The 4 Freedoms Library

It takes a nation to protect the nation

I hadn't particularly wanted to focus anything in particular on Breivik's trial, as I felt it would be covered extensively in the media and by various counter-jihad freedom fighter blogs.  But it seems they are giving it little coverage.  I guess that they are wanting to keep a low profile.  So, I will start to post some of the interesting things that are in the corners of this trial, and which the media will probably ignore.  This will not necessarily be a chronological account - I'll just post things here as I see them, which may mean the chronology will be less than linear.

The first thins is an interview with the leader of the Norwegian Defence League, who has been called to give evidence.  As he says he has never had contact with Breivik, and there is no evidence that Breivik was ever "a member" of the NDL, one has to wonder what on earth his testimony would prove.  Even if the opposite was true, it would not mean that this man or the NDL has responsibility for Breivik's actions -- Anwar al Awlaki was considered responsible for telling muslims to go and kill people.  The leader of the NDL brings out other interesting issues, like why is the Coward of Utoya island not on the list of witnesses?  The Coward of Utoya Island was there on the day when the shooting happened.  Read the details here, and ask yourself whether or not this Coward is a far more pertinent witness:

https://4freedoms.ning.com/group/norway/forum/topics/the-coward-of-...

So the Coward, with years of experience in being questioned, is not going to be interrogated in court, yet ordinary people who had nothing to do with Breivik are going to get the full glare of the media machine.

The questions are italiicised. Please complain if it is still not clear who is saying what.


http://norwegiandl.com/modules/nyheter_norsk/item.php?itemid=85 

You are summoned as a witness in the trial against Anders Breivik. Do you have any idea about why you’r called for? Did you have any contact with him at all?

“Until 23/7 (the day after terrorist attacks), I had never heard his name, I have never had any contact with him. Thus, I’am very surprised that he summon me as a witness in this case and I mean it is ridiculous that Norwegian law allows this. It makes it a mystery to me why I was summoned as a witness.

I fear that our opinion will be misused by the press and media so that we are portrayed as minded with a terrorist, and this in turn will be used in an attempt to silence the critics of Islam. The first day of the trial already, the press questioned if critics of Islam should be banned! This is the worst possible solution.
This will definitely be the last nail in the coffin for freedom of expression in Norway. We will never stop criticism of Islam. It would mean that the rest of the population loses the ability to listen to us... In addition, we, Islam critics, lose the ability to detect people who want violence as a solution”.



Blitz's-member and leftwing professional demonstrator Stein Lillevolden is called as a witness too; it is possible that “Blitz” may have connection to the motivation of Breivik, because of the fact that NDL was infiltrated by Blitz-members before the organization was completely restructured and Lena Andreassen and Blitz’ infiltrators were caught and thrown by EDL?

“I cannot answer what contact Blitz, SOS Racism and others, trying to "hijack" NDL (feb2011 to April 2011)…had with the terrorist, but that he summoned Lillevolden as a witness could indicate that he ( the terrorist) has a thought behind it, and a goal. It could been fun to see how many emails “SOS Racism” actually wrote to the terrorist in order to create the livelihood of the organization's fraud ... and last but not least; to see what the subject was. Remember that the organization “Serve The People” are the owners of “SOS Racism”, and they are working for an armed revolution in Norway…”


Has Breivik ever been a member of NDL after that Lena Andreassen steered the ship straight into the iceberg?

“In police interrogations (with the terrorist) the Police confirms that he was never a member of the NDL. This is in line with what NDL has claimed all the time. The fact that the previous leader (Lena Andreassen) has maintained this is probably due to several things. First, it involves a confusion between two nearly identical profiles on Facebook. One called "Sigurd Jordsalfar" and the other who called himself "Sigurd Jordsalfare". The latter is the terrorist and has NEVER been associated with NDL.

Moreover, the media's intense hunting for scapegoats is one of the reasons why the terrorist is linked to the NDL (by the press), and we have repeatedly pointed out that the terrorist was NOT a member of the NDL! The problem is that the media is not interested in telling the truth.

I would like to add that I NEVER said that the terrorist was a member with us. This is something the media have invented! What I have said is that I cannot rule out that he was a member during the period “SOS Racism” did coup NDL. Now when it is known that he was NOT a member of the NDL, I wonder if the press will render this fact during, or after the trial….”


What will you say to Breivik if you get a chance to a direct appeal to him?

“I have no desire to say anything to him, I expect that my testimony will show that I despise his actions, and what he did cannont be justified, under NO circumstances!”

Do you think Islam-critical persons are called to testify, only to be accused of both defender and prosecutor as accomplices in Breivik's insane actions on Utøya and in Oslo?

“I believe that the Norwegian people will distinguish between us, who want to use freedom of expression, information and democratic means to create a discussion about the increasing adaptation to the ideology of Islam, - and the terrorists, - to which he belongs! His methods are just as bad as the Islamists themselves uses, namely terror and fear. And I know of NO serious critics of Islam in any way supporting his actions. To accuse us of being accomplices is a direct insult, an insult on a par with terrorist ideas. He argues that he HAD to stop the Labor progress.

For the politicians to say we should be banned because we are fellows in crime must be another way of saying that they are afraid of an open and informative debate on the matter.”


What is your opinion about being summoned as a witness, while Eskil Pedersen who actually was on Utøya during the killing and escaped by ferry, is not summoned?

“I am amazed to the witness list in the whole and cannot believe that our legal system allows a terrorist to call whoever he wants. I have contacted various agencies to avoid having to testify because I feel I have nothing to contribute, and cannot see anything positive by witness in this case. I had however expected that Eksild Pedersen was called as a witness, if only to illustrate what he experienced at Utøya and that he would give an explanation as to why he not ordered the ferry back to rescue more helpless people, who were abandoned on the island.

In addition I had hoped he would explain why the radio communications was broken and why they deliberately did not picked up helpless people in the water.
As I see it this is of great public interest and as such it should have been examined, especially as the AUF leader now come forward and insist that he was the main target, despite the fact that the terrorist all along have claimed that Harlem Brundtland was the target. Is this something the terrorist have said to scare the AUF leader even more, or does it mean that we cannot trust any of the so-called plans of the terrorist?”


Prior to 22.7; had you heard about Breivik?

“NO, I'd never heard his name or had any contact with any of his many fake profiles. Nor no one I know had heard of him before 22/7!”


Do you, as Breivik, believe that the Islamization of Norway has gone too far? If so, why?

“The terrorist and I have totally different view regarding the solution concerning the Islamization of Norway and the rest of the West. It is impossible to avoid that we share certain points. This because his manifesto consists of cut-and-paste from various bloggers previous manifest.

Even the police and PC (Political Correct) politicians agree in parts of the manifest if it is split up into small enough topics. Primarily we disagree in the solution because I want to use free speech as a tool to inform what's happening. The way it develops in Norway, we should take the issue seriously because the muslims they (security service) refere to as extremists today, are in increasing numbers!

The difference between Norway and some other countries is the population is tha it should not be a large number of immigrants before the Islamist groups is considered as large. There are already major extremist groups seeking to impose sharia in Norway. As known; Sharia is a totalitarian and oppressive law.

When looking at Sharia law, it is frightening that Norway will equate this ideology Islam with Christianity in the Constitution. It is completely wrong to equate an ideology that fights against gender equality, freedom, democracy and all the other rights we see as a matter of course in Norway. Our politicians will introduce a law that will make it a criminal offense to criticize oppression and terrorism in this country.”

On your opinion; is the danger of another terrorist attack in Norway the most from a new Breivik, or from a crazed Islamist?

“Both me, other critics of Islam, PST, and a number of others believe that the threat level in Norway is unchanged, which means that what is referred to as extreme Islamists represent the largest threat in and to Norway. We look at developments in networks, and in fact we see that the number of "extreme" Islamists develops in an alarming speed. I wonder when the media will focus on these groups...
I fear however that the attitude of society today against Islam's critics may create more immigrants that intervenes to violence to focus on Islamization. We clearly see that's happening.”


Is Breivik's greeting in the courtroom a Nazi salute, as the media claims, or is it something he has invented for his imaginary army, where he's sort of commander?

“The mentioned greeting he performed in court is probably another fantasy he has come up with. I am sure that if he had been asked what the greeting means, he would have had an explanation problem. That the media regards this as a right-wing attitude is just as stupid as the greeting. I will make a cautious assumption of what he means by this greeting; it could be that he has done this because of love for his country and thus feel he is unjust accused. This is of course reprehensible! The man should be put in a cell and remain there! Such people should not be let loose again and should never be granted leave from prison.”


Is Breivik crazy?

“YES! I personally believe that a person who commits such an act must be crazy, he might not be crazy in legal sense as he have been planning this for many years, according to him selves. But there is little or no doubt that he is NOT normal! That said, I am amazed that he is addressed as unaccountable as the latest report claims he is sane.”

Visninger: 365

Svar til denne diskusjonen

Just as Anders Breivik was inspired by the success of jihadi terrorism, so the Urkainian white supremacist who murdered an elderly muslim in Birmingham was also inspired by the success of jihadi terrorism.

"Lapshyn admired the Boston Marathon bombers and had downloaded images of the April 15 attack and its aftermath on to his computer."

http://www.hopenothate.org.uk/news/article/3045/revealed-pavlo-laps...

Of course, that little nugget is tucked away inside Hope Not Hate's article claiming he was inspired by football hooligans and computer games.

Breivik slams prison food, praises Hitler in court speech - bigstory.ap.org
http://bigstory.ap.org/article/e2849e74cdea4654a79bdb418dc78062/bre...
Note: this is a later trial, where he is complaining about his prison conditions.

Well, time moves on, and another of my predictions has come true.

Around the time of the Breivik case I was predicting that in future he would be seen as a hero.  The demographics the Leftist elite have put into play will ensure this inevitably.  Furthermore, I predicted he wouldn't be the last of these killers.  And I predicted there would come a time where society sided with the killers contemporaneously.  The killer would not need to wait 20 years for his society to be so divided that the indigenous people would side with the killer.

In Italy we've reached that point.  I won't embed the video here but I will include a link to the appropriate time slot (to save you all time in seeing what I'm seeing). https://youtu.be/TFev42kLQXw?t=382

Now, as tuned into what's going on as I thought I was, I'd missed that there was any connection between the Italian killer, his victims, and a butchered Italian woman.  But the Italians are clearly aware of this connection.  And they support the killer.  He is a hero before he's even been convicted.  And these are the people prepared to express an opinion.  

I'm told that across England when the reports of Darren Osborne were on the TV in pubs, working class people were saying he didn't kill enough Muslims. That kind of sentiment comes as a shock to us who move in different circles.  But if the working class were ever allowed on TV debates without being shouted down and hounded, it might be a sentiment with which we were not so unfamiliar.  I did think it might strange during his trial that the CPS were allowed to "blacken" his name by associating him with Tommy Robinson, without any kind of outrage by Osborne's defense lawyer and no reprimand from the judge.  But then when it came to the summing up the judge said (paraphrase): it doesn't matter if you side with Osborne, you are to decide if he was simply guilty of murder.  That whole farrago struck me as an attempt to bias the jury - followed by explicit instructions from the judge that Osborne was guilty of murder.  Their fear must have been that the jury might have been divided and wouldn't convict.  

https://3speak.co/watch?v=rair2/yvzvtylq&jwsource=em

Fjordman Interview (Part 6)

Posted: 24 Feb 2021 04:16 PM PST

Hat tip Document.no and Gates of Vienna 
 This is part 6 of an interview of Peder Jensen aka Fjordman in Norway. As previously mentioned in cross-posting the first 5 segments of this interview, Fjordman is an outspoken critic of Islam. He was mentioned by mass murderer Anders Breivik as someone whose writings he (Breivik) read. This segment is centered around a discussion of Breivik.

RSS

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)"

© 2021   Created by Netcon.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service