Heitänpä tähän nyt vielä kertauksena tiivistelmän siitä, miksi tämä blogi a) on joutunut viime aikoina muun blogosfäärin varsinekstensiivisen huomion kohteeksi ja b) lakkautetaan lähiaikoina (la 21.7.) serverin omistajan toimesta.
Prodos Marinakis, thinkertothinker-blogipalvelun ylläpitäjä
Alkuperäinen viestini Prodokselle:
I am writing to you because I received a letter from [a Finnish] municipal police department saying they want to interrogate me because of the anti-Muslim, pro-Israeli, pro-European, pro-American posts in my blog. According to the letter, I am suspected of “hate speech” merely because I have pointed out that Islam is a fascist ideology that advocates killing Jews, atheists, homosexuals etc.
I hope you will not submit under the yoke of censorship that the Muslims want to impose on us. Do not delete any of my blog posts without an explicit order from an Australian court of law. I am assuming your server is based in Australia and is therefore under Australian jurisdiction.
I live in Espoo, a suburban municipality in the Helsinki metropolitan area in Finland, and I am certain that the municipal police will never take this case to court in Australia. But they might send you some e-mail “politely” asking you to delete my blog. Don’t do this if you value freedom.
This is a very important symbolic case, the first of its kind in Finland. No one has ever been interrogated before in this country for blog posts criticising Islam. Probably thousands of people will be following this case already before I will visit the police station for the interrogation next Monday, because I have told about the ongoing police investigation to several other bloggers whose pages get thousands of visitors per day.
This is an extremely important case, a litmus test for the freedom of speech, a landmark case, a historical milestone.
The Finnish government is apparently trying to impose Chinese-style totalitarian censorship on the internet.
Forwardoin tämän myös Leonard Peikoffille, mutta saatuani sittemmin lisää tietoaminua koskevan tutkintapyynnön aiheesta jouduin kirjoittamaan Peikoffille allaolevanlisäselvityksen:
Dear Dr. Peikoff,
When I visited the police station for the interrogation, the detective questioning me said he does not actually suspect me of hate speech against Muslims, but against African immigrants. I had no way of knowing this when I posted my comment to you because the letter in which I was told to come to the police station for the interrogation said merely “you are suspected of hate speech on the basis of your blog posts, therefore you must visit the police station for questioning on Monday, May 7, 10 AM”, nothing else. There was absolutely no description of the grounds for my being a suspect, except the mention that the investigation is based on my blog posts in general.
I have written about the totalitarian nature of Islam in several dozen posts and about the high crime rates of African immigrants only in a couple of posts, so I couldn’t possibly expect to be accused of “hate speech” against black immigrants. The charge was that I was “preaching hatred” toward black people by quoting crime statistics published by the Ministry of Justice. This is totally ludicrous. I obviously did not blame blacks collectively for anything because it is self-evident that only individuals are responsible for their crimes. I was only discussing statistical correlations. Blacks commit more crimes than whites, just like men commit more crimes than women.
Mentioning this fact does not mean placing any collective guilt on anybody.
The person who had told the police to interrogate me was a government bureaucrat (“minority ombudsman”) named Mikko Puumalainen; he is generally known to have a very extreme political agenda that is in contradiction with the existing laws and the Constitution of the country and he is trying to use policemen as pawns in his game.
Mr. Puumalainen has said in numerous press statements and interviews that the publication of all opinions and information that “help maintain the current anti-immigrationist political atmosphere” (verbatim quote from public statements by Puumalainen) ought to be totally criminalised. In other words, he wants to change the political climate of the country by banning the publication of all opinions and facts that are not in line with his rose-coloured utopian view of immigrants.
In Nazi Germany, the first thing that Hitler did when he was given dictatorial powers in March 1933 was to ban all newspapers critical towards Nazism. Puumalainen wants to do the exact same thing. He explicitly says that my blog should not be allowed to exist because I am saying that African immigrants commit more crimes than the Finns do. This is a fact that I have demonstrated by quoting crime statistics published by the Ministry of Justice, but in the opinion of Mr. Puumalainen even objective facts can be “hate speech”.
This time he did not mention Islam in connection with these allegations of racism, but there was no way for me to know this before Friday evening (the interrogation was on Monday) because he repeatedly refused to specify his allegations and to email me the relevant material that he had sent to the police. I had to call him twice and email him twice before he mailed the material to me on Friday afternoon. This was the first time when I learned that I was accused of “hate speech” against Africans instead of Muslims.
I was able to obtain the material from him only after I notified him that I could sue him for failing to send me the relevant material because the police had explicitly asked me to comment on his allegations in written form, which I obviously could not do as long as I had not even seen the allegations in the first place.
Puumalainen undoubtedly committed a crime by acting like this.
In other words, a criminal bureaucrat is harassing me. Puumalainen is also seriously wasting taxpayer money by forcing the police to spend time reading my blog posts and discussing them with me, instead of trying to catch criminals.
Rapes are up by 64 % from last year, according to the official crime statistics that Puumalainen wants to make illegal. Puumalainen wants to stop people from knowing how many crimes are being committed, and by whom, i.e. by Finns or by immigrants.
I have mentioned in my blog that immigrants commit 20 (twenty) times more (as in, 2,000% more) acts of rape per capita than the Finns do, again by quoting crime statistics published by the Ministry of Justice. If this is “hate speech”, Puumalainen will have to sue the Ministry of Justice.
With the recent very large increase in the number of rapes, the police should allocate more resources to trying to catch those rapists, but no, Puumalainen wants the cops to spend time chatting with me instead.
Also, it is extremely important to understand that since this man has repeatedly and explicitly said in the media that all facts and opinions that “help maintain the current anti-immigrationist political atmosphere” ought to be totally criminalised, he obviously wants to make criticism of Islam illegal because the Muslims are immigrants, and if the Finns have a negative opinion of Muslims, they will not be in favour of open immigration from Africa and the Middle East.
He also systematically lies about the actual content of my blog posts in the allegations in his letter to the police. He says I am “comparing certain ethnic groups to animals” (verbatim quote from his letter to the police) which I have certainly never done. I said people in general are biological beings, evolutionary in nature, shaped by their genes, as opposed to created by a divine hand. In other words, I oppose creationism and other irrational, superstitious mumbo-jumbo. Puumalainen is saying that this means I think black people are subhuman. This is a flat-out lie. It never ceases to amaze me how people think they can get away with such absolutely obvious lies. Lying like this is utterly despicable.
Anyway, thank you for your interest Dr. Peikoff.
Lauantaina Australian aikaa eli tod.näk. perjantai-iltana Suomen aikaaserverin omistaja Prodos Marinakispoistaa minulta oikeudenpostata tänneja yleisöltämahdollisuuden jättää viestejä kommenttiosastoon. Vanhat viestit kuitenkinjäävät tänne arkistoon toistaiseksi.
Jos joku haluaa kommentoida postauksiani minulle jälkikäteen, kommentteja voi jättää mm. Uusi viesti-bloginpostauksien perään. Omistan nykyään ko. blogin, koska sen perustaja Väinö Valpas siirsi ylläpito-oikeudet minulle kuultuaan Prodoksen päätöksestädisabloida käyttäjätunnukseni thinkertothinker-palvelimella.Saatan myös julkaista Uusi viesti-blogissa joskus uusina postauksina parhaita paloja tästä blogista.
Annan lisäksi luvan kenelle tahansakopioida postauksiani sekä täältä thinkertothinker-palvelimelta että nykyisestä blogistani sillä ehdolla, että kirjoittajan nimi mainitaan.
Sanomattakin on selvää, että postauksistani ei saa siteerata yksittäisiä lauseita asiayhteydestä irroitettuna. Postaukseni(jakommenttiosastoon lukijoidenijättämiin viesteihinkirjoittamani vastaukset)ovat kokonaisuuksia, joiden merkitys on vahvasti kontekstisidonnainen.Jos olen esimerkiksi ironisesti sanonut “islam on rauhan uskonto”, tätä lausetta ei saa siteerata ilmanironisuuden selväksi tekevääkontekstia.
Myöskään ei pidä missään nimessä luulla minun olevan samaa mieltä kaikkien sellaisten tahojenkanssa, joita olen siteerannut tai linkittänyt. Jos omasta kannastani jonkin asian suhteen on epäselvyyttä, ottakaa yhteyttä em. Uusi viesti-blogin kautta.