He had been investigated earlier by a heavily politicized Finnish police department over his Facebook postings in August of 2016, and went to trial almost exactly a year ago today, and was eventually found guilty of ”hate speech”. Today, Sebastian asks the same question concerning this investigation as he did in his closing statements at his trial: “How else can one write about Islam…….?”
The text simply reads: “Terrorism knows no religion. If you don’t count Islam”
What the Finnish judicial system and the police are doing, can accurately be described as prosecuting political speech. As I have often stated before, Muslims by default belong to a political party, called Islam. It’s not of our making, our choice nor fault. Islam is what it is. It’s an entire society and/or civilization with its rules and laws that govern every aspect of human life, even that of non-believers.
Criticizing that ideology and the followers who champion its all encompassing mandate, is by default political speech, and it’s that speech that needs protection, not prosecution. In 2015 Jyllands-Posten’s former editor Flemming Rose gave a wonderful speech at Helsinki University concerning the ever growing restrictions we face here in Europe on free speech. Truth is no longer being considered a valid defense of one’s own speech and thoughts if it runs counter to political policies accepted by the ruling (consensus driven) elite.
Flemming Rose, addressing political leaders and media giants in Finland stated the following:
In 2008 the European Union demanded that all member states pass these laws criminalizing the denial of the Holocaust or downplaying the importance of the Holocaust. Today these laws are the books in 13 member states in the European Union, and just two weeks ago the EU commission in charge of this field once again called on all European Union member states to pass these laws.
These laws are based on a specific reading of the events that led up to the Holocaust and triggered the Holocaust. It is basically saying that evil words will lead to evil deeds. That if you do not criminalize racist speech or incitement you will sooner or later have racist violence.
And if you allow people to deny crime against humanity, you may run the risk that it will repeat itself, it will happen again.
I think that is a problematic reading of the events leading up to the Holocaust, even though I acknowledge and I believe that there is a relationship between words and deeds, and anti-Semitic speech, anti-Semitic propaganda played on a visible role in the events leading up to the Holocaust.
But, in fact in Weimar Germany in the ‘20s and ‘30s you did have hate speech laws protecting Jews against anti-Semitic speech. If you take Joseph Goebbels, the propaganda minister of Adolf Hitler, he was taken to court many times by the Vice Police Director of Berlin, Bernhard Weiss, who was Jewish, and Goebbels basically lost all the cases.
And if you take, Julius Streicher, the editor and chief of Der Stürmer, the anti-Semitic magazine that was being published in the ‘20s and ‘30s, Julius Streicher went to jail twice for anti-Semitic speech. His magazine over the course of ten years was confiscated or taken to court 36 times. So there were laws on the books protecting Jews against verbal attacks, but they didn’t work.
And these laws criminalizing Holocaust denial, they are now being copied and have inspired other kinds of laws in other parts of the world where they do not have the same good intentions.
If you take Eastern Europe, in Eastern Europe the crimes of Communism seem far more present than the Holocaust, so Poland, the Czech Republic, Lithuania and other Eastern European countries, they have passed laws criminalizing denial of the crimes of communism.
If you take the Ukraine, this Spring, passed four new laws, two of them criminalizing insult to the freedom fighters of Ukraine during the 20th century, which in fact also implies two groups that took part in the Holocaust. So when Western historians write critically about these two groups they may risk being arrested when they travel to Kiev.
The most far-reaching law in this respect was passed in Russia last year, and it is interesting that it was passed with the same reference to the Nuremberg trial after the Second World War as all the other anti-Holocaust denial laws in Europe. The Russian law basically says that it is a criminal offense to criticize the actions of the Soviet Union during the Second World War.
What we are witnessing, and Sebastian Tynkkynen and others like him have been experiencing at the hand of the state, is not unlike the scenarios just described. He (Sebastian) is being persecuted because he is offending the state, the political policies that they’ve embarked upon shall not be judged nor criticized at all. The protected class, whether they be dead soldiers or Muslims promoting sharia law and Islam in general, have the government’s full backing.
This is of course highly political, and those who dare question their policies will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. This makes anyone running afoul of the government’s policies on what can be said and not said about Islam, a political dissident. Here is Sebatian’s video concerning his recent incident with the police.
The trial of Finns party chairman, Jussi Halla-aho, cemented the fact that in Finland, truth is not a defense, that in Finland, we have lost the fundamental right to not only defend ourselves, but to speak our minds.