The Norway Bombing - Facts of the Conspiracy

When I first heard about the Norway Bomb on the radio and the words al Qaeda in the same sentence I automatically thought there was more to this than meets the eye. Now it appears that the MSM have dropped the al Qaeda and opted for the word Palestine, this all seems a little too much of a coincidence to me so I started listing a few discrepancies that should be listed as the story of events unfold

Please see below my current list of how and why this could be a conspiracy.

1. The bombing took place at the time that Rupert Murdoch was being questioned about his illegal phone tampering connections. The newspapers (ironically) were plastering him all over the front pages and the heat was turned up, recognized people were starting to ask questions and getting involved.

2. The radio stations and other media outlets connected the dots to al Quaeda before the facts were given.

3. The late night interviews with Norwegian officials were quoted as saying that 'he acted outside any group despite the interviewer trying to lead him to the al quaeda line,' first of all how did they know this? and second of all why were the media so transfixed on al qaeda before the facts were given? still after the officials said he acted alone they tried to connect the bombing to radical muslims.

4. The Norwegian authorities arrived more than 1 hour after the shots were reported

5. The norwegian authorities took a sinking boat to the island instead of a helicopter which would have been quicker

6. Eye witnesses have said that there were 2 shooters on the island yet the MSM is plastering 'lone gunman' all over the tabloids

7. The stepbrother of the crowns princess was on the island and 'tragically' was shot

8. The 'lone gunman' Anders Breivik was a mason

9. Officials in Norway keep on changing the story in regards to the timings of events especially the events to the shooting on the island

10. There does not seem to be any mention of how he was arrested ?

11. Norway released statements prior to the bombing saying that they will not be forced to fight in Libya and will not be threatened by any terrorism

12. The 'lone gunman' bought 6 tonnes of fertiliser and no questions were raised

13. 87 people were shot on the island according to the MSM there is no mention of what gun he was using and because of the changing time lines from the officials verification cannot take place as to how long it took to shoot all 87 people.

14. There were no police on the island even though a political rally was going to take place the next day?

15. Norwegian police officers brought in sniffer dogs days before to check for bombs

16.Norwegian police were training for an incident like this prior to the event

17. The bombing took place at a time where peoples opinions on bailing out Greece were changing and people were starting to ask questions.

18. Norwegian officials said that the bomb came from underground and not from a car however, the MSM are still reporting that the bomb came from a car.

19. Norway supports full palestinian statehood set to be voted on in September

20. Norway had decided to pull its support for the bombardment of Libya and withdraw completely from NATO operations by august 1st

21. Norway had made progress to freeze $42 million dollars that they had put in for the greece bailout fund which could have tarnished relations with the Anglo American establishment.

22. Norway is not a member of the European Union

23. The trial for this 'lone gunman' will take place in private and the cameras will not be allowed in.

24. Authorities have said that the trial could last as long as a year.

I will update as more details come to light

reply to post by franspeakfree


Whether or not this was a planned attack by multiple persons or a lone nut, the govt knew about it. We have so much spy technology that it is almost impossible to not know when something is going to happen. We see these same patterns over and over. The govt conducting safety training for the exact same scenario that happens. Bomb sniffing dogs before the event occured? Unless having bomb sniffing dogs at the building on a regular basis, that has to mean that the govt knew about it or they were in on it. I don;t know all the facts so I am only speculating, but history shows what these signs mean.

reply to post by franspeakfree


What bugged me was that this guy had an "organic"farm yes?
So how could he possibly get away with claiming to need so much nitrate fertiliser(chemical based) for a farm which should only be using organic fertiliser?

The shop he bought from should have picked up on that straight off IMO.

reply to post by Silcone Synapse

The shop he bought from should have picked up on that straight off IMO.

Unless the organization he belonged to, whether that be a small group of nut cases or a full blown agency, made it easier and less of a hassle for him to get.

Originally posted by Zamini
reply to post by Silcone Synapse

 

The shop he bought from should have picked up on that straight off IMO.

Unless the organization he belonged to, whether that be a small group of nut cases or a full blown agency, made it easier and less of a hassle for him to get.

Why? 6 tons is a particularly large amount for a farmer.

6 tonnes is not an inordinate amount of fertiliser, according to the spokeswoman from the agricultural supply chain which it was ordered from:

"These are goods that were delivered on May 4," Oddny Estenstad, a spokeswoman at agricultural supply chain Felleskjoepet Agri, told Reuters, without giving the exact type of fertilizer purchased. "It was 6 tonnes of fertilizer, which is a small, normal order for a standard agricultural producer." "I do not know him or the company, except that it is a company that has contacted us in a normal manner and ordered fertilizer and had it delivered," she said.

uk.reuters.com...

She says it's a normal order and they did not know his company, so why would they have any suspicions ?

Not everyone's paranoid, nor prescient. Why would someone at an agricultural supply chain in Norway have any concerns about a farmer buying fertiliser ?

Originally posted by franspeakfree
5. The norwegian authorities took a sinking boat to the island instead of a helicopter which would have been quicker

The only suitable helicopters which was available in Oslo were 2-seater - clearly not adequate for the Delta force. All the Delta force helicopters were based in the far south of the country, so obviously it was quicker to reach Utøya island by road and boat - although their equipment was apparently too heavy for the first boat. No other boats were available because the locals on the coast and an island further up had mobilised a flotilla to rescue the survivors in the water.

I think that people really need to appreciate just how unprepared a country like Norway is for this kind of attack. The slow police response and lack of adequate transport is easily explained by them not realistically catering for anything like this happening, and also by the essential services being stretched and already occupied by the earlier bombing in Oslo.

I agree with item number one on the list but don't go for much of a conspriacy and if this one rings the right belles for you then 9/11 must blow you into outer space.

Sorry but we are so use to false flags that we are seeing them when they are not their and i think this is one of them cases.

I recommend that you read his manifesto, which will answer some of your loose theories.
It's over 1500 pages of different subjects, all from his views on islam, marxism, to his personal experiences with muslims in Oslo, where he's from. He also describes how to make the bombs he did, and kind of a diary where he describes the last approx. 40-50 days.