“Advertising leaflets are truly dangerous.” ??
Here’s an excerpt from Hesari about the Porvoo cathedral fire. Am I understanding this correctly?
The main defendant himself expressed contrition and said that he acted on whim. “I put paper in the drain and lit it. I didn’t think that the fire would spread. It was a mindless act. I have a critical attitude toward religion, but I am not hostile toward it. Now I regret that the foolishness of one person has caused so much harm to many others.”
The judge in the case, Lars Karlsson, asked the defendant about the ladder and the paper. The defendant said that he had shredded advertising leaflets that he had found on the street. “Advertising leaflets are truly dangerous. They should simply not exist“, Karlsson said.
…a Finnish judge thinks leaflets are “truly dangerous” - WTF? Is he worried about papercuts, or drunken youth using them to spontaneously set old churches on fire? Maybe this is the same judge who got arrested for drunk driving on their morning ride to court. I hope this sentence was taken out of context. LOL!
We have nutty judges..
A few years ago, a rapist had his sentence suspended thanks to him having a full-time job.
We really have a nutty legal system too, the serial rapist in Oulu denied it was rape and instead plead guilty for “forced sex”.
WTF!
Our legal system, is a disgrace to put it succintly.
Comment by Harri — Wed, Aug 30th, 2006 @ 1:04 pm
Don’t feel bad, in the states we give the death penalty to retarded people.
Comment by Phil — Wed, Aug 30th, 2006 @ 1:23 pm
sarcasm
n : witty language used to convey insults or scorn; “he used sarcasm to upset his opponent”; “irony is wasted on the stupid”; “Satire is a sort of glass, wherein beholders do generally discover everybody’s face but their own”–Johathan Swift [syn: irony, satire, caustic remark]
Comment by Kimmo W. — Wed, Aug 30th, 2006 @ 2:54 pm
Ahhhh…you think? Sarcasm doesn’t seem to translate well when they go Finnish-to-English. I read the English pages of H.S. each day, don’t think I’ve seen it in their non-commentaries, I guess I wasn’t expected it.
Comment by Phil — Wed, Aug 30th, 2006 @ 3:00 pm
I can see that there were no courses on “recognising the obvious” at your university!
Comment by Kimmo W. — Wed, Aug 30th, 2006 @ 3:03 pm
I to think the judge was being sarcastic. Finns do have a sense of humor but at times it is so hard to tell…..
Comment by Fred Fry — Wed, Aug 30th, 2006 @ 3:32 pm
Hmm, they didn’t mention this quote in HBL. I suspect his opinion is a) sarcasm (although not really a common Finnish trait so not really so likely) or b) he’s an old school BorgÃ¥/Porvoo resident (not so unlikely given his name) and therefore his language was slightly coloured by the emotion of the whole event of the cathedral being burnt. Either that or it’s a very dodgy translation from the original Hesari article. Who knows? It does certainly sound strange in English, so I understand why it jumped out at you!
Anyway, tomorrow at 13.00 Finnish time the judgement will come. I hope that at least some prison time is involved. It’s so sad a reasoning to burn down such a hisorical landmark and ‘hallmark’ of the town.
Comment by JG — Wed, Aug 30th, 2006 @ 4:16 pm
I hope they burn more.
Comment by Fägäri — Wed, Aug 30th, 2006 @ 4:38 pm
Finnish humour is kind of Russian-lite, smart assing all the time. Russians have even more weird sense of humour
Comment by tim73 — Wed, Aug 30th, 2006 @ 5:48 pm
“Ahhhh…you think? Sarcasm doesn’t seem to translate well when they go Finnish-to-English.”
After having read the news in both Finnish and English I’ll have to say that nothing is lost in translation, the quote means exactly the same in both languages.
Had the defendant blamed the leaflets for the arson the sarcasm would be obvious of course, but now it just sounds stupid to say that leaflets should not exist.
Comment by Nirva — Wed, Aug 30th, 2006 @ 5:53 pm
Finns do have a sense of humor but at times it is so hard to tell…..
Thanks, Fred, for encouragement. It’s nice that there’s somebody out there who thinks we’re human … or, wait a minute, was it sarcasm? It’s hard to tell, because you Americans just don’t understand the concept.
JG, I think that sarcasm/irony even vahingonilo/skadeglädje (?) are often the foundation of Finnish humour. Perhaps I’m wrong.
The judge was being sarcastic, and so was the reporter who decided to write it down. Phil just has his expectations wrong: a judge can’t he humoristic or a Finn can’t be sarcastic … let alone a Finnish judge telling a “joke”. Perhaps I’m wrong, but usually something is funny because what happens doesn’t follow your expectations.
Comment by tomia — Wed, Aug 30th, 2006 @ 7:08 pm
Good. One more judge in this world that agrees that those paper thingys are just annoying and pointless.
Comment by Mo — Wed, Aug 30th, 2006 @ 7:40 pm
I can see that there were no courses on “recognising the obvious†at your university!
I should try reading Hesari while I’m stoned from now on, maybe I’ll finally get all the subtle humor.
Comment by Phil — Wed, Aug 30th, 2006 @ 8:29 pm
I was also astonished regarding the stupid leaflet sentence. WTF? :-/ I live in Porvoo and the fire was a deep shock.
I should not be as sarcastic as this Finnish judge, but perhaps we read tomorrow in Iltalehti: the leaflet was from Lidl. The evil one! Pois Suomesta! Iltalehti loves Lidl stories :->
Well, the sentence seems to be now 7 years… They should also make him pay till the end of his days. At least this happened in Germany when a girl called the Düsseldorf Airport that there was a bomb. There wasn’t any, but the cost for security efforts and the mess was huge.
Comment by Sunny — Wed, Aug 30th, 2006 @ 9:35 pm
“Thanks, Fred, for encouragement. It’s nice that there’s somebody out there who thinks we’re human … or, wait a minute, was it sarcasm? It’s hard to tell, because you Americans just don’t understand the concept.”
Ha! I was dating my now wife for six months before I realized that she had a sense of humor.
Comment by Fred Fry — Thu, Aug 31st, 2006 @ 2:53 am
Phil is losing it. OMG WTF ROTFL.
Comment by Anonymous — Thu, Aug 31st, 2006 @ 6:44 am
I was dating my now wife for six months before I realized that she had a sense of humor.
No, no, that’s not funny but just embarrasing.
Comment by Anonymous — Thu, Aug 31st, 2006 @ 7:55 am
Well, the sentence seems to be now 7 years…
I wonder how many years were tacked on extra because it was a famous old church?
Comment by Phil — Thu, Aug 31st, 2006 @ 9:45 am
Phil is losing it. OMG WTF ROTFL.
Writer - You’ve written under 9 different usernames, insulted quite a few members including all Swedish-Finns, and you’ve impersonated another frequent commenter. Insults are fine, but pick a unique username and stick with it if you wish to continue. And impersonating another commenter is a big no-no.
Comment by Phil — Thu, Aug 31st, 2006 @ 9:56 am
Honestly, in uber-safe, uber-enviornmentalist Finland, I seriously thought that maybe a judge could dislike leaflets (because they clutter up the city, I don’t like those leaflets much either).
The judge was being sarcastic, and so was the reporter who decided to write it down.
Obviously the suspect in this case somehow eluded to the fact that the leafets provoked him or something like that, then the judge would make a sarcastic comment like that - but the English article on H.S. doesn’t refer to that. It just places the judge’s sarcasm out of the blue.
Comment by Phil — Thu, Aug 31st, 2006 @ 10:09 am
Writer - You’ve written under 9 different usernames, insulted quite a few members including all Swedish-Finns, and you’ve impersonated another frequent commenter. Insults are fine, but pick a unique username and stick with it if you wish to continue. And impersonating another commenter is a big no-no.
Now, now, Phil, that’s just an expression of freedom. I mean, whose person or property is this guy violating against?
Anyway, you’re being watched folks, be warned!
Comment by Anonymous — Thu, Aug 31st, 2006 @ 10:53 am
“Honestly, in uber-safe, uber-enviornmentalist Finland, I seriously thought that maybe a judge could dislike leaflets…”
Now can you see how looking at everything through ideologocal glasses can affect a person’s perception of reality?
Comment by Kimmo W. — Thu, Aug 31st, 2006 @ 11:35 am
Now, now, Phil, that’s just an expression of freedom.
The only freedom you have on my blog is the freedom I give you.
There’s only three things I’ve asked of commenters, and I’ve never once broken this rule…
1. Don’t impersonate another writer by using his/her username.
2. If you’re going to flame, please use one username and stick to it.
3. No SPAM.
Comment by Phil — Thu, Aug 31st, 2006 @ 3:02 pm
Now can you see how looking at everything through ideologocal glasses can affect a person’s perception of reality?
People do hate ad leaflets, I’m sure many would like to see them outlawed, and a judge would certainly be a person to help do that. I’d say the same thing about an American judge. And besides, my second sentence in the post was, “Am I understanding this correctly?” - maybe it would have been different if I had just blasted the judge/newspaper. I realized something was fishy about this - sarcasm, lost in translation, out of context etc…
Comment by Phil — Thu, Aug 31st, 2006 @ 3:05 pm
3 years, 2 months for the main culprit. I am glad he gets prison time for this. Incidentally, you can donate money to the reconstruction if you are so inclined. Information on how is at http://www.borgaforsamlingar.fi (in Swedish- and Finnish languages).
////
Domkyrkobranden gav fängelse 31.08.06 13:31
Borgå tingsrätt har dömt en 18-årig man till tre år och två månader i fängelse för att ha anlagt branden i Borgå domkyrka.
Ynglingen dömdes för sabotage. Åklagaren hade yrkat på sju års fängelse för grovt sabotage.
De två övriga åtalade, en 19-årig kvinna och en 20-årig man, dömdes för räddningsförseelse. De slipper böter på grund av den negativa publiciteten kring ärendet och på grund av att de erkänt.
För deras del yrkade åklagaren på villkorliga fängelsedomar för underlåtenhet att anmäla grovt brott.
Comment by JG — Thu, Aug 31st, 2006 @ 3:21 pm
If it wasnt clear by now, the defendant said that he saw those leaflets on the street, and thought it would be fun to burn them on the roof. He claimed that he wouldnt know the church would burn down.
After that, the judge remarked how dangerous the leaflets were.
Comment by iJusten — Fri, Sep 1st, 2006 @ 2:43 am
Writer - You’ve written under 9 different usernames, insulted quite a “few members including all Swedish-Finns, and you’ve impersonated another frequent commenter. Insults are fine, but pick a unique username and stick with it if you wish to continue. And impersonating another commenter is a big no-no.”
ok phil, you talk about freedom and liberty. you have detailed records of ip-addresses and you obviously keep those.
as someone said, be warned! this phil is a communist and welfare loving treehugger who tracks your every action and scans your computers.
the american way of freedom - phil!
Comment by Anonymous — Fri, Sep 1st, 2006 @ 4:17 am
The judge was probably forced by his wife to take “the damn paper recycle box” out in the morning and couldn’t resist the temptation of making an enigmatic personal remark from the bench on marketing scheisse filling everybody’s trash can.
Comment by antti (the redneck one) — Fri, Sep 1st, 2006 @ 12:50 pm
Ever heard the term “sarcasm”, Phil?
Comment by Anonymous — Fri, Sep 1st, 2006 @ 2:32 pm
Sarcasm. People say shit like that in the states or starts lawsuits because eg. “the coffee was hot”. And the judge that got caught drunk driving, was a woman. And obviously she had an alcohol problem. Nobody’s prefect.
Comment by Keksi — Sat, Sep 2nd, 2006 @ 12:05 am
ok phil, you talk about freedom and liberty. you have detailed records of ip-addresses and you obviously keep those.
The blog platform keeps them, I wouldn’t know how to get rid of them if I tried. The only time I ever look at them is when assholes like yourself impersonate other readers of this blog.
Comment by Phil — Sat, Sep 2nd, 2006 @ 9:58 pm