Sunday, January 22, 2017

The saga continues: Appeal to the Supreme Court

I won my compensation case in the Gulating court of appeals, but the government has still not given up. They have appealed to the Supreme Court of Norway. As we await the Supreme Court's decision on whether or not they are going to hear the case, I will now share the new documents in the case so everyone can read the arguments.

Here is the notice of appeal from the government, and here is my lawyer's reply. The government lawyer has also written a short response to that reply, which can be found found here.

The quotes by me in the appeal notice reflect my character perfectly. That is exactly the kind of dissident I am. But it is legal to say those things; indeed they are pretty tame as far as inflammatory speech goes. To rise to the level of criminal incitement in Norway, statements must not only be published with malicious intent, which I most assuredly possess, but also be immediately likely to trigger the commission of specific criminal acts. This is conveyed by the crucial word "iverksette" (carry out) in the law.

I only expressed a general desire for rebellion against the state, and gave my moral support to all activists against feminist sex laws, from the humblest blogger like myself up to and including violent activists. This is not a pragmatic exhortation to carry out violent insurrection (which would presuppose having fighters at my beck and call ready to actually do so), but rather the expression of moral values in favor of insurrection. It is advocacy, but not incitement. It is also not very effective, but if anybody is ever convinced by my blog to attack the feminist police state, then that is the sort of danger society must tolerate, because the alternative would be to abolish freedom of speech as we know it. If the spirit behind one's statements is supposed to be enough to put one in prison, then we have tyranny. It is impossible for me to speak my mind without conveying my belligerent message against the feminist state, because that sentiment is integral to the core of my being. But mere political sentiment is not criminalized. Note also that one is free to incite the commission of criminal acts in private conversations (including small groups) and correspondence with impunity. So what is the difference? There is no difference in character between someone who incites privately only and one who does so publicly. The malicious intent is the same, but the law only applies to the latter. There is only a pragmatic difference in how likely the incitement is to lead to criminal actions, and the law is only applicable when that risk crosses a certain threshold, conveyed by "publicly" and "carry out."

I want to emphasize that I am every bit as hateful against the state as the sort of person that the incitement law (then § 140 but now replaced by § 183) was meant to put in prison. But it is my right to be politically hateful and express it in the manner that I have done. This is exactly the sort of speech that freedom of speech is meant to protect -- you don't get to convict me for my opinions and feelings. And the principle of legality dictates that laws need to specify what is illegal in a clear and understandable way, so this can't suddenly change at the whim of prosecutors.

The Gulating court of appeals agrees with me that the kind of rhetorics for which I was prosecuted is protected speech. The most interesting question to be decided by the current appeal is whether that definition will stand or be overturned somehow by the Supreme Court. In particular, what is the difference between publicly encouraging or advocating criminal acts (which is legal) and publicly inciting someone to carry them out (which is illegal)? I have a pretty good idea about where the line goes now, since my blog can be used as an example of legal speech (especially this post and comments, where my allegedly worst quotes appear in context), but it is an open question what the Supreme Court will do when they apply their political creativity. We are therefore entering dangerous territory if they take the case, and everyone in Norway who cares about freedom of speech should pay attention.

Update 2017-01-31: I won the appeal too! The case is not going to the Supreme Court, and so my victory is final.

47 comments:

Anonymous said...

Your family, and especially your father, was right, you are a despicable and mentally disturbed being, but aware of your crimes, which you do not even deny. You are a shame as a human being, and I do not understand how the Justice Court has not put you inside a padded cell to prevent you propagating your insanity to the rest of society. You will never win, evil being.

Eivind Berge said...

My blog is an exemplar of legally protected speech in Norway no matter how you feel about it, and we have the court rulings to prove it. If the Supreme Court declines to hear the government's appeal, then this situation is affirmed and my victory is final. If they do decide to take on the appeal, we will have to argue the case again in Oslo, I and might still win.

My father has picked the other side and is no longer part of my life.

The feeling of evil is mutual. As shocking as this must be to you, sex-hostile feminists don't have a monopoly on defining evil. You do control the sex laws at the moment, but there are people like me who seethe with hatred in the opposite direction, and freedom of speech ensures that we still have a voice. I will tirelessly promote my agenda of antifeminist sex law reform as long as I live and to the full extent permitted by law.

Eivind Berge said...

As to whether I deny the crimes of which I was accused, the answer requires some nuance. I do not deny the factual description of them, and I certainly don't deny malicious intent and premeditation, but the law did not actually apply to what I had done and still does not. So the short answer is that I do deny my crimes, because they are not crimes at all.

Look at yourself. You want to put me in a padded room for having a different morality, derived from years of thoughtful deliberation, and different political opinions. Even if you don't realize how incredibly evil and dangerous you are, hopefully most of my readers will. And while that sort of nightmare is a real risk in the Norwegian system, it did not at all work in my case because even the prosecution's own appointed psychiatrist refused to go along with my family's attempts to have me declared insane. I didn't even have to fight for my sanity like Breivik did, because all the claims of insanity weren't even remotely credible to professionals. Your kind of hysteria is recognized for what it is.

Anonymous said...

You know that looking for someone's name can find a lot of information and make people pay for their crimes. In 1999 in Oslo they had the name of a suspect by murder to a 14-year-old girl, Eivind Berge, a well-known hebephile known for trying to flirt with pubescent children in pubs and other places. According to the case the girl was groomed by the pervert and when Berge was accused of statutory rape, the girl was found death in the area near Utøya, in the water, Berge could not be prosecuted for having contacts, or so claimed the investigation. To me this provokes anger and pain as these perverts do not pay for their crimes against women, but it is certain that this monster is inside a ring of child pornography (or pedophile ring) with a contact who is very fond of the opera. This is this motive of their insistence on legalizing perversions and unjustifiable crimes. I am going to contact his current partner and his family, in addition to the police and the Norwegian prosecutor, I leave this message to know the crimes of this scourge and their ring of child predators, even Berge is in fact known in pedophile activist websites as "an old friend of the pedophiles", which I hope thanks to this records, these scourges will pay for their crimes. Not a girl can being a victim anymore if we can stop these perverts at time.

Eivind Berge said...

You are seriously messed up. So delusional that not even the authorities will take your gibberish seriously.

By the way, in 1999 I was living in the USA, so if you want to implicate me in a crime, the correct location would be Clarksville, Tennesse.

Anonymous said...

Eivind, hvorfor sletter du ikke konsekvent idiotisk spam? Der findes i forvejen for meget af slagsen her på nettet. Ellers tager det til, og det ender med at det overskygger seriøse indlæg. Du kan skrive en advarsel øverst på din overside, hvor du pointerer at det ikke er censur, men at det sker af praktiske grunde.

Eivind Berge said...

I see your point, and yes, I won't tolerate too much of this idiocy. However, I also think it is worth knowing what kind of maniacs are out there, and so far this has been informative enough that I decided not to delete it. After all, this lunatic is only slightly less crazy than the "serious" vigilante groups that are tolerated by the authorities, such as this one:

https://www.facebook.com/Barnastrygghet2.0/videos/1811142769123912/

The man-haters who call themselves "Barnas Trygghet" engage in the exact same madness, entrapping men with lies, in a form which actually functions as an extension of the police and justice system. These evil forces are too powerful and enjoy too much support in the population to ignore. Now that we have reached the point where men are imprisoned for believing lies which elicit their ideology, persecution of men for professing the very same ideology can't be far behind. The "grooming" nonsense is simply an extraneous step to catch people who refuse to internalize the politically correct sexual norms. As an activist against these norms, this is disconcerting, because there is only a very thin line separating us from a full-fledged witch-hunt where madmen like my commenter here get to call the shots.

Anonymous said...

This man-hating anonymous is imbecile, hebephilia? and what is that? Do not even know how to write this idiot?

Eivind Berge said...

That vigilante video has now been removed from Facebook, but here is a good discussion:

"Barnas Trygghet" – en terrororganisasjon


http://vgd.no/samfunn/aktuelt/tema/1835572/tittel/barnas-trygghet-en-terrororganisasjon

caamib said...

Eivind - what is that organization about? What does their name even mean? Could you explain for those of who don't speak Norwegian? I am a bit under the weather now but I will write a longer post when I get better about some things that come to mind.

Eivind Berge said...

Barnas Trygghet, which means "The Children's Safety," is all about entrapping men by pretending to be young teenage girls online and incriminating them thanks to the grooming law which feminists managed to pass in 2008. Their mission statement is to catch "groomers," or rather men who are gullible enough to believe their lies. Usually the girls are impersonated by Stig Kalsnes, the 24-year-old mangina who is the founder of the organization. They then post videos on Facebook and YouTube of men who tried to meet the fake girls and instead got confronted by sadistic man-haters. Their popularity on Facebook is a squalid testament to the level of misandry in the population (the latest video had 16,000 likes), but they also inadvertently help recruit MRAs and raise awareness about the normality of attraction to young teenagers, as seen in the second link above.

What struck me about the comments on their Facebook page is that while there are many feminists and manginas who support their work, their supporters tend to be squeamish about showing the identities of the targeted men, because they sense that hatred flows in two directions and there will be a backlash when MRAs are given such an excellent opportunity to band together as an ostracized group. The feminist establishment and media in Norway are careful to anonymize the identities of sex offenders because they know that is the way to maximize oppression while minimizing dissent, so I am rather enjoying the amateurishness of Barnas Trygghet. They even comically call men "pedophiles" who are perfectly normal (at worst they might be hebephile, which is within the normal range and failed to get into the DSM-V despite feminist attempts) -- in fact, Barnas Trygghet don't even try to entrap real pedophiles, possibly because they realize pedophilia is so rare that they would have a shortage of victims to satisfy their sadism. I think they are actually a net benefit for men's rights, because men who lose everything have no choice but to pick a side. There are millions of men in Norway who find girls of the same ages attractive while pretending not to in order to be part of politically correct society, and anything which serves to reduce this hypocrisy is at least partly beneficial, in my view. The real enemy of men is of course feminist sex laws such as the grooming law and age of consent, not these clownish vigilante organizations. I say bring it on -- expose the true nature of masculinity, because we have nothing to be ashamed of about our sexuality and unity will make us stronger.

Feminists have two weapons against men: the law and shame. This organization mainly exploits the latter, and that is the one thing we can resist simply by changing our state of mind. So let's do it! Let the concept of "groomer" carry no shame.

Anonymous said...

As far as I can see, the main reasons why they pretend to be 13-14 year olds (and not younger children) are two:
1) It is unlikely that 8-9 year olds would be able to actively search for sexual partners on the internet (due to lack of experience, organizational reasons, and because they are kept much more under control). True pedophiles, who have learned to be careful, would smell a rat immediately.

2) Most of normal men have interest in young teenagers, and a lot of young teenagers, if given the chance, would not dislike (or even prefer) a much older sexual partner.

Reason 1) in conjunction with 2) means that it is much easier for these thugs to find a victim (which is what they are looking for) by posing as a 13-14 years old girl.

Eivind Berge said...

You are probably right. I had not given the question of how one would go about contacting prepubescent children online much thought, but upon reflection it seems unlikely that they can be found at dating sites like the ones used by these thugs (Barnas Trygghet apparently use Badoo.com). Which makes the entire concept of "protecting children" against pedophiles in this manner even more spurious and idiotic.

Anonymous said...

I was "targeted" by what I now in retrospect understand was "Barnas trygghet" on Badoo once. I then thought it only was some kind of money scam or something because I understood right away that the girl who claimed she 18 on the profile but said she was 13 when she contacted me, wasn't a young girl at all because of the way she presented herself in her messages to me. If I knew then that this was "Barnas trygghet", I would have played along and met up with that mangina and kicked his ass!

Anonymous said...

Man skulle lade som om man går med til et møde med et (fiktivt barn), og bagefter møder man op femten stykker... så er jeg spændt på at se hvem der bestemmer!

Eivind Berge said...

Now it has been decided: The Supreme Court has unanimously declined to hear the appeal! This means my victory in the compensation case is final, and we can rest assured that the definition of free speech stands as well. The state has also lost another 26,000 kroner in legal costs to me, and I will shortly receive everything I am owed with interest.

Anonymous said...

hahahaha! Du skulle møtt opp i Allehelgensgate i Bergen og sagt til dem, hit med penga mine! For noen fjols. I stedet for å bare gi seg med en gang har de forfulgt saken fra runde til runde. Og det verste er at det foreligger en slags moralsk pekefinger mot befolkningen fra påtalemyndigheten sin side at man som siktet skal innrømme skyld umiddelbart, for å unngå rettslige skritt.

Anonymous said...

At de selv skal være med til at støtte Eivind økonomisk må være et mareridt for dem, så det ville ikke undre mig hvis de nu fandt et nyt påskud for ikke at punge ud...

Anonymous said...

Blir spennende å se om de faktisk betaler ut pengen de etter dom må betale

Eivind Berge said...

De må betale, for alle ankemulighetene deres er brukt opp nå. Men ja, det gjenstår å se om de faktisk gjør det.

Anonymous said...

Jeg håber at du også har fået erstatning for dine uskyldige kaktusser, som måtte omkomme på grund af politiets ransagningsliderlighed...

Anonymous said...

Du skriver at din familie "valgte side". Så du opererer med klare moralske poler. Føler du at advokaten din som nå har vunnet saken har vært på din side "ideologisk"?

Eivind Berge said...

For min families vedkommende er ikke dette bare et moralsk spørsmål. Jeg har vært moralsk og politisk uenig med dem hele livet, med trodde det var noe man kunne leve med inntil de faktisk samarbeidet med politiet og gjorde alt de kunne for å få meg dømt, og attpåtil forsøkte å få meg erklært utilregnelig. Det var altså ikke et abstrakt spørsmål om holdninger, men en rent praktisk nødvendighet for å overleve at jeg måtte fjerne dem fra livet mitt. De valgte side bokstavelig talt, i praksis. Jeg trodde ikke at et slikt svik var mulig, og har lært en lekse der, nemlig at moralske poler spiller en større rolle enn jeg ante. Hvis noen er grunnleggende uenig med deg politisk, så er det antakelig en illusjon at man kan være venner, for da vil de ikke nøle med å bruke maktapparatet mot deg når de får sjansen. Men nå kan det hende at min familie er ekstra forrædersk, da. Ingen av dem hadde plikt til å forklare seg for politiet eller vitne i saken, noe de ble informert om, men alle stilte gladelig opp på avhør hvor de anstrengte seg for å fremstille meg i verst tenkelig lys (bortsett fra min mor som tilfeldigvis var på ferie i utlandet, men hun ville utvilsomt gjort det også). Ville det skjedd i andre familier? Antakelig ikke i de fleste, men moralen er at moralske og politiske motsetninger betyr mer enn man skulle tro.

Og ja, jeg føler at advokaten har vært på min side ideologisk. Selvsagt må han operere innenfor juridiske rammer, så det kommer ikke så klart frem som det gjør i mine ideologiske ytringer. Men hvem ellers ville forfulgt saken på denne måten? Han første jeg fikk oppnevnt var helt elendig, så jeg fikk også føle hvordan det var å ha en advokat som ikke var på bølgelengde.

Ox said...

Congratulations Eivind! Ikke gi deg. Du er jævlig flink og Norge trenger deg og andre som deg.

Hilsen en som forakter politiet og feminister minst like mye som deg.

CulDeSac said...

Ja, du har absolutt vært heldig med advokaten din. Advokater kan ikke trylle, ikke den du valgte heller, men i motsetning til mange andre advokater, så er din advokat åpenbart villig til å forfølge et krav der han vet med seg selv at han har rett i det juridiske. Mange advokater virker det som er mest opptatte av å gjøre seg populære hos påtalemyndighet og myndigheter for øvrig og/eller er pengegriske.
Jeg personlig hadde en sak om uberettiget straffeforfølgelse mot staten. Jeg hadde advokatkontoret Elden, altså John Christian Elden sitt, men deres korte brev med kravet førte ingen vei og de var ikke villig til å skrive klage eller noe. Det eneste de sa de kunne gjøre var å vurdere saken rettslig hvis jeg betalte inn 10 000 kroner på klientkontoen deres. Det gjorde jeg ikke, men valgte å heller skrive klage til Statens sivilrettsforvaltning på egen hånd hvorpå jeg vant frem med hele kravet mitt. Advokatfirmaet Elden kan jeg bare advare på det sterkeste mot.

Eivind Berge said...

Nå har denne saken pågått i fire og et halvt år, men journalistene i BT har fremdeles ikke lært seg forskjellen på trusler og oppvigling eller fått med seg at jeg kun var siktet for det siste.

http://www.bt.no/nyheter/lokalt/Truet-med-politidrap_-far-full-erstatning-329764b.html

Teksten er bak en betalingsvegg, så jeg får ikke lest den, men overskriften sier:

«Truet med politidrap, får full erstatning»

Og billedteksten:

«TRUET: Bloggeren Eivind Berge i Bergen Tingrett i forbindelse med saken mot ham i 2012 hvor han var siktet for trusler mot polititjenestemenn, etter at han skrev på bloggen sin at han planla å drepe politifolk. Han ble frikjent, og tilkjent erstatning. Staten anket erstatningsspørsmålet til Høyesterett, men de har nå avvist anken. FOTO: Silje Katrine Robinson»

Er de virkelig så dumme, eller prøver de å gjøre det mer sensasjonelt enn det er?

Anonymous said...

I høst ble staten dømt til å betale 37.100 kroner i erstatning til Berge.

Staten ble også dømt til å betale Berges saksomkostninger på 150.000 kroner.

Regjeringsadvokaten anket saken til Høyesterett, men 27. januar avviste Høyesteretts ankeutvalg saken.

Dermed er den lange prosessen mot Berge over, og staten må betale både erstatning og saksomkostninger til den selverklærte anti-feministen Berge.

Truet med vold mot politiet

Eivind Berge meldte selv om avgjørelsen i ankeutvalget på Twitter:

«Enden er god: I stedet for straff fikk jeg 37 100 kroner for å si min mening om politidrap som mannsaktivisme mot sedelighetslovene! Hahaha!»

Saken mot Berge startet tilbake i 2012 da Berge arrestert av politiet i Bergen. Det skjedde fordi et innlegg på 36-åringens blogg blant annet handlet om at han planla å drepe en politimann på Torgallmenningen.

Saksøkte staten

I juli 2012, etter å ha sittet tre uker i varetekt, ble Berge beordret løslatt av Gulating lagmannsrett.

Høyesterett slo siden fast at ytringer på internett faller utenfor definisjonen av «trykt skrift» i straffeloven. Riksadvokaten henla saken mot Berge i desember 2012.

Berge har innrømmet å forherlige voldshandlinger, men nektet for at han har oppfordret til drap. Han har siden understreket at han ikke angrer på noe av det han skrev på bloggen sin.

Han saksøkte staten og krevde oppreisning, og det er denne rettsprosessen som nå har fått sin ende.

LES OGSÅ: Kjæresten til antifeministen

caamib said...

Well, Eivind, I congratulate you on your final victory. Predictably, all those idiots who chastised you when you were arrested and celebrated when your detention period was initially extended in July 2012 are now completely silent.

But what can you expect from such vermin? The amount of lies and hysteria they can produce is truly astounding, kinda like this nutjob in the comments who claimed you were under suspicion for murder in 1999 Norway when you didn't even live there at the time. But this is probably some of the less crazy shit they said. I remember liberals saying you were the author of Emma's posts, then that got your girlfriend because you bought her since she's a destitute Russian or entire campaigns to get you off University because your beliefs about rape somehow meant you are a rapist. These people have no knowledge of the material world. Their fantasies and incorrect nonsense is all that exists for them. They are dangerous, they are maniacs and they hate you because you're white, straight and male. They don't give a fuck about any rape or age of consent or whatever.

The groups they find immune to criticism could rape their mothers, sisters or daughters and they'd be ok with it. The groups they find immune to criticism can rape newborns, it's all ok to liberals since these groups can't be criticized since they lack privilege. You have to understand that to a liberal actual definition of rape is any rape a straight white male has at any time. They are self-hating freaks and monsters and they will get what's coming to them very soon. They have already basically stopped reproducing and turned women over to groups like Muslims and they have no biological or ideological future. Nobody wants a pathetic mangina who asks for consent over and over again every millimeter. Women want men who do what they wish with them, it is in their nature. Consent is a very useful concept within an environment of patriarchal civilization. Today it's a gone concept. You cannot have consent as something that is demanded of just one group of people and liberals actually believe that just one group of people has to think about "consent". And even when they do get consent they still hate this group !

Liberals have no chance with any of these women and they have only decreased their chances by making the women in their countries basically a monopoly of the Muslims. And in the end these same Muslims will destroy the liberals who cherish them so much and that is a good thing. Western world has forfeited its future. It is gone. It can no longer be saved.

Eivind Berge said...

Thanks, caamib. Today I was informed that the payout will happen on February 16th and be 37,911 kroner, which includes 8.5% interest since two weeks from the verdict. So they have finally admitted defeat.

By the government lawyer's own admission in his arguments for appealing to the Supreme Court (which was flatly denied by that court), this case is also setting a precedent for similar cases, leading to an absolute requirement that someone in my position must be compensated ("konsekvensen er at siktede i tilfeller som vårt får et absolutt krav på erstatning og oppreisning"). This will help deter police from trying similar prosecutions. While it doesn't come out of their personal paychecks, they do lose face when they not only fail to get a criminal conviction but have to pay for their mistake as well.

caamib said...

My guess is that they're gonna keep trying, one way or another. Now they've lost this legal path so they will wait see if you will somehow slip and say something that could be prosecuted. You're certainly not a priority but I believe they're quite annoyed as this was a slap to their face. So they will check from time to time. But given that 1) you're much milder in your posts since you're not even incel anymore and 2) since already back in 2012 you admitted that some of your statements were too extreme and won't be repeated again they are almost certainly wasting their time.

Anonymous said...

Look at this mangina piece of shit Tom Stranger. The piece of shit Tom Stranger has convinced himself that he's a rapist, which he of course is not. But that piece of shit Tom Stranger is even to cowardly to sign up for a prison sentence for his self proclaimed crime. Let's see what this cowardly fucker would have said if he was met with the opportunity of a prison sentence.

http://www.nettavisen.no/nyheter/utenriks/her-star-kvinnen-frem-med-mannen-som-voldtok-henne/3423311459.html

Eivind Berge said...

Tom Stranger is not a rapist, but he is a mangina of the worst kind. It is really sad.

I also have trouble believing the girl's story of counting to 7200 while supposedly being too drunk to resist sex (that would be a daunting task even while sober). She is a professional feminist rape activist. How convenient that she has a "rape" in her past.

Anonymous said...

Yesterday I saw a man scream "I'm going to hit you if you do not get in the car" to a woman who would be his partner, this is just another crime of gender violence, and the worst thing is that the woman probably not report the man to the police. It's horrible, I cried yesterday for it, we are monsters, we are killing women, we are despicable, I wish I could stop being a man.

Anonymous said...

"I cried yesterday for it, we are monsters, we are killing women, we are despicable, I wish I could stop being a man." Yes, you are despicable, but please do not portray other men as losers, just because you are one. Sex-change would not help at all, you need a brain surgery if improvement were to be made.

Mom46now said...

I am a female and after a decade of nothing but an onslaught of lie after lie from my ex, Eivin Berge, he finally pulled the ultimate manipulation. He actually promised one of our 4 kids that if she could start a fight with me,and then leave the house and call 911 and report that I had beaten her-he guaranteed that she would have it better at his house. Now, he was currently getting divorced from wife#3, and a month later moved in his girlfriend AGED JUST 18yr old!!sick. for 3 months the children had no beds and only the clothes and bedding they packed when they were unlawfully taken from my home. I never in court brought up the fact that there was domestic violence, but there was and my eldest was remembering allot. I was arrested charged with 3 aggrevated assault charges (38,mom of 6,served in the military, taught preschool from home)-it was all gone because of a lie. This lie now a year later has caused depression, PTSD and anxiety because I can't afford $75/hr supervised visits. They aren't going to take anyone from family court that perjurers themselves and prosecute but it is the Judge in the family courtroom that is and can sanction very high fines and place that person on probation for up to 5 years which comes with a monthly fine. The best way to lobby this is to approve the attorney general with at least 5 cases that span a decade and pull minute entries, show the discrepancies in the testimony and statements and propose that the state could actually gain from these people trying to lie to the system and manipulate the situations in their favors if more family court judges would assign guilt of perjury beyond a reasonable doubt through fines and fees for maximum sentencing probationary periods. This would deter many to come not to lie. There also necessary to campaign to raise the age of consent to 21, this will prevent ugly men from engaging in vulnerable and uninexperienced high school girls.

Anonymous said...

If you want to be a story teller, please learn how to write properly, first!

Anonymous said...

Those who tell false stories about you are a bit wrong of the head, yes, but you are the living definition of a crack, you just have to take a look at your Twitter timeline, I think you even do only to annoy society, whatever your affirmations are real or not. It is as if in denying each thing who supports the society and following the contrary and unpopular version on earth you believe that you will succeed because of it, it is not so, there are things demonstrated by medicine and science, regardless you have reason in other things or not, maybe that's why you hate psychiatry, because I do not think that you even know what's going on in your head.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crank_(person)#Crank_magnetism

Anonymous said...

Statens Sivilrettsforvaltning deler villig ut en halv million kroner til en mann som var siktet drapsforsøk etter at vedkommende vitterlig hadde knivstukket en mann minst åtte ganger med kniv. Bakgrunnen var at denne eks-direktøren som nesten ble drept angivelig hadde gjort seksuelle fremstøt mot dama til knivstikkeren. I motsetning til i Eivind Berge sin sak som utelukkende handlet om ytringer på nett, så synes ikke Statens Sivilrettsforvaltning at denne knivstikkeren bør bære noe av ansvaret for sine egne handlinger. Selv om det var snakk om hele åtte knivstikk og vedkommende kunne kanskje stoppet ved ett snikk. Eller kanskje to? Nei, Statens Sivilrettsforvaltning er et bol med feminist-rotter. Det er åpenbart at knivstikking av menn som har gjort seksuelle fremstøt er helt greit i følge Statens Sivilrettsforvaltning og ikke fører til verken nekting eller avkortning av erstatning eller oppreisning. Helt utrolig, spesielt når man sammenligner med Eivind Berges erstatningssak.
http://www.vg.no/nyheter/innenriks/han-fikk-492-000-kroner-i-erstatning-etter-aa-ha-nesten-drept-eksdirektoer/a/23926412/

http://www.vg.no/nyheter/innenriks/krim/graatkvalt-eryka-i-retten-eksdirektoeren-gjorde-seksuelle-fremstoet-mot-meg/a/23571138/

Anonymous said...

Eks-tingrettsdommer Inger Myhr som ble tatt for fyllekjøring etter å ha kollidert i fylla med høypromille alkohol kunne ikke lenger jobbe som dommer men ble belønnet av staten med en stilling i nettopp statens sivilrettsforvaltning.

http://www.vg.no/nyheter/innenriks/bil-og-trafikk/sorenskriver-hadde-2-98-i-promille-slipper-fengsel/a/10106950/

Eivind Berge said...

Jeg fikk pengene på konto i dag! 37 911 kroner. Så de betalte til slutt, men ja, det er litt rart at Sivilrettsforvaltningen kjempet imot helt til Høyesterett samtidig som de gir erstatning uten å nøle i saker som den over.

Emma said...

Sex-hostility and man-hating. Yeah. They rape children. If you talk to one of the 'straight male' as a female commentator, she’ll say that, when it comes to sex (which he tells you is likely going to happen to you,) they, “not leave young girls alone… usually.” Usually. As in not always. As in they sometimes FUCK LITTLE GIRLS.

I don’t care if everything else they touch turns into rainbow fucking sprinkles, I don’t care if being a lesbian feminist is literally Hitler, that is not acceptable.

Minister said...

I will prove why libertine Eivin is wrong, and still thanks to the inspiration of the Lord who guides every word of mine.

Caesar Nero had openly homosexual marriages and young boys as sexual partners as young as age-8. Child sex is only for creeps. Period.

In fact, the Roman Empire, with its great emphases on "practicality and doing what works", considered the simplest way to deal with all orphans and unwanted children was to allow them to be "purchased-adopted as sex slaves" - male or female of any age - as long as they were kept off the streets, fed and sheltered.

The evil nature of humanity being as it is, this did solve the "orphan problem" as compared to the hordes of sometimes scores of thousands of orphans on the streets of London in the 1600-1700's. This is what libertarianism (AKA anarcocapitalism) wants for 2017 as well.

Prostution is an evil like pedophilia and robbery, is slavery. In ancient Rome, prostitutes were often foreign slaves, captured by soldiers (one of their main reasons for serving in the Roman army) or purchased as slaves for sexual purpose, usually having been raised for that purpose, sometimes by large-scale "prostitute farmers" who took all abandoned children.

Indeed, abandoned children were almost always raised as prostitutes in ancient Rome. Enslavement into prostitution was sometimes used as a legal punishment against criminal women. Buyers were allowed to inspect naked men and women for sale in private and there was no stigma attached to the purchase of males by a male aristocrat.

Scattered throughout the Roman Empire, and especially in the Ancient Near East along the Tigris and Euphrates rivers, there were many shrines and temples or "houses of heaven" they were called dedicated to various deities documented by the Ancient Greek historian Herodotus in The Histories where sacred prostitution was a common practice.

Thanks to God this came to an end when the Emperor Constantine in the fourth century AD destroyed the goddess and homosexual temples and replaced them with Christianity. Sex is something that our Lord gave us to procreate and continue his work. Marriage, as it was thought by God, is the only time that sex is benign and healthy.

Sadly, Constantine had much more Christian spiritual insight than modern Christian nations!

Anonymous said...

Hi Eivin, I'm just a 14 year old girl who thinks you're very sexy, you're very hot !! >_> Let's stay on webcam I want to meet you I'm very dirty do not tell anyone hehe >___~ nasty_girl14@hotmail.com xoxo

Anonymous said...

Ja ja, da så...

http://www.bt.no/nyheter/lokalt/Politimannen-som-anklages-for-a-ha-lest-om-overgrep-mot-barn-vedtar-boten-pa-15000-kroner-330965b.html

Eivind Berge said...

Utrolig at han sier seg skyldig og godtar straffen uten rettssak. En helt vanvittig mangina, men vi kan vel ikke vente noe annet av en politimann? Nå blir denne definisjonen av «barneporno» stående iallfall inntil en skikkelig mann blir anklaget.

Eivind Berge said...

Og advokaten hans er enda mer blåst:

«Austgulen mener politimannen har tatt en riktig avgjørelsen om å vedta et moderat forelegg i en moderat sak.»

Går det an å kalle seg forsvarsadvokat når du er en så stor rævslikker av feministstaten at du aksepterer at noveller skal være straffbar barneporno uten videre? Og 15 000 i bot er til og med en «moderat» straff for å lese tekster??? Er du så sykt mannevond i hodet ditt at du mener fengsel skal være normalstraffen da?

Eivind Berge said...

Vegard Austgulen bør miste advokatbevillingen. Det der er ikke bare feministisk, men direkte uetisk også innenfor advokatstandens egne normer. Å fremstille klienten som om han slapp billig unna når han blir straffet er ikke forenlig med å ivareta hans interesser, uansett sak. Alle menn i Bergen, STYR UNNA denne advokaten hvis dere blir anklaget for noe! Han er både en ideologisk fiende og inkompetent!