[5.7-5.11] Anders Breivik Psychiatric Report 2011-11-29, by Torgeir Husby & Synne Sørheim

[5.7-5.11] Anders Breivik Psychiatric Report 2011-11-29, by Torgeir Husby & Synne Sørheim

Breivik Report | 2011-11-29 | Torgeir Husby & Synne Sørheim

"[Breivik] emphasizes that if he had not been censored by the media all his life, he would not have had to do what he did. He believes the media have the main responsibility for what has happened because they did not publish his opinions.... The low-intensity civil war that he had already described, had lasted until now with ideological struggle and censorship of cultural conservatives...... He explains that this is the worst day of his life and that he has dreaded this for 2 years. He has been censored for years. He mentions Dagbladet and Aftenposten as those who among other things have censored him..... He says that he also wrote “essays” that he tried to publish via the usual channels, but that they were all censored..... The subject summarizes: As long as more than twelve were executed, the operation will still be a success. The experts ask how the number twelve comes into consideration. Twelve dead are needed to penetrate the censorship wall, he explains..... About his thoughts on the Utøya killings now, the subject says: The goal was to execute as many as possible. At least 30. It was horrible, but the number had to be assessed based on the global censorship limit. Utøya was a martyrdom, and I am very proud of it..... The subject says in the conversation that he knows the truth that is hidden from others. He believes that there is a civil war in the country. He believes he had to kill at least twelve, because there is a censorship-wall preventing an open debate about what is happening in the country..... So I knew I had to cross a certain threshold to exceed the censorship-wall of the international media." 

[Breivik Report :: 1.0-2.4|2.5-2.6|2.7-4.1|4.2-5.6|5.7-5.11|5.12-9.0]

5.7 Seventh conversation with both experts on 5 September 2011

Like the last time, the experts meet the subject in a large room at Ila prison and detention center. The Norwegian Correctional Services has approved that the visit take place without the use of a glass wall between the subject and the experts. As in the first conversation, there were three conference tables between the experts and the subject, and two prison guards were present during the conversation. The subject showed up in transportation belts, with his right hand free.

The conversation lasted for more than three hours.

It is agreed that thematically, the conversation will be about the period from August 2010, after we abandoned the collection of anamnestic data at that time in the sixth conversation. The subject was willing to do so.

About the period from August 2010 the subject says that this was four consecutive weeks of research to find weapons and ammunition. He decided to travel to the Czech Republic, and had thoughts that he might be able to move on to the Balkans in order to obtain weapons there.

I rented a car, he says, and took the ferry to Kiel, Germany. Then went on to Prague. The subject smiles and laughs. I was also to pick out “police insignias” (badges, experts’ note), he says. The subject states that he brought with him 50,000 in cash on the trip. There was partying at the hotel, and I tried to approach the community, but I could not get any weapons contacts, he says.

The subject says he lost the motivation to acquire weapons on the trip, and thought that he might as well get it legally, at home. Tried to ask the people I saw were criminals, the subject says, but they thought I was completely mad. Prague is a bad place to buy weapons. He returned to Norway empty-handed after ten days.

The subject explains that by having a membership in a hunting club, he was allowed to buy a Ruger Mini 14 (a semi-automatic rifle, experts’ note). The subject had already been a member of Oslo Pistol Club for a few years, so he resumed target practice. He estimates that he actively did target practice for about five months, from September 2010 until the start of 2011. He applied for permission to own a Glock (semi-automatic pistol, experts’ note).

In the months after his return from the trip to Prague, the subject says that he planned to get enough body armor. He thought he would try to acquire 10 magazines of ammunition, I like to be on the safe side, he says. He thought that the equipment had to be light, mobile, and rich in content. The subject says that at that time he still had not decided what the goal of his operation would be. He smiles: Had not yet decided if I should be stationary or mobile, he says. Did not discuss this with anybody, he adds.

Around the turn of the year 2010/2011, the subject says that he was in the “Explosion acquisition phase“. He explains that in this period, he studied bombs and acquired ingredients to make them. The subject says he bought a fuse and various chemical substances in December 2010.

The subject also says that in October and November 2010, he spent a lot of time writing a guide for others, so that future revolutionaries would have an approach to upcoming operations. He adds: Was very satisfied. Had high morale during this period.

In January and February 2011, the subject says he did a lot of shooting and a lot of training. He had started a Dianabol cycle in December 2010 and found that the training gave results, and that he got more muscles. When asked if he noticed any mental changes, the subject answers: There was perhaps 25% more gusto, and I was a little more motivated. The subject thinks this was due both to an improved self-image, and the chemical effect. Beyond this, he noticed no side effects or changes resulting from the drug he used. About the target practice in Oslo Pistol Club, the subject says: It was boring. Went twice a week and got the signatures I had to get.

The subject says that during the same period, he spent a lot of time in front of the PC, and used a lot of time to purchase minor things. He mentions caustic soda, acetone.

In January and February 2011, the subject was a lot at home in front of the PC. He says: I still had not planned which operation to carry out. Had thought of several, but it was not decided. Our organization is focused on single cells, so a lot of operations are therefore excluded. It is a question of what is doable for a single person.

The subject says that in January and February 2011, he considered taking over the NRK (Norwegian Broadcasting Corporation) to broadcast propaganda, but many more people would be needed to do that. Thought about detonating the Halden nuclear reactor. Also thought about blowing up the royal castle, but Europe’s royal families should not be executed until 2020.

The subject says that already a year earlier, he thought about setting off a bomb at the congress of SV (Socialist Left Party) or the Labor Party. Considered it again at the beginning of 2011.

At this point in the conversation, the subject again starts speaking in the plural we form. We have declared a preemptive war against those who belong to category A and B, he says. There are about 4,500 people in total. They are all legitimate targets. The subject says that already towards the end his work with the compendium in 2009, he thought about the possibility of attacking the government building. He justifies this by saying: Wanted to give the government a warning first.

The subject says that during a period of approximately one year, from the winter of 2010 to the winter of 2011, he had a plan A. The plan consisted of placing 300 kilo car bombs by the government building, the Youngstorget square, and at the royal castle. This plan included that the subject envisioned to be able to include three bonus targets. This was the execution of the Blitzers, executions in the Dagsavisen newspaper, and executions in the socialist party headquarters.

The subject adds that he has pondered much over blowing up the royal castle. It would have drawn the whole world’s attention to our pan-European organization, he says, and the survival of the Norwegian ethnic group is the most important issue for us. The subject, however, was not sure how this would have been received by the militant revolutionaries. I am still not sure about the royal castle.

The subject explains: One of the motives was to reorganize the political scale. 120 million Europeans support the operation. 15% of Europeans support the operations directly, while 50% support the primary principles. In about 60 years, 40% will support the practical policy, and 70% of all men. I believe this will be the dominant political orientation.

The subject is very verbose and talks fast. There was a B plan as well, he says. It was to blow up the Labour Party’s national convention, blow up the Skup conference (Conference of the press, experts’ note), or execute traitors at Utøya island.

The subject says he had thoughts about possible executions on Utøya for the first time in the summer of 2010. He says: Thought it was a good target, isolated, police would have problems, access to 730 activists at one time, and no civilians present. The subject says that civilians are everybody not politically involved on the left.

The disadvantage of Utøya, the subject says, was that some of the people there were only potential traitors. And it’s not ideal with people under 18.

About the time from February 2011, the subject says: It became clear that I needed an operational base. Checked out “Småbruk.no”, looking for what was available to rent.

The subject found a farm to rent, Åsta farm in the valley Østerdalen, and signed a lease there at the end of March 2011. The farm had sufficient land to allow ordering three tons of fertilizer from Felleskjøpet. He says: I ordered the fertilizer in late April. He says fertilizer is a necessary ingredient for making bombs. The subject said he had 3000 kg fertilizer delivered to the farm in the beginning of May 2011, about the same time as he moved into the place himself.

The subject says: I sold the Atos, and leased a car that I imagined could blow up the royal castle or the government building. Still had not decided.

The subject says that when plans for the operation became firm, he always envisioned a gigantic detonation by the government building. The ultimate target in Norway was the government building, he says. It was a goal to kill as many as possible, but I was delayed, and it turned out to be a failure. 200 to 500 deaths would be the “best case”. Less than 12 was a failure. I expected to be able to listen to the P4 radio channel afterwards, he adds, then I would soon learn if the operation had been a success.

If I had heard on P4 afterwards that there were several hundred dead, I could have driven to Grønland (police station) to surrender, the subject says. In order to get international press, there must be a large impact, he says, one must exceed a certain limit. I imagined that Utøya could be a bonus operation when needed, or alternatively the newspaper Aftenposten’s premises, or the NRK.

Utøya was not firm until about a month before the operation, he says. Everything was delayed and put back, so I missed possible targets at the Labour Party’s national convention in April, as well as the Skup conference.I continued having Aftenposten and NRK on the list until quite close to the operation, he adds.

Had some reservations, would have preferred A and B, not C traitors, he says. The media have used the word children about the those who were on Utøya. That is a demonizing strategy against me, 80% of the people there were over 18 years old. In any case: In a Phase ll civil war, everybody above 15 years will be legitimate targets.

However, the subject believes that Utøya was not an optimal target. It was a barbaric operation to perform for me, he says, but it had to be done. The subject becomes intense as he continues: Every day my sisters get raped and maimed because of traitors. Now they will know how it feels.

The operation is more than justified by that, he adds, but in all there are several different motives. The operation was necessary for revenge, and it was a preemptive attack to prevent more activity from those individuals who betray Norway. The operation also functions as a warning. Most importantly, the subject says, the operation expresses my love for my own people and country, and is my contribution to getting rid of the evil in the country.

The subject thinks it is a paradox that the EU’s fight against terrorism has made ​​it much harder to obtain explosives. Because it has become so difficult, the mass executions are results of the politicians’ tighter rules. Had it been easier, explosions could have been set up with higher precision. The future is in arms.

May and June 2011 are called the chemistry phase by the subject. The subject says he installed a ventilation hood and fan on the farm. He used a gas mask while working with the production of three car bombs, which he hoped could be finished at around May 15. It turned out that it was time consuming to make bombs, and at about June 15, the subject realized that he could not make more than one bomb of about one ton. He gave up the rest.

The subject explains that circumstances contributed to determine the design of the final operational plan. I had enough explosives to blow up the government building, he says. I was still considering Aftenposten and NRK, but the conferences I had thought of were no longer relevant since they had already been held. Utøya was the only remaining political event of the summer. The subject says he spent the week between June 15 to June 23, 2011 doing reconnaissance of Utøya before I made the final decision.

The subject decided to do the operation on July 22, which was the day when former prime minister Gro Harlem Brundtland was to give a speech on Utøya, according to the camp program.

The subject explains that it was not possible to wait until the autumn to carry out the operation. I had liquidity problems, he explains. There were bills for fertilizer, rent, lease, and I would have to buy food, and then the PC broke down. I could not afford a bad credit rating, because then I would not be able to lease a car. I could not wait any longer. The subject says he was about to give up in June 2011, because there were so many problems.

The last four weeks before 22 July 2011 started with the subject driving to the Swedish border, where he dug up the box containing the armor he had buried a year earlier. He says completing the bomb was slow and messy work.

The subject says he worked really hard, surely 7-8 hours a day. He worked with the production and completion of the bomb both at the barn and in the kitchen on the farm he rented. The subject explains in detail how he worked with the mill, cement mixers, and blenders. He bought new blenders several times, because the wear was great.

The subject also explains in detail how he worked with sulfuric acid. He distilled water and mixed it with the acid. The subject says that part of the work was performed at night. I got dust in my hair and face, the subject says. It was dangerous work. I finished the primary and secondary booster, it was a week’s work. Finished the Analfo just weeks before the operation (Analfo is according the subject one of the ingredients of the bomb, experts’ note). Loaded the finished 50 kilo units onto the car a week before.

He adds: It was a risky project. I could have blown my arms off when I was working with the aluminum powder. But I thought I had to sacrifice myself for my people.

The subject did a test detonation 2-3 km from the farm. He said he had visitors on the farm three times during June and July 2011. XXXXX, the girlfriend of the previous tenant of the farm, came by in early June. I woke up and saw a text message in which she said she wanted to stop by to fetch something. I would have had to execute her if she revealed me. Was thinking I could have slept in the woods if she had to be executed, and then I could go for Aftenposten and NRK afterwards.

XXXXX saved her life by coming by two days later, the subject says. In addition, there was a beekeeper in charge of beehives on the property who came by a few times. It went well.

The subject also says that on one occasion, a stranger stopped by, and said he was a tourist. I knew he was from the police, the subject says, but he did not see anything.

As the time of the operation came closer, the subject said that he got anxious about the operation day. I have never hurt a mouse my whole life, he says, and he tried to simulate the operation to avoid being paralyzed by fear. The subject says he tried to use computer games to practice, but could not do it.WoW is not like real life, he says.

The subject says he also listened to music by the group SAGA, and artist Helene Bøksle to prepare for the day of the operation, July 22. He eventually became convinced that the best preparation to suppress fear would be to be mentally exhausted.

About 22 July 2011, the day of the detonation by the government building and the executions on Utøya, the subject says: The plan was to be in Oslo, and start the transmission of the compendium at 03:00. But I was delayed at Åsta, and was not in Oslo until 23:00 the day before. The subject then stayed in his mother’s apartment in Skøyen until the next day.

The subject said he was very tired and thought he needed sleep and rest before the operation. He therefore slept until eight o’clock, and started the day by making three packed lunches, sandwiches with cheese and ham. He had hoped to be at the government building at 10:00, but started the day by installing a new high speed modem and configuring Outlook on his PC. This took more time than he had planned, and he panicked, worrying about time.

The subject drove the only car he had at his disposal, the Diablo, and parked it on Hammersborg square. He left some equipment in the vehicle, did some reconnaissance in the Grubbegaten street, and walked to the Domkirkeplassen square. Here he took a taxi back to Skøyen. He says: Realized that I did not have much time. I started to realize that most people had left the government building already.

Back in his mother’s apartment, the subject uploaded a film he had made ​​to the website YouTube. He wrote the last message in the compendium at 14.45, and then began to send the compendium to the 8,000 cultural conservatives whose e-mail addresses he had collected. Since it was getting late, the subject says he thought about leaving out either the bomb or Utøya. But when I saw 600 e-mails had been sent at 15.05, I decided to follow the plan, he says.

The subject walked to the car he had parked by Olsens Enke at Skøyen. He got into the car, and changed from civilian to military clothing. He then drove to the government building via the National Theater. He had intended to attach the PST logos he had in the car with magnets, but did not do that. However, he attached blue lights on the roof of the car, about 200 meters from the target.

The subject said that he intended to drive with the police in tow in case someone attempted to stop him when driving the Grubbegata street in the wrong direction. The plan was to wipe out the police if they tried to stop me, he says.

The subject says he was thinking: Most people in the government quarters have left now at two o’clock during the summer vacation. I thought already then that the operation was a failure, but I did the best I could. The subject says he ideally envisioned that the Prime Minister and two or thee ministers and many political secretaries would die. But an added bonus was that Delta and the police also had vacation.

The government building is the place in Norway where there are the fewest civilians, the subject says. There will always be someone, that’s just the way it is. The goal was the largest possible number of A-and B-traitors, and the lowest possible number of civilians and police.

The subject adds: We accept up to 50% dead civilians. It is impossible to determine completely in advance. It’s just chosen that way. We have calculated that there would be few civilian deaths at first, but then the objectives will be secured and there will be more because of imprecise attacks.

The subject smiles: Am incredibly pleased with the small number of dead civilians in the operation. An ex-policeman and only four civilians. Fewer than 10%. In war there are always civilian casualties, unfortunately. We regard the Labour Party as a terrorist organization, and this hit pretty accurately.

The experts ask if the subject that day had thoughts about putting the plan away, to save lives, or for other reasons. No, the subject says. I never thought about turning back, or stopping. I only thought about getting it done. The subject denies having made thoughts about the victims’ situation. The dehumanization process started already when I wrote the military section of the compendium in 2009, the subject says, or already in 2002, when I committed to a life of suffering. The subject says that after this he has not have had pangs of conscience linked to what he calls executions. In war, the rules are different, he adds.

The subject says: When I stopped 200 meters from the target, that was a moment of great importance. This is what I have trained for and have been trained to do, I thought. The experts ask who taught him. It is at an abstract level, the subject says. He smiles broadly. I am very proud of the operation, he adds. All in all it was a 100% success.

The experts ask what makes him so sure that the operation is a success. The subject smiles: At that moment, I was not comfortable, I was in mortal danger, but I dehumanized the enemy, the operation was justified because of the war crimes of the power elite.

I had a pause. Sat for two minutes in the car. The subject laughs out loud. I considered dipping tobacco or smoke, but dropped it and put on the bullet-proof vest and the helmet with a visor.

The subject said he had calculated that there was about 5% chance he would survive the detonation of the government building. He says: I thought: Now I’m going to die in two minutes. The plan was to eliminate the police or security staff if anyone tried to stop me.

The subject says that the bomb in the car he drove to the government building had the most explosive force to one side. There were, however, two cars inconveniently parked outside the high rise building, so the subject simply had to park where there was room, without taking into account what was ideal.

I lit the fuse, he says, and was afraid that everything would detonate. He explains to the experts how he had calculated how long the fuse would have to be for him to make it back to the other car. The subject got out of the car where the bomb was, and took his Glock pistol from the holster while walking to Hammersborg square.

I had six minutes, and walked quickly. I walked past a man who was curious, the subject says. Think he was a civilian police officer. The subject assumes that pictures of him had been sent to several government buildings, and that the man he met was there to verify the car or me. If he had attacked, I would have executed him, he adds.

After getting into the car he had parked on Hammersborg square, the subject says that he turned on the ignition, set the GPS, and drove off. I heard a bang after driving two blocks, he says, adding: I had the “Spanish riders” and smoke bombs to throw at any pursuers, but I did not see any.

The subject turned on the radio and heard that there had been a powerful bomb on the Youngstorget square. They said that a person was dead in the government building. Then I knew that this part of the operation was unsuccessful, he explains.

When asked, the subject denies having experienced psychiatric symptoms of any quality in the weeks before, or at the time of the operation. He is specifically asked about the occurrence or experience of consciousness changes, including convulsions and loss of consciousness, and somatic symptoms. The subject denies any presence of such symptoms related to the days before, or at the time of operation on 22 July 2011.

The subject himself adds: I think I will be killed in prison within 12 months. They put right wing radicals like myself in Muslim-dominated prisons. There are examples of dozens killed and forced conversions in prisons. This happens when you don’t segregate prisoners. It will be one crusader against 100 jihadists. It is deliberate.

All Muslims at Ila know about it and will try to kill me soon. The subject does not think the management at Ila Prison will try to protect him. He says: Muslims can be allies, and there are many networks of Muslims in prison. Despite his conviction that he will be stabbed in a matter of months, the subject denies having feelings of fear or other emotions related to this. As he explains this, he appears without activation, or visibly affected.

The conversation is ended. It is agreed to continue pursuing the topic in the next conversation with the experts.

Current status by both experts on 5 September 2011

The subject is awake, in clear consciousness, and aware of time and place and situation. Intelligence clinically assessed to be in the normal range. The subject uses numerical values ​​and percentages to a greater extent than is common in regular speech. He uses a technical, unemotional and not very dynamic language in the conversation.

He uses unusual terms such as dehumanization, preventive war, potential traitors, assassinations, military clothing, eradicate, eliminate, and war crimes of the power elite. The terminology used is entirely linked to the subject’s notion that there is a civil war going on in the country. The terminology used is considered to be grounded in paranoid delusions.

He appears emotionally shallow, with complete emotional distance to his situation, his victims and to the experts. He is polite and cooperates to the best of his ability. He laughs and smiles quite often, when related to issues concerning his own individual significance and/or his actions.

The subject has a light glaring look and blinks a lot. He appears with a somewhat reduced facial expression and a somewhat rigid body language, as he moves very little in the chair during the hours of conversation.

The subject is not able to recognize or describe his own feelings. He appears thus with alexithymia and prominent emotional numbing.

He has not had any thoughts about the victims’ situation and can not take their perspective when directly asked. He is considered to have a severe, almost total empathic failure.

The subject believes that his motive for the executions is to reorganize the political scale. He expects that his actions will lead to sympathy and support of millions of Europeans and that his policies will be the dominant political orientation of the future. The ideas are considered as grandiose delusions.

He emphasizes that the main motive for the killings was that the operation expresses my love for my people and country and will contribute to getting rid of the evil in the country. He believes that he, despite the perceived risk for own life, sacrificed himself for his people. He believes that the records of his actions during this period will provide guidelines for similar actions to future revolutionaries. The ideas are considered as grandiose delusions.

The subject says that in August 2010, he had not yet determined who or which institutions to attack and kill, but that he from this time and onwards began efforts to obtain weapons and a few months later also explosives. The subject justifies the planning as follows: We have declared preemptive war against those who belong to category A and B. There are about 4,500 people in total.

He had different plans, including blowing up the government building, a detonation at the royal castle and killing the royal family, killing Blitzers, the Dagsavisen newspaper, and at the socialist party’s headquarters. He also describes persistent thoughts about blowing up the Labour Party’s national convention and the Skup conference for journalists.

From January 2011, he describes persistent thoughts and plans to detonate the nuclear reactor in Halden and set off bombs on the Labour party’s or the socialist party’s national conventions. He still considered blowing up the royal castle. From February, he explains that it was a goal to kill as many as possible in the government building, preferrably including the prime minister and a couple of other ministers.

The ideas about murders referred to as executions are justified by the subject’s notion that all the aforementioned in a very concrete way represent individuals who are betraying Norway. He decided to kill Gro Harlem Brundtland and the participants at the AUF youth summer camp in June 2011. He believes that Labor is a terrorist organization. He believes he by taking the lives of these people would help to get rid of evil in the country.

The subject thinks he soon will be killed and believes that the prison management tacitly agrees.

The ideas are considered to be an all-encompassing, paranoid delusional system, with fear for his own life and extensive thoughts on homicide of several thousand people. The subject seems to have begun to act on the basis of these delusions during the course of 2010.

The subject appears to have an unclear identity feeling, as he switches between describing himself in the singular and plural.

The experts have occasionally had difficulty in following the subject. In parts of the conversation, he appears to have a moderate association disorder and formal thought disorder in the form of perseveration. There is no latency or thought block during the conversation.

The subject appears completely without depressive thoughts in the form of guilt, shame, hopelessness, or thoughts about his own death by suicide. He denies experiencing sadness, joylessness, reduced initiative or lack of initiative. There is thus no evidence of a depressed mood.

The subject does not exhibit increased psychomotorical tempo, or perceived, high mood. The subject’s speech is coherent and with normal syntax. He has no mind or voice strain. He is “affect stable”. There is no evidence of lack of impulse control, neither verbally nor physically. There is thus no evidence of a high mood.

The subject appears without clinical suspicion of being intoxicated. The subject denies having suicidal thoughts or plans.


5.8 Eighth conversation with both experts on 13 September 2011

Like the last time, the experts meet the subject in a large room at Ila prison and detention center. The Norwegian Correctional Services have approved that the visit take place without the use of a glass wall between the subject and the experts. As in the first conversation, there were three conference tables between the experts and the subject and two prison guards were present during the conversation. The subject showed up in transportation belts, with his right hand free.

The conversation lasted for nearly three hours.

The topic of the conversation is agreed to be the subject’s experiences in the time span from the moment he left the government building about half past three and for the rest of 22 July 2011. The time interval encompasses the time of the criminal acts.

The subject starts off himself by saying: “Terror” requires “conspiracy”, so when the police are using the term terror, it proves they have arrested somebody else. Am pretty sure about that, after an operation or before.

About the time interval from the subject was driving from the government building until he was later arrested on Utøya, the subject says: I started driving after having plotted the coordinates on the GPS. The subject then gives a detailed explanation of the route he followed through Oslo, over Sollihøgda and to Utøya.

The target was more brilliant than the Labor Party itself, he says, but it was impossible to prepare mentally for the actual shooting. The primary targets for Plan B were Jonas Gahr Støre, Gro Harlem Brundtland and Marte Michelet. Now I could get one of them, and it was never meant to stop with her.

On the way to Utøya, the subject says that he was still in combat mode. I psyched myself up for a possible martyrdom, he says. I thought that after a major terrorist attack against the government building, it was natural if they sent a Delta squad to Utøya. Was surprised that they had not sent forces to Utøya to protect the island as a political target.

There was no one at the ferry landing to Utøya when the subject arrived, except civilian guards from AUF. The subject took out the bag he had in the car and pulled it on board the boat. The subject smiles. I had to deactivate myself, and resume being a sleeper cell again. I spoke to them, and infiltrated them. I pretended to be police.

The subject says he spoke with a woman who said she was in charge of security on the island. I asked her to summon the guards to a meeting where I would inform them about the bomb in Oslo.

The subject says he considered handcuffing or executing the crew of the boat. It was a huge tactical blunder to not carry out that, he says.

When the boat docked in Utøya, more people came. There was an ex-policeman who asked several questions. I assumed those were test questions because the act was exposed, the subject says. I suggested walking up to the main building, and both the woman and the ex-policeman walked ahead of me.

Right then, a minute lasted for ten years, the subject says. I was really not looking forward to taking lives. When I reached for the Glock, I had a lot of barriers, and almost was not able to do it. I shot both in the head. 90% of the shots were head shots. I am a good marksman, he adds.

The subject believes he had good ammunition management. I used lead bullets, he says, because they do the most damage. Both in front of me fell straight forward and looked like they were asleep on the ground. There were two behind me, closer to M/S Thorbjørn.

The experts ask what the subject thought about the victims. He responds, however, by talking about himself. It was a traumatic experience to take lives, he says. Taking another life is extreme. Have played a lot of computer games, but this is something purely biological that the body tries to avoid.

The subject elaborates by saying: The brain was under stress and began to erase memories actively. I only remember ten minutes of Utøya, but do remember the first “encounter” well. The experts ask whether this is terminology from war games. The subject answers: No, our working language is English. The brain was bombarded and access to the databases was gone. It was like a death threat and I felt I was in danger. It was a completely horrible situation.

The subject says that he knows that after this he kept going, he walked without stopping until he later surrendered. He repeats: Could not access my own databases. He smiles. When I think back, it is absurd, not normal. But I managed to behave tactically optimal, and carried it out.

The subject says he intended to herd the kids into the water, and use it as a weapon of mass destruction. The first target was indescribable, he says laughing, but I quickly became immune. When they swam, I was almost on autopilot and wanted to execute as many as possible. I was thinking about setting the main building on fire, because there were many who had barricaded themselves there.

Most on the island were over 18 years, the subject believes. The average age was probably 22 or 23 years. I thought about stopping half way through, but executed another 20 afterwards. The subject believes he shot and killed 40 people and that 29 drowned while swimming.

The experts ask what the subject was thinking as he was walking around shooting. He says: Had a pragmatic approach, wanted to kill enough to give the launch of the compendium world press. The operation was just a formality.

The experts ask if the subject compared the experience with playing computer games. No, he says, this was completely different. The games simulate war, I was in a real war. The games were perhaps a means to get the decision making capability trained, but now I had to force myself to go through a nightmare.

The experts ask again if the subject can imagine what the experience was like for the kids on the island. The subject says: We in the Knights Templar only think about making a pragmatic approach. We are forced to choose barbaric methods, we do not want to. All of the Knights Templar would prefer explosives rather than running around in the woods.

The subject repeats that it is the government’s war on terror that have cut off the militant revolutionaries’ access to explosives. We want to annihilate the enemy, he says. That day, I alone was leading a war against all the Western European regimes. I had the guts to do it alone. I felt traumatized every second, while blood and brain matter was splattering. War is hell, he adds.

Asked to elaborate on his role, the subject says: What is happening in Norway is an ethnic cleansing of my people. What happened was necessary, for people to open their eyes for what is happening in Norway and Europe.A person like me almost sacrificing his life for the cause is noble. There is nothing nobler than sacrificing oneself for your own people.

The subject smiles and laughs a little when the committee briefly comments that this may sound almost salvation-like. We want to forgive you, the subject says, those who condemn us who are performing the actions. He adds: We are willing to forgive everybody, even the traitors of type A and B if they recognize our efforts and our struggle.

The subject says: In 20 years, about 35% of the population will recognize us. I say it was a barbaric operation, but am very proud of the operation as a whole. My status will be changed, and although I am demonized now, it will become clear that I contributed to saving my people. I am prepared to be a martyr, with a noble role and noble motives. It will manifest itself in the future.

All in all the subject believes that his actions on 22 July 2011, gave 300,000 militant nationalists a tool for seizing power in England and Norway. He believes a network from the military or the police will seize power and save the country. Now there is an oil fund with billions that hide the symptoms of low intensity jihad. The civil war has different phases.

About nomenclature, content and concepts in his compendium the subject explains that the title contains the year 2083 because it marks the 400-year anniversary of the Battle of Vienna. The subject becomes very detailed and verbose and explains why the battle was a christian victory, which crushed islam at the gates of Europe. The subject says that the battle took place on September 11, 1683, and he would like to have September 11 as the new national day of Norway.

Spreading the compendium is the goal of the operations, he says, and the operation’s success is measured by the spreading of the compendium.

The experts ask how the subject will take it if the compendium flops. This I have obviously foreseen, the subject says. Analytically, I think 15 to 45% will agree with the main principles. The subject corrects the figure to 50%.Approximately half agree that Islam deconstructs Europe, he says, but the problem is that they do not read the compendium.

The subject says he knows with certainty that 300,000 militant nationalists have gotten the tool they need. The compendium is very well written, he says, but it is only intended as a draft. A gift to you. From us to you.

The experts ask the subject to elaborate what the gift consists of. The offer is crusader nationalism as a gift. The new nationalists in Europe are crusaders. Knights Templar are crusaders with several purposes. One: It is an organization for the interests of the indigenous peoples of Europe. Two: It is a crusader organization against jihad. Three: It is a war criminal judicial court that will trial and execute category A and B traitors all over Western Europe.

The experts again comment that the subjects phrases are reminiscent of salvation. The subject laughs: But we are the saviors, he says, we will free Europe of tyranny. We want others to open their hearts to us.

The subject says he has learned much from what he calls “Reverse techniques”. Have studied the cultural marxists, he says. They infiltrate and want to deconstruct what is ethnically Norwegian, Norwegians and Norwegian values. The subject mentions Marte Michelet, Thomas Hylland Eriksen, and Hilde Haugsgjerd as examples of the most dangerous traitors.

Most journalists are multiculturalists, the subject says. This is why NRK is an important target. Volda University College is also a place where they are brainwashing aspiring journalists. And also the University of Oslo is infiltrated, and worst of all is the sociology program.

The conversation is ended.

Current status by both experts on 13 September 2011

The subject is awake, in clear consciousness, and aware of time and place and situation. Intelligence clinically assessed to be in the normal range. The subject uses numerical values ​​and percentages to a greater extent than is common in regular speech. He uses a technical, unemotional and not very dynamic language in the conversation.

He appears emotionally shallow, with complete emotional distance to his own situation and to the experts. He is polite and cooperates to the best of his ability. He laughs and smiles quite often, when related to issues concerning his own individual significance and/or his actions.

The subject has a light glaring look and blinks a lot. He appears with a somewhat reduced facial expression, and a somewhat rigid body language as he moves very little in the chair during the hours the conversation lasts.

The subject is unable to take his victims’, society’s or anyone else’s perspective. He can not describe or recognize his own or others’ feelings. The phenomenon is considered as a serious empathy failure, alexithymia, and egocentricity. He appears with a prominent emotional flattening.

He uses unusual terms such as targets, battle modus, execute, effectuate, ammunition management, “encounter”, capitulation, infiltrate, and deactivate. The terminology used is entirely linked to the subject’s notion that there is a civil war, and considered as expressions of underlying, paranoid delusions.

In the conversation, the subject uses terms such as martyrdom, noble role, liberate, pardon, noble motives, sacrifice, gift and savior about himself and his deeds. The terminology used is in its entirety linked to the subject’s notion that he is to liberate Europe from tyranny, and that on 22 July 2011, he alone waged a war against all Western European regimes. The terminology used is considered as expressions of underlying, grandiose, and possibly religious delusions.

The subject believes it will become apparent that he through the murders on 22 July 2011 contributed to saving his people. He believes that his role is that of a martyr, with noble motives, and that his actions will give the militant nationalists a tool for seizing power in Europe. He believes that his organization, Knights Templar, has a mandate to act as a war crimes tribunal. The ideas are considered as grandiose delusions.

The subject says in the conversation that he was in a real war. He believes ethnic cleansing is taking place in the country. He believes that he was waging a war against all Western European regimes. He believes that there is an ongoing process where the cultural marxists are infiltrating, brain washing and destroying what is ethnically Norwegian. The subject has extensive thoughts on infiltration and underlying conspiracy among key figures in public debate and institutions. He believes that certain named individuals are traitors. The ideas are considered as an all-encompassing paranoid delusional system, with extensive thoughts of homicide.

The subject appears to have an unclear identity feeling, as he switches between describing himself in the singular and plural.

The experts have occasionally had difficulty in following the subject. He exhibits in parts of the conversation to have a moderate association disorder and formal thought disorder in the form of perseveration.There is no latency or thought block during the conversation.

The subject appears without depressive thoughts in the form of guilt, shame, hopelessness, or thoughts about his own death by suicide. He denies experiencing sadness, joylessness, reduced initiative or lack of initiative. There is thus no evidence of a depressed mood.

The subject does not exhibit increased psychomotorical tempo, or perceived, high mood. The subject’s speech is coherent and with normal syntax. He has no mind or voice strain. He is “affect stable”. There is no evidence of lack of impulse control, neither verbally nor physically. There is thus no evidence of a high mood.

The subject appears without clinical suspicion of intoxication. The subject denies having suicidal thoughts or plans.

5.9 Ninth conversation with both experts on 16 September 2011

Like the last time, the experts meet the subject in a large room at Ila prison and detention center. The Norwegian Correctional Services have approved that the visit take place without the use of a glass wall between the subject and the experts. As in the first conversation, there were three conference tables between the experts and the subject and two prison guards were present during the conversation. The subject showed up in transportation belts, with his right hand free.

The conversation lasted for nearly three hours.

It is agreed that the conversation will be about the subject’s relations to his own family, his personal qualities, and thoughts about his own situation now. The subject was willing to do so.

[...]

The subject says that his own relationship with his mother is above average good. We’ve had some disagreements, he says, but those were minor issues, like when I quit high school before graduation. He says that he has talked a lot with his mother about devoting his life to the cause, and about writing a book. But my mother is a simple person, and no visionary, he says, and not so interested in such topics.

The subject directly moves on to talk about himself. I want to do something noble, he says. And the noblest thing is to improve humanity. We want to save our people.

The subject explains that because his mother is a woman, it is understandable that she can not fully understand his motives. Women do not understand honor the same way as men, he says. 90% of women are emotionally unstable. For the past million years, the women have been protected inside the camp. Men are more alert, and may make security decisions. Women should take care of the children.

The subject continues: Some people are noble, and save the tribe, he says. My mother thinks — what is wrong, and why? She cannot tell her friends that her son is a visionary who will save Western Europe. The subject says he had wished his mother was proud of him, but he considers this unlikely, since she gives in to public opinion. The subject says for this reason he does not want to have contact with his mother in prison.

The experts ask if the subject regards himself as a noble person. I can’t look at my people being raped, he says. I have sacrificed everything, wealth, freedom, my life. The subject is comparing his situation with that of Tsar Nicolas the first. He attempted to liberate Europe from Islam, he says. He risked everything for his people, but failed to liberate Anatolia. He was the last great crusader in Europe. The subject then compares his situation with Richard Lionheart’s.

The subject then summarizes how the Crimean War, the Armenian Genocide, and Hitler’s rise to power are interrelated. It is difficult to follow him, and the committee ask him to explain.

It’s about the motive, he says. I did not personally profit from what has happened, but have sacrificed all for something greater than myself. The subject thinks that 120 million individuals will look at him as noble, and a hero, mind you if they know my motives. But many have problems understanding it, like you, and my mother.

The subject continues. Many nobles must suffer, he says. Many have died already. We act according to our conscience.

The experts ask the subject to explain what qualities he has that have made him who he is. The prerequisites are to be intelligent and resourceful. I have never been a victim, and have had a good childhood, he says. I am a good person, do not lie, and am kind. I act upon my conscience. And I am particularly willing to sacrifice my own interests. The subject estimates his intelligence in IQ points to be about 130.

The experts ask if the subject believes he possesses special qualities beyond this. The subject says: I am extremely ambitious and a risk pervert. I value honesty and loyalty highly. I’m elitist, among the intellectual elite on the political right. He adds: Humility and modesty are also important virtues. He sums up: I do not know of a more perfect knight.

The subject also says that he considers himself as pragmatic, with too much empathy, and with a lot of determination and firm principles. Still, the most important prerequisite is my love for my people, he adds.

The subject says he has struggled hard to become the perfect knight. Am perhaps the most perfect knight after world war two, he adds.

The experts ask what the struggle has consisted of. You need 500,000 kroner and two years of your life, he says. Then you follow step by step the revolutionary science in the “How to Guide,” the compendium, which is a handbook of knighthood. It has never been done before, but now it’s proven. It is a small organization with limited resources, but possible.

The experts ask if the subject believes he has qualities others do not. The subject smiles. There is no term for it, he says. But I know the truth which is hidden from others.

The subject is asked to assess his own status and position now. The subject says: I consider everything in light of the operation’s success. It is a great “moral boost”, and a huge “ego boost” for me. Valuable right wing intellectuals are in short supply, he says, adding: Have nominated myself as the leader of the conservative guardian council.

The experts ask for an explanation to this. Let’s say that militant nationalists take over Britain, he says. Then chances are that I will be released, even though I have much blood on my hands. A conservative guardian council will be appointed for Norway, and I can have a major role in the new board. Maybe chairman or leader.

The subject says that he has intellectual qualities that make him suitable to be an ideological leader of our pan-European organization.

The experts ask whether it is to be understood that the subject thinks he will be released. I’m 100% sure that it will be happen ​​within 15 years, at least in 2083, at the 400 year anniversary of “The Battle of Vienna”. But it does not matter who is to lead, the key is the liberation of my people, he says.

He adds: If Labor refuses to change ideological direction, more attacks will happen. We, the Norwegian resistance movement, offer immunity up to January 1 2020. After 1 January 2020, all the 4,500 A and B traitors will be executed. The 90,000 C-traitors will be executed after that.

The subject emphasizes that the organization Knights Templar is currently the only one in the association of organizations he describes as the Norwegian resistance movement. But more will emerge in the time up to the capitulation, he says.

The experts ask what the subject means with the term capitulation. The subject explains: We demand the immediate dissolving of Parliament, he says, and the Western European royal families will have to capitulate. We will get access to NRK, make a new army to be called in, and we will establish a guardian council.

The subject says he is very close to perfection now. Am in the last phase. Using the term “noble”, depends on the sacrifice you have done. Have sacrificed my life. The deed is essential. I have cleared a path. Am stronger than most, and have been a sleeper cell for so long. On Utøya I thought about self-terminating, but I am strong enough to suffer on. Phase III is the trial, and phase IV is the martyr death. I’m only a tool for the militant resistance movement.

The experts say it remains unclear how the subject assesses his position in Norwegian society now. Thousands of militant nationalists let themselves be inspired by me being alive, he says. I alone carry the fury on my shoulders.It signals strength to all the militant nationalists in Europe.

The experts commented that it may seem like the subject regards himself as a significant person. The subject laughs heartily. This is the role model for our ideology, he says. I am a leader by example. A noble act that can be copied. The deed is in the sacrifice. The compendium is the project, not the killing. I managed to distribute both the movie and the compendium, he says, adding: I am probably somewhat of an attention whore.

In 2083, muslims will account for 60% of the population, he says. This will be the year of victory, and then the Muslims will be deported. What is happening now is a much greater threat than world war two. Islam is a much greater threat than nazism was. We are only three people in Norway now, but there are 60,000 sympathisers. Now we are in phase I, low intensity asymmetric civil war. In phase II, the war is escalated.

The subject says he is sure that after the attack there will no longer be three, but thirty single cells in the national resistance movement in Norway. He says he knows that the operation has had such an effect, and justifies this by saying that he is rarely wrong.

The experts wonder how the subject is able to quantify this so precisely. The number of single cells can be quantified on the basis of historical knowledge, the subject says. I give good estimates. He adds: The compendium is so good, and the essays are so good that they will influence others. A ten-fold increase in Europe.

The experts ask if the subject is open to the possibility that others view his actions on 22 July 2011 as a political or ideological failure. No, the subject says. The operation was a recruitment operation, so it is not possible. Armed combat is considered the right thing, whatever that is visible in the short term. Within two to ten years, this is a success story.

The experts ask what success criteria the subject will consider in the future. New attacks on cultural marxists are a success, he says. And if moderate cultural conservatives get it easier, that is a success. It could for example be that the Progress Party got into power in Norway. The subject starts talking in we form. We are looking for success in both in the UK and Norway, he says. It’s us or Islam. We are 100% confident of victory.

The experts ask how the subject would consider it if his compendium does not contribute to the recruitment of new, militant nationalists. The subject reminds the experts that the Knights Templar is also a military court. Those who died were legitimate targets and deserved to die, he says. It will in any case be a success.

The subject adds that he is prepared to become character assassinated. It will be like the war tribunals in Norway after world war two, he says. Norway’s Minister of Justice and Hamsun and many in the Nasjonal Samling were locked up in lunatic asylums after the war. The war tribunal was masked and manipulated. The losers lost their power of definition. I am prepared for the same.

The subject summarizes: As long as more than twelve were executed, the operation will still be a success. The experts ask how the number twelve comes into consideration. Twelve dead are needed to penetrate the censorship wall, he explains. We expect a short-term setback, but have taken many giant leaps forward for the militant cultural conservatives. I have given them a tool, and now they can live in the same way as the islamists.

The experts ask how the subject’s single cell logic is working now after 22/7/11. I have had contact with others along the way, he says, but all the decisions were my own. I was alone about the execution of the operation. My identity is now known, and I will be very disappointed if militant nationalists regard Utøya as cowardly. But I do not see it as cowardly. I did what I could to attack Labour’s yearly convention, but I did not make it. So I am proud of the AUF operation.

The experts fail to find out how the subject may have communicated or will communicate with other single cells in his organization.

About his thoughts on the Utøya killings now, the subject says: The goal was to execute as many as possible. At least 30. It was horrible, but the number had to be assessed based on the global censorship limit. Utøya was a martyrdom, and I am very proud of it.

The subject says he called the police when he thought that the operation was completed. He says that at the time he called, he did not believe he could find more targets, and I had been searching a long time. Despite the fact that he called to surrender, he continued shooting after having hung up. He says: I introduced myself as the commander of the Norwegian resistance movement, and was of course counting on that those who answered would understand who I was.

The subject surrendered when he was asked to. The experts ask what made ​​the subject wish that his martyrdom would end with his own survival. Phase III, my own trial, is important for our cause. I am willing to accept the sacrifice, he says.

The experts ask again if the subject has had any thoughts about how what happened on the island appeared to the participants of the summer camp.There were no civilians there, the subject says. Those who were there were marxist activists, who are on the execution lists for our organization. In his descriptions, the subject is not able to take neither the dead’s nor the surviving teenagers’ perspective.

Present status by both experts on 16 September 2011

The subject is awake, in clear consciousness, and aware of time and place and situation. Intelligence clinically assessed to be in the normal range. The subject uses numerical values ​​and percentages to a greater extent than is common in regular speech. He uses a technical, unemotional and not very dynamic language in the conversation.

He appears emotionally shallow, with complete emotional distance to his own situation and to the experts. He is polite and cooperates to the best of his ability. He laughs and smiles quite often, when related to issues concerning his own individual significance and/or his actions.

The subject has a light glaring look and blinks a lot. He appears with a somewhat reduced facial expression, and a somewhat rigid body language as he moves very little in the chair during the hours the conversation lasts.

The subject is unable to take his victims, society’s or anyone else’s perspective. He can not describe or recognize his own or others’ feelings. The phenomenon is considered as a serious empathy failure, alexithymia, and egocentricity. He appears with a prominent emotional flattening.

He uses unusual terms such as commander, security decisions, liberation, resistance, immunity, and capitulation. The terminology used is entirely linked to the subject’s notion that there is a civil war going on in the country, and considered as expressions of underlying, paranoid delusions.

In the conversation, the subject uses terms such as martyrdom, death, perfect knight, visionary, noble, and suffering about himself and his tasks. He compares himself with the historical war and knight heroes like Tzar Nicholas and Richard Lionheart. The terminology used is entirely linked to the subject’s notion that he, through his actions on 22 July 2011 sacrificed himself, and is considered a hero. The terminology used is considered as an expression of underlying, grandiose delusions.

The subject believes that he is a perfect knight. He believes that he has been nominated as head of what he calls the conservative guardian council, who will rule the country after taking power. He believes that he is suited to be an ideological leader of a pan-European organization. He knows he will be released. He believes he is rarely wrong, and has extraordinary capabilities. He believes he is a leader by the power of his example and that his deed is in the sacrifice he has made. The ideas are considered as grandiose delusions.

The subject says in the conversation that he knows the truth that is hidden from others. He believes that there is a civil war in the country. He believes he had to kill at least twelve, because there is a censorship-wall preventing an open debate about what is happening in the country. He believes that the war tribunal after World War II was masked and manipulated and compares his situation to that. The ideas considered as an all encompassing, paranoid delusional system.

The subject appears to have an unclear identity feeling, as he switches between describing himself in the singular and plural.

The subject makes several threats during the conversation. He says that there will be more attacks, and that up to 90,000 traitors will be killed unless Labor does not change its politics. The ideas are considered as extensive, homicidal thoughts.

The experts have sometimes had difficulty in following the subject. He exhibits in parts of the conversation to have a moderate association disorder and formal thought disorder in the form of perseveration. There is no latency or thought block during the conversation.

The subject appears without depressive thoughts in the form of guilt, shame, hopelessness, or thoughts about his own death by suicide. He denies experiencing sadness, joylessness, reduced initiative or lack of initiative. There is thus no evidence of a depressed mood.

The subject does not exhibit increased psychomotorical tempo, or perceived, high mood. The subject’s speech is coherent and with normal syntax. He has no mind or voice strain. He is “affect stable”. There is no evidence of lack of impulse control, neither verbally nor physically. There is thus no evidence of a high mood.

The subject appears without clinical suspicion of intoxication. The subject denies having suicidal thoughts or plans.


5.10 Tenth conversation with both experts on 20 September 2011

Like the last time, the experts meet the subject in a large room at Ila prison and detention center. The Norwegian Correctional Services have approved that the visit take place without the use of a glass wall between the subject and the experts. As in the first conversation, there were three conference tables between the experts and the subject and two prison guards were present during the conversation. The subject showed up in transportation belts, with his right hand free.

The conversation lasted for nearly three hours.

It is agreed that the conversation will be about a video the subject posted on the website YouTube, the subject’s mental and physical health, and consumption of drugs. The subject was willing to do this, but initially wanted to give the experts a briefing on the last detention meeting he attended. The detention meeting took place on 19 September 2011.

The subject says about the detention meeting in Oslo District Court 19 September 2011: Lots of interesting things are happening. As commander of the Norwegian resistance movement, I want to be tried by a military court. The subject justifies this by saying that Labor looks at us like terrorists. The subject says he tried to promote his views at this detention meeting, but was interrupted.

The subject says that he has been given access to a new activity room by his cell, where he has access to a treadmill. I am a bodybuilder, the subject says, I do not run. The prosector has “washed his hands” by offering a treadmill. It appears that the subject prefers physical activity by brisk walking in the prison yard, where he estimates that he spends 40 minutes each day.

About the video the subject has posted on the website YouTube, he says that it is a propaganda video for the less intellectual ones. He believes that anyone who watches the video must use the pause button actively. The subject wonders if the experts have seen the video and ask what the experts think about it.

The subject confirms using the name Andrew Berwick when uploading the film to the net. He did this ​​to avoid attention from the police or PST. He says that he has actively chosen music by Helene Bøksle, who sings in the old Norwegian language. He says: It is martyr music. Very Norwegian. Battle Music. In a process where you fight to the death, there is very little that will fit, so I used Helene Bøksle and the group SAGA. The music helps to preserve morale.

The subject adds that he has used the same music in order to preserve morale since he did not have access to other cells. He believes the music is well suited to displace anxiety, and says: For battle purposes, where you most likely will die, the songs can be used pragmatically to repress fear of death and preserve morale.

The subject believes that he has now tested and proven that the music works as intended. The anxiety and the fear of death were not that strong. It is proven by my example. He adds: Many on Utøya got fear of death, and froze. It often happens in war.

In the film, the Battle of Thermopylae is mentioned. The experts ask what this is supposed to illustrate. The subject says: It is an exceptional example. A small group of militant nationalists stood against a large Persian army. We are today’s Leonidas. Although we are a group with the odds against us, we can win.

The subject says that the historical examples he has used are pure propaganda, they justify our struggle, and have great symbolic power. He smiles. Militant nationalists like the movie, it is being related to our “struggle”. He asks again if the experts liked the movie.

About his physical health, the subject initially says that he does not have, or have had a physical illness. He denies ever having had any head injury, episodes of unconsciousness or convulsions.

The subject says he has never been investigated for, or have been diagnosed with diabetes, heart disease or high blood pressure.

The subject has, apart from one day’s admission to a hospital in Oslo because of the mumps when he was very small, never been hospitalized or received treatment from any part of the specialist services.

The subject says he has had the same doctor for a number of years. The doctor is located at XXXXX. He has rarely had contact with this doctor over the past few years, but mentions that he has a few prescribed allergy medications. He confirms to have had telephone contact with the doctor in April 2011 and says that he took contact because of suspicion of a respiratory infection.

About his mental health, the subject starts off by saying he has a very strong psyche. He can not even report any mental health problems or some mental difficulties, apart from what he describes as declining fighting morale, expressed in percentages after his imprisonment on 22 July 2011.

The experts then systematically go through, and ask specifically about if the subject ever in life has had explicit, psychiatric symptoms. The subject is informed that the questions are standardized, and that some of them may not be appropriate for his situation. The results are used to fill out the MINI Plus and SCID I.

The subject says he has never experienced periods of depression or sadness. He says he probably has experienced adversity and problems, but has regarded it as learning. The subject also denies ever having experienced periods of more than two weeks with feelings of guilt, shame, guilt of any significance, lack of initiative, decreased appetite, inner tension, concentration difficulties, experienced joylessness or pessimistic thoughts.

The subject says that in a period of just over one year, from 2005 to- 2007, he turned the day around, and had a changed sleeping pattern. His explanation is that he in the same period was working extremely much. In addition, he played computer games on the Internet and the games took place at night.

About his sleeping pattern now, the subject says he is sleeping well. He gets up at seven, and goes to bed at 2100 hours. He believes that going to bed early is a survival strategy. In the recent weeks he has slept up to 12 to 14 hours a day. I’m in hibernation mode, he says.

When asked, he says he has never had thoughts of suicide, but confirms persistent thoughts about his own death by martyrdom, and other’s deaths by fair executions. He adds that he for a few seconds during the criminal acts on Utøya wondered whether he should take his life, but that he stuck to his oath and plan, and dropped it. He adds: We are not allowed to commit suicide.

When questioned, the subject denies that he has ever had a period of one week or more with experienced euphoria or mood elevation. When asked, he also denies ever having experienced augmented pace of movement or speech, irritability, perceived thinking or thought flight, or increased feelings of aggression. When asked whether he in any period of life has experienced increased sexual interest, the subject laughs and says: Since 2002 it has been immoral for me to enter into any relationship. Hasn’t happened much.

The subject said that he for short moments has experienced boosts of pleasure. He believes that these moments happen as a result of his good routines. He also believes that he can manipulate his thoughts into a kind of meditation, which is what makes it possible to be a sleeper cell.

The subject denies that such moments of pleasure have been of a sustained quality. He says: There may be two cycles in a week, lasting from a few seconds to a full day. The subject says that in such moments, he feels extremely inspired, feels fantastic. The contents of these thoughts is usually related to the subject’s roles in the future, alliance partners or relationships with friends and acquaintances. The subject laughs and adds: XXXXXXX, I wonder what they are saying now.

He says he is generally happy with himself and his own thoughts.

The subject denies when questioned, to ever have experienced anxiety or panic.


When asked, the subject confirms having witnessed an extremely traumatic episode. He says that he on 22 July 2011 saw a lot of people die and was not sure if he would survive himself. The subject denies having experienced intense fear, helplessness or horror during the experience. He denies having had dreams about the incident afterwards, and he has not tried to avoid talking about it. He does not experience physical discomfort associated with thinking back on the events. He says: I am proud of the operation and managed to keep fear and anxiety under control.

Regarding psychotic symptoms, the subject confirms experiencing imminent danger for his own and other’s lives. He justifies this by the ongoing low-intensity jihad, which puts the Norwegian culture and Norwegian population at risk. He adds: We must be saved from an Islamic caliphate with Sharia laws. The subject becomes very enthusiastic and verbose. It will stop the advances in research, literature and philosophy. We will be stuck in the middle ages if the Muslims seize power. The Norwegian indigenous population will be wiped out. Marxist women do not see it as their mission to bear children.

The experts ask if the subject feels persecuted. He confirms this, and says: We are a persecuted minority. Can not talk to the neighbors, it smells in the stairways, we are at risk of being laughed at and called nasty things by a Muslim gang in the streets.

The subject goes back to talking in we form. Our sisters are raped and our people are assaulted. Yes, we in the resistance movement believe that the Norwegian people are being persecuted and killed. Enclaves will grow like cancer. Norwegians will have to move from Grorud to Oslo West, and then on to Bærum. We will end up cornered, maybe in Vestfold or in Northern Norway. The epicenter of the cancer is Islam in Oslo.

The subject confirms grandiose, psychotic ideas in that he sees himself as the near perfect knight who is to ensure recruitment and victory in Europe by his written work and the criminal acts. The subject says he will contribute to recreate a kingdom in Norway.

The subject says that he is able to do everything because his knowledge data base is so large. He believes he was ignorant before he turned 21, but that his combination of intelligence, initiative, and principles have transformed him from being ordinary to being brilliant.

The subject says he has 15,000 hours of study equivalent to 9 years of university education. This has made ​​him exceptional in some areas. The subject says: I made 1 million before I was 24 and six million before I was 26. And together with the operation, this makes me very pleased.

The subject repeats as he has previously said: It is terrible that Norway is in civil war. But I know that 600,000 Norwegians sympathize. 50% of the police sympathize with us, too. In the ideological battle, 100,000 Norwegians regard me as a national hero.

The subject confirms thoughts about killing a large number of people. He explains that if the A and B traitors do not surrender and make concessions by 2020, it will come to a cruel revenge. He says in that case, both the 4,500 A and B traitors, and the tens of thousands of C-traitors will be executed.

The subject says: The Norwegian people will be saved. It is conceivable that the D traitors, union leaders, chief of police Killengreen, fire chiefs, and industry leaders must be executed.

The subject says that this last group is called the nomenclature. He adds: Those are all the intellectuals, apart from the new elite of the Crusaders. The nomenclature includes people in their positions, also yourselves (referring to the experts, experts’ note). The subject emphasizes that a final decision it has not yet been made as to what to do with this group, which may include as many as 200,000 people.

The subject denies ever having heard voices, sounds or other sound phenomena of any quality. He does however confirm, while we are at the subject, that he holds about 2% of the information secret. This includes details of his communications with others. The subject says he can not say anything about how this is happening, or with whom, but adds: It may have been physical communication or online.

He adds: Have promised to keep certain things secret. At the meeting in 2002, where we, the Knights Templar order was founded, ten people met, there were two who could not come. The puritan conditions of single cells started after the last contact. We must have the possibility for self-motivation without “pep talks” from others. I do not want to say something about what is secret.

The subject said he was afraid of sounds the first time he lived on the farm Åsta east. It was windy, there was a lot of squeaking, but it had to do with the house being so old.

The subject confirms having received messages in code, through cryptology. He thinks there has been very little of it and that he does not know a lot about it, but he knows enough to set up a digital algorithm.

The experts ask whether he has received messages directly addressed to him, through newspapers, radio, television or the Internet. The subject answers: Can not say anything about it, unfortunately. The subject laughs and smiles. He adds: Maybe there is some evidence already. Have told the police too much. There are “leads” in the interrogations. He adds: The author Fjordman writes a lot between the lines, but everybody understands it. It is not aimed specifically at me.

The experts ask if the subject has felt exposed to radiation. He replies: Yes, there has been radiation anxiety, but I have not exposed myself to any radiation sources.

The subject denies to ever have believed to be poisoned by food or drink. He says: I eat all kinds of food.

The experts ask if it is correct that he at times took the food his mother made ​​into his own room, and ate alone. He confirms this, but says: I picked up the food and ate alone to avoid getting infected. I let my mother smoke alone on the balcony, and did not go out to her. He also confirms to have used face masks before, but believes that this only lasted a short period in April 2011.

The subject denies having experienced qualitative changes related to sight, smell or taste.

The subject denies having experienced any subjective changes of his own thought processes, learning ability, or ability to concentrate.

The subject is asked if he has experienced changes related to his own appearance or body. He answers that he has not. The experts ask if it is true that he has adjusted his own appearance by plastic surgery. When I was 20, I did a “nose job”, he says, and justifies this by saying that his nose was crooked.

I had some cartilage removed. In retrospect, I have regarded this as stupid, had a great Nordic nose, while the one I have now is not original.

The subject confirms that he recently has considered to fix four teeth in the lower jaw because they are a little crooked. I wanted to get closer to society’s ideals, he says. The subject adds: I thought that since I was to become a martyr, I wanted to get closer to the ideal. He says that all investment in his own appearance was related to thoughts of how he would be perceived at martyrdom.

The experts note that the subject’s mother has stated that the subject was more than usually preoccupied with his own appearance a few months before the criminal acts. I think she probably remembers correctly, the subject says. My mother was worried, I did not like that she was suspicious, and this may have been said to distract her. It was a good “cover”, he adds, laughing.

The subject confirms that he has had thoughts about possible wiretapping of his phone since the end of 2009. The last half year before the criminal acts, he has also had a suspicion of possibly being monitored with surveillance cameras. He has searched for, but has not found surveillance equipment where he was staying.

About his consumption of drugs, it appears that the subject has never tried or used the psychoactive substances amphetamine, hashish, ecstasy, cocaine, heroin or benzodiazepines. He also has no experience with the substances LSD or GHB.

The subject says that he has smoked marijuana twice, around the turn of the year 2010/2011, and in May 2011.

The subject says that he first drank alcohol when he was 15 years old. He says: Later the consumption has been below average. He estimates an intake of alcohol once or twice a week until I was twenty, then every other week.

Since 2006, I have only been drinking three or four times a year, he says. He believes to have consumed a bottle of wine at each occasion, in social events.

The last nine months before the criminal acts, the subject says that he only has been drinking alcohol a few times, because he did not want to drink when he was using steroids.

The subject says that he smokes five cigarettes a day, and uses dipping tobacco once or twice a day.

The subject says he has used ECA-stack at some occasions. He explains that this is a mixture of ephedrine, caffeine and aspirin that is no longer on the market. The subject says that the mixture increases performance by 50% in a two hour period.

The subject says he has studied the topic ECA stack combined with steroids. He bought it over the counter the first time in Sweden in his early twenties. From 2002 to 2005, while he was working, he estimates his consumption to about 20 capsules per year. From 2006 to 2011 it has been much less. The subject says: It can be about 60 capsules throughout my whole life.

The subject says he took a total of six capsules during the past five days before the criminal acts. The last capsule he took at 14:30 hours on 22 July 2011.

About the use of anabolic steroids, the subject explains himself completely in line with information given to the experts in the sixth conversation. The information is therefore not repeated here.

Current status by both experts on 20 September 2011

The subject is awake, in clear consciousness, and aware of time and place and situation. Intelligence clinically assessed to be in the normal range. The subject uses numerical values ​​and percentages to a greater extent than is common in regular speech. He uses a technical, unemotional and not very dynamic language in the conversation.

He appears emotionally shallow, with complete emotional distance to his own situation and to the experts. He is polite, and cooperates to the best of his ability. He laughs and smiles quite often, when related to issues concerning his own individual significance and/or his actions.

The subject has a light glaring look and blinks a lot. He appears with a somewhat reduced facial expression, and a somewhat rigid body language as he moves very little in the chair during the hours the conversation lasts.

The subject is unable to take his victims’, society’s or anyone else’s perspective. He can not describe or recognize his own or others’ feelings. The phenomenon is considered as a serious empathy failure, alexithymia, and egocentricity. He appears with a prominent emotional flattening.

He uses unusual terms as commander, military judgment seat, martial music, capitulate, and “struggle”. The terminology used is entirely linked to the subject’s notion that there is a civil war going on in the country, and is considered as expressions of underlying, paranoid delusions.

In conversation, the subject uses the term to martyr oneself and national hero about himself and his tasks, believing that hundreds of thousands of Norwegians look at him like that. He compares himself with the historical war hero Leonidas. The terminology used is entirely linked to subject’s notion that he qualifies as a hero through his actions on 22 July 2011. The terminology used is considered as an expression of underlying, grandiose delusions.

The subject sees himself as a near perfect knight, who will ensure recruitment and victory in Europe and recreate the kingdom of Norway through his written work and criminal actions. He believes that he has changed from ordinary to brilliant since he was 21 years old. The ideas are considered as grandiose delusions.

The subject confirms ideas about monitoring and surveillance. He has considered himself exposed to infection and has been afraid of radiation, but without any known radiation source. He has been particularly afraid of infection. He has used a face mask indoors and consulted his GP about this. The phenomena are considered to be paranoid delusions.

The subject believes he belongs to a persecuted minority. He believes that the Norwegian people is persecuted and killed. He thinks that Norway is in a state of civil war. He believes that there is an imminent danger to his own and others’ lives. The ideas are considered an all encompassing, paranoid delusional system.

Auditory hallucinations and possible influence phenomena cannot be confirmed, since the subject maintains that his forms of communication with like-minded persons are secret.

The subject appears to have an unclear identity feeling, as he switches between describing himself in the singular and plural.

The subject makes several threats during the conversation. He says that if the ones he refers to as A and B traitors do not surrender and make concessions by the year 2020, at a certain point there will be a cruel revenge. He says it will lead to executions of up to 200,000 people. The ideas are considered as extensive, homicidal thoughts.

The experts have sometimes had difficulty in following the subject. In parts of the conversation, he is exhibiting a moderate association disorder and formal thought disorder in the form of perseveration. There is no latency or thought block during the conversation.

The subject appears without depressive thoughts in the form of guilt, shame, hopelessness, or thoughts about his own death by suicide. He denies experiencing sadness, joylessness, reduced initiative or lack of initiative. There is thus no evidence of a depressed mood.

The subject does not exhibit increased psychomotorical tempo, or perceived high mood. The subject’s speech is coherent and with normal syntax. He has no mind or voice strain. He is “affect stable”. There is no evidence of lack of impulse control, neither verbally nor physically. There is thus no evidence of a high mood.

The subject appears without clinical suspicion of intoxication. The subject denies having suicidal thoughts or plans.

5.11 Eleventh conversation with both experts on 22 September 2011

Like the last time, the experts meet the subject in a large room at Ila prison and detention center. The Norwegian Correctional Services have approved that the visit take place without the use of a glass wall between the subject and the experts. As in the first conversation, three conference table were placed between the experts and the subject and two prison officers were present during the conversation. The subject showed up in transportation belts, with his right hand free.

The conversation lasted for nearly three hours.

It is agreed that the conversation will be about the subject’s membership in the Masonic Lodge, further details about the organization which the subject denotes by the name of Knights Templar, and thoughts about his future situation. In addition the experts want to discuss information from the child care services with the subject, having obtained this through police documents. The subject was willing to do so.

The subject blinks more than usual with both eyes during the introduction to the conversation. He is asked why. I just had a shower, he says, and I feel dehydrated in the eyes. As in previous conversations, the subject has a rather glaring look during conversation.

About his involvement in the Masonic Lodge, the subject says that he was recommended to become a member there in 2002. The subject says that he arrived at the 3rd degree, approved for further promotions. He said that he would be in the 6th degree if he still had been active in the organization.

The subject says: The freemasons have adopted many temple knight rituals from the 11th century. It was good to be a member to participate in the rituals and get networks. The subject informs the experts that the Masonic order is an anti-Marxist order, only for men. Their principles coincide with many of our principles, he says. He also says: Knights Templar have inspired the Masonic lodge. We do not have access to the library. They have archives that we need, and the Masons are librarians for us.

The subject says that the Masonic lodge is apolitical, while the Knights Templar is a military organization. The experts ask who the subject now includes when he says we. The original twelve, says the subject. The experts ask if it is true that the twelve have met and agreed on what kind of relations they want with the Freemasonry.

No, this is my interpretation of it, says the subject. Both they and we are Zionist organizations. Haven’t met more than three others in the Knights Templar. The meeting was sectioned for security reasons.

The subject gives further details about the organization he refers to as Knights Templar. I was told to attend one of two meetings, he says. The experts ask how the meeting was summoned. It’s a secret, he says, so unfortunately, I cannot say anything about it. When asked how many people he was told that he was going to meet in London, he says I was told that they were eight, no I cannot quite remember. When ordaining oneself, one becomes Knight Chief Justice.

The experts ask if the meeting gave the subject the right to define the organization’s further goals and structure. No, that right has been distributed, he says, but in Norway I am Knight Chief Justice. The subject gets excited. The Knight Chief Justice in each country is sovereign. It is a great advantage as far as interpretation is concerned. The subject is asked how he knows that he is the Knight Chief Justice of Norway. It is determined by established rights, he says. And it depends on the operation. My right is surely established now.

The experts ask the subject to explain more fully how the organization Knights Templar is built up.

We were three plus me at the inaugural meeting in London in 2002, he says. We were all ordained there. The subject says that six did not show up. There were two French, two English, one from Serbia or Liberia, one from Sweden, one from the United States that did not come, one from the Netherlands, one from Norway, one from Greece, one from Spain and one from Belgium.

The subject says that it was verbally agreed at the meeting that the mandate of the organization was to be war crime tribunal judges, jury and executioners. A person who carries out a spectacular operation, becomes a commander I am therefore Knight Chief Justice now, after the operation on 22 July 2011.

The subject explains that he saw the ordination itself as tame. After the meeting, he got a document stack of 60 pages that he was to develop. The Primary concept is individual cells, he says. So it was after I started writing that the terms were clear. The subject explains that in principle, there mey be several Knight Chief Justices in each country. Each Knight Justice responds to a Knight Justice Master, he explains. Above all Knight Justice Master is a Knight Justice Grand Master.

The experts commented that it sounds like a terminology and an organizational structure similar to the one used in the Freemasonry. The Masons have copied us Templars and our organization, he says. The nomenclature is similar. The experts have a hard time understanding this, since the Freemasonry has had its nomenclature and organization since long before 2002.

There are historical explanations, says the subject.

The experts also wonder who currently occupy the positions of Knight Justice Master and Grand Master in the subject’s organization. There is no Master or Grand Master in Europe now, he says. It is because we are in phase I, the low-intensity civil war, now. When we get to phase II, the elections will be open.

The experts ask what kind of contact the subject has had with the others to establish consensus on the terminology within the organization. There has been little or no contact with the others after 2002, he says. He smiles and giggles. This terminology is a suggestion from my side.

He adds: But a successful operation in one country will establish rights in another, and now I have such rights in Norway and Europe. The experts ask if he thus has the right to define the content and structure of the organization. Yes, the subject says. My interpretation will be stressed, because now I have the power of definition as a consequence of the operation on 22 July 2011.

The subject says that the organization Knights Templar is both a military order and a martyr organization, in addition to being a military court, judge, jury and executioner. Everyone is willing to fight until death, he says. The 50-60 pages of documents I was given in 2002 contained the most part already, I have only made the facade.

The experts ask who has defined and identified by their names the ones that the subject refers to as A, B, C, and possibly D traitors in Norway. It is defined by me, says the subject. The names are put down by me.

The experts ask whether it is the case that the subject alone can decide who shall live and die in Norway. This is the main principle, he says. We have decided that we must act, and the right to do so is established. I do not pick out, I identify war criminals in Norway for their actions. Jens Stoltenberg, Jonas Gahr Støre are obvious, he says, but it can be difficult to identify others.

The experts ask how it feels to have such a responsibility. It is a huge responsibility, the subject says, in many ways oppressive.

The experts ask what will happen if his identification of targets is wrong. The subject says: In Beslan, 100 children were killed. Those who were behind it were condemned by other Islamists. But I have chosen to take that responsibility. Our organization identifies A, B and C traitors because of individual war crimes against our people. It will be hard to err, but some targets are more justified. Islamists focus on civilians, but we do not.

The subject is asked how he thinks his actions on 22 July 2011 will be judged by the Norwegian people. I know that after “nine eleven”, 40% supported the operation, he says. A low estimate would be that 15% support my operation, but they dare not say it out loud.

The experts ask if he would be surprised if he finds out that his actions will be condemned by all parts of the Norwegian society. I will be incredibly surprised if I have not figured it out correctly, he says, laughing. I still regard Utøya as a good target. But it will take several years and generations to find out for sure. I will still be responsible for both targets, but will be disappointed by lack of support.

The experts ask what could make the subject feel any guilt for the actions on 22 July 2011. The subject laughs. I did ​​Norway a favour, he said. It is not possible to regret having killed just targets.

The experts ask again if there anything could make him regret his actions later. Perhaps if I were to be so demonized by the surroundings that I began to believe their lies, he says. If I were to be brainwashed.

The experts ask the subject whether he has thought about what made him develop the qualities that enabled him to perform such an act without regret or feeling guilty. I was radicalized by multiculturalists and Islam in Norway, he says. He is puzzled by the idea that any changes may have taken place in himself, or that his ability to empathize with others may have changed.

The difference between murders and executions is the legal aspect, he adds. What is savage is not necessarily wrong. During the operation, 68 political activists from the Labour Party were executed. The question of guilt is therefore completely hypothetical.

The experts ask again if he thinks that anything might have happened to him in recent years that makes him feel that guilt is irrelevant. My love for my people, my responsibility and my conscience are overdeveloped in me, he says. This is the answer.

The expert say it may seem that the subject’s empathy with the situation of others is impaired. No, it is not true, the subject says. My empathy level has been constant. It is love that condemned the traitors to death for war crimes and that makes me stand for everything.

The subject asks for help to draw a graph on a paper in which he explains how empathy level and radicalization relate to each other. The graph does not make sense, which after a while is also pointed out by the subject himself. He says instead: After the Second World War, I am unique, a pioneer in the European civil war. He laughs a little and smiles.

The experts ask why exactly he became unique. I can not look at ethnic cleansing, he says. My love, empathy and conscience are overdeveloped. The subject adds that the hatred towards Marxists, my background and personal qualities have also contributed. And then there are the historical events and personal experiences, as when I lost 100,000 kroner.

As examples of historical events the subject mentions: Tsar Nicholas II, Hitler and World War II.

The experts ask the subject to name some of his own weaknesses. I am too conscientious, he says. And maybe a little too wimpy. He adds that he may not have been disciplined enough.

The experts comment that these do not sound like real weaknesses. No, I lack nothing, I am a good alliance builder, I am interesting, have a good appearance and have no real shortcomings, he says. After a while, he says that he probably thinks someone might see him as arrogant and not so easy-going.

The experts ask for an explanation to this. I belong to the intellectual elite, he says, with qualities most people do not have. Then one is not so popular.

The subject adds on his own initiative that, despite the fact that he will give himself 6 points on a scale of appearance from 1 to 10, he knows he is unsuitable as a figurehead.

The experts ask for an explanation. It appears that at some point, the subject posted a picture of himself on a site where others would rank his appearance by using the aforementioned scale. I got 4.9, he says, and therefore do not exactly qualify for the term beautiful.

The subject sums up by saying that he has sacrificed everything and donated ​​his assets worth five million to the struggle.

Asked to explain how he sees his own future, the subject begins by saying that he is unsure as to how he is regarded by fellow prisoners. I will fight with the pen from prison, he says. I want to use certain channels on the internet and twitter, and people will be interested in my opinions.

The subject is excited. The conservative league will be a revolutionary, conservative party, he says. We must await the right time window for a coup. I want to build networks in prison.

The subject thinks he will be in jail until the coup. It could happen in 2020, in 20 years or at the latest in 2083, he says. There may be talk about the junior officer in the military and an “Arian brotherhood” in prison.

The experts ask him to explain this further. I will use my qualities as an organization builder, he says, but must live with my fear of being killed. The subject says he does not intend to be violent again, neither if he gets out of prison.

The subject goes on to say: There is a 50% chance of a coup d’etat in France within 15 years. It may take longer time in Norway, but there is a 10-20% chance of a relatively imminent coup and seizure of power here.

The subject believes that he will be let out of prison when it comes to the coup d’etat in Norway. He estimates that he will then have a 2% chance to take part in the Guardian Council and a 0.5% chance of becoming the new regent in Norway. The experts ask the subject to elaborate. I work now with the party program of the conservatives league, he says. It is likely that in 2020 there will be an execution of the current Glücksburg family, and one of us in the conservative guardian council will be the new regent.

It appears that the subject has Norway’s current royal family in mind when he uses the term Glücksburg family. He says: Yes, it is Harald & co. We decide to execute the family, or another suggestion might be to send them into exile. The subject says it is likely that the Glücksburg family must be executed, since they do not dissociate themselves from multiculturalism.

The subject says he will take the name of Sigurd II the Crusader if he will be the new regent in Norway. He says: We will discuss what form of government we will go for. Getting a new king is likely.

The subject adds: The new regent may be one from the Guardian Council, or the one who has the greatest DNA similiarity to Harald Fairhair or Harald Hardråde. DNA samples must be taken for genetic analysis of everyone on the right side.

The experts ask how the subject will carry out his duties as a new regent, if it will be him. He laughs and smiles. I will take the name of Sigurd II the Crusader or Sigurd Magnusson Jorsalfar because he is my role model, he says. It’s a little unclear what function I will have. If it will be an active role, I will be responsible for deporting 300,000 Muslims from Norway.

It appears that the subject envision the deportation of Muslims, for example to North Africa and Turkey. He says: We will invade the ports and harbors to ensure deportation ports. The question is what the U.S. will do. We believe it may trigger a nuclear war.

The experts ask the subject to elaborate. Queen Isabella annexed areas of North Africa to get the Moors deported, this will be equivalent, to deport all who have to be deported. There may be many dead, but we would prefer to use cruise ships with military escort.

The experts ask what, if any, will be the criteria for deportation. Knights Templar has an assimilation list, he says. If you comply with the points, you will not be deported. But 90% would probably not approve of the claim relating to conversion to Christianity.

The subject says he is concerned that Russia or the United States may intervene in European affairs. The U.S. may go bankrupt, he says, and perhaps be split in two, a European and a multi-nationalist part. Someone there may intervene and try to invade Europe. If we have access to nuclear weapons, bombs will rain.

The subject adds: The United States will do everything to avoid that the countries in Europe fall. NATO will take action, and nationalist soldiers mobilize. The subject believes there is a real danger that it could trigger a new, third world war.

The experts ask the subject to estimate how likely this scenario is. The subject starts to calculate percentages of percentages, and says after a while: If I say I will be the new regent and there will be a new world war, you will think I’m crazy. He then gives up calculating percentages for this seizure of power.

The subject maintains it is likely that there will be a new regent in Norway in 2020, and that he possibly will be in the Guardian Council created when the royal family and Parliament are removed. He maintains that the new regent will be selected from the guardian council , or picked by DNA testing.

The experts finally ask the subject to comment on information they have obtained through police documents, regarding the subject’s care situation when he was little. I’ve never been in respite homes or foster homes, he says. He has not heard anything about the child welfare services assessing his care situation.

He knows that it was a legal process about the parental responsibility for him. He believes he may have been about two years at the time. XXXXXXX (the subject’s father and stepmother, experts’ note) were witnesses in the case, he says. XXXXXXXXX

The subject says he thinks it would have been better if the father and stepmother had won the case, so that he could have stayed with them.

The subject then starts a long argument regarding possible amendments to the laws regarding custody of children. My mother is not intellectually capable, he says. She is average, and against Islamization. But women do not understand notions of honour, and 90% are emotionally unstable. That’s why we support an amendment to the law, so that the father automatically gets custody, he says. The one governing the crib aso governs the world. This will reduce the divorce rate.

The experts ask the subject to explain further. I despise Marxism for my own parents’ divorce and for the matriarchy. Therefore, the role of women shall be in the home. The subject says he thinks that women may be encouraged to pursue a bachelor’s degree, but nothing more. They will not get a divorce and the father shall have custody.

The subject explains further that he will create a Norway as it was in the fifties. The families will stay in reservated areas. The divorce rate is to be reduced, the nuclear family upgraded, and the moral virtues to be reestablished.

The subject says that 95% will stay in the reserves. This will preserve Norwegian culture. Liberal zones will be created in three cities, where marijuana can be sold and prostitution may take place. There may be many who will stay in the liberal zones during their youth.

Oslo will be a liberal zone if it goes through, he says. The reserves will be in the outskirts, where people will live when they have children. The subject says he plans to write a new book, “Solutions for the future”, where everything will be further described. That will be book number two or three, he says.

The subject says that in the new book, he will explain the in vitro model, which he considers an important political tool for the future. We must reach 2% or preferably 3% birth rate, he says. Mass factories for births will be needed, using surrogate mothers from the third world.

The Norwegian indigenous populaton with the highest IQ and a Nordic look will be selected as donors. The subject says he may plan to become a donor himself. Maybe 5 children through this model, he says, but I would probably choose a donor with a better look.

The experts ask how the subject envisages providing eggs for this production. We need 15,000 births a year, he says. 50% of Norwegian women will donate eggs voluntarily, the rest must be obtained by force. Boarding schools will be created for the children after they are born.

The subject pauses a while to think.

50% is perhaps too high an estimate, he says. But no more than 1,000 women are needed to create 15,000 children, since each woman can make twelve to fifteen eggs a year. They can be obtained with economic compensation or by threats.

The subject says he sees several advantages to this system. It will obviously improve our ethnic Norwegian genetic “pool” he says. Insanity, cancer and arthritis are eradicated. We will DNA test and take blood samples of the women.

The experts ask whether the subject envisages that the system will be introduced if he will be the new regent in Norway. We will improve and save the country from ethnic cleansing on all levels, he says. Politics is time consuming, and improvements will be developed and be gradual.

The experts finish the conversation.

Present status by both experts on 22 September 2011

The subject is awake, in clear consciousness, and aware of time and place and situation. Intelligence clinically assessed to be in the normal range. The subject uses numerical values ​​and percentages to a greater extent than is common in regular speech. He uses a technical, unemotional and not very dynamic language in the conversation.

He appears emotionally shallow, with complete emotional distance to his own situation and to the experts. He is polite, and cooperates to the best of his ability. He laughs and smiles quite often, when related to issues concerning his own individual significance and/or his actions.

The subject has a light glaring look and blinks a lot. He appears with a somewhat reduced facial expression, and a somewhat rigid body language as he moves very little in the chair during the hours the conversation lasts.

The subject is unable to take the victims’ or the community’s perspective in relation to the criminal acts. He maintains that it was fair that the victims were killed, he does not regret and feels no guilt.He believes that the victims died as a consequence of his love for the Norwegian people. The subject appears with a marked emotional flattening and severe empathy failure.

The subject uses unusual terms, e.g. low-intensity civil war, military order, military tribunal, executioner, and operation. The terminology used is entirely linked to the subject’s notion that there is a civil war going on in the country, and is considered as expressions of underlying, paranoid delusions.

Observanden uses unusual terms such as established rights, sovereign, power of definition, responsibility, love of the (my) people, unique, pioneer and new regent related to descriptions of his own position. The terminology used is considered as an expression of underlying, grandiose delusions.

The subject presents homemade words like Knight Chief Justice,

Knight Commander Chief Justice, Chief Justice Knight Master, and Chief Justice Grand Master. The terms are considered to be neologisms.

The subject believes that he by established right is the ideological leader of the organization Knights Templar, which has a mandate to be both a military order, martyr organization, military tribunal, judge, jury and executioner. He believes he has the responsibility of deciding who shall live and die in Norway. The responsibility is perceived as real, but burdensome. The phenomena are considered as grandiose delusions.

He believes that 15% of the population supports the criminal actions.He believes that his love is over-developed. He thinks he is a pioneer in a European civil war. He compares his situation to historic war heroes such as Tsar Nicholas and Queen Isabella.The phenomena are considered grandiose delusions.

The subject believes it is likely that he may become the new regent in Norway, named Sigurd II the Crusader, following an imminent coup and seizure of power. He believes he has given five million kroner to the struggle. He thinks he may one day be responsible for the deportation of several hundred thousand Muslims to ports in North Africa. The phenomena are considered grandiose delusions.

The subject believes that ethnic cleansing is going on in Norway, and that he lives with the fear of being killed. He believes that a nuclear third world war may be triggered as a result of the events he is a part of. He believes there is a civil war going on in the country. The subject is working on suggested solutions that will improve our ethnic Norwegian genetic pool, eradicate disease, and reduce the divorce rate. He envisions reserves, DNA testing, and factories for mass births. The ideas considered as part of a bizarre, paranoid delusional system.

Auditory hallucinations and possible influence phenomena cannot be confirmed, since the subject maintains that his forms of communication with like-minded persons are secret.

The subject appears to have an unclear identity feeling, as he switches between describing himself in the singular and plural.

In the conversation, the subject appears with comprehensive ideas about the killing of named individuals on a list, such as the Royal Family, the Prime Minister and Foreign Minister. The ideas are considered as extensive, homicidal thoughts.

The experts have occasionally had difficulty in following the subject. In parts of the conversation, he is exhibiting a moderate association disorder and formal thought disorder in the form of perseveration. There is no latency or thought block during the conversation.

The subject considers his own private and personal experiences of paramount importance to social issues and decisions. As an example of this, one mentions the subject’s understanding of how the court case regarding the care takeover when he was small justifies the need for introduction of patriarchy and restrictions on women’s involvement outside the home.

The subject appears without depressive thoughts in the form of guilt, shame, hopelessness, or thoughts about his own death by suicide. He denies experiencing sadness, joylessness, reduced initiative or lack of initiative. There is thus no evidence of a depressed mood.

The subject does not exhibit increased psychomotorical tempo, or perceived high mood. The subject’s speech is coherent and with normal syntax. He has no mind or voice strain. He is “affect stable”. There is no evidence of lack of impulse control, neither verbally nor physically. There is thus no evidence of a high mood.

The subject appears without clinical suspicion of intoxication.The subject denies having suicidal thoughts or plans.

» » » » [ Breivik Report :: 1.0-2.4|2.5-2.6|2.7-4.1|4.2-5.6|5.7-5.11|5.12-9.0]