FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist  Chat Chat  UsergroupsUsergroups  CalendarCalendar RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Anders Behring Breivik trial transcripts

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    9/11, 7/7 & the War on Freedom Forum Index -> General
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Mark Gobell
On Gardening Leave
On Gardening Leave


Joined: 24 Jul 2006
Posts: 4529

PostPosted: Sun Apr 22, 2012 12:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Anders Breivik Trial resources:

Attack On The Labor Party

Blogging the events surrounding the 7/22 attacks in Norway

Archive for April 16th, 2012

7/22 trial commences

Oslo District Court 04/16/2012

Google translation [edited for clarity]:

Breivik: – I do not recognize the Norwegian court system
4/16/2012

He protested when District Court Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen assumed that he was out of work in Ila prison.

- It is not correct. I am a writer, working from prison, said Breivik.

He also repeated that he does not recognize the court and stated that Arntzen is biased because she is an acquaintance of former Justice Minister Hanne Harlem [sister of former prime minister and Labor party leader Gro Harlem Brundtland]. Arntzen has herself informed this to the court when she was appointed and the conclusion was that she is not disqualified.

- I do not recognize the Norwegian court system because you have received your mandate from political parties, that support multiculturalism. Moreover, it is known that you are a friend of Hanne Harlem, the sister of Gro Harlem Brundtland.

Handcuffs removed

Breivik have the same sideburns as we have seen in prison meetings. Well-groomed.

Breivik remained standing looking down while he waited for the handcuffs to be removed. As soon as they were off, he repeated the right-wing greeting which he also performed in the court proceeding in February.

- This is to show that I am proud and strong-willed, Breivik has previously stated…

Original article: Breivik: – Jeg anerkjenner ikke den norske rett
_____

Google translation [edited for clarity]:

Historian: Breivik-greeting is part of the play

4/16/2012

Mentioned in the manifest

In his so-called manifesto Breivik mentioned the “the military salute for Templar Knights.” Here he describes that the right hand should be raised with a clenched fist, preferably wearing a white glove.

The clenched fist represents “strength, honor and hatred against the Marxist tyrants in Europe, while the white glove symbolizes purity, duty, kinship and martyrdom.” He also writes that the greeting is not to be confused with the Nazi salute or the Roman greeting, where the palm should be flat and face down.

According to Breivik done the Knights Templar salutation is performed in defiance of the multicultural elite in Western Europe that Breivik views as left-wing fascists.

Breivik’s defenders have previously said that he sees himself as an appointed Templar Knight that will rescue Norway from multiculturalism and Islamifisation….

Original article: Historiker: Breivik-hilsenen er en del av skuespillet
_____

Google translation [edited for clarity]:

Breivik claims emergency self defence

4/16/2012

When the indictment was read out, there were several in the audience that wept loudly when the name of their loved ones were read out, but they managed to quickly gather themselves. There was a pressing and serious atmosphere in the room, when District Attorney Inga Bejer Engh described the fatal injuries.

Breivik showed no emotions openly, but he remained sitting and biting his lower lip. He closed his eyes and looked down at the table. To the new court appointed psychiatrists, Terje Tørrissen and Agnar Aspaas, the terror accused 33-year-old has stated that it was tough to hear the indictment when it was taken out….

Original article: Breivik påberoper seg nødrett
_____

Google translation [edited for clarity]:

Breivik in tears from own video

4/16/2012

While playing a video Breivik posted himself online the defendant began to cry.

After first having gone through how Breivik planned his acts of terror the prosecutors play a propaganda video. When it becomes clear that the video will be played Breivik seems pleased that the court will get to see the video he has made himself.

The video contains various pictures and texts about the ideology that the defendant believes he stands for.

The pictures are accompanied by a pompous music, the music creates a special atmosphere in the courtroom. Some survivors look away, others follow on the screens.

After a while, Anders Behring Breivik begins crying.

The accused dries his tears, and was clearly moved by his own propaganda video. This is the first time Breivik shows strong emotions during the trial.

After clearly having had to wipe tears Breivik takes himself a little together, and watch the rest of the video.

By use of tightly written, almost unreadable text Breivik gave his definitions of cultural Marxism, Islam and Nazism. The video thereafter showed how Breivik believes the claimed organization Knights Templar shall save Europe from certain destruction.

Accompanied by pictures of Crusaders, the video called for others to contribute in the battle against what Breivik considers Europes enemies….

Original article: Breivik gråt av egen video
_____

Written by Admin1

April 16, 2012 at 10:36 am

Posted in Uncategorized

7/22 trial schedule

The schedule for the trial against Anders Behring Breivik is as follows:

Monday, April 16 – Monday, April 23
Indictment. Introduction Lecture. Anders Behring Breivik explains himself from Tuesday April 17.

Tuesday, April 23 – Monday, April 30
Bomb and the scene, Oslo. The deceased and the victims Oslo.

Thursday, May 3 – Monday, June 4
Arrival Utøya. Weapons and venue, Utøya. The deceased Utøya. The victims, Utøya.

Monday, June 4 – Tuesday, June 5
Former friends, mother and online contacts about contact with Breivik.

Wednesday, June 6
The [police] investigation.

Thursday, June 7 – Friday, June 15
Evidence from the defence and plaintiffs’ lawyers.

Monday, June 18 – Wednesday, June 20
Forensic psychiatry.

Wednesday, June 20 – Friday, June 22
Procedures.

(Source NRK)

Original article: Slik blir Breivik-rettssaken

_________________
The Medium is the Massage - Marshall McLuhan.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mark Gobell
On Gardening Leave
On Gardening Leave


Joined: 24 Jul 2006
Posts: 4529

PostPosted: Sun Apr 22, 2012 12:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Attack On The Labor Party

Blogging the events surrounding the 7/22 attacks in Norway
Breivik testimony April 17, 2012

Oslo District Court 04/17/2012

[04/17 This post will be updated]

See also: Breivik’s statement in court April 17, 2012

Google translation [edited for clarity]:

Breivik: – Yes, I would have done it again

4/17/2012

Breivik: – Yes, I would do it again

Behring Anders Breivik read a prepared document when he began his testimony in the Oslo District Court.

The declaration should according to Breivik form a frame around his own defense and explain his actions.

- I stand here as a representative of the Norwegian and European anticommunist and anti-Islamic resistance movement, said Breivik when he began to lay the framework for his defense, as he explained it.

No confidence in democracy

Breivik said that in Norway and Western Europe there has not existed any democraty since the interwar period. It was at this time those he calls the liberalists and culture-marxists took over power. These groups have since carried out what Breivik calls a deconstruction of society.

This is how he has lost confidence in democracy, and then it is according to Breivik a short step to take up arms.

Breivik also said that brutality is not necessarily evil, and referred to U.S. military leaders during World War II when they decided to bomb Japan with nuclear weapons.

- 300,000 Japanese were killed, but they saved perhaps several millions. I and other militant nationalists are using exactly the same logic, Breivik said.

Should prevent civil war

The purported logic is in that the attack on 22 July should get the Labour Party to change its policy and thereby prevent a future civil war as a result of multiculturalism in society.

The only thing that should surprise, is that such a major attack has not happened before, said Breivik.

- Yes, I would have done it again, because the crimes against my country and my culture is a thousand times as barbaric, the defendant said.

Interrupted several times

Breivik spent a long time and was several times interrupted by the court administrator, who asked him to word himself briefly.

The first interruption came after half an hour. He had come to page 6 of 13 and strongly stated theat he should be allowed to complete [reading] what he had written.

- This is the framework for the defense, and I can not defend myself without explaining why 22/7 was carried out, Breivik said a bit later, explaining that the document had already been compressed down to 13 pages from the original of 20 pages.

Strong statements

24 minutes into the reading of his “document” Anders Behringg Breivik was interrupted by the court administrator Wenche Elisabeth Arntzen who told him to moderate himself.

- You said initially that you had moderated your rhetoric. Out of consideration for the bereaved …, Arntzen began.

- It will not become worse than this, said Breivik, who had just compared AUF [Labor youth organization] with the Hitler [Jugend] Youth, and made strong statements about the journalist Marte Michelet [left wing Norwegian journalist].

The press got flack

Also the press is totally penetrated by Marxists and liberals, according to Breivik, and stamped Norwegian journalists as anti nationalist political activists.

- News agencies shall be objective, but that they are not. A journalist who is not objective, but who supports the multi-cultural, is not a [real] journalist, but a political activist.

Breivik believes that 30 percent of news agencies “should have spoken our cause,” but instead 100 percent are for multiculturalism.

Thus, according to Breivik it is not possible to succeed through free speech and democracy, and then it is a short step to arms.
..

Original article: Breivik: – Ja, jeg ville gjort det igjen
_____

Google translation:

Questioning of Breivik – word for word

4/17/2012

Read the prosecutor Inga Bejer-Engh and Svein Holden questioning by Anders Breivik Behring below:

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – When is the right set. When I give the word to the prosecutor for further questioning by the defendant.

VG: – Breivik looking out at the prosecutor as she talks to him.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Now you have explained yourself a little, Breivik, and you’ve realized that we should follow up with the questions we might have. We have set aside quite a few days to your statement.

What we are concerned, it’s a bit about how you become who you have become. What has been your way up to today.

What we are concerned, is how you get there you are, from when you left high school up to 22 July. What we will discuss first a bit about why you did this, but it also may be that we get some BRAZZY this again later.

So we are going to hear about your planning and how you planned it and for how long. After that we will talk about 22 July and what happened that day.

But before we go through the sessions I have planned, I will take up the thread of what you just said and what happened yesterday. I have listened to what you have read to the judge and made me some ideas of your essence.

Then you can correct me if it is wrong. The way I understand you, then what you describe as a ULEV injustice, that’s why you sit here today.

That’s why you sit here today. I want to learn more about where does your duty to defend the Norwegian people from?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is the result of chance, which started when I was fifteen. Maybe even earlier.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – But how did you get the right to defend the Norwegian people from?

Anders Breivik Behring – I talked all about the universal human rights allows the defense of their ethnic group and its culture. Many militant extremists in Europe and elsewhere, it takes as a starting point.

All unique people and cultures have the right to fight for survival, and against its own extinction.

The starting point is what I just mentioned. There are universal human rights. If you put it on the tip it may sound absurdly out. Basically it is that, yes.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – But there is a right you have given yourself then, or has it come from others?

Behring Anders Breivik: – People who choose to fight, and who have fought for 2 World War II, they have very little had the opportunity to organize. Before the intelligence services got so many resources that today, it was possible, but today it has become impossible to organize.

You can also see what al-Qaeda after 22 July has embraced a encellesystem. They understand that it is not possible to build hierarchical organizations and operate conventional resistance.

VG: – People learn from each other, I might say that politically motivated violence, says Breivik questions about where he
take this from, and before he is interrupted by Bejer-Engh.

Behring Anders Breivik: – For quite a few years ago, was 90 cells rolled up. We should have been a encellesystem. There has been a constant development. We adapt and evolve, as intelligence health services do too. I learn from others, I have learned from Norwegian militants.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Have you given up that right themselves, or are there others who have left it? It’s that simple question.

[Breivik laughs]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – But you have given yourself this right, or is it someone who has given you this right?

Breivik: – I see a ULEV injustice. I see that my people are victims of ethnic cleansing. It is everyone’s duty to fight this. They have it for good, there is no state that has given me permission to what I have done, says Breivik before Bejer-Engh asks if he has decided this or the other.

The problem is that the nationalists after World War II, has had no sovereign states, because the last nationalist government in Europe was defeated in World War II. So I have not received any mandate from the sovereign state.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – When I ask you these questions, then answer the others, I am more interested in you. Have you decided that you should save the Norwegian people?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I came in contact with militant nationalists in 2001, and it helped that I took the choice I have made. I made it myself. There are two dates that are important to note, that in 2001 and 2006. But I decided it ourselves.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – You have given you the right even to defend the Norwegian people?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have not been asked by a sovereign state, that’s right.

Behring Anders Breivik: – If you take based on universal human rights, one can give themselves such a mandate.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Do you get such a mandate, or have you given yourself such a mandate?

[Here are questions and answers quickly back and forth between the prosecutor and Breivik. Bejer-Engh repeats these questions several times, without getting a clear answer.]

Anders Breivik Behring – I and those associated with me have given me this mandate. When one sits and sees that their culture destroyed furniture and it will be suitable for a deconstruction, there are many who feel this somurettferdig because they never have the choice about this. When they choose to fight, someone chooses to ..

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – But your mandate? I understand that you want to defend the Norwegian Indigenous Peoples. Does it have any right to kill in defense game you fight?

Behring Anders Breivik: – So. People who choose to become militant nationalists, they support the armed struggle and as long as guns are involved in a fight, there will always be people who die.

I came in contact with other militant nationalists in 2001. We want to build a system based on autonomy and independent cells. I have had very little contract with this group since 2001, but there has been contact.

With the mandate we have given ourselves. I and other militant nationalists in Europe. It is not because we want to kill other people. We would focus on a very important issue. You have to remove the ULEV injustice rather than continue operating censorship.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – But the right to use violence in that game, it is an admission that you have given yourself, or did others given you the right?

But it is the group that has permission to use violence in this game or have you decided that?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I would say that generally I have even given me the mandate. When I was in contact with those in 2001, I decided not then I will blow up government building. The decision came much later.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – But if the group you’re talking about, which we shall return, they have had no impact on the mandate you had 22 July?

Behring Anders Breivik: – With the mandate that we have given ourselves. Politically motivated violence, to get attention to your choice, you have to remove this ULEV violence.

To the extent that it legitimizes it. They legitimize predict projections for the opposition. If you look at the 40 different political violence carried out by national militants since World War II, there is a red thread in them. In everything from Erik Blücher Johnny Olsen Arne Myrdal.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – But little concrete, with the group that you refer to as you say you were in contact with, they have had any impact on your exercise of violence so that you in your mandate to use violence?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have been influenced by them. They were militant nationalists before I was. They have influenced the radicalization of me.

No, I will not claim it, but maybe in an indirect manner, by influencing anyone. Through dialogue, then one could help shape a person, so … But in a very small extent.

To a small extent they have shaped me, but mainly I have taken inspiration from other places.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – If you are going to say something about the militant nationalists you met in 2001, you can say something about how they have influenced you to how you are today?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It was my first encounter with militant nationalists, but it was because I searched the solution that they represented.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – What do they represent?

Anders Breivik Behring – No, we are talking about several individuals, and one can not put them in a uniform group, but some were very … Thus, the confrontation.

Behring Anders Breivik: – While others may want to build a gressrotorganisajon who fought on the streets, but that was non-violent and democratic.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – But when you come in contact with they were talking about using violence in this resistance then?

Behring Anders Breivik: – There was talk about it, yes.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Why would you use violence?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Because you did not express themselves, they were excluded from the democracy, as it was for all nationalists and cultural conservatives after the 2nd World War II.

And when one is excluded from democracy and is banned from the liberalization of food and kulturmarxister there is only one solution left.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Had these people you met in 2001. they had experienced the same injustice as you?

Behring Anders Breivik: – They had experienced an injustice, but not necessarily related to what I have experienced.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – If you had the same goal?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I would not tell much about the people, but what I can say is everything I have written in the compendium right, but it is a glossy picture of what was.

Behring Anders Breivik: – Holden stressed the uniforms as important, it’s just a moment. It is not important at all. It is only a suggestion from my side with tittelssystemt to help create a Dunamar. The battle will last for decades and it is important to have a foundation.

Behring Anders Breivik: – But what is an existing system is the network.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – So the network that you are talking about that you had a conversation with other nationalists, it is real?

[Breivik confirmed.]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Grassland: The KT-network?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is KT, yes.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – But you say that the manifesto is a glossy picture, but that KT is real. When you say “glossy picture”, what do you do?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is not a lie. but it is a magnificent representation of the actual realities.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Does that mean that you have embellished on things, right?

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – But when you say that it is not important, why have you pictured yourself in uniform?

[Breivik believes he has already answered this.]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: It is important, but not so important?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is important, but it is far from the most important. I believe that I and some others have tried to introduce new traditions of militant nationalists in Europe. We have taken some from al Qaeda and Muslim extremists, including glorfisieringen of martyrdom. I wrote a martyrdomgave in the compendium. It comes from Muslim extremists.

One can look at the al-Qaeda as the most successful military organization in the world.

Unfortunately, until now, the resistance in Europe since World War 2 was completely pathetic, so I introduce new traditions among the so-called right wing militants in Europe.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Now, I noted that you said I and some others want to be someone else, is it Knights Templar you talking about?

[Breivik confirmed.]

Behring Anders Breivik: – But it is also of course other than those I’m talking about, yes.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – I understand that you would wear my uniform in court? Why are you smiling?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Basically, when I spoke with the first two expert witnesses, so I did not have access to the media, so I had to choose only one line of how I would present it.

After I was arrested by the police and started questioning and was going through an initial evaluation, I decided to go for a line where I chose a magnificent presentation.

It has been shown that there was a big mistake by me.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Why was it wrong?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Because I have been portrayed as insane. I should not have chosen such a pompous production, so where do I just take the criticism on it. And now I’ve got an expert report against me because of it.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I should not selected this presentation, but I have already located lies in the report. From Huseby and Sørheim. Lies from the Husby and Sørheim.

I submitted an article to three newspapers in Norway. Unfortunately, not pressed it but where it emerges omtrt 100 of the 200 lies. I may well take the feature article and go through each point.

[Bejer-Engh Breivik told that she has read his op-ed]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – As I understand that you believe that the first experts perceived the error because you appeared pompous?

Behring Anders Breivik: – So, I chose a line of explanation, and in retrospect I see that it was a big mistake for me to do.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Why did you choose such a line?

Behring Anders Breivik: – If I put myself it would remove all doubt that I was insane, instead the opposite happened.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh – How have you geared up for it?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It was really explain it in such a pompous manner possible and likely stay within. All I said was rational and that I stand for.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I stand for everything I said, but I made ​​it very easy for them to misunderstand what I said. I have to take self-criticism.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – How have you geared up for it?

Anders Breivik Behring – I toned it down quite a bit.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – What did you toned down?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Pompøsiteten.

I chose to portray in the beginning it as a glossy picture, and it was a mistake – it was a big mistake. But that does not mean that everything is not true of starting. All I said is true.

To take an example. I have the compendium conveyed a network as a pan-European organization. Basically there are only a very few individuals. That’s what I’m talking about when I talk about a pompous presentation. That is correct.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – The truth about the Knights Templar is that there is a large organization?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I walked away from the presentation I started with.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – The truth is that the Knights Templar is the organization, but to a lesser extent than what you described it as?

Breivik: – So many individuals that I have claimed, but I have used adjectives that convey it in a pompous manner.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – As the scale of it is correct, but the adjectives you used does not?

Behring Anders Breivik: – No, not right, but I have used adjectives to describe it in a pompous manner.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – But the network you have described in the compendium is correct?

Høyesterettsjustituarius is a lawyer.

How does it with the Supreme Court in Norway?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I’m talking about the principle of using a pompous production system.

What I am saying is that sovereign states, it is tradition for the use of this. The parallel is incorrect.

Behring Anders Breivik: – Forget I said it. I am a militant nationalist.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – But a Supreme Court, it’s a real feature of the Norwegian legal system?

What is it like for you to have such a responsibility?

VG – There are some trick questions, I understand, says Breivik questions about how it is to have such responsibility from Bejer-Engh.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have decided to act. I am a militant nationalist. There’s no point in talking about responsibility, so you try to do. I have chosen to act.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have answered this question before, then I know how it was abused.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Can not you come up with the answer that you believe is right now?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I suggest rather that talk about the facts, and that is that I’m militant nationalist and I chose to act.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – If you think you now that we start a clean slate, as Breivik. You know that the court is not aware of the questioning, so when I ask you how you feel this responsibility, you have the opportunity to clarify it for us.

Behring Anders Breivik: – You could say it in exactly the same way I said it without taking it out of context.

To illustrate the point I can use what I used initially in the day. It is under 2
World War II when the U.S. chose to bomb Japan. The military command in the United States decided to do it. They did it not to be onsdskapsfulle. 300,000 dead Japanese would prevent escalation of the war, said the Americans.

But it is action which is very barbarous, most killed 300,000 Japanese were innocent, but it was not a vicious act. That did it for something good, they tried to prevent a wider war.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – 3 But when it comes to actions 22 July, so I understand that you believe these actions are not evil, but necessary?

Behring Anders Breivik: – 3 In the same way you can compare the actions that I and other militant nationalists in Europe have done. We act not to be evil.

And we look at what we call a systematic deconstruction that is ethnic cleansing. It is absurd to say that what I have done is goodness, but a barbaric act is not necessarily evil.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – What you did 22 July is not evil?

Behring Anders Breivik: – No.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Your example from World War II, the bombing of Japan. It was a war. Is there a world you are in?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It was not what I said.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – But are you at war?

Behring Anders Breivik: – We try to work for the Norwegian for the Norwegian Indigenous Peoples and European rights of indigenous peoples. We can look at more than one thousand no-go zones in Europe, war-like zones, where the police did not even dare to run ghjennom.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – 1 Do you think that at some point I will and many other beautiful and understand what you did?

Behring Anders Breivik: – 2: Even among militant nationalists is what I have done very controversial. Perhaps half are against Utøya campaign, but all support the government quarter.

They think it is a legitimate goal, but about half of the militant nationalists in Europe, it seems that Utøya was over.

I knew it would be a highly controversial goal, that’s why I did everything I could to get that goal. I copper in advance to meet another goal. I worked basically the investigative conference, which had been a much more legitimate targets.

I worked really hard to realize it. I could unfortunately not to implement the action.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – We will get back to what plans you had something later, but I was not completely clear to you, is this: I understand you so that you have done this to protect or defend the Norwegian people?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I want to stop the deconstruction of the Norwegian ethnic group and Norwegian culture.

VG – Breivik laughs sarcastically while Bejer-Engh question.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – I understand that you do this to protect us. Will we come at a time when I and others see this?

Anders Breivik Behring – I do not think so. What I have done so on the fringes of militant nationalism that I will not be recognized as such.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – But if we do not understand this, what was the point of doing it?

Behring Anders Breivik: – One can already see, to take an example to illustrate the point: After 9/11 in the United States, was even Islamic militants shocked. They think it was all over, they thought it was barbaric. 3000 innocent people, they were not active, they were not anything.

Behring Anders Breivik: – And in the beginning it was a lot that opposed, but eventually it became a mentality change, a development. After a while, the second militant nationalist groups to become much more radicalized themselves.

Behring Anders Breivik: – It was a method of jump that was actually much more recognized for some years. In the beginning, people were shocked. After 22 July, were militant nationalists that, eventually, there has been a mentality change.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – What kind of mentality change?

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – But it’s that you say the influence of those you believe have the same opinions as you, but what do you think of this society which is unjust, do you think your actions 22 July is going to fix it?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Absolutely not. If you look at me as a nationalist, you take all wrong. I am an ultra-nationalist, and subject to a nationalist is completely different motives of an ultra-nationalist.

Anders Breivik Behring – I and those like me want to speed up a conflict because we are afraid of the port as a minority. To do that, I felt that I had to provoke a witch hunt by moderate conservative cultural nationalists.

I think 22 July managed to provoke a witch hunt of moderate cultural radical nationalists.

So it is indeed exactly what I hoped for. So there are many nationalists who have written letters to me and said ‘what are you doing, our fight is weakened “

But then, they have the very misunderstood. The goal is not that we should get an immediate boost. We will first see an increase in Europe. As the long term will increase radicalization.

VG – Breivik use your hands to a greater extent in order to explain to the prosecutor in the courtroom now.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Now we are talking about two things. In the long run it will increase your brethren? But I have seen you, so you want to change an injustice of the Norwegian society. Will your actions 22 July in the long run to change this injustice?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Absolutely. Because it will contribute to a witch hunt, it will lead to more censorship, which in turn will result in polarization, which in turn will contribute to radicalization.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Your goal is that as many as possible to become revolutionary?

Behring Anders Breivik: – My goal is a conflict before the ethnic Europeans are in the minority. Because when we are in the minority, it will be too late.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – You look at your actions 22 July as legal actions? Within the framework you’re talking about?

Behring Anders Breivik: – With radicalization, more choice. The more people who lose hope in a peaceful struggle for democracy, the more will be revolutionary. The only ones who understand it are those who are ultra-nationalists.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – What do you hope then?

Behring Anders Breivik: – The important thing for me is to make a contribution. You can imagine that a person who wants to sacrifice his life for that matter, who knows … I knew of course that I would be seen as a monster and malicious. Of course it is not for my own image that I am doing this because it’s the nature of the murder itself. So clearly there is a victim. I expect that most will never understand. Maybe if it gets a board from the right wing in Europe, many may understand it, but it is difficult to predict the future.

I do not know, maybe, maybe not, but it looks as those in America, they tried to fight, says Breivik questions whether he believe others can understand it.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – But you, several times in the place you used the term “we” and “our”, what is it?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I am talking about other militant nationalists.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have not put me in a good light with these actions. I do not expect that people understand what I have done but I have tried to explain as best I can.
Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh – Can you specify some, who it is?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Other militant nationalists in Europe that Laser Male 2, or NSU in Tysklland, Or as Erik Blücher or Johnny Olsen or Arne Myrdal.

VG – Prosecutors Bejer-Engh asks if there are these people talking about when Breivik says “we”.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I speak on behalf of everyone I represent, and include many militant nationalists in Europe.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – But we heard yesterday that the calling in from Utøya, the second call, do you remember that? Where did you say that you presented yourself as a commander, and so she asks what you are commander, and let you respond Knights Templar, that you are acting on behalf of them. If you have any comments on that?

When you said you acted on behalf of the Knights Templar in Europe, it is real?

Also you say that you are connected with two other people in Norway? Is it true that you are the commander?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have described a person who has overall responsibility associated with the other two, it is correct. So I referred to what I wrote in the manifesto, a cell commander.

What is the starting point of the statement is tr I tilnknyttet two in Norway that is affiliated with KT and as I have bekrevet a cell commander, this is real.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – Just to inject it, it’s one-man cell, or?

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – So is commander the same as a cell commander, and it is the same as you?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I am a self-sustaining and independent cell. I am affiliated with two others, who are also single cells. Total three-man cells.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Three one-man cells?

Behring Anders Breivik: – That is correct.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – When you say you acted on behalf of KT, is this the answer?

[Get brekreftelse ABB]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – In court yesterday, we saw the film you had made ​​and posted. What were you thinking when you saw that movie?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I thought of Norway and Europe, which is controlled by politicians and journalists who kill our country. It was a very touching film.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Why was it moving?

Anders Breivik Behring – I thought that my country is dying and my ethnic group is about to die.

[Confirm that this was why he was moved by the film]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Is it an important film for you?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is an ideological film, the music and the film itself is quite simple. It is an amateur film. I’m happy with it.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Why are you satisfied with it?

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Were you touched that it’s your first film or the content of it?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is especially the songs combined with the message and the knowledge that there is much international press who see the movie.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – What did you think about it that so many got it back?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Because it was my first YouTube movie and I was happy with it. Being the first is not so bad. But it’s just a trailer.

Anders Breivik Behring – I think it’s sad to see the culture and my people deconstructed.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – the grief of the see a people and a culture to be dekosntruert. This film reminded me of it. Among other things, the three songs I use everyday when I meditate

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – You said questions from the administrator that you had chosen to tone down a bit. Then I wonder what you’ve toned down?

Behring Anders Breivik: – That’s just the presentation of what I have described in the compendium.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Can you give some examples of what you have toned down?

What is the reason you chose to tone down?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is because I sent the madhouse so I had no choice. It was so wrong felt that I had no choice. It is appropriate to choose a communications platform, people understand.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Do you think people understand you more now that you have toned down?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Absolutely, I think so. But the introductory lecture today, it … I think it puts some answers to questions that have been in the past, for I am well aware that the small-speeches I have made, that they have been very compressed, and incomprehensible, except for a small group.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have been aware of it all the time, it was a tactical choice because I knew I could explain to me during the trial and then would I also have the opportunity to explain myself. It was a tactical choice.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – I understood you initially today that questions from the judge you had toned down because of the aggrieved party. Now it’s because you’ve been perceived as sick?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have never had any intention to conduct me to conduct myself in a way uaksptabel against the victims and those who have suffered as a consequence of what I have done. I have tried to take a lot of reasons.

I have no intention of adding load to the burden they have. I know it’s horrible what I’ve done and that I have caused incredible amount of suffering. I can not understand the suffering, and I do not want to reinforce it.

That’s why I refer to the Labour Party and Labour Youth. The failure to mention them is difficult, since they have been so central in the management of Norway after World War II.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – But do you now that you are in the situation you are in now, that you take into account the victims and survivors?

Behring Anders Breivik: – In the sense that I do not intend to refer directly to them. I could have used different rhetoric if I wanted to add cargo to the suffering they already have. It is not appropriate, because my goal is to shed light on what is happening in Norway and Europe. It is not appropriate.

That’s why I’m going to refer to the political party, the Labour Party and Labour Youth.

If I had been cruel, I could begin to talk about what happened on “MS Torbjørn” but I’m not going to do it. I could have tried to use a different rhetoric aimed at those who have suffered. I think what happened 22 July was terrible but necessary.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Now I thought that we should go through the sessions I’ve talked about earlier. I just want to hear about my colleague has some questions for you.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – Breivik, you said that you were in a group, the Knights Templar. So you told us that within the network were divided opinions. Some wanted a confrontation and did not want it. Can you elaborate on that?

Behring Anders Breivik: – What I said earlier. I do not want to tell you more, I have completely lost track.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – Those who are behind the cage up there, does not know what you have said in the interview.

Anders Breivik Behring – I do not want to talk about other people in all.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – But you can just say a little about how it was for you?

Behring Anders Breivik: – [Holden and Breivik goes back and forth, but Breivik will not elaborate on who he is talking about] I do not want to tell you about others, I have told what I want to say about it.

Svein Holden: – What is the reason why you can not tell anyone about it for me?

Behring Anders Breivik: – In 2001 I came in touch with some militant nationalists and there was a meeting in London 2002. I went to Liberia in advance and met a person there and went to London on the way back. I met three other people in London and it was to use a pompous presentation: the establishment meeting.

Behring Anders Breivik: – What is discussed here is in the compendium. I was probably the youngest there and I got passed a lot of information on the meeting, including the basis for the compendium.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – Was it there this controversy that someone wanted confrontation and someone wanted grassroots movement, it was where it appeared?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I do not say anything about it.
Prosecutors Svein Holden – I particularly noted that you used the word pompous again. There you have used 15-20 times a day. What do you mean the word pompous?

Behring Anders Breivik: – If you represent let’s say a group and you want to convey it in a way that optimizes proagandaeffekten conveys you to a pompous manner. Instead of telling about four sweaty guys in a basement, use the second description of ways.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – You dress a little on that?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Yes, well … One can use that word.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have told what I want to say about that, but it is to emphasize a point. There is talk of a few militant nationalists, all I have written compendium votes, but I chose a pompous manufacturing technology.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – Finally, you gave a lecture at 73 minutes, what kind of feedback do you expect in the post?

Anders Breivik Behring – I expect no feedback whatsoever, because I think all media companies in Europe are going to censor it in its entirety.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – Do you think no one is going to refer to what in particular?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is safe to pick up weaknesses and convey it in a way that ridicules me and my case.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – What kind of feedback do you want?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is not for me. 22. July is not about me. It was called a suicide attack. I did not expect to survive the day. There is talk that I’m narsist. A narsist would never sacrificed their lives for someone or something.

VG – very Breivik smiles during an exchange with the District Attorney Holden talk about “sweaty guys in a basement.”

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – But, since you now have sat and talked for about an hour, and prepared it, I though, so I expect that you did it with a wish. What was wanted and your goal with it?

Behring Anders Breivik: – The goal is to try to convey the truth to Europe about what is going on around deconstruction of European countries and ethnic cultures, and especially for Norway for me.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – When the ball goes back to Bejer-Engh.

Anders Breivik Behring attached either handcuffed and led out of the courtroom. He talks with Geir Lippestad as he goes out….

Original article: Utspørringen av Breivik – ord for ord
_____

_________________
The Medium is the Massage - Marshall McLuhan.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mark Gobell
On Gardening Leave
On Gardening Leave


Joined: 24 Jul 2006
Posts: 4529

PostPosted: Sun Apr 22, 2012 12:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Attack On The Labor Party

Blogging the events surrounding the 7/22 attacks in Norway

Archive for April 17th, 2012

Google translation [edited for clarity]:

Questioning of Breivik – word for word – part 2

4/17/2012

VG: – Anders Breivik Behring attached either handcuffed and led out of the courtroom. He talks with Geir Lippestad as he goes out.

VG: – The court now has a 20-minute break.

VG: – Participants in the trial starts to come back after the break. Anders Breivik Behring has not come yet.

VG: – Breivik’s defenders are in place in the courtroom.

VG: – Anders Breivik Behring come into court and put in the witness box.

VG: – Breivik rises for judges.

VG: – The court is set.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – As negotiations continue. Bejer-Engh can you briefly explain the agenda of the day today and tomorrow in relation to what you have announced.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – So that we have set aside enough time so that it might be relevant to the individual themes.

Judge Wenche Arntzen Elizabeth: – Is it possible for you to say how long you are going to use for this block?

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Now, I just followed the Breivik said today, and now I’ll start, as I outlined earlier, to ask some questions to Breivik on the road has been since he was in college and beyond.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Yes it will go the rest of the day today and well into tomorrow. We’ve talked about with the defender is going to take the most time. It depends on how much the defendant will answer and how much he answers.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – You know it’s been five days to explain? Do you have in mind.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Yes, we will remember and we will adapt so that we stay within the limits laid down.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – When I first word I thought that I announce that I have presented a timeline of [the members], and it’s just a timeline that outlines a number of dates.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh – I thought I’d give it to you also, Breivik. [Bejer-Engh give the document to Breivik]. It is meant as a help document, if we see we need it.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – As I said to you in place, Breivik, we shall return later to the Knights Templar, the network and how it was in 2001 and how it is today. But before that, I will go back a little in time. I want to hear from when you went to high school. You stopped in the third gym, is that right?

Behring Anders Breivik: Yes, that’s right.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: Yes. And when you live with your mother?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is not quite relevant to this case, when we go so far back. The only thing that is relevant is to cover the period when I first got in touch with militant nationalists.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I see it is very much that you wish to speak as I do not understand the relevance of. I have noticed that the media has made a point of my childhood but it is not relevant. I had a good upbringing, that’s not why I chose to become a militant nationalist.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – But I’m not going to go into your childhood I. I want to go into what you did when you left the gymanset, and then I will hear why you dropped out of high school.

Behring Anders Breivik: – It was because I started a company together with another person, and there was a telephone company, which I obtained via a franchise agreement with a U.S. company.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Quit the high school because you wanted to do something else to go to school?

Behring Anders Breivik: – And when I stopped at Handel’s in December, I ran the company and because – of what should be said – cooperation problems between me and NN, I chose to end this partnership a half years later.

Behring Anders Breivik: – It has no relevance. At that time I had gone through the curriculum for third grade, so I felt that it would give me so very much. As an entrepreneur, I have 100 percent ownership of the company I was going to start. So it was not as critically important to formalize my education.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – But does that mean that you had read your way through 3 class syllabus in advance, but that you did not see the relevance of taking exams?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I did not see the relevance in it, no.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – In case there is some evidence that you had a lot of absences in the past year. What is the reason?

Behring Anders Breivik: – When I started the company, so I worked part time in another company, and it went over a lot of evenings, so I stopped at the school.

VG: – It will then say that you currently do not have high school, ask Bejer-Engh about. The answer Breivik yes.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Was it a conscious choice? [Get confirmation from Breivik] Have you then obtained some education beyond this?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Not a formal education, I have not. But I think the studies are important. Therefore, I studied a lot, a lot of themes. I know that for a person who does not have formal education is important to be able to describe their expertise so that it reflects their level of knowledge. That is why I have this system that I have told the police. I have 15,000 hours of study in multiple fields.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Why have you calculated it?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It may seem very strange for a person who has a formal degree. But among entrepreneurs is not so abnormal. Some do it this way to convey the level of knowledge you are on.

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is a very general and a round number. I made a survey in 2001 I think, or 2009, with a view to impart the knowledge I have. I knew that in some contexts would be used against me.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – But if you do not use it when to seek a job, what to use it then?

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Who would you use those numbers above?

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – When you’re talking about 15,000 hours, what do you in there then, what kind of reading or information gathering is what you mean?

Behring Anders Breivik: – You can use it in connection with the engagement, where it is important to highlight the level of knowledge. If you have 15,000 student hours in a field and it conveys the impression that one has only two years in high school, it gives a wrong impression of the person you are communicating with.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Why was it important to include in the compendium?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is difficult for the press, after completing a so-called suicide attacks.

Behring Anders Breivik: – No, in this specific case, I have gone through the 10 different books in that field.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Are there other fields that you have been concerned?

Behring Anders Breivik: – The fields that I have been most interested in the history of religion.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – 2: How do you get your knowledge from, primarily?

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – remember some of the titles?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I do not remember now.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have probably spent most Wikipedia. The English articles are incredibly rich.

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is difficult to say. I’ve probably taken from many different sources.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – How much of these study lessons are things that you have read on the Internet? Do you have some percentage of that?

Behring Anders Breivik: – In the case of Hiroshima and such, so the more you learn at school. But in a political context, so you might find information about it from other quarters, where it is used for propaganda purposes.

Behring Anders Breivik: – So it’s important to look at me as a seller. I am selling a message, an ideology, it is important to look at me in that context. The fact that my intention is not necessarily to come up with concrete events, but use specific events.

Behring Anders Breivik: – But there are writers and cultural conservative writers.

Behring Anders Breivik: – Bejer-Engh: Is there anything you do not expect these classes? It included quite a few of the hours I put in the compendium yes. I had to read the incredibly much, and it was something that was written, I had to write it yourself.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have quite a few books on economics, I bought some in English, so it’s a combination of regular books for internet books, e-books, to the technical reports that are found on the internet to wikipedia articles.

Behring Anders Breivik: – It can not anticipate is reading newspapers, reading of professional journals and such. If you are looking up a field to examine the field, it is estimated that a study hour.

Behring Anders Breivik: – But anyway I have a great understanding that the way to present knowledge of the sounds absurd.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Is it important for you to get signaled?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is important to have signaled that they are not ignorant, it is important to signal that one is not, it’s true.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – In these 15,000 hours, including you with some information gathering to the compendium?

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Do you remember when you started reading so much?

Anders Breivik Behring – I think I’ve thought about it all the time, I’ve probably been in a situation where I have wanted to defend my way of acquiring knowledge. In the old days there were only two ways to acquire knowledge in the library and schools, but when the Internet came, there was a new method, but today it is not very widely known.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – The reason was that I based it on information retrieval. In addition, I have quite a few courses through the companies I’ve worked. I have also studied the fields I’ve worked with on their own. I believe that it is equivalent to the curriculum.

Anders Breivik Behring – I could of course print out a certificate for myself, nah .. [Breivik laughs when he says this].

Behring Anders Breivik: – No, I will not try to lie about it. I had no plans to formalize it. I was planning on it until 2002, but after I came in contact with the nationalists, I have not considered it.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – When you say you have a bachelor’s degree so do you think?

Anders Breivik Behring – I wrote there that it was not accredited, and it will basically say that you have not graduated from the program.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – 3 I see that we found your resume on your PC, and you have written Bachelor of Busines Administration from American InterContinental University not accredited. What is the reason you set it in your resume?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have not been a very religious person, but there is a saying that states are no atheists in the trenches. This is very correct., If you know you will carry out a so-called suicide attack, one is probably a bit more religious.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – How do you see yourself today?

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Have you had military service? [Breivik: - No.] What is the reason?

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – So I wonder … Do you see yourself as a Protestant, or how you stand in relation to the church?

Anders Breivik Behring – I registered in the state church, but I have a greater attraction to the Catholic Church. But I am a member of the Church.

Behring Anders Breivik: – It was postponed until I was 25 years, when the requirement was waived.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I regret that I did not. Because it is useful knowledge for one who was militant.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – When we have been through school and your education and spoke little about religion. Regarding your companies. When you left the Handel it was because you started a separate company and was working. So I see that you started something called Direct Response Services, is that right?

Behring Anders Breivik: – 4 I wrote an application for release of not having to lehgge the company. Was told that it was possible ikek. In the interests of my company, I had to find a reason for not releasing. When I chose to justify the fact that I had self-care for sick mother.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – When did you just before you left high school, where you worked from 1997 until 2003?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Before I worked for Acta dialogue marketing, next to the school.

Anders Breivik Behring – I was working part time Well there I think, so I took full time eventually.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Can you tell us about what type of position you had in the company and what you did there?

Behring Anders Breivik: – When I was working the job was to book meetings for sales or economists, but it was a sales job where I worked on different projects.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Did you have any management responsibilities?

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh – also told you in the place that you started a company (name of company). It was started in 1998, so while you were in high school. What were you doing?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Yes I had the feeling of it, otherwise I would not get promotion. But they had several different … I worked with several different positions there, they were also given a new name, they called themselves after each SNT, for the period I worked in technical support. In perhaps the biggest part of my involvement there, I was team leader.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Did you feel that you did a good job in this company?

Anders Behring Breivik: – It is a franchise agreement you did with an American company, it was a call-back system that started with, but then it [technical term], the use of an alternative platform to Telenor, and the purpose is cheaper units. For foreigners who want to call overseas.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I was chairman. There were a corporation. I had been working on development. I and NN had developed the concept for this company, which was to collect 300 million.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – There was a new company called Media Group. Can you tell what it was, what you were doing there?

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Did you have any profits then?

Anders Breivik Behring – I had no merit. We lost perhaps 5,000 kroner.

Behring Anders Breivik: – The reason was that we failed to cooperate, companion was unable to raise enough money.

Behring Anders Breivik: – We rented premises in Lower Castle Street [The prosecutor asked if it was here that he met Lippestad]. It was the same offices as Lippestad.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – What was the purpose of the City Group?

Breivik: – It was really just to fall back on a platform where I could save up a new start-up capital. Once I had a new start-up capital.

Anders Breivik Behring – I think I established a legal identity, as a company is, without a clear business plan in the beginning. I think I experimented a bit.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Also, I understand that it is you end up with the diplomatic community? [Get confirmation from Breivik]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – When you then sold it, you’re still in the DRS and work there?

Anders Breivik Behring – I think I went back there, yes.

Breivik: – As the fall 2002 experiment I with different business models. It turns out that earnings are managed best with the ene.Det is the project that is morally reprehensible.

Behring Anders Breivik: – But legally it was not illegal.

Behring Anders Breivik: – Legally, it is not actually illegal, it is in the gray area, because they have pretty clear clauses for those who buy it, that they are not allowed to use them in official contexts.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – What did you think about the illegality of it when you started it?

Behring Anders Breivik: – That you have lost diploma on fire. There were of course many who had the opportunity to abuse it. It was morally very bad project

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Wrote the media about you and this?

Anders Breivik Behring – I think it was a competitor of mine, actually, who tipped Aftenposten about it in 2004 or 2005.

Behring Anders Breivik: – At the time I had already come into contact with militant nationalists, the focus ended up on that one ended up in a situation where one did not want to contribute tax money in a society that supports multiculturalism. It meant that one felt an obligation to pay as little tax as possible.

Behring Anders Breivik: – If I do, however, not ended up in the environment that I came in contact with, I would probably not chosen the project. I was terrified of the media to know about it. Then all career opportunities across. Because it is morally questionable.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – They had been named one of the employees. They wrote that it was someone who was doing this in Norway, and U.S. authorities warned about this. There was also handed over a document to Tor Axel Busch.

Behring Anders Breivik: – To prevent that I was exposed. For it was not legally prohibited but it would be incredibly embarrassing.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – So you downloaded the company because you were afraid that this was illegal and you were mentioned in the media?

Anders Breivik Behring – I had gotten very big very big exposure because of it, yes. Negative exposure.

Behring Anders Breivik: – The intention was to ensure that as much of the money was withheld from taxation. For this I had to implement a strategy for money laundering. Therefore, I created accounts in tax havens in the Bahamas and in Latvia. It was perhaps seven countries in total.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Was the other Baltic countries?

Behring Anders Breivik: – And the intention was to ensure that as little as possible of this was beskattet.De most banks in these countries gives you the debut cards and packages for people wishing to launder.

Behring Anders Breivik: – Most of these banks in these countries offer packages so you get a debit card in Europe without being registered.

Anders Breivik Behring – I made ​​the first million when I was 24, and four million maybe when I was 26

Behring Anders Breivik: – There were at least two countries in the Baltics and maybe three or four countries in the Bahamas.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – But how old were you when did you set this sale of diplomas, then?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It was in 2005, I think.

Behring Anders Breivik: – 2: Yes, that’s right.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I am not quite sure, but there are a couple million.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – It was previously talked about six million.

Anders Breivik Behring – I’ve said that I was very unsure about it. I have said that the amount I am not sure.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – When you finished this once in 2005 or 2006, you have some thoughts about how much money you then was left with?

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – But is it true that most of this money was foreign accounts?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Yes, that’s right.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – If you now tell us something about how the success you had with these companies, what would you say then?

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Is it right summarized that you try out a variety of companies and different projects that you do not achieve any particular revenue. But when you start to sell these diplomaene, you start to get success?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I want to mention that it was a learning curve. The company did very poorly. I learned incredibly much. I am grateful to go through the learning curve. It is useful to go to a slam, I think that to get success.

Behring Anders Breivik: – Absolutely. I think if you look for yourself what is the reality in Norway, there are not many Norwegians who manages to earn his first million when they are 24 If you look at Røkke, so he earned his first million when he was 24, and the same with Big Valley, so it’s not easy when you’re so young. But I did. In a company that was legal, in fact, even if it was morally reprehensible.

Behring Anders Breivik: – The way it is portrayed in the media, then comes the one as a result of the other. That I saw on the first two as a failure. you come out the “break-even” and with lots of contacts. I looked at it as a useful phase that was important to make money in a future company. It was a learning curve.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – 2: Summary of the day thought that you made ​​the success of these companies?

Behring Anders Breivik: – No, that I have never said that either does one financial success or not, but success is not only the financial but also that they have gained friends and contacts, etc.

Behring Anders Breivik: – As financial success – absolutely not, but the two companies – certainly a useful learning.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – When we talked about school and your companies. Then I will talk about your political involvement. You have been a member of a political party. Remember when you engage in politics?

Behring Anders Breivik: – We have talked to police a part of it. I think you remember that I was 15 or 16 years, but police said it was a bit later. I was maybe 17 years?

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – The information we have is that enrollment in FpU in 1997 and when you were 18, and you shall be registered in the Progress Party in ’99, when were you 20 years.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – But do you remember anything about why you wanted to join a political party?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Basically, it was the background that I had that shape you as a person and political opinions. It was probably a result of my childhood and the experiences of Rice school was crucial that I told myself.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Do you remember today how you were like 15-16-year-old, what kind of thoughts you had on society and how things should be, then?

Anders Breivik Behring – I was not very politically active when I was 15, I was not. But I remember that I had any political views, which was clearly on the right side.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – You have in your manifesto, in book three, an interview with an anonymous Templar. In the interview, it appears clear that it is yourself. Is that right? Yes I’m being interviewed, responding Breivik.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – There you have a question because you set for yourself, how you then were thinking when you were younger. I want to be holding you.

VG: – Breivik begins to smile when Bejer-Engh references from his manifesto of his political opinions.

VG: – The prosecutor read a quote from Breivik’s manifesto for radical, as she confronts him.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – But when you refer to something that happened fifteen years ago, how old were you then?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I was 14-15 years.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – When you were 14-15 years or prior enrollment in political parties, so when the whole political landscape as you do today?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I think what I’m trying to say there is that if I had seen myself 15 years ago, I had thought that “the guy where he must be crazy.” For it is hard to know what it means to be radical, the radical may be similar to irrationality.

Anders Behring Breivik: – What I have described in that section, it is the fact that I had a Muslim best friend for many years and he knew many in the Beagle Boys and A-gang, but at the time I was in a hip hop -subculture or a gang, and was on some occasions the Blitz as well, because there were clear links between hip-hop community and the Blitz-culture.

Behring Anders Breivik: – And I saw a lot, I experienced a lot. As a result of these experiences, I was very right side. And there are a lot of what I have described in this section.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – When you choose to sign up when you were eighteen years in FpU that the Progress Party’s youth section?

Behring Anders Breivik: – There had been plenty before that. I have been physically … how shall I say it … I have been exposed to violent attacks from Muslims, and also friends of mine in Oslo.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – But when you then join the party, we see that you had a number of positions, including in FpU.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – In Progress says that you were chairman of FpU Major trail. You were a member in October 2001 to November 2003.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – You had thus several positions. What was the reason why you chose get involved in that way?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I was with because it cost only 50 million a year, and there was a cost that was not so high.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – But these positions you took, it was …?

Behring Anders Breivik: – You could say that my involvement Progress and FPU was not significant. I had the positions and was a member of the control of Majorstuen and Uranienborg school.

Behring Anders Breivik: – But it is good as CV-fill then.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – It says here that you did something called political school in March and April 1999. What did you learn at this school?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Only generic courses that are linked to the party program. One can say that there is everything from debating technique, the processes related to the district committee, all that may have relevance for all who work with policy at district level.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – In this period when you were a member, what were you concerned when you were a member of the policy, do you remember that?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I believe that until 2001, I was keen to make money. It was the only thing that interested me. In addition, I was concerned about immigration – and cultural politics. I have been since I was fifteen. Career-wise, I was most interested in making money.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – So from 1999 to 2001, were you concerned about making money. The police have looked at how active you were online in the period you were politically active. Then they looked at FpU Forum from 2002-2003, in the period you had a total of 231 posts on this site. Do you remember anything about the contents of your activity. What was that you were concerned then?

Anders Breivik Behring – I think that at least at one point, I was busy trying to advance in the party, so I never went back within the limits of political correctness in the party. And it was one of the points where I said that Islam was good or something like that. And I found myself in it, thinking “how is it possible to be so hypocritical?”

Behring Anders Breivik: – When I actually hold a fairly moderate line after it, too.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have talked a lot with the police about the dates. I ran two races, I had invested a lot in politics and would see where it led. I would nominate myself in the council, and see how it was going.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – When was it you were careful to say what you meant?

Anders Breivik Behring – I communicated not what I meant, but it might be beneficial for a person who wanted to advance in a party.

Behring Anders Breivik: – While I was familiar with some militant nationalists in 2001, but I did not everything I had in my hands for it. I wanted to see what would happen the other way.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Did you make a bet did you?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Very little, actually. It could be seen as a bet, and it was the more noticed of course. But I was not so very high on the list, I did well at 37 space or something.

Behring Anders Breivik: – 4 But it was interesting to see.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – What about the local elections in 2003?

Behring Anders Breivik: – To be nominated for a party in a local election, you must be nominated by your local chapter, which for me was the Frogner. So you need to get support from several neighborhood battles, and you need the support of perhaps 3 quarter strokes to get high enough up. It is normal is that you are summoned to a nomination meeting, where they check your CV, how much support you have and so on.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – But you were nominated to the council in 2003?

Anders Breivik Behring – I was summoned to a nomination meeting. The list, I thought there were 20 names on the local list.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – What were you wrote in the compendium?

Anders Breivik Behring – I assumed that I was at 23 space, but as it turned out that I came in 37 space. It was a careless mistake on my part.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – What I wonder is that in the CV, which we talked a little about the place, so you write that you were nominated to the Oslo City Council in 2003. And then you repeat it in the manifesto, and you have … At least, I have noticed it, that are five times has told the police that you were nominated to the city council and came in 23rd space.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have really fokrlart that at the time I took the assumption that there were 20 names, but I was wrong. There were 33 seats. From there I made an argument that I was nominated.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – When you write in your CV that you were nominated to the City Council in 2003, it was wrong?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It was a careless mistake by me, yes.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Thinking out whether you actually were nominated before you wrote in your resume?

Anders Breivik Behring – I wrote about myself in the compendium to make it more difficult for journalists to make me sickly and ridicule me.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – In the hearing of your Utøya it is one of the first things you are saying that you were nominated to the City Council on behalf of the Progress Party. What was the reason?

Behring Anders Breivik: – All on the list, the nomination list for a party consisting of the list you will find in the school premises, it is an abbreviated list. Also there are the rest of the list. For FrP part was a total of 70 names I think. Thus, three places above the list you actually find in schools. It is not wrong to say that you are on the list. It is an extended list.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – But you have repeatedly said that you came in 23rd place, and that is why I wonder why you said it?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have explained this twice now.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Now we have obtained the list of local elections in 2003. Number 23 is a NN Do you know her?

Anders Breivik Behring – I know her. I’ve known her for many years.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Is that why you said you were on 23 space?

Anders Breivik Behring – I remembered that I had three places of the list. And then I was at 37 space instead of 33 space. That was the difference.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – We have obtained some of these posts of the 231 posts to the forum on FpU, I shall only briefly refer to any of it. [Breivik begins to speak even now].

Anders Breivik Behring – I may well tell you what I wrote, from housing policy and housing policy in particular and very little about immigration. The reason is that the Progress Party is a moderate party, you want a career where you can not have immigration as core policy. They do not want any attention about immigration.

Behring Anders Breivik: – Yes, I remember. It was an idea.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Why were you interested in creating a common platform?

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – But you are also 23 May 2002, perhaps you remember, you have a post where you say you are trying to establish a platform based by members of youth parties on the right side?

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Why would you encourage others to join the Progress Party?

Behring Anders Breivik: – The starting point for what we are talking about now is that I believed in the democratic struggle. When I lived in the exile that our system could be changed through the use of democratic means. A proposal to facilitate cooperation between youth parties.

Behring Anders Breivik: – What date was it you said?

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – June 2003

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Also, there is a post later, in June of that year, where you say that it is important that more members of FpU become members of the Progress Party. Why did you do that?

Behring Anders Breivik: – You have a message on this website in May 2002 for writing that it is extremely important that you get better at getting involved. [Bejer-Engh describes what ssår written verbatim]

Behring Anders Breivik: – A part of my involvement in the forum. I would be performing a bird dancing in connection with the nomination process.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – And then there is also a post 22 June later that year, where you say that “we are forgetting one thing, what is the benefit of the United States is also very often in favor of Europe ‘. Do you have any thoughts on why you felt it?

Anders Breivik Behring – I think the setting I’ve written it, I thought about the exploitation of oil resources from the Middle East and Europe have not fought for their interests in many years.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Here you write that rich countries like Norway should approach U.S. policy, both foreign and domestic. It can be seen as kmynisk. [This refers Bejer-Engh]

Behring Anders Breivik: – 2: Everything that is written by me at that point is within what is called FpUs political framework. I wanted to see how far I got in the nomination process. When I go of course not beyond the political correct drug frames.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – But did you know that you made ​​a contribution to the party in the period?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Not really.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – How do you describe the activity I have explained now? [ABB replies that it is not significant]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Did you know that you did success in politics when you were there?

Anders Breivik Behring – I did not feel I had any involvement in politics. My engagement was marginal.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – 3 But do you think that what I have described about your positions and your posts in this period, you think that it is marginal, it’s what you mean?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Basically, it’s meaningless duties. You use it almost as CV-filling. I feel I have learned a lot of commitment but for the organization, it is meaningless.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Did you got something back for the suggestions you made?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have conveyed some suggestions, I felt and learned very quickly the limits of political correctness.

Behring Anders Breivik: – No, the proposals were harvested as usual.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Did you come to where you wanted to come?

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – What did you think about it, then?

Anders Breivik Behring – I thought that there is a rigid party in many ways. It has sold so many principles to come to power that they have thrown out the baby with the baby carriage. There, I feel.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Now I’ll go over it you were on before today. The reason you were radical and chose the way you have done. Then we go over on a topic where I wonder what is it that you gave up on democracy?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I made ​​a good summary of introduction today. Do you have any further questions to it?

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Yes, I have. You talked about personal experiences, and assaults you talked about, but then I wonder, there are some political events that you think have been important to you?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Well, I summed it up very well in the introductory lecture. It is a combination of personal events.

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is probably a combination of personal events and experiences. The fact that I have been, what should be said, has had confrontations with Muslims, combined with confrontations my friends have had and other Norwegian children have had with Muslims has meant a great deal. When I was 16-17 years, there were very many in Oslo West understood that the Muslim groups of friends robbed, beaten and raped. There were no consequences of it. Those who tried to organize against them were branded as racists and neo-Nazis who was a great injustice.

Behring Anders Breivik: – It was accepting the terms of the Muslims established gangs because they were immigrants, but if the Norwegians did the same, we were branded as racists away. The injustice of this is communicated to the press coverage of this.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – In your manifesto, and so far in questioning, you have gone through a number of violent incidents that you believe have been crucial to your radicalization. But this episode you have experienced yourself or someone you have heard from others?

Behring Anders Breivik: – In some cases I have heard from others, in other cases I have experienced myself.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – When you have heard from others, you have done some thinking about it was right what you heard?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Do you plan and continue until four o’clock without a break or what? I’m getting pretty tired now.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – Are you tired now? [Breivik confirms that he is tired and asks for a ten minute break.] When we take a ten minute break.

VG: – Breivik talks with Geir Lippestad before he moved out of the courtroom.

VG: – Breivik moved out of the witness box. He talks briefly with his lawyer, before he moved out of the courtroom.

VG: – It is almost time for the judges again, but there are very few of the players sitting in their seats.

VG: – The four experts are now at their seats while Breivik two defenders standing.

VG: – Breivik is now being brought into the courtroom and speak some of his defenders.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – When is the right set. Bejer-Engh, we aim to finish at 16 o’clock today. You have a natural point at that time so we finish.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Breivik, what we are talking about now was the episode that you’ve experienced that has been crucial to your radicalization. [Breivik confirmed]. So you say you have experienced violence themselves, and stated that others have had similar episodes. Have you done anything to investigate whether it is true what you’ve been told by others?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have heard pretty much as I have not included, then the points that I have included those, I have great confidence that has happened.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – But you have done some research about it?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have considered the allegations of the witness credible or not. If they are then this is included in the compendium.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – These are people you have spoken directly with that told you about these cases?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Yes, in some cases. In one case there was a rumor, but in most cases it is perceived.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – But now I think first on the other, before going to even experienced. How thoroughly have you done to find out if this is true?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have not done much research related to the witness descriptions that are considered credible.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Enough to take it with descriptions of the Manifesto?

Behring Anders Breivik: – For example, if there have been good friends who have come to the story, so I have not had reason to doubt it.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – You have explained they experienced the events of the Manifesto. Are there friends of yours who has been present in the episodes you’ve been in?

Behring Anders Breivik: – In some cases I have been alone. In other cases, I have been with others.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Are you familiar with what your friends have beliefs of this?

Anders Breivik Behring – I think probably most people, I have the hyped up slightly, to support them as a radikaliseringspunkt, it has probably been consistent.

Behring Anders Breivik: – No, I saw those who saw the key points that are worth mentioning.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Now you have “hyped” the up?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have probably passed it a bit pompous.

Behring Anders Breivik: – Everything has probably happened.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – When you say pompous, you’ve overdone the episodes?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I can not remember that I have overestimated some of the episodes.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Now some of your friends in to testify, but I thought you could tell a little about it now.

Behring Anders Breivik: – Of the 20 episodes, it was one that happened at Bohemians, where I attempted robbery of a Muslim. And then I went with two others, and they have in the police interrogation … they believe that they do not remember. Also, there are two episodes of NN, which he claims he does not remember. Otherwise I think everything is verifiable.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – But in one of these descriptions in your manifest, which describes that one of the results was that you broke your nose?

Behring Anders Breivik: – In a confrontation, I was attacked by a gang of Muslims. Because I tried to pull a buddy of mine away. So, I was also attacked then I got a slap in the face. When I broke the nose.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – What did you do with it?

Behring Anders Breivik: – No it was a failure, but it seems not very good. Or it does not seem at all ..

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – the police have obtained a medical certificate where you got your nose surgery, but there was nothing about the violations.

Behring Anders Breivik: – What they have brought in is a surgery when I was twenty years. Where the intention of the intervention was to chisel away some of the nose and it was not made any investigation of the violation at that time. There is a difference between an intervention and surgery. I have noticed that he has not registered that it was not a violation.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – So your perception is that you broke his nose during this confrontation?

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – What we can do is that we can forward these documents, and then we can submit it to the judges tomorrow.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – It is asked a question to the NN which has operated the nose, but it has not turned up any violations.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – What we can do so find these documents and display it in the morning.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Did you speak with?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Perhaps two of the cases are not 100% but I was pretty sure. It has been shown in one case, the episode of Young Market, where I thought he was a Christian from the African Congo, but it turned out he was a Muslim from Ghana. There was an error assumption of mine.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – With the episodes you had seen yourself, you are sure that they were Muslims?

Behring Anders Breivik: – In the cases mentioned, I’m sure.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Could it have been other reasons for violence than they were Muslims?

Behring Anders Breivik: – That is an argument from the police is that this is criminal people on the basis of criminal intent. And a majority of the attacks committed by Muslims in Europe and Norway directly related to that they are Muslims. Cultures they represent is the result of Islam. The cultures that have grown up in Muslim countries are so integrated and the result of Islam. The majority of crimes in Europe can be linked to Islam.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Now we have gone through what you have personally experienced, that led to your radicalization.

Behring Anders Breivik: – Can I just emphasize the point? The basis of my claim is that Islam is a very, what to say … They look down on other cultures and it is a grunnlaggende contempt for other cultures in Islam, because in the Islamic world, is basically that it is the Islamic world, also it’s the world that are not yet Islamized.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – But some thoughts about Islam, we must come back to. But now we have talked about your personal experience formulas or things you have heard from others. Are there other politicians either in Norway or Europe that has been decisive for you?

Behring Anders Breivik: – If I get chance I’ll go through the twenty confrontation I had with the Muslims.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Now I’m concerned about your personal experiences, but some other political events in either Norway or Europe that has made ​​you radical?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I remember that I was very opposed to Palestine when I was 15, I can not remember why I was there.

Anders Breivik Behring – I think probably I have mentioned Serbia conflict as a conflict, but I do not think I’ve been so involved in it as I should have been.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – What was the Serbian conflict?

Behring Anders Breivik: – As it appeared in the media at the time, it could be interpreted as the Christians very largely exercised matkmiskbruk against Muslims, but in retrospect, it emerged that coverage of the war, Serbia was extremely subjective. But I found it extremely unfair that Serbia was invaded because they attempt to deport their Muslim.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Was it important for you in the situation you were in?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have perhaps emphasized more in retrospect.

Behring Anders Breivik: – That at the time was unknown to many Europeans.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – The declaration set the question: “What tipped the scale (…)” (…)

Behring Anders Breivik: – Maybe. I do not remember very well, there are very many years ago.

Anders Breivik Behring – I know what I wrote and I wrote that Serbia war was crucial for the establishment of the KT network, but it is important to distinguish between essential and that it was the straw that made ​​the cup to overflow, it are two different things that it is important to distinguish between

Behring Anders Breivik: – But this conflict meant more for others in the network than for me. The compendium is not just for me, it’s also on behalf of others.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – “Persons charged with the opinion that one can thus say that the bombing was the crucial issue unchanged that it is necessarily appropriate for engagement. »

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Did it mean anything to you?

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – It is a way of saying to come up with inane answer but it was the straw for many. To be honest, I do not remember very well but it was a factor for me. It was just after 9 september was important factor for me than anything else. As a nationalist in Serbia cares Mon perhaps as much about it.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – But the reason I ask is that in a recent questioning your requirements and you say … It says: “The requested ring accused wants to emphasize that it was Serbia-war that were decisive for his radicalism, but that it was the drop that made the cup to overflowing …”

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – But if the conflict in Kosovo importance for the establishment of the Knights Templar in 2001?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Yes, it was probably the straw that made ​​the cup to overflow for very many nationalists in Europe.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – And it was as a result of NATO bombing, is it to understand?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Among other things, the bombing of Kosovo in April 1999 was a very important hitsorisk.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – How do you see this bombing?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It was Kjell Magne Bondevik and … Foreign Vollebekk who was responsible, it was they who signed the documents that gave NATO the ability to bomb Serbia. And I think it was grossly unfair that NATO bombed Serbia who only wanted to deport the Muslims from the area.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – When did you become aware of this? When were you aware of that?

Anders Breivik Behring – I was not aware at the time. I was not involved at that time. In 1999 I was, until two years later I came in contact with militant nationalists. It meant more gradually.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – When you came in contact with the militant nationalists, it meant more to you then?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It meant probably more to me then.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – What was the Progress Party’s stance in this conflict?

Behring Anders Breivik: – According to what I’ve heard, they were supporters of the bombing and invasion. I’ve had a conversation with the police about it. I did not realize why I was in a party that supported the bombing of Serbia. But I thought that they come in further to the right of a party anyway.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – But the police asked you the question of what kind of position you had in this conflict. What did you do?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have not experienced that they have been to a Christian country.

Behring Anders Breivik: – Yes, they asked about it. I do not remember what I said. I thought they were against it.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – But have you ever experienced that Progress has been against NATO?

Behring Anders Breivik: – You were politically active but you get after each contact with the militant nationalists in 2001. Thus, it was the straw that got it to run over this bombing.

Anders Breivik Behring – I do not know if I was in the party until 2004, believes it was only until 2003.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – You were certainly in the Progress Party from 1999 to 2001. This was in 2001. When you met them, you said that there was straw. Why did you not know then that your party had the position in this conflict?

Behring Anders Breivik: – For me, the conflict has been used mostly in retrospect. But if you are from Serbia, means the destitute lot. But vesdt Europe’s nationalists do not care so much. Even if one likes to use serbiakrige the propaganda context, it is Adré things Western European nationalists are more concerned about.

Behring Anders Breivik: – But is it correct to understand that when you are in 2001 made ​​contact with militant nationalists, some of them were the bombing Serbia-drop, and for you, too, was the drop?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It has probably been there for me. It is most important in retrospect.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Did you try to figure out what kind of attitude was the Progress Party of NATO and the Balkans at that time?

Behring Anders Breivik: – At the time I did not really about Serbia, but there were other things that are important to me. 911 had just happened. It was an awakening on the far right in Europe.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Were you concerned about how your own country as this bombing in 1990? Did they ask?

Behring Anders Breivik: – People know that Norway is a NATO country and I have talked to police about the former. [Breivik wanted to not go further into this question and what he talked to the police]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – Now we have been visited several times that you made ​​contact with militant nationalists and that it was in 2001. Did you try to make contact with someone in Norway first, before you were abroad?

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh – I do not know if the police have asked me about it sometime, i. [The prosecutor asks him to still answer.] I think I thought at the time .. It was chance that made me come in contact with the Internet.

Behring Anders Breivik: – If I might meet a person in Norway, it might have gone the other way.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – But at the time in 2001, where I then realize that you began to search against extremist forces, is that correct?

Anders Breivik Behring – I think I was searching at that point, but I did not know what I was looking for, in a way, but in another way, it was a coincidence.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh: – But were you looking for some like-minded users in Norway when the first?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I do not wish to comment.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I do not comment on it, and would not comment on it here [Breivik do not answer the question to the prosecutor]

VG: – The judge speaks briefly about how long they will need tomorrow.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – When the court adjourned.

VG: – Breivik now stands and speaks with his defense Geir Lippestad and has not left the court yet.

VG: – Breivik has left the courtroom….

Original article: Utspørringen av Breivik – ord for ord – del 2
_____

Google translation [edited for clarity]:

Pressed Breivik about the «Knights Templar network»
4/17/2012

Breivik was pressed with ever tougher questions by the prosecution after the lunch break. The terror accused 33-year-old seemed somewhat irritated at the prosecutor who makes repeated questions about his world view – among other things the uniform he made for Knights Templar, and about who he refers to when he talks of “we”.

Breivik moved his head back and forth as he explained himself. When Breivik saw how he was portrayed after the media ban was lifted he realized the mistake.

- Basically, I had no access to the media. I had no idea what people were talking about. After the arrest, I had to chose a line on how I should present myself. I chose to go for a pompous presentation. It turned out to be a big mistake by me, the mass murderer told during his testimony in court.

- Why was it a mistake, asks prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh.

The prosecutor sits leaning forward. She makes short and concise questions, and tries to get Breivik to give evidence in his own words. She has hardly taken her eyes off Breivik during the questioning.

- I was portrayed as completely insane. I must take strong self-criticism. I should not have chosen such a presentation. Unfortunately, I have now received a statement against me because of it. I should have not selected the pompous presentation, but when that is said, I have identified 200 lies in the first forensic psychiatric report says Breivik.

- Who gave you the right to kill?

Bejer Engh early asked questions about how Breivik had the right to defend the Norwegian people, something which was a central theme in the speech he gave in court for over an hour earlier today.

- Is it a right that you have given yourself or does it come from others, the state attorney asked.

- People who choose to fight after the Second World War has to a small degree been able to organize themselves. Intelligence organizations have so many resources that in recent years, it has not been possible other than in single cells, Breivik responded.

While Breivik explained himself, he rocking back and forth on the chair. He looked at the state attorney, but did not maintain eye contact for long

- I came in contact with militant nationalists in 2001. It came to that I decided to do this, Breivik continued.

- You decided yourself, asked Bejer Engh.

- Yes. It was my own choice.

- You have given yourself that right?

- No, it becomes incorrect to say that. The starting point is human rights and international law, but it is correct that I have not been connected to others who have given me the mandate.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh ask questions in a quiet friendly tone. All the four court psychiatrists followed very closely.

Pressing him about “Knights Templar”

The claimed organization “Knights Templar” will be a central theme in the questioning by the prosecution.

Breivik has the last weeks admitted that the titles, medals and the organizing that he describes in the manifesto and in the first interrogations are only a proposal – and does not exist in reality.

He still maintains however, that he has been to meetings of “Knights Templar”, among other places in London and that there exists other cells, including in Norway.

Prosecutors will during the questioning press Breivik regarding aspects surrounding “Knights Templar”. Police believe there is no such organization.

Is it something Breivik believes in because he is mentally ill, does he lie to create fearor has the police not yet identified the other cells?..

Original article: Presset Breivik på «Knights Templar-nettverket»

_____

Google translation [edited for clarity]:

Three reasons why Breivik wept in court
4/17/2012

Breivik’s reaction to the film showing in court yesterday, was an early topic when prosecutors today had the opportunity to ask questions.

- Why were you moved by the film, asked prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh.

- Because I was thinking about that my country is about to die. My ethnic group is about to die.

Breivik holds [his] hands quietly on his thighs while he answers. At the same time, he looks directly at the prosecutor. The defenders Geir Lippestad and Vibeke Hein Bæra put their heads together and whisper.

- Is it an important film for you, ask Bejer Engh.

- It is made as an idelogisk film. The music and the movie is quite simple. But what shall one say? It is an amateur video. It is my first Youtube video. Had it been my tenth then I had probably not benn satisfied with it, Breivik responds calmly.

The songs

- Were you touched by it being your first film or was it the content that did?

- I think it was the songs. And knowing that there are many who watch the film and got the message, says Breivik.

- I use to meditate to the music.

While Bejer Engh questions Breivik, her colleague Svein Holden follows closely. He takes a few small notes in between, but mostly looks at Breivik.

- I am thinking that there are many who got [the message] yesterday. It is tragic that the international press does not take responsibility for what is happening in Norway and Europe. I look at them as activists for multiculturalism, Breivik explains further.

- Was that why you were moved, ask Bejer Engh.

- Yes, it was the sorrow over it….

Original article: Tre grunner til at Breivik gråt i retten
_____

Related post: Breivik’s statement in court April 17, 2012

[updated 04/17/2012 9pm]

Written by Admin1

April 17, 2012 at 3:34 pm

Posted in Uncategorized

Another co-judge in Breivik trial forced to step down

The Oslo District Court (Tingrett) decided today that co-judge, Thomas Indrebø, should step down, after it became known yesterday that Indrebø had made strong statements regarding Breivik before being appointed co-judge.

It appears that Indrebø may have an Italian middle (sur)name (Ciccone) that he has not been using when serving as a co-judge in the trial against Anders Behring Breivik.

Using the alias “Thomas Ciccone”, Thomas [Ciccone] Indrebø commented on the Facebook group of VG Nett on July 23 of last year: “Death penalty is the only fair thing in this case!!!!!!!!!!”

Before the trial commenced, another co-judge had to step down after VG revealed that the son of that co-judge was a prominent Labor Youth Organization (AUF) politician.

A reserve co-judge will now take the place of Indrebø.

Yesterday, Breivik objected to the court’s neutrality. He said that the Oslo District Court gets its powers from political parties that support multiculturalism, and that the primary judge, Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen, is a friend of former Justice Minister Hanne Harlem.

The Justice Department was completely destroyed by the 7/22 explosion, and Hanne Harlem is the sister of former Prime Minister and Labor Party leader, Gro Harlem Brundtland.

Google translation [edited for clarity]:

Removed as co-judge after death penalty message
04/17/12

Oslo District Court (VG Nett) Thomas Indrebø (33) is finished as lay judge, because he wrote that the defendant Anders Behring Breivik should be punished with death.

Late last night it became known, via vepsen.no, that one of the lay judges in the 22 July case has taken position on both the question of guilt and punishement reaction in social media. This was new to the court, despite the fact that all the judges in advance were asked specifically about online activity.

It meant that the District Court Judge Wenche Arntzen started rettsdag second with one hour break, so they could make a decision in the unfortunate case.

“His statements are likely to weaken confidence in whether he will consider the question of guilt and punishment sanctions in an unbiased manner,” Arntzen said afterwards.

She pointed out that the fact that such statements was a topic in relation with him being appointed, further weakened the confidence in Indrebø.

“All co-judges have in several meetings been asked whether they have made statements regarding punishment and guilt. That he has not stated this before causes confidence to be weakened further,” Arntzen read from the decision.

The court was unanimous when they decided that Indrebø is disqualified. He did not participate himself in the evaluation.

Both the prosecutors, the defence and plaintiffs’ lawyers agreed that Indrebø had to resign as co-judge when the information about the online activity became known.

The first replacement judge, pensioner Anne Elisabeth Wisløff (71), will take Indrebø’s place. Ole Westerås (46) from Lier will step in as new reserve.

When District Court Judge Wenche Arntzen took up the question of impartiality of the lay judge in court, Breivik smiled. The accused 33-year-old discussed with his defender just after court was adjourned – still with a smile around his mouth….

Original article: Fjernet som medommer etter dødsstraffmelding

Related post: Co-judge in Breivik trial found to have conflict of interest, steps down

Related post: Court decides that regular co-judges be appointed in Breivik trial

_________________
The Medium is the Massage - Marshall McLuhan.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mark Gobell
On Gardening Leave
On Gardening Leave


Joined: 24 Jul 2006
Posts: 4529

PostPosted: Sun Apr 22, 2012 12:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Attack On The Labor Party

Blogging the events surrounding the 7/22 attacks in Norway

Archive for April 18th, 2012

Breivik testimony April 18, 2012

Oslo District Court 04/18/2012

[04/18 This post will be updated]

Google translation:

Day 3: Pressing Breivik about claimed Liberia trip – word for word

4/18/2012

Read Wednesday’s first part of prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh and Svein Holden questioning by Anders Breivik Behring below:

VG: – Here you can follow Breivik’s testimony in court today. The court set on just over twenty minutes.

VG: – The four experts are sitting and talking with each other while prosecutors Bejer Engh and Holden have taken their places.

VG: – Now, Breivik defenders into the room and sits down.

VG: – They exchange a few words before Bejer Engh come over to the two and talk a little bit.

VG: – Now Holden is also lost, and the four talking together before the judge and the accused enters the room 250

VG: – Breivik is now in the saddle. He stands around the four attorneys accompanied by police officers.

VG: – Breivik make their right-wing greeting before he sits down in his place. He has not taken the witness stand yet.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – When is the right set. I see there are film cameras here, and assumes that the NRK cameras. When we allow broadcasting. We will find out how we are doing in terms of time.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – Honourable Court, when it comes to driving the plan forward, we believe that we are pretty well on track. As I announced in the keynote speech, this is the period we are now entering the prosecution and the defendant who has a different opinion. We spend the day today on this subject, and tomorrow we go over to the summer of 2006, and the episode in regjeringskvatalet and then on Friday, Utøya, and Monday afterwards and other things that are natural to take.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – It is certainly the preliminary plan we have.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – It sounds good. Then it is realistic that we do, Lippestad? Lippestad said, that’s it.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – I ask the defendant to take a seat in the witness box.

VG: – Prosecutors Engh says that defends Lippestad want about an hour to comment. This class will likely come in the morning.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Before we begin to ask new questions, Breivik, so I thought I would say one thing. This was from yesterday that you had a broken nose. In the interview with the doctor from Bunes Clinic, says that it was a plastic surgery, it says nothing about a broken nose, but I will not go into it.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – Engh, be as good as you continue your examination.

VG: – Breivik has two microphones in the witness box and the defendant confirmed that he uses it right.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – Photographers must leave the room at five past ten. Now it’s just still images.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – I asked you many times yesterday if there were any conditions in Norway or internationally that had influenced you in your particular radicalization. And when I perceived that it took some time before you answered me.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – And then, in this connection I want to be keep up to your first interview that you gave, it was still Utøya while you were there.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – [The judge asks the photographers to leave the room] When I read from a passage from the interview that you have voted early in the case. When you say to the police: The reason that Knights Templar was established [Lippestad wonder which side we are talking about] 1 May 2002 was triggered because of Bondevik and Vollebaek’s support for the invasion of Serbia (…).

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – When they wanted to deport Muslims in Serbia to Albania. It was umuiliggjort through NATO invasion, which was authorized by Bondevik and Vollebaek.

Breivik: – Yes, that is, as I said earlier, it was the straw for many nationalists who chose to go on to become militant.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – And that you then ended up meeting, you talked about in any case?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have not said all but one of them.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Now I have to apply minded. I have not felt that you have given up on democracy, but you’re still looking, is that correct?

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – [If confirmation from Breivik] Then I wondered if you tried to make contact with someone in Norway?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It was just a coincidence that I came into contact with on the internet. I wish not to reveal what, but generally I have applied to the European militant nationalists. I’ve realized that the nationalist community in Norway but it is velfdig monitored.

Behring Anders Breivik: – It will make the process of direction for the agencies more complicated by going over national borders. It makes it ten times less likely to end up on a list.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Does that mean that there was a conscious thought on your part?

Behring Anders Breivik: – What I’ve said that it was really a coincidence that I came in contact with a person.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – In relation to Norwegian nationalists, were you afraid of being discovered by the Norwegian authorities?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It represents maybe something I was searching for. Had it been any different had I gone the other way. It was a coincidence that I came in contact with someone on this site.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – What were you thinking at the time of the Norwegian nationalist community? [Breivik think about this for a while without answering.] If they had something to offer you?

Behring Anders Breivik: – No, I … I know some of the Norwegian nationalist militants environment, and what I wanted, it was really a coincidence that jkeg came in contact with this person.

Anders Breivik Behring – I was probably very skeptical of the Norwegian community because they were monitored.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Was it a problem that they were monitored?

Behring Anders Breivik: – There was a problem, because you do not want to be monitored.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – So have you told that you came in contact with someone on the internet, you can tell us a bit more about it?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I do not say anything more than what I have said in interviews, not under any circumstances of how I came in contact, but it happened in 2001. It is the foundation that I went to Liberia and London.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Where did this person was located?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I do not wish to tell anything about.

Anders Breivik Behring – I do not want to tell something more about the circumstances surrounding it … But it happened on the internet.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – Was there a person in Norway or abroad?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It was abroad.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – What happened after the initial contact with the person.

Anders Breivik Behring – I do not want to tell something more about it.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – This you have told about the interrogations, you know that I said that the court has not read a single interview by you. So when you refer to police interrogation, it is difficult for the court to understand, so it is somewhat important that you …

Behring Anders Breivik: – No, it was a person I came in contact with, that was how it started for me, and that’s how I came into contact with others.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I came in contact with several people, in the end I went to Liberia and London, and had a meeting with three others. It has been very limited contact. That’s what I have said to the police, and I have not said anything more.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – But I have understood that what you have told the police you can tell in court?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I want to give you an overview of what I have told the police.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – The Court thus has not read your questioning.

Behring Anders Breivik: – The police have pushed myself a part of the question, I do not approach the extremes of what I can say.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – But this jack you say you had in Liberia. how long was why you went to Liberia when you created this contact on the internet?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Half a year maybe.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Also, you say that you went to Liberia and what is the reason you went right to Liberia?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I would meet a person. It was a militant nationalist.

Anders Breivik Behring – He lived there at that time.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Which country was he from?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Yes, in part, one can say that. [Prosecutor: - Would you say his name?] No, I do not want to disclose information that could lead to other arrests.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – This, then, was a Serb who was in Liberia and the militant nationalist? [If the confirmation FRAS Breivik] Do you know why he was in Liberia.

Behring Anders Breivik: – Yes I know why he was in Liberia. It was because we look at it, he was a military completely but according to the War Crimes Tribunal in Yugoslavia, he was a war criminal.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Why was he called a war criminal?

Anders Breivik Behring – He had defended his country.

Anders Breivik Behring – He had fought against the Muslims in his country.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – What does he feel about NATO and its intervention in this conflict.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Spoken you anything about it?

Anders Breivik Behring – I do not want to tell something that happened in Liberia.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – But you say he was wanted, or wanted by the international criminal tribunals, it’s that you say?

Anders Breivik Behring – I do not know the exact circumstances surrounding it.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Was he in Liberia because he was hiding, or were there other reasons?

Anders Breivik Behring – I interpreted it as that, yes.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Also did you, but then I realized it was him you came in contact with the web?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have not said that it was hjan I came in contact with online.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – But what was the reason you went to Libera just to see him?

Behring Anders Breivik: – What was the reason? The reason was that I would visit him.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – But how did this condition?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I do not say anything more about it.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I came in contact with this person in Liberia because of this first person I came in contact with.

Behring Anders Breivik: – No, it is not.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Who then is this person you came in contact in Liberia?

Anders Breivik Behring – I met him in London.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – What role did this man you met online, in your journey to Liberia? Was it he who had put it together?

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – And the first person you had contact with online, what nationality was he?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I do not say anything more about it.

Anders Breivik Behring – I do not want to say any information that could lead to an arrest

Behring Anders Breivik: – In the worst case it is. [Prosecutor: But what about the Serb?] I have conveyed the information earlier, I wrote about it in contact. And I’ve said before that I’ve said too much in the compendium, and I regret anything I wrote.

Behring Anders Breivik: – What I said was that it was coincidence that made ​​me got in touch with this person.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Did you have any concerns in having contact with him since he was wanted?

Anders Breivik Behring – I was probably worried about it, but I acted perhaps rash. I could have had more reservations.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – What subject could you all?

Behring Anders Breivik: – The only sure way to not get caught by the intelligence authorities (…)

Behring Anders Breivik: – As long as you come in contact with someone, you take a big risk.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – But the risk it took you then.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Were you aware that he was wanted when you went to Liberia?

Anders Breivik Behring – I got that impression, yes.

Behring Anders Breivik: – It goes without saying, (…)

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – What was the reason why you met the Serb?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I told the police earlier that I was quite young. I was 23 years.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Just to get the dates clear: You say that you are applying in 2001, you can contact a half before you go and you go down in June 2002. Yes. Just … Then I broke off a bit, go ahead.

Behring Anders Breivik: – No, they did welcome their reservations as well. They would perhaps eliminate the possibility that I was a curious person, and (…)

Behring Anders Breivik: – Because it’s dangerous to go down to Liberia at the time.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – What was the reason why they wanted to talk just to you?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It was a coincidence really, to get in contact. I do not want to reveal anything more about it than that.

Behring Anders Breivik: – It was a half years before I started graduate company.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – That professionally how did you do?

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – You live in the residence, and you work in the SNT. So we’ve been through politics, you were vice president of FpU, you were online and you were a member of the Progress Party branches. What would the Serb get to meet you?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I do not say anything more about it.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Not the kind of people he wanted to get in touch with?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have written some of the compendium.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I stand for everything I have written.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – We have made ​​it so that we have taken out a few excerpts from the lecture notes as we would like to ask some questions from Breivik. We’ve heard that it was difficult to follow from other courts. These will be displayed on the screen.

VG: – Prosecutors say they will ask Breivik about some things from the manifest.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – When you say, Breivik, that you have dealt with this manifesto, which you shed light on the meeting and contact with the Serb. Here is it … [The prosecutor read from the manifest. Interrupted by Lippestad, who do not understand which side she is reading.]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – [Lippestad: - Yes, okay. When I'm in! Bejer Engh continues.] Can you explain a bit what’s here?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Yes, it’s written in a punktløs way. In principle, it is the people who have considered their contacts, have considered many, at least it resulted in that I went home.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – But you say they did a background check on you. What did they do to check you out?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It was to try to find out if I was the flag, if I had been a member of the radical right organizations. They believed that they were able to find out that I had not been. It did, too.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – How they managed to obtain the information?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I do not know, what you ask them.

Behring Anders Breivik: – They did well different background scan through the internet maybe.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – What would they find on the internet about you?

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – When you say them, who are they?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is those individuals that I have referred to earlier.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – He was in contact with you on the internet and he Serb?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I do not wish to enter.

Behring Anders Breivik: – Yes, it’s true. But it is written in a pompous manner.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I use some adjectives to convey it in a pompous manner.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Can you come up with an example of a pompous adjective?

Behring Anders Breivik: – For example, “military tribunal”. It’s a way to describe an organization. It is not wrong in principle.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – But it is written in the first sentence that you came in contact with a Serbian cultural conservative. At least as I perceive it.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have just described a person for the police. I do not say anything more about them.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – You said just now that it was a coincidence that you came in contact with them on the internet. [Reading from the manifesto]. How was it a coincidence that they ended up with you?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is important that … Police have misunderstood. They believed there were several hundred individuals who had been accepted and the group were picked out a few, but I have not written.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – What are you writing?

Behring Anders Breivik: – In Norway, for example, if you go on the secondary – and tertiary contacts.

Behring Anders Breivik: – The outer edge of the Relationship circuit. Then I did several hundred acquaintances in Oslo too. If I make an organization; in Norway, I would have considered all I had been in contact with throughout their lives.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – But what you describe here?

Anders Breivik Behring – I describe well the conditions for the meeting.

Behring Anders Breivik: – That is what I have been told, but do not say anything more about it.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – How did you feel it?

Behring Anders Breivik: – No, I have been in the same situation myself, I have considered several hundred people too.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Now I’m concerned about you, what do you think?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is natural to consider the whole circuit’s acquaintance. If one is to judge who is a suitable candidate.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – But you write here that we have considered several hundred, and it says that you have been informed by them. How did you feel when they ended up choosing you?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have already described that it was a magnificent presentation of what happened. I came in contact with a person went down there.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – But did not you answer my question – what did you feel?

Anders Breivik Behring – I do not want to tell something more about the process. [Breivik says he is telling the truth to questions about it]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – When you say “training course”, where would it be?

Behring Anders Breivik: – That is it, “training course” can be anything from dissemination of knowledge to physical exercises, and the word I have chosen to use there, it’s so obtust that it can be interpreted in all directions.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – I agree, but you wrote it, so I wonder what kind of sense you mean by this?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It was mostly information. But I would not specify what I mean by this.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – You write here that they searched for centuries for such a training course. Was he the Serb who wanted this?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is all scientific topics related to revolutionary activity. Everything from the rhetorical strategies, bomb-making … Everything possible.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Who should learn who it?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I do not wish to tell anything about.

Anders Breivik Behring – I do not want to tell something about it.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – How did the Serb at you when you met him?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I do not say anything more about Liberia.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Was there any special qualities in you that he considered useful?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I do not say anything more about it.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – You have been questioned about this several times. I would like to say what you have said to the police. [Bejer Engh will read from a document, Breivik says it's ok] You say that it was coincidence that the accused came in contact with the first person where the accused is very results oriented.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – “He was in many ways a multi-talented back then in terms of persuasion and rhetoric. He built trust. It has always been. He had hostile intentions. He could have infiltrated all organizations in Europe, except Muslims, of course. “[From police interrogation]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – [The prosecutor read on in the excerpt from the interview, and continues with one more. Breivik smiles as she reads.]

Behring Anders Breivik: – May I ask what exactly is the purpose of what you put up to now?

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – The purpose of my reading up what you have told the police and have your comments about it. [Breivik repeats his question about what the prosecutor's intent is with these questions]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – It may well be that you mean it is not important. But I want to illuminate it.

Behring Anders Breivik: – But the intention is to try to cast doubt on the existence of the KT network, that is what you try? Just so we are clear. that’s what you try.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – And when I read the interview … [Interrupted by Breivik]

Anders Breivik Behring – I hope you put less emphasis on ridicule, and more on the matter. The police have focused on cases from the compendium, which I regret that I have written. I hope you focus on the case and not a person.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – [referring to the interrogations in which the accused is described] sold you in with the Serb?

Behring Anders Breivik: – One can say that it is done indirectly, in any case, if you want to make a good impression on people. One tries to show its best features.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – But is it that they were looking for particularly gifted individuals?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is perhaps a little ridiculous way to say it.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Why is it ridiculous?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I understand that it is ridiculously written, as I have described, is the compendium a draft, it has not been through editing. There is a lot of what I have written is ridiculous, just as it is said.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – But here, as I understand it here, Breivik, here you describe something that happened? As you have been involved in?

Behring Anders Breivik: – There are things you’re trying to illuminate. [Holden adds the extra questions if there is a draft]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – But on your resume, what did they think about your political involvement in the Progress Party and FPU?

Behring Anders Breivik: – They got access to my background. [Prosecutor: To resume?] Yes.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Do you remember anything about how they reacted to your resume?

Behring Anders Breivik: – For them it was that I had a criminal past and was not affiliated with other extremist organizations.

Behring Anders Breivik: – The main focus of these were what I just said. [The prosecutor asked if they knew about his political activity. Breivik not wish to answer.]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Was there anything beyond the resume they had made ​​that they would be in touch with you? [Breivik do not want to answer]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Is there anything more than CV that makes want to have contact with you?

Behring Anders Breivik: – The basis of the contact was accidental. Prosecutor: But what about you? Breivik: I will not comment on it.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – But in this interview you will be prompted. Here they ask “have access to the resume?” then answer elusive. Have they?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is not relevant to the issue.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – But in this interview you said that the people you came in contact with had your CV. Interview when asked if there was anything beyond that would CV that they wanted to contact you?

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Did you get a feel for what Serb thought of you when you got down there, did you get good contact?

Anders Breivik Behring – I do not want to tell something about it.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Did he know that you had not been in the military?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Thank you. What you said was taken completely out of context. There was a sequence where the police tried to ridicule my background, I wrote a lot more than the two points. The most important thing was that I did not have criminal backgrounds, and that I had not been any radical organizations.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – At this time you had any contact with him were you with the Progress Party. Would he have any warranty (…)

Anders Breivik Behring – I know what’s coming in the next two hours. We can actually just skip it. Police do not think there’s any explanation, they do not think there is any person I came in contact with. But police have not even questioned the person I spoke to in Serbia, because Serbia will not cooperate with the Norwegian police.

Anders Breivik Behring – I know you’re going to delegitimere my explanation now. We could keep on for two hours but .. [Breivik seems exasperated Bejer Engh questioning now]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – I understand that you are of the opinion that we believe that the network can tell, that we doubt that exists. What do you think about it, the police doubt it?

Behring Anders Breivik: – What surprised me, I have already said that I am very concerned about the 8,000 Facebook contacts, that you should look at the specifics, as it turns out that you have not done it, that you do not have any interest to do so, or interview any of those in Serbia, because you do not believe in me.

Behring Anders Breivik: – You have not done (…) to follow up. I understand that you have chosen a line and follow it. I understand their mandate.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – But now I understand it that way by how we look at it. It’s right up here, what should be the outcome of this case. There are those who will enter judgment. If you and I disagree with this. I ask you questions, you can say what you feel is the truth. The court determines what is this network and what is the truth. Do not get hung up in what I do.

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is only to information for everyone else that the police wanted to investigate this.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Can we go a little bit then? [Breivik seems stressed, and certifies that they can continue]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – And then, before we move on to the Liberia-trip. I have asked this question many times now: Did you get an impression of what kind of people they basically wanted to get in? Were there any features that were particularly important?

Anders Breivik Behring – I will not tell anything about it except that it was a coincidence.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – In your interview, [one of the first interrogations], say: [the prosecutor read from the manifest of who Knights Templar wanted to find]. Would you elaborate on anything in relation to that?

Behring Anders Breivik: – No, I think that basically, the compendium, which is basically the principle is called a terrorist school, so I think anyone can do it really.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Anyone? What you have done? Are you serious?

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – With the specified detail makes it all easier.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Would all clearly mental, by doing that?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Do not women, perhaps, one of ten women, perhaps, not all men either. It’s certain circumstances that is required, one must for example be born with a spine, and it is not all that is.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Why are you talking about women? Do you think that women do not have the same opportunities as men?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Basically, they have it. However, if you look at the revolutionary activists as it is one of ten are women. It is more likely that the men had done so.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – But your message now is that anyone could do it, if they had trained up?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Basically, yes. In that sense it is a little off what I said, so far. One need not be particularly gifted, but you have to be willing to go a very long way.

Behring Anders Breivik: – No more than others. Maybe.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – How do you see this?

Anders Breivik Behring – I think with determination and good attitude can all do everything.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – But that which I read here, that they were looking for extremely talented individuals, and this with the Special Intelligence Database, what is it?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It means you are in, for example PST database. One is on an intelligence list. Pst probably operate with three lists.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – But why were these people keen to find extremely talented individuals, if you do not need to be extremely intelligent?

Anders Breivik Behring – I think probably it was a rather casual comment of mine. It was wrong that I know I wrote it that way. Prosecutor: But now I am reading from the police interrogation Breivik: I’ve probably given many casual comments there as well.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – But I see you’ve been very careful to read through your questioning?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Yes, but there are limits to how much you can do it.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – This Liberia-trip. As we see it, you were there from 17 April to 3 May 2002. Can we add it to the ground? [Breivik confirms it]

Behring Anders Breivik: – But is not it pretty remarkable that I was in Liberia ‘. It’s not like Husby and Sørheim said that I was in a psychosis and had not been there.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh – I know you have been in Liberia, it is I also used. I am trying to find out why, i. What was the purpose of your visit?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I would not tell it. [Engh: Nothing?] No.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – How was Liberia at that time?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It was a civil war there. Only the capital again. It was the cowboy states. It was very extreme. Engh: How? Breivik: The capital city was full of refugees and people who were starving and had no clothes. It was just before the capital fell. Only a matter of time before the regime fell.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – So it was not a pleasant time?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is the biggest hole I’ve been ii the world.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Do you remember your itinerary where you went away? [Breivik said he bought an open ticket so I could put a return journey via London] Why do not you remember this?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Because it was ten years ago. I remember just not.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Do you remember when you visited London on the way back there?

Anders Breivik Behring – I was visiting London on the way back. [Engh ask if they took the same route home] We from the land in Kenya, but I do not remember if we did it way back.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – In testimony tells you that it was the same route back and forth. Do you remember what you paid trip? [Breivik says no]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – In the interview, you talked about the Ivory Coast that you went there first, is that right? Had to have a visa to Liberia How did you get a visa to Liberia?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I would not got a visa in advance, but they are so corrupt that you can just give them some money, then get the visa right away.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – I see that you have obtained a visa from Liberia, the Ivory Coast on 17 How to pay your stay? Did you bring a credit card?

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Did you bring a credit card? [Breivik says he believes he has paid the most cash but can not remember whether he had a credit card].

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – We have evidence that the Solli took place about 50,000 Norwegian kroner in cash, in Euros. Did you have any need for some protection while you were there?

Anders Breivik Behring – I do not want to tell something about it. I prefer not to disclose information that could lead to other arrests.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – How?

Anders Breivik Behring – I forwarded the 1100 pages of testimony. It’s so massive amounts of information so …

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – But are you interested in telling us to right the same as you told the police?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is the principle of a little hard, I have not memorized 1100 pages.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – When I ask you now, you’ve been asked the same question and answered it. You have answered if you were in need of protection or not, and now you have the opportunity to answer it yourself. [Breivik do not tell]

VG: – [Breivik will not say anything more about Liberia and distress now and ask the prosecutor to refer the questioning rather than answering self]

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – Breivik, it will save time if you want to tell it, rather than that the prosecutor read it from police interrogations.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – It is the present, I can read it, but it takes more time. I understand that you are interested in telling the judge the same as you told the police?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I do not talk about Liberia and London. I have no idea of ​​what I have communicated and not.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – You have said something about you needed protection down there, that you have already told?

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Then I ask again: Did you have a need for protection down there?

Anders Breivik Behring – I do not want to comment on Liberia. You can actually just skip that theme.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – The prosecutor read that Breivik before he went to Liberia wanted to have a party who was not affiliated with the party he visited. Says Breivik was in need of protection

VG: – Not really, says Breivik. [The prosecutor asks if it is true and if he remembers that he remembers nothing about those who would protect him]

Behring Anders Breivik: – I would not comment on it.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – But Breivik, what’s wrong with telling something that you’ve already told the police?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Now I have passed more than I should have said. I have no overview. I do not want to say too much can lead to arrest.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Now you’ve already said it, what is wrong with repeating it here? [Breivik looks pretty uncomfortable now. He has already told the prosecutor that he thinks she is trying to "delegitimere" his explanation of Liberia]

Anders Breivik Behring – I may well repeat what I just said. I can well tell you about it for the third time why I do not want to say something about this.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – Breivik, I would point out that you have the right to say anything more, but all this can be used against you. So, if you choose not to respond, it can be used against you.

Behring Anders Breivik: – In what way can it be used against me?

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – In the court’s assessment of the evidence can be used against you. We can not have these discussions all the time prosecutor.

Behring Anders Breivik: – But when I ask you to have clear the quotes you want to read up, to save court time.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – [The prosecutor referred again from Liberia section of interrogations, where he talks about the bodyguards.] Is it true what is written here? Did these bodyguards when you come down at the airport?

VG: – Breivik asked if he had the need for protection. – I do not want to tell you more about Liberia and London.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Did you tell the bodyguards about why you were there?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I would not comment on it.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – But is it that you have said in interviews?

Behring Anders Breivik: – One was for the authorities down there. I specified that I was working for UNICEF.

Behring Anders Breivik: – They took me to an interrogation room and asked why I was in the country. [The prosecutor asked more about his role in Libya and that he told in interviews that he was in Liberia in connection with UNICEF].

Behring Anders Breivik: – They were so corrupt that it does not matter what they are. I had a different cover; alleys of blood diamonds. I told them that that was why I was in Liberia. I created a scenerio where I wanted them to have a role in it, that it would be less likely they were to rob me and take my money.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – So the government, they at the airport, they told you about UNICEF? Had you done anything to secure the cover there?

Anders Breivik Behring – I had been with UNICEF Norway and brought brochures. So that it would support the cover, I let it randomly, so they saw it when they opened the suitcase.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – You say you were buying blood diamonds?

Anders Breivik Behring – I bought some equipment, a magnifying glass and some equipment, and so have the police investigation showed that I had ordered some brochures and a few other things to support the cover. I could not tell anyone that I was going down there to meet that person. Therefore, it was critically important that I made a very thorough cover.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh – and above those that would suit you? It was the diamond cover, the authorities used to UNICEF? [Breivik confirmed]

Behring Anders Breivik: – The reason was that they saw through me and see that I am not a person who would work for Unicef.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Why could you not have the same cover to those that the authorities down there?

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – So they had to look after you all the time?

Behring Anders Breivik: – [Engh asks if there are people he'd been all along] Not all the time, but on several occasions.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – How would you have a cover when those who would look after you should be with you all the time?

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Was it a problem to have some cover for the diamond?

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – 3 Did they at it?

Behring Anders Breivik: – 4 It is such a special story that people think it is not possible to find something like that.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – 1 What I wonder now’s the two you met you down. Are you considering finding a different cover to the friends who were less spectacular. Considered to say that you were going to charter?

Behring Anders Breivik: – 2: People would think, why on earth are you there? Prosecutors Engh: But you had to say that you were going to Liberia. Not for ent another country?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I told nobody that I was going to Liberia, I’m told it only to the closest friends. I think I told them afterwards. I think the one person told another, OPG, when it was just a bunch of history.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – The one person you told before you left – who is it?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is one of the witnesses who are called in later.

Behring Anders Breivik: – At the time I had given a promise of a cover (…)

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – did you live with him at this time? Why did you all say that you were going to Liberia?

Behring Anders Breivik: – If you first must create a cover, the essence of it is that it is so similar to reality as possible.

Behring Anders Breivik: – Because you forget a cover. One should not lie in the first place. I am not a person who is lying, just as I said I was the pawn to my friends.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – So you would not lie with the destination, but the reason you were there?

Anders Breivik Behring – I told him, that I had to keep my word, and therefore I could not tell why I was supposed to there.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Now we will soon have a break, but I think Holden had a question?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It was a coincidence that I came in contact with him and it was a coincidence that I am in many ways went down to Liberia.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – I have a question for you Breivik. It’s one thing I wonder. What is the reason that this called for Serb wanted to meet just you. A 23-year-old NATO member Norway and active in the Progress Party who supported the bombing of Serbia?

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – random, this was a wanted man, you tell us, and you were subjected to screening?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It was a coincidence that I came in contact with one person. It was essential that I came in contact with a person who knew this person. They wanted to establish a network.

Prosecutors Svein Holden – I’m not going to tell something about the circumstances of this

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is always a risk.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – How did they know what you were registered with the Criminal Record?

Behring Anders Breivik: – The two factors I mentioned somewhere that I did not have a criminal record and that I was not associated with any radical organization. I do not want to tell something about it. I was good at selling myself, and was a trustworthy person.

Behring Anders Breivik: – They interpreted it that I had not had a criminal background.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – What about this screening in relation to that you were not active in extreme environments, how they knew it, it was based on trust or was it screening?

Anders Breivik Behring – I’ve told a lot about it already, and would not comment on it.

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is a screening process, so it went, of course, on trust. Holden: What you assume that they did in the screening process?

Behring Anders Breivik: – No, it’s the same screening process that the court do when they are checking whether a judge is competent.

Behring Anders Breivik: – As this organization – when they run screening, they and google you? [Breivik: I do not think google existed at the time.]

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – Was it the screening process? [Breivik answer he did not know exactly what they did]

VG: – The court takes a break to ten over half eleven….

Original article: Dag 3: Presser Breivik om påstått Liberia-tur – ord for ord

_________________
The Medium is the Massage - Marshall McLuhan.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mark Gobell
On Gardening Leave
On Gardening Leave


Joined: 24 Jul 2006
Posts: 4529

PostPosted: Sun Apr 22, 2012 12:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Attack on the Labor Party

Google translation:

Day 3: Prosecutors take Breivik in shifting explanation – word for word

4/18/2012

Read Wednesday’s second part of prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh and Svein Holden questioning by Anders Breivik Behring below:

VG: – Breivik be entered in court again. He talks a long time with one of the members of the court, still wearing handcuffs, before he entered the witness box.

VG: – The judges arrive.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – When is the right set. We continue the examination. Engh has the option to go directly to your questions. It seems that he has specific ideas about what he will and will not answer. He is their right not to answer too. It’s okay to ask questions, he will not answer and so appear more down in police interrogations.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Breivik, before the break you said several times that you do not have an overview of what you have told the police. But it’s important that you have in mind now that you explain to the court what is true. Not what you told the police or told to the police.

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is important that we also understand my role in relation to the role of the police. It is not my task to lead to arrests, and I do not want to contribute to it. I know how you and Holden have put it up, and it’s very special that you avoid talking about my radicalization. You are trying to undermine my credibility, and that’s not what we are talking about.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – Now we are in an examination phase. When it comes to strategy and such, I am confident that prosecutors will return to it later. Now it is most appropriate that we continue with the questions, and when I give the word to Engh.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – There we were on the trip to Liberia. [Engh summarizes some what Breivik said before the break].

Anders Breivik Behring – I had made ​​several purchases of artwork. I took it with the utmost seriousness, as I have also taken other cover in the future.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – But you, what you bought, how did you cover it?

Anders Breivik Behring – I bought the diamond effects. [Do not go into what he used them] I would not comment on it, I can only really present what you want to get out, so you can comment. It had been the fastest in any case.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Did you bring the diamonds you bought to Liberia?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I would not comment on it. I am generally very interested to elucidate radikaliseringspunkter, but I do not want to do your delegitimiseringsstrategien easier for you. You may well refer to what I have said in the interview.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – How long were you down there?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I would not comment either Liberia or London [Engh: Nothing] No.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – [Engh read from an interrogation] In interviews, you said that you were there for two or three weeks together, correct? [Breivik confirm this].

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Were you tested in any way when you were down there? [Breivik: I do not want to comment on it] [The prosecutor read from the police interrogation] Is it true?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Everything I’ve said in the interview voices. I do not want to comment on Liberia or London.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – What is the danger of saying something about this now Breivik? [Breivik: I do not want to say something about this other than to highlight a few points around radikaliseringspunkter.]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – We went through the course yesterday. [Breivik: - That's what is important in this case ...] It is a very important part too. [Breivik: - Not to ridicule me.]

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – Breivik, while Engh looking for the next quote from the interrogations, only I wonder: Why would an answer to this question help to delegitimere you?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have not said. But the strategy you’ve been up to now stems from the fact that you’re trying to document or explain my delegitimere related to Liberia and London. I am familiar with what you have done the research. You have called a witness [who Breivik believes prosecutors believe he also was there in connection with the diamond trade and to meet Serb]

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – But Breivik, can not answer the question about the physical trials you were exposed to, have the opposite effect, just to justify your stay down there?

Behring Anders Breivik: – You might be right, so I will probably tell you what I feel I can. [Holden: - Yes, so good!]

Behring Anders Breivik: – No, these trials I told the police. The trip was a trial, there was a danger to travel down there. Some of it was that I had to build confidence in them, they had to make sure I was a genuine person who wanted this.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – That he had confidence in you, right? [Breivik still want not to answer such questions]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – It is as Holden says, when you feel that I’m trying to delegitimere … why have not you wish to defend yourself? [Amp atmosphere between Breivik and prosecutors]

Behring Anders Breivik: – I understand that the police are interested in getting in touch with people associated with the KT network, but it’s not in my interest to provide information that can lead to an arrest.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – But what was the result of his stay in Liberia? We have heard that you ended up in London. When was it decided that you should go to London?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I do not wish to comment.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Went straight from Liberia to London? [Breivik: It was shortly afterwards. I was not in Norway in the meantime.]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh – I missed something: While in Liberia, do you remember if you use your credit card in any way?

Anders Breivik Behring – I do not think they have any credit card terminals where [smiles].

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – In connection with the journey, which includes two outlets of the bank card in the Ivory Coast. [The prosecutor rattles off some of the outlets and the date the parties] Do you remember that you left out of Liberia to take out money?

Anders Breivik Behring – I do not want to tell something about it. I remember that I took out the money (…). I took them out in an emergency. It was the currency differences. I tried to go to the Central Bank of Liberia, but I had only exchanged one hundred euros.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Did you have to travel out of Liberia again, then? [Breivik: - Yes, I had to.]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – What happened, you went back to Liberia, then? [Get confirmation from Breivik]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – So I asked you how long you were there and you confirm that you were there two or three weeks together. Remember when it was decided that you should go to London it was when you were in Oslo and was in Liberia?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I would not comment on it. [Engh: Do you remember if you had to make some changes to the ticket in London]

Behring Anders Breivik: – I would not comment on it.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – But I understood that the Serb failed to?

Behring Anders Breivik: – That’s what I said earlier. You ask the questions you know I’m not going to answer.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – He had you been in contact with the internet, you said just now that he was at this meeting in London. Was he in Liberia as well?

Anders Breivik Behring – I’ve said it, yes. Do not want to comment on it.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – When you come to London, where did you stay away then?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I do not comment on it.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – We find no payment in London, just use a credit card at a cafe 3 of May. [Breivik: I do not want to comment on it.]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – How long were you in London. [Breivik: - A few days]. So you went to Oslo, and you were at home 3 May?

Behring Anders Breivik: – According to you, I was there [Breivik smiles. Engh: But you remember that you were there for a few days?]

Behring Anders Breivik: – What I have said previously that I was there for two or three days.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Do you remember your stay today? (Brevik, I remember any of it. I would not comment on it.]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – What you write about the London meeting of the Manifesto. [Bejer Engh read from the manifest.] Can you comment on that?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I do not comment on anything.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Here you have mentioned a number of people with different names. [Engh reads a name in English]

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have said to the police, yes. He could not travel to London, why should I speak of his case.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – What were your thoughts when he asked you to travel to London for you? [Breivik: - I would not comment on it.]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Why had not he able to go yourself?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Most likely because he was in Liberia. I go based on that.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Do you have any opinion about the others who were in London, why they had ended up there = [Breivik: Will not comment on it]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Do you know why London was chosen?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It was perhaps because of the initiators. [Breivik would not say who is the initiator]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – You talked about a mentor in place. Who is the English your mentor? [Breivik would not comment on it].

Behring Anders Breivik: – I would not comment on it.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – It says “french catholic” it says here. So, you have accounted for this meeting in the police interrogation. Let’s see …

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – [While Engh finds papers] The information it displays is the right? [Get confirmation from Breivik.]

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have only met the people on that list. [Holden double check again if it's true] I was a little unsure of the date. But outside there should be correct. It is noted that the informajon passing votes. I met a total of four people in London. It is with the proviso that the information is correct, but I could not verify.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – How could you know that there were so many? You had only met three people, not four. The fourth you met were Serbs, but he remained in Serbia and you were a proxy for him. Had he told you what to think of him.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I would not comment on it.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – But in this overview, you have been asked about this in interviews. [Engh says he writes or says that the inaugural meeting were accused's youngest member, but this was the Serbian war heroes in the 40-50-years.]

Behring Anders Breivik: – Refers to the meeting in London now? [Engh confirms it]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – [reading from the police interrogation, the former Serbian war heroes] Where are they on the list?

Behring Anders Breivik: – There is only one Serb, but that person is represented by the other.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – [Continuing to push Breivik]

Anders Breivik Behring – I’ve tried to recall it. But it’s right what’s in the compendium. There are too many details to remember. [Engh ask Breivik out in any detail now about these meetings]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Why did you think of what you had written? Why could not you just think about what you had experienced?

Behring Anders Breivik: – A lot of what the statement is reconstructed in retrospect, I have not taken detailed log book from 2002. Some are recharge afterwards. Therefore, there is some information I have reconstructed best of my ability. This is where the mistake with the City Council came [yesterday]. Also in the interview there will be some careless mistakes, then, for it is based on memory.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – But now you say that when you wrote this … Was there a meeting in London?

Behring Anders Breivik: – If there was a meeting in London, yes it was a meeting in London [Breivik smiles this question]. I have not invented anything [Engh asks if he can find the meeting in London].

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – The question you got from Engh was, why could not memorize directly from the incident?

Behring Anders Breivik: – There are two sides of same coin, really. It is true that you said that I should have worded myself differently, I would say I remembered from what happened. But what’s in the compendium, that’s right.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Which three did you meet? [Breivik want to comment]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Examines it by saying who it was, I arrest anyone? [Breivik will not comment on it]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Do you know who it was you met? [Breivik: I do not want to comment on it.]

Prosecutors: – Can you describe the people you met, their background, who they were, their personality? [Breivik: I do not want to comment on it.]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – You have done it in the manifesto?

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Can you say what you have written in the compendium? [I do not say it, says Breivik]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – When we look at what you wrote in the compendium about it. [Read excerpt] Here, you say that it is one of the most elegant politicians (…)

Behring Anders Breivik: – [Breivik smiling broadly.] It is of course a pompous way of saying it. There are four people with tremendous integrity, so much integrity that they want to defend their country.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Figured it as soon as you met them?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It’s been an ideological journey. That is it for everyone unless you are not interested in politics. I’ve changed me a lot since then, it has certainly too. One of the things I’ve written in the compendium, I have written in retrospect.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – I understand that you wrote it after you have experienced. You write not there and then, you write later when you get home.

Behring Anders Breivik: – But it is also part of the information was incorrect.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – I do not want to say that when you write in retrospect, that you come home from London, are you writing about retrospect. Is that what you mean?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have not kept a journal since 2002.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Can you have remembered wrong?

Behring Anders Breivik: – In some cases, I do. [Engh: - in this case?] Basically this is correct, although I have described it in a special way.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – I think you said yesterday that you would sell a message and promote an ideology. Then it is important that we find out what is true and what is invented.

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is not something that is invented. One must see what is written in a context. The glorification of certain ideals, certain principles and certain motifs.

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is communicated in a way that makes it a sales tool simply. But everything seems to vote. Selling in principle dreams. That is what is going on to sell an ideology. [Engh: But this is no dream.]

Behring Anders Breivik: – If you had to use one word, it’s …

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Now you say to me that you are describing a meeting in London. Was this to sell dreams?

Behring Anders Breivik: – now I talk really about the basis of sales. To sell anything sell you dreaming. Something you want people to embrace, regardless of what you want to sell. The compendium is the communication of reality as we see it. Anything that’s right.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – You made ​​it nicer than it was, is that what you mean? [Breivik: - Do not want to comment on it]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – This pompous. I have heard many times. [Breivik: It is the same as nicer]. It is the answer, but you have made it nicer?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have said in interviews all the time that it is a magnificent way.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – How do you perceive your role at the meeting in London in terms relative to the others? [Breivik: I do not want to comment on it. It's not my job to shed light on what happened in London]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – How was your age in relation to the others? [Breivik: I do not remember.] “I was the youngest there,” it says here. Did it matter that you were there.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Were you the leader at the meeting?

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – What role did you have on that meeting?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I would not comment on it. [Prosecutor: You previously had an English mentor, as you call Richard? I do not want to comment on it.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: - But you will not say what type?

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: - Is it true that they got access to your CV?

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: - [Engh points out interrogations.] “Persons charged has written that he had and has a relatively close relationship with Richard, his first mentor,” Further down you say: “Persons charged were asked to explain whether it was Richard who wrote the part of the Manifesto. In relation to that Richard should have written the foundation of the part, not the accused explain further. He was the perfect knight “Is it foot soldier you mean by that?

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Why did he try?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Yes, that’s it basically, but you mentioned the perfect knight. In principle, means just what a perfect foot soldier that can carry a lot on your shoulders without assistance. It’s the starting point for the tank.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – What is special about a knight? [Breivik is clearly tired now. He touches his eyes with one hand and poured himself into his glass of water]

Behring Anders Breivik: – What is special about a knight? There is a person who is strong enough to (…) it depends on what setting you see it. In the setting of a one-cell system, independent and self-propelled cells, the person shall be strong enough to carry out an operation without help from others

Behring Anders Breivik: – That he needs to master everything from rhetoric to convey knowledge.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Are you one of those perfect knight?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have never called myself a perfect knight. I said that I have tried to reach for those ideals. A perfect knight is a perfect foot soldier.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Are you a perfect foot soldier?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It’s a lot missing, but I feel I’ve done it I wanted.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Used you any nicknames? [Breivik will not comment on it]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – In your manifesto you say that you have used code names. You have used the name of Sigurd [When the prosecutor says the name smiles Breivik very back]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – [smiles wide] It was a ruler in the 1100s. Sigurd Magnussen’s his name. [Prosecutor: Why was the name used?]

Behring Anders Breivik: – No, for my part it is because he is perhaps the most significant leader when you are connected to the ideals we have, which is crusading identity.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Richard, then? You also describes his Richard Lionheart – why he used that nickname?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It makes you ask him if you had a chance to ask about it.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Are there more nicknames that were used at the meeting? [Breivik: I do not want to comment on it.]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – How was it at the meeting in London? Did you have something special to talk about? [Breivik:-would not comment on it.] Four sweaty guys?

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – [Breivik will not comment on it] You said something yesterday about four sweaty guys?

Anders Breivik Behring – I did not say that we were four sweaty guys. But I explain my reasoning, but I put a little on the tip.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Were you dressed? [Breivik: I do not want to comment on it.]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – You wrote about some rituals in KT. If you had it in London?

Behring Anders Breivik: – What’s in the compendium is not an existing ritual, it’s a ritual I’ve made ​​myself because I think it’s a good ritual that can work for future members.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – So then you have made ​​a proposal on how you think it should be. Did you have any thoughts you should use the principles there then. [Breivik says he has no further comments on it].

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – What did you agree at this meeting? [Breivik: I do not want to comment on it.]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – [Engh refer again to the court documents] Let’s see. [Reading from the interrogations of KT meeting in London, about the religious aspects of the organization.] Here you say it is’ structure and symbolism and historical events. “

Behring Anders Breivik: – What you commented now, is a desire now, and was also a wish (…) between the nationalists, nasjonalkonservatister, as I am, and Christians. There are three types.

Behring Anders Breivik: – The platform that the compendium represents a bridge between the three groups. It was the intent then and it is now.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Did you then quite well agreed on what you should stand for? Did you have something in common (…)?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It was common. What we have in common, it is also in the compendium. The principles. Regarding identity, the essence was to try to distance themselves as far as possible from National Socialism, because it was so soaked in blood. We felt it was important for the future of Europe, that you had to distance himself from the story. [Engh: - For the future?]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Would you create something completely new?

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Were all agree, or was it you who made ​​the proposal? [Breivik want to comment]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Had you thought of something about Crusaders before you were in London. [It does not want to comment Breivik].

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Was it decided that you should use the name Knights Templar then? [Breivik: I do not want to comment on it.]

Behring Anders Breivik: – I would not comment on it. But I’ve basically written compendium that it was clear then.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – So that means that the others at the meeting also spoke of themselves as members of the Knights Templar? [Breivik want to comment]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – You had agreed to use the word Knights Templar. [This does not wish to comment Breivik] It says that you have said in your manifesto? [I stand by what I have said, says Breivik to this]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Was it a good name? [Breivik: KT conveys crusader identity and it is a good name.]

Behring Anders Breivik: – For a platform that tries to reconcile three groups on the far right, it’s a good name.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Was it talked about how you looked to you that you should change society?

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – How do you see for you to change society. Were you at the meeting agreed that you could solve it in the following manner? [I will not comment on it says Breivik]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Speak you that you should use violence? [Breivik: I do not want to comment on it.]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Yesterday you talked about that some considered a grassroots movement. It may well say something about?

Behring Anders Breivik: – What I can say is that I have said in interviews with police that at that point I had not decided I was going to blow up the ar ministries. I wanted to serve 30 million.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – In London in 2002 had not decided to use violence? [Breivik would not comment on it]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Did you get any exercise at this meeting?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Yes, I’ve written in the compendium is that I was asked to create a compendium.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – What would it go on?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It goes on to create a foundation for a new movement in Europe. Making the compendium would contribute to the foundation.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Were the others to decide on what you should write something about?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Yes, we did it.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – How did you bring that information? [Breivik want to comment on this.]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – What was the manifesto was that you wrote down fifty full pages of notes on the latest topics? [Yes that's right says Breivik]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Where did you find the information you wrote down from?

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – I read in this place, Richard the Lionheart that he had written the foundation of the Manifesto. Was what I read, then. What do you mean when you say it. If he had written a draft in advance, or?

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – [Breivik would not comment on it.] Is it true that he wrote the foundation of the Manifesto? [Breivik: All that stands in manifest votes]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Then I wonder why could not this Richard continue to write the manifesto or any of the others. Why did you do that? [It will not Breivik comment]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – What is wrong with the comment why you got the task?

Anders Breivik Behring – I was asked about it. There are certainly to contribute to a cause, and you can contribute in many different ways. I was asked about it.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – You have described how the other place was. You have blown it up a bit. You have said that they were militants from Europe.

Anders Breivik Behring – I did not say I blew it up said it in a pompous manner. It was not just me who was asked about it [Bejer Engh now ask really in depth about these meetings in London].

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – You have been asked in the interview. Was he at the same meeting that you? [Breivik: I do not want to comment on it.]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – But when you went there at these meetings, it was another who had been given this assignment, also were the one who had received the assignment. Could you run the risk that he did not write the same as you?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is not in my interest to shed light on what happened in London.

Behring Anders Breivik: – Because I do not want to disclose information that could lead to arrest.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – You have created a compendium where you want to sell a message. Why do you wish to tell about it?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is not an organization in the traditional sense. In the future there will be a lederløs organization. The basis for the creation was a hierarchy, but the term was meant to be éncellesystem.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – But now my colleague a question, so if you just …

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – You said there would be a encellestruktur. But you said yesterday that while in London at the meeting there were some who wanted confrontation and someone would create grassroots movement [Breivik says he remembers what he said yesterday] was among the four of you there was a disagreement? [I do not want to comment on it].

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is not my interest to elucidate it. It add up.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – But Breivik, this trailer not add up. [Breivik: - What is it that does not add up?] How can you have harmony between a grassroots movement and a éncellestruktur?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Hvoirdan you can have harmony? We talk about the four independent individuals, each with their own thoughts on the sea they want before they will agree on what basis should be. The fact that people are different and do different assessments are completely natural.

Behring Anders Breivik: – What we agreed on the principles contained in the compendium. Outside of that … [Breivik let it hang in the air and does not complete]

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – Is it possible to organize a grassroots movement and be organized in a encellestruktur?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Well, it’s two different things, it represents two different fronts.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – Does that mean that there were no thoughts of a grassroots movement that came out of this meeting?

Anders Breivik Behring – I do not want to go into what the meeting was about. [Holden says thank you for it Breivik]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh – I wondered why Richard could not write the manifesto instead of you. [Reading from the police interrogation] [Breivik scribbles something on his pad of paper while she reads. Then he raises his eyes again.] What do you mean by …?

Behring Anders Breivik: – But this is the reflections on it in retrospect. It’s not a conversation we had there and then.

Behring Anders Breivik: – General French nationalists might have trouble working with English because of the historical deficiencies. When I talk about the sofa generals, when you try to convey the cattle they have great difficulty communicating because they are keyboard warriors.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Was Richard such a “keyboard warrior”? [It does not want to comment Breivik].

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – But you say that it is important that the writer has credibility in relation to writing, and credibility in the fight. Did you know?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Perhaps the major problem of militant nationalists is that there have been very few examples from the 2 World War II, so if a keyboard warrior or couch General to take inspiration from al-Qaeda, but will not do it himself, so he will not have any credibility.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – But what kind of credibility you had? What have you been?

Breivik: – The principle I mentioned now: If there is a person who glorify martyrdom to martyrdom in the right extreme environment in Europe has not he have any credibility if he would be able to promote the tradition.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Did you have the prerequisites? [Breivik: No, I did not.] But you know you that task?

Behring Anders Breivik: – But to say that the weight of the compendium and the principles behind going to introduce new traditions among militant nationalists in Europe. If one is to implement something like this, there must be a force behind it. D

Behring Anders Breivik: – A “keyboard warrior” if he would try to introduce these traditions through martyrdom and other things you have to have the legitimacy to do so and it happens through the action for example.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Does that mean that you have no credibility until now after 22 July? [Breivik: Yes.]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – And 22 July has given you the credibility?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is wrong of me to comment on it. But what is true is that there are many keyboard warriors who have passed on things that will promote us, but it is difficult to carry out martyrdom when one is afraid to die himself.

Behring Anders Breivik: – The problem in Europe after the 2nd World War II among militant nationalists is the lack of role models. [Are you a role model asks Bejer Engh] It makes others respond to.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – To end the meeting in London, I would like you to answer why the other three proud that you have handled the design? What did they gave you the confidence?

Behring Anders Breivik: – What I said was that I was not the only one. I was asked. The fact that I was not the only one, may say that they are not attached very much trust in me.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Did not it?

Behring Anders Breivik: – If they had attached a lot of trust in me as they had not asked another.

Behring Anders Breivik: – Had I been in their situation I would have done the same.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – You will create a new platform, bringing something new into. And if there is one, two, maybe three people who are writing these compendiums, so, one risks that they write very different things in their compendiums! What does that say about the seriousness of the network then?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Eh .. it is a pragmatic approach. The purpose is to promote price sipping. (…) As long as you are fighting, it does not matter how you convey it. What is the essence of the KT network is to create a foundation for further resistance.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – It was not the content of the compendium is so important that it was like?

Behring Anders Breivik: – If I were the person who asked another, I would not bet everything on a card.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – Just inject it: Breivik, so the other person is talking about?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I do not comment on it.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Were you concerned about what the other person felt about the compendium? [Breivik would not comment on it]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – When you left London and was home 3 of May. What did you do? Did you know that you had any sense traps. [Breivik: I do not want to comment on it.]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – You have previously referred to yourself as a commander, or knight. Were you there then, when you were finished in London?

Behring Anders Breivik: – That is what I have added the word, is a cell commander [Engh: Did you feel that you were a cell commander then?]

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is basically just a pompous way to describe a foot soldier attached to others, who have a parent role.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – At this first interrogation at Utøya, say to the police who interrogated you, “My life ended when I ordained myself Knights Templar of Europe.” What do you mean?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It emphasizes not really going to ordain him. It is in principle out to put down an oath that they want to fight. It can be interpreted in many ways, but it ordineringsritualet as I mentioned in the compendium, it is more in line with what you said now, that you are waiving some material things, and you have to sacrifice for the cause. That you must live more ascetic, for example.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – But you say that when the police confront you Utøya that “I myself ordained me to the Knights Templar knight.” Was it you or someone else who ordained you?

Behring Anders Breivik: – So I was at a meeting and it ordineringsutvalget I have made ​​in hindsight I made ​​a ritual. In the first explanations my so I passed on KT in a pompous manner

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – When I read that you ordained yourself, is it not true?

Behring Anders Breivik: – What I want to comment, is what I just said, that in the first interviews, so I wanted to convey KT that way.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – I have seen. Then I wonder, is it true? [Interrupted]

VG: – The court will now break. Breivik are wearing handcuffs again at the witness stand and stop at the defenders before going out of room 250….

Original article: Dag 3: Aktor tar Breivik i å skifte forklaring – ord for ord
_____

_________________
The Medium is the Massage - Marshall McLuhan.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mark Gobell
On Gardening Leave
On Gardening Leave


Joined: 24 Jul 2006
Posts: 4529

PostPosted: Sun Apr 22, 2012 12:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Attack on the Labor Party

Google translation [edited for clarity]:

Day 3: Breivik refuses to answer – word for word

4/18/2012

Read Wednesday’s third of prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh and Svein Holden questioning by Anders Breivik Behring below:

VG: – Here comes Breivik into the courtroom again. He talks a bit with Lippestad now.

VG: – where the judges entered the room again, too. The court is set

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – What we are left with before lunch Breivik was that you had been in London and went from there. What was the status of you when you went to that meeting? Then I’d keep you something you have said to the police in questioning [about Breivik's ordination]. What do you mean here

Breivik, you were ordained in London?

Behring Anders Breivik: – First, that so-called Serb war criminals were hunted by NATO, but by Yugoslav courts. But when I look at the events, I see that I was then.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Can you say more about who ordained you, or how this happened? [Breivik to comment]

Anders Breivik Behring – I do not want to comment on the meeting. The description in the compendium is a magnificent presentation.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – When you arrived home from London, were you worried that someone would discover what had become of the time. [Breivik: I do not want to comment on it.

Behring Anders Breivik: - It is not in my interest to shed light on this matter.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: - Did you take any precautions?

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: - Began typing the compendium at once or when?

Behring Anders Breivik: - Primarily, I started to write on the compendium in 2006 or 2007.

Prosecutors: - Align yourself for a special way, or you lived it before. Breivik: For my part, I would make a lot of money, about 30 million before I was 30 years. It was my plan A.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: - It is after you moved to your mother that you start this work?

Anders Breivik Behring - I lived in Tidemann Street where I could use 15,000 a month on rent, or I could be conservative in their spending and live with my mother. He had cracked my budget.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: - Were you notified the Serb who was in Liberia what had happened in London? [Breivik: I do not want to comment on it.] – You come home 3 May to Oslo. And the 31 May transfer $ 500 to Liberia, to a man named NN. 14. June to transfer $ 2,400 to the same man from your own account. First, who was it you sent this money?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I do not comment on it.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Was it this man you sent to Liberia? (Breivik would not comment on it] – Yes, you’ve told it to the police. [Breivik: You know, traceable bankktransaksjonen, is a result of police work - What do you think that the police have tracked down the transaction?

Behring Anders Breivik: - When I expect that they also have made ​​questioning.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: - Did you transfer from your account and to Liberia?

Behring Anders Breivik: - No, I sent money to was the ones you described as bodyguards.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: - Why did you send any money to the Serb?

Behring Anders Breivik: - It had not been very intelligent to send money to him. It would be irresponsible to send to someone I do not want to be tracked up.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: - If you have no problem with that dise money was tracked down, you can not say who they were then?

Behring Anders Breivik: - I would not comment on it.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: - When you sent the money did you use any other payment like Western Union? [I will not comment says Breivik]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – You will not say what vedkomne you sent money to the money. Would you simply like us to speculate freely then? [Breivik: I do not want to shed light on the matter. I do not want to comment on it.]

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – Breivik, I just have to interject: We are now in this to justify, which you are a little concerned. Are we not built on a point here where it might be nice to explain a bit how it all hangs together.

Behring Anders Breivik: – Well, I do not contribute to the arrests, and it’s not in my interest to disclose the London trip and the trip to Liberia.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – If we stay outside information that could lead to arrests. For someone in the room there is something that does not add up. If you are in a country, what is the reason that you send money to them when they have come back in Norway?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I would not comment on it. [Prosecutor Holden: Is there any information in this that can lead to an arrest?] I do not want to comment on London or Liberia.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – In the interview you will be asked to transfer. Interview sums up and says that “the accused transferred 40,000 to Liberia.” [Engh read on the hearing on monetary transfers to Liberia.] Do you have any comments on that?

Behring Anders Breivik: – no, that is, the correcting my comment is what’s right, but it must be added that I kept money in the shoe, which was why it was mentioned in the commentary.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Should the money go to the weapons training? [I do not wish to comment says Breivik]. – I wonder, now that you have been in Liberia and had contact with a Serb and had enough contacts to be sent as his proxy in London. Why do you maintain an alternative network then.? ] Breivik, I would not comment on it.]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – So there is one more thing. I saw you earlier today that made you some thoughts about not doing certain things because they could be taken, or end up on lists of the PST. What I wonder: You say that you have had contact with people online, you have met people in person in Liberia, and you have used your credit card down there? [Breivik: - I have not]

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have not. [Says he used it in the Ivory Coast] – I saw that it was within the acceptable. In the two cases, I had no other choice. I did not prefer to do it.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – Have you ever been exposed to Nigeria Fraud? [Breivik: No, never. ]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – When you then come home in spring 2002, when worked in the Direct Response Center, also we have heard how you started the company after a while. Also, we have been through your policy yesterday. Then I wonder. When you come home from London, then. Why do you continue to be involved in politics?

Behring Anders Breivik: – As I already said it was a track I had started earlier. I wanted to see where it led away. I wanted to see how far up on the City Council lists I came, and I did yes.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Does that mean that when you came home from the trip had not you given up on democracy yet?

Behring Anders Breivik: – One can say that I am to some extent had faith in democracy. Even in 2009, when the general election, I hoped that the Norwegian press was starting to be less subjective. I had always hoped that the situation should change. Muslim riots in other countries in Europe were put on the lid of the Norwegian press. If the Norwegian press had ceased to drive the campaign journalism they had before, had probably not 22 July happened.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – So when you come home from that meeting, so you still think that you can stay within the legal forms?

Behring Anders Breivik: – When I came back from London? [If confirmation from Engh] my goal then was to make money. – To start the NGO. There are many ways to work with politics. One is conventional politics. The second is the interest group. – I had invested in a track that had gone back in time, and I wanted to see how far this went.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – In 2002, you have 75 posts on the forum FpU with political statements, and in 2003 you have 156 messages. Do you have any thoughts on why you became more involved after the London trip?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is because the investment it was, led to a city council nomination. I wanted to see the race completed, and that was why I spent some time on it.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – But yesterday, we visited some of the posts you had on this forum, from May or June, when you came home from London with a message of support to the United States. Do you think the Serb saw it?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It was in relation to the exploitation of the Middle East in terms of petrolium, it was what you thought of?

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – There was a comment when you wrote that you should follow more with the United States?

Behring Anders Breivik: – My point, what I was talking about was that Europe after the Second World War has given up interests in Africa and the Middle East and think less of their interests. U.S. thinks more of his interests.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – That’s what I wonder. He Serb you have had contact with, though I was not satisfied with NATO’s involvement of his homeland. Do you think he was aware of your supporting statement to the U.S.?

Behring Anders Breivik: – If you listen to what I say, as I interpret my post, it was not a message of support to the United States, but to say that Europe should change direction to take care of their interests. [Breivik playing with his pen.]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – In your manifesto. Where is this interview I talked about before, who was with you. There you have a heading called “April-May 2002″, ie in the period after London. There, you write: “I will stop my involvement in the FRP and has lost faith in democracy.” Is that right?

Behring Anders Breivik: – When was that? [Engh said the headline was in April 2002 that it was "I will end my involvement in the Progress Party has lost faith in democracy"] – It’s part of what I’ve written in the compendium that is written in retrospect. In retrospect, I think that’s when I ended policy. It has been shown that the nomination process in the City Council in 2002 … [Breivik is confronted with the fact that this date is wrong Bejer Engh]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – But you, before we leave this topic until you had a cover story to the authorities in Liberia and to your friend, also told you that only one of your friends knew you were going to Liberia. [Breivik: That is correct.] – Also told you that you had bought some diamond-effects?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Yes, that’s right, I had made ​​some purchases and invested in it.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – We see here that you are 18 March to buy diamonds in Church Road and buy a magnifying glass. 18. March so did you know that you were going to Liberia? [I think it probably says Breivik] 4 and 15 april call a store in London called Diamond House. What was it about these phone calls?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It’s like I said in place to support the cover. [Engh: How would these conversations strengthen cover?] – No, it is to collect information, such as when it came to UNICEF-cover, so I contacted people in UNICEF. In the same setting, it was perhaps appropriate to obtain references, etc.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – But if you view the phone to any statements?

Behring Anders Breivik: – To support your cover. [Bejer Engh continues on diamond slot] – It’s the same I chose the My Real Extraction. Then it was real people in the prospectus, but in case I would have been arrested by the police, would it torpedoed a trial.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – In the city said that this cover was well built, and it went well with the two that would suit you. When you came home after a while it told the story of diamonds and Liberia to other friends when you came back again. Why?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I believe it was a robber story. [Engh ask why] – I do not remember if it’s possible that my friend told it by accident. I had to support it to my friend. It may have been said by accident at a party for example.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – What do you think about it to tell a lie story to your friends?

Anders Breivik Behring – I had promised not to tell why I was there, and I do not like … Thus, when one has promised anything, it is important to keep a promise. It is the most important.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – But you came home 3 of May. from London. Why did you pay 12 May 86 dollars for a diamnatvekt? (…) [Engh tells of how he rang around the United States to the institutions involved in the diamond business. ]

Anders Breivik Behring – I was planning another trip down. I interpreted that the cover was not good enough. I could too little. In interviews, for example, I had to be more. There are support cover.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – But you told me before lunch that the two who would look after you in Liberia barn is used. NN does not question, either before or after your journey. Why did you strengthen your cover then?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is because when you go down somewhere so I could come in contact with other people that I had to have a reinforced cover for. If you have a real kredibelt cover, such as “mineral extraction”-cover, something I worked for years. Police believe that yes that was what was the cause.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – But the spectroscope and the equipment that you bought, you should have it with you to Liberia?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I do not remember but everything related to it is to support the cover.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – But how would you support the cover? How would it strengthen the cover?

Behring Anders Breivik: – If I had been arrested or towed into London or Liberia because they were on the trail of Serb, I had to have a kredibelt cover. If I had not had it, so I had been placed on a watch list as a potential helper, and I would avoid it.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – So your thought on this to strengthen the cover, you should have this cover, so if you were caught with this Serb, could you say that you were in Liberia to buy diamonds?

Behring Anders Breivik: – For example, yes. Then we had the UNICEF-cover and it had not worked at all.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – But how do you think it would be seen if you were taken by the government of Liberia to buy diamonds down there?

Behring Anders Breivik: – What I was concerned, it was to be the flag while I was down there.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – How they look at the diamond trade there. Is it legal?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It worried me. What worried me was to be monitored.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – In testimony to the police in March you say something about how you looked at the diamond trade in Liberia. [Talking about the death penalty for diamond trading in Liberia.]

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have no idea what the rules down there, there was an assumption. At the time, so I do not remember what I thought.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – When you get home, it was when you told it to a party for some friends. Have you told about your trip to Liberia, and your purpose of buying diamonds to others?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Perhaps one or two people.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – You have been asked by police about a named (…)

Behring Anders Breivik: – Yes, well, I remember, he is a person whom I have discussed with some in connection with FpU forum. He said he had many who had … He seemed certain, he said he was against the far right.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – But did you meet him ever physically, or did you just touch via the Internet?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It was only online, it was the only one who commented a few posts. I had a conversation with him on one occasion. He was depressed and said he would end his life. Then I thought that why he says this to an unknown. What can I say to such a person. I can tell you about our trip to Liberia, or cover it. What I said was that if you leave a big hole in Africa, they’ll change your perspective on life. You’ll see your problems in a completely different light. I told him a bunch of history. I had been in Liberia.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – You served him a lie do you mean? [Breivik: I had been in Liberia.] But not as diamond smuggling?

Anders Behring Breivik: – I could not tell him that I was in Liberia to meet a wanted war criminal, of course, I could not say it, but my intention was good, to get him to travel to Africa to change the perspective her. It was special to talk to someone who talked about taking his life. I wanted him to go abroad, maybe Africa, see their problems in a new light.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Thinking to cheer him up in some other way?

Anders Breivik Behring – I do not know. How is one to cheer up the sort of person who would take his life. He thought I had been in Liberia for buying diamonds. He had seen some other posts that he concluded that it was probably why I was.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – But in the spring of 2002, do you have any more contact with the network that has been established, called the Knight Templar. [Breivik: I do not want to comment on it.] – Nothing?

Behring Anders Breivik: – There has been contact, but I do not want to go into it. – It’s not in my interest to elucidate it. [I understand that you want others to follow you, says Engh Bejer After the answer] – I want more people to engage in the fight to save Norway and Europe. It has nothing to do with me. I’m just a foot soldier.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – But is it not important that they know what kind of network they can take part in, then?

Behring Anders Breivik: – So, KT Network is a loose network cable. It is designed that you should be an autonomous cell. It is not designed as a conventional network.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – You will then have written this manifesto. Are you standing by that? [Yes I stand by it says Breivik] – [The prosecutor read the manifesto of contact between the cells]. Can you explain what this means?

Behring Anders Breivik: – What I remember is that the meeting in London can not be compared with that in the Baltics. – Here fremtår as follows in the compendium as that, or is it a composite excerpt?

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – 4 No, this is a section that is straight from the manifest. – What was this meeting in the Baltics? [Breivik_: It was right-wing people who were afraid of being the flag.] – But there were 25-30 people that you write here? ([Breivik confirms] Were there people from the countries there, or you are not sure about that?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I’m not sure a few of the countries. [Breivik would not comment further sessions] You can either describe that there were two sessions on two different days, or that there were two sessions on two different cells.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – What were these “sessions” about? [Breivik would not comment on it] – [Read beyond the manifesto of participants in a meeting]: What is a “training course”?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is not in my interest to shed light on the meeting.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Earlier today you said that “training course” was the dissemination of revolutionary knowledge.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I would not comment on it. – It is a magnificent account of what happened. [Prosecutor: Was there a meeting?] Yes, there was a meeting.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – [Engh read further from the compendium, which Breivik states that he is impressed with the participants, and that they were not flagged by the authorities.] What do you mean by that?

Behring Anders Breivik: – There’s a pompous way of describing the realities.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – What was the reality? [Breivik replied that there was a meeting]. – Do you want to say anything more about how you were impressed by their screening parameter? [Breivik: No] – All those that you describe here, they were present at this meeting? [Breivik: - Yes, that's right]

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – In order to address this with the screening of the place you said you used the internet to screen people. I said that it was incorrectly used google, did you mean. What used to screeene people? – Does that mean that you were impressed and there is something beyond a simple internet search on each one? [I do not wish to comment, says Breivik] – OK, no, but this can not continue then. Thank you.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – This is you know, Breivik what I’m going on now: The police have tried to determine whether you have been in the Baltic States, also they have come to the conclusion that you have been on two trips there.

Anders Breivik Behring – I was on two trips where I created two accounts, yes.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – It is confirmed that you were on these trips. Police have found out you were in Lithuania in January 2004. When you arrived in Lithuania country half past two in the afternoon. Then went to 21 January thirty. Do you remember where you live or where you were in the 25 hours you were in the country? – Want to say something about why you were there so short? [Breivik: I do not want to comment on the two journeys.] – But while you’re there, in the 25 hours, then create an account with something called Snöras bank. Do you remember that?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Yes, I remember. No, one of the reasons was that there was a cover for that trip. And also I thought that I would need this account on both trips. – First there was cover for the meeting. Secondly, I would need the accounts as well.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Have you had any use for these accounts?

Anders Breivik Behring – I think I’ve used both. I do not think I needed one, but then I started to use it anyway after a while.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – I see in Lithuania, when you created 21 January an account Snöras bank. Here insert a check for just over $ 20,000. It was to you from an American company. Do you remember that?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It was in connection with the diploma company, I had forgotten. But when I had enough “cashed” into it.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh – also see that in 2004, five transfers from that account to other accounts you disposed around. But this means that if the meeting had been to Copenhagen, you would set up an account in Copenhagen?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Maybe not in Copenhagen, but I think this was before these countries joined the EU, so it was quite a special destination. Had it been to Copenhagen, it could have been different, but I think these countries outside the EU at that time. [Engh: Yes, that's right.]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Was it luck for you that the meeting was added to these two countries?

Anders Breivik Behring – I think I probably had created an account anyway. [So you had traveled to Lithuania matter, ask Bejer Engh] – If I would have traveled to Lithuania anyway? [Prosecutor: Let's say the meeting was held in a completely different country.] – I think I needed one of those accounts, but not the other. I think I ended up using both, but I only needed one.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – The next trip that the police have uncovered, here we have your ticket-Next trip in 2004, 28 and 29. april. When you come to Estonia at half past nine and went home the next day at 15.20. There, create a new account in the morning and then put you into a check. How did you all this?

Behring Anders Breivik: – What was the time did you say? [Bejer Engh wonder how Breivik may have had these "Training Course" in such a short time and Breivik is clearly uncomfortable] – I have not said that it was on that trip. I have said that it was one of those trips. – I do not want to comment on the two trips. But it goes without saying that I was able to have the meeting at one of the tours.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – You have said you do not want to talk about Liberia, London and the Baltic States, then I wonder why you have mentioned this in your manifesto, if you do not want anyone to know about it?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is a good question. I thought that part of the compendium, I would not be written. So it was a good observation. [Breivik said this Bejer Engh]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – What was the outcome for this meeting in the Baltic region. Was there anything decided at that meeting? [Breivik: I do not want to comment on the two trips.]}

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – But what we saw on the screen here, it was that after these two trips so it was decided that all contact would cease to exist indefinitely. Is that right? [Breivik: - I would not comment on it.] – I will relate one thing you have said in interviews. [Breivik plays with the pen in the break]

VG: – Engh can not find his papers and asks Holden continue.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – It was one thing I wondered. It is affected yesterday and today. What is a cellekomandør?

Behring Anders Breivik: – There is a foot soldier who is connected with two others, as you might have a slightly superior to the role.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – There is a pompous expression that is associated with other two?

Behring Anders Breivik: – But it does not matter if I call my foot soldier or not. I am affiliated with two others in Norway, it is because I have chosen to use this term before.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – When did you become associated with the other two? [Breivik would not comment on it] – Do you remember what you told Engh in place?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have told quite a lot of Engh. – [Holden said he said he had a cell commander in London] Did I say that? When I said that?

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – Engh asked how you looked at yourself when you came home from London. When you said you looked like a cell commander?

Breivik have always said that he has contact with two other Norwegians, who is affiliated with Knights Templar. – Then I have said wrong, says Breivik.

Behring Anders Breivik: – That’s right do not. It’s not that I was a cell commander when I came home from London.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – You were not cell Commander? What did you do?

Behring Anders Breivik: – So as I have described in the compendium, I altsåå defined cell commander that a person who has the strength to bear an operation on his shoulders. If you use that definition, is that right. If you use what I said in the place, right there.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – The question is what lies in the expression cell commander. This means that one is connected with two others. If there are several definitions of this?

Behring Anders Breivik: – That which I have already communicated that I grayling described in the compendium is that it is not an existing system.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – I understand that you stand for. But what does the term cell Commander?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Everything else is irrelevant. There is a description of the compendium, I think it is important to create a basis for further combat.

Comment from Dennis Ravndal VG: The Court will take another break until 14.15. Breivik is wearing handcuffs and led out of the auditorium….

Original article: Dag 3: Breivik nekter å svare – ord for ord

_____

_________________
The Medium is the Massage - Marshall McLuhan.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mark Gobell
On Gardening Leave
On Gardening Leave


Joined: 24 Jul 2006
Posts: 4529

PostPosted: Sun Apr 22, 2012 12:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Attack on the Labor Party

Google translation [edited for clarity]:

Day 3: Breivik respects the death penalty – word for word

4/18/2012

Read Wednesday’s fourth and final part of prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh and Svein Holden questioning by Anders Breivik Behring below:

VG: – Now, Breivik into the courtroom. He speaks with his defense, Geir Lippestad. – All judges are in place, and the court has been set. – Breivik sits in the witness box and get the handcuffs taken off your hands.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – The court is set. [Breivik goes to the witness stand] Prosecutors have many questions left now? [The prosecutor says no]

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – Breivik, then we are almost done with this part here, but I was wondering if you could say something about the Knights Templar network is today. What kind of organization or network is it?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is intended to be for the nationalists and Christians in Europe. When it comes to militants as it is meant to be a version of Al-Qaeda.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – Why al-Qadi? Is there any role model?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Al-Qaida is the most successful revolutionary organization for Muslims. – What KT is today, I do not know, I do not know.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – But you have several times been on al-Qaeda, you think you have something to learn from them?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Not me. I have nothing to learn from them, but I think that all militant nationalists in Europe have much to learn from al-Qaeda.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – What is it with al-Qaeda as well?

Behring Anders Breivik: – fight or ideologue characterizes al-Qaeda, in that they use extremely brutal methods to influence samfunnsutvilkingen, especially in the Arab world. To a large extent, they have had success. We want to make a European version.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – Is it right summarized that they are exemplary, not what they want, but in how they proceed, is that correct?

Behring Anders Breivik: – What is …. if I can explain it another way: I and other militant nationalists have had three different ideologies. The first is the history of Lionheart and some other war heroes. [Certify that we are talking about Richard Lionheart] – And then there are the ideological role models and contributors. Anyone who contributes to the ideology. Finally, the methodological role models. If one is to consider the militant nationalists in Europe has made it pretty pathetic that they have done today. Therefore, one must go to another page to find someone else because there are some on the left that is worth drawing inspiration from. Although we are anti-Islamists.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – Several times today you talked about martyrdom. What do you mean, and why do you mention that word?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Well, if we are comparing two warriors, one that is willing to die for a cause, and another, for example, a Red Army faction, who do not believe in any afterlife, they were very afraid to die. That is what is special about Islamic militants that they believe in it. For our part, I think many of us in an afterlife.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – Us? Who us? You must specify a bit. – But you must specify what you’re talking about. Are you talking about the KT network or in general about other nationalists?

Behring Anders Breivik: – now I talk in general about all anaonalister (?) In Europe. There are many who are not Christians. National Socialists are not Christians, but many are right to say. If we glorify martyrdom, going to be willing to sacrifice their lives for a cause, it is ten times as potent as the activists who fear death.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – And you, how you come into the picture there?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I looked at 22 July as a so-called suicide attack. I did not expect to survive the day.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – If you had died Utøya. Had you been as a martyr?

Behring Anders Breivik: – If I die today, many people look at me as a martyr. But for others they have higher requirements to see some as a martyr.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – But how do you think that the Church should look at the actions that you have exercised?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I think we should stick to the issue instead of talking about the church … [Interrupted by Engh]

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – How do you think the church looks at this?

Behring Anders Breivik: – In order to illustrate the church today, I get a refaranse from the old days. Before the Reformation there was a militant church. The Pope was the top militant leader in Europe. I want a militant church, which is more prominent than we have today. Unfortunately, the church we have today a part of the problem itself.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – But do you want the Catholic Church will recognize your and any other actions?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is never going to happen as long as the present church is governed by pacifists.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – But would you in the long run? [Breivik says he wants to run a more militant church that justifies the defenses] – Have you formed any thoughts you have received a pardon?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It depends on what kind of vision you have in Christianity. If you are a militant Christian, and in a way was I a militant Christian, it is clearly open for self-defense is legitimate, and to help stop Muslim immigration to Europe, it is self-defense. [Engh: - Is that what happens now?] – No, that is what is happening now, is a de-Christianization of Europe and Norway. I believe that Christian leaders in Norway and the rest of Europe should support the militant nationalists who are fighting against the de-Christianization of Europe. – They want their support. But they support us.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – Because you are trying to stop the de-Christianization of Europe, and since then the church should have supported you and gave you if not praise, the recognition for it?

Behring Anders Breivik: – As long as the church in Europe is led by pacifist leaders like much of the blame for the de-Christianization of Europe.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – A number of militant nationalists? – Is there someone from your network? [Yes, Breivik answer to that question].

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – How do you state that people who have acted like you should get to church? If you could create a world now, how do you want the church to look at you and your brothers?

Behring Anders Breivik: – As I said, those who are fighting for Christianity, the church and the de-Christianization of Norway and Europe, we want the Christian leaders that will help in the fight and recognize those who sacrifice themselves for Christianity and the church.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – But how could such a recognition be?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It’s … I have not done me so many thoughts about it. It is unrealistic. It is that leadership in Saudi Arabia. They are keen to have a good relationship with other countries.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – But what have you written?

Behring Anders Breivik: – What I have written is that church leaders in Norway and Europe should help to stop the de-Christianization and thus help to support the people, both militant and political solutions through trying to stop the de-Christianization of Europe.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – But you also have in your compendium said anything about what status you should have been in the church. Can you say more about this?

Behring Anders Breivik: – No it’s nothing more to say about it than what I said now. But as for what happened and the outcome of this case there are only two fair outcome of this case. One is that there is an acquittal or the death penalty. As I see it is irrational. It’s not a real alternative but follow the logic of it is.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – What do you think if Norway had introduced the death penalty now after this?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It had been the right thing in many ways. If one is to consider a case like this here, so there are only two published. The unrealistic, which is an acquittal, and the more realistic, which is the death penalty. I’m looking at 21 years in prison as a pathetic sentence.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – But do you wish we were condemned to death? Or do not we, but the court.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I do not want it but I had respected the decision. There are two outcomes I respect. It is capital punishment or acquittal. 21 years in prison is ridiculous. – Because of the shame that Indrebø was fired, he seems to support the death penalty.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – But you think that if we as a society now doubles the penalties, what do you think about it?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It had earned my business. It had proved that Norway had thrown his principles out the window far, and that as a building society we want to fight.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – undermine the rule of law is that what you think of when or what? [Breivik answer yes to this]. – What do you think about the reactions that have been after the media ban was lifted? Have you got what you wanted?

Behring Anders Breivik: – There is no question about what I want. It’s not about me. It’s about the future of Norway’s and Europe’s future. I’m just a tool for a revolution. This case is neither the government quarter, Utøya or me, it’s about the future of Norway’s and Europe’s future.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – How does it?

Behring Anders Breivik: – This is the most important issue in Europe now. For the first time in 12,000 years we are going to be deconstructed. WE deconstruct our own culture.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – Have you been looking forward to this trial? – But what you say, you do not believe me and you want to take me in a lie, and …

Anders Breivik Behring – I respect that you have a strategy, like that, I have an interest.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – Here’s your chance to tell us and convince us this is real Breivik.

Behring Anders Breivik: – What is it that should not be real? It is one thing, the police believe that because they have failed to arrest anyone. It is not in my interest to cause some apprehension. The fact that you have chosen not to call in more among the 8,000 I sent out your compendium. – Because one of the is one of those I have referred to, and I think it’s very special that you have not done more.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – One of those you have referred to when? One of the KT network has to be sent to the compendium? – It is in the KT network that you have sent to the compendium. [Yes I have tried says Breivik] – In the first interrogation of Utøya you said [quote about war crimes tribunal] What do you mean by war crimes tribunal?

Behring Anders Breivik: – No, it’s because we look at the systematic deconstruction of our culture as a war crime against our people, which is the biggest crime that has happened to our people of 12,000 years.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – But you are a court?

Behring Anders Breivik: – In the settings you put it in now so it will sound absurd not to describe it as a court

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – So the court is wrong?

Behring Anders Breivik: – In principle, we are the more so, in other words …

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – But how you act as a court of law?

Behring Anders Breivik: – We are a network of militant nationalists.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – judge you any? A court judge. Judge KT Network anyone?

Behring Anders Breivik: – We represent the indigenous peoples of Europe, and we act on behalf of them. We consider the goals that we think are legitimate goals, and we act. And in that one can use pompous rhetoric.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – But you will not answer my question now, Breivik? You will not answer if you are a court?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Now you try to ridicule here. We are a network of militant nationalists. WE are not more or less.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Breivik, Inga Engh read up on this categorization A, B and C offenders you call them. Is this section a proposal from you or is it something you have agreed on the network?

Behring Anders Breivik: – There is a suggestion from me. Previously it has been focusing on individuals or organizations, but considering that many militant nationalists have a long perspective on this conflict, it is appropriate to establish a better foundation, and it is a part of it.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – So it is that is you who have suggested who is allowed to kill and not kill.

Behring Anders Breivik: – No, that since 2 World War II, where the first militant nationalists began to trade in Europe, is this system which is used by other movements.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – What is the status today. And when you say that there are two other cells in Norway and they will not talk about. Are there any more cells in Europe?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have not idea of what KT network is today.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – Only thing you understand is that there are two in Norway?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I connected a total of six people. [You have said that there are two people in Norway? Ask Bejer Engh] Yes it is. [Breivik is further confronted with what he has said to the policeman at Havard Gåsbakk Utøya. - I think I remember that I said that I am one of three in Norway and the other two will strike soon. I said, if I remember correctly, it was what I said.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: - Yes, well, now there is a report, he comes and witnesses, so we can see he has to say then.

Behring Anders Breivik: - I know what he claims. He claims that I should have said that I did ... I was the one who conducted Utøya, and that there was another who conducted the government quarter. But it is wrong. - The only thing I have said is that I'm one of the three.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: - In your interview on Utøya say [referring to the introduction of capital punishment and waterboarding]. Were the two other cells in the process of killing the 300 other cells?

Behring Anders Breivik: – To talk about what you’re referring to now. I was very surprised to survive the day, and I had actually put some plans on. I saw it as a 5% percent likely that I would survive the ministries, it’s one of the most heavily guarded buildings. But I survived not only that, but also Utøya.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – [Breivik says he should not conveyed it] Why you should not conveyed it? [Breivik says it sends the wrong signals.]

Behring Anders Breivik: – If two others had carried out two separate actions or in the course of two years will result in the deaths of 300 people. [Breivik answer this question it is true from Bejer Engh]

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – Can we genuinely fear Thurs the 2nd cells now? Every day, they can turn to in Oslo, is that what you mean? [Breivik: Yes.]

Behring Anders Breivik: – As to the claim, I should not have been included. Basically, as it would have been a great victory to have a sovereign nation to break its legal principles, but it was presented in a very unprofessional manner, so I told the police that I regretted that I came up with the proposals.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – If you do not stand for them, why did you say that?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Under the circumstances, they were presented in an unprofessional manner and I had no right to promote them. [Straight? Ask Bejer Engh] – So what we are linked to, are two other cells. If they had been fulfilled … [Interrupted] [Engh: Who can possibly give you such a right?]

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – So you would have never given the other two, even if we had introduced the death penalty?

Behring Anders Breivik: – What was the thought was that if it was the knowledge that it would never happen, I passed on it. But it was unprofessional, and I apologize.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – In the same interview said that: the accused refers constantly to “we” and accused says there are 80 cells in Europe and in Norway there are three cells. Here you say 80 cells in Europe?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Where did you get the quote from?

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – There I read from an interrogation. It was taken on the Oslo police, on Saturday 23 July, the day after.

Behring Anders Breivik: – If you had taken that which was written just before and after this quote, it had emerged that I had no view.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – In your manifesto you come with assumptions about how many there are in Europe.

Behring Anders Breivik: – You must first specify what you specifically referring to. Do you think militant nationalists, or KT-members? [Prosecutor: KT members] – The only thing I’ve written about in the compendium, is a rough estimate of how many militant nationalists there are in Europe.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – We can see ….. the manifesto on page 983 Here’s your manifesto. Here is an overview of the organization. [Describe facts about the organization, how many members (15-80)]

Behring Anders Breivik: – Fifteen is an estimate. The starting point is that it is the number that we talked about earlier. Thirteen total plus two that are tilknyuttet Norway. Beyond that I do not know.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – 15-80 is a finger in the air or what?

Behring Anders Breivik: – The assumption was that there were more than 15 [Engh: - But where do you get that number from?] I have referred to. It is the thirteen I have written plus two other

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – Now, are you talking about the list from London? [Yes confirms Breivik] – Other in London meeting may have contributed in their respective countries? [Breivik: - Yes.] Let’s see. There is a lot of questioning, so it takes some time. [Breivik: - Yes, I'm used to it.]

Behring Anders Breivik: – [There is much questioning, says Engh] It’s okay. I’m used to [Breivik smiles].

prosecutor Svein Holden: – The number 80, how did you come up to the number 80? 80 then? [There is an assumption based on what others may have contributed.]

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is only an estimate. [Prosecutor: What do you build the estimate of?] I do not remember what the reason was the time I wrote it. But it is only an estimate.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – You have estimated it at another time and not just when you wrote it, but in questioning 23 July: “We are very much in Europe, a maximum of 80″

Behring Anders Breivik: – For it is there exactly what I mean. Estimates range from 15-80. I do not simply, the only thing we know, is that in any case is fifteen individuals.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Is there a reason for the number 80?

Behring Anders Breivik: – There are 15 individuals and the assumption is that there are more than 15 individuals. I have talked some about the contact after the London meeting. But will not say anything more about it.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – We just wonder … What is the reason you estimate it to 80? [Breivik: I have replied. I can not answer any more about it now.]

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – Breivik, one last thing. Use of titles. Now we have heard the call where you call in from Utøya. You call yourself commander, Breivik, but thinks it might be more correct to call you foot soldier.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I understand that it’s interesting to get caught up in uniforms and titles. But it is not true at all.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – Why do you use it if it is not important? Could not you just say, ‘Anders Breivik Behring “on Utøya? Why did you say Commander?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have told many times, and I may well say one more time. When you are in an organization or is connected to a network and want to contribute to a development in an org that will grow and attract others, then you have to sell a message. And when you want to sell that message, so you can use a pompous presentation. But it is not relevant, because I am a militant nationalist, and I have completed an action, that is what is relevant. What you are doing now, ridicule, and it is not relevant. – But I tell you what the thinking behind this was. There is nothing more to attribute.

Prosecutors: – You say that you are trying to sell something and is a glossy picture. But when you call in to police on Utøya why are you interested in selling yourself then?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is because I am only one of many militant nasjonalitser in Norway and Europe. It is important for me to convey that I am not a paid attention. If our demands are met, this will happen again and again.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – Was it important for you to convey that you were not alone?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is important to communicate it. Using a title like “cell commander”, insinuating that you are not alone.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – Is it a lie when you say you are a commander? – But then you were imprisoned in November 2010. Now I noticed the judge’s questions that you said you were a Knight Chief Justice. Why did you do that?

Anders Breivik Behring – I preferred the better when you accused me as a child. [Laughter in the audience. Engh: Yes, it's over it now]

defender Geir Lippestad: – I have a question and objection. We have received many questions about why he calls himself Commander and he has tried to answer it. I do not see the purpose of asking more questions about it. It is also almost over and it is there?

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – The answer is that it is almost over. – You said during his imprisonment, that you were a knight, Chief Justice of the Knights Templar Europe. Why did you do that?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is described in the compendium. It was right to stand firm on that. The decision turned out to be wrong on my part.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – In this interview you’ll see on page three that he explained that he is the supreme leader of the Knights Templar in Norway, but if he was recognized by his German, Spanish Greek [Engh lists several countries here now] .

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – What do you mean by grandmaster knight?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Obviously, I pulled the pompous to the extreme, and it was something I said but I should not say.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – When it comes to the compendium, Engh, it begins as presented in the compendium of section twelve. Could we in the morning had submitted it to come in book three.

defender Geir Lippestad: – Thank you then, we have some questions. Then begin defending Vibeke Hein berries.

defender Vibeke Hein Bæra: – Breivik, I want a little back to your communication forms. You’ve been on it a little earlier, we start with Facebook, where you say you had 8000 friends and styles you wonder why not more of these accounts have been identified. Can you say more about that?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have 8000 Facebook contacts. I have communicated to the police that I was concerned they would be able to locate these people, for it was probably the best lead-one they could get. But it has been shown that they did not follow up these leads late.

defender Vibeke Hein consequences: – It is facebook …

Behring Anders Breivik: – That is why they have not decided.

defender Vibeke Hein consequences: – It is breivik facebook, then I will hear you a little about the use of epostkontier. WE will come back to it during a batch called “under investigation”. However, as other cells in the KT network has been a theme today. Can you tell us about your estimate of how many epostkontier you’ve had?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I do not know, maybe 20

defender Vibeke Hein Bæra: – We received Mr. recently presented a report stating that there were 31 e-mail accounts. Do you use email a lot?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Yes I use email a lot, yes.

defender Vibeke Hein Bæra: – Could it be a form of communication in the network?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I will not tell you how to communicate, but what is essential, and which I have admitted in the compendium, is the use of online communication is that it masks the IP address of their For example, through tools such as “Anonymizer”.

defender Vibeke Hein Bæra: – We have submitted a report stating that you had 31 e-postkontier. Do you use email a lot?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Yes, I would not tell you how to communicate but it is essential to hide their IP address.

defender Vibeke Hein Bæra: – What do you think of what has been discovered, about the communication that has been done?

Anders Breivik Behring – I’m not quite sure what that is obtained. Maybe you can tell about it?

defender Vibeke Hein Bæra: – We will come back to the block ettrerforskning. When I tell you that only ten of these e-mails are identified. What do you think about it?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Only ten of the thirty? [Breivik wonder that the figure is so low] I thought they at least have identified at least twenty.

defender Geir Lippestad: – You have several times today said that the presentation was a glossy picture – both what was described in the manifesto and what you have said in recent interviews. I am keen to find out about when you found out that this was a glossy picture?

Behring Anders Breivik: – When I decided to go for a magnificent presentation? [No, says Lippestad but when you realized that your presentation was pompous] – It has been all the time.

defender Geir Lippestad: – If we look at the use of the word “glossy picture”: Can you tell us a little bit more about what you mean by the word “glossy picture”?

Behring Anders Breivik: – No, well … It goes on to convey something in a pompous manner. There is no better way to describe it.

defender Geir Lippestad: – Can you remember what you said under questioning from 02.11.2011. Can you remember what you said about the Knights Templar and the organization of KT at the time.

Behring Anders Breivik: – No, I can not remember.

defender Geir Lippestad: – Then I read up on it from the interrogation, from 2 november. [Lippestad read that Breivik said that KT in practice is being established.] What do you mean when you say that “in practice is being established”?

Behring Anders Breivik: – No, you can probably see the same thing, if you look at al-Qaeda before 9/11, one can say that they were being established. They were established around the 9/11. If you had to work to build the foundation for such a great revolutionary movement that aims to collect much of the right wing in Europe, it is a work that takes a long time. It is happening now is just the beginning, so I will look at it as an organization being established.

defender Geir Lippestad: – The fact that this is a glossy picture you have described as early as 18/10/2011. Can you remember when the first trial expert report came?

Behring Anders Breivik: – There were 28 november. [Lippestad: Almost 29 november. Can you remember when you had media bans extended.] – It was probably 15 or 12 maybe? [Lippestad: - Yes, that's just right. December. So after an expert report.]

defender Geir Lippestad: – You said earlier that you were surprised when the first explanation came. That you could tone it down a little [the pompous presentation], but you said before the first report came? – Organisation, that concept. What do you mean by the term?

Behring Anders Breivik: – A conventional organization consists of a clear hierarki.På many ways can one say that a revolution distinctive network, a loose network management, so-called “open source networks,” is not a conventional organization. In the feature article I wrote to ABC, VG and Dagbladet, it was taken out of context. It was a bit casual written. What I meant to say is that it is not a conventional organization.

defender Geir Lippestad: – It is based on the prosecutor’s questions, important to clarify around this organization exists or not. Therefore, your definition of an organization is important. Can you remember what you said in the interview 18 October when you would describe your organization? [Breivik do not remember.] – It is important. “Persons charged are sure that the organization KT is not the same after 22/7. Persons charged explains that he does not have an overview of how the situation is today. He has only an overview of the buildings that are Knights Templar. “

defender Geir Lippestad: – It is not just an organization but an ideology being established. It may take ten to twenty years before it is under fixed limits [Lippestad refers Breivik's interrogation] Can you tell us more about this? But what did you mean about what you said in October?

Behring Anders Breivik: – No, well, the network was a network prior to 22 July and there is a network now. There are people who plan the operation now. But I do not have any details of it. I had a rough idea before 22 July. The situation in Europe today, it is impossible to form a large cell or organization, because it is made impossible by the intelligence agencies.

Behring Anders Breivik: – And the only option, it is self-run and independent cells, and basically with the KT-network is to be an open source network, the objective of open and self-propelled cells.

defender Geir Lippestad: – Breivik, it means what you say and what I’ve read, from October 2011, that you understood at the time that you had expressed your pompous?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Yes, absolutely.

defender Geir Lippestad: – You have been asked some questions that you have had difficulties to answer, and there will be evidence of whether this is true or not. Have you told the truth about everything in the interrogations of the police, or have you intentionally left out anything, from day one?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I think that everything I have been told is correct, I can not remember that there is something not right, but if I wanted to explain to me, I have told about it, but all I has said is correct.

defender Geir Lippestad: – So all you have said, that’s right – but it’s something that you’ve left out?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Yes, I did not want to explain to me about some things.

defender Geir Lippestad: – Can you remember having explained in percentages how much you’ve wanted to tell the truth about and how much you have wanted to tell the truth about?

Behring Anders Breivik: – What I have communicated to the police is that in principle can provide 90% of the information. I made a deal with the police for action, and that was that I could pass 98% of the information, with the assumption that I am not saying the remaining 2%. When I said that I would not disclose information that could lead to an arrest. – And in the worst case I will do everything I can to prevent everything I can that there is an arrest. I have conveyed to the police.

defender Geir Lippestad: – It is true that you want to explain about 98 percent of what you know. You said that already in the first interrogation on 23 July. What I wonder. You’ve talked about that you want to sell a message, and through these two days you said that you have been selling earlier and a good negotiator. What are the characteristics of a good dealer?

Anders Breivik Behring – He must have something to negotiate about. I do not know if that’s what you refer to?

defender Geir Lippestad: – Do you, now I ask directly, express yourself in such a way with the police, trying to get a negotiating position?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have completely kjlart wanted to get a negotiating position with respect to 98 percent of the info I put on.

defender Geir Lippestad: – What were you negotiating?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I wanted to negotiate all information, except information that may lead to an arrest.

defender Geir Lippestad: – But to get into a negotiating position, 23 July, what did you feel that you had to do then to be attractive to a negotiation?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have explained that I am willing to provide 98 percent of the information, except as may lead to an arrest of the others. The police have accepted.

defender Geir Lippestad: – But it was important for you … We’ve heard you referred to the network with the number of people and you say you told that you gave a magnificent presentation. Was it important for you to talk about the KT network to get in better negotiating position with the police.

Behring Anders Breivik: – No, it was not. Everything I have said in the police interrogation votes. That I chose a pompous presentation was the most that I wanted to sell it as a complete diet consisted of.

defender Geir Lippestad: – But can you remember what you were especially interested in the first interrogation, which was taken at the Police Station 23 July. What was it you wanted to talk to the police then?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I think that when you made ​​the agreement on your mind? [Get confirmation from Lippestad] No, I was keen to make an appointment with the police.

defender Geir Lippestad: – I can see from your statement. [Lippestad refers to the interview now where Breivik has two requirements list] Do you remember what the requirements were?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Yes, I remember. You can read up.

defender Geir Lippestad: – There was that it would be PC in the cell with the word processor Word and the printer. It may not contain the open Internet, but with access to Wikipedia. That was step 1

Behring Anders Breivik: – Step two was the use of the Knights Templar uniform in court. Point three: open trial with a free press, paragraph four (…)

defender Geir Lippestad: – It was a requirement you asked the police 23 July 2011. How would you get in position to negotiate the police of unusual requirements at that time? What did you do to get advance payment position?

Behring Anders Breivik: – In principle, I had to tell all. – I had to be a bit pompous because I wanted to sell a message, not because of that agreement. – Basically, we made a deal and I fulfilled my part of it. I understand that it is difficult for the police. I expected that I would get a PC.

defender Geir Lippestad: – But you got the PC? [Breivik confirms it] – We are happy there.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – Has assistance attorneys any questions?

Lawyer Siv Hallgren: – You have talked a lot with the prosecutor about this with Christianity. Is there a Christian Europe?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Yes that’s right in principle what you say.

Lawyer Siv Hallgren: – Your own relationship to Christianity, you mentioned yesterday that you have a relationship with the Catholic Church. What relationship do you have yourself to Christianity?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Well, I’m a militant Christian and not particularly religious. But I’m a bit religious. To prevent the de-Christianization of Europe is important, but it’s not that we want a theocracy. – We want a Christian heritage, Christian teaching in schools and Christian framework in Europe. We are not Christian fundamentalists. It is not the KT network is.

Lawyer Siv Hallgren: – But you then? You confess to the Christian faith? Do you believe in the resurrection?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I am a Christian, I believe in God. I am a bit religious, but not particularly religious.

Lawyer Siv Hallgren: – What do you mean when you say you are a little religious?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I believe in God and I believe in an afterlife. Beyond that, I have no comment on that.

Lawyer Siv Hallgren: – But what’s important to be a Christian and be a Christian country?

Behring Anders Breivik: – There was an evaluation from China a few years ago, they made ​​an overview of why Europe was so successful, and they concluded that Christian. Battle of Vienna in 1683 stopped the invasion from the Ottoman Empire. – And I want to preserve the Christian heritage of Europe.

Lawyer Siv Hallgren: – It is not faith that is important then?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I do not work for theocratic goals, no, that’s right.

Lawyer Siv Hallgren: – But you were talking about some self-study, you have done theological studies under it? Where was it learned about religion?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It was the time it was the Christian teaching. Before it was abolished by the Labour Party.

Lawyer Siv Hallgren: – So, you mentioned something about the rape of your sisters and the piece. Who do you consider to be your sisters in this context?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Basically, there are all those I see as my extended famliie. An ethnic group is an extended family. In addition, I support all ages who support us, even if they are not ethnic Norwegian. It differs from the national conservative nationalists. I consider those who are not etinsk Norwegian, so long as they support us. – While they support us and our interests, they need not only be ethnic Norwegian.

Lawyer Siv Hallgren: – But this term “extended family”, you can define it? Was that what you did now?

Behring Anders Breivik: – The nation state in Europe is based on ethnic states and ethnic families. In that context, it is what I referred to earlier. It is not only ethnic groups but also others who support the direction that I support.

Lawyer Siv Hallgren: – What defines you as an ethnic group?

Behring Anders Breivik: – What I define as an ethnic group? [Hallgren: What do you belong?] I belong to the Norwegians. [Hallgren: - But what about the Swedes, then?] – Swedes are an ethnic group, it’s the same with Sami. Samer is not ethnic Norwegians, they are Sami.

Lawyer Siv Hallgren: – How do you see as the Sami?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I recognize the Sami’s rights, and they should be indigenous ethnic Norwegians. I have nothing against Sami. I recognize them as a urfolkd OPG they should recognize us as an indigenous people.

Lawyer Siv Hallgren: – And can Sami live in Norway, is that right?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Sami living in Lapland. And then there are many Sami who live in Oslo, of course. – I have not taken a position on it.

Lawyer Siv Hallgren: – Have you traveled extensively in Norway itself?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have traveled extensively in Norway, yes. I’ve been all over Norway with the exception of Bergen. Everything from cod municipality, to Oslo, or in other words the South Coast. I’ve been all over Norway, with the exception of Finnmark and Bergen.

Lawyer Siv Hallgren: – But this has been in the holiday context. With family and friends?

Behring Anders Breivik: – With family and friends.

Lawyer Siv Hallgren: – What relationship do you have to Oslo?

Behring Anders Breivik: – My grandmother comes from Fagerborg, and the rest of the family coming from other parts of Norway.

Lawyer Yvonne Mette Larsen: – We want to give out the compendium and the beginning of book three. So we can get it on the screen [It discusses how to organize femvisningen]

defender Geir Lippestad: – We are going to be very concerned now about bistandsavokater should help the prosecutor. Should we have another round of Knights Templar. We will respond immediately to it.

VG: – The judge, defense counsel and assistance attorneys are discussing what kind of questions counsel is allowed to stand. Defense is critical to further questions about the Knights Templar.

VG: – Aid lawyer is allowed to start asking questions, the court shall determine the way they are relevant enough. Lawyer Yvonne Larsen Mette go at once with this.

Lawyer Yvonne Mette Larsen: – When I start up. Breivik, what we are concerned about the Knights Templar and how you describe this organization. Can you describe for themselves what kind of organization this is.

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is distributed now, it’s really just a clause that enables the distribution of the compendium without criminal liability.

Lawyer Yvonne Mette Larsen: – And that was what I was thinking of. Legal disclaimer, what does it mean in Norwegian?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is a legal clause that allows the distribution of the compendium without criminal liability. If it had been, had it not been possible to distribute it.

Lawyer Yvonne Mette Larsen: – Why was there a point of such a legal disclaimer?

Behring Anders Breivik: – The essence of making it was to distribute it. Had I not done that it would complicated process and deliver the fictional description. It is to relieve people for criminal liability.

Lawyer Yvonne Mette Larsen: – [quoting from the manifesto]: Which organization reviews you there?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Now, are you talking about the legal clause. It facilitates the distribution of the compendium without criminal liability. It is of course because it contains a bomb recipe and countless violence and incitement clause nullifiserer it.

Lawyer Yvonne Mette Larsen: – Okay, but if we go a little further down the [describe the sentence]. How should the court consider this? How do you describe Knights Templar?

Behring Anders Breivik: – In this legal klauseulen I do. That is the whole meaning. The clause enables the distribution of the film without criminal liability. Without this it would be a criminal offense to convey the film.

Lawyer Yvonne Mette Larsen: – But yesterday, as you mentioned something about four sweaty men in a basement. Is that where you are, or what? – Yes, that was to underpin the word “pompous”, I was not talking about reality. – If there had been a reality with the Knights Templar. It is long since you wrote it, it is strange to you that no one else has done it and proved that the Knights Templar.

Behring Anders Breivik: – Are you sure there are others who have campaigned for 22 July?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have limited access to the Internet and the media, so I do not know.

Lawyer Yvonne Mette Larsen: – Are you sure there are others who have campaigned?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I know that others have campaigned. But I have not been verified whether it is from KT. For instance in Italy, but that said not been verified if they are part of KT.

Lawyer Yvonne Mette Larsen: – You use the term, we can also say I am. Who else has inspired you to action 22 July?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Inspiration on which area? Methodological or ideological?

Lawyer Yvonne Mette Larsen: – When I think of the area killing of youth and adults. Who has inspired you at that point?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Are you talking about the methodology or ideology? [Larsen asks him to just answer the question] When it comes to methodology, it is al-Qaeda it is their methodology. When it comes to ideology, it is probably all, what can we say [Breivik think long here], all the authors who support violence.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – Larsen, we can not repeat the question asked earlier. Do you want to ask about anything that is not mentioned before?

Lawyer Yvonne Mette Larsen: – I’m past the Knights Templar now. You said initially yesterday, Breivik, that you performed these actions to preserve our culture and our democracy, is that right?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is too narrow to use that definition. It is much more than that, and it is important to emphasize all aspects. It is therefore the initial presentation was as far as it was.

Lawyer Yvonne Mette Larsen: – Are there any aspects of our Norwegian culture that supports the attacks on 22 July?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Absolutely. [Larsen: What then?] You are talking about the Norwegian principles today. [Larsen: And our culture that you want to protect? .] – It’s a good question. You could say that honor codecs for Norway was also deconstructed by the AP after the 2nd World War II. You can say that most men in Norway are feminized and lacking backbone. And have no code of honor. So it’s really old, we are trying to recover

Lawyer Yvonne Mette Larsen: – But is there anything that separates you from a terrorist in the al-Qaeda network?

Behring Anders Breivik: – The difference is that I fought for primarily Norwegian indigenous peoples’ rights and also Europe. – I do not want to invade other countries and people like me are isolationists, while al Qaeda is expansive.

Lawyer Yvonne Mette Larsen: – But Breivik, what have you really accomplished? Is it so that the organization which you belong, this has been successful, Breivik, or is it failed, this fight against the multiculturalists?

Behring Anders Breivik: – One must first try to take a holistic about it. Of course it is tragic that you have to carry something so tragic to be heard in a society and help to change safmunnet. I think it is tragic that one is forced out of democracy and are censored and ridiculed. On the one hand I think it’s terrible that something be done, on the other hand, I see that it is necessary. You have to look at motives. – One is to provoke a witch hunt for moderate conservative culture. It was true. Shortly afterwards it was a witch hunt in several countries. It will contribute to increased polarization and to more censorship and thus more radikalisiering. It is indeed a better result than expected. – In addition, it went on to distribute the compendium.

Lawyer Yvonne Mette Larsen: – What do you know, now you have the full access to the media, what have you achieved? Give one example of that.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I can well illustrate. After 9/11 were Islamic militants were appalled. After a year, raised the threshold for what was acceptable. People that I want conflict early before we get a minotritet in their own country and Europe. We believe that our only hope is to create conflict before we lose the majority. – And so I set it as appropriate. But I think it’s sad that it’s the only way conservative culture has to influence society.

Lawyer Yvonne Mette Larsen: – Thank you, when I finished.

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – A question? Breivik, you have expressed a strong hatred of the Labour Party. When was that you developed it?

Behring Anders Breivik: – In a way, I will not say I hate them. I am willing to forgive them, if they had renounced their party politics. My responsibility was to act, nothing else.

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – It is your analysis that leads to action 22 July?

Behring Anders Breivik: – No it is only a very small caricature of an analysis. What can one say, I will not use the word hate. But you can say rage. When my eyes caught sight of that reality did not match what you saw in the media.

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – Would you like to elaborate on it?Behring Anders Breivik: – With very few exceptions, it has been the AP’s leading party in Norway by 2 World War II. They have had the support of 30-60% after 2 World War I, they represent the governing power. – It takes almost half an hour to ask about it and I’m very tired now.

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – You have given an overview of the analysis now? [Absolutely not says Breivik] – We can go further on it later if necessary. You mentioned in your introduction, human rights as a basis for your actions. Can you elaborate on the human rights basis to build on?

Behring Anders Breivik: – The starting point is the universal human rights principle that one should allow for self-defense. An ethnic group that experiences deconstruction has the right to self-defense. It is not so controversial.

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – Knights Templar are a group that consists of three one-man cells. Can the rebel group is recognized in international law?

Behring Anders Breivik: – You could say that nationalists or militant nationalists in Europe has not had any sovereign nation since World War 2, after it has been individuals and groups who have continued the fight against kommismen.

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – But you have international legal basis for what you do?

Behring Anders Breivik: – They do not recognize those individuals who struggle. That we understand.

VG: – Frode Elgesem wonder if Breivik has an argument to be able to do what he did on 22 July?

Behring Anders Breivik: – The springs of human rights. I’ve written a lot about it in the compendium. It applies a word not used very often in Norwegian: “cultural Genocide.” I have written little about it in the compendium.

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – We have been in on it earlier today that KT is a war crimes tribunal, in each case it is expressed in the compendium. Is it correct to say that you had handed down death sentences as you did on Utøya?

Behring Anders Breivik: – The principle is what a pompous way of describing that you shoot Communists.

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – How does it themselves to human rights?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Exit point for our struggle is that we want to prevent our ethnic group and culture being deconstructed. We have a legitimate right.

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – In the period from 2006. Can you say that there are others that have inspired you than those you met in London in 2002?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I do not want to encourage more people fall into that group being hunted.

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – Now I think of open sources. Fjordman and so on, at the time you’re in and read it?

Behring Anders Breivik: – What I can say is that it is ridiculous to conduct a witch hunt for a moderately violent anti democrat Fjordman who does not even support the violence, which I’ve used a couple of essays. He even supports democracy.

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – There is no question of a witch hunt here, Breivik, it’s just a matter of what you were inspired by this period?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is also quite a few others. I started when I was eighteen, maybe when I was fifteen.

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – The hatred that I call it, grew it out in the period to 2006? Or is it later? – Do you read anything about ideology in this period?

Behring Anders Breivik: – That is the direction that I represent, many advocates. [Assistance Attorney: But you read something? What?] – Among other authors listed in the compendium. [Elgesem: - When did you mean?]

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – Can you name any writers you read at that time?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I remember reading at the time, Ayn Rand, including kulturkonservartive writers, I have listed some of the compendium that I have gone through.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – If the experts questions? [No says the experts]

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – Just one last question. You claim that there are two cells. Are the cells you connect with in this period?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I do not comment on it.

Lay judge Ernst Henning Eielsen: – (…) How to set this in a historical context?

Behring Anders Breivik: – What they are afraid of today, it is that it should pop up a new Hitler. It is legitimized, that’s how they legitimize censorship, etc.

Lay judge Ernst Henning Eielsen: – You said earlier that you are not a national socialist. If Adolf Hitler had won, what do you think about it?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I am an anti-Nazi.

Lay judge Ernst Henning Eielsen: – What you have presented here overlaps to a great extent?

Behring Anders Breivik: – If you call Japan and South Korea, a national socialist nation, then you can call me that. But they are not. They have many cultural conservative principles, but it has nothing to do with being a national socialist to do. The cornerstone of National Socialism’s expansionism, I’m isolationists. – National Socialism is antikristen.Jeg is prokristen. We differentiate ourselves in many areas. Among other things, in their view of Jews.

Judge: – You take away from National Socialism? [Yes, I do says Breivik]

Lay judge Ernst Henning Eielsen: – A question to: The Islamists are against you. How do you interpret this to multiculturalism?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have a more liberal view of ethnicity and biology than a national socialist. A national socialist means that Norway is the Norwegians. I can tolerate a 0.2% migration. I am willing to accept a small percentage, but now we are quite a minority. It is unacceptable.

Behring Anders Breivik: – No, absolutely not. A dilution and a takeover, it is important to distinguish between. 2 percent that is not etinisk Norwegian had been acceptable for me. But not if you use Norway as a dumping ground for the second and third world as it is today.

Judge Arne Lyng: – [Judge Heather takes the floor.] There are some concepts you have used many times as I want you to clarify for me. Militant nationalist, what do you mean?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is a nationalist who is militant. – I can explain it another way. There are three revolutionary directions. [Breivik lists the three]

Judge Arne Lyng: – What makes a nationalist militant?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is that he is either an activist himself, or that he sympathizes with militant nationalism.

Judge Arne Lyng: – When the nationalist is the kind of actions aiming to?

Behring Anders Breivik: – There is talk of armed resistance. – So it’s really a question of definition. Some would say that only those trades, while others will say that there are also those who sympathize.

Judge Arne Lyng: – Ultra-Nationalist, how you define it?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Thus, a common nationalist. A country where there existed ultra-nationalists, are meaningless. When there is no difference between ultra-nationalists and nationalists (…)

VG: – Breivik compares with Fjordman and says the two are very different.

Judge Arne Lyng: – But the ultra-nation list, more to the right than nationalist, or ultra-nationalist militant? I ask for your definition.

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is a question of definition. [Heather - I ask for yours.] An ultra-nationalist nødvendigivis do not be violent. It is an expression that is also called ultra-conservative. They need not be violent. It is an extension of it. I am also ultra conservative in many ways. It is important to separate the phrases in many ways.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – As I have just a question of what was on the screen. You said that there was a legal commitment. Can you explain what you meant by that?

Behring Anders Breivik: – In the first place, so when I distributed the compendium should I send detil 8,000 people. Most of the very right-wing, so I feared that people would get an overview of what was the content. Then it is obvious that they feared the consequences to distribute it. – To minimize that possibility seemed logical to me, and to include the clause was part of it.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – So you were therefore concerned that the 8000 was to distribute it further, it was what you were afraid?

Behring Anders Breivik: – No, I was afraid that people would be afraid not to distribute them [because of the legal responsibility]

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – This type of hypothetical response to the threat. All in the compendium votes as there were not a hypothetical response?

Behring Anders Breivik: – No, absolutely not. It was a legal clause that allows for a response.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – Then you write also about a hypothetical, “Fictional group”, that you name to KT?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have the same clause in front of the film is distributed.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – When you say it is a hypothetical group [Breivik interrupts and asks the judge disregards the text] – But if you were afraid of the legal responsibility, was it wise to use the Knights Templar as the name of this manifesto?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Yes, in many ways. Because even today one can not therefore function as a legal clause, and I see no obstacle to using the KT-name.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – So it was not unwise to give this name? – The name is a name that you have found? [Breivik says it is not] – It’s four o’clock, and we have completed batch 1 It is as I understand the most extensive block, and tomorrow, we started with batch 2 The court is adjourned.

VG: – People gets up and starts to leave the premises. Anders Breivik Behring is applied handcuffs and confer with his lawyer, Geir Lippestad….

Original article: Dag 3: Breivik respekterer dødsstraff – ord for ord


_____

_________________
The Medium is the Massage - Marshall McLuhan.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mark Gobell
On Gardening Leave
On Gardening Leave


Joined: 24 Jul 2006
Posts: 4529

PostPosted: Sun Apr 22, 2012 1:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Attack on the Labor Party

Attack On The Labor Party

Blogging the events surrounding the 7/22 attacks in Norway

Archive for April 19th, 2012

Breivik testimony April 19, 2012

Oslo District Court 04/19/2012

[04/19 This post will be updated]

Google translation [edited for clarity]:

Day 4, word for word: Breivik ridiculed court-appointed psychiatrists

4/19/2012

Read Thursday’s first part of prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh and Svein Holden questioning by Anders Breivik Behring below:

VG: – The four trial expert is in place in court. The same state – and defense attorneys.

Comment from Dennis VG Ravndal: Breivik talking briefly with Lippestad as he enters. It looks like they are discussing.

VG: – Breivik has arrived in Courtroom 250 He speaks with a lawyer Lippestad accompanied by policemen.

Comments from VG Morten Hopperstad: Breivik has arrived saddle 250 in Oslo Courthouse. Arrestforvarerne lock of his handcuffs, but he dropped his trademark against tilrørerbenken – fascist-greeting. Mass murderer descendant thus required from manager Trond Henry Blatt Man Support Group 22 July.

VG: – The judges now come in and sit down. – Breivik be taken off the handcuffs and has not done his extreme right message in right before he sits in the witness box. Breivik did not do this after talking with Lippestad.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – The court is set.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – We continue the prosecutor’s examination of the defendant.

VG: – Breivik takes place in the witness box.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – Be so good prosecutor.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Breivik today is what you and I to talk. I was thinking today that address the situation from 2006 and talk about Masonic lodge and as your financial situation at that time. After that we go over to the period in which you moved back home to your mother in the summer. Talk about computer games and then more of the compendium. After that I had planned to embark on the preparation phase and selection prior to 22 July.

Behring Anders Breivik: – Yes, all right.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Do you sit and make a note here now, and that you brought with you any papers, you can tell what it is for someone or?

Behring Anders Breivik: – There are two things that I want to go through during the day. One is the comments of the head psychiatric report made by Asbjornsen and Moe. The other is radikaliseringspunkter that should be most important to you.

prosecutor Svein Holden – I hear what you say but when it comes radikaliseringspunktene I do not think we have so much focus on it as you wish. But it can be your defender.

Behring Anders Breivik: – Yes. But it’s only now three days of re-and when will I then have time to explain the most important?

prosecutor Svein Holden – I think probably we will have time for that on Monday, that is. And the other issue you brought up, the first forensic psychiatric statement, we will also make time for it, because I agree, it’s an important point.

Behring Anders Breivik: – When do you do it?

prosecutor Svein Holden: – It is possible that we arrive at the first report today also. We’ll see whether it is appropriate to include something about it then. Sounds nice out? [Breivik says it's OK] – I mentioned this with the Masonic lodge first. We know that you had the first meeting there in January 2006. can you tell about the occasion that you had membership there?

Behring Anders Breivik: – No, I just wanted to be a member of the Masonic lodge since I was 17-18 years, and the reason is that it is a Christian organization that has taken many European traditions. and it is not really the main basis for that I wanted to join.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Can you describe a bit how you became a member?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It’s 24-year age limit but the basis that I joined, I came in contract with my femme education, he was one of my mentors.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – So that was what was … he was the one who got you into the lodge?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Yes, you must have two sponsors to come in, and he was the one.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Who was the other then?

Behring Anders Breivik: – There was another person that I did not know but that he knew very well.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – You said that this was a desire from 17-18 years old and be a member there. Did you get any input from others that it was an appropriate membership to have?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Yes, I did it. It is a militant nationalist who recommended me to join, and I’ve written a bit about it in the compendium.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Can you tell us a bit more about the situation, who it was and the background?

Behring Anders Breivik: – What I have written in the compendium is that it was a person who recommended me to join. Beyond that I do not want to comment.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – When was this happening? [Breivik: I do not wish to comment.] Was it in London?

Behring Anders Breivik: – There can vote there. It was during that period.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – The militant nationalist, he said the reason was that you should become a member? =

Behring Anders Breivik: – It was probably the reason I gave earlier. That it is a Christian organization that has taken a part traditions that no one else has taken care of. That alone, in addition to that there are many interesting texts in the Masonic library is enough to want to join.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – How did your membership? Black is the expectations?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I was never particularly active in the Masonic Order. The reason was that I had completely different priorities and I looked at the Masonic order more as a hobby. So it was not a priority.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – The nationalist that you referred to said, according to you that it was important to make use of the library. Did you know?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I got access to a lot of fabric from the Masonic order but much material was available on the internet. So I do not think I was at the library once.

Behring Anders Breivik: – If I had been active, so I had possibly been in the 6th extent, but I was very inactive, so it was nothing more than a few meetings. Less than five.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – But yet you have taken a picture of you in the uniform of the Masonic lodge in the compendium, is that right?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Yes that’s right. And it’s okay to explain a bit about it. As I mentioned earlier, the 100 points that I have emphasized in connection with the marketing phase to make it harder for European media to make me morbid. The image from the Masonic Order is one of the things I’ve done that the media should not portray me as an introvert and retarded person.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – That’s what I thought to hear about the Masonic lodge. You closed the sale of these fake diplomas during the first half of 2006. Can you tell us a little about your financial situation at this time?

Behring Anders Breivik: – 2006 ‘. In 2006, I had probably 6 to 700.00 in the account, possibly … So I had 300,000 in cash, as my fortune was probably a million at that time. – I think it was a regular bank account. There were between 500 and 700,000 respectively. Perhaps 300,000 in cash.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – These 300,000 in cash, which you kept them?

Behring Anders Breivik – I kept it in a safe.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – I think I saw a safe in the pictures from your room.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I had two safes in the room.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Just under one million, all your funds, I understand you correctly then?

Behring Anders Breivik: – At the time it was there.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – How would you describe your cash situation? Might hear a little silly when you said you had to NOK 300,000 in cash, but still.

Behring Anders Breivik: – My cash situation was excellent. You’re certainly on the liquidation of E-commerce group. In Norway it is unfortunately the case that it is cheaper to have a controlled bankruptcy rather than to liquidate it, partly because of the auditor’s costs. By turning the bankrupt I saved a lot of money.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Yes, for E Commernce Group was forcibly dissolved? [Breivik: It went bankrupt yes. But it gives a wrong impression. The reason was no liquidity problem, but to save approximately 100,000 million that otherwise would have gone to the accounting and auditing costs] – These 6-700000 that you had on the account and as you said you thought it was a bank account … Which account do you think it might have been?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Yes, that is, it’s possible it was on the north online account, a brokerage account. It may have been a bank account, I do not remember.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Nordnet account, what is that? I’m not that good at trading.

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is a repository that is associated with a brokerage ..

prosecutor Svein Holden: – What is it that separates it from a regular bank account, then?

Behring Anders Breivik: – So it’s good for Norway … then everything will be well under the Bank Guarantee Fund. The only difference is that a conventional bank … you get better rates there. But there is an escrow account.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Had you invested any money in stocks at this time? [Breivik says he does not remember this] – I looked at it last night, you know, so I bet I noticed a company called Suncom Wireless Attitude. Tell us a little about it.

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is a mobile company in the U.S., and I was a shareholder with a year maybe, and it was probably a position that I came out from the break-even, perhaps.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Was that it?

Behring Anders Breivik – I seem to remember that it may have been “break even”, but I can not remember.

Behring Anders Breivik: – There can vote, yes. I think I had the record company that I transferred to a private person, possibly. – It was primarily the shareholding. I do not recall that there were other means.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – How much money did you put on that company?

Behring Anders Breivik: – How much money I had put on the company? [Holden: - Yes, that is, invested in the company.] – I had not invested anything in the cupboard sold. It was a company that received substantial revenues Brentowwd Limited Solutions. As was registered in the Bahamas. I transferred large sums to the Baltics and used Brentowwd Solutiopns Limited to transfer money to the E-Commerce Group. – As thus the company was just a legal identity, which I used to launder money from the Bahamas.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – The company I wonder, is this Suncom Wireless Holding. Your shareholding in this company, how much was it worth?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Perhaps 500,000. – As you said in the place that you had 600-700000 dollars on account?

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Does that mean that you had money in the account was in this company?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I do not remember very well. Maybe.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Maybe. How was it doing that?

Behring Anders Breivik: – What I expected to happen, happened. I bought the company, and expected that it would be acquired by Vodafone or any other company? – It happened but not with the gains I had calculated.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Was there anything a gain? – The share price, it was at some point suspended from trading?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Not that I can remember, but it is possible.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – We will come back to this later, Judge. This is something we’ve focused on lately, but we come back to it later.

Behring Anders Breivik: – Yes, you can vote.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – So, the share was first opened for business again July 2007. – You said you had a big part of your funds in this company. How do you perceive the situation?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I would never have liquidity problems. I had a cash balance of more than 300 000 If one considers what is in the media gets the impression that I moved home and hired with my mother because I had company, went bankrupt. I wanted to conserve my funds but not because of liquidity problems. I would not pay 15,000 dollars for an apartment in the Frogner.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – As I understand you, you also recalled that trade in this stock was halted at some point. What did you do?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I remember being very shocked. [Holden: - Because you had a lot of money there?] Absolutely, so I was really worried. – I’m a pretty risk pervert. I’ve taken a lot of risk in the past. But I was very worried, but it loosened up pretty good.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Did you know that all your money was lost?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I was very worried. [Holden: - What do you mean?] If I had … No, I did not think they were lost.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – What did you think when …?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I do not remember, I have had positions in hundreds of companies.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – You say you had a fortune of one million, and let’s say you had half invested in this company. So you sit there in December, and the trade stopped.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I do not remember that it happened once, before you said it. I remember there was something, it’s possible it was suspended, but … I have had hundreds of positions in companies, and …

prosecutor Svein Holden: – But there was something special about this company here? Well …

Behring Anders Breivik: – The special was that I expected it to be bought by a competitor. There is nothing to watch. One is an investor in a company. It is not something that worried me greatly.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – If half the wealth is in a company that suddenly no it is not allowed to trade more, and you are really worried that they may be lost (…)

Behring Anders Breivik: – I do not remember how I reacted. I knew I had a position of SunCom, but it is a long time ago, and I think if I had been traumatized by it, so I’d probably remember it much better.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – How would you describe your trading? Were you a long term investor, or was it more like that short-term trades you were doing?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It depends on. It was well short. But my shares speculative thought I had a great loss. I think I lost 2 million. According to you, I lost only 360,000.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Drive to the day-trading?

Behring Anders Breivik: – In certain periods, so I did.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Was that what you were doing the most with? [Breivik: - exception.]

Behring Anders Breivik: – There were two periods I was active stock speculation. [Holden is very interested in the accused's financial situation around 2006]

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Okay, then I think we can leave that subject, but we will come back to it. You have already told a little about why you move to Hoff Road. (…)

Behring Anders Breivik: – I lived in an apartment in Tiedemann street. It was the period where I would start putting together the compendium. Before that, I should take a sabbatical to do what I have dreamed all his life, who is playing Warcraft hardcore for a year. To do that, I had to try to conserve funds. – So. The only responsible to do was to conserve funds. Then rented a room with my mother and paid 3500 crowns. But I might as well continue to bp at Frogner and paid 15,000 dollars a month, but then I had spent more money on it, selvfølgeilg

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Did you have any fresh inflow of capital after you moved back home to mother?

Behring Anders Breivik: – As I already said I had a contact holding, so it was no problem.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – But you earned any money after you moved back home to mother?

Behring Anders Breivik: – After I closed down the company, I have been living on savings.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Have you received any form of state benefit schemes?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have never received a dime in my whole life, the state social security or benefits. For I am opposed in principle to go on welfare or benefit plans.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – You said you would treat yourself to a sabbatical. What gave rise to the desired?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is well that I actually dreamed about it all my life – to take at least a sabbatical and play. People are different, some want to take a year off and travel around the world, others want to take a year off to play golf [smiles].

prosecutor Svein Holden: – When was the desire awoke?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It has been there all the time. From 2002 to 2006, I worked an average of 12-14 hours each day. I have worked incredibly hard and much. I think why I deserved a year to do what I wanted. especially for the forthcoming so-called suicide attack, that I had tino back. As a martyr estate gift.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – So does it mean when you now characterize it as a martyrdomdomsgave, that you had already decided to conduct a violent reaction.

Behring Anders Breivik: – Yes, in 2006.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – World of Warcraft, when did you acquainted with the game?

Behring Anders Breivik: – One of my employees in Russia played a little WoW, I had played three-ERN few years earlier, between 2002 and 2006, I had not undt myself to play in any appreciable degree to play World of Warcraft.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Decided you immediately that you have a whole year, or were there thoughts of a shorter period first?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It was not really the point that I thought I’d play until I actually got tired, I would take it as it comes. But it was the starting point: that I would play until I got tired.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – You heard the judge’s questions to me the first day that this game is violent?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I played Modern Warfare and Call of Duty, which is a war simulator. A fantasy game that is not violent at all. a strategy game. To work with many others to overcome challenges. Very social game. Mistake to look at it as an asocial games, perhaps the most social games of all. It can be compared to Facebook.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – This is a little unknown to the court, can you tell us about how communication takes place?

Behring Anders Breivik: – So, you create a team of players who prøbver to overcome challenges where you need 25 people. So one establish a team of 50 people, may meet several times a week from approximately at 20-00. – It requires a high level of precision and synchronous collaboration.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – How are the players communicate with each other?

Behring Anders Breivik: – You can communicate through normal chat, otherwise we use Ventrillo, a common communication system, which works a bit like Skype, that you have a headset and talk to each other.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – In principle there are perhaps 25 people who can talk to each other simultaneously, correct?

Behring Anders Breivik: – That is correct. There is a space where people meet. Then there is a team leader who gives orders to others. Under him he has people who take specific tasks. It is dependent on a high communication.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Can you tell us about your time spent on this game this year?

Behring Anders Breivik: – In that year, so I played maybe 16 hours per day. [Holden: - Wow, it sounded a lot!] There was a lot. – Only playing and sleeping.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – What about other things up?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is a year that I wanted to spend on it. It was a dream I had, so I wanted to do it.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – What about the studies in this period? You drew quite a large amount of hours. – So this year you studied nothing? [Breivik says no to this]

Behring Anders Breivik: – I know that it is important for the prosecution and the media and focus very much on WoW. It is pure entertainment, it has nothing to do with 22 July to do. Some people like to play golf, others sail. It’s not a world you are immersed in, it’s just a hobby.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – And as I interpret you to mean that you would rather not spend any time on the compendium in this period?

Behring Anders Breivik: – This year I did not, no.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – As from summer 2006 to summer 2007, you had not started in the compendium?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I may have begun as far as the preparation of the foundation of the compendium in 2007, maybe. I had a point that I worked on with, so …

prosecutor Svein Holden: – How did your surroundings at this year then?

Behring Anders Breivik: – They reacted with shock and disbelief. One of the reasons it was convenient that year was that I knew there would be an impending action. It was convenient that I isolated myself in that period. To implement what I have done I could not have a network that was close to me. I could not have friends close. Before that I had been very social and lived a normal life. Friends and family reacted with shock and dismay.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – What about your mother, then, that you lived with?

Behring Anders Breivik: – She reacted the same way.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Did you tell her what you did? [Breivik: I said that I should set aside time for what I did.] – What about the KT network up? Did they know about the Sabbath?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have talked to police about it, and I will not comment on it more than I did.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – they considered you as a dropout the knight?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Maybe.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – What did you think about it?

Behring Anders Breivik – I felt it was important to do so.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Commented it back to them?

Behring Anders Breivik: – To a certain extent, but I did not really understand it. It was not easy as a hobby such as golf and sailing.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – After this year was gone, did you take some more time on WoW then?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Yes, when there came an expansion, so I spent some time on it. [Holden: - What is it?] Thus, an expansion pack, which they brought on two occasions afterwards. There was one instance in 2010, then “Cataclysm” came, and when I spent some time on it. – And when I played a bit with the friends I had there and checked the contents. I have spent some time on it as a hobby after the Sabbath, but I spent much less time on it.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – In one period we have been printing so you can see in November 2010 to 4 February 2011. Then you have an average of six hours per day?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I think probably you should concentrate it to the first part. I played a few intense weeks to check the new content pack. It was not distributed in such a long period.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Do you remember how you spent New Year’s Eve, the last New Year’s Eve before you came, before you performed 22 July?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I know where you want to go. [Breivik laughs] You want to do what you can to ridicule me. But in the stage I wanted to prepare myself mentally to carry out a suicide attack, and when the friendship is not very high.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – I particularly noted the fact that you played over 17 hours this New Year’s Eve? [Breivik say yes and smile now at Holden's questions]

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have been quite social over the last year before the operation. I have attached a lot and hard. When I did other things I did it thoroughly. I understand that you only emphasize the things that puts me in a bad light, but it is important to see the whole.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Do you feel yourself that you had a problem in the sense that you spent too much time on this?

Behring Anders Breivik: – No, I think it was within the limits I set for myself.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – You said somewhere that this has no impact on 22 July. If it had any significance for the compendium, for example?

Behring Anders Breivik: – So it is an assertion by the prosecution that I have taken the word “justice” from WoW, but it’s wrong. I have used justituarius, which is the term for the highest judicial leader in Norway. A title in the UK and Norwegian system. A derivative that the Latin word that means man of the law. Do not take it from WoW, but from the Norwegian and British legal system. – But I know that in World of Warcraft, there are hundreds of titles, and I know that one of them is “justice”, but that’s not where I got it from.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – You mentioned yourself that you had played other computer games, such as Modern Warfare and Call of Duty [Breivik: - It is the same game.] It’s the same game, yes.

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is a so-called “first-person shooter” games. It is simply a war simulator. I have not liked those games, but it’s good for exercise’s sake. For example, the Red Army in China are using this in their simulation and it is a war simulator that is used by armed forces around the world. It was the purpose of using the time on it.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Can you tell more about how you used it? I see that you created a user account 18 January 2010, and then it registered an average running time of ten hours per month for 1 year and 4 (??) months.

Anders Behring Breivik: – As I just described, that it is simply a war simulator, you can get an idea of how the term systems work, you can try to accumulate experience in the long term systems, it is the greatest advantage, for you will of course not recoil when you shoot. But if you practice the recoil shooting range, so you can work out long-term systems. There are many different systems you can use.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – The term system that I used to Utøya was a holographic sighting system that is represented through the game [Modern Warfare]. – Was it a conscious choice that you selected the same type of view that you used in Modern Warfare? [Among other things, answer Breivik]

Behring Anders Breivik: – The first came as a result of the other. I did not run the system that cost 12,000 kroner because I played the game, but practiced it as a result of buying term system. It is important to get it in the correct order.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Was there any particular scenarios you worked on beyond what you now told of sighting system?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have just written a little about it in the compendium. [Holden - You smile] It was a situation …. [Holden: - Is this something to smile about?] No.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – If we take a step to the side. There are no survivors here on Utøya, how do you react to what you say about the sighting system?

Behring Anders Breivik: – They respond well in a natural way, with horror and disgust.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Why do you think they react that way?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Why should I not believe it?

prosecutor Svein Holden: – In a context like that … [Holden lets Breivik reply]

Behring Anders Breivik – I smiled because it was very obvious what you meant to say. It was not the content of what we talked about, but your obvious intentions.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – If we go back to the scenarios you’ve trained on, tell me about it?

prosecutor Svein Holden: – What is a pincer maneuver?

Behring Anders Breivik: – People are trapped in the area of the two flanks, and you will have to fight their way through the weakest flank. – [Holden: - How is trained on that scenario?] It was simply frontal assault on one of the flanks, a total of six people at once.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – What were your conclusions on the basis of …?

Behring Anders Breivik: – The conclusion was that it was 100 percent chance of failure. Mon trained, I calculated not to be surrounded by two Delta teams. But I calculated two conventional law enforcement officers. I tried to calculate the chance of survival based on the approach you used.

prosecutor Svein Holden – This scenario that you have suggested, did you ever thought about in which situation could occur? – All right. Then we immediately go on to talk about something else.

Behring Anders Breivik: – What I calculated with, when I had parked the car outside the government building, so I figured that it would turn full alarm at once, that there had been three to four armed persons at once, and that I had to fight myself out of it with a pincer movement. – I considered the probability of surviving government building and get away from it alive as less than 5 percent. I had trained to get out of that situation. It was the simulation.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – Now Holden asked you about the TV game, and you’ve talked about what I perceive as an attack from the Delta or the police. Were there other things you had seen you? We know that you ended up on Utøya.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I went through the regular shooting training, to be as good a marksman as possible. I’m talking about regular recruit training, and use of the term systems, which can be done largely in Modern Warfare.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – Okay, so if we keep the shell away the physical training with weapons. When you play this game, I’ve never played it before so I do not know, you train to shoot and hit and stuff, right?

Behring Anders Breivik: – You are training to use the term systems, then you will become an experience with it.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – What kind of experience is what you get then?

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – What were the goals in this game?

Behring Anders Breivik: – The objectives are byget up so that there are many different missions, hundreds, and there are a few of those missions that can be compared to, what to say, attacks in reality. This is why it is used by many armies in the world. It is amazing to acquire experience.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – But the goal, when you talk about possibly shooting down another person. [Breivik confirmed.] In that game so you can practice shooting down various targets, and then it can be persons.

Behring Anders Breivik: – Yes, that’s right. It is a war simulator that simulate shooting other people. The concept of the game.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Did you learn anything from it?

Anders Breivik Behring: – As I said in the place, you gain experience in the use of the term systems.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – But what you simulated in the game, it was something you did use for later?

Anders Breivik Behring: – What then? No, first I assumed not to survive the government building … [Interrupted by Engh]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Did you experience some of the experience of this Utøya?

Anders Breivik Behring: – If you know of a holographic sighting system is constructed in such a way that you could give it to your grandmother and she would become a top marksman. It is designed for everyone. It requires little training to use it in an optimal manner.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – But you were on an island you were on Utøya, it was something that was simulated in the game, the setting? I do not know, because I have not played it.

Anders Breivik Behring: – You can not do more than what I just described [- Engh, so just a view ..... (get confirmation from Breivik)]

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – Now you’ve told us a little about computer games. You have said that the training increased your experience. You trained with firearms in any other way?

Anders Breivik Behring – I trained with the rekylltrening Løvenskjold Railway. [Holden: What is rekylltrening?] – I bought a rifle, a Ruger Mini 14, which is .223 caliber, the same as the Norwegian army, 5.56, when you go just on the field, it is a target 100 yards away, and when you train you up on accuracy, and you get used to the recoil effect has.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – Ehm … okay .. how often were you on the range?

Anders Breivik Behring: – Not many times. Only four times maybe.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – I see you join in Oslo Pistol Club in June 2010?

Anders Behring Breivik: – It must be specified that what I am talking about now it was a rifle training, and in addition to what it’s shotgun training that I’ve been on maybe six times, and in addition to it’s gun training that I have been perhaps 25 times.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – I see you’ve been shooting training in Oslo gun club from June 2010 to March 2011. – These 25 times in Oslo gun club, what did you do?

Anders Breivik Behring: – It is extremely difficult to get permission to buy a gun in Norway, so it is required that you do not drop the magazine and meets the requirements to be an active shooter. So I almost had to get a confirmation from a shooting head there, and then I had to shoot so many times. Had to shoot much at all be able to apply.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – And for that Glock you later acquired, it was a legitimate purchase?

Anders Breivik Behring: – It was a legitimate purchase, yes.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – You have mentioned three weapons. It was Ruger and Glock you had with you on Utøya. Did you name these weapons?

Anders Breivik Behring: – We know also from our own Norse history. It was customary to give the weapons name, and I thought I’d pass on a great European tradition. – In the setting you are asking now sounds completely out bizzarr [Holden: I do not object to it]. European heroes who have fought against the Islamic occupation. A leader from Andalusia named El Cid (…) a great historical brand in Spain and he had a sword that he gave a name. He is not the only warrior in Europe that has a weapon a name. There are many who have it.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – What is the name you gave your weapons?

Anders Breivik Behring: – The rifle I called Gungnir is Odin’s magical spear that comes back after you have thrown it. I called Glock Mjølnir, the hammer warrior Thor. The support vehicle is the vehicle from the first bombebil other bombebil. The vehicle I gave the name of Sleipner. There are eight-legged horse of Odin.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – These names, it was just something you used these tools or took it too and marked them in any way?

Anders Breivik Behring: – Yes, I noticed them, I wrote it in runes on all three sites.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – So then you use three norrønne name that you noted on these items with runes?

Anders Breivik Behring: – What is the reason for the reference to the Norse? – As I said, if you go back to the European war history had many of our ancestors a tradition of naming weapons by name. That’s how you try to describe it, it bizzarr and insane, but it is a European tradition to make it

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – Do you think it’s still great?

Anders Breivik Behring: – I think tradition is great.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – It is not pompous? [Breivik says it obviously is pompous]

Anders Breivik Behring: – I think the tradition is a great European tradition. [Holden discuss with the judge of when the break should be.]

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – Now we get a pretty significant change theme. Then we go over to the compendium. It was we examined yesterday, when you describe something of the situation when you got this assignment. It was a bit like bits and pieces, I think, so can you describe a little bit more about it?

Anders Breivik Behring – I was asked to write the compendium. And I wrote the compendium. – In connection with the meeting in London I was asked to write a compendium and I’ve written a bit about already, and I have not written much more about it, and would not comment on it beyond that.

Prosecutors Svein Holden – I could have imagined something more comprehensive. – But can you explain to me why you do not want to talk about just that? – Yesterday we got the answer many times you did not want to comment on it …

Anders Breivik Behring – I do not want to disclose information that could lead to an arrest.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – But how the hell can about how you were asked to write kompendiemateriale contribute to arrest?

Anders Breivik Behring: – So what you focus on now, there are two percentages I do not want to talk about. I have been open for 98 percent of what is relevant now. Although it seems that I am very reluctant now, it’s because you go hard on the two percent I do not want to talk about – I will not comment on it further.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – For this is a question of the origin of the compendium. And as I understand it’s important to you. Is that right?

Anders Breivik Behring: – Complete Diet is not important for me, but it was important to me.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – Okay, so we agree that the compendium is essential. Do you want it to be, to use your words, legitimacy externally?

Anders Breivik Behring: – In what way? The contents of the compendium represent more conservative direction. It is an attempt to create a foundation for the far right in Europe associated with the same ideology. There is a difference between creating a foundation and an ideology.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – But when you now say that there is a desire on your part that it should form a foundation. Will not the foundation will be strengthened if you tell us more about the origin of the compendium?

Anders Breivik Behring: – I can not see it. The importance of the compendium is the content and not oppstendighetene around.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – To put it slightly at the tip, you fear that it may be perceived as a cut and paste work that you sat at home in his bedroom and sewed together?

Anders Breivik Behring: – It is not perceived as a “cut and paste” work, it is a “cut and paste” work. Sixty percent are cut and paste. Essays I have borrowed from other writers in Europe that I believe on critical issues. Forty percent are authored by myself.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – On the other hand, if you tell us a bit more about the origin maybe it could help strengthen the perception of the message?

Anders Breivik Behring: – The purpose of the compendium is the starting point, which probably was the original title of it: “In Brace of the New Knighthood,” a book that was written by one of the most important intellectuals in Europe associated with lower risks. It was he who made the Templar identity. The compendium would be a book number two. The school legitimize the new direction, and it would explain how one can become the perfect knight, or the perfect foot soldier. It consists of three parts and was designed to provide a foundation for the development of a revolutionary high direction in Europe.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – Now we come a little further, now you said some things that were interesting, you said that the book should be called “In Brace of the New Knighthood,” and you said that it would defend the crusader identity and that the would explain how you became a knight. Was it a frame you got time?

Anders Breivik Behring: – Yes, that’s right.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – Were there other guidelines that were given in that regard than those you have visited?

Anders Breivik Behring: – It is the basis of the compendium that is the 50 pages that I have described, and the principle of the charts.

Anders Breivik Behring: – In connection with that meeting was in London, so I was left with about 50 pages information, and that is the basis for the compendium.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – You say you were left with about fifty pages. What is it?

Anders Breivik Behring – I’ve probably written about it in the compendium.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – I am not so interested in what you have written in the compendium.

Anders Breivik Behring: – I would not comment on it. I explained what I have been able to police, I will not comment on it further.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – Is it because you do not remember it?

Anders Breivik Behring: – I remember what I have explained to the police.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – I am not so interested in what you have explained to the police, but if you remember when you got this assignment.

Anders Breivik Behring: – I remember what happened, and I have explained it to the police.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – If you have already explained it to the police you might as well say it here too, then?

Anders Breivik Behring: – After that meeting, I was left with fifty pages of information and it has been the basis of the compendium.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – You were left with 50 pages of information. Does that mean you were given 50 pages or that you wrote 50 pages?

Anders Breivik Behring: – I have written compendium that I wrote down about 50 pages of information.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – Sea, you said in the interview then?

Anders Breivik Behring: – I have said that it was conveyed fifty pages of information. But I would not specify the form in which it was conveyed.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – You were left with about 50 pages. This sheaf of principles lists, came along and it was included in the 50 pages?

Anders Breivik Behring – I was left with 50 pages, including everything.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – If … when we started talking about this you said you were left with fifty pages, and received a policy list. The way I understood it, was that this came along?

Anders Breivik Behring: – When you take enough mistakes. I thought I was left with fifty pages, it included a foundation for the compendium that includes a list of principles.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – What is a principal list? A list of bullet points or something else?

Anders Breivik Behring: – Basically, it’s the prinspippene we stand for. KT Network has two main points, one is that we are an organization of European urforlk, Second, there is a crusading organization, we want to contribute to deport the majority of Muslims from Europe. It is the basis for its establishment.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – Does that mean that there are two bullet points on that list?

Anders Breivik Behring: – There are many principles. [How many was it, ask about Holden] – The most important thing is that you communicated what you represent. It is irrellevant how many bullets it poses.

Anders Breivik Behring: – The two points are the reason we are sitting here today. It is the essence of what we are talking about today. There are the two most important.

Comments from VG Morten Hopperstad: Breivik rises from the chair and dishes on the shirt before arrestforvareren put him handcuffs. On the way out, he speaks with defender Geir Lippestad.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – Does that mean you have more?

Anders Breivik Behring: – The most important thing is that there is an interest organization for the European peoples. As a Christian country, we want to ensure the Christian cultural framework in all countries. We support Israel’s struggle against Jihad and it is part …

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – Sto also on this principle the list?

Anders Breivik Behring: – A list of principles was conveyed. That’s what we stand for. How it was passed is irrelevant. There are fifty pages of information….

Original article: Dag 4, ord for ord: Breivik latterliggjorde rettspsykiatere
_____

_________________
The Medium is the Massage - Marshall McLuhan.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mark Gobell
On Gardening Leave
On Gardening Leave


Joined: 24 Jul 2006
Posts: 4529

PostPosted: Sun Apr 22, 2012 1:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Attack on the Labor Party

Google translation [edited for clarity]:

Day 4, word for word: Breivik in disagreement with his own manifesto

4/19/2012

Read Thursday’s second part of prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh and Svein Holden questioning by Anders Breivik Behring below:

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – As negotiations continue, there you Holden.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – Let’s see, Breivik, I leave London and go on a bit of time, you told us in the place that you were playing fulltime WoW, from the summer of 2006-2007, also said that you might could have started on the compendium of the period, but the bulk of the work was done afterwards. [Breivik says he started the compendium in 2007.]

Anders Breivik Behring – I did something, but I do not remember.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – What was the reason why you waited so long … because then it’s nearly five years after you got the job?

Anders Breivik Behring: – That is the starting point for developing a compendium is to bring you more free-years and take enough time to work out a compendium. I would use at least two years. You need an economic foundation to start. capitalization phase started in 2002 and lasted until 2006.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – Where you were left with about one million. [Breivik: That is correct.] – Did you get any feedback from the KT network, that you’d start about five years later? – I do not want to comment on it. I do not comment on contacts I have had with others. – Although it can not lead to more arrests?

Anders Breivik Behring – I do not want to comment on contact. I have told what I can to the police.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – Can you describe the process when you were working on the compendium?

Anders Breivik Behring: – Utggangspunktet I had some information. The first thing I did was to create an overview of the areas and points that should be covered. I made a list of the three parts. I knew it would cover a historical part, an ideological component and a military part. I wrote all these three parts from the start. Before I was finished it was 4-5000 pages. Later I shorten it down to around 1800.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – You indicated yourself a 60-40 ratio in terms of things that you obtained from others and things you have written yourself?

Anders Breivik Behring: – I am not quite sure how much, but maybe 30-40 percent, which I have written myself.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – The bulk of what is written by you, where do you find it?

Anders Breivik Behring: – In 2002 I did not feel competent to do so, no. That’s in part three. The starting point was that the compendium would cover the three areas I thought were important. When I made the list, I checked the sites authors had written something I thought was relevant at. The points that were not covered, I wrote myself.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – Was it the three-team, it was from the start?

Anders Breivik Behring: – It included all the three parts, yes.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – Did you feel competent to enter the military section in 2002?

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – Because it is possible perhaps to wonder this collection of Serbian war heroes that give the assignment to a 23-year-old to write that part?

Anders Breivik Behring: – I have described three individuals whom I met in London, and four if you include Serb. Now puts you in a way that it refers to a large environment, but I have only described four individuals.

Prosecutors Svein Holden – I only remember the FOIL that Engh was on the go, where you specified that it was a majority in the Serbian nationalists?

Anders Breivik Behring: – I saw that word, yes. But I have referred to a person.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – Do you have any thoughts that you were assigned a task you were not feeling quite competent?

Anders Breivik Behring: – Now, you describe it in a slightly pompous way, as I have done, but in principle I was asked to create a foundation and that is what I did. There is nothing more complicated than that.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – You told us a bit about the title in place, that originally it was planned that it should be called “In Brace of the New Knighthood”. What was the reason why you changed it?

Anders Breivik Behring: – Thus, as described on the cover, the title is still there. But it’s been a subtitle. I thought it was the main title was more appropriate.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – The main title can you tell us about it?

Anders Breivik Behring: – 2083 indicates a year that represents the 400 anniversary of the Battle of Vienna took place in 1683. One of the two most important battles in European history because it prevented the Ottoman Empire to subdue the whole of Western Europe. 400 years celebration.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – What about the other part of the title?

Anders Breivik Behring: – Yes, “European Decaration of Independence.” It is from an essay by a writer who calls himself Fjordman, and I thought it was appropriate.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – The 2083 has no significance in relation to what you have described as an ongoing civil war?

Anders Breivik Behring – I and many others in Europe think the conflict as time progresses, there will be a conclusion on it within a few decades. When I have chosen 2083 as a possible reference point.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – Then we will see, we can take up side 952 of the compendium. [The court looking for the excerpt.] What are we looking for something here, Breivik?

Anders Breivik Behring: – There is an overview of the expected scenario in Europe is based on many political analyzes from other cultural conservatives who think the same.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – But the juxtaposition and dated in phase 1, 2 and 3, it is something you have done or are picked up by others?

Anders Breivik Behring: – Basically, it’s written by me.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – So the idea that you have a Phase 3, for example, from 2070 to 2083, there is a future vision that you have developed?

Anders Breivik Behring: – It is impossible to predict the future but it is based on the political parties that Labor does not change course and is an expected scenario. – It’s just an estimate. One should not put so much emphasis on accuracy.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – 2083, it was the working title and the hypothesis in this scenario all the way to or operated with other time estimates?

Anders Breivik Behring: – That is the essence of the message to myself and many others, is that within the next few decades, the conflict is played out now escalate, if people do not change direction. There’s no accurate time estimates.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – But you work with different time than the 2083 estimate?

Anders Breivik Behring: – I remember talking to police about an e-mail address I found on [number] 2183. There are a hundred years into the future. Whether I am the registered e-mail address to deviate from this. Maybe I had used that title before. But I remember really. It seems far in the future, but I think I have said to the police. I’m not sure.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – To create an email address called year2183, a hotmail address, which you use on blogger.com 17.10 from 2008. This address of 2183 is active on a blog. What was the reason why you were on the blog?

Anders Breivik Behring: – So, what has become known is that I have 30 e-mail addresses, and I do not think you should put too much emphasis on one e-mail address. I do not know why I chose that name. Maybe “2083″ was busy, or maybe I used it for other reasons.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – But … did you intend to use the blog to something in connection with the compendium?

Anders Breivik Behring: – It was a plan to distribute and upload compendium on several blogs. I walked away from the strategy, but I was finally away from that plan.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – Here we see that 20 June, the year after, in 2009, create a new blogspot and then e-mail address in 2083. So my question is [Breivik: When was the date of the second email address?] Shed light on this somewhat by the title of the compendium?

Anders Breivik Behring: – As we said in place, then it may have been a solution, yes. I do not remember. It may have been other reasons too.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – But, it may therefore be that in June 2009, that you thought, “okay …” [interrupted]

Anders Breivik Behring: – It’s a date that marks the 500 anniversary of the battle. Maybe I thought that there were various reasons to choose a 500 – instead of 400-year anniversary.

Prosecutors Svein Holden – I see that email in 2183 came also came in 2083. Does that mean you changed the title of the compendium?

Anders Breivik Behring: – Yes, you mentioned it, yes. I do not remember why, I do not know what is the cause.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – We are concerned that so far in place, but … how important is the compendium for you?

Anders Breivik Behring: – Compendium itself contains a lot of information that sheds light on the problems Norway and Europe today. It is critical that this information is spread to others today. – The Compendium is only the framework for the information. I do not know if it answered your question?

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – No, I can also read that up for you as you said in an interview, which I have bitten me in here. The words you say 23 July last year. Here are the following. “The financing was very challenging and it took several years to earn enough money to finance it, that was my main task.” – What really happened yesterday is just the fireworks of the compendium. Does this make sense?

Anders Breivik Behring: – That is correct. The distribution of the information on the compendium was one of the most important primary motives for the operation.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – I will round this with the compendium, you said several times that the compendium is a product. What do you think the reason is that the compendium or ideology it is based not on its own, but must be produced as a glossy picture or pompous?

Anders Breivik Behring: – To ask a question. What you should have asked you about the place is why it is necessary to do something to show that knowledge. [Breivik rebuke thus keep some of his examination now and starting to get annoyed] – You should then focus on Norwegian and European media. They are political activists, not journalists. The follow-up question that you should have asked. But to take what you said about: The compendium is a compilation of several ideological directions. It represents quite a few directions ideologically. The starting point of the compendium is to try to unite the three directions in Europe; National Conservatism, national socialism and militant and orthodox Christianity. – So basically is to highlight key areas as different Europeans are concerned and try to create a bridge between the different perceptions, to fight under one banner.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – But why do you portray it so shamelessly?

Anders Breivik Behring: – When it comes to a military unit and glorification of martyrdom has been disseminated in a manner such that the probability increases that one can market traditions that are from organizations such as al-Qaeda. It is to try to push these dedicated individuals continue from where they are today. [Was it a successful strategy for Holden asks for the answer] – You make a resistance movement and create a foundation on which to build further on and the Compendium is a contribution to the foundation. It should not represent a specific ideology, but three hovedideologer and main objective next time is to bridge the gap between them.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – Then Engh any questions.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – As I understand you now, would you like to create a platform with your compendium, to innovate and reach out to someone who will follow your thoughts – is it correct?

Anders Breivik Behring: – It is not correct. It is not my thoughts. I am just a seller of ideas that others have created. – I agree with those who have developed the mind, but I am just a seller of a message.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – I have though. But when yesterday was concerned about what is the reason the world and society is unfair and you are talking about radikaliseringspunkter, I have understood that it is an important premise for who you are. Is that right?

Anders Breivik Behring: – Well, it is wrong to say that society is unfair. Status in Europe and Norway is that we do not have a democracy and real freedom of speech. That’s the way we see it a ULEV clock skill. – It is with particular reference to the Norwegian press and European press. The main problem today.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Is there a premise for your conclusion? Is what you describe now, it is an important premise for the conclusion you draw?

Anders Breivik Behring: – Well, it is one of several terms, yes, that’s right.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – So, in this compendium explains you how you have come to this. Is that right? – The premise, the writing is that right? [Breivik says yes it's true] – What do you greatly?

Anders Breivik Behring: – What is happening in Europe today, it is that we are threatened demographically, we are threatened by our ethnic and cultural identities deconstructed. I think it is so critical for the Europe and Norway is now to change course, if not then we will not survive as an ethnic group, and trust between the citizens will be degraded to such an extent that the conditions for a Norway is not present in 100 years .

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – So then I realized you’re passionate about. As I wonder about is your last interview in March this year, so you say something about this that I want you to elaborate a bit. “The basis of the compendium is to help create premises that are to build at a conclusion. [Describes what's on] But that does not mean that the premises are not true. “What do you mean by this?

Anders Breivik Behring – I never said that it will create the premises. It is reported incorrectly. The ULEV injustices in Europe today, justifies the conclusion [Bejer Engh ask what the conclusion is] – The conclusion is that Norway and Europe, given that we do not have real freedom of speech or free press, we are a cultural liberal and kulturmarxistisk dictatorship. Will we become a minority and lose our ethnic group. If people do not say clearly that we will not.

Anders Breivik Behring: – I understand. It is not to create the premises. These injustices described by the authors which I have referred in the compendium. It does not mean that they support violence, or that they are against democracy.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – But from the last I read, I would ask you: What is most important to you – political change, or to use violence?

Anders Breivik Behring: – Violence is a tool to achieve a goal. Violence should only be used when no other options left. I have tried many ways to get our voice to be heard. The press in Europe and Norway censor all on the right side. It is not possible in a peaceful revolution.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – Breivik, when you were finished with the compendium?

Anders Breivik Behring: – One is never finished with a compendium, it is a draft. And it is a preliminary draft. The compendium so I thought it was never finished. It can be continued by others, or … But I finished in the autumn of 2009, I think. – But I concluded that I finished in the autumn of 2009. So I included a few things in the aftermath, including the different periods, so I included the log.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – Was also the military part more or less finished in autumn 2009?

Anders Breivik Behring: – It was all done so, with the exception of what I just mentioned now.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – You say the compendium is a draft, you have said that what happened 22 July was to spread this compendium. Assessed at any time to do the compendium finished before sending it out?

Anders Breivik Behring: – No, as I see it, it is not possible to be done with it … [Interrupted]

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Are you standing in for what it says or you are not sure if that’s what you stand for?

Anders Breivik Behring – I included all the information in the compendium. No, I do not agree with everything. [Engh: So you kill 77 people without having to completely agree with what is in the compendium you want to convey?] – Let me explain. What stands in the compendium, it does not represent my opinions, it represents a great many Europeans opinion, I agree with perhaps 95% of these principles. I do not agree with everything, but I was asked to create a compendium and distribute it. I do not agree with everything, there are small things I do not agree in. – You have to consider … [Engh: Concern for whom?] One must take into account the people I associated with.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – If you have no free will in this?

Anders Breivik Behring: – No, but the intention is to unite the three groups. Then you have to take into account what the other two groups want. Then you have to give up their wishes. One must try to develop resistance that has been in Europe for 2 World War II.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – So what’s in the compendium, and that you took action for 22 July, that’s what those in the KT network that is built for, but you are in for the most part, is that correct?

Anders Breivik Behring: – I stand in for the vast, vast, vast majority.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Why do you say that there is a draft?

Anders Breivik Behring: – You should not emphasize it so much that it is a draft. There is a written document that is not fully edited.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – Did you ever thought about whether you should have this compendium completed before going into action 22 July? [Breivik: - Absolutely.] Well, why did not you? Breivik: It is your safety. Unfortunately, a Norwegian intelligence and European intelligence … They have so many resources that preclude the formation of conventional networks. We had to pay attention to it. – You felt you were about to be taken? – No, but you do know what the contents are and I have edited any of it. – Ideally, you should have some more time on you to finish everything there? (Breivik: Yes, that’s right).

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – You say you had input. Who did you get that from?

Anders Breivik Behring: – From among other things, a person I am affiliated.

Comment from Dennis VG Ravndal: – You say you agree with 95 percent of the compendium. Can you say something you disagree with? asks Judge Arne Lyng. Breivik says he has given at the point of capitalism in the Manifesto. – There I’ve given to me, he said. Breivik move his eyes to judge bench while talking and looking directly at Lyng.

Judge Wenche Arntzen Elizabeth: – Is it one of those in the KT Network? There was this other person who also was told to write a compendium? [Breivik will not comment on this].

Judge Arne Lyng 11:22: – 95 percent of the contents of the compendium you agree in. Can you name something that you do not agree with?

Anders Breivik Behring – I personally capitalist oriented. But I know that to unify a wide range of individuals, then you have to give at that point, because most people are less informed about capitalism than I am. At that point, I have given for.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – Breivik, we will make a small change of theme. When did you start to think about the idea of ​​carrying out a violent reaction?

Anders Breivik Behring: – The first thoughts must have been maybe from the age of 20.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – What …. even before the Knights Templar? [Breivik confirms: - from 18 to 19 years of age.]. Can you describe this? – Describe for us your thoughts at the time.

Anders Breivik Behring: – I remember that we talked the more loosely to people about what they saw as injustices in society and I have been very skeptical of Muslim immigration. So in some settings it has been considered whether to attack the Muslims in Norway and Muslim groups. Militant nationalists are divided into two when it comes to goal: Half believed to attack Muslims and minorities. The other half is believed to attack the elite and responsibility for them. – So it is important to emphasize that there are two groups that mean something quite different among militant nationalists. For example, some supported attacks on minorities in order to harm the immigration that way. I do not agree with it. It is not Muslims’ fault that they have been invited here, there are others who stand for it. – At some point, possibly before what happened to Benjamin Hermansen in Oslo … when I shared the perception of the others that it was best to attack the Muslims in Norway. But then I changed position, and found that there were others.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – Now you have told about when you started to think about it. When you decided to carry out such an action?

Anders Breivik Behring: – 2006 possibly.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – What is the reason you scheduling it?

Anders Breivik Behring: – That’s when I go undercover for the first time. I reconnoiter the government quarter in 2006, I reconnaissance on NRK-premises. I do not remember exactly what year it was. It may have been in 2006, 2007, 2008.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – What did you do something when you reconnoiter?

Anders Breivik Behring: – I thought exactly where the vulnerabilities were, it was very early stage, so I considered how an attack could be done.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – Materialized it in something, anything in writing, any purchases?

Anders Breivik Behring: – In the compendium, it is purified for descriptions related to the goals. It says everything except goals. I’ve written everything except goals in case it was discovered.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – So this was just thinking? [Yes there were only plans says Breivik] – [Reading from the first forensic psychiatric report]

Anders Breivik Behring: – Before proceeding there, Holden. I have previously commented that the report is worthless. It is known by Asbjornsen and Moe, is fictional. 80% of the content is worthless. It is not true.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – But Breivik, we can not just say it like that I read up first, then comment the next?

Comment from Dennis VG Ravndal: While Holden reads from the Declaration, taking Breivik notes with rapid movements.

Comments from VG Morten Hopperstad: The prosecutor read from the first expert report which Breivik explains that he first began in 2009 to think of terrorist attacks. It goes against what the mass murderer said a few minutes ago – that he decided for the attacks in 2006. Breivik believe the report is only fiction and reiterates that it is written by Asbjørnsnen & Moe as he now calls Husby and Sørheim.

Comments from VG Jarle Brenna: Holden gets a reminder from Arntzen judge that he must speak into the microphone. Prosecutors put a little difficult position since he was reading from a binder, but now the same on the screen so that he can read from there. The sound is important since the trial transferred to 17 other courts in Norway, a publikumssal in Oslo and three press centers.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – [Holden still read from the report, about the details of the Breivik moved home to his mother and in-depth about how Breivik wrote the compendium and how he planned the different phases of the plans, which he has said in the first talks with the experts] From there, Breivik, so it may seem that the decision whether a violent action grew from 2009?

Anders Breivik Behring: – As I was on the spot, based on what they have written, what they have written. The report is worthless. I have noticed that and Moe has his own theory for what I have done and they support their theory by making up things I should have said, but has not said. Perhaps it would have been a gr to get the documents HVO conversations were taped, but they were unfortunately not. If I believe you can just ignore the report in its entirety.

Comments from VG Jarle Brenna: Holden is now Breivik clear message that he believes terrorist planning first began in 2009 – not 2006 as he claims.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – So here there is no confusion once, this is fiction? So “the plan required executions grew from 2009, he says” It is pure fiction?

Anders Breivik Behring: – It is fiction, yes.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – Do you have any idea how Husby and Sørheim have the idea of writing all this? [Breivik reply to this]

Anders Breivik Behring: – The mount does not trust my explanation, therefore, supports the theory of his own to fabricate.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – Shall I tell you something, Breivik. I also wonder if much of this is just pure fiction. [Breivik: - Yes, you do it?] Yes, I do. The firm GeoFarm, when was it created? [In May, 2009.] Was it an important prerequisite for implementing the action?

Comments from VG Jarle Brenna: Holden points out that the company GeoFrame was created in 2009 (used for fertilizer acquisition), and that e-mail address linked to a blog shifted from 2183 to 2083 in 2009. All that he applied for credit in the fall of that year.

Anders Breivik Behring: – Eh … yes, that was it. But before you continue: to understand why Geofarm was important … As I called the credit card acquisition phase, I had to have this company. It was I then.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – Geofarm was important to carry out this operation? So there was this e-mail changed and e-mail address had been changed from 2183 to 2083. It happened in June [Breivik takes over word]

Anders Breivik Behring – I do not think you can conclude something I myself am very unsure. I would create 31 email addresses, so I do not think you should put as much emphasis on it.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – No, but then I have in mind, but I have a couple of points to, you know, that I will have comments. September-October ’09, so do what you just mentioned, obtained credit cards. Was there a defining premise?

Anders Breivik Behring: – Yes, I started on credit card debt … most probably after I had finished the lecture notes, or at least in the final phase. It was the one that marked the final phase.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – So what we have mentioned that you have logged that the compendium of autumn 2009?

Anders Breivik Behring: – The plan was always to start at the operational section when the compendium was completed. – Yes, that excludes me. – As the military part I started in parallel with the others. It took a long time because I had to write it yourself. It ended on the date you referred to.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – So did you say to Grassland in place that Modern Warfare is something you learned from? It was a premise and training for the action. It was from 18 January 2010. So we know that the first acquisition that can be linked to 22 July is a “pelikancase” that you buy 23 april 2009.

Anders Breivik Behring: – So you could say that credit cards were the start of the operational phase. The first purchases was probably a uniform similar stuff in 2009 or 2010.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – Do you understand that I can start thinking about the idea that maybe was not a military part before the end of 2009?

Anders Breivik Behring: – What is your logic is that because I started the operational phase in 2009, I had only thought about violence in 2009. It’s your logic. What I have said and that is the actual realieteten. Had a phase from 2002 to 2006, the sabbatical, I would kompendiefasen before I went over to the operational phase. – There has been a plan all along and I started and I decided this in 2006. It differs little enough from your theory.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – We will later speak to Huseby and Sørheim and then hear their comments for this claim. – Regardless of when this decision was taken … Engh come in from the sidelines with a question.

Prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh: – When you got this from the first declaration of 2009, I have noticed that the experts must have it from the interrogations. Where did you get that?

Anders Breivik Behring: – What I was referring to was the text on that page. They have had access to interviews so they know which point I have. So they have launched their own theory and put it up against the factual realities. [But where have they got that number from 2009, says Engh Bejer]

Comments from VG Jarle Brenna Lippestad interrupts and says that forensic report is not signed by the client and only the experts’ opinion. Prosecutors have consistently shown this report to questions about 2009. Judge Arntzen answer, however Lippestad and says she will allow to oppføgingsspørsmål Breivik at this point.

Anders Breivik Behring: – I have been told what happened to them and then Husby and Sørheim said: No, we do not believe you. So they thought that I have begun with these thoughts in 2009, they have written that I’ve said it.

Prosecutors Svein Holden – I think it was a point that Engh was up, so I will pursue it further. Where did the number 2009 from? What do you think about it?

Defense Geir Lippestad: – The prosecutor, the specialist declaration is not signed and accepted. He says that they have misunderstood him, it is wrong to move forward on it.

Anders Breivik Behring: – There is no confusion at all. [As Engh ask, also ask Holden, why 2009?] – It makes you almost ask the experts about.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – Did you have mentioned 2009 in a different context to them, do you think?

Anders Breivik Behring: – It goes out of the interrogations is that I started with the operational phase in 2009, and that I then got the first thoughts of violence. – It is when their theory and the experts.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – We received your article where you pointed out 200 lies in the declaration. [Breivik: More than 200 lies] pointed out that as a lie?

Anders Breivik Behring – I started working with the op-ed, so I made ​​a list. I started with the first meeting, this was the period when I was tvangsobservert. So I concluded that I had not time to bring everything, so I took a sample. – Because there are quite a few lies, which is pretty much increased yield. It may well be true, but if I had documented all the lies, it would become a document of 300 pages, not 38

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – When we go to what I just started. Regardless if this decision was taken. Tell us a little about what the original plan was? As you may know where I want? [Yes says Breivik]

Anders Breivik Behring: – I have considered many alternatives, but the plan was based was to make three bombs. Two of the bombs would be a ton each and the third would be at about 500 pounds.

Anders Breivik Behring: – The plan was structured so that there would be three car bombs that were followed by a firearm based operation. The plan was to use a support vehicle, which is a mini Honda, Gorilla’s called. It is a small motorcycle, which can weigh about 60-70 kg. It is a logistics vehicle, that is to run from one vehicle to another.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – If we take the bombs first. What three goals did you have your sights on?

Anders Breivik Behring: – The first two goals were very clear. One was the government quarter, the second Labour Party headquarters. The third, I was not sure. I considered many options.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – What fell down at the end?

Anders Breivik Behring – I can try to tell how I reasoned. Basically, I had great doubts about the Labour Party headquarters, because there are civilians, innocent businesses in the area. Among other things, the Norwegian Tourist Association. – And I knew that everyone in the Norwegian Tourist Association would perish if I detonated a large bomb there. I thought that there were so many better targets. The third bomb, which I thought long post transfer building, what is now called Aftenposten building. – But Aftenposten represent only a small part of the building. I calculated that there were too many civilians who were in the building. The aim was therefore unacceptable. I have considered the Parliament on several occasion for the bomb. On both sides actually. City Hall has been the goal and the Palace has been a goal. Another is that which surrounds Hansen’s bakery at the Parliamentary Quarter.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – Now you have entered a number of targets [Breivik: Yes, this was with regard to the third goal. I landed at the castle. In a setting where the royal family would not be damaged. It was uaksptabelt to attack the royal family. ] – Why would it be unacceptable?

Anders Breivik Behring: – No, because the majority of nationalists and cultural conservatives is a supporter of the monarchy, including myself. Therefore I considered it as an acceptable goal.

Anders Breivik Behring: – We want to give the royal family a warning but it must be the castle without being there. The castle is Labor’s local representation that they share with government leaders worldwide. – So the goal described is more like APs official functions and not an attack on the monarchy at all.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – Can you tell us about how you assessed the various goals. What was it you did? Did you tour the Parliament, the pictures on the internet, you were there and then?

Anders Breivik Behring: – When it came to the government building, I reconnaissance where a total of 80 times. In Parliament, I reconnoiter a total of 4 times. I have used the opportunity to reconnoiter in connection with meetings of the Masonic lodge.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – What have you done then, you have stood by Mason built and looked over to the Parliament?

Anders Breivik Behring: – I have considered weaknesses in the building, if it could be an old entrance that you could drive a car through. The essence of a reconnaissance is to identify weaknesses in the building and the optimal detonation inside the building or the building. – Or that you drive into the building’s courtyard. Considering all the weaknesses, as one falls down on how one chooses to do so. – It was not possible by the Parliament. It was thought also for its ministries .. one will be able to inflict much more damage to the building if they could get under the building, but I considered it too difficult. If I had done it … I consider it very difficult.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – So you ended up with the government quarter, Labor headquarters and Royal Palace. Was it an expression of a priority?

Anders Breivik Behring: – Yes, absolutely. I did not expect to survive the first goal. I had perhaps survived the Labour Party headquarters. I had considered the likelihood that small to survive longer than that.

Anders Behring Breivik: – But in case I should survive not only ministries, but the next two goals, so I planned a firearm based action, outside of Parliament, or that I lifted down this mini-motorcycle and started a firearm based action until I was killed himself. It was based on a detailed plan, which I spent a lot of time, which went on to run down from the castle down to the Blitz-house and executed as many blitzere as possible. If you survived it … – SO, the plan was to drive two blocks to Day newspaper space and execute as many Times journalists as possible. Times will be counted as a voice channel for the Labour Party. – If you survived the Times, where the likelihood was small, so the plan was to drive to the Socialist Left Party headquarters and execute as many as possible there. It was not appropriate to add more goals than that. The plan was not to surrender before the entire operation was completed. It was basically a suicide action.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – You said you had spent much time on the weapons-based part in. What was the plan in?

Anders Breivik Behring: – The planning consisted of the first purchase armor, so-called “body armor” in addition to ammunition and firearms in itself. It is very difficult to acquire armor, so I used a very long time on this armor procurement phase. – Ehm … it is described in some detail in the compendium.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – So when you talk about a long time for preparation was the acquisition of things?

Anders Breivik Behring: – In order to simply train with armor on. [Holden Where you trained with the armor on?] – I had to prepare myself to wear armor. What I did was to fill two backpacks in front and back with rocks, about 30 kg, also I went hiking with it. I did at. – And I did it in Rena, and although it looks a little strange, aroused no attention to the extent that I was discovered. How to train Mon body so that it can work with guns in a bit heavy armor.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – But then it was not the plan?

Anders Breivik Behring: – The training was a prerequisite in all cases, but it’s true that there was no plan.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – What was the reason why it was not so?

Anders Breivik Behring: – The reason was that it was difficult than I thought to construct a bomb. It took much longer to construct than I thought.

Anders Breivik Behring – I had problems with the synthesis of acid. In addition, many other processes I had problems with.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – What kind of processes, it was that was problematic?

Anders Breivik Behring: – It was the fact that I lacked the raw materials to produce enough. [Here Breivik rattles up the various ingredients he lacked] – I had great difficulty finding a method [describe the bombing substance]. But I tried many other methods before it.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – Were there problems other than things related to the production process to the bomb?

Anders Breivik Behring: – Money was also a problem. They saved my funds. The last I had to transfer an amount that the guy who owns the farm. 30.000 million. After I had done it had I not (…)

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – When did you change plan, then? Or abandoned the original plan?

Anders Breivik Behring: – It was probably clear that I would not be able to make a bomb number two … In late June, maybe.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – In questioning, you have stated it to be between 30 June and 10 July, it’s true enough.

Anders Breivik Behring: – The plan was that it would only take 3-4 weeks to make three bombs on Rena, but it took three times as long to make one. – There was no alternative plan to the point where I gave up that idea. What you may refer to was that there was an alternative plan. It was to use smaller bombs of 50 kg. It was to combine it with a large car bomb and some less. In this context, the goals changed and I decided that it would be Aftenposten by driving a bomb [Here, Breivik in detail how this should be solved] – But then the probability to do something afterwards was little.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – When was the idea of Utøya goal appeared?

Anders Breivik Behring: – One may also my review of NRK, VG and Aftenposten. The reason it fell to Aftenposten that the VG and NRK was geographically unsuitable. – It was the most attractive target in Norway.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – What was the reason why it was Utøya and nothing of what you have mentioned now?

Anders Breivik Behring: – When I came to a situation where it was impossible to make more than a bomb, so it resulted in a strategy where you had to choose one bombemål and one goal which was based shooting action. And the goal should be either investigative conference, that this was actually a plan that I thought at the beginning of 2010. If I succeeded in making a bomb would SKUP conference in Tønsberg be the most attractive target. – Norwegian press bears the greatest responsibility, perhaps as much as the Labour Party, that we are where we are today. I did not do as much research in the stage, but the investigative conference was by far the best target for a shooting-based operation. – I could maybe combine it with a car bomb. It could have happened, but unfortunately I was late. I got not a farm early enough and therefore I did not scoop Conference in 2011. Then was the second best measure Labor Party’s national convention, I did everything I could to reach that date. But human limitations did I not.

Comments from VG Morten Hopperstad: Breivik applied handcuffs and led out of the auditorium. On the way he stops enough once up and talk to Lippestad. Follow responses of questioning directly on VGTV: direkte.vg.no/studio/rettssak-dag-4 The pause lasts for one hour.

Anders Breivik Behring: – So then I ended in a situation where I had three car bomb targets. I estimated 3-4 weeks. At worst, if I failed to do so before the summer holiday, he would Utøya be a target.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – Viewing the clock is twelve, so …?

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – As appropriate to take a break, then fit it to pause the clock 13….

Original article: Dag 4, ord for ord: Breivik uenig med sitt eget manifest

_____

_________________
The Medium is the Massage - Marshall McLuhan.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mark Gobell
On Gardening Leave
On Gardening Leave


Joined: 24 Jul 2006
Posts: 4529

PostPosted: Sun Apr 22, 2012 1:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Attack on the Labor Party

Google translation [edited for clarity]:

Day 4, word for word: Breivik wanted to kill everyone on Utøya

4/19/2012

Read Thursday’s third of prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh and Svein Holden questioning by Anders Breivik Behring below:

VG: – The different actors begin to take place in the courtroom. Breivik have also been received.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – The court is set. Be as good as the prosecutor can proceed examination.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Breivik, you told us in the place that you assumed you had been on reconnaissance in the government building 8 times. What were you doing when you rekogniserte?

Behring Anders Breivik: – That is what we talked about in place, there was one thing I forgot, regarding alternative plans, I might take it first? [Holden: - Yes.] I had an alternative plan in case I could not get enough explosives. As an alternative strategy was to use a so-called poor man’s atomic bomb, which I have described earlier.

Behring Anders Breivik: – [here describe Breivik how he would construct a so-called poor man's atomic bomb] It can be used in several places in Oslo. It was important not to harm civilians. The two attacks had been directed at the government building and 1 May train that is out of position at Youngstorget.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – What was the reason why it lapsed?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It lapsed for the simple reason that I had access to produce its own large car bomb (…).

prosecutor Svein Holden: – When to blow up a charge in connection with a 1 May train, did you ever thought about how many lives could be lost there, or?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is difficult to estimate, but up to several thousand people. Considering that it collected all the ten thousand people, it would be the biggest event to hit segment. The entire kulturmarxistiske elite gathered at the square, the percentage would be only about ten percent innocent would be killed. – I did not do as much research around the [1 May train] in the beginning. It is the only event where the politically active Marxists are gathered. It is the international communist days. – What I considered it was that such a major attack was over. I considered it unacceptable. I looked at what the Labor Party should be given a warning before a big attack and the warning was 22 July.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – I believe we return to what I started with. You told the place that you’d reconnoiter. What was reknogoseringen in?

Behring Anders Breivik: – No, I do reconnaissance in two ways. Maybe four times I reconnoitre from a distance, and observed. On four occasions I went just over. To avoid being suspected, one can only sacrifice a glance. I did not take the chance to use Google street view in case it was flagged electronically. – But what I was looking for ways to get under built. Any weaknesses. Where you run into and how much a car that could fit. What time of day it may have been set up blocking really all possible such details.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – And when you were at a distance, how far away were you when?

Behring Anders Breivik: – No, that is, the closest I came was to go on the sidewalk right outside the building. – But the four times when you were at a distance, where were you then? – The first time was the VG-building and it was a little further away in Grubbegaten. Once at the Oslo Public Library. Another time was Hammersborg square.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – How long you observed each of these places would you estimate?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I do not remember exactly, but I’ve tried to make a record of police, and there will be no more specific than that really.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Did you discover any valuable information when you stood by the VG-built, Hammersborg and down in Grubbegaten?

Behring Anders Breivik: – That’s pretty limited what you can observe from the distance. Reconnaissance is not necessarily just built but around, but how to run away from there and learn about the quarters. Where you can run in and out. There was only one entrance to the quarter and it was Grubbegaten. Then I heard about the case where one would put up roadblocks.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – The four times when you were a little closer, as you mentioned, among other things, walking on the sidewalk, there were other places you were approaching or were you close in other ways?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It was the closest I came.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – And what kind of …. you stopped and looked at the building, or you just threw a glance when you went over?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I never stopped up, I just threw a glance.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – The times you looked, you discover something important about then?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It was the points that I described the place as I was concerned. But what is important of course, when reconnaissance is to slip into the environment, so it’s important that one is a Clas Ohlson bag or something similar, which may support or provide a reason for that is there.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – I looked for cameras, for example?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I was considering doing it but it would be too risky if you looked up and saw the cameras. I did not but I figured that it was 100 percent camera coverage.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – But you saw that is not a single camera?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I did not see the cameras.

prosecutor Svein Holden – I sit and wonder … is there really any significant risk to sit down with lunch by the fountain at the high-rise building? Was it in 2006?

Behring Anders Breivik: – There is probably no other than me to answer. I do not know the routines of the PST in Norway. It is better to make a reservation that there is some security.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Did you have any observations related to the guards in the building?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I assumed they were the same, that they had external guards and that they had internal guards, I assumed that it was a security center a few blocks from where it was the camera key and I assumed that there were four Armed guards on the ground floor, which would come out as soon as I walked out of the car. – I took into account fight against four people. It was also why I was wearing uniform.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Did you do some research to confirm or disprove any of these assumptions? [No I did not respond Breivik].

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Was it part of the reason for what you did in Modern Warfare, with to prepare you for a pincer movement?

Comments from VG Jarle Brenna: Holden suggests that it probably had not undergone any alarm if Breivik had sat down and ate lunch box at the fountain outside the high-rise building in 2006.

Behring Anders Breivik: – No, that is now referring to a war simulation, digital simulation is a tool to prepare for something that is real. I have no opportunity to obtain information, so I did just an assumption.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – What about the pillars? Size of columns? The kind of thing. As for the kind of thing?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I think I reviewed it at some point. I had studied some “case studies” in the past. Among other things, World Trade Center bombing and other attacks in the Middle East. They had I studied. It was limited in what I was able to reason my way to. It is not possible to make a calculated analysis of it.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Men looked for beams?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I did enough, but I just concluded early on that it does not matter, that’s not where the limit is, the limitation lies in the human.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Did you do any reviews on the thickness of the pillars?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I meant to remember I did it.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – It is asked about it in interviews [referring to interview 20 December and read about the defendant's explanation of the columns in the building].

Behring Anders Breivik: – I do not think you should add very much weight on it. What we concluded the conversation was that I thought it’s just to try with a 1-ton bomb, and it is perhaps a slight possibility that the building collapses, but it is difficult to calculate. – I had two reference points, one was the WTC 93 and the other was Oklahoma City.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Now you said that you were on reconnaissance eight times. Four of the times you stood at a distance, including the VG, Deichman. Previously, you stopped and looked toward the mansion. Is this a thorough reconnaissance?

Behring Anders Breivik: – a large enough degree. That all depends on. What is the conclusion of what you come up until now is that I concluded that I have not qualified for a blast analysis, I just have to try and see.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – So you told the site that at one time or another were then Utøya chosen as targets. Probably at the end of June, also made it clear I want you in the interview had said that it was in the period 30 June to early July. What was the reason you ended up on Utøya then?

Behring Anders Breivik: – The reason was that it was the most attractive political target in Norway at that time I was going to strike. It was common holiday, it means that most conventional measure … two-thirds of all personnel in the buildings was not present. It turned completely upside down on the action, and alternative targets were selected. – It coincided with the fact that I had only managed to produce one bomb. And the fact that it was common holiday. It was the best measure of the time.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – What was it that was appealing to you when it came Utøya?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Well, part of the reason that I wanted in the first place other goals, it was because I knew that Utøya would be a very controversial measure, even among militant nationalists. The impression I have is that about half of militant nationalists in Europe supports the goal.

Comments from VG Jarle Brenna Breivik repeat once enough information that it was important that innocents were not killed by a bomb. This time he is interrupted by the prosecutor, who points out that we’ve heard this before.

Anders Breivik Behring – I knew that if it was humanly possible, and if there was a better measure, should be a better measure will be selected. But it is very common to criticize an action after the fact. There are many sofageneraler who does and who think I should have chosen the Labour Party headquarters instead. – If I had attacked Labor’s head office instead Utøya there had been many civilians had died. As the Tourist Association. Based on the situation I was in was Utøya the most attractive destination outside the government building.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – You used the 50/50 percent estimate for a day or two ago as well. what you build it, that half of the militant nationalists (…)?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is the impression I got based on feedback. I have an impression of what is written on forum of people who support the militant nationalists.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Okay, so it is through letters people have sent to you?

Behring Anders Breivik: – This is where I got that impression, yes.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – What was it about Utøya was attractive then?

Comments from VG Morten Hopperstad: Breivik says that the aim of the attack on Utøya was to frame the Labour Party. He scratches his nose and mentions people he interviews has called category A-traitors: Marte Michelet, Jonas Gahr Støre, Minister Gro Harlem Brundtland and Jens Stoltenberg. Breivik believe Brundtland was the most attractive target.

Behring Anders Breivik: – It was that a political goal. The aim of Utøya it was to attack the … The primary goal in one of the five days Utøya was the first day on Wednesday, Marte Michelet would be the speaker. The next day was to be Minister, the day after that again would be Gro Harlem Brundtland, and the day after that again would be prime minister.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Did you have any preferences as to which days you should attack?

Anders Breivik Behring – I looked at all the days that very attractive. Because so militant nationalists were all category A traitors. Maybe not Marte Michelet. But Gro Harlem Brundtland is the most attractive target. – At that time, she [Brundtland] possibly an even more attractive target than Stoltenberg. Minister Brundtland and I considered that the most attractive targets. Do you want me to talk about (…)?

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Now you have told about what you categorize as category A, those who were most attractive. What about the others who were there because they were attractive targets?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Yes, the plan was that if you survived the first part of the action – Government buildings – one would go to Utøya, get over, and go after the primary goal of the day was Gro Harlem Brundtland. The aim was to strike at the Government buildings at ten, so there was Utøya at 11, when she was there.

Comments from VG Jarle Brenna: It gave a big sigh from the audience when Breivik end a long session on Utøya by saying: “The goal was to kill all”.

Comments from VG Morten Hopperstad: Breivik said that the plan was to blow up regjeringskvatalet 10 am and drive to Utøya and be there at 11 He wanted to bring a camera and film the execution of Gro. Goal number two was Eskild Pedersen then intimidate other participants in the aufs fun. – The goal was not to kill 69 people at Utøya. The goal was to kill everyone. The weapon was to be a detonator and the water would be a weapons of mass destruction, says Breivik. In the sitting room, Trond Blatt Man of the Support Group 22 July and shakes his head.

VG: – It says Breivik that the plan was to bring a camera, called the police digital camera and an iPhone in order to send a movie to supporters in which he showed that he killed Gro Harlem Brundtland.

Behring Anders Breivik: – After the plan was to execute Eskil Pedersen, he was goal number two. The plan after that was to intimidate the rest of AUFerne by shooting people out there and the main plan was to use water as a weapons of mass destruction, let the people drown in agony. – I considered it very difficult to swim away from there when you are in agony. So the goal was not to kill 69 people at Utøya, the goal was to kill everyone. – And the goal was not to shoot as many as possible, but the target product to use firearms as a detonator and use water as a weapons of mass destruction. The goal was to kill everyone.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – If we take hold of it first. It threatened to kill a person and broadcast it, how did you get the idea?

Comments from VG Morten Hopperstad: Breivik explains in detail how he would proceed Utøya and that he, among other things, inspired by al-Qaeda. The voice is still clear, and he sits quietly in the chair.

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is a strategy and tradition among militant Islamists. It is primarily a psychological weapon I consider to be very effective and I would like to help to establish a tradition among Islamic militants in Europe. – The way I see fit so had a great effect on al-Qaeda.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Had you done some preparation in terms of carrying out such acts?

Anders Breivik Behring – I had taken with a bayonet and a knife as well. The camera I would take was discharged. But before that I had concluded that it would take too long to upload the movie. The goal was to shoot everything and try to download it. I never got as far as I bought the iPhone. But it went away because of human limitations.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Did you have included some tools to pacify individuals who were [executed]?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I had taken with plastic handcuffs, I had three pieces of the coffin in which I had, and they were used in the execution.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Some would guess – and not just some – many would say that this is an extremely brutal way to kill someone?

VG: – It says Breivik that he planned beheading as a method of execution by Gro Harlem Brundtland. He planned to do this using the bayonet of his rifle, he said.

Comments from VG Morten Hopperstad: Breivik said he tried to focus on people over 18 years Utøya, and he describes an encounter with a young boy whom he shot and killed. – It is not desirable to have goals that are under 18, and that was why I was even critical of Utøya goal, says Breivik with her eyes fixed on the prosecutor.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – So you say quite clearly here that the goal then was to kill all the Utøya through to shoot someone and then the rest were drowned. Did you ever reflect on how many you had to kill with guns before the rest fled into the water?

Behring Anders Breivik: – What I concluded before I went out there, it was, I have the experience, even from a political youth party, and it’s 16-year age limit. Up until 23 I thought the AP had a 16-year age limit and that none of Utøya were under 16. I also knew that most young people in political parties, about 75% are over 18 years.

Comments from VG Jarle Brenna: The information that Breivik had planned to carry out an execution on Utøya that would be filmed creates reactions belong to the bench. Many shake their heads, some give each other a comforting hand, more people are given out.

Behring Anders Breivik: – That’s what I calculated, and I thought well, I knew that killing someone under 18 would be criticized, and I tried to avoid shooting people under 18 But what happened was that people turned around, and what you use to recognize the age, that face, fell away.

Comments from VG Morten Hopperstad: Breivik reiterated that he stands for what he has done and that he would have done it again. He denies that he is a child murderer, and justifies it with everyone who works for the multiculturalists are legitimate targets.

Behring Anders Breivik: – You did not really have to consider with regard to age. So the strategy proved to be more difficult than planned.

Comments from VG Jarle Brenna Breivik has the police interrogation was very concerned that he did not kill anyone under 16 years Utøya. Later he learned that the youngest victim was 14 years. – Are you a child killer, ask the prosecutor Svein Holden.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – But you chose to take the chance?

Behring Anders Breivik: – my starting point was that there was someone there who was not 16 years. I thought so right up to 23 July. (…)

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Utøya we come back tomorrow. To take it a little more generally, when you discovered that there was a significant number of people who were killed were under 18 years …. [Interrupted]

Behring Anders Breivik: – There were more than 25 percent that I could calculate. It was 40 percent instead of 25 percent.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – How do you see it today? – How do you see this today, in retrospect, when you have seen that there were many during 18 ..?

Behring Anders Breivik: – judging from the conditions and what happened is I Utøya and what I have done. I would still have done it again. – And the starting point for this is that there was no better political goal in Norway.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – One of the first things you said in court was that police had wrongly accused you of being a child murderer?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Did the police accused me of it?

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Yes they charged you for it because you said you had not killed anyone under 14.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have not accused the police to say it. I have blamed the media for saying that. [Prosecutor: Are you a child killer?] – No, I’m not a child killer. I believe that all political activists who choose to fight for multiculturalism and working actively for political and leadership positions in an organization is legitimate targets. – And 44 of the 69 persons had leadership positions in the AUF and many of them were nominated for the City Council.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Does this apply also for 14 and 15 year olds?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is not desirable to focus on people under 18, but there was no better than the political objective that day was better.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Do you remember how you rated yourself as a 15-year-old?

Behring Anders Breivik: – That’s right, I was not a political activist when I was fifteen. It was my first when I signed up into a political party.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – [prosecutor refers the manifesto of Breivik's political viewpoints and attitudes]

Behring Anders Breivik: – If you do not flag their political positions and joined a political party, then you have not selected a political direction. But when you have chosen in and taken on a leadership role, you have it. As I said in place, it is not desirable to focus on those under 18. My point was that everyone was over 16 years and I could distinguish between those who were younger. In retrospect, I would still say that there was no better political goals. – Alternatively, you might consider an attack against Labour which 50% had been innocent civilians, which has nothing to do with politics, and I consider that it would be a much poorer goal, even if it had hit the AP.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – According to your own division, the A, B and C offenders: How these people fell under?

Behring Anders Breivik: – All who have leadership positions in the Labor and Workers’ Youth (…). Anyone who has leadership positions are category B. 44 of the 65 individuals were not only members of the AUF, they were leaders, too.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – The fact you can now characterize these as Category-B. Is it consistent with what you’ve done before?

Behring Anders Breivik: – So the media have written that there were innocent children, until I managed to find out for yourself that 44 of those had leading positions in the AUF. – And yes … And I found out a month ago.

prosecutor Svein Holden – I think you remember that you have previously said that these people fell into a category C.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I do not think you should hang you so very much up in it.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – No, we can ask the question, at least. Do you have characterized it as category C in the past?

Comments from VG Jarle Brenna: Holden now has the help of Inga Bejer Engh and police assessor Kenneth Wilberg to find out what Breivik has previously said about the victims of Utøya. Holden says to remember that Breivik has called them “Category C traitors”.

Behring Anders Breivik: – It does not matter … It … Utøya [interrupted by Holden]

prosecutor Svein Holden: – So that I can explain the question. The reason I ask is that according to A, B and C offenders you do not have a mandate to kill the category C offenders.

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is described in the compendium is that as far as possible one should focus on those categories. If not possible, we will attack the possible attack. It is like saying that of course will attack the government directly, but they are very good at building castles around itself, so that attacks are made possible from a single cell. This is the natural consequence is that you focus on others who are under them. – And second, had it not been for the EU, Norway and PST’s campaign against explosives, including fertilizer, it would have been an action, which was three car bombs, but what happens is that the Norwegian authorities gjlør it impossible to obtain enough explosives. When blirt politically motivated violence, men forced to leave the bombings, to go to gun-based attacks. – It’s not something we have chosen, but we must adapt. We have no other opportunities for you have taken from us the other opportunities we had.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – So then it is preferable to bomb? [I had not preferred firearm based action because it is difficult for an individual to do it, says Breivik] – What do you think that “it is hard”?

Behring Anders Breivik: – To do something like what happened at Utøya prejudice against all human nature. And you must prepare yourself really to be able to implement it. – If you can train yourself to hammer out your emotions, and build up a dødsforakt … even then it is very difficult to implement such a reaction that actually goes against human nature. – It’s easy to push a button and trigger a bomb. It is very difficult and barbaric to conduct a firearms based action.

Comments from VG Jarle Brenna: – There may be some who would argue that the primary responsibility lies with you, Breivik? – For multikulturisme? – No, for the victims of Utøya. – Yes, of course. All liability rests with me.

Behring Anders Breivik: – But when our tools are deprived of you, or EU authorities, it is what we are forced to do.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Are you pleased that you managed to implement it?

Comment from Dennis VG Ravndal: Breivik explains with quiet and insistent voice when he tells why it was necessary to kill 77 people in Utøya. He would have preferred a bomb, he said. He owes back the press as the reason for the massacre, before Holden dishes for him.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I think it’s terrible that you have to do such acts in order to pass a message. If you want to see a list of those responsible, it is the Norwegian press and European press who refuse to express ourselves in addition to the Labour Party.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – There may be some who would argue that the primary responsibility rests with you Breivik.

Behring Anders Breivik: – Responsibility for multiculturalism is with me? [Holden: The responsibility for the death of these people.] Of course. That responsibility lies with me.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – On Utøya then said the following when you were interrogated there: “Most of those who were at camp today categorized as C. And we do not really have a mandate to execute category C offenders.” Have you upgraded them afterwards?

Anders Breivik Behring – I based myself on the information I had read in the media, that this was the members and leaders. After it appeared that 44 of 69 were managers. – Had it been the only members it would have been category C yes.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – You have repeatedly said that it is so difficult for militant nationalists to acquire fertilizers and explosives. Was that it?

Comments from VG Morten Hopperstad: Prosecutors ask more questions about Breivik’s explanation that it was difficult to procure fertilizer. – Why was it so difficult? Was not it just go up to Rena? asks Holden. Breivik answers evasive and repeats himself and starts talking about the capitalization phase, which began in 2002 and research he did to make the bomb.

Behring Anders Breivik: – If you look at the operation as a whole, including the capitalization phase, beginning in 2002. To conduct an operation, you need money, and that is done by working or steal. I chose to work. – And I chose to work and when I spent several years in providing me enough money to carry kompendiefasen and action phase.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – So it was your lack of access to capital that was the difficulty in obtaining fertilizers?

Behring Anders Breivik: – To acquire fertilizer costs 30,000 kroner. That in itself is not that expensive.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – But why did you confirm that it was one of the barriers that led to the action you performed on Utøya? Answer my question.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I did a lot of research and it was unknown to the vast majority that it was possible to use fertilizer to construct a bomb. It said online that it was possible to implement. I do not know who might have posted the information online, maybe it’s the United States or other sovereign powers. – It was the forum post after forum post that said it will not detonate because the authorities in the EU has mixed it with lime. Many lived in the knowledge that it is not gonna work. [Breivik explains some further detail about the ingredients]

prosecutor Svein Holden: – But Breivik, it was difficult to get fertilizer? Was it placed some barriers that need ground that (…)?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I was very unsure if it was going to detonate at all. [Holden: But Breivik, was it difficult?] Of course there is that, when EU authorities mixing with lime to make it impossible!

prosecutor Svein Holden: – But it seemed .. It seemed the more.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I did not know it in advance. It was a theory that was based on much research. [You did not? asks Holden]

Comments from VG Jarle Brenna: Prosecutors ask judge Svein Holden nice to have a break before they go onto the next topic. The reason is the gruesome descriptions Breivik has been included. Judge Arntzen would first have paused at. 14.20, but accepts a quarter break after Holden says they need it.

Behring Anders Breivik: – Most militant nationalists believed right up to 22 July that fertilizer could not be used because the EU authorities have mixed it with 15% lime. We prefer not firearms operations, but bombs.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – But Breivik, you were deprived of the ability to use explosives?

Comments from VG Morten Hopperstad: Prosecutors ask for a break and tell the judge Arntzen that he will move on to planning next. Lippestad stating that he will start with their questions tomorrow. Breivik led out of the hall in handcuffs. He smiles to Holden when he leaves the witness stand.

Behring Anders Breivik: – Obviously, it appears that I was not there, but I was not sure until it detonated.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – It is strictly speaking a little time left to break. I must admit that after what you’ve said so we leave Utøya yet. [The judge wonders whether prosecutors will soon be done with batch 2]

VG: – It is discussed further time schedule for time and examination for the day and tomorrow. Defender Lippestad want to have time at the end of the day questioning his client….

Original article: Dag 4, ord for ord: Breivik ville drepe alle på Utøya

_________________
The Medium is the Massage - Marshall McLuhan.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mark Gobell
On Gardening Leave
On Gardening Leave


Joined: 24 Jul 2006
Posts: 4529

PostPosted: Sun Apr 22, 2012 1:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Attack oin the Labor Party

Google translation [edited for clarity]:

Day 4, word for word: Breivik claims he is empathetic

4/19/2012

Read Thursday’s fourth and final part of prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh and Svein Holden questioning by Anders Breivik Behring below:

VG: – Here comes Breivik into the courtroom again. – He speaks enough even with its defenders.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – As we continue negotiations. Holden I think of time spent in the future. We are located at one stretch and quit before four. [Holden says he should have in mind]

Comment from Dennis VG Ravndal: Breivik is out of breath when he sat down in the witness box. He will now explain more about the preparations for terrorist assassination.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Breivik, before we move forward I think to take up the thread at one point. But first, you have something to attribute to what you already said?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Do not deny the fact that violence is and should be the last option. And as I see it, and I have very many others tried to make themselves heard, but because of Norwegian and foreign press have been marginalized, and then we have been pushed.

prosecutor Svein Holden – I have set up a point on the list called preparation. You have been told that “I have a viewpoint that is a little different than yours,” we have talked about the implementation of the action and målutvelgelse. We have talked about Utøya and its ministries. Now I go a little further into this with the preparation. – I’m not going to spend so much time on this. Can you talk a little about the equipment. What kind of reviews you did about it. I told the opening speech that the majority of the purchases took place from April 2010 to March 2011. What kind of reviews did you do about this issue?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Let’s see. [Breivik writes in a note.] So, basically based on what kind of operation we are talking about then you first have to secure financing. It is the very first. That’s what I did the first year, I came in kompendieskrivingsfasen, so I secured nødkreditt, so I started email recuperation. After that I started rustingsanskaffelsesfasen who went on to buy a bulletproof vest and a helmet. – So what can be called armor parts. I spent maybe 80 to 90,000 just on that alone and spent some months on it. As I leave it up, so I shared planning in four phases, each phase and after I tried to get rid of all the evidence, so that I could start next without fear of being discovered. – And when I had finished getting all the armor … eh … it was the helmet, a few other armor pieces – designed that I have made myself – as well as Spanish riders and politiemblemer. – What was the plan was to combine poltiemblemer in armor phase. I therefore travel to Prague to finish it. I buried a box of equipment at the Swedish border in July 2010 to eliminate all evidence of what I had done until then. I could then go to weapons procurement phase.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – So just to sum ​​this up with armor. You got some armor parts and at one point put everything together into a box. What kind of case was it?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It was a special case that can withstand a lot, which I bought from the U.S., a “Pelican” case. It is the one pictured.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – So did you and let the armor or armor parts in this and dug it.

Comments from VG Jarle Brenna: It was more crying in the break, including journalists.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Where did you dig it down? Breivik: North of Kongsvinger had the most isolated place in Norway.

Behring Anders Breivik: – A place called Råtnemovegen. It is 200 meters from the road. Then I dug into the repository there. When I had done that I started on weapons procurement phase. I informed all friends and I knew that I was on a bokturnè to Eastern Europe which up till then had not shown any friends. – I had only told part of it. So when I said that I was going down on a bokturné, when in reality I was down and buy weapons. When I had concluded that the best place to buy weapons was in Prague, the capital. The main purpose of the trip was to buy a Kalashnikov and shrapnel grenades. – Possibly also I spent a lot of time trying to acquire rustningspentrerende ammunition … [Interrupted]

prosecutor Svein Holden: – What was the reason for that?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I also wanted a flamethrower and I held up the opportunity at that time. But I wanted primarily to obtain weapons.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Flamethrower, what is that?

Behring Anders Breivik: – A flamethrower … there’s probably nothing more descriptive words than that. It’s pretty self explanatory.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – What did you see for you to use something like this to?

Comment from Dennis VG Ravndal: Breivik explains about where and how he got the equipment he would use in the terrorist attack. He uses words like “weapons acquisition phase,” “armor penetrating” and “potent psychological weapon.” It is greatly to hear Breivik explain this in neutral and conversational tone. He approached the prosecutor and his face showing no emotion.

Comments from VG Jarle Brenna: Holden tried several times to get Breivik to explain what a flamethrower is, but the defendant thought it said itself. Only when the district court judge Arntzen break in and ask with his strict voice, he replied.

Behring Anders Breivik: – A flamethrower is not a practical weapon, it is a psychological weapon. As I and others interpret the politically motivated violence, is not it kill as many as possible, but to get through a message. It is often best done through if you are using psychological weapons. I considered it as a very potent psykolgoisk weapons.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – Breivik, can you explain what that weapon is made ​​up of?

Behring Anders Breivik: – A flamethrower consists of a tank filled with flammable liquid and it consists of a pistol-like object that deploy this solution. And there is a small device that antennas fluid after it is distributed. There is a flamethrower. – But it will prove impossible so I focused on conventional weapons. Prague was not as suitable for weapons procurement. [Holden wondering what he was doing there when] – I went to Prague to print logos, PST logos to put on the car with the magnet piece, I made 12 pieces of these PST logos to attach to vehicles. Everything was based on the strategy in three car bombs. In addition, I printed out three police identification proving I had made in Photoshop.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – So the purpose was fulfilled with the trip, I realized?

Behring Anders Breivik: – That’s right, but I was unable to procure weapons on that trip. And on that trip, I decided … considering that I have no criminal weapons, so I could buy these weapons. – I owned at that time already a shotgun. What remained then was to buy a semiautomatic rifle and a pistol starting point was to buy a Kalashnikov. I had already a .308 rifle. [Breivik says when the ammunition to pass] If I had bought it in Prague, I could do it in Berlin or Copenhagen.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – How did you try to approach potential sellers?

Behring Anders Breivik: – In perhaps six occasions so I contacted people that I thought might be helpful, people who saw the crime. I went to places where I assumed that the probability was high that I could find weapons. – But it did not result in the fact that I managed to get a weapon contact. So I could not. Then I decided … I had done it if the will was there. I could go down to the Balkans, but I chose to get me there in a lawful manner.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – When it comes to the weapons acquired later, Ruger and Glock, Can you explain why there were these two weapons.

Behring Anders Breivik: – A primærvåppen as I see it is a rifle. Of all the weapons you can acquire in Norway is the Ruger Mini 14, which is the most obvious conventional combat weapons. There are many accessories that can be purchased from foreign retailers such as magazines. It was basically that I chose it.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – What about the Glock, then?

Comment from Dennis VG Ravndal: Breivik explains how he traveled to Prague to get a Kalashnikov, or AK 47 It is a native Russian made assault rifle, which is the most widely used automatic weapons in the world. He approached several people in the city, which he considered as criminals out, to attempt to obtain the weapon. It did not work. Instead he bought legally a semiautomatic Glock 9 mm pistol and a Ruger Mini-caliber rifle with 223

Behring Anders Breivik: – Glock was actually the same argumententet. It is possible to gain enhancement, particularly high-capacity magazines. It was the first place.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – High-Capacity Magazine, what is that?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Frequently magazines for the rifle was five, but you could add high-capacity magazine that allowed you to take 30 shots, and Glock was the same number, versus 17 that were common then.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – What was the reason why you considered it an advantage?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is an advantage if you are planning an action that is based on access to a lot of ammunition. If you are planning an assassination, an execution of a person. When it is completely unnecessary. If I had decided to execute such Stoltenberg, it might be appropriate.

Comments from VG Morten Hopperstad: Breivik take a break and drink water before he continues to explain why he acquired as much ammunition as he did. Police, mass murderer fired at least 186 shots on Utøya. In addition, it was seized around 900 shots from pelikankassen he had at his so-called “base of operations” behind the main house on the island.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I considered that I would go for a completely different type of operation. When I needed more ammunition.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – In the city you talked about the primary goal was to scare people on the water on Utøya, needed you so much ammunition?

Behring Anders Breivik: – One must take into account that one does not go as expected. Theoretically, it would have gone with one shot, but it had been very stupid. One must always take into account that one needs more than you think.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – When it comes to the choice of ammunition, can you tell us a bit what you were thinking at that point? You have been a little inside it already.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have been told that I was trying to get armor penetrating ammunition for it was the second part or conventional police who tried to kill me and they had armor. I tried to obtain such ammunition that could penetrate it.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Were you about it? [Breivik: No, I could not get armor-piercing ammunition. ]

Behring Anders Breivik: – No, I did not succeeded. I probably would have done it, but it required a lot of resources so I put it on the shelf. But basically you need to take account of what is humanly possible to carry. If you use military parameters, so there are 15 kg is the limit for that you should be combat capable.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – If you take more equipment with you than it affects your battle skills. The goal is that everything you take with you is essential. It is a familiar concept in the military. Everything else you need to leave behind. On Utøya I had to make a choice, I will go with the armor, or should I take with me ammunition.

Behring Anders Breivik: – If there were armed people out there I would blirr killed without armor. I chose to take the ammunition instead of armor. Considering that you had to opt out of all that is essential.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I chose the soft point bullets. The setting will be, as far as possible, firing a shot per person when you go for a vital spot and it’s head. And I used soft point bullets, for it is most deadly.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – But how do you think it worked on Utøya? [Breivik: - Can you specify?] Ammunition type, were you satisfied with the election?

Behring Anders Breivik: – There is no question of being happy. We are talking about achieving an objective.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Did you know you did it? [I felt I achieved the objective I had answers Breivik]

Behring Anders Breivik: – The starting point is that it would scare many people as possible on the water, an it did not work as intended so you had to adapt.

Comments from VG Jarle Brenna prosecutor Svein Holden need to ask questions, but it looks like he might intend to drop. It’s a sad mood all over now. Breivik talking quietly about, detailed preparations to kill as many as possible.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – You said that some of the purpose of the ammunition was that it would stick with one shot. The killed were hit by at least 189 shots. And it would probably be roughly just under three shots per deceased. How do you feel about that?

Behring Anders Breivik: – The aim was to kill, and then shoots, up until you reach that goal, and you shoot as many times as needed before one can ascertain that the goal has been achieved.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Are you considering other types of weapons than the ones you’ve been through now? [What kind of weapons do you mean, ask about Breivik]

Behring Anders Breivik: – [Breivik drinking water.] You are talking about biological munitions.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – What are we looking for something here?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It was created as an illustration. [Holden shows a picture of Breivik from the manifesto] – There is a picture of a person in a chemical suit.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – How did this picture here for?

Behring Anders Breivik: – The setting was that I took with me a chemical suit and took a picture. The purpose of the illustration is to sell KT to other militant nationalists. And it signals that we have the capacity that it indicates.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – “We have the capacity to indicate.” What capacity are you referring to?

Comments from VG Morten Hopperstad: Prosecutor taking up a picture of Breivik wearing a chemical suit and mask that he has attached to the manifest. In the picture he stands with ensprøyte in one hand and ammunition in the other. – Hensiktenmed image was to sell the Knights Templar to other militant nationalists and signals that we have the capacity that it indicates, says Breivik.

Behring Anders Breivik: – The intention is to sell into a militant nationalist solution to other militant nationalists who still are not associated with any identity. The purpose of the image is in a marketing purpose. Give a signal that the picture drawn by the media that the far right are jerks that go with sticks or stones are misleading. We try to lay a foundation [You are talking about we, then asks Holden] – It was my idea to bring it, but there is talk about what we want. But it is my suggestion, yes, that’s right.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Did you buy anything, what can we say, unconventional ammunition? Or biological weapons?

Comments from VG Morten Hopperstad: Without emotions Breivik describes how he wanted to make biological munitions for use in the massacre of Utøya, but he abandoned the idea because it was not practicable.

Behring Anders Breivik: – Ehm … with a view to planning an attack on the Labour Party’s national convention, I calculated that the most appropriate would be to obtain biological munitions. It would be a lot of security there, and it was important that each shot was fatal. – In this connection I bought … [Breivik mention what and how much the lethal dose he has the ammunition]

prosecutor Svein Holden: – What do you våpeniseres? [Breivik: There is no good Norwegian word for it. In English it is weaponized.]

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is the biological material, when injected into a ball. The idea was to blunt the ammunition and use it as a biological munitions, and when it is in principle a biological weapon.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Left the tank?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I left the tank. [What was the reason for it, asks Holden about Breivik] – The reason was that [tells about different types amunisjon.] It would be irresponsible without a backup weapon. It was not me.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – If we go over to a third group of preparatory acts. Bomb production. The first step which is probably the acquisition of Vålstua farm? Can you tell us about the process?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It was the autumn of 2010 when I started the localization process of trying to find a farm. It turned out to be harder than I thought. I spent much time on it.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – What was it that was problematic?

Comments from VG Morten Hopperstad: Breivik takes a long pause as he notes on a white sheet of paper before he talks about how he manufactured the bomb.

Behring Anders Breivik: – The problem was that the farms that were too little had been farmland, and therefore risked being flagged by your dealer. It was therefore essential that the amount of [chemical] stood in relation to the farm. Therefore there should be a specific farm, and it had to be near Oslo. So I managed to obtain a suitable farm in April.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Can you tell us about the production process? This is something that it is quite detailed about in your compendium. What I want is you to give a more concise version of how you did this.

Behring Anders Breivik: – [Noting] In principle, a bomb consisting of three charges – a primary, secondary and tertiary charge. – What I started to create an acid and once you’ve made it, you can synthesize it on. Simply by increasing the purity of the [Breivik says stands for acid] It is the same as NATO use in bombs. It is stable material. There are ten times as stable as Islamists tend to use. The problem is that it is difficult to make it.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I took that chance because I thought that what is commonly used is extremely dangerous, so I tried to make [abbreviation]. Most people who try to make it, can not do it. I was very worried about it. So it can start making was [an acid]. Then I made a few grams [an abbreviation.] I did a test on it, so it turned out that I was able to produce both substances.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – The test you have set to be 12 June, just as it is listed.

Behring Anders Breivik: – When I had assured me that I had managed to create primary and secondary part, I started on the Tertiary section, ie manure. I do not know how much you want me to tell you ….?

Comments from VG Jarle Brenna: It is clear that Breivik like to talk about bomb production. He talks long and detailed without the prosecutor Svein Holden need to make follow-up questions ..

Comment from Dennis Ravndal VG: He grins as he wonders how detailed he should be, so that the recipe will appear in open court.

Behring Anders Breivik: – What you need is [Breivik username of fertilizer here] and it comes in 600-pound bags. It consists of prilled. The Norwegian and European authorities have done is they’ve soaked it in water so it will be worthless for so-called terrorists. In order to contrast it must use stops and miksmastere. I experiment with multiple stops. – I bought 12 different brands, tested each one and examined what was most appropriate. Then went to 3-4 different Elkjøp and I bought the (number) of [the brand that worked best] and I broke these pills. [Describes problems related to production.] At the time I had three tons of [drug]. [Explains further method.]

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – Holden, it is necessary to go into much detail on everything here? Also with regard to consideration of the issue you raised with the closing of doors, etc?

prosecutor Svein Holden: – We may go a step further, you mix into this …? – [Breivik describes methods] After this, what do you do?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Increases explosive power and the possibility of detonation. Then it goes from [describe various substances]. It was the tertiary charge. It is not very volatile. [Explains the various charges and how they are connected.] It is the principle behind it.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – [Substance], it was someone I mentioned earlier, I said something about that there were some of the inside of the barrel, is that correct?

Behring Anders Breivik: – That is correct. In the inner charge, I used [describes an ingredient] – Shall I tell how I … [Holden interrupts and says they do not need to go into this, while Breivik smiles]

prosecutor Svein Holden: – What you might say something about, the time spent.

Behring Anders Breivik: – Well, I expected to be completed within four weeks. The ingredients that you need to make [matter], you need to simply do everything outdoors. When the problem is that others can see you, and it generates a lot of smoke unimaginable, so you have to do it at night. So it raised some questions. And it takes time. What I intended was three to four weeks.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – How long did it take?

Anders Breivik Behring – I hoped was finished by the end of January, but I was not finished before 21 July.

prosecutor Svein Holden – I should not ask more questions about the production of the bomb, but have one last little point of production. This applies to the use of performance enhancing drugs. Can you tell us a little about that?

Behring Anders Breivik: – What I described in the compendium, it was really just a theory, it was all about, or it is not just a theory. It goes without saying that if you use anabolic steroids so you increase your performance drastically. Additionally, if you use ECA as you increase your performance even further.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – ECA what is it?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is a mixture of ephedrine, caffeine and aspirin. It was legal in Sweden until 2002. It is a performance-enhancing drug to thin blood. It makes the heart takes up more oxygen. You become more persistent and it is very performance-enhancing. There are a few drawbacks, and it lasts only two hours after taking a dose. It lasts up to four hours.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Did you use any anabolic steroids prior to July 22?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I started on it if you want to call it a cure at the end of april, because I figured that I would be finished in late May, and that which is common with so-called testosteronkur is that It lasts for six weeks. One should not do it anymore than that. – So I started it in late April, and I started with something called Dianabol, which are tablets, 40-50 milligrams per day, ie about five tablets each day. – And it turned out that I took even more time and treatment was very long and I went over to something called Elastosenol. There is another type of steroid. The downside is that you get an accumulation of fluid in the body and it is an unnecessary weight of water that you do not. If you go onto Vinstrol after the water flows out while muscle mass is maintained. – And on 22 I went in July, when the Vinstro. [Prosecutor: Trained something parallel to this?] – I had started training for months in advance and I had taken two courses of testosterone before I started on the last, so I had g
radually built up muscle mass. It was critically important, because I calculated to carry so much weight and so on that day. Without the anabolic steroids I had to cut down on equipment.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – Breivik, used anabolic steroids to those from late April to early July? [Breivik: - Yes, that's right]

prosecutor Svein Holden: – On the 22 July had you taken ECA?

Anders Breivik Behring – I had taken it a few days in advance to return the body to effect. – I can not remember, it’s possible that I took it between the hours of eleven and two o’clock.

Comments from VG Jarle Brenna: It is very rare interruptions from the defense bench. Only on a few occasions over the last four days have Lippestad broken into.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – As we begin to approach 22 July. I said during my opening speech that you ran the craft bag or car bomb in Oslo on 20 July, and there you had tertiary charge. What happened next?

Anders Breivik Behring – I parked the car away from all buildings, as isolated as possible.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – How far from the apartment? [Breivik: There is a suitable place I had spent some time trying to find. The place in Skøyen how it went at least the traffic passing by.] – What was the reason for that … [Breivik interrupts.]

Behring Anders Breivik: – I was very worried about too many transient because there are chemicals that smell, it has very strong odor. So you can smell it if you go by a car. I had made a logo in Photoshop that said “drain cleaner” or something like that I put in the windshield. So if someone perceived a very pungent odor, it could be the reason. – So it was parked there and so I went to go back to Rena day. I stayed in Hoffsveien that day. So I went by train to Rena day at 10.00.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Did you have anything with you on the train?

Behring Anders Breivik: – In the car bomb I had with Glock who was charged. – I had come to a situation where there was no turning back. I had no plans to come alive. – I had it in a toilet bag. So at that point I decided that there is no turning back. The next day I took the train to Rena and there was 13.15. Where did I last preparations for the primary charge.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – As the primary and secondary charge in Doploen down to Oslo?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It took longer than I thought to make the final preparations, so I have not gone before 7-8. When I came to Oslo like in 10 to 11 o’clock.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – If I remember correctly, both the GPS at half past twelve. It soon will I get a message here, whether it was or not.

Comments from VG Morten Hopperstad: Breivik said he was very nervous when he awoke in the morning 22 last July. He was tired and was delayed because of it.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I took with my PC because I would use to distribute the compendium.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – So you stayed with their mother that night, too? [Breivik: Yes, that's right. ]

Comments from VG Jarle Brenna: All the three places on the prosecution bench have computers. They apparently use a chat function to give each other messages and suggestions, Holden has repeatedly stated that he will soon get a message on it, if he is unsure of the details. The police also have a separate room behind the courtroom where it sits investigators who also can communicate directly to prosecutors in the audience.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I did not think very much, because I was exhausted after working all day, so I went to bed, fell asleep and did not think much about it. But then I woke up and thought that “today is the day I’m going to die.” So I thought I was pretty little keen on dying, really. – I was really nervous that morning. The first thing I did was actually å .. [Interrupted]

prosecutor Svein Holden: – When did you stand up? [I was well up in eight hours, says Breivik] – Was not the original plan to make the bombing of the government building in the early morning?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Yes, that’s right, but I was so exhausted. I do not remember when I went to bed, but I thought that one way is the best that I can not lie, I’m up all night. But then I thought that when I’m going to be so tired that I’m not going to be able to carry out the following day. – With the impact it made.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – The car was back half past eleven?

Comment from Dennis VG Ravndal: Breivik explains in the same quiet, conversational tone of his thoughts on the morning of 22 July. He said he thought “this is the day I’m going to die.” – I was not too keen on dying, says Breivik.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I had to make some preparations for that night. I thought that I can not lie now, but I can not complete unless I sleep. So I decided to sleep.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – So you stood up, what happened next?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I do not remember exactly what I did in the beginning … [Interrupted]

prosecutor Svein Holden: – It is the least activity on your computer.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I started to upload the movie, but had major problems with it. It meant I lost some time. Once that was done, I knew it was time to deploy the first car. So when I went in civilian clothes, went over to the Doblo, placed the primary and secondary landing and drove to the Doblo Hammersborg square. – And then it was probably at around noon. Also, I went past the ministries and reconnaissance for the last time, and took a taxi to Hoff Road.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – What kind of reconnaissance were you doing then?

Comments from VG Morten Hopperstad: A custody enters the room 250 and switch places with a colleague.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I then simply whether it was possible to drive into the parking lot. So I took a taxi to Hoff Road from Stortorvet and when I was at Skøyen maybe half a year and then remained late. It was the dispatch of the compendium. So it took a lot longer than I thought because I wrote the last update and tried to remove part of the cover stories. The Kautokeino including the only cover. It was something I had not had time to remove. I did the latest updates and sent it off. I had big problems with sending and I got lots of error messages. I came into a situation where I was extremely frustrated. – So in the end I noticed that a bulk e-mail addresses went through. So I decided that I had to send away the other 12 to 13 dents, total of 8,000 e-mails, so I had to almost drag. Outlook was working and when I went, and it ruined my plan to destroy the hard disk so that the police got it. But I had no choice, I had to leave the machine. Went over to the car (the road). – It was three o’clock, I think. When I went in civilian clothes to the car with a big bag, I think. Or so I already had the equipment in the back of Craft coach. So I went into the craft behind the coach, skftet to the police uniform and armor, and sat down and started to run to the government quarter. – And when the time was about three. Do you want me to tell … [Holden: - Yes, just keep] So I came to Skøyen and so it was a police roadblock. It was apparently a trailer that had driven off the road, I had logos that could be identified. The helmet was lying next to me.

Behring Anders Breivik: – So I came to the front of the courthouse. When I came I to the first point where I could not run anymore because the entrance which was forbidden. When I broke the ban and there had been police cars there when they could stop me, but I was prepared for it.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – How were you prepared for it?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I was armed and I had the armor and I was not going to let me stop. So I’d probably just run on. If they had run after me, so I had lit the fuse much closer, and that is passed back, detonated it while I was in the car, to protect it. – If something skjeddde, but it was not [pause while he drinks water]. And when we come to a point where you’ve shown the film that we saw a couple of days ago.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – How did the sequence here. What were you thinking?

Behring Anders Breivik: – When you get to the point when you see the car stopped, I stopped to mount the blue light and I was supposed to put on PST logos in four places. But then I decided to just put on the blue light and drop the logos. Then I thought that I will die in exactly two minutes, but then I thought that I’m * little keen to die now. – At the time, then the reflection my brain disconnected, so I acted very instinctively after that point, and that is why I have forgotten a lot after that point. It is the cause of it. – So when I run up to the government quarter and sees that the angle I was going to park in, was not possible. I had made a shaped charge.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Was there any car on the right side? [Breivik said that yes there think he]

Comment from Dennis Ravndal VG: He takes a short break while he drinks water, before saying that he was prepared to protect the bomb with his life after having lit the fuse, if someone stopped him.

Comments from VG Morten Hopperstad: Breivik repeats what he has explained to police that a car parked outside the high-rise building prevented him to park the way he had planned. – The bomb was therefore less powerful since it was built so that the pressure wave was supposed to go in a certain direction, says Breivik.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I had made ​​the charge so that the pressure wave would be greater if the car was parked in a special way, and the car standing destroyed the opportunity and the bomb was apparently much less severe because I had to park the car like that. Lit the fuse in there, so I thought that now it comes out four armed people. Then I saw none. So I locked the car also went away, which I had simulated the past. I had not done it if I had not really trained for it, examined it at least 20 times. Had I not had the training, I would not have done it.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – What kind of training do you think then?

Behring Anders Breivik: – There are really only simulation … What should I do when I park the car. The plan was actually to use the support vehicle in the rear. I was running a mini bike that was strapped firmly placed in the rear. – The basis for the plan were three bomb cars and I thought it was not necessary now. Then I could just go over to the other car. Then I decided to drop that plan and just go away, and then just went away. – I remember very little, I acted instinctively. I met a man I considered a threat. I thought that if he is from the monitoring center and if he tries to attack or hold me tight, I would shoot for. But it did not happen, so I walked right past him.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – And then you put yourself into the Doblo. What happened next?

Behring Anders Breivik: – [Breivik drink more water] I’ve been told that apparently, when I came to Hammersborg square … [Interrupted by Holden] – I have been told that when I came to Hammersborg I met a woman who I asked to go out of its ministries. I have no memory of it was when the reflection brain was disconnected.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – When you say that the reflection brain was disconnected, what does it mean?

Behring Anders Breivik: – So when this is the theory in psychiatry, but there are many psychiatrists who believe that when one is existentially threatened, so taking over the amygdala, that is a special part of the brain that makes you act instinctively. When you are in that mode, it stops your brain reflection, and then there are some considerations that you take, including ethical. – And when you act instinctively. When you are in that mode, there is much you do not remember. And based on that theory, I do not remember much.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – What happened when you got to the car?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I went into the car and checked if anyone was following me. It was not, and I would have pre-set at P4, for I knew that they have news updates that break into the programs. So I started to run. Two boxes fell down behind, and they made a very trouble. But they had fallen down because of the pressure wave. Then I realized that the detonation had occurred. – Also there was an update on P4 after one or two minutes, which stated that there had been a detonation at Youngstorget, and shortly after it was ahead of its ministries, and after 10 minutes approximately, so there was a message that the entrance to the Government buildings had collapsed and that at least one person was killed. – And at that point I thought, “Now the operation is a failure” because the building did not collapse, or rows of support pillars had collapsed. Then I saw it as a failure. – Then I decided that it was necessary to conduct the entire operation.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – If you had the radio on the way out to Utøya or? Did you get any new updates along the way? [Breivik: Yes, I did.] What updates then?

Behring Anders Breivik: – The last I heard was that there was a car bomb had gone off, and that it was an expert who explained that this was a revenge attack after Osama Bin Laden was dead, and that there was a person who was killed.

Comments from VG Jarle Brenna: Holden asks Breivik what he perceived on the car radio before he started shooting massacre. He says that he heard an expert who stated that it was a revenge attack for the killing of Osama bin-Laden and that one had died.

Behring Anders Breivik: – So I parked on a plot near nedkjørselen.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – What did you do on the site?

Comment from Dennis VG Ravndal: Several of the family sitting with his head in his hands while listening Breivik speak. There is a pressure atmosphere in the courtroom today, both inside the hall and press rooms.

Anders Breivik Behring – I knew from previous studies that the ferry named Thorbjorn went every hour, and I was there about quarter past four. I thought that now I did not have the ferry, so I have to wait for five of five, because I can not risk that I have to wait on the pier in 40 minutes. Then people will see through the cover I have.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – What did you do these 40 minutes you were on this place?

Behring Anders Breivik: – As I stood on the site, changed my equipment. I took off his flak vest and I took on a battle west instead of – as I had pre-loaded with ammunition and other equipment. It was basically what I did.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Did you hear on the radio then or?

Anders Breivik Behring – I actually do not think so. Maybe. I can not remember having done so.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – We will put a line there, Engh will take up the thread from there tomorrow. But you said you based on the messages you heard on the P4 considered the operation a failure. How do you campaign in the aftermath?

Behring Anders Breivik: – What I decided was that the criteria for the attack to be successful was that at least the outermost row of supporting pillars would collapse. It had resulted in at least 12 dead. It was the main criterion.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – When it comes to the number of fatalities that you say is twelve. How did you come up to it?

Behring Anders Breivik: – What I have explained to the police, I have studied many attacks before, and has considered media exposure based on the number of fatalities. The goal is to bring attention to the issue you’re fighting for. Unfortunately, the way society works, I had not gotten much attention if I had blown up mailbox to Big Mountain. – But, unfortunately, is that media coverage is associated with the shock of an attack.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – But this number 12, where does it come from?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It’s good I did an estimate based on some reviews.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – What thoughts do you have about this action today?

Behring Anders Breivik: – What are you thinking then?

prosecutor Svein Holden: – About NEGLIGENCE, the number who died, the number of people were injured.

Behring Anders Breivik: – As I look at 22 July it is not about me, government building or Utøya. That’s how I relate to 22 July.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Is it a little bit about those who died and those who were injured as well?

Behring Anders Breivik: – For me it is about Norway’s future and it’s about the future of Europe, and that includes our people’s future and our culture’s future.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – In relation to the government quarter, did you ever thought about the people who would die and be injured?

Behring Anders Breivik: – The aim of the attack on government building was to kill the whole government and the prime minister. – It was the primary goal of the attack in the government building. I had calculated that the probability was highest on a Monday, because I have a theory that they have a meeting every Monday. – That it would be the best day to attack and that a strong enough bomb, would the entire building collapsed. A best case scenario was that the entire government and the Prime Minister, would perish. – And everyone in the building. For the building of what would have collapsed. But for the first action was postponed …. [Interrupted by Holden]

prosecutor Svein Holden: – But employees in the building, it was a desirable goal?

Behring Anders Breivik: – So High density housing is the most attractive political target in Norway. It is known among the PST that is the most interesting political goal among politically motivated violent men. But you are talking about the employees? What can justify the state secretaries and lawyers? [Compactor and other passers-by, cyclists] – When the NATO bombing of Libya or any other goal, as they calculate to be less than 10% civilian casualties, and there are also military nationalists goals, to have the fewest civilian, preferably below 10%, and that was my goal too.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – But who is it that possesses characteristics “civilians” among people in this area?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Civilians will be people who are not affiliated with the ministries and that is random passers-by.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – So all that is associated with a ministry, was a legitimate goal, is it to understand?

Behring Anders Breivik: – In the description that is in the compendium, they are judged differently, as you have mentioned earlier, but our goal as a whole is a legitimate target.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Who has decided that it is a legitimate target?

Behring Anders Breivik: – In this context, it is my decision.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – But it is contrary to the compendium?

Behring Anders Breivik: – No, it does not. It is the most attractive desktop political target in Norway.

Behring Anders Breivik: – There is not a goal in Norway that are more attractive. The reason for this is that almost no shops, cafes, virtually no civilian passers-by.

Comment from Dennis VG Ravndal: Breivik explains with quiet but dedicated voice about how he does not want to hit civilian targets. Political activists are nothing, he said.

Behring Anders Breivik: – The goal of al-Qaeda is to kill many innocent people. They had put the car outside GlasMagasinet or Oslo City. But it is unacceptable to kill innocent civilians. The goal is political activists.

Comments from VG Jarle Brenna: She wonders who the civilians. According to Breivik there are those who are not political activists. – So there are only two categories, ask Engh.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – But are employees of the Ministry necessarily political activists?

Behring Anders Breivik: – They are affiliated with the Ministry and it is not they who are the primary target, but it is a consequence of an attack against a primary target.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Then at least I have come so far I’ve been thinking, but I see that Engh is a follow-up questions?

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – You are talking about civilians today. Those who do not fall in the category civil what are they?

Behring Anders Breivik: – There are political activists.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – Do we have only two groups to relate to, there are civil and political activists?

Behring Anders Breivik: – As I have described it in the compendium, I have categorized in three groups to try to explain it. (ABC) – All these are legitimate goals, there are approximately 90,000 category-C traitors suitable as indirect targets. – All these go under the category of political activists.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – Which group would I fall? [Breivik: - You would not have been on the list.] Am I civil?

Behring Anders Breivik: – With political activists, I mean journalists, academics and politicians who actively work for a multicultural goals.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – How can you determine which category they’re in?

Behring Anders Breivik: – If you attack a political party, a congress, for example, it’s a gathering place for a certain type of person. If there is a nursery, there is something else. It is easy to make a difference on what’s appointment goals and not.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – But anyway, that is, if you have a journalist who is far out on the right side, there will be an enemy to you, or? Breivik: You know, a hundred percent, all news agencies in Norway supports multiculturalism in Norway. There is not a journalist that does not support multiculturalism.

Behring Anders Breivik: – That is, these so called journalists, they are political activists. For a journalist to call himself so, he must be objective. They support multikulturisme.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – One thing I noticed, you spoke just now that at some point 22 July do you remember so well from. Which word did you used?

Behring Anders Breivik: – What I mentioned, there is a theory that many psychiatrists support, and that was what I was talking about.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – But you said it happened when you were existentially threatened, and then I wonder – who were you threatened by the 22 July?

Behring Anders Breivik: – What happens if you are in a situation where you’re going to die in two minutes. I think probably everyone in my situation had ended up in a biological mode where you act instinctively. – You can simulate as much, but you’ll never be able to simulate it. So it is impossible to predict. It’s something I have described in retrospect and I support the theory that many psychiatrists support.

Comments from VG Jarle Brenna Breivik explains how he was preparing to kill. And says that psychiatrists can certainly say something about it. – Yes, we have quite a few of them here, so they can certainly say something about the future, said Inga Bejer Engh, referring to the table in front Breivik, where four of the leading psychiatrists say directly closely together to determine the defendant’s mental health.

Behring Anders Breivik: – Yes, now we have many psychiatrists here, so we can listen to the later. But you say that just 22 July, is there anything you do not remember because “I feel threatened.” But I wonder what it is you are threatened by?

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – I think you misunderstood me. I say that your body and your brain feel that you are existentially threatened, it does not mean that someone is threatening you.

Behring Anders Breivik: – It happened to me. It is against your own will.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – But what or who is threatening you that day?

Behring Anders Breivik: – You fall into that mode if your body feel existentially threatened, for example.

Comments from VG Jarle Brenna: She wonders what Breivik the word “simulation” which he uses often when he talks about how he prepared to carry out terrorist attacks.

Behring Anders Breivik: – The situation I’ve been in I’ve been twice in my life. The first time was at the government building, the other time was when I released the first shot on the pier at Utøya.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – But how do you in that situation, you say you have to feel threatened to get in that situation. Had the opportunity to say “No, I just drop it, I go home.” – And what threatened you?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have not said that some have threatened me, I’ve said that your brain perceives that you are threatened.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – Your brain perceived that you were threatened. Was it real? – Was it real?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Now we are talking about how the brain works. You’ll have to talk to psychiatrists. [Engh - This was your feelings, how you experienced that day?] Breivik: Yes, among other things.

Comment from Dennis VG Ravndal: Breivik describes to judge Arntzen he runs called Bushido meditation to clear their feelings. Otherwise he would not be able to carry as this trial, says Breivik.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – We are concerned about how you felt that day, how did it this time? [Breivik: - That we will probably elaborate on later.] Yes, we can get more into that tomorrow.

Behring Anders Breivik: – That we will probably more into. [The judge asks what Breivik mean by simulation] – A so-called suicide attack, you can hammer away your fears through various drills. Although used Bushido – meditation to displace fear. It affects the whole emosjonsjonsspekteret. If you use it over a year or two you will be off emosjonalisert. You get a dødsforrakt. And for me it’s something I depend on to, for example, be able to conduct this trial, so I meditate daily.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – Are there things we come back later or …? This is the simulation? Is this something you come back to later?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I started this in 2006 when I decided to do what I should do. I have described it in detail in the compendium.

Judge Wenche Arntzen Elizabeth: – Is this a daily occurrence?

Behring Anders Breivik: – In the beginning I did it every other day, and last year I have probably done it every day.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – And that is something you continue – until now?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I do it maybe not every day. But at least every other day.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – What would it be gone if you did not. Would you sit here now?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is a good question. [Engh: - Would you failed, then, Breivik] Maybe. – Firstly, if you normalize your emosjonsspekteret, you are more emotional.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – You showed emotion when we showed this film. What did not work then?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I think I just had not prepared me for that movie, and it is actually the songs I use in meditation. The meditation is based on that I simulate this video. I see the video in my head.

Comment from Dennis VG Ravndal: – It is a good question, says Breivik. Asked by Engh about what went wrong when he began to cry, thinking about Breivik quickly. He explains that the two songs used in the youtube video he uses even when he meditates. He was not prepared for it to be so strong, he said.

Behring Anders Breivik: – There are two primary songs, one is [song name] and the second is Helene Bøksle its “ERE the world crumble”.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – But how does this help you?

Anders Breivik Behring – I experimented with it. What kind of music that works and not. I have tried everything from trance music. There are some specific songs that you can use for this purpose.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – How does it help you? What is it about music that helps you, that makes you sit here now?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is a type of meditation that helps you suppress your fears. – It affects emsjonsspekteret. You avemosjonaliserer yourself.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – Do you think that if you had not been able to use this method. Would you managed to show empathy and compassion with others then?

Behring Anders Breivik: – So, you want to be careful to say empathy and compassion for others. You use it very subjective. It is not very compassionate for others to deconstruct their own culture and group. It depends on the worldview. One who is a humanist has a different worldview than another person. – Now you’ll get to be judge of worldviews.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – But I just ask: Do you consider yourself an empathetic person?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Yes, absolutely. I admit that I through the meditation has helped turn me off-emosjonalisert.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – How does your empathy is?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Now go into a very extensive discussion. So perhaps we can take it another … When I’m not so tired. [Engh: - Do you think it is a difficult question?] It is a broad question.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – You’d rather not answer that now?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is such an important question that I think it is “fair” that you take it when I’m not as tired as I am now.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – As I understand it that we are approaching a rettsdag ended. Then the court adjourned.

VG: – Breivik carried out after browsing through his papers. He shut down a few words with Lippestad on the way out. The two are surrounded by very many police officers….

Original article: Dag 4, ord for ord: Breivik hevder han er empatisk

_________________
The Medium is the Massage - Marshall McLuhan.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mark Gobell
On Gardening Leave
On Gardening Leave


Joined: 24 Jul 2006
Posts: 4529

PostPosted: Sun Apr 22, 2012 1:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Attack On The Labor Party

Blogging the events surrounding the 7/22 attacks in Norway

Archive for April 20th, 2012

Breivik testimony April 20, 2012

Oslo District Court 04/20/2012

[04/20 This post will be updated]

[VG announced today that the paper may leave out details that are particularly gruesome.]

Google translation [edited for clarity]:

Day 5, word for word: – Would not have killed if media respected FRP [Progress Party]

4/20/2012

Read Friday’s first part of prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh and Svein Holden questioning by Anders Breivik Behring below:

Comments from VG Jarle Brenna: Hello, we are in place in the courthouse in Oslo and ready to report what is happening today. Breivik to explain about Utøya and it is expected that many of his descriptions will be tough to hear. We got to go see how he explains in detail and without any feelings about how he wanted to carry out executions 22 July. Yesterday, prosecutors concluded their questioning of the time from 2006 through bomb attack in the government quarter. During this period, Breivik and prosecutors strongly disagree about when the defendant began to plan terrorist attacks. Breivik claims he started in 2006, when prosecutors first thought to see concrete evidence of planning in 2009 when he also created the company Breivik Geofarm.

VG: – Three of the experts are now collected while only defends Vibeke Bone Army in place of Breivik’s defenders. There has Prosecutor Bejer Engh arrived. – There will Lippestad in and talks to Vibeke Hein berries.

Comments from VG Marianne Vika: A large number of regular listeners was this morning told that there is a single place to belong hall Monday (last day of Breivik’s explanation). It is obvious that there are more listeners present at the courthouse today – the queues were long for the first time since Monday.

VG: – Where is Holden in, and we expect when the defendant and the judges.

VG: – Breivik comes in and this time with a white tie and black shirt, unlike the other days where he had a white shirt and colored tie. – The judges arrive.

Comments from VG Morten Hopperstad: Judge Wenche Arntzen explained relatives and survivors in the audience that they have the opportunity to leave the premises outside the breaks.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – When is the right set. This means that the filming is not allowed. We shall now continue the interrogation of the defendant. Before we embark on it and I will make those present aware that it is permissible to leave the hall outside the breaks. When I give the word to the prosecutor. [Food that it is defense that will be started the day]

defender Vibeke Hein bearer: – Anders. Initially, I ask you a bit. It was for many a difficult day yesterday, to hear about how you planned and carried out 22 July and it is also the theme today. What are your thoughts on that?

Behring Anders Breivik: – You think about how it is to tell about it, just?

defender Vibeke Hein Bæra: – Now, I think first and foremost on whether you think it is a difficult message for others?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Absolutely, it’s about cruel and barbaric acts and I can not even begin to fathom what it is like for others, and I had failed to conduct the trial and the police interviews that I have done. I have consistently distanced myself from it. I try to by-emosjonalisere myself. Trying to use a technical language. Had I used a normal language had been difficult.

defender Vibeke Hein Bæra: – Yes, it was Anders. And you said something about this, you’ve said it many times in the police interrogation, that it was cruel, but necessary. You have also used a different expression: The ULEV injustice. What does this ULEV injustice? What do you mean when you use that term?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Mainly so we are talking of freedom of speech and that the very large group of people have been prevented since 2 World War II, from expressing itself. These people are nationalists and cultural conservatives who have been prevented by liberals and kulturmarxistene. – They have actually been excluded since the second world war. It is the primary exclusion made by the Norwegian and European media. – For individuals and organizations. It also goes out on the systematic demonization of these individuals. The purpose of the Norwegian and European media is to exclude the large group of people from democracy. They use free speech as a tool to do this.

defender Vibeke Hein consequences: – It is pretty strong opinions you have about this, Breivik, which can be difficult to understand and we have to talk some more about how you were so, what you call your radikaliseringsfaktoren.

Comments from VG Morten Hopperstad: Most of us in the room are journalists, but there are also several family members and survivors who have turned up today to hear Breivik testify about the attack on Utøya.

Behring Anders Breivik: – The main point is probably when I was 15 years, I learned that everything I had learned at school and read in the newspapers did not match the reality of the picture I saw. I developed a great distrust of the establishment, especially the media. And I asked myself many questions. Why is this so? Why do we learn anything in school that does not match the reality? I was interested in, what is politics, why Norway is the country we are today? – In addition, … in my background so … I have known many people from minority groups and had many friends. What I experienced when I was fifteen years got me onto that direction. I was very much a witness to the Norwegian degree are treated differently than minority youth. I thought: why does this happen?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Why tolerate the government and the media that Muslim youths commit the atrocities in Norwegian adolescents. Why tolerate that they systematically harasses, rape, abuse. Why this injustice is tolerated from one side and why Norwegians do not defend themselves.

Behring Anders Breivik: – When I learned that the Norwegian and European media will consistently protect minorities and the multicultural experiment and all who try to criticize it gets its head cut off and subjected to a cruel dehumaisering and ridicule. Consequences: We’ll come back to it with the media, Anders. But now you write and as you have described earlier as well, you understand that it may be perceived quite racist, so I ask you directly. Are you, do you think of yourself as a racist? Breivik: No, I perceive myself as an anti-racist. And I have even noticed the racism all my life, but this is a matter of anti-European racism European media and the Norwegian media, and especially from kulturmarxistisk elites. It is a violent, almost hatred of the European, to our culture, against our ancestors, as advocated by primarily Communists, kulturmarxistene, and because they are so sure in the school sector and in the media sector, as they represent an unprofessional much power, they have had very much power after World War II, and it may explain why not a single journalist in Norway opposes multiculturalism. 100 percent all the media agencies in Norway and more or less all the media agencies in Europe are in favor of multiculturalism, and all they want to protect the multicultural and multiracial experiment. Baehr: But let’s be a little specific on some other points too, you were much within the school system. For the right and we all can understand a little more, what are the specific school you react like that for? Breivik: Well, you can say that after the Second World War it has been decided that nationalism is evil, and those who advocate kulturmarxisme, ie the protection of their own culture, they are vicious and curriculum should be organized at the school so that it produces individuals that automatically advocates the lofty truth, multiculturalism and cultural Marxism.

defender Vibeke Hein Bæra: – When are various a Norwegian series, “Roots,” which appears for all Norwegian children at school that shows how evil American slave traders were, although Norway has never been involved in the slave trade, which attempts to transfer the bad conscience. Educational songs like “Children of the Rainbow” written by Little Bear Nilsen is a self-proclaimed Marxist. He is a very good example of a Marxist, which filters the cultural sector. He creates educational songs used in part as a brainwashing for Norwegian students, and he himself has said that rather than being, nor to create Norway’s laws, I will make Norway’s songs. So his ideal is to influence Norway politically, but he believes there is more leverage to create educational songs in school than helping to formulate policies or laws. He is a perfect example of a Marxist activist and his work and the work of those who used him in the left wing Norwegian school. Bæra: But Anders Nilsen Little Bear is not part of the school system, so let’s stick to the school system now, and academic circles. What is it about the curriculum and culture of the school that you have done you some thoughts about? Breivik: So, if you look at the majority of countries in the world, it’s female and male role models. And when the Soviet Union won the Second World War, it was noted that Norway adopted many customs communist, Marxist traditions. Labor was the way the support of Moscow from the Holocaust. It is a very Marxist party. And they decided that one ought to introduce a communist revolution in Norwegian schools. And then you suddenly get the boys to start knitting, you will get the boys to begin to crochet and cook. And you will get the girls to begin with gutted. So you’ve tried to follow Communist ideals, that is to remove the traditional role patterns. It is another example of the left-wing Norwegian, but also European school

defender Vibeke Hein Bæra: – Let’s stick to the school system now. (…)

Behring Anders Breivik: – If you look at the majority of the rest of the world, it’s female and male role models. When the Soviet Union prevailed, we see that Norway adopted a number of communist practices. Labor decided that we should introduce a communist revolution in Norwegian schools. And when should you suddenly get the boys to knit, boys to work, and you should get girls to begin with gutted. – So you’ve tried to follow the communist ideals that is to remove the traditional roles.

defender Vibeke Hein Bæra: – You said yesterday that before you got the mind of a violent action to gain power, said you had tried to do something without violent means. What did you mean by that?

VG: – We are sorry – but because of a technical fault we were not out messages about what Breivik told the court between 9:10 to 9:15

Behring Anders Breivik: – You could say that before 2002, I had faith in democracy. I thought it was possible to change the Norwegian and European policy through work and activities. I learned early on that cultural conservatives and nationalists have no real freedom of speech. Cultural Conservative writers were systematically censored and did not come to shows and TV channels, they received no government support. They were kept out through the press support. – As a tool for protecting media hegemony in Norway. And then there comes an interesting point that Arne Strand, editor of the Times, also spoke. He understands, of course, because he is an intelligent person, he knows that the day press support falls, then open it up for cultural conservative and nationalist media. – He knows that as long as the media hegemony is maintained, then the people that he and Marxist newspapers like Times take part in the hegemony and keep everyone out. I have been witness to … have heard of hundreds of examples where the right-wing writers who criticize cultural Marxism, multiculturalism does not get published. – It has been so long that you forget to send in for you can not publish anything anyway. It applies to publishers, not just newspapers and television. If one is to publish a book and criticize the government must use dissidentforlag.

defender Vibeke Hein Bæra: – What do you mean by dissidentforlag?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is the big publishers who own bokkjedene. Therefore, one has to be, one can not fall into disfavor with them, then you get not distributed anything. There are three companies in Norway, which is the monopoly. – And it’s all the cultural conservatives who are critical of cultural Marxism and multiculturalism know that they can just forget about getting anything published. Then you have to drive so powerful self-censorship to such an extent that much of what we are trying to bring up losing their meaning.

defender Vibeke Hein Bæra: – Now you say “all”, that you talk a bit about, how do you know?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Well, you can say that. I will be careful to take specific name, for it will have consequences for the people I name the. I know of hundreds of cases where the right-wing writers have tried so many times raw submit letters to the editor due to the major newspapers that they give up. And I have tried to get through to some newspapers themselves. I and people I know have contacted both the NRK and TV2 have contacted about the lack of coverage of the Muslim riots in Gothenburg and France. Answer: We will not talk about it, your fascist, because we will protect our (…). – They say you never what they really want, they say “no, it is not news worthy” major European events are not news worthy, they say.

defender Vibeke Hein Bæra: – Did you experience it, or is this something you’ve experienced?

Behring Anders Breivik – I experienced it on two occasions. In 2009, around the Muslim riots Gothenburg and France. Then I was told by NRK and TV2 that it was not news worthy. What happened was that there were choices. They were terrified to cover the riots because the FRP would have greater support. They thought that we can not cover this because then you get FRP greater support. – What happened was that 4-5 weeks with massive riots in France and Gothenburg, who Norwegian media did not cover at all. Under the deck, there was no coverage.

defender Vibeke Hein Bæra: – But Breivik, many will probably think like me, that you have heard about the riots with Muslims in both Malmö and France and Gothenburg and …?

Behring Anders Breivik: – That is correct, what you refer to now is the major riots France in 2005, what I’m talking about now they are a little less in summer 2009.

defender Vibeke Hein Bæra: – Why was it covered in 2005 and not 2009?

Behring Anders Breivik: – What happened was, this is a claim: When they covered the depth of 2005 saw the coverage that led to recruitment on the right side. Greater support for parties that are critical to massive immigration. They took themselves to have made a mistake, and I said to my self: we can not shed light on issues related to Islam and African and Asian minorities because we help to shower up right. – And when they learned of it and thought, okay, we have to ignore it or write about it. Before the parliamentary elections in 2009 so they chose not to write about it at all. It was not surprising to many cultural conservatives, at all, and that the election was conducted. As the top of the cheek, then the Norwegian Broadcasting Corporation with a report one week later. – They should have written about four weeks before the election. When talking about just the election, I remember that the Progress Party had 30 percent support the spring. Then I thought, “Now it seems that there is actually a change of government.” – Where a party is actually cultural conservative. Then I began to doubt what I was doing because I planned a large and deadly action. If there is a change of government, and it is a party that is culturally conservative, what should I do? Then I started getting a little faith in democracy. I thought maybe I was wrong, and democracy. Maybe not the media scuttles Progress this time. – Maybe they’ve done it for 15 years, but maybe they do not do it this time. Then I thought, what should I do now? I have invested so much time in this. If there is a change of government and as a result, Norway places itself on the Danish level of cultural and immigration, I’m not going to do any action at all.

defender Vibeke Hein Bæra: – Then I ask you directly what you are saying is that if the Progress Party had won the election in 2009, it would have been a consequence that …

Behring Anders Breivik: – No, that’s not what I say. What I am saying is that if the Norwegian media had followed the rules for once and not had a torpederingskampanje the Progress Party (…)

Behring Anders Breivik: – So, I had not carried out an attack. Regardless of what the result had been.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – Berries, go a little further now. Media point is understood.

defender Vibeke Hein Bæra: – What do you mean the word democracy?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Democracy is a democracy and a democracy where the majority controls. There is a majority dictatorship. What is the basis for a democracy, the assumption is that there is a free press. When you end up a situation where not only half, but certainly all the major news agencies, not only in Norway but throughout Europe, supporting cultural Marxism and multiculturalism is not the case. – So there is no basis for democracy. For there is no freedom of speech. When there is no democracy. When people are not informed about what’s going on. This is the premise of democracy gone.

defender Vibeke Hein Bæra: – Breivik, I’m going back where we started today. Then yesterday and the topic we’ll talk about today is difficult to hear. Many will perceive that your explanation on difficult technical details. Can you say something about why that is?

Behring Anders Breivik: – So it is in many ways a protection mechanism. So firstly, if one at all should be able to carry out such a barbaric action, then you have to work on his own psyche for many years. It is known in military circles as well, one can not send an unprepared person in action, one must be prepared, mentally. – For me, using a technical language avemosjonalisert only option. I could not be conducted this trial or interrogation by the police if I had used plain language. It would not have been possible.

defender Vibeke Hein Bæra: – What are some examples of experiences that have made ​​an impression on you, emotionally?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is an important question, people will say that the person who successfully complete 22 July can not possibly be empathetic. He must be a monster, from a different planet and emotionally blunted. But again, there to prepare and train up. But you ask if I have empathy and emotions. And you could say I was pretty normal until 2006, when I started a-vemosjonaliseringen through meditation. – Like all those I know can attest, they will describe me as a very likeable person who is genuinely caring to close and friends and in general to all, but when it comes to build up an enemy, you choose to use tactics dehumanizing …

defender Vibeke Hein Bæra: – What do you mean by dehumanizing?

Behring Anders Breivik: – To be able to attack anyone, no matter in what way, you have to justify it to yourself. Norwegian media said that it does not matter, we can attack Breivik because he is a monster. It’s understandable. Norwegian soldiers in Afghanistan they do not see Afghans as equals. They look at those inferior cave dwellers.

Behring Anders Breivik: – If they had not had that view, they had not managed to kill them. This is fundamental prinispper used in warfare. You meet the enemy face to face, you will not be able to kill him. I have been a dehumaniseringsstrategi to be able to kill someone. – If I had not done it in a very careful way, so I had not done it. So I have used the same way.

defender Vibeke Hein consequences: – The term “strategy” I understand that as a conscious choice you have made. It’s something you have chosen to do?

Behring Anders Breivik: – You do not really have any choice if you want to kill someone. One can not do it unless you prepare mentally very thoroughly. It takes two years of training and it is extremely difficult even with the training. But there is a choice I made to practice it.

defender Vibeke Hein Bæra: – Do you understand that enough people sit and wonder if you can feel sorrow for other things? Can you name some examples?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Well … [Breivik think about.] I think probably I was reasonably normal emosjonsmønster before 2006 before I started the workout. After 2006 and after training, then one could modify and manipulate their own sense of design and what I have said to all psychiatrists is that which enough is incomprehensible, is that my love for my ethnic group and my country is stronger than my love for me themselves. – And it’s probably quite logical too. Because a person will not sacrifice their lives for their country or a people, if love itself is larger than that of the country and the people. And when we arrive at the narcissistic again. A narcissist has basically the most love for themselves.

Behring Anders Breivik: – A narcissist would never sacrifice anything for anyone. But I understand that you draw that conclusion. Basically, I feel a great love for this country, the culture and my people. And it might not be normal but that I am. I think many people are nationalists. [Breivik you do not respond to defense counsel's questions, said the judge]

defender Vibeke Hein Bæra: – I want down on the lower level. When did you feel something that had nothing to do your ideology? I think of a specific episode, a funeral.

Behring Anders Breivik: – There are many examples, as many witnesses can tell that I am an emotional person under normal circumstances. An example is a funeral I was with my friend NN, it was his brother’s funeral, and I thought maybe it was the saddest day I have experienced. – I was the one who wept most of the funeral. So … I illustrate, at least the picture drawn by me may not be entirely true.

defender Vibeke Hein Bæra: – Are you a social person Breivik?

Behring Anders Breivik: – From 2006 I have consistently isolated myself, for I knew that it would be a so-called impending suicide attack. I have chosen to isolate myself, to protect my closest. But I have been very social until 2006. And one year I took a sabbatical and decided to spread his isolated myself totally and completely. I looked at it as necessary, really.

defender Vibeke Hein Bæra: – You have awnings that you isolated you, there were some who reacted to it? What did your friends then, when you went into isolation?

Behring Anders Breivik: – No, well … In many ways, I broke with the friends I had. It was a choice I did myself because I knew what was to come. But they knew enough not quite what happened. – They thought I was a compulsive gambler and I could not give them a good answer on that. I could not say that I will carry out a suicide attack in a few years, so I must distance myself from you. I understand that they thought I was game-related. I played a lot on it, I used it as cover.

defender Vibeke Hein Bæra: – So you bought, or rented to go to Vålstua farm. What did your friends then? Was there anyone who would come to visit you there?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Yes, there were several who wanted to come up and visit me, and for obvious reasons I had to do everything I could that it would not happen, so I just had to say that unfortunately is not possible that I keep on working and stuff like that. – But, there were a lot of pressure over time. They wondered why I wanted them to come up. It was a very great pressure eventually. On a couple occasions were they actually to run up and a couple of occasions I was forced to turn off my cell phone. One of the main reasons was probably that I had no street address. – There were no street address on the farm. They did not find out where the farm was. It was probably crucial.

defender Vibeke Hein Bæra: – Did you do any concrete agreements on a date they could get?

Behring Anders Breivik: – In the end it got a lot of pressure, and it was then … There were approximately 21 July, where I talked with one or two friends recently, and when I had the subject in two months, and so I said “Fine, you can come up next week,” with the knowledge that it would never happen.

defender Vibeke Hein Bæra: – As I have just one question for you. And d is a term that hangs a bit after yesterday and I think you have to explain to us. It was “existential fear”. What does it mean? You used the example when the large outside the government building.

Behring Anders Breivik: – It’s probably wrong to use that word. What I was trying to say was that I ended up a “fight or flight” mode that lets you act instinctively and parts of the brain shuts down. The mode you end up in extreme circumstances. There is much research in that area and that was what I tried to explain.

defender Vibeke Hein consequences: – The research and what you’ve read about it, it will Lippestad ask you further details, I’m finished. Thank you.

defender Geir Lippestad: – Just one follow-up questions to what you have posted so far. If I quoted me correctly, so you said that all who fought against multiculturalism is seen as evil, it is the right quote?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Yes … Roughly speaking, one can say that.

defender Geir Lippestad: – The action that you performed, how it can change that impression?

Behring Anders Breivik: – The basis of that I lost faith in democracy is that I had tried all peaceful means. I have personally experienced that all peaceful means were useless. I had tried to engage myself politically, written essay without coming through. Then there was one chance left, and there was violence.

defender Geir Lippestad: – So it is your logical explanation for it. One more question, just before I go over to what I was talking about. Are there any states in the world, for you have mentioned some of it, there are some who have a government that is a pattern of state?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Yes, Norwegian and European media do like to communicate that cultural conservatives and nationalists are anti-democratic and would like a terrorist City. The truth is that there are more than two states today as nationalists and cultural conservatives looking for. – The two countries are Japan and South Korea. They have taken away from cultural Marxism and mulitkulturismen from the 70′s. They have had problems with the Communists. But they are pattern states.

defender Geir Lippestad: – You have said that some of the main reason for what you have done, is the lack of freedom of speech in Norway and press censorship. Do you know anything about how the press conditions in Japan and South Korea? Is it better than in Norway, do you think?

Behring Anders Breivik: – [Breivik thinking for a while.] One can say that all countries … One must be honest enough to say that all countries have a state ideology that they are running on … And I expect that both Japan and South Korea is no exception. – I think perhaps enough Communists in the same positions in Japan and South Korea as nationalists in Western Europe. – Because Western Europe, Marxist, and Japan is the other way. Islamists in the Arab world have been badly treated. The “Arab spring” changed it, now controlled the Middle East of radical Islamists. I say that Europe is going to be controlled by radical conservatives in the future. It happened in the aarbaiske world and it’s going to happen in Europe.

defender Geir Lippestad: – Then I go over to what is my team. You have some theories that you build on some knowledge. You have told the prosecutor that you have studied up to 15,000 hours. And I might add that there is no disagreement that it is he who made the bomb. When you decide to make a bomb, I expect that there is something you already have. How did you go to obtain knowledge about making such a powerful bomb that you made?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I had no knowledge that, from 2002, but mainly I had to do new research. For the explosive agent I had knowledge of it was made almost impossible to produce it, for it is put so much restrictions …

defender Geir Lippestad: – Yes, and it is the researcher that you have done and when you went with it. I assume that there is a recipe on the web about it. You do not need to mention websites, but I want you to tell us a bit more about it.

Behring Anders Breivik: – The problem is that it is extremely dangerous to acquire these assets because they are flagged. Those who sell the customer provide their lists. I had to do lots of research associated with chemistry. I did research and got access to 600 guides to explosives. I thought the explosives that are realistic to make the basis of the procurement of the components. – Those who had been very popular among the al-Qaeda and others were difficult (…) and it was known that it was extremely difficult to make them. However, the components were easy to get in. I will try with one that was very difficult.

defender Geir Lippestad: – Yes, I understand, and we know that you did it. But I’m more interested in gaining an understanding of the process, i. How long did it take before you became aware of that, “I must make it and the fabric and combine it with them and the quantities to make a powerful bomb”?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Ehm .. research phase lasted perhaps one or two months. Procurement phase lasted one period. But then came to the point where you … none of the guides I could use … [Lippestad interrupts] – I found five different guides to how you made the acid but it assumed that they had advanced laboratory equipment. SO I had to experiment a bit.

defender Geir Lippestad: – How experimenting you do? What was it you did?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I tried the one and a guide and tried to put together a new guide, also I just had to experiment.

defender Geir Lippestad: – Made you a small laboratory on top there?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Yes I made ​​a laboratory there.

defender Geir Lippestad: – But is it, to create a laboratory. Had you learned in high school, or where you had the knowledge from?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have previously told that I have 15,000 study hours, and I have spent some hours to study chemistry, it is one of the areas that I have invested some time in.

defender Geir Lippestad: – And it was prior to … Thus, when did you read the chemistry?

Behring Anders Breivik: – The stage was probably in the autumn of 2010 until 2011. [When did you learn about chemistry to create such a bomb? want Lippestad confirmation. Breivik answer yes]

defender Geir Lippestad: – You told me yesterday that because of new compounds in fertilizers, it is not so easy to make bombs any more. Is there anyone who has done this before, made such a bomb of this fertilizer, which you know about?

Behring Anders Breivik: – One can say that the most famous event is probably Timothy McVeigh who made ​​a bomb consisting of 98% ammonium nitrate. After the incident predict certain European governments to put some restrictions, so they made it impossible Z. .. The mixed ammonium nitrate from 98% to 85%.

Behring Anders Breivik: – As was the highest permissible level of the substance. There was a perception of all that it would not detonate. I have not heard of a bomb with the level of [substance] in.

defender Geir Lippestad: – So this mean you managed to create the bomb, there was research on your part?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It was an experiment. It was likely that this is not going to detonate. But then I tried to mix in a couple of extra funds, but it was an experiment, yes. I think that most people claim that it would not detonate.

defender Geir Lippestad: – So you have not had any recipe. This is something you have found out for yourself. But this that you used four apertures that were used to crush … How was the idea? How did you find out that it was a good way to do it?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I had to experiment quite a bit. I bought the manuals to use gravity to crush prilled. When I bought the 50-pound manual and thought the weight would crush prilled. I spent a long time on it. It did not work and was impossible. It was an unsuccessful attempt. I had many failed attempts there. I had to find new methods. I was afraid that if you used the mixmaster so it would detonate. – There was very little information about it online, but then I remembered an article I had read about the Baader-Meinhof. [Lippestad: You remembered it in your head?] His name was Andreas Baader well, I think. There, it emerged that he was in the 70s had bought miksmastere the 70′s and had broken the prilled that way.

defender Geir Lippestad: – So it was just information that you searched and found after a while?

Behring Anders Breivik: – So it was unbelievable amounts of research that was required to find these answers.

defender Geir Lippestad: – You mentioned another example, yesterday, that when these prilled was broken, you had to put it into bags. How did you find out?

VG: – Breivik explains how he did this.

defender Geir Lippestad: – I think we could put a lot of questions but we have got the impression that it is complicated toe create such a bomb and it is not readily available process. But the small processes were your thoughts on the great process you were inside that you made the big bomb?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It was all the time as a backdrop. It did

defender Geir Lippestad: – But that one ton. How did you come up to it?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I really needed three tons. I would make three bombs. – That I considered was to take the truck patch. I was in the process of taking it. [It was something you ask Rated Lippestad] When you have a Class B driver’s license that limits the vans to a load of 1200 pounds. And it is simply a limitation. I could have used a 3-ton bomb on the day but the car could be broken in two. So it was a vehicle restriction.

Defense Geir Lippestad: – Vehicles are restricted, you say. But did you or did you have any knowledge of how much damage the bomb could have, or was it a bit like “I hope that …”

Anders Breivik Behring – I had two primary reference points, one was WTC93, which was detonated in the basement of the World Trade Center in ’93 by Al-Qaeda, and the other was Timothy McVeigh. – There are two known events, but what kind of knowledge you had about the bombs that were used there? How did you know? – The U.S. government has made it difficult to find out what really happened. There are many estimates and how big the bomb was. Some say the bomb was at 600 pounds, the second was 3,000 kilograms.

Defense Geir Lippestad: – But did you read anything about it? Did you do some reviews if you needed a bomb on [various sizes]?

Anders Breivik Behring: – No, I did just a mistake like that set, because I believed enough in the one theory that the Oklahoma bomb was of 600 kg, but as I learned afterwards that it was of 3000 kg.

Defense Geir Lippestad: – I am not that concerned about whether there were fewer kilograms or not, I am interested in how you obtained your knowledge?

Anders Breivik Behring: – It is simply impossible to calculate. Velositeten [Breivik says little in detail here] unless you have extreme expertise in that area. It was really an assumption that the first would fall down.

Defense Geir Lippestad: – All the knowledge you had, you talked to some other people about it or collected it all yourself?

Anders Breivik Behring – I obtained information from someone I know who is affiliated with KT network, but the problem was that he had knowledge of a different type of explosives, which I was not interested in.

Defense Geir Lippestad: – So it was a completely different bomb? (If confirmation from Breivik) You also said yesterday that the bomb was in the white car, it was the direction located. What does it say that a bomb is placed and the direction of how you can control a bomb?

Anders Breivik Behring: – It is possible to increase velositeten. (…) Built up the bags in a certain way when the pressure wave in one direction becomes more powerful.

Defense Geir Lippestad: – And the knowledge about it? [Breivik, I had acquired quite a few guides related to (...)] – The guides, they had to get from the internet? [Breivik confirms it.] How many do you have a number on it?

Anders Breivik Behring: – That’s seven hundred guides on quite a few areas. [Lippestad ask how many of those who were for directional control] It was perhaps thirty guides for this by directional bombs.

Defense Geir Lippestad: – How did you know about the location of the car. You had to put it somewhere else than what you intended to. There was another car parked where you intended. Precisely so, what impact did it?

Anders Breivik Behring: – Because I had to park the car as I did, the detonation 30 percent less. [Lippestad: Why?]

Defense Geir Lippestad: – Yes, exactly, so … but when you had been on reconnaissance .. when you looked at the building, it was when you found out where you should put your car?

Anders Breivik Behring – I had earlier reconnaissance and knew how the parking was. I would drive in and park on the right. I ended up doing the opposite. It resulted that the detonation was much less.

Defense Geir Lippestad: – And did you know about it when you parked your car? [Breivik: Yes, I had it. ] – Knowledge of building … Engineering, to put it that way, it’s something you have, it is something you need to place a bombebil?

Anders Breivik Behring: – Aboslutt. Thus, the whole essence of it is that it must be within several meters of the building. If it is further away from the building it has drastic consequences for Detonation, – So how construction is and how the building is from is important. Buildings before 1960 were not built for earthquake protection, among others.

Defense Geir Lippestad: – Do you know when the tower block was built? [Breivik: It was built around 1960 I think, and it was built as the Government House and probably the most robust building in Norway at that time.] – Have you studied it in any other way than to just put it outside, or, Have you any thoughts on how solid it is, to put it that way? Breivik: Yes, I have considered these columns to other buildings. I thought that it could take quite a bit, and therefore was one of the worst goals in Oslo. I calculated that the building would not collapse, but at least the outer row of columns.

Defense Geir Lippestad: – I told a little knowledge you have about the bomb and onto another topic where you can also have knowledge in the preparation phase. You told us yesterday that you knew who was present political summits. You mentioned Støre and Harlem Brundtland and Stoltenberg. How did you know that they should be on the island?

Anders Breivik Behring: – What I did was go to aufs website. There were programs for the week. How did I know who would be there when.

Defense Geir Lippestad: – When was it you did it?

Anders Breivik Behring – I reconnoiter Utøya three weeks before the 22 July.

Defense Geir Lippestad: – But let us not dwell long on it. But when you obtained the knowledge of who was on the island two to three weeks before, can you tell us why you did it?

Anders Breivik Behring: – The reason for this was that I wanted to frame primarily Gro Harlem Brundtland, or Minister. I calculated that the Minister would have two to three armed guards. There was an assumption. In that case, so I assumed that I would have been killed or injured. Gro Harlem Brundtland, I figured that it would only be an armed guard.

Defense Geir Lippestad: – So you made ​​these types of assessments in order to reach as you see it? [Breivik: It is the equipment that you choose for the various actions] – You said something about the equipment you assumed that the police and Delta would have, and you used the name of any vests that you thought they have. What are their jackets again?

Anders Breivik Behring: – It is called SAPI, sapiplater. [Lippestad: - How do you know that it's bulletproof?] The phases which I have described earlier, there are phase armor, weapons, explosive phase phase. Before each phase, I spent several weeks studying how it worked. Bullet-proof everything.

Defense Geir Lippestad: – Where did the information come from? [I obtained it from the internet, says Breivik] – Can I just go in and retrieve it on the internet? [Breivik: As long as you know what you are looking for.]

Anders Breivik Behring: – Delta uses a weapon that … I bought the armor that I knew would endure, it is a very weak weapon, so just select armor that can withstand bullets, so I choose the weapons that I know will penetrate their armor, then.

Defense Geir Lippestad: – Was there anything you tried out or had practical exercises on the equipment. [Breivik: The starting point is that militant nationalists see the police as their brothers and military as well. In the future, if there is a coup d'etat, we must have cooperation with them. We want to avoid confrontation with the police. This was, in fact if I was attacked.]

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – You did not answer the question directly, if you had any training with it?

Anders Breivik Behring – I never tested the armor that I acquired, I did not, but theoretically, so it should work quite well.

Defense Geir Lippestad: – But … just an extension of it. In the case of the bomb. Did you have any nuclear tests then?

Anders Breivik Behring: – Yes it was a test explosion two kilometers from the farm in a desolate place. It was a very critical thing, you can be exposed by detonating a charge of course. I decided one day it thundered so that it would not attract attention. I did a detonation [said ingredient] As a result of the nuclear test as did the acid cleaner.

Defense Geir Lippestad: – You said one thing yesterday, that you had studied other attacks from terrorists in the world and how they had received attention. What kind of studies and what knowledge are you talking about it? You said, among other things, that there was no point in adding a bomb in the mail for him as a former Minister of Justice.

Anders Breivik Behring: – That I’ll get into later, the right’s radical tradition of armed resistance …

Defense Geir Lippestad: – What I am concerned, there are some attacks that you think they got attention, a scope, making this type of assessment to determine what goals you should take?

Anders Breivik Behring: – In principle, one can say that before 9/11 that did not exist al-Qaeda and it was a marginalized organization. 9/11 created the al-Qaeda and today it is the most successful revolutionary organization in the world.

Defense Geir Lippestad: – But the question is not so. When you choose to put it brutally Utøya and government building as a goal, you did it to raise awareness. What attacks do you have studied and it was specific attack you have studied, in order to conclude that when I would arrive with my case?

Anders Breivik Behring: – I have just mentioned the attacks I have studied before, but it is well known that’s unfortunately that in order to shed light on an issue, then you have to get attention, and politically motivated violence has been used for thousands years to get attention, and if you want to reach, not only in Norway but in Europe, it must unfortunately a very … Thus the shock effect is as large as possible.

Defense Geir Lippestad: – But where did this knowledge come from? Is there anything …. [Interrupted by Breivik]

Anders Breivik Behring: – Knowledge is based on the effect of al-Qaida attacks. [How have you been studying al-Qaida asking about Lippestad] – Firstly, the conditions for al Qaeda, Islamism. One can say that the Ottoman Empire was really al Qaida. After that ottmanske kingdom is the only al Qaeda who represents Islam. I’ve studied a lot of actions, what they have done wrong and right. Exactly what is needed to attract attention

Defense Geir Lippestad: – But now we were inside the core of my question. You’ve studied, you say, but I wonder how? How have you been studying Al Qaeda?

Anders Breivik Behring: – There are case studies online.

Defense Geir Lippestad: – How do you find such kind of case studies? [It is found on the net, says Breivik]

Anders Breivik Behring: – What’s in Arabic and some are in English. [Lippestad: What do you do when you find an Arab source that you are studying?] – What I’ve done is that I translated certain words in Arabic to English, so I try to look up the Arabic sources, they are often much more detailed than the English.

Defense Geir Lippestad: – How long … [Judge wonder if Lippestad think of break soon] Well, then fit it really to take a break now.

VG: – Breivik is followed out by police officers, and talk a bit with Lippestad before he goes out. – It is right to break in to the 10:40….

Original article: Dag 5, ord for ord: – Ville ikke drept hvis medier respekterte Frp

_________________
The Medium is the Massage - Marshall McLuhan.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mark Gobell
On Gardening Leave
On Gardening Leave


Joined: 24 Jul 2006
Posts: 4529

PostPosted: Sun Apr 22, 2012 1:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Attack on the Labor Party

Google translation [edited for clarity]:

Day 5, word for word: – Tries not to comprehend the families’ suffering

4/20/2012

Read Friday’s second part of prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh and Svein Holden questioning by Anders Breivik Behring below:

VG: – The judges are now in court.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – As negotiations continue.

Defense Geir Lippestad: – Breivik, I have asked you some questions about the preseason and how you acquired your knowledge, and so little about how you did versus the social event. There are not many questions again, but I think they are important. Can you keep a little bit where you were, what you have studied al-Qaeda’s actions?

Anders Breivik Behring: – Let’s see. In other words. One may say that it was created after 9/11. after that, there have been the biggest security risks for Europe, if we are to believe in the intelligence agencies say. And al-Qaeda also have a propagandadel, including a magazine called Inspire.

Defense Geir Lippestad: – Is there a magazine that you read in any way?

Anders Breivik Behring: – There is endless information to Inspire I have access to, which is also used by militant nationalists.

Defense Geir Lippestad: – But this is the magazine readily available? If it is released by al-Qaeda, it is perhaps not so readily available?

Anders Breivik Behring: – Unless it gets hacked by the CIA and it will be added to muffins recipes, it is available. Now of course those who make it have been killed, but it was available earlier.

Defense Geir Lippestad: – And that magazine, I read you?
Comments from VG Morten Hopperstad: Judge Arntzen has set right after the break. Now you want Lippestad and hear Breivik explain how he has studied al-Qaeda terrorist attacks. Arntzen is the court’s administrator management negotiations. She has since 2009 been a member of the EOS range, such as conducting inspections of PST, but the job makes her not disqualified, according to the district court.

Anders Breivik Behring: – I have gained access to some information, yes. [As it was, ask Lippestad] It was well after 2006, between there and 2011. And a well-known strategy for al-Qaida is to camouflage emergency vehicles. You kill a certain number of people and then comes a vehicle and kill emergency personnel. It is not appropriate for me. – But that’s where I got the idea for FedEx uniform and police uniform. [Lippestad: Through this magazine?]

Defense Geir Lippestad: – Are there other things you got inspiration from there? You mentioned having a major attack, and then have a second attack, when the emergency personnel, but there were other things in these actions you are charged?

Anders Breivik Behring: – It was not really the most use of vehicles and information related to vehicles that I have learned from these sources. The problem with militant Islamists is that they are obsessed with explosives, so they shoot based events I was not from them. – But I have learned a lot and have learned a lot of al-Qaeda. [Lippestad follow up: If you can estimate how much time you have studied al-Qaeda and their working methods. Are we talking an hour or one hundred hours?] – There are very many series that have been made, numerous documentaries, war movies, where it is perhaps not very much can learn, but one or two things. If you look at enough documents, you can learn a lot. There has been information retrieval through the usual pop culture.

Defense Geir Lippestad: – In addition to that you simply have read the al-Qaeda’s own magazine? [Breivik: - Yes.]

Anders Breivik Behring: – In the compendium, I have done a case study of many revolutionary organizations and assessed what the strengths and weakness of each one and them. Everything from the FARC, ETA, IRA and al-Qaeda. – I’ve studied the weaknesses and strengths. I have concluded that the most successful today, al-Qaeda. This is because they relate to their martyrdom operations. They embrace death as Japanese Bushido uses. It is the key to successful resistance.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – Breivik, your defender asked you if you have an estimate on timescales of these studies.

Defense Geir Lippestad: – If you think all the groups you have studied, then? [Breivik: - Hundreds of hours.] Many hundreds of hours. When you say that you study the weaknesses and strengths of those you study, you can cite an example of when a weakness of ETA and a strength?

Anders Breivik Behring: – Well, the weakness of communist organizations like ETA is that they fear death. They do not dare to carry out a suicide attack. Communists do not believe in an afterlife and it is their major handicap. – Carlos and a few others. They fear death. It is their major handicap. Al-Qaeda, they glorify martyrdom, it is the great great advantage they have.

Defense Geir Lippestad: – Is it correct to say that knowledge of the martyrdom of you from al-Qaeda?

Anders Breivik Behring: – No, it is wrong, and it is good quest, there are three krigerkodekser related to martyrdom. Muslims pray five times a day and hammering away fear in the way, while the Christian Crusaders had their codes, they used prayer. Prayer worked a little for me, but not so much. Then I had to look in other krigerkodekser, and when I chose the Japanese Bushido-Code of meditation, a combination of prayer and work for me.

Defense Geir Lippestad: – VI shall not continue longer in some farms in the different directions that you have studied. But shure you have read this from 2006 to 2011, it seems that you have studied this quite a bit, what have been your focus then? Has there been a curiosity, or what has been your focus?

Anders Breivik Behring: – The starting point has always been that this would be a suicide mission. The primary motive of the mission were two things. It was to provide a compendium that contains valuable information. The second was to start a witch hunt for moderate conservative culture. – To contribute to increased polarization. [Lippestad: But when you have studied from 2006-2011, when found on the internet and around the ... [interrupted by Breivik] – The basis is to gather the most relevant information to include in the compendium. All the studies I have done has been because of that it should in the compendium.

Defense Geir Lippestad: – And you have explained the purpose of taking action was to spread the compendium. [Breivik: - Yes, that's right.] I go a little over to another field, you must have studied in the preseason. – I now come to another field that you obviously must have studied in the preseason. You have carried out a major terrorist act and was not detected. Can you say how you plan and how you obtain knowledge about the bomb not to be discovered.

Anders Breivik Behring: – Well, the starting point for planning is that you have to steel herself that this is going to be a very lonely affair. You get minimal assistance. Normally, nothing.

Defense Geir Lippestad: – Why was it important for you to be lonely?

Anders Breivik Behring: – Dessverrre, such as the European etterretningsorgansiasjoner are today … they are so skilled, they do a good job that it is impossible to build up a large traditional organization today. Although only two to three people, 90% chance of being caught. – [Lippestad: How do you know?] It is based on studies I have done and probability calculation to be taken when one is three, two and one. If you are three people is 90 percent chance of being caught. 60 percent if one is two. 30 percent if you are one person. If you are the flag before you can forget about explosives. Then it’ll just go with a firearm based action.

Defense Geir Lippestad: – We have heard that you have isolated yourself and there is a theme that you have isolated yourself. Why do you feel isolated?

Anders Breivik Behring: – By necessity, really. Of course, everyone will surely have a community and fight together, but the expertise to PST is so solid and they are so skilled at what they do that one is forced to use éncellesystem. Unfortunately for us, but lucky for them. Of course, the best had been a huge revolutionary organization with a hierarchy, but the only thing that works is a éncellenettverk as KT.

Defense Geir Lippestad: – Right. Pst, how they work … how do you know?

Anders Breivik Behring: – If you compare the Stasi and PST had Stasi informants in every living increase. However, PST is based on the homogenous Norwegian society. That we are an ethnic nation, and trust each other. The trust is lost in multi-culture. [Lippestad interrupts]

Defense Geir Lippestad: – I understand, but to stick to the question: How do you know how PST works and thinks. It is open to all. There is something of the purpose of it.

Anders Breivik Behring: – There is not really through studies of various forums and … So you get an idea of ​​how it works. One can also learn a lot of popular culture. Police series and movies and … You also know that all outlets that sell components are monitored, and you must assume that all customer lists are submitted.

Defense Geir Lippestad: – For example, when you bought the fuse to the bomb. [Breivik: - It was a great risk] Yes, why was there a risk?

Anders Breivik Behring: – I was fully aware of the customs authority reports its findings to the intelligence authorities. Then they take a check and they find nothing and then everything will be okay. But the purchase had to be bought in December when it was near New Year’s Eve. One had to have a good history to cover the dealer that it was not the flag. Lippestad: So you ordered the fuse in December that it would look like it was a New Year’s rocket? – In addition, we know that the item is then flooded with packages, and they have less opportunity to check the packages in the period. – There is such little things you need to think about all the time. There may be hundreds of such modification you have to take.

Defense Geir Lippestad: – It was to go under the radar to PST?

Anders Breivik Behring: – Another point is the cover for my IP address. [Lippestad: - Say something about it.] – You use a service that masks your IP address, such as Anonymizer two networks, which allows them to be more anonymous online.

Defense Geir Lippestad: – But it was too å .. Why did you do that? Why would you be anonymous online?

Anders Breivik Behring: – It was to prevent that one could be flagged. If it was an extremely forum would perhaps forum moderator, if he wanted, to get information about who was on board he would have received but a false IP address.

Defense Geir Lippestad: – The fact that you masked address was to preserve the anonymity? [Breivik: Yes] Faced with whom?

Anders Breivik Behring: – Faced with people who could have reported it. For PST, for example.

Defense Geir Lippestad: – Are there other things you did to stay away from the radar to PST or others who might be interested in what you were doing?

Comments from VG Marianne Vika: From the witness stand explaining Breivik is now calculated on the precautions he took before the 22 July to stay under the radar to the Norwegian intelligence authorities. He says among other things, that he ordered the fuse to the bomb just before New Year’s for not making a fuss. He believed that it would be a smaller chance of being detected, since people might think that it was a New Year’s rocket. Breivik also used anonymity services on the internet to hide their IP address.

Anders Breivik Behring: – Basically, one can not express extreme. One must constantly reconcile yourself to what is the limit for disclosure of the various places on the web. As long as you arrive with the rules and adapting to, it is unproblematic.

Defense Geir Lippestad: – So you watched what you said?

Anders Breivik Behring: – All the time then you have the more careful not to attract attention and make radical expressions.

Defense Geir Lippestad: – How do you know what is a radical expression of the PST, or for search engines to catch up. You’ve said things that were responded to yesterday. How do you know?

Anders Breivik Behring: – What one considers when looking thread, considering Mon. what the intention is for this individual. To a large extent I have been obvious that I have written a compendium. The intention is to write. I used consistently a book to prevent people thought I had other intentions.

Defense Geir Lippestad: – Does it mean that you understand that people online have reacted if you had said what was your intent with 22 July?

Comments from VG Morten Hopperstad: In the police interrogation has Breivik explained on an episode where a car antennas parked next Vålstua farm where he made ​​fertilizer bomb at 950 pounds. He believes that this was PST.

Anders Breivik Behring: – Absolutely. And I think probably you will find the many rabid statements around, which may seem quite extreme, but you can probably conclude that most of them are harmless. Those however are intelligent enough to pose a threat, they are too intelligent that they are discovered.

Defense Geir Lippestad: – Yes, we know that there was someone who found something in you that you were discovered. Now we are going over to a different theme, where we are dealing with the ability to adapt without it might be an appropriate name. We are talking about the days in July when you were doing your preparation. It happened quite a few things that caused you to change your plans. You had such plans in three bombs instead of one. When you realized that you would not be able to make three bombs, but just one … can not you tell us about what you reflected upon then?

Anders Breivik Behring: – During the planning was an issue all along that there were problems so I had to adapt. My original plan failed time and time again, about 20-30 times. I came into a situation where I asked myself what do I do now. I was about to give up because it was incredibly difficult. I had to adapt.

Defense Geir Lippestad: – If for example we take the example that you said yourself, that you 22 July to park your car and you got no place where you intended. Can you try to help us with what assessments were you doing? “It is a car where I was going to park.” What did you do?

Anders Breivik Behring: – The mode that I was then, the brain functioned limited, because I was in the “fight or flight” mode. When I went in there, so I observed that there was a car there, and I just had to adapt to the original plan by changing the whole strategy. Something I forgot to say yesterday was that in the second where I actually lit the fuse, it was quite powerful gases that flowed out of that hole I had made. So I thought that these gases are going to detonate, and I will die as soon as I light the lighter. But it did not happen.

Defense Geir Lippestad: – So are we to another assessment … or assessment process. You testified yesterday that you heard on the news and found out the extent bomb had done. So you said that if it had done more damage and the bomb had fallen block, you had perhaps not gone further. Can not you tell us about when you decided to go to Utøya and what was your assessments.

Anders Breivik Behring: – The starting point for action was not killing as many as possible but to send a powerful message and ensure that the compendium was distributed. So I knew all along that if the first action will be 100 percent successful and the building collapses and dies in it’s Utøya unnecessary, and I can drive down to Greenland and surrender myself. So I had the P4 to get the update. The attack failed when the building did not collapse. On the basis of the information, I decided to implement the action as well.

Defense Geir Lippestad: – So there was a review you did there and then? [Breivik: That is correct.] When I have a few questions again about how you have functioned socially in the period 2006-2011. We know you moved back home to your mother. Did you eat dinner together? Did you talk together? How was it?

Anders Breivik Behring: – No, I have always had a good relationship with my mother. I have not really had a good relationship with my family. The only thing, my father, that I had three siblings, and my father did not want contact with their children. At that time I had a stepfather, NN, so it worked really quite well.

Anders Breivik Behring: – You have to get some hobbies, go with friends and so on [Breivik said this to his mother] Even though I lived there we lived separate lives. We may have spoke a total of one time per day.

Defense Geir Lippestad: – Are there others who were visiting the apartment, stopping in between. Was there any other people?

Anders Breivik Behring – I had .. It played absolutely no role. I’ve always had a very good relationship to remind mother. It has never been any significant disputes. We ate together … she is early retirement, and I said she had to get a hobby. She said that “my only hobby is you.” – No, it was not really so very many people who came there, sometimes there were some friends of her. If I wanted to make friends, so I went instead to them. [Lippestad: - But did you know?] Yes, I did it. And in that time so … The last six months especially, I was part of the friends.

Defense Geir Lippestad: – Are those some of those same friends who come here later? [Breivik: - Among other things]

Anders Breivik Behring: – We have been enjoying for many years. I’ve known since I the eleven years. We have been together the whole time until I distanced myself from them in 2006. In 2002, I chose to work 12-14 hour days. The friendship has lasted and we had contact.

Defense Geir Lippestad: – What’s stepfather, stepmother. Have you been to visit them in that period?

Anders Breivik Behring: – It has been well … NN, I have not spoken to for quite a while. [Narrator here with contact with the stepfather.] I have had some contact with everyone, really. [Indicates that he has had regular contact with the sister.] Because I could not tell her what I was doing, I said that I had some problems and stuff, I’ve been a compulsive gambler, etc. – But unfortunately I could not tell what really happened, that I planned this. So it was really quite convenient that she believed it. It was really convenient for everyone.

Defense Geir Lippestad: – But your sister once a month, there were letters, mail or phone?

Anders Breivik Behring: – There was contact by telephone and email contact. She has not been in Norway for many years. [About her sister who lives in the United States]. Lippestad: Yesterday you said that you attach hard when you attach. What do you think about it? – No, we’ve been, I’ve been a regular there since I was maybe 16-18. I put quite a lot until I was 22, 23 From 2002-2006, I have attached part, I have attached a little less after that. A few times a year, and when we go out and partying as usual.

Defense Geir Lippestad: – “Sometimes”, it is once a year, or three, five or ten or?

Anders Breivik Behring: – Last year in 2010 and 2011 there were at least once a month. Maybe a little more often. [Lippestad: With who?]

Anders Breivik Behring: – When I went out with friends, we had afterparty and went out as usual. [Lippestad: How did you do?] Breivik: Age My team, who live there, we used to take most of the items. Or Solli place.

Defense Geir Lippestad: – Pub, restaurant .. what do you do?

Anders Breivik Behring: – It is a bit from regular clubs to places where they sell food as well. [Lippestad: This is from 2010, was the same group of friends?] – It was until 2011, at the end. It was not really until the end [Lippestad: When was the last time you were there.] – Maybe a month before.

Defense Geir Lippestad: – Thank you, I have no further questions.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – Has assistance attorneys a question?

Lawyer Yvonne Mette Larsen: – If you look around here in the hall and look away from those journalists who are here, have you formed any thoughts about who they are?

Anders Breivik Behring: – I see mostly families and victims that I have destroyed lives, and which I have created unimaginable suffering for.

Lawyer Yvonne Mette Larsen: – Are you also aware that this matter be transferred to many other courts in the country [Breivik: - I am aware of it.] Do you know how many [Breivik: - Is not it 17?] – The number of thousands of people who are dramatically affected by your actions? [It's probably more than that, says Breivik] Do you know what you have done to them?

Anders Breivik Behring – I think it is cruel. I can not say I have the ability to comprehend the suffering I have caused. I have no ambition to try sometime. [Larsen: But I ask you to try now.] – I do not think I had managed to conduct this trial without having tried to avemosjonalisere myself. If I were to attempt to comprehend the suffering I have caused, I had not been able to sit here, or live, after 22 July. – But I know what I have done, I know what I have caused, but I will not make any attempt to take it upon me, because I do not think one person has the capacity to do so.

Lawyer Yvonne Mette Larsen: – But you said that you have implemented the strategy. If one takes the word empathy, what do you mean by the word?

Anders Breivik Behring: – It is putting into the other’s situation, in principle. [Larsen: Can you tell us more about it. Is it possible for you?]

Anders Breivik Behring: – It is possible for me, yes. If I choose to do so. [Larsen: - Can you choose to do it?] No. – [Larsen: - Try to take it over you] I have no chance. I would have broken down mentally, I would have removed the mental shields I have.

Lawyer Yvonne Mette Larsen: – But yesterday we saw other people who broke down and went out. Is it a problem that you break down?

Comments from VG Morten Hopperstad: Several survivors and relatives look down on the floor when Breivik explains why he chooses not to show emotions.

Anders Breivik Behring – I feel that my interest is to help prevent our culture and our ethnic group is deconstructed. I understand your interest, but 22 July is not for me, whether family members or me. It’s about the future of Norway’s and Europe’s future. But I respect the position you respect, but I have other interests right. And choose to take it over me. It is perhaps difficult to comprehend in Western Europe. In Western Europe, men are feminized, it is customary to show emotions. But in large parts of the world, men are taught not to pop to show emotions. Men should not show emotions. These are ideals that I share, and therefore I have for years chosen not to show emotion, and I can show emotion, but it is a choice.

Lawyer Yvonne Mette Larsen: – How should we understand the argument against that you sat and cried when you saw your movie on the big screen?

Anders Breivik Behring – I had not been prepared for the film. It’s a film that represents the struggle that many Europeans have been fighting to prevent losing what they love most. It is a film that represents everything I love. – What I love is not the same as those they love. [Then it was legitimate for you to show your emotions? Yvonne Larsen follow-up] – To put it bluntly, my emosjonsregister works differently than a normal person emosjonsregister. My registry can be compared to a bansai soldier during World War II. You will probably understand more if you compare a bansai warrior and me right here and now. – But I can choose to remove the mental shields that I build and maintain every day through meditation, but I choose not to do it, to survive.

Lawyer Yvonne Mette Larsen: – Only a oppfordrinngsspørsmål. As for the bushido-codecs. How long were you working on this when you should remove your empathic feelings?

Anders Breivik Behring – I started in 2006. When I did it every other day. I’ve done it every other day since 2006.

Lawyer Yvonne Mette Larsen: – Every day from 2006 and without the strategy, how would 22 July has been then?

Anders Breivik Behring – I had not managed to implement 22 July without it.

Lawyer Yvonne Mette Larsen: – I will a little further to see how you look at yourself. [Will present a document Breivik not prepared. Breivik gives permission that it is okay] I’m looking for you to say something about this notion that we find there that is called “show mode”. When will you be in “show mode” – During the trial I will be in “show mode” and will be selling a message, it says. Can you elaborate on it when you said it to an expert dry ice?

Anders Breivik Behring: – I guess what I really have said already. If you consider me as a person, you must consider me as a seller. I am a foot soldier for the conservative revolution. I look at what I do, 22 July as a job, not just a job but a life. And that life is to do everything I can to save Norway and Europe.

Lawyer Yvonne Mette Larsen: – So there are a few key words that we can be based in. The difference between “we” and “I”. Why do you say sometimes “we”?

Anders Breivik Behring: – I have absolutely no vague identity experience. I say “we”, I talk about other nasjonalkonservatister I and others in Europe. It’s that simple.

Lawyer Yvonne Mette Larsen: – I will grab something from the first expert statement. Can you read other people’s thoughts? [Breivik interrupts].

Anders Breivik Behring: – Just to comment a little more on the first question, it is a universal principle from the sale. When you represent something, try to create some depth, perhaps unprofessional, but to serve a purpose. In some settings we use we have to emphasize that not only am I sitting here.

Lawyer Yvonne Mette Larsen: – There’s this if you perceive that you can read others’ thoughts?

Anders Breivik Behring: – It is from Asbjornsen and Moe’s report. I never said that I do.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – I would like you to call the experts by their proper names. [Breivik: What I have explained to them that I am good at reading others and body language. And they have interpreted that I can read others' thoughts]

Lawyer Yvonne Mette Larsen: – So then it is a key word, and forget what the experts looking at you. How do you see your own sanity?

Anders Breivik Behring: – Well, this thing is very simple. I am not a psychiatric case, and I’m sane. And I was shocked when I read the report.

Prosecutors Svein Holden: – Excuse me, Judge. For the record, we will take this up with forensic quite extensive on Monday.

Anders Breivik Behring: – (…) .. Something as fundamental, something so extreme, one can imagine that this is irrational and insane. There is a difference between political extremism and insanity in the clinical sense.

Lawyer Yvonne Mette Larsen: – I’ll go ahead and there was a question. Why you chose the government building that bombemål? Had the security there or how you could dismiss the importance of car bomb that you chose the government building that bombemål?

Anders Breivik Behring: – But by Hammersborg square was the building work, so it was not possible to get into a car there from that side. – Access to the main entrance, that it was essential? I had been following the issue of putting up barriers. And I was very concerned about the al-Qaeda boys were taken last year that it would expedite the process. So I was afraid that these idiots had ruined for me. But then there were two entrances to the quarter.

Lawyer Yvonne Mette Larsen: – In the interview you say a sentence: The primary argument for the assessment has been that the government quarter has been a goal as long as you can run into. Was that how you saw it?

VG: – Breivik explains and says: It could theoretically be done without running, but it’s true what you say.

Lawyer Yvonne Mette Larsen: – When you heard on the radio that it was al-Qaeda who had been blamed on the day, what thoughts did you feel that they got the blame?

Anders Breivik Behring: – It was very natural. Up to 22 July was not militant nationalism in the spotlight. So The only logical conclusion was that it was militant Islamism. So it was quite natural that they thought it was Muslims.

Lawyer Yvonne Mette Larsen: – But what are you doing? You have mentioned the al-Qaida in recent days.

Anders Breivik Behring – I thought that now is it safe for any Islamic group that tries to take the blame / credit, depending on how you look at it. At the time I thought of some other stuff, but I heard it in the background.

Lawyer Yvonne Mette Larsen: – And then you said a bomb blast in government building were unsuccessful. I do not know if you have put yourself in the people you killed and wounded in the government quarter, so I’ll brush up a bit. There are many lawyers, there are security guards, it’s academics, that there are people who have a scientific basis for being there. Why did they die, really?

Anders Breivik Behring: – I can tell you. And it is a big problem for – if you want to call it politically motivated violence men – what goals should frame. What goals are appropriate to frame? Then it depends on whether militant Islamists who want to kill civilians or in my case: that they wanted to kill as few civilians as possible. – When you come in on part of what I have written in the compendium. How can one justify and what to focus on? Of course it was a caretaker there who have nothing to do with the operation. And then there are lawyers and you referred to that are not political activists, but working directly under the government. – The first goal had been then and gained access to a building where there were only Labor’s parliamentary politicians, government and the Prime Minister, but such a building, such a possibility does not exist. Therefore it was necessary to take the language that was closest to it. Government buildings are closest to the target

Lawyer Yvonne Mette Larsen: – But you did not receive enough attention by the bomb blast, why did you go to Utøya at all? There are many here who are wondering.

Anders Breivik Behring: – Well, there is no question that I get attention, it’s not about me at all. What I heard on the P4 was that there was a person who had died. It was one of the reasons I decided. – I had a criteria to achieve the action a success and there were twelve fatalities. Had P4 reported I do not know what I had done, because there was one killed and the building was collapsing.

Lawyer Yvonne Mette Larsen: – Because a radio station that reports to the contrary, this is not your responsibility, Breivik? Are not you responsible for the choices you made?

Anders Breivik Behring: – Of course. Everything is my responsibility. I have never denied responsibility.

Lawyer Yvonne Mette Larsen: – I’ll go further, these two KT-cells you are talking about. They supportive of this action?

Anders Breivik Behring: – That I have no idea. One can say one thing to want something. As I have explained in the interview. One is romantic until you have done an action. So it may well be that the one person who knew about the campaign regret later. But I do not know.

Lawyer Yvonne Mette Larsen: – Many people wonder if the cells that you have mentioned [Breivik: I have had contact with six people.] The six people you had contact with, you could not get help from this network?

Anders Breivik Behring: – I could certainly have been given. [Larsen: - But you got it?] Thus, as I explained about the place … I can say that I chose not to take that chance.

Lawyer Yvonne Mette Larsen: – Some also wonder, have you had contact with the English Defence League?

Anders Breivik Behring: – I have never had contact with the EDL. I have posted on a forum. I’ve probably written on forums related to EDL. But it also applies to many other organizations in Europe. But when I wrote moderate. When no one believed I was a militant.

Lawyer Yvonne Mette Larsen: – Is there anyone who supports you, of these, English Defence League or Fjordman, they support you today?

Anders Breivik Behring: – Thus, EDL is an anti-violence organization that supports democracy. And they are against Sharia and Islamization. So they have nothing to do with KT at all. I am an ultra-nationalist. – And Fjordman, there are five other writers who have published essays that are available and that I could use. It is quite a coincidence that I used him. As he has written before, he has written that he is against violence. – So he and I have different views on most things.

Lawyer Yvonne Mette Larsen: – I am almost done, Breivik, but it’s probably quite offensive to those we represent. There you have great understanding, but you choose to say it anyway. Can you tell us about it?

Anders Breivik Behring: – Well … I represent a world that is so ulytt most people here, that I fully understand that they do not understand it. I have great understanding.

Lawyer Yvonne Mette Larsen: – But you only the very end, I asked you two days ago. I asked you what you had achieved. I remember you mentioned that “when the pressure support is removed.” Do you think that could happen?

Anders Breivik Behring: – On 22 July is not about me. It’s not about Utøya. [Yvonne Larsen interrupts]

Lawyer Yvonne Mette Larsen: – You say: “When press subsidies are repealed.” Why do you say when, if you do not think it will be repealed?

Anders Breivik Behring: – There is probably no chance of that. I have already commented on it. I did not expect to survive the operation, and the commentary I’ve regretted, it should never be released. this conflict could be ended today if arrogant government in Norway and Europe had been willing to not block a group from the public. But as long as you are not willing to do so, then this is just the beginning.

Lawyer Yvonne Mette Larsen: – Full finally, the word “coward.” What do you mean the word “coward”?

Anders Breivik Behring: – It is not relevant to what I put into it. [Yvonne-Larsen: Some would describe the action on Utøya and government quarter as a cowardly act, have you thought about it?]

Judge Wenche Arntzen Elizabeth: – Is assistance lawyers whether or not we have more questions?

Anders Breivik Behring: – Thus, theoretical ethics, it is, if I should not have been a coward so I had called the Norwegian military to a duel at the lake and they had set up with 20 (?) Bombers and 30 (?) tank against me. But when you are versus the massive strength that has all this to disposjon, one is forced to use asymmetrical warfare. The only advantage you have is the element of surprise. And this is an urban guerrilla war.

Lawyer Yvonne Mette Larsen: – Thank you, administrator, then I’m done.

Comments from VG Marianne Vika: Coordinating counsel Siv Hallgren now takes over the questioning. She asks about the Masonic lodge. Breivik wonder how she has information she asks for from, since the Masonic Lodge is only reserved for men. Hallgren calmly responds that the information publicly available on the internet.

Lawyer Siv Hallgren: – You said you started with these Bushido exercises in 2006. The same welcome to this year reported to you in the Masonic lodge. Used you ever frimurerlosjens the opportunity to move up the ranks?

Anders Breivik Behring: – I have not much to tell about the Masonic Order. It runs on self-development. But you used it, therefore you developed yourself? – I learned a lot of the Masonic Order.

Lawyer Siv Hallgren: – How many meetings were you on? [The ten responds Breivik] When did you mean? [Maybe in 2011, responds Breivik] – But to what extent did you, were there any meetings, discussions, debates that were raised?

Comments from VG Morten Hopperstad: Coordinating counsel Siv Halgren begins a question with details of the structure of the Masonic Lodge. – How do you know that woman? Ask Breivik. – Through the internet, answer Hallgren. Clearly the mass murderer is irritated several of her questions.

Anders Breivik Behring: – I was between 5 and 10 meetings. One of those was a lecture, and it was the rest were good meetings.

Lawyer Siv Hallgren: – The schedule says that four meetings you were on, it’s recordings in 2007, 2008 and 2009. – I will return to your faith and your sympathy for the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church does not recognize, even manslaughter. But choosing a form of suicide attack that you have explained it. Do you have any thoughts?

Anders Breivik Behring: – the Bible speaks of self-defense and a preventive attack is a self defense attack. It’s as advocated in the Bible. I’ve written a lot about it in the compendium, so I recommend you read the book three.

Lawyer Siv Hallgren: – My last issue, it’s culture. You say you love the Norwegian people and the Norwegian culture. Can you define culture?

Lawyer Siv Hallgren: – And what about what we normally do in culture. For example, literature?

Anders Breivik Behring: – Literature is part of the culture. It is not that important to me. Thus Norwegian literature, what do you mean, then, poetry and fiction?

Lawyer Siv Hallgren: – Yes, for example. I wonder if you are interested in it?

Anders Breivik Behring: – One can say that the heart of Norwegian culture, the Norwegian ethnic group. All that is in Norway, ranging from door handles to patterns of beer brands to behave. Everything is culture. Courtesy Fraser, addressing ways. Absolutely everything is culture. – I’ve included a few poems in the compendium, but beyond that is not the most important literature.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – Attorney Elgesem you have any questions?

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – It is in the compendium included the police have found the coordinates for specific locations, which are encoded. What is the purpose of it?

Anders Breivik Behring: – What I’ve said to the police is that there is a coordinate with an error margin of 10 mil, and more than that, I have not spoken to the police, and I’m also not going to say to you.

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – Are we to believe that there are specific targets for anything, these coordinates [Breivik: - I will not comment on it] – Have you considered the LO and the Union as a legitimate target?

Anders Breivik Behring: – Yes, I have considered both. [Elgesem: And what is your conclusion] – LO is a key part of the labor movement. They are very much associated with the Labour Party and the government and a very large part of the political hegemony that prevails in Norway, so they are a very attractive target, but some ministries fall over.

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – Thinking about the entire organization, or are you when the country around?

Anders Breivik Behring – I do not think about all the organizations. I think of the leaders of Trade Unions. The fact that they systematically keep the Progress Party and the conservatives from the management. They work for strong ties with the Labour Party. [Is that what you fear from them? Ask about Elgesem] – It is an undemocratic communist social model derived from the Soviet Union, it is not going to understand that the model understands in Norway 2012. They should stay far away from politics.

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – If we go back to the story up to 22 July. You mentioned some instances of censorship that you had experienced in connection with the parliamentary elections of 2009. As for his own words, found that violent action was the only solution in 2006, did you have when experienced any form of censorship?

Anders Breivik Behring: – Well, I was intelligent enough to Z. .. [Elgesem: - Just answer the question] I’ve experienced censorship by over one hundred occasions. [Elgesem: - For example? ] – It is in that I observed others who were censored. And then I focused more after that. Intelligent people do it. One understands what is being printed and not. You know what is acceptable speech and not. It is not allowed to criticize multiculturalism.

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – But you did not experience themselves? You were a kind of self-censorship, then, I understand.

Anders Breivik Behring: – I observed the many other writers that were censored, and I have over 100 examples.

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – But why did you then still in 2009?

Anders Breivik Behring – I wanted to hear the rationale for TV2 and NRK. What could be the reason to not try this?

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – You think it was worth trying? [Breivik: I was curious, I guessed that they would say that it was not news worthy, and it was exactly what they said.] – On the first day so I noted that there had been offers of peace talks? Is that correct, or how to comment on that?

Anders Breivik Behring: – [Printer] Just to comment on the second question first. I remember I asked two questions to Hilde Scientist in an online debate. I asked, do not think it is undemocratic that it is not a single newspaper in Norway that are against multiculturalism? – So she said that: no it is not any particular conflict of interest in this area. It illustrates how ridiculous posture it is from the Norwegian media.

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – That’s your opinion at least. But this with the peace talks?

Anders Breivik Behring: – [Breivik forced laughs] It’s a very pompous way of saying it. I know that militant nationalists today are not being taken seriously. – It is only a theoretical possibility, but it is not realistic because we are not taken seriously.

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – One thing we talked in the first round about is Labor’s policy. One thing I have noticed. Journalists do you as a group, without distinguishing between. When it comes to politics is the hatred directed at the Labour Party. Why separate them? Breivik: One must distinguish, when I refer to journalists, I mean of course not sports journalists. What can one say? News agencies in Norway, who may exercise the most power in Norway and they abuse it as much. Those who are most responsible for multiculturalism is the Labour Party and the news agencies that support multiculturalism. – But if you should change immigration policy, it must be quite large changes in attitudes in society, must not it?

Anders Breivik Behring: – Yes, and here comes the media in ensuring that there is no real freedom of speech.

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – You have stated that aufs summer camp was the most important that day. You said you wanted to frame Labor Achilles heel. What would be the consequences for the AUF after 22 July?

Anders Breivik Behring: – What you say now, it is not true. It was not Utøya which was the main goal that day, it was regjeringskvaraelet. When the H-block not collapsed, there was Utøya vikgiste goal that day.

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – We can not go into the rhetoric, but you said it was the most important political goal that day, but … What do you hope happens with the AUF? What would happen?

Anders Breivik Behring: – If my plan had been successful, had absolutely everyone on the island died. Then there had been no AUF again, and certainly no leaders.

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – How could you think that the AUF would disappear?

Anders Breivik Behring: – most of the leaders of the AUF, all branches send delegates to the island and those on the island is the leaders of all of Norway, most of the island was the leadership of the Labour Youth and the goal was to kill or execute all. What are the consequences it would have to AUF’s self esteem high. You asked why?

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – But what did you think would happen to the AUF, thought it would disappear as an organization, or?

Anders Breivik Behring: – No, absolutely not. The purpose of the two primary motives I mentioned earlier. There are a total of three subjects. First, it attacks the primary goal. – So it goes on to provoke a witch hunt for moderate conservative culture, and distribution of the compendium.

Anders Breivik Behring: – When did you start putting yourself into aufs policies and their summer camp. I have followed in the media for many years. I know they are on the left, they are extreme Marxists.

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – What you justify it?

Anders Breivik Behring: – On their policies and their meanings.

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – How have you found out?

Anders Breivik Behring: – They are for the deconstruction of the Norwegian ethnic group, our culture, they are textbook example of a multikuluralist.

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – Did you do some research on who was present on such a summer camp?

Anders Breivik Behring – I knew well, the only name I had was on that particular day was Gro Harlem Brundtland and Eskil Pedersen. – I also knew that all local associations send delegates. So primarily the leaders in Norway.

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – Was it possible for you to examine who else was there except the two you mentioned?

Anders Breivik Behring: – [Breivik think about.] Not beyond what I said now.

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – You mentioned that you subsequently found out that 44 of those killed had the office. How have you found out?

Anders Breivik Behring: – I have received information that there was 44 of 65 who have leadership positions in the AUF. I knew from before that over half of which would have leadership positions.

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – How did you know? [Breivik: Each local chapter sends delegates and it is the most active participants, so my assumption was that it would be over half who had leadership positions.]

Comments from VG Morten Hopperstad: A person leaving the hall when Breivik explains why he knows that 44 of the 69 victims in Utøya had leadership positions.

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – But what did you do the research on the age of those who are there?

Anders Breivik Behring – I did not really know much about it. I tried to check the minimum age, that is the minimum age. I thought it was like other parties, that is 16 years. Thus, there was an assumption.

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – You are not investigated but it was an assumption? [Yes, responds to the Brevik]

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – We take a break at one o’clock so we continue there.

VG: – Breivik applied handcuffs and as usual have a chat with the defenders on his way out. – The court pauses until 13:00….

Original article: Dag 5, ord for ord: – Prøver ikke å forstå pårørendes lidelser

_________________
The Medium is the Massage - Marshall McLuhan.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mark Gobell
On Gardening Leave
On Gardening Leave


Joined: 24 Jul 2006
Posts: 4529

PostPosted: Sun Apr 22, 2012 1:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Attack on the Labor Party

Google translation [edited for clarity]:

Day 5, word for word: Breivik describes killing mission in detail

4/20/2012

Read Friday’s third part of prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh and Svein Holden questioning by Anders Breivik Behring below:

VG: – Breivik talking Lippestad and will soon put the witness stand. – The judge has arrived.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – You have any further questions Elgesem lawyer.

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – Yes, Behring Breivik, we continue with questions from us. I got a call during the break from colleagues who want a concrete answer to that violence is the most important tool. What Behring Anders Breivik even made to resolve the conflict before you took to violence?

Comments from VG Marianne Vika: The Court is now set for lunch break. Lawyer Frode Elgesem continues his questioning of Behring Breivik.Han Anders says he has received input from counsel colleagues in the interval of follow-up questions. – You say that violence is the ultimate instrument – what have you made other attempts to resolve the conflict you are in – before you took to violence, he asks. Breivik will talk about what his ancestors have done. Elgesem will not hear it, he will hear what he has done – give examples. Breivik says he has done everything but have trouble giving specific examples beyond that he was involved in a political party.

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is probably fair to say what my ancestors have done [Elgesem: - No, it's you I wonder.] So I’m on my own afterwards. [Elgesem: - It is a very brief question, actually.] As is known, we are 3 generation of militant nationalists in Europe. I have done everything possible to do. For example, conventional political involvement essay-writing, dissemination of opinion pieces. All that is possible to do. – Absolutely everything. And the only thing that remained was the option I chose. And there was violence.

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – But it is essay writing and debate are your experiments? [Breivik: when I was fifteen years I saw how society works

Behring Anders Breivik: - I have done absolutely everything possible to do, until I lost faith in democracy. [Elgesem: And that's what you have mentioned so far?]

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – You have divided the traitors in four categories, and said what the punishment is. For A, heads of state and so, the penalty is death, so is B, which is from the political parties, also the category C, less traitors, it is as fines and imprisonment, for Category D, there is no punishment. Did you, when you selected goals, some specific assessments regarding these categories?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Absolutely. We talked about it earlier. As I said … to first define the difference between a stationary target … probably the most political target in Norway … [interrupted by Judge Arntzen]

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – Can you try to answer the question directly Breivik?

Comments from VG Marianne Vika: Breivik now has a computer screen in front of him. He can see the excerpt that the players give an example from, among others from questioning and manifest. We have not seen this screen before.

Behring Anders Breivik: – Yes, I have made ​​the considerations, yes. [Elgesem: And the AUF member or a guard or random passers-by?]

Behring Anders Breivik: – Primary … [Elgesem: - answer the question, Breivik.] Yes, but you must let me respond. The primary goal is SKUP conference, the second was the Labour Party’s annual meeting, when the two were impossible, then the Utøya the third best destination. – It was the best political goal in this period. That was why it was chosen.

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – A church AUF members attending summer camp. Which category ends up in?

Behring Anders Breivik: – When I reviewed Utøya as a measure focuses on the overriding considerations. There will always be an indirect loss, and it will always be a few innocents who die. And Utøya was the best political target in Norway 22 July.

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – If we look at the brand you wore your uniform. It says that you have a permit, a permit therefore, muliculti Traitor hunter permit. Does this apply to these categories of yours?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is called “moralbadges” as used in the same way in Afghanistan. It is a moral note. – There is a moral note just as it is for Norwegian soldiers in Afghanistan. [Elgesem: When did you get the mandate?] – It is the mandate we have given ourselves based on the universal human rights. [Elgesem: Does that mean that Anders Breivik Behring has given you?] – We have provided us with these permissions yourself and I have given myself this mandate.

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – To hunt for A, B and C?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I would not put me up in a moral note. [Elgesem: Did you have such a license?] I gave myself permission to hunt. The objective is political activists. I focused on the category-A. C is an indirect measure. It is a mandate that all revolutionaries have. It is not something granted by a sovereign stat.for we have not in the back. [Elgesem interrupts very much now]

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – But at that time was the investigative conference and the Labour Party meeting which countries were the main target. Thought the AUF at that time?

Behring Anders Breivik: – There was a 3 targets at this time.

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – Were you thinking about summer camp? [Breivik: - I have thought of long summer camp] – But you are open for Category-C? [Breivik: With such a goal will always be category C traitors present] – But you did not have investigative and you did not congress, it was in April. And you moved into the Vålstua in May. What did you think when you missed SKUP and congress?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Primary operation has always been three car bombs, it has been the strategy all along, and what I said in the place, they had an alternative plan.

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – But it would be a better reaction if you had hit SKUP most Labour Party national convention?

Anders Breivik Behring – I had considered it a more successful action if I had managed investigative conference. But I did not.

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – And when did you discover that you can not make these three car bombs. When it dawns on you? [Breivik: At the end of June.]

Behring Anders Breivik: – That is correct.

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – On Utøya you have already explained that your primary target, Jonas Gahr Støre and Gro Harlem Brundtland. [Breivik: - That's right] What did you do to reach them?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I worked as hard as I could to the range of dates. [Elgesem: How important was it for you to hit the?] It was very important.

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – We have heard that on 21 July, when you come to Oslo, you’re tired and you decided to sleep longer.

Behring Anders Breivik: – No. That’s not what I decide. I was exhausted and I had failed to conduct an operation without sleep. There was no question of sleeping longer. It is essential to do everything, is sleep. There are biological needs.

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – So I gave up Gro Harlem Brundtland, too?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It was not an option anymore. Theoretically, if I had not encountered the problems through Outlook and the compendium.

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – Why did not you bend over backwards to reach at least Gro Harlem Brundtland?

Anders Breivik Behring – I needed a minimum of sleep, but … It would of course be possible that she was there even after the lecture and even spent the night. So I did not give up that goal, pack road if I knew I missed the lecture at 11

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – You did not. Is it true you were looking for both her and Eskil Pedersen there?

Anders Breivik Behring – I knew the likelihood was not so great anymore. But it could be there.

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – Because you explained earlier today, that if you were to go on the attack there, would you go in with full armor. But you did not it?

Behring Anders Breivik: – No. But I was looking for both Brundtland and Eskil Pedersen that day.

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – Is it true that Utøya was an important goal to reach? [If confirmation from Breivik] – What protection did the people in Utøya then?

Behring Anders Breivik: – There were three armed guards. [Elgesem: Since neither the Minister or the Brundtland was there, the protection was there when?]

Behring Anders Breivik: – I had assumed that it was the one armed guard, it was my assumption all along.

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – Did you get any information … we can get back to it afterwards. Back to the age of those who were there. Among the youngsters who died on Utøya, it was about half under 18 and down to 14 – It was about, it was less than half. [Judge: Lawyer Elgesem we can not repeat the questions that are asked] Now you go to countries where an unprotected group of young people and children?

Behring Anders Breivik: – my assumption was that it was a team of armed police on the pier, which protected the goal Utøya is.

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – Why did you not on your armor, then?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It was calculated risks. My intuition .. I had to bet on it. I could not switch armor out there.

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – If the Minister had been there would you go in with full armor? [I went in without armor responds Breivik] – But this was clear to you after a while, but when you look at this in hindsight. You have killed 69 people there, many of them without protection. Is that a manly surgery?

Behring Anders Breivik: – We are fighting with the assumptions we have. If I called for a duel with the Norwegian army at the lake? Had it been manly, more manly? – You fight to achieve a goal and objective, it is important to me and other militant nationalists. And when we do what we can to achieve the goal no matter what it is.

Lawyer Frode Elgesem: – You will not answer the question, no? [Breivik: I have already done]

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – Have the experts queried?

Law Psychiatrist Terje Tørrissen: – Breivik, what would be the reasons why the experts were to lie about what you have said in the report?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is a good question. I hope you can answer me on that. [Tørrissen: - You do not have a theory that you can get to? ] – I have a theory. They will come back to later when we talk about the report. I do not answer it until Monday.

Law Psychiatrist Terje Tørrissen: – When we discussed our conversations on Ila, percentage returns and returns numbers, now you come with a new staging of numbers. If you are three, 90 percent and if you are two or is it 60 or 30 percent chance. Where are you taking the numbers from? How do you feel about that? How can you reach it?

Behring Anders Breivik: – You mean that is the foundation of the assumption, or you wonder why I tend to use numbers?

Law Psychiatrist Terje Tørrissen: – Yes, I wonder first of all, but we can take it with the numbers first.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I feel that if you want to explain something others IKK have so much knowledge. Then it is good to explain it in a way people understand. Using figures, it is a form of communication that makes you need to use fewer words to describe the same. It is a simplification of the presentation and it becomes more efficient. I see it as an effective method of communication. I tend to use numbers to explain things. That’s because there are very special subject we are talking about. In everyday language I use is not so much numbers.

Law Psychiatrist Terje Tørrissen: – The second question: You say that you have read a lot and you have gone through the internet and found a lot, but there are some things with the composition … so are you coming with a claim that hangs like it together. There are several of us who do not recognize us in the historical data. What evidence do you have? I see that the newspapers take apart allegation by allegation. How do you feel when you get to a point of resistance. Experts say that these are not cohesive.

Behring Anders Breivik: – No, that is, I do mistakes like everyone else. I saw that I had used the word reform, and it is wrong use of words, I’d spent the Enlightenment. I make mistakes like everyone else. But when it came to selecting topics for the compendium, so I had already chosen it. It has never been the intention that the compendium would be objectively presented.

Law Psychiatrist Terje Tørrissen: – A small question is how you take into you the other agencies to you. How do you take it inside you? We are talking about empathy, how to take it to you.

Comments from VG Marianne Vika: Psychiatrist Terje Tørrissen wonder why Breivik spend so much per cent returns and calculate their way to the calculations, as well as what he thinks when he gets resistance. Breivik When asked if he should answer to both questions, please Tørrissen answer the first first. The terrorist believes figures indications is effective communication. At the end ask Breivik Tørrissen specify their questions and provide an example. Tørrissen is calm and explains patiently.

Law Psychiatrist Terje Tørrissen: – There is little on how to understand other people. When it comes to empathy and knowledge. How can you make it sound different. You apparently think (…)

Behring Anders Breivik: – Do you have an example? [Tørrissen: Yes, that reflect the brain and the amygdala. Purely professional, it is perhaps not quite what we'd talked about it.] – Firstly, I have no particular expertise in that. I described to the police in the beginning that I ended up in shock, a kind of shock you end up in where you are unable to think clearly, that was how I described it in the beginning. So I’ve been reading more afterwards. – But I have read so much that … It is not a state of shock. It is more correct to describe it the way I refer to.

Law Psychiatrist Terje Tørrissen: – You will say it, but the rest of us might say that there is a more nuanced [Breivik interrupts and says: Maybe you disagree with that I have referred that theory right] No, I do not think I disagree but [Breivik interrupts again]

Behring Anders Breivik: – Yes, but it is very difficult to explain. If you get into a mode that me and they end up in Utøya it is difficult to put into words. The fact that Eskil Pedersen would explain why he fled the island alone, and then there was another psychiatrist who helped a little, he explained that it is a state of shock when you feel threatened.

Law Psychiatrist Terje Tørrissen: – It’s okay, I do not think I have more questions. [Judge: - Sørheim?]

Law Psychiatrist Synne Sørheim: – I want a little bit back to what you told me about meditation. You said that you used it in 2006 and it worked.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I do not know if I started with it then. I would not say it worked. I have referred to it as selvradikalisering. [Sørheim cancel Breivik]

Law Psychiatrist Synne Sørheim: – You brought it up in connection with this with empathy and you believed it had helped you to switch off? [Breivik protesting the choice of words] What properties changed with you using this meditation?

Behring Anders Breivik: – The purpose was to try to hammer away her fears through the use of meditation and that is done through a so-called self-realization meditation, and I think I succeeded. I mean to say that I have managed to hammer away my fear that way. But as a side effect, it has also changed all my emotions. Not only fear, but all other emotions too. – As long as I oprettholder the meditation feel me avemosjalisisert. [Sørheim: Are there any other feelings that are gone?]

Law Psychiatrist Synne Sørheim: – Can you name some?

Behring Anders Breivik: – There is everything from the joy, sorrow, fortvilethet, hopelessness, anxiety and fear. All feelings you have. Right Psychiatrist Synne Sørheim: Just so I understand you correctly, you feel feelings anymore or is it less of them? – Some of them. [Sørheim: - When did you noticed it?] – I is trying to use some songs, such as trance songs. [Sørheim: - When did you notice that it worked?] Maybe .. I had not done very much in the first year because I spent so much time on it the first year. Then I noticed that it worked. – From the first few times I meditated yes. [Sørheim: And you noticed less of the feelings after a while?] Yes

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – [Breivik confirmed. Holden wants to speak, but the referee stops him.] I know you want the word, but we can not open for another round of questions. Can you save your question until Monday?

Comments from VG Morten Hopperstad: Lay judge Diana Patricia Fynbos (3Cool asks Breivik talk about when he started his technical language. Mass murderer claims he had a more technical language when he began with the compendium and especially after his arrest on Utøya. He believes it is a defense strategy. The last eighteen months has worked at the Fynbos Loren primary school, where she is a tutor for one of 2 classes. Previously, she worked at the Grorud school. She is also chairman of Norskcolombianos Association – a nationwide association for adopted Colombians. Fynbos is even adopted from Colombia.

VG: – [It is debatable whether the questions will be taken up again]

Lay judge: – You said earlier that the ability to carry out the actions to be here and you began to use a technical language. When did you mean? [Breivik think really long on this question]

Behring Anders Breivik: – Perhaps from 2007, since I started writing the compendium. So I used it after his arrest, as a defensive strategy.

Lay judge: – Tested it out in some way along, and when and how? That it worked then?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is not possible to test it out, for it is not possible to predict the effect the project will end up in.

Judge Arne Lyng: – You have been told about your assumptions about arming both in relation to shifts in the government building and guards at Utøya. What do you base your assumptions about the arming of?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It can be anything from observations through popular culture that shows, movies and lowered for Norwegian conditions. United States is far more paranoid than Norway. It is perhaps the main basis for the assumptions.

Judge Arne Lyng: – So have I seen you there, if the building had collapsed as the explosion had not completed action on Utøya. Was this something you had thought through in advance, or was it something you thought when you were sitting in the car and listened to the radio?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It was something I had thought through in advance [Judge Arne Lyng: - Had you planned what you would if you did not need to travel to Utøya?] – The alternative was to go to Greenland and let me apprehend.

Judge Arne Lyng: – Had you thought any more detail about that?

Comments from VG Morten Hopperstad: Lay judge Diana Patricia Fynbos (3Cool asks Breivik tell about when he started to use a technical language. Breivik explains that it was in connection with the compendium and especially after his arrest. He believes it is an important forsvarsttegi for him. The last eighteen months has worked at the Fynbos Loren primary school, where she is a tutor for one of 2 classes. Previously, she worked at the Grorud school. She is also chairman of Norskcolombianos Association – a nationwide association for adopted Colombians. Fynbos is even adopted from Colombia.

Anders Breivik Behring – I had not really planned much in detail because I expected to die before the government building. So I had … There was much I could have done the preparatory actions afterwards, but I did not expect to survive the government quarter.

Judge Arne Lyng: – You testified earlier today that if the media had given the Progress Party a chance in the election of 2009, there had been no response. Correct me if I’m wrong.

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is one of the main causes. [Judge Heather: How would this attitude from the media, that they should give sjansern FRP rescue the European indigenous population? - It's a good question. But I had probably not then lost hope in democracy and I would have fought long with democratic means. There and then I thought that it may be that I have been wrong, that democracy is not so dysfunctional after all, but then happened what happened and when I got the final confirmation.

Judge Arne Lyng: - Thank you.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: - I have some questions about the connection between Knighs Templar and the game World of Warcraft (WoW). Is it a coincidence that you chose this particular game?

Behring Anders Breivik: - Yes it was a coincidence. [Judge Arntzen: Is it the nursing terminology that you already had the Knights Templar] – In WoW, there are hundreds of titles, so if I had chosen commando or 20 other titles. [Judge Artnzen: Which titles did you?]

Comments from VG Morten Hopperstad: Judge Arntzen see Breivik and ask him why he took the nicknames he did when he played WoW for a year and it has a relationship with Knights Templar. Breivik see her in the eye and claiming he has obtained the names from the Norwegian legal system. The judge is also interested in how Breivik has socialized in recent years. She is clear in his question formulations. The mass murderer is sitting quietly in his chair and explained with a clear voice.

Behring Anders Breivik: – No, that is, like a militant nationalist in principle, it is the principles that represent the Latin meaning of the Chief Justice, who is a man of the law. So it has nothing to do with the game. – It has nothing to do with the game. It has something with legal system to do and it is from the Norwegian and British legal system.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – When it comes to what you have talked about the isolation. You have explained a bit contradictory on the insulation. Are you aware that you have given divergent explanations of the point?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Can you specify what you are referring to? [JUDGE: Yesterday you said that you could not have friends who stood up too close, in the period from 2006. And in that time you had indulgent this year of gameplay, and enough natuyrlig isolated yourself in the peripoden. But in the post, how isolated you feel then?] – I had contact with … When I took up the contact again.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – Did you take the time once a month so that you described?

Behring Anders Breivik: – There was limited from 2007 until 2011 [Judge Arntzen: How limited then?]

Comments from VG Morten Hopperstad: Breivik says that he goes around in circles in the yard at Ila. He does not have music in their ears as before terroangrepene as he meditated, but he believes he remembers the music in the head.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I am limited to the summer of 2010, so it was more contact from summer 2010 to summer 2011. [Judge Arntzen: And when you say you had to limit contact with close friends, what was the cause of it?] – The reason was that I wanted them to find out what I was doing. Also, I wanted also to protect everyone I knew, I did not want to involve them.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – Then there was this with your meditation. I understand that this is something you are still doing now to conduct this trial. How much time do you spend on this?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Since poågripelsen it has been every other day. [The judge will follow up question] – The last month has been very bits and pieces. [Artntzen Judge: And how do you feel when you meditate?] – For example, at Ila …. they tend to be in the prison yard. When I go only to ring in the yard while I meditate. – I do not have access to music, no equipment. I only remember the songs.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – You changed medication at some point. Was it a drug with the same strength and same dosage?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Vinstrol makes you retain muscle mass. [Arntzen Judge: But you had the same dosage?] – I had X mg extra of it. 10 to 20 milligrams more.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – And the ECA stack that you talked about, you were not sure if you had taken it. Are you more confident when you could have taken it? – [Breivik: No, it's not there] But if you had taken a number of e-Stac that day? – How strong is such a pill? [Breivik: Those who were sold commercially in the past, I made myself, equivalent to one and a half like that. It is a common tablet size, the one I had was maybe one and a half size. It was more powerful than a normal dose] – The [drug], it is something you used over time? Daily?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I used it about two or three times a few weeks before to habituate the body to the drugs.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – Then at a quarter of two and we are on overtime prosecutor. Are you sitting inside with an urgent question? [The prosecutor says it can wait] [The judge gives the word of the prosecutor Engh]

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – I want you to try to put you back to 22 July. About now you can explain in your own words what happened on that day Utøya?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Yes, I would almost recommend anyone who does not need to hear to listen. It will be very gruesome depictions. – You want to hear everything? [Bejer Engh says she wants to hear everything]

Behring Anders Breivik: – We were on the property and I should wait for five of five, because I figured that the timetable agreed with the boat that I had read on the homepage of AUF. I saw lots of emergency vehicles to pass and parked so that no one had access to me from the road.

Behring Anders Breivik: – And then I changed and prepared equipment up there, took off my armor, put on my combat vest with a lot of magazines. So I connected the blue light. I considered whether I should put the PST logo, but I chose not to do it. – So I drove down five of five. And … I came into the building area. I’m not quite sure hundred percent that I had managed to activate the blue light properly. I made a gesture to activate it.

Behring Anders Breivik: – As I drove across. I saw it was an AUF stand there with four people. When I came down on the quayside I parked a little past the ferry landing. Then I saw in the window that there was a AUF’er towards the car. I had some equipment there that I did not want them to see. When I went out of the car to ward off that they saw in the car behind. Some cases where the suspect could see out. I met him halfway. – It was a guard responsible, for he had a communication device on it, and when I went out I had the gun in the holster and police ID around his neck. I was very worried that he would do an evaluation if they looked real enough, and so I was very unsure about it. I had to mentally prepare myself for what he would do if it is not so authentic. – So when I went up to him and said that there has been a terrorist attack in Oslo, and “I am placed here routinely, there are 40 other police officers who are placed in 40 other locations. For we have not arrested anyone. “

Behring Anders Breivik: – So what I need … no …. I asked him first if the boat is coming soon. He said the boat was set because of the attack. I told him I wanted him summoned the boat from the other side, because I had to tell about what had happened. – So he called up the skipper of the boat. He said that it comes in ten minutes maybe. And then it was he and another, there were two other AUF’ere who stood in the background. So I went over to the car. I saw he was moving towards the car. Then I said: Keep your distance. Then he went back again and took the hint. I did not want anyone to see the emblems and devices in the car.

Behring Anders Breivik: – So I went into the car and sat there and watched the rear-view mirror, so I looked for 5-10 minutes that the ferry was called “Thorbjorn.” It was a woman who was there, it was she who had restored the responsibility for Utøya, Monica Bosei, so I told the same to her. Also, she began to ask: why have not we been informed of this? No, there is chaos in Oslo now, so it has not been possible, I replied. – So there has not been possible. Also she said okay, she bought it. So I said “now I’ll … Now there are two pieces that are on the way, but what I wish is that I will be transported on the other side, so you call up all the guards that are there, and I will inform them of what has happened. ” – Then she said it was okay. So I said that I would carry a box of equipment to the island. She went to the boat and I went to the car. I took the rifle and a pretty heavy Kase as I pulled over to the boat. Then she came over to me. I had the rifle completely uncovered and she came and was completely open. – Then she said you can not come with the rifle on the island. You’ll scare all AUF’erne, you must at least hide it, she said. So I said okay. I’ll find something to hide it. When I went to the car and let the case stand in the boat. I took the black plastic bag that concealed the shotgun. I thought to take it but had to leave it behind. I had it because I expected to meet fierce resistance on the pier.

VG: – We warn against strong portrayals in this part of Breivik’s explanation.

Comments from VG Marianne Vika: Although Breivik seems confident when he talks about his movements on the way to and on Utøya. Yet he stops occasionally to think and swallow.

Behring Anders Breivik: – … who guarded the goal Utøya was because it was the biggest political event the whole summer, so I was almost 100% sure that I would meet resistance there that I met through my fight. Lot shotgun stand again (…) if I met resistance on the pier. So I packed the rifle in a black plastic bag so I went over to the boat captain, he also came with another plastic bag that he placed too high, then started crossing. – So began the journey from the pier to Utøya. At the crossing as I remember it was the captain and another person who was in the wheelhouse, I think, I think the captain came down and said hello. I can not remember what we talked about. There I spoke with Monica Bosei about, it was, she said it is a policeman on the island. And then I thought “ok, now it’s going to happen soon.”

Behring Anders Breivik: – I began to examine her and ask if he had police powers or whether he was armed. This she said that he was not and that he was there in the civilian. I told her that I suggested that she summoned the guard, and (…) I thought it would be important to collect the guard because of threats they made.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I thought that maybe they could have a shotgun or rifle lying in a house. It would be a big threat. So she did. I was prepared to meet them. When we got to the other side were three or four people to me. Then I saw very clearly the duty managers, that man.

Behring Anders Breivik: – And he looked like a professional, what to say, the abuser, in the sense that the police and the military appears to perpetrators of violence. This is the biggest threat on the island, I thought. I went over to him and introduced me, and he considered politiemblemene mine and did not react to it. I asked the captain if he could carry into the box and run it into the back of the house, so there will be snipers on the other side, so I need to establish a forward base here. – It can not be down at the beach, then it will be open for snipers on the other side. So I asked someone else to run the Treasury. And he did. As I talked with Monica and he, I do not remember what his name is … [Engh: - Berntsen, is his name] Berntsen, yes, okay. – Then he starts asking me about where I sit, in which police I come from. I think I introduce myself as the Oslo police, that I came from Greenland, or PST. I can not remember. After I had talked with him for five minutes, I noticed that he was getting a little suspicious. He started asking security questions, if I knew it and the person in the PST. – I was almost paralyzed. I was not happy. I thought that I have so little desire to do this here. I answered to the best of my ability. So he made a follow-up questions and then I interrupted him and said that I propose is that we go up to the main house, so “briefer” I tell you about what has happened in Oslo.

Comments from VG Marianne Vika: From box indictment says Breivik not just about what he saw and what he’s talking to people about, he also talks about what he thought. According to him, he shuddered, and thought that it was now or never. There are no visible emotion to track the terrorist’s face or body language. He said that it was “one hundred voices” in his head that said he would not do it, and that body fought against. Sometimes drinking Breivik water glass he had in front.

Behring Anders Breivik: – So then he nodded approvingly to it. So indicated that I would go up, so I went and Monica Berntsen up in front of me and then I thought: It’s now or never. And I had a 17 shot magazine, I had no helmet, but a secondary weapon in the holster and I went with the rifle in his hand in a bag. And then I thought: It’s now or never. Either I must I let myself be arrested now or we will implement what I have planned. – And the minute as it lasted, it seemed like it lasted a year. I thought so … So, really, my entire body tried to fight back when I took the gun in his hand. It was kind of one hundred voices in my head that said “do not do it.” And then …

Comments from VG Morten Hopperstad: With a calm and controlled voice Breivik explains how he perceived the guard and the policeman Trond Berntsen when the two met at the pier at Utøya. Breivik repeat his statement to the police and expresses the same concern that Berntsen would expose him. Polit man was not armed. Breivik explained in court that he was asked a series of critical questions from Berntsen, among other things, about whom he knew in the PST. Mass murderer says that he canceled the series questions and proposed to go up to the main house. According to Breivik, it was at this time five people who stood around him in the immediate vicinity. While the case of equipment was run up the gravel road to the white main house, followed the mass murderer Berntsen, a guard and Bosei up. – It’s now or never, says Breivik while looking at the prosecutor. – The body fought against when I took the gun in his hand. A hundred voices in my head told me not to do it, do not. Trond Berntsen was the first victim of Breivik Utøya. The officer was employed by the Police Immigration Unit (PU), but he was on sick leave when he worked as a civilian guard at aufs fun. Father of two had been there for several years and he was also the last year hired the so-called “private paid overtime.”

Lawyer Yvonne Mette Larsen: – Excuse administrator, we are told that Breivik’s voice sounds bad. [Breivik told to sit closer to the microphone]

Behring Anders Breivik: – When I held a gun and therefore it was a bullet in the chamber on it. Everything was ready. And at that point I knew that there were three people behind me. I was surrounded by five people. I knew that if they are suspicious, they would overpower me. – But when we started going up, I took out the gun I thought it’s now or never. It seemed like that moment took a year. I remember when I picked up the gun, I must have spent a long time, Monica said: Do not point it at him. It was his head turned towards the house. This was a professional person who easily could have brought me. – And then … Just after she said it … So I pointed the gun at his head and pulled the trigger once, and shot him in the head. – Then turned to Monica Bosei and ran in another direction. So I shot at her head.

Comments from VG Marianne Vika: In microphone Breivik speak into it sounds good that he breathes heavily. He seems more uncertain now, but explains the total freezing of the first murder. He speaks now with a lower pitch than before, he speaks more slowly than we have heard him earlier today. Breivik make arm movements when describing how he carries with him his rifle. Many of those affected are now looking straight ahead, staring out in front in the air while listening. They do not Breivik or on screens.

Behring Anders Breivik: – It was not that far apart. So I shot him twice in the head, so I went over to her, so I shot her twice in the head. – When it began to be screaming. There were some people at the house, and there was a guard who was not very far from me. Maybe 5 to 10 meters, he ran from me and I raised the gun toward him. He was too far away for me to shoot him in the head. So I shot a stop shot, also I shot him (…).

Behring Anders Breivik: – And then I ended up in this state of shock again, I do not remember very much from Utøya, I remember a total of ten minutes … So I really do not know if I fired at the house or if I just went to the house and started walking towards the cafeteria building. I think people ran in all directions, and I followed only the main stream. And it was up to the café building.

Behring Anders Breivik: – And I did not run, I did not go quickly but calmly. I had a lot of equipment on me, so I was not really able to run. At this point, the box located behind the house. The plan was to ensure that those who ran the “MS Thorbjorn” and execute them. For I knew that this boat would be used by Delta forces to get to the island. – So I thought that now I have thirty minutes to me, because I’m going to die and be shot by Delta. I had to spend the time thoroughly to achieve the goal.

Comments from VG Morten Hopperstad: Three arrestforvarne enters the room 250 and replace with three other colleagues. Thurs arrestforvarere sits adjacent Breivik.

Comments from VG Marianne Vika: Mass murderer stops much up, drinking and watching thinking out now. Saying that there are over a half years since he testified about the police and that he has not thought about it much afterwards. Says he will do his best to remember. Despite this, he continues to explain very detailed about the incident.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have to almost go back where I was, I had actually decided to neutralize the boat crew, but then I thought it is not certain they are connected to the AP, perhaps those are civilians, so why did I an assessment that was not specifically military tactical, but that was mostly based on my conscience. I could not bring myself to attack those who steered the boat because I had no indication that they belonged to the Labour Party, so I looked at them as collateral. – So … When I was down there at the pier and the first shot was then I heard he båtkapteinen say something like “see hell and drive away from here” or something like that. I can not remember what it was. But they were very frightened and ran away from there. Then I thought that “it was really a big mistake to let the boat run away, but that is just.”

Behring Anders Breivik: – And when I then go to the cafeteria building, so I do not remember much until I arrived. I remember exactly nothing. I think that when I was in front of the main building, I took the rifle out of the plastic bag, and changed the new magazine in the Glock on the way up to the café building. It was half empty at this time. The next thing I remember is that I come up the side of the café building. Then there are many people who have heard the shots, but they do not quite understand where it comes from.

Behring Anders Breivik: – Then I calmly accept them. And people look quite frightened they do not know what’s going on. It’s a half years since I’ve explained this to the police. But I’ll try to remember what I can remember. [Breivik drinking water] So I think I ask a question in order not to confuse them. – I think I ask a question: what is going on here, what has happened. Some said: You shot him, you shot him. When I stood in front of the cafe building and there were many at the entrance to a cafe built. And then I think that the gun was in the holster. I think I raised the rifle to the cafeteria building, it is possible I shot someone nearby, so I fired a few shots at one of the windows where they were a few people. – And it was total chaos, people running in all directions, and I thought that “where I should go now, I’ll go into that building and executing as many as possible in there.” And because I come into the building, so I change from rifle to the Glock. – I do not remember if I used the magazine. I do not think so. So I’m going into the first time that the first room. When I told the police that I do not remember anything from this very room, but there was much blood on the walls when I was there afterwards. – So they would not confirm it. I learned afterwards that I have killed six to seven people in the room with the Glock, but I have no memories of it. When I get into the big room so I have quite a few memories. And when I get in there, there were maybe fifteen people in that room. And I remember a piano that was on the right side.

Behring Anders Breivik: – And when I turn to the right and [now describes his method on killing more young people in the café building]. [Breivik describes the reactions of people in the room. He seems even to be completely untouched. Does he run out of ammunition.] [He says that he changes magazine in the gun and continued firing.]

Comment from Eva VG-Therese Grøttum: Breivik is now underway to explain the killing of Utøya. He has warned about the gruesome details. We will not pass on everything he says, but we would warn our readers that this is a strong reading.

Comments from VG Marianne Vika: In a low tone of voice says Breivik completely calm about the scenes that took place in the cafe building on Friday afternoon 22 July. It seems that the terrorist concentrates to remember. He describes what he saw, describing the people he sees and tells in detail how he shoots the young people. Still not feeling to catch a glimpse of the terrorist, but his heavy breathing and swallowing part. Sometimes he will stop slightly.

Behring Anders Breivik: – [He describes the details he remembers from the room. He tells of many where he shoots. More victims are trying in vain to resist. He describes how it will be quiet in the room]

Comments from VG Morten Hopperstad: Several relatives and survivors in the audience breathes heavily when mass murderer describing gruesome details. Many are still with eyes closed.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I remember coming out of tent space. [Indicates that there were many AUFere standing on the tent site, on the other side. Tells about a specific murder and describes the reactions of those on the other side and the terrified looks on. He also grotesque detail.]

VG: – Breivik says switching from Glock to the rifle and preparing to shoot at the other group at the grove. He says he fires away at the group. Breivik said they were fifty yards away. He says that he shoots from the hip in that direction.

Behring Anders Breivik: – [Breivik explains about several murders. He explains very detailed about some murder he remembers.] [He seems himself unmoved] [He is now back and explains more about the tent site, and in which direction the youth fled.] – So I go … I think that’s when I go for the group that goes against Love trail and I notice that there is a group of ten pieces or something like that. [Narrator detail about what the victims did and how he killed them.] At this point I have lost complete control of how many I shoot.

Comments from VG Marianne Vika: Breivik said the reason he did not remember so much was because he had what he calls “overview sight” – that he held a view to anticipate potential hazards. He feared that people would attack him with sticks or stones. Although he says he does not remember so much, he gives detailed descriptions. Breivik scratching and sometimes in the face while talking.

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is as far as I can work. I think that I go south along the western part of the island. I do not remember that I meet someone when I go south, so I thought this was absolutely the wrong way. I checked, when I come to the classroom. [Here he describes that he meets a person and how he sees another person, and how they behaved.] The reason I do not remember so many details that I have so overblikksyn. – I am aware that people can hide behind trees and everywhere. I really focus on the overview and detail. So I remember a few people from Utøya. To get back to one thing: What I had planned before I came to Utøya was to shoot as few people as possible, I told myself. The shooting would be the detonator and the aim was to scare AUF’erne on the water so they drown.

Comments from VG Marianne Vika: Breivik notes several times while talking. It looks as if he quoted words on the sheet in front of him, as he strokes after a while. This is probably the topics he plans to go through, which he strokes as he has said so. He said that on two occasions, he cried out, “You shall die, Marxists” on his mission of killing Utøya.

Behring Anders Breivik: – It was the plan. For that I would be able to have a good chance to do this, I considered two things. I considered using psychological weapons in the attack. One psychological weapon I reviewed was a huge swastika on his chest. [Judge: What is it?] It is the symbol of national socialists. It is a very potent symbol. It is a basic fear of the symbol in Norway, and I figured that if they told each other about it, it would scare many on the water. But then I thought that if I died out there, people would have thought that I was a National Socialist himself, so I decided not to use it. – So I decided not to use it. But another strategy that I had decided in advance, was to use psychological cry that was to create fear. I have read some interviews with AUF-ers who claim that I have said different things, but it’s wrong. What I was called out on two occasions: “You will die today, Marxists.” – There I called on two occasions in the tent. People were very panicky. But, back to where I left off earlier [describes meeting with a man and a woman as he spoke before the derailment] He called her “race.” [Describes the first murder of the man and the subsequent murder of the woman in detail]. – So I went to the school building and I thought that there are many people inside the building, so I should really shoot up the door and go in and shoot everyone. Then I think I will take one or two shots in the building. If I go in there I think I get knocked down with a blunt object. – I can not cover all the angles when I walk into a building, so I decide not to go in and I go on.

Comments from VG Marianne bay: Judge Arntzen has requested a break until 14.45. Thus, Breivik spoke constantly about his journey across the Utøya and the beginning of his murder about which in 40 minutes. He seems very cold and emotionless when he talks about this.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – I believe we are taking a break for each of three.

VG: – Breivik moved out of the room. The court pauses until 14:45.

Comments from VG Marianne Vika: In an otherwise busy and loud pressesal during breaks, it is now almost completely silent. The only thing I can hear some people talk quietly with each other and the sound of the many keyboards. On the way he had a brief conversation with Lippestad. Before the break explained Breivik incessantly and insensible on Utøya in 40 minutes. He described how he killed what he thought, what he cried out and have him looking around. Now he will continue….

Original article: Dag 5, ord for ord: Breivik beskriver drapstoktet i detalj

_____

_________________
The Medium is the Massage - Marshall McLuhan.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mark Gobell
On Gardening Leave
On Gardening Leave


Joined: 24 Jul 2006
Posts: 4529

PostPosted: Sun Apr 22, 2012 1:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Attack on the Labor Party

Google translation [edited for clarity]:

Day 5, word for word: – I shot at everyone

4/20/2012

Read Friday’s fourth part of prosecutors Inga Bejer Engh and Svein Holden questioning by Anders Breivik Behring below:

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – As we continue negotiations.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – It is presented a map. For the information of the judge: This is a map piece that was missing in the introductory lecture.

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – Engh, we aim to finish about four o’clock.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – When can it be we are not quite finished with Utøya today, but we will continue on Monday. Then you just continue where you left off, Breivik.

Behring Anders Breivik: – [Breivik receive a map of the District Attorney Holden of Utøya] What I have mentioned earlier is that when using the ECA, the chemicals, it is one of the side effects urination. You get dehydrated and you need to drink lots of water. – I had a camel back with a liter of water, and an extra camel back in the box behind the house. There I had extra ammunition, four extra magazines and a few other things. What I also forgot to mention the place was that when I got out there, I thought that it is unlikely to encounter Gro Harlem Brundtland. I was especially careful to look for Eskil Pedersen and Gro Harlem Brundtland. – But I knew that the chances that I would encounter Gro Harlem Brundtland was less … And when I come down in the school room. – There is a kind of road. When I go to the car in which this case has been placed. I noticed that in the beginning was very heavy going because I had so much equipment. But it gets easier. Since I spent ammunition. I had also taken two cans of diesel. – And the plan was to force those who were inside the houses to come out so I could shoot them. So I had a lighter that I was looking for at the time and it did not. It was misplaced somewhere. So I had no opportunity to use the fuel that I had brought. The idea was to pour it around the buildings and set fire to. – Those who came out who was there, would then burned alive. But as I learned afterwards that diesel is not flammable, so it was a mistake as I did. Anyway, I had misplaced the lighter that I could not find.

Behring Anders Breivik: – And then I think that if I can not burn them out so I’ll try to smoke them out those who were in the house, I considered going into the house as an unacceptable risk. But I had smoke grenades. – So I took out one and threw it with full force against a window, so it should hit the main house. I hit exactly where I wanted it to hit, but it was not heavy enough to go through the route, and it rolled down to the pier. – It was not appropriate, but it took so long that I thought Delta was going. I thought they were close. At the angle that would prevent Delta sniper’s shooting me. – So I kept me on the side of the smoke to avoid being hit by a sniper. So I take a new grenade and throw it against the building which is opposite the main house.

Behring Anders Breivik: – It takes effect in the house. But there is no coming out. Then I hear something from the dock area, so I go down to the wharf area, and then I see that there is some boat traffic there, there are two-three boats, and when I see that there are some AUF-ers to the left of me. I believe that I shoot to the left, ie north. And I think I hit two of them. – And at that point I think I see Reiulf who are on their way from Utøya to the other side. And when I fired at least ten shots against “Reiulf” The purpose is to kill those who are into. [Describes how he went forward to try to kill those inside the boat]

Behring Anders Breivik: – So I see another boat, a big white boat that is between Utøya and pier on the other side. Then I fired several shots at it too. Where is the one that saves up AUFere swimming.

Comments from VG Marianne Vika: A left lifted his glasses and wipes a tear, before she puts the glasses back on and turn our attention to Breivik, which she has views right on.

Behring Anders Breivik: – And it’s really to scare away the boat, and I see that I only hit the hull, so I change the angle and trying to pet by two shots at a shadow that is on the boat. At that point I thought maybe it could be “Thorbjorn” that I shot at, but when I explain myself to the police I’m a bit unsure. – So is it possible that I shoot with another boat in addition that also picks up the AUF-ers. This is certainly what I remembered, but according to what possibly happened, then I may as up and took another smoke grenade and new ammunition. – It is possible that I have been wrong of it. So I go to the café building again. I see none. I’m going to a different angle on the café building. I see the kiosk is there. The first thing I think is that I should go in there and find a lighter that I can use later. I go then into the building and see that it is a mobile on the floor. I think I probably have completed my mission. I have hundreds of frightened people on the water, so I think my mission is complete. – So there is no point in me continuing. The plan was to complete the mission. If I survived, it was acceptable to surrender. If you were stopped before I had completed the mission I would fight to the death.

Comments from VG Marianne Vika: While he is talking complete, flip Breivik with the pen he had in his right hand. He seems to be sweating in the forehead.

Behring Anders Breivik: – That’s what I had decided in advance. But at that point I thought that the action is completed, so there is no point to continue. I tried to find my own mobile first, but I thought I had forgotten it in the car at the government building, so I pick up the one on the floor and rings and say that I am willing to surrender. (Breivik now speak slowly and very concentrated.) – So when I call it also is concerned I try to call a couple of times, does not come through at the 112 or 113 Also I’m finally through, and this is the conversation that we’ve heard been played. I seem to remember that in both calls asking to be transferred to the Delta, but … – But … I seem to remember that through both calls specifically requested that he would call me up when she had found the right person … and yes …. that’s what I remember. So I am very sure, I think, “what should I do now?” I can not reach the right person.

Behring Anders Breivik: – What should I do now I thought. Is this a successful mission or not. So I thought no because they do not call me up again, they are not going to let me capitulate so I can continue until I am killed.

Behring Anders Breivik: – And I can let fate decide, so I can continue until they call me up again. I think it was when I called. And then I go from the cafe built sloping northwards against the Bolsheviks and Stolt Mountain, as I go along the inclined not far north, so I’m going Bolshevik. Where I see [a group of people] from a distance. [Explains that he shoots at them.] – As I continue all the way to the northern tip, Bolsheviks, and where I think I see a group standing there. And when I go to these people, and when I think I shoot .. I do not remember, but police have said that I shot somebody. But I have really no memories from the Bolsheviks.

VG: – We warn against strong portrayals in this part of Breivik’s explanation.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I can only remember that I was there. I seem to remember that it was [describe a small group of people he killed there]. I thought I would never follow the eastern route because it is within the Delta forces’ reach. I thought that I had to go on the eastern side, because then I would be shot in the head by a sniper. – So I have to go anywhere else than on the east side. So I go back again, when I follow the upper slope of the island. At the pump house and I can not remember anything until I get to the pump house. I walked past something I thought was an outhouse. So I see some people who are there.

Comments from VG Marianne Vika: Just calmly explain Breivik that he was referring to the head of youngsters. He says that one of them asked him not to shoot.

Behring Anders Breivik: – Have you seen him, I said, to confuse them so they do not run. [Breivik describe their reactions. He changes his mind, he thinks now that he mixes two situations]. I think I said: Have you seen the terrorist? to them. [Describes a dialogue with young people] You gotta get here, there is a boat to evacuate you, I said.

Comments from VG Morten Hopperstad: During the murder cruise Breivik shot several shots at each victim. He wanted to be sure they were killed. His voice is calm and clear. He sits back in his chair and plays with the pen in my right hand when he says that he fired several shots at people he believed played dead.

Behring Anders Breivik: – And there were others who moved towards me. [Describes how he shot people at the Pump House.] I shot at all. [Breivik now speak very slowly and hesitantly.] I shot everyone who was there. [Narrator detail about it.] – When I went to the edge and checked all directions. [Tells how he fired at a group of people and telling detail about how he systematically kills].

Comments from VG Marianne Vika: After he had shot the young people who hid at the pump house, rang the police Breivik again. Says he asked to be transferred to Delta, and asked them to call back when it was done. Then he went on.

Behring Anders Breivik: – Back to the pump house, it was crowded to get past the shed, so I had to go in between and I saw exactly what I had done, and the effect of what I had done, and I think it was cruel . I walked up the path again and then I thought, well no one has called me so I’ll try to call the police again. – So I try to call several times. It was busy. So I finally got through again, and when it is the second call that has been played. Again I asked: Can you put me to the operations manager for Delta because I want to surrender. There was much back and forth. So I said: Look, just get the right person, then call me back when you have it. – So I went to the western tip, and it was a cliff-like … It was a cliff there. I saw that it was a very natural haven. I thought all the time when I went around that I would go places where I would hide me, because … And I thought when I came to the Western tip. – But when I looked over the cliff where I saw some people who tried to hide out until the rock wall. There was a fence there and it was very steep down. I had some equipment for me and would not be able to climb down, I would fall. So I took out his rifle and started shooting.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I think I shot [a group of people] There was a large group began to swim towards the south-west tip of the West. [Breivik describes one additional murder]. At the time I saw a yellow boat, it looked like a speedboat that ran from the southern to the group of people who were swimming.

Comments from VG Morten Hopperstad: As Breivik came to the southern tip of the island, a helicopter flew over his head. Mass murderer thought that it was the police who had placed a sniper in the helicopter and tried to stay in the forest. In retrospect, it appears that there was a Norwegian who was in the helicopter. When Breivik was on the southern tip, he looked at the gun and considered whether he should shoot himself.

Comments from VG Marianne bay: The first two experts are leaning far back in chairs, while the last two are appointed by leaning forward supporting his head in his hands. All four studies Breivik carefully.

Behring Anders Breivik: – and I thought this is a utrykningsbåt, a hjelpebåt, so I fired two shots toward the boat, which took a u-turn and drove back again. When I went from the western tip and down and when I came to love trail and saw all the friends I had shot earlier. Just after Kjærlighetsstien I hear a helicopter coming rushing over the treetops. Then I thought: Okay, this is the police and they have a sniper in the helicopter. [Breivik points on a map in front of him with pen in hand while he talks.] – By going to kill me every moment. So I thought “okay, now I am hundred percent sure that the police must be on the island, and now it just before I get killed by shots from any angle.” And I was south of Love trail, and then I thought, “I really want to survive this? I’m going to be the most hated person in Norway, and every day for the rest of your life is going to be a nightmare. ” – So I looked down at my Glock that I kept wondering, “Should I shoot myself in the head right now.” I had the opportunity. If I were to do it, I had to do it now. So I thought it was written in the compendium, that one must fight through a legal process or in prison – I thought that when I do survive this and be responsible for this action and then I saw the helicopter, and this time it came pretty close, maybe 100 meters. Why on earth are you so close I thought. The police helicopter has the thermographic camera.

Behring Anders Breivik: – that it was possible to see see through the trees from one kilometer distance. I thought there was something wrong with the thermo-graphic camera theirs. I thought that I can shoot at least ten rounds if I want to the helicopter. I thought: Now the mission is over, but will not shoot at police officers, for it is not they who are the enemy. – So then I tried to go under the tree tops, and when I went down to the south of the Love Trail. I saw none, and when I approached Sydspissen. And then I saw that it was very much activity as the sea, I saw perhaps some people who were swimming. Also I came to Sydspissen, and when I see that it is … Yes, before I got there, I take two things that I have forgotten.

Behring Anders Breivik: – [Talking about something he remembers from the cafe building, jump then back to Sydspissen. He sees a group of people, tells how he shot these people. Telling a child he remembers that he chooses not to shoot. He says that as he remembers a group of people he might loose shots at swimming towards the shore without being sure it is.] – It is possible I shoot on a boat but I have no memories of this from Sydpissen. I think now I’ll try to go to my base of operations the cut and put on my armor or bulletproof vest. Then I try, it will increase my chances for me to capitulate to the Delta. I thought that it’s been so long so my instinct told me that they were nearby.

Behring Anders Breivik: – As I approach just southeast of Skolestua I look at the forest edge that there is a group of six and I understand that the Delta. I think: Okay, when I throw from my rifle. And only then I consider to attack or not, but decide not because it is not those lens. I throw from my rifle and go ten meters. So I hear that they call something.

Behring Anders Breivik: – [Talking now very calm and concentrated. He drains the pen on the table] In retrospect, I have heard that there were armed police, and when I thought that now … I do not think I thought as much when I was there.

Behring Anders Breivik: – “Lie down on the ground,” some shouted “Lie down on your knees.” So I thought, “Okay.” I was not scared at all but thought, “What shall I do?” I replied, a little arrogant towards them, “Shall I lie down on your knees or I will lay me down on the ground?” So I thought, “I Kverulerer more now I get a shot in the head. ” – So I went down on her knees and down on the ground. Before I lay down, they asked if I had explosives on me. I said no I have only ammunition. So I was assured by them. They assumed, and I saw it on them, that they knew there were several on the island. They did not think it was just me. Immediately after I had been secured as they looked for others.

Behring Anders Breivik: – … and they asked: How many are you, how many are you? I said I’m the only one on the island, and they did not believe me. So they immediately began to look for other accomplices, while I was assured by one person. And that place was secured, I remember I was only five or ten feet from where I had killed someone and I lay there for maybe 30-40 minutes. And … So I was led into the main house … For three of the Delta operators. And .. When we get into the main house, so I think so … “Ok, ok, this is going to be like the series” The Shield “, which you can not imagine. They’ll do anything to get information from me. ” So when I told them “if you are going to execute me, you might as well do it in 1 floor. “

Comments from VG Marianne Vika: Breivik looks down at the table when he is finished. Keep your eyes there for 10-15 seconds while he is quiet. Then he raises his head and asks if Bejer Engh wonder more.

Comments from VG Morten Hopperstad: Prosecutors Engh cough and ask Breivik has further to add, after he feels complete explanation. Engh also states that they have some general questions that many of the relatives and survivors want answers to.

Behring Anders Breivik: – So they said “No we will not execute you.” So we went up the second floor of the main house. And then they started hearing that lasted for maybe five hours. [Long pause]

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – I have a question for you Breivik but is there something you want to add now in connection with Utøya. [Breivik: - I come at the most now, but if I have forgotten something, only to ask] – [Drinking water]. I have some general questions to you in relation to what happened on the island, but I think we’ll start with some questions related to how you moved around the island. There are some things I want to hear more about. There are many concerned and many wonder enough at what you did at the various locations. You’ve described how you came by boat, and the first two murders at the information building. Why did you shoot several shots at these first two you killed?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It was to assure me that I killed them. [Engh ask for details of a single murder at the café building.]

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – [Engh ask for details of individual killings at Café Building] So you said that you went to the café building. And outside the entrance to the café building was found a group of people who were killed. Do you remember anything specific about this group?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Could you specify on the drawing? {Bejer Engh shows Breivik point] I do not remember anything about it.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – So on the front cafe building, where all the windows are, it [talk about the same as is found]. [Breivik: I remember very well that I was there.] [Tell a woman he talked to. Describes the exchange of words] Why did you do that? [Breivik: to confuse them.] – [Breivik: - Yes, right.] But you remember that is not about you shooting people on the side of the building?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I remember that I shot [people] but had never overview. I had to constantly look around me so that I did not get a stick in the head or a blunt object in the head.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – Before you went into Café building extension beyond the tent? [Breivik: - At one time or another I shot through a series of tents. But it was the opposite side of the tent, but I do not remember] – [The prosecutor now ask detail about the weapons that were used and Breivik answer.]

Behring Anders Breivik: – There was a view that magnifies three times, it is a long-distance sight.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – Do you remember how long you stood and shot outside the Café building?

Comments from VG Marianne Vika: Breivik lets look around the room, from prosecutors to judges of their own defenders, while Bejer Engh makes the question of small-and large hall.

VG: – [Breivik will now see an outline of the Café building showing the location of each victim, prosecutor ask any question referring to his statement to police about his movements in the building] [Breivik and the prosecutor discussed details of the building and is slightly disagree with the notion]

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – [Prosecutor asks additional detail about the murders in this house. Breivik answer.] [The prosecutor asks detailed questions about the various killings in this room. Breivik describes reactions.]

Comments from VG Marianne Vika: Engh ask Breivik explain more about what happened inside the café building. Breivik says that there were many who cried and many who begged and begged for his life. In there, he changed magazines before he continued to shoot. Breivik talking to Grassland in a very calm and controlled tone.

Comments from VG Morten Hopperstad: Breivik said he was called a figh-to-fight-mode and was bomardert with a thousand thoughts. He explains the restrained and at a leisurely pace that he thought much, but that he did not have time to take an ethics check.

Comments from VG Marianne bay: There is unrest in the audience when he says Breivik charge of, and shot two youths who acted like they were dead. People look at each other. Thurs survivors rise from their seats and leave the room.

Behring Anders Breivik: – [The prosecutor asks questions about what to charge for. The prosecutor asked how he thought. He says it is cruel.] It is important to grasp is that when you are in a “fight or flight” mode, so the brain is bombarded with your thoughts. There are a thousand thoughts rushing through your mind and you do not make an ethical check … – .. that you normally would if you killed a person without being in this mode. It is a mode you are in the brain tries to protect you. Because you are so traumatized that your brain shuts off some features. – When you do not have to do, you can not do any ethical evaluation before every action, because your brain does not have the capacity to process it.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – Does that mean that you are in that situation did not feel anything? [Breivik: - It was extremely difficult because I have two the first shot and shot Bosei and Berntsen, it goes against human nature. But that I had done that I got in fight or flight mode, it was much easier.]

Comments from VG Morten Hopperstad: Breivik has a serious facial expression, but he seems to have no trouble explaining all about killing the cruise. Mass murderer says that he thinks the first killing was difficult, but that it was easy after a while.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – We have heard the shots from this little room.

Behring Anders Breivik: – So it was much easier to implement it than the first two shots. But it was difficult, I think thousands of thoughts. I knew it was wrong, but I did it. – [Why was it wrong, ask Bejer Engh on] It’s always wrong to take another life, it is the most extreme acts a human can do. But considering it against the overall objectives. For a militant nationalist, it is.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – You consider your actions as legitimate? [Breivik: - That's right, but it does not mean that the acts were barbaric for it. Do you remember how close you were when you shot [a group of people]?

Behring Anders Breivik: – [Explains the details of the murder. Engh: - Extension to all in the head] Yes. [Engh: - Why did you shoot all in your head?] The goal was to kill, and then it’s a natural place to shoot someone.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – [prosecutor describes a new room, and ask questions about details] Do you have memories of it? [Stiller questions about details] Do you remember anything from there?

Comments from VG Marianne Vika: Breivik says he shot some of the youngsters in the minds of just 10 centimeters. Breivik lose concentration for a second. He looks straight into the desk with deep furrows in the forehead while Bejer Engh turns the focus towards a placard of a cafe built on the big screen. She must address Breivik twice before he starts to talk about the killings.

Anders Breivik Behring – I seem to remember that the speaker stood at the top right. [Breivik thought it would be a group where fatalities]

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – Can you describe something closer to (…)? [Breivik: - I thought that [enter details as he remembered it from the building remember what he calls "skirmishes".]

VG: – Engh refer to the map marked with likfunn. She asks questions about some bodies which have been found. Breivik answered that he did not remember. He describes how he thinks he has gone, but are unsure of their movements through the house.
prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – When you walked out of this building, how it looked there? Inside the house.

Behring Anders Breivik: – It was absolutely horrible. [Breivik said there was a group of people there and there was blood everywhere]
prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – Did you have any idea how many you have killed at that time? [Breivik: - What I thought when I was arrested was that I had shot maybe 20-30 people. ] When you were arrested on the island?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Once again questioning the Utøya, so I reasoned out that I had shot 40 people. At this point, so thought I had killed fewer than I had, because I did not remember completely.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – But you had no idea here of how many you killed?

Behring Anders Breivik: – perhaps less than ten people, nearly twelve. [You know you have killed the three at about the house, says Engh before Breivik interrupts her] – What happens is that your brain feel … you are traumatized. As a result, your brain begins to delete the photos, to help you, against your will. I think that’s why I’ve forgotten so much.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – Was it important for you how many you actually had killed at this time? – At this point, you have killed 21 people. [Long pause] – You said somewhere that twelve people would be enough to kill. Why did you not to kill when Breivik?

Behring Anders Breivik: – My goal was not to kill 21 people, but killing 600 people. [Prosecutor: Can you repeat that?] What I thought then was that most people have tried to swim, so I assumed that everyone had begun to swim would be broken. When enough people were sent on the water, I called the police for the first time. It was tankgegangen when I was there

VG: – Breivik take the lid of the carafe, take a glass of water, put the lid back.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – But is it correct to understand that at this time when you left the café building thought you had not killed enough people?

Behring Anders Breivik: – What was the goal was to shoot enough people and so many people were scared of the water. [You did not answer my question Breivik, I wonder if you had any thoughts about when you left the café building if you counted the number of fatalities, ask Bejer Engh] I had no thoughts.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – [how many he had wanted to kill] you had no thoughts about it. Why was it important for you?

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – So you can not answer me now if it was of importance to you how many you have killed at this time?

Behring Anders Breivik: – At the time, was it a thousand thoughts in my head. What I thought when I came out of the Café building was to kill as many people as possible. I did not think the courts. It was only later when I thought the lens was finished that I thought of this. – But it was not at the time there.

Comments from VG Marianne Vika: Breivik heading in the chair before he leans forward and picks up a water carafe. He keeps the boys in the trap caught with his hand on the lid without taking it off, for over half a minute while he says “my goal was not to kill 21 people. My goal was to kill 600″. Finally, he takes off the lid and fill his cup with water and drink the plastic cup. Breivik drinks while Holden talks

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Breivik, the reason we ask you just this is that when you talked about the government building left an impression on us that you would not have gone to Utøya if you heard on the radio that there were more than 12 dead .

Behring Anders Breivik: – I think I was very unsure about it. I remember that I said it, but basically I knew already that the ministries had failed to advance, because two thirds of the employees were on vacation, plus I came there after two, so I knew that two-thirds had gone home. – Soap that was less than .. I calculated that there were 50 or a hundred again. So I calculated that fewer Dec. 1 would be killed. So it was probably wrong to say that my goal that day was to kill 12 people. It is wrong. – So it is wrong to say that the goal was to kill twelve people that day.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – But if you had been told on the radio that there were over 12 dead. [Breivik: - I do not know what I had done. I did a lot of reviews that day and the time.]

Behring Anders Breivik: – Basically, before I started the day so I thought already that the government quarter had failed already, because I got there too late and because I failed to make the bomb before the summer holiday, so really I thought to do Utøya anyway.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Exactly. And we wondered, was the fact Utøya was determined in advance?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It was decided in advance, yes, I had also thought that if the building had collapsed, then it may be that I had not gone further.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – You say “might”. What do you mean by that? [Breivik: If I had managed to collapse the building, it would have been a successful campaign.] Thank you.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – Let’s see Breivik, then I just .. I have some questions about the description you give of further actions. The tent space you stand and shoot. Do you have any recollection of how long you shoot then?

Behring Anders Breivik: – maybe up to 15-20 seconds. [Engh: - Were there many people there when?] They are on the other side of the tent. – Yes in the end there and I use charged and ends with shooting from the hip.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – So you say you meet someone, and so do you remember that you have shot [ask for a single murder.]?

VG: – They are discussing a single murder.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – [Tells about the people who died in the tent]

Comments from VG Marianne Vika: While going through Brevik killings, breathing Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen heavily.

VG: – [Bejer Engh questions about a group of ten that were found on the trail love] [It is questionable from Bejer Engh about a person who survived] [Breivik believes that the person must have acted like the person was dead]

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – Then there are descriptions, as we have analyzed the case, that you shoot down a cliff. Do you have any recollection of this?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Yes, it is probably the slope which is the Love Trail. [Engh says that there are many who are injured here, and ask Breivik what he thinks about it.]

VG: – [Breivik considering that there were many who had trouble finding hiding places. Tells about his thoughts on that it was long distance and talk about how he shoots and his choice of weapons. Answers detailed questions about the killings.] – [Breivik think about this for a while when he responds to prosecution questions] [Breivik describes consistently the victims as women and men and not boys, girls and children]

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is one thing I forgot to say in place. There has been a claim from a AUFer that I have laughed or smiled when I walked around there. I can only disprove. I have never laughed or smiled there. – [Engh: - Why not?] Why I do not have joints? Why would I laugh when I was there?

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – They have given a description of you laughed.

Comments from VG Marianne Vika: Breivik will take up that AUF has been alleged that he smiled and laughed as he killed. That he refuses to. Holden interrupts and asks if he has control of when he smiles and laughs. Breivik says that there is much he does not remember, and that he can smile as a protection mechanism. Yet he believes that he did not.

Behring Anders Breivik: – There is a AUFer who said it and it has been rumor and not true.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – Breivik, you always have control of when you smile and not?

Behring Anders Breivik: – As I said, there is much I do not remember from there. Very often I can smile about defensive … As a defensive mechanism.

prosecutor Svein Holden: – How can you rule out that it did not happen at Utøya?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I have no memory of it anyway. If I smiled I do not have joints. I can not believe I’ve smiled or laughed. I remember anyway, I’m sure I do not have joints. There is no reason to make it out there. If I had done it had I probably said it because I have said anything.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – So you think the police have gone down Love trail and ended up on the southern tip. Where are you at approx. 17.40. Do you remember anything from the pinnacle here the first time?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I guess I’ve only been there once. I’m pretty sure I have not been there once before. When I went down Kjærlighetsstien first time, so I strode up to the school shop, and then I went back to the main house. – So, it was the very end that I was on Sydspissen.

Comments from VG Morten Hopperstad: Defender Geir Lippestad sitting with a serious gaze directed at the prosecutor Engh. Already during the press conference yesterday he said that today is the most difficult in court.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – Your recollection is that you go down the path and cross over to the woods behind the school house. [Breivik: - Oh that right, it was the two people] [Breivik pointed up in the air and clearly have an a-ha experience] – Only the memory of the once Sydspissen. Ok. So, you explained that you go into the woods [describe the dialogue between young people Breivik encounter]. Then I realized that moving to Skolestua. (…) Why did you do that?

Comments from VG Marianne Vika: Holden’s head is leaning against both fists, while he supports both elbows on the table. He looks at his colleague Bejer Engh when she speaks, in Breivik when he speaks.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I remember it really. It has proven that .. . When I was questioned there as I looked at Skolestua and thought “oh, yes, there have never been.” – I may recall that I could have done it. And I thought that I did not go in there because then I would have been struck down with a blunt object. – But I remember when I was out there as I recall had not been there. [Bejer Engh: - So when you say you've been there, you have been told that you have been there by the police? - Maybe. Or maybe it's partially memories. I am a bit unsure. [The prosecutor Bejer Engh: - I remember going on to this house, house information where you have your stuff alone. Retrieve more ammunition when?] – Votes. There were three or four new magazines. There were two .. One or two Glock and two magazines for the rifle.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – Did you then run out of ammunition when you got back there?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is good question. This is possibly I had some magazines again. Maybe more. [Bejer Engh: - Now you've told a few smoke bombs, and it was to get people out of there] Yes, that was it.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – You had your fuel with you. What did you want to get turned on then?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It was the main house and on the opposite side of the main house.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – Yes, about the house and storehouse that is on the other side. How was the fuel was going?

Behring Anders Breivik: – It is possible, I took them out of the box [Bejer Engh: - It's when you can not find the lighter?] That’s right.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – You said that you went down to the pier of broken and at a different time?

Behring Anders Breivik: – That’s possibly sooner if I should trust any of the witness reports. [Engh asks him not to think about the witnesses.] I do not remember. It may have been before, it may have been after.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – But you remember a boat that fired on a boat?

Behring Anders Breivik: – I do not remember that I shot at “Reiulf”. I remember I shot against another boat that looked like “Thorbjorn.”

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – Do you remember if you shot on a boat? [Breivik: I remember that I shot from another boat.] Do you remember that you saw something on the land there?

Behring Anders Breivik: – Yes, I remember I saw a police car, or an emergency vehicle, and there was much activity there, it was a man who ran across the pier. I considered whether I should fire at the other side of the pier, but I did not. – But just when I thought that now it is surely a sniper on the other side who have much better aim than I have. Charged mine was not good enough to hit the other side. Charged mine was calibrated for a hundred meters, but it was six hundred feet to the other side.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – Were you afraid of getting hit [Breivik: - I was not afraid of it, I was worried about it] – What is the difference between what?

Behring Anders Breivik: – No, fear is something you can displace, while concerns are something you should be … Or you should be worried.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – What were you at that time? Breivik: (…) I was only there at some point. – Were you afraid of dying at that point? [Breivik: - No I was not there] – So do you explain that you go up to the café building. When did you find a mobile phone? Gave up looking for the lighter at the time?

Comments from VG Morten Hopperstad: The court is adjourned for today. Breivik rises from the witness box, applied handcuffs and goes to the defenders. He speaks with Lippestad arrestforvarerne while standing around him. Now he carried out.

Behring Anders Breivik: – I think I tried to go into the cafe or kiosk, but it was locked. So I considered going into the door that was there, but then I thought ‘no, it’s probably pretty strict, since it is an AUF camp. They are certainly not allowed to smoke here and do not sell lighters. ” – So I thought, “Maybe it’s a lighter in the kitchen?” I meant to remember that there was a kitchen there, so I went in to look.

prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh: – If we quit now?

Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen: – When we finish. The court is adjourned….

Original article: Dag 5, ord for ord: – Jeg skjøt mot alle

_________________
The Medium is the Massage - Marshall McLuhan.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    9/11, 7/7 & the War on Freedom Forum Index -> General All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group