Norway Massacre: The Killer's Mind

2011, Crime  -   232 Comments
Ratings: 8.34/10 from 35 users.

Norway Massacre: The Killer's MindIt's the world's worst spree killing. Discovery Channel Norway Massacre: The Killer's Mind examines the terrible events of that day. In 90 minutes of madness, 32-year-old Anders Behring Breivik killed 69 young people. The film pieces together Breivik’s day of terror hour by hour, from the time of the bomb he set off in Oslo, to the cold blooded shooting of defenseless youngsters on the remote island beauty spot of Utøya.

Who is this man, and what made him act? This film examines the criminal mind and motives of one of the world’s worst killers, offering psychological analysis, as the day of the massacre unfolds. It examines his motives, analyzes his likely psychological journey through the planning stages and over the course of the day itself and asks what drove him to plan and carry out this massacre. Was he a terrorist as he claimed, a madman, or was he indeed both?

The film will have first-hand accounts from eyewitnesses and survivors who have not spoken on camera before. Including: taxi driver Arild Tangen who was the last man to speak to Breivik before his attack; survivor Adrian Pracon who was shot in the shoulder and tried to swim away from the island. He pleaded with Breivik to spare him; Bjørn Kasper Ilaug who rescued some of the kids whilst the shooting was happening by pulling bodies on to his boat; and Brede Joherraaten – Camp owner, was there and recovered bodies and saved swimmers.

The killer’s action are analyzed by a host of experts, including: renowned criminologist Professor David Wilson; Katherine Newman from Princeton university who is one of world’s the top experts on spree shootings; Matthew Goodman, the leading authority on British and European right wing terror groups; and terror and weapons expert Charles Shoebridge. And foremost, above all, is the memory of those who died. What were the warning signs? What could have been done? By investigating this appalling crime, there is the hope that an atrocity like this can never happen again.

More great documentaries

232 Comments / User Reviews

  1. ahhh! NOW it makes sense!

  2. A decent watch. Takes you through what happened on that day, with some witnesses speaking and a little bit of analysis of who this guy is/were.

    No in depth documentary. More a ´to the point´, fact/witness based doc.

    I give it a 7/10

  3. they didn't kill that guy fast enough... thats bs

  4. I was so shocked when i turned on my television that day :/ it feel so unreal and too close, im from Denmark, its my nabour country, so in someway it shocked me much more :/

  5. I personally do not think that Anders Behring Breivik is evil. He said that he did this to "save his country and Europe" from the muslims. I do not agree with that, BUT, he also said that he knew by doing this he would lose his family, his friends and he would either be killed or hated. How could anyone call this evil?? His actions are, ofcourse, EVIL and GRUESOME, and this should never have happened, but I have difficulty seeing that he is evil. His opinions and beliefs may be crazy, maybe he IS crazy, but I cannot see evil in a man that is willing to sacrifice everything he has for his beliefs, crazy as they may be.
    The biggest issue now, is the verdict: accountable or not.. I cannot believe that he is anything other than accountable, he planned this for eight years or more. If however, he is judged inaccountable, it will change the whole legal system. Not only in Norway, but everywhere. `Cause if this man can get away with being sentenced to the psychic ward, who can`t?? Scary!

    1. After 41 days of presentation of evidence, said prosecutors in the criminal case against Anders Behring Breivik Thursday that they believe Breivik was unaccountable when he carried out the attacks.

      Source: TV2 news.

      According to the Criminal Code (§ 44), a person who was psychotic, high grade mentally retarded or unconscious in the moment of action, can not be punished.
      A psychosis is a psychiatric term for a mental state in which he has no contact with reality. Hallucinations (hearing, sight, less smell, taste, touch) and delusions are common symptoms of psychosis.
      The most common forms of psychosis is schizophrenia, paranoid psychosis, acute and transient psychotic disorders, schizoaffective psychosis and psychosis as part of bipolar disorder.
      The person may be transferred to compulsory health care where it is deemed necessary to protect society. The conditions are that the person has committed a serious crime that violates the life, health or freedom, and that they consider that the risk of recurrence.
      The person shall be released when the person is considered healthy, but the person may end up not get out again in society.

      (Source: NTB)

      It is not a shock to me he was judged unaccountable, first the families had to suffer his face in the news for over a year?! and that's not the worst, then he did not get the punishment he deserved becaus he was too sick for prison?? i agree with u that this is scary.

    2. the norwegian experts are no experts at all. Their lack of experience within the subject and lack of empathy makes them a terrible choice to even talk about it. The most psychologist in norway has no chance to even understand a fragment of what goes on within a killers mind. I used two minutes to understand the entire thing,they used months..its sad.

      As an expert in psychology and ex marine judging him unaccountable is to show that they have no experience within the subject of psychology. He was accountable the very first moment, for a very good reason. A reason that i bet most psychologisthistorians know about,but dont dare to talk about.

    3. You my friend are crazy...there are no rationalizations that you can spew here to make ANYONE agree that this demon is not evil. He is certainly a coward. He has no beliefs or ideals and is in league with Adolf"P.O.S."Hitler. How can you say these things? Shame on you.

  6. Is it the influence or the Motivation?
    Dont make him a martur you conclude in the program but every ones so fastly televised, What programs on media/tv 'n'...etc influenced by ? Breivik gets comforts no remorse life in prison bunch of letters, christians who wants to convert him, woman who wants to marry him..his face on every , tv , dvd I ask again what drives such action ?

  7. Wherever there is suffering, there are psychopaths having fun. He has the traits. Grandiose schemes. Self-delusion. No fellow-feeling. There is no cure. Lock him up. It doesn't matter what he himself thinks. Just keep him from doing it again.

    1. The problem is that Norway is not a country that could be related to any kind of human suffering (inflicted by the state or wars anyway). Even bigger problem is that this guy has been declared 'sane' by the relevant professionals hired to establish his psycological condition.

    2. The fact that Norway has been lucky on that kind of statistics does not have anything to do with this. Anders Behring Breivik acted totally on his own, from his belives that Europe is "infected" by muslims. His plan where not originally to kill the 69 people, but to kill one polititian, Gro Harlem Bruntland which had left the island just hours before he reached the location.

      The fact that he is declared sane is because only then will the cops be able to send him in prison. Norway don`t have deathpenalty, maximumtime here is 21 years. In this case, Breivik will be held in custody for 3 years to begin with. If he don`t get declared as sane after that period he will be sent to a highly secured mental facility, where they will medicate him to "make him healthy". As you can imagine, that wouldn`t be a punishment. So the Norwegian people (including myself) are happy he is most likely to end up in jail even though 22.7 will reappear in the media every 3rd year.

      I lost 3 people that i knew that day, so I`m happy he`s never gonna come back to society, and if he does he woun`t survive for long since his head now has a prize on it.

  8. gun control...i live in GA, USA, and if that happened here at a camp, he would have been shot with a deer rifle..

    1. Absolutely!!!

  9. Fanaticism, brutality and stupidity are endless, until we prevent the latter we are always prone to the former's.

  10. I live with someone who lost a friend on that hellish island and quite frankly the fact that he took it upon himself to play god with the lives of 69 individuals should deny him the right of any mercy whatsover. This is the only point that should be discussed in these comments because conspiracy, insanity and blame on the norwegian security forces should all be irrelevant factors in this debate. He did not just disrupt society he ruined the lives of hundreds of families, to add to this the event will forever phsycologically impact the survivors and probably never allow them to lead normal lives. These are the points to be discussed here. We should lock him up and throw away the key in a prison run by the families who lost loved ones in this atrocity.

  11. christian or crazy,muslim or moron,there are those who see killing as an acceptable option to gaining power,there is hardly a race on the planet without blood on its hands, remember most nations were formed by the use of force, look at your own lineage!

  12. what a horriffic nigthmare! I'm aghast that that police response was so slow!
    and, no security on the island? what the hell were they thinking? all the ruling
    party's kids on an island so isolated? if i were a norwegian kid i'd be thinking
    twice about camping there "we're taking it back" attitude notwithstanding.

    1. If I had to guess, the lack of security was a part of the freedom that their country enjoys. One man in a million should not determine the fate of all. Unfortunately there are a lot of angry people in this world. The slow response was probably a matter of response to the bombing while deciphering all of the different emergency calls. I don't believe policing would have mattered. I think it would have only made things worse through more meticulaous planning.

  13. I believe pests like these men are like 'cockroaches' you need to see only 'one' of them to know that around the 'one' found; there will be millions of those of repugnant bugs larking and waiting to make themselves known" So, this is no just one person job, this is the work of networks, he was only the one who acted out. We better be ready for them!

  14. omg that's so sad :( i'm gonna cry :(

  15. Another religious fundamentalist what's new, the only thing this documentary is missing is the rest of the fundamentalists they have not mentioned, New York Times did though, and people still think he is Muslim.

  16. Honestly, what is wrong with you people? You seem to be bordering on extremism yourselves.
    This documentary is rubbish. Mostly assumptions concerning Breivik which give no real answers nor introduce any interesting new views or thoughts. It's a tad better than that horrible, american low-budget movie that was made, but not much. Not to mention that the film effects used were quite annoying, especially the narrator.
    I am Norwegian and, although I sometimes worry about the fuzz the media is making, I do trust the Norwegian law to deal with Breivik in a responsible and just way.
    For the idiots who call for death penalty in Norway or believes "boiling" to be a suitable end for Breivik (including you @Malchik and your "easy way out"), you have all completely misunderstood the point of modern criminal code. We lock people up to protect society, not because they deserve it. If possible we wish them to return "healthy" and law-abiding. I am not saying Breivik should be let out any time soon, and by the looks of it I guess he will be spending quite some time in prison contemplating his recent deeds, but his punishment and the reasons behind it should not extend beyond that protection, and the norwegian law and justice system should most certainly not spend time satisfying your anger and need for revenge.
    And @drinker69, you seem reasonably sane. We don't know yet weather Breivik is insane, don't draw your conclusion from this documentary, as I said, it's rubbish.

  17. There are so many mentally ill people out there its incalculable. When someone 'snaps' psychologically that doesn't mean they start drooling and screaming in the street. Some might, but the dangerous ones begin to calculate and plan how to render suffering through violence on as many as they can. Psychology has nothing to do with race, religion, country, age, gender etc. The mind goes deeper than all that s***. The question is can you handle it? You'd be surprised and shocked at how many cannot. Keep your head on a swivel people.

  18. "The Killer's Mind"

    It didn't say anything about the killer's mind, it was just interviews with survivors. Why isn't there an interview with Breivik himself?

    1. cause he's not allowed time with the press... though there was requests made to the Norwegian government to allow him to speak to the press... but he's been blacked out for the moment... they are not even allowed to film inside the courtroom when he is on the stand... but journalists are tweeting and posting his statements online all the time... personally i don't think Breivik is insane, but that is more comforting for the world to perceive him as such.

  19. Christian terrorism in a nutshell. And everyone's worried about Muslims.

    1. Give me a shred of proof that Anders Breivik was a Christian, or ever claimed to be a Christian. He was labelled a Christian terrorist because it was convenient.

    2. It's in his 1500 page manifesto. Start on page 1. It won't take long to see evidence.

  20. He hated Muslims and yet none of his targets were Muslim?

    1. Yes, exactly. But the damned god-fearing coward also hated liberals, socialists, and multi-culteralism.

    2. Not true. Some of them were. Anyways, he attacked the labor party because they "invite multiculturalism". So there.

  21. 26.38min OMG what an ass;))

  22. I thought it was great documentry when I watched it but I don't get why people are commenting on him and what he did the movie was about his mindset. But after watching the movie I agree he was narsasistic but they kept saying he never lost control just doing this was slowly killing him if he got another 45mins he would have lost control just saying.

  23. b*st*rd. only a sick son of aa b*st*rd can do such a thing.

  24. What a propaganda.

    You'd expect that a film titled "The Killer’s Mind" would tell about who the killer was and why he killed. What you get instead? 40 minutes of people telling you over and over again that he did terrible things and was a very very bad men. Another 5 minutes of loose opinions that not only he was a very bad man but a madman. They don't stop there. They go on to suggest yet another time that all the worlds diversity is made up by two kinds of people. Good people who make up the monolithic socialist society, pay their taxes and have no opinions beyond the narrow-mindedness presented in media and all the people who dare to anyhow oppose to that mind set: nationalists, terrorists and even libertarians are all bad and live to make your life a nightmare.

    Since they are all bad and devoted to make us - good people miserable, the only way you can remain a good man is to fight back. As a result it's bad when bad people kill us but it's OK if we kill them. It's all to spread and maintain that goodness of ours after all.

    Am I exaggerating? I don't think so. Just look at the comment below. Mr Richtofen the ignorant dick is telling us that what he learned from that movie is that Breivik is so bad that making bad things (like torturing and killing) towards him is not bad at all. Or perhaps he doesn't think that? Perhaps he is just so plain ignorant that he don't care to consider the fact that words and deeds have consequences?

    1. i agree, these people are so convinced to be on the right side that would hurt another person just because this doesn't follow their system/society, just about what the killer acted for.

    2. He killed 69 innocent people, he "ideas" about society (or anyhting) and his mindset are of rather little relevance...and, yes, torturing and killing sickos who murder dozens is NOT bad at all. Yes, words and deeds do have consequences, the consequence of his happens to be 69 corpses and hundreds of people grieving, this is NOT about political demagogy of rebellion any more. TOO bad they don't ahve death penalty.

    3. The death penalty is only appealing to people who believe in hell and eternal punishment. To the rest it's an easy way out.

  25. they should boil that guy alive and a little at a time.

    1. They could make it a world wide Pay Per View Event. I would be curious to see how many people would pay to see it, and if it was a lot of people what then would it say about the state of the human race as a whole? I don't think I could stomach watching it, not that it would ever be allowed to happen anyway. But I agree with your feelings that just throwing him in jail for life would be letting him off to easy (you didn't actually say that but the thought or one like it had to cross your mind for you to come up with this idea).

  26. @ ForeverDove maybe 99 % of the serial killers you know are white, but there are allot of murders in this world that you know nothing about.

    1. Oh i dont presume that i do.

  27. 99 % of mass murderers and serial killers are white, what does that tell us?
    White people are more susceptible to socio and psychopathic tendencies resulting in the harming of fellow human beings.

    Deny all you like!
    The evidence is irrefutable.

    1. Please give me the source of that statistic. Oh wait, you just pulled it out of your a*s.

      Skin color doesn't have ANYTHING to do with the individual. If you actually think so, then you're no better than the average racist.

      How about you stop posting, you idi*t.

    2. I don't as a rule like to jump in the middle of an argument because it is a guaranty I will get facts wrong and make a big mess of it. Not that I don't tend to get things wrong anyway so I guess wtf I will add a comment and try not to mess things up to much. I was under the impression the vast majority of serial killers were white males, thinking back I am sure I got this info from TV shows like CSI. Who would have thought all their facts were not right?

      Anyway I did a little googling to research this whole serial killer vs race thing. Sorry ForeverDove but like me you were missinformed on this.

      I found an FBI site: FBI GOV STATS & SERVICES - REPORTS.

      And this is part of what I read, well saw lol I didnt read it all.







    3. Hispanic is not a race, as well as Asian. The information you provide is already erroneous. Although I do not support foreverdove.

    4. @gaums

      My information came directly from an FBI web site and was copied and pasted, I did not come up with the terms they did . And if my information is erroneous take it up with the Government because the statistics are theirs compiled from their cases. So my information is just fine (lol because I never actually gave any of my own info. And just because I copied and pasted it in my comment doesn't make it MY info), if you have an issue with the facts well I already said take it up with them.

      Plus I started off my comment with a disclaimer about any facts I give.

      I mistakenly clicked like on your comment, which is ok I guess as you are entitled to your opinion, which is in part correct. Asian and Hispanic aren't races they are cultures, but you look on pretty much any US government form and it will under the heading of race have the word Hispanic as an option. Although once again this info was taken from a web site so who knows if it is correct or not.

    5. He isn't a serial killer, he is a spree killer. Get your facts right please.

    6. I do not watch fictional shows. You must admit though that the majority are Caucasian. And i want to also make it very clear that my comments are in no way meant to be Racist. And if people are feeling like my comments are, then i am deeply sorry that you are misunderstanding me. I consider myself to have a high tolerance to pain, but being called a Racist hurts me hurts my soul :(

    7. Fictional shows?? Are you kidding me??!!?!?!? The blast woke me up, I was taking a nap. And TRUST ME, the things that went on at Utøya was very real. I actually find it very insulting that you could call this fiction.

    8. you say "being called racist hurts my soul" what does that even mean?
      99% of all serial killers are white? thats simply wrong. white people are more susceptible to socio and psychopathic tendencies? have you even travelled? have you been to the congo? do you know about war crimes and human trafficking? i can guarrantee theres mass murders going on now in non white countries that you havent even heard of, sorry if this statement hurts your soul but you are 100% wrong

  28. ahh man American psychology docus are so shit and done for pure drama. Someone from UK do one intelligently

  29. i wonder why Anders Behring Breivik wasn't called a 'Christian terrorist/fundamentalist' or even a 'terrorist'? The media kept on referring to him as the 'lone-gunman' or 'attacker'. They are not shy to call anyone 'Islamic terrorist' (which is fine cause they are terrorists) so why not measure Breivik by the same stick? Why double standards when he did terrorize a nation?

    1. That is a very good question you bring up. I think maybe these days in order to be called a terrorist (and he was clearly a terrorist) you need to be a Muslim and being from the middle East helps too. Not to be confused by the "Homegrown" terrorists so your heritage must at least be middle eastern. I am not sure if you can count as a terrorist if you marry a middle eastern person and your heritage is from the west and you are white, even if you convert and become a Muslim. That would make you a terrorist in-law and while they would take into account your religious conversion I think you are still classified as an infidel and therefore if you become a suicide bomber you probably only get maybe 30 virgins. As an aside if I am going to blow myself up I am not sure if I would want my reward to be 72 middle eastern virgins, I am not racist so I hope this isnt coming across that way I am just trying to be a smart ass, while I have seen some very attractive middle eastern women I have noticed that some of them are not raving beauties and they are virgins. I would personally take a lesser number of girls and while some could be virgins I dont want them all to be sexually inexperienced, I would like a portion of them to know what they are doing. I dont think they would need to be like porn star experienced lol ... well maybe a few if they had been thoroughly tested and scrubbed down. Anyway back to the original point of why this idiot hasnt been called a terrorist, my thought is that the word terrorist is now synonomous with as I said earlier someone from the middle or as bad as it sounds someone who is dark skinned and Muslim which is obviously wrong on so many levels. The lone gunman thing sounds like a throwback to Lee Harvey Oswald and this idiot in Norway shouldnt get the special attention of being the reason a new term is used to distinguish between Middle Eastern and Western terrorists. A terrorist is a terrorist is a terrorist so we should call him, and any cohorts he may have had and if there are more in the future which sadly there will be, what he is which is a terrorist.

    2. I didn't read Breivik's manifesto, but from what I heard from this video, he doesn't strike me as a "Christian" terrorist, probably not a fundamentalist whatsoever. It sounds like his platform was anti-Islamic, anti-immigration. If he is a true narcissist, I don't think he had to have a cause, he would jump on any bandwagon. I think his main goal was to be infamous, that people would know his name. He might claim to be "Christian", but he didn't have many friends, they didn't mention him being a part of a church. Perhaps he thinks anti-Islamic equals Christian, but I think he was a victim of himself.

    3. Is the manifesto available somewhere to be read? I am thinking it would be evidence and had it at some point been on a web page or something it would have been removed by now. Not sure if I would want to read it anyway but it may be entertaining in a sick way. I agree with your comment about him being anti-Islamic and anti-immigration as I believe it was mentioned in the doc. He just didn't want anyone at all moving to Norway but I think he in particular disliked Muslims. Your point about him wanting to be infamous is right on as well because it was mentioned he wanted to kill more people than some other mass murderer years ago in Norway and wanted the notoriety that came with it. I always find it messed up that these maniacs say they are doing whatever it is they are doing ie killing a bunch of people because they are Christian or Muslim or whatever or doing it in the name of their religion. I am not a big religious person but I am sure the bible and or The Koran don't promote the mass murder of people with different beliefs.

  30. Well I knew the story was not complete. This documentary was concocted on a quickie made for prime-time basis to push the narrative that was being sold in the mainstream media. The fact that more than half a dozen surviving witnesses have clearly identified other shooters is not mentioned, and contradicted the "narrative" of a "Lone Wolf" scenario, makes the story incomplete. Now the Norwegian police have confirmed they where running drills "practically identical" to the event that occurred, and "The bomb attributed to Breivik went off only 26 minutes after the anti-terror drill finished, according to officials."

    Wow... I don't think we have the goods yet, better not be an Operation Gladio type controlled event. Quite the production here; the vanity photos, the 1500 page manifesto, the slick movie you can watch online he supposedly made by himself. Now, identical drills. Makes you think.


    EXCERPT from "Norwegian Police Confirm Drill Identical to Breivik’s Attack"




    Such “coincidences” are now routine during terror events.



    1. How reminiscent of the 9/11...7/7, attacks Eh? They were all running drills prior to terror attacks.

      Norad running drills on and prior to 9/11...Deutsche bank had run a similar exercise a few days, and prior to 7/7

    2. @Achems
      I didnt know they were running drills just prior to the attacks. How many times is this same story going to be told at different disasters before people yell STOP WTF is going on with this? It is amazing how they get away with this time after time.

    3. Greg_Mc:

      How they get away with it time after time? have you ever watched docs or movies of big swarming herds of animals, and say, lions stalking them, the lions single out and attack, everyone scatters, the lions eating their kill and all the other animals go about their business like nothing happened.

      Almost the same scenarios with us humans, herd mentality.

    4. Achems

      I know what you are saying and that it is true but when you take the time (which far to few people do) to watch these docs, actually discuss it with other people online, possibly learn something and find out more of what is actually going on instead of just watching the news and saying "oh my isnt that terrible, what is the world coming to?" then cracking open another beer and waiting for wheel of fortune to come on it get frustrating. Although while I try to get myself informed and educated on what is going on in the world and realizing we are getting F'd over time and time again at the end of the day what am I doing to help? Not a damned thing that is in any way constructive or helpful, as I am sure you have found out yourself you cant even bring this stuff up in a conversation outside of one of these forums because people role their eyes up at you and either call you a conspiracy nut or at least think it or as people have said to me "I don't care" or "The Government would never do anything like that, they wouldnt be able to keep it a secret even if they did as you say have something to do with it".

    5. Webster Tarpley is not my idea of a reliable source or of having an unbiased opinion. He interprets every incident as an operation of the military industrial complex. His take on current events are too predictable and automatic.

      That an anti-terror unit was doing anti-terror drills is not unusual at all. I would think that they would be conducting drills all the time. Its their job.

      People are notorious for being poor witnesses. That there are conflicting stories is to be expected. It doesn't prove a black ops situation. What it does indicate is confusion and hysteria among the witnesses and victims.

      You are not any where close to proving a false flag operation. Hunches are not enough. Watching a documentary just to find any slip-up would indicate an agenda. Anyone looking for problems will almost certainly find them. Loose ends and unanswered questions will always exist in any situation. You should have facts that cannot be denied before you accuse someone of murder.

    6. Hey Webster Tarpley is fantastic. He's maybe a bit heady for some people, Ph.D and all. Without a doubt a brilliant historian with deep knowledge and analytical skills. He is fluent in Italian, German, French, Latin and Russian. A decades-long expert on international terrorism, and a documenter of Anglo-American hegemony. A knowledge base not to be flippantly dismissed.

      Essentially the terror drills are suspect in the Norway event. Identical terror drills to the terror act, what are the odds, and the identical terror drill ends 26 minutes before the terror act starts?

      I think what it is Jack, there are "symptoms" of this potentially being an "Operation Gladio" type event. You remember Operation Gladio, now declassified, of the CIA killing hundreds and hundreds of Italians over the years in post war Italy; kids, woman, mostly civilians, to facilitate political objectives & agendas in Europe. They used terrorism with bombs, explosives, assassination, random shootings, as a tool to terrorize Italy's civilian population for American/Anglo western powers geo-political agendas. And of course, as to the plan, blame it all on the Communist Party. It worked great until the CIA got outed as the responsible party.

      The emblem of "Gladio", Italian branch of the "stay-behind" covert paramilitary organizations has the motto "In silence I preserve freedom". God they killed a lot of people in terrorist acts, with the purpose of placing the blame on a desirable enemy foreign or domestic.

      Go look it up, little history never hurts, look up "Operation Gladio" Also look up "stay behind networks". The similarities of the operation, the propaganda, the tools, methods, will give you a chill.

      I don't know... maybe CNN is right, and I should slip into a nice warm coma, not read so much history, watch a baseball game and shut up. Still, look up "Operation Gladio".

    7. @ Gough
      You are killing me dude, you keep bringing up facts then backing them up with things to google like this "operation Gladio" leaving me no choice but to read about it because while I am not an overly educated person I am a bit of an information junkie. I havent yet read up a lot on it because the page I went to started out with the story of Roberto Calvi and how he was killed, it seems in order to find and learn about one thing there are 10 other things you must research and know first. My only problem is it is time consuming and it is tough to find the time. There is one thing I have to say, in almost all false flag operations or these secretive and or covert operations that are to put in an overly simple way bad things done by bad people ie covert murder operations made to look like suicide, or killing on more of a mass level, kidnapping etc one persons name pops up constantly over the past 50 years or so as being involved in some way. And that man is Henry Kissenger, as a kid in the 70's because of the way the media portrayed him I thought he was this great man who did so much to help the world. Man was I wrong, I have read and heard so much over the years (all starting with me researching 9/11 after seeing a few docs that made me question some of the things that happened that day and the explanations for them from the Gov) that brought me to the conclusion there is a good chance the man is pure evil, and I don't label people in bad ways like this on a whim.

    8. Gladio cannot be proven to have taken an active part in the terrorist acts in Italy. They did encourage and support terrorist groups who they thought would help them in a struggle against communist aggression. They would turn a blind eye to what these groups were doing and could be said to be complicit in some of the bombings. The extent of their participation is unknown and still being debated.

      I have no doubt that there were many things that the CIA did that we would consider to be an atrocity. It does not follow, however, that all atrocities are the fault of the CIA. It seems that the "conspiracy" people quite often start off assuming to know who the culprit is and then look for clues to support their claims. I can predict exactly what some people's positions are on any new current event because their methodology is so predictable. No matter what one believes that is not the way to find out what is happening in the world. To always have the same answer to any issue cannot be possible. World events are too complex to revolve around one villain.

    9. @Jack1952 I am not informed enough to either agree or disagree with your comment about Gladio but just from reading what you said you clearly have done your research on the subject and are able to relay your opinion based on your research in a well thought out and concise manner. The same can be said about your views on the "conspiracy" people but in my opinion only to a point. Yes so many of them are beyond predictable in how they are going to respond to any new current event and those people take away from anyone who may have valid concerns, views, questions or opinions that differ from what the so called "official" reports or story say. The person who looks at a news report on whatever bad thing has happened and dares to stand up and say "hey I don't think I agree with what I am being told happened" it doesnt all add up to me and I dont believe the police/government/or whoever are telling the whole truth and are hiding something from us (not necessarily saying the Government or any of its agencies were involved, or possibly even saying "I think the Government was involved somehow" and stating some reasons to back up their view) is very quickly labelled as a conspiracy nut. Unfortunately you are as I said earlier correct in your assesment of the people who see a conspiracy around every corner. You said they start off assuming the know who the culprit is then look for clues to support their claims, I cannot argue that point. But is it not similar to what Bush and his buddies did in regards to Saddam and his WMD's, or the 9/11 hijacker's? They came up with a list of the hijackers and claimed Bin Laden was the mastermind very quickly and I am not even sure they really spent much time looking for clues to back up their claims. In fact because of a total lack of evidence the FBI never even put him (or took him off a short time after if they did put him on their most wanted list) on their list of suspects because they had nothing pointing to him as being behind it all. Whether he was or wasnt and if not him then who was behind it I do not claim to know I am just pointing out the Gov in this instance acted similarily to how the "conspiracy" people (lets call them nuts as a lot of them are lol) do. I believe I am a pretty rational semi intelligent person that doesnt jump to conclusions too easily and do not consider myself a conspiracy nut (a bit of a nut in general but hey it makes me more interesting lol) but through researching this 9/11 topic and listening to a lot of very smart people state their scientific findings and views I do have to say that by learning some basic physics from these people I have some questions and concerns about the official story because to me it doesnt even come close to telling us what happened that very sad day. And if having some what I believe to be valid questions or points makes me a conspiracy nut or a bad person because I dont take what I am told by those in authority as the gospel and just go home and carry on with my life as if nothing is wrong then I guess I am a nut and or a bad person.

    10. @ Greg_Mc

      I can understand how some would say that accusing Bin Laden of 9/11 was a little hasty. They did have solid reasons for doing this.

      In 1996 OBL declared open war on the west and in particular the United States. His statement of Fatwa was published in a London based Muslim newspaper. He had already been linked with other bombings including the bombing of the twin towers in 1993. A look at the passenger lists of the planes hi-jacked that day revealed individuals, who had ties with OBL, on all four of those planes. In other words, an individual, who had displayed open hostility towards the United States, with strong links to terrorist bombings including a previous attack on the WTC, and who has associates on all four planes hi-jacked that day, would almost certainly be the number one suspect. OBL also had the means to finance this type of operation and headed an organization that had the necessary personnel to recruit from. Motive means and opportunity, three requirements for indictment, were met.

      I am lost on how the killings in Norway would have benefited any government. If Norway had been placed under a sustained military lockdown or martial law afterwards, I would understand the suspicions somewhat. No one has even mentioned any repressive laws enacted in Norway in response to this tragedy. False flag allegations do not make any sense except to those who see government intervention everywhere. Sometimes a nut is just a nut.

  31. I have a couple of problems with this documentary as a Security Specialist and Private Investigator.

    The documentary claims he had a duffle back of weapons and ammo. But earlier in the documentary it claims he purchased a handgun and riffle legally. Which was it? Did he us a rifle and a handgun to kill 69 historical kids or did he have more guns and ammo in the bag? How many magazines did he have? To hunt down 69 people and successfully kill people running, hiding, swimming, etc. for over 1 and a half hours, you have to be a damn good shoot, with accuracy and catching plenty of people by surprise and that alone still doesn't giving you a head count of 69 dead. And if there were more guns and ammo in a duffle bag somewhere, where did the other guns come from? Where was the duffle bag as he calmly walked around the island killing people? Next, the documentary claims that he got off the fairy killing his way up to the first building where there were a large gathering of people. Really? No one ran after the first shoots from the beach to the building (while killings that occurred as he WALKED his way up to the first building?) and dead bodies started to drop all over the place? How many people could he have actually killed who didn't already seek cover? I have a major question for the witnesses. What was the maximum number of people they actrually saw and witnessed getting shoot and killed? Nearly every interview I seen said one or two. Some even said they see people running who were shoot during the attack. I bet no one seen more then 5 or 10 people at the time of the shooting. If so, how could he possibly have killed 69 hysterical screaming and fleeing teenagers with only a hand gun and a rifle while again...WALKING around the island calmly? Is it possible there were other shooters on the island that assisted in the killing as the people fleed? The scenario I present is that they run from the Jason (Friday the 13th character) into the cross hairs of undisclosed shooters. Therefore, he now has the luxury to walk and be calm around the island. When the police come, the others flee and the calm killer turns himself in without incident. Something to think about.

    1. You bring up some interesting points and questions Curt. I hope you get a lot of replies to this as I am curious what others have to say.

    2. Yes, very interesting points, you seem to know your stuff. Am also curious as to others take on your scenario.

    3. Also if you noticed, the kids in the documentary are way to calm, especially for people to talk about an incident that occurred barely 2 months earlier.

      Something just isn't right.

    4. you make a good point Ned. Even though the kids had a couple of months between the incident and the interview to possibly get some counciling and start the process of getting over their trauma and moving on with their lives (not enough time to get over it if they ever can fully get over it) they were very calm and seemingly emotionless. It is possible that as an act of mental self preservation the only way they can talk about it is to be emotionless and sort of robotic, but it is odd that no emotion was shown by them. You would think a couple of them would have at least teared up a bit or have some trouble getting through the interview so yes it seems odd. But after having said that are we being over analytical and looking for something that may not be there ie some sort of conspiracy? It is difficult for us to really get a handle on everything to do with this and do anything more than speculate when you know we are only getting whatever info the media allows us to see and have no way of getting any questions we may have answered.

    5. In America when they show a report on an "incident", they normally interview people (who cried) while they cry, makes it more wrenching. Perhaps here, they chose to show people who at the time of the interview were able to stay poised for a few moments.

    6. @Azilda You make a very good point (I wish you people would stop doing that lol, now I may have to contradict myself again because you have brought up a reasonable point that I must take into consideration thereby re thinking my original comment), it may be a cultural thing where they wanted to interview people who were calm and maybe more able to tell their story in a more rational way. Here in North America (not sure if they do it more in the USA than here in Canada) as you said we go for the wrenching emotional interview because I guess they think showing someone crying, heartbroken or overwhelmed with grief or emotions will get more viewers. Sadly ratings is all the media outlets care about and people channel surfing will stop at a channel where they see someone in distress. Possibly in Norway (although this was a discovery channel show wasnt it?) they dont sensationalize peoples suffering so much. It is also probably like you said and the producers wanted a show where they interviewed kids who were able to tell there story calmly in order to keep the show more about what facts they had so as to actually inform people as opposed to sensationalizing the poor traumatized kids.

    7. And if they were crying and sobbing while talking about their experiences, someone would be bound to criticize them for overacting and that the makers of the film were using American style emotional tactics.

      What isn't right is how individuals draw conclusions from the tiniest bit of evidence. They allow that tiny shred to become proof and conflicting evidence becomes propaganda. It is how they guarantee that they never have to admit an error in judgment.

    8. hey maybe it never happened, just like the moon landing and the holocaust? I guess we should trust your analysis since you're a "Security Specialist" Here's a thought, research if for us, get the facts, then propose your conspiracy, otherwise it's just disrespectful to those family members who are living, isn't it?

    9. he wont be able to research anything
      he is more than likely a rentAcop

    10. Lol I love the total cynisism people have for one another on here. If you post a comment and at any point in that comment you leave yourself open for any type of ridicule people will be all over you. It's great to read so please don't stop doing it lol.

    11. Remember, he was dressed up as cop and what he did was calling the panicked students to find safety near him, after the gunfire started.

      Hi killed dozen of students in the first several minutes and then he was just walking around as a cop offering safety. After gathering a group of 5 -10 people, in a close range, he would just shoot them. He repeated that 5 times over an hour and there you have 69 victims.

      Of course there were groups and individuals that didn't believe him. They just didn't want to step outside of their hiding places (under water, under beds, on trees, in bushes, hollow rocks...etc). They knew he was the shooter, but unfortunately some didn't.

    12. Makes perfect sense although sad to the core!

    13. You are a private investigator ? I think you better go back to school and learn how to spell first. Having an assault rifle as well as a pistol with enough ammo being carried in the bag would have surely been enough for him to do the damage that he did. He probably practiced mastering his shot over the years in which he was planning the attack. Any more brain busters?

  32. He is obviously a Muslim or maybe a commie...wait, we need not fear commies anymore that was the 50s and 60's now they have seen the error of their ways...gotta be a Muslim....

    The media were great trying to sell this angle, even in light of his Manifesto....

    Tragic and horrible, I will pause for a minute for the families effected by this day.

  33. I'm sorry, but the voice of the introduction repelled my interest

    1. I think they call that auditory discrimination. I'll give you that the narrator was sooooo "Fox TV" it cheapened the video, but the content was actually worth watching (unlike fox tv).

  34. The police did not use two hours to get there. Local police was at the mainland side relatively fast actually. But at that time they had information that there were up to five attackers with military-grade weaponry and explosives, so they did as any police force would; they waited for the swat-team (or Delta as norwegians call them) and started organizing a perimeter and helping those who had reached the shore. Delta of course had just recently been deployed in Oslo and was rerouted in the cars they were already in. There has been some speculation as to why the militarychoppers etc was not used, but they were already loaded into cars, so they naturally turned their lights and sirens on and drove there as fast as possible. Breivik was arrested1 h 27 min after first 911-call.
    In retrospect it is quite easy to comment on these things, but You have got to understand that this was not an everyday happening in an active warzone where a fleet of personnellcarrying choppers are active at all times.If you look it up in an atlas you will see that Norway is a country with significant distances between settlements (and airforcebases) - population density is very low. In retrospect one can argue that our readiness was not good enough, but that does not automagically point to an international conspiracy to discriminate the rightist-movement in the USA. Our police force was simply not prepared to manage a (big) bomb in the capitol center followed rapidly by a very unexpected massacre somewhere in the bushes some 200 kilometers away.

    When it comes to this being a false flag attack: Well, the norwegian government did obviously not use it to reduce the civil liberties - quite opposite; they focused on the importance of solidarity, respect and democracy, and the milieu in Norwegian politics and its transparancy has undoubtedly improved.

    If Washington does something else, I would say that the voters have a job to do.

    1. And oh! This documentary is obviously produced way to early. It reports as facts some things that at the time of this production was just speculations. This is just discovery trying to be quick with news from their psychologists and profilers. It will still be a couple of months before they can make a real documentary. An independent commission has just been set up (And it looks like the commission truly is independent).

  35. This guy should NOT consinously be put on frontpages of newspapaers and news broadcast around the world 24/7. I understand the newspeoples point of view, but the matter of the families that have lost their loved ones, the people that are injuired and others suffering from this mad mans attack should come first. He is not worthy the front pages in any news or magazine, he shouold be studied but not on the mainstream media. Forget this lunitic, focus on what is the really wrong doings in ths workd, hunger, war, politicians and their greed and so forth..

    1. I agree with you John and wish for the families sake and those close to the dead the coverage was toned down. Imagine your son or daughter being one of the kids murdered and every time you turn the tv or radio on or look at a newspaper you see pictures or headlines about it (I am sure in Norway it was almost constantly on one channel or another) it would mentally break you. Unfortunately nothing will change, in the next few weeks when the next horrible things happens it will get front page attention. We have become so used to seeing and hearing about acts of brutal violence that we have become numb to it and want every bit of info available, it is both human nature to do so and also due to what I stated above. The newspapers etc are just giving us what we want, if you put 4 newspapers on display for sale and 3 have on the front page some nice heartwarming story and the 4th one has pics, headlines and a story about a violent bloody murder the 4th one would probably outsell the other 3 combined. Not something we as humans can be very proud of is it?

  36. We have no real definitive idea what transpired in the Norway terrorist act, but the wheels are spinning aggressively. Geraldo Rivera is waxing his mustache, getting ready to tell us the gory details.

    "See something say something. I see Joe Six Pack, the new face of terror. Where is Sarah Palin when you need her? Oh, there is nothing more helpless and irresponsible than a FOX Newscaster in the depths of an ether binge. Maybe she can give us some fair and balanced news on all this terrorism in Norway, before she starts running for President...."

    Maybe Sarah Palin can fill us all in with the reality of this situation? Who knows. Lots of conflicting information even between the mainstream troughs. This Documentary is by no means the final word on this event. They better not think they can now curtail the rights of citizens in the European Union and the Untied States of America because of this act of terrorism, false flag or home grown.

    1. I didn't understand any of that. What does that have to do with the price of tea in China!?!

    2. It's poetry! Come on,


    3. Sorry, I'm in Asia--woefully unaware of American politics much of the time.

    4. Is that Rivera clown still still employed by someone as a ....cough..... investigative reporter/reporter etc? Maybe when he is done in Norway he can go back and take another look behind Al Capone's brick wall.

      And yes Gough what you wrote was sheer poetry, look out Dr. Seuss you have competition. I would not watch him on a train, I would not watch him in the rain, not on a boat and not with a goat not in a shack or high on crack .. I do not like that big nosed hack

    5. Thanks Greg, I wrote it for you. ;) Little Pinocchio was on fox news as an investigative reporter, and he told me he was dating Sarah Palin.... her integrity gave him a woody.

      See, fair and balance news.

    6. @Gough
      I appreciate you thinking of me when you wrote it.
      I am in Canada and as far as i know FOX news isn't available here, at least not by my provider anyway (to be honest I would like to see it so I could view first hand what everyone seems to always make fun of), but I do get CNN which for all it's faults still is the channel I go to when something big happens in the world. While they will play whatever their latest update on which ever current tragedy or big story is going on over and over again till your eyes bleed they are good at getting the basics of the story on quickly. You just have to make sure you change the channel before you get sucked in to listening to them as they analyse things in their own unique way.

      HAHA Gerry Rivers and Sarah Palin hooking up, you must be a special and important person to have such a well respected journalist as him confiding in you.

  37. One Christian White Male does an act such as this one and the whole world goes crazy and calls it a massacre. BUT, every day in the middle east you have muslims go and blow them selves up in the name of allah and you get a 2 minute update how how many people they killed and then the story is over. This man should be known as a hero for his ideas, now his act I do not condone, but his ideaoligy makes perfect sense. Especially when sharia law is trying to be instituted in a Christian country. The world we live in makes me sicker every day. You sit their and attack gun laws and all these liberties, what world do you want to live in? Really? Do you want to live in a world where you are scared of your government? Because the stronger they get, the more you lose your freedom as a human being on this planet. So keep up the liberal bullshit, and drive this world into a deeper hell than we are all already in. Just look around you with things like the Patriot Act... That's enough to persuade away any educated person away from the leftist politics going on today. Why can't Ron Paul just be America's president already??? lol. But seriously, the beginning rant wasn't about being anti-muslim, but if you look at how the liberal media machine has treated this guy, it can be said it is very pro-radical islamic. How, you may say? Just like I said earlier, this many innocent non-violent muslims die every day by suicide bombs, and not to mention America's war machine, where are their documentaries??? Instead we have the media trying to attack people for labeling them terrorists, or even going as far as calling our own citizens terrorists, like Joe Biden did about the Tea Party. To me that's the terrorists, the media, and our politicians. Not a man trying to reverse the neo-socialist, democracy destroying ways our world is headed towards, if not already there. Nobody says anything when Obama hangs out with his Weather Underground friend, but yeah, they weren't "terrorists", they just blew up a bunch of buildings... AMERICA, AND THE WORLD, STOP KIDDING YOURSELF.


      You'll find hundreds of them filed under the categories of Military and war, Politics, 9/11, History, Religion and Society.


      Yea, all he did was indiscriminately kill 77 people and injure another 96. Jeez you cant do anything nowadays without people overreacting am I right?

      I didn't read the rest of your rant, but I hope you get the help you need.

    2. Who says suicide bombers aren't terrorists? When people say we aren't fighting terrorists they mean the people in Afghanistan and Iraq who are just defending their country from the US. Sure some of them are in Al Qaeda or other terrorist groups but most are just people who are tired of watching their innocent friends get killed in bombs that miss or shot in crossfire.

      Suicide bombings got huge coverage when they first started happening, but after two or three decades of it the media plays it less and less. They play stories for ratings, and people have become desensitized to it after so long.

      Yes guns are important in keeping the government in check, but what have we done in the past 200 years to make sure our government is in check? Most people that are for changing the laws on guns are for gun control laws, not anti-gun laws. They want it to be harder for someone to get a gun, where I live anyone over 18 can go into a store and buy a gun. No background check, no waiting period, just walk in and get one.

      The idea is that if you want a gun for a legitimate reason, a background check and waiting period should be no problem for you. It's like when you right an angry letter, you're supposed to put it in a drawer and sleep on it, you most likely won't send it the next day. If you're so angry at someone you're contemplating killing them, you probably won't be that angry after the waiting period is up.

      If you can understand the logic of killing innocent people in order to purify the world of Muslims, please get help.

    3. Just one thing I would like to add to Chaksos and Ansars comment. Patriot Act is a republican brainchild implemented by Bush administration. Fail my friend. You seem confused. On one hand you condemn that our rights and freedom are being trampled on and on the other you are against liberal society?
      Try comparing different countries and the corelation between liberal/secular societies and ones where religion is the guideline and are less liberal (if at all). Across the board you will find that people living in liberal societies have better education, less crime, more freedoms and I assure you, better quality of life.
      This person is most certanly not a hero. I can hardly think of a more atrocious act and his ideology is f*** up. The best way to defend a free democratic culture is devision of state and church. This way you do not have to fear sharia law without killing anybody in the process.
      Also I would like to add that a social country is not something bad. Quite the opposite. I think that one of the main merits of how developed a society is is how it treats it's weakest members but at the same time not limiting others to achieve their full potential. Scandinavian countries are a good example.

    4. Unfortunately, the suicide attacks have become routine in many places. Living in North America and Europe we do not have to live with this type of violence on a daily basis. It is a feeling of security and comfort that we take for granted.

      The Norway shootings is a bizarre incident. It punches us in the stomach by the fact that its horror takes place where we would normally feel safe; safe enough to send our children without any fear. The danger seems to include all of us because we are accustomed to thinking that we live in civilized society.

      Of course there are problems in Western Society. The Patriot Act is just plain wrong and it thumbs its nose at the American Constitution. Sharia law should absolutely never be allowed in a free state. Its very nature does away with freedom of choice. My opposition to these issues will never, in any way, cause me to call Breivik a hero. He is a sickness; a man who allowed his ideals and his hatred to consume him. Those ideas that you endorse include the idea that it is necessary to indiscriminately slaughter children. He is not a hero.

      Around the world, people who might sympathize with his beliefs, would now tend to view them with suspicion. He has done immense harm to his own cause and yours. He is someone that anyone with your political viewpoints should distance themselves. He has destroyed everything he touches. If you value your beliefs, do not align yourself with him in any way. Any such alignment could hurt your cause ten times more than any government crackdown.

      He is not a hero!

  38. Ok: last thought-----To all of you who oppose law abiding citizens carrying guns I pose this question: Obviously there was a failure to protect the kids on this island for over an hour as a madman slowly and deliberately killed children one by own.

    So, HOW do you protect yourself and your children form someone like this? Don't you? Or do you just run and scream and die if it's your incredible bad luck to be trapped on that island at the time?

    I have no agenda other than I'd like to sincerely know what you think should and could have been done to prevent this terrible crime.

    Peace to all,

    Charles B.

    1. One last thought from me. How often has an incident of this nature happened in Norway. How often does it happen anywhere in the world. I would be more likely to win a super lottery than be killed in a shooting spree like the one in this documentary. It is extremely rare. To arm myself for protection when I go on a holiday to order to protect myself from such aberrant behavior seems almost paranoid. I refuse to allow such fears to rule my life.

      There was not a failure to protect those children. To use the word failure would imply that the people in charge of the retreat are at fault. There is no one on this planet who could have predicted what happened there. Sadly, things happen and people die due to strange and unpredictable circumstances. I wish we could be ready for any and all catastrophes, but I am afraid it is impossible.

      I still prefer living in a place where people do not routinely carry concealed instruments of death; instruments that are specifically manufactured and designed for one purpose. Its purpose and only reason for existence is to kill people. Maybe that is why I live here and not there.

    2. It's not so rare nowadays. I was in the mall two years ago when it happened here--turned out it was a bank robbery rather than a terrorist attack, but they happen here often (usually bombs). I don't have a gun in the house as I thought the possibility of my son getting it is higher than the possible need for it during a home invasion robbery. But, innocent people are victimized daily somewhere by someone. When I go back to the U.S.A. I'll get a gun. Also for hiking. Mountain lions actually can attack and kill small children and women--not very often, but it happens.

    3. Charles, just so you know I'm not opposed to citizens having guns. Especially not in the US, considering it is in your constitution and all. If a nation is going to have an army which takes orders from the government than every private citizen should have at least one gun per household IMO.

      To parellel what Jack said, this is a rare occurance, for every massacre of this scale there is literally 1000's of people dieing everyday of preventable diseases and accidents. But where is that on the daily news? Why isn't that reported? Because it doesn't sell. For every $1 spent on terroism defense there should be $10,000 spent on research into health sciences and education on how to prevent accidents.

      We live in a world of irrational fears. The chances of dieing by way of what we see on the news is next to 0. It would be like me spending my life savings because I bought a lottery ticket and have a chance of winning.

    4. Was not this person a "law abiding person" by your standards. I mean he bought a gun legally.

      The problem here is that no one can prove or disprove how many killings have been avoided by the refusal of guns to those who shouldn't have guns.

      That is the advantage of your argument.

  39. I don't believe this event is comparable to a 'Gladio Network' involved in a 'strategy of tension', seen in Italy during the 70's. That involved the state. This event is more in the context of an idea of a "leaderless resistance", which has been developing for some time now amongst fascist/white supremacist groupings in Europe and the US, with lone individuals, with political beliefs attacking on certain fronts. In the 30's the "enemy" were Bolsheviks and the Jews. Now it's those deemed "Cultural Marxists" and Muslims. The former labelled as 'politically correct', the latter as 'Islamofascist". Neither of these are as they are termed. The term 'politically correct' is used to stifle dissent. The term "Islamofascist" is 'far from fascist. Islam is a religion, not a political movement that ends with shovelling bodies into ovens, in camps built specifically for the purpose of forced, slave labour and killing people. Be aware of the dangers of fascists who try to portray themselves as anti-fascists.

    1. Just one thing - Fascism as you are implying it has nothing to do with National socialism (Nazis). Fascism is an economic/political alliance between the state and "Fortune 100" business/corporations/banks. Nazziism was a particular version of it that did involve ovens but all western Nato countries are fascist. Anti government malcontents are freedom fighter/dissidents whatever - but not fascist. It's an important distinction.

      And I'd add that most "lone wolf" attacks that have occurred in the past or which we are now duly being primed for are in fact false flag attacks perpetrated by fascist governments using scapegoats in order to further their own truly corporate/fascist agendas.

      Read Machiavelli's "The Prince" - "Acts of terrorism must always be performed by the state and blamed on its enemies while dividing and conquering them so they fight amongst themselves and never suspect the prince/state"

      We the people are now the openly declared enemies of the fascist state...

      Corporate profits valued more than quality of human life = fascism

      Quality of life valued more than corporate profits = democracy

      now ask yourself who's been shaping our laws since at least 1913?.... Read "The Creature from Jeckyl Island"

    2. let's wait and see if norway passes a version of the patriot act, or sth of that sort

    3. Great points Daniel.

    4. All western NATO nations are fascist. What country on this planet isn't fascist using your criteria. Where is life that good and perfect, with a leadership that is that kind and benevolent, that it stands as a beacon for the rest of the world to emulate and follow?

      I hope you're not calling Breivik a malcontent. He was not some guy having a bad hair day. He is an angry delusional person who has the arrogance to believe that only he knows what is right for the rest of us and that this exalted position he places himself in gives him license to exact justice anyway he sees fit.

      How do you know which "lone wolf" killings are false flag operations? Is this an assumption or do you have the facts to back up such a claim?

      The actions of one insane man in Norway does not indicate that we live in a fascist state. That is one giant leap.

  40. Hello people... I sort of scimmed through some of the comments here and felt like posting something. I am a frequent user of this site (never posted anything though) and thus stumbeled onto this thread.

    I live about 45 nminutes from where the shooting happend and the bomb went off. Somewhere in the middle I suppose :-)

    The news up here in Norway bombards us about this thing every day. And why not? It´s simply the worst thing happenining on norwegian soil since WWII. What hits me though is how you can make a documentary so soon after the fact.

    To the guys talking a about conspiracy: Well, I must admit it accoured to me.

    To the guys who are blaming this on islam: Start to think for yourselfe.

    To the guys who believe this has to do with quantities of firearms: Please, com on....

    1. I agree. Have the media learned nothing from Columbine. Look at the Hysteria caused by that and then 10 years later after heavy research the book "Columbine" comes out and proves everything the media told us about it was DEAD WRONG and they were jumping to conclusions.

      If that's how long it takes to get the story straight then that's how long it takes! I'd rather wait 10 years for the right answer than spend a minute on the wrong ones.

    2. If we waited the 10 years to tell the story because we wanted to get the story correct, there would be those who would still cry foul. There would be accusations of media cover-up and interference. Some would say that it took that long because they had to fabricate some "official" version and after 10 years they know that it would be difficult to refute this fabrication.

      If we are to have a free press then we have to accept that there may be limitations on how accurate they may be. It is called being human. The public insists that it has the right to know. Even the most honest reporter can make mistakes and may be the recipient of inaccurate information which he relays on to the public. It's unfortunate but inevitable.

  41. "Let's not mak him a celebrity" Said by the same guy who jumps on the chance to give his two-cents in front of cameras and make phoney pyschological assements based on very little to work with. How does he not see the ironey in this? You just did more than any of us could fella! I think he may have the same narcissistic qualities and illusions of granduer.

    1. I kinda got that same impression about him... The Ego of the Academic was pretty hard to miss in that guy.

    2. Could it be the same "Ego of Academic" exhibited by atheists?

    3. lakhotason that was weaaaaaaaak. I feel sorry for you.

    4. i agree, the antlers are best!

    5. @ Az

      Haha! Like I told C and N..."If the head fits, wear it." And, believe me, this one fits...(In several kinds of ways, lol.)

      You know, I think Oz must have found himself a different site to post on, and I'm afraid we won't see him anymore. :( Its still been informative around here without him...but its also been a lot duller. He had so much spirit, and he acted as a catalyst for me, too.

    6. All that time I thought your moosehead icon was some existential statement about evolution and human potential or something silly like that.

      Reminded me of a story about a woman who always cut the ends of her potroast before roasting it. Why she thought? Because Mother did so. Mother said, because Grandma does so. So, when asked why Grandma did so, it was because her first roating pan was too small to fit it all in at one time! So, a family tradition was started and carried on without question "just because."

  42. I hope breivik realises just how brutal the 'christianisation' of pagan villages was and at one point king john of england used the fear of christianisation to recruit scandanavians. Yes at one point christianity was norways enemy... what a backwards idiot if only hitler had the same idea ''I don't like jews... I know I'll kill all ze germans''.

  43. that english commentator is so full of bs i mean the comments like 'he is narcissistic, paranoid bla bla bla'... always the same story, targeted to make us feel better because we are not like that.... well, the truth is that he(the shooter) is just another dude, not satisfied with the situation and perfectly NORMAL like most of us, the only difference is him having the guts to do what he believes in, and that makes him perfectly human ... i do not approve of his metods or political views!

    1. the narrators american he just speaks english lol

    2. haha i always read some comments before watchin the doc but now i know who ur talkin about... my bad

    3. To murder innocent and unarmed bystanders and young people does not take guts. It takes someone who is experiencing a complete mental breakdown. If he is normal, then this type of behavior would be happening hourly and everyday. Very few of us are happy with the world situation. It is the rare and abnormal ones who let this dissatisfaction motivate them into such aberrant behavior. They are not normal.

    4. you missed the point -the thing he did may or may not be normal, but that does not mean that he is not perfectly sane... and considering he is sane it takes a lot of guts to do what he did... again -i do not approve it

    5. He probably was narcissistic and paranoid. When I was a teenager I went through a phase of narcissism after my parents got divorced. It was just a way to not have to deal with it.

      The way he presented himself screamed narcissism. After my bout with it it's always been easy for me to tell when someone else is, I guess it's kinda like the idea of gaydar.

      You're right that any person can become narcissist. People like to believe they can't be murderers, or drug addicts, or things as negative as these, but under the right circumstances anyone can fall into these.

      BTW, I hate that I just put murderers and drug addicts in the same category.

  44. I know it was a youth camp, but why wasn't there at least another adult with a gun on this island? 600 UNARMED victims?

    Nearly every person is my family in the U.S.A. (except me) packs heat. Even my pretty little blonde niece has a pistol and a permit to carry it concealed! I think I would have at least tried to knife the moster. Mob him, trip him, stone him in the face when he's down! Hard to understand why no one mounted a counter attack that we know of.

    1. I live in Canada and almost no one carries weapons as part of their daily routine. Those who do pack heat are looked upon as psychos and find themselves becoming social pariahs. 600 unarmed citizens at a tourist retreat would not only be normal in Canada but is almost a certainty. Canadians feel that the American obsession with their weaponry to be a form of insanity and we are grateful that we don't have to worry that the stranger standing next to us may be carrying a concealed weapon and that in a fit of rage he could start shooting people.

      During a shooting spree I would think most people would be in a state of shock or panic. This would hardly be ideal condition for an effective counter attack to be executed. You can't fight bullets with your fists.

    2. Yeah, there in Canada only the ciminals are ARMED. I actually feel safer when I know Dad and my brother and who knows who else is packing. It's a lot harder now with all the regulations.

      True story: When I left for the Philippines I said, "Mom, here's the 38 special and the amunition. Lock and load if ya need it!"

      P.S. I've been in a similar situation here in the Philippines, but not quite as deadly. I surprised myself with my bravery. I'm not sure, but I think I would have tried to kill him myself with my bare hands if nothing else and with no place to run, and perhaps some did try but didn't succeed.

    3. I wish it was the same here but knifes are common... always like the sound of Canada peaceful unless pushed.

      @ C and N Everyone is born with 3 fears fallin, abandonment and loud bangs. Thats why military forces train with blanks and practice grenades... to get u used to the bang crack of live ammo

    4. Charles most criminals in Canada are not armed. And once you arm yourself with a concealed weapon, you become a criminal.

      The United States has ten times the population of Canada but 100 times the murders per year. That's a cold hard fact.

      And we do have guns, we just keep em at home where they belong.

    5. I could not agree with you here more ,I am sorry but in a situation as such the only thing people would think is to save their own life ,what you would of done if you were there with your favourite concealed weapon probably would of been to shove it up ur a** and run the hell away . Americans are so full of it with your gun trigger happy culture that you are blind to the rest of the world ,not every one needs a gun were we come from that is why that we have the police which in this case did a really s***t job of getting there in time,but at least we don't fly planes and crash them in our own country and kill innocent people by the thousands to justify a war !!!

    6. I must strongly support what avd420 posted below. Most criminals in Canada are not armed. Even if they own weapons they tend to leave them at home because their fellow criminals are not carrying weapons. Canadian criminals view their American counterparts as a bunch of "loogins" and they distance themselves from any nut job who starts carrying a concealed pistol every day. Its not that we have fewer criminals....but there are strong social taboos about carrying concealed weapons. In Canada we feel safer when our companions are not packing. Anyone carrying a gun is likely to be reported to the police and will find himself in jail. The average Canadian will not tolerate the gun culture the American seems to embrace. We feel safe because of it.

    7. Jack, you need not fear 99.99% of law abiding citizens with a gun--fear the criminals--armed or unarmed. If you are about to be raped and murdered by someone with a knife, (or no weapens at all), and yu're very much the weaker person physically, would you or would you not like to have that gun? What about your sister, mother, or daughter, or son?

      Someone tried to rape my elderly mother a few years ago. Fortunately she had her phone and called the cops from her bedroom. They got there in time as the man was pounding on her bedroom door trying to get in. He was unarmed by the way, but could easily force an old woman.

      It turned out ok this time, but what had she not had her phone? I would have blasted him the moment that bedroom door came down, myself I think!

      I don't now own a gun myself, but gun culture is not a bad thing if you're not a criminal.

    8. HummDrumm: I don't think the Amerian government crashed any planes into the Twin Towers to start a war. We could have done that anyway, and Bin Laden was guilty as sin. Setting aside the 911 conspiricy theory, you bring up a good point---what if your GOVERNMENT is the one you need to protect yourself against?

      The U.S. constitutional right to bear arms (guns) was made to protect people from tyranical governement origianlly. You're entire unarmed populace will have no response should your own government be the evil perpitrator of slavery against you someday.

      I personally think it is futile in our modern society to resist should the government try to put you in a concentration camp, etc. It's no longer 1776! Times have changed, but it was for the purpose of preventing the governement from tyrany that the 5th amendment was established, not protection from criminals. That's just a bonus.

    9. Why is Bin Laden guilty?

    10. Bin Laden is guilty because he is a terrorist who is jealous of the west.

    11. AVD420: You may have somewhat of a point about the crime rate, but I would argue that is the result of moral decay in society not from law-abiding citizens with guns.

      You said Canadians have guns too. Don't you also have gun murders? Whom do they kill then? Unarmed or armed victims?

      They recently allowed guns into some places that allow drinking alcohol here in the U.S.A. They thought violence (and gun violence) would rise. Just the opposite in fact! ALL violence, especially gun violence went down. If you want to murder somone, and you think "Oh, there might be somone else that has a gun too" you think twice, but if you know you're the only one with a gun you can walk calmly around the island/bar/mall slowly gunning down unarmed civilian victims.

      Either way, drug dealers and gang members are exempt from the argument as they aren't law abiding in any way shape or form and would pack heat even if Grandma Johnson couldn't.

    12. C and N

      Yes but I believe guns account for less than 30% of the 150 murders here we have a year for a population of 33 million.

      Gun murders, from my knowledge is mostly criminals against other criminals, hunting accidents and crimes of passion. So if the gun laws here were like the US, and EVERY unarmed victim who was killed with a gun was saved because they also had a gun, that would save literally like 11 people a year. Probably less. God knows how much more choas it would cause.

      My cost/benefit analysis says that would be a bad move:)

      We LOVE our guns here in Canada, just not on the street.

    13. It is terrible what happened to your mother. I can fully sympathize with your feelings concerning this incident and I'm glad she wasn't hurt. Having a gun in the home is not uncommon in Canada, especially in rural areas. This does in no way compare to the gun culture as is demonstrated in America.

      I have spent time in the States and I did not associate with the criminal element (to my knowledge). I did see ordinary Americans whose personality seemed to change when they held a pistol in their hands. There was an increased bravado in some of these individuals and I felt that under the right circumstances they might do something that was out of character. There is a reason that the murder rate in the United States is much higher than in Canada. If a handgun is present in almost any social function, the odds increase dramatically that an impulse shooting will occur. A person in a fit of rage might be tempted to produce his weapon, especially if the odds are against him or he is frightened enough to believe that he is in danger. In Canada, almost all disputes are settled by a punch in the nose. You don't see a weapon because they are not kept readily available. That is the difference in our gun cultures. I worked as a bartender for eleven years and have had to break up many a fight. I have never seen a gun produced and I have worked in some seedy establishments. I'm not sure I would have worked in a similar situation in the States. A room full of strangers, under the influence and some of them quite likely armed is not pleasant prospect.

    14. Jack and avd420: That was well enough said. You convinced me. I've seen people get gun-happy too, but never fearfully so. If circumstances were the same in the U.S.A. as they are in Canada strincter gun laws would work, I think. Areguments well done.

      Yet, in the rare case where a gun is needed and none are available, such as in this case, what do you do?

      Ok: SUPER SCARY true story time! I bought a 30-06 hunting rifle immediately after that Branch Dividian feasco in Wacco Texas a decade back where David Koresh was killed along with most of his followers. I was mentioning how I thought the goverentment botched that big time and could have gotten the people out alive, etc.

      Realizing I wasn't opposed to the Branch Dividians (Well I am but not critially so) he said, "I told Daivd not to do something like that! Glad I got out of there when I did." Ha! The person that supplied Koresh with his weapons was living in my tiny hometown! I replied, "Yes, it was a wise move to get out of Texas when you did."

    15. Do you know how stupid you sound? "American obsession with their weaponry to be a form of insanity"

      Are you nuts? Nothing wrong with a personal revolver for self defense.

      I can think of 76 reasons. By the way Jack, thats the body count.

    16. @ GoughLewis

      I am not the one who believes that. It is the consensus in Canada. Mention the States and the way they relate to their guns and you will hear this sentence repeated over and over. "They're all nuts down there." That is the Canadian mindset.

      Once again, we have no problem with guns. We don't think that people should be walking around with them at all times. Handguns are severely restricted and any problem we do have are the result of smuggled handguns from the United States. The tendency is then to blame the American laws concerning personal weapons and the overpowering effect of American culture and media on our youth. Most Canadians would not go to a resort for a holiday retreat if they felt it would be necessary to carry a weapon for self defense.

      Even in the United States it would have been unlikely for a group of young people at a political retreat to have weapons at their disposal. The body count would have been quite high no matter what the culture or location.

    17. Hey, you can get a licence, but only for using it when you hunt or shoot at pistol Shooting Course(not sure what the word is in english) not really to protect yourself, I live in Sweden, and the media here says that it's to easy getting a licence?? after what happend there, i know f--king morons.. when it's against the law to carry weapon, only outlaws will have them.

    18. I agree! We have gun laws in place in Washington D.C. and the crime rate is HIGHER THERE because only the ciminals are armed. If you know Grandma Johnson doesn't have a gun, then you're more likely to break into her house and perhaps killer. But, if you think that she might have a gun, you think twice! At least in America, that's just the way life is.

      Had ony one law-abiding citizen on this island had a gun also, he could have been stopped sooner.

    19. @ C_and_N
      I agree that people are more likely to rob someone if the chances are they don't have a gun, but don't make it seem like killing is just another thing to someone who's likely to rob.

      Under different circumstances, you could easily be robbing to feed your family.

    20. Ansar11: Yes, I understand that; I live in the philippines--we get stolen from all the time! Very annoying!

    21. thats why you have at least one shooting spree per year

    22. And where do you live, so I can look up violent crime statistics, etc. on your city/country and see if they are comparable.

  45. Do all of you people alluding here -or stating it outright- to some elaborate clandestine conspiracy realize how much your own apparent worldview chimes with this killer's? Seeing sinister, hidden motives and threats in nearly every. single. newsworthy event, or world circumstance? Is it really so difficult to believe that one motivated psychopath with enough resources at his disposal is capable of putting this madness together all by himself, without having to drag in "government curtailing of civil-liberties" and international bankers? Get real! Individuals are just as capable of evil acts as groups of individuals are, and psychopathy is an occasional fact of the world we live in. I don't see one piece of information in this story anywhere to suggest anything other than that... (But that's probably a part of the conspiracy, too, right?)

    1. They lie us into wars, lie us into privatizing the banking system, false flag us into the war on terror, lie us into banker bailouts, patriot act, destroying the constitution, bill of rights, so so many lies...

      But don't question the Norway Shooting? We live in times that require healthy skepticism & discernment, not blind faith. The media lies.

      The tragic terror attacks in Norway display a number of the telltale signs of a false flag provocation. It is reported that, although the world media are attempting to focus on Anders Behring Breivik as a lone assassin in the tradition of Lee Harvey Oswald, several eyewitnesses saw a second shooter active in the massacre at the Utøya summer youth camp, outside of Oslo.


      Further, United States intelligence agencies had been conducting a large-scale program of recruiting retired Norwegian police officers with the alleged purpose of conducting surveillance inside the country. This program, known as SIMAS Surveillance Detection Units, provided penetration and subversion of the Norwegian police by NATO.

      All that said, I have no idea what the reality is. The whole thing reeks of PSYOP, but that is just the odor. Look up Operation Gladio, a little history might help put some perspective on those who are reluctant to take the Bombing/Shooting events that happened in Norway as sold.

    2. 1) I don't take anything on blind faith; I have plenty of aptitude for thinking critically...
      2) Every time I look into anything to do with conspiracy-theories (and I've looked into a lot) , there are invariably great big gaping holes everywhere, as many, if not more, as you find on the other side of the picture...

      I don't presume to know all the reasons for events, either, but until and unless real evidence surfaces linking this particular man with something like Gladio, about which a lot of questions remain, anyway, I'm going to go with the simplest explanation as the more reasonable one. You play it however you want, of course, but I'm not going to live my life, or color my views, with the idea that everything is just a cog in the wheel of some vast NWO agenda, or some similar thing.

    3. I agree. Those hidden agendas that some people have posted can be what motivates some of these spree killers. Part of the planning stage includes justifying why these killings are necessary. A common theme is that the average citizen must be awakened from his state induced trance. Young people at a political retreat would be exactly the types of "zombies" that would infuriate a conspiracy theorist who has deteriorated into paranoid delusions.

      There are many problems surrounding the banking, government and corporate entities in the world. Almost every reasonable person will admit this. However, it would seem that there are conspiracy theorists who respond to all news events in a knee jerk manner. They feel compelled to find any thread of evidence in an event to validate their personal viewpoint of the world. They cannot understand that this compulsion enslaves them. They become sheep to their own agendas.

      I am not saying that they are completely wrong in some of their allegations. I agree, whole heartedly and emphatically, that we should view the world with a critical eye. I do believe that we should approach a news story with an objective mind. If we actively search for a conspiracy, we will certainly find one.

    4. Have to disagree Jack. A "conspiracy theorist" would be targeting the hidden masters of the universe not innocents - Banks, puppet politicians perhaps, in-the-loop corporations like maybe a Halliburton.

      The reason they/I smell a rat is that we listen for the telegraphed warnings that always emerge before the next phase of Psops gets rolled out. You cant help but notice the thunderous new drum beat called "The average white guy next door is the new terrorist model"

      So now the huge totalitarian Patriot act type model which has been rolled out in every NATO country can be turned against anyone who disagrees with corporate/fascist/banking controlled government.

      We're always pre-primed and its psychology 101 stuff really.

      Once you've seen the pattern enough times it becomes positively asinine in its ham-fisted simplicity.

      The simple fact is that anyone who disagrees with their nonsense is the true patriot and they who have reneged on our various national sovereignties to the same foreign owned banks are the true terrorists/criminal/threat. we're all in this together.

      If a nations laws place the welfare of a corporation above human life you have fascism. If the reverse is true you have democracy. When the top 1% own more than the bottom 90% democracy becomes rather thin on the ground.

      Hug your nearest conspiracy theorist because he cares a lot more for you and your welfare than your puppet politicians or their corporate paymasters.

      'nuff said.

    5. @ Daniel Jones

      "We are always pre-primed". You use an argument that can never be wrong. If a government reacts with a Patriot Act type of legislation, you are vindicated. If they basically do nothing, then you claim that a news story is one of many government actions designed to brainwash the public into repressive laws. This logic guarantees that you always have a viable argument because there will always be these types of news stories and people will always be frustrated enough to ask if anything could have been and should be done. In the end, your ideas will continue as they were because your political formula has been devised to withstand any evidence to the contrary.

      If this was a lone wolf operation, any government official will be criticized by those who believe as you do as a fear monger if he mentions anything about lone wolf type killers. If those same government officials say nothing, they will be accused of attempting to lull us to sleep in order to further enslave us. Again, you never lose.

      You have claimed that we should be skeptical of all news stories. However, you are not really championing skepticism. You are advocating that we find the holes in every story, no matter how small and tenuous they may be, and then cry foul. There has never been a news story, an historical event, or even a personal story recounted among friends, that doesn't have its discrepancies. Since discrepancies exist, again, your theories will always be validated. In your mind you can never lose an argument because you have found the perfect formula to always be correct.

    6. @ Daniel

      I agree with you that the Corporations have become a huge social issue in the world. Some companies have committed despicable crimes and do not seem to have any conscience. It is imperative that they have greater restrictions on their operations, whether it be in business or government influence. This does not mean, however, that every incident involving violence or fraud around the world must be the result of corporate machinations. Ordinary people can do bizarre things when they have lost control of their mental faculties.

      Breivik targeted the people who he believed to be the problem; that is the socialist, labor party types who he felt responsible for the policies which allowed the Muslim immigrants into the country. He hated them. They were the traitors and a traitor is almost always hated more than even the enemy.

      There absolutely must be change in the world political system. It is an imperative. However, to cite these killings as the work of a black ops operation does not help change things. The average person will see those who hold these views as being a little eccentric and will not take them seriously.

      I don't think you and I are as far off in our basic philosophy as you would think. But, I will not allow preconceived ideas influence my reasoning ability. I have to see direct evidence, not patterns of behavior which may be as much interpretative as factual.

      Have a good day.

    7. In reply @ Jack

      Fair enough. I'd never accept anyones opinion without proof myself. That's the ultimate point of our discussions hopefully. It's about stimulating out of the box thinking and personal research. Admirable sentiments and I wish you well on your own road to enlightenment. :-)

      But try researching into Labor party's support for Palestine. It was an issue of note that came up just before the shooting. It may have relevance. I'm not yet decided myself. Need more data but it's more grist for the mill...

  46. Thank you for making completely obvious observations and explaining things like I am a small child Professor David Wilson!

    1. haha... It is that obvious isn't it, but still too cutting edge for CNN or Fox News no? And, I don't think of you as a small child Nwttp, actually I am not sure what you think. Vote Ron Paul ;)

      (NOTE: Everyone should vote for Ron Paul)

    2. Personally, I will vote Ron Paul, if he gets the nomination. If Romney or anyone else gets it, I'm gonna throw my vote away on whatever really long-shot there is. I've had enough of these phucking wars, had enough of this phucking spending, had enough of the phucking Fed, and certainly have had enough of Washington bullsh1t-as-usual...

      (NOTE: Tell that to FuxNews, why don't you? It's not something I need to hear. But, I'll grant you, there is a conspiracy...)

  47. Something is just not sitting right with me on the Norway shooting. The more you look at it, the vanity photos, the 1500 page manifesto, the slick movie you can watch online he supposedly made by himself, the whole thing seems produced. A little wag the dog smell going on here.

    Since the Norway Shootings, the new buzz word is "Lone Wolf" threat and is being used all the time in interviews by US President Obama and US Homeland Security. Too creep me out even more, all the new terrorist warning videos that have come out of Homeland Security have new bad guys & gals. They are domestic terrorists who are white, blonde, libertarians, and disgruntled with government policy. Pretty scary, the terrorists are no longer brown people in foreign lands of the oil rich Middle East.... they are Joe Six Pack.

    I just kind of know we are not getting the straight goods here. Maybe Breivik is a patsy/or co-opted for a Gladio type operation. Operation Gladio was a “strategy of tension” devised by the Intelligence community that employed terrorism – assassination and bombings – to discredit political opponents in Italy after WW2. I don't know, but I do know we are being handled on this in the media.

    I don't like this meet Joe Six Pack, domestic terrorist, that is being rolled out by Homeland Security before and after the tragic Norway murders. My point is, governments have a history of executing this type of event. In the days ahead, we should expect more false flag terror events in the USA like a Norway situation. I say that because it seems like they are preparing the public for it. These type of events will be used by the corporate media to portray opponents to: the bankster scams like the Federal Reserve; defense budget increases for "new" domestic terrorism; government draconian bills eviscerating what is left of the constitution.... as domestic terrorists.

    I guess my concern is that false flag attacks, followed by intense propaganda campaigns, are one of several methods used by governments to neutralize political opposition. This technique is also used as a form of coercion to scare the general public to make them give up freedoms in exchange for security. As you know, this technique is as old as Rome. Hey, it worked on 911.

    Watch the movie, see if you get that sensation of half truth's or that whiff of propaganda...

    1. Just going to comment on your first paragraph for now. I couldn't agree more there is no way he put all that stuff together, the pics, video, the manifesto (didn't know about the vid but I didn't watch much of the CNN coverage because it is ... well it is CNN, don't really need to elaborate on that I don't think) then put together a bomb, detonated it, drove 100 miles or whatever the distance was, caught a ferry and once on the island pulled off that brutal killing spree all without a hitch and did it all by himself. It is just way to much to believe and the general public as usual are going to buy whatever story they are fed. I understand what you mean when you say the whole thing isn't sitting well with you, the whole thing is just to slick and as with 9/11 evidence backing up what they want us to believe (and that should be kept under lock and key by the authorities for his trial and also not to taint potential jurers) appeared just a little to quickly and easily for my comfort level.

  48. what a monster. sick. My most heartfelt condolences to the victims and their families.

    It took police an hour to get to the Island after receiving a call for help? That's terrible. The news copter was there before the cops! I pray they house this guy in a jail full of angry muslim criminals who have their way with all of his orifices on a regular basis.

    And btw, those photos of Breivik wearing different uniforms (as a freemason, in a hazmat suit, as a scuba special forces soldier, and in the 'knights templar' uniform) are not real; they were made with Photoshop.

    1. The pics were photoshopped? Are you guessing this, or do you know for sure?

  49. So? he just had it with the labour party. but still i wanna know what he has to say, i hope to hear that.

  50. Out there is an undercurrent of disorder that the authoities have yet to come to terms with. We are so focused on the Islamist world that we forget of home grown terror. This will not be the last of these types of things. Right wing, left wing. Islam..and who knows who. Terror is only terror if you let it be terror. This is the price of a free society, sick people will harm others. If we change overly to stop them and take away all freedoms, we let them win.
    I will watch how a progressive society like Norway handles this. I agree with the PM statement, don't let this change who we are.

  51. Just like his father told in an interview, the guy should have just killed himself, not others.

    I especially appreciate parents who really think like that when their children have committed murders and slaughters of all sorts. Not this this cookie dough modern day "...but he's my child, i'll support him no matter what!" -bullshit.

  52. In other words.. the very smart, talented, gifted people are most likely to have killer minds such as ted bundy and etc.. big deal. this was torn apart during the 90s!

  53. This documentary stinks!

    The narrator tells us nothing, does nothing, except promote the official story.

    The comments and opinions by so-called experts who have never met, let alone interviewed Breivik are no more or less vaild than yours or mine. They claim "this what he thought" or was "thinking"; "this is how he was feeling" - what nonsense! This has more to do with their own thinking and feeling.

    Consider what we have:

    1. Janet Napolitano's "See something, say something" videos portraying all suspects as white 'middle class' males.
    2. A solitary white, 'middle class' male allegedly is solely responsible for Oslo's day of 'terror'.
    3. Obama gives a speech in which he says today's greatest threat is the "Lone Wolf". He repeats this "Lone Wolf" several times, then after these repetitions, refers to the Oslo events, then immediately ends with yet another reference to the "Lone Wolf".

    That is just preparatory, manipulative rhetoric, very obvious to anyone who actually listens to what is being said.

    The documentary, several times, highlighted the EDF which is an extreme anti-Muslim group giving the impression it is of a 'terrorist' nature - well, guess what, among white, middle-class Americans will be found folks who are rabid anti-Muslims, especially among the Christian evangelical ranks.

    The narrator suggests that Breivik, when arrested, did not conform to the pattern. That is misleading. Look at John Lennon's assassin's behaviour and that of several others - complete docility. Depends which pattern you choose as to whether or not he conforms to a pattern, doesn't it?

    We can expect more, to quote Obama, "Lone Wolf" attacks - and we will be expected to accept thems at face value, having been primed to do so.

    The narrator mentioned that this has been desctibed as Norway's 9/11. Really?
    I describe it as Norway's Oklahoma and Norway's Dunblane or Port Arthur.

    The intro text ends with: "By investigating this appalling crime, there is the hope that an atrocity like this can never happen again."
    Indeed. That's all we've ever been offered - hope. Always hope for tomorrow, never anything today. Elections are fought on hope and religions are maintained on hope, hope for the future, but today ... ?

    I conclude this is just another commercial for government's official story.

    1. Hope and faith are always demanded of the proletariat when the light of truth would expose the necessary deceptions which allow the few to control the many. "Abandon hope all ye who enter here"

    2. I agree. These points of considerations you make are what is making this Norway shooting hardly solved or answered in this documentary or the mainstream media. This whole thing has that "Wag The Dog" smell to it.

  54. A true monster!!!

  55. Donning a costume of a Templar Knight or a Free Mason, does not mean he was involved with the societies anymore than him donning his' distinguished Norwegian gentleman outfit makes him a gentleman...

  56. Just another Doc captializing on a recent current event. everything they said was already covered by the media. being an american Doc Junky I often gloss over these or take em with a grain a salt but its a slow day so whatev. i remember after 9 11 Nat geo channel had 6 Docs weeks after the attack alost non stop, better ones came out 5-6 year later and got better over time when real research was done. so i give a few years when a rly good Oslo attack doc comes out.

  57. sorry..not in the Europe

  58. Good to see they covered most of what I wrote, except for the Zionist part (of course).

  59. I have not viewed this documentary yet but wanted to say a few things first. This crime occurred in Norway they , the people and the media , have a different out look than Americans. They have a much lower recidivism rate than we do so I trust their judicial system. Again this documentary about a crime in Norway presented by an American company. The Norwegians would not create this movie because they don't want to glorify the killer.

  60. He was a Reich wing Zionist terrorist ZioNazi Judeo-fascist "Christian" who also was involved with the Freemasons. Anders Breivik was inspired by the same propaganda pushed on American television shows like this and Zionist/Neoconservative websites who spread vile hatreds towards Muslims. Regardless of his motives the guy was clearly a nut-case. Curiously the day before the shooting the camp held a Palestinian-Solidarity rally and a hit piece was posted on a right-wing Jewish website. There was comments on that forum saying 'somebody should kill these people' essentially then the next day low and behold the massacre happened.

    1. The whole Norway situation sounds like a bad hollywood script, a PSYOP. Particularly the way you put it.

  61. lets not give him any attention...the best way to hate him, is to ignore him! Cant blame anyone for this..police did the best they could, Norway is a small country where murders happen rarely. They could never be prepared for anything even close to this. Instead of blaming, it might be better just to except and move on.

    1. I agree with everything you said but the last part and even that was not really off the mark to me. I would only like to say that as part of accepting and moving on this horrible situation should be studied by the Gov and police and they need to learn from it. Hopefully as you said nothing even close to this ever happens again but in case something bad does happen in the future the police need to have a better way to deal with it. Like next time (god forbid) don't send everyone to the diversionary explosion and have people held back and ready to react to a second situation. Although having said that it is hard to fathom not getting every available form of help to those who need it at something like that explosion. So yes I kind of contradicted myself a bit but I am just thinking out loud I will leave it to those who are smarter and better informed on such things than I am to figure out (lol then I will sit back and comment on what I disagree with)

  62. The cops should have just shot him on site whether he was still armed or not. Now he is going to get the attention he wants and probably get to somehow at some point be able to spew his insanity in a forum, be it court or whatever, and you know the media will print every word of it thereby giving him one more victory in his crazy self enduced war. All the attention and coverage should be given to finding out how he was able to get away with his killing spree for so long and to make sure something like it never happens again along with and I think more importantly paying respects to the family and friends of those murdered and doing something (if this hasnt already been done there which I am sure it has to some degree) to not only honour these poor kids but to let everyone know who they were so they are more than just a picture and name in the paper. Tell their stories, who they were, what their dreams were and things like that.

    1. Well that would have been highly illegal Greg. It's up to the consumers to stop eating what they're fed, it's not up to the media to stop feeding them. Other than that I agree with you. It's really a shame and quite ironic that the media always asks "why" when the answer is, "to get attention" which is exactly what they get.

      To quote "Se7en" to get people's attention today you can't tap them on the shoulder you need to hit them in the side with a sledgehammer

    2. I know it would be illegal for the cops to just shoot him but deep down I would bet it is what most people would have wanted to happen. It would however (had it happened that way with little or no repercussions) it would obviously have set a dangerous precedent.

      You are correct in regard to the media but unfortunately the average consumer wants to see and hear all the gory details and far to many people take what is said on TV and believe it all to be the unbiased truth (this is why I come on here, you are more apt to run into people who don't just believe what they are told and they question it and in a lot of cases, I find it is often the same people making good points on the various docs I watch, have a perspective I had not come to on my own thereby teaching me something. Unlike some people (I am not meaning you by this so please don't take it that way) I understand I don't know everything and that I can learn from others even those who's opinion I may not agree with.

      I was reading some comments below and I am amazed at how many people think these kids or at the very least someone on the Island should have been armed. I for one do not want to live in a world where everyone carries a gun, yes I know someone can find statistics that may show places where people can carry weapons have lowered the crime rate since people were allowed to carry a concealed weapon.But my point still stands, that is not my idea of a world I want to live in. Actually the way things are now there are far to many places in the world I would not want to live in. I live in Canada where we are relatively safe (we have crime and psycho's too but are generally pretty safe) and it is far from a perfect Country but still one of the best places in the world to live. Lol sorry for another of my wordy comments but as I have said on other pages I start talking and do not know how to shut up.


      Hi Greg, you seem like a nice guy. Nothing wrong with having a revolver for self defense, just be responsible, real, and straight forward. A revolver is a tool to protect yourself. So if somebody, or more than one person, is trying to rob you; beat up while mugging you; or in this case murder you.... defend yourself. That's all it is my friend, a tool.

      It is interesting that the Norway Shooters chose a place where the victims would not be able to protect themselves, and could not run away. Also, that he dressed as an authority figure. Most people would submit to this authority figure.... a Police Officer.

      See Greg, sometimes you can't always depend on the Police Officer to protect you. It is just a tool...

  63.'s hard to believe someone would think that way and be considered sane, I wonder when his trial will be

  64. I don't understand why it took the police so long to get to the island. There were even other people on their own private boats that were circling the island helping victims before the police. I do agree with goughlewis a form of propaganda indeed yes pieces are missing to the story. My heart goes out to the victims.

    1. They were distracted by the bombing in Oslo. Remember this isn't
      American with it's heavily armed police forces roaming the nation. This is a peaceful nation. Yes I feel for the victims. I admire the way hey handled themselves on camera. We are used to seeing emotional outburst from victims.

  65. What a peice of s***!

    Religion sucks! We should kill the Bible and all other religious nonsense! Wait, let us recycle them into something useful.

    1. For those that missed the comment left in defense of religion, it sounded like this, "your mean and ugly, I know you are but what am I, what a stupid comment."

      See folks, we are winning and "spirituality" is currently taking the place of religion. We live in great times, for humanities futures sake.


  66. I don't know why I am feeling a little weird about this doc, but it really felt like a form of propaganda has been injected into it. I just don't think I am getting the real picture of what happened here. What about the second shooter? Several survivors talked about this dark haired shooter in a bullet proof vest with a handgun and an automatic machine gun?



    I don't know what it is, but something just is not sitting right here. Well, I can tell you one thing with certainty, it is a strong case for carrying a firearm for self defense at all times. Shot em all in a "de-armed" area, and it took the police 90 minutes to respond to "men with automatic rifles are shooting kids..." Nice... absolutely disgusting. Actually this whole event is disgusting, and they better not use this as an excuse to crack down on what is left over of civilian rights in the USA, since the great gutting of the constitution since the 911 false flag/stand down operation.

    Something just is not adding up here....

    1. i didnt know they saw someone else
      thats crazy

    2. Havent watched the doc yet as I like to read some of the comments about it first. It can at times give me a perspective on what I am watching that is different than the one I am forming (or the one I may be predisposed to using based on my life experience) while I watch it which can sometimes make the doc a little more interesting and get me to possibly think more while reading between the lines of the so called "official story". I hadn't heard of there being a possibility of more than one shooter (although it makes sense as that is a lot of people for one guy to kill) but I admit I haven't read a lot or watched a ton of coverage on this whole thing. You make some good points Gough and I think from reading some of the comments below (a lot of them are very nicely presented and bring up facts and opinions that run along the same lines as mine do) others agree there is more to the story than is being told, which as we all know is par for the course. Anyway just wanted to say this before I watched the doc

    3. Agree with you Gough. And In the UK this doc was advertised round the clock during every single commercial break complete with Norway flags revolving into Crusader like crosses in graveyard-like imagery. Even the music was hypnotic and the narration gave me a case of the creeps. This had Psy-ops written all over it.

      If I had to guess I'd say this is the much predicted shifting of the "terrorist" profile to the white guy who lives next door. They needed the foreign muslim scapegoat to set up the police state tyranny in the first place but now that infrastructure will be used against its intended victims all along - ie anyone who opposes the new corporate/fascist/banking controlled state.

      God help us all

    4. If you read more about the attacks you will see that Anders was both of the individuals, that he first appeared as a policeman, obviously not to draw suspicion, then removed his police uniform....policemen do wear bullet-proof vests, no?

    5. He was arrested in his police uniform, he was also not waring a dark haired wig. Something is not right with the Norway shooting, just can't put my finger on it.

      My concern is that propaganda is often tritely changed as the truth is exposed. The information will change conveniently to stay on message. The message is he was a "Lone Wolf" in the mainstream media like CNN, BBC, FOX News, etc. So now he is doing costume changes while shooting 76 teenagers. Well the police did take 90 minutes to respond to "men killing kids with Automatic rifles". I guess he could have changed costumes at least once.

      I don't think he was doing costume changes personally, but hey who knows, we are being handled. As they say, the first casualty in the war on terrorism is the truth.

  67. Well said, Daniel. And for those who have looked deeply into so-called "lone nut" politically motivated killings, what we have seen over and over are events are not as they have been made to appear by our mass media program(mer)s. Lone nut outsider = powerful, highly organized nuts on the inside, whose agenda always gets a powerful boost from the event, being opposite to that purported by the demonized, manipulated, mind-controlled provocateur (aka False Flag attack). Order out of chaos - they make the chaos and then bring in the predesigned order.


    1. So, what are you trying to say

    2. Vance, what Robert is saying is it might be an Operation Gladio type event, or an Operation Northwoods type event. Google those terms to find out. Make sure you are sitting down when you do.

  68. Horrifying, now are they going to class him as insane and put him into a mental home with the caveat of letting him out if they think he is cured and has regained his sanity?

    1. Guess it will be quite difficult for him to live anywhere in norway as a free man.
      And even in prison they are going to have to keep him isolated for the rest of his life.


    1. The Police took 90 minutes to respond to "men shooting kids with automatic rifles". Sound reasonable right? No hurry, what's the rush?

      "We have plenty of time, the shooters will still be there when our police yacht sails in. The choppers are a little to loud, they hurt my ears and I can't listen to Justin Beber on my iPod...", says the Police Officer.

      This whole Norway shooting is weird and not adding up.


  70. Narcistic psychopath.
    Jail for life, and throw away the key.

  71. I am by no means trying to justify this man's actions but I do not think he is portrayed inhis totality. I also think that there is more to this story than we are told. This guy has good connections and he did not keep them a secret.
    As a person who has myself studied criminology, I also think that the Criminologist's analysis is way too flat and simplistic ... a lay man would have done a better job.

  72. That face, it's scary how simmulair it looks like someone else that is media horny. (The picture you see each time when the title shows up.)

  73. Wow, this is damn fast that a documentary is made. Go Discovery Channel.

    Stays a horrible event which should have never occured.

  74. Norway has the most guns per capita in Europe - but that island was a gun - free zone. Is that a coincidence? He couldnt have performed that shooting spree anywhere else in Norway because the citizens would have defended themselves and not had to wait 2 hours for police to arrive. But no doubt this will be used to disarm the rest of the population. That's the first Psy-ops rat I smell. There are others but that will do for now...

    1. Why two hours? That island is very close to the main land.Accessable in minutes with a speed boat or helicopter. The bomings at Oslo are not a good enough excuse

    2. Why did the State wait 2 hours to intervene? Why did the London Police allow looting in the London Riots for the first 2 nights? It gives them the ammunition they require to use the incident to further limit basic freedoms. Textbook Psy-ops propaganda with full media complicity. Like this doc. It came out too quickly, attempts to justify and shape public opinion and is positively asinine in its one man nut job pop psychology. Give me a break. It was like watching Osama's face placed next to the Twin Towers when one of them was still standing. Times like this I can only think of Donald Sutherland's brilliant analysis of the JFK coverup in Oliver Stone's JFK.

    3. Can you pls post a link?


    5. @eatmeatraw Just to be pedantic, in Norway they don't make 911 calls. They call 112, 113 or 110.

    6. @q_bit: Yes, You are quite right - you are pedantic. I know what we dial. Just making the message easier to comprehend in translation. Other info is factual. (I was at Storøya).

    7. So what are you insinuating here? That a bunch of minors aged between 14 and 25 should be taking guns to a summer camp on a remote island which is a well known holiday destination and has been crimefree ever since. That would be the way to go in your opinion? Makes more sense if that one sicko never had the chance to even buy a gun. Then stuff like this can't occur. There's no conspiracy theory that's gonna debunk that simple and logical fact!

    8. Criminals never fail to find their guns. But if we're not talking "conspiracy" here then we'll have to call it all one heck of an almighty series of coincidences then that every Western State is engaged in the same ultimately fascist behavior. I love freedom and democracy - I just don't see very much of the real thing happening anywhere it should.


      18-24 are not minors.. im 24

      not everyone needed to be armed, just a few of the more mature ones. its the only way to prevent or mitigate situations like this. responsible adults should get comfortable with the idea of carrying a weapon in case some ish go down... im begining to realize this myself as I pay more and more attention to the news.

      i will be open carrying soon...... i will not be caught with my pants down and when people around me start falling.. i will gladly be the equalizer.

    10. If I was going to go on a shooting spree, I'd probably pick a place where nobody had guns. That sort of makes sense, doesn't it? I love how any planning that goes into an attack is immediately latched onto as 'proof' of a 'conspiracy' by people like you.


      Seriously, your arguments are bad and you should feel bad for making them. And did you seriously reference a movie as a piece of valid information? Wow. Just. Wow.

    11. A movie, might I add, by the same media you seem to be saying is in on this worldwide conspiracy. So...the media is bad, except when it tells you what you want to hear, then it's trustworthy?

    12. Here's a valid point Justin - Reuters and Associated Press are both owned by the same holding/front companies - so essentially all news is "manageable" if they want to manage it. Who owns them? The Rothschilds who also own all the central banks and charge us all for printing our own money. And let's not even get started on the global banking heist and "austerity measures" we're all forced to endure now. They also own Nature and Science magazine - thereby influencing the entire direction of scientific research on the planet because if you're not published there you don't get funded. Located in the above explanation is all of the seeds for a truly global conspiracy/cartel/cabal/racket - call it what you will. Knee jerk anti-conspiracy theory rebuttals are a short cut to rational cool headed thinking. I look at both sides, including yours and I just try to bring another and very valid view point to counteract a well funded corporate mindset that deflects attention away from the central banks we should be looking at. And we should should stop allowing ourselves to be divided and conquered by emotive issues when we all agree on the same basic principle of humanity, love and basic kindness.

    13. Norway does not hold the top rank of guns per capita in Europe. Nor has there been any talk of disarming the population, they have talked about changing some of the gun laws, but nothing is dessided as of now. I personaly dont se the problem with denying ordenary people the right to own military grade weapons as they are talking about (he used a close relative to the M14), they are after all made for the sole purpose of killing other human beings. In Norway you have to be a member of a gun club to say, own a glock 17, and i think that is a good thing. We dont have to look any further than to our neighbourghs in the west, America, to see the consecuense of a people protecting themselves with lethal force where they see it as necessary. We own our weapons to hunt, not because we belive we will find ourselves in a deadly situation requiring to take another life. I dont see how it would have been any different if he had attacked a zone not considered gun free, other than that the police may have been faster on the scene. If you are going to use a high caliber hunting rifle (like a 308, wich is what the avrage hunter in norway owns) in a high populated area you better be sure to hit your target, our you could end up ruining someone else's day within a radius of a couple of kilometers.

    14. Nothing you said addressed my point: You are willing to listen to the media when it props up your distorted worldview, but not when you perceive that it's lying to you? What kind of sense does that make?

    15. Wow justin you really dont like the JFK analogy. Thats all it was. An analogy. I referred to the sentiments expressed in an excellent scene in a movie but didnt quote it as fact. Many people here will get exactly what I mean by that character's description of how a psy-ops story is spread through the media in a pre-packaged and highly glossy way. Analogies and well known vignettes save time in these situations. And art has a funny way of imitating life sometimes. Christ, read some Jules Verne for a bit of pre-sentience personified in text albeit not media. Peace brother :-)

    16. No, Finland has.

    17. Actually Serbia has the most guns per capita in the world and the Switzerland. even so. very tragic what happen there

  75. A truly horrific event. My heart sincerely goes out to all the victims, their families and the people in Norway.

    I wish there was a way to prevent senseless slaughter like this but I just can't see how it will be possible in the near future.

    1. Destroy religion and understand the insanity of it.