Norwegian Men’s Rights Activist blogger Eivind Berge, known for his violent rhetoric and rape apologia, has been arrested for death threats against police.
Not too surprising, given that he once announced on his blog that “[k]illing at least one cop is on my bucket list.”
Here are some Google-translated details from a news account here:
The right-wing extremist and anti-feminist blogger Eivind Berge has been arrested for having encouraged and glorified the killing of policemen. The police have found both ammunition and textbooks in use of explosives at Berge.
The police regard the threats as an invitation to others to kill police officers, but also feared that he would commit the acts themselves shortly.
He was evidently arrested on Wednesday. According to this story — at least as far as I can tell from the obviously crude Google translation — he made a specific threat to kill a police officer this Saturday:
Berge also writes about how he was planning to attack a policeman with a knife on a Saturday evening:
“Then I used the trial to come forward as a good example for men, and I considered it to be worth 21 years in prison for premeditated murder.”
According to this account, Berge is being held for two weeks. He claims innocence.
Berge, as readers of this blog may well already know, is a fan of right-wing terrorist and mass murderer Anders Brevik. On his blog, he’s also argued (among other things) that “Rape is Equality.”
He’s glorified the murder of police on his blog numerous times.
Some examples, taken from the second news account:
“… attack on the police is something 100% in harmony with everything I stand for.”
“I maintain that police murder is both ethically and tactically correct.”
Some other examples, direct from his blog (each paragraph is from a separate post; click on the quote for the source):
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.
This was his reaction to a news story about a police officer being killed:
Good news for men is rare in this hateful feminist utopia that is Norway, but today is a joyous day! Today I feel schadenfreude in my heart along with all the hate that feminism and resultant mate deprivation have instilled in me. One blue thug less on the streets.
From another post on the same subject:
The swine Olav Kildal died while trying to enforce our lack of cognitive liberty. This was a defensive, much deserved killing that cheered me up.
Here he threatens a female prosecutor:
To feminist prosecutor Anne Cathrine Aga I have the following message: The Men’s Movement is watching you, bitch, and we are seething with hatred against you personally and the police state you represent. Actions have consequences. Trials are still (mostly) public and they sink into our collective minds, where they form the basis of future activism. Hate breeds hate — that is a fact of life too smugly ignored by feminists. …
2011 is the year Norwegian men as a group emerged out of the blogosphere and into the battlefield. This in turn has led to a breakthrough for MRAs such as my good self in the public discourse, probably for the simple reason that the powers that be now realize ignoring us has deadly consequences. Men are angry now, and we have proven that we are deathly serious about resisting feminism. So the feminist prosecutors referred to above ought to wipe that smug look off their faces before it is too late. Clearly seventy-seven body bags wasn’t enough, but I am fairly confident that you will be sorry one day.
Aside from the explicit threats of violence, the violent and threatening rhetoric here is not unlike much of the rhetoric we see regularly on A Voice for Men and other MRA sites. AVFM founder Paul Elam, for example, told one feminist that:
I find you so pernicious and repugnant that the idea of fucking your shit up gives me an erection. … We are coming for you.
The blogger Emma the Emo, Berge’s girlfriend, has posted comments here in the past defending him. The news account quotes someone identified as Nataliya Kochergova, described as his girlfriend; I assume this is “Emma,” because what she told the media is similar to what she posted here. She of course denies that he planned any real violence. According to the article, she said:
There are not really threats. He has never had plans to kill someone, he has said several times in his blog. When for example, he says that “the police killings are an effective way to prevent stupid laws,” it’s a factual description and not a threat. Even those who love the police agree with it.
Berge, for his part, has stated publicly that if he had not met Emma, he probably would have killed by now:
At the time I wrote my last blog post, I believed I would probably become Norway’s first modern violent activist in peacetime. Celibacy enforced by a feminist regime had driven me to the point where I saw no other option. I would target the pigs who enforce feminist law, knowing I could realistically at least kill one of them before I would be captured or killed myself. Thus revenge would be assured and if I lived, my reputation as a violent criminal would make me attractive to some women. But then in the nick of time this blog attracted a lovely girl commenting as “Emma.”
This is why I take violent rhetoric from MRAs very seriously.
Meanwhile, on this side of the Atlantic, MRAs glorify MRA “martyr” Thomas Ball, who killed himself on the steps of a New Hampshire courthouse last year in hopes that his death would inspire MRAs to literally burn down courthouses and police stations.
Ball’s manifesto is still up on A Voice for Men in its “activism” section, including these passages:
So boys, we need to start burning down police stations and courthouses. … This is too important to be using that touchy- feeling coaching that is so popular with business these days. You need to flatten them, like Wile E. Coyote. They need to be taught never to replace the rule of law. BURN-THEM-OUT!
Most of the police stations built in New England over the last 20 years are stone or brick. Fortunately, the roofs are still wood. The advantage of fire on the roof is that it is above the sprinklers
AVFM tastefully omitted Ball’s specific instructions on how to make Molotov cocktails, but left this in:
There will be some casualties in this war. Some killed, some wounded, some captured. Some of them will be theirs. Some of the casualties will be ours.
For many more examples of violent threatening rhetoric from MRAs, I urge you to go through some of my posts here and here.
@Pecunium
Join a religious order which insists on abstinence. Adhere to its tenets.
I’m thinking we should throw in a vow of silence for good measure.
Tom Martin is in no way the face of the MRM. He has made a name for himself, but it is for himself. He is no more MRA than Barack Hussein Obama is.
insisting things are whatever you arbitrarily declare them to be isnt going to work any better in this thread than the last one, duder.
maybe you should work harder on not being incompetent?
Who is the face then, Steele? Show us.
Again- It’s not arbitrary. Tom Martin’s views are fundamentally against the fundamental principles of the MRM. It’s no more arbitrary than a feminist declaring a pro-life individual cannot be feminist.
hear that, dracula. steele told you ‘nuh-uh.’ how can you possibly come back from from an argument that devastating.
I’m seeing a lot of positive write-ups of Mr Martin being posted here, Steele. Any pieces condemning him you’d like to share?
and you wonder why people encouraged you not to become a writer…
yeeeaah, i had to think long and hard about the question of whether someone could be pro-life and feminist and i still dont think i have a perfect answer. it is in no way the same as you absolving yourself of association with anyone you find inconvenient because you happen to be a lazy thinker who managed to associate himself with a coterie of violent, angry assholes.
Ah, Steele is the kind of person who likes to include that Hussein in Barack Obama’s name. Why? Did you think we might think you meant another Barack Obama? Do you say Rand Howard Paul? Rush Hudson Limbaugh III? Richard John Santorum?
it is in no way the same as you absolving yourself of association with anyone you find inconvenient
Not true, there are individuals I dislike who I would consider MRAs because they do not violate the fundamental principles of the Movement. Ferdinand Bardamu immediately springs to mind.
But Tom Martin, Berge, and the like- are at odds with the deepness of what the MRM is.
Ick. Can’t we all go back to the “place names with the word ‘man’ in them” thread?
Tom: The latest establishment scam in the UK, is to describe child prostitutes as “vulnerable children groomed for sexual exploitation”, then talk about them being “passed around” etc, without mention of the fact that these young people agreed to be whores, and are getting paid for it.
I see… but you agreed to pay for an education where the library had hard chairs. You thought this a grave injustice, even though you knew about the chairs in advance.
But kids being fucked for money, that’s not a problem because they agreed to it.
You pathetic worm. You miserable cur. You sad sack of watery shit. You ignoble waste of carbon.
I can’t really think of a sufficiently clear phrase to express my sadness that a person like you managed to come to be. I’m even harder pressed to say how much is pleases me that your greatest achievement in life is probably going to be that you were ordered to pay £37,000.
i say willard ‘mittens’ romney. does that count?
Steele: Like Berge, Tom Martin is no MRA.
Oh yes he is. He says he is, and that’s all it takes. More to the point other MRAs have lauded his (failed) attempt to “take it to the (wo)man”.
You get to keep him.
BTW, what about Vietnam, and the videos you promised us.
Ah, Steele is the kind of person who likes to include that Hussein in Barack Obama’s name. Why? Did you think we might think you meant another Barack Obama? Do you say Rand Howard Paul? Rush Hudson Limbaugh III? Richard John Santorum?
This is (wait for it!) projection and paranoia.
Steele, can you point us to the web site that lists the fundamental principles of the MRM, and explain how those differ from the things that Tom Martin says? I mean, I am so glad we could find some common ground, but I am not sure our reasoning is at all similar.
Steele, it’s a question. Did you think we might be confused about which Obama you meant? Why did you feel the need to include his middle name? [dog whistles]
He says he is, and that’s all it takes.
So, do you repudiate the feminists who have denied Sarah Palin the label? Do you consider Sarah Palin a feminist?
the fundamental principles that no other self-identified mra ever talks about. the ones you seem to have made the fuck up because its convenient to your argument? those principles?
oh cool. more trite excuses.
Ah, this is interesting. Can you define the “deepness” of the MRM, and explain why Bardamu is in coherence with it, but Martin and Berge are at odds with it?
I could see your point about Sarah Palin if there were a lot of feminists out there singing her praises, but as it is I’m not seeing it, Steele.
I call him Romney Mittens too! I hate him so much.
So Steele, are there any MRAs denying Tom Martin, other than you?
don’t be cruel, cloudiah. you know writing is hard for him.
1. The MRM is non-violent. Any violent rhetoric is not part of the Movement.
2. The MRM repudiates abject moral repugnance. Martin’s views on child prostitution cross this line.
3. The MRM is for equality between the sexes.
4. The MRM believes in the fundamental value of human life.