Anders Behring Breivik Court Transcript 2012-06-15 Live Report
Husby suggests that Breivik should be treated for his supposed psychosis before an assessment can be made about any personality disorders. They maintain that Breivik is completely dysfunctional, incapable of holding a job, and that there is a high risk of recurrence.
They cite Breivik's believe that he decided who lives and dies, and knows what other people think, as evidence for a delusional thought universe. Fact is that Breivik only claimed that he was good at reading people due to working in sales for many years, not that he literally knew what people thought. They claim they are convinced that Breivik believes in the KT, meaning that the KT is either real or a delusion, they exclude the possibility that the KT is a carefully constructed lie.
The subject of neologisms comes up again, that Breivik invented words, according to Asbjornsen and Moe Breivik makes up terms left and right, according to other experts most words are unusual but existent, while the non existent terms are comprehensible.
Husby claims the compulsive politically correct reactions from the audience in the court room, primarily by Category B, C, and D traitors, to be indicative of Breivik's statements being out of touch with reality. Half an hour later she claims that the difference between the first and second report is because Breivik behaved differently during the earlier interviews with them, none of which were recorded.
Lippestad begins an interesting line of questioning, at one point asking if Asbjornsen and Moe see a notable difference between Breivik warning of a Muslim takeover and warning of a takeover by a hedgedog. Sørheim confirms that in principle it wouldn't make a difference. Amusing.
Lippestad asks them why they failed to consider the fact that Breivik presented himself as a foot soldier during one police interrogation included in the psychiatric report, or that Breivik only estimates his chance to become a future regent of Norway to be 0.5%. Sørheim answers evasively stating he doesn't remember, even though it comes straight from his own psychiatric report, claiming his conclusions are backed up by their unrecorded conversations with Breivik.
Sørheim states that no one has the right to decide who should live and die. I don't think he realizes he presents a political statement as fact, making it indisputable that he's declaring Breivik insane because of ideological differences.
Lippestad asks if it is a bizarre delusion if four men meet in London and agree that Islam is a threat to Europe, or if the highly specific targeting of Category B and C traitors makes a difference. Naturally he doesn't get a straight forward answer to this.
Lippestad asks how someone incapable of supporting himself can move out and live by himself on a farm. The response is that they are primarily concerned with Breivik's social functioning.
This line of questioning continues for a while. At one point they conclude that Breivik's primary motive is violence, that his ideology comes second. Heroism is a better explanation in my opinion, and it doesn't discredit the ideology.
17:40 At last Commander Breivik gets to address the court:
Firstly, I've talked a lot with Husby and Sørheim and they are nice people and we had good conversations. The intention of my calls were to give highly detailed descriptions of the content of the compendium and the Knights Templar organization. I thought to use it as an opportunity because I expected the report would be leaked. I figured it'd be smart to be as detailed as possible.
But it was a big mistake because I provided a large volume of information that could be abused if they wanted to, and that's exactly what happened. I gave a lot of information. The person described in the first psychiatric report might be insane and in need of medication, except that the person isn't me. I refute many of the allegations in the 38 page report that you've received.
I won't go into detail right now, just refer to it. The conclusion is that I believe 80 percent of the content to be fictional. Then we come to, well, what's in the manifesto, not in their report. To make a point. It is already in 2002 that I'm supposedly severely functionally impaired, though after that period I've ran a company with an employee, and have worked with the board of a company that was sold.
Then I started a company that had great financial success. At the age of 24 years I had an employee and a fortune of over one million. The following year I had five to six employees. In this period Husby and Sørheim defined my life as a failure. Earnings can be verified by the police. From autumn 2007 onward, I was described as a total failure.
For this period they give a wrong impression. They allege four coffee visits a year, but this is actually as many as twenty. At least twenty a year with friends, on average. I notice they toned it down slightly, which is understandable given the circumstances. In addition, I had many meetings through the Masonic Order and was involved in two shooting clubs. I knew people in all these clubs and I socialized and talked with them.
I was thus in two shooting clubs that I participated in, I worked out three to four times a week in the Elixia Fitness Club with friends, so I was quite normal regarding social contacts. In addition, there was partying with friends, cafe and restaurant visits and online contact. Not to mention 8,000 Facebook contacts and my extensive list of contacts on the Internet who assisted with the development of the compendium, and must therefore be seen as a self employed author. There are quite a few of those in Norway.
I am portrayed as totally retarded and this is a completely inaccurate impression. They have purposely distorted reality, let me look through two days worth of notes.
Huby and Sørheim's main contention is I'm a dreamer who is driven by violent fantasies and that 7/22 has nothing to do with ideology. They disagree that I've become politically radicalized. They show that they are not familiar with the contents of the compendium, which emphasizes that violence must always be the last resort. I have never been violent prior to July 22, police questioning of friends confirms this.
In addition, I didn't even fight back the times I was attacked by Muslims during my childhood. Then we have the period after July 22, I've been around roughly two-hundred people in the past ten months, and have never displayed aggression. This can be verified.
I have no intention to change this in the future. I have stressed ad nauseam that the action of July 22 was an isolated case. They claim that I enjoy violence, which does not match my behavior over a lifetime. There is a reason I had to use military dehumanization strategies and go through years of mental training to use violence. I taught myself to see the enemy as inferior before I could carry out such cruel acts because it is contrary to my nature.
If I enjoyed and fantasized about violence there wouldn't have been a need to drug myself with chemical stimulants in order to execute July 22. If all I do is dream about violence, why did I spent four years of my life to write a political manifesto? There are six sources that give a basic description of me. Among others there are police interrogations, the compendium, and testimonies in court. Of all these sources Husby and Sørheim are the only ones who differ.
The foundation of the report by Husby and Sørheim is my mother's explanation. This is problematic because she is not a reliable witness due to her health. I ask the judge to ignore it.
The main argument for Husby and Sørheim is that I look at myself as a judge who decides who lives or dies. The armed resistance on behalf of a revolutionary group or as a so-called lone wolf is a universally known guiding principle of revolutionary thought.
In other words, any so-called terrorist who kills someone acts as a judge and decides that the person must die. Examples of this are the more than 50 daily executions around the world as a result of politically motivated violence, mainly Islamic. More than 15,000 terrorist attacks have been carried out resulting in deaths. [list of terrorist groups and terrorists including Peter Mangs and Beate Zschäpe]. There are many others. All of these appointed themselves judge over life and death. Does that mean that all so-called terrorists are paranoid schizophrenic?
The answer is no. For so-called terrorists the killing of the target is a medium. The goal is to deliver a message. Then the judges consider whether the political message is rational or not.
I'm on to my last point. The court has previously been informed that Sørheim and Husby had contact with the forensic commission. I mentioned earlier that I thought that the Commission should be disqualified, but it has now become known that Husby was the superior of two members between 96 and 97, and that Sørheim was the superior of six of the seven members.
What has emerged in the wake of Aftenposten, is that Torgeir Husby, as late as in 2009, referred to Melle in the DRC as "one of my best friends." This quote is taken from Dagbladet. This supports the claim that the DRC should be completely disqualified in this case.
Thanks, that was all.
17:58 Breivik finishes his address.
I disagree with Breivik that the first report describes someone who is insane, just a gaming addict who failed in life, with Asbjornsen and Moe jumping to conclusions.
It can't be stated often enough that Breivik is a hero who sacrificed everything in an effort to save his people from an almost inevitable annihilation. When all this is over a statue of Breivik should be erected on Utoya, and unless the Cultural Marxists destroy the weapons, people from all over the continent will come to see the gun and rifle that executed 67 traitors and started the European Revolutionary War.
|Breivik's Glock 34 pistol named Mjolnir: Thor's Hammer|
|Breivik's Ruger Mini-14 carbine named Gungnir: Odin's Spear|