What the MSM never told you about the Utoya shootings

originally posted by: Shamrock6
To put a point on it, I'm sure what your angle is here anymore. You're saying MSM never reported on any accomplices.

A quick search shows 10 of the top 10 articles all mentioning the shooter's claims he had accomplices or was part of a group. Six people were arrested and released. Seems to me not only was it covered but the police acted on the information.

Six times.

The first and second day the Norwegian MSM made some reports on this, but after the government made a statement that there only were one shooter everything went quiet. Also, the international MSM - which is what matters here - never reported on any of these claims.

-MM

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: MerkabaMeditation

And I'm sure they believe their testimony as well.

Still doesn't make it the truth. It means it's what they believe is the truth.

This is quite strange statement from you as all civilized courts in the world consider eyewitness testimonies as the truth. Espesially multiple eyewitness testimonies.

-MM

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: MerkabaMeditation
Funny how you're willing to accept some people's word but not others.

One could make the same statement about your own "opinions". It is quite funny to see you accuse me of something that you have just done yourself.

But to your point; Yes, I do take sworn eyewitness accounts more seriously than someone claiming to speak for all involved at Utoya just because he has a daughter that knows someone that was involved - and so would any sane person.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: MerkabaMeditation
I'm out.

It is good to see you leave .

-MM

Okay - assuming there was at least a second shooter, why would the Norwegian government just let him go and not follow it up?

Also, why would Breivik not mention his accomplice? It would be in his interest to have people think he was part of a movement and that uncaught operatives were out there.

As for the video camera, I'd be surprised if there wasn't several official and personal recordings of the actual rally - so it could be confused with that.

It's not a bad theory, but I don't see any evidence to support it other than testimony from people under high stress. Presumably all the other testimonies are more in line with the "official" story.

Edit: Actually, it seems that Breivik did initially claim to have accomplices, but withdrew the claim when no evidence was found to support it.

Your all overlooking one very important piece of evidence. Balistics. It is known that the shooter had two weapons ,now if the balistics don't match to those two weapons then by extension there had to be more than one shooter.
What does the balistics say?

The camera thing jumps me straight to snuff ring.

originally posted by: crayzeed

What does the balistics say?

What difference does it make, it's all fake: And this is why

Why would anyone make such absolute statements about the accuracy, or lack thereoff, of those eyewitness accounts?

Why would anyone even want to?

Ahhhh! The drill right before the actual event:

www.aftenposten.no...
Only hours before Anders Behring Breivik began shooting children on Utoya, concluded the police emergency squad an exercise where they practiced an almost identical situation. ...
The training shall thereafter Aftenposten know, have gone straight into the met police in Tyrifjorden the same day: a mobile terrorist attack in which one or more perpetrators only goal is to shoot as many people as possible and then shoot the police when they arrive. .... Chance would have it that way, says a key police source, who declined to quoted by name.

The exercise ended a half hour before the first bomb exploded in Oslo. I'm sure it's all just coincidence.

a reply to: MerkabaMeditation

We have the same thing happening here as happened in most other events, like 9/11 and 7/7 etc.
The news coming out at the time is confused, conflicting, with various statements by various people, and often they are incorrect. This then becomes the "truth" to some, who either accidentally or intentionally weave what they've heard into what they experienced.

You also have fantasists who want to become part of the story, and the best way to become part of the story is to give an angle no one else is giving, something more unusual, a different version of events.

The young man in the first video doesn't say anything to contradict the official version of what happened, so I'm not sure why this is being presented as some kind of proof of a conspiracy.

The man in the second video has no evidence to prove that he was there, and even if he were he's claiming that he heard gun shots from different directions... when was this? During the shooting (echoes are plausible and entirely likely) or during the arrest?

Finally, where is the motivation for anyone to lie about there not being anyone else involved? How does the government benefit from that in any way?

If I recall correctly, there were suggestions in news broadcasts at the time that there was more than one shooter, and I believe that's probably how this conspiracy started. Just like the "explosions" during 9/11 (the floors impacting) and just like the multiple false alarms on 7/7 (trains stopped between two stations, which resulted in reports of explosions at both) this is nothing more than misreporting in the media leading to paranoia amongst people unwilling to understand how this happens.

There is no credible evidence to suggest there was another person involved in this.

a reply to: starviego

Except they don't tell you that these drills are routine and happen regularly all over the world every damn day without anything bad happening. Police departments run drills and training exercises hundreds of times every year, this is not unusual and it's not a sign of anything.

They also don't mention when they say "almost identical" that they actually mean "entirely different".

This is complete nonsense, manufactured by simple minds who can't find enough horror in what actually happened so they need to manufacture more suspicion to occupy their sick little brains.

For a lone gunman, this man had entirely too many two-way communication devices.

www.bt.no...
"bt.no get last night announced that the perpetrator was talking in the headset during the massacre. This will be a number of eyewitnesses have observed."

www.dagbladet.no...
Anders Behring Breivik (32), who was until his fourth interview today, explained that he was carrying a walkie-talkie when he was in the (Oslo)ministries where the bomb went off, confirmed defender Geir Lippe....

Explain away, explainers away!

-------------------------

originally posted by: Rocker2013
They also don't mention when they say "almost identical" that they actually mean "entirely different".

And white is really black, and black is really white! Of course, I understand it now!!

Echoing is definitely likely, if people are saying they heard more than one gun. But if people actually said they saw more than one person, then that's where things get really interesting. Always seems to be some sort of information with-held in these mass shootings, not sure why they have to keep truth back. Unless these mass murders are often somehow govt. perpetrated. Just don't see what benefits there are for governments to make these things happen though.

originally posted by: DaemonD14
Just don't see what benefits there are for governments to make these things happen though.

Seriously, is it that hard to understand?

Gladio agent Vincenzo Vinciguerra :
“You had to attack civilians, the people, women, children, innocent people, unknown people far removed from any political game. The reason was quite simple: to force … the public to turn to the state to ask for greater security.”

a reply to: starviego

Is there any need for the hostility? It was a simple question.

There would need to be a mass murder on an epic scale for people to turn to the govt. for greater security. Has anything happened in Norway since this shooting? Have people completely given up all of their freedoms to allow the govt. to run their lives? Of course not.

In the US, it seems far more likely that the govt. would be behind mass killings as a means to tighten gun controls but that doesn't really seem to be getting them very far, as there is too much opposition to it.

Would honestly not surprise me in the least to hear a govt. was behind this or many others but I think it would take a lot more than this for people to turn to the govt. for greater security on the scale that would be of any benefit to them.

The story surrounding the actions of Breivik are something closer to mythology than to mental insanity. Ubiquitous Breivik managed to put car bombs in front of the parliament and detonate them while he was getting close to his shooting position, getting ready to kill the children of the inner party. And that's not all ....
The incredible actions of ubiquitous Breivik don't end there. For whatever reason, the car bomb seem to have exploded creating a WEIRD phenomenon. The walls of the parliament collapsed outside of the building, instead of inside the building. Which begs the question ... Did Breivik just use an alien made bomb, that works by creating a vacuum instead of a pressure wave? Unbelievable stuff ... The bomb sitting in Brevik's car (which wasn't breivik's car) has sucked the wall of the parliament into the street.

I wonder whether he was in a "secret mission" sent by norwegian royal family to intimidate other institutions that were interested in opposing certain ... things ...

... but in the middle of all of this ... where was Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg ?
Was he already clowning around about NATO expansionist unstoppability or was he doing something else ?