Summary
Salwan Momika, the Iraqi man who staged several Quran burnings in Sweden in 2023, was shot and killed in Sodertalje, near Stockholm.
His actions had sparked international outrage, riots, and diplomatic tensions. Swedish police confirmed a murder investigation is underway, and several arrests have been made.
Momika, who sought asylum in Sweden in 2018, faced charges of incitement to hatred, with a verdict scheduled for the day after his death.
His protests were permitted under free speech laws but led to legal action against him.
I’m not for the death penalty or killing people generally (very rare exceptions, maybe).
That said, he did it to rile up millions of people with hate speech (for them it is I bet), so like don’t do that or you might face consequences.
Free speech isn’t about the right to hate speeching. What a douchebag.
Edit: idiot below trying to frame it I think you shouldn’t “blasphemy”. No lol go ahead and blasphemy all you want, that’s free speech IMO.
Blasting religion for it’s cruelty is always appreciated.
To bad he was a raging hypocrite who targeted Muslims due to himself being targeted as a Christian. Religion is gonna religion until they all stop believing the nonsense or everyone gets converted (alive or dead).
Being offended is not a justification for killing nor is it hate speech.
Where the hell do you see me saying killing is okay? I say literally the opposite.
Also, he did hate speech, he was on trial for it, read the article!
Are you one of the bigots trying to stir things up or what the hell is your agenda?
No agenda. Free speech absolutist. Criticism of a topic no matter how offensive must be allowed.
Publicly burning symbols of a minority group or a world view is an incitement to violence against that group or people holding that world view.
It has nothing to do with constructive criticism. It is symbolizing a violent act, with the goal to incite more violence.
It is more offensive to kill someone rather than destroying a book. Any group of people that kills over offense is a danger to their society and the world.
Which group? How do you define that group? Do you think groups of people should be collectively punished for the actions of individuals of that group?
Also i fail to see why incitement to kill people, which is the ultimate goal of the book burning becomes acceptable, because killing people is worse? Is every lesser crime acceptable? is every hate speech acceptable? Is everything acceptable that falls short of killing someone?
I think it should be obvious that lesser crimes are still crimes and i think it should be obvious, that hate speech against minorities is particular problematic, as it leads to killing people of that minority, which as you point out is the most severe crime.
I don’t think we should consider blasphemy as hate speech. Or do you want to be required to follow the rules of all religions because they are all offended by it?
It wasn’t the blasphemy that was hate speech, it was the whole rhing riling them up ffs.