Breivik’s Confession and the Media’s Silence

NORWAY-TRIAL/APPEARANCEFrom his prison cell, the confessed mass murderer Anders Behring Breivik in January 2014 circulated a letter in which he repudiated all association with the Counterjihad and anti-Islamists. He gloated over how easy it was to fool the Western mainstream media (MSM) into supporting his intended witch-hunt on peaceful anti-Islamists:

The idea was to manipulate the MSM and others so that they would launch a witch-hunt and send their <<media-rape-squads>> against our opponents. It worked quite well. (…) I tried to hint about this double-psychology, by quoting <<war is deceit>> x number of times, but I couldnt make it more obvious, as it had to be credible to the aggressive army of 2000 media psychopaths (the MSM-rape-squad). The <<hug-your-opponents, kick-the-ones-you-love>>-tactic is one of the oldest in the book.

The forensic psychiatrists Synne Sørheim and Torgeir Husby declared Breivik insane. Their conclusion was controversially overturned by the Oslo District Court in August 2012 after political and media pressure. Sørheim and Husby noted his frequent use of neologisms (made-up words or phrases) as one of many indications that he suffers from paranoid schizophrenia.

They were mocked for this claim. Yet if one examines the way Breivik uses the term “double-psychology” in the above quote, this is the kind of neologism that one would expect from somebody suffering from schizophrenia. “Reverse psychology” might be a real term, but I’ve never seen the term “double-psychology” being used in this manner or context by any sane person, regardless of their political views.

Inventing new words is normal for children. They have a vivid imagination and haven’t yet learned the proper use of the language. Yet for an adult, the extensive use of neologisms consistently displayed by Breivik is a common symptom of psychotic disorders such as schizophrenia. People suffering from this illness invent an alternative language in order to describe the alternative reality inside their own head.

Critics might object that coining new words by itself does not indicate insanity. After all, William Shakespeare introduced new words to the English language. That’s true, but he was a master communicator, still admired centuries after his death. Breivik is clearly not a new Shakespeare. His language is downright primitive, and just as unfocused as his logic.

As Ned May wrote when reading the letter: ”No one in his right mind believes that the mass-murder of dozens of unarmed teenagers will force newspaper editors to engage in ’dialogue.’ A person who seriously entertains the idea is deeply, deeply deranged.” Indeed he is. Breivik is deep into the territory of clinical delusions here.

Breivik now declares that he is a Nazi and despises me because of my alleged “Jewish network.” In his letter he praises Tore Tvedt, Varg Vikernes, Erik Blücher and Nicolai Kvisler. They are all among the (very few) genuine neo-Nazis in Norway. He further states that “When the norwegian MSM announced that Fjordman was my role model and idol, they couldnt be more wrong. These four individuals, on the other hand, are all worthy of trust, respect and praise, due to their past and continued efforts.”

I’ve been widely portrayed as Breivik’s “mentor” and viewed as morally co-responsible for mass murder. We now have Breivik’s own confirmation that those presenting such claims ”couldn’t be more wrong.”

It is worth noting that none of the neo-Nazis he mentions supported his attacks. So even Nazis don’t want Breivik. Varg Vikernes explicitly rejected his massacre at Utøya because most of his victims were from his own nation and ethnic group. Moreover, Breivik seems to think that to be an ethnic nationalist and a “Nazi” is the same thing. It’s not. Breivik has adopted the false claims of the radical Left. The Nazis were defeated by ethnic nationalists from other European countries.

In this letter Breivik claims that ”ethnocentrism gained momentum” through his mass murder. Is the man on drugs? Unfortunately not. Perhaps he should be, though.

He further indicates that he wanted to harm the anti-Islamists to strengthen ethnic nationalists. So in Breivik’s mind, the clever way to strengthen nationalists is to murder children from their (and his) own nation and ethnic group.

Is he crazy? Yes, that’s probably exactly what he is. Nuts. Clinically insane.

My impression when reading this letter was not that Breivik is a Nazi. He’s too incoherent to be taken seriously even as a neo-Nazi. My impression was that he is not receiving the anti-psychotic medications he so clearly needs. ABB first claimed that he was an anti-Nazi terrorist. Now, he’s suddenly a peaceful Nazi who wants non-violent “dialogue” with the media. Next month, he’ll be a smurf. The month after that, he may proclaim that he’s Kermit the Frog from The Muppet Show. He will say this partly because life in prison is boring and he craves personal attention, and partly because he might actually believe it. Perhaps he will design a new uniform for Commander Kermit of the Knights Templar?

There are two alternatives:

1. Anders Behring Breivik is just plain insane, and there is no point in taking anything he says seriously at all.

2. Anders Behring Breivik specifically wanted to instigate a mass media “witch-hunt” on peaceful anti-Islamists. He said both during the trial in 2012 and in this letter from 2014 that he’s very satisfied with the way the media behaved.

The Western mass media have portrayed ABB as a rational and sane person who was inspired to commit mass murder by texts written by me, Robert Spencer and other Islam-critics. This viewpoint can no longer be presented as the truth. It is false, and always has been.

He is almost certainly insane. To the extent that he is rational about anything — which is highly debatable — ABB has been very explicit for years that his intention was to use the mass media as allies to damage Islam-critics such as Robert Spencer, Bat Ye’or, Daniel Pipes or Fjordman as much as possible. Claims made by the established media that Breivik is an anti-Muslim terrorist are incorrect and should be rejected. He admired the Islamic Jihadist terrorists of al-Qaida, and copied them in order to kill non-Muslims and marginalize peaceful Islam-critics.

In between rantings indicative of medical insanity, Breivik occasionally touches upon real subjects. One of these is the issue of bias, distortions and dishonesty in Western mass media. Ironically, he has indirectly exposed just how biased, distorted and dishonest Western mass media can be and often are.

Breivik’s letter from prison was sent to a number of international media outlets. These included The Wall Street Journal, the largest newspaper in North America, Die Welt in Germany and Ekstra Bladet in Denmark. In January 2014, these publications acknowledged receiving the letter and stated that Breivik complained about “torture” in jail. Yet they were not honest enough to admit that he confessed that he had quoted anti-Islamic writers in order to harm them. The only outlet that stated this was the left-wing radical magazine Expo in Sweden, which is usually very hostile to Islam-critics.

As the author Robert Spencer noted on Jihad Watch: The New York Times, the BBC and many other Western media in the aftermath of Breivik’s attacks in 2011 contributed to a smear campaign against Islam-critical writers on both sides of the Atlantic who had done nothing wrong. When it later turns out that Breivik wanted to damage these writers and used the mass media as his allies to do so, the same media say…..nothing.

No apologies for having unfairly smeared decent people for years, just nothing. They pretend it never happened. Breivik was only useful as long as he could be employed to intimidate and silence critics of Islam and mass immigration. When that’s no longer the case, he ceases to be useful.

Anders Behring Breivik did great damage with his attacks. The single positive side effect is that he may have inadvertently helped to expose just how rotten and dishonest Western mass media are, how much information they hide and how much they distort. It is shocking to witness, although sadly not surprising. It leaves one wondering what information the same media distort on other topics.

Robert Spencer is perfectly correct in pointing out that the international press should apologize to Islam-critics for their behavior over the last few years. One of those who should receive a public apology is yours truly. Sadly, I don’t think most journalists have the decency to apologize.

The attacks of July 22 2011 are first and foremost a story about how many families lost their loved ones due to the actions of a sadistic and deeply sick individual. However, these events were cynically exploited in a political witch-hunt, much to the satisfaction of the terrorist himself. The media who participated in this witch-hunt have so far been unable or unwilling to engage in some healthy self-criticism over their unfair smears against their ideological opponents.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

  • Kristendommen

    So true;
    “The single positive side effect is that he may have inadvertently helped
    to expose just how rotten and dishonest Western mass media are, how
    much information they hide and how much they distort. It is shocking to
    witness, although sadly not surprising. It leaves one wondering what
    information the same media distort on other topics.”

    Politically correct media are those who suffer from delusion/psychopath,
    they hide the true about that islam are take over Europe/USA.
    White are bad guys, blacks are good guys,
    but the reality is opposite in the
    alternative media.

    • tellaL

      I found the reports very accurate. its the freedom idiots that cause problems because there are allways obvious questions that can never be answered.

  • Guest

    “The Nazis were defeated by ethnic nationalists from other European countries.”

    This is a whopper of epic proportions. Aside from the obvious fact that the Nazis could not have been defeated without Roosevelt and Stalin, real “ethnic nationalists,” such as the rulers of Vichy France, were among those most likely to seek accommodations with the Nazis. It would seem Fjordman enlists people like Churchill and De Gaulle, that’s to say, everyone who was not clearly on the “left,” as a fellow “ethnic nationalist.” He doesn’t realize that it were precisely those “conservative” principles that sit least well with raw ethnic nationalism — the respect for law and order, a genuine understanding of and preference for civilization, strong religious convictions, and simple old-fashioned patriotism — that drove all disinterested “right-wing” opposition to Hitler. Aside from that, “ethnic nationalism” before the era of mass Third World immigration was practically inseparable from antisemitism.

  • emptorpreempted

    “The Nazis were defeated by ethnic nationalists from other European countries.”

    This is a whopper of epic proportions. Aside from the obvious fact that the Nazis could not have been defeated without Roosevelt and Stalin, the real “ethnic nationalists,” such as the rulers of Vichy France, where among those most likely to seek accommodations with Hitler’s Germany. But it would seem Fjordman enlists men like Churchill and De Gaulle, that’s to say, everyone not clearly on the “left,” as fellow “ethnic nationalists.” He doesn’t seem to realize that it were precisely those conservative principles that sit least well with raw ethnic nationalism — the respect for law and order, a genuine understanding of and preference for civilization, religious convictions, and simple old-fashioned patriotism — that drove all disinterested “right-wing” opposition to Hitler. Aside from that, “ethnic nationalism” in the era before mass Third World immigration was inseparable from antisemitism.

    • Guest

      I think Fjordman went a bit too far with that statement, but I think I see his point. In those days, ethnonationalism was kind of ingrained, rather than being some ideology that people embraced in opposition to civic nationalism/multiculturalism. Roosevelt’s America was predominantly white and saw itself as a white nation. Churchill’s Britain was near 100% indigenous, and after the war Churchill campaigned to “keep Britain white.” Stalin’s Russia may have been officially communist and multicultural, but the people of the Soviet Union were still loyal to their ethnic identities, as we later saw when the USSR collapsed, and during the War, Stalin had to turn to Russian nationalism to motivate the Russian troops to fight. The Soviet soldiers couldn’t be motivated by class warfare, hence why Stalin’s new anthem spoke of the glories of Russia. There were also ethnic tensions within the Red Army. The multicultural harmony was a farce.

      In summary Fjordman’s point is that ethnonationalism is a natural feeling, and has been a motivating factor in human tribalism for nearly our entire history. One does not have to be a National Socialist to understand that.

      • Birger Skruddusvingen

        “The multicultural harmony was a farce.”

        That’s shocking news!

    • Birger Skruddusvingen

      “Aside from that, “ethnic nationalism” in the era before mass Third World immigration was inseparable from antisemitism.”

      Was it, really? I beg to differ.

  • The Facts

    There is a third alternative. The truth. Breivik plagiarized Fjordman, Ye’or and Spencer to compose his entire manifesto and is incapable of developing his own cogent hate ethos. He swiped one from you. The world knows it.

    • Jason P

      The phrase is “cut-and-paste.” It is a compendium of other people’s articles with occasional text that he inserted. His text is very different from the authors he has tried to discredit. Most noticed the difference right away.

      Breivik is a revolutionary fascist who has complete contempt for a liberal order. He expressed admiration for Islamists and even shares their goal of a “monoculture” implemented by force. He created a map of the world split into different zones where each culture was secured. He even talks of joining forces with the jihadi.

      The clues were there; the “cut-and-paste” was meant to discredit reformers who work through free speech and parliamentary procedures.

      • The Facts

        It has taken the counterjihadist movement a good two years to come up with this story that they were elaborately framed by Breivik. That’s a pretty long time to make a chess move of only one pawn, considering that initially they endorsed him. Also, I have never heard of a student who plagiarized and then got his F changed to an A simply because he changed the terminology of his plagiaristic act.

        • Jason P

          Immediately after that attack it was pointed out that Breivik’s purpose was to do damage to the counterjihadi movement:

          • The Facts

            Yes. Daniel Pipes is one of the few people who immediately went into damage control mode. Over the next couple of years it took the rest of the counterjihadists a while to get their stories straight. Now the new official version is that all along they were being framed. The Templar angle of Breivik caused a lot of internal confusion within the Spencer-Geller-Fjordman axis since they all actively and materially support the EDL. The layman might recognize Mr. Pipes from the recent Obama pseudo-documentary, whose producer was just arrested for campaign finance crimes.

          • Jason P

            “Spencer-Geller-Fjordman” took Tommy Robinson at his word when he said he was purging anti-Semitic types from his group. Perhaps they were naive (compared to Melanie Phillips.) They never supported Breivik nor his fascist dream. Yes, that dream was apparent in his inserts while the cut-and-paste had nothing to do with such an absurd and radical posture.

            I also blogged about his “Compendium” at the time:

            I noted his “identity politics” (and his equating “cultural genocide” with actual genocide) puts him in the leftist-Islamist camp. A year later he confessed his fight against “cultural genocide”:

            It was clear to us; but the hysterical left saw nothing else besides “he’s critical of Islam and you’re critical of Islam so you both want the same thing.”

          • The Facts

            OK, so now the story is that Spencer, Geller and Fjordman were naive? Were they naive when Robinson/Yaxley-Lennon entered the United States on a forged passport to speak at their meetings?

          • Jason P

            What has this to do with Breivik? They never supported Breivik. Indeed, the are all committed to a liberal order and one of the motivations for their opposition to Islam is it’s historical illiberalism. Clearly Breivik and Islamists are soul mates. That was obvious when reading his inserted text in the Compendium. And he can’t hide it anymore.

            Breivik isn’t insane as Fjordman says. He’s cunning. His meticulous plans had two components: physical attack, diversion of wrath to his real opponents, i.e. liberal critics of Islamism. You fell for his trap, admit it. I didn’t (see my blog). Neither did Pipes.

          • The Facts

            I can’t wait until a hundred years from now when Breivik’s prescient cunning will be elevated to Nostradamian levels by years of speculative historical fiction. You’ve already elevated him to subterranean political mastermind, all without spending a dime on web-hosting. One can see the degree of personal investment.

          • Jason P

            You’re the one whose been suckered by Breivik. His vicious calculating nature was obvious in the attack. You’ve been taken in by his propaganda to do his bidding.

          • reader

            Spencer-Geller-Fjordman axis? Really? Do you have records of their communications, money transfers, etc? I don’t even know why you troll here – drones and trolls don’t visit here to get information from other drones and trolls like yourself. Enjoying showing off your depravity?

          • The Facts

            Yes. I do have those records. I am saving them for the big in-person debate day.

          • reader

            Trolls like youare unlikely persons of in-person debates. I’m not holding my breath.

          • Drakken

            Silly little commi, what you don’t quite realize or understand is that nationalism is on the rise because idiot leftist are flooding the 1st world with the 3rd world, sooner or later this is going to lead to uncivil strife, if you side with the 3rd world, perish with them.


            Is your teleprompter broken, comrade?

    • tellaL

      it should just have read: chit, I screwed up bigtime, I feel like an idiot, so thankfully my mother is terminally ill so I can use that as a cover to go live with her. maybe I can protect some of my inheritance from the government who is trying to put her into a special care home. now I can rent a farm so I can play wow 24 hours a day and insult and bully little kids on the internet to make myself feel good. oh no, my world is falling apart, im going to buy costumes from the internet and do a clockwork orange on the government.

  • disqus

    Breivik Had enough of it and it got to his head and he made a stupid move. The killing of innocent people was actually meant for muslims because the country is getting full of the wrong people ready to take over the country and he took to the gun. Many people are thinking the very same thing but only Breivik pulled the trigger. That alone should have been enough to close all Muslim borders.

  • UCSPanther

    I think in the end, this whole mess will be remembered for how the Norwegian government used it as an excuse to try and silence those who expressed views contrary to the official party line…

    • Marit

      Correct !

    • sk0gr


  • smitty werbenjagermansen

    this article sure is unbiased. 10% about the actual story and the rest about comparing breivik to a child with mental problems and how “crazy” he is

    breivik is a hero . god bless that man

    • Marit

      Are you mad like Breivik ? Poor little you.

  • Andrew

    English isn’t his first language. Of course he may sound a little childish

  • GHjo

    This “unfair Smears” is learned from the paper Pravda in the former Soviet Union
    and the “newspapers” in the former DDR,in which they have great admiration,and
    are hoping to recreate these times,by means of multiculture and the discriminating,rasistic,violent and warlike ideology of –Islam–.

  • Crusader Niels

    “The Nazis were defeated by ethnic nationalists from other European countries.”

    How were Churchill, Stalin, Roosevelt and Truman in any way ethnic nationalists? I mean, Stalin’s army was highly multicultural and also multiracial and Stalin himself wasn’t even bloody Russian.

    Roosevelt was strongly leftist(for example:'s_record_on_civil_rights -read the first part)and didn’t seem to have any indication of being a ethno-nationalist. If he was one then he would be shipping blacks and other minorities out of America, which he totally didn’t.

    Neither Churchill, Truman or Roosevelt left any ethno-nationalistic legacy whatsoever, if they were nationalists then America and UK wouldn’t have these large demographic problems(like millions of muslims in the UK or millions of blacks and Mexicans in the USA).

  • Patrick of Atlantis

    Breivik attacked the people who own the government. That is one salient and irrefutable fact. The salient motive is the importation of Islam and its adherents by those government people,to rape, plunder and eventually replace the indigenous people. Breivik obviously objected to that policy.

  • tanstaafl

    Bravo, Fjordman!

  • Porkys2istan

    Brevik was just 25 years too early.

    We in the Counter-Jihad are all supposed to say that, “We don’t condone Brevik’s actions,” but if things keep going in the current direction then eventually Brevik will be proven correct. Brevik attacked not muslims, but rather, the hard core left within his country that has an irrational love affair with importing blatantly inferior cultures. That camp that he shot up was where future political leaders were brought to learn about the plight of the ‘helpless’ palestinians, and the ‘truth’ about the evil Israelis. It was basically a hard left brainwashing center.

    Even though muslims are chronically unemployed and disproportionately criminal, the REAL threat (right now) is the fact that no one can have a rational logical debate about islamic immigration. One can’t even tell the truth about islam without being brought up on various ‘civil rights’ charges. (At least for now) you are far more likely to be jailed by your own country for ‘offending’ a muslim than actually killed by an ‘offended’ muslim.

    If we could discuss these things NOW, then we could turn off the immigration spigot. We could cut the overly generous welfare benefits that attract (and keep) muslims by the millions, but rational dialogue is ‘racist’ or ‘islamophobic’. Without new muslims and welfare benefits the islamic problem would gradually resolve itself. Despite what they say, muslims do leave islam when presented with almost any alternative, and it’s hard to have 4 wives and 10 children when the government won’t feed them for you. Eventually muslims would convert, become secular, leave, or be put in prison. Problem solved.

    Whatever side you are on, it’s obvious that Brevik is isane, and the hard European left has gleefully used him to discredit the Counter-Jihad. But how long before Brevik goes from insane homicidal madman to a prophet ahead of his time?

    I say 25 years, unless things change now.

    • Birger Skruddusvingen

      “But how long before Brevik goes from insane homicidal madman to a prophet ahead of his time?”

      To me, he already looks like that (“a prophet ahead of his time”).

  • moodychops

    The EDL leader used Anders Brevik to threaten an innocent member of the public and he thought he was hilarious ,it is caught on film and available to watch on you tube.
    The leader of the EDL implied that it would’ve been better if he had murdered Muslims!!!!!!

    Lots of support for Anders Brevik came from the EDL until they realised it was a publicity nightmare,the EDL are not very clever

  • Lucian

    Only one thing is clear! Breivik’s god IS Satan! Believe what you like but he is just a pawn of Satan to mess with people’s minds and souls!

  • tellaL

    the writer is trying to get schizophrenics killed. obviously, anyone who is trying to hide their true motivations will do this, and also its just very anti authority. I do think he had personality coping disorders increased by severe stresses. I don’t think he was insane the whole time. I think he thot back to when he went nuts and said…hmmm, that was a good idea I think I will expand on it. maybe its sort of a high like people get when doing drugs? he should have been killed. some people willfully abuse their ability to go crazy alone.

  • tellaL

    neologisms can actually be more a part of a dissociative disorder which can manifest as a personality disorder or like mild autism. the problem is determining whether it is psychotic or willfull. I think the courts found that he was highly ordered socially and so had mostly control over his thoughts. he had many opportunities to withdraw from his plans. but instead, he put them aside and left them for when he found his situation to be intolerable.

  • Thomas H

    Sorheim/Husby’s insanity verdict was not overturned simply after media/political pressure. Sure, the court ordered a new assessment by a different team partly as a result of such pressure, but the court came to its own conclusion (of not insane) after thorough cross-examination of both sets of doctors and questioning about their reports. Breivik is not insane, that’s just a pathetic attempt to sweep under the carpet the real issues he brings up.

  • libswilllose

    Mass murders do not get newspaper editors to engage in a dialogue?

    They do if they are insane moslem mass murderers. Saddam Hussein had leftist American media falling all over themselves for interviews.

    Imagine if UBL would have wanted to be interviewed…

  • Ørjan Øijord

    “ABB first claimed that he was an anti-Nazi terrorist. Now, he’s suddenly a peaceful Nazi who wants non-violent “dialogue” with the media.”

    Why do you call him a Nazi? He didn’t say he is a Nazi.

  • Ørjan Øijord

    You said Breivik is insane because he used the word “double-psychology”. “Double-psychology” means “double-dealing”.

  • Knut Holt

    According to my view Breivik’s actions is a terrible revenge against society for something that happened to him in early chidhood. He was taken care of by child protective agencies and the psychiatry and what happened with him there must have been both painful and humiliating for him. All his political agendas are thus just clumpsy efforts get an acceptance for his actions. It is interesting that all parts in the case are extremely secretive about what kind of examinations, testings and therapies he underwent at that time. Even Breivik himself, probably because the humiliation he feels by this issue.