwegian State have crafted their story surrounding Breivik in the media to fit this profile and they have no reason to disbelieve what they are told because nobody has seriously criticised the ‘official’ story yet and pointed out the fundamental flaws that make this claim completely unsafe and stated so.
In 33 years Breivik has not had one single psychotic episode and nobody he ever had any dealings with over the course of the past 5 – 10 years saw any signs of paranoid schizophrenia - He is a political terrorist.
The only ones who have are the first State sanctioned psychiatrists who based their report on false information and they are being endorsed by the blatantly biased Psychiatric Commission.
The independent psychiatrists disagree and have been severely criticised in the media for disagreeing.
The Norwegian police and health care professionals in control of the State’s case against Breivik are being controlled by a “secret group” of high level Government figures in the respective fields controlling the State’s case who are operating independently outside the bounds of the Democratic process, which now includes sending Breivik to a specially built psychiatric unit no matter what the outcome of the trial.
There can be no other conclusion than there is a high level Government cover-up underway in Norway over Breivik, and all under the gaze of the compliant international media.
A "secret group" orchestrating the State's case behind the scenes and a blatantly biased Psychiatric Commission.
Then you ask the question why?
Breivik the “solo terrorist” connected to no one who is ‘insane’ - or - Breivik the son of a former Government diplomat to London, step son of a former Army Major and best friend of a Ministry of Defence lawyer who was recruited into a secretive group because of his family background for financial and political reasons and trained for July 22nd 2011?
Which is more realistic in the scheme of things?
Breivik’s actions were all about politics and not some random acts that have no meaning that you expect from a paranoid schizophrenic who woke up one day psychotic wanting to kill people.
If you accept the Norwegian State’s 'official' story surrounding Breivik then there is no story he is just a mad man who did just wake up one day suffering from a psychosis and became the most successful “solo terrorist” of all time in the history of international terrorism after playing computer games in his bedroom.
Come on!!!
They say he is connected to no one which means their story stands because if he is connected to someone then there is a bigger story and then the unraveling and explanation of the real story behind him begins and God only knows where it ends and what it reveals.
The Norwegian State controllers of the Breivik case do not want this which is why there is a complete white-wash of the story in the media.
If there is evidence that contradicts this ‘official’ story then what could the reason be that the Norwegian State controllers behind the Breivik case do not want it revealing so as to get to the bottom and the whole truth behind ‘Operation Breivik’ and the events of July 22nd 2011?
The current Norwegian State apparatus controlling the case have closed it down completely and refuse to accept Breivik is connected to anyone even though there is still evidence outstanding that needs to be fully investigated.
The dilemma…
What would it mean if Breivik is connected to other people?
What story would that tell?
Whatever it is the Norwegian State controllers of the case do not want the World to hear it which is why they have closed it down and dismiss the possibility that he is connected to other people.
Is the memory of all those innocent Norwegian children murdered by Breivik and all those injured for life in the name of politics at his hands not worth finding out?
This to me is one of the most important lines of enquiry left that could completely shatter the Norwegian State’s story surrounding Breivik and open up a story in itself that could quite possibly explain the truth behind Breivik and other people’s involvement with him.
Then who knows what the bigger story would tell?
Breivik is guilty but what about other people’s involvement with him.
Breivik claims he had an English ‘mentor’ assigned to him after his Liberia trip when he travelled to London where he says he became part of a secretive group. His father was a Norwegian diplomat in London around this time and we all know these people working in high positions are part of funny secretive handshake groups involving financially and politically motivated people, and they rub shoulders with all different types of influential financially and politically motivated people from all over the World as part of their Government work.
The codename of his English ‘mentor’ is ‘Richard the Lionheart’.
Alan Ayling aka Alan Lake is from the world of funny handshake groups of financially and politically motivated people and works within a major EU bank located in the square mile London. He was given a mickey mouse interview over his possible role as the English ‘mentor’ and he has a friend who uses the alias ‘Richard the Lionheart’ online which puts him directly in the frame.
Is that not a piece of evidence critical to the investigation concerning Ayling?
What story would this person’s identity reveal?
Alan Ayling has a contact in the Norwegian Government who lost friends at Utoya and the Government quarter in Oslo which puts him directly at the scene of the crime.
Is that not a piece of evidence critical to the investigation?
What story would this person’s identity reveal?
Alan Ayling had a Norwegian secretary in one of his money funneling companies which shows he had links into Norway prior to July 22nd.
Is that not a piece of evidence critical to the investigation?
What story would this person’s identity reveal?
He is in the frame as the English ‘mentor’ and these 3 critical questions that are integral to the investigation because they are 3 direct factual leads into Norway and the heart of the case need answering as part of the evidence in the ongoing police investigation.
Also who taught Breivik the failed business man and high school dropout the art of international banking that saw him have 11 different accounts in 7 different Countries that ended up with him washing $600,000 through them and out the other side in his own mother’s accounts in Norway?
Alan Ayling works inside a major international bank operating in many different Countries and has had multiple money funneling companies with one of them being linked to Norway if my memory serves me correctly.
Are these not questions that need answering to prove or disprove whether or not Breivik is telling the truth about having an English ‘mentor’ meaning he is not a “solo terrorist” connected to no one, and whether or not Alan Ayling is the person he speaks of considering he is in the frame?
One can only hope that the Utoya families are now pressing the Norwegian police for the answers to these questions seen as though Ayling has been interviewed as the possible English ‘mentor’ behind the man who murdered their children.
Unless of course they believe the ‘official’ story surrounding Breivik and dismiss all other possibilities?
If Alan Ayling is the English ‘mentor’ behind Breivik then it could be very damaging for many people considering he works for the EU controlled bank, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development that is now working in Islamic Countries, he has supporters of his political agenda right into the heart of the British Establishment, links into the Swedish Government and quite possibly links into the ruling Norwegian Government.
Who knows what story he would tell the police if directly connected to Breivik and was facing 15 – 20 years for directing terrorism in a Category A British prison like Belmarsh that is awash with Al Qaeda terrorists?
Nobody is saying any of Ayling’s connections knew about Norway but guilt by association is bad enough if Ayling is connected when the story unfolds and MI5 must have a file on him due to his directorship behind the EDL which means they know all of his political supporters and endorsers.
What reason could there be that he has been shielded from the investigation?
Have members of the British Government shut down the case surrounding him?
The Norwegian State controllers of the Breivik case do not want to even go there with Alan Ayling and admit the possibility that someone might be directly connected to Breivik which is why they have closed the case down in Norway and white-washed the case through the media, completely dismissing all outstanding evidence as being irrelevant to the case.
What could the reason behind that be?
I wonder if the Utoya families believe that the outstanding evidence in relation to their children’s cold blooded murders is irrelevant.
Alan Ayling is the only person who had reason enough to frame me for being behind Breivik (full explanation cannot be denied) because Breivik does not know me personally and his actions towards me were hostile in nature so there is a reason and explanation behind why he did. He is from the exact same ideological movement as Breivik and is linked to Breivik’s ideologues of which I am not one of them because I am not mentioned in the “2083” manifesto once (thank God), he has direct factual links into the case and the Norwegian police have my witness statement concerning this.
Only nobody has done anything about it and the Norwegian State controllers of the case do not want to do anything about it because they are all satisfied with the “solo terrorist” connected to no one story they have presented to the media and are propagating in court room 250 in Norway.
Ann Marchini was the one who brought Ayling into the picture and into the American controlled Counter-jihad movement (not anti-jihad movement) which has its own ideologues which includes Fraudman and the only way she can save herself and the reputations of those she is directly connected to which includes a Companion of Honour is by giving a witness statement against him and revealing the identity of ‘Richard the Lionheart’.
If Ayling infiltrated the movement for his own personal reasons that have damaged the movement and possibly people’s reputations then this can be explained as such (infiltration), otherwise it means complicity and I don’t think the leaders of the American side of the Counter-jihad movement would want or endorse complicity in Breivik’s acts, nor the Companion of Honour and all of the other high level contacts associated with him through their mutual politics.
That’s not for me to know though, only time will tell and they know.
Under no circumstances am I taking responsibility for the cold blooded murder of 69 innocent children on their summer camp with many more injured for life in the name of politics, as their attempt to frame me for the crimes so as to remove me from being a threat to their continued political agenda.
Would you?
My hands are clean…
The outstanding evidence; what will it tell us?
The media should be asking the questions about Alan Ayling and reporting on his profile for the benefit of the public following the case, but the Norwegian State controllers of the Breivik case claim he is a “solo terrorist” connected to no one which places an impartial media in a dilemma.
To continue to question other people’s possible involvement with Breivik completely undermines the Norwegian State’s story surrounding him and to ignore it means a public endorsement of it.
We will see whether or not the media is impartial.
The only thing with this though is that the Norwegian police have themselves completely undermined the Norwegian States story because they have admitted that the investigation is still ongoing with about 50 detectives working on the case with the identity of ‘Richard the Lionheart’ still a missing piece of their evidence.
This means there is the possibility that the Norwegian State’s ‘official’ story is wrong.
The English language media have all stuck with the ‘official’ story surrounding Breivik for their audiences and created the perception of a “solo terrorist” connected to no one who is ‘insane’ because this is what the Norwegian ‘officials’ have presented to them.
Even though they are still investigating the case.
The “power of the media” and Norwegian State sanctioned trial by media with high level State actors directing events in the media towards their predetermined goals for the benefit of public perceptions just like the Portuguese case against the McCann family over their abducted daughter.
The Founding English Defence League Interview - No.1
Psalm 23
A Psalm of David.
The LORD is my shepherd;
I shall not want.
2 He makes me to lie down in
green pastures;
He leads me beside the still waters.
3 He restores my soul;
He leads me in the paths of
righteousness
For His name’s sake.
4 Yea, though I walk through
the valley of the shadow of death,
I will fear no evil;
For You are with me;
Your rod and Your staff,
they comfort me.
5 You prepare a table before me
in the presence of my enemies;
You anoint my head with oil;
My cup runs over.
6 Surely goodness and mercy
shall follow me
All the days of my life;
And I will dwell in the
house of the LORD Forever.
Disclaimer
Comments posted on this blog are the responsibility of the individuals who post them and not the blog author. They will, and have been, published in the interest of debate and opinion over the subject matter.
Isaiah 54:17 "No weapon formed against you shall prosper, And every tongue which rises against you in judgment You shall condemn.
This is the heritage of the servants of the LORD, And their righteousness is from Me,”Says the LORD.
VG: Is that not discrimination?
blog posts
