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.
What are the chances of that in the scheme of things considering there is now the very real possibility that there are UK citizens who are directly connected to Anders Breivik and his July 22nd 2011 massacre and bombing, or who hold vital key information directly connected to the case and other peoples possible direct involvement. This would mean the potential for multiple extradition cases from the UK to Norway for them to undergo police interview under caution, if they were not willing to travel voluntarily that is, with them then standing trial in the Country if there is evidence against them and they are charged with conspiracy to commit terrorist acts.
Atleast Geir Lippestad will now know the intricate details of extradition law between the 2 Countries and even though he is a defence lawyer he knows what is right and what is wrong in this case that has affected his whole Country as he has played a central role as Breivik's lawyer from the beginning so knows whether or not their is scope for people to be interviewed under police caution.
If nobody has anything to hide then voluntarily offering up a witness statement in such a serious case that they are directly implicated in should be a matter or course, but to attempt to refuse and then go down the path of fighting extradition would tell its own story.
And we already know that individuals are already partial to using lawyers to lie on their behalf over this case so extradition might be the only option.
Will be interesting to see now considering there is still outstanding evidence in the Breivik case that this Counter-jihad clique along with others still posses.
There has been an investigation into the Civil State Security Apparatus's response to 'Operation Breivik' before and during the terrorist attacks which found a catastrophic number of errors led to the terrorist attacks not only being able to have been prevented before July 22nd 2011 but also not being as bad during the time of the event.
The Commission report that covered the investigation into the Emergency response to 'Operation Breivik' also highlighted a State appointed police Director lying when giving testimony to the media and political opposition along with a Government official (that we know of), and the Prime Minister refusing to secure the Government building when repeatedly being told to do so which means negligence in political office.
Misleading the public and political opposition concerning the truth surrounding 'Operation Breivik' which is an attempted cover-up and white-wash of the truth and facts in the case on State level.
We have now seen the State's prosecution case against Breivik played out in front of the World's media that has shown it to be a pre-planned concerted effort from the very top to influence the 'rule of law' towards their predetermined goal in the case.
To secure the 'criminally insane' label upon Breivik.
This is contrary to the belief of 9 out of 10 Norwegians following the trial, the psychiatric field in Norway and abroad, and the presiding judges who unanimously rejected the prosecutions case and heavily criticised all aspects of it in summing up.
What does that tell you about the State's prosecution case?
The only thing left now is to investigate the Norwegian police investigation into 'Operation Breivik' to determine whether or not their 'official' conclusion that Breivik was a "solo terrorist" connected to no one is actually a credible and fail-safe conclusion that can be trusted.
Based upon the Norwegian State's 'official' case so far and its complete and utter failings it is not very hard to perceive the outcome.
If there are others directly connected to Anders Breivik and his actions on July 22nd 2011 then should they too not be held to account for their complicity in his crimes?
Most importantly the mass murder and massacre of a group of innocent misguided teenagers on their summer camp in the name of politics.
We have to wait now to see whether or not the integrity and credibility of the 'official' Norwegian police investigation is going to be investigated to determine whether or not it is credible, and considering all aspects of this case must be anaylsed for the sake of Norwegian society to understand fully what happened on July 22nd 2011 then it is very hard to see how investigating the police investigation cannot now take place.
Or is the Norwegian police investigation into 'Operation Breivik' beyond reproach?
District Court judges and 22 July Commission members have faced many of the same challenges:
Expectations have been running high. The landscape is unclear and confusing. Well established power being challenged.
For the Commission was represented by a self-conscious governmental apparatus and concealing police.
For the district court had the form of a secure prosecution and a psychiatric oligarchy.
Both the District Court and the Commission had to find their own way through this. It is now done. With two clear and independent leaders, Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen and Alexandra Bech Gjørv, in the course of about two weeks, created an invaluable foundation that we as a nation can move forward with less trauma than we otherwise would have had.
This will place the two women central to the grand story that is now printed on July 22nd-place of tragedy in future national consciousness.
Heavy settlement The five District Court judges takes a sharp confrontation with single-minded experts and an uncritical forensic commission.
Systematically throughout the forensic psychiatric canvas scrutiny. And just as systematically Husby / Sørheim report picked apart.
The main objection is crystal clear: The two psychiatrists have never been genuinely interested in other explanations of Anders Behring Breivik's life and actions than to place him safely in psychiatry solid - and at times - fixed terms.
Therefore, they have been consistently wrong. Anders Behring Breivik's violent extremism can not be explained away by morbidly do it. He's part of our time. This is absolutely central perspective Thurs the 1st expert totally have disregarded. Therefore, they have not understood the man they observed, but consistently misinterpreted him.
It's brutal, but it's true.
Scandal Commission Just as true as when the court notes that the forensic commission has not done its job.
Completely uncritical has left the weaknesses of the first report pass, while doing his best to brace legs for the other. The court said it directly, but it's in the cards: This Commission has made prestige trump academic honesty.
Right Psychiatry is many years called judges without cap. With good reason, it is argued that the court often abdicates in the face of this little verifiable expertise. So it was not in the courtroom 250
Rather, it reeks of common sense and legal common sense when the court considers the various reports against each other. Equally important, the court sees the whole picture where many have only seen bits and pieces. For it is the overall presentation of evidence which has convinced Anders Behring Breivik five judges that he is beyond a reasonable doubt can be held accountable for the accident he staged.
Self-examination It was a misjudgment when prosecutors asserted in its argument that the evidence was not strong enough to convict the accused to 21 years' detention. Equally wrong was it to build criminal allegation so heavily on an expert report an earlier could be seen not measure up. And it would have been a disaster for the matter of prosecution and the defendant is successful in its strong and unanimous opposition that it would appoint new experts.
As we now know: There was an independent law who insisted on more experts. Today we know that the rock matter from a judicial scandal.
Both the Attorney General and the defender must today be a sobering thought that they had gotten their way in the winter, yes, then we will have a completely wrong verdict. Without the two new experts - Agnar Aspaas and Terje Tørrissen - would Anders Behring Breivik now been on the road to compulsory psychiatric care.
Such must invite introspection with prosecutors. And already the evening news last night was attorney general Tor-Aksel Busch commendable clear in its self-criticism on this crucial point. It was important for the credibility of the prosecution.
The sample consisted Yesterday tingrettsdom is clear, direct and logical.
At the same time it's open final word on the future of democracy a judgment that is deeply rooted in our society's shared values.
First there was the court ordered State sanctioned psychiatric report that deemed Breivik to be a paranoid schizophrenic who was psychotic at the time of his actions which meant he was criminally insane.
There was uproar over this diagnosis by most concerned parties in the case which challenged the court to order another evaluation to take place.
The State prosecutors challenged this and argued in court against another evaluation taking place as they were happy with the first reports diagnosis of Breivik.
The judge had no alternative but to overrule this challenge due to the seriousness of the case before the court and allow for another independent evaluation to take place.
The second evaluation came to a completely different conclusion to the first and stated that Breivik was criminally sane during the time of his actions and was not schizophrenic or psychotic as the first report concluded.
The psychiatric commission charged with overseeing the debate in court over Breiviks mental health had no comments to make against the first report which meant they fully supported its findings. Instead they challenged the integrity of the second report by passing negative comments on it which meant they did not fully endorse it.
The State prosecutors then prosecuted Breivik based upon the first evaluation seeking to have him found criminally insane.
The first report was undermined by all leading health care professionals in the field of psychiatry in the court room including a specialist team who dealt with Breivik in prison around the clock who found no signs of schizophrenia or psychosis in him.
It was also heavily criticised by most leading experts in the field of psychiatry externally who were following the legal proceedings remotely.
The State prosecutors ignored all leading witnesses and continued to uphold the first report in their prosecution case and then left it to the judge to determine the verdict hoping that the law of doubt would be enough to gain the conviction of ‘criminally insane’ against Breivik.
After 2 months deliberations the judge ruled against the prosecution and passed the criminally sane verdict on Breivik. This verdict was a unanimous decision from all the judges sitting over the case which meant there was no doubt from them about their verdict.
In summing up the judge also heavily criticised the work of the first set of psychiatrists who wrote the first State sanctioned report.
The Attorney General who sat above the whole State’s case against Breivik only now states that they should have allowed for the second evaluation to have taken place at the beginning, after the State’s prosecution case has now been completely exposed as an attempt to secure a verdict contrary to the ‘rule of law’.
The question is; why contrary to the evidence did the State seek to secure the criminally insane label against Breivik at all costs?
The Norwegian State’s prosecution case against Breivik has been shown to be fundamentally flawed to the point that the Attorney General should have stepped in and directed his State appointed prosecutors to accept that the first psychiatric report was wrong and misleading. He did not do this, instead the State sanctioned psychiatric commission under his authority upheld that report and undermined the second independent report in an attempt to tip the scales towards the States favour and prosecution case in the eyes of the judges.
Is that not perverting the course of justice?
But this is the Norwegian Attorney General doing it who is above the law because he is sits on the throne of Norwegian law.
The question is; why have the Norwegian State been so desperate to secure the criminally insane label on Breivik contrary to the professional evidence and contrary to public opinion who were following the evidence remotely and could see for themselves?
I have my opinion about why.
This means that the State’s prosecution case against Breivik has been completely exposed as a farce, raising very serious questions about what the State were up to in the court room with the evidence now plain as day for anyone to look upon to draw a conclusion from, although it will all be wrapped up in nice clean clothes for the public perceptions. And the State’s Civil Security Apparatus concerning Breivik was also shown to be a complete farce that has made Norway look like a failed State in the eyes of all outside observers via the July 22nd Commission report that showed a catalogue of errors that allowed ‘Operation Breivik’ to be as successful as it was.
People have got to be thinking now that there is something seriously fundamentally wrong with the Norwegian State’s handling of the whole terrorist attacks inside Norway, even to the point that there has been a hidden hand at work behind the scenes orchestrating things.
All that is left now is to determine whether or not the ‘official’ police investigation into ‘Operation Breivik’ that concluded he was a “solo terrorist” connected to no one is actually a credible conclusion that can be trusted. Based upon the known evidence about the case the answer is no.
This is on top of now knowing that the police response was completely flawed with a catastrophic catalogue of errors based upon the commission report, and now their prosecution case being shown to be completely flawed with very serious questions now arising as to what went on in the court room in front of the Worlds media.
Does the evidence not point to the fact that the Norwegian State in control of the whole case have been working towards a pre-planned agenda which is to cover-up and white-wash the whole thing?
Then you look for reasons why, for which I have come to my own conclusions upon even if they do sound to be unbelievable on the face of it. The evidence is now starting to point to the fact that there might be substance to what I am saying.
The credibility of the police investigation into ‘Operation Breivik’ will now confirm or deny my claims. That is if it is investigated which it should be for the sake of those young Norwegian lives lost on July 22nd 2011 where their memory deserves for truth & justice to prevail along with other accomplices to the event held to account for their complicity.
I can only continue to wait and hope and there is still a whole investigative track outstanding surrounding my ‘official’ witness statement voluntarily given to the Norwegian police after I stood accused of being Breivik’s English ‘mentor’.
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?
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.
What are the chances of Breivik the international jetsetting political terrorist who committed the worst terrorist attack in Europe of the 21st Century not meeting any like minded militant Nationalists or neo-nazis over the course of 10 years stretching back to his mysterious Liberia London trips?
He does have an extensive historical travelling itinerary over that period.
The name Knights Templar is just the name used by the group to wrap up their group and potential terrorist campaign in, which is a textbook copy of Al Qaeda as any military intelligence analysts who have studied the rise of Al Qaeda in the internet age can see.
Take that away and you have a small ideological group of extreme militant Nationalists more than likely controlled at the top by foreign agents intent on starting a new leaderless terrorist group to bring down NATO governments using the legitimate grievances of the political right-wing i.e immigration, multiculturalism and Islamisation with which to inspire homegrown followers to follow in the footsteps and carry out 'lone wolf' attacks against their respective Governments.
Breivik actively sought out physical contact with individuals, had over 600 contacts on Facebook, is said to have attended 2 EDL demonstrations, yet the Norwegian State in control of the case want the World to believe Breivik was a "solo terrorist" connected to
The judge commented rightly "on the basis of the evidence", as a judge that is what she had to work with in summing up.
Who can put any trust in the evidence presented to the court by the Norwegian police?
How can the Norwegian police confirm whether or not Breivik did meet people in London in 2002 which was 10 years ago, if they could not even trace Alpha Kallom who was an actual tangible physical person who the newspaper VG tracked down in 6 days?
On that basis how can you have any confidence in their 'official' conclusion and evidence presented in court?
This guy killed a few people, look at the size and scope of Breivik and we are meant to believe Breivik was a 'lone wolf' connected to no one.
Aftenposten
March this year killed Mohamed Merah (24) three Jewish children, a rabbi and three soldiers in the city of Toulouse in France.
Finally, Toulouse-terrorist he shot and killed by police as he threw himself out of the house where he had barricaded himself in.
He has been described as a "lone wolf."
But according to the French newspaper Le Monde , there is much to suggest that Merah not work alone. The newspaper has received access to confidential papers from the French intelligence agency DCRI, according to the BBC.
Called to over 20 countries
BBC correspondent Christian Fraser in Paris says the documents, which Le Monde has gained access to, draw a picture of another picture Merah than the French intelligence tried to draw early in the investigation.
The prepared Merah as a criminal as "radicalized himself".
But according to documents Merah had taken more than 1,800 calls to over 180 different contacts in 20 countries, including Egypt, Morocco, Kenya, Kazakhstan, Saudi Arabia, Butane and Britain.
Someone now holds the trump card in the Breivik case which determines whether or not my hypothesis about who was behind him and involved with him is correct, and that is the still publicly unknown evidence that surrounds Alan Lake and his Counter-jihad clique in the UK which was the ideological movement Breivik came from as outlined in the “2083” manifesto.
I am willing to accept I am wrong on presentation of the evidence, and until that time my hypothesis is open to speculation based upon the factual evidence that is publicly known, and the still publicly unknown missing evidence in the case.
I believe ‘Operation Breivik’ was ultimately a Russian operation and I give my reason and motive supported by the facts here: The new Arctic war-zone
If I am right then how do you relate that story to the masses, and what about the implications for international relations, and for the Norwegian people as a whole who were inflicted with this savagery against a group of their innocent misguided youth on an isolated summer camp island in the name of politics?
Is it better for all concerned to hide the truth but know behind closed doors who was ultimately behind the worst massacre and act of political terrorism in Europe of the 21st Century?
I wonder what the families of the dead and injured in Norway think about that question as they seek truth & justice for their dead and injured children.
What implications would it have for Norwegian society and their political/military position in the World if I am correct?
Straight after ‘Operation Breivik’ a Norwegian General was elevated to the top position within NATO’s Syria mission which was a clear signal from NATO. A conflict that now sees NATO lined up against Russia, not to mention the escalating Iran situation here either.
Would such an act of State sanctioned terrorism like ‘Operation Breivik’ by a foreign power not be an act of aggression and War against Norway’s Sovereignty and by default an act of aggression and War against the NATO Alliance?
That has very serious ramifications if correct which is why ‘Operation Breivik’ was so carefully concealed by multiple layers. Call it “smoke and mirrors” in the World of international espionage, although those within that World can read between the lines, which would mean that carrying out an attack against Norway was deemed an acceptable step by those behind it, thus directly challenging by-proxy other Government powers (NATO Alliance) which is exactly what the Cold War was all about.
Only this time in the heart of Europe with a planned new terrorist group to bring down NATO governments using homegrown militant Nationalists like Breivik.
What can Norway say or do to their Russian Super Power neighbour? And will a foreign Government declare war upon Russia for carrying out a terrorist attack inside Norway?
A strategic step worth taking by those military strategists and thinkers behind it considering what is at stake in this new Cold War that is taking place in the Northern hemisphere.
Russia under Putin has made this region its No.1 priority.
Sweden have recently stated they would join NATO and defend Norway if attacked by an outside force, so you have to question why they have made such a serious public political statement at this moment in time. Also Russian Generals have just warned Finland in no uncertain terms about joining NATO which shows the escalating political/military tensions in that Northern/Eastern European region. This is on-top of the Cold War scenario taking place in the Arctic Circle between Eastern & Western Super Powers with little Norway (5 million population) in a key strategic position in the middle of the whole scenario, with the Russian military already invading Norwegian airspace and flying regular sorties along their Northern coast.
Government’s of the World who have a vested interest in the Arctic region and have already carried out major military operations there know that what happens politically and militarily over the next 5 to 10 years in this part of the World is crucial as Government powers converge there so you cannot rule out that ‘Operation Breivik’, as a political event, was not a part of a foreign Government’s short to long term strategy for political control and dominance over the region.
Is the ruling AUF-Norwegian Labour party staying in power under Jens Stoltenberg’s leadership in Russia’s short to long term political interests in the region?
That is a question for serious political analysts who know Norwegian and Russian politics, and if the question is yes then that is a tick in the box to support my hypothesis.
Proving Breivik was directly connected to Alan Lake (if it is proven) would be bad enough for the Ruling Political Establishment in Norway, especially on the back of the catastrophic July 22nd Commission report but beyond that if there is a bigger story surrounding him then the potential social and political ramifications that stretch beyond Norway’s borders are in the hands of allot more knowledgeable people than me.
I just want to get to the bottom of the truth behind why I was accused of being the English ‘mentor’ behind Breivik, and if proven right then they should be held to account for their complicity in his crimes, and if there is a bigger story surrounding them which I believe there could well be based upon my hypothesis then that is other people’s concern.
You can only wonder whether or not the truth to be known is in the strategic interests of a friendly NATO Government or Allie in the region. One thing is for certain and that is the outstanding evidence surrounding Alan Lake who was interviewed by police over the possibility that he was the English ‘mentor’ behind Breivik has not been publicised yet for some reason and someone must now possess this evidence and know how it fits into place or not as the case may be which is the trump card to determine the outcome of this case and potentially Norway’s political future and standing in the World.
Norway cannot escape its position in the World now or its destiny which was, and is, in God’s hands.
Is ‘Operation Breivik’ going to be allowed to be continued to be covered up in Norway by World powers or are they going to force the truth to be known, or atleast several layers of the truth which will then leave enough speculation aimed at the front door of the Kremlin?
Time will tell...
Either the Norwegian and British police have interviewed Lake’s Counter-jihad clique to ascertain the identity of his friend ‘Richard the Lionheart’ and who is friend in the Norwegian Government is, or they have not. We do not know. And considering the Norwegian police have stated they are still trying to identify the English ‘mentor’ ‘Richard the Lionhearted’ from the “2083” manifesto and have interviewed Alan Lake you would think that knowing this person’s real identity who was invited to the pre-founding English Defence League strategy meeting in Lake’s Barbican flat before the founding of the EDL meeting took place, is an integral part of the on-going police investigation and an important part of the public discourse over the Breivik case. Everyone else’s identity over this case has been in the public domain so why not this still unknown person’s identity?
What would his identity reveal which could be the reason why it has not been revealed yet?
I have only seen one newspaper article admitting this persons existence so why the complete silence about this integral piece of evidence by the mainstream media?
Police Chief assistant Keith Wilberg is the officer who took center stage in the Breivik trial on-behalf of the Norwegian investigation team charged with investigating Breivik's terrorist attacks.
He officially concluded on-behalf of the 'whole team' in front of the Worlds media that "Breivik acted alone in the entirety of his actions with no physical or mental help" which meant there is no one else to look for and no bigger story surrounding him.
Nice clean 'official' story...
This was then spread around the World's news outlets and set the public perception over 'Operation Breivik'.
I wonder if every Norwegian investigating officer working on the case stands behind that 'official' public statement presented to the World on their behalf?
There is a question and answer for any future anonymous survey for the whole Norwegian investigation team when investigating the credibility of the investigation into 'Operation Breivik'.
I wonder whether or not there are multiple lines of enquiry in the case that were prevented from being followed up because the Police Chief already had the story in mind to be presented to the public concerning Breivik, and to cross the line and publicly challenge this to pursue the line of enquiry in question was more than a mere investigating officers jobs worth, not least having no authority to investigate it anyway?
Officially preventing professional Norwegian investigators from pursuing legitimate lines of enquiry to get to the bottom of the whole truth behind 'Operation Breivik' where 69 innocent Norwegian teenagers were murdered in cold blood with many more injured and maimed for life.
We know for a fact that after 10 months the Norwegian investigators had not investigated the Liberia story, and it took the Norwegian newspaper VG 6 days to track down a witness in the case which happened during the trial, which says all you need to know about the credibility of the investigation and subsequent 'official' conclusion.
We also know that Keith Wilberg publicly stated in court that the police will not be investigating Breivik's Facebook accounts even after Breivik alluded to them finding a link to an accomplice (whether true or not).
This same police spokesman stated the 'official' conclusion in the court room but in a strange twist of conversation to the judge stated that the police investigation was still on-going whilst he was standing there in the court which completely undermined his stated 'official' conclusion in one fail swoop.
It is not like the heads of the Norwegian police have been caught lying to mislead the public and opposition political parties over the case is it, or Government ministers lying to mislead the same target audience to cover up the truth. With more accusations of lies and misleading statements from 'official's' to come I suspect.
Or a completely corrupt and biased State sanctioned psychiatric report endorsed by a criminal State appointed psychiatric commission to secure the insane label on Breivik with which to endorse the "solo terrorist" connected to no one 'official' conclusion for public perceptions.
What if there is a bigger story surrounding 'Operation Breivik' and other people's direct involvement with him but the Norwegian police under the control of their State appointed heads have shut the whole case down and prevented the real truth about Breivik from coming to light as part of a pre-planned agenda controlled from the top.
One question that undermines Keith Wilberg's 'official' conclusion is where did Breivik learn to build bombs, or are we so stupid to just accept the fact that an unskilled bomb maker was capable of building a bomb from scratch on a rented farm with no prior help that was able to completely blow up his Government building killing 8 people and wounding 30 more in the process after downloading a recipe from the internet which was successful on his first attempt?
That means someone helped him and means physical and mental help contrary to the 'official' conclusion.
W0rk this one out. If the Norwegian court passes sentence down on Breivik tomorrow stating that he is criminally insane, which means they accept that he is a psychotic schizophrenic as the first set of State sanctioned psychiatrists concluded contrary to almost all other health professionals in this field, which means he must be sent to a psychiatric hospital under the care of psychiatrists for compulsory treatment. Then the psychiatrists there, if they do not believe he is what the judge has ruled he is do not have to treat him.
Quote: Psychiatry at Regional Security Department Dikemark says it is unthinkable to treat Anders Behring Breivik (33) on the basis of an expert report ordered by the court.
Does that not show there is something fundamentally wrong with the Norwegian justice system?
The judge sitting at the top of the justice chain rules someone is 'insane' in a legal sense because 2 corrupt State psychiatrists say he is but the actual experts in psychiatry who will deal with him on a daily basis disagree and refuse to treat him for psychotic symptoms because they judge him to be sane.
The psychiatrists who will be dealing with Breivik if the judge passes down the insane label have already evaluated him and stated he is not insane.
The only thing the insane label on Breivik does is endorses the Norwegian State's cover-story in the eyes of the public around the World who will not be looking at the underlying issues surrounding the verdict, or the bigger story surrounding the case.
The official Story coming out of Norway and propagated through the World's mainstream media outlets for public perceptions will then be Breivik the lone wolf nut connected to no one who drove himself insane after playing computer games and reading right-wing websites before going out and committing his atrocious acts whilst being psychotic. Sentenced to compulsory psychiatric care by the judges in the trial because he is a raving lunatic (insane) which seals the 'official' version of the story in the mind of the public and then everyone can close this story that is now in their subconscious minds, written and directed for them by the current Norwegian State Apparatus, and not question the truth.
On the other hand if the judge rules that Breivik is 'sane' as almost all professionals believe he is, then the State's case against him is in serious crisis because people are going to start questioning and want answers as to why the 'official's' in Norway in control of the case have been so adamant for nearly a year, even going as far as prosecuting him on this basis in front of the World's media.
It will not look good after the July 22nd Commission report.
Dagbladet can today (26.03.2012) reveal that Anders Behring Breivik was inspired by a secretive anti Islamist networks. It terrorist himself admitted in police interviews. The network is called Four Freedoms Community (FFC), an organization with its own website.
The British businessman Alan Lake is behind, and he preaches the organization's message through personal contact, the business card with the code of conduct and his name, and through secret meetings in two churches in London.
Breivik has said in interviews that he has used FFCs websites as inspiration when he wrote his so-called manifesto. Breivik says he saw the page as very interesting, and he still remembers it very well.
Breivik says FFC stands for much of the same organization he claims to be a member of - Knights Templar. The terrorist looks particularly up to FFCs anti-Islamist stance, and that the organization was "indigenous rights."
Breivik confirms the direct, confrontational questions from police interrogation experts that when he answers evasively their questions about the FFC, it may be because he wants to withhold information about it.
After repeated attempts to reach the Lake, got the following sms on mobile phone Dagbladet reporter:
"Why do you support the killing of gays, honor killings, female genital mutilations, attacks on Jews and non-Muslims, rape of youngsters, and Several more atrocities committed by Islamofascists? Why do you support Islamist enablers and radical left wing liberals, who care nothing for human rights and instead focus their hate Wed those who are tryning to protect civilization from these horrors? What kind of coward are you? Are you being paid by Islamists and their enablers two do their dirty work for them? Shame on you! "
The message is probably transmitted via the Internet. The message does not come from any phone number, and the newspaper does not know who the sender. Whole article:Breivik link to Alan Lake
Around 40 Moscow spies are believed to be operating in this country at any one time. Some are involved in traditional state espionage, while others monitor London-based oligarchs or engage in industrial spying for the commercial benefit of Russian firms.
There are fears Russia will ramp up its efforts over the coming months while the UK security services focus on the Olympic Games and the Queen’s Jubilee celebrations.
Britain's close relationship with America is also hugely attractive for Russia who sees it as a “back door” to US intelligence, one expert warned.
William Hague, the Foreign Secretary, said in a written statement that the government had asked the Russian embassy in London withdraw a member of their staff from Britain on December 10.
He said the request was "in response to clear evidence of activities by the Russian intelligence services against UK interests."
"They broke the rules of the game," a security source said. "Once we detected what they were doing we had no other option than to act. It's just not on."
The source said it was a "question of Smiley-esque tradecraft," referring to the character from novels by John le Carre.
"There is a huge Russian intelligence operation in the UK and all over the world which is both active and assertive but in this case they have crossed a line and it needed a response," he added.
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.
blog posts
