Monthly Archives: June 2012

Anders Behring Breivik Trial – Friday June 15 (Day 38)

9:01 Commander Anders Behring Breivik enters the courtroom.

Today we get more of the same from Husby and Sørheim. Breivik prefers to call them Asbjornsen and Moe, after the 19th century collectors of fairy tales.

Anders Behring Breivik Court Transcript 2012-06-15 Live Report  


Husby suggests that Breivik should be treated for his supposed psychosis before an assessment can be made about any personality disorders. They maintain that Breivik is completely dysfunctional, incapable of holding a job, and that there is a high risk of recurrence.

They cite Breivik’s believe that he decided who lives and dies, and knows what other people think, as evidence for a delusional thought universe. Fact is that Breivik only claimed that he was good at reading people due to working in sales for many years, not that he literally knew what people thought. They claim they are convinced that Breivik  believes in the KT, meaning that the KT is either real or a delusion, they exclude the possibility that the KT is a carefully constructed lie.

The subject of neologisms comes up again, that Breivik invented words, according to Asbjornsen and Moe Breivik makes up terms left and right, according to other experts most words are unusual but existent, while the non existent terms are comprehensible.

Husby claims the compulsive politically correct reactions from the audience in the court room, primarily by  Category B, C, and D traitors, to be indicative of Breivik’s statements being out of touch with reality. Half an hour later she claims that the difference between the first and second report is because Breivik behaved differently during the earlier interviews with them, none of which were recorded.

Lippestad begins an interesting line of questioning, at one point asking if Asbjornsen and Moe see a notable difference between Breivik warning of a Muslim takeover and warning of a takeover by a hedgedog. Sørheim confirms that in principle it wouldn’t make a difference. Amusing.

Lippestad asks them why they failed to consider the fact that Breivik presented himself as a foot soldier during one police interrogation included in the psychiatric report, or that Breivik only estimates his chance to become a future regent of Norway to be 0.5%. Sørheim answers evasively stating he doesn’t remember, even though it comes straight from his own psychiatric report, claiming his conclusions are backed up by their unrecorded conversations with Breivik.

Sørheim states that no one has the right to decide who should live and die. I don’t think he realizes he presents a political statement as fact, making it indisputable that he’s declaring Breivik insane because of ideological differences. 

Lippestad asks if it is a bizarre delusion if four men meet in London and agree that Islam is a threat to Europe, or if the highly specific targeting of Category B and C traitors makes a difference. Naturally he doesn’t get a straight forward answer to this.

Lippestad asks how someone incapable of supporting himself can move out and live by himself on a farm. The response is that they are primarily concerned with Breivik’s social functioning.

This line of questioning continues for a while. At one point they conclude that Breivik’s primary motive is violence, that his ideology comes second. Heroism is a better explanation in my opinion, and it doesn’t discredit the ideology. 

17:40 At last Commander Breivik gets to address the court:

Firstly, I’ve talked a lot with Husby and Sørheim and they are nice people and we had good conversations. The intention of my calls were to give highly detailed descriptions of the content of the compendium and the Knights Templar organization. I thought to use it as an opportunity because I expected the report would be leaked. I figured it’d be smart to be as detailed as possible.

But it was a big mistake because I provided a large volume of information that could be abused if they wanted to, and that’s exactly what happened. I gave a lot of information. The person described in the first psychiatric report might be insane and in need of medication, except that the person isn’t me. I refute many of the allegations in the 38 page report that you’ve received.

I won’t go into detail right now, just refer to it. The conclusion is that I believe 80 percent of the content to be fictional. Then we come to, well, what’s in the manifesto, not in their report. To make a point. It is already in 2002 that I’m supposedly severely functionally impaired, though after that period I’ve ran a company with an employee, and have worked with the board of a company that was sold.

Then I started a company that had great financial success. At the age of 24 years I had an employee and a fortune of over one million. The following year I had five to six employees. In this period Husby and Sørheim defined my life as a failure. Earnings can be verified by the police. From autumn 2007 onward, I was described as a total failure.

For this period they give a wrong impression. They allege four coffee visits a year, but this is actually as many as twenty. At least twenty a year with friends, on average. I notice they toned it down slightly, which is understandable given the circumstances. In addition, I had many meetings through the Masonic Order and was involved in two shooting clubs. I knew people in all these clubs and I socialized and talked with them.

I was thus in two shooting clubs that I participated in, I worked out three to four times a week in the Elixia Fitness Club with friends, so I was quite normal regarding social contacts. In addition, there was partying with friends, cafe and restaurant visits and online contact. Not to mention 8,000 Facebook contacts and my extensive list of contacts on the Internet who assisted with the development of the compendium, and must therefore be seen as a self employed author. There are quite a few of those in Norway.

I am portrayed as totally retarded and this is a completely inaccurate impression. They have purposely distorted reality, let me look through two days worth of notes.

Huby and Sørheim’s main contention is I’m a dreamer who is driven by violent fantasies and that 7/22 has nothing to do with ideology. They disagree that I’ve become politically radicalized. They show that they are not familiar with the contents of the compendium, which emphasizes that violence must always be the last resort. I have never been violent prior to July 22, police questioning of friends confirms this.

In addition, I didn’t even fight back the times I was attacked by Muslims during my childhood. Then we have the period after July 22, I’ve been around roughly two-hundred people in the past ten months, and have never displayed aggression. This can be verified.

I have no intention to change this in the future. I have stressed ad nauseam that the action of July 22 was an isolated case. They claim that I enjoy violence, which does not match my behavior over a lifetime. There is a reason I had to use military dehumanization strategies and go through years of mental training to use violence.  I taught myself to see the enemy as inferior before I could carry out such cruel acts because it is contrary to my nature.

If I enjoyed and fantasized about violence there wouldn’t have been a need to drug myself with chemical stimulants in order to execute July 22. If all I do is dream about violence, why did I spent four years of my life to write a political manifesto? There are six sources that give a basic description of me. Among others there are police interrogations, the compendium, and testimonies in court. Of all these sources Husby and Sørheim are the only ones who differ.

The foundation of the report by Husby and Sørheim is my mother’s explanation. This is problematic because she is not a reliable witness due to her health. I ask the judge to ignore it.

The main argument for Husby and Sørheim is that I look at myself as a judge who decides who lives or dies. The armed resistance on behalf of a revolutionary group or as a so-called lone wolf is a universally known guiding principle of revolutionary thought.

In other words, any so-called terrorist who kills someone acts as a judge and decides that the person must die. Examples of this are the more than 50 daily executions around the world as a result of politically motivated violence, mainly Islamic. More than 15,000 terrorist attacks have been carried out resulting in deaths.  [list of terrorist groups and terrorists including Peter Mangs and Beate Zschäpe]. There are many others. All of these appointed themselves judge over life and death. Does that mean that all so-called terrorists are paranoid schizophrenic?

The answer is no. For so-called terrorists the killing of the target is a medium. The goal is to deliver a message. Then the judges consider whether the political message is rational or not.

I’m on to my last point. The court has previously been informed that Sørheim and Husby had contact with the forensic commission.  I mentioned earlier that I thought that the Commission should be disqualified, but it has now become known that Husby was the superior of two members between 96 and 97, and that Sørheim was the superior of six of the seven members.

What has emerged in the wake of Aftenposten, is that Torgeir Husby, as late as in 2009, referred to Melle in the DRC as “one of my best friends.” This quote is taken from Dagbladet. This supports the claim that the DRC should be completely disqualified in this case.

Thanks, that was all.

17:58 Breivik finishes his address.

I disagree with Breivik that the first report describes someone who is insane, just a gaming addict who failed in life, with Asbjornsen and Moe jumping to conclusions.

It can’t be stated often enough that Breivik is a hero who sacrificed everything in an effort to save his people from an almost inevitable annihilation. When all this is over a statue of Breivik should be erected on Utoya, and unless the Cultural Marxists destroy the weapons, people from all over the continent will come to see the gun and rifle that executed 67 traitors and started the European Revolutionary War.

Breivik’s Glock 34 pistol named Mjolnir: Thor’s Hammer
Breivik’s Ruger Mini-14 carbine named Gungnir: Odin’s Spear
Advertisements

Anders Behring Breivik Trial – Thursday June 14 (Day 37)

8:59 Commander Breivik is brought into court.

The first psychiatric report will be today’s focus.

The court is informed that the section on Breivik’s childhood when he was 4 years old will not be read in court. This section has also been censored in leaks of the first psychiatric report and second psychiatric report, making this the only part of Breivik’s life the system has managed to completely censor.

9:24 Torgeir Husby and Synne Sørheim take the witness stand.

They start out by claiming they’re mainstream psychiatrists. They admit knowing little about history and politics. I think it’s an interesting thing to consider that psychologists get to decide on which perceptions of reality are normal, which perceptions are not, and that they get to do so with little scrutiny. It’s important to realize that laws are mostly meaningless and judges can do whatever they want as long as it doesn’t get them in trouble.

Sørheim mentions that Breivik said that KT is the highest authority in Norway when it comes to the mandate to kill. Breivik’s rejection of the system remains a difficult concept for many.

13:05 Husby reads out a section about the interview with Breivik’s mother that was censored in the first psychiatric report:

The police informed the committee that observandens mother the night of 07.23.2011 was admitted to Deacon home hospital. There are Husby department and was on vacation at that time. The experts returned from his vacation and it was prepared for the komperentes section chief that he would not participate in meetings where the full interest rate was discussed, it was also clarified that the experts Husby should not have access to patient records.

The expert Sørheim took a few days before the call to your doctor and through, he asked if she was willing to engage in conversation with the experts. The doctor reported back that komporenten was positive. The conversation took place at the office at Husby Diamkoonhjemmet. Komportenten was informed of his situation as a physician at Diakonhjemmet, and that he had no access to komporentens journal. Komporenten had no objections to this and was willing to call.

Komparenten met the experts alone. The conversation was of three hours duration. So begins the conversation. Komparenten said initially that she looked forward to the conversation because she thinks psychiatry is interesting. She said there had been a strain to be observandens mother. She was sad and upset over what she describes as insincere journalism. He was a planned child, and she previously had a daughter from a previous relationship.

It was a breach between father and observanden after one and a half years. Complete rate is not aware that it should be psyskisk disease observandens family on both mother and father’s side. The family consists of father, mother and half sister. Observanden said she had the right to use apartment observanden age of 18. It was observanden about three and a half years they moved to the apartment on Lower Silk Straw. Complement interest rate can not remember that it was associated with a special concern in observandens behavior in childhood.

She says it was because the court Breivik’s father wanted the boy to move to them. When we were in a period of SSBU. Observanden thrived. He began in Smestad school at the usual time. He was a good student, had friends and good neighbors, and it was a very good time. He was a kid it was easy to have good conversations with. In 1-6. class, it was never mentioned that he had academic or behavioral difficulties. There was no need for additional education or measures. He began at Rice middle school. There was nothing special, went with the newspaper and made it for many years. She knew that everything was in order and did not hear anything either.

Komparenten says observanden during adolescence were long and thin. This could be a complex for him. After being shown around the gym of his sister six years older, he began to exercise regularly. He trained just right, not true “rambo” as in winter. She was asked if he changed his circle of friends. She says she does not remember, but she remembers that he once was arrested for tagging. He began to buy spray cans and tag the age of 14, we were several parents who tried to reveal the purchase of spray boxes. So called police and said they had taken him. He got away with three thousand dollars in fines and community service.

She adds that he had to pay their savings to pay the fine. His father found out and was angry. He slammed the door to Breivik then. When Breivik was four years they moved to at. Half-sister had left home and need less space. After finishing school began observanden the Oslo Handel. The experts say observanden says he went to Hartwig Nissen school. This is how the mother is not correct. She says she remembers little from this period because she was seriously ill. Observanden moved to a commune in Frogner. Komparenten says she thinks it will go well in Oslo Handel before observanden came home and said he would drop out of school.

She remembers that he said had enough experience and would start for themselves. Komparenten says she was upset that he left school before graduating from high school. She was anxious and very upset and thought he had been so obstinate. Half that what he says to the police is a lie. He has not been in 20 countries. Half the time, remembers his mother that he worked in the Acta. He would save money and took night shifts as well. He started the company Behring and NN and perceptive think it worked well. They had offices and desks in the basement, but orders have colored and they had to close. He was doing something else. So he got a fight-owned and was going to make fake diplomas for customers over the Internet. Komporenten tells her after an operation in 1995 … (…) He was incredibly kind and caring, she says. This was why he sought and received deferment of military service.

As far as she knows the extension granted several times until he was finally discharged. Komparenten was asked if she knew that he was politically involved in the FRP. She knew where he stood politically, but there was no burning interest. She said she had a boyfriend who observanden had a close relationship. In recent years he has been so strange moral. Had ideas that one should not have sex outside of marriage and stuff. He was so kind and always thought of me, he helped me with everything possible at the time and was outstanding. In 2002 he moved from collective to an apartment.

Komparenten says he still ran with diplomas, but it was a Republican who had caught it and he had to stop it. It went well at first, and he rented offices in the center. Complete Interest says she washed observandens apartment in recent years in Tidemann Street. Experts question how this happened. “Boys at that age is not particularly to clear and clean so I offered me.” Observanden was during the time he lived alone more and more inside. He was doing things that are not carried out. Komparenten said observanden had between 15-16 to 21-22 years several girlfriends. They lasted briefly, but it was sweet girls.

As far as she knows have not had any observant boyfriend since 2001. When I asked, he said he was not ready to establish himself. Her mother says it was she who suggested that the observant could move home to her. I thought that it might be good for him to stay home and save money. He was very busy in front of your PC. The latter firm was declared bankrupt. This mother knows the circumstances, he had still some money left when the firm was liquidated. He would take some sabbatical. She was completely panicked and thought it was forjævlig. Observant asked her to quit whining, and he never contacted Nav. She says that observant almost was in his room, and he wanted to lie in bed in the morning, but when I pulled him up. He would write a book. (…) She saw him as polite, except that he isolated himself in the room.

Observanden stated that he would write a history book in English. She saw her son’s involvement in writing as abnormal. He was a normal boy from 2006, but then he changed it. Most of all he changed in 2010. He was sometimes angry if he was interrupted. He became more and more introverted. He wrote a book that would be about Norway, the world and world view, thought komparenten. She saw him as eventually abnormally intense. He said I voted Labor, but I have voted Progress with help from him.

From 2010, he was totally weird. He said I had to sneeze and would not come into the room to me. He was strict. Komparenten says she does not remember when it started but observanden said even he was not so pretty anymore. He began to talk about plastic surgery and new teeth. In the autumn of 2010 he said that the book was finished. He went to Germany where he attempted to sell it at a book fair. From winter it went too far komparenten says. He stood and let out all about politics. He was quite beyond and believed everything he said, joking. Komparenten are seldom able to give examples of how observanden was.

I felt the pressure, both companionship and contact with him were changed. We had had so much fun together, now it was just politics. He could not have a suitable distance to me anymore, would not come out, or sat beside me. One time he kissed me on the cheek. It was so violent. I started to annoy me over to his way. She says that observant the first year were growing concerned to avoid infection. He accused me of talking to many who could infect us. He ate the food in their room and handed the dishes in the door. He walked with his hands over his face and a period, he used a face mask before. She thought more often that his son was very strange and uncomfortable. I apologized and thought that he would soon be better.

In autumn 2010 she responded that he had gone il purchase of what he described as a bulletproof case. She grew what he wanted with it. He said that it was in case someone broke into his car. He was very passionate about it. She wondered much of what was in his room. He bought a shotgun and a rifle that also stood in his room. She told him that he could not stay at home with so much weaponry. She said he repeatedly put on what he termed as survival gear, and he said it was the hunting test.

Komparenten tells of observanden during the past year would speak of an impending civil war and komparenten could not. He spoke loudly and intensely I tried to avoid those topics. Komparenten says that just before Christmas 2010, a mass mail to observanden with bags heavy as lead. I wondered greatly and filled cellar. I found two backpacks with stone door in the spring of 2011 and four huge bins with lids behind them. Komparenten says she was angry and sour when she asked what he was going. Mother remembers observanden went in the red uniform jacket with emblems. Komparenten thought, “Now I give up, he does so many strange things.”

The experts ask if she ever thought her son had been sick, or changed the way she did not know him again. – Ever since 2006, but the worst from 2010. He has lived in a dream world. He talked about Kristain 4 and the leader and everything. I thought that if he began to be completely crazy. I thought there must be something wrong with his head. She says that observant began to train, but that seemed excessive and totally rambo. He supplements in black bags in their room. In April 2011 he said he wanted to be a farmer. He was renting a farm. She stood surprised that he would become a farmer, but was glad that he moved out of the apartment.

May 7 he rented a car and was moving all of Rena. She looked forward to visiting him, but it did not. She met observanden in Oslo 2 June 2011. Nor when she received confirmation that she could come and visit. He was in contact with her ​​several times before he came to her the day before the attacks. He lied and cheated on me, she says, crying. She denies that she has seen him as a sad, she has never heard him talking aloud to himself. He should have had the sound on your PC very loud at times, but turned down when she asked him about it. He was very interested in sounds and talked a lot about it. He also talked about that he was afraid that the liver fails, something komparenten not understand. He was also concerned about spiders when he lived on the farm. He said that oozed from them and that it was a spider’s hell. She describes another phone call where he said that there had been an undercover agent into the yard that would take pictures.

She thinks the stories sounded strange. Komparenten says in conclusion, looking back that observanden must have been insane so different as he was, but said: “I ​​do not think like that can happen, I think that I have not yet.
13:30 Husby is finished.

Sørheim mentions that Breivik invented the term ‘Suicidal Humanism’. I personally quite like the term as Humanism appears to function as a pacifier to keep people from taking action, making it inherently suicidal.

Breivik confirms that he didn’t join the military service so he could take care of his mother who was seriously ill at the time. Breivik regrets this in retrospect as it would have given him valuable skills and knowledge. It should be noted that Breivik states in 2083 that he didn’t join the army because he rejects the system, but this is a strategical error in my opinion as we need as many militant nationalists in the army as possible to prevent the system from establishing a military dictatorship.

It reflects positively on Breivik’s sense of honor and loyalty that he took care of his mother, and the same goes for his mother confirming that he had several girlfriends before taking an oath of celibacy and dedicating his life to the cause in 2001.Sørheim starts summing up a list of statements by Breivik that supposedly proves that he is psychotic. Some statements are taken out of context, all in all there is little that is particularly strange or a clear sign of psychosis.
This nonsense continues until 18:05. Commander Breivik is not allowed to make a comment.

18:05 The court is adjourned.

Anders Behring Breivik Trial – Wednesday June 13 (Day 36)

9:02 Commander Breivik is brought into the courtroom.

Today we’ll have one witness.

9:05 Karl Heinrik Melle takes the witness stand, he’s head of the psychiatric group RMK.

The RMK reviews written psychiatric statements submitted to the court. Melle mentions that Husby had been the superior of two of the members, and that Sørheim was the head of the RMK group at one point in time.

This seems like a conflict of interest, but we weren’t expecting a fair trial anyways. The first psychiatric report was approved by the group, and the second psychiatric report was rejected. The second report should be re-submitted at one point, but if it’s rejected again the judges might use this as justification to  only consider the first report and declare Breivik insane.

Melle is hard to follow and rarely says anything interesting or insightful during the four hours he’s in the witness stand.

Melle clarifies his committee found fault with the manner in which Breivik was diagnosed with a personality disorder in the second report. He continues to argue that the first report confirms a psychosis, and that three weeks of observation where Breivik showed no symptoms does not technically disprove anything.

Melle confirms that the entire RMK team considered Breivik psychotic after reading the first report. Breivik probably regrets not having asked Sørheim for writing tips after hearing that. 

14:39 Commander Breivik addresses the court.

Just a short one .. I will not comment on Husby and Sørheim’s report, I have done so before. But a note to Melle. According to him, they claimed I only planned for a couple of years, after losing touch with reality. It is not true that I started planning in 2009, as in the original report. So it does not add up.

When it comes to statistics or general information that the forensic commission should have access to, it shows that internationally there are no Islamic militants who are sentenced to compulsory psychiatric treatment. What is clear is that the DRC lacks expertise in the assessment of politically motivated violent men.

And when the DRC lacks expertise in the so-called terrorist mentality it’s their duty to obtain information about it. Since they have no reports about it, it is natural to obtain English-language information about militant Islamic violence, the militant nationalist’s psyche is very similar. The DRC chose not to make themselves familiar with this, it was a mistake. This should be recognized by the DRC. They lack expertise in the area. They must recognize that they lack expertise in the reports of the political-militant psyche. They should also recognize that they are still disqualified.

Sørheim has had a close relationship with 6 of 7 commission members, Husby had a close relationship with 2 of 7. And is it really so dangerous to acknowledge this and that they are disqualified? “If there is dissent, it will be chaos.” That’s a quote from the meeting DRC had. Is not that kind of rhetoric, a way to push for consensus? My question is, it Melle who have come to this? But he has gone now.

14:42 The court is adjourned.

So you want to have a terrorist penpal?

Will I get in trouble if I write Breivik?

Are you stupid enough to write about your chosen path of joining the militant nationalist crusade?  Then yes, you will get in trouble.

It’s best to assume a worst case scenario: getting flagged.  This can have consequences for your career (especially if you work in the public sector) and family life.  If you simply wish to express your support to Breivik, I’d suggest doing so anonymously, by not providing a return address.  In this scenario you can be relatively free in how you express yourself in your letter. If you are established, self reliant, and willing to defy the system regardless of the personal consequences, or wish to assist Breivik and engage in non-violent activism then give your full details, and expect a reply.

It’s also possible that your letter gets leaked to the press, the chance of this happening is higher for letters that contain criminal content and have a copy of it given to the police, as more people will have access to it.

Will the Norwegian authorities put me on a black list?

If you include your name and address with your letter you most likely will. Norwegian authorities have made it a priority to deport all foreign militant nationalists that support Breivik and have a criminal record.

It’s unclear if the Norwegian authorities will contact your government for writing a letter to Breivik, they most certainly will if they believe it contains unlawful content.

Are you underage?

Then you likely live with your parents and are forced to write from your home address; this is very undesirable. The system loves intimidating minors and might take you in for questioning and / or confiscate your computer. Make sure your computer doesn’t have anything on it you’d rather not explain to a police officer, with a little luck you’ll get it back in one piece.

It’s best to protect your reputation until you are established in the world.  Being designated as a far right supporter can affect your future options, both as a professional or as an activist (no indigenous resistance/anti-marxist/anti-islamist organization can afford a link with Breivik at this point).  Your parents may face repercussions as well.  Instead, focus on increasing your future earning potential and gaining influence, get involved with moderate organizations, or form your own.  And of course you can always send an anonymous letter.

Are you a girl or woman that is in love with Breivik?

You should know this is perfectly natural, I encourage you to declare your admiration and love for Breivik.  Publicly if possible, especially if you’re cute.  Men need to know that women admire militant nationalists.  The Jihadists have 70 virgins waiting for them, let our guys be confident that they can look forward to having a few female penpals, or even a hot prison wife who will worship and revere them.  Writing a run of the mill love-letter is low risk as the authorities will label you as just another emotionally confused female.

Are you a serial-killer fan, an angry life-hating self-mutilator, or want to help him find God?

Feel free to write in your diary instead.

Do I need to include Norwegian return postage?

This will greatly increase your odds of receiving a reply, though it can be tricky to get your hands on Norwegian stamps. All monetary gifts will be confiscated with the exception of stamps.

Is it ok if I write my letter in English?

Yes, Breivik will receive letters that aren’t written in Norwegian. It is however best to write your letters in English so Breivik doesn’t rely on a potentially erroneous translation by the prison authorities. Breivik in fact suggests to learn English for international correspondence if you don’t speak the language.

Do I need to give a return mailing address in order for Breivik to write me back?

Use the astral realm of the cultural conservative. Pure ethereal thought energy will transmit mail message.

Will Breivik write me back?

Hopefully!  But it takes a long time.  Make sure to share the interesting tidbits with the Breivik Report if you do get a reply!

What is the mailing address of the prison that Anders Behring Breivik is in?

Anders Behring Breivik
Postboks 150
1332 Østerås
Norway

Anders Behring Breivik Trial – Tuesday June 12 (Day 35)

9:00 The court is set.

Today five witnesses are scheduled to testify.

9:03 Randi Rosenqvist is the first witness, she observed Commander Breivik in Ila prison. She wrote three reports that are available on the resource collection.

She says Breivik is an exemplary well behaved prisoner. She does not believe Breivik to be psychotic, and compares Breivik’s mindset to the one of a member of a sect.

She says she was concerned about Breivik’s strong personality, and warned prison employees against being manipulated by Breivik. She says that contact with like-minded individuals is an important component of the radicalization process, which makes it likely that Breivik had contact with others ultra-Nationalists.

Rosenqvist argues that there’s a rational component to the belief that killing 77 is a small sacrifice for saving Europe and compares Breivik to a general who has to make the same kind of decisions. It appears she’s a conservative and taking a less political correct stand than other witnesses.

She doesn’t speculate about the different conclusions of the 1st and 2nd report. It’s my insight that political correctness was at an all time high following 7/22, creating the environment that allowed to declare Breivik insane.

She brings up the fact that no Jihadist has been accused of being psychotic. This is not surprising as under Cultural Marxism it’s the most powerful group, white males, who must be deconstructed as part of the multicultural experiment. It’s important to distinguish between genuine freedom fighters like Breivik, and those that seek to subdue Muslims as part of the multicultural experiment. As such Breivik has further destabilized the system by forcing authorities to focus on oppressing white males instead of stabilizing society by oppressing radical Islam. So far Breivik’s polarization strategy is working extremely well.

Rosenqvist repeatedly states that Breivik acted out of a sense of necessity, to save Europe, and that long term visions are uncommon in people suffering from a psychosis. The warning of a coming civil war is something the court has tried hard to oppress, and few witnesses have dared to rationalize Breivik’s actions.

She criticizes the first psychological report for not diagnosing Breivik individually making it unlikely the conclusion was reached independently by both psychologists. She confirms it’s rare that two reviews have different outcomes.

11:24 Breivik addresses the court.

Thank you. I am glad that Rosenqvist confirms that I am not insane. When it comes to future medication, it is unfortunately not possible to medicate militant nationalism. (…) Perhaps the forensic commission shall consider it again. When it comes to dress in white and uniform, I included this in the propaganda strategy for rational reasons, as a propaganda strategy. My remarks about water boarding were predominantly intended as a joke, it was not because I actually believed it existed in Norway. I was aware on July 23 that water boarding was not used in Norway. If I have used it in retrospect, it was as a joke. When it comes to description of my daily mental state, I used the term “morale”, not “spark of life.”

So this is not the authority of an organization with a stamp and signature. But this is something all revolutionaries use in one form or another. When the prosecutor uses the word “authority”, it is a very deliberate choice of words. It is the legal justification. The militant nationalist side uses the right to prevent the ethnic cleansing of their group as a justification.

Marxists use another justification. When Che Guevara and Fidel Castro took over Cuba they had their own legitimization in their struggle. Militant nationalists have another. This is not a case of someone being authorized by the organization, or having a general legitimization  In the case of the KT network, I said that it is not a large network, and I only had contact with six people. There has been no change in that area and I did not say I had contact with more than those six.

I hoped that Rosenqvist would not address the issue of Ila, because she thinks I accused her of leaking information to the media. She wrote an article in Aftenposten about this. What happened was that I communicated with her and someone else in that period. There was some information that came to my attention and I passed this on to my lawyer. My lawyer in turn wrote a letter to Ila about it and she has felt it necessary to take this up with the Director. So I tried to avert the extremely minor incident by asking her to talk it over with me. I have not manipulated or lied. I regret that the situation arose.

There have been some erroneous claims. Regards the allegations of conspiracy theories, it is not called a theory when it is documented. The fact that Norway is a multi-ethnic society, and the people had no say in this, is documented. To say that my worldview is a delusion is a display of the prosecution’s arrogance.

Those who choose to call me a terrorist and mass murderer only show that they are ignorant. Bejer Engh, a beautiful Nordic woman, and Holden, a great Nordic man, should acknowledge that Nordics should defend their genetic heritage. When you insinuate that no one should be allowed to show me sympathy, it is an ideological statement.

11:33 Breivik finishes his address, and is reprimanded for talking about the prosecution.

Breivik appears to over rationalize the legitimization of his authority. I have only one thing to say:

Anything that is right for a group to do is right for one person to do. 

12:30 Svenn Torgersen is the next witness, he has stated that the content in the first report doesn’t support the conclusion.

I read the first psychiatric report and agree there is nothing in the report that supports that Breivik is psychotic.

This is common practice however, take the Minnesota trans-racial adoption study for example. This study was designed to proof once and for all that race was skin deep. The researchers measured the IQs of black, white, and mixed race children adopted by wealthy white families, the results at age 17 adjusted for the Flynn effect: Biological white children: 105, Adopted White children: 101, Adopted Mixed Race children: 93, Adopted Black children: 83.

Conclusion of the study: The results are inconclusive, and do not suggest there is a genetic difference in average intelligence between the Black and White population.

In summary: Researchers are allowed to gather their statistical data, give a political correct conclusion, and collect a big fat paycheck. Someone ought to tell us how much these clowns were payed to write the first psychiatric report.

Back to Torgersen.

Torgersen states he didn’t find a correlation between premises and conclusion in the first psychiatric report. He praises the second report for being of a much higher quality. He explains that believing in the validity of horoscopes does not make one psychotic.

He is asked if he believes that Breivik posing like a bodybuilder after being forced to undress indicates a psychosis. He answers that he would consider it a joke though he’d explore alternative explanations.

He says there is no validity to considering Breivik’s childhood as none of the psychological assessment forms take childhood into account. He doesn’t think Breivik has experienced any particularly traumatic events as a child.

He sees some narcissistic and grandiose traits in Breivik but doesn’t think there’s enough to pin point a specific personality disorder.

13:52 Breivik addresses the court.

To comment on what you quoted: “Because of my good looks ..” it is from the manifest. Of course, I should have written it differently, and I regret that I wrote it that way. I’ve always been happy with my appearance, but of course it is wrong to say it like this.

In a country like Norway where the Law of Jante is very important, it is extremely inappropriate. Had I on the other hand, said this in California, Los Angeles, it would be acceptable under the cultural norms and as an expression of personality. I am strongly opposed to the Law of Jante, and I’ve always been. It was more a stab to the Law of Jante. It was stupid to write it.

I was ordered to take off my clothes, but when I first had to take off my clothes, it was just a joke that I flex some muscle right there to add to the excitement. It was not funny. I accept the criticism and it was juvenile.

If a bloody action shall be included in an evaluation, this means that all Jihadists are diagnosed with a personality disorder. First, antisocial, and then if they say they are knights who will take over the world on behalf of Allah, they will have a narcissistic personality disorder. Therefore equating political extremism to a mental illness. It should not be taken into account because it would qualify most as mentally ill.

Thank you.

13:55 Breivik finishes his address.

Of course Cultural Marxists with their suicidal multicultural experiment are political extremists as well. Fortunately some can be cured after the revolution by sharing a cell with their beloved Muslims or Africans. It’s crucial for the Marxist elite to live as far removed from minorities as possible so they won’t question the validity of their delusional world view.

14:15 The next witness is Tarjei Rygnestad who heads the Forensic Commission.

He’s on a commission that reviews psychiatric reports. They accepted the first report unanimously, and had major objections to the second report. Six of the seven people on the committee used to work for Sørheim who wrote the first report.

Breivik’s belief in a coming civil war wasn’t discussed in the meeting because there was no mention of it in the first report. Obviously these guys are a bunch of clowns covering each others backs.

15:46 Alpha Kallon is the next witness and on the video link from the United States.

He explains Breivik contacted his friend and wanted their services, which meant they took care of all his transportation needs like being picked up and dropped off at the airport and being driven around town. Kallon and his friend showed Breivik a couple of diamond stores and had a few drinks at a club. Breivik told him he didn’t bring enough money to pay for their transportation services and would send some more money upon his return to Norway. He accepted the offer because Breivik seemed like a friendly and reliable guy.

They were in a small town and he has no idea what Breivik did after he dropped him off at his hotel in the evenings. 

16:40 Breivik addresses the court:

The reason for the trip was to meet a militant nationalist. In preparation for the trip I was told by my English contact to create an alias. It was “Henry Benson.”

They did not know me as Anders Behring Breivik, they thought I was Henry Benson. I was also told to create a cover for the trip and it was that I traded blood diamonds. This was advice that I chose to follow. I was told that I must be very careful. If the Serb saw believed that I could compromise him, it could become dangerous. When I came down it was during the Liberia civil war and the rebels had surrounded the capital.

There were lots of refugees in the city. Very complex. Now I know not what Alfa means by “small town”, but there are at least 500,000 people in Monrovia, including the refugees. The city was besieged and full of refugees. I had a mobile with me. I do not know if Alpha knew. Regarding the 5 or 6 retailers about diamonds, I can only remember that there was a meeting in a back yard and maybe we drove by a dealer. The reason I did not buy anything was that it was not why I was there. I met them only six times. The reason I got in contact with them was to support me if something happened. Alfa’s friend Michelangelo was very convenient because he worked in a travel agency.

They had a poor overview of my whereabouts. I was worried that they would find out which hotel I was staying in. I was partly brought there. They had nothing to do with the Serb, they had nothing to do with July 22. They were not familiar with the Serb’s identity and my contact with the two was limited to five or six occasions. I was in Liberia twice and can only remember that they brought me one of the two times. When it comes to money I had plenty. Police can confirm that I converted back the money when I came back to Norway, it was a fairly large sum.

So if I had wanted to buy I could have done so. His story strikes the cracks. He has obviously learned what Michels explanation was before this testimony. This does not match his first explanation, that was in VG. He says he used my money to travel around and look. I had planned another trip there and therefore transferred the money. I told them that it was to buy blood diamonds, but the aim was to smuggle the money there so I did not have to do it again.

But my intention was to avoid having to smuggle money there again, so I would have access to useful men who could give me access to money later. So I told them not to look for diamonds. Had the police asked my neighbor on July 21 what I was doing, he would have said that I was a farmer. It was the cover I gave him, and that was what he believed. These are two completely irrelevant witnesses.

16:45 Breivik finishes his address.

According to Wikipedia there were about 1 million people in Monrovia in 2002, making Kallon’s statement that it was a small town an obvious distortion of reality. I’ll reserve judgement on whether Breivik met an ultra-Nationalist or not, it has little relevance to 7/22 or the KT which Breivik is turning into an alliance of Radical Nationalist from various ideological backgrounds.

16:47 The court is adjourned for today.

Anders Behring Breivik Trial – Monday June 11 (Day 34)

9:00 Commander Breivik is led into the court room and the show trial continues.

The plan for today is to hear seven witnesses.

9:03 First one up is Kringlen who briefly observed Breivik as a prison health care provided.

Kringlen states that the first psychiatric report by Sørheim and Husby didn’t take Breivik’s ideological background into account, and that it’s impossible for Breivik to be delusional and not showing any symptoms of this during the trial.

He finds the conclusions of the second report by Agnar Aspaas and Terje Tørrissen to be more agreeable with reality. This is backed up by hundreds of hours of questioning during which Breivik behaved in a calm and rational manner and Breivik’s methodological preparations for 7/22 proof that he is fully functional.

9:37 Prosecutor Svein Holden takes over the questioning from Lippestad.

Kringlen argues that it isn’t particularly relevant if Breivik acquired permission to carry out executions from the KT or decided to do so for himself.

On the subject whether the KT is real, a lie, or a delusion, Kringlen states that the first psychiatric report didn’t try to establish whether Breivik was lying.

I think it’s obvious the prosecution doesn’t want to entertain the idea that the KT is a carefully constructed lie, as such presenting only two options 1) The unlikely case that Breivik is telling the truth 2) The unlikely case that Breivik is delusional.

The fact that Breivik hasn’t confessed that he lied about the KT is probably because Breivik believes that it will make it more likely that people will commit acts of terror under the KT banner.

Ultimately it doesn’t matter. Even if the other six persons exist their contributions prior to 7/22 are insignificant and not worthy of praise. Breivik is the ideological founder of the KT as he did at least 99% of the work, if not 100%, and all one has to do to be a member is to take the oath, pick up arms, and off a bunch of traitors or Muslims with minimal civilian casualties. The KT is real and an unstoppable force due to its leaderless structure, and I believe anyone who thinks differently will be proven wrong within a couple of years.

This is not a call to action, I simply disagree with the system that the KT is a fantasy, it became real on 7/22. There’s no need to incite violence, as it’s impossible to do a better job at inciting violence than the oppressive totalitarian Cultural Marxist rule the indigenous Europeans are forced to live under. There is no better motivator than the knowledge that thousands, if not millions, will die when the multicultural experiment leads to a bloody civil war.

9:52 Holden returns to whether Breivik began planning in 2002, 2006, or 2009.

Kringlen continues to refuse to follow Holden’s lead, stating it doesn’t matter that the decision to carry out the killings was made in 2006 or 2009. Half an hour later he once again states that Breivik is not behaving like someone with a mental disorder in court and that based on the low functionality score given to Breivik in the first psychiatric report he would expect massive psychotic symptoms. He suggests to look for explanations in the political realm.

10:53 The next witness is Eric Johannesen who works one day a week at Ila prison and spoke with Breivik about 20 times.

Eric Johannesen is almost 100% certain that Breivik is not psychotic, and thinks it’s a combination of ideological radicalization in combination with grandiose notions. With this he means that Breivik is extremely ambitious. He states he thinks that Breivik tries to play a role, and fails to do so convincingly. He says Breivik changed his rhetoric from “we” to “I” when he realized Johannesen and his colleagues weren’t leaking to the media. Johannesen doesn’t think Breivik can be treated for his ideology and states he meets the minimum requirements for an antisocial personality disorder.

Two can play this game however, in my opinion Cultural Marxists meet the minimum criteria for an antisocial personality disorder by 1) failing to conform to reality 2) repeated lying 3) failure to think/plan ahead 4) aggressiveness towards opponents 5) reckless disregard of the safety of their nation 6) consistent irresponsibility, as indicated by failing to honor financial obligations like our large national debts and spending money on ridiculous social engineering projects. 7) Lack of remorse as indicated by being indifferent to, or rationalizing, having hurt, mistreated, or stolen from the indigenous population at large.

Johannesen is convinced that Breivik lies about the KT in order to create more fear. Another benefit is that if Breivik had declared himself the founder and ideological leader of the KT he would never have been allowed to call for a terrorist attack within 1 year and 3 months. I still find it strange that the media failed to censor this, though it’s obvious they have yet to realize what they are dealing with here, the system is still in a state of denial hoping it will all go away if they pretend Breivik is just a fluke, that their experiment will work if people simply stop being racist. In 2083 Breivik calls for a terrorist attack every five years, this has now been lowered to two years.

Johannesen doesn’t think Breivik has asperger syndrome. He compares Breivik to Hannibal from The Silence of the Lambs, a highly intelligent serial killer. The media highlighted this statement while they failed to report on the witness being convinced that Breivik is sane, meaning they’re still preparing the masses for an insanity verdict.

12:12 Breivik addresses the court:

Thank you. As you know, I completely disagree with Aspaas, Tørrissen, Flikke and Johannesen when it comes to these alleged personality disorders. What is common to all four is that they include 22/7 in this calculation, and it’s a big mistake. It should not. In these assessments, as is 22 July in the calculation. Taking away 22 July, falling to a certain extent these diagnoses. It is only secondary. I’m glad he thinks I’m not insane. When it comes to empathy failure are we talking about selective empathy. I show no mercy or compassion to the Communists and other multiculturalists, but I do towards nationalists, or those who share my worldview. This was covered in last week. 

When it comes to being deviant and not showing remorse for the atrocities, it is based on military training. This is taught every day to Norwegian soldiers heading for Afghanistan in the Rena military camp, it is common practice.

Regarding being rejected by Fjordman, the reason I got in touch with Fjordman was to get his email address. I have never been rejected by anyone in my life. I broke with the hip-hop environment when I was fifteen, but apart from that I have never been rejected.

And in 2006, it is assumed that I felt that I had failed, but as a matter of fact I was debt free and had one million in assets, making this a particularly bad starting point for such a conclusion.

Regarding honestly taking the personality tests there is disagreement on what I am. I say that I am an altruist, but all psychiatrists say that I am an egoist. They told me that I respond to the test as if I was Mother Teresa, but altruism can serve as the basis for misguided international interests. The reason I did not answer 25 of the questions is because they would put me in a negative light.

Thank you.

12:15 Breivik finishes his address.
Fjordman has turned into somewhat of a drama queen, claiming he denied Breivik’s request to meet him in real life, that Breivik’s “twisted” interpretation of his articles is what caused 7/22, and that he is somehow a victim in all this. I think Fjordman falls in the same category as Pamela Geller, a Jew who is worried about Islamization but couldn’t care less about European indigenous rights. Looking at the translation of Breivik’s comments at document.no all I can see is that Breivik asked Fjordman to email him in case he wanted a copy of his book when he was finished.
 
13:04 Arnhild Flikke is the next witness, she had contact with Breivik in Ila prison and is a psychiatrist.
She is confident that Breivik is neither psychotic, suicidal, or delusional. She mentions the mustard incident with the cat, something Breivik says was a story he made up. I’d say it’s extremely difficult to put mustard in the anus of a cat, it’s disturbing how these psychologists can’t separate fact from fiction, lies from delusions, and ideology from psychopathy.

14:32 Breivik addresses the court:

I am pleased that the Flikke does not think that I’m insane. There are two serious allegations that I have two personality disorders. Dissocial and narcissistic personality disorder. It prevents a person from functioning in socially to a great extent.
 
In terms of how I view myself, we have discussed a lot together. I have commented that much of it is directly related to the July 22 action. If I had failed and the car had exploded on the way to the Government buildings I wouldn’t have been here. It may turn out that the action is important if it is emulated by others. So the picture that emerges is completely wrong.
This was a suicide operation that I did not expect to survive. How much attention I got after I was dead was of little importance.
Thank you.

14:53 Maria Sigur Jónsdóttir is the next witness, she was the technical director of the observation team.

The team was composed of 18 people with between 6 and 34 years of experience in the field. Towards the end of the observation 17 gave their opinion, with 16 concluding that Breivik was not psychotic, and one was unsure. She goes down a long check list of things where Breivik appears to function normally, and like other witnesses she indirectly praises Breivik’s intellect.

It appears that most people who spend a long period of time with Breivik develop a certain degree of respect for him. 

16:16 Alexander R. Flaata is the next witness, he observed Breivik for 60 hours.

The most unusual statement he heard was that Breivik hypothesized that one day the human brain could be connected to a computer. He didn’t observe any sign of psychosis. 

16:33 Next witness is Bente Sundby who observed Breivik for most of the 21 day period.

 
She didn’t observe any sign of psychosis. Breivik’s lack of interest in the notes she was keeping showed that he isn’t paranoid either. All in all this adds up to over 20 people who observed Breivik declaring him sane, opposed to 2 people declaring him insane.
 
16:53 The final witness, Thor Egil Holtskog, is waived.
 
16:55 The court is adjourned

Anders Behring Breivik Trial – Friday June 8 (Day 33)

9:28 Commander Breivik enters the courtroom.

Anders Behring Breivik Court Transcript 2012-06-08 Live Report

One psychiatric expert will testify today.


The court has decided not to allow the child psychiatrist Per Olav Næss to testify as Breivik’s mother withdrew her permission. This is about the period when Breivik was four years old, of which very few details are known, but the court states the generic information available should suffice. In summary, Breivik was difficult to handle at age four, the mother got help, things returned to normal.

9:51 Today’s witness is Ulrik Fredrik Malt. He works at the National Hospital and is a professor of psychiatry.

Malt denies having seen the criteria for paranoid schizophrenia in Breivik, but does not rule out the possibility and takes a minute to praise Sørheim and Husby, the clowns who wrote the first psychiatric report. Malt also doesn’t think Breivik suffers from a paranoid psychosis, characterized by delusions of grandeur, but once again doesn’t rule out the possibility.

Malt suggests that Breivik may have a narcissistic personality disorder. Lippestad complains about Malt’s speculation calling it an unofficial 3rd psychiatric report, which continues until it’s time for the one hour lunch break. The list of disorders that Breivik is affected by has grown rather large, and apparently includes honor, courage, intelligence, determination, loyalty and perseverance, all undesirable traits under totalitarian Cultural Marxist rule.

After the break they bicker for another hour, upon which the judge decides that Malt can continue.

Malt takes us on a little tour where everything Breivik does is taken out of context and characterized as weird and strange, which reminds me of the first psychiatric report.

14:06 Breivik finally loses his cool and says that he finds Malt’s testimony offensive.

The words high functioning autism and Asperger are dropped. He goes on to describe Breivik as someone with an emotional and intellectual schism, intelligent enough to understand the social rules and norms, but ultimately incapable of feeling true empathy. He concludes that Breivik has been tested for Asperger, resulting in the conclusion that he does not have it, though as usual he doesn’t rule out the possibility that Breivik masks the supposed mental disorder.

Tourettes is next, which in some cases can involve pervasive thoughts of violence besides the usual tics. Not surprisingly it’s possible for someone to completely suppress the tics, leaving the pervasive homicidal thoughts. While he has no direct evidence he basis the diagnosis in part on witness reports from Utoya, probably while maintaining a straight face. Breivik however has a hard time stopping himself from laughing out loud about the absurdity of it all.

There’s a short break and Malt continues to take things out of context. He claims that Breivik may be good at masking his Asperger syndrome and come across as a perfectly normal sociable and likable guy to everyone, until the pressure becomes too high. He says he cannot exclude the possibility that Breivik managed to hide a full blown psychosis for almost a year with no outward symptoms.

16:31 Breivik addresses the court:

I want to give my congratulations to Malt for a perfectly executed character assassination. In the beginning I was quite offended, but eventually I thought it was hilarious. The outlined premises outlined is false. It was alleged that I said that I am the commander of a large organization here. I’ve said from the very beginning that I have been in contact with six people. It was claimed that I said that I have conducted the largest operation since the Second World War, this it is not a grandiose delusion, it’s a fact.

It has been claimed that I said that I want to become regent in Norway, this is a statement I have commented on earlier that is simply not true. It is a fictional statement and I have not said anything to suggest this. Then there is a claim that I said in March that the uniform was no longer something important. I have said it is important, but not in the larger context. It is important to realize.

In terms of narcissism, the main definition of the term describes a selfish person who is primarily concerned with their own interests. I am not an egoist, I am an altruistic person. It is plain stupidity to say that a person who has made great personal sacrifices is a narcissist. I have given up everything in order to serve my people, it’s a ridiculous claim. I’ve never had deviant behavior as a child. The document you refer to from my childhood was an assessment of my mother, she had problems after the divorce. This is not uncommon as a divorce can be quite dramatic. It is said that I am obsessed with numbers, this must also be seen in context, although I am more concerned with statistics than most people.

It’s not a fact that I wrote 4550 pages as seventy percent was written by others. Thirty percent was written by me. It is important to take note of this. Regarding the allegation of loneliness, I’ve never been lonely except for when I was isolated and had a full media ban.

Aside from that, I’ve never been lonely in my entire life.

Regarding homicidal thoughts before I was 20 years. It gives the wrong impression. I had considered a politically motivated attack, but it is incorrect to place it in the same category as those of typical serial killers.

There was only one operation that I considered. For example, the introductory lecture was planned a long time ago. I wanted to complete the explanation, so it gives a bad impression of me when you use it as a starting point for a general description. Regarding empathy, it has been confirmed by many previous situations where I have shown emotions in this trial. Lack of empathy does not match what has been documented.

It’s an unfounded assertion that I’m not capable of friendship, it’s been opposed by the people I was friends with before who have testified. They were very close friendships as of the age of eleven.

I’ve never been depressed. There are claims that I was slightly feminine, that’s not the case.

Dropping out of school to start a company is labeled as failure. I think it will offend many entrepreneurs to call this a failure.

Grunting at Utøya … it has never been documented once. It’s just a shot in the dark. Claims of vocal tics are also unfounded.  I wrote a well reasoned 38 page response that criticizes the first expert report. In particular the claim that I have the right to decide who should live and die, this is a general statement. When Che Guevara and Castro killed people in Cuba it was no different, people who call for revolution accept that people are going to die.

It is asserted that I have not had any long-lasting relationships. I had two for about six months since 2002. Keep in mind that from 2002 to 2006 I worked 12-14 hours per day, this leaves no time for a relationship. It is not because of my inabilities, but because of my focus on a goal. I have dated during this period and I haven’t had problems coming in contact with women. The impression is given that I hate women. I love women, I hate feminism.

I’ve never had any problems dating women or becoming acquainted with women. So this is false information. As of 2006 I decided to plan a violent action and I didn’t think it was the right course of action to establish a family with wife and child. The Stockholm bomber left a wife and child.

The claim that I was afraid my family would be tortured in also a distortion of the truth. What I was afraid of was that they would be lynched, as I was expecting over 250 deaths on Utøya. This would have greatly increased the emotional instability among the population, especially among the radical left and Muslims. It’s not an irrational concern.

Based on the generic description of narcissism half of Oslo West could be placed in that category. The diagnosis is the equivalent of a blank check. Regarding Asperger. I managed a business with six employees from 2002 to 2006 with great economic success. It seems contrary to the argument.

It appears to me that Malt was here today to defend the psychiatric field. He should have said that many agree that those who have written the first expert report have committed professional suicide. This shows collegial loyalty. The first experts made up 200 lies in their report that I have documented. Malt was called to aid the prosecution and it is important to realize what their agenda is, to portray me as crazy as possible, to get me declared insane.

And the judge, in this case, should discard all psychiatric witnesses and disregard them, and place emphasis on the two reports that are available since this case is clearly about political extremism and psychiatry.

Thank you.

16:43 Breivik finishes his address.

As usual Breivik is the lone voice of reason in this trial. Malt is an intellectually dishonest spin doctor, though he did disagree with the diagnosis that Breivik is psychotic.

After Breivik finishes the judge concludes that he appears to be the only one in the courtroom who perceives Malt’s testimony as a character assassination. I’m sure it’s no different in North Korea whenever a dissident stands trial.

16:48 The court is adjourned.