Brit Dee, Contributor
The trial of Anders Behring Breivik has today ended in Norway, with the self-confessed terrorist claiming that he acted to prevent a “bigger barbarism” – Norway becoming a “multicultural hell” – and demanding to be acquitted.
Having pleaded guilty to the Oslo bombing and mass shootings on Utøya, there is no chance of Breivik’s release and what happens next depends on late August’s ruling by the trial’s five-judge panel. If judged insane Breivik will be committed to a psychiatric institution for as long as he is deemed sick and a danger to others – though in all likelihood he would never be released.
If judged sane and criminally responsible for his actions, he will be given Norway’s maximum sentence of 21 years and sent to prison, though the term can be extended if the prisoner is thought to still pose a threat. Breivik very much wants to be found sane and criminally responsible, so that his political ideology cannot be written off as the ravings of a madman.
Much of the trial has focused on Breivik’s sanity – to the extent that other crucial questions have been inadequately addressed. Breivik has consistently claimed to be part of a wider network of right-wing militants, claims dismissed as nonsense by the prosecution and even cited as evidence of his alleged psychosis.
Whilst it is possible that Breivik did indeed invent the network, in order to add credence to his worldview and inspire other potential militants, it is equally possible that the network really does exist and, as Breivik has threatened, is planning future terror attacks. As discussed in a previous article, evidence supports Breivik being in the places he claims to have been, when he claims to have met other ultranationalist extremists.
Defence lawyer Geir Lippestad today referenced the fact that others share his client’s extreme political ideology, a point already proven by individuals such as the Jewish Defence League’s Roberta Moore, who openly agreed with Breivik’s beliefs, and, more chillingly, supported his murderous actions. Regardless of whether the militant network Breivik claims to be part of really exists, there is no doubt that some do support his call to arms – a hugely worrying fact that has been consistently downplayed during the trial. In their determination to portray Breivik as ‘mad’ the prosecution has avoided a discussion of the very real problems in Europe – and the very real threat posed by extremist ultranationalists, some of whom are prepared to respond to the European political elite’s failing immigration policies with violence.
Breivik has alluded to other such extremists to the very end of his trial. In his final speech to the court today he claimed that right-wing militants were behind the explosives found on Wednesday at a Swedish nuclear power plant. Said to be the size of “a fist”, the explosives were found underneath a truck and police have claimed not to know anything about how they got there, or who put them there. We can only speculate as to the truth of Breivik’s latest claim. Either he is receiving intelligence from militants whilst in prison; he knew the alleged perpetrators and was aware of their plans before his incarceration; or he is lying in order to maintain a state of fear and to glorify and exaggerate the threat posed by likeminded militants.
Responding to Breivik’s claim, Swedish police spokesman Tommy Nyman said that he had no comment – “especially not if he (Breivik) says it.” Again, we see Breivik instantly dismissed – or, more specifically, the possible truth in what he says instantly dismissed – because he is widely seen as a psychotic, delusional madman.
During the last 10 weeks Breivik has been given the opportunity to fully explain himself, and the best course of action would now be to lock him away for the rest of his life, to never be heard from or seen again. He is a brutal mass murderer and no amount of political rhetoric can obscure the fact that he ended the lives of 77 innocent people, and injured many more.
The debate, however, should not disappear from public consciousness. Indeed, the need to rationally discuss the very real problems caused by multiculturalism and the breakdown of national identities and indigenous cultures – as well as the positives of immigration – is more important than ever. To simply sweep the issues under the carpet, as if they didn’t exist, would be the worst possible end to a very sad and disturbing case – and also incredibly dangerous.
This article first appeared at ResistRadio.com
Brit Dee’s ResistRadio.com is an independent media website approaching global news, politics and conspiracy theory from a radical, but critical and rational perspective.