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 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.


«Oldest   ‹Older   201 – 203 of 203
CoAlphaAntiModernist IncelBlogger said...

"Rape is martyrdom, because the hero will suffer the western society revenge."

Will he though? He might if the woman reports it. But modern Western women never report rape unless they know the rapist is incel or somehow see him as of lower value. Even in the case of being raped by a total stranger they won't mind. This is because we destroyed patriarchy and rape victims are now something that cops (of all people !) are supposed to deal with. This is nonsense, as cops have their hands full with real crimes.

Eivind Berge said...

I am wondering whether it is true that women don't report classic stranger rape. All the statistics I've seen on supposed unreported rape are so debased by corrupt feminist redefinitions of rape that I don't know if anyone has even tried to put a number on the real thing. My feeling is that women indeed only report date rape and drunken exploitation and all the other feminist bullshit kinds of rape 5% of the time or less, but if they get attacked and actually raped by a stranger, I am guessing that closer to 90% of them will report it to the police.


Hei, jeg heter Tasha, jeg gikk gjennom en artikkel og fant ut om en mann som heter Dr Pomoh. I mitt liv trodde jeg aldri det var slik ting som åndelig forbønnelse. Problemet mitt startet åtte måneder tilbake da farene til barna mine begynte å sette opp en merkelig oppførsel, jeg visste aldri at han hadde en affære utenfor vårt ekteskapshjem. Det begynner på meg på den trofaste dagen da han kom til huset for å plukke sine ting som var da jeg visste at situasjonen har gått tom for hånden, og han fortalte meg at han var ferdig med ekteskapet som jeg har bygget i over fem år, jeg var forvirret og dumbfounded jeg ringte familie og venner, men til ingen nytte. Men jeg ble positiv og trodde jeg kunne få ham tilbake og få ham til å bli. se, dr Pomoh hjalp meg og vi lever lykkelig nå. Dr Pomoh er en fin mann, han hjalp meg også med å stoppe hjerteproblemet mitt. Takk til ham og takk til Gud for gaven som er gitt til ham. Hvis du har noe problem, ta kontakt med ham på denne e-posten:

Kontakt ham for følgende og se det store arbeidet til Dr Pomoh:
(1) Hvis du vil ha din ex tilbake.
{2} Hvis du søker etter en jobb
(3) Du vil bli markedsført på kontoret din.
(4) Du vil at kvinner / menn skal løpe etter deg.
(5) Hvis du vil ha et barn.
(6) Du vil være rik.
(7) du vil få ekteskapsstaver
(8) Fjern Sykdom og sykdommer fra kroppen din Staver
(9) Bedriftsspell
(10) Lotteri vinnende tall.
(11) Ta tilbake tapt kjærlighet
  og mange flere.......
Du kan kontakte ham via e-post:

«Oldest ‹Older   201 – 203 of 203   Newer› Newest»