The 4 Freedoms Library

It takes a nation to protect the nation

I tried copying in the embedded link from the Vlad Tepes article (in case the post on VT disappears at some point), but going to that link on the MRC TV site says it's not found.  So here's the link to VT.

The videos shows that the police found a marina (from which they could presumably hear gunshots, and could see people in the water), but then decided to waste 18 minutes by driving to a different marina.

The article on VT says that this is a reflection of how public safety officials in some countries now put their own safety above that of those they are supposed to be protecting.  The same thing could be said for the police in the recent riots in Britain (there were numerous reports of people waiting for 3 hours before police responded to emergency calls).

The Norwegian police and security services come out of the Brievik massacre very badly.  I have no expectation that any public enquiry would ever make that judgement - they seem to be entirely cover-up operations.



Merker: &, Breivik, Cover-up, Health, Police, Safety

Visninger: 377

Svar til denne diskusjonen

Now it is clear that there were a series of avoidable disasters: there was no helicopter to fly armed police to the island when the shooting started; nearly all Oslo’s police were unavailable because they were on holiday on July 22; a police telephone operator failed to accept Breivik’s “surrender”; and for three hours after Breivik’s car bomb narrowly missed killing government ministers in central Oslo, the prime minister had no security . The city was apparently considered so safe that it was normal for him to have no secret service protection on duty.

The head of the intelligence service, which was fixated on the Islamic threat and virtually ignored Right-wingers, has been forced to resign.

Well, at least someone lost their job over it.  I don't think anyone was sacked or disciplined for what happend on 9/11. Scores should have been sacked after that debacle.

I was pointing out within days of the Uttoya massacre a) that Breivik must have had military training, and b) that the police and security services were obviously woefully inept.  It looks like the Breivik trial is not even going to discuss the ineptitude of the Norwegian police (as demonstrated in that video in the first post on this thread).  The trial is going to last for 2 months, he admits to doing it, and they are not going to discuss the boy scouts who are "protecting" the western world.

I think Breivik even says in his Compendium that he had been visited by the security services in Norway, due to his purchases of large amounts of suspicious chemicals.  If that is true, then this report is false.  He had been on their radar, but they were so useless that they fell for his cover story.  And these are the highly-trained experts guarding us around the western world!  They are almost always reactive, and the reason may well be because they are being blinded by political-correctness.

There's an elephant in the room: if the head of the security services was fixated on the threat of islamic terrorism, why is it forbidden to talk about islamic terrorism ("The War on Terror" not "The War on Islamic Terrorism")?  Surely there can be no such threat from islam - it's the religion of peace.

Here is an old comment from one of our community, Albert Case, one week before the Uttoya massacre (you can find it on the Wall of this Room, dated 15 July) :

Even so, it was a surprise to read on July 11 — the same day that the newspapers reported the car fires — that out of 430 new graduates of the Norwegian Police University College, only fourteen have been offered jobs on a police force anywhere in the country.  Fourteen!

Now, you can’t blame this on the economy.  Norway is a rich country (which is to say that the government is rich, not the people), and it’s almost the only place in the Western world whose job market hasn’t been decimated by the economic slump of the last few years.  No, this situation is the product of state budgetary priorities that are sheer lunacy.

How is it a member of our community, who lives in Australia, is able to highlight the inadequacies of the Norwegian policing system?  He could see the appalling statistics about the carbeques in Oslo, and the incompetence of a country training up huge numbers of police officers, then not employing them.

It's really no surprise a) that they didn't have the necessary equipment on 22 July, b) that they responded in such a disorganized and unprepared manner.

A quick heads up - there is a documentary on this on BBC2 at 9pm tonight.

A Norwegian professor's observations on the current circus in Oslo:

"On July 22 young people died because the police decided to protect themselves first. Now they can’t seem to use enough resources to protect the serial killer. [...] Norwegian forensic psychiatry was probably a victim at Utøya. A welcome result may be to remove the unwise rule that a psychosis automatically exempts guilt."

The rest of what the prof says is mealy-mouthed.  Some of the comments bite through to the bone:

This article is silly or better, show the silliness of Norwegians.

They built a sick society, all creamy and sugar, where evil people could go and rape with impunity, sure the governments would turn a blind eye to their crimes.
Now, confronted with the results of their actions, with the effect of their silly criminal code, they react with open disregard with any respect for the rules.

The statement "But even a minister from the Labour Party will not remain in his position for many hours if this mass murderer were ever to be let loose or granted leave." show how much the law is really respected in Norway when they harvest what they sow (I'm talking about the laws they enacted).

They didn't (and don't) respect the victims with weak laws, they don't respect the laws with their statements.

And this comment is also well-observed:

There are several points worth considering about Breivik's massacre of the innocents:

1. I believe it is now fairly obvious that the killer Breivik is not insane.

2. If it can be recognized that Breivik is not insane, then, as in all murder cases, a motive has to be found for his crime. A motive can be used in proving any crime as a 'proof' of the offence/s as having been carried out.

3. What motive/s will be seized upon by the court to assist in proving Breivik's guilt?

4. Why are person's who have no connection to Breivik, apart from having Breivik comment on their blog, being summoned as witnesses to Court? What possible and tangible evidence can these blog operators provide?

5. Why didn't the Court take up In Camera proceedings for the sake of the victims families rather than allow this trial to become a public circus?

"5. Why didn't the Court take up In Camera proceedings for the sake of the victims families rather than allow this trial to become a public circus?"

I am confused by some of the negative attitudes to the process of the trial.  Surely, the shaking of hands is a good sign, as is the dismissal of the lay judge that made an injudicious (pardon the pun) comment.

And surely we don't want in camera proceedings?  There are issues here that need to be discussed in public.  We want more dialogue on the sensitive, politically incorrect topics, don't we?

There is also the Commission of inquiry, briefed with looking at the whole issue from every angle, not constrained by the matter of the court, which is getting little mention in the press, but which may turn out to give the most valuable insights.  Well, it may or it may not, it depends if Norwegian society is prepared to bite the bullet and take a long hard look at all its preconceptions and conceits about itself, and what it has become.

I don't read anything from the shaking of hands.  I think I would refuse to shake the hand of a mass-killer.  Why put up a veneer of respectability.  If I was invited to meet Ahmadinajad or Nick Griffin or Breivik I can see no reason why I would want to pretent that I do not feel animosity to them.  I would like to see some of them executed.  

The dismissal of the judge is absolutely a good thing.  I think that judge should himself be in prison.

As for the "in camera" proceedings.  There are those on Gates of Vienna who feel that the trial is being used to tarnish their names (Breivik himself seems to be intent on destroying some of them, the media and judiciary also seem to have this in mind).  Either leave all the trial open or do it all in camera.  But once a country starts to edit the version that the public sees, then there is ample scope for a show trial.

There is a variety of commentary on GoV at the moment.  Some are scared that the Breivik trial will damage them or "the movement".  Others are disgusted by how the GoV editorialisng (and comments) have become very tame since the Utoya massacre.

I guess we should consider the opinions of those Freedom Fighters in Norway who are being implicated in some way.  Why call people to testify if they have never met Breivik?  Are these counter-jihad Freedom Fighters being called as expert witnesses on islam?  Is it some kind of testament to the insight they have into the islamisation of the west?  Their faces are going to be splashed all over Norwegian media.  Once identified in that way they may lose their jobs, wives, etc.  They may become targets for assassination.  If it was me, I would want the proceedings held in camera.  I will post something I have seen by someone from the Norwegian Defence League.

Good point, individual safety is an issue, so perhaps they could offer the witnesses to give testimony from behind a screen.

Twenty eight of his victims died after the Norwegian extremist rang the police twice from a mobile phone he found on Utoya Island, where he hunted down members of a Labour Party youth camp.

One wonders if the Norwegian media are hounding the Norwegian police and the leader of the AUF as guilty parties in the events on Utøya Island.  It would be interesting to find out if there is no media commentary on those parties.  It would be strange if the leader of the NDL who never met Breivik is called to the trial, yet the police are not investigated, since more than 1/3 of the killings could be directly attributable to the incompetence of the Norwegian police.  In fact, given their Keystone Kops performance in the above video, it maybe as many as a half of the deaths could be attributed to them.

It is just disgusting how all the eyes of the world are on Breivik while everyone is deliberately keeping themselves blind to the reasons why Breivik did what he did. 

When will these imbeciles start looking inside themselves, and admit the errors of their ways? When will they admit that it was their insane immigration and tolerant policies that caused Breivik to finally lose his cool?  


People can use any excuse to do what is wrong.  Poverty, the parents, divorced parents, bullied at school, relative poverty, unemployment, being too fat/short/skinny, the devil made me do it, an unhappy childhood, failed marriage, drug abuse, not enough love growing up, disenfranchisement, no friends, etc. etc. etc. 

My point is, no, Morrigan, I do not believe it was Norway’s ‘insane immigration and tolerant policies that caused Breivik to finally lose his cool’ and murder 77 people.  Though you ask it as a question, some readers may get it wrong and think you are saying such policies actually caused Breivik to do what he did.

Some people think that people do horrible things because horrible things have happened to them personally or to their family or to their country.  People may think this because they do not think deeply enough, in my opinion.  There is an important element missing.

Before anyone does anything, take any action, especially action that is planned and premeditated, they must believe it is okay to do it.  That it is right in their moral universe to do what they want to do.

I do not believe that humans are simply pavlovian reactors or mechanical functionaries.  Beliefs of one sort or another say it is okay to do this and not okay to do that.  Ideas of right and wrong, and a conscience, are embedded in each and every person.  The nature of the world and how this world is understood, are of course factors in what we do but we cannot ignore the moral space within each person which contributes to what a person actually does.  Breivik could have reacted in other ways to what he perceived to be an injustice and a grave threat to the cultural traditions of Norway, if only he had different beliefs than the ones he evidently has.

So there are causes and then causes of causes.

Morrigan Emaleth said:

It is just disgusting how all the eyes of the world are on Breivik while everyone is deliberately keeping themselves blind to the reasons why Breivik did what he did. 

When will these imbeciles start looking inside themselves, and admit the errors of their ways? When will they admit that it was their insane immigration and tolerant policies that caused Breivik to finally lose his cool?  


Page Monitor

Just fill in the box below on any 4F page to be notified when it changes.

Privacy & Unsubscribe respected

Muslim Terrorism Count

Thousands of Deadly Islamic Terror Attacks Since 9/11

Mission Overview

Most Western societies are based on Secular Democracy, which itself is based on the concept that the open marketplace of ideas leads to the optimum government. Whilst that model has been very successful, it has defects. The 4 Freedoms address 4 of the principal vulnerabilities, and gives corrections to them. 

At the moment, one of the main actors exploiting these defects, is Islam, so this site pays particular attention to that threat.

Islam, operating at the micro and macro levels, is unstoppable by individuals, hence: "It takes a nation to protect the nation". There is not enough time to fight all its attacks, nor to read them nor even to record them. So the members of 4F try to curate a representative subset of these events.

We need to capture this information before it is removed.  The site already contains sufficient information to cover most issues, but our members add further updates when possible.

We hope that free nations will wake up to stop the threat, and force the separation of (Islamic) Church and State. This will also allow moderate Muslims to escape from their totalitarian political system.

The 4 Freedoms

These 4 freedoms are designed to close 4 vulnerabilities in Secular Democracy, by making them SP or Self-Protecting (see Hobbes's first law of nature). But Democracy also requires - in addition to the standard divisions of Executive, Legislature & Judiciary - a fourth body, Protector of the Open Society (POS), to monitor all its vulnerabilities (see also Popper). 
1. SP Freedom of Speech
Any speech is allowed - except that advocating the end of these freedoms
2. SP Freedom of Election
Any party is allowed - except one advocating the end of these freedoms
3. SP Freedom from Voter Importation
Immigration is allowed - except where that changes the political demography (this is electoral fraud)
4. SP Freedom from Debt
The Central Bank is allowed to create debt - except where that debt burden can pass across a generation (25 years).

An additional Freedom from Religion is deducible if the law is applied equally to everyone:

  • Religious and cultural activities are exempt from legal oversight except where they intrude into the public sphere (Res Publica)"

© 2023   Created by Netcon.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service