Explosion Norway

[Jan Klimkowski]

Jan, I'm wondering with you where the hell the Telegraph is getting these informants from and why the Police in the UK and Norway aren't ordering them through legal process to name them; produce them~! Had the legend been that the shootings/bombings were by an 'Islamofascist' the Tellegraph reporter's office, home and all electronic devices would already be in police custody for that information. Something is very odd.....make that EVERYTHING is quite odd on this case.

Peter - precisely.

Everyone from the EDL to his father is denying any contact with Breivik.

Yet London's Daily Telegraph speaks with an anonymous source who facilitated his rise through freemasonry's ranks, and another anonymous source who discloses that Breivik had extensive plastic surgery in the USA, and did so because he's a vain man who wanted to get laid more.

It's blatant legend creation.

The magician diverting the audience away from the truth before their eyes.

The Telegraph would not publish such anonymous material if they did not think the source was "sound and reliable". The newspaper has long standing and strong relations with British intelligence.

Check out, for example, Con Coughlin:

Habbush letter

In late 2003, in a front-page exclusive story, Coughlin revealed a leaked intelligence memorandum, purportedly uncovered by Iraq's interim government, which detailed a meeting between Mohamed Atta, one of the September 11 hijackers, and Iraqi intelligence at the time of Saddam Hussein.[6][7] The memo was supposedly written by Iraqi security chief General Tahir Jalil Habbush al-Tikriti to the president of Iraq. The report was subsequently challenged with American officials also reiterating that there was no such link.[8]

The Daily Telegraph's exclusive report was picked up and repeated by several conservative columnists in the United States, including syndicated columnist Deroy Murdock[9] and William Safire.[10]

[edit] IranCoughlin has alleged that Iran is producing nerve gas and chemical weapons.[11]

The Press Complaints Commission rejected a series of complaints from the Campaign Against Sanctions and Military Intervention in Iran, which had examined 44 articles written by Coughlin about Iran between October 29, 2005 and October 10, 2006 and made the following claims [12]:

Sources were unnamed or untraceable, often senior Western intelligence officials or senior Foreign Office officials.
Articles were published at sensitive and delicate times where there had been relatively positive diplomatic moves towards Iran.
Articles contained exclusive revelations about Iran combined with eye-catchingly controversial headlines.
The story upon which the headline was based does not usually exceed one line or at the most one paragraph. The rest of the article focused on other, often unrelated, information.

We're being played.