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.
@Ugh
“Here is a list of things that feminist activists have done for men:
Advocated for and acheived legislation against prison rape.”
Feminists advocate for gay acceptance, gay sex is the only cause of men raping men.
————-
“Set up thousands of shelters and sexaul assault centers. There is a feminist-run crisis center open to all genders in virtually every major city in the world.”
A blatant lie. Feminists adovocate that no funding be set aside for men. They falsify facts that women aren’t equally culpible for DV. The same acts that women are permitted such as controlling behavior are DV when men do it to women. The list of lies is endless.
————-
“Advocated for greater acceptance of non-normative sex acts. There’s still about 10 states where fellatio is illegal, and they’re not the ones who listen to feminists.”
Who made feminists the moral authority of which sex acts are acceptable or unacceptable?
————-
“Advocated for greater acceptance of non-normative sexuality and gender expression.”
Who made feminists the moral authority that non-normative gender expression are good?
————-
“Over the last thirty years, have promoted the idea that men can be child care providers and that relationships can be equitable. The rate of men receiving custody after divorce has massively increased as a result.”
Another lie. The only thing that has gone up is divorce which feminism promotes and offers as a monetary reward. Woman is the primary caretaker, a made up word to evict any man from the family, kidnap his children and extort money using the violence of the state.
————-
Feminism is a hate movement designed to destroy the family and transfer all wealth and power to the state. It has been that from the start and continues to be that.
“Well, given that approximately 98% of manboobzers are whores themselves, I’m guessing
you’re probably going to want to blame it all on MRAs.”
Seriously, Tom, go fuck yourself. Even I am a whore, a big slutty easy shagging for cash trollop, I am still a far better person that a rape apologist pedophile supporter shit bag like you. So go fuck yourself, twice, up the arse.
I’ll be at the club if anyone needs me.
You know, I would hazard a guess that less than 98% of manboobzers have sex on any sort of regular basis. So even if we accept Tom’s definition of whore as “have sex with somebody and don’t repay them exactly for everything they’ve ever done for you as well as for the sex itself,” that figure still wouldn’t be correct.
And that’s a frakking big “IF.”
*applauses Fembot a million times*
Uhm, *applauds. I can does writing good, honest.
Nobody needs you.
NWO said:
Haha
Yeah your Godwin problem is totally solved. Oh wait no
Also, huh?
@NWO
“Telling someone their actions are repulsive is also good so they won’t continue doing it.”
Well, we’ve been telling you and Tom that you are repulsive, but it doesn’t seem to be doing much good 😀
Steele: That’s what I said; you argued that “misandry” (“the hatred of men”) cannot be used to refer to isolated incidents of anti-male sentiment. In other words, you are very (very, very) invested in a semantical argument that essentially leaves us with no word to describe anti-male rhetoric and/or actions.
Dude… don’t you have any other hobbies than trying to make feminists accept your definition of misandry?
1: We don’t need a single word for people who hate men, because it’s actually less efficient.
1a: If the framework in which that sort of hate was occuring was a larger social whole, then yes, such a word would be needed.
1b: Such a framework does not exist.
2: In light of 1, and sequlae, to force all such hatreds into a single idea is a poor idea, since it fails to address the characteristics of the acts.
2a: This is, to a lesser degree, a problem with misogyny. It’s why many misogynistic acts/aspects of society are further delineated (e.g. rape culture, dengration of female achievement/use of single examples to tar all women).
3: You admitted you have an agenda; that you are trying to make the nonsensical idea of institutional misandry
3a: You have refused to admit to what few concessions you were given. You insist on an all or nothing agreement.
All of which adds up to you not arguing in good faith (as proven by your ire, you horror, shock, disgust and wrath that we wouldn’t codemn a fictional person for a fictional act which didn’t meet the definitions of misandry we had been arguing for something close to 1,100 comments).
Since the overarching idea, equivalent to misogny (which we have seen is, in itself an inadequate catch-all) isn’t supportable, your word is neither useful, nor efficent, even in the narrow case you pretend is your present goal.
Which leads to the following points about your general behavior in these fora:
1: You can’t even use google to find provable facts on things like Vietnam.
2: which means you either don’t give a shit about the truth (implicit in all the other dishonesties you’ve engaged in) or are thick as a kauri-stump (both is, I suppose, possible. Boggling, but possible. I wouldn’t rule it out).
3: You still owe us videos celebrating the actual deaths of actual men, just for being men: made by feminists, to counter those of the people celebrating Sodini, Lépine and the like.
Hop to it.
Eurosabra: You’re going to be surprised, if not exactly comforted, that I was led to Berge via the Hit the Bitch and Stockholm the Game controversies when I was tasked with doing an anti-rape PSA’s subtitles. I personally am all sorts of ick, but my work is progressive. Consider it, well, penance.
What… spending time telling a person who says he wants to rape people how to better manipulate them and coerce them?
That’s your idea of penance?
You aren’t convincing me you didn’t need minders (and it’s still a self-admitted fact that your behavior did attract attention, and response).
Eurosabra: And I probably should have inveighed.against him, rather than considr him ” but for the Grace of G-d go I”
I see, there but for the Grace of God, you’d have been arguing men have the right to rape women.
Not helping your case.
BTW, unlike Berge I’m not in Schutzhaft and I don’t owe £37,000. So am obvs doing stg right.
Right… you just wish you could find better allies than the fascists, and you were smart enough to realise that lawsuits like Martins were non-starters.
This isn’t really a ringing endorsement of “doing something right”.
You are a self-confessed manipulator. You are a self-confessed gaslighter. You are self-confessed at not thinking Berge was as bad as he said he was, and that you thought teaching a wannabe rapist PUA was a good idea. You say that coddlig him was some sort of penance.
None of those are things I’d want to see in a dossier on me. All them are things you have admitted, in a public place.
But we already knew you weren’t as clever as you thought (see again that someone spotted your creepy ass as creepy when you were in college).
Yeah, you’re just going to negatively spin anything I say.
You haven’t said anything positive.
youre rilly creepy, fyi
Honestly Eurosabra, you’ve come with one pathetic excuse after another for your support of a man who makes death threats to cops and openly advocates for the legalization of rape, you’ve claimed repeatedly that you haven’t manipulated anyone in ages when you’re trying to do so as we speak, I mean for fuck’s sake man, what possible motivation could any of us have to give you the benefit of the doubt at this point?
Even if I hadn’t seen you the very same shit, both here and on The Pervocracy, there’s more than enough evidence in this very thread to prove you’re a lying, amoral creep.
Eurosabra, there’s no need to spin a damn thing you say. I know you’re dim and can’t keep track of your lies, but the rest of us don’t have that problem.
Because I happen to be right?
No, making anti-rape PSAs was penance for coddling Berge. And I should never have approached it as a philosophical issue.
Is that really the best response you can come up with? Are we meant to have faith in you or something? Why? Give me one solid reason that doesn’t depend on just taking you at your word.
You’ve given no one here any reason to trust you. I’m sure that hurts your feelings, but I honestly don’t give a shit. You’ve brought it on yourself.
Can I just say that Eurosabra is the troll I would most like to see banned? His completely amorality and attempts to fake morality in order to better manipulate people make my flesh crawl.
Right about what, exactly?
Eurosabra, I already did not trust your word based on the stuff you wrote on Cliff’s blog. The stuff you have written here? Has only confirmed the horrible impression you have already left on me.
Eurosabra: Yeah, you’re just going to negatively spin anything I say.
What’s the positive spin on saying that, “there but for the grace of God go I,” about a man who thinks raping women ought to be a civil right, and that if he doesn’t get laid he’s going to exercise it?
Really… what’s the positive takeaway on that one?
Your greatest problem here is that we are/i> taking you at your word.
Your words paint you in a bad light.
As I said, you don’t seem to be that clever, you’ve painted yourself into a corner and are complaining that leaving is going to stain your feet.
That’s on you, bro; not us.
I was once as angry as he is now, but have moved on. Essentially, I should have pushed him towards therapy.
There is no state penalty for being a crank on the Internet on my jurisdiction. Frankly I think Berge and Price are being lunatics on Breivik. Violence needs to be beyond the pale.