Terrorism knows no religion. If you don’t count Islam.

The PC Police are at it again in Finland. This time they’re chasing down a politician who dared to post uncomplimentary things about Islam on the Internet.

Here’s the story from Tundra Tabloids:

Finland: Police investigate gay politician once again for posting about Islam

Sebastian Tynkkynen (FB) is a Finnish politician who has been at the forefront in creating awareness about Islamization in Finland.

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…


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 Sebastian’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.

Read the rest (and follow the embedded links) at Tundra Tabloids.

11 thoughts on “Terrorism knows no religion. If you don’t count Islam.

    • There were two versions of the IRA. The first one was responsible for the liberation of Eire, and the later one, a compromised terrorist org which worked with other terrorist groups like the PLO.

  1. The whole EU “Project” is simply a mode of turning Europe Moslem. That is the aim of it all. We are governed by Sleepers, who, pretending to be “moderate”, brought Communism to Europe in the guise of “multiculturalism”. That means Islam is a reality.

    I detest the whole cult and those that pedal it via traitors within the EU bureaucracy, The whole fetid shower should face prosecution for attempted genocide. To me, the death penalty would be fair play for their disgusting Leftist activities. I loathe Globalists and my heart felt gladdened when one of its chief exponents died – Peter Sutherland, UN Migration chief. These people dress in Gucci suits and wine and dine each other. [Vulgar and excessive intemperance redacted]

  2. here’s a funny thing:
    Sebastian Tynkkynen is openly gay, so basically he should automatically be a darling of the press, the green-left parties and the marxist university- crowds. However, his strong opinions about islam make him a spitpot for the above mentioned factions, and he is regularly openly accused of nazism, racism, and whatnot.

    So once again, the rights of islam trump the rights of everyone else, in this case even the rights of gay people, who normally are idolized by the neo-marxists.

    • The only thing that will convince the left that Islam is evil is if all white Christian males converted.

    • The identity and special-interest groups, gay rights, feminist, civil rights, are simply cultural-Marxist fronts and have no interest in the up-front issue. For instance, logically it would be intuitive that feminist groups would oppose female mutilation, support arrangements where women can choose to stay at home and raise their children, and gay groups would support gay men under siege. But, in fact, these groups are only fronts to dissolve the culture. So, no gay group is going to be in the least interested in a gay politician being politically persecuted.

      Interestingly, the genuine identity groups, black lives matter, la raza and the like, are actually racial identity groups, and more likely to support any black or any latin, against any white.

    • In the game of diversity Top Trumps, this case highlighted the utter moral confusion of the left when it comes to Islam, and of course which group has the ‘Top Trump’, as apparently calling for gays to be “burned, decapitated and slaughtered” is okay as long as it’s a Muslim voice doing so.

      “According to Dutch media advisors from the anti-discrimination bureau MiND said that, while homophobic abuse was usually a crime, it was justifiable if you were Muslim due to laws on freedom of religious expression.

      They argued that the Koran says it is acceptable to kill people for being homosexual, and so death threats towards gay people from Muslims could not be discriminatory. ”

      I suppose once exposed ‘Dutch MPs reportedly “reacted with horror”.
      But fingers and dykes come to mind (no pun intended).

      • More like fingers in ears while they chant, “Nah, nah, nah, can’t hear you…” The usual leftist remedy for news they don’t like, e.g., that “AGW” – anthropogenic global warming/cooling/change is a hoax. The crux of their strange thinking is a love of catastrophes and their determination to do ‘something’, ‘anything’ to cure whatever crisis they dream up.

        Now it turns out that Canada’s recycling scheme consists of dumping so-called “recyclables” in with the rest of the trash.

        • It’s when politicians reach a consensus one should start to worry.
          As Nigel Lawson once observed: “large errors normally follow a cross-party consensus because no one questions or scrutinises the arguments.”
          Which is exactly what happened when the House of Commons unanimously ushered in the most expensive bill in the history of that institution, all based on the fraudulent and alarmist ‘settled science’ of AGW, sorry Global Warming, sorry Catastrophic Climate Change, sorry Climate Change, which it naturally does of course, without any help from us.
          Of course to point out discrepancies such as no warming for 20 years, fraudulent graphs and data is to be a ‘denier’, for the left is replacing empirical science with ‘feelings’.

  3. It’s obvious by now that the laws against denying the Holocaust were simply a stalking horse for a general clampdown on freedom of speech, especially political speech. There is so much evidence for the occurrence of the Holocaust, including videotapes of actual survivors, that laws against Holocaust denial are, in reality, totally irrelevant.

    But, the totalitarians of the EU and their judicial toadies use the issue of persecuted minorities, and the horrors of the Holocaust, as a foot-in-the-door for enforcement of political orthodoxy in communications. It would, of course, be illegal to point out the built-in anti-Semitism of Islam. Paradoxically, one could make a good argument that in a functioning Muslim country, ruled by a dictator (caliph) Jews are actually well protected. But, why bother with going to the trouble of making coherent arguments when you can take the shortcut of simply making assertions you don’t like, illegal?

Comments are closed.