Anders Behring Breivik, the Norway killer

reply to post by SkurkNilsen


No explanation?
Yeah, that's what I thought.

reply to post by Aeons


Darling, no one is forcing you to debate me
You can walk out right now, no one is going to follow you in order to debate mind control.

You know, I'm always very happy to be speculative.

I'm not particularly fond of speculation being synonymous with reality. I suspect the not so minor difference between speculation and reality is less than firm in many people. I suspect this thread would be a good basis of evidence for debate about the subject.

Buehler?

reply to post by Aeons


Oh excellent!

This is where we all get to say what we are not particularly fond of, in a manner which is intended to intimate that these things that we are not particularly fond of are wrong.

OK!

I'm not particularly fond of those who present opinion as fact.
And, I would venture to add, I'm also not particularly fond of the idea that opinion based on the official story is the only possible reality.

Awesome. Then start from an actual hypothesis/conjecture - you believe that Breivik was under the influence of mind control by _____________________ because _________________________ .

Breivik was indoctrinated. He specifically documents that that is what he was doing to himself. In detail.

Since you are choosing to ignore (or don't know this, or discount it because it doesn't support your belief) then you also need to fill out this conjecture -
you believe that Breivik's description of how he was indoctrinating himself isn't true because _________________.

See how this works?

Does Anders Breivik fit the Profile?

John Douglas was one of the original FBI profilers, going into prisons to develop psychological profiles of serial killers, spree killers, and mass murderers. He has written a number of interesting books on the subject. Here is what he has to say about mass slayers--people who kill a lot of victims in one setting(From "The Anatomy of Motive" by John Douglas (Scribners)):


"Generally speaking, mass murderers are white males, ranging from their mid-to-late thirties to their mid-to-late forties.

[Breivik was 32. Close, but no cookies.]


"....and he'll be an asocial loner.

[Wrong. It's natural that now no one wants to associate with the guy, but I'll bet he traveled in a clique of people.]


"The identity of the person who's responsible for this crime should not come as any surprise to his community. "This is someone who's had a history of turmoil in this locale.

[Wrong, no one picked Breivik as the type that would explode someday.]


"Most likely, too, there was a specific precipitating stressor to cause him to act when he did.

[Wrong. Breivik is thought to have planned this for many years.]


"This is not somebody who ever blended into the community.

[Wrong, He seems to have blended in rather well.]


"Those around him thought of him as weird or strange. They had an uncomfortable feeling about him that they might not even have been able to place or articulate.

[Wrong. Haven't heard that from anyone.]


"You would look for (the perpetrator) to have written letters, perhaps to the school principle(speaking of Dunblane massacre here) or....the local newspaper....

[Wrong, nothing of the kind has surfaced.]


"These types are much more comfortable with the written form of communication and so they'll express themselves in diaries... When they feel they are not getting satisfaction, they may escalate and address their grievances at an even higher level. In the U.S., it could be to the president."

[Well, he did write his manifesto, though it doesn't look like he tried to appeal to any politician beforehand. Wrong again.]



Does Brevik fit this profile? He obviously does not. Why not? Is it because Mindhunter John Douglas does not know what he is talking about? No, it is because Breivik is no "natural born" killer, like the ones Douglas studied. Rather he is an artificial creation, a diabolic blend of high technology and the covert operators.

Originally posted by Aeons
I'm not particularly fond of speculation being synonymous with reality.

And a government press release is synonymous with reality? Is there even a witness who has actually been quoted in the media as saying "Anders Breivik was shooting.... ?" Not a one, so far.

Seriously? There have been numerous people who have been interviewed, and they've clearly been given his picture. There have been vids put up taken by people on Utoeya. The people who were there who survived ...not one of them goes online and screams "oh my God, that guy I saw in the paper it isn't HIM!"

Please point me in the direction of this phantom "official governmental release" listing all the facts of this event, dated from the day of or the day after these attacks. Please. I'd like to see it.

Anyways. Interesting to note that so far Breivik's father and mother have been interviewed, and both of them have cut contact with him. None of his brothers or sisters have said a darn thing. But it is very interesting to see that both of his parents reactions are those of people quite willing to cut the anchor loose. Even the mother who lived with him.

His friends who don't like what he did are kinder. How interesting is that as a bit of psychological grey-noise.

reply to post by Aeons


Oh yes, I can see exactly how this works - and how a debate with you is a circular dead-end.

But I'm amused and feeling a little indulgent, so let's have a crack at it, shall we?

Here are some red flags re: mind control false flag ops:

1. Eyewitness accounts of more than one shooter.
Source

2. The police bomb drills in the same area a year before.
Source

3. The Wikileaks files from 2009 detailing Norway's lack of preparedness for a terror attack
Source

4. Eyewitness report of the suspect speaking into a headset.
Source
5. Intelligence agencies had flagged and then let him off for buying large amounts of chemicals illegally, even though it would have been fairly easy for them to see his radical views in his supposed online postings. Right?
Source

6. The suspect was on steroids and ephedrine
Source: admitted by the suspect himself

7. Multiple reports are conflicted as to what was actually on his Facebook profile. The earliest postings I read, which incidentally have been taken down, reported that he just posted some music videos that he liked and commented on them. Later, the media reported that his Facebook profile was full of conservatism and Christianity.

8. His physical appearance since his arrest resembles that of Jared Loughner. His eyes are unfocused, he is wearing a strange smile, he appears completely emotionless about what he has done.

9. His hearing was closed for "security reasons."

10. The police arrived an hour and a half after the killing began. First they didn't have a big enough helicopter, and then they couldn't find a boat. Couldn't find a boat? Really?

11. He claims to have worked nine years on that manifesto. How strange, then that it appears to be mostly copy and paste, most notably from Ted Kaczynski's writing, almost verbatim - except to change a few words, such as substituting "Muslim" for "Black" etc.

12. Kaczynski himself was a subject for MK Ultra testing at Harvard by Dr. Murray.

13. And here are the cases of Norway's own MK Ultra children:
Source

edit on 1-8-2011 by CodyOutlaw because: (no reason given)

reply to post by CodyOutlaw


There are always accounts of more than one shooter. Always. Without any evidence of it, it really doesn't mean anything. What it does usually mean is that scared people misinterpret or assign danger signals to others.

Just about every nation is ill prepared for a terrorist attack. That's why its a useful tactic. That's not a conspiracy - that's just being aware of the problems.

Yes, he was speaking into a headset. He called police.

So what? He was on steroids. He put that in his manual. That isn't evidence of anything except that he wanted to look pumped up. The ephedrine is used to slim down, so that your muscles look more intimidating. That doesn't have squat to do with him being "controlled."

His facebook was not inconsistent. The difference was due to there being two screenshots taken - one when the person was logged onto facebook, and the other by someone logged off facebook. This changes what you can see on someone's page.

The guy isn't "emotionless" in the pictures. He's sporting a look of being self-satisfied - he's PLEASED with himself. Proud. He doesn't look like Loughner - Loughner looked frackin' crazed.

His hearing was closed for security reasons. Good. It should be. The guy can and does send messages, and that's what he wants to do in an open court. He already sent one, with his clothing while being transported. Given an opportunity, he'll continue to do so. Sending out "its a go" isn't exactly the message that anyone wants him giving out.

Yes - the security services where ill prepared. Clearly. It took Breivik slightly longer than that hour and a half to get to the damn Island, and he knew what he wanted to do. Emergency services were stretch between two points, and they had already deployed teams of people into the political core of Oslo. Who would have thought that the real target was a pile of hippy children? The police service messed up - they had reasons, but they don't have excuses. I also suspect that the police services in Norway do not have the latitude of action that you are used to ascribing to police, and it might not even occur to them to do things like appropriate a vehicle from individuals or corporations and it is highly likely they don't legally have those powers.

The work is not "mostly" a cut and paste of the Unabombers. You should really read it before making more commentary on it that can be so easily swept into the trash bin. He has quoted the Unabomber. Of course, he also discussed Margaret Atwood, so the subjects of his fancy seem pretty far ranging.

I don't doubt that experiments on humans have been done all over the planet. I don't debate that such programs existed, and had terrible effects on people. I actually think that the earliest of these institutional attempts at hothousing people into different things is older than most of you people think....which you'd know if you'd ever read anything I said about it.

However, unless Breivik was hothoused in high school while playing video games in his suburban home with Mommy.... he wasn't. However, I would bet a big shiny coin that he could converse about the subject for a while quite intelligibly. Being that he's probably studied up on it.

That mind control human experimentation existed, isn't actually an argument that BREIVIK was in one.

Originally posted by starviego
Is there even a witness who has actually been quoted in the media as saying "Anders Breivik was shooting.... ?" Not a one, so far.

edit on 1-8-2011 by starviego because: (no reason given)

There have been many in Norwegian papers.

Here's one: Eyewitness to the Utøya shooting

I'll leave it to you to google-translate that if you have any interest in reality.

Originally posted by CodyOutlaw
reply to post by SkurkNilsen

 

MK Ultra is not hearsay, it is documented.
You know this, you're just being deliberately obtuse.

1. It is your OPINION that MK ULTRA was a total failure. This is not fact. We are not privy to the facts, you see, because it is a highly classified government programme.

2. Everything you have posted in rebuttal as "fact" is what has come from the official story on the timeline of that day. That's your OPINION. My OPINION is that this is untrue.

3. Did you miss the part where he was also found to be taking ephedrine? Guess so.

4. You're taking what you have been told as fact. Just because someone tells you something, this does not make it fact. People lie, governments lie - and if you don't accept that, then you must really have your head in the sand.

5. Aeons did not make a good point. In fact, I have yet to see her make a good point. Her sentences are strangely tangential, vague, and without coherent structure. As I pointed out to her, the Patriot Act was passed because of fear. Or are you disputing that? Are you saying that people would be more than happy to have their rights taken away as long as they felt happy and secure? Honestly? Um...

Originally posted by CodyOutlaw
reply to post by SkurkNilsen

 

No explanation?
Yeah, that's what I thought.

-I do apologize for the late reply your highness, but my body is unfortunately privy to a couple of hours of sleep, a filthy habit I indulge in from time to time. I do beg your pardon.

1. I have never said that the existence of MK-ULTRA was hearsay, you should read what I write, or are you maybe one of those who ignore other posters out of love for your own voice.
According to those who ran MK-ULTRA it was a total failure, this can be documented unlike your statements.

If ABB was under mind control, then getting rid of the evidence would be top priority, hence he would be dead now.

2. Everything I have written in a try to get a real debate going is fact based in the term that it can be reviewed by you and others. I acknowledge that it is your opinion, I just want you to make that opinion less fictional and a bit more substantiated. But, all I get is someone diving into the trenches as if I was doing some kind of personal attack.

3. I do know he used ephedrine as well, I am sorry I forgot at the moment, but a cocktail I think usually has more than two components. Also I would like to know if there is any reason to think that steroids and ephedrine in any way can be used as a mind control substance, I think not, and a quick search might convince you as well.

4. I still don't see any reason to not believe in the official story as it was reported live, there is film of ABB walking around on the island, there are eyewitness records of him being the shooter.

5. As for the fear argument, Norway has one of the highest rankings in the world of happiness and standards of living. We felt and still do feel safe in our country. One deranged killer is in no way going to change that and make us all tremble in fear.
Norway is not a fear based society unlike the U.S, so the comparison does not add up.
And Aeons is still making a verifiable claim and a good point. Just because Aeons academic standards are a bit higher than yours, doesn't mean you need to take it personal.

I find it interesting that every time one of your wild claims are found to be untrue fantasy, you just go right ahead and make up more stuff

1. Panic. It is still not clear that ABB was alone and this is one of the main themes in the interrogation. But a second shooter does not make your claims of mind control any more likely.

2. The police/Delta force having a bomb drill near the government buildings, the most obvious place for a terror attack, one year ahead of the events seems pretty logical.

3. Lack of preparedness, is not the same as no preparedness.

4. The suspect called the police himself to say he wanted to surrender, most likely from a headset.

5. He bought the chemicals legally, he was a registered farmer and 6000 kg of fertilizer is not a large amount in that setting, my neighbour buys 12.000 kgs a year. It was never flagged, he was registered buying 0,3 kgs of natriumnitrate from Poland. He was also very moderate in internet debate and never proposed violence, wich is rare on those forums.

6. The suspect was indeed on steroids and ephedrine, but that is in no way proof or circumstantial evidence he was under mind control.

7. Logged in/logged out. He also had two FB profiles.

8. Seems satisfied.

9. For good reason, not the most popular person in Norway at the time, also any messages to someone he might work with would be terrible. There is also good reason to believe he would use this chance to spread his hate filled propaganda, which he did to the judge in lieu of a wider audience (He read from 2083).

10. Already explained, but I will humour you and do it again. There was a bomb set off in the middle of the city center, they were a bit preoccupied, the mobile network was swamped. It was chaos. And like you yourself have stated and sourced, they were not prepared for this.

11. Read it before you make uneducated guesses.

12. Hearsay, at best.

13. There was human testing going on in Norway as it was all over the world. How does that have anything to do with ABB?

reply to post by Aeons


Everything you've pointed out comes straight from the official story.
My points stand.

reply to post by SkurkNilsen


I can answer everything you've posted with a simple line:

"So they say."

You parroting the official story back at me is pointless, dude. If I wanted that, I'd watch the news.

P.S. Maybe you should read Ted's writing. Then you wouldn't keep rabbiting on about hearsay,

There is no official story.

Again, if there is, please point me to it. I'd like to take a gander at this document.

But I love this piece of logical magic, that you can make facts disappear by waving the wand of "official" over it. Its even better than the one that people use waving "crazy people believe it" to dismiss facts.

If you never actually agree there are any facts, then you never have to lose your argument. Awesome.

reply to post by CodyOutlaw


Wow, you really got me there.....

Your superb logic has conquered me...

I stand corrected....

Nah, just kidding. That was just lazy of you.

ETA:

If that's the best you can come up with I can't really be bothered with your little fantasy world. It's my holiday after all.

reply to post by SkurkNilsen


Yeah, you only get lazy from me now, since you're being very boring and didn't even read the links I so kindly posted for Aeons last night, and to which you both lazily replied saying the same thing over and over again.

So, now we're all going to be lazy!

reply to post by CodyOutlaw


Riiight, I didn't read your sources..... You are mistaken unfortunately, and I have adressed every one of them.
However, that does not fit in with your obscure view of the world, and is therefor easily dismissed by you.

Here's a link to some interesting thoughts on ABB's use of steroids and his own thoughts on why he himself chose to use them:

ABB chose to use steroids to keep up his agression and to halt doubts and anxiety about the attack.

Of course I won't expect you to read something that is taken out of the real world.

reply to post by SkurkNilsen


Nah, you replied to them with your OPINION, which, suitably couched in a lax but authoritative tone, you hope to pass off as fact.

Lazy boy