Thank you, Infowars!
As mentioned in the last post ("Let's All Jump to Conclusions"), Kurt Nimmo of Infowars has decided that Anders Breivik is "obviously a patsy for a Gladio operation to destroy political opposition to the bankers." The Powers That Be in Norway were fed up with populist opposition to the New World Order agenda, so they staged a false flag terrorist attack that implicates a right-wing, anti-government terrorist.
Sounds good. But just for fun, let's be contrarian and examine this theory a little.
Evidence for a false-flag attack:
1. Breivik belonged to Norway's Progressive Party, a populist libertarian party that opposes big government and economic bailouts.
As Nimmo himself states, however, Breivik hasn't been a member of the Progressive Party for four years. Wouldn't it make more sense to frame, I dunno, a current member? If you pick a patsy whose membership has lapsed for nearly half a decade, the sensible members of the public will just assume that Breivik no longer subscribes to the PP platform, and conclude that his involvement isn't germane to what happened Friday.
Breivik's major beef, if the video and manifesto attributed to him are authentic, was Muslim immigrants. If you wanted an anti-government/anti-big business patsy, would you pick this guy? No. You'd pick a guy who makes incoherent vids about the evils of banksterism.
Protip: If you're trying to destroy the reputation of a large political movement by making its members look like psychotic mass murderers, you might want to frame more than one guy, and make sure they actually belong to said political movement.
2. Lots of false flag attacks have been staged.
Well, yes. And lots of people have gone on shooting rampages for any number of dipshit reasons.
3. The Norway massacre has been likened to the Oklahoma City bombing, and that was a false flag attack designed to squash the Patriot movement.
Really? Then why did every other douchebag in Washington try to pin it on Middle Eastern terrorists? Did they not get the memo?
4. Breivik may have been a Freemason. Another gunman who targeted children, Thomas Hamilton of Scotland, was a Freemason - and perhaps part of a Freemasonic conspiracy.
The Dunblane conspiracy theories are, to be blunt and crude, fucking retarded. And no, I don't mean retarded in a developmentally disabled way. I mean retarded in the I-have-a-fully-functional-mind-but-I'd-rather-waste-it-thinking-up-idiotic-conspiracy-fairytales way. The Dunblane theory is basically this: The Scottish Powers That Be wanted to outlaw guns, but They knew The People would fight them tooth and nail. So they blackmailed or persuaded a mentally unstable pedophile Freemason to go into a school and shoot as many little children as possible. Voila! Problem solved! No more guns, and only 16 innocent Scottish children had to die.
To buy this theory, you have to ignore the fact that the Tory government didn't outlaw handguns, but restricted legal handguns to single-shot .22s. This was on the recommendation of the Home Affairs Select Committee, which advised that outlawing all handguns would be worthless "panic legislation". It was the Liberal [correction: Labour] government that put a ban on all handguns. If the sinister master plan was to get rid of guns, then the Tories would have done it ASAP. They're good at sinister master plans.
The shooter, Thomas Hamilton, was very peeved that people kept getting in the way of his youth group leadership (he was turfed from the Scouts back in the '70s for inappropriate behaviour, but had set up several "youth clubs" since that time). He was continuously getting complaints from parents, and felt that his favourite activity was about to be taken away from him. He was also unemployed and completely freaking insane.
Theoretically, yes, Masons could blackmail other Masons to do all kinds of wacky stuff. But I don't suppose that's any more common than plain old blackmail.
5. The blasts may have come from beneath the buildings, rather than from a car bomb. Whew! Finally, some meaty physical evidence!
Or maybe not. According to this article by Paul Joseph Watson, the source is the father of an anonymous Norwegian emailer. According to Anon's dad, an explosives expert, the "pattern of damage and debris" reveal the blast came from underground. Until this alleged guy gives us some details, or someone else notices the same thing, I'd say this piece of evidence is thinner than lefse.
And to get all semantic and shit, let's remember that the term "patsy" was originally used to denote scapegoats; innocent or marginally involved people blamed for someone else's actions. Nowadays the word is used promiscuously, slapped on everyone from co-conspirators to masterminds who get busted for their minions' doings. This is bullshit. Real patsies are not involved in the plot, don't know there even is a plot, and probably won't admit to doing anything wrong unless there's some heavy-duty coercive questioning going on.
As Breivik has already reportedly confessed to this crime without implicating even one accomplice, he's likelier to be the guy who did this than a fall guy.
- ▼ July (4)
- ► 2010 (50)