by Webster G. Tarpley, Ph.D.
July 24, 2011
More Than One Shooter on Island;
Oslo Police Drilled Bomb Blasts;
Was It NATO’s Revenge for Norway’s
to Stop Bombing Libya?
Washington DC, July 24, 2011
The tragic terror attacks in Norway display a
number of the telltale signs of a false flag provocation.
It is reported that, although the world media
are attempting to focus on Anders Behring Breivik as a lone assassin
in the tradition of Lee Harvey Oswald, many eyewitnesses agree that a second
shooter was active in the massacre at the Utøya summer youth camp outside of
Oslo. It has also come to light that a special police unit had conducted
drills or exercises near the opera house in downtown Oslo which involved the
detonation of bombs during 2010 - exactly what caused the bloodshed a few
hundred meters away this Friday.
Further research reveals that United States
intelligence agencies had been conducting a large-scale program of
recruiting retired Norwegian police officers with the alleged purpose of
conducting surveillance inside the country.
This program, known as
SIMAS (Security Incident Management
Detection Units, provided a perfect vehicle for the penetration and
subversion of the Norwegian police by NATO.
A motive for the attack is also present:
as part of its attempt to mount an
independent foreign policy, including the imminent diplomatic recognition of
a Palestinian state as part of a general rapprochement with the Arab world,
Norway was leading the smaller NATO states in dropping out of the
imperialist aggressor coalition
currently bombing Libya.
Norway was scheduled to stop all bombing and
other sorties against the Gaddafi forces as out of August 1 at the latest.
the CIA limited hangout operation known as
Wikileaks has already
furnished a prefabricated off-the-shelf case for incompetence and
malfeasance against the current Norwegian government that is doing all these
things - in the form of a series of real or doctored dispatches which
document the alleged negligence of this government in dealing with the
terrorist threat, all in the view of U.S. State Department officials.
VG of Oslo - “Several”
Eyewitnesses Say there were Two Shooters on the Island
As noted, world press and media of the Anglo-American school have
immediately battened onto Breivik as an archetypal lone assassin cast in the
mold of Lee Harvey Oswald, Sirhan Sirhan, and so many others.
The problem for the terror mythographs is that ,
in most of these cases, there is credible to overwhelming evidence that
these figures could not have acted alone. Among more recent loan assassins,
Breivik could be compared to Major Nidal Hasan of Fort Hood, Texas, whose
shooting spree dates back to November 2009.
Hasan is accused of having killed seven people.
At the time, it was considered remarkable that Hasan had managed to kill so
many armed soldiers on the military base. But early reports suggested that
there were one or two other shooters in addition to Hasan. As usually
happens, these extra shooters were soon expunged from the hegemonic media
In the Norwegian case, the evidence that Breivik was not alone in claiming
his fearful toll of victims is clear and convincing.
Here are some excerpts from a report published
by the Oslo newspaper VG:
“Several of the youths who were
at the Utøya the shooting drama, told VG that they are convinced
that there must have been more than one perpetrator. Marius Helander
Røset believes the same thing: I am sure that there was shooting
from two different places on the island at the same time, he said.
Witnesses - There were two people
Police believe Anders Behring Breivik (32) is the perpetrator who
was dressed as a policeman , and have charged him for two terrorist
Young people interviewed by VG
describe an additional perpetrator - who was not wearing a police
uniform. The person was following them around was 180 centimeters
tall, had thick dark hair and a Nordic appearance. He had a pistol
in his right hand and a rifle on his back: I believe that there were
two people who were shooting, says Alexander Stavdal (23)…
At the press conference Saturday morning opened the police said that
there could have been several perpetrators and emphasized that there
is an ongoing investigation.” 2
The presence of a second shooter is of course most inconvenient for the lone
assassin theory, since it represents incontrovertible evidence of a criminal
conspiracy, the very thing which the media coverage is usually anxious to
In the Norwegian case, the reports of a second
shooter seemed to be persistent enough 36 hours after the main event so as
to hold out some hope that the entire official version can be brought down
on this particular.
Police Had Drilled Setting
off Bombs in Same Area During 2010
Another telltale critical sign of a false flag operation is the holding of
drills or exercises - allegedly for counterterrorism purposes - by the
police or the military at the same time as the terror attack, or shortly
before the real terror attack begins.
Sometimes, the terror drills or exercises are
scheduled to begin slightly after the time when the actual terror attack
occurs. For large-scale terror actions, which the Norway attacks were, it is
not uncommon for the drills to occur well in advance - 9/11, for example,
was the result of capabilities which had been built up over a period of
several years, as well as of future drills stretching well into 2002.
In these cases, it is often discovered that the
self-styled anti-terror drill or exercise contains a simulated action or
event which strongly resembles the real world terror attack, the one which
actually kills people. The media will then refer to an astounding
coincidence or a weird happenstance, but the reality is that the terror
drill has been taken live or flipped live in the form of real killings.
Once the drill has occurred, the capabilities,
hardware, etc., which it has created can remain in place to be mobilized at
the desired moment.
The secret is that the legally sanctioned drill
has been used to conduit or bootleg the actual butchery through a government
bureaucracy whose resources are required to run the terror but in which
there are many officials who cannot be allowed to know what is happening.
The Norway events provide a very clear illustration of this principle. In
Oslo, a powerful bomb went off in or near the building which houses the
office of the Prime Minister. Exactly as we would expect, special
anti-terror police had been drilling setting off bombs in a nearby part of
the Norwegian capital in advance, specifically during 2010.
The public had
not been informed in advance, but found out what was happening when they
began hearing bombs in the opera house district, less than a kilometer away
from the prime minister’s office which was attacked on Friday.
Here is a report from the newspaper Aftenposten:
“Armed police were seen in the area around
the opera house in Oslo, and violent explosions could be heard over
large parts of the city. No one knew that this was all a matter of
practice. The Information Section of the Oslo police deeply regrets that
the public was not made aware of the seemingly dramatic exercise…
It was the emergency squad, the national
police special unit against terrorism, which was conducting a drill in
the cordoned off area at Bjørvika pier. According to a press release
from the police, nearly a day after the exercise, the drill consisted of
training in the controlled detonation of explosive charges…
The exercise will continue for the rest of
Wednesday night and a few more explosions are expected…
The exercise followed a familiar pattern for
all anti-terror forces around the world: The men lowered themselves down
from the ceiling and into through the window that had just been blown
out, while they fired hand their weapons.” 3
Peter Power of
Visor Consultants told BBC Radio
Five in the wake of the London subway bombings of July 7, 2005 that his firm
had been conducting an exercise based on explosions going off in
substantially the same stations of the London underground at the same times
when the real explosions had actually occurred.
The Norwegian events exhibit the same kind of
A Motive - Norway Had
Decided to Stop Bombing Libya August 1
The targets of the Norwegian terror attacks are all expressly political,
including government offices and a summer youth camp of the ruling Labor
Party, and thus point in the direction of politics.
The government of Norway is currently a
coalition composed of the Labor Party, the Socialist Left Party, and the
Center Party. Norway has traditionally attempted to cultivate a pro-Arab
foreign policy, as seen in its sponsorship of the Oslo peace accords between
Israeli Prime Minister Rabin and Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat in the
The current government has announced its
intention of granting diplomatic recognition to a Palestinian state in the
near future. When the destabilization of Libya began last February, the
Norwegian Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Støre of the Labor Party warned
Norway’s partners in the NATO alliance against getting involved.
But soon after this, Norway gave in to U.S. pressure and agreed to participate
in NATO’s bombing of Libya for an initial period of three months, sending
six planes which have carried out an estimated 10% of all the bombing raids
mounted by the Atlantic alliance.
However, as the end of its three-month
commitment had passed, Norway had reduced its contingent to four planes
during the month of July, and had announced on June 10 that it was planning
to withdraw altogether from the NATO bombing coalition no later than August
The Norwegian decision to drop out of the NATO attack coalition was
associated with a similar move by the Netherlands, which was announced on
that same day of June 10. The Dutch had decided to maintain their contingent
of six planes, but will no longer take part in bombing attacks on ground
targets. Henceforth, the Dutch are willing only to help enforce the no-fly
zone through air interdiction.
There was therefore the potential that Norway’s
example could trigger a general tendency by the smaller NATO states to quit
the bombing coalition, in which their collective presence is highly
Leading figures of the Norwegian government were among the first to undercut
the supposed rationale for the NATO bombing, while urging negotiations:
‘”The solution to the problems in Libya are
political, they cannot be solved by military means alone,” Norwegian
Prime Minister Stoltenberg told reporters gathered for a conference in
Oslo on May 13.
“We are very much supporting all efforts to
find a political solution to the challenges we are facing in Libya,” he
Norway’s government… pledged to scale down its
role in NATO-orchestrated air strikes on Libya after its current three-month
commitment ends on June 24.4
This was the policy of the entire Norwegian government:
‘Norway will scale down its fighter jet
contribution in Libya from six to four planes and withdraw completely
from the NATO-led operation by August 1, the government said Friday…
Defense Minister Grete Faremo said she
expects understanding from NATO allies because Norway has a small air
force and cannot “maintain a large fighter jet contribution during a
Norway’s air force, meanwhile says its F-16
jets have carried out about 10 percent of the NATO airstrikes in Libya
since March 31. The parties in Norway’s center-left coalition government
had been at odds over whether to extend the country’s participation,
which was scheduled to expire June 24.
The most leftist faction in the government,
the Socialist Left Party, opposed an extension, but a compromise was
reached to stay in the operation until Aug. 1 with fewer planes.
“It is wise to end the Norwegian fighter
jet contribution. Now Norway should apply its efforts to find a
peaceful solution in Libya,” Socialist Left Party lawmaker Baard
Vegar Solhjell said.’ 5
State Department Complained
of Norway’s “Lack of Commitment” to Libyan Adventure
The Norwegian decision to stop waging war against Libya, the first of its
kind by any member of the Atlantic alliance, has attracted the attention of
diplomatic observers, one of whom commented that the current government in
Oslo has advocated,
“a distinctly more peaceful approach to
global policies by the Norwegian government…. [despite] recent pressure
from the U.S. on Norway to contribute more in Libya military campaign.
Norway has been resisting that pressure and pushing for a more peaceful
approach to the U.S.-led NATO attacks on Libya and refused to provide
weapons to NATO, finally announcing last month that Norway would quit
its military role in Libya by August 1.
In March, as the U.S. was rallying unilateral
support to invade Libya, Norway’s minister of foreign affairs Jonas Gahr
Støre was one of the few nations to warn the U.S. against armed
intervention in Libya. Norway initially supplied six fighter jets for
Libya operations and has carried out about 10% of the Libya strikes
since 19 March.
However, U.S. officials singled out Norway and
Denmark for their ‘lack of commitment’ to the mission to oust Gaddafi…
Other Norway-Libya links include Norway’s
major oil- and fertilizer-related interests in Libya: the Norwegian
state-owned Statoil, which has about 30 employees at its Tripoli
offices….[Norway’s] businesses have conducted major business operations
in Libya, in co-operation with Qaddafi’s regime.” 6
At the present stage of the inquiry, the best
estimate of a motive for the Norwegian attacks is to punish the country for
its independent and pro-Arab foreign policy in general, and for its
repudiation of the
NATO bombing coalition arrayed against Libya in
Are SIMAS Surveillance
Detection Units the New Gladio for Norway?
U.S. and NATO intelligence have been shown to possess extraordinary
capabilities inside Norway, many of which may be operating outside of the
control of the Norwegian government.
In early November 2010, the Oslo television
channel TV2 exposed the existence of an extensive network of paid assets and
informants of U.S. intelligence recruited from the ranks of retired police and
other officials. The ostensible goal of this program was the surveillance of
Norwegians who were taking part in demonstrations and other activities
critical of the United States and its policies.
One of the Norwegians recruited was the former
chief of the anti-terror section of the Oslo police.7
Although the goal was supposedly merely
surveillance, it is possible to imagine some other and far more sinister
activities that could be carried out by such a network of retired cops,
including the identification and subversion of rotten apples on the
active-duty police force. Some of the capabilities of a network of this type
would not be totally alien to the sort of events that have just occurred in
The official name for the type of espionage cell which the United States was
creating in Norway is Surveillance Detection Unit (SDU).
The SDUs in turn operate within the framework of
the Security Incident Management Analysis System (SIMAS). SIMAS is known to
be used for spying and surveillance by U.S. Embassies not just in the Nordic
bloc of Norway, Denmark, and Sweden, but worldwide. The terror events also
raise the question of whether SIMAS has an operational dimension.
Could this apparatus represents a modern version
of the Cold War stay behind networks set up in all NATO countries and
best-known under the name of the Italian branch,
The Norwegian government needs to find out.
Thus far Norwegian ministers have asserted that
they never approved the SIMAS network of SDUs.
“We never knew about it,” claimed Norway’s
Justice Minister Knut Storberget and Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Støre
Hillary Clinton stated instead that the
Norwegians had been informed.
CIA’s Wikileaks Limited
Hangout Has Rationale for Toppling Norway’s Government
Thanks to document dumps by the CIA limited hangout subsidiary generally
known as Wikileaks, an obvious path for using the Norwegian terror attacks
as a rationale for overthrowing the current government has already been
Real or doctored State Department cables
obligingly made available by Wikileaks portray the Norwegian government
which NATO hates as a collection of bunglers and misfits, unable to take
effective measures to safeguard the national security of the country.
Some of these tables have been published in the immediate wake of the terror
attacks by the London Daily Telegraph, a newspaper reputedly close
to NATO intelligence circles.
According to this article, while,
‘talking about an attempt by the Police
Security Service (PST) to track one particular suspected Al Qaeda terror
cell, a cable written by the U.S. Ambassador to Norway, Barry White,
describes [how Norwegian authorities] … refused the help of the UK
authorities to put surveillance on a potential suspect and adds:
“Not only will they not put their own
resources on him… but they also just turned down the visiting UK intel service’s offer of two twelve-person surveillance teams.”
The cable goes on to say the UK and U.S.
intelligence services analyzed coded conversation between terror
suspects and decided it warranted surveillance.
But, says the cable,
“PST instead found a way to interpret
the same translated coded conversation in a rosier, less threatening
light, an interpretation which makes little sense to the U.S. or UK.”’
A catalog of even the most recent failures and
fiascos of the FBI and the CIA in the
so-called Global War on Terror would
help to put these hypocritical judgments into proper perspective, but it
would also be too voluminous to be appended here.
Another damaging particular appears made to order for an attempt to blame
the alleged bungling of the Norwegian government for the Oslo bomb attack:
‘The memo also reveals how, despite
apparently having surveillance on the suspect, the PST lost track of
bomb-making equipment which was being stored in an apartment after it
was apparently removed without investigators’ noticing.
The PST then failed to track one suspect for 14
days because the investigator assigned to him was called away on another
The memo concludes:
“The PST is in over its head… it simply
cannot keep up.”’
Another State Department memo dished up by
Wikileaks, supposedly written in 2007… adds:
“The official police (PST) threat
evaluation… states that international terror organizations are not a
direct threat against Norway."
A memo written in 2008 shows how the U.S.
felt that Norway was not awake to the possibility of a potential
The cable reads:
“We repeatedly press Norwegian
authorities to take terrorism seriously. We will seek to build on this
momentum to fight the still-prevalent feeling that terrorism happens
elsewhere, not in peaceful Norway.”
And a cable written just last year adds:
“The PST still viewed Denmark as more of a
target than Norway, for reasons very specific to the cartoon
The government of Norway needs to go on the
offensive and establish the whole truth of what has just occurred.
Otherwise, that government is likely to succumb to the internationally
orchestrated campaign which the Wikileaks documents so clearly foreshadow.
1 - http://tarpley.net/2009/11/16/nidal-malik-hasan-of-virginia-tech-bethesda-ond-fort-hood-a-major-patsy-in-a-drill-gone-live
2 - See RIA Novosti, July 23, 2011, http://en.rian.ru/world/20110723/165350450.html;
- From the VG website: “Flere av ungdommene som var på Utøya under
skytedramaet forteller til VG at de er overbevist om at det må ha vært
mer enn én gjerningsmann. Det mener også Marius Helander Røset.” “Jeg
har overbevist om at det var to personer som skjøt, sier Aleksander
Stavdal (23).” “Vedkommende var i følge dem rundt 180 centimeter høy,
hadde tykt mørkt hår og så nordisk ut. Han hadde en pistol i høyrehånden
og et gevær på ryggen.” http://www.vg.no/nyheter/innenriks/oslobomben/artikkel.php?artid=10080627
3 - “Politiet glemte å informere om øvelse: Anti-terrorpolitiet avfyrte
sprengladninger under en øvelse midt i Oslo, to hundre meter fra Operaen,
men glemte å gi beskjed til publikum,” Aftenposten, c. July 20, 2011,
4 - “Libya solution more political than military-Norway,” Reuters, 13 May
5 - “Norway to quit Libya operation by August,” AP, June 10, 2011, http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2011/jun/10/norway-to-quit-libya-operation-by-august/
6 - Tragic Irony Surrounds Oslo Bombing, Phuket Word, July 23, 2011,
7 - Thomas Borchert, “U.S.-Geheimdienst mit Nordfiliale: USA lassen Norweger
überwachen,” Deutsche Presse-Agentur, November 4, 2010.
8 - Mark Hughes, “WikiLeaks files show Norway unprepared for terror
attack: Norway’s intelligence service had previously been criticized for
its failure to keep track of suspected terror cells and the country was
felt to be complacent about the prospect of a terror attack, secret
cables from the WikiLeaks files reveal,” London Daily Telegraph, July