Radio Netherlands Worldwide

SSO Login

More login possibilities:

  • Facebook
  • Flickr
  • Twitter
  • Google
  • LinkedIn
Friday 19 December  
Geert Wilders
The Hague, Netherlands
The Hague, Netherlands

Is Wilders partly to blame for Norway attacks?

Published on : 27 July 2011 - 11:04am | By Marco Hochgemuth (photo: ANP)
More about:

Discussion has started in the Netherlands about the influence Geert Wilders had on the Norwegian bomber Anders Behring Breivik, since he praises the Dutch anti-Islam politician 30 times in his manifesto. Whether it's fear of polarisation or political correctness, Dutch political parties seem to be inclined to protect Wilders.

Democrat MP Boris van der Ham called it an "idiotic reflex" to link Mr Wilders with the massacre, while Socialist Party leader Emile Roemer said it was unwise to point the finger at Mr Wilders. "If a murderer quotes me tomorrow does that make me responsible too?" he asked.

Historian Dirk-Jan van Baar has an answer to that:
"I would say Wilders is not legally guilty. But as a politician he must be perfectly aware that there is such a thing as political responsibility. And he would undoubtedly have pointed that out if the killer had been a Muslim."

Arab Party
Freedom Party leader Wilders can hardly be said to have kept a low profile in recent years when it comes to, say, hate-preaching imams and their effect on Muslim terrorists. He has also had harsh words to say about the Norwegian Labour Party, which was the target of the attacks.

In a speech he gave in Rome in March this year, Mr Wilders accused left-wing multiculturalists of cheering at every new sharia court or mosque. He claimed Europe would fall if it was stupid enough to believe that all cultures were equally valid and there was no reason to fight for its own culture.

On 1 May - Labour Day - he sent a tweet directed at Dutch Labour Party leader Job Cohen:
"Congratulations, Job, on the 65th anniversary of the Arab Party. You gave the Netherlands mass immigration and imported countless no-hopers and criminals."

On Tuesday Geert Wilders announced that he was "repulsed" by Breivik and that the violent actions of a psychopath were "a slap in the face for the worldwide anti-Islam movement" Job Cohen welcomed Mr Wilders' statement but also had a comment:

"Wilders has now distanced himself, but I think it's good to realise that your words do have an effect - and that goes for all politicians including Wilders. They can influence people and play a role in all kinds of ways. There is no way Wilders can be held responsible for this in any sense, but he [Breivik] uses the same rhetoric as Wilders does."

It seems Cohen has fired the first salvo in political debate, with the message "watch your language" but Boris van der Ham claims a debate at this point would have a polarising effect.

Dirk-Jan van Baar is not surprised at the reticence of Dutch politicians:
"It's typically Dutch and perhaps typically politically correct. Political correctness works as a kind of protection for the Freedom Party, which is one of the ironies of the situation. We know what kind of echoes these dramatic events can have over time - you only have to look at the debates that followed the murders of populist politician Pim Fortuyn and film-maker Theo van Gogh to know that we haven't seen the end of this."

Geert Wilders rejects all attempts to link his ideology and that of Breivik. He claims the left is trying to make political capital out of the tragedy. However, speaking in parliament, he has himself linked remarks by his political opponents with potential terrorist attacks.

Green Left MP Tofik Dibi has now requested a parliamentary debate with Prime Minister Mark Rutte about xenophobia in the Netherlands. He believes the Freedom Party is largely responsible for channelling resentments in the Netherlands and he wants to discuss the similarities between Breivik's ideas and attitudes which are prevalent in the Netherlands, for instance in Freedom Party circles.




uotg 31 October 2011 - 3:43am

I think "ethnic cleansing" is more 21st century; genocide is 20th century.biomass fuel

Anonymous 15 August 2011 - 5:49pm

Excellent and valuable information, thank you !
Jeux de tracteur

Ravi Ranjan Singh Bharat Panthi 8 August 2011 - 6:10pm / Bharat(India)

They are barbarians, but no fools!

They can pass through any test, faking to look like as if they have regards for Civilized World, Human Values and loyalty to the Organization. Being married to doctrine of destruction, they are destructive beasts in totality.

Wolf is not as brainy as human, and is far down in the rung of evolution, but is smart enough to make plan when, how and where to wait, when to attack and when to kill.
However, Wolf kills only for food, not in hope of 72 virgin, so is lees harmful and of course less stupid lunatic daydreamer.
It can and does kill humans, though is not a Student of Science or Master of Arts, but knows how to kill?, Treats every creature it can attack or over power as its prey.

You can't have wolves roaming about in your city streets, nor can put them to any military or civil job, can't trust them as we trust dogs, for sake of Zoo item or to preserve little number of endangered species is O.K.

But you know what to do with wolf roaming in Streets of your town or in Countryside.

If you don't do, what you should be doing, Wolf will do it anyway, what it has to do.

Be Great, Be Merciful; Not Fool, don't Suicide!

Do the needful.

Vera Gottlieb 1 August 2011 - 5:03pm / Germany

All kinds of things are being published about this deranged guy, but do we know if he had a job and if so what? From where did he get the money to buy all the arms, etc.?

Hooge Noorden 30 July 2011 - 9:11pm / Netherlands / Sweden

Breiviks has past all his human rights.
No more comments.

Ravi Ranjan Singh Bharat Panthi 30 July 2011 - 5:45pm

If US Army attacks a Nation, it is military order and not Church order, so how can Christianity be blamed. Whereas terrorist are obeying fatwa by Maul-vi.

DON'TSHIFTTHEBLAME 30 July 2011 - 8:31am

"it was Breivik who planted the bomb and pulled the trigger. Ted Kaczynski was motivated by opposition to animal research, but not every animal rights defender becomes the Unabomber. Tim McVeigh was driven to violence by a belief that the U.S. government had become tyrannical, but not every anti-government activist blows up a federal building in Oklahoma City. Millions of American strongly oppose abortion, but they don’t join Scott Roeder in shooting an abortion provider at his church in Wichita, Kan.

Indeed, if every political idea that has had an act of violence committed in its name were discredited, few political ideas would remain. Responsibility for acts of violence or terrorism must remain squarely upon those who commit them.

That does not absolve extremist groups of feeding hostility and fear, but that’s different from committing acts of violence. Breivik was a powderkeg — if a spark hadn’t come from anti-immigrant ideology, it probably would have come from somewhere else. Based on what’s known so far, blame rests with one man."
Excerpt from Register-Guard editorial: One man, many influences
Don’t shift blame from Norwegian mass killer
Wednesday, Jul 27, 2011

SandraV 31 July 2011 - 10:04am / Nederlands

I second that, Amen to that!

Phranque 30 July 2011 - 7:41pm / USA


Anonymous 29 July 2011 - 8:42am / USA

That Norway killer hurt more than those people he shot. He hurt all the brave,insightful,inovative crusaders for freedom and rights. One right is the right to resist and fight the hell of Islamic culture imposed on your beloved home lands ! All those courageous,anti-Islam tourchbearers who work so hard to expose the evil of Islam and warn democratic societies ! The writers, internet warriors, autors of books about the subject, and YES wonderful, heroric leaders like Geert Wilders ! He deserves to be appreciated, not criticized. Europe, and other free societies MUST awake to the fact that there IS a problem- a problem that is making people very frustrated and angry, and it's Islamists bound and determined to impose their backward lifestyle and laws on us. It's time to stop accusing the people who are trying to help ( like Wilders ) and have the guts to deal with reality. Actually, what we need is MORE people like Geert Wilders.

Anonymous 28 July 2011 - 7:08pm / UK

Lot of finger pointing going on at the moment.If you come to the conclusion that anyone with views similar to Anders Behrig Berivik is a pyschopathic terrorist then Europe is full them.If anyone is to take blame then look towards the left wing sociopaths who created the open border multiculti EU mess and the ridiculous social security system

American 29 July 2011 - 3:09am / U.S

I totally agree and think strongly that this idiot's messages and lectures influence young people especially loosers like the friking terrorist who killed tens of innocent people with a cold blood and yet he is proud of himself. We have to fight these sick people just as hard as we fight terrorist groups like al9a3ida.
God bless all humain being!

Anonymous 28 July 2011 - 8:32pm

All fingers should only point to Breivik.

Anonymous 28 July 2011 - 7:08pm / UK

Lot of finger pointing going on at the moment.If you come to the conclusion that anyone with views similar to Anders Behrig Berivik is a pyschopathic terrorist then Europe is full them.If anyone is to take blame then look towards the left wing sociopaths who created the open border multiculti EU mess and the ridiculous social security system

Vera Gottlieb 28 July 2011 - 7:02pm / Germany - for the Islamophobics...

Anonymous 28 July 2011 - 8:38pm

"So far, the few Muslims who choose to speak up against militant extremist Islam have faced threats of violence and accusations of being anti-Islam. Even members of this Coalition face threats as they carry out their work. In effect, the message disseminated by radical Muslims is that merely discussing Islamic terrorism is to be construed as an attack on Islam."
Free Muslims Coalition

Billy Khan 28 July 2011 - 6:55pm / Wales.

Breivik lived for fantasy and freemasonry, christian religion and violence . He loved dressing up as a soldier, owned weapons, and also liked hearing speeched from Wilders. Of course Wilders had an influence, albeit very minimal, on a somewhat deranged sociopath.
To blame Wilders is not going to help the dead Norwegians, but perhaps the Dutch people need to tell him to shut up with all his hate-speeches.
Religion is a fools` errand, no matter which one one... Christians, Jews, Moslems...they all bring trouble!.

jasmin 28 July 2011 - 2:33pm

Thinking before speaking is needed by leaders, and even the journalists and the visitors here. Any person can get inspired from any word and commit a crime. Strangely, nobody is blaming the man who killed scores of people in cold blood. He planned his strategy well before hand, quietly putting the blame on Wilders..The Norway killer anticipated it all and will now get sympathy as a madman inspired by a Dutch politician in power...

user avatar
knirb 28 July 2011 - 2:40pm

Well said, jasmin!

Lewis 28 July 2011 - 11:03am / NL/UK

"If Breivik starts to cooperate with the law-enforcement agencies and unexpectedly dies in jail, the world will be presented with yet another opportunity for guesswork".

"If, instead, it transpires at the early phase of the investigation that Breivik was a member of an extremist group, the existence of a wider design would be almost impossible to deny".

Abed 28 July 2011 - 8:44am

Hiram, here are a few reasons why Muslims might hate America, Corporate imperialism of oil wells, gulf war 1, gulf war 2, implanting dictators,unconditional support of Israel. Breivik is a psychpath NOT a TERRORIST.Had he been A Muslim or an A-rab than he is a terrorist and represents all of them! You may hate Islam, fine. But when your hatred and delusion of that "God" in the sky deters you from recognizing the strife of people because they do not go to mass or look like you then you are just as bit as evil.

Hiram1 29 July 2011 - 5:00pm

Abed, I am sure there are a lot of reasons why Muslims "might" hate America; but, do you think their religious teachings "might" be the primary one? As to your other reasons, you fail to mention the greed of those in power who control the oil wells in Islamic nations. The leaders of Muslim nations who abuse their people to satisfy their greed. The greed for oil is not only a Muslim problem. Greed transcends religion. It is universal. What you fail to mention about the Gulf war was the Greed of Saddam for the oil resources in Kuwait. He and his military went into Kuwait and terroised the people, stoled their possessions, rape and murdered it's citizens. Greed knows no boundries. It is politically correct. It does not judge who can or who can not partake of it's bounty. As to Breivik, he is both a psychopath and terrorist. When he went about the island killing innocent humans, he became a terrorist. As to your perception that I hate Islam, I will say that Islamic teachings are very clear in it's teachings. I don't like the teachings. I don't like watching a woman get whipped for any reason and when whippings take place because a woman doesn't dress accordingly. I don't like it when they are forced to cover their faces. I don't find it a peaceful and loving religion. As to a god in the sky, that is inaccurate and based on a weak perception that you have acquired from a lack of knowledge. In closing, how do you know I go to mass and how I look?. You assume those statements. Why? "Maybe", you did it because of your religious dogmas of how Muslims view others whom they perceive as non-Muslim. I have known a lot of Muslims and found them, just like Christians and Hindus, to be different. My friend, I think it is you who that hates anyone not like you.

Gary 28 July 2011 - 8:35am / USA

How did so many people who read this site get so reactionary and right wing? It seems clear that neither the author of the article, nor the people quoted, are directly blaming Geert Wilders. However they are pointing out that his aggressive, un-nuanced and polarizing tone contributes greatly to the extremely negative atmosphere. Breivik was just loony enough to pick up the borderline ball that is Wilders's rhetoric and to run with it all the way to an extreme place.

user avatar
knirb 31 July 2011 - 5:23am

There was no ball called “killing”, or even “violence” in Wilders’ “rhetoric”. Breivik found that elsewhere.
You, the authors, and anyone else are welcome to bring forth whatever opinion that floats your boat. Blanket descriptors like reactionary, right wing (or left), polarizing, rhetoric, ideologue, negative and hyperbolic are meaningless subsitutes for a real, specific rebuttal.
This article is anything but clear. Would it “seem” “non reactive” and “left wing” to call it “innuendo”?

Arnt 28 July 2011 - 2:01pm / The Netherlands

Thank you Gary for pointing out the obvious. Unfortunately the public discussion here is well beyond recognizing the obvious. Mr. Wilders himself shouldn't be surprised at all that both his ideology as well as the tone of his rhetoric are being questioned in the light of striking similarities with the rantings of a crazed mass murderer. Nor should his detractors be surprised that they're being accused of abusing this tragedy to further their own political agendas. As Mr. Wilders knows very well himself, both overt hyperbolic accusations as well as hidden insinuations make very good sound bites, even for his opponents. We should all be humbled by the general dignified response of the Norwegians. No doubt Mr. Wilders truly abhors this violence, but as an extremely well seasoned politician, he should also have the guts to acknowledge that despite the current situation, a discussion about his ideology is legitimate at any moment. Or would he fear such a discussion to reveal to the general public what he doesn't want them to realize? Personally I'm convinced that his true objectives are absolutely incompatible with equality and individual freedom. The right to issue fundamental criticisms on religion isn't his major issue at all (and already well embedded into our society and part of the general discourse), he just wants to be allowed to single out one in particular. What is the real reason why he and his movement want to strike article 1 of our constitution? "All who reside in The Netherlands are treated equally under equal circumstances". His PVV wants an article that celebrates our (Judeo-Christian) cultural heritage. Fine by me, as long as they don't overlook the mitigating influence of Humanism and the Enlightenment. But why not just add one! Why actually deleting the article 1 itself and replacing it with something that is superfluous in a legal text? Anyone who wants to delete the principle of equality under the law, which is at the very core of our rule of law and democracy, obviously cannot be a true friend of freedom. I'm certain that a fundamental discussion on his true objectives is among his greatest fears and reason enough for him and his supporters to lash out towards anybody daring to be critical of their version of the truth. Indeed a tactic they might very well have learned from the leftist PC-crowd that used to make any fundamental discussion on immigration politics virtually impossible.

Anonymous 28 July 2011 - 5:30am / USA

I dont think the question is if Wilders is responsible for Brevik, but that the same international neofascist network is responsible for both of them... they are both programmed fanatic ideologues of the sort the Nazis and other Eurasian Fascists turned out in the 1930s... this time the cosmetic theme is Islam instead of Judaism, but the rest of the rhetoric and ideology and objectives are basically the same. Look to Germany and German-funded neonazi organizations in other countries for the source.

ChekIn - ChekOut 1 August 2011 - 6:53pm

Well said indeed ... in case you missed this article From Spiegel Online, I include it now:

The Likud Connection
Europe's Right-Wing Populists Find Allies in Israel

" Islamophobic parties in Europe have established a tight network, stretching from Italy to Finland. But recently, they have extended their feelers to Israeli conservatives, enjoying a warm reception from members of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's coalition. Some in Israel believe that the populists are Europe's future. By Charles Hawley more..."

Link ==>,1518,777175,00.html

Luke Ahead 28 July 2011 - 4:28am / PL

It is just so typical of ignorant people to blame sth or sb else for one's actions. This is of course also the case with Islamic terrorists who think they'll escape responsibility because they're fulfilling Allah's will.

On the other hand, ideology does provide the infrastructure for violence in the case of Islamic jihad. The so called counter-jihad is not an ideology or even any specific world-view, it's common sense and Breivik clearly lacked that. Geert Wilders hasn't invented any ideology and his anty-Islam speech is evidently legal, and it should remain so.

sofaman 28 July 2011 - 4:23am

And by this logic, Pim Fortuyn and Theo van Gogh were actually 'responsible' for their own murders.

One of the most repulsive headlines I've ever read.

This suggests that RNW can't distinguish between calling for a halt to certain immigrant groups and mass murder. If that is so, I'd suggest the author find another profession.

Gary Rumain 28 July 2011 - 3:54am / Australia

Another hatchet job? Tsk! Tsk!

Post new comment

Please be reminded all comments must be in English, short and to the point - guideline 250 words. Abusive and inappropriate comments will be removed.

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <p> <br>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.

More information about formatting options

RNW on Facebook

RNW Player

Video highlights

Ladies on the move
RNW is keen on featuring inspiring women in our target countries, women who...
What about men?
In many countries, men don't stick around to raise their children. This is...