«Conspiracy Theory» som verbalt våpen

Begrepet «konspirasjonsteori» har vært brukt som verbalt våpen mot skeptikere og maktkritiske journalister og systemkritikere siden det ble pålagt pressen gjennom en propagandakampanje anført av CIA i kjølvannet av Warren-rapporten etter Kennedydrapet i november 1963.

«Fornektelse av sammensvergelse i amerikanske medier»
av Lance deHaven-Smith – norsk oversettelse av Alexander Simonsen

Mange amerikanske journalister ser ut til å være låst inne i en merkelig måte å tenke på som gjør dem blinde for tegn på politisk kriminalitet i høye maktposisjoner. Dette tankegodset er karakterisert av en tilsynelatende manglende evne til å skille grunnløse anklager om elitær politisk intrige fra legitime bekymringer om amerikanske lederes og institusjoners integritet. Av en eller annen grunn, når det kommer til populære mistanker om planer som involverer nasjonens politiske elite, er det mange journalister i Statene som ikke gjør noen forskjell. De kategoriserer alle slike mistanker som «konspirasjonsteorier», som de antar ikke bare er usanne, men også sinnssyke og paranoide.

Dette er en av et antall kognitive forstyrrelser assosiert med begrepet «konspirasjonsteori» som jeg analyserer i min nye bok, Conspiracy Theory in America. Boken vil bli publisert 15. april i år på University of Texas Press i en bokserie redigert av Mark Crispin Miller. Conspiracy Theory in America forklarer at konspirasjonsteori-stemplet ble popularisert av CIA som del av et globalt propagandaprogram for å angripe kritikere av Warren-kommisjonens konklusjon — at President Kennedy ble snikmyrdet av en enslig skytter uten noen forhåndskunnskap eller medvirkning. CIA-kampanjen påkalte utenlandske medie-firmaer og journalister til å kritisere «konspirasjonsteoretikere» og stille spørsmål ved deres motiver og dømmekraft. All og enhver kritikk av ‘enslig skytter’-forklaringen på attentatet ble klumpet sammen som «konspirasjonsteorier», og erklært grunnløs og ondsinnet, og tillagt baktanker og kommunistpropaganda-påvirkning.

Idag er konspirasjonsteori-stemplet blitt brukt i det vide og brede som en verbal forsvarsmekanisme for amerikansk politisk elite for å undertrykke mistanker som uunngåelig dannes når sjokkerende politiske forbrytelser tjener topp-politikere eller passer med deres agendaer. Spesielt når de samme tjenestemenn sitter med makten i byråer som er ansvarlige for å forhindre de hendelser det siktes til, eller for å etterforske dem etter at de har hendt. Det er bare naturlig å være mistenksom når en president og visepresident som er fast bestemt på krig i Midtøsten blir advart om nært forestående terrorangrep, og likevel ikke evner å varsle den amerikanske offentligheten elller øke beredskapen hos nasjonens væpnede styrker. Hvorfor skulle ikke amerikanere forvente svar når de blir fortalt at arabere med dårlige pilot-egenskaper evner å kapre fire fly, fly dem tvers over det østlige USA, på en eller annen måte klare å unnslippe Amerikas flerlagssystem for luftforsvar, for så å krasje to av flyene i Tvillingtårnene i New York, og ett i Pentagon i Washington? Med samme mynt er det naturlig å stille spørsmålstegn ved presidentens og visepresidentens motiver når de sleper føttene etter seg i etterforskningen av denne tilsynelatende uforklarlige forsvarssvikten, og så, når etterforskningen endelig er igangsatt, så insisterer de på å vitne sammen, under hemmelighold, og ikke under ed.

Å fordømme troen på sammensvergelser uten å skille mellom løst og fast, er åpenbart å villede, fordi politiske sammensvergelser i høye sirkler faktisk forekommer. Enhver vet at tjenestemenn i Nixon-administrasjonen konspirerte om å stjele president-valget i 1972, slik at Reagans Hvite Hus ble engasjert i et kriminelt komplott om å selge våpen til Iran og kanalisere profitten til Contras (en opprørshær i Nicaragua), og at Bush-Cheney-administrasjonen gikk sammen om å villede Kongressen og offentligheten om styrken i beviset for Irakiske masseødeleggelsesvåpen. Hvis noen konspirasjonsteorier er sanne, så er det tøvete å avvise alle mistanker om elitens intriger som falske per definisjon.

Men likevel er det nøyaktig slik mange amerikanske journalister går frem. Vurdér fjorårets offentlige påstander fra Chuck Todd om usannsynligheten for at stemmeautomatene ble rigget i det amerikanske valget. Todd er en NBC-nyhetsreporter og analytiker. Ifølge Andrew Krieg ved OpEdNews.com, fortalte Todd ved et nasjonalt møte med delstatsvalg-tjenestemenn at mistanker om at stemmeautomatene ble manipulert i statene, var «å tøye virkelighetens grenser». Todd leverte en lignende beskjed i en tweet like før presidentvalget i 2012, da han skrev: «Stemmeautomat-konspirasjonene hører sammen i samme kategori som Trumps ‘birther’-søppel» [påstander om at Obama ikke er født i USA — red.anm.].

I denne tweeten utviser Todd symptomet for fornektelse av sammensvergelser: Han ser ingen forskjell mellom to veldig forskjellige mistanker. Én involverer planer om å stjele valget ved å tukle med stemmeseddel-utstyr, mens den andre handler om president Obamas status som innfødt statsborger. Disse mistankene er vidt forskjellige i troverdighet, sannsynlighet og empiriske bevis. Tvil rundt president Obamas egnethet som president er blitt tilbakevist av dokumenter som viser at han ble født på Hawaii. Til kontrast er det et antall grunner til å tenke at svakheten ved elektroniske stemmeautomater og tabulatorer kan utnyttes for å endre valgresultatet, spesielt ved presidentvalg, der kontorets makt, penger og energi er investert i kampanjer der innsatsen er enormt høy.

Som valganalytiker for et riksdekkende TV-nettverk vet nok Todd at elektronisk stemming og tabulatorsystemer er meget sårbart for hacking. Dette ble demonstrert i 2006 med elektroniske touchscreen-stemmeautomater av forskere ved Princeton University. Forskerne fant ut at programmer kunne plantes i maskinen for å snu stemmr over fra én kandidat til en annen, slik at stemmesedlene nøyaktig matchet antallet velgere som skrev seg inn for å avgi stemme. Programmet kan instilles til å kun kjøre på valgdagen, og ikke før, når maskinene ble testet. Programmene kan også konfigureres til å slette seg selv ved slutten av dagen, slik at ingen spor av elektronisk tukling ligger igjen. I 2006 viste dessuten HBO-dokumentaren «Hacking Democracy» at optiske scanning-systemer, som også leser og tabulerer stemmer på papirsedler, er sårbare for samme type manipulering av programmer som kan settes inn i maskinen med minnepinner.

Akademikere begynte i utgangspunktet etterforskning av sikkerheten ved elektroniske stemmeautomater fordi valgresultatene i 2004 skilte seg systematisk ut fra spørreundersøkelser utenfor valglokalene i de viktigste vippestatene. Like etter valget postet Steven Freeman, en statistiker ved Universitetet i Pennsylvania, en rapport på nettet som analyserte avvikene. Freeman påpekte at proporsjonen av stemmene kreditert til Bush og Kerry samsvarte med skillet rapportert ved utgangs-spørreundersøkelsene i 10 av 11 vippestater, og at Bush i hvert tilfelle mottok flere stemmer enn spørreundersøkelsene antydet at han ville få. Det ville ikke være overraskende om valgresultatene skilte seg litt fra resultatet i spørreundersøkelsene i én enkelt stat, men det er forbløffende at de gjorde det i 10 stater, og at støtten til Bush i hvert tilfelle var større enn i kalkuleringen ved utgangsintervjuene. Freeman kalkulerte oddsen for at dette skjedde tilfeldig, gitt størrelsen av prøvene for valgdagsmålingene og tyngden til forskjellene mellom stemmeopptellingen og målingens funn. Han konkluderte med at oddsen var én til 250 millioner.

Chuck Todds selvgode avvisning av legitime bekymringer rundt stemmesystemets svakheter, ble møtt med spontan applaus fra samlingen av delstatsvalgets tjenestemenn. Publikum svarte med affeksjon fordi Todd styrket mektige normer i nasjonens politiske klasse, mot å ytre mistanker om den politiske elitens kriminalitet. Disse normene tjener interessene til politikere og regjeringens tjenestemenn, gjennom å beskytte dem mot offentlige avhør om urovekkende hendelser, slik som statistisk usannsynlige valgresultater, som de eller deres politiske partier kan ha tjent godt på. Det er langt lettere å latterliggjøre populære mistanker enn å svare på dem med grundige spørsmål og forsvarligee sikringstiltak.

Mange journalister ser ut til å ha blitt påvirket av offentlige tjenestemenn til å underkaste seg sammensvergelsesfornektende normer, selv om disse normene motsier journalistisk etikk, historisk erfaring og sunn fornuft. Journalister som fornærmer politiske eliter ved å etterforske eller kun sitere populære mistanker om sammensvergelse, risikerer å miste tilgang til kilder som de er avhengig av for deres nyhetsrapportering. Selvfølgelig er den korrekte journalistiske respons til denne politiske tvangen å avsløre den og finne andre kilder. Det er hva Carl Bernstein og Bob Woodward gjorde med Watergate, og det er nettopp hva Russ Baker, Seymour Hersh, Jane Mayer, James Risen m.fl. journalister fortsatt gjør.

Men de fleste middelmådige reportere har omfavnet fornektelsen av sammensvergelser, og for dem er det blitt et følelsesladet og selvforsterkende trossystem. Tankegodset er selvforsterkende i den forstand at det forårsaker følelser av overlegenhet og er avvisende i forhold til bevis. Ironisk nok er fornektere av sammensvergelser av den tro at de beskytter det sivile og fornuften i offentlig diskurs, når de ved å latterliggjøre fornuftige bekymringer og appellere til elitens fordommer, faktisk gjør nøyaktig det motsatte.

Dr. Lance deHaven-Smith er professor ved Reubin O’D. Askew School of Public Administration and Policy ved Florida State University. I en fagfellevurdert journalartikkel fra 2006 introduserte han begrepet State Crimes Against Democracy (SCADs) — statlige forbrytelser mot demokratiet.

Viktigst i april 2013

Disse sakene var viktigst på 9/11 Truth Norway i april:

1 Flyet som droppet feil motor
2 Humanist lunacy from Didrik Søderlind
3 Oslo Dokumentarkino den 11. september
4 Breivik uniting Zionism and Nazism
5 9/11, 7/7, 22/7 and the ICC

9/11-flyene har stått i fokus denne måneden, med artikkelen om feil motor funnet på Manhattan på 9/11 selv, og også med nyhetene om landingshjulene som ble funnet på Manhattan sist i april, som senere viste seg å være fra en vinge, og som også viste seg å ikke ha ID-serienumre likevel, slik at heller ikke denne flydelen kunne knyttes til noen av de fire angivelige flightene fra 9/11.

Nytt av måneden er også [911dψb] — den allestedsnærværende og høyst ærede redaktørens ydmyke analyse av den innenlandske 9/11-debatt.

	* reklame *

Viktigst i mars 2013

Den gamle artikkelen «Elin Brodin og muslimene» fra oktober 2011 gjør en ny visitt helt øverst på pallen for «Top of the Pops» i mars 2013. Etter å ha brukt store deler av mars måned på å piske en død hest – eller på å skjelle ut nordmenn som tviler på at holocaust fant sted – en gruppe nordmenn som består av nøyaktig 0 personer – har den sterkt religiøse forfatteren Elin Brodin valgt å legge ut sine aller første forvirrede reaksjoner på 9/11-terroren, på sitt eget Facebook-forum «Brodins snakkeboble». Brodin fortsetter her med sin ideologisk-religiøse kampanje for å styrke og bekrefte tidligere USA-president George W. Bushs udokumenterte teorier om hva som skjedde og hvem som sto bak 9/11-angrepene.

Nærmere studier av lignende norske forfattere i samme krets som Elin Brodin, tyder på at også «raddiser» som Ingvar Ambjørnsen og Gert Nygårdshaug tror med hele sitt hjerte på disse miraklene vi har fått høre inntraff den 11. september, med digre passasjerfly som rett og slett bare fordampet i kollisjonene. Den mer agnostiske Stavanger-forfatteren og Aftenblad-anmelderen Sigmund Jensen opplever på sin side – etter 2012-romanen «Taushetens tårn» – en form for sabotasje eller krigsinnsats mot seg fra både forlag og bokhandlere, der bøkene hans holdes vekke fra julesalget og etter noen år sendes direkte til makulering istedet for mammutsalg. Folk skal rett og slett ikke få lese de tykke mursteinromanene til Jensen, det synes å være vedtaket her. Om det så er fattet av frimurere eller av andre lyssky organer blir mer et spørsmål for litteraturhistorikerne. At dette er en total krig på alle fronter, er det i alle fall liten tvil om. Den bare føles litt mindre total helt oppe på overflaten for de av oss som nekter å gå i dybden.

Ellers har Reidar Kaarbø fra HvaMenerPartiene.com skrevet den første artikkelen i 2013 for 9/11 Truth Norway som ikke er forfattet av redaktøren selv. Vi håper det blir mange flere artikler utover året, både fra Kaarbø og fra dere andre! Kaarbøs artikkel tar for seg flymotoren som braste gjennom Nordtårnet på World Trade Center på Manhattan den 11. september 2001, og landet på et gatehjørne 4 kvartaler unna. Hva slags flytype stammet denne motoren fra, og hva kan årsaken være til at de over 10.000 journalistene som er organisert i Norsk Journalistlag ikke vil røre ved denne saken med ildtang? Trenger De en påskekrim – eller kanskje to? – når De sitter på Deres hytte i fjellheimen sammen med mer eller mindre intellektuelt stimulerende slektninger eller skyldfolk? I så fall anbefales Kaarbøs fagbok «9/11 en åpen sak» (pdf) og redaktør Viddals «Politisporet» (epub | mobi) på det varmeste! Begge bøker kan lastes ned gratis til alle brett, pads og laptops.

Vår kjære redaktør og webmaster Torstein Viddal har muligens svaret på den siste delen av dette spørsmålet i kronikken han skrev helt på tampen av mars måned, men dette mulige svaret får du dessverre ikke lese før én av disse 10.000 NJ-journalistenes redaktører våger å publisere den. Norge er tragisk nok ikke noe fritt land, og vi har dessverre ikke en fri presse her til lands. Dette har som kjent allerede fått katastrofale følger, og ført til en masse helt ubegrunnet hat, også innenfor våre egne grenser. Som under naziokkupasjonen, der Aftenposten fortsatte å komme ut, ligger redaktørene under for utenlandsk makt, og kan ikke fritt velge å sette på trykk ting Berlin eller Washington er sterkt imot.

Vi får likevel håpe på en ny vår for de demokratiske idealene, selv her i det nytotalitære USA-underbruket Norway. Fremad i alle retninger!

PS: Trenger De en påskekrim – eller kanskje to? – når De sitter på Deres hytte i fjellheimen sammen med mer eller mindre intellektuelt stimulerende slektninger eller skyldfolk? I så fall anbefales Kaarbøs fagbok «9/11 en åpen sak» (pdf) og redaktør Viddals «Politisporet» (epub | mobi) på det varmeste! Begge bøker kan lastes ned gratis til alle brett, pads og laptops.

Viktigst i februar 2013

Disse sakene var viktigst på 9/11 Truth Norway i februar:

1 Redd Norge, redaktører!
2 Elin Brodin og muslimene
3 Humanist lunacy from Didrik Søderlind
4 Breivik uniting Zionism and Nazism
5 Olje eller Israel?

Listen viser at angrepet på Norge – mot Oslo og Utøya i 2011 – og hvem som i virkeligheten sto bak dette engasjerer leserne i februar. Den viktigste saken var Redd Norge, redaktører!, der undertegnede, Torstein Viddal, advarer Norge og oppfordrer redaktørene i Norge til å ta ansvar, for én gangs skyld. Dette var vel å merke et halvt år før 22/7-terroren, og lenge før Norges statsminister ødela ansvarsbegrepet én gang for alle. I løpet av februar er også romanen min ferdigskrevet, se annonse nederst på denne siden.

Videre har vår skribent Ole Christian Juvet Herup fått en kronikk på trykk i Klassekampen – stort kryss i taket! – den 21. februar, om Vepsens tåpelige stigmatisering av 9/11-skeptikere, og litt om nazistbaser på månen, som Juvet visstnok stiller seg skeptisk til.

Og sist, men ikke minst, har undertegnede hatgrupperepresentant (igjen ifølge den tvilsomme hatgrupperapporten fra Vepsen) vært i Horsham i England og rapportert fra terrorrettssaken der mot BBC.

En nokså begivenhetsrik måned, med andre ord. Men vi trenger likevel flere artikler *her* på nettstedet, fra *dere* der ute. Dere trenger ikke være en av oss, men kan fx være noen som elsker å *ta* oss og filleriste argumentene våre. Ta kontakt om du har trøbbel med å sende inn stoff!

Redd Norge, redaktører!

Det er bare én måte vi kan stanse terror mot norske mål og mennesker på, og det er ved å nøste opp det nettverket som nærer og støtter terroren i vår verdensdel på 2000-tallet.

Dere redaktører kan og bør nå bidra til dette. Dere kan ikke la ideologi og prinsipper komme foran det å verne og beskytte menneskeliv i vårt eget land og i vår egen hovedstad. I så fall er dere for landssvikere å regne.

Dere vet fra måten T-banen i London ble sprengt på – med bomber under gulvene i vognene – at britiske myndigheter ikke snakker sant om angrepet på London-undergrunnen den 7. juli 2005. Dere vet også fra måten Tvillingtårnene ble sprengt på – med nanotermitt og andre eksplosiver – at amerikanske myndigheter ikke snakker sant om angrepet på World Trade Center i New York den 11. september 2001.

Dere vet også at amerikanske og britiske myndigheter har satt ut villedende rykter og desinformasjon om disse terrorangrepene, samtidig som de aktivt har hindret og sabotert reelle og uavhengige granskninger av disse dødelige hendelsene.

Det går ikke an å lukke øynene for slike tragiske hendelser og dødelige nettverk, og så håpe på at de ikke skal slå til i Oslo og Norge.

Vi trenger dere nå. Alle fakta er allerede gravet frem av de alternative mediene. Det er ingenting mer å lekke. Alt vi venter på nå, er at noen av dere tør skrive om det, prate om det og vise bevisene på TV.

Dere kan ikke lenger påstå at dere tror det står muslimer bak disse angrepene.

Elin Brodin og muslimene

Elin Brodin er en norsk forfatter som hevder å «forsvare muslimene», men som hver gang hun slipper til i massemedia bekrefter det jeg kaller Dolkestøtslegenden mot muslimene. La oss se hvordan en Facebook-tråd hun startet lørdag kveld i «Brodins snakkeboble» artet seg, med fokus på dialogen oss imellom.

Tråden fortsetter, selvfølgelig, men går i ball for Brodins del, som går i personangrepsmodus, etter kommentaren min om at hun neppe kunne forstå norsk når hun ikke engang etter to gjentagelser av spørsmålet forsto hva det var jeg spurte om.

Oppsummert kan vi likevel si – etter å ha fulgt resten av tråden – at Elin Brodin nærmest hver eneste gang hun har opptrådd i massemediene har bekreftet den hatefulle Dolkestøtslegenden mot muslimene, samt at hun – selv om hun nå hevder å ikke ta stilling – heller ikke for fremtiden har noen planer om å avstå fra å bekrefte den hatefulle Dolkestøtslegenden mot muslimene når hun figurerer i media.

Elin Brodin ser rett og slett ikke ut til å fatte hva som skulle være problematisk med å støtte en slik hatefull dolkestøtslegende. I stedet vender hun i kjent stil sin vrede mot dem som påpeker at hun rent faktisk bekrefter denne legenden med sine innlegg i massemediene, slik at hele problemet med den hatefulle Dolkestøtslegenden for hennes del blir de menneskene som peker på at hun ikke burde støtte den, dersom det stemmer at hun ikke har tatt stilling til hva det var som skjedde i New York og London.

Vi avventer derfor i spenning Elin Brodins neste innlegg om terror og islam i massemediene, og kommer tilbake til hva hun da sier i kommentarene nedenfor.

Humanist lunacy from Didrik Søderlind

Metaskeptic «Humanist» editor Didrik Søderlind on NRK1 TV about 22/7: «One of the reasons that I was quite sure Anders Behring Breivik wasn’t a part of a network and that he must have done it all by himself, is that we know that no Norwegian rightwing extremists can keep their mouths shut, so it had to be just one man.»

John Færseth and Didrik Søderlind.

Now, there are several things to note in this argument from the editor of «Humanist», but let’s start with the most serious mistakes:

1) Even if ABB should have been all alone about it, we know he couldn’t keep his mouth shut. The ministry’s audio phonelog disappearing and even the note written about the threats by the operator vanishing, was due to solid cooperation, not a lack of talking. Same thing with the Utøya threats at the Hegnar Online politics forum, that disappeared in its entirety on Wednesday 20th July 2011.

2) The rightwing extremist, national zionist ABB in no way kept his mouth shut, rather, he boasted about his foreign network: «Breivik claims the persons who in total were behind some 50 attacks in Europe since WW2 are the members of this [anti-communist resistance] movement.» according to Dagbladet.

3) It’s typical of zionist editors to argue that a foreign network was impossible because Norwegian zionists were eager to talk (to try to be as categorical as these zionist editors themselves).

4) The «Humanist» editor’s absolute belief in absolutes, and in absolutely homogenous groups within the labels he makes for them, probably also explains how it’s possible for him to believe that neither the first Manhattan Project (the atomic bomb) nor the second (the WTC demolition) were possible to carry out, as «someone would have talked», and America’s super-duper-free journalists and editors are simply foaming at their mouths at the thought of revealing 9/11. Extremist zionists are human beings, too, and human beings have a tendency to be diverse as individuals. Some talk and some keep their mouths shut.

5) You can believe when you are in your church!

6) Why does editor Søderlind think the police are filed as suspects by the families who lost their loved ones in the terror attacks of 22/7?

*

Metaskeptiker og Humanist-redaktør Didrik Søderlind på NRK1 om 22/7: «En av grunnene til at jeg var ganske sikker på at Anders Behring Breivik ikke var del av et nettverk og at han måtte ha gjort det alene, er at vi vet at ingen norske høyreekstremister klarer å holde kjeft, så det måtte være bare én mann.»

Det er flere ting å merke seg ved Humanist-redaktørens resonnement, men la oss starte med det aller grøvste:

1) Selv om ABB skulle ha vært helt alene, vet vi at han ikke klarte å holde kjeft. At departementets lydlogg er forsvunnet og notatet operatøren skrev ned truslene på forduftet, skyldes solid samarbeid, og ikke mangel på kjeftbruk. Likeledes med Utøya-truslene på Hegnar Onlines politikkforum, som forsvant i sin helhet onsdag 20. juli 2011.

2) Den høyreekstreme nasjonalzionisten ABB holdt nettopp ikke kjeft, men trakk tvert imot frem sitt utenlandske nettverk: «Breivik hevder at personene som totalt står bak et 50-talls angrep i Europa siden 2. verdenskrig utgjør denne [antikommunistiske motstands]bevegelsen.» ifølge Dagbladet.

3) Det er typisk for zionistiske redaktører å argumentere med at et utenlandsk nettverk var umulig grunnet norske zionisters snakkesalighet (for forsøksvis å være like kategorisk som de zionistiske redaktørene).

4) Humanist-redaktørens absolutte tro på absolutter, og på absolutt ensartede grupperinger innenfor båsene han snekrer opp, forklarer trolig hvordan det også blir mulig for ham og hans likesinnede å tro at hverken det første Manhattanprosjektet (atombomben) eller det andre (WTC-sprengningen) var mulig å gjennomføre, fordi «noen ville ha plapret», og USAs superduperfrie journalister og redaktører bare sikler etter å avsløre 9/11. Ekstreme zionister er også mennesker, og mennesker har det med å være forskjellige som individer. Noen plaprer og noen holder kjeft.

5) Tro kan du gjøre i kjerka!

6) Hvorfor tror redaktør Søderlind politiet er anmeldt av de etterlatte etter terrorangrepet 22/7?

Norwegian only: Det eksakte sitatet i kontekst er fra det drøye minuttet 23:00-24:15 i dette klippet: [youtube]

Konspirasjoner skjer hele tiden, og verdenshistorien og nåtiden er full av sammensvergelser; folk som har snakket sammen, skjulte maktbindinger osv. Det som kjennetegner den typen konspirasjoner som det snakkes om her, det er jo disse enorme konspirasjonene som er allmektige, som aldri gjør feil, hvor ingen plaprer osv.

Det som er så veldig typisk med de konspirasjonene som skjer i virkeligheten, er at folk hopper av, de ljuger osv, ikke sant? En av grunnene til at jeg var ganske sikker på, da det kom frem, da folk snakket om at Anders Behring Breivik var del av et nettverk og sånn, så, nei, han må ha gjort det alene, for det vi vet om norske høyreekstremister, det er at ingen av dem klarer å holde kjeft. Ikke sant, det må ha vært én mann.

Sånn at det er det som er så typisk her. Men jeg skjønner veldig godt at konspirasjonsteorier slår an, fordi verden er et veldig uoversiktlig og rotete sted, og de tingene konspirasjonsteoriene tilbyr deg, det er jo ikke bare et ganske ordnet univers, som er sånn nesten manikeisk, at det er det gode mot det onde, og sånn, men de tilbyr deg en helt spesiell plass; du er den eneste som har gjennomskuet det, og så er du omgitt av horder av hjernevaskede sauer, eller sheeple, som ikke forstår noen ting.

Breivik uniting Zionism and Nazism

I happened to be present at the Oslo courthouse on Tuesday, April 17th, watching and listening to 22/7 terrorist Anders Behring Breivik’s 75 minute main prepared defense speech. A speech that the press and media were banned from broadcasting to the general public. These are my thoughts after following the story for almost nine months.

The first thing that has to be said, is that watching Breivik defend himself for 5 hours this Tuesday removed each and every doubt that he is indeed «legally sane», in the sense that he is absolutely fit to be punished by the Norwegian judicial system for his criminal terrorist acts. All «experts» who say otherwise are flat out lying. This is a sane, rational, logically stringent man of great wit, who happens to also have some pretty effed up ideological views that have made him become a mass murderer and a terrorist.

It should also be said right from the start of this article that there is little doubt that he carried out both the bombing in Oslo and the shooting at Utøya. What remains to be seen is whether he had accomplices and what parts of the misdeeds these people took part in. There were also some pretty amazing instances of police SNAFU – 27 according to one commentator, but a lot more if you look more closely. There’s a string of maybe 40 or 50 or 60 grave mistakes on behalf of the police, guards and government, making them unable to stop Breivik before the bombing of Oslo, stop him getting out of Oslo and to nearby Utøya, and to stop the shooting ASAP when Breivik amazingly managed to get himself transported over the sound to Utøya island, using the Labour Party’s own ferry.

So many instances of SNAFU, in fact, that the mathematical probability of them all occuring on the same day or relating to the same person, should tell you all you need to know. And of course, in the weeks and months after the terror, documents, tapes and other evidence started disappearing. As by invisible hands.

OK. So, returning to the terrorist’s defense speech on Tuesday, April 17th. Breivik started telling us how there’d been no real post-WW2 democracy in Norway, because «nationalists» like himself were not allowed free speech and democratic rights. This should tell us that he wanted there to be more democracy, and that Norwegian democracy should also include «ultra nationalists», a fair point that even I could agree on.

However, he messes it up by contradicting himself completely. He loves America, and especially a certain McCarthy, the postwar communist witchhunt general, and he regrets that McCarthyism didn’t go far enough and never succeeded in sending alleged «commie» American citizens to Soviet Russia. So, really, when it comes to a more real and including democracy with less political censorship, our terrorist is only in favour of it when it applies to his chums, and to his «nationalist» parties.

Apart from this ideologically induced blindness or logical breakdown, he argues convincingly that censoring a movement like his own for too long, eventually will make members of that movement resort to other means, even violence.

His speech more generally was aimed at reaching out to a slightly broader audience than his Manifesto and his earlier writing on Norwegian websites, or to «unite national conservatism, which I support, with national socialism and militant christendom», as he put it himself. So the strategy obviously is to appeal to a broader spectrum of racists, and to play down the Zionist issue, which divides Breivik, JDL, EDL, NDL and Knights Templar, on the one side, from other nationalists and nazis, on the other.

Breivik talks rather openly about the strategy of supporting and expanding «street extremism», like the JDL, EDL and NDL (Jewish, English and Norwegian Defense League, respectively), while at the same time building a network of single cell terror operatives, borrowing tactics from – yup – al-Qaida.

The reason for using terror cells consisting of only one man, says Breivik, is to avoid the eyes of anti-terror agencies. This way he only needed to meet with his comrades once or twice during a decade, if we choose to believe him, and I guess blogs, forums, RSS feeds, social media etc took care of the rest.

Breivik also tries to use the term «counter jihad» as much as possible, rather than «zionism», which is what he really supports, and he has succeeded in selling this bogus «counter jihad» term to the Norwegian mainstream media. To quote from the terrorist’s Manifesto:

«So let us fight together with Israel, with our Zionist brothers against all anti-Zionists, against all cultural Marxists/multiculturalists.»

So, then, this is what it came to in Norway: Where we could have had the press digging into and revealing the horrific lies of the 9/11 terror attacks ten years after the events, instead we got a snob from the West who bombed his own city using «al-Qaida tactics», and who shot fellow Norwegian kids taking part in a summer youth camp for young politicians and future administrators, because he believed the lies and racist conspiracy theories fed to him for ten years by every newspaper, radio and TV station in this nation and throughout the West. Malicious, racist lies about muslims behind every terrorist act from New York and Bali, through Madrid and London, to Mumbai and Stockholm.

The mythical snake – Midgardsormen – seems to be biting its own tail: False-flag terrorism over a long, sad decade goes unnoticed by the press, the journalists and the editors, and the inevitable end-product of these ten years of lies and cowardice and cover-up is our very own Nordic mass murderer and terrorist; Anders Behring Breivik.

Whether he had handlers or not we don’t know, and the press and the police for some reason don’t seem very eager to find out, he is now the shining example, or knight in shining armour, intended to inspire many, many followers in Scandinavia, Europe and America.

He will even be allowed internet access in jail, and thus to build, expand and strengthen his zionist terrorist networks, both on the streets and in the single-man sleeper cells.

Bølløcks.

Olje eller Israel?

Jeg har lyst til å starte det nye året med et litt større spørsmål, som jeg vil kjøre parallelt på tre arenaer, nemlig Viddals ViktigVegg, Brodins Snakkeboble og 9/11 Truth Norway. Spørsmålet dreier seg om de bakenforliggende kreftene for verdensbegivenhetene, og kan derfor lett avfeies av alle overfladiske mennesker, som utelukkende er opptatt av overflaten. Dere trenger med andre ord ikke lese videre. Dere som mer generelt ikke tåler at mennesker diskuterer ting, behøver strengt tatt heller ikke lese videre.

Etter min nokså brede lesning av dyperegående analyser og forklaringsforsøk, har det seilt opp for meg to strengt tatt konkurrerende og derfor i bunn og grunn utelukkende forklaringer på et av de aller største spørsmålene, nemlig hva det er som dypest sett styrer begivenhetene vi alle hører om hver eneste uke i massemediene.

Jeg presiserer *dypest sett*, da det på litt grunnere farvann mer er et spørsmål om både-og, enn enten-eller. Her vil vi altså frem til Den store beveger, og ikke en komité av store bevegere (noe som selvsagt kan være tema for et litt annet seminar).

Vi utelukker her altså allerede i utgangspunktet naive forklaringer som den om at alle verdensbegivenheter er en kombinert effekt av 7 milliarder mennesker «that go about their daily business». Grupper av mennesker er oppfunnet forlengst, og makt er allerede en egen hylleseksjon i bibliotekene, så den må du lenger ned i årsklassene med.

Ifølge den ene aktuelle forklaringsmodellen er det slik at USA har underlagt seg nær sagt hele verden, med sitt nettverk av 5000 militærbaser og tropper i 150 land som det mest håndfaste bevis for underleggelsen, men med utallige mer myke og kulturelle underleggelsesmekanismer involvert, og at Israel gjennom den pro-israelske (ofte kalt zionistiske) lobby i USA styrer utvelgelsen av presidentkandidater fra begge partier, styrer Kongressen og Senatet, styrer den offentlige debatten gjennom sitt bias og sine tabu, og så videre og så videre. Hvorsomer burde de fleste være enige i at den som styrer USA, styrer det meste av dagens verden.

Ifølge den andre aktuelle forklaringsmodellen er det slik at olje og lignende energiressurser er den egentlige Store beveger, og at nær sagt alt skjer for å koordinere jakten på denne ikke-fornybare ressursen. Ifølge denne modellen blir det mer naturlig å se på Israel som en strategisk plassering av pro-vestlige (les: pro-amerikanske) militærstyrker, u-båter, atomstridshoder etc. Dette med tilgang til energiressursene kan også være en vesentlig årsak til at USA av egen fri vilje overfører enorme summer til Israel hvert eneste år, som den største mottaker av amerikansk våpen- og pengestøtte. Alle som har spilt Risk har vel skjønt at dersom en spiller hele tiden utstasjonerer nye styrker i én provins, runde etter runde, så er det noe i gjære, da har han en plan, og den planen er ikke nødvendigvis verdensfred og fredelig sameksistens mellom provinsene.

Alternative kommentatorer som Michael Rivero (WhatReallyHappened.com) terper gjerne på at amerikanske politikere gjør ting som ikke er i Amerikas interesse, men som mer er i Israels interesse, men han misser på én måte poenget siden Amerika i langt mindre grad er en nasjon nå, enn det er et globalt imperium. Og for et globalt imperium som er helt avhengig av petroleumsressurser for sin opprettholdelse (drivstoff til tanks, bombefly, hangarskip, ubåter etc) er det helt klart interessant å både donere penger og utstasjonere militært utstyr midt i det største gjenværende oljeområdet i verden, nemlig Midtøsten.

Rivero blir selv med jevne mellomrom stemplet og utdefinert som antisemitt, holocaustfornekter og alt annet usaklig, hvilket er feil, om man hører på hva han sier hver ukedag. Men her er vi kanskje inne på enda en fordel med den andre forklaringsmodellen – la oss kalle den Oljemodellen – at man via en slik USA-støttet opprettelse av en «jødestat» som strategisk investering i fremtidig energitilgang får mulighet til å skjule den egentlige Store beveger og utrope alle dens kritikere som nettopp antisemitter, holocaustfornektere, sannhetssøkere og denslags kontemporære banneord?

Det er i alle fall slik at en verden der realpolitikken er grim og grusom og konsentrert om en kynisk og nådeløs kamp om energitilgang samt en tilsvarende kynisk og nådeløs finanssektor er vrien å kritisere i vår tid uten at jokerkortene Antisemitt og Holocaustfornekter og Sannhetssøker spilles ut mot en, så lenge disse spillkortene fortsatt fungerer.

Men jeg vet altså ikke hvordan det egentlig er. Kanskje er det slik at Amerikaimperiet først forsøkte seg med Oljemodellen, skjult under dekket av Israelmodellen, som en antatt ukritiserbar modell, men at ting langs veien kom ut av kontroll for Amerika-delen av Amerikaimperiet, slik at Israelmodellen nå er den rådende? Hva mener du, og hvordan tester man egentlig slike ting vitenskapelig?

Et interessant moment helt tilslutt kan være dette med petrodollaren og Amerikaimperiet i forhold til nasjoner som litt freidig naivt og selvstendig ønsker å begynne å selge sin olje til sine naboland i andre valutaer enn «nasjonen» USAs valuta. Det hevdes av smarte mennesker at Amerikaimperiets militærvesen finansieres gjennom at alle land må kjøpe dollar fra det for å kunne handle olje, samt at alle land som vil selge olje i andre valutaer enn Amerikaimperiets får føle dets militære vrede. Det kan tyde på at Oljemodellen er viktigere enn Israelmodellen når Amerikaimperiet velger ut sine nye røverstater for bombing og regimeendring.

	* reklame *

Writing a crime novel about the police trail in the 22/7 case

Democracy activist Torstein Viddal is currently writing the crime novel «Politisporet» [Police Trail], that focuses especially on the many suspicious failures of the police on the day terror struck Norway, and to what degree these can be explained by corruption, infiltration or conspiracy.

This interview is translated from Taliban Norge.

- Why a novel about 22/7? And why publish it before it’s completed?

I guess everyone likes to think they’ve got a novel inside of them? More seriously, so many strange things started happening in my life – while my news search for my surname started returning headlines like «Feels like being in a Hollywood movie» – that I started thinking: This is something! This could become a book. The interesting thing about publishing chapter by chapter from a crime novel at the same time as the real-world terror attack is being investigated, is that the readers can then send their tips to private investigator Karlsen about important trails and indications.

- Do you frequently google yourself in the news?

After the NRK in July spread a rumour to Agence France Presse that ended up in newspapers all over the world in about 20-30 different languages claiming I was an elected representative for the Progress Party, I find it worthwhile to keep an eye on what the tabloid media say about me, yes. Before you know it, old ladies with umbrellas might think they have a reason to hit you in the head with them.

- You’ve chosen the title «Police Trail» for your novel, which alludes to the Palme case and the suspicion that elements in the Swedish police might be involved in the very assassination of the prime minister. Are there reasons to suspect something similar when it comes to Utøya and 22/7?

Firstly, the «Police Trail» is a novel, and thus a work of literary fiction. Having said that, I support social scientist Svein Tuastad at the University of Stavanger, who after the last of the hearings carried out by the Parliament’s Control and Constitution Committee, asks why all crisis plans were forgotten, and how the police could fail so completely. The Swedish crime author Leif GW Persson has written a Palme trilogy [«Fall of the Welfare State»] in which exactly the «police trail» is a central element, but terribly many years after the murder itself. As Palme, too, was a social democrat, 22/7 in a way becomes a Palme assassination with 77 victims, and the same forces may theoretically be behind this time. I also thought i could be a bit of an early bird.

- Is the book in any way autobiographical? I hear rumours that you should have written «history’s most expensive blog post in Norwegian»? How great is the distance between the fictional character Karlsen and the real-world Viddal?

Sadly, I cannot comment on the current judicial twist, but obviously I use elements from my own and other people’s lives when writing crime. But the fact that both Karlsen and I are phoned up by the Oslo police after blog posts, and that we both were questioned by police for several hours on November 29th because of articles we have written, is purely coincidental, to steal an element from an explanatory model often used by the police itself in connection to their «effort» on July 22nd. Karlsen also lives in Strandgaten in Bergen, while I’m in Akersveien in Oslo.

Politisporet / Torstein Viddal. Oslo : Glohug, 2013. — ISBN 978-82-93070-02-3 (epub). The novel is being published chapter by chapter online, and is freely available at politisporet.origo.no.

Two Years of Cablegate As Bradley Manning Testifies

Thursday, November 29th, Bradley Manning testified for the first time since his arrest two and a half years ago in Baghdad. Today also marks the two-year anniversary of the first front pages around the world from Cablegate, an archive of 251,287 U.S. State Department diplomatic cables – messages sent between the State Department and its embassies, consulates and diplomatic missions around the world. In collaboration with a network of more than 100 press outlets we revealed the full spectrum of techniques used by the United States to exert itself around the world. The young intelligence analyst Bradley Manning was detained as an alleged source.

WikiLeaks came under attack, with American politicians and right-wing pundits calling for all of us to be designated as terrorists, some even calling for my assassination and the kidnapping of our staff. Speaking on Meet The Press, Vice President Joe Biden referred to me as a «high-tech terrorist,» while Senator Joe Lieberman demanded that we be prosecuted under the U.S. Espionage Act. The Department of Justice spokesperson Dean Boyd admitted as recently as July 2012 that the Department of Justice investigation into WikiLeaks is ongoing, and the Pentagon renewed its threats against us on September 28th, declaring our work an «ongoing crime.» As a result, I have been granted political asylum and now live in the Ecuadorian embassy in London, surrounded by armed police while the FBI portion of the «whole of government» investigation against us, according to court testimony, had reached 42,135 pages as of December last year.

Earlier this week, WikiLeaks released European Commission documents showing that Senator Lieberman and Congressman Peter T. King directly influenced decisions by PayPal, Visa and MasterCard to block donations to WikiLeaks, which has blocked 95 percent of our donors since December of 2010. Last week the European Parliament expressed its will that the Commission should prevent the arbitrary blockade of WikiLeaks.

Bradley Manning, who is alleged to be a source of the cables, started testifying on Thursday about his pre-trial treatment, which UN Special Rapporteur Juan Mendez said was «at a minimum cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment in violation of Article 16 of the Convention against Torture.» Captain William Hoctor, the government psychiatrist with 24 years of experience who evaluated Manning at Quantico base in Virginia, testified that brig commanders had ignored his recommendations for Manning’s detention, something he had not even experienced in his work at Guantánamo bay prison.

Bradley Manning has been detained without trial for 921 days. This is the longest pre-trial detention of a U.S. military soldier since at least the Vietnam War. U.S. military law says the maximum is 120 days.

The material that Bradley Manning is alleged to have leaked has highlighted astonishing examples of U.S. subversion of the democratic process around the world, systematic evasion of accountability for atrocities and killings, and many other abuses. Our archive of State Department cables have appeared in tens of thousands of articles, books and scholarly works, illustrating the nature of U.S. foreign policy and the instruments of U.S. national power. On the two-year anniversary of the start of Cablegate, I want to highlight some of the stories that have emerged.

A War of Terror

The United States’ War on Terror has claimed hundreds of thousands of lives, inflamed sectarian violence, and made a mockery of international law. Victims and their families struggle to have their stories acknowledged, and the U.S.’ systematic avoidance of accountability for war crimes implicitly denies their right to be considered human beings. Moreover, as the U.S. increasingly relies on clandestine military operations conducted outside the scrutiny of government oversight, the execution of this expanding War on Terror becomes increasingly uncoupled from the democratic process. While President Obama had promised the American people in 2008 that he would end the Iraq War, U.S. troops were only withdrawn when information from a cable revived international scrutiny of abuse occurring in Iraq, resulting in a refusal to grant continued immunity to U.S. troops in 2012 or beyond.

In 2007 the U.S. embassy in Baghdad obtained a copy of the Iraqi government’s final investigation report on the massacre of 17 civilians on September 16th, 2007 in Nisour Square. The report concluded that the incident was an unprovoked attack on unarmed civilians, asked for $8 million in compensation for each death and $4 million for each injury, and demanded that the private security firm Blackwater be replaced within six months. Blackwater continued to operate in Iraq for two years afterwards, and the U.S. Embassy compensated victims with $10,000 for each death and $5,000 for each injury. Five years later, the offending Blackwater mercenaries have escaped from accountability to Iraq, and attempts to bring them to justice in the U.S. have resulted in a long chain of dismissed cases and one undisclosed settlement. WikiLeaks’ Iraq War Logs release of 391,832 U.S. Army field reports uncovered 14 additional cases where Blackwater opened fire on civilians, along with numerous other incidents of abuse. The Iraq War Logs also showed how the United States handed over prisoners to be tortured in gruesome detail – stories of electrocution, mutilation and of victims being attacked with drills.

The fact that, five years on, the victims of the Nisour Square Massacre have seen no meaningful accountability is an atrocity. But it is unfortunately no surprise that the U.S. claims immunity for its forces in other countries, then fails to administer justice at home.

These events – and in particular one cable detailing the summary execution of 10 Iraqi civilians, including four women and five children – by U.S. soldiers and a subsequent airstrike to cover up the evidence, forced the U.S. withdrawal from Iraq in 2011. The story of handcuffed execution and cover-up sparked outrage around the world in the midst of negotiations to extend U.S. troop presence into 2012 and, in response to international coverage, Iraq revived its investigation into the incident. Iraq ultimately refused to grant immunity to U.S. troops in 2012, forcing the U.S. to withdraw in December 2011.

This systemic violence and cover-up extends to the war in Afghanistan. When news emerged that a midnight bombing campaign on the Afghan village of Granai in 2009 had possibly resulted in the death of up to 100 civilians, U.S. officials publicly asserted that most of the dead had been Taliban fighters. A State Department cable written shortly after the event summarizes a meeting between the Red Cross’ Afghanistan chief Reto Stocker and U.S. Ambassador Carl Eikenberry in which they discussed findings from an investigation of the event. In the cable, Stocker is referred to as «one of the most credible sources for unbiased and objective information in Afghanistan.» The Red Cross report estimated that 89 of the dead and 13 injured were in fact civilians. Neither the U.S. government nor the Red Cross publicly revealed these figures.

WikiLeaks and the Arab Spring

The Tunisian cables describe the extreme corruption and lack of transparency of the Ben Ali regime. The Ben Ali extended family are described as the worst offenders, their lavish life accompanied by «a wide-range of corrupt schemes,» including «property expropriation and extortion of bribes.» We also learned that Ben Ali family assets included an airline, several hotels and a radio station. One cable describes state censorship of Tunisia’s only private broadcast satellite TV station, and a surprise tax judgment against the station of almost $1.5 million.

In its 2011 annual report, Amnesty International praised WikiLeaks and its media partners for catalyzing the revolution in Tunisia:

«While the ‘Jasmine Revolution’ in Tunisia would not have happened without the long struggle of brave human rights defenders over the last two decades, support for activists from outside the country may have been strengthened as people scrutinized the WikiLeaks documents on Tunisia and understood the roots of the anger. In particular, some of the documents made clear that countries around the world were aware of both the political repression and the lack of economic opportunity, but for the most part were not taking action to urge change.»

When Tunisia’s president Moncef Marzouki spoke with me on The World Tomorrow, he thanked WikiLeaks for its work, saying, «I am very grateful for all that you have done for promoting human rights, truth, and I admire and support your efforts.»

Shortly following Tunisia’s revolution, protests erupted in Libya, and a new batch of cables revealed the strategic calculations behind U.S. support of the Gaddafi regime. In Egypt, cables revealed that Mubarak would rather die in office than step down and that his son would likely succeed him. Then, just as evidence emerged that Vice President Suleiman was tipped to replace Mubarak, cables were released detailing his former role as intelligence chief, as well as his close ties to Israel. Such elements became a crucial part of the ongoing Egyptian uprising.

A Global Death Squad Consulting Firm?

For years, WikiLeaks faced a chorus of accusations by U.S. officials and right-wing pundits of making the world a less-safe place, and of having potentially caused harm through publication of embarrassing secrets. In reality, the cables show that torture and killing are not isolated events, but the violent manifestations of an aggressive policy of coercion used by the United States in the pursuit of its strategic commercial and political goals around the world.

While U.S. law bans the training of military units with a history of human rights violations, in practice the law is easily and often circumvented. The Indonesian army’s elite special forces unit KOPASSUS has brutally repressed the West Papuans’ freedom movement (West Papua has been occupied by Indonesia since 1963), as has been extensively documented by Human Rights Watch. Despite this, U.S. diplomats in Jakarta judged in 2007 that the time had come to resume collaboration with KOPASSUS, for the sake of «commercial interest» and «the protection of U.S. officials.»

A diplomatic cable from November 2009 mentions as a side note that right-wing paramilitaries in Colombia were responsible for the death of 257,089 victims, a figure well above the estimations of local human rights activists. The U.S. has nonetheless offered generous support to the Colombian military; Amnesty International, which has called for a complete cut-off of U.S. military aid to Colombia, has estimated that total U.S. aid in 2006 amounted to $728 million, of which 80 percent was given to military and police assistance. As of 2012, U.S. military support to Colombia is ongoing.

Such examples illustrate the United States’ liberal interpretation of the laws banning the training of military units with a history of human rights violations. In another cable from August 2008, U.S. officials acknowledge that the Bangladeshi death squad, the Rapid Action Battalion (RAB), has been involved in obvious human rights violations, making support for the RAB difficult – U.S. officials hoped, however, to improve the RAB’s record and polish its public image. U.S. officials praised the RAB for having «succeeded in reducing crime and fighting terrorism, making it in many ways Bangladesh’s most respected police unit.» In a diplomatic cable from 2009, it was also revealed that the UK had been training the RAB for the previous 18 months «in areas such as investigative interviewing techniques and rules of engagement.»

Foreign Service Spies

In 2009, Hillary Clinton sent an intelligence gathering directive to 33 embassies and consulates around the world. The directive asked diplomats to gather intelligence on UN officials, including credit card numbers and online handles. A similar cable requested intelligence on officials from the Democratic Republic of Congo, Burundy, Rwanda and Uganda, and specifically mentioned the collection of DNA samples, iris scans and computer passwords.

Another state department cable revealed that a mole within the German government was spying for the U.S. Embassy in Berlin, frequently updating U.S. officials on negotiations between Merkel’s conservative Christian Democrats and Westerwelle’s FDP on the formation of a new coalition government in 2009. Helmut Metzner, formerly chief of staff to Germany’s foreign minister, admitted to being the mole mentioned in these cables when this story broke in the press, and was subsequently fired.

Lobbying for Unaccountability – Manipulation of Judicial Process in Other Countries

Abuse that occurs in war, as it did in Iraq, is often dismissed by its perpetrators as exceptional, and we are often assured that when abuse has occurred, the accountability mechanisms in place will bring justice. The diplomatic cables have given us numerous concrete examples of the coercion used by the U.S. to manipulate and undermine judicial processes in other countries, and they establish a clear policy for the evasion of accountability in any form.

During the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq, two journalists – including the Spanish journalist José Couso – were killed and three others were wounded when a U.S. tank fired on the Palestine Hotel in Baghdad. An investigation into the event was subsequently launched in Spain, and an international arrest warrant was issued for three U.S. soldiers involved. Cables showed that the U.S. aggressively fought to have Spanish officials drop the case. Writing about the case in one cable, U.S. Ambassador Eduardo Aguirre emphasizes: «While we are careful to show our respect for the tragic death of Couso and for the independence of the Spanish judicial system, behind the scenes we have fought tooth and nail to make the charges disappear.» Shamefully, this quote was redacted in the original reporting on the subject from El Pais and Le Monde.

In another example from 2003, a German citizen of Lebanese origins, Kalid el-Masri, was kidnapped while on vacation in Macedonia, renditioned to Afghanistan by the CIA, and tortured for four months. When his captors finally decided he was innocent, he was flown to Albania and dumped on a country road without so much as an apology. In a cable from 2007, we learn that when a German prosecutor issued arrest warrants for agents involved in el-Masri’s kidnapping, the U.S. ambassador in Berlin warned German officials that there would be repercussions. No arrests have yet been made and el-Masri is still seeking justice.

The U.S.’ manipulation extended to the UK, where a cable shows that during a British public inquiry led by Sir John Chilcot into the UK role in the Iraq War, the Ministry of Defence had «put measures in place» to protect U.S. interests.

Global Powers Work to Break Environmental Solidarity, and to Exploit «Opportunities» of Climate Change

On environmental issues, cables show that the U.S. routinely makes symbolic gestures rather than initiating substantial practices to combat climate change, and works aggressively to tailor international agreements to its own commercial interests.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton asked embassies to gather intelligence on the preparations for the Copenhagen UN Convention on Climate Change Meeting in December 2009, asking for biographical details of representatives from China, France, Japan, Mexico, Russia and the European Union. Cables show that in Copenhagen the U.S. manipulated the accord talks by offering «gifts» to poorer countries to derail opposition to the accord proposed by first world powers. Another cable from the Secretary of State revealed that in 2010, a Maldives ambassador designate had stressed the importance of «tangible assistance» from larger economies to smaller ones. As a consequence of this meeting, the accord offered financial compensation to poor countries suffering from the effects of global warming.

In a visit to Canada in 2009 David Goldwyn, the State Department’s Coordinator for International Energy Affairs discussed public relations assistance to be offered to the oil sands industry. Goldwyn proposed consulting experts, scholars and think tanks to «increase visibility and accessibility of more positive news stories.» The cable was later used by environmentalists in their battle against the Keystone XL pipeline, which ships crude oil across the U.S.-Canada border. In early 2012, President Obama rejected the Keystone XL pipeline proposal, but recently publicly announced support for another proposal. It also turns out that Goldwyn eventually went on to work for Sutherland, a lobbying group in favor of Keystone XL.

The cables also reveal that the U.S. is carefully positioning itself to take advantage of new opportunities for harvesting hydrocarbons and minerals from the Arctic as climate change melts polar ice. U.S. diplomats were hoping to offer Greenland support for its independence from Denmark in exchange for access by American gas and oil companies to exploit the country’s resources. The U.S. has been closely watching Russia, America’s main competitor for Arctic resources, but American officials also showed concern over Canada’s potential territorial claim to the Arctic’s Northwest passage.

Secret Agreements – Circumvention of the Democratic Process

The State Department cables revealed that the United States and its allies systematically make secret arrangements with various governments, hiding details not only from the country’s public, but sometimes even from the country’s representatives, ministers and oversight bodies.

In 2009, Jeremy Scahill and Seymour Hersh broke a story in The Nation on secret U.S. special operations forces combat missions and drone strikes in Pakistan. When questioned about the story, Department of Defense spokesperson Geoff Morrell dismissed the claims as «conspiratorial theories.» Only one year later, cables released by WikiLeaks confirmed their story. In addition, cables quoted Pakistan’s Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani telling U.S. officials: «I don’t care if they do it as long as they get the right people – we’ll protest about it in the National Assembly and then ignore it.» Stories based on State Department cables also revealed agreements between the U.S. and Yemen in which the Yemeni government would claim responsibility for attacks launched by the U.S. on local militia groups. The release of State Department cables resulted in total transparency with respect to certain aspects of the War on Terror.

State Department cables also revealed that the U.S. worked with Australia to weaken the text of an international agreement banning the use of cluster munitions – bombs which spray thousands of smaller bomblets over a large area. Out of more than 13,000 casualties of cluster munitions registered by Handicap International, over 98 percent are civilian and one-third of those are children. Despite this, cables also revealed that the UK’s then-Foreign Minister David Miliband secretly approved the use of a legal loophole to allow the United States to store cluster munitions on UK territory, despite the fact that the UK is a signatory to a convention banning them. The United States is not a signatory to the Convention on Cluster Munitions, and even attempted in 2011 to have the ban lifted by the UN.

In 2007, former Canadian Deputy Prime Minister John Manley asked U.S. officials for predator drones to help shore up liberal support for a sustained Canadian presence in the war in Afghanistan. At the time, Manley was leading a government-appointed panel charged with investigating Canada’s interests in a future role in Afghanistan. In August 2012, the Ottawa Citizen reported that the Canadian government is seeking to spend up to $1 billion on a state-of-the-art armed drone fleet.

The cables also revealed that Canada’s conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper secretly promised NATO in January 2010 that Canada would remain in Afghanistan to conduct army training even after the end of its mission in 2011. The Canadian public was shocked when the government announced that it would be extending its mission in November of that year. Harper expressed concern to U.S. diplomats that an early departure of Canadian troops from Aghanistan would seem like a «withdrawal,» reflecting the low public support for Canada’s mission in Afghanistan.

In 2008, the U.S. proposed an «informal agreement» to Swedish government officials for the exchange of information on terrorism watch-lists. U.S. officials explained that they feared scrutiny by the Swedish parliament would jeopardize «law enforcement and anti-terrorism cooperation.» Cables also revealed that in 2009, the U.S. resumed full intelligence-sharing with New Zealand after it had been restricted in retaliation for the country’s ban against nuclear-powered or armed vessels in its ports. Both governments agreed that the newly resumed cooperation should be kept hidden from the public.

The Realpolitik of Commercial Lobbying

State Department cables illustrate that U.S. officials and their commercial partners take a default position of having an intrinsic right to resources and market dominance around the world.

In a 2007 cable to the U.S. Trade Representative, U.S. Ambassador Craig Stapleton suggested taking a hard-line approach towards the European Union over its resistance to American genetically modified products and foods. France’s refusal to embrace GMOs and agricultural biotechnology, according to Ambassador Stapleton, would lead to a general European rejection of GMOs, and he suggested retaliation to help the French see things differently:

«Country team Paris recommends that we calibrate a target retaliation list that causes some pain across the EU since this is a collective responsibility, but that also focuses in part on the worst culprits. The list should be measured rather than vicious and must be sustainable over the long term, since we should not expect an early victory.»

The cables also showed that the U.S. revoked visas of then-Ecuadoran presidential candidate Xavier Neira and seven others due to their involvement in a legal case against the American pharmaceutical company Pfizer for unfair competition. The timing of the decision to revoke their visas coincided with the upcoming presidential elections and an impending court decision on the case. In its explanation of the revocation, officials cite «corruption» and the case against Pfizer.

The U.S.-based Shell Oil company has a long and sordid history in Nigeria, and its representatives spoke openly about activities in the country. In a 2009 meeting, Shell representatives told U.S. officials that they would be able to influence the Nigerian government’s 2009 Petroleum Industry Bill to suit their interests.

Cables from 2005 highlight U.S. determination to «improve the investment climate» for mining companies in Peru. Representatives from Canada, UK, Australia, Switzerland and South Africa met to strategize ways of circumventing anti-mining protests coming from a diverse group of NGOs, the Catholic Church and indigenous Peruvians. Once protests had turned violent, the U.S. used this as an excuse for monitoring NGO groups such as Oxfam and Friends of the Earth, and asked the Peruvian government to enhance security by taking control of roadways and transit areas.

In other cases, officials in the U.S. Embassy assisted in lobbying for or against particular pieces of legislation according to U.S. commercial interests. U.S. officials lobbied on behalf of Visa and MasterCard against a bill in Russia which would have created a national card payment system, taking away Visa and MasterCard’s market share.

Strategic Duplicity on Human Rights and Press Freedom

A cable summarizing a meeting with a director of Al Jazeera shows that U.S. officials expected a special report with graphic images of injured Iraqis to be changed and its images removed. In another cable, the director is asked to explain Al Jazeera’s lack of coverage of the Iran elections and protests as opposed to their «heavy» coverage of Gaza.

The U.S. Navy’s Fifth Fleet is based in the kingdom of Bahrain, and the U.S. has maintained a mutually beneficial relationship with the country’s leaders over the past years. In one cable, the U.S. ambassador to Bahrain praised the country and its king, pointing out that U.S. companies had won major contracts there. This same regime brutally cracked down on protesters during the Arab Spring, and Bahraini authorities shut down dissident websites and publications. While the U.S. State Department harshly condemned the crackdown on protests after Iran’s 2009 elections, it remained silent on the killings in Bahrain.

Thailand’s Monarchy Exposed

Thailand’s lèse majesté law prevents anyone in the country from speaking openly about the monarchy without risk of severe punishment. As such, any reports about political developments in the country are censored, and there is a huge gap in public knowledge about the country’s political environment. WikiLeaks’ release of State Department cables gives an unprecedented view of not only the monarchy’s deep impact on the politics of the country, but also the close relationship that Thailand had with the U.S. Journalist Andrew MacGregor Marshall quit his job at Reuters to write his book Thailand’s Moment of Truth, using the Thai cables exposing obscured and taboo aspects of Thailand’s politics, history and international relations for the first time.

U.S. Aims to Reshape Global Views and Law on Intellectual Property and Copyright

U.S.-based lobbying groups work hand in hand with U.S. State Department officials around the world to aggressively lobby for legislation and trade agreements that favor American companies such as Google, Facebook, Apple and Microsoft, or large film studios such as Disney, Paramount, Sony and Warner.

A 2006 cable from Japan describes the first draft proposals for a «gold standard» in intellectual property rights enforcement, called ACTA. This standard was meant to give intellectual property owners much stronger powers, even at the expense of citizen privacy and due process. ACTA was subsequently negotiated in secret, unknown to the general public, until WikiLeaks leaked the first draft in 2008. In the film industry, the lobbyist group for motion picture studios conspired with their Australian counterpart to establish a legal precedent for holding an Internet service provider accountable for copyright infringement in Australia. What is the effect of this push and pull? It is a global environment where legislation and legal precedents are set to benefit intellectual property owners who are rich, powerful and influential – even at the expense of public good.

Breaking the Monopoly on Influence

The examples I present above represent only a small fraction of what has been revealed by WikiLeaks material. Since 2010, Western governments have tried to portray WikiLeaks as a terrorist organization, enabling a disproportionate response from both political figures and private institutions. It is the case that WikiLeaks’ publications can and have changed the world, but that change has clearly been for the better. Two years on, no claim of individual harm has been presented, and the examples above clearly show precisely who has blood on their hands.

In large Western democracies, the political discourse has been so highly controlled for so long, that it is no longer shocking when Western experts fill in to speak for third world victims, or when an American president stands up at a podium to accept his Nobel Peace Prize, and makes the case for war. It is, in fact, no longer safe to presume that a media outlet such as The New York Times would perform the same act today as they did in 1971 when Daniel Ellsberg leaked the Pentagon Papers.

In a panel discussion with Daniel Ellsberg and New York Times editor Jill Abramson discussing the Pentagon Papers, Ellsberg voiced his dissent over the Times’ acquiescence to the Bush administration’s request to delay James Risen’s story on warrantless NSA wiretapping until after the 2004 elections. Abramson equivocated:

«The thing is when the government says – you know – by publishing a story you’re harming the national security, you’re helping the terrorists. I mean, there are still people today who argue that the NSA program was the crown jewel, the most valuable anti-terrorism program that the Bush administration had going, and that it was terribly wrong of the Times to publish.»

On the same panel, Daniel Ellsberg said of the Pentagon Papers:

«The secrecy of these documents has so far condemned over 30,000 Americans to death and several million Vietnamese. And the continued secrecy of them will undoubtedly contribute to the death of tens of thousands more Americans, and so forth. I think that’s true. But that comes up in the WikiLeaks case, right now.»

Since the release of the diplomatic cables, WikiLeaks has continued its operations despite the financial blockade, publishing leaked documents from companies selling mass interception units to state spy agencies around the world; detainee profiles for almost all of the people detained at Guantánamo Bay prison; U.S. policy manuals for detention of military prisoners in the War on Terror; intelligence databases from the private intelligence firm Stratfor; and millions of documents from inside the Syrian government. The information we’ve disclosed frustrates the controlled political discourse that is trumpeted by establishment media and Western governments to shape public perception.

We will continue our fight against the financial blockade, and we will continue to publish. The Pentagon’s threats against us do the United States a disservice and will not be heeded.

Norway terrorbombed on the birthday of modern terrorism

22/7 – or July 22nd – is viewed by many historians as the birthday of modern terrorism. On this day there was an attack carried out in 1946 by the militant terrorist right-wing Zionist underground organization the Irgun on the British administrative headquarters for Palestine, which was housed in the King David Hotel in Jerusalem. 91 people of various nationalities were killed and 46 were injured.

The leader of Irgun, Menachem Begin, would later (January 1974) go on television in the US, claiming to prominent journalist Russell Warren Howe that he was not just the father of terrorism in the Mideast, but «in the entire world». Two of the operations for which the Irgun is best known are the bombing of the King David Hotel in Jerusalem on 22 July 1946 and the Deir Yassin massacre, carried out together with Lehi on 9 April 1948.

Begin would five years after the Howe interview go to Oslo, Norway, on December 10th, 1978 to receive his Nobel Peace Prize:

The first 22/7 zionist terrorist Menachem Begin of Israel receives the Nobel Peace Prize in Oslo’s Town Hall on December 10th, 1978.

65 years to the day since Begin’s Jerusalem bombing, the Norwegian administrative HQ in Oslo is shocked by a 950 kilo ANFO-based fertiliser bomb that breaks shop windows for many square kilometers all through the Oslo downtown area.

You could read in some smaller local papers that the day was remembered for the King David Hotel bombing, but these were automatic «Today’s Date» columns taken from some database, and of course printed the night before the Oslo attack.

Using the words «Breivik» and «King David» we can extract from news databases the figures – 16 months after the attacks – for how many articles in Norwegian that have made the connection, in any way, between the two attacks on 22/7.

The number is 6. And most of these six articles are ridiculing either professors of peace and conflict studies Johan Galtung or Ola Tunander, or indeed, yours truly, for having the balls to even bring up the fact that 22/7 was an important date in modern terrorism.

The fact that the Irgun terrorist organisation was a zionist organisation, and that coincidentally Anders Behring Breivik also is a devoted zionist, would perhaps raise some eyebrows in the editing rooms of the major Norwegian newspapers, when they both attacked government buildings on the same day? But no. Breivik’s words in his manifesto: «So let us fight together with Israel, with our Zionist brothers against all anti-Zionists, against all cultural Marxists/multiculturalists.» were «clearly» the words of a madman, or so they said, for 9 long months, before the court decided he was not the slightest bit mad after all.

So there was clearly a cover-up by the mainstream media.

Other cover-ups were to follow suit.

The 22/7 Commission Report – released on August 13th, 2012 – completely fails to mention the reported fact that the DELTA force, the police anti-terror force, held a 5-day anti-terror and anti-massacre drill in the Oslo area from Monday 18th through Friday 22nd July 2011. The drill reportedly ended at 3 pm.

The DELTA force drill on the same day may have puzzled the Operation Leader and probably also other key persons, who were left wondering whether these events were «real world or exercise». Not including such an important factor, one that also was already revealed by Aftenposten and a host of other daily newspapers back in August 2011, is a bit of a scandal. But it gets even worse if the exclusion was intentional in an attempt to obfuscate an important part of the Police Trail.

We can easily imagine that knowledge of this DELTA drill was an important part of Breivik’s planning, execution and escape from Grubbegata on Friday afternoon 22nd July 2011.

Neither does the report mention the directing role of the NATO and its Gladio behind the terror of eg. the Bologna railway station bombing in 1980, and the Munich Oktoberfest Bombing the same year, both mentioned in the report, an omission that gives parliamentarians and other citizens who read the report a false and twisted picture of who has historically been behind terror in Europe since WW2.

I mentioned the Police Trail. So far, pursuing this trail has earned me the doubtful honour of being the author of the most expensive blog post in Norwegian history. A fine of roughly 5,500 pounds – and counting – as I understand, may be issued to me as a reward for my hard and mostly lonely work. However, these are things I cannot control.

A dubious trio in the Oslo Police Department seems to emerge from the pages of the 22/7 Commission Report. I shall name names, as these persons are highly suspect in their inability to defend Norway against the secondary attack – the Utøya massacre – of 22/7.

I would not release these names if this wasn’t such an enormous scandal in the middle of the worst terror attack against Norway since the second world war. I also would not carry out this investigative work if it wasn’t for the fact that our journalists and editors stopped working for truth in terrorism related cases a decade ago. I’m doing this to stop further terrorist attacks from the same band of criminals.

My suspects for sabotaging the police operation on 22/7 are first and foremost:

• Anders Snortheimsmoen, head of the DELTA force.
• Johan Fredriksen, chief of staff at the Oslo PD.
• Thor Langli, field commander (innsatsleder) on 22/7.

It is my view that these men should be investigated further, in depth, and that their testimonies to the 22/7 Commission should be released to politicians, researchers and the public at large. Keeping their testimonies secret deep inside some archive for 30 years may be dangerous and a risk to national and international security.

I cannot see that pursuing the Police Trail is wrong in any way. However, I can understand that the police doesn’t see it that way. Unfortunately, suspects are in no position to decide whether other people suspect them of wrongdoing. Or rather, they should not be.

What’s NOT in the 22/7 Commission Report

Sometimes it can be more interesting to look for what’s NOT covered in a commission report after a major terror incident, than reading what’s actually there.

Those familiar with the 9/11 Commission Report, for example, will have noticed that the collapse of the skyscraper WTC7 – almost twice the hight of our own Oslo Plaza – isn’t mentioned with a single word in the report, that was published at the end of July 2004, almost 3 years after the event.

In Norway we ended up with a 22/7 Commission Report that doesn’t mention these three crucial elements:

1) The report doesn’t mention the fact that Vaalstua farm was rented from a [?convicted NOKAS bank robber, an accomplice in the NOKAS robbery of 2004, or that it was this convicted felon?] who recently had used Vaalstua as a cannabis farm.

2) The report also doesn’t mention the reported fact that the DELTA force, the police anti-terror force, held a 5-day anti-terror and anti-massacre drill in the Oslo area from Monday 18th through Friday 22th July 2011. The drill reportedly ended at 3 pm.

Both of these bits of information are absolutely highly relevant to the solving of this case, and they should therefore have been included in the report.

Of all places, Breivik chooses to rent a farm in Rena, not far from the main Army base in Southern Norway, and also the home base of the Telemark Batallion, and from a former grower of cannabis (at the farm) and [?convicted robber from the NOKAS robbery?], where a policeman was shot dead. Maybe not the ideal place for someone who wants to hide away and do his thing without interrupting visits from nosy police patrols? But what do we know.

The DELTA force drill on the same day may have puzzled the Operation Leader and probably also other key persons, who were left wondering whether these events were «real world or exercise». Not including such an important factor, one that also was already revealed by Aftenposten and a host of other dayly newspapers back in August 2011, is a bit of a scandal. But it gets even worse if the exclusion was intentional in an attempt to obfuscate an important part of the Police Trail.

We can easily imagine that knowledge of this DELTA drill was an important part of Breivik’s planning, execution and escape from Grubbegata on Friday afternoon 22nd July 2011.

3) Neither does the report mention the directing role of the NATO and its Gladio behind the terror of eg. the Bologna railway station bombing in 1980, and the Munich Oktoberfest Bombing the same year, both mentioned in the report, an omission that gives parliamentarians and other citizens who read the report a false and twisted picture of who has historically been behind terror in Europe since WW2.

Breivik uniting Zionism and Nazism

I happened to be present at the Oslo courthouse on Tuesday, April 17th, watching and listening to 22/7 terrorist Anders Behring Breivik’s 75 minute main prepared defense speech. A speech that the press and media were banned from broadcasting to the general public. These are my thoughts after following the story for almost nine months.

The first thing that has to be said, is that watching Breivik defend himself for 5 hours this Tuesday removed each and every doubt that he is indeed «legally sane», in the sense that he is absolutely fit to be punished by the Norwegian judicial system for his criminal terrorist acts. All «experts» who say otherwise are flat out lying. This is a sane, rational, logically stringent man of great wit, who happens to also have some pretty effed up ideological views that have made him become a mass murderer and a terrorist.

It should also be said right from the start of this article that there is little doubt that he carried out both the bombing in Oslo and the shooting at Utøya. What remains to be seen is whether he had accomplices and what parts of the misdeeds these people took part in. There were also some pretty amazing instances of police SNAFU – 27 according to one commentator, but a lot more if you look more closely. There’s a string of maybe 40 or 50 or 60 grave mistakes on behalf of the police, guards and government, making them unable to stop Breivik before the bombing of Oslo, stop him getting out of Oslo and to nearby Utøya, and to stop the shooting ASAP when Breivik amazingly managed to get himself transported over the sound to Utøya island, using the Labour Party’s own ferry.

So many instances of SNAFU, in fact, that the mathematical probability of them all occuring on the same day or relating to the same person, should tell you all you need to know. And of course, in the weeks and months after the terror, documents, tapes and other evidence started disappearing. As by invisible hands.

OK. So, returning to the terrorist’s defense speech on Tuesday, April 17th. Breivik started telling us how there’d been no real post-WW2 democracy in Norway, because «nationalists» like himself were not allowed free speech and democratic rights. This should tell us that he wanted there to be more democracy, and that Norwegian democracy should also include «ultra nationalists», a fair point that even I could agree on.

However, he messes it up by contradicting himself completely. He loves America, and especially a certain McCarthy, the postwar communist witchhunt general, and he regrets that McCarthyism didn’t go far enough and never succeeded in sending alleged «commie» American citizens to Soviet Russia. So, really, when it comes to a more real and including democracy with less political censorship, our terrorist is only in favour of it when it applies to his chums, and to his «nationalist» parties.

Apart from this ideologically induced blindness or logical breakdown, he argues convincingly that censoring a movement like his own for too long, eventually will make members of that movement resort to other means, even violence.

His speech more generally was aimed at reaching out to a slightly broader audience than his Manifesto and his earlier writing on Norwegian websites, or to «unite national conservatism, which I support, with national socialism and militant christendom», as he put it himself. So the strategy obviously is to appeal to a broader spectrum of racists, and to play down the Zionist issue, which divides Breivik, JDL, EDL, NDL and Knights Templar, on the one side, from other nationalists and nazis, on the other.

Breivik talks rather openly about the strategy of supporting and expanding «street extremism», like the JDL, EDL and NDL (Jewish, English and Norwegian Defense League, respectively), while at the same time building a network of single cell terror operatives, borrowing tactics from – yup – al-Qaida.

The reason for using terror cells consisting of only one man, says Breivik, is to avoid the eyes of anti-terror agencies. This way he only needed to meet with his comrades once or twice during a decade, if we choose to believe him, and I guess blogs, forums, RSS feeds, social media etc took care of the rest.

Breivik also tries to use the term «counter jihad» as much as possible, rather than «zionism», which is what he really supports, and he has succeeded in selling this bogus «counter jihad» term to the Norwegian mainstream media. To quote from the terrorist’s Manifesto:

«So let us fight together with Israel, with our Zionist brothers against all anti-Zionists, against all cultural Marxists/multiculturalists.»

So, then, this is what it came to in Norway: Where we could have had the press digging into and revealing the horrific lies of the 9/11 terror attacks ten years after the events, instead we got a snob from the West who bombed his own city using «al-Qaida tactics», and who shot fellow Norwegian kids taking part in a summer youth camp for young politicians and future administrators, because he believed the lies and racist conspiracy theories fed to him for ten years by every newspaper, radio and TV station in this nation and throughout the West. Malicious, racist lies about muslims behind every terrorist act from New York and Bali, through Madrid and London, to Mumbai and Stockholm.

The mythical snake – Midgardsormen – seems to be biting its own tail: False-flag terrorism over a long, sad decade goes unnoticed by the press, the journalists and the editors, and the inevitable end-product of these ten years of lies and cowardice and cover-up is our very own Nordic mass murderer and terrorist; Anders Behring Breivik.

Whether he had handlers or not we don’t know, and the press and the police for some reason don’t seem very eager to find out, he is now the shining example, or knight in shining armour, intended to inspire many, many followers in Scandinavia, Europe and America.

He will even be allowed internet access in jail, and thus to build, expand and strengthen his zionist terrorist networks, both on the streets and in the single-man sleeper cells.

Bølløcks.

How Global Guantánamo came about

I guess we knew those muslims would be kept for a long time at Guantánamo, but maybe not for 10 years.
I guess we knew most of those muslims would be entirely innocent, but maybe not bought for 3 yearly salaries a piece.
I guess we knew the authorities would be lying about them, but maybe not simply making up that they were «directly related or responsible for 9/11».
I guess we knew they would review their detainment policies after a while, but maybe not that they would extend them to every dissident all over the world.

I guess most of this long decade we thought they were doing at least something honest in Afghanistan. Turns out we were wrong. It seems they just bought prisoners like slaves, like they paid Africans for slaves in past centuries. I don’t know, maybe to erect an illusion that dangerous muslims were behind the 9/11 terror attacks? If the very first warden at the Guantánamo concentration camp says he was made to lie about the prisoners being «directly related or responsible for 9/11», then, hell, maybe the American authorities were covering something up? Maybe they just needed the slaves they bought to be there as the eternal «suspects», never to be heard or tried in a proper court of law?

In any case, we let them do this. We let them do this and get away with it for ten years. Many of us even believed America was attacked by muslims on 9/11, for a while.

Now, the legacy of the 9/11 Wars is the gravest possible. They can get away with terror against their own people using stealth, torture, detainment, controlled media and a constant queue of pandemics, crisis and general fear-mongering. TV will show footage of nuclear bombs going off together with vague hints that «sources» say Qaida now has or may very soon have the bomb. Tube trains will blow up in other cities and other nations and there will be no real investigations because they are for some reason not all that curious as to who conducted these acts of terror.

They can extract «intelligence» from their «suspects» through «harsh interrogation techniques» and feed this bullshit intelligence to the disgusting mainstream media, that keeps on force-feeding it to the gullible general public.

This works! This actually works like hell. For no significant percentage of the population will ever feel like distrusting their own government, or their government’s partner governments in other nations. Then they would much rather distrust their independent journalists and researchers, branding them «conspiracy theorists», even though conspiracies are rampant and omnipresent.

That’s why you get an NDAA 2012 act that turns America and the world into a military dictatorship, in which the military can disappear anyone they want for life without even a rigged trial. That’s why the whole world has now suddenly become occupied Cuba. Become the global Guantánamo of the new decade.

1. www.nytimes.com/2012/01/08/opinion/sunday/notes-from-a-guantanamo-survivor.html
2. www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/01/06/terry-carrico-ex-guantanamo-prison-commander-says-facility-should-close.html

Neste side »