The Einsatzgruppe Case tested the distance between the militant language of a small nationalist circle and what prosecutors could establish as an actionable plan. The 1998 court proceedings ended with the charges dropped for lack of concrete evidence of planned terrorist strikes; the book leaves open whether the group was ever materially or psychologically prepared to carry out violence on that scale.

A Small Core and a Wider Circle

The account distinguishes between a hardcore of four or five people, whom police arrested, and a looser surrounding group estimated at fifteen to twenty. That outer circle was fluid: some young people were drawn in without fully understanding the scene or its more serious aims. Their possible participation in disruptive, exciting activities did not, in itself, establish involvement in a coordinated violent plot.

One example of this peripheral activity was a plan to disrupt a meeting of the Israel Mission in Stavanger. Younger boys were reportedly included in that circle. The account presents such an action as a form of provocative group activity, while sharply distinguishing it from allegations involving attacks on arms dealers or stealing assault rifles to target political opponents. That distinction matters to the case: proximity to militant rhetoric or disruptive plans was not proof of a concrete terrorist operation.

Allegations and the Limits of Proof

When the case came to trial in 1998, the charges against the Einsatzgruppe were dropped. The court had not been presented with concrete evidence that the group had initiated plans for terrorist strikes. Some of the nationalists implicated in the case later chose to bring counter-lawsuits against the state, alleging wrongful imprisonment. The legal outcome therefore did not affirm the alleged plans; it marked the failure to prove them to the court’s standard.

The account keeps a separate question unresolved: whether the group was genuinely ready to move from rhetoric into action, and whether its members had the practical and psychological capacity for a high level of violent conflict. It states that this cannot be known for certain, even while noting the intensity of the rhetoric in some nationalist circles. The distinction between forceful language, preparation, and an executable plan remains central to the case’s uncertain record.

Political Connections and Aftermath

The case also sits within a wider, explicitly described but ambiguous interaction between elements of the Black Metal scene and revolutionary-right circles. The Einsatzgruppe supported Varg Vikernes, whose public profile gave him access to media attention, though the reach of his influence among more established far-right groups remained unclear. This association provides context for the case without demonstrating that every person in either milieu shared the same aims or took part in the same activities.

After the alleged breakout scheme associated with the group failed in the spring of 1997, Vikernes’s book Vargsmål was published. The account describes the publication as a propaganda success for him, but it does not establish that the book resulted from the case or that its publication resolved the allegations. Instead, the episode shows how political visibility continued after the alleged plot had failed, while the court’s central evidentiary conclusion remained unchanged: concrete plans for terrorist action had not been proved.