‘Eurabia’ Opponents Scramble for Distance from Anti-Muslim Murderer

Doug Saunders, Globe and Mail, July 25, 2011

As self-confessed Norwegian terrorist Anders Behring Breivik waits behind bars for a late-September trial for at least 76 killings he committed, attention has turned to the circle of anti-immigrant writers, bloggers and political figures whose ideas he cited as motivations for his atrocities.

As they learned that their ideas had formed the ideological basis for one of the deadliest acts of terrorism in recent European history, these writers and leaders have delivered responses that range from denunciation to denial to awkward arguments that the killer was correct in his motives, but his actions damaged their common cause.

Mr. Breivik, 32, used a brief, closed-door pretrial detention hearing in Oslo on Monday to bring further attention to his rationale for the Oslo car-bomb blast and island shooting rampage at a camp for children and teens. He told Judge Kim Heger that he wanted the killings to send a “powerful message” about his politics, she told reporters after the proceeding.

Mr. Breivik told the court he had been carrying out a detailed plan, with what he claimed were accomplices elsewhere in Europe, to “save Europe” from multiculturalism and Muslim immigration, and to punish Norway’s governing Labour Party for being tolerant of Muslim minorities and immigration.

While he seemed to have organized and carried out his terrorist attack entirely on his own, he said that he had two “cells” of accomplices. On Monday the English Defence League, a right-wing party with similar beliefs to his, admitted to having met with him, leading to speculation their members might form part of the Europe-wide “Knights Templar” Mr. Breivik says he organized.

Norwegian officials did not allow him to appear in public or wear a uniform–reportedly one he created for his self-declared “army against multiculturalism.” As a rare instance of a lone gunman who chose not to die in a blaze of glory, he apparently hoped to turn his trial into a grand publicity opportunity. Instead, the judge ordered him jailed for eight weeks without bail, four of them in isolation, before his late-September trial.

His ideas–though certainly not his actions–draw upon a wide circle of popular right-wing voices who have argued in recent years that Muslims and people from Muslim backgrounds are a cultural and demographic threat to Western societies.

His 1,500-page manifesto released on the morning of his mass killings and titled “2083: A European Declaration of Independence” draws heavily on arguments made by right-wing authors and bloggers who warn of a “Eurabia”–a continent dominated by Islamic politics. Many of these writers believe that Muslims are an ideological conspiracy rather than simply a religion or an ethno-cultural group.

Frequently cited, quoted and praised in his manifesto are such figures as Bruce Bawer, author of the bestseller While Europe Slept; Geert Wilders, the Dutch anti-Muslim provocateur and leader of his country’s anti-immigration Freedom Party; Mark Steyn, the Canadian columnist and author of America Alone: The End of the World As we Know it; the British columnist Melanie Phillips, author of Londonistan; Gisele Littman, the author (under the pseudonym Bat Ye’or) of Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis; and the anti-immigration blogs Gates of Vienna, Atlas Shrugs and Jihad Watch.

None of these authors have advocated violence. But their warnings of impending Islamic takeover–a concept that is widely dismissed as implausible in conventional scholarly and political circles–sometimes carry an urgency that might seem to invite angry responses.

“European officials have a clear route out of this nightmare” of Muslim demographic growth, Mr. Bawer has written. “They have armies. They have police. They have prisons.”

Mr. Steyn has written that multicultural policies are a “suicide bomb,” that Muslims in Western countries are “a threat to the survival of the modern world,” and that Muslims are destined to take over the Western world because “they’ve calculated that our entire civilization lacks the will to see them off.”

Such language, considered extreme but hardly materially menacing before, takes on a whole new tone in the wake of the atrocity.

As a result, many of these authors have struggled publicly to respond to the inclusion of their arguments in the killer’s rationale, and to find a way to distance their own ideas from those of Mr. Breivik.

On one extreme is Mr. Wilders, whose Freedom Party is lauded by Mr. Breivik as his model of a European political party and whose ideas are the closest to his own. Mr. Wilders believes that Muslims subscribe to a political ideology bent on the domination of Europe and are best compared to Nazis.

Mr. Wilders, whose party holds 15 per cent of Dutch parliamentary seats, was quick to distance himself completely from the killer.

“The attacker is a violent, sick psychopath,” Mr. Wilders told Dutch radio, adding that he “abhors everything the man stands for and what he has done.”

Another tack was taken by Mr. Steyn, whose ideas are cited several times by Mr. Breivik to support his case. Mr. Steyn has argued that Muslim cultures pose a demographic threat to Europe.

In an article on Monday for the U.S. conservative publication the National Review, Mr. Steyn dismissed any suggestion that he had been an inspiration, arguing that because Mr. Breivik had not killed any Muslims, his actions could not have been influenced by anti-Muslim or anti-immigration writers.

But a more direct–and, for some, shocking–response came from Mr. Bawer, who wrote in The Wall Street Journal on Monday that Mr. Breivik’s manifesto “makes it clear that he is both intelligent and very well read in European history,” and that he has expressed “legitimate concern about genuine problems,” but had sadly found an “unspeakably evil solution” to those problems.

The great tragedy of Mr. Breivik’s act, Mr. Bawer wrote, is that it discredits the anti-Muslim and anti-multiculturalism causes: “It will, I fear, be a great deal more difficult to broach these issues now that this murderous madman has become the poster boy for the criticism of Islam.”

A more humble response came from the author whose work was arguably responsible for launching the entire genre. Ms. Littman, the Swiss-Jewish author who writes under the name Bat Ye’or, coined the term “Eurabia” in a 2005 book.

“Of course I regret if this man took inspiration from what I wrote or from what other writers wrote,” she said Monday in an interview with the Associated Press. Like many of these authors, she preferred to describe Mr. Breivik’s action as mental illness rather than a coldly rational response to a set of ideological beliefs rooted in such works.

“As an insane person he should have been treated before, and I am greatly saddened for all the young innocents who tragically lost their lives, and for their families,” she said.

But she warned that her ideas, and those of fellow authors and leaders on the anti-Muslim right, could continue to have violent repercussions if Mr. Breivik proves influential. “I’m afraid that this is something that other people will imitate.”

Topics: , ,

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.

23 Responses to “‘Eurabia’ Opponents Scramble for Distance from Anti-Muslim Murderer” Subscribe

  1. Anonymous July 26, 2011 at 5:42 pm #

    “awkward arguments that the killer was correct in his motives, but his actions damaged their common cause”

    Not awkward at all, but entirely sensible.

    And it’s funny – I don’t remember any articles about how Muslims were “scrambling to distance themselves” from 9/11.

  2. Anonymous July 26, 2011 at 5:44 pm #

    “their warnings of impending Islamic takeover—a concept that is widely dismissed as implausible in conventional scholarly and political circles”

    The problem is that the Lefties are what passes for “conventional”. “Scholarly” is no longer a positive endorsement, neither is “political”.

    Anyone with eyes and a brain knows the truth. This reporter has self-identified as an ostrich, with his head in the sand. He is part of the problem.

  3. Anonymous July 26, 2011 at 6:00 pm #

    There is nothing wrong with Islam that wouldn’t be fixed by white people converting to Islam.

  4. jewamongyou July 26, 2011 at 6:07 pm #

    “But a more direct—and, for some, shocking—response came from Mr. Bawer, who wrote in The Wall Street Journal on Monday that Mr. Breivik’s manifesto “makes it clear that he is both intelligent and very well read in European history,” and that he has expressed “legitimate concern about genuine problems,” but had sadly found an “unspeakably evil solution” to those problems.”

    What I find shocking is that any serious writer would imply that the use of violence automatically discredits the perpetrator’s ideas. What if Breivik had killed in order to protest cruelty to animals? Would Sounders have then claimed that it is perfectly okay to torture animals?

    A better way for Breivik to have spread his message would be to simply talk about it and educate people – but this is illegal in Norway; they have “hate-speech” laws.

    More on this here:


  5. Anonymous July 26, 2011 at 6:08 pm #

    Everyone, especially the media is going into overdrive in order to cover up the obvious. This man was a RADICAL zionist who killed all those people not because they were pro-muslim but because they were carrying around “Boycott Israel” banners. An extremely dangerous schism in the left has developed between those who are pro and anti-Israel. Obviously, it’s gone from bitter rhetoric to mass murder.

    This is nothing new. Prior to both world wars you had such levels of violence as the communists and the fascists fought it out in the streets for who would represent leftist thought. These acts of terror and those two world wars are our punishment for not ironhandedly suppressing both political bents.

    One has only to dig up the blog posts for the Daily KOS during the recent war between Israel and Lebanon war. In 2006, these children’s parents were openly demanding a second holocaust.

    Certainly, there is LOTS of room to criticize Israel, especially it’s treatment of the Palestinians. But these people wanted GENOCIDE against the jews…..and aided and abetted groups trying to accomplish exactly that.

  6. highduke July 26, 2011 at 6:27 pm #

    Yet more proof that the entire fiasco was orchestrated by the pro-Muslim elites to smear the Right. They want to send us back to the late 90s in the aftermath of Le Pen’s & Buchanon’s failure to gain power.

  7. SS July 26, 2011 at 6:45 pm #

    This whole thing is too, much much much too convenient for me.

    One day the dhs points the finger at Whitey and the next, Whitey strikes. As far as I’m concerned, this whole thing was and is a set-up.

    Spare me on the location as the message is: Whitey is the one to fear and now they will say, see, we told you so.

  8. Anonymous July 26, 2011 at 6:47 pm #

    “I don’t remember any articles about how Muslims were “scrambling to distance themselves” from 9/11”.

    No, thats because muslims were the ‘true victims’ and their grevances explored. The media/left were concerned, the true concern, was that muslims might be unfairly stereotyped. But i suppose noticing that makes me an extremist. No doubt AmRen has always been monitored. Then again AmRen was most likely started in the first place by monied interests who wanted to give the desperate a place to let off steam/feel good about themselves.

  9. NBJ July 26, 2011 at 7:27 pm #

    That’s what is so frustrating about this whole tragedy. This guy’s message and ideas are right on target, but his terrible actions completely drown them out. I’ve yet to see even ONE reporter look at what he wrote objectively to see if his concerns are legitimate. I suspect they are afraid to admit he is right.

    What’s even more frustrating is that in the last year or so, there have been world leaders who have come out and said multiculturalism has been a total failure and that Muslims are not assimilating to European culture. I beleive it was an article that I read here that talked about the 751 “no go zones” in France where the native population dare not go because of Muslims.

    How can these reporters ignore these facts and continue to call this guy’s message crazy? His actions were, but his “ideas” are just fact, and that’s all there is to it.

  10. A Comment from Australia July 26, 2011 at 9:40 pm #

    Quoting Mr Bawer “…An unspeakably evil solution” yes I agree completely.

    10 years ago on September 11th another unspeakably evil act was committed. The initial response from the USA and it’s close friends has been to get totally bogged down in pointless, costly and half hearted wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. We have then gone out of our way to listen to Islamic apologists as well do everything to try and generally appease the whole Islamic world. We even have the President of the United States supporting the erection of a mosque at the site of the 9/11 evil. What is going on?

    It has often been reported that there was dancing in the streets in some of Sydney’s Muslim dominated South Western suburbs back on 9/11. I do not think there would be any celebration anywhere regarding the Norway tragedy. But will there be any favourable media reports about the growing concern about the Islamic invasion of the West? After Norway I tend to think not. Those who are (quite legitimately) concerned will simply be described as far right extremists, racists or even Nazis by our very biased media.

  11. Who In Their White Mind? July 26, 2011 at 9:56 pm #

    Alot of good points I’m reading. Unfortunately, this is one of those cases whre actions speak louder than words. The shear viciousness and cold, calculated killing of innocent unarmed teenagers will forever discredit this guy. But that is the difference between those of us who use common sense and those on the left who use raw emotion. I will never defend this guy for his atrocious acts. If it was a Muslim extremist, the left would be using stupid catch phrases &blaming the host nation for not allowing the Muslim communities to feel “more at home”. ForGod’s sake. They left home and I’m guessing it wasn’t because they liked it a whole lot. Also the only way you could accommodate the Muslims any more would be to import sand, camels and automatic weapon casings to adorn their apartments. What do they want, 72 virgins? Not in the West. Sorry ain’t happening.

  12. Anonymous July 26, 2011 at 11:00 pm #

    I find it annoying when White men feel guilt or remorse because of the actions of White men with whom they have ideological connection. I have no such emotions, and I have contempt for White men who do. I notice that other types of men, Black, Arabic, Oriental, etc. have no such emotions either. Unless the individual is a close relative, or member of a close knit group to which he belongs. With Blacks, it’s only a mother who may show some remorse for her child’s actions.

    Notice that Blacks don’t attack other Blacks who engaged in criminal acts. The most they do is say it was “a foolish thing to do, but …” . On the other hand, White men who disagree with the political views of the villain, use it as an opportunity for defamation and vilification.

  13. Tom S. July 26, 2011 at 11:06 pm #

    Ever notice that every time muslims blow something up theres an immediate fear of a “backlash” against all muslims by the media liberals, when conservatives do it theres an immediate call FOR a backlash against all conservatives!

  14. Preston Wiginton July 26, 2011 at 11:51 pm #

    Tomorrows reactionaries are the victims of today.

    by Preston Wiginton on Tuesday, July 26, 2011 at 10:08pm

    While many are looking back to try to understand the actions of Anders Behring Breivik I am not. I am looking to the future.

    Of course every security agency from Homeland Security to Scotland Yard will be investigating and harassing Nationalist organizations and the people that ascribe to such. Frankly they are barking up the wrong tree.

    Most in that ascribe to Nationalism have their outlets to blow their steam. In some cases there are even political parties to represent them. Surely most if not all have learned to survive and have learned how not to be directly victimized in a multicultural society.

    Now the question is will all of the investigation of the Nationalist stop the displacement of white people in the nations they reside? Will the investigations slow the rapes of white women and the violent crimes against whites? Will the investigations stop the expenditures caused by the invaders? Will the investigations stop the kidnapping of white children to be sold into sexual slavery, just in America over 2000 children go missing daily and blond hair blue eyed children bring as much as 6 figures.

    No the Nationalist are not to be worried about. Now the dad whose daughter is raped and then made to cheer for her rapist or the middle aged man who looses his job due outsourcing or cheap immigrant labor, or the mom who learns her child is being pimped or forced to do child porn? Really now how much longer does anyone think it will take before one of the victims snaps?

    Tomorrows reactionaries are the victims of today.

  15. Sylvie July 27, 2011 at 5:18 am #

    This Breivik fellow has done the equivilant to the immigration debate that the Fukushima Nuclear Plant disaster did to the nuclear power debate.

    Last night on a news show here in Australia, the Breivik atrocity was presented and talked about, then all-of-a-sudden a map of Europe pops up with the countries highlighted (with their own flags) with mention of ‘far-riht anti-immigration parties’ as if to tar the brush of anyone that dares to question their countries’ immigration policies with this deranged killer!

    You can expect a lot more of this people and remember to watch what you say in public!

  16. shaunantijihad July 27, 2011 at 7:41 am #

    If taking up the sword, as it were, proved an argument wrong, then Churchill must have been wrong, wrong, wrong!

    Perhaps because the Communist, I mean Labour, Party of Norway have made even questioning Muslim immigration a Hate Crime, they limited freedom of speech to such an extent that a non-verbal response became necessary in the mind of this man.

    After all, as the same Labour Party told Oslo’s victims of rape – every rape was by a Muslim immigrant over the last 6 years – that the rape victim must bear some of the responsibility for being raped by the un-Islamic way they dressed, then perhaps the same argument could be used against the Labour Party, that they too must bear some of the responsibility for this by their manner of political dress which is raping Norway?

  17. Un-Indoctrinated July 27, 2011 at 9:21 am #

    I was watching NBC Nightly news on Monday night. The on,site reporter spoke of liberal groups who claimed that conservative talk radio was to blame. The tone of the report was that words can skew the weak-minded into anti-social actions.

    That’s funny. I don’t remember the MSM writing rapabout violent racist lyrics involving black rappers. This wasn’t true years ago. Now so many “songs” talk about killing YT that it s been accepted. I’m a little surprised that the left hasn’t embraced the ideology when a black criminal commits a crime. The liberals no longer claim it was the music’s fault, not the assailant. Because that would also be attacking black culture.

  18. Fr. John July 27, 2011 at 9:22 am #

    IF one remembers the utter ‘disgust’ everyone who hated Senator McCarthy exhibited in the 1950’s, and then look at the facts, we can see a lesson to be learned.

    McCarthy said that the ‘reds’ were overtaking the US Gov’t. And he named names. The Press, the intelligentsia (most of whom were devotees of the Frankfurt School) and the Left all said he was crazy, rabid, sick, etc.

    Fifty years later (and after the ‘conquest of the institutions,’ honest observers see that McCarthy was utterly correct.

    Breivik’s actions bespeak something of a mind co-opted by dark forces, but his analysis should be looked at. Perhaps today’s crazy may be tomorrow’s prophet.

    (Oh, and how many MILLIONS of souls did Stalin, Mao, and the Communist philosophy kill? Keep that in mind when you hear leftists make comparisons….)

  19. Laager July 27, 2011 at 9:41 am #

    Is it a coincidence that the blog:

    “I Luv South Africa – But I Hate My Government” which was referred to in his manifesto has been pulled from the www?

    Be on the alert race realists.

    Blogs like this one are being monitored by people who fear the uncomfortable truth that they discuss and expose.

    Earlier in the year, the blog: “South africa Sucks” was pulled after being shut down 5 or 6 times, and the creator of the blog was arrested and harassed by the (black) SA Police to the point where he emigrated to the west to find peace and safety.

    It seems as if freedom of speech is only permitted to exist if you are a left wing liberal towing the pc line.

  20. Anonymous July 27, 2011 at 11:03 am #

    “Fifty years later (and after the ‘conquest of the institutions,’ honest observers see that McCarthy was utterly correct”.

    The Verona files revealed that too. Now someone who believes the same as McCarthy did truly is crazy. At least by society’s standards and those who make the labels. Wonder who isn’t seeing reality correctly tho?

    Really, ‘McCarthyism’ truly began in the late 50’s and is practiced by those who have gone on 60 years about the evils of ‘McCarthyism’? The left have been given free and unopposed reign to practice the smear and guilt by association tactic. Or am I just imagining that everyone is scared? I guess only sometimes are the politics of fear evil. Now those who are afraid are made into the evil ones.

  21. Bill R July 27, 2011 at 12:31 pm #

    Several have made a very valid point. In Norway, as in much of Europe, it is ILLEGAL to criticize Jews, ethnic replacement immigration, the Holocaust itself, ANY minority group by name, etc. When a free (or what used to be a free) society criminalizes open discourse one of two things will happen: there will be discourse underground, leading to underground rebellion, or there will be open violence as the only means left to those who disagree with the political regime’s policies and mandates. If we cannot debate and educate, then what is left? Bear in mind, here in the US there are those (almost always of the left wing bent) who would criminalize much discussion HERE on race, immigration, the homosexual agenda, and a host of other politically mandated agendas. What irritates ME is that on almost every left wing blog, they call for BLOOD in the streets and the murder of those who disagree with them. On Conservative blogs, generally, only the rare nut job does so, but it’s Conservatives who are charged with endorsing violence? Why is that? Well, it’s because the left wing controls all the media. What we get from all forms of media anymore is NOT news, it’s propaganda, all of it, designed to push the left’s agendas.

  22. Sardonicus July 27, 2011 at 1:51 pm #

    Frequently cited, quoted and praised in his manifesto are such figures as Bruce Bawer, author of the bestseller While Europe Slept; Geert Wilders, the Dutch anti-Muslim provocateur and leader of his country’s anti-immigration Freedom Party; Mark Steyn, the Canadian columnist and author of America Alone: The End of the World As we Know it; the British columnist Melanie Phillips, author of Londonistan;

    The multicultural left has used this tragedy to go after people like Geert Wilders, Mark Steyn and Melanie Phillips. You would think that all of them were in agreement with the violent child murderer? This proves that the controlled media can twist any legitimate criticism of Islamic extremism or unrestricted immigration into a benediction of mass murder.

  23. WASP July 27, 2011 at 3:43 pm #

    “3 — Anonymous wrote at 6:00 PM on July 26: There is nothing wrong with Islam that wouldn’t be fixed by white people converting to Islam.”

    ^ This is a fallacious assertion. The truth is that Islam is a false religious system built on fallacy with a false prophet as its reason for existence. Islam is flawed no matter how many people are deceived by it.

    Anonymous at 6:00PM on July 26 is a good representation of the type of nonsensical thinking (and resulting false assertions) that passes for “truth” anymore but really constitutes mistruth based on fallicious reasoning.