Is Female Genital Mutilation a Lesser Crime Than Rape?

The Finnish police have launched the first preliminary investigations into the genital mutilation of girls taking place within well-known immigrant communities. Hopefully, the cases will be clarified and those responsible will be punished.

According to a news report on the matter, a person guilty of mutilating girls’ genitals — that is, so-called circumcision — may be sentenced to imprisonment ranging from one to ten years. In other words, the scale is quite broad.

For my part, I would hope that the courts eventually handling the first cases will be up to their task and refrain from applying the lowest penalties on the scale. I justify this by noting that, according to the law, even basic-form rape must result in a custodial sentence of at least one year — and surely no reasonable person can consider the permanent damage of a woman’s genitals to be a lesser act than their forced use?

It is therefore also necessary to question the reasoning of lawmakers — that is, ministers and members of parliament — who have implicitly written into law the view that causing permanent bodily harm would be equivalent to causing temporary harm. This despite the fact that rape also has lasting and serious psychological consequences — but does not mutilation, which is considered particularly brutal violence, have many times more such consequences? And does the fact that it is typically inflicted on girls of growing age not make circumcision even more condemnable?

If I were a lawmaker myself, I would have started the penalty scale for mutilation from where it ends for ordinary rapes. I would also have added to the law the deportation of the parent or parents who decided on the mutilation, if they are not native Finns. After all, the intentional damage of genital organs is an act that demonstrates complete disregard for the values and legislation of Finnish society.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Will European Culture Collapse Under the Weight of Islamic Immigration?
Finnish Society Adopts Medieval Characteristics
A Muslim Woman's Lack of Solidarity with Iranian Women

Free School Education for Foreigners Ends in Finland

The Parliament of Finland approved the government’s proposal according to which students from outside the EU and EEA will in the future pay an annual fee in upper-secondary schools (lukio) and vocational institutions corresponding to the actual cost of their education. We are not talking about small sums: for example, the cost of one year of upper-secondary school can exceed 10,000 euros.

According to Statistics Finland, in 2022 there were about 35,000 foreign nationals studying in vocational education and about 3,400 in upper-secondary schools. These figures also include people from EU and EEA countries, to whom the legislative change does not apply. The largest groups in vocational schools were Estonians (around 4,500), Russians (around 4,500), Iraqis (around 3,500), Afghans (around 2,200) and Filipinos (around 2,000).

In Parliament, the proposal was opposed not only by the left-wing parties—the Greens and the Left Alliance—but also by the Centre Party. It would be interesting to know what the party’s voters think about the matter at a time when public services have been cut and will continue to be cut drastically—if not from foreigners’ services, then from Finns’.

This was also noted by MP Joakim Vigelius, who additionally stated—quite correctly—that "Finland cannot be the world’s educational hub, nor a global social service office, health centre, care home or prison. The money will not be sufficient if the number of those to be served expands to everyone crossing the border without conditions, fees or responsibilities."

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Attitudes Toward Immigrants Are a Problem in Schools
Has Modern Education Strayed Too Far — and Is It Time to Change Course?
Marx in the Classroom: How Ideological Education Shaped Careers and Values

The original blogpost in Finnish:
Laitavasemmisto ja Keskusta haluaisivat Suomesta koko maailman ilmaisen koulutuskeskuksen

Ukraine Must Defeat Corruption Before Joining the EU

In addition to waging war, Ukraine is also striving to root out the rampant corruption in the country. And no wonder — in 2024, the nation ranked as low as 105th on an index measuring corruption levels. That means Ukrainians are slightly more corrupt than those in Morocco, the Dominican Republic, or Serbia, but still less prone to bribery than people in Algeria, Brazil, or Malawi.

Incidentally, the least corrupt countries in the world were Denmark, Finland, Singapore, and New Zealand. At the very bottom of the list — in positions 178 to 180 — were Venezuela, Somalia, and South Sudan.

* * *

Let us return, then, to Ukraine, which is fighting desperately for its independence against the Russians, with strong support from Western nations. Its leadership has also expressed a firm desire to join the European Union.

In my view, the EU — which itself struggles with corruption — must, despite all sympathy toward the Ukrainians, firmly maintain that this goal cannot be achieved unless corruption is thoroughly eradicated from the country. In this respect, Ukrainians are on the right path, but unfortunately still far from the finish line.

It was therefore rather foolish that President Volodymyr Zelensky tried during the summer to limit anti-corruption investigations — a move that raised doubts, both in me and surely in many others, about whether Ukraine can ever leave behind its Slavic legacy of corruption and one day embrace a Western way of life. 

To be sure, he quickly reversed course, but it is clear that the damage was already done and the stigma of corruption attached to Ukrainians only grew stronger. Erasing that image will not be easy — it will require revelations and punishments that may also reach into Zelensky’s own apparently corrupt inner circle.

It remains to be seen how Ukraine will tackle corruption in the future — and whether the problem can ever truly be brought under control so that the country’s EU membership might one day become even theoretically possible.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Ukraine Risks Losing Western Trust by Muzzling Corruption Watchdog
A New Beginning: Economic Independence in the Hands of Developing Nations
Can Trump Resist the Kremlin’s Lure?

Finns Give Their Government a Green Light to Ban Face Coverings

According to a new public opinion survey, 54 percent of Finns support and 26 percent oppose banning face coverings in public places and public services. This view is especially common among supporters of the Finns Party (92%), the National Coalition Party (70%), the Centre Party (62%), and the Social Democrats (54%). Thus, only the supporters of the left-wing parties (the Greens and the Left Alliance) are, on the whole, opposed to such a ban.

In fact, support for banning face coverings among different parties is even higher than the figures above suggest. For example, 14% of National Coalition supporters did not express an opinion, meaning that only 15% of them opposed the idea. Moreover, among those Green Party supporters who did state a view, around one-third supported a ban on face coverings.

There are at least two main justifications for prohibiting face coverings. First, they complicate criminal investigations.

Second, wearing a face covering is not always voluntary, since in certain cultures women are forced to cover their faces against their own will. Therefore, a ban could promote gender equality and the rights of girls and women.

That is why I now ask whether Prime Minister Petteri Orpo’s (NCP) government, together with the Social Democrats, could ensure that the will of the people on this matter is implemented as soon as possible. Drafting such a law should be fairly straightforward, as Finland could follow the example of countries such as Norway, the Netherlands, or France, where such bans are already in effect.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Managing Societal Change with a Growing Muslim Population
A young woman skiing in a swimsuit caused a controversy among women
Did police have the right to strip women

The original blogpost in Finnish:
Hallitus sai kansalta valtakirjan kasvojen peittämisen kieltämiselle

Demonstration Demonstrated the Selfishness of the Demonstrators

A World Rally Championship event is currently taking place in Jyväskylä, Finland. In connection with this, the Finnish branch of Extinction Rebellion, known as Elokapina, organized a protest without prior notice—in other words, an illegal demonstration—intended to disrupt the event. While the incident caused little actual disturbance to the rally itself, it demonstrated how little these identity politics-driven activists care about the law or other people.

This phenomenon is far from new. In fact, it has become an almost permanent feature of major sporting events (example). And it’s likely only a matter of time before the situation escalates to the point where the highlight of someone’s career—perhaps even the culmination of a lifetime dedicated to sport—is ruined.

That’s why it’s important that the activists who protested in Jyväskylä are brought to court, and that the full extent of penalties allowed by law be applied, to make clear that their actions are not acceptable. At the same time, lawmakers in Finland and elsewhere should revise legislation so that the threshold for disrupting major sporting events is raised as high as possible.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Finnish Branch of Extinction Rebellion Faces Possible Ban
Eco-Fascist Blackmail: Threats of Sabotage Loom Over the World Ski Championships
Criminal Attack Against Finnish Democracy

Organized Vandalism in Helsinki, Finland

An office building located in Helsinki, the capital of Finland, was vandalized with red paint last night. The building houses the Finnish branch of Allianz Trade Suomi, so the incident is most likely connected to organized terrorism targeting that particular company.

This conclusion is supported by a report from Middle East Monitor in January, which stated that the pro-Palestinian group Palestine Action had already carried out similar actions against 15 Allianz offices across Europe.

The act appears to have been carried out by a group called Palestine Action Suomi, which has previously vandalized the historic and valuable Finnish Ministry of Defence building, as well as the premises of Nammo, a company manufacturing defense equipment. In the latter case, the group's justification for its reckless actions was either false or misleading.

One can only hope that the police succeed in identifying and locating those responsible for the vandalism so they can be brought to justice and held accountable for the damage caused, as well as the costs of cleaning up the paint. In this regard, I am fairly confident, as the Finnish police have proven to be highly effective in recent decades.

It is also important that Finnish media outlets prominently report the legal consequences and compensation rulings related to this politically motivated vandalism once the court has issued its decision. Such reporting would help younger generations understand how irrational it is to join organizations like Palestine Action, instead of seeking to influence political issues through legal and democratic means.

Aiempia ajatuksia samasta aihepiiristä:
Activism Without Truth 
Greta Thunberg in Search of a Greater Thrill
The demands of the vandals

In Finland, the Enemy Is Clear – and Now the Truth Is Emerging for the Palestinians Too

The Finnish government is proposing an extension to the so-called "pushback law." This law, which closes the border between Finland and Russia, came into effect last July with an almost unanimous decision in Parliament. Extending it once again requires a clear majority in Parliament.

That appears to be happening, as the parties still hold the same positions they did during the original vote that enacted the law. Only the Greens and the Left Alliance oppose the proposal, while the rest understand that Putin must not be given the opportunity to continue his hybrid warfare, which instrumentalizes migrants.

Meanwhile, the Social Democrats—also in opposition—have stated that "ensuring border security is just as relevant as it was a year ago," and they intend to support the government. The Centre Party, also in opposition, will do the same.

It seems that Finland’s eastern border will remain closed until Russia provides credible proof that it will no longer use asylum seekers against Finland. For everyone's sake, it would be best if this happened as soon as possible—the ball is now in Vladimir Putin’s court.

* * *

News has also emerged from the Holy Land. Frustration among Gaza’s residents appears to have reached new heights after Israel resumed bombings a week ago, following a two-month ceasefire.

As a result, Palestinians in Gaza staged a protest on Tuesday against Hamas, which governs the territory. The demonstrators called Hamas members terrorists and demanded an end to the war against Israel.

It appears that many Palestinians have come to realize that their biggest problem is not Israel but Hamas, which continues to wage endless terrorism. However, it remains to be seen whether the protests will grow large enough to force Hamas to surrender, release the hostages, and agree to lay down its arms permanently.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
The Complete Demilitarization of Gaza: What Would It Mean for the Palestinians?
Time for Hamas to Accept the Facts
Defending National Security: Finland's Response to Hybrid Warfare

Finnish International Law Experts Viewed as Political Influencers by Peers

Finland, like other Western nations, is a rule-of-law state where power is based on Montesquieu’s theory of the separation of powers. According to this principle, executive, legislative, and judicial powers must be vested in separate entities. In recent years, however, Finnish lawyers have increasingly been accused, particularly by the political right, of attempting to undermine the freedom of the Finnish Parliament, which exercises legislative power.

A striking comment about this issue was made today by Jukka Savolainen, the Network Director at the European Centre of Excellence for Countering Hybrid Threats. He stated that many international legal experts view their Finnish colleagues more as political influencers than as lawyers focused on the impartial administration of justice.

Specifically, Savolainen noted: "Next week, I’ll be hosting a symposium with seven professors of international law, and the majority of them have expressed surprise at the emergence of Finnish international law experts. They’ve wondered whether these experts are just poor legal scholars. Then they’ve concluded, no, they’re political influencers."

Left-leaning legal scholars have particularly criticized the return law passed last year to counter Russia’s hybrid warfare. This law allowed Finland to close its eastern border, effectively halting the flow of asylum seekers facilitated by Russia. The legislative amendment was enacted despite opposition from these scholars and successfully stopped the influx of migrants across Finland’s eastern border.

According to Savolainen, the emergency law was enacted in accordance with proper legislative procedures. He also emphasized that Finland is a sovereign state that can choose its commitments and withdraw from them as it sees fit. Additionally, he noted that Russia’s modern warfare doctrine explicitly mentions directing migration waves toward targeted countries as a method of state destabilization, providing both theoretical and factual justification for the law.

Regrettably, I doubt that even the criticisms I have discussed here will have any effect on left-leaning Finnish legal scholars, whose leading figure is Martin Scheinin. Scheinin, a former member of the UN Human Rights Committee and also once involved in Finland’s Communist Party, has shown no respect for the separation of powers whenever it has conflicted with his own ambitions. This trend is evident throughout his career.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Defending National Security: Finland's Response to Hybrid Warfare
Finland to Tighten Asylum Legislation and Reduce Undocumented Residents
Putin's useful idiots in Finland

Why aren't People Interested in the Rights of Iraqi Girls?

In recent years, there has been concern in Western countries for issues like the rights of sexual and gender minorities. A sign of this was, for example, when two men were allowed to box against women in last summer’s Olympics.

It is therefore strange that Iraq’s plans to allow marriage for nine-year-old girls have not sparked much opposition, even though these children would, in practice, be forced to fulfill the misguided desires of their pedophilic husbands.

So far, this issue has led only to remarks from the UN and human rights organizations, but not to major reactions from ordinary people, such as protests or demonstrations. It remains to be seen, however, whether people in the West will take notice if this law is indeed passed, subjecting little girls to legalized exploitation. 

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Responsible Development Aid and New Priorities: Finland's Development Cooperation Reforms

A Muslim Woman's Lack of Solidarity with Iranian Women
Everyone has the right

Three Islamists Arrested in Finland on Suspicion of Belonging to a Terrorist Group

Finland's National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) has arrested three foreign men suspected of involvement in the activities of the Islamic terrorist organization ISIS. Two of the suspects were born in the 1980s and one in the 1990s.

The police are not commenting on the possible crimes committed by the men, but under Finnish law, merely participating in the activities of a terrorist group can lead to a conviction. At this stage, however, nothing suggests that there has been a terrorism threat directed at Finland.

If the men are found guilty of involvement in a terrorist group, they will be sentenced to a minimum of four months and a maximum of eight years in prison.

So far, Finland has only had one Islamist terrorist attack. It occurred in Turku in 2017 when Abderrahman Bouanane, a Moroccan who came to Finland as an asylum seeker, randomly stabbed people, killing two of them.

For this act, Bouanane was sentenced to life imprisonment, from which the president can pardon him if desired—usually no earlier than after 12 years of imprisonment. It remains to be seen whether Finland’s first Muslim terrorist will ever be released.

In this regard, it is interesting that - relative to the size of Finland’s Muslim population - the country sent the highest number of terrorists to ISIS's caliphate in Syria and Iraq during the last decade. However, none of them have yet been convicted for their atrocities there. Additionally, the police have not suggested that the arrest of the current suspects is in any way related to ISIS’s caliphate.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
The Stabber Killed Three People in an Extremely Multicultural City
Cancellation of Taylor Swift's Concert in Austria Was a Success for the Terrorists
Two out of three Palestinians support October 7 attack

Defending National Security: Finland's Response to Hybrid Warfare

Yesterday was an important day for Finland and all of Europe, as the parliament approved the so-called return law with a vote of 167-31. In this way, our country has shown our hybrid war-fighting neighbor that Finland will not submit to its victimization.

With the new return law, asylum seekers attempting to enter Finland can be prevented from entering the country, submitting asylum applications, or removed from outside the borders when they are being used as tools of hybrid warfare. Thus, the law is not about violating human rights but about a means to prevent the misuse of the asylum system when its purpose is to destabilize or blackmail the security of Finland and/or Europe.

Unfortunately, 31 members of parliament decided to express with their voting behavior that promoting the hybrid activities of our eastern neighbor is more important to them than the safety of their own people. Therefore, I considered it appropriate to make a list of them so that the irresponsible actions of these politicians would remain in the memory of social media for a long time to come.

The members of parliament who voted against the return law are Li Andersson (Left Alliance), Eva Biaudet (Swedish People's Party), Fatim Diarra (Greens), Tuuna Elo (Greens), Bella Forsgrén (Greens), Timo Furuholm (Left Alliance), Elisa Gebhard (Social Democrats), Pekka Haavisto (Greens), Timo Harakka (Social Democrats), Atte Harjanne (Greens), Hanna Holopainen (Greens), Veronica Honkasalo (Left Alliance), Inka Hopsu (Greens), Saara Hyrkkö (Greens), Krista Kiuru (Social Democrats), Mai Kivelä (Left Alliance), Anna Kontula (Left Alliance), Minja Koskela (Left Alliance), Johan Kvarnström (Social Democrats), Merja Kyllönen (Left Alliance), Laura Meriluoto (Left Alliance), Krista Mikkonen (Greens), Matias Mäkynen (Social Democrats), Maria Ohisalo (Greens), Aino-Kaisa Pekonen (Left Alliance), Jenni Pitko (Greens), Nasima Razmyar (Social Democrats), Jussi Saramo (Left Alliance), Hanna Sarkkinen (Left Alliance), Oras Tynkkynen (Greens), and Sofia Virta (Greens).

Of the people on the list, 23 or 74 percent are women, and the remaining 26 percent are men. In other words, female members of parliament are significantly more inclined than their male colleagues to act as Vladimir Putin's helpers or at least his useful idiots.

Among them, Eva Biaudet belongs to a government party, so there will likely be consequences for her voting behavior. Otherwise, those who have chosen to act as Russia's stooges represented the extreme or slightly more moderate left.

It was also significant that all three members of parliament with a developing country background - Diarra, Forsgrén, and Razmyar - supported Putin. This suggests that Finland's security is not important to them, or they are unable to understand the threat posed by Russia. This is, of course, unfortunate, because one would especially expect them to appreciate the security of their current home country.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Finland and Western Europe: Effectively at War
Putin's useful idiots in Finland
Change of immigration policy and development cooperation

Finland to Tighten Asylum Legislation and Reduce Undocumented Residents

Finland is modifying its asylum legislation. One of the new changes will be the restriction of the right to appeal a negative decision.

This change is necessary because, until now, it has been possible in Finland to remain without asylum rights by making new asylum applications. Thus, people from safe conditions who have come to the country for social security reasons have been able to stay in the country for years.

The new legislative amendment will take into account the means provided by the new European Reception Directive, thereby reducing the number of undocumented residents. At the same time, the amount of reception money offered to them will be reduced to a minimum, so Finland's attractiveness is expected to decrease significantly among people from developing countries seeking to enter Western countries on false grounds.

This way, dishonest asylum applications can be reduced, thereby speeding up the processing times of applications from those genuinely in need of personal protection. It will also reduce the costs of asylum seeking for Finnish taxpayers.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Getting asylum in Finland becomes significantly more difficult
The Finnish forest is life-threatening to asylum-seekers
A new wave of asylum seekers

The Relationship Between the Professor and Teemu Selänne

On the discussion forum of a Finnish newspaper Uusi Suomi, a Green municipal councilor referred to me by writing that "'Professor' is indeed a Selänne". The perspective was interesting in that I have not been very interested in the life of the former Finnish hockey star.

Then I noticed a small article about Teemu Selänne in Ilta-Sanomat. According to it, he has received US citizenship and has been active on social media. Through the newspaper's reporter, he conveyed a few interesting comments to us Finns.

In the first, he explained his view on Extinction Rebellion: "It's not about not accepting demonstrations. That's not true. The criticism was about how they are organized... In my opinion, demonstrations are a great thing, but breaking the law and making people's lives difficult is not acceptable."

In the second, he commented on the intellectual dishonesty of the green-left: "The whining is quite loud sometimes. It's funny that those who whine demand freedom of opinion and speech, but suddenly differing opinions are not okay."

In the third, he reminded us of the rules of societal debate: "If you have something to say about a matter, it needs to be said. But there's no point in coming to explain that I am an asshole or something about our children. That's not okay."

In the fourth, he addressed the presidential elections in his new home country, USA: "It's vague that in a country of 330 million people, there are no other candidates than two old men... It might be appropriate to head towards younger candidates and a bit of a new style."

In the fifth, he shared his view on society: "I still believe that the state should interfere in people's lives as minimally as possible. Individual power and personal decisions are the most important."

In the sixth, he commented on how the media chooses sides: "It's a bit like listening only to the prosecutor in court. You don't get the right picture. When I started following politics, I was told to watch both channels, CNN and Fox, equally. Those who only watch one side do not have a true picture of what is happening."

All in all, the article in Ilta-Sanomat conveyed Teemu Selänne's societal views in such a healthy way that any reasonably sensible person would easily agree with the thoughts he expressed. Therefore, I do not mind the characterization of myself recorded in the comments section of Uusi Suomi. Not even because that particular Green municipal politician later claimed in his comment that "the professor's thoughts" are not worth reading.

Instead, I suspect that this is precisely why an exceptionally large number of people reading the discussion clicked on the link to my writing - which in turn led me to find out why there had been an unusually high number of readers for that particular writing on Uusi Suomi.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Joe Biden Must Step Aside, But Can a Suitable Candidate Be Found?
Competence of the political left
Correct minister, ridiculous facts

Finns want a border law

According to a recent opinion poll, a clear majority of Finns support a new border law that would better counter Russia's hybrid warfare. The idea was backed by 62 percent of respondents, while only 17 percent opposed it.

This means that of those who expressed an opinion in the poll, 78.5 percent were in favor of enacting the law. And this is a very large majority. In other words, Finns want a new border law.

President Alexander Stubb also supported the law, stating that "according to our intelligence, Russia is capable of moving migrants to our border who are not traditional asylum seekers but people used as weapons and instrumentalized. Over a thousand in a few hours."

Hopefully, this information will sway those Social Democratic MPs who have so far opposed the law change, and perhaps even some representatives of the Greens or the Left Alliance.

Of course, there are no guarantees, but at least I wouldn't want to be the MP who ended up supporting Vladimir Putin's efforts to use masses of people from developing countries as a hybrid weapon by flooding them across our eastern border. And in doing so, helped one of the cruelest dictators of our time to undermine our organized society and its security.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Putin's useful idiots in Finland
Immigration issue
Mass immigration is the greatest concern for EU youth

The British human rights decision led to unwarranted calls

In the UK, a bill has passed which would allow asylum seekers to be sent to Rwanda while awaiting a decision on their asylum application. However, this hasn't been put into practice just yet, as it requires approval from King Charles first, followed by what are known as human rights activists organizing a trial farce, and then there must be a court decision on the matter.

In the future, we will likely see mass deportations of asylum seekers from Europe to Africa. Additionally, according to the new British law, a potential asylum would only entitle the applicant to stay in Rwanda—not to unsettle British society.

What's particularly interesting about the case is that Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has directly stated that the purpose of enacting the law was to create a deterrent effect on asylum seekers heading to Britain. On the other hand, there has been skepticism in the opposition about its impact on the numbers of people attempting to cross the Channel.

It remains to be seen how the law will impact the numbers of asylum seekers attempting to cross the English Channel. Will it achieve its goal of redirecting the flow of people, or will the previous trend continue, with the difference being that British taxpayer money is used for the nearly 6,500-kilometer flights of arrivals?

The question is pertinent, as according to Britain's own parliamentary institution, the Rwanda program costs nearly two million pounds per asylum seeker sent to Africa. If this estimate holds true, the bill for combating modern-day migration will be considerable.

On the other hand, if the flows of migrants seeking to exploit European social welfare were indeed effectively redirected elsewhere as a result of the decision, London's administration would save significantly more money. Moreover, the process of demographic change in Britain, sometimes referred to as population replacement, would slow down significantly from its current pace. Consequently, Britain's population would remain predominantly European well into the future.

* * *

Today I got to read an article where it was reported that the United Nations and the EU are urging the island nation to reject the bill.

According to the story, Michael O'Flaherty, the director of the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA), expressed that he is "concerned that the Rwanda bill enables the implementation of a policy of removing people to Rwanda without any prior assessment of their asylum claims by the UK authorities in the majority of cases.

The statement raises the question of whether there is a misunderstanding among influential figures in the UN and EU. The explicit intention of the British bill is that the assessment of the spontaneous asylum seekers' protection will be conducted in Rwanda, and thus there is no rational basis for conducting it first in the UK.

According to the same article, Rwanda has expressed satisfaction with Britain's decision and welcomes any potential entrants. This way, they can find a safe place to build their lives, which is ultimately what the international asylum system is about. It's not about the subjective right of all people in the world to settle in Europe and burden its inhabitants' economy or change its culture.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
A white family does not represent real Londoners
Finnish journalist called for British Prime Minister´s head to be placed on London bridge to dry
The arrival of caliphate citizens must be prevented

Getting asylum in Finland becomes significantly more difficult

Finnish Minister of the Interior, Mari Rantanen (PS), announced good news yesterday. According to her, the government intends to extend the residency requirement for obtaining Finnish citizenship from the current five years to eight years, and the calculation of this period will start only after obtaining a residence permit. Additionally, the acceptable period of residence abroad will be shortened from the current standard, and the amount of reception allowance and allowance for asylum seekers will be reduced.

The government also plans to add passing a citizenship test, which will be established, as a requirement for obtaining citizenship. Moreover, asylum will always be intended as temporary and as short as EU legislation allows. And in the future, it will no longer be possible to transition from an asylum seeker to a labor-based immigrant.

Furthermore, the Minister of the Interior emphasized that refugee status or asylum could be denied or revoked in the future if the individual is considered a threat to society, has committed an especially heinous crime, is suspected of or has committed a crime against peace, a war crime, a crime against humanity, or an act contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

The asylum process is also planned to be expedited through border procedures, during which asylum seekers are not allowed to leave the vicinity of the reception center assigned to them. Additionally, a fast-track procedure is intended to be included in the Aliens Act, under which applicants who receive a negative decision can be deported more quickly than in the regular asylum process. It is intended to be applied to individuals deemed a threat to national security and to those who have submitted repeat applications.

In addition to these changes, a proposal has been prepared at the Ministry of Justice, led by Leena Meri (PS), to amend the Penal Code regarding the criminalization of female genital mutilation and its preparation. This law is significant not only on the basis of human rights but also because it reduces Finland's attractiveness among asylum seekers who intend to mutilate their daughters' genitals, a practice that constitutes a significant portion of economic migrants arriving in Finland.

Overall, the government parties intend to implement exactly the policies that a large portion of their current voters supported in the last parliamentary elections. When combined with the billion-euro cut in development aid funding, voters finally have reason to be satisfied—provided, of course, that the intentions I've outlined above are realized.

Previous thought on the same topic:
The EU's 7.4 billion euro aid package is intellectual dishonesty
The Finnish forest is life-threatening to asylum-seekers
In Germany, immigration policy changes are being planned

Duck emphasizing the urgency of the new border law

In Finland, there is fear of a hybrid operation organized by Russia, which could result in an influx of asylum seekers from developing countries as spring arrives. Among them, there may also be activists or operatives playing into Putin's hands.

For this reason, the government has prepared a proposal to enhance our country's ability to defend against Russian aggression. During the preparatory consultation process, the draft legislation in question received some critical comments - as expected - so the potential enactment of the law is still ahead.

However, there is hope that this so-called "pushback law" - or the new border law - could be finalized and enacted as soon as possible, and that it would also be effective in practice. This has also been emphasized by both the former and current leaders of the country's foreign policy.

* * *

Relating to the text above, MTV3 published news yesterday stating that if something "looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it is probably a duck." The discussion was about a series of mischief in the Baltic countries, suspected to be a hybrid operation organized by Russia.

Related to these incidents, Janis Sarts, the Director of NATO's Strategic Communications Centre of Excellence, assessed that if Russia sees the method working in the Baltics, similar hybrid influence operations could also be seen in Finland in the future. This could include, for example, Molotov cocktail attacks or threats against daycare centers - something hardly any Finn would want.

It is evident that the suspicion of the hybrid nature of the crimes witnessed is correct, and therefore Sarts' assessment should also be taken seriously in Finland. Steps should be taken to ensure that Russia is not given leeway on our own soil.

Understanding this issue in all parliamentary groups - including those on the political left - is essential right now. And especially when the government's new proposal for the so-called "pushback law" is next up for discussion: in that context, I certainly wouldn't like to see a single useful idiot for Putin.

This is because the law will need to be enacted as a so-called emergency law, which requires a five-sixths majority in parliament. If such a majority cannot be found, there is a risk that we will soon find ourselves even more at the mercy of Russia's bloody dictator.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Desperate cry of Russians
The Finnish forest is life-threatening to asylum-seekers
Political rats and useful idiots

The Non-Discrimination Ombudsman violates the law on openness

In Finland, there is an authority named the Non-Discrimination Ombudsman, which operates to provide statements related to its field and also comments on matters through social media. In messaging service X, this authority has most recently conveyed information stating, "The Non-Discrimination Ombudsman assesses that the closure of almost all eastern border crossing points and the concentration of seeking international protection at the Raja-Jooseppi border crossing endangers the right to seek asylum."

If one attempts to respond to the message, it is not possible, and comments can only be given from accounts specifically mentioned by the ombudsman. I am not one of those account owners, and neither is Minister of Justice Leena Meri.

This is perplexing, as the Non-Discrimination Ombudsman is a publicly funded entity serving taxpayers and should cater to the entire population. However, as evident from the above, this is not the case, prompting the question of why.

The issue at hand is why this particular authority is not inherently open to public discourse—or even public dialogue with the government of the country—but instead predefines with whom it is willing to engage.

Therefore, it is pertinent to inquire how this operational model aligns with the purpose stated in the Act on the Openness of Government Activities, which, in clear Finnish language, articulates that "the purpose of the statutory right of access to information and the obligations of authorities is to implement openness in the activities of the authorities, provide individuals and communities the opportunity to monitor the use of public authority and public funds, freely form their opinions, influence the exercise of public authority, and monitor their rights and interests."

Finally, it is worth noting that the current Non-Discrimination Ombudsman is Kristina Stenman, who previously served in the Refugee Advice Centre, assisted far-left professor Martin Scheinin and worked as a city manager. She assumed office on August 1, 2020, having been appointed by the government of Prime Minister Sanna Marin.

The original thought in Finnish:
Yhdenvertaisuusvaltuutettu ja laki viranomaisen toiminnan julkisuudesta

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Freudian slip, 9-year-old girl and cultural appropriation
A Finnish police officer is afraid to speak about the problems of immigration
"Woke" pushes American science academies to favor women in their membership selections

Erdogan wants fighter jets, and uses Finland and Sweden to get them

Foreign minister Mevlüt Cavusoglu of Turkey is currently negotiating with his colleague of the United States, Anthony Blinken, about buying General Dynamics F-16 fighter jets to his air force. They have asked those already quite a while ago, but only now have got their chance.

The reason is that Finland and Sweden have asked to be accepted as members of the NATO. And that provided Turkey a chance to blackmail Joe Biden´s regime to accept the trade. 

That probably is also the reason why Turkey is setting impossible demands to Sweden for a positive response. That is, asking Sweden to even change its legislation in order to send Kurdish refugees to be sentenced to jail for issues that are not crimes in the Nordic countries.

* * *

In both Turkey and Finland people are waiting whether Americans will couple the fighter trade to President Erdogan´s approval of the applications of Finland and Sweden. And to help in such a way to increase our safety as neighbors of the aggressive Russia. 

While waiting for Turkish ratification I would like to point out to Turkey´s regime, that keeping Finland out for too long does not enhance positive attitudes of Finns towards the country. Actually, the reluctance seen thus far has already injured sympathy that prevailed between the people of the two nations just few years ago. 

Turkish behavior is also followed in other Western countries, and therefore the ruler of the Bosporous strait is now under a lot of pressure from other NATO members. A common expectation, however, is that Turkey would actually be ready to accept Finland and Sweden, but wants to get a reward for its graciousness. That is, modern fighters to be used in it own interest in Near East and elsewhere. 

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Long distance trade
Finland and Sweden invited to NATO - but what about Kurdish people
Why Finland will apply for a membership in NATO

Finland and Sweden invited to NATO - but what about Kurdish people

Today was a big day for Finland and Sweden as they were invited to join NATO. It was also an important day for Turkey´s wannabe sultan, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, who most probably obtained a promise from President Joe Biden of obtaining F16 fighters from the USA. 

A day was a bit less great for Turkish minorities. That was very clearly pointed out by a member of Swedish  parliament, Kurdish Amineh Kakabaveh, who did not accept the deal by the Swedish Social democratic government, and said to her compatriots that a "vote for the Social Democrats is a vote for Erdogan". 

The reason is that Finland and Sweden agreed on actions against terrorists. And terrorists in Erdogan´s understanding are more or less synonyms for Kurds. 

Already now Finland and Sweden are considering PKK as a terrorist organisation, due to an obvious reason that PKK has been guilty of terrorist attacks. On the other hand, the two Nordic countries do not consider other Kurdish organisations - including Syrian YPG - terroristic organizations, but neither do they support them. 

Therefore, the agreement between the Nordic countries and Turkey - as far as is possible to figure out based on the available public information - will not change the current political practices considering Kurdish people. 

It is also clear that neither Finland nor Sweden will send a single Kurd to Turkey if that would be against their own legislation. That means no one - who is not a terrorist according to Nordic laws - has a fear of being sent to Turkey for a trial. 

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Why Finland will apply for a membership in NATO
COVID-19 against Finland´s NATO plans
Is President Putin on his way to repeat the destiny of Czar Nicholas II?