Tunanders frågor om Anders Behring Breiviks kopplingar leder till brittiska imperiet

For English go to the bottom of this slug

Den som vill förstå det brittiska uppspelet till ett tredje världskrig bör studera professor Ola Tunanders analys av möjliga inspiratörer och finansiärer av Anders Behring Breiviks fasansfulla sprängdåd i Oslos regeringskvarter och massmord på Utöja. Professor Tunander har efter några månaders detaljerad granskning av Anders Behring Breiviks "Manifest" och annan efterforskning vågat diskutera just  motiv i den internationella storpolitiken liksom möjliga underrättelsekopplingar. Hans frågeställningar leder till den typ av verksamhet som det Brittiska imperiet använder för att få igång ett Tredje världskrig med just nu Syrien och Iran som detonationspunkter.

De möjliga kopplingar och nätverk som Tunander plockar fram ur Breiviks manifest, är nära kopplade med den Brittiska imperiepolitiken och dess underrättelsetjänster. Tunander nämner britterna, men pekar inte ut deras koordinerande roll mellan just dessa nätverk. De mycket viktiga frågor som han ställer, måste bli centrala för alla kompetenta fortsatta undersökningar om vilka som stod bakom det värsta terrordådet i Norges historia.

En del av Tunanders frågor liknar det som Lyndon LaRouche sa om intresset att med ett dåd av Breiviks typ skapa en miljö av generell destabilisering. Lyndon LaRouche pekade på att det kunde ingå i skapandet av den atmosfär av terror och internationell destabilisering som det Brittiska imperiet vill ha, för att kunna få igång ännu större terrordåd. I LaRoucherörelsens nyhetsbrev den 27 juli 2011 stod det:
"Därför har Lyndon LaRouche varnat för en ny stor terrorattack, ett nytt större 11 september av någon sort, som skall tjäna som en ny riksdagshusbrand för att möjliggöra diktatur. Det vi nu är inne i är ett uppspel till denna stora statskuppskatastrof, där chockerande terrordåd, som de i Norge i helgen, och andra destabiliseringar kommer att både skapa en miljö och avledning inför den stora attacken. Det är den vi måste fokusera på, säger LaRouche."

Idéerna i Breiviks manifest framställdes som helt unika, men som larouche.se påpekade i notisen "Breivik ej ensam om sitt tankegods" finns mycket etablerade politiker som har samma argumentation. Den neokonservativa ideologen Samuel P Huntington är en av dem och hans politik är en viktig del i den upptrappning till ett nytt världskrig, som pågår nu.

Professor Tunander är verksam vid fredsforskningsinstitutet i Oslo (PRIO) och har publicerat sin rapport i det norska Universitetsförlagets tidskrift Nytt Norsk Tidskrift nr 4, 2011 under titeln "Inspiratorer, intressenter, innvielsesmestre og investorer i Breiviks verden". Trots att Breiviks dåd varit stort uppmärksammat i svenska media, och Tunander är en svensk forskare, har svensk media bara kort avfärdat de djupt penetrerande och högexplosiva frågeställningar han tagit fram.

Även i Norge har Tunander fått flera panikartade mothugg, som han bemött (1) och (2). Trots det, är det en tydlig skillnad på norsk och svensk utrikespolitisk självständighet, som här gör sig gällande. I Norge vågar man åtminstone från etablerat håll publicera och debattera, ifall  internationella politiska krafter kan ha medverkat vid en stor nationell förlust, i motsats till de fega myndighetsdiskussionen och -utredningarna om Estonia och morden på både Sveriges statsminister och utrikesminister. De som vägrar diskutera Breiviks internationella kopplingar, hjälper till att dölja hela den politiska miljö, och därmed också de  underrättelsekopplingar, som finns bakom ett sådant dåd. Därmed gör de sitt land sårbart för nya terrordåd och världen för ett tredje världskrig.

Här följer utdrag ur Tunanders artikel först på norska och sedan på engelska:

Så här sammanfattar Tunander sin artikel:
"Norske forskere spekulerte i Dagserevyen den 22. juli 2011 om et islamistisk angrep, men det viste seg snart at den ansvarlige, Anders Behring Breivik, hadde blitt inspirert av et helt annet politisk miljø. Denne artikkelen ser nærmere på gjerningsmannens inspiratorer og på hvilke aktører som kan ha hatt interesse av å bruke ham. Her framheves ikke minst voldelige nettverk og finansielle bånd som Breiviks manifest og andre vitnesbyrd peker mot."

Artikeln består av följande avsnitt: Inspiratorene, Interessentene, Innvielsesmestrene och Investorene. I det första avsnittet går Tunander igenom många hatiska inlägg på anti-jihadistiska  bloggar. I avsnittet "Intressenterna" skriver Tunander:

"Mer alvorlig er at noen kommentarer ikke kun kan bli beskrevet som oppfatninger, men også som mulige halvoffisielle signaler. Det gjelder ikke minst en kronikk av Barry Rubin i Jerusalem Post den 31. juli. Rubin er en sentral israelsk-amerikansk anti-jihadist, som har vært rådgiver for den israelske regjering. Han skriver for New York Times, Washington Post og Wall Street Journal, for Foreign Affairs og Foreign Policy. Han sitter i styret for Daniel Pipes Middle East Quarterly. Rubin skrev at AUFs program på Utøya vesentlig var et «pro-terrorist program». Arbeiderpartiets samtale med Hamas og støtte til en palestinsk stat var, ifølge Rubin, å oppfatte som støtte til terrorisme. Han skrev:
IF TERRORIST murders by Hamas and Islamists did not stop well-intentioned future leaders of Norway from considering them heroic underdogs, an evil local man could think his act of terrorism would gain sympathy and change Europe's politics.
For den norske regjeringen, med egne barn eller venners barn på Utøya, og noen døde der, fremsto dette som ubehagelig. Ifølge Rubin skulle norsk politikk (støtte til «terrorisme») kunne føre til at Norge blir utsatt for terrorisme. Det er lett å lese dette som en trussel. Var det noen som ville markere overfor Norge at den norske Israel-politikken er «uakseptabel»? På tross av at Norge ikke oppfatter samtaler som «terrorisme», er dette et følsomt spørsmål i et land som i nyere tid kun er blitt utsatt for ett politisk attentat, i Lillehammer, da Mossad henrettet en palestiner (og, som det viste seg, feil palestiner). Da ble henrettelsesteamet umiddelbart arrestert den 22. juli 1973, og dette var en av de pinligste hendelsene i Mossads historie." ...

"Breivik skriver at Israel er «vår primære allierte» og at «det har blitt bestemt [når] angrepet skal bli utført» (Breivik, 2011: 1424), som om noen skal ha gitt ham instruks om å utføre angrepet på en bestemt dag. Denne «noen» skulle ha valgt datoen for revansje for fiaskoen i 1973, og samtidig dagen som hedret det første store israelske bombeangrepet, det på King David Hotel: den samme dagen, den 22. juli."

Tunander pekar på att de israeliska uttalandena kring Breiviks terrordåd inte räcker för att bevisa någon inblandning därifrån när han fortsätter i avsnittet " Innvielsesmestrene":
"På tross av at det finnes en viss logikk i disse argumentene, er dette ikke noen forklaring. Det er ikke tilstrekkelig å søke svar i Breiviks anti-jihadisme og voldsretorikk eller i mulige israelske interesser eller i deres feiring av bombeangrep. At operasjonene ble utført på en bestemt dato med en symbolsk betydning, er heller ikke noe bevis. Kanskje var det så at Breivik ville hedre de første korsfarernes seier i Jerusalem den 22. juli 1099. Det er heller ikke nok å peke på at Breivik er blitt preget av Natos bombing av Serbia i Kosovo-krigen. Serberne ble fornedret, og det la grunnen til en serbisk revansjisme som skal ha betydd mye for Breivik, men dette kan i seg selv ikke forklare hvordan en nordmann ble kapabel til å sprenge regjeringskvartalet og skyte nærmere 100 personer på Utøya (med 69 drepte). Inspirasjon og interesser kan ikke gi en tilstrekkelig forklaring. Ikke heller Breiviks ulykkelige forhold til sin far kan forklare hans ufølsomhet. Hans trening med dataspill og bruk av dop (steroider) kan ha gjort ham mer ufølsom, men heller ikke dette er nok. En person som føler hat og har lest seg til nødvendigheten av å drepe, kan ikke bare gå ut på gaten for å skyte 100 barn. En slik oppgave krever en brutalisering, f.eks. en blodig krigserfaring eller en paramilitær trening som kan senke terskelen for bruk av massiv vold. Det må undersøkes om det kan finnes et annet miljø som Breivik har operert i enn den intellektuelle anti-jihadismen.

Vi vet at både Pamela Geller og Robert Spencer har støttet ekstremistgruppen English Defence League (EDL) (Jihad Watch, 2010). EDL er imidlertid meget voldelig og har utført angrep mot muslimer. På tross av at EDL er pro-israelsk har mange i EDL nære bånd til det nazistiske miljøet, og det finnes en spenning mellom det pro-israelske EDL og dets nazi-inspirerte aktivister. Breivik skriver:
I used to have more than 600 EDL members as Facebook friends and have spoken with tens of EDL members and leaders. In fact; I was one of the individuals who supplied them with processed ideological material [...] [But] the KT [Knights Templar] view the EDL as naïve fools, wasting all their energy monkey-screaming to deaf ears while they should instead have focused on means and methods that are meaningful in regards to achieving true political change, in regards to tearing down the multiculturalist regime known as Britain (Breivik, 2011: 1436).

Det røde malteserkors som Breivik har på omslaget til sitt manifest kommer fra tempelridderordenen, men et liknende kors er også [English Defence League] EDLs symbol. En av grunnleggerne, en tidligere talsmann for EDL, Paul Ray, bor nå på Malta og er opptatt av tempelridderne. Han anvender navnet «Lionheart» (Ray Blog), hvilket i Breiviks manifest opptrer som navnet på hans mentor (Breivik, 2011: 1415). Breivik sier også at en av grunnleggerne av EDL muligens er en av grunnleggerne av «Knights Templar» (s. 1363). På nettet finnes videoer fra en «Order 777» som viser Rays bånd til den tyske «tempelridderen» og tidligere nazisten Nick Greger. En video viser tempelriddere, Ray og Greger i t-skjorter med samme malteserkors som Ray har på bloggen sin og som Breivik har på omslaget til sitt manifest (Ray Blog). En annen video viser deres helt general William Boykin (ibid) som maner til krig mot islam. Rays Templar Knights-videoer og Gregers Order 777-videoer viser de kristne heltene, kampen mot islam og tempelriddernes kommende seier akkurat som Breiviks egen video som han har lagt ut på nettet (Greger video; Breiviks video). Den sakrale korsangen og den gjentatte inzoomingen av bilder med brede sorte rammer er den samme. Man må spørre om det er samme person som har laget disse videoene. Samme maleri av en knelende tempelridder finnes i Breiviks manifest og i videoen fra Order 777. Enten finnes en kopling mellom Breivik og Order 777, eller så må det være en profesjonell tredje aktør involvert. Order 777s videoer viser også Greger i Afrika, i Liberia og hans uttalte støtte til Liberias tidligere president Charles Taylor og til den serbiske kommandanten Milorad Ulemek eller «Legija». Greger snakker også om sine bånd til den russiske mafiaen.

Ulemek var en serbisk kriminell, «korsfarer» og nestkommanderende for den serbiske paramilitære styrken Arkans Tigrer, som spredte død og skrekk i Bosnia på 1990-tallet. Ulemek ble i 1999 leder for de serbiske spesialstyrkene, og noen videoer om ham fra 1990-tallet anvender samme estetikk og symbolikk som Order 777s filmer (og Breiviks film). Visse sekvenser i disse filmene er identiske (Greger video; Ulemek video). Enten har Greger kopiert disse videoene, eller så er de alle blitt redigert av noen innen det serbiske nettverket. Ulemek tilhørte den serbiske mafiaen (Zemun) og hadde bånd til den russiske mafiaen. Han ble dømt for mordforsøket på Vuk Draskovic og for mordet på tidligere presidenten Ivan Stambolic i 2000 (og hans menn skjøt statsminister Zoran Djindjic i 2003). Samtidig ser mange serbere på ham som en krigshelt. Han overga seg i Beograd 2004 (Ulemek wiki). Breivik skriver:
I came in contact with Serbian cultural conservatives through the internet. This initial contact would eventually result in my contact with several key individuals all over Europe and the forming of the group who would later establish the military order and tribunal, PCCTS, Knights Templar [...] I met with them for the first time in London and later on two occasions in Balticum. I had the privilege of meeting one of the greatest living war heroes of Europe at the time, a Serbian crusader and war hero who had killed many Muslims in battle. Due to EU persecution for alleged crimes against Muslims he was living at one point in Liberia. I visited him in Monrovia once, just before the founding session in London, 2002 (Breivik, 2011: 1379).

Her har vi kanskje funnet nøkkelen til Breiviks utvikling. Breivik skriver om det serbiske nettverket og at han ble innviet i den hemmelige tempelridderordenen av en serbisk krigshelt (som da var i eksil i Liberia), som ble representert av ham på det konstituerende møtet i London 2002. Det fremstår som trolig at denne krigshelten var Ulemek eller en av hans nærmeste. Breivik nevner et annet sted Ulemeks heltemot:
If we had executed let's say, 100 000 Marxist intellectuals in Western Europe after WW2 and banned all form of Marxist doctrine we could have prevented the creation of the anti-European hate ideology known as multiculturalism. It's absolutely essential that we, the cultural conservative patriots of Europe do not repeat this mistake again [...] Patriotic militias must create and update execution lists containing the names of every single parliamentarian, journalist, NGO leader/board member and university lecturer/professor etc. who has supported and propagated multiculturalist doctrines [...] The biggest threat to an effective and thorough lynching campaign is the temptation to commence the deportation of Muslims. This is why the lynching force should only contain soldiers under professional leadership with the given «unofficial and clandestine» mandate. An illustration [...] The Serb Volunteer Guard - SDG was a volunteer paramilitary unit [10 000 men] founded and led by Željko Ražnatovic, widely known as Arkan [Second in command: Colonel Nebojsa Djordjevic Suca and Milorad Ulemek] [...] The Albanian Muslims in Serbia refused deportation and convertion from Islam (and instead started armed resistance) and as such were targeted for annihilation (ibid: 1276-77)."

Tunander kommer sedan in på frågorna om finansiärerna i avsnitter "Investorene":

"Hvis Ulemek virkelig har spilt en rolle for Breiviks «tempelriddere», er det sannsynlig at russeren på London-møtet 2002 kan ha vært den tidligere GRU-offiseren og generalmajoren Vladimir Filin (Scott, 2011). Han sto nær Ulemek og hadde bånd til den russiske mafiaen. Fra 2000 var han visepresident for selskapet Far West LLC, som har blitt beskrevet av Peter Dale Scott: «In fact, Ulemek was said to have been so close to Filin, that Far West was ‘threatened' by Ulemek's (Legija's) imprisonment» (Scott, 2005, 2010).

Ifølge Scott ble Far West skapt i 1998 av tidligere GRU-offiserer som hadde arbeidet med heroin i vestre Afghanistan på 1980-tallet. I likhet med Ulemek sies Far West å ha vært dypt involvert i heroinhandel, og selskapet sies også å ha vært en stor aktør innen våpenhandelen i Øst-Europa, Sentral-Asia, Kaukasus og i Colombia. Filin, som var sentral i ukrainsk etterretningstjeneste, sies å ha både ukrainsk, britisk og serbisk pass. Hans aktivitet i Georgia 2003-2004 skal ha vært finansiert av Kellogg Brown & Root (KBR/Halliburton) i samarbeid med CIA. Han bidro til Georgias (og Israels) angrep på Sør-Ossetia i 2008. Far West utgjorde en front for et østeuropeisk-sentral-asiatisk nettverk med bånd til bl.a. amerikansk, britisk, israelsk, tyrkisk og saudisk etterretning.

Den hviterussiske opposisjonspolitikeren Mikhail Reshetnikov sier at Breivik tre ganger har vært i Hviterussland og besøkt en paramilitær treningsleir som eies av en russer og tidligere GRU-offiser, nå hollender, Valery Lunev. Hviterussiske myndigheter bekrefter at Breivik var i Minsk i mars 2005. Han sies å ha blitt kalt «Viking» innen etterretningen. Ved de to andre tilfellene skal Breivik ha vært i landet på falsk pass og fått store beløp for å finansiere sin aktivitet (Mamchur, 2011). Hvis Breivik fikk denne type paramilitær trening, skulle det kunne forklare hans brutalitet under hendelsene på Utøya.

Men Valery Lunev var samtidig administrerende direktør i selskapet Far Wests Dubai-kontor og kollega til Filin fra vestre Afghanistan. Lunev skal ha vært involvert i kuppet i Georgia 1991, i borgerkrigen i Tajikistan og sies å ha samarbeidet med den høyreradikale organisasjonen De grå ulvene (i Tyrkia), som har operert for CIA med en viktig rolle for heroinhandelen via Tyrkia. To andre Far West-generaler og GRU-offiserer fra vestre Afghanistan, Anton Surikov fra Georgia med tyrkisk og amerikansk pass, og Russlan Saidov fra Dagistan med tyrkisk pass, har de samme båndene til CIA og De grå ulvene. Saidov skal ha vært etterretningssjef for den tsjetsjenske presidenten og hatt bånd til den saudiske etterretningssjefen prins Turki bin Feisal, mens Surikov arbeidet med hans kollega, den saudiske våpenhandleren Adnan Khashoggi, som var dypt involvert i Iran-Contras-affæren, med Israels Shimon Peres for leveranser til Iran og i renvasking av penger via Antigua. Surikov var mistenkt for å ha bidratt til bombeangrepene mot boligblokker i Moskva 9. og 13. september 1999 (da 213 personer ble drept og 450 ble skadd). Far West sies å ha vært eiet med 13 prosent av det tidligere Cheney-kontrollerte militære selskapet KBR/Halliburton og med 37 prosent av prins Turki bin Feisal. General Filin og general Saidov sies å ha kontrollert 25 prosent hver, men selskapet drives i praksis av Saidov, Filin og Lunov, av Breiviks mulige kontakter. Far West består av agenter fra De baltiske stater, Hviterussland, Ukraina, Georgia, Tsjetsjenia og Usbekistan og tilhører et israelsk-amerikansk-saudisk-britisk-tyrkisk nettverk for geopolitisk transformasjon, etterretning, våpenhandel og narkotikahandel (Scott, 2005).

Dette nettverket er ifølge Peter Dale Scott en fortsettelse av skandalebanken BCCI, som opererte med overføring av penger for våpenhandel og narkotikahandel via Antigua i Vestindia. Breivik skriver om sin aktivitet i 2005-2007:
[I was] Managing director of E-Commerce Group AS [...] This was a front (milking cow) with the purpose of financing resistance/liberation related military operations. The company was successful although most of the funds were channelled through a Caribbean subsidiary (with base in Antigua, a location where European countries do not have access): Brentwood Solutions Limited with bank accounts in other Caribbean nations and Eastern Europe. E-Commerce Group was terminated in 2007 while most of the funds were channelled in an «unorthodox manner» to Norway available to the coming intellectual and subsequent operations phase (Breivik, 2011: 1399).

Politiet har hevdet at det i 2007 ble overført 624 000 kroner til Breiviks bankkonti (Buanes, 2011). Breivik sier til politiet at han hadde seks millioner til å finansiere angrepet og skriver at han anvendte banker på Antigua:
Ifølge Lippestad har Breivik blant annet forklart seg om en omfattende reisevirksomhet til et tyvetalls land over hele verden [...] [Det er] snakk om reiser i direkte sammenheng med planleggingen av angrepene, som var mest intens de siste årene. I tidligere avhør har Breivik forklart at han hadde seks millioner kroner til å finansiere terrorangrepene.

Till slut ställer Tunander upp frågeställningar som varje kompetent undersökning av Breiviks manifest borde försöka att besvara. I slutet tar han också upp ett  liknande frågeställning som Lyndon LaRouche varit inne på om "generell destabilisering" och vad Tunander kallar «calibration of violence»:

"Man kan naturligvis ikke se bort fra at de kontakter som Breivik snakker om, kun finnes i Breiviks egen fantasi, at han kun er en fantast som har utført operasjonen helt alene, og at hans snakk om reiser og millioner er rent tøv. Men hvordan lyktes han med å utføre en så brutal operasjon uten profesjonell støtte? Hvordan har han kunnet skaffe materiell for å utføre angrepene uten å ha noen kjente tilganger? Hvorfra fikk han de 624.000 NOK som ble plassert på hans bankkonti i 2007? Hvordan har det vært mulig for ham å skrive et 1500-siders manifest, til dels på god engelsk, til dels på mindre god engelsk uten å ha skrevet noe tidligere? 100 sider eller kanskje mer er kopiert fra anti-jihadistiske nettsider, og noen sider er kopiert fra den såkalte Una-bomberen, men hva med de øvrige? Hvordan har det vært mulig å lage en video som er så lik visse andre anti-jihad-filmer i innhold, teknikk og estetikk uten at det finnes noen sammenheng? Hvorfra har han kunnskapen om bankforbindelser via Antigua? Og hvorfor indikerer han at det er andre som har tatt beslutningen om tidspunktet for operasjonen? Det er en del som peker mot at Breiviks angrep ikke var et rent solo-utspill."

Tunander diskuterar till slut möjliga motsättningar och därmed ansvar mellan de olika möjliga organisationer, men beskriver alla nätverken som likvärdiga, trots att den brittiska underrättelsetjänsten är helt tongivande  ifråga om samtliga nätverk som han nämner:

"Vi har diskutert den høyreekstreme israelske og jødisk-kristne siden av Breiviks nettverk, israelske interesser i å disiplinere Norge og israelsk feiring av bombeattentater. Breiviks angrep fremstår her som en ny King David Hotel-operasjon: den 22 juli. Men på tross av at denne forklaringen kan synes logisk, kan forklaringen være den motsatte. Kanskje var operasjonen et saudisk svar på et israelsk spill? Far West ligger i skjæringspunktet mellom israelsk og saudisk etterretning, men det er dominert av saudierne. Hvis Far West overhodet har spilt noen rolle for Breivik, er det grunn til å se nærmere på saudiernes konflikt med israelerne. Vi vet at Gust Avrakotos, som sto bak CIAs bevæpning av de afghanske mujahedinene på 1980-tallet, kritiserte Cheneys mann, kongressmannen Charlie Wilson, for å ha «tatt inn israelerne i CIAs muslimske jihad» (Crile, 2003: 391). Det var israelske fly som fløy israelske våpen til det som seinere ble al-Qaida, m.a.o. Wilson hadde i konflikt med CIA og saudierne tatt inn israelerne for å infiltrere «al-Qaida» (Scott, 2007: 108). På 2000-tallet, da PLO hadde problemer med aktivister fra al-Qaida, fant PLOs sikkerhetstjeneste at al-Qaidas kontaktoffiser for disse palestinerne tilhørte Shin Beth, innenriksetterretningen i Israel (Claudet, 2002). Disse faktaene har ført til en diskusjon om hvorvidt vesentlige deler av al-Qaida har vært infiltrert av israelerne, og om sistnevnte bruker disse gruppene for å diskreditere islam (Veterans Today, 2010). Kanskje saudierne mener at israelerne har gått for langt, og at man som mottiltak har rekruttert paramilitære anti-jihadister via den østeuropeiske mafiaen for å la dem sette spørsmålstegn ved anti-jihadismens legitimitet. Far West har nære bånd til tsjetsjensk terrorisme, men først og fremst til saudierne, mens båndene til israelerne og de neokonservative synes å være av finansiell/kriminell art. I så fall kan Breiviks tempelriddere paradoksalt nok betraktes som et speilbilde av al-Qaida. Ifølge denne hypotesen blir 22. juli saudiernes sofistikerte svar på Israels aktivisme, alternativt er det israelsk-amerikanske-saudiske nettverket først og fremst interessert i en generell destabilisering som jeg tidligere har beskrevet som «calibration of violence» (Tunander, 2009). Kort sagt, de tegnene vi kan tolke peker i forskjellige retninger, men historisk sett har denne typen terrorangrep ofte vært knyttet til en eller annen statlig tjeneste, og vi kan ikke utelukke at dette er tilfelle også denne gang. Uansett er det ikke usannsynlig at terroraksjonen i Oslo handler om mer hardkokte aktører enn de ideologer jeg beskrev i det første avsnittet."

Here the Summary and excerpts are translated into English

"Summary: Norwegian researchers speculated July 22  , 2011 in [the Norwegian News Program] Dagserevyen about an Islamistic attack, but it soon turned out that the culprit, Anders Behring Breivik, had been inspired by a completely different political environment. This article looks closer at those who inspired the perpetrator and at which players might have had an interest in using him. Highlighted here are primarily violent networks and financial connections which Breivik's manifesto and other evidence point to"

English abstract: Inspiration, interests, initiation and investments in Breivik's world
"The terrorist attacks in Norway on 22 July 2011 were first described as an al-Qaeda operation. When Anders Behring Breivik was arrested and we were able to look at his video and read his manifesto, it became clear that he was inspired by Jewish-Christian anti-jihadist writers, the very individuals that had pointed to al-Qaeda in the first place. Some critics argued that Breivik had been used by Israeli forces with an interest in changing Norway's policy towards Palestine, as if Breivik had copied the Israeli bombing of the British headquarters in Jerusalem in 1946, on the very anniversary of that attack. However, inspiration and interests are not enough. One also has to look at Breivik's contacts that supposedly financed him and initiated him into his crusading «Knights Templar» order. Breivik himself points to Serbian crusaders, while others points to an East-European military mafia. The two converge, however, into one network that is surprisingly close to Saudi and Chechen intelligence and to the very Islamists that Breivik detests, as though Breivik's Knights Templar were the mirror image of al-Qaeda."

The sections of the article has the following names: The inspirers, Interested persons, The initiators, and The investors. In the first section, The inspirers, Tunander cites some comments on anti-jihadistiska blogs:

"On July 22 at 3.26 p.m., a bomb exploded in the government quarters in Oslo. Several ministries were severely damaged, including the office of the Prime Minister. Two hours later, reports came of a man shooting people at the AUF [The Labour Party Youth organization] summer camp in Utöya. The TV channel Fox News reported that an al-Qaida group, Ansar al-Jihad al-Alami, had claimed responsibility for the Oslo attack. Former U.S. Assistant Secretary of State and U.N. ambassador John Bolton said to Fox News (July 22): "It sure looks like Islamic terrorism." "The extent of the attack also points to al-Qaida," said terrorist expert Magnus Ranstorp (NRK, 2011). The Wall Street Journal, the New York Times, BBC, Reuters, CBS News and CNN all talked about an al-Qaida attack. When it turned out that the culprit was a Norwegian, Anders Behring Breivik, and that he had been circulating a 1,500 page manifesto (Breivik, 2011), the interpretation was changed. The manifesto was partly well-written and seemed to show him to be influenced primarily by Western "anti-Jihadists" like Bat Ye'or, having written about Europe as "Eurabia", Peder Jensen, having written under the pseudonym "Fjordman" for Gates of Vienna, Daniel Pipes from Middle East Quarterly, who was an adviser to presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani, Robert Spencer from Jihad Watch and the blog Atlas Shrugs with Pamela Geller (Breivik, 2011). Spencer and Geller recently wrote a book prefaced by John Bolton: The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration's War on America (2010). According to Bolton's own words, he is a possible republican presidential candidate. They all belong to what we in Norway would call an "Israeli-U.S. extreme right-wing".
On July 22, before Breivik was arrested, Pamela Geller wrote: "Islamistic websites rejoiced over the attack." One commentator says: "In Norway it's more important to boycott Israeli products than protecting the population from Muslim extremists." Another commentator says: "Islam is an invading army, nothing else." A third one says: "So, Jihad comes to Norway. No surprise really." (Atlas Shrugs).
After Breivik had been arrested, the above-mentioned anti-Jihadists have distanced themselves from him, but for many of them this was not enough. On July 31, Geller wrote in her blog Atlas Shrugs that what took place at Utöya before Breivik's attack was also unacceptable. She points to a photo of foreign minister Jonas Gahr Störe and AUF chairman Eskil Pedersen and behind them the slogan: "Boycott Israel". Geller writes:
"But the jihad-loving media never told us what anti-Semitic war games they were playing on that island. Utoya Island is a Communist/Socialist campground, and they clearly had a pro-Islamic agenda [...] [Fox News] Glenn Beck was not far off when he compared it to the Hitlerjugend." (Atlas Shrugs, 31. juli 2011)
In a commentary the day before, July 30, she refers to a discussion she had earlier, on June 24, 2007. At that time she had published in her blog what she described as "a heart-breaking e-mail" from an anonymous Norwegian. He wrote:
"Well, yes, the situation is worsening. Stepping up from 29 000 immigrants every year, in 2007 we will be getting a total of 35 000 immigrants from Somalia, Iran, Iraq and Afghanistan. The nations capital is already 50% muslim, and they ALL go there after entering Norway. Adding the 1.2 births per woman per year from muslim women, there will be 300 000+ muslims out of the then 480 000 inhabitants of that city. Orders from Libya and Iran say that Oslo will be known as Medina at the latest in 2010 [...] From Israel the hordes clawing at the walls of Jerusalem proclaim cheerfully that next year there will be no more Israel, and I know Israel shrugs this off as do I, and will mount a strike during the summer against all of its enemies in the middle east. This will make the muslims worldwide go into a frenzy, attacking everyone around them. We are stockpiling and caching weapons, ammunition and equipment. This is going to happen fast [...] Never fear, Pamela. God is with you too in this coming time." (Atlas Shrugs, 24. juni 2007)
What follows in her blog is a discussion about the necessity of using violence and about a possible civil war in Norway. John Jay, a member of the board of Pamela Geller's and Robert Spencer's "Stop the Islamization of America", says: "Christians and Jews: to arms!! To arms!! If our leaders betray us, and surely the [N]orwegian leaders betray their citizens." Another commentator says: "I only hope that in event civil war breaks out there or [in] any other democracy, that the US still has enough moral clarity to supply the native population with guns and ammunition if not troops.» A third participant says: «nice letter [...] [but] he or she could be prosecuted under hate-speech laws for writing or posting in Norway what you have passed on to us.» Pamela Geller wrote: «Yes turn, which is why I ran it anonymously» (ibid).
After Breivik's massacre, Geller edited her 2007 blog, cutting out to sentences: "We are stockpiling and caching weapons, ammunition and equipment. This is going to happen fast." These words could be perceived as sensitive, she wrote (Atlas Shrugs, July 30, 2011).
When certain pivotal U.S. figures like Pamela Geller and Glenn Becker compare the AUF with Hitlerjugend and discuss the necessity of a civil war in Norway, one has to ask whether they also have had some influence on Breivik. Have they been his inspirers? In other words: Is there a connection between Breivik's physical violence and the hatred and the reputed caching of weapons and ammunition being presented on these websites?
These figures are not peripheral. Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer are politically linked to Fox News, to the Ambassador and former assistant Secretary of State John Bolton and to Lieutenant General William Boykin, former assistant Secretary of Defense responsible for intelligence, and to other parts of the neo-conservative milieu. Boykin, a former commander of the U.S. special forces, says: "Europe is doomed, and in the middle of this century Europe will be an Islamic continent" (Ray Blog). But these possible inspirers are, of course, not directly responsible for the terrorist attacks. They can all have influenced and inspired Breivik, but so far there is no sign of Geller and Spencer or Bolton and Boykin having taken part in any kind of plan involving Breivik."

Tunander writes in the section "Interested persons" about the official responses to the Breivik´s atrocities:
"More serious is that some commentaries can be described as not only opinions, but also as possible semi-official signals. This applies most emphatically to a column by Barry Rubin July 31 in the Jerusalem Post. Rubin is a pivotal Israeli-American anti-Jihadist, who has been an advisor to the Israeli government. He writes for the New York Times, the Washington Post and the Wall Street Journal, for Foreign Affairs and Foreign Policy. He sits on the board of Daniel Pipes' Middle East Quarterly. Rubin wrote that the AUF program at Utöya was essentially a "pro-terrorist program" (Rubin, 2011). The fact that the Arbeiderpartiet [Norwegian Labour Party and mother party to AUF] was talking to Hamas and supporting a Palestinian state should, according to Rubin, be seen as support for terrorism. He wrote:
"IF TERRORIST murders by Hamas and Islamists did not stop well-intentioned future leaders of Norway from considering them heroic underdogs, an evil local man could think his act of terrorism would gain sympathy and change Europe's politics." (ibid)
For the Norwegian government, having children of their own or their friends at Utöya, this appeared unpleasant. According to Rubin, Norway's policy (support for "terrorism") could lead to Norway being hit by terrorism. This can easily be read as a threat. Was there someone who wanted to make a point in respect to Norway that the Norwegian Israel policy is "unacceptable"? Even if Norway does not consider talks to be "terrorism", this is a sensitive issue in a country which in recent history has been hit by only one political attack, in Lillehammer, when the Mossad executed a Palestinian (and, as it turned out, the wrong Palestinian). At that time, the execution team was immediately arrested, on July 22, 1973, and this was one of the most embarrassing moments in the history of the Mossad.
A simple chronology starting from May might give a hint. On May 5, Israeli President Shimon Peres criticized Norway for talking to Hamas (TV2, 2011a). On July 14, the Jerusalem Post criticized foreign minister Jonas Gahr Störe. On July 18, Störe received the President of the Palestinians Mahmoud Abbas in Oslo. Störe said: "Norway is ready to recognize a Palestinian state when such a state is ready." He signed a treaty with President Abbas, and the Palestinian representative in Oslo was given the rank of Ambassador (UD, 2011). Two days later, Jonas Gahr Störe said at Utöya: "The occupation must end, the wall must be taken down and it must happen now" (TV2, 2011b). This was a language perceived by the Israelis as unacceptable. On July 22, the pro-Israeli Breivik carried out his terrorist attacks in the government quarters and at Utöya. In his manifesto, he wrote that he was against Arbeiderpartiet and its "multiculturalism" which opened for Muslim immigration and for talks to Hamas. Two days later, defense minister Ehud Barak said (2011) to the Israeli army: "The government's most important task is to mobilize Europe to stop the Palestinian leadership's proposal [for a Palestinian state]". On July 24, the Jerusalem Post expressed its regrets concerning the events in Norway, but wrote that Norway must put question marks around its "multiculturalism" (JP, July 24). On July 28, a columnist in the Jerusalem Post wrote a far from flattering critique of Norway (Glick, 2011). On July 31, Barry Rubin wrote his column in the Jerusalem Post claiming that Norwegian "support for terrorism" (against Israel) might have led to terrorism being directed against Norway. This aroused an agitated critique from Jews in Norway. On August 4, the Jerusalem Post apologized to Norway and compared some people's Islamophobia to how the Nazis portrayed Jews in the 1930s (JP, July 31). The next day, the Jerusalem Post published a sharp criticism of primarily Rubin, written by deputy foreign minister Espen Barth Eide (2011). But among the 300 commentaries which were posted after Jerusalem Post's apology, many supported Rubin. Israeli websites recommended letting the Norwegians "drown in blood", "they deserve it" (Goldberg, 2011). On September 27, Espen Barth Eide said in the U.N. that Norway would be glad to welcome Palestine as a full member of the U.N. (TV2, 2011c).
Immediately after the event, Israeli President Shimon Peres and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu expressed their regrets in no uncertain terms concerning the terrorist attack in Oslo and at Utöya, to King Harald and Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg. Here, there was no Israeli lack of clarity, but at the same time, other Israeli players, not unimportant, sent out a signal that Norway must count on suffering some losses, if it continues its Palestine policy. The July 22 bombing and massacre in Norway, according to this line of thought, would have been a response to Norwegian policy. A parallel is said to be (WMR, 2011) the bombing of the King David Hotel in Jerusalem in 1946, by the Jewish paramilitary group Irgun. After British security forces had tried to crush Jewish military organizations, the paramilitary organization Haganah instructed the extremist group Irgun (and future Prime Minister Menachem Begin) to place bombs in the King David Hotel. The hotel functioned as the colonial headquarters of the British authorities. The bombing was directed against British rule, to force them to change policy, without any official acknowledgement of the terrorist attack from the Israeli side. On July 22, the Irgun detonated a bomb in the King David Hotel. 91 persons were killed (41 Arabs, 28 Brits, 17 Palestinian Jews and some others). The British were outraged. Jewish leaders immediately condemned the terrorist attack in unmistakable terms (King David Hotel wiki). Haganah leader, later Prime Minister, David Ben-Gurion, condemned the Irgun. Much later, it was confirmed that it was the Haganah which had given the instruction to Irgun. The bombing of the King David Hotel is considered having contributed to the British giving up their colonial rule in 1948. When the 60 year anniversary of the bombing was celebrated in 2006 by Irgun activists and current Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the British protested against it, saying that the celebration was improper.
In both Jerusalem 1946 and Oslo 2011, the official regrets contrasted to the unofficial forceful language. It has been pointed out that there is an Israeli tradition for terrorism. According to Prime Minister Moshe Sharett, Ben-Gurion's associate Shimon Peres was directly involved in the bombing of U.S. and British cultural institutions in Kairo and Alexandria in 1954 (Rockach, 1980). The buildings were blown up with the purpose of putting the blame on the Egyptians and creating divisions between Egypt and the U.S./Great Britain. But Israeli agents in Egypt got caught, the agent net was uncovered, and Israeli Minister of Defense Pinhas Lavon had to resign. Prime Minister Sharett was not informed. In his diary, he puts the blame on the former Prime Minister and leader of Haganah, David Ben-Gurion (ibid.). For 50 years, Israel denied responsibility, but in 2005 the attack was officially celebrated by President Moshe Katzav (Lavon Affair wiki). Israel's celebration of a brutal bombing attack only a few years ago, and the similarity to the King David Hotel operation, in combination with Israel's explicit critique of Norwegian policy, have made some observers ask whether Israel was behind the July 22 attacks in Oslo (WMR, 2011; Azaziah, 2011). Breivik writes that Israel is "our primary ally" and that "it has been decided [when] the attack is to be carried out" (Breivik, 2011: 1424), as if someone had given him instruction to carry out the attack on a certain day. This "someone" should have chosen the date for revenge for the fiasco in 1973, and also the day which honored the first big Israeli bombing attack, the one in the King David Hotel: the same day, July 22."

In the section "The initiators" Tunander points out that these leads are no proof.

"Even though there is some logic to this reasoning, this is no explanation. It is not sufficient to seek answers in Breivik's anti-Jihadism or violent rhetoric or in possible Israeli interests or in their celebration of bombing attacks. The operations being carried out on a certain date, carrying a symbolic meaning, is no proof either. Breivik might have wished to honor the first crusaders' victory in Jerusalem, on July 22, 1099. It is also not enough to point out that Breivik was marked by the NATO bombing of Serbia in the Kosovo wars. The Serbs were being humiliated, and that laid the basis for a Serbian revanchism, which is said to have been of great importance to Breivik, but this in itself cannot explain how a Norwegian became capable of blowing up the government quarters or shooting close to 100 people at Utöya (69 being killed). Inspiration and interests do not offer a sufficient explanation. Neither can Breivik's unfortunate relation with his father explain his insensibility. His training with computer games and use of steroids might have made him more insensitive, but even this is not enough. Someone who is being hateful and has learnt from books the necessity of killing people, cannot just go out on the street to kill 100 children. Such a task requires a kind of brutalization, like a bloody war experience or a paramilitary training, capable of lowering the threshold for use of massive violence. It should be investigated whether Breivik has operated in some other kind of environment, other than intellectual anti-Jihadism.
We know that both Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer have supported the extremist group English Defence League (EDL) (Jihad Watch, 2010). The EDL is, however, very violent and has carried out attacks on Muslims. Despite the EDL being pro-Israel, many members have intimate links to the Nazi environment, and there is a tension between the pro-Israeli EDL and its Nazi-inspired activists. Breivik writes:
"I used to have more than 600 EDL members as Facebook friends and have spoken with tens of EDL members and leaders. In fact; I was one of the individuals who supplied them with processed ideological material [...] [But] the KT [Knights Templar] view the EDL as naïve fools, wasting all their energy monkey-screaming to deaf ears while they should instead have focused on means and methods that are meaningful in regards to achieving true political change, in regards to tearing down the multiculturalist regime known as Britain." (Breivik, 2011: 1436)
The red Maltese cross which Breivik has placed on the cover of his manifesto comes from the Knights Templar order, but a similar cross is also the symbol of EDL. One of its founders, a former spokesman for EDL, Paul Ray, now lives in Malta and has become a member of the Templar knights. He uses the name "Lionheart" (Ray Blog), which in Breivik's manifesto appears as the name of his mentor (Breivik, 2011: 1415). Breivik also says that one of the founders of the EDL is possibly one of the founders of the "Knights Templar" (page 1363). On the internet there are videos from an "Order 777" which show Ray's connections to the German "Templar knights" and former Nazi Nick Greger. One video shows Templar knights, Ray and Greger wearing T-shirts with the same Maltese cross which Ray has on his blog and which Breivik has on the cover of his manifesto (Ray Blog). Another video shows their hero, General William Boykin (ibid), calling for war against Islam. Ray's Templar Knights videos and Greger's Order 777 videos show the Christian heroes, the fight against Islam and the coming victory of the Templar Knights, just like Breivik's own video which he has placed on the internet (Greger video; Breivik's video). The sacral chorals and the repeated zooming of images with thick black frames are identical. One has to ask whether these videos have been produced by the same person. The same painting of a kneeling Templar knight is found in Breivik's manifesto and in the Order 777 video. Either there is a connection between Breivik and the Order 777, or a professional third actor must be involved. Order 777 videos also show Greger in Africa, in Liberia and his explicit support for Liberia's former president Charles Taylor and for the Serbian commander Milorad Ulemek or "Legija". Greger also talks about his connections to the Russian mafia.
Ulemek was a Serbian criminal, "crusader" and second in command of the Serbian paramilitary force Arkan's Tigers, which spread death and fear in Bosnia in the 1990s. In 1999 Ulemek became the leader of the Serbian special forces, and some videos about him from the 1990s use the same esthetics and symbolism as the Order 777 films (and Breivik's film). Some sequences of these films are identical (Greger video; Ulemek video). Either Greger has copied these videos, or they have all been edited by someone in the Serbian network. Ulemek belonged to the Serbian mafia (Zemun) and had connections to the Russian mafia. He was sentenced for the assassination attempt against Vuk Draskovic and for the murder of former President Ivan Stambolic in 2000 (and his men shot Prime Minister Zoran Djindjic in 2003). At the same time, many Serbs view him as a war hero. In Belgrade in 2004, he turned himself in (Ulemek wiki). Breivik writes:
"I came in contact with Serbian cultural conservatives through the internet. This initial contact would eventually result in my contact with several key individuals all over Europe and the forming of the group who would later establish the military order and tribunal, PCCTS, Knights Templar [...] I met with them for the first time in London and later on two occasions in Balticum. I had the privilege of meeting one of the greatest living war heroes of Europe at the time, a Serbian crusader and war hero who had killed many Muslims in battle. Due to EU persecution for alleged crimes against Muslims he was living at one point in Liberia. I visited him in Monrovia once, just before the founding session in London, 2002." (Breivik, 2011: 1379)
Here, we have perhaps found the key to Breivik's development. Breivik writes about the Serbian network and that he has been initiated into the secret knights templar order by a Serbian war hero (at the time in exile in Liberia), who was being represented by him at the founding session in London in 2002. It appears likely that this war hero was Ulemek or one of his closest collaborators. In another place, Breivik mentions Ulemek's heroism:
"If we had executed let's say, 100 000 Marxist intellectuals in Western Europe after WW2 and banned all form of Marxist doctrine we could have prevented the creation of the anti-European hate ideology known as multiculturalism. It's absolutely essential that we, the cultural conservative patriots of Europe do not repeat this mistake again [...] Patriotic militias must create and update execution lists containing the names of every single parliamentarian, journalist, NGO leader/board member and university lecturer/professor etc. who has supported and propagated multiculturalist doctrines [...] The biggest threat to an effective and thorough lynching campaign is the temptation to commence the deportation of Muslims. This is why the lynching force should only contain soldiers under professional leadership with the given «unofficial and clandestine» mandate. An illustration [...] The Serb Volunteer Guard - SDG was a volunteer paramilitary unit [10 000 men] founded and led by Željko Ražnatovic, widely known as Arkan [Second in command: Colonel Nebojsa Djordjevic Suca and Milorad Ulemek] [...] The Albanian Muslims in Serbia refused deportation and convertion from Islam (and instead started armed resistance) and as such were targeted for annihilation." (ibid: 1276-77)"

Finally Tunander in the the section "The investors" puts up the questions about the financing of Breivik´s terrorism:

"If Ulemek actually played a role for Breivik's "Templar knights", then it is likely that the Russian at the 2002 London meeting could be the former GRU officer and major general Vladimir Filin (Scott, 2011). He was close to Ulemek and had connections to the Russian mafia. From 2000, he was vice president of the company Far West LLC, which has been described by Peter Dale Scott: "In fact, Ulemek was said to have been so close to Filin, that Far West was ‘threatened' by Ulemek's (Legija's) imprisonment" (Scott, 2005, 2010).
According to Scott, Far West was created in 1998 by former GRU officers who had been working with heroin in western Afghanistan in the 1980s. Just like Ulemek, Far West is said to have been deeply involved in the heroin trade, and the company is also said to have been a big player in the weapon trade in Eastern Europe, Central Asia, the Caucasus and in Colombia. Filin, who was pivotal in the Ukrainian intelligence service, is said to possess both Ukrainian, British and Serbian passports. His activity in Georgia in 2003-2004 was supposedly financed by Kellogg Brown & Root (KBR/Halliburton) in cooperation with the CIA. He contributed to Georgia's (and Israel's) attack on South Ossetia in 2008. Far West was a front for an Eastern European-Central Asian network with connections to, among others, U.S., British, Israeli, Turkish and Saudi intelligence (ibid).
Belorussian opposition leader Mikhail Reshetnikov, says that Breivik has been in Belorus three times and visited a paramilitary training camp owned by a Russian, a former GRU officer, now Dutch citizen, Valery Lunev. Belorussian authorities confirm that Breivik was in Minsk in March 2005. He should have been called "The Viking" in intelligence circles. On the two other occasions, Breivik supposedly visited the country on a false passport and received large sums to finance his activity (Mamchur, 2011). If Breivik received this type of paramilitary training, then this could explain his brutality in what happened in Utöya.
But Valery Lunev was at the same time administrative director of the Dubai office of the company Far West and a colleague of Filin from western Afghanistan. Lunev should have been involved in the coup in Georgia in 1991, in the civil wars in Tadzhikistan and is said to have collaborated with the radical rightwing organization The Grey Wolves (in Turkey), which has operated for the CIA with an important role for the heroin trade via Turkey. Two other Far West Generals and GRU officers from western Afghanistan, Anton Surikov from Georgia with Turkish and U.S. passports, and Russian Saidov from Dagestan with a Turkish passport, have the same connections to the CIA and the Grey Wolves. Saidov should have been head of intelligence for the Chechen President and had links to the Saudi head of intelligence Prince Turki bin Feisal, while Surikov worked with his colleague, Saudi weapon dealer Adnan Khashoggi, who was deeply involved in the Iran-Contras affair, with Israel's Shimon Peres for deliveries to Iran and in the laundering of money via Antigua. Surikov was suspected of having been complicit in the bombing attacks on neighborhoods in Moscow on Sept. 9 and 13, 1999 (killing 213 and wounding 450 people). Far West should have been 13 per cent owned by the previously Cheney-controlled military company KBR/Halliburton and 37 per cent by Prince Turki bin Feisal. General Filin and General Saidov should have controlled 25 per cent each, but in practice the company is being run by Saidov, Filin and Lunov, by Breivik's possible contacts. Far West consists of agents from the Baltic States, Belorus, the Ukraine, Georgia, Chechnya and Uzbekistan and is part of an Israeli-U.S.-Saudi-British-Turkish network for geopolitical transformation, intelligence, weapon trade and illegal drug trade (Scott, 2005).
This network, according to Peter Dale Scott, is a continuation of the scandalized bank BCCI, which operated with channeling money for weapon trade and drug trade via Antigua in West India. Breivik writes about his activity in 2005-2007:
"[I was] Managing director of E-Commerce Group AS [...] This was a front (milking cow) with the purpose of financing resistance/liberation related military operations. The company was successful although most of the funds were channelled through a Caribbean subsidiary (with base in Antigua, a location where European countries do not have access): Brentwood Solutions Limited with bank accounts in other Caribbean nations and Eastern Europe. E-Commerce Group was terminated in 2007 while most of the funds were channelled in an «unorthodox manner» to Norway available to the coming intellectual and subsequent operations phase." (Breivik, 2011: 1399)
The police claims that in 2007, 624,000 crowns were transferred to Breivik's bank account (Buanes, 2011). Breivik says to the police that he had six million crowns to finance the attack and writes that he used banks on Antigua.
"According to Lippestad, Breivik has said that he was travelling a lot, to a score of countries all over the world [...] [There is] talk of travels directly linked to the planning of the attacks, concentrated to the last years. In previous interrogations, Breivik has explained that he had six million crowns to finance the terrorist attacks (Kvilesjö and Tollersrud, 2011)."
It is of course not to be excluded that the contacts which are mentioned by Breivik, only exist in Breivik's own imagination, that he is nothing but a dreamer who carried out the operation all on his own, and that his talk of travels and millions is pure bunk. But how could he succeed in carrying out such a brutal operation without professional assistance? How could he acquire the equipment to carry out the attacks without having any known assets? Where did the 624,000 Norwegian crowns which were placed on his bank account in 2007, come from? How has it been possible for him to write a 1,500 page long manifesto, partly in good English, partly in less good English, without having written anything before? 100 pages or perhaps more have been copied from anti-Jihadist websites, and some pages have been copied from the so-called Unabomber, but what about the rest? How has it been possible to produce a video that is so similar to some other anti-Jihad films in content, technique and esthetics, without there being any connection? From where does he know about banking connections via Antigua? And why is he indicating that someone else has made the decision about the timing of the operation? Some evidence is pointing to Breivik's attack being not entirely a solo performance.
We have been discussing the extreme right-wing Israeli and Judeo-Christian side of Breivik's network, Israeli interests in disciplining Norway and Israeli celebrations of bombing attacks. Here, Breivik's attack appears to be a new King David Hotel operation: on July 22. But even though this explanation could seem logic, the explanation could be exactly the reverse. Perhaps the operation was a Saudi response to an Israeli game? Far West is at the point of intersection between Israeli and Saudi intelligence, but it is being dominated by the Saudis. If Far West has played any role whatsoever for Breivik, this is a reason to take a closer look at the Saudis' conflict with the Israelis. It is known that Gust Avrakotos, who was behind the CIA's arming of the Afghan Mujahidin in the 1980s, criticized Cheney's man, congressman Charlie Wilson, for  having "incorporated the Israelis into the CIA's Muslim Jihad" (Crile, 2003:391). Israeli planes flew Israeli weapons to what later became al-Qaida, in other words Wilson, in conflict with the CIA and the Saudis, had incorporated the Israelis to infiltrate "al-Qaida" (Scott 2007:108). In the 2000s, when the PLO had problems with activists from al-Qaida, PLO secret services found that al-Qaida's liaison to these Palestinians belonged to Shin Beth, Israel's domestic intelligence service (Claudet, 2002). These facts have led to a discussion whether fundamental parts of al-Qaida have been infiltrated by the Israelis, and whether the latter use these groups to discredit Islam (Veterans Today, 2010). Perhaps the Saudis think that the Israelis have gone too far, and that they in response via the Eastern European mafia have recruited paramilitary anti-Jihadists to have them put question marks around the legitimacy of the anti-Jihadism. Far West is closely linked to Chechen terrorism, but above all to the Saudis, whereas the links to the Israelis and the neo-conservatives seem to be of a financial/criminal character. In that case, Breivik's Templar knights can paradoxically be regarded as a mirror-image of al-Qaida. According to this hypothesis, July 22 becomes the Saudis' sophisticated response to Israel's activism, or, in the alternative, the Israeli-U.S.-Saudi network is primarily interested in a general destabilization (Scott, 2011) which I have earlier described as "calibration of violence" (Tunander, 2009). In short, the signs we can interpret point in different directions, but historically this type of terrorist attack has often been related to some kind of government service, and we cannot exclude that this is true also in this case. In any case, it is not unlikely that more hardboiled actors are involved in the terror attack in Oslo, than the ideologues I described initially."

The questions Professor Tunander has raised, following his investigation of Breivik´s "Manifest", points to the possible involvement of networks controlled by the British Empire. Those, who refuse to discuss the possible international networks of Breivik, are helping the concealment of the political environment and thereby the connections to intelligence services behind such an act. They not only put there own country in danger of terrorism but also in the danger of a Third World War.

----