What is more serious: encouraging people to kill the prime minister and finance minister of your country or suggesting that Muslims should be boiled alive? The police are presently investigating whether to launch an inquiry against Perussuomalaiset (PS) Kotka municipal election candidate Amon Rautiainen, reports YLE in English.
Rautiainen has publicly apologized for what he wrote on Facebook.
”I wrote the posts with humor and in the heat of the moment,” he said.
Is “humor”encouraging readers to kill Prime Minister Jyrki Katainen and Finance Minister Jutta Urpilainen as well as suggest that Muslims should be boiled alive?
Like many racists and social media bullies, you will find cowardice and low self-esteem behind their ignorance and bravado.
What would happen if an immigrant, visible minority, never mind a Muslim, would have suggested the same fate for the PS and its leadership as Rautiainen did for members of the government and Muslims?
There would be a public outcry.
The fact that these types of characters appear almost constantly from the PS suggests the extent of the social illness that has inflicted Finland.
Their racist and ultra-nationalist ideology grow in PS greenhouses of hatred.
Sad but true.
But there is something positive to mention: Finland’s reaction to racism is an ever-growing a reaction.
A few scenes from Innocence of Muslims was enough for me to understand that free speech not only gives you the opportunity to make a horse’s ass out of yourself, but declare war on a religious group that ended costing the lives of USAmerican citizens in Libya.
The stance of the Finnish Islamic Council (SINE) concerning the fourteen-minute film must be commended. In a common statement, SINE condemned both the film that offends the Prophet Mohammed and the violence that it sparked. ”The sacred values of Muslims are constantly targets of attacks in the West,” the statement declares.
One of these is Salman Rushdie, the author of the Satanic Verses, which caused outrage from conservative Muslims for blasphemy and mocking their faith.
Reporter: Do you feel that that person has done something terribly wrong?
Salman Rushdie: I think he [Bacile] has done something malicious. That’s a very different thing from writing a serious novel. He’s clearly set out to provoke and he has obviously unleashed a much bigger reaction than he hoped for, and one of the problems of free speech is that you often have to defend people who are outrageous, unpleasant and disgusting.
Reporter: So when you saw that man taken in for questioning over the weekend completely shrouded to mask his appearance any level of sympathy there?
SR: Not really.
Reporter: Why not?
SR: He did it on purpose and he set out to create a response and he got it in spades.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d9PpAxX6MHI
These types of movies that aim to insult other groups are no different from the Islamophobic hate speech we are seeing in Europe these days.
The last matter that these extremists are interested in is free speech.
Free speech is only a catchword they use to eventually limit such an inalienable right.
Voters in the Netherlands did not back Geert Wilders’ calls for the country to ditch the European Union, reports the BBC. Wilders, who has dominated Dutch politics for years, is known for his tough anti-Islam and now anti-EU stance. Among many of his provocative statements, the Dutch politician has equated the Koran with Hitler’s Mein Kampf.
The biggest victors of the Dutch elections were pro-EU parties like the center-right VVD (41 seats) and center-left Labor Party (39). Between them they could form a majority in the 150-member lower house.
Contrarily, Wilders’ Freedom Party saw its share of seats plummet from 24 to 13.
Just like the Islamophobic Danish People’s Party that supported minority governments for a decade in exchange for tougher immigration laws, the election setback to the Freedom Party comes as a big blow to their influence in national politics.
The interesting question to ask is how the setback for the Freedom Party will impact the Perussuomalaiset (PS) of Finland and other likeminded parties in Europe.
This is a valid question. It’s pretty clear that the PS’ election victory in 2011 had a positive impact on similar anti-immigration parties in the Nordic region and elsewhere in Europe.
Despite Europe’s financial woes and issues with anti-immigration populist parties, it’s clear that a growing number of Europeans are not buying their xenophobic message.
As Migrant Tales has pointed out on a number of occasions, the worst enemies of parties like the PS, Freedom Party, Danish People’s Party, Sweden Democrats and others are none other than themselves.
It’s pretty clear that what goes up politically must eventually come down. Some groups, which have recently surged in popularity like the Perussuomalaiset (PS), could see their bubble burst quickly. While I wouldn’t count on anything like that happening anytime soon, it could be a totally different story for the hardline Counterjihadists of the party.
The question that should concern us all is what will these radical members of the PS do if they see their popularity wean.
Do they have a plan B? Will they take to the streets and incite more people to parrot their message of hate?
One of the most naive ideas that Counterjihadists hold is that they can keep their hate rhetoric on a short leash. Anders Breivik’s murderous rampage in Norway proved once again that racism and Islamophobia can bite back at its ideological master.
While we are already seeing greater violence to visible minorities and immigrants after last year’s PS election victory, the question is how do we challenge such a threat effectively?
Everyone knows that the hardcore Counterjihadist MPs of the PS are Jussi Halla-aho, James Hirvisaari and Olli Immonen.
If PS chairman Timo Soini wished, he could land a fatal political blow to the Counterjihadists by banishing them from the party. As a so-called taxi party (all of its members could fit in a taxi), they would no longer be a political force like they are today in the PS.
In many respects, Soini’s relationship with these extremists could be described as that of a junkie hooked on heroin. One hates being a junkie but it sure feels good to inject oneself with such a drug.
If Soini ever kicked out the Counterjihadists from the party, would these politicians go down without a fight?
It would be naive to think so.
Their message of hate would certainly get louder and their rhetoric more violent.
Norwegian mass murderer Anders Breivik cited five Finnish groups in his manifesto, 2083 – A European Declaration of Independence. These were the Perussuomalaiset (PS) party, Suomen Sisu, Suomalaisuuden liitto, Suomen kansan sinivalkoiset and Vapaan Suomen liitto, according to a report by theFinnish Security Intelligence Service (SUPO).
Writes YLE in English: “Texts similar to the manifest of Anders Behring Breivik have been published in Finland which [Maria] Paaso says shows an ideological preparedness to commit violent acts.”
While these latter groups haven’t carried out the same type of terrorist acts like Breivik did in July 2011, both are strongly bonded by Counterjihadist and/or populist radical right (PRR) ideology.
Some well-known Counterjihadists in Finland are PS MP Jussi Halla-aho, MP James Hirvisaari, MP Olli Immonen and others.
Counterjihadism is a radical ideology that speaks out against immigration and the Islamization of Europe. Counterjihadists like Breivik blame “multiculturalism” for the spread of Islam in Europe.
As most sensible people know, multiculturalism is a Canadian integration policy that was implemented in the 1970s. Counterjihadist ideology, however, sees multiculturalism as an immigration policy that permits Muslims and non-Europeans to emigrate and live in Europe.
Some well-known European Counterjihadist websites are: gatesofvienna.blogspot.com, jihadwatch.org as well as brusselsjournal.com. To these you could add Halla-aho’s Scripta blog in Finland.
Contrarily, PRR groups base their ideology on populism, radicalism and right-wing position on the left-right scale.
Populism means hostility to representative-pluralist politics. The PRR sees democracy as nativist, authoritarian and populist, according to a study by the University of Leicester.
Breivik is an excellent example of what Counterjihadism and PRR ideology are and can breed in countries like Finland. In Norway we tragically saw how it came to fruit.
The Internet is the breeding ground for Counterjihadist ideology in Europe and Finland. Some of these forums in Finland are Hommaforum and Scripta. Two PS members, Matias Turkkila and MP Halla-aho, are their editors respectively.
Turkkila was named in May by the PS as the new editor-in-chief of the party’s newspaper and web page.
The aim of Counterjihad and PRR groups is simple: keep Europe and Finland white (culturally and ethnically) and place as many obstacles on cultural diversity as possible.
One should never underestimate an ideology like Counterjihadism or any other one that is exclusive and bases its ideology on “race and blood.”
If there are threats to our Nordic and European way of life today, we will find them right under our noses. Two of these are definitely Counterjihadism and PRR.
Anders Breivik, the Norwegian mass killer who shocked Europe and the world on July 22, 2011, was sentenced to at least 21 years in prison. The sentence by the Oslo district court is not only a relief to the loved ones of the 77 victims, but sends an important political message as well.
The court considered the mass killer sane when he was on his murderous rampage. He was not seen as a psychotic lone wolf as far-right and xenophobic groups would have wished.
Norway begins today the long process of healing the wounds inflicted by Breivik and the Counter-Jihadist ideology that encouraged him to carry out his killings.
According to researcher Toby Archer of the Finnish Institute of International Affairs, Counter-Jihad is the new ideology found in the blogshpere, which is not anti-Semitic and does not associate itself with neo-Nazis.
Counter-Jihad movements could be seen as a modern expression of fascism spreading the same message of intolerance. In the 1930s it was Jews, today the scapegoats are Muslims.
The Norwegian mass killer’s deeds did great harm to anti-Islam and anti-immigration groups throughout Europe, especially in the Nordic region. In many respects, the political tide has turned after 22/7.
What Breivik did in the summer of 2011 is incomprehensible, but the smoking gun behind the bloodshed was far-right hate speech that warns Europe that it is being invaded by Islam.
Migrant Tales applauds the sentence by the Oslo district court.
One of Migrant Tales’ aims has been to bust urban myths about immigrants and minorities. A book published last week by Alfred Knopf Canada, The Myth of the Muslim Tide, aims to do just that concerning Muslims.
Writes Doug Saunders, the author of the book: “In the U.S., anti-Muslim bigotry has reached such alarming levels that four of the leading Republican presidential candidates went mostly unchallenged as they spread patently false notions about Muslims and Islam, often at the behest of their rich Islamophobic funders.”
Saunders tackles a number of myths like: Islamization and high birth rates; the majority of immigrants are and will be Muslims; Muslims want to live in ghettoes; Muslims are not loyal to their host countries; as well as others.
Read original book review by Haroon Siddiqui here.
German newsmagazine, Der Spiegel, published the top ten most dangerous politicians in Europe concerning the euro crisis. One of these was Perussuomalaiset (PS) chairman Timo Soini, who is in the ”good” company of Geert Wilders, Viktor Orban, Marine Le Pen, Nigel Farage, Silvio Bertlusconi and four others.
Even if Soini is in the opposition, his shadow hangs heavy over the government of Prime Minister Jyrki Katainen, according to Der Spiegel. “Not a penny more,” he is quoted as saying defiantly about the euro crisis. “We have paid enough.”
Even if Soini is considered as one of the most dangerous politicians of Europe, there’s nothing to be proud of. All of Der Spiegel’s ten-most dangerous politicians are euroskeptics as well as Islamophobists, populists and even quasi-dictators like Prime Minister Orban of Hungary.
Writes PS MP Reijo Tossavainen on his Uusi Suomi blog: “In my opinion Timo Soini is right. I am satisfied, and even somehow proud, that Soini as well as other Perussuomalaiset members have been against [euro bailouts]…I am pleased that the same trend is evident in other parts of Europe as well.”
I wonder what medicine Soini, Tossavainen and others of the PS will prescribe to Europe if the euro becomes history and we slip into a deep recession.
Will they step up their attack on the usual scapegoats like immigrants, Muslims, homosexuals and other minorities?
Exactly a year ago Anders Breivik carried out his mass killings, which ended up causing the death of 77 innocent victims. Have we learned anything from that tragic Saturday that shook the Nordic region and changed it permanently?
In order to answer that question, we’d have to travel back in time to see how things were prior to that day.
In Finland, the right-wing populist Perussuomalaiset (PS) had just won a historic election victory that enabled the party to increase the number of its MPs to 39 from 5 in 2007. While party leader Timo Soini played down anti-immigration sentiment as one important factor behind the PS’ election victory, others disagreed.
Before Breivik erupted on the stage, anti-immigration parties like the PS were the new political force to contend with in Finland. It seemed that nothing could stop them from adding new election victories in the future. The louder and cruder their anti-immigration and anti-EU stances were, the more supporters they’d rally to their cause.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xjVD0ztWaKA
In Norway, Denmark and Sweden, far-right populist anti-immigration parties had grown as well and were openly challenging traditional parties.
Everything changed, however, after July 22.
The first blow came in Norway to the Progress Party (FrP), which saw its support in the September municipal election plummet by 6.1 percentage points to 11.5%. In the same month, another anti-immigration party, the Danish People’s Party (DPP), suffered an election setback.
Since 2001, the Islamophobic DPP had supported minority right-wing government in exchange for tighter immigration policy.
In many respect, Breivik was a wake-up call that woke up for Finland and the Nordic region to the threat of intolerance and hate speech.
A recent supreme court ruling against Jussi Hall-aho is a case in point. The PS MP was not only fined for defaming a religion but for inciting ethnic hatred as well. The ruling wasn’t only a big blow to the PS but to the far-right Suomen Sisu wing of the party. Halla-aho was forced to resign as chairman of the administration committee, which, among other matters, sets immigration policy.
The presidential election was another important example of how Finland is distancing itself after 22/7 from the anti-immigration and populist rhetoric of parties like the PS.
Two conservative anti-EU candidates, Timo Soini of the PS and Paavo Väyrynen of the Center Party, lost to Green Party hopeful Pekka Haavisto in the first round of voting. Haavisto is openly gay and pro-EU.
The next test for the PS will come in the October municipal elections. If polls are anything to go by, the party will suffer another election setback.
In light of the above, can we claim that Breivik had had a direct impact on the popularity of the PS and other parties in the Nordic region that are anti-EU, anti-immigration and anti-Islam?
Your answer to that questions will probably reveal more than anything else your political views on immigration, Islam and cultural diversity.
But if we ask Norwegian Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg, Norway had become after July 22 “more tolerant, [and] more careful not to judge people” by ethnic origin.
Even if Stoltenberg has shown leadership on how a wounded society should react to intolerance, it’s still unclear what impact Breivik will have on our societies. We are still healing from the wound and can matters return back to “normal” in Norway after Breivik?
If we set aside politics and try to understand the impact Breivik had on the region, one matter is certain: We are outraged by what happened but dread even more the possibility that it could happen again.
Competing for the anti-immigration thunder and rhetoric of parties like the PS, DPP, FrP and Sweden Democrats are far-right groups like the Finnish Defense League, which are copy-and-paste clones of the English Defense League.
Breivk scared the wits out of some of us and proved that anti-immigration and Counter-Jihad rhetoric can convert itself into a monster that has the ability to wreak terror and change our societies for good.
That I believe is the real message and threat of 22/7.
It is ironic that those right-wing populist and far-right parties that have gone out of their way to warn us about the threat of multiculturalism and religions like Islam have become the threat and Trojan Horses in our societies. In one horrific blow, Anders Behring Breivik did not only strike at Norway’s liberal democracy, but tore a hole in the argument of the anti-immigrant populists and fanatics.
In the Nordic region, living in a post-22/7 Europe and Nordic region means a serious loss of public face for those groups that have been the breeding ground for hatred towards immigrants and minorities. We know as well that Islamists are not the only ones who commit acts of terrorism, as the Guardian of London pointed out.
When these groups warn us today of the “threat of multiculturalism” and how it is acceptable to treat minorities with contempt, a killer called Anders Behring Breivik will haunt us in the back of our minds.
Every time these individuals and groups spread their usual rhetoric of hatred, we will stop to think and see Breivik’s eerie arguments and logic that drove him to become a mass killer.
When people go to the polls the next time in this part of Europe, some will see gruesome images of Breivik shooting down young members of the Labor Party. People will think twice whether to cast their vote for the Progress Party of Norway, Finland’s PS, Danish People’s Party and Sweden Democrats.
They will ask if supporting a party that bases its popularity on anti-immigration rhetoric is feeding future homegrown terrorism.
Possibly what happened on 22/7 will be a wake-up call for these parties to think about the impact their provocative claims not only have on immigrants but on deranged people like Breivik.
