About these ads

Norwegian Men’s Rights blogger Eivind Berge released from jail. Court rules that threats on the internet do not count as incitement

Eivind Berge

Eivind Berge, the Norwegian Men’s Rights blogger who was arrested after making repeated death threats against police on his blog, has been released from jail. The country’s Supreme Court has ruled that his comments – in which, among other things, he talked about how killing police was on his “bucket list” – are not illegal. His property will be returned to him and he is evidently entitled to compensation for his time in jail.

As far as I can figure it from the Google-translated articles I’ve read, the Supreme Court has ruled that statements on the internet are not “public” and therefore his threats don’t count as “incitement” under the law. Here’s what one article says:

Supreme Court’s Appeals Committee believes statements Berge has made ​​on his blog are not covered by the Freedom of the definition in the Penal Code. incitement to violence and murder of police officers are therefore not presented publicly in the legal sense and therefore is not criminal, says the Supreme Court.

Apparently the issue was a fairly narrow legal one. According to the same article, the law under which he was prosecuted (written long before the birth of the Internet) “operates with a public safety and publishing concept that … do not take account of electronic publishing on the Internet.” The majority on the Supreme Court, the article goes on to say, felt that “the indictment includes actions that are clearly worthy of punishment,” but that existing law does not allow punishment for statements made on the Internet.

If anyone here knows Norwegian, let me know if this is correct. Here and here are several more articles in Norwegian, translated by Google. Here’s an article in English, written before the Supreme Court rendered its judgment, that spells out the issues a little more clearly.

On his blog, Berge celebrates his victory in the courts:

My blog is legal after all. The police had no lawful basis for pursuing criminal charges against me. This means the case has collapsed for the prosecution and I will be entitled to compensation for the three weeks I spent in prison. I was arrested and jailed for speech which the Supreme Court has ruled is legal, so obviously the entire prosecution was utterly baseless.

He considers his release a giant victory for Men’s Rights:

Being a political prisoner provided a welcome boost to my activism. … The entire process has been tremendously empowering for the Men’s Rights Movement. This spectacular prosecution of an MRA sparked debate and demonstrated to the horror of the feminist establishment that there are more antifeminists out there than they knew. I am not some kind of extremist easily dismissed, even though some of my writings may appear somewhat ungenteel. While my kind of violent rhetoric is legal, it is no longer needed. We are strong enough to fight feminism in more elegant and subtle ways now.

I will highlight some of Berge’s “ungenteel” opinions in future posts.

See here and here for previous posts of mine on Berge, which include many examples of his “violent rhetoric.”

 

About these ads

Posted on August 2, 2012, in antifeminism, eivind berge, MRA, threats. Bookmark the permalink. 575 Comments.

  1. Cue NWOSlave gloating about it in 3…2…1…

  2. god he’s a self-important little ninny

  3. he and mikey should hang out

  4. Yes, Berge, having your supreme court highlight holes in your law and urge them to be closed is totally a victory for ‘men’s rights’ XD

  5. Didn’t he also publish a plan that he was going to go stab a police officer? What happened to that?

  6. I hate when loopholes like this allow criminals a free pass but it’s even worse that this particular moron actually thinks he proved himself to be in the right rather than exploited the system in order to squeak by without punishment. What a tool.

  7. Does he even know why he was in jail in the first place?

  8. @aworldanon
    Because of the feminist government conspiracy of course, they are heavily anti mra you know.

  9. aceofsevens, I’m not sure. News articles referred to this repeatedly — that he had talked about stabbing a police officer on a certain day — but I never found such a comment on his blog, so I’m not sure where it appeared or what specifically they were referring to.

  10. So much for the great feminist government conspiracy.

  11. Good news for your friends over at the RadFem Hub then this ruling…at least it will be when the day comes that their comments re murder, infanticide & encouraging violence towards men, transgender people & male children are taken as seriously by others as they themselves do, that is. That day being some time after hell freezes over.

  12. Right, how could I forget the international soviet feminist conspiracy that wants all of teh menz to sit in hard chairs all of the time.

  13. Clearly this is no simple feminist conspiracy, there has to be reptilians involved somewhere. Feminist reptilians.

  14. “Falsely” accused man mildly inconvenienced, film at 11.

  15. Alright, “mildly” is probably a bit harsh, but if he’s going to whine about feminist persecution, it would help his case if he wasn’t just released (with compensation no less)!

    MRAs seem to have an amazing case file of men who were victims of the evil feminist system–98% of whom either had charges dropped, never had charges filed, or were acquitted.

  16. Do you think he’s gonna gloat like this if he ever gets filed for something more serious, like an actual murder or rape?

  17. It sounds like the law regarding threats make reference to them being actionable when they are “printed matter” which is why they suggest changing the law to account for the internetz.

    But as of now, the Court seems to say that he is free to make as many calls to kill police officers, et al., as he likes as long as he doesn’t do it in print. Great outcome, MRAs! The world needs more internet calls to murder people!

  18. It sounds like the law regarding threats make reference to them being actionable when they are “printed matter” which is why they suggest changing the law to account for the internetz.

    Shit, I’ve got a printer, I can fix that.

  19. OK so yesterday I had to deal with obnoxious rightwingers gloating about buying a chicken sandwich for Jesus and thus “sticking it” to the left (not sure how that was supposed to work, I feel utterly unstuck), and now this.

    Ima go watch more stuff with Jeremy Renner and hide from the universe for a while.

  20. OK so yesterday I had to deal with obnoxious rightwingers gloating about buying a chicken sandwich for Jesus and thus “sticking it” to the left (not sure how that was supposed to work, I feel utterly unstuck), and now this.

    Here in Canada we don’t have Chick-fil-A. We have to make our own chicken sandwiches and waffle fries.

  21. He said ‘KIlling a cop is on my bucket list”, among others. If you are going to blatantly lie, do so more convincingly.

  22. Wait, is this the moderate MRA troll we’ve been waiting for?

  23. Well, moderate as far as defending based on false information goes.

  24. We are strong enough to fight feminism in more elegant and subtle ways now.

    Yes, PLEASE be more subtle!

    More.

    More.

    …No, I can still hear you. MORE SUBTLETY! How else will you ever defeat the feminists?

  25. Shiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiit.

  26. Can’t decide which MRA fantasy is the most elegant or subtle, femicide or fuckbots.

  27. Threatening to kill a cop is not a real threat guys!!

    and I think it is way too early to call me moderate, or extreme for that matter

    This shit just got real!!

  28. Oy. Robert, he said all of these things on his blog (in English, to boot, so there’s no issue with translation):

    I viscerally despise cops and wish them the worst. Killing at least one cop is on my bucket list.

    If ever a victim of psychiatry, here is what I would do. I would first attempt to kill the cops or whoever tried to apprehend me. Failing that, I would feign docility in order to get out as soon as possible and then kill a representative of the industry as revenge. … killing cops is also very much a men’s issue. Every pig killed is also a blow against feminism, so men should be doubly elated whenever an officer goes down in the line of encroaching on our cognitive liberty.

    [I]f you are a victim of psychiatry, it is probably in your best interest (as well as a publicly beneficial act of activism) to kill a guard or cop in order to get a fair public trial and possibly escape treatment before it ruins your health completely.

    His comment about “watching” the prosecutor ended with this not-very-subtle reference to someone who had just massacred 77 people:

    Clearly seventy-seven body bags wasn’t enough, but I am fairly confident that you will be sorry one day.

    See here for specific links to the quotes on his blog:

    http://manboobz.com/2012/07/07/norwegian-mens-rights-activist-blogger-eivind-berge-arrested-for-death-threats-against-police/

  29. Anybody who is okay with Anders Breivik is not ok to be in the general population.

  30. Jesus, Robert, I know MRAs have trouble with the concept of words meaning things, but come the fuck on.

  31. Oh, we got a badass over here!!

  32. The way he carries on about psychiatry, I’d half expect him to be a Scientologist.

    And I don’t know how he expects to try to plug a cop, fail, and then go “docilely.” I’ve got no experience with Norwegian cops, but here in the States the cops tend to react with overwhelming force, especially since that shooting spree in Pennsylvania in 2010. Take a shot at a cop, and you’re likely to end up dead yourself, even if you miss.

  33. I’d say anyone who has read Berge and decided he didn’t call for killing cops, is either a troll, or an extremist; both if (of course) also possible.

  34. Over here in the UK, I’d imagine that if you took a shot at a cop and ducked down into cover after the hail of return fire (we’re assuming here that you’ve been seen with a gun and therefore have firearms officers facing you), you could then stick your gun up in an obviously-not-ready-to-fire fashion, come out with your hands up, and not get shot unless you make a sudden move for another weapon (or something that looks like one). Not *certain* but plausible.

  35. “If I ever find myself on the jury of a criminal trial involving, say, statutory or feminist-defined rape or nonviolent drug offenses, I would vote to acquit in any event as a matter of principle, regardless of the evidence, because I fundamentally disagree with the laws in question. Convicting anybody for such bogus, victimless crimes would be contrary to my core libertarian moral values.” – quote from the turd-Berge’s blog

    By this logic, if the turd-Berge were ever to get himself drugged, raped and mugged, then he would have no cause for complaint for this victimless crime as it would be contrary to his liberatian moral values.

    Then again, if he had a change of heart and thought that this victimless crime was only OK when HE wasn’t the victim and he decided to call the police to complain, they’d probably just laugh their heads off at his bleeding bum and empty wallet.

  36. @MorkaisChosen: Yeah, probably over here you could avoid getting shot if you evaded the hail of return fire and then very definitely surrendered.

    The cops might shoot you anyway and claim you had another gun.

    Hell, sometimes they shoot you and then plant a gun on your body. That kind of cop we must identify and remove from the force.

    The sovereign citizens who shot up Memphis a couple years ago were in their car, and the police fire kept up a while after they stopped shooting.

    Bonnie & Clyde got ambushed, and this is what their car looks like. Of course, they were known to carry multiple Browning Automatic Rifles (500 .30-06 bullets a minute) and they had a (false?) reputation as cop-killers.

    I’m no expert on cop culture over here, but there’s a definite and large strain of “this is a highly dangerous career,” to the extent that larger police forces are becoming indistinguishable from the military.

  37. So should we all practice our surprised faces for when this guy goes on a spree of some sort?

  38. thebionicmommy

    Bonnie & Clyde got ambushed, and this is what their car looks like. Of course, they were known to carry multiple Browning Automatic Rifles (500 .30-06 bullets a minute) and they had a (false?) reputation as cop-killers.

    Well, they did kill some cops, so that might be part of the reason they had that reputation. They even killed a constable and police detective here in Joplin in April of 1933, and their hideout is now designated as a preserved historical sight. Some of the most famous photos of the couple were taken in Joplin, and they left their camera behind in their rush to get away from more law enforcement. The local newspaper, the Joplin Globe, found the camera, developed the photos, and now they own the rights to them.

    Bonnie and Clyde’s hideout

    Back to OP, well I guess if there was a loophole, then there’s nothing Norway can do, but I do hope they at least keep an eye on him and his blog. I also hope they fix the law to include online threats.

  39. “So should we all practice our surprised faces for when this guy goes on a spree of some sort?”

    Let’s hope not. Last thing I need is to be paranoid about people’s safety :(

  40. The BAR can’t fire at that rate Yes, the cyclic rate of fire is 550 rounds per minute, but it can’t really fire more than about

    Background, the cyclic rate of fire is the fastest cycling rate of an automatic weapon. It takes between 6-10 rounds fired for the rate to get to that speed (the reason for the difference has to do with friction, spring tension, gas pressures, temperature of the parts).

    But firing at that rate means a lot of recoil, and the BAR only weighs about 20 lbs, so it had a lot of climb.

    The BAR had a 20 box magazine.

    A practised shooter, in braced position can fire 3-5 rounds before he has to stop and reacquire the target. Call it five. That’s four bursts, an a bit of slack in the middle.

    Call it 6 seconds.

    Lets’ say the shooter is really good at changing magazines, it only take five seconds, plus time to regain the target, call that another three seconds, for an eight second delay between firing periods.

    6 + 8 = 14 +6 =20 +8 =28 +6 =34 +8 =42 +6 =48 +8 =56 = 6 magazines in a minute = 120 rounds.

    That’s still a lot, but a lot less than the cyclic rate implies. It’s also not accurate. The, “sustained rate of fire” is the one which matters, that being the rate at which rounds are put downrange, while being able to engage the target, without wearing out the barrel. For the BAR that’s about 60 rounds per minute.

    To add to the problem (for someone like Clyde Barrow: who was the one with the BARs†) each of those mags is also non-trivial for weight. Each loaded magazine is 1.6-1.8 lbs. So 6 magazines is about 12 lbs. 500/20 = 25 x 1.75 = 43.75 lbs.

    It wasn’t the rate of fire, per se, which made the cops ambush them, it was that it fires a 30-06 cartridge, which, when loaded in the mil-spec M1 Ball configuration has a muzzle velocity of about 2,700 feet per second, and an energy of about 2656 ft lbs. The penetration is about 24″ of white oak at 200 yards. At less than 100 yards, because of the time it takes the round to stabilise the penetration will be less, but still enough to go through any sort of obstacle between the shooter and the target.

    †The BAR M1918A2 had no semi-automatic option, but rather a two rates of automatic fire, the 55o Cyclic, and a 350 Cyclic. The 350 meant that one could fire with less climb, the practical rate of fire wasn’t that much less; given that the rifle’s rate of fire on the way to the 550 cyclic was pretty much not getting past the 350, and the 350 was getting closer to cyclic.

    It didn’t come out until 1937, by which time Bonnie and Clyde were already dead.

  41. @misanthropic muse

    I hate when loopholes like this allow criminals a free pass but it’s even worse that this particular moron actually thinks he proved himself to be in the right rather than exploited the system in order to squeak by without punishment. What a tool.

    eh, from a usian perspective, what he did is not criminal behavior, i dont think it should be criminal, and i have no problem with it not being called that, i just think it’s stupid that he thinks this is other than a technical victory under the law

  42. @purvis

    He said he was close to stabbing an officer. That’s pretty extreme but it’s not sedition or a threat.

    saying you’re going to stab someone is the textbook definition of a threat, dummy.

  43. Citizen Justin

    @ Robert Purvis: “He is an admirable activist.”

    He is a wretched man who says “involuntary celibacy [i.e. not getting laid] has ruined my life”, who “wishes [he] was a pick-up artist”, and as a consequence, rather than ask himself why that is the case, has instead become a self-described rape advocate. He admires the Norwegian mass murderer in the same way that other pathetic people have drawn swastikas on walls or called themselves Communists, because it’s a scary theme they can attach themselves to. Then he complains when someone finally takes him seriously by arresting him!

    I’m not surprised that someone finds him admirable, however – there are probably hundreds of people with the same lack of awareness, both of self and of others, as he.

  44. Can I just point out this from Sandra is NOT OK? Rape = not funny. Rape of rapists = still not funny. Cops laughing at rape victims = way too goddamn common and acting like it’s fiiiine when they “deserve it” makes me want to vomit.

    Then again, if he had a change of heart and thought that this victimless crime was only OK when HE wasn’t the victim and he decided to call the police to complain, they’d probably just laugh their heads off at his bleeding bum and empty wallet.

    I especially like the gratuitous description of the violence of his imagined rape. Lovely.

  45. whoa justin thats a bit out of left field we have people who admire a mass murder, people putting swastikas every where and communist a political belief. one of these things is not like the other.

  46. We’re supposed to be scared of communists? Sorry to break it to you, buddy, but J Edgar Hoover is dead.

  47. I’m a bit intrigued by the idea of someone calling themself a communist to come off as a badass outlaw. It seems a bit quaint. In school, everyone is taught to boo the anti-communists (they’ve at least heard of McCarthy) and cheer the anti-anti-communists. Anti-communism lost and now it’s beyond the pale.

  48. Monsieur sans Nom

    Can’t decide which MRA fantasy is the most elegant or subtle, femicide or fuckbots.

    The answer is the former, because fuckbots are now a reality.

  49. Monsieur sans Nom

    Also, fuckbots aren’t just for men anymore!

  50. Ditto to what Hrovitnir said.

  51. Someone tell Antz about this new development, stat! It’ll make his day

  52. Communism is a political belief, but anti-communist political beliefs are incitement to violence and don’t count as political beliefs. You’re free to propose any policy, as long as it’s one of the handful of policies that aren’t considered incitement to violence.

    By this logic, if the turd-Berge were ever to get himself drugged, raped and mugged, then he would have no cause for complaint for this victimless crime as it would be contrary to his liberatian moral values.

    To Berge, rape is not a victimless crime (although his definition of rape is narrow). He considers rape of women and affirmative action against men to be symmetrical crimes that cancel each other out. Berge also believes that men can have sex with men whenever they want, so that the presumably male-on-male rape that you describe wouldn’t be canceling anything out. As for female-on-male rape, Berge considers a woman forcing a man to have sex to be a blessing for the man, but you describe a “bleeding bum,” and Berge would consider a woman anally raping a man to be a non-sexual assault.

  53. Robert could totally be a Berge sock! That would be our most high-profile sock yet!

  54. Citizen Justin

    Me again. I ought to have better clarified what I meant about people who “called themselves Communists” – I was specifically thinking of those individuals in the West who openly professed to admire the USSR during its existence. There were a few of them. I’m not talking about what McCarthy said was happening, which no serious historian endorses these days anyway!

    But, we’re off topic here – thanks Wetherby for getting back on it. I wonder, just how much of the ‘admirable’ Mr Berge’s views Robert does disagree with?

  55. It sounds to me like he’s inciting murder. And those fantasies about killing cops are quite disturbing. He could very well be the next guy to go on a murder rampage.

  56. Ruby, I doubt Eivind Berge will go one a rampage. Lots of libertarians say, for example, that “taxation is theft,” which according to their principles they could retaliate against with deadly force, but very few of them run amok.

  57. Sorry if I missed a previous comment clarifying the subject, but I do understand Norwegian, and can confirm that David’s understanding is correct – most of the judges found the statements to be punishable but do not find the justification in the law that would be required to prosecute, as per the Norwegian Constitution and Human Right’s. I only read http://www.vg.no/nyheter/innenriks/artikkel.php?artid=10067455, if you need understandings of the other articles, just let me know

  58. While my kind of violent rhetoric is legal, it is no longer needed. We are strong enough to fight feminism in more elegant and subtle ways now.

    Yeah, somehow I doubt this means an end to his violent rhetoric.

  59. Wetherby: I’d say that Berge is a rape evangelist, not apologist. He isn’t justifying the rape that happens/exists, he argues that rape needs to be encouraged, increased, and made an overt act of intentional policy.

    [redacted] either doesn’t know about it, cares not that he does it, or agrees with it. I can’t really see any other way to look at that, and come up with the adjective, “admirable” when talking about what Berge calls activism.

  60. Well, they did kill some cops, so that might be part of the reason they had that reputation.

    I don’t know why I said that last night.

    I blame the jasmine rice bliss.

    If I had to guess, I’d say it’s because I heard somewhere years ago that everybody claimed Bonnie shot a downed cop “to make sure,” but there wasn’t much evidence for it and it got blown up in the popular media.

  61. Monsieur sans Nom

    Rape = not funny. Rape of rapists = still not funny.

    I cannot understand why you’d have ANY sympathy for rapists and what happens to them behind bars. Quite a few women I’ve spoken with think that the penalty for rape should be rape itself as opposed to execution. But hey, everyone’s entitled to my opinion! :-P

  62. Dude, why are you so convinced rapists should be allowed to keep raping people behind bars?

  63. RAPISTS ARE THE ONES RAPING BEHIND BARS.

    RAPE IS NOT AN APPROPRIATE PUNISHMENT (see cruel and unusual)

    YOU ARE AN ASSFACE.

  64. Monsieur sans Nom

    RAPE IS NOT AN APPROPRIATE PUNISHMENT (see cruel and unusual)

    This reminds me of a cartoon I saw where in the left frame there was a protester shouting “the death penalty is cruel and unusual punishment!”. In the second from was a gravestone with the caption below saying “So is being a victim!”.

  65. howardbann1ster

    Yeah… how deep and profound.

    It’s good that you love humanity so much that you really care about victims.

  66. I cannot understand why you’d have ANY sympathy for rapists and what happens to them behind bars. Quite a few women I’ve spoken with think that the penalty for rape should be rape itself as opposed to execution.

    What happens to rapists behind bars? Who’s going to rape them, the embodied cosmic force of poetic justice?

  67. If you only rape other rapists, do you deserve do be behind bars and/or to be raped?

  68. Ah… the misanthrope things prison is a place where karma comes to call.

    In the real world we know that rapists rape. Even if, assuming, arguendo, that rapists on the outside were going to be raped, on the inside, that means you are in favor of rape.

    Which is evil. It’s also nonsensical.

  69. Monsieur sans Nom

    What happens to rapists behind bars? Who’s going to rape them, the embodied cosmic force of poetic justice?

    BUBBA! :-P

    Most of the prisoners who rape other inmates are not serving time for rape on the outside. In fact, sex offenders(especially child molesters) are the lowest caste in prison hierarchies around the world.

  70. thebionicmommy

    I don’t know why I said that last night.

    I blame the jasmine rice bliss.

    If I had to guess, I’d say it’s because I heard somewhere years ago that everybody claimed Bonnie shot a downed cop “to make sure,” but there wasn’t much evidence for it and it got blown up in the popular media.

    It’s no biggie. I hope I didn’t sound too much like a smart ass by saying that. I was just interested in the topic of Bonnie and Clyde, but I don’t know much about them except for what they did here in Joplin. And the only reason I knew about this is that I’ve been trying to come up with free or cheap things to do that have air conditioning, and the local museum has some relics from them.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 8,540 other followers

%d bloggers like this: