Norway’s Anders Brevik: Weapons of Mass Destruction and the Politics of Cultural Despair

ABOUT THIS REPORT (click to show)

At some point, most security analysts face the dilemma of balancing expediency with analytical thoroughness. Such is the case with Norway’s Anders Breivik. As his victims await burial, Breivik’s treatise—the 1500 page, 2083:
A European Declaration of Independence
(click here for PDF link)—became available only a few days ago. While some researchers, mindful of the value of analytical completeness, patiently plod through this massive manifesto, analysts at the Federation of American Scientists (FAS) conclude that the nature of Breivik’s attacks, compounded with the extraordinary content of his treatise, raise questions of such immediate concern that the formulation and release of initial analyses are prudent. We present such an effort here as both a highly formatted blog post and as a preliminary report. The former allows for a quick delivery of
our preliminary investigation amid a platform for open discussion of a threat that remains, we believe, largely inchoate. The latter conforms to our professional dedication to robust research and application of various relevant analytical methodologies.

While Breivik’s unprecedented attacks alone warrant profound study, his treatise seeks to portend far greater acts of terror and destruction than those visited upon Norway on July 22nd. However, to date, no substantive effort addresses the document’s detailed exposition of the fabrication, delivery and general merits of chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear weapons (CBRN). The paucity of concern and immediacy revolving around Breivik’s assertions of forthcoming CBRN attacks likely result from two interrelated issues. First, Breivik is incarcerated and will likely remain so for the rest of his life; Breivik himself is no longer a threat. Second, some question his technical acumen with regard to CBRN; even if he were free, according to one putative CBRN expert, “Breivik’s WMD idea is not realistic.”[1] We
largely agree with such conclusions
. However, any proper risk assessment must conduct a so-called “assumptions check.” Such an exercise has two primary elements: 1) explicitly identifying conclusions that rely, in part or in whole, on assumptions and 2) identifying and evaluating the consequences should such assumptions prove false.[2] Application of an assumptions check to the Breivik case, we believe, precipitates the need for serious and immediate analyses of the treatise’s content for two primary reasons.

First, Breivik has made claims, through his writing as well as to Oslo District Court Judge Kim Heger, that he is in league with extremist cells and that some of these co-conspirators “are already in the process of attempting to acquire chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear materials.”[3] While it is likely that Breivik acted alone, we are not comfortable assuming that this is the case. Moreover, given the operational sophistication of his attacks, and, among other salient components in the case writ large, the overall operational security that he maintained for years, it is axiomatic that Breivik’s threats should be considered in great detail. Indeed, as renowned terrorism expert Gary Ackerman has warned, “History is replete with cautionary tales warning against basing threat assessments on static analyses of an opponent’s motivations and capabilities.”[4] In short, it is possible that subsequent attacks—some perhaps even utilizing CBRN—may be forthcoming, and it is therefore prudent for the intelligence communities to carefully consider Breivik’s writings.

Second, our initial analyses of Brevik’s comprehension of the relevant issues surrounding the fabrication and employment of CBRN concludes that he was motivated and capable of credibly pursuing low-end CBRN attacks—specifically those likely to result in mass effect as opposed to mass destruction . As our report details, this is specifically the case with some biological and radiological agents. Should Breivik be part of a cell of violent extremists, it is possible that his confederates share an equal, if not greater, understanding of the technologies underlying certain CBRN. Moreover, they may have access to the necessary agents and technologies necessary to actualize Breivik’s more ambitious stratagems for the employment of CBRN.

We are presently inclined to conclude that Breivik acted alone. Consequently, his warnings of forthcoming CBRN events are likely invalid. However, given the nature of his attacks and the content of his treatise we urge the security community to seriously consider the possibility that cells of violent extremists are linked to Breivik; the pursuit of a CBRN capability—as well as the possibility of radiological and/or biological use—are a possibility.

Blog posts and reports from the FAS Terrorism Analysis Project are produced to increase the understanding of policymakers, the public, and the press about threats to national and international security from terrorist
groups and other violent non-state actors. The reports are written by individual authors—who may be FAS staff or acknowledged experts from outside
the institution. These reports do not represent an FAS institutional position on policy issues. All statements of fact and expressions of opinion contained in this and other FAS-published reports are the sole responsibility of the author or authors.


[1]
See “Alleged Norway Shooter Considered WMD Attack, Jihadi Alliance,” ABC News,
July 24, 2011. Available at: http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/anders-breivik-alleged-norway-shooter-considered-wmd-attack/story?id=14148151

[2]
Whether we are conscious of it or not, most of us frequently conduct an
assumptions check. For example, imagine that as you are about to lie down in
bed for a night of sleep you suddenly realize that you cannot be sure if you
locked your car doors. You might temporarily assume you did; however,
you mind quickly assesses the consequences of a faulty assumption.
Whether or not you get up, get dressed, and trudge out to your car is largely
the result of the risk assessment you make should the car be unlocked.

[3]
Andrew Berwick [pseudonym for Anders Behring Breivik], 2083 A European
Declaration of Independence
, July 2011, 1022.

[4]
United States Senate Committee on Homeland Security
and Governmental Affairs Hearing on “Nuclear Terrorism: Assessing the Threat to
the Homeland.” Testimony of Gary A. Ackerman, April 2, 2008, 3.
Available at: http://hsgac.senate.gov/public/_files/040208Ackerman3.pdf

Norway’s Anders Brevik: Weapons of Mass Destruction and the Politics of Cultural Despair

CHARLES P. BLAIR, KELSEY GREGG, AND JONATHAN GARBOSE 1

 July 27, 2011

Ten years after the events of 9/11, it is often forgotten that high fatality terrorist incidents remain a rarity. Indeed, prior to 9/11 the single deadliest terrorist attack was the 1978 Iranian theatre firebombing perpetrated by Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK: People’s Majahedin of Iran) with 470 fatalities. Since 1970, only 118 incidents of terrorism have killed more than 100 people—0.12 percent of the 98,000 terrorist events encompassing that four decade span. As the death toll of the July 22 attacks in Norway approaches 100, it is useful to appreciate this fact. In addition to recognizing their uncommonly deadly outcomes, two other features related to the attack are salient. First, significant elements of Anders Breivik’s treatise—the 1500 page 2083: A European Declaration of Independence 2 (click here for PDF link)—address the acquisition, weaponization, and use of chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear (CBRN) agents or devices against Breivik’s perceived enemies. Second, his ideological platform, said by Breivik to represent his role as “Justiciar Knight Commander for Knights Templar Europe and one of several leaders of the National and pan-European Patriotic Resistance Movement,” is largely informed by European racist ideology that first emerged in the nineteenth century and continues to this day. This report principally evaluates the CBRN elements of Breivik’s treatise. A subsequent report (schedule for release in late 2011) will orient Breivik’s ideological underpinnings within the broader historical milieu of European racist thinking. First, however, it is useful to place Breivik’s attack in perspective.

 


AN UNPRECEDENTED ACT OF TERRORISM, A STATISTICAL PERSPECTIVE

While the vehicle-borne improvised explosive device (VBIED) used in the Oslo attack warrants attention for its size and deliverability, the Utoya Island attack represents a true outlier in regard to incidents of terrorism. As noted above, attacks generating high levels of death (more than 50) are a rarity. 3 As Figure 1 illustrates, less than 0.5 percent of all terrorist attacks since 1970—over 98,000—generated more than 50 fatalities. 4 With the exception of suicide bombings, all of these attacks, when the perpetrator was known, were conducted by more than one person. In short, if Breivik was the sole shooter, with at least 68 people killed, the Utoya Island incident is unprecedented.

Figure 1: Incidents of Terrorism and the Fatalities They Generate, 1970-2010

When considering the use of firearms in incidents of terrorism (as opposed, for example, to bombings), the events on Utoya Island are also unique. 5 Figure 2 demonstrates that in terrorist events utilizing firearms, either as the only weapon type or in combination with other weapon types, just over 0.5 percent result in more than 50 fatalities. 6 Furthermore, if the death toll from the Utoya Island shooting remains at 68 then it becomes evident that only 97 attacks utilizing solely firearms have generated equal or greater casualties in the time period 1970-2010—0.25 percent of all attacks.

 

Figure 2: Fatalities When Weapon Type Includes Firearms, 1970-2010

Moreover, of the 209 incidents involving firearms that generated more than 50 casualties, 112 utilized firearms and other weapons. Reportedly utilizing a customized Ruger Mini-14 rifle, a Glock 17 pistol, and a Benelli Nova pump-action shotgun 7 the Utoya Island attack is a true anomaly in the history of recorded terrorism.

 

“WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION” AND THE TREATISE OF ANDERS BREIVIK

As unprecedented as the attacks themselves were, Breivik’s treatise predicts that greater acts of violence are forthcoming. Significantly, Breivik warns of the use—by his unnamed confederate Knight Templars—of CBRN agents and/or devices against the “cultural Marxists” and “multiculturalists” responsible for the Islamic “colonization” of Europe. While it is tempting to dismiss his threats as hyperbole from a “crazy loner” it is entirely possible that Breivik is, as he claims to be, a member of a neo-Templar group. As Jeffrey M. Bale, a terrorism expert with decades of experience researching and analyzing, inter alia, elitist, conspiratorial, right-wing, exterminationist, and apocalyptic millenarian ideologies with overt political overtones, asks:

“[D[/ref]oes [Breivik[/ref] have organizational connections to any of the dozens (if not hundreds) of small neo-Templar groups that nowadays exist throughout Europe? … Most such groups are utterly harmless inasmuch as their members mainly like to wear medieval garb, participate in elaborate rituals, network with each other, and imagine themselves to be the aristocratic heirs of the Templars, but at times various neo-Templar groups have been involved in serious acts of violence (e.g., certain groups reportedly linked to the Service d’Action Civique, a Gaullist parallel police apparatus in France, and the cult-like Ordre du Temple Solaire).”[8. Email correspondence with primary author Blair, July 24, 2011. Emphasis added. See also, Jeffrey M. Bale, “The Oslo Terrorist Attacks: A Story of Rival Right-Wing Extremisms,” Monterey Institute of International Studies, forthcoming.[/ref]

In short, revelations in the last few days suggest that Breivik may not have been acting alone. Moreover, Breivik may have links to clandestine, well-funded, sophisticated, and violent non-state groups. Oslo District Court Judge Kim Heger stated that Breivik claimed to be part of an “organization” (ostensibly a splinter of the Knights Templar) and that there were “two more cells in [Breivik’s[/ref] organization.”[9. Sam Jones and Ben Quinn, “Norway Attacks Live Coverage,” July 25, 2011. Available at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jul/25/norway-attack-live-coverage-anders-breivik[/ref] Ominously, Breivik states that, “There are cells that are already in the process of attempting to acquire chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear materials.” 8 Given these claims and the operational security Breivik (and, possibly, others) maintained—as well as the obvious tactical sophistication of the attacks and a clear lack of compunction instigating mass-casualty terrorism incidents —it is prudent to consider his threats of forthcoming CBRN use seriously. 9

TIMING OF CBRN USE

In his treatise, Breivik elaborates in great detail about the perceived need for Muslims living in Europe to either “assimilate” or leave the continent.  The deadline for his “Assimilation policy/demand” expires on January 1, 2020.[12. “Assimilation” includes Conversion to Christianity; Name change; Not allowed to practice your ”mother tongue” or Arabic; All mosques and Islamic centers will be demolished or converted; Correspondence with other Muslims abroad is strictly prohibited; etc. The Declaration, 809-810.[ Breivik warns that the use of radiological and nuclear weapons will not occur before this “capitulation deadline."[13. Ibid, passim, see especially 811 and 820.[/ref] The timing for possible first use of chemical and/or biological weapons (CBW) however, is not explicitly identified. Breivik appears to leave the door open for CBW use by noting that, “We will not initiate any nuclear power plant attacks until the deadline has passed … we will instead focus on non-nuclear attacks until then.”[14. For the radiological deadline see Ibid, 1059; for nuclear deadline see Ibid, 1027-1028.[/ref] As noted below, CBW attacks may be precipitated according to Breivik, “if we feel that conventional approaches are fruitless or if the … Western European regimes successfully manage to neutralize our long term efforts…”[15. Ibid, 1027. Emphasis added.[/ref]

MOTIVATION FOR CBRN USE

The effective use of CBRN is an understandable aspiration for Breivik and his putative Templar “brothers” (whoever, if anyone, they might actually be) given the ideology outlined in the former’s treatise. Breivik writes that, “We will not allow our corrupt and traitorous EU elites to sell the European people in to Muslim slavery,” adding, “We will not allow them to annihilate Western civilisation[sic[/ref], our identities and culture by allowing them to continue to institutionalise[sic[/ref] and implement multiculturalism.”… “We demand their full surrender- nothing more, nothing less..” 10 Of great significance is the fact that Breivik calls not for the systematic destruction of Muslims but, rather, for the elimination of their European enablers and apologists:

“Make no mistake. These Muslims must be considered as wild animals. Do not blame the wild animals but rather the multiculturalist category … traitors who allowed these animals to enter our lands, and continue to facilitate them. This is nothing less than a genocide aided and abetted by our own elites, primarily Marxist, suicidal humanist and capitalist globalist politicians and journalists. They will eventually pay the ultimate price for their war crimes. Judgment day is coming closer for each and every … traitor. No mercy will be shown to them because they know what they have done and continue to do.” 11

The threat of use and the actual employment of CBRN, therefore, is perceived by Breivik as facilitating his goals in at least four ways:

1. Compel/coerce: forcing his perceived enemies—“the criminal multiculturalist regimes of Western Europe”—to capitulate.[18. Ibid, 478.[/ref]

2. Undermine the power base of perceived enemies: “Just imagine how much ideological, psychological and economical damage it would cause the criminal French cultural Marxist/multicultural regime if they had to abandon the Eiffel tower [sic[/ref] and create a 1km containment zone around it for several decades to come.” 12

3. Resolve asymmetric tactical/strategic imbalances: CBRN “might be an option if we feel that conventional approaches are fruitless or if the intelligence agencies/system protectors working for the Western European regimes successfully manage to neutralize our long term efforts to liberate our countries.” 13

4. Punish perceived European enemies: “They will eventually pay the ultimate price for their war crimes… No mercy will be shown to them because they know what they have done and continue to do.” 14

CBRN TARGETING

Breivik carefully qualifies the means of achieving “surrender” from his foes by noting that “our objective” is not to kill hundreds of thousands of people, “[o]ur aim is to execute surgically precise attacks with a medium to low amount of casualties ([on specific[/ref]concentrations of … cultural Marxists / multiculturalists.” 15 CBRN attacks are to be utilized against the two echelons of European traitors: so-called “Category A” and “Category B” groups. The former—said to number ten per 1 million citizens—represent “usually any current Heads of State, ministers/senators, directors and leaders of certain organizations/boards etc. who are guilty of [certain] charges…” These charges range from, “Aiding and abetting the cultural genocide against the indigenous peoples of Europe” to  “Contributing to institutionalised [sic] persecution, discrimination, harassment, illegal monitoring, incarceration, torture and/or mental/physical abuse of any and all individuals who attempt to resist or oppose the Islamic invasion/colonisation [sic] of Europe through demographic warfare and/or cultural genocide.”[23. Ibid, 957[/ref] Breivik estimates that “Category B traitors” represent 1,000 out of every 1 million Europeans. “Category B traitors” are also deemed appropriate targets for CBRN. This category includes “cultural Marxist/multiculturalist politicians, primarily from the alliance of European political parties known as ‘the MA 100’ (parties who support multiculturalism) and EU parliamentarians.” 16

SPECFIC CBRN AGENTS/WEAPONS

1. CHEMICAL WEAPONS

Perceived Utility and Sources of Chemical Agents

Breivik writes that the use of chemical warfare (CW) agents is desirable when executing “surgically precise attacks with a medium to low amount of casualties (concentrations of category A and B cultural Marxists/multiculturalists).” 17 The utility of CW is enhanced, Breivik notes, “as it will leave the infrastructure intact.” Alleged sources for CW agents, according to Breivik, include the Russian mafia, various jihadist groups, and legitimate Austrian chemical companies. While references to Russian black market “sources” are in line with common misperceptions, Breivik’s advocacy for CBRN cooperation with “the enemies of our enemies” (i.e., jihadists) is noteworthy. 18 Breivik warns:

“…Knights Templar will for the future consider working with the enemies of the EU/US hegemony such as Iran (South Korea is unlikely 19), al-Qaeda, al-Shabaab or the rest of the devout fractions of the Islamic Ummah with the intention for deployment of small nuclear, radiological, biological or chemical weapons in Western European capitals and other high priority locations. Justiciar Knights and other European Christian martyrs can avoid the scrutiny normally reserved for individuals of Arab descent and we can ensure successful deployment and detonation in the location of our choice.” 20

Specific Chemical Agents

URAGAN D2: Breivik believes that this blood agent—a hydrogen cyanide also referred to as Zyclon B—is “easily obtainable.” 21 Moreover, he states that “[t]hree kilogram[sic] is enough to kill as many as 40 000 people,” a claim chemical weapon expert Jonathan Tucker describes as “absurd.” 22

OTHER CW AGENTS: Also briefly noted in the treatise are “nerve agents, ricin, lewisite and mustard gas.” 23

Delivery and Targeting of Chemical Agents

As noted earlier, Breivik considers CW useful in “surgically precise attacks.” Accordingly, he advocated the use of “chemical bullets” (see “Biological Weapons” section below for “poison bullets”) or the dispersal of chemical agents “through ventilation systems of buildings where there are concentrations of category A and B traitors.” 24 As noted above, Breivik conceives of CW use if “conventional approaches are fruitless or if the intelligence agencies/system protectors working for the Western European regimes successfully manage to neutralize our long term efforts to liberate our countries.” 25 With regard to “acceptable” death tolls from CW attacks, Breivik  notes that “Certain target building complexes can contain as many as 30-50 category A traitors, 200-300 category B traitors and 2000-3000 category C traitors with an acceptable amount of civilians.” 26 Outside of Western Europe the use of CW is also identified as a specific option in the “liberation” of “Greek Western Anatolia, Northern Cyprus and Armenian Eastern Anatolia” from Turkish control. 27

2. BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS

Overview

Along with other CBRN, Breivik calls for the use of biological weapons (BW) and toxins against the “cultural Marxist/multiculturalist elites,” stressing that “Efforts must be made to obtain [them].” 28 Despite claiming his “aim is to execute surgically precise attacks with a medium to low amount of casualties…” Breivik intended to use CBRN to cause mass casualties. In his treatise he defines “surgically precise” in a manner that is anything but:

“The number of civilian loses will be acceptable for certain targets. Certain target building complexes can contain as many as 30-50 category A traitors, 200-300 category B traitors and 2000-3000 category C traitors with an acceptable amount of civilians.” 29

Weapons of mass destruction are intended for just that purpose—mass destruction. In calling for the surgical use of weapons to cause thousands of deaths—by no means a low casualty count–one can see the disparity between his stated purpose and his intended results.

As noted earlier, Breivik claims nuclear or radiological weapons will not be used by himself or his followers until at least 2020 30 and until then he urges his followers to use conventional, biological, and chemical weapons. To incentivize the use of BWs, he created a commendation system explicitly laid out within the treatise. For example, the ‘Lord of War Commendation: Silver Sword’ is to be awarded to individuals who “execut[ed]/kill[ed] at least 10 category A, B or C traitors… [with] a biological or chemical WMD…” and the ‘Commendation of Clandestine Logistical Excellence: Gold Sword’ to be awarded for “…exceptional logistical skills in a military operation… involving conventional weapons with an unconventional WMD, biological, nuclear, etc.” 31

Specific Biological Agents

Breivik’s treatise focused on Bacillus anthracis (the causative agent of anthrax), ricin, and concentrated liquid nicotine. Fortunately, Breivik neglected the obvious and relatively easy to acquire BWs such as botulinum neurotoxin and Foot and Mouth Disease—both of which could have massive social and economic ramifications if deployed effectively. Aeorsolized anthrax, nicotine, and ricin are considered deadly BWs, 32 but Breivik only mentions the use of aersolized anthrax. He focuses instead on using un-aerosolized ricin and nicotine for armed assaults. 33 Breivik’s understanding of the social implications of BW attacks is well grounded and he is capable of making and/or obtaining ricin and nicotine for assault use. However, Breivik’s ability to obtain weapons grade anthrax and toxins is less likely.

ANTHRAX: While Breivik discusses Bacillus anthracis at great length, he lacks the necessary knowledge to culture and weaponize the spores himself. For example, his laboratory equipment list does not include basic bacterial culturing equipment, such as incubators, centrifuges, and fermentors. Breivik also recommends getting an anthrax vaccination, but does not appear to understand that the vaccine is not available to the general public. 34

Breivik understands that the technology required to weaponize B. anthracis spores is likely too costly and involved to allow for a single individual to successfully accomplish the task alone. 35 Therefore, he recommends contacting the “Christian Nationalists” in the Middle East for sympathetic “… scientists or any other competent individuals who might be of assistance in developing biological/chemical compounds or whom are willing to use their networks to obtain high grade anthrax etc.” 36 Breivik also recommends the Russian Mafia 37 and to a much lesser degree, jihadist groups and Iran 38 as possible sources for acquiring BW capability.

In terms of B. anthracis deployment, Breivik identifies the 2001 anthrax attacks as “a good anthrax campaign” 39 and advocates similar targeted anthrax mailing campaigns across Europe, including targets in Germany, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Belgium, and Sweden. Breivik’s plan seems logical and could be devastating if accomplished. The main barrier to his plan is acquiring the large amounts of anthrax he calculated for the attacks (409 – 818 kilograms). Breivik seems to understand this barrier, and supports using a hoax powder as a scare tactic. Breivik muses that in the hoax aftermath:

“Many cultural Marxist/multiculturalist elites will defect, quit politics, their media, university, artist position as a result. Some may even realise [sic] what they are doing/have done and may join our struggle. Many of the so called “category A and B” traitors aren’t truly cultural Marxists/ multiculturalists. Many are just “going with the flow” and will therefore reevaluate their involvement in future activities.” 40

TOXINS: Breivik was capable of safe, crude extraction of the deadly toxins ricin 41 and nicotine 42 from, respectively, the Castor bean and dried tobacco leaf. However, these extraction methods do not create weapons grade toxins.

Ricin: Breivik’s limited knowledge hinders his ability to even identify an average lethal dose of ricin. He cites four different sources for this dose, with estimates ranging from 1mg to about 70mg. Part of his confusion stems from the fact that a toxin’s route of entry (aerosol, ingestion, injection) affects the amount needed for a lethal dose. This amount is quantified by the LD50 (the lethal dose at which 50% of people will die if exposed). He lists the LD50 for ricin at 60mg for a 75kg man (about 165 lbs), 43 which is a few orders of magnitude off for any entry route. For a 75 kg man, the LD50 should be about 1,500mg if the toxin was ingested, and it would be around 0.4mg if the toxin was injected or inhaled. 44

Nicotine: In addition to the available crude extraction methods, Breivik recommends purchasing pure or diluted liquid nicotine (for boiling down).[53. The Declaration, 1020[/ref] Breivik details how he created a cover identity as an e-cigarette researcher to obtain 50mL of pure liquid nicotine from a Chinese company with “… no complications whatsoever.” 45 This information is unsettling as we may see more people similarly acquiring this toxin for nefarious purposes.

Poison bullets: Breivik planned to create ‘poison bullets’ 46 to ensure the death of his victims. The poisons—ricin and nicotine—were to be injected into the tips of hollow point bullets. However, Breivik seems more fascinated with the idea of poison bullets than their practicality since the quickest, cheapest, and least labor intensive method to ensure a victim’s death would be to just shoot them again.

It is also questionable whether or not a lethal dose of toxin would even survive the heat generated by firing a round. According to infrared data for a .30 caliber round, 47 the tip of a bullet can reach 170°C (338°F), and the portions in contact with the gun barrel can reach 320°C (608°F). 48 It is therefore possible that a toxin within a hollow point bullet could reach temperatures near 170°C for approximately one second. 49 Even during this short time frame, one could expect some loss of toxicity based on the thermostability of ricin 50 and nicotine. 51

More worrisome than the assault scenario presented above is the scenario Breivik described of releasing chemical and/or biological agents into a building’s ventilation system.[61. The Declaration, 957. Breivik states that “Uragan D2, anthrax or equivalent lethal chemical or biological weapons should be dispersed through ventilation systems of buildings where there are concentrations of category A and B traitors. … Several containers with timer/dispersal mechanisms could be placed in strategic locations in the ventilation system.”[/ref] This mass casualty scenario, at least for biological agents and toxins, is luckily hindered by the technology involved and his ability to acquire weapons grade materials from outside sources.

Summary of Biological Agents and Weapons

Breivik understands that along with possible high fatality rates (without the loss of infrastructure), massive media coverage, economic damage, and intense psychological effects, there are other ‘good’ reasons for attempting a BW attack. 52 For many technical reasons, 53 Breivik himself was not capable of creating and deploying biological weapons, but his planning and resolve to manipulate people and organizations in order to acquire weaponized biological materials is troubling.

3. RADIOLOGICAL WEAPONS

Utility and Sources of Radiological Agents

The technical section of Breivik’s treatise dealing with radiological agents and weapons lifts verbatim from Wikipedia (Breivik does not explicitly note his source nor does he use quotation marks). 54 Despite this lack of originality, Brevik’s appreciation for the utility of radiological weapons reflects a clear understanding of their limitations; specifically their usefulness as a weapon of mass disruption as opposed to a weapon of mass destruction. Breivik predicts, “… Our radiological attacks (RDDs) will cause minimal to no civilian casualties but it will create devastating ideological, physiological and economical damage on the targeted cultural Marxist/multicultural regime. 55.”

In harmony with Wikipedia’s entry entitled, “Dirty Bomb,” Breivik notes that Russia, other former Soviet republics, and the U.S. all possess large quantities of radiological material, “unsecured… [and[/ref] in the strangest of places.” Breivik considers it:

“… relatively easy to acquire at least one [high-risk radioisotope[/ref] if you have a minimum of information in regards to appropriate sources. It is therefore likely that any Justiciar Knight cell attempting to acquire radiological material will be successful. We, the PCCTS, Knights Templar or any allied liberation organization is likely to obtain radioactive material through the “black market” or by going directly to the sources ourselves. Due to the nature of our hierarchical structure it is unlikely that we can afford purchasing it from criminal organization as the prize [sic] would simply be too steep. In any case, the black market remains as one viable option for acquirement.” 56

Specific Radiological Agents

Ten high-risk commercial radioactive sources are briefly mentioned in the treatise: 57

  • Americium-241 (Am-241)
  • Californium-252 (Cf-252)
  • Caesium-137 (Cs-137)
  • Cobalt-60 (Co-60)
  • Iodine-131 (I-131)
  • Iridium-192 (Ir-192)
  • Plutonium-238, 239 (Pu-238 and Pu 239)
  • Polonium-210 (Po-210)
  • Radium-226 (Ra-226)
  • Strontium-90 (Sr-90)

 Significantly, Breivik demonstrates an appreciation for the typical radioactivity levels of individual radioisotopes and the differences between, and sources of, high-energy alpha(α), beta (β) and gamma (γ) emitters.

Delivery and Targeting of Radiological Weapons

While writing about the possibility of the Knights Templar working in cohesion with jihadist groups , Breivik notes their potential utility in deploying radiological weapons in Western European capitals and other vital locations (as noted above, he specifically cites the contamination of the Eifel Tower as an effective means for “ideological, psychological and economical damage” 58. The actual delivery of radiological weapon is portrayed by Breivik as a likely suicide mission:

“Let there be no doubt; the cost and complexity of using protective systems needed to protect the handler from radiation is not realistic. Our goal is therefore to use protective systems (hazmat suits, improvised and relatively inexpensive lead containers) that allow the builder/transporter of the bomb to survive long enough in order to successfully deploy and detonate it […[/ref] [They] are therefore sacrificing themselves and will die as martyrs for the cause..” 59

4. NUCLEAR WEAPONS AND FISSILE MATERIALS

Perceived Utility and Sources of Nuclear Weapons

In contrast to several prominent jihadist sources, 60 Breivik’s treatise displays a broad understanding of the technologies underlying nuclear weapons. While entire sections are lifted from Wikipedia (for example, the nuclear fuel cycle), his analysis is sound. Fabrication of an improvised nuclear device (IND) is understood to be an unattainable goal for the foreseeable future (recall that the treatise only calls for the use of nuclear weapons after 2020). 61 Theft or unauthorized access to nuclear weapons remains the goal for Breivik’s putative Templar co-revolutionists, both extant and emerging. 62 Consequently, readers familiar with The Turner Diaries will find similarities between that work of fiction and Breivik’s treatise. 63

According to Breivik, future (so-called “Phase 2 or 3”—2030-2070 64) sources for intact nuclear weapons hinge on whether “European cultural conservative” forces are able to “seize control of a British or French nuclear storage facility or if we manage to negotiate with the Russians, Indians, or Israelis.” 65 As is the case with chemical, biological, and radiological stratagems explored by Breivik, jihadist groups are seen as a potential source vis-à-vis a cooperative effort in the acquisition of nuclear weapons. 66

As noted above, Breivik’s assertion that CBRN are to be employed chiefly in “surgically precise attacks” runs counter to the effect of some CBRN weapons and agents. 67 Nowhere is this more so than with regard to nuclear weapons. The treatise recognizes this fact, noting that, “Using nuclear weapons would normally inflict too many civilian casualties and therefore it is hard to imagine how nuclear weapons could benefit our cause.” 68 Thus, Breivik concludes that only nuclear devices with “a very small charge (0,05-0,1 kt yield [sic])” are desirable. 69 Looking toward the Phase 2-3 period, the treatise outlines a strategy in which 24 such low-yield nuclear weapons are procured by “the patriotic pan-European resistance movement 70:

“We threaten to detonate the charges in a specific European capital (major government buildings only, with minimal civilian casualties) unless the Multicultural establishment capitulate and transfers all military and political mandates to a tribunal lead by Cultural Conservatives. Obviously, each country operates independently so it will be a country by country effort starting with France, the UK or Germany (France is the natural choice due to the advancement of the Islamisation [sic]. They will refuse the first time because they assume we will not be willing to detonate. They will however most likely capitulate when we threaten to detonate the second charge. […] Even the smallest nuclear detonation would therefore inflict massive ideological, psychological and economical damage on the target Multicultural regime and is likely to result in full surrender and collapse of the system. […]The conclusion is; the threat and willingness to use small nuclear devices can end the European civil war faster and thus save up to hundreds of thousands of lives. However, it will prove more or less impossible to obtain in Phase 1. A well organised [sic] resistance group with military contacts will however be able to raid either a UK or French cache/facility during phase 2. This operation alone might end the civil war sooner than we anticipated with us as the victors.” 71

Specific Fissile Materials

Plutonium: Breivik only mentions plutonium in the context of the nuclear fuel cycle and in the context of possible agents for use in radiological weapons (both types of references are lifted verbatim from Wikipedia).

Uranium: Similar to his handling of plutonium, uranium is mentioned in the context of the nuclear fuel cycle. Additionally, the treatise briefly explores the use of depleted uranium (useless as a nuclear weapon’s primary fuel) in conventional munitions.

Other fissile materials are not identified by Breivik (e.g., neptunium-237).

Delivery and Targeting of Nuclear Weapons

As explored earlier, Breivik’s treatise limits the employment of nuclear weapons to 2020 at the earliest. The treatise assumes the procurement of intact nuclear weapons, putatively obviating the need to weaponize or otherwise “enable” the devices before use. As noted, European cities are the primary targets although Breivik repeatedly emphasizes the need to only employ low-yield warheads. In his treatise, Breivik states that, “We threaten to detonate the charges in a specific European capital (major government buildings only, with minimal civilian casualties)…” 72 Furthermore, Breivik uses Brussels, London, and Paris as examples of European capitals to be targeted by “A nuclear warhead launched from a medium range missile or in an air craft and detonated 20 miles above” 73 for an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attack. Breivik also states that “…when the civil war has been won and the focus will be on the re-conquering of Anatolia nuclear EMP attacks would be favourable.” 74 Finally, Breivik’s treatise provides detailed plans for attacks on European nuclear power plants. 75 Entitled “Operation Regime Ender,” 76 Breivik claims that “A new Chernobyl disaster in the heart of Western Europe will break the back of the EUSSR, have no doubt. Causing a new Chernobyl disaster on a multiculturalist regime would completely cripple them and might eventually lead to the collapse of the EU altogether or any targeted individual regime.” 77

Summary of Nuclear Weapons

The acquisition and use of nuclear weapons by Breivik’s supposed Knights Templar allies is obviously the least likely outcome with regard to CBRN writ large. Breivik clearly acknowledges this; caveats are infused with all of his planning for future nuclear events. Still, the treatise’s handling of nuclear weapons is unique. First, it carefully considers the preservation of Breivik’s alleged constituency through the employment of only low-yield warheads. Second, the treatise is unique in that it considers multiple state sources for nuclear weapons, many in the context of cells working with Knights Templar. This includes India, Israel, and Russia.

PRELIMINARY CONCLUSIONS

Even when considered in isolation of the Oslo bombing and the rampage of death visited upon Utoya Island, Breivik’s treatise precipitates profound concerns. First, the question of co-conspirators. Numerous sections of the treatise mention ideologically aligned clandestine military cells that, within the larger struggle of resisting the Islamization of Europe, presently seek CBRN capabilities. Assuming the existence of such cells, it is entirely possible that the attacks in Oslo and Utoya Island and supposed extant and forthcoming attempts to secure, weaponize, and deliver certain CBRN agents are directly linked in a campaign of violent revolution the opening salvos of which began in earnest on July 22.

Second, and far more plausible, is the likely role Breivik’s treatise will serve imparting CBRN knowledge, tactics, and goals to others. Unlike other extremist manuals dealing with the acquisition, handling, and delivery of CBRN agents, 78 Breivik’s writings lay bare a poorly kept yet supremely important “secret”: that the use—or credible threat of use—of even non-lethal CBRN agents (either due to the agents quantity or quality) is likely enough to generate widespread panic and devastating regional and global economic consequences. Moreover, Breivik correctly challenges conventional thinking by observing that CBRN can be used on a tactical level. Indeed, two of the most notable instances of CBRN terrorism, the 1984 Salmonella poisoning (Salmonellosis) incident perpetrated by members of the Rajneeshee group and Aum Shinrikyō’s 1995 Tokyo subway sarin gas attack, were triggered by the perceived need to address immediate concerns (as opposed to the groups’ strategic goals.) 79 Dismissing Breivik’s “WMD idea” as “not realistic” dangerously overlooks important nuances that give his CBRN impulses added validity and applicability to subsequent violent extremists. 80

Finally, it is important to note that the comprehensiveness of Breivik’s treatise far exceeds other modern day manifestos and related revolutionary manuals. For example, the manifesto of Dr. Theodore Kaczynski (the so-called “Unabomber”) was limited in size to 35,000 words in order to accommodate publication in leading U.S. newspapers. 81 While Kaczynski’s ideology is explored in depth by his manifesto, his writings offer no practical application to anyone sympathetic with his neo-luddite weltanschauung. Similarly, the works of William Pierce 82 and Ben Klassen 83—most of them only available in book or pamphlet format—fail to match Breivik’s scope with its blend of ideology and practical application. Of course the overarching power of Breivik’s treatise is its unprecedented manifestation and dissemination: the Olso bombing and the Utoya Island shootings are a grim yet ideal announcement of its arrival while its spread on the Internet lends it to an unlimited audience. The “narrative” of Breivik’s actions and treatise has largely been established by Breivik himself with little hope of containment at this late stage.


Notes:

  1. The authors thank Rebecca A. Remy for her valuable research assistance.
  2. Andrew Berwick, pseudonym for Anders Behring Breivik, 2083 A European Declaration of Independence, July 2011, hereafter referred to as The Declaration.
  3. The single largest open-source terrorism incident database is the National Consortium for the Study and Responses to Terrorism’s (START) Global Terrorism Database (GTD), available at: http://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/
  4. From 1970 – 2010 fatalities were as follows: 118 incidents with 101+ fatalities; 313 incidents with 51 – 100 fatalities; 3,890 incidents with 11 – 50 fatalities; 36,637 incidents with 1 – 10 fatalities; 50,262 incidents with no fatalities; and 6,841 incidents with “unknown” fatality levels. Data drawn from the GTD.
  5. “Firearm” includes, “Automatic Weapon,” “Handgun,” Rifle/Shotgun (non‐automatic),” and “Unknown Gun Type.” See Global Terrorism Database, “GTD Variables & Inclusion Criteria” (June 2011), p. 40. Available at: http://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/downloads/Codebook.pdf
  6. From 1970 – 2010 fatalities in incidents of terrorism involving firearms were: 52 incidents with 101+ fatalities; 157 incidents with 51 – 100 fatalities; 2,208 incidents with 11 – 50 fatalities; 22,581 incidents with 1 – 10 fatalities; 9,015 incidents with no fatalities, and 2,079 incidents with an “unknown” number of fatalities.  Ibid.
  7. The Declaration, 1422-1423, 1429, and 1464. A survivor of the Utoya Island attack interviewed by National Public Radio mentioned Breivik using a shotgun. Available at: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=138628671.
  8. The Declaration, 1022.
  9. This is not to imply that Breivik had—or his supposed colleagues have—the capability to fabricate and use a true weapon of mass destruction. Breivik’s resources and capabilities likely limited him to the possible employment of a radiological agent (e.g., a “dirty bomb”) or an attack on chemical infrastructure. Cf. Lee Ferran, “Alleged Norway Shooter Considered WMD Attack, Jihadi Alliance,” ABC News, July 24, 2011. Available at: http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/anders-breivik-alleged-norway-shooter-considered-wmd-attack/story?id=14148151
  10. Ibid, 959.
  11. Ibid, 957-958.
  12. Ibid, 1059.
  13. Ibid, 1062-1063.
  14. Ibid. 959
  15. Ibid, 478.
  16. Ibid, 771-772 and 930.
  17. Breivik elaborates on Category B traitors as: individuals from various professional groups (but not limited to): “journalists, editors, teachers, lecturers, university professors, various school/university board members, publicists, radio commentators, writers of fiction, cartoonists, and artists/celebrities etc. They can also be individuals from other professional groups such as: technicians, scientists, doctors and even Church leaders. In addition, individuals (investors etc) who have directly or indirectly funded related activities. It’s important to note that the stereotypical ‘socialists’, collectivists, feminists, gay and disability activists, animal rights activists, environmentalists etc are to be considered on an individual basis only. Not everyone who are {sic} associated with one of these groups or movements is to be considered as a cultural Marxist/multiculturalist.” Ibid, 931.
  18. Ibid, 957.
  19. Breivik likely meant North Korea.
  20. The Declaration, 959.
  21. Ibid, 954. The German’s utilized large quantities of Zyclon B during the Holocaust (i.e., the agent fueled the “gas chambers”).
  22. author’s interview with Jonathan Tucker, July 25, 2011. Tucker also notes that Brevik’s claim that Uragan D2 is easily obtainable despite only being made by one Austrian company is incorrect; the agent is manufactured in a different European country.
  23. The Declaration, 954
  24. For “chemical bullets” see Ibid, 1112-1122; for ventilation systems see Ibid, 957.
  25. Ibid, 959.
  26. Ibid, 957.
  27. Ibid, 1921.
  28. Ibid, 951.
  29. Ibid, 957. Breivik notes that, “A briefcase full of high grade anthrax has the potential to kill as many as 200,000 people if dispersed effectively. However, this is not our objective. Our aim is to execute surgically precise attacks with a medium to low amount of casualties… The number of civilian loses will be acceptable for certain targets. Certain target building complexes can contain as many as 30-50 category A traitors, 200-300 category B traitors and 2000-3000 category C traitors with an acceptable amount of civilians. Uragan D2, anthrax or equivalent lethal chemical or biological weapons should be dispersed through ventilation systems of buildings where there are concentrations of category A and B traitors. The Justiciar Knight will either have to do a break-in during business hours (this will be risky as it will most likely alert personnel which may evacuate the building) or plan ahead by seeking employment as a janitor in the targeted building. An alternative would be to do a break-in during night time. Several containers with timer/dispersal mechanisms could be placed in strategic locations in the ventilation system.”
  30. Ibid, 1027. As noted earlier, Breivik claims that “The PCCTS, Knights Templar will allow all Western European regimes to capitulate to our demand and we are hereby giving them a deadline which is January 1st , 2020. We will not initiate any nuclear power plant attacks until the deadline has passed (we will instead focus on non-nuclear attacks until then).”
  31. Ibid, 1082. See also, Dembek, Z.F., “Anthrax,” Chapter 4, Medical Aspects of Chemical and Biological Warfare. (Washington, D.C., Department of Defense, Office of The Surgeon General, US Army, Borden Institute,2007, 672. Available at: http://www.bordeninstitute.army.mil/published_volumes/biological_warfare/biological.html
  32. “Aerosolized nicotine could be used in a terrorist attack, but it has limited effectiveness for military applications as it rapidly degrades in the environment.”  Center for Disease Control, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), United States Government. The Emergency Response Safety and Health Database: Nicotine. Retrieved May 12, 2011 from http://www.cdc.gov/NIOSH/ershdb/EmergencyResponseCard_29750028.html. See also, Dembek, Z.F., “Ricin,” Chapter 15, Medical Aspects of Chemical and Biological Warfare, 672. Available at: http://www.bordeninstitute.army.mil/published_volumes/biological_warfare/biological.html
  33. The Declaration, 1012. Breivik states that “ Shock attacks or more precisely armed assaults, involving assault rifles or pistols, on concentrations of category A and B traitors, should be combined with the application of poison bullets. A relatively simple process will convert hollow point and even standard ammunition – lead or other alloy bullets into hollow bullets.”
  34. Ibid, 954.
  35. Ibid.
  36. Ibid, 957
  37. Ibid, 911.
  38. Ibid, 958-959.
  39. Ibid, 961-962
  40. Ibid, 964-965.
  41. Ibid, 1018.
  42. Ibid, 1020.
  43. Ibid, 1017 and 1021.
  44. Barrett, A.D.T. & Stanberry, L.R. (2009). “Ricin,” Chapter 55, Vaccines for biodefense and emerging and neglected diseases. London, UK: Academic Press
  45. Ibid, 1011. Breivik reprints his “Nicotine cover story” as follows: “Here is a copy of the email I sent to the supplier;” Hello, My company is in the process of attempting to establish a market for e-cigarettes in Norway. In this context we are going to produce a test/research batch of these products with the intention of documenting the effects as a quit-smoking product. Our government’s main argument against allowing commercialization of these specific quit-smoking products is that there is lacking research on this area. We are looking forward to pursue the possibility of choosing you as our main supplier of nicotine base once e-cigarettes can be commercialized in Norway. However, in this initial research phase we only require an initial 30 ml batch of 99% liquid nicotine. I realize that there is a 1 L minimum order but we do not mind paying the full liter price for the 30 ml batch. I assume that you will take all security precautions regarding safe shipping/packing/labeling considering the extremely toxic nature of the compound. Thanks in advance and hope to hear from you soon. Best regards,…” Breivik notes that he “received the 50 ml of 99% pure liquid nicotine shipment from China today. I’m relieved to see that there were no complications whatsoever.” Ibid, 1424. Breivik does not have a full grasp of the field of Biological weapons and biology, this can clearly be seen when he incorrectly identifies “four kinds of biological warfare agents: bacteria, viruses, rickettsiae and fungi.” (p. 953). He should have included biological toxins, and removed rickettsiae as it is a type of bacteria.
  46. Ibid, 1013-1022
  47. This caliber is slightly larger than a .223 caliber round that would be fired from his Ruger Mini-14 (p 1013 & 1429)
  48. Richards, A. “Infrared Camera Measures Bullet Heating,” Advanced Imaging. March 2004. Available at:http://www.corebyindigo.com/PDF/articles/AdvImg3-04.pdf.
  49. Standard autoclave dry heat sterilization protocols for complete sterilization advise for 170 degrees C (340 degrees F) for one 1 hour.
  50. Crude ricin loses approximately 15 percent activity when held at 73F (22.8C) for 3 min. See He, Xiaohua; Lu, Sixin; Cheng, Luisa W.; Rasooly, Reuven; Carter, John Mark. “Effect of Food Matrices on the Biological Activity of Ricin.” Journal of Food Protection, Vol. 71, No. 10 (October 2008), 2053-2058.
  51. The decomposition temperature range for nicotine is 132-246°C. See Perfetti, Thomas A. “Subject: Thermal Stability of Nicotine, Levulinic Acid, Nicotine Levulinate and Sodium and Calcium Levulinate”. 13 Jul 1990. Bates: 512345754. Available at: http://tobaccodocuments.org/product_design/512345754-5754.html
  52. Ibid, 951-952 and 964.
  53. Breivik does not have a full grasp of the field of biological weapons and biology, this can clearly be seen when he incorrectly identifies “four kinds of biological warfare agents: bacteria, viruses, rickettsiae and fungi.” (p. 953). He should have included biological toxins, and removed rickettsiae as it is a type of bacteria.
  54. The Declaration, 1059-1063.
  55. Ibid, 1059
  56. Ibid, 1062.
  57. Nine are listed on page 1061; Iodine-131 is mentioned on page 1044.
  58. The Declaration, 1062
  59. Ibid, 1058 and 1063.
  60. See Sammy Salama and Edith Bursack, “Jihadist Capabilities and the Diffusion of Knowledge,” in Gary Ackerman and Jeremy Tamsett, eds., Jihadists and Weapons of Mass Destruction: A Growing Threat (New York: Taylor and Francis, 2009), 193-231
  61. However, Breivik does briefly explore the procurement of nuclear “materials” in a likely effort to assess the plausibility of an IND. For example, Breivik specifically identifies the Russian Mafia group “Solntsevskaya Bratva” as a reliable source for nuclear material. The Declaration, 911-912.
  62. “PCCTS, Knights Templar “franchise” operations, lead by autonomous/ independent cells, will continue to emerge around Europe in the coming decades.” Ibid, 1022.
  63. With regard to The Turner Diaries, this report’s primary author has previously noted:

    Published in 1978 and initially only available via gun shows and mail order, The Turner Diaries is easily the most widely read book among U.S. far-right extremists. Written by William Pierce under the pseudonym Andrew Macdonald, the novel details a race war that ultimately succeeds in riding the United States, and much of the world, of all non-whites, including Jews. So-called “race traitors”—those whites who willingly tolerated, collaborated with, coupled with or defended non-whites— are also targeted in the mass extermination; ultimately the world is left with an all-white population of fifty million. {Andrew Macdonald, The Turner Diaries (Hillsboro, WV: National Vanguard Books, 1978)} The book, considered by the FBI as the “bible of the racist right,” has sold over 500,000 copies worldwide. {Camille Jackson, “Fightin’ Words,” Intelligence Report, Southern Poverty Law Center, Fall 2004} Significantly, protagonists from The Diaries (as it is commonly referred to) rely on radiological and nuclear weapons to achieve their goal of a “purified” world. Before exploring the book’s references to radiological agents and nuclear weapons, however, it is useful to appreciate the impact The Diaries has had on U.S. domestic terrorists and extremists. The Diaries is directly linked to acts of terrorism. Timothy McVeigh, convicted of the April 19, 1995, bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City, was known to have been heavily influenced by the The Diaries. McVeigh avidly sold the novel at gun shows and a well-read, dogged-eared copy of it, with highlighted passages of specific bombings against U.S. targets, was found in his car on the day of the Oklahoma City bombing. {See, Anti-Defamation League, Extremism in America: William Pierce.} Pierce’s novel is also credited with inspiring deadly criminal activity by right-wing extremist groups. The Order, an American white supremacist group active in the early 1980s, is arguably the most successful criminal organization to have claimed The Diaries as inspiration. Indeed, in The Diaries, “the Order” actually refers to the quasi-religious secret cadre that directs the “white revolution” through its Aryan foot-soldiers, the Organization. Responsible for the largest armored-car robbery in U.S. history—money from which was to be used to finance a race war and may have gone towards the purchase of Pierce’s 350 acre West Virginia compound—the Order continues to be idolized by extremists today. Moreover, in 1998, authorities arrested members of the New Order, a terrorist group modeled after the Order, as it made plans to ignite a race war via assassinations, bombings, and water supply poisonings. Finally, the white supremacist gang the Aryan Republican Army reportedly had its members memorize sections of The Diaries and used the book as both template and inspiration in a string of 22 bank robberies in the Midwest in the mid-1990s. The Diaries relies on radiological agents and nuclear weapons to advance the story-line and, ultimately, to precipitate a “White” victory over non-whites. For example, when plotting attacks on critical infrastructure, The Diaries ’ protagonist, Earl Turner, develops a plan to utilize an RDD (i.e., a “dirty bomb”) by packing “enough of a really hot and nasty radionuclide—something with a half-life of a year or so—into a cane or crutch, together with a small explosive charge for dispersing it.” Turner notes that the facilities will not be damaged physically but, “decontamination will be such an enormous task that {they} may very well stay closed permanently.” {Macdonald, The Turner Diaries, p. 116.} Ultimately the Organization decides to attack a nuclear power reactor with mortars weaponized with radiological materials. The full destruction of “the System”—the military and political cadres of the United States that are controlled by a clandestine groups of Jews—in The Diaries is only achieved by the use of nuclear weapons seized from California’s Vandenberg Air Force Base. Miami Beach, Florida, Charleston, South Carolina, and New York City are all victims of 60 kiloton nuclear warheads. The Order then launches nuclear strikes against the Soviet Union and Israel. Coupled with the attack on New York, the destruction of Israel “knocks out two of the world Jewry’s principal nerve centers.” {Ibid, 191.} Knowing that the U.S.S.R. will launch a retaliatory strike against the entire United States, the System launches a decapitation strike against Soviet counter-force targets. Some Soviet warheads, however, do reach the U.S., further curtailing the System’s control over its population. The final destruction of the System is initiated when Turner, “faithfully fulfilling the obligations of his race,” flies a nuclear-armed aircraft into the Pentagon in a suicide strike. {Ibid, 211.}With control over the U.S. and the destruction of Israel and the U.S.S.R, the Organization is able to destroy China and much of Asia by “resorting to a combination of chemical, biological, and radiological means, on an enormous scale to deal with the problem.” {Ibid, 210.} In short, nuclear weapons allow for a purified White world; the Order is thus able to “spread its wise and benevolent rule over the earth for all time to come.” {Ibid, 211.}

    See, Gary Ackerman, Jeffrey M. Bale, Charles P. Blair, et al., “Anatomizing Radiological and Nuclear Non-State Adversaries: Identifying the Adversary,” report prepared for the Science and Technology Directorate, Department of Homeland Security, grant number N00140510629 (College Park, MD: National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism, 2009), 81-82.

  64. The “Phases” are describes as follows (Ibid, 803): European Civil War, Phase 1 – 1999-2030 – Islam, 2-30% based on country – Open source warfare, military shock attacks by clandestine cell systems. – Further consolidation of conservative forces. European Civil War, Phase 2 – 2030-2070 – Islam, 15-40% based on country – Consolidation continues, more advanced forms of resistance groups – Preparation for pan-European coup d’etats. European Civil War, Phase 3 – 2070-2083 – Islam, 30-50% based on country – Pan-European coup d’etats. Cultural Communism/multiculturalism defeated in the first European country followed by the rest – The implementation of a Cultural Conservative political agenda begins – Execution of cultural Marxist/multiculturalist category A and B traitors initiated.- Deportation of Muslims initiated.
  65. Breivik writes that, “As of now we do not have enough insiders working in the French, British and German facilities although we might have enough in phase 2.” Ibid, 1023.
  66. See, for example, Ibid, 959.
  67. See, for example, Ibid, 959.
  68. Ibid, 955
  69. Ibid, “Nevertheless, we cannot, under any circumstances, accept deployment of nuclear weapons for surface detonation above 0,2 {sic} kilotons as it would involve too many civilian casualties. However, smaller devises up to approximately 0,2 {sic} kilotons are ideal for annihilating concentrations of category A and B traitors (traitor HQs).” Ibid, 960.
  70. Ibid, 955
  71. Ibid, 955
  72. Ibid, 955
  73. Ibid, 956.
  74. Ibid.
  75. Ibid, 1025, there is a section entitled “Using European nuclear power plants as a weapon of mass destruction.”
  76. 1028, Breivik goes into great detail as to how he imagines an assault on a nuclear power plant would work. He provides estimates of minimum requirements for success and six different “assault strategies.”
  77. Ibid, 1026
  78. See, for example, Salama and Bursak, “Jihadist Capabilities and the Diffusion of Knowledge,” and Anne Stenerson, “Al-Qaeda’s Thinking on CBRN: A Case Study,” in Magnus Ranstorp and Magnus Normak eds., Unconventional Weapons and International Terrorism (New York: Routledge, 2009), 50-63.
  79. In the case of the former, the agent was used with the hopes of influencing a local election; in the case of the latter, to distract the police as they closed in on the group. See, W. Seth Carus, “The Rajneeshees (1984),” and David Kaplan, “Aum Shinrikyo (1995),” in Jonathan B. Tucker ed., Toxic Terror (Cambridge: MIT Press: 2000), 115-138 and 207-226 respectively.
  80. Ferran, “Alleged Norway Shooter Considered WMD Attack, Jihadi Alliance.”
  81. Theodore Kaczynski, Industrial Society and Its Future-completed 1995.
  82. Founder of the National Alliance and author of The Turner Diaries, see footnote 73.
  83. For a brief yet excellent overview see, “Creativity Movement,” Extremism and American, the Anti-Defamation League. available at: http://www.adl.org/learn/ext_us/wcotc.asp

Tags:

10 Responses to “Norway’s Anders Brevik: Weapons of Mass Destruction and the Politics of Cultural Despair”

  1. William Nardin July 28, 2011 at 10:22 am #

    I would have liked to see the illustrations, which did not appear within the body of the report above, as I believe they are an important part of the presentation.

    Thank you FAS for producing this analysis. We have been using a similar scenario in our training exercises for quite some time. It is unfortunate some governmental organizations have used potential far right direct action for political purposes leading some in the public sector to assume a “cry wolf” attitude.

    A careful review of “The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind” by Gustave Le Bon is highly recommended for those not familiar with the work and the relationship between his thoughts and the electronic media overload of today could also be very useful.

  2. Alexander Calapini-Solberg July 28, 2011 at 2:10 pm #

    Greetings,

    Thank you for this great work in analyzing the declaration. Excellent work and very informative. It helps us Norwegians to see a little bit further through the fog of terror.

    Continue as you were…

    • Charles Blair July 28, 2011 at 4:44 pm #

      Alexander,
      Thank you for your kind words. Please know that all Norwegians are in our thoughts. I highly recommend that you read Jeff Bale’s forthcoming piece (mentioned in the report): “The Oslo Terrorist Attacks: A Story of Rival Right-Wing Extremisms.” A true terrorism expert, Bale’s essay will likely assist in placing this tragedy in an accurate and informative light. It won’t be out for a few weeks but if you email me I’ll make sure you are alerted to its arrival (cblair@fas.org).

      Sincerely,
      Charles

  3. James Boling July 28, 2011 at 3:25 pm #

    Thank you for your analysis of the still on-going situation. A couple of comments:
    1. {in the preface} “…[S]ome question his technical acumen with regard to CBRN…” COMMENT: Those same people probably would have questioned his ability to orchestrate the bombing in Oslo followed by the assault on Utoya Island. Never underestimate your enemy.
    2. Your distinction between weapons of mass disruption vis-a-vis mass destruction. COMMENT: I believe FAS can take the lead in promulgating this very simple truth: Of the four elements of “CBRN,” only one results in mass destruction (the nuclear option). The others, chemical-biological-radiological, are all mass casualty weapons whose deployment results in little or no “destruction.” Ergo, we should probably cease using the sobriquet “WMD” for all these classes collectively. If the other popular acronym of CBRNE is used (included high-yield Explosive potential), then we have two classes of destructive device (WMD), and three mass casualty weapons (MCW). The distinction should be made.

    • James Boling August 1, 2011 at 3:21 am #

      I happen to agree with “me” (above) but await any response from the authors or other readers…..
      JMB

    • Charles Blair August 2, 2011 at 10:25 am #

      James,
      Overall, I agree with your observations — especially with regard to the fact that nuclear is the only mass destruction weapon. As you know, the use of the acronym “CBRN” or “CBRNE” is the general norm in the security field. However, most people outside of the field do not know what that means and, thus, partially in an effort to reach out to the general public, the term “weapons of mass destruction” (WMD) is unfortunately used (I teach a class called “technologies of weapons of mass destruction” — I suppose the thinking is that students wouldn’t sign up for “technologies of CBRNE”; hopefully this will change). While I find the usage of the term “WMD” unproductive, some in my field are utterly (and justifiably) incenses by its use (one of my colleagues will only use “WMD” with quotation marks, no matter how many times he uses the acronym in a single essay). Note that Faisal Shahzad – the “Time Square Bomber” – is facing charges of attempted use of WMD. Good grief! The bottom line, as you observed, is that only nuclear weapons can cause true mass destruction (although the historical use of mass fire-bombings [Dresden, Tokyo, etc.] is a contender; however, those necessitated the use of thousands of weapons to reach the levels of destruction wrought by a single fission weapon. Moreover, no amount of conventional bombing can begin to reach the level of destruction inherent in a thermonuclear weapon). I agree that chemical and biological weapons (CBW) are best termed mass casualty and/or mass disruption weapons. I do not believe, however, that radiological should be placed under the rubric of mass casualty. While their use may result in a rise in stochastic deaths, they are best termed a weapon of disruption. In short, I fear that the over-inclusiveness of CBW and radiological agents into the “mass destruction” descriptor diminishes the profound threat posed by nuclear weapons. Most Americans think that the risk of nuclear weapons dissipated with the end of the Cold War. The threat still remains.

      • James August 3, 2011 at 2:53 am #

        We are on the same wavelength.
        RE: “Mass Destruction” potential of nuclear weapons, I agree, yet we have a matter of scale that also factors in. The nuclear cannon shells and light rocket loads produced today have less yield that some “conventional” devices, so even the nuclear option cannot – in every case – be said to be “WMD.” Similarly, the neutron bomb has little destructive effect, yet is extremely disruptive by virtue of intense rads and EMP. Maybe the title of my old course is better than I thought. I used to teach “Everything is a weapon – If you know how to use it.” Classes were SRO.

  4. Adam Neira August 1, 2011 at 5:14 am #

    Another reason why FAS is a must read every few days. All acts of violence can be deconstructed. Even though an over-interest in a pathology is a pathology in itself, it is vital to try and understand why certain acts take place. In the face of such evil crimes as this it may seem paradoxical but truth is that violence is not innate and the universe really is stable, ordered, benevolent and expansive. The problme is in the minds of many.

    Prayers for Norway.

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. Norway’s Anders Brevik & Right-Wing “White” Nationalism: Weapons of Mass Destruction and the Politics of Cultural Despair | The Santos Republic - August 7, 2012

    [...] of Anders Breivik’s treatise—the 1500 page 2083: A European Declaration of Independence 2 —address the acquisition, weaponization, and use of chemical, biological, radiological, and [...]

  2. Norway’s Anders Breivik & Right-Wing “White” Nationalism: Weapons of Mass Destruction and the Politics of Cultural Despair | The Santos Republic - August 7, 2012

    [...] The Declaration, 1012. Breivik states that “ Shock attacks or more precisely armed assaults, involving assault rifles or pistols, on concentrations of category A and B traitors, should be combined with the application of poison bullets. A relatively simple process will convert hollow point and even standard ammunition – lead or other alloy bullets into hollow bullets.” ? [...]

Leave a Reply