Anders Behring Breivik: a Judeo-Masonic Terrorist

Anders Behring Breivik: a Judeo-Masonic Terrorist

"Boycott Israel": Labour Youth League summer camp, Utøya, Norway, July, 2011

by Michael Hoffman

In the aftermath of crimes perpetrated by the Cryptocracy's "lone nuts," the controlled media seek to muddy the waters with competing theories, motives, background, ideologies and affiliations acribed to the shooter. In the case of Lee Harvey Oswald he has been presented as pro-Castro and anti-Castro; a CIA agent and a Soviet agent; a pawn of the Mafia and a stooge of the FBI. The JFK assassination itself has been presented as a military coup, a mafia hit, a CIA hit, a right wing hit, a left-wing hit etc. The same game has been played with the source of the cancer pandemic in the United States. It is exacerbated by drinking coffee; on the other hand, coffee prevents cancer; cancer is caused by junk food; on the other hand studies show there is no link between junk food and cancer. The point of all of this deliberately seeded confusion is to discourage us from seeking the real causes of cancer and the actual perpetrators of conspiracy. The end result of this misdirection is that the people tend to beieve that "everything causes cancer;" therefore they continue with their status quo lifestyle. The assassination of John F. Kennedy has been so muddied that there is the tendency to think, "everyone killed Kennedy." Of course if everyone did it, then no one did; at least no one we can trace or indict or bring to justice.

This is the process at work in the media in the case of Anders Behring Breivik. They insinuate that he was a proto-Nazi seeking "white Christian" dominion over Europe. His Israeli-driven ideology is given short shrift; mentioned in passing,and then tossed into the mixing bowl with all the competing theories and claims, and lost therein. The fact is, Breivik sought to exterminate a pro-Palestinian Norweigian island youth camp. As we will see, his terrorism is being applauded in "Israel," despite official, pro forma Israeli condolences to the bereaved.

Judaism despises Europe to its heart. This detestation is a core principle of Orthodox Judaism. After the Israelis have extracted the last ounce of financial support and military muscle from Europe they will delight in seeing it reduced to a burning cinder. Breivik is an ignoramus and his ignorance is shared by millions of our fellow Americans, who believe that the Israelis are the allies of the Christian West. For example, Breivik claims to be a type of medieval Crusader. The Crusaders destroyed Judaics wherever they found them. Their crusade was as much against Judaism as Islam.

Breivik is just a weaponized version of modern Judeo-Churchianity's personnel. They all believe the same double-minded buncombe that Breivik promotes. One characteristic of contemporary western whites is their worship of their executioners. The unbreachable chasm between the Judaic and the gentile yawns before their oblivious eyes. Orthodox Judaism is anti-goyimite in its essence. This essence cannot be seperated from Judaism. Anti-goyimism is the foundation upon which the synagogue is based. The rabbinic texts teach that in the coming era of Judaic supremacy, a Judaic may kill even a "righteous gentile" on a whim. Once they have helped the rabbis and Zionists achieve their world-historic objective there will be open season on the millions of church-going lemmings who at the present time adore counterfeit "Israel.” Modern western men and women are afflicted with a profound death wish. Why? With their contraception, abortion and adulation of the antichrist Israelis, they defy God: "All those who hate Me love death" (Proverbs 8:36).

We need to get beyond symptoms. When the Israelites of old rebelled against God, He turned their land over to hostile, alien peoples. Is something similar happening in the U.S., Canada, Australia and Europe, where the children God wants to send into the world are refused, by means of the birth control and abortion practiced by selfish whites? If it is, then the Muslims are sent by God to plague Europe for its sins. How many children did Breivik have? How many children do any of the other "crusaders" among the Zionist white nationalist parties of Europe have? 


The Zionists desire war to the hilt with Islam; that is, with nearly one billion people -- for generations. The western intelligence agencies shepherd Al-Qaeda today, just as the Rambam, Moses Maimonides, guided the sultan in the thirteenth century; just as the Judaics of medieval Iberia opened the gates to the Christian forts to allow the Muslim armies to attack.

Here below we present documentation related to Breivik's anti-Nazism and Israeli Zionism. We conclude with testimony concerning the enjoyment the Israelis are deriving from the massacre of Norweigian goyim on the island of Utøya and in Oslo. The Israeli state that was founded by terrorism privately delights in terrorism when it is perpetrated on its behalf.

"In numerous online postings, including a manifesto published on the day of the attacks, Breivik promoted the Vienna School or Crusader Nationalism philosophy, a mishmash of anti-modern principles that also calls for “the deportation of all Muslims from Europe” as well as from “the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.” According to the manifesto, titled “2083: A European Declaration of Independence” and published under the pseudonym Andrew Berwick, the Vienna School (http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com) supports “pro-Zionism/Israeli nationalism.”

"Anders Behring Breivik, who committed the massacre in Norway on Friday in which over 90 people were murdered, spoke out in the past against Islam and said that he is a strong supporter of Israel, Channel 2 News reported on Sunday. According to the report, in an English document he published on the Internet before the massacre, Breivik called himself a strong supporter of Zionism, praised Theodor Herzl the founder of Zionism, and attacked the European political establishment because he saw it as being anti-Israel. Breivik commended Israel for not giving most of the Muslims who live under its control civil rights, as opposed to the various European countries. He also praised Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu for including the Yisrael Beiteinu and Shas parties in his coalition...“It’s time to end the stupid support for the Palestinians and begin to support our cultural cousins – Israel,” Channel 2 quoted Breivik as having written in the document.”

From Breivik's manifesto:

"And then we have the relationship between conservative Muslims and so-called "moderate Muslims". There is moderate Nazis, too, that does not support fumigation of rooms and Jews. But they're still Nazis and will only sit and watch as the conservatives Nazis strike (if it ever happens). If we accept the moderate Nazis as long as they distance themselves from the fumigation of rooms and Jews? Now it unfortunately already cut himself with Marxists who have already infiltrated-culture, media and educational organizations. These individuals will be tolerated and will even work asprofessors and lecturers at colleges / universities and are thus able to spread their propaganda.

"For me it is very hypocritical to treat Muslims, Nazis and Marxists differ. They are all supporters of hate-ideologies...(page 2-3)...We have selected the Vienna School of Thought (http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com) as the ideological basis. This implies opposition to multiculturalism and Islamization (on cultural grounds). All ideological arguments based on anti-racism. This has proven to be very successful which explains why the modern cultural conservative movement / parties that use the Vienna School of Thought is so successful...To sums up the Vienna school of thought: Cultural Conservatism (anti-multiculturalism), Against Islamization, Anti-racist, Anti-authoritarian, (resistance to all authoritarian ideologies of hate), Pro-Israel/forsvarer of non-Muslim minorities in Muslim countries, Defender of the cultural aspects of Christianity. (end quote)

In an entry dated “Autumn 2008,” Breivik wrote that he attended a birthday party in Oslo and that:

I noticed a majority of these people were Labour Party sympathisers. I guess they don’t really have a choice considering the fact that they are all climbing the public sector hierarchy. A thought occurred. The judges during WW2 who had party affiliations with the NS (Nazi Party) or any affiliation with the SS, were prosecuted and imprisoned. Is it therefore only fair that judges of high rank with party affiliations to the Labour Party and the other parties who support multiculturalism (and therefore Islamisation) is to be considered category B or C traitors? They obviously have a considerable responsibility and should be considered traitors of their people… (end quote).

Breivik signed the manuscript:

Andrew Berwick Justiciar Knight Commander

Knights Templar Europe

Knights Templar Norway

Max Blumenthal: "...in November 2010, the Israeli government...accus(ed) the Norwegian government of 'anti-Israel incitement' for funding a trip for students to New York to see the 'Gaza Monologues' play. Then, the day before Breivik’s terror attack, which he planned long in advance, Norway’s Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Stor visited the Labor Youth camp at Utoya. There, he was met with demands...to support the Palestinian Authority’s unilateral statehood bid. 'The Palestinians must have their own state, the occupation must end, the wall must be demolished and it must happen now,' the Foreign Minister declared, earning cheers from the audience." (end quote)

Why Breivik doesn't like Nazis

by Rowan Berkeley

"Breivik would consider that the Nazis were completely wrong in considering 'the Jews' to be the primary vectors of European and western political degeneration. He would appear to hold to the concept of 'Judeo-Christian civilization'. The phrase 'Judeo-Christian civilisation' is quite recent: it first appeared in what might be called an official ideological context in 1952, in a speech by then-US President Eisenhower. It has become a watchword among Jewish neoconservative anti-Islamic propagandists since 9/11. To understand the increased salience of this concept, I think we have to see it in the context of the very public swing to the right in zionist politics which started with the first Israeli Likud government in 1977. Up until then, western members of the hard right tended to regard Israel as somewhat 'socialistic'... But from the 1970s onwards, zionist propaganda in the US and Europe completely changed its ...socialistic 'kibbutznik' angle of approach and began instead to concentrate on hard right themes. Gradually, the older idea of 'the Jews' as subversive of the conservative western order was eliminated. Instead, 'the Jews' became symbols of a western conservative defense against 'leftism' and 'liberalism'. This really was the essential message of the neoconservative movement, pioneered in 'Commentary' magazine from 1979 onward." (end quote)

"The overwhelming (Israeli) response is schadenfreude "

"The Norway massacre has touched off a nasty war of words on the Israeli Internet over the meaning of the event and its implications for Israel. And I do mean nasty: Judging by the comments sections on the main Hebrew websites, the main questions under debate seem to be whether Norwegians deserve any sympathy from Israelis given the country’s pro-Palestinian policies, whether the killer deserves any sympathy given his self-declared intention of fighting Islamic extremism ...on Saturday (July 23) in an opinion essay at Ynet (in Hebrew only)...Ziv Lenchner, a left-leaning Tel Aviv artist and one of Ynet’s large, bipartisan stable of columnists...(wrote a column) called “Dancing the Hora on Norwegian Blood.” He argues that the comment sections on news websites are a fair barometer of public sentiment...and that the overwhelming (Israeli) response is schadenfreude, pleasure at Norway’s pain ... that judgment seems pretty accurate...It’s worth noting that at some point late on Saturday several readers found links to Norwegian news sites showing that some kids at the campground where the shooting took place had been brandishing signs a day or two earlier calling for a boycott of Israel." --J.J. Goldberg, Jewish Daily Forward

Thirteen typical Israeli blog responses to the terror attack in Norway

1. There’s no getting away from it, Norway, was always against the state of Israel it’s not new and never will be!! We’re not in favor of the attack but to say that maybe they’ll understand us better after what happened is entirely legitimate!!!

2. Enough demagoguery! The Norwegians and Europe generally are super-anti-Semitic. So 100 people were killed there are 7 billion more people in the world. I don’t pity them they’re my enemies they hate Israel so they have it coming!!!

3. The whole world dances on Jewish blood. Europe is the same Europe and even more anti-Semitic. The killer is right!!! Europe is defeated, Norwegians are becoming a minority.

4. Ha Ha Ha! Europeans, this is your “liberalism."

5. Let them eat what they cooked.

6. Good news for Shabbat (the Sabbath). So may they increase and learn the hard way.

7. Allow me a few moments of pleasure.

8. I’m sorry, it doesn’t move me. From my point of view, let them drown in blood.

9. The boy wanted to send a message. Extreme, yes, but they don’t understand anything else.

10. Coming soon to all the Norwegians. And all the Europeans.

11. You leftists have to be wiped out too. And it will happen soon.

12. Norway's Anti-Semitism did not make it immune.

13. Norway is one of the most antisemitic countries.

Sources:

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4098821,00.html

http://www.ynet.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-4098981,00.html

http://blogs.forward.com/forward-thinking/140297/

Photo source:

http://politisk.tv2.no/nyheter/støre-om-israel-palestina-konflikten-–-okkupasjonen-ma-opphøre-muren-ma-rives-og-det-ma-skje-na/

***

On the Contrary is made possible through donations from readers and the purchase of Mr. Hoffman's books, newsletters and recordings.

***

TWITTER: http://twitter.com/#!/HoffmanMichaelA

E-MAIL: hoffman[at]revisionisthistory.org

PURCHASE a revisionist history book, newsletter, CD or DVD:

http://www.revisionisthistory.org/page7/page7.html

DONATE: http://tinyurl.com/4hwh7dz

Michael Hoffman is the founder of The Hoffman Center for the Study of Anti-Goyimism.

On the Contrary is a public service of Independent History and Research, Box 849, Coeur d'Alene, Idaho 83816 USA. Copyright ©2011

***

Read More

Judaic Columnist Urges: "Kill the Muslims"

Excerpt: "Any and all collateral damage in the form of casualties to friends, relatives, or anyone connected to the lives of these terrorists should be swiftly ignored...In terms of Jewish law, I think that the issue is probably clear. While no army should go out of its way to harm a civilian population in times of war, during the legitimate pursuit of an enemy that has instigated an attack against its people, a nation may defend itself with whatever means necessary, even if it includes causing death to civilians.."

The Appropriate Response To Islamic Terror
By Lawrence Kulak
Published December 11, 2008
The Five Towns Jewish Times, pp. 59-61

http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:-Jz30rqwkNUJ:www.5tjt.com/news/read.asp%3FId%3D3539+5+towns+jewish+times&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=us

Some of the greatest discoveries of medical science, most notably penicillin, have been made by sheer accident. It is a signal tragedy of our times that, in the all too conspicuous absence of competent statesmanship among the leadership of democracies around the world... the solutions to certain international security issues must also be discovered by accident.

About six months ago, there was an article published in the New York Times about an incident in Afghanistan where the U.S. military, while attempting to take out a certain Taliban terrorist, dropped a bomb on a tent that was occupied by members of his extended family, killing several women and children. The particular terrorist that was being hunted was not home at the time, although there were several others that were part of the same terrorist network who were also killed.

This story ostensibly was published for the purpose of demonstrating the “horrors” of warfare, focusing primarily on the women and children in the tent who were killed, by all accounts of the U.S. military spokespeople, unintentionally. In our dangerous age of political tentativeness and compromised militaries, however, there is an overwhelming probability that even top-ranking U.S. military commanders were unaware that they may have accidentally stumbled upon the solution to international terror.

I’ll never forget how, during the last Lebanon war with Hezbollah, an Orthodox Jewish Russian immigrant who had survived Stalin approached me, gesturing with his hand while repeating the word “tzetlach” (“notes” or “letters” in Yiddish). He was referring to the pieces of paper which were dropped by the Israeli Air Force over Lebanon warning civilians of the bombs that were about to be dropped. In the process, the Hezbollah terrorists were also warned, which may have allowed them to escape to the north in large numbers and ultimately force Israel to belatedly engage its ground troops, leading to numerous casualties and the loss of the war.

“Did Stalin drop tzetlach when he bombed Berlin during the Second World War?” my Russian immigrant friend asked, obviously comparing the militant, pro-Hezbollah Lebanese civilians to the citizens of Germany during the Holocaust. The United States, it seems, did in fact originally institute the practice of dropping leaflets over an enemy population, as it did before it bombed Dresden and Berlin, but apparently Stalin had his own ideas. Israel was apparently afraid to stray from the U.S. precedent even if it meant risking the loss of a war.

In terms of Jewish law, I think that the issue is probably clear. While no army should go out of its way to harm a civilian population in times of war, during the legitimate pursuit of an enemy that has instigated an attack against its people, a nation may defend itself with whatever means necessary, even if it includes causing death to civilians. Those who are inclined to issue knee-jerk gasps to this common sense state of affairs that is etched in the Mosaic law are probably easily forgetful of the fact that Muslim countries are routinely targeting innocent civilians via their terrorist proxies and leaving the standing armies of nations alone. This is more or less what recently occurred in Mumbai, India.

Although the attack had all the hallmarks of Al Qaeda penetration into local Pakistani Muslim terror groups, there is ample evidence of complicity by the Pakistani Intelligence Service (known as the ISI.) which has a long and well-known history of facilitating acts of terror in Indian-held Kashmir. Reports indicate that a rogue element of the ISI recently forged a link with a local terrorist commander linked to Al Qaeda, which then embarked upon a plan to target Westerners in Mumbai.

The Mumbai attack signifies a change of course for Al Qaeda, which until this point had refrained from attacking India because of India’s prior course of neutrality vis-à-vis Islam’s conflicts with the West, and because of the need for its use of India as a transfer point to fly undetected in and out of Pakistan and the Afghan regions. This perhaps explains in part why India’s naval security was in such a state of low awareness and why there was not a perceived need to update their police department’s anti-terrorist training. (The Jewish Center was allegedly targeted specifically for attack for reasons stemming from the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.)

Whatever the level or degree of the Pakistani government’s complicity in the attack that is ultimately proven to have taken place, the fact is that this operation could not have been accomplished without assistance from Pakistani Intelligence. This factor makes the Mumbai attack as much of an attack on India’s sovereignty as it was an attack on its civilians and foreign visitors. As such, it cries out for some type of retaliatory attack by the Indian government.

Aside from India, however, the attack on the foreign nationals of Israel, the United States, and Great Britain by proxy also constitutes an act of war against these countries and therefore legitimizes the infiltration of Pakistani territory for the purpose of pursuing the aggressors. While a generalized war with Pakistan should not be contemplated or pursued, it may be unavoidable, depending upon the vigilance with which Pakistan seeks to defend the terrorists within its borders.

The retaliation that is undertaken should strike hard at the training bases, madrassa schools, and homes of all the properly identified terrorist commanders and fellow terrorists of those identified in the attack, in a series of sustained surprise attacks over a period of time that is aimed at total eradication of the entire network that coordinated this attack. Any and all collateral damage in the form of casualties to friends, relatives, or anyone connected to the lives of these terrorists should be swiftly ignored. Public opinion and what is written in the newspapers should also be ignored by nations seeking to avenge the death of its innocent civilians.

When terrorists undertake to hide behind a sovereign government and to attempt to hide within its borders, it becomes the responsibility of that government to take swift action to flush them out and to neutralize them. Pakistan has obviously not done this, and is itself responsible for failing to purge itself of rogue commanders who facilitated the carnage in Mumbai. It must now step aside and let the foreign governments whose citizens have been mercilessly attacked take the proper course of action. George W. Bush certainly knows how to do it, and if his heart will be in the right place, so does Barack Obama.

As for the Islamic terrorists themselves, there has been a universal ineptitude in understanding their mentalities and how they work. Primarily because of leftist leaders and public sympathy with revolutionary mindsets, which have in cancerous fashion infiltrated the efficient workings of Western governments and Israel, the tactics that are necessary to defeat Islamic terror have been suppressed and discarded as politically incorrect. Many will remember how before Shimon Peres encouraged Prime Minister Rabin to embark on his infamous peace process with Arafat, the latter advocated “breaking the bones” of Arab rioters in the West Bank and Gaza as a means of putting down the intifada. Those means were apparently used for a period of time by Rabin, with much success, until his government decided to embark on a seriously unwise course of conciliation with premeditated and avowed murderers.

President Bush also delivered a setback to his own war on terror when, in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, he labeled Islam a peaceful religion that had been hijacked by radical elements. By making that statement, the president all but rejected the possibility of taking drastic action to eliminate entire terrorist networks that would of necessity cause the mass deaths of other potential operatives, and those others clandestinely associated with the actual terrorists, who provide means of support.

Contrary to all attention that has been given to the Muslim shaheed’s pursuit of the 72 virgins, the idea of martyrdom in Islam is really more of an exaggerated spin-off of good old fashioned American machismo and hero worship. A Muslim will seek martyrdom in order to bring honor to himself and to his family, just as a Muslim will kill others even within his own family to prevent or offset a similar association with dishonor or shame. If he knows that his family will all be killed, and there will be nobody left after him to claim that honor, he will be left with little reason to pursue his murderous mission.

One of the main daggers which Israel has thrust into its own heart was the government’s decision to abort the practice of demolishing the homes of terrorists. The prospect of rendering his own family homeless and desperate served to deter a potential terrorist from killing himself and anybody else by reducing the honor and machismo associated with the act. The notion of the 72 virgins is only a reward for the achievement of an act that brings honor to himself and his family, but there is nothing honorable in Islam about bringing harm to one’s family.

Perhaps this is the underlying reason why, since the war of terror has begun, we have been unsuccessful in tracking down Bin Laden. And if, as many feared before the presidential election, Barack Obama is really sympathetic to the Muslims radicals, it might also explain why his main promise in continuing Bush’s war on terror was to pursue this archterrorist through the hills of Pakistan. If Bin Laden is killed and hence martyred, it will only bring honor to himself and his family, who will be very much intact and alive. That will only give rise to more militant imams and more terrorist leaders.

Moreover, the only way to deal with Islamic terrorists is the same way in which they deal with their victims. Muslims believe in the literal interpretation of the Biblical doctrine of an eye for an eye, and they do not have respect for anything perceived as a lesser standard of justice. They killed our innocents, and unless we kill theirs, they will go on killing ours. The Torah, however, preaches a doctrine which, if implemented by the West, could finally put an end to all Islamic terror: If somebody is coming to kill you, rise up and kill him first.  [End quote]

Lawrence Kulak can be reached at Craniumcrust@yahoo.com

 CAIR Asks NY Jewish Leaders to Repudiate Call to Kill Muslims
12/12/2008 2:39:00 PM

(NEW YORK, NY, 12/12/08) - The New York chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR-NY) today called on leaders of the Jewish community in that state to repudiate a columnist for a Jewish newspaper who called for the killing of “innocent” Muslims.

In a commentary in the December 12 issue of the 5 Towns Jewish Times, titled, “The Appropriate Response to Islamic Terror,” Lawrence Kulak wrote:

“Moreover, the only way to deal with Islamic terrorists is the same way in which they deal with their victims. Muslims believe in the literal interpretation of the Biblical doctrine of an eye for an eye, and they do not have respect for anything perceived as a lesser standard of justice. They killed our innocents, and unless we kill theirs, they will go on killing ours.”

SEE: The Appropriate Response to Islamic Terror (Pages 59-61)

“Such inflammatory comments have no place in reasoned public discourse,” said CAIR-NY Community Affairs Director Faiza N. Ali. “Calls for violence against innocent civilians of any faith should face universal rejection and repudiation by religious leaders.”

CAIR-NY and the Muslim Public Affairs Council, New York City office (MPAC-NYC) recently recommended that interfaith exchanges take place between Indian Hindus and Muslims in the wake of the Mumbai attacks.

CONTACT: CAIR-NY Community Affairs Director Faiza N. Ali, 212-870-2002, 718-724-3041, fali@cair.com; CAIR-NY Civil Rights Director Aliya Latif, 212-870-2002, 732-429-4268, alatif@cair.com; CAIR National Communications Director Ibrahim Hooper, 202 488-8787 or 202-744-7726, E-Mail: ihooper@cair.com

***

Read More