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.”
Oh, god, the melodrama coming from this kid! Hey Robert, go get a copy of the Violent Femmes first album and lock yourself in your room and sing along until you’re over it. Worked for me as a teenager.
OK, let’s talk about the best teen-angst albums/songs instead. The above gets my vote.
@Ugh: yeah, kids like Robert make me kinda glad children aren’t on the agenda.
Nope, the sad part is that you can’t talk about it like an adult. What is with all you PUA types who think initiating intercourse is some ritual that the man has to Njust right or everything will be ruined? If sex wasn’t happening, just be like “I want to have sex. Is that something you want?” This shit is seriously not complicated.
Haha yes because attacking the general public is a normal, adult response to loneliness.
Again, Toer. Celibate. Not by choice. Not a murderer. Do you see how “misogyny” is the variable here?
He killed people he didn’t even know. What would he do to people he actually knew and who he thought wronged him? Like if a woman didn’t want to have sex one night? If he would kill random women because other women wouldn;t have sex with him, what do you think he’d do to a girlfriend who didn’t want to?
Boo. Fucking. Hoo. Most people go through 4 or 5 years of celibacy at some point in their lives. And yet, among all the billions of people in the world, Berge is one of the few to want to kill people over it.
Hmm, I wonder what could be special about people like Berge?
LOL, this dude has had MULTIPLE GIRLFRIENDS and he calls himself incel?
Pull the other one, it’s got bells on.
Against the general public, for accepting feminism. Against police officers, for “enforcing” feminism. Seems he has a problem with women to me.
Oh, wait, no, he just has a problem with feminism, not women, because it caused “mate deprivation” *eyeroll*.
Maybe, just maybe, you were too shy and weren’t mature enough to be ready for it yet. Maybe it’s not a horrible wound: maybe it’s part of growing up and getting past the barriers of one’s personality to begin to recognize and pursue what one wants to enjoy.
Or a horrible, haunting wound of nonsex. Whatever works for you!
The dude was so deluded he believed that 30 million women had rejected him. Not healthy. That is a personality ripe for some kind of abuse.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=8258001&page=1
The point is that the violence and the “incel” could well be caused by the same factor, an underlying issue which might well have lead to him abusing or attacking a romantic partner, the proclivity of which being evidenced by the fact that he fucking murdered women because he hated them.
Why would anyone want to be with people so terrified of being alone in their own company that they shriek they will outright DIE unless some attractive girl is prodded into spending time with them?
Still dodging the point, I see. OK, let’s try the For Dummies version.
You said that women would be willing to do this because they’d be paid, but not much. When it was pointed out that this wouldn’t be enough of an incentive you responded with the idea that since the economy is so terrible right now, some women would go for it. That’s an attempt to exploit the poor in order to feed your little “government girlfriends” scheme, because you know that the number of women who’d sign up for it willingly is miniscule.
Try again.
Of course you don’t. Being massively self-centered tends to have that effect on people.
Robert, I don’t know you. I haven’t read any comment but this last one. All I can say is this. If not having sex makes you physically ill when you see women, fucking go see a god-damned pyschiatrist before you hurt yourself or someone else. This is not normal for any guy, this is a mental illness you need help and treatment for.
Hah! I didn’t mention this before because I thought Robert’s “incel” meant “never had sex despite desperate attempts at trying.” Nope, turns out that I’m an incel according to this definition. Man would I have liked to have been having sex these past couple years, but I had a lot of personal stuff going on and I’m not the most outgoing person anyway so finding someone would be difficult.
No murderous depression towards women. Amazing how that works.
I like the best teenage angst songs/albums topic much better too. Maybe if we ignore creepy kid he’ll go away.
How about this one? I mean, it’s right there in the title.
IT IS CALLED DEPRESSION IT IS NOT TREATED BY VAGINA
Good lord. The completely free OKCupid doesn’t work well enough, so obviously the solution is to get the government to pay women to get me dates. Otherwise they’re murderers. But I’m totally not blaming women at all, no sir.
I mean seriously. How do you reason with someone who doesn’t see that a proclivity murder people because you can’t get laid doesn’t have underlying issues besides “not getting laid”?
This. Evolution does not tell you to lay down and hide because you want a mate so much; it gives you an indirect drive to go and find one. It’s not healthy, and it’s not just one response on the bell-curve of responses to not getting laid. You need psychological help, Robert.
Dude this sounds pretty much like clinical depression to me. Trust me, someone who is merely lonely does not usually have these thoughts. This is not your “biology” screaming at you. I get all sorts of strange jealous and angry thoughts when I am isolated and my mental health is poor; I do not get them when I am functioning well and my mental health is better, even if I don’t have a lot of social contact. Loneliness and rejection hurt but they should not be tormenting you like this. That’s indicative of other issues in your life. Please talk to somebody about this (who is not somebody you are trying to bang or a random person on the internet).
Also you need to seriously sit and have a think about the fact you are identifying with a mass murderer and what this says about you and your life. NOT about women or about the government or your parents or whatever. About you and your values and how you want your life to end up.
I am kinda leaning for a ban on robert, I don’t feel comfortable letting someone like him post here.
Considering what Cliff’s said, I’m with jumbofish on this one. I am getting more and more uncomfortable here. o.o
In complete honesty, when I was still depressed, I used to lay in my bed at night and wish that I could have a girlfriend lying beside me to assuage my loneliness. My thoughts would revolve solely around that idea, because I felt alone in my battle against family issues and mental problems.
I never went on to a website that convinced me that those feelings were correct at face value. I wasn’t told that “yes, in fact a good girlfriend is all you need to be happy.” I saw a therapist. I worked out issues (which for me had next to nothing to do with sex). I no longer have that same empty loneliness despite still not having a girlfriend (though one would be nice 😛 ).
Seriously, Robert, go see a therapist. Chances are that pain you experience has absolutely nothing to do with sex, and it will vanish once you’ve addressed the real issues.
I’m leaning towards a ban too.
*sigh* kinda reminicent of that other person we tried to convince to see a therapist, eh? If Robert ever starts talking about how he can’t help but comment here, I’d lean towards a ban too. Otherwise, just ignore him. This is a public forum after all.
I vote ban, because this shit is funny when we think it’s just ranting that we think won’t translate to real life, but I’m not sure about him. We’re not therapists, we’re often downright mean, and I don’t think we should be fucking around with the mental state of someone who might not be just ranting.
I’m done with this thread and voting ban.
Or if for whatever reason David doesn’t want to ban him I vote ignore, permanently. This person is probably dangerous, and we should not engage any further.
Also done.
I was uncomfortable enough with where this discussion was going. Now someone’s given me information that makes me think “Robert” is a troll, or that the person behind the account is using that name to smear a real person by that name.
So “robert” and his alter-ego are banned, and I’m banning any mention of his last name.
I googled him. Ew.
I vote ban/ ignore.
But please do get some help, Robert.