Norway: One Month On.

It has been four weeks since Norway was devastated by Anders Behring Breivik who killed 76 people in a bomb attack in Oslo and a shooting rampage on Utoya island. So far I've explained how Britain engineered these attacks to keep Norway in the Libya campaign, ignite tensions between Jews and Muslims and promote discussion about the Julian Assange/Wikileaks trial.

Although these were the main reasons behind the attacks there were others including;

North Sea Oil: Both Norway and Britain have the right to extract oil and gas from the north sea oil reserve. Hoping that it will soon have control of Libya's oil reserves Britain has set about reducing the amount of oil extracted from the north sea reserve by placing exorbitant taxes on oil companies operating there. The idea is to preserve that reserve for as long as possible so Britain still has oil when everyone else has run out. The problem is that Norway hasn't followed suit leaving production and tax levels more or less the same. If this imbalance continues then all the oil companies will simply move from Britain to Norway so all the oil will be pumped out anyway and Britain won't get any revenue from it at all. This has been a source of major tension between the two nations with Britain seemingly shocked and confused that the Norwegian government is acting in Norway's interest rather then Britain's.

Afghanistan: As a NATO member Norway is currently engaged in Afghanistan. Led by the United States NATO members are currently debating the best way to withdraw from Afghanistan. As that withdrawal approaches there has been an increase in attacks carried out by members of the Afghan National Army (ANA) and the Afghan National Police (ANP) or by militants wearing uniforms they'd stolen. As he carried out his attacks Anders Breivik wore a Norwegian police uniform. So that aspect of the attacks was designed to promote discussion about the role of the Afghan police in a post-NATO Afghanistan. America wants to pull out as quickly as possible while Britain wants to stay on until it has trained and therefore gained control of the Afghan police.

The Security Culture: Although it does have crime Norway has nowhere near the levels of crime you get in other western nations such as Britain and the US. As a result Norway simply doesn't need much of the security apparatus such as CCTV cameras and repressive laws that other nations have. For example Norway's only police helicopter was unable to respond to the attacks because it goes on holiday in the summer. So by carrying out the attacks Britain was trying to create fear in order to change Norway's security culture. In part this was done to create a global homogeneity which makes it harder to argue against the ever more totalitarian and repressive measures that Britain wants to introduce. Mainly though it was done to help British companies to sell Norway things like blast resistant glass which Britain is something of a market leader in. Also according to some conspiracy theories this was also the reason Israel carried out the 9/11 attacks and those attacks were most certainly exploited after the fact for that reason. So discussing this aspect of the Norwegian attacks feeds into reinforcing the entirely false idea that the 9/11 attacks were an Israel false flag attack which in turn inflames tensions between Jews and Muslims.

Now there are also other reasons why the attacks were carried out but I think this is enough for now because we are talking about a decreasing level of importance. Meanwhile Britain continues it's relentless pressure on Norway. First in the form of the polar bear attack and then through the oil leak at the Gannet Alpha lateral drilling platform in the north sea. This is actually the basis of a hostile bilateral discussion between Britain and the US over Libya amongst other things. However because they share north sea oil, north sea wildlife and north sea coastline Norway have been dragged into the middle of it.