It has been made clear by several European governments to their citizens that criticizing European migrant policies or migrants is ‘criminally off-limits’ and may lead to arrest, prosecution and including convictions.
These practices constitute police state behavior but they didn’t stop there. They went farther and are ensuring that Islam in general, is not criticized either.
In many parts of the Western world Muslims are demanding, and getting, preferential treatment. And in the process, freedom of religion is slowly being eroded. Muslims around the world are seeking to implement such censorship on all non-Muslims. It was reported in 2009 that, At the UN level, for example, Muslims are hoping to use UN Resolution 62/154, which has to do with “combating defamation of religions” to allow Islam to be above all criticism and critique.
The European country that recently adopted this policy of sanctions against those who attack Islam is Finland. A Finns Party politician, Terhi Kiemunki, was found guilty of “slandering and insulting adherents of the Islamic faith” in a blog post of Uusi Suomi. She claimed, in this post, that all terrorists in Europe are Muslims and the court found that when she wrote of a “repressive, intolerant and violent religion and culture,” she meant the Islamic faith.
Kiemunki was asked during the trial why she didn’t use radical Islam to make a distinction. She said she meant to refer to the spread of Islamic culture and religion and “probably should have” spoken of radicalized elements of the religion instead of the faith as a whole. She was fined 450 euros and her lawyer has already appealed the verdict.
Kiemunki issued a press release after the verdict, in which she said:
“I am still of the view that declaring statistical facts or even sharing an opinion is not a crime if someone doesn’t like it… I wrote that I don’t want our country to be overtaken by a culture and law based on a violent, intolerant and oppressive religion.” She added that her essay did not generalize about Muslims, but pointed out that not all Muslims are terrorists. “In these times, specifically in the recent past and today, all of the perpetrators of terrorist acts have turned out to be Muslim.”
Kiemunki should have presented the court with quotes from the Quran, such as, “Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them…” (9:5), and “So fight them until there is no more fitna [strife] and all submit to the religion of Allah.” (8:39). Perhaps the court could have understood that the only differences between “Islam” and “radical Islam” is the action involved since all Muslims are taught these beliefs.
As Turkey’s President, Recep Tayyip Erdogan said, “These descriptions are very ugly, it is offensive and an insult to our religion. There is no moderate or immoderate Islam. Islam is Islam and that’s it.” There are extremist Muslims and non-extremist Muslims, but there is only one Islam.
In the Netherlands, a state-funded hotline, run by the anti-discrimination bureau MiND, it could not act on complaints about death threats to homosexuals. It says that threatening homosexuals with burning, decapitation and slaughter is just fine, so long as it is Muslims who are making those threats, as the Quran tells them that such behavior is mandated. This might be one of the most astounding examples of voluntary submission to sharia law in the West thus far. The same officials forget that the Bible also condemns homosexuality with death – Leviticus 20:13 – “If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them.”
In February 2016, a man was found guilty in Danish court for making statements on Facebook that were “insulting and demeaning towards adherents of Islam.” He wrote, “The ideology of Islam is as loathsome, disgusting, oppressive and as misanthropic as Nazism. The massive immigration of Islamists into Denmark is the most devastating thing to happen to Danish society in recent history,” and was fined for “racism” but the High Court overturned the verdict in May 2016 as his statements were “directed at the ideology of Islam and Islamism.”
Australia is another country that joined the band wagon this past August 2016. Vilification on the grounds of religion (“Muslim vilification” is the more accurate term) is now illegal and in serious cases could result in a criminal conviction with a fine of up to $7500, under laws passed by the ACT parliament on Thursday. Thursday’s changes to the Discrimination Act also added disability to the list, so it is now illegal to vilify someone because of disability, religion, race, sexuality, gender identity, and HIV/AIDS status. Vilification can include social media posts, actions in a workplace and wearing clothes, signs or flags that would incite hatred, contempt, ridicule or revulsion.
Both Labor and Liberal supported the move put by the Greens Shane Rattenbury, who said the display of hatred, intolerance and offensive behaviour towards Muslims was one of the biggest intolerance issues in Australia today. And the scary part is that the term “vilification” is left undefined. It could be anything from looking at them in a wrong way to outright attacking them.
The saddest part of all of this is that none of these countries have any similar laws protecting God, Jesus Christ, the Bible or Christianity. It’s okay to blaspheme against Jesus and the Bible but say the slightest thing against Islam you’re in big trouble.
Freedom of speech doesn’t seem to exist anymore and these stories show that is becoming more and more true. It seems that no Islam criticizing whatsoever will be tolerated and we must be on guard to make sure these don’t become laws here in America.