Expert Witness: Vigrid Founder: Tore Tvedt: Norwegian Consensus Opinion Dictatorship Authorities are Responsible for 22 July Attacks

Expert Witness: Vigrid Founder: Tore Tvedt: Norwegian Consensus Opinion Dictatorship Authorities are Responsible for 22 July Attacks

Andrea Muhrrteyn | NRK | Translation: Halvor Raknes

Who do you think is responsible for 22 July?

Norwegian authorities, Norwegian opinion dictatorship authorities who have, among other things through the way in which they crushed Vigrid, - because Vigrid was crushed - has shown that anyone who believe that you can be active in civil .. and have a life on the side, that is impossible. If you're active in the civil you're going to be so run over and thrown down with the iron heel... that obviously nobody does it. Back when I ceased and retired, then nobody has been active either.

The Labour Party is itself responsible for the attacks on it?

The consensus dictatorship must take responsibility for those conditions. Not me.

But how are you perceiving it? We all have thoughts about what he has done.

I was thrown out from the society to which you belong and have learned to live with that and live quietly and peacefully, and prefer more to take a walk in the forest and talk with bunnies.. so I don't consider at all what takes place in your society.

Expert Witness: Vigrid Founder: Tore Tvedt: I will not distance myself from Breivik; his views are completely standard

Expert Witness: Vigrid Founder: Tore Tvedt: I will not distance myself from Breivik; his views are completely standard

Andrea Muhrrteyn | 04 June 2012 | VG & Vigrid

When the founder of Vigrid.net, Tore W. Tvedt (69) is to testify in Breivik's terror trial, he will refuse to distance himself from the mass murders of Anders Behring Breivik.

“I do not take a position on it, and I will not be asked about it once. I don't give a damn. I have not asked them to be a witness, they have asked me,” says 69-year-old. The leader of the ethno-cultural network Vigrid, which bases their ideology on Norse mythology, advocates racial doctrine and believes Adolf Hitler was “Europe's savior,” and a “savior”.

On Vigrid, Tvedt writes: “Yesterday I received and returned a signed witness summons in Breivik matter and look forward to giving my Vigrid opinions and contribution to illuminate Norwegian society of our perspectives of reality. It is an honorable mission, which I hope will help Odin to enable a little more understanding of why evolution has brought us where we stand today. So far, the power elite have succeeded completely with their tactical plan that is to draw all attention away from the political necessity arguments in this trial, namely their immigration policy issues that underlie the case and instead to concentrate the publics attention on Breivik's alleged psychological state.”

“The Norwegian media is actively participating in mocking blame game, which should not surprise anyone who is aware that of the fact that the media's only task is to promote the same power elite's interests and nothing else.....”

Seven Islamic Related Expert Witnesses Refuse to Testify in Breivik Case

Seven Islamic Related Expert Witnesses Refuse to Testify in Breivik Case

Hanna Nabintu Herland | Mullah Krekar | Blogger Peder Nøstvold Jensen (also known as Fjordman) | Islamic Activist Mohyeldeen Mohammad | Islamic critic author Bruce Bawer | Peace researcher Johan Galtung | author: Walid al-Kubaisi

Andrea Muhrrteyn | 4 June 2012 | Aftenposten & Legal Project

Aftenposten reports that four of the expert witnesses due to testify on behalf of Breivik's Political Necessity Defence arguments have refused to testify and will not be appearing in court today.

Furthermore of the original 17 expert witnesses called, only 11 remain. The four witnesses who will not be testifying today are: Mullah Krekar, blogger Peder Nøstvold Jensen (also known as Fjordman), the Islamic Activist Mohyeldeen Mohammad & the Islamic critic author Bruce Bawer.

Chaos began when the religious historian Hanne Nabintu Herland refused to testify, saying she would rather go to prison than testify in the case of Breivik. A letter to Ms. Herland to inform her of the details of Breivik's necessity defence and detailing that ecological expert witness academics consider it their honour and duty to testify on behalf of political necessity ecological necessity activists, such as Greenpeace, fell on deaf ears.

Bawer and Fjordman contacted The Legal Project to help them to avoid testifying at Breivik's trial; and the Legal Project - for some strange and illogical reason - considers their removal from the expert witness list as a “tremendous victory for Free Speech.”

In November last year, the author filed an application to the court and Breivik for an order to “(A) act as Mr. Breivik’s paralegal assistant in aiding him to represent himself in accordance to the Political Necessity defence; by means of research, contacting relevant Norwegian and International expert witnesses to testify to relevant issues documented in his manifesto, research, etc; (B) act as Mr. Breivik’s paralegal forensic psychology advisor in aiding Mr. Breivik to expose the fraudulent allegations against him -– questioning his Mens Real political necessity criminal culpability on 22 July 2011 -- by those practicing political psychiatry , intent on denying Breivik, his Political Necessity Treason trial.” There was no response from Breivik; although it is unknown if Breivik's defenders informed him of the applications submitted to the court on his behalf. The court refused respond to the application, and it was subsequently submitted to the Supreme Court for review; who also refused to address the issue. A complaint of Judicial Ethical violations has been filed with the Secretariat of the Supervisory Committee for Judges.

We Have Met the Enemy; It is Us: “Feeding the World's Hungry Millions: How It Will Mean Billions for U.S. Business.”

We Have Met the Enemy; It is Us: “Feeding the World's Hungry Millions: How It Will Mean Billions for U.S. Business.”

The Culture of Future Conflict: Overpopulation & Resource Scarcity will be the Direct Cause of Confrontation, Conflict, and War: ... Resource scarcity will be a direct cause of confrontation, conflict, and war.... Gross overpopulation will destroy fragile possibilities for progress in much of the non-Western world, and much of this problem is the West's fault....

Food for Peace / [Food Aid to Enable Our own Colonisation by Immigration]: Following World War II, U.S. agricultural surpluses reached alarming levels, and storage of excess grain cost the government millions of dollars per year--even as the food deteriorated and became inedible. A solution had to be found, and in 1954 President Dwight D. Eisenhower signed the Agricultural Trade Development Assistance Act into law.

The program, known as Public Law 480, benefited the U.S. by decreasing food surpluses and by creating new markets for its agricultural products....

Living in a Lifeboat: ..... Our experience with Public Law 480 clearly reveals the answer. This was the law that moved billions of dollars worth of U.S. grain to food-short, population-long countries during the past two decades. When P. L. 480 first came into being, a headline in the business magazine Forbes (Paddock and Paddock 1970) revealed the power behind it: "Feeding the World's Hungry Millions: How It Will Mean Billions for U.S. Business."

And indeed it did. In the years 1960 to 1970 a total of $7.9 billion was spent on the "Food for Peace" program, as P. L. 480 was called. During the years 1948 to 1970 an additional $49.9 billion were extracted from American taxpayers to pay for other economic aid programs, some of which went for food and food-producing machinery. (This figure does not include military aid.) That P. L. 480 was a give-away program was concealed. Recipient countries went through the motions of paying for P. L. 480 food -with IOUs. In December 1973 the charade was brought to an end as far as India was concerned when the United States "forgave" India's $3.2 billion debt (Anonymous 1974). Public announcement of the cancellation of the debt was delayed for two months; one wonders why.

"Famine-1975!" (Paddock and Paddock 1970) is one of the few publications that points out the commercial roots of this humanitarian attempt. Though all U.S. taxpayers lost by P. L. 480, special interest groups gained handsomely. Farmers benefited because they were not asked to contribute the grain -it was bought from them by the taxpayers. Besides the direct benefit there was the indirect effect of increasing demand and thus raising prices of farm products generally. The manufacturers of farm machinery, fertilizers, and pesticides benefited by the farmers extra efforts to grow more food. Grain elevators profited from storing the grain for varying lengths of time. Railroads made money hauling it to port, and shipping lines by carrying it overseas. Moreover, once the machinery for P. L. 480 was established, an immense bureaucracy had a vested interest in its continuance regardless of its merits.

Very little was ever heard of these selfish interests when P. L. 480 was defended in public. The emphasis was always on its humanitarian effects. The combination of multiple and relatively silent selfish interests with highly vocal humanitarian apologists constitutes a powerful lobby for extracting money from taxpayers. Foreign aid has become a habit that can apparently survive in the absence of any known justification.

Finnish Deep Green Ecologist Pentti Linkola Agrees with Breivik on Immigration, Democracy & Minority Violence, Anti Liberal Political Correctness, Corrupt Corporate Elite's Use of Education for Brainwashing

Pentti Linkola: Can Life Prevail?: A Radical Approach to the Environmental Crisis

Diord Fionn | Ireland First

“If there were a button I could press [to radically reduce world population], I would sacrifice myself without hesitating, if it meant millions of people would die.” - Pentti Linkola, Wall Street Journal Europe, May 1994

“A minority can never have any other effective means to influence the course of matters but through the use of violence.”

“Any dictatorship would be better than modern democracy. There cannot be so incompetent dictator, that he would show more stupidity than a majority of the people. Best dictatorship would be one where lots of heads would roll and government would prevent any economical growth.”

“Foreign affairs: All mass immigration and most of import-export trade must stop. Cross-border travel is allowed only for small numbers of diplomats and correspondents.”

“Science and schooling: Education will concentrate on practical skills. All competition is rooted out. Technological research is reduced to the extreme minimum. But every child will learn how to clean a fish in a way that only the big shiny bones are left over.”

“By decimating its woodlands, Finland has created the grounds for prosperity. We can now thank prosperity for bringing us – among other things – two million cars, millions of glaring, grey-black electronic entertainment boxes, and many unnecessary buildings to cover the green earth. Wealth and surplus money have led to financial gambling and rampant social injustice, whereby ‘the common people’ end up contributing to the construction of golf courses, classy hotels, and holiday resorts, while fattening Swiss bank accounts. Besides, the people of wealthy countries are the most frustrated, unemployed, unhappy, suicidal, sedentary, worthless and aimless people in history. What a miserable exchange.” – Pentti Linkola

Linkola is one of the few voices who advocates:

1. No immigration
   
2. Downsize population
   
3. Kill defectives
   
4. Stop rampant technology

In the eyes of the most credible sources, planet Earth can sustain a half-billion humans without any sizable destruction of our habitat, or any loss in species or stability of our ecosystem. Any numbers higher than that, no matter how much they recycle, will cause environmental chaos. The modern leftist-tinged environmental movement is terrified of telling anyone that they cannot breed and keep buying whatever strikes their fancy, but someone must do this in the future. The sooner we do it, the fewer people in the future will be left without a means of sustenance and thus require termination. As Linkola himself has said, "We still have a chance to be cruel. But if we are not cruel today, all is lost."