Defamation, Blasphemy, and the End of Free Speech in Finland

The Finnish author and journalist Jussi Halla-aho has made guest appearances in this space previously. We have also written about the attempts of the Finnish establishment to silence him for his hate speech. These attempts intensified when Mr. Halla-aho was elected to the Helsinki city council last fall.

Now the Finnish government has taken the next logical step: it has charged Jussi Halla-aho with incitement of an ethnic group (the Finnish equivalent of hets mot folkgrupp) — and blasphemy.

And was his “blasphemy” perhaps against the Lutheran Church in Finland? Or maybe the Holy Catholic Church?

What do you think?

Tundra Tabloids has this report:

Jussi Halla-aho to stand trial for blasphemy against Allah

Believe it or not, Finland still has blasphemy laws on the books, but there have been repeated attempts to rescind Section 10 of chapter 17 of the Finnish penal code. All attempts however, at removing the anti-modern statute from the law books have proved unsuccessful, with the latest attempt failing in 1998.

Helsinki city councilman, Jussi Halla-aho was charged with blasphemy and incitement of an ethnic-group in the Helsinki district court today, and ordered to stand trial for publishing on his blog that Islam’s prophet was a pedophile. According to the Deputy Prosecuting Attorney, Jorme Kalske:

Halla-aho had uploaded to the Internet and submitted writings to the general public, in which Islam and its sacred institutions were combined with pedophilia, and in which was also presented the robbery of pedestrians and the looting of tax revenue was a certain national group or a specific genetic characteristic.

The charges were presented in the Helsinki District Court. Halla-aho denies the charges

Courtesy of the blogger Vasarahammer, here is Helsinki City Councilman, Jussi Halla-aho’s post that the Finnish state wants him prosecuted for. It is addressed to Mika Illman, the Finnish state prosecuting attorney, in response of the Finnish state’s prosecution of Seppo Lehto last year:

- - - - - - - - -

A couple of baits for Mika Illman

[Begins with an account of the successful prosecution of “filth blogger” Seppo Lehto]

According to state prosecutor Mika Illman and Tampere district court insulting the prophet Muhammad is illegal, because Muhammad is revered by Muslims.

(On the other hand professor Hämeen-Anttila could certainly confirm that in Christianity Jesus and God are holy figures. Of course, this doesn’t prevent anybody from defaming Jesus or God freely in the way he or she chooses.)

Next I intend to throw Mika a bait:

Prophet Muhammad was a pedophile and Islam reveres pedophilia as a religion. Islam is a religion of pedophilia. Pedophilia is Allah’s will.

Are these statements illegal? They certainly insult Muslims’ religious feelings. Let’s approach the issue logically:

As a 50 year-old man Muhammad was engaged to six or seven year old Aisha. Their marriage was “consummated” when Aisha was nine years old. It is possible to think that they were living in another age and Muhammad’s deeds must not be judged according to today’s standards, but as we have learned during the last few years, schoolbooks from the 50’s were racist when they spoke about “negroes” (even if “negro” was not a racist term at the time by anybody’s standards), it’s equally justified to call a child rapist who lived 1400 years ago a child rapist.’

What has to be done so that the bolded statements were not true? You must insist that

a) Quran is not literally true (i.e. Muhammad did not have sexual relations with a nine year old girl). This will not do, since according to Islamic doctrine and Muslims’ opinion Quran is a literal word of Allah. Consummation and Aisha’s age cannot be denied without insulting Muslims.

b) Muhammad’s actions were not always acceptable. This will not do either, since according to Muslims (and Tampere district court) criticizing Muhammad is the same as criticizing Allah and therefore blasphemy. The penalty is death. Muslim’s believe that Muhammad’s actions were the will of Allah. Because Muhammad had sexual relations with a child, that was Allah’s will as well.

As we see, all the argumentative ways to disprove the bolded statements have been theologically exhausted. The fact that Muhammad was a pedophile and Allah supported pedophilia can only be denied either by denying the literal truthfulness of Quran or Muhammad’s status as a messenger of Allah whose actions are according to the will of Allah.

Therefore I repeat my claim:

Prophet Muhammad was a pedophile and Islam reveres pedophilia as a religion. Islam is a religion of pedophilia. Pedophilia is Allah’s will.

Go over to Tundra Tabloids to read the second “bait”. Regular readers of Jihad Watch and other Counterjihad sites will recognize the Koranic basis for Jussi Halla-aho’s statements about Mohammed.

But that’s not enough to protect him. The truth is no defense. And quoting the Koran defames Islam!

Funny about that.

Needless to say, Mika Illman took the bait, and Mr. Halla-aho will be hauled into court. The International Free Press Society is on the case. We’ll keep you informed as it develops.

But don’t expect any major human rights group to organize a defense fund for an Islamophobic Finn.

Like the UN, they’re all in favor of free speech — until someone starts telling the truth about Islam.