"For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury."This is one of the reasons cited in the American Declaration of Independence as justifying rebellion against England in 1776, but it applies just as well to contemporary Norway. The scumbags in our legislature are now determined to deprive us of the benefits of trial by jury, and not just in many cases, but in all cases. Feminists have been lobbying for this change for over a decade, and now the majority of our legislators agree. The primary motivation behind abolishing the jury is to enforce feminist rape law reform, which has thus far largely been subject to jury nullification.
Ever since a radical feminist definition of rape replaced our traditional and quite reasonable legal concept of rape in the Norwegian Penal Code in 2000, prosecutors have had nearly unlimited power to charge men with "rape" whenever women regret sex (although they are still not satisfied and keep pushing for more feminist reforms to the legal definition of rape as well). Juries have usually refused to get with the program and convict men in the most egregiously feminist-motivated cases, however. This is because the people's natural sense of justice simply does not correspond to the hateful feminist ideology of our politicians, so for as long as the safeguard of a jury of peers remains in place, legal reforms to expand rape law can only have a limited impact. The explicit purpose of removing the jury is therefore to get rid of this pesky obstacle to imprisoning more men for normal male sexuality. This motivation has been explicitly stated many times by feminists such as Attorney General Tor-Aksel Busch, for example, who is one of Norway's most malevolent characters (along with Minister of Justice Anders Anundsen) and probably the person whose guts I hate the most in the entire world. He is the single mot powerful feminist lobbyist in Norway and the scumbag responsible for pushing through most of the prosecutions for false or feminist-defined rape since our rape law was reformed for this purpose.
Jury abolition is something I predicted all the way back in my very first blog post in 2007, and now it is actually happening. As American history attests, the travesty of denying us trials by jury is a just cause for rebellion even if you are not a men's rights activist. These expanded government powers are certain to harm a lot of women as well, so unless they are obsessed with enforcing the insane feminist concept of rape, women also have reason to join our fight. Unfortunately, I have failed to incite an insurrection among men against our government because most men are just too damn complacent, and now the political climate in Norway has become so hateful that I am seriously looking forward to collapse. Collapse is the only realistic way that the feminist regime in Oslo will be destroyed. The day when the scumbags in our legislature realize that not only do they not have a future, but that their children and grandchildren are dying of starvation in short order, will be a joyous day indeed. I don't prep to save myself, because I know it will be futile, but I do keep enough victuals on hand to gloat with a full belly over the despair of our feminist rulers and their enforcers when collapse comes, at least in the initial weeks. And most importantly, I will be psychologically prepared and not shocked like most people when it becomes clear that everything they love is dying.
Since the turning point came with crashing oil prices last year, 22,122 jobs have been lost in the Norwegian oil industry so far. And this is before we even have a real financial crisis, so you ain't seen nothing yet. Most people still think all the layoffs are just part of a transition to a more renewable and not dramatically poorer future, although it is a bit comical that the best idea anybody can come up with for replacement jobs is to go and teach the Saudi Arabians how to implement fracking so they can extend their oil production a bit. We are still very much in what the Archdruid calls the Era of Pretense. Norwegians have not yet figured out that the oil age is ending, and we have certainly not figured out that nothing can replace oil. Nothing can replace oil because nothing provides comparable usefulness to society in proportion to the effort spent on obtaining it. You can study thermodynamics and systems theory to understand this or you can just look around you and think about what role oil played in producing everything you have and how hard it would be to get things any other way. Before that realization will sink in, though, the whole system will be broken because oil limits manifest as an intractable financial crisis long before we "run out" of oil. According to Gail Tverberg, oil would have to bounce up to the completely unrealistic price of $130 per barrel now in 2015 and then keep rising every year in order to avoid a breakdown of the system, and I think she is right.
And so I am looking forward to the financial crisis to end this odious political system. If we can't have jury trials, and there is no willingness to rebel either, then we might as well have no society at all, as far as I am concerned. I have one pet project left before the collapse, however, which is to collect compensation from the regime for my wrongful political imprisonment. I am happy to report that my appeal trial is coming up on December 4th, 2015, in Gulating lagmannsrett (this is the verdict I am appealing and this is my blog post about the last trial). I will blog more about my appeal later and try to whip up as much excitement around it as I can in order to make it into an MRA event.
Its always worth prepping a little bit. Buy a few dozen jars of peanut butter which are a high source of calories and supplement these with tubs of multivitamins. Bury them in secret locations if you think you'll be robbed or make some homemade weapons. You only have to survive longer than your neighbours do before the pressure on land and resources eases.
Even if you fail and you get killed or starve what do you get by not trying?
"women also have reason to join our fight"
They don't though, they know they will get favorable treatment, which is why giving women equal rights has always been a problem, and has become critical now that women have few male family members. It's true that an objective prosecution can be overruled by the jury's sympathy for a female defendant, but in a feminist system the prosecution is biased as a matter of policy, women don't have to worry about being punished. Getting men into jail is their only concern
In the US, though, jury trials are much like our elections: just a show to make people believe that there is actually any popular input. It may as well be abolished here, too, for all the good having juries actually accomplishes.
All the best for the 4th of December Eivind.
The law that trumps all other laws, must be the law of self-defence. And if the State behaves as an enemy to free men, such that its laws put their lives at risk, then those men have a living right to rebel against those laws, and that State.
Hi Eivind. I am wondering if you have some data on how many men and how many women were accused under post 2000 rape laws in Norway. Or some other relatively recent period. I think I saw you posting something like that once somewhere but can't find it now. Please let me know if you can.
Here is a page with the official crime statistics of 2013:
For that year, it lists 928 rape accusations as well as 88 accusations of attempted rape, which is a typical number for recent years (and the trend is still upwards, so this year it will probably be something like 1100). As far as I know, only one woman has been accused by a man for rape in Norwegian history, the one case from 2004 that I have written about before. And that was a ludicrous case of a woman performing oral sex on a sleeping man, who only got upset because she did it at the behest of her faggot boyfriend. SSB lists females accused of sex crimes for recent years, but I do not have a link to any complete statistics of women accused of rape specifically. I know there have been a handful other cases where women have been complicit in what the law absurdly defines as "rape" in some way (cases involving a group talking a girl into masturbating and that sort of thing, and one woman was convicted for "negligently raping" another woman), but none others where an adult man has straight up accused a woman of rape. This simply does not happen. Trust me, I would have known about it if it had happened again. It remains just one bizarre occurrence, an event rarer than one in ten thousand rape accusations so far, and if it ever happens it will be such a sensational story that the whole world will know about it. Even in the most extremist feminist legal system in the world, which bends over backwards to prosecute all sex crimes equally and with an insanely expanded definition of rape, men do not avail themselves of the opportunity to accuse women, not even once per decade.
Vi har samme problem i Danmark, hvor de radikale feminister ønsker at redefinere voldtægtslovene, hvormed mænds retstilling vil blive alvorlig truet og de tager kun udgangspunkt i heteroseksuel voldtægt, mens de nægter at forholde sig til kvinder kan voldtage andre kvinder elller mænd. Feminister er stenalder mennesker og de har bare ikke opfundet den dybe tallerken, når det drejer sig om sex.
Trist å se at så mange i befolkningen støtter fjerning av jury. Nok et tap for demokratiet. Enda en seier for diktatur og tyranni.
Post a Comment