Yeah, those pictures on that extreme-left site really impress me.
The site shows pictures of people from Vlaams Belang and pictures of nazis. For some reason, I don't see any pictures combining the two. There's also a picture of Filip Dewinter in front of a banner that says "Bush is right". Is supporting Bush a crime? In your eyes, it probably is. In my eyes (and I'm not a Bush supported myself), it's not. Then there are is a picture of Dewinter taking his oath as a member of parliament. The commentary suggests that he is doing the hitler salute. What a load of crap. And yes, there IS a picture of an underaged Karel Dillen doing a real hitler salute during the war (as a boyscout in the Hitler Jugend, not as an SS officer in the concentration camps as the site would like you to believe). Then there are a few pictures of 'fights' on the street. As we don't know the context, we don't know whether they were just defending themselves or not (violence AGAINST Vlaams Belang members is quite common; for example: a few years ago some left-wing guy entered their headquarters with a rifle and threatened to kill everyone). Of course, you will find these things much serious than Joschka Fischer being the leader of a real terrorist group doing real acts of terrorism. The other pictures try to associate Vlaams Belang to neo nazi groups by mean of multiple associations: the nephew of member X of Vlaams Belang once spoke to the dentist of a guy whose sister once walked in the same demonstration against abortus as member Y of this or that neo nazi association. It's like playing 'six degrees to Kevin Bacon' (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six_Degrees_of_Kevin _Bacon).
In short, its an extremely dubious and misleading collection of pictures and you know it.
Yes, tell me. What would be the similarities? Do they try to outlaw political opponents? Do they prosecute politicians for having a podcast? Oh no, those are the ruling parties that use those Nazi techniques.
You're wrong. The party has nothing to do with neo-nazi gangs. That is the lie the ruling parties try to spread. Do you honestly believe that more than 30% percent of the population would vote for a neo-nazi party??
The founder was 15 when WWII started, so I guess he was probably not a major player in the collaboration. When one of the members of the party was asked whether they were xenophobic, he said they were not xenophobic but maybe islamophobic in a sense that they are afraid of the influence the Islam is getting in Europe. Is that being racist? Or is that being just realist if you consider that Belgium (just like its neighbouring countries) is becoming the epicenter of muslim terrorism.
BTW, the current leader of the Belgian socialists has his roots in an obscure and dangerous extreme-left movement. And the German Vice Chancellor Joschka Fischer was a leader in several street battles fought by the anarchist Putzgruppe. And these politicians weren't 15 when they did these thing.
The organisations behind that demonstration are a bunch of racists, and neo-nazis from all over Europe are planning to come.
That is not true. The demonstration was aimed aiganst islamisation of europe, not against islam. This is a real social issue and people should be able to express themselves about it. If a German courtyard acquits a muslim man who had seriously beaten up his wife 'because the Sharia allows him to do that', there IS a problem with islamisation of Europe... The organisators have nothing to do with racism or extremist groups. Only when the demonstrations were forbidden, certain extremist groups decided to come. Just like you always have violent extreme left protesters that come stir up ant-globalist demonstrations.
But still people were able to vote for them. So it had no actual effect except the feeding of the persecution complex.
So, in your opinion there would also not be a problem when the counting of the votes is falsified: you can vote; the vote just isn't counted...
If it was made in the election period and contained political messages it probably fell under those rules. If he has actual evidence of identical cases where people were not getting fined I'm sure his lawyers will know what to do.
His lawyers came with a whole list of identical cases but because the judges are completely under the influence of the ruling political parties, this got him nowhere.
Yes. A demonstration in Brussels against islamisation of Europe on 9/11 was forbidden. At the same time, violent demonstrations against the danish mohammed cartoons were not forbidden.
Were you not able to vote on the party you wanted ?
The Belgian government does everyting it can to outlaw the large opposition party Vlaams Belang.
I am in fact also very suspicious about the motivations behind the lawsuit against Vlaams Blok, but it has had no influence on the popularity, the ability to publish, the ability to organize gatherings, or the ability to participate in local government of Vlaams Blok / Belang.
Example: thanks to the conviction, the public television channel was able to ban the party almost completely from its political debates.
And I don't know what podcast you're referring to, but if someone was using the Internet to go around political advertising laws, I'm glad they got fined.
So, you think free speech is a bad thing? It wasn't about ads by the way. It was about a typical podcast (half an hour MP3). And the fine was selective: only members of the opposition got fined, while politicians of the ruling parties could do the same thing without any problem.
I know Vlaams Belang thrives on persecution complexes
This is no conspiracy theory.
You can check everything I said. Take for example the podcast history. Due to massive protests, the law was changed in the meanwhile, but the member of parliament is still prosecuted and received an order to pay the fine last week:
http://www.vrtnieuws.net/cm/vrtnieuws.net/cultuurm edia/media/070903Verstrepen_boete
The government voted a law tailored specifically for this political party and then prosecuted for actions in the past (before the law was voted!). And even then, the basis for the conviction was very dubious. No other government since the Nazis have ever done things like this. The only real reason the party was prosecuted was because they gained lots of votes in the elections (more than 30% in the biggest city of Flanders).
Do you also deny that a member of parliament was convicted for having a podcast? Yeah, there was some law forbidding politicians to make podcasts (you call that democratic?), but it was not enforced on any of the politicians in power. Even the prime minister had a podcast at that time.
The nazis also made laws to enable prosecution of their political opposition. Even the prosecution of the Jews was backed by all kinds of laws.
Belgium is no democracy. Maybe you don't see that there's a huge problem because you vote for one of the parties in power that do all these undemocratic things.
In Belgium, even the biggest political opposition party has been prosecuted since years. The prime minister said literally: I will search the whole country to find a courtyard that wants to outlaw them. One member of parliament got a huge fine 'because he had a podcast'.
It's a horrible repressive country to live in.
Slashdot Mirror
Hey, look at this Indian nationalist skinhead:d ers/ghandi3.bmp
. jpg
c her_crimes1.jpg
http://www.trinity.edu/jdunn/images/YoungWorldLea
And, here's Bush doing the you-know-which salute:
http://www.tonypierce.com/images/2002/bush/waving
As you see, if you manipulate, you can prove anything. On the other side, here's something REAL: (left-wing) Vice-chancellor of Germany Joschka Fischer (with black helmet) beating up a cop: http://photos1.blogger.com/hello/198/2847/320/fis
Yeah, those pictures on that extreme-left site really impress me. The site shows pictures of people from Vlaams Belang and pictures of nazis. For some reason, I don't see any pictures combining the two. There's also a picture of Filip Dewinter in front of a banner that says "Bush is right". Is supporting Bush a crime? In your eyes, it probably is. In my eyes (and I'm not a Bush supported myself), it's not. Then there are is a picture of Dewinter taking his oath as a member of parliament. The commentary suggests that he is doing the hitler salute. What a load of crap. And yes, there IS a picture of an underaged Karel Dillen doing a real hitler salute during the war (as a boyscout in the Hitler Jugend, not as an SS officer in the concentration camps as the site would like you to believe). Then there are a few pictures of 'fights' on the street. As we don't know the context, we don't know whether they were just defending themselves or not (violence AGAINST Vlaams Belang members is quite common; for example: a few years ago some left-wing guy entered their headquarters with a rifle and threatened to kill everyone). Of course, you will find these things much serious than Joschka Fischer being the leader of a real terrorist group doing real acts of terrorism. The other pictures try to associate Vlaams Belang to neo nazi groups by mean of multiple associations: the nephew of member X of Vlaams Belang once spoke to the dentist of a guy whose sister once walked in the same demonstration against abortus as member Y of this or that neo nazi association. It's like playing 'six degrees to Kevin Bacon' (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six_Degrees_of_Kevin _Bacon).
In short, its an extremely dubious and misleading collection of pictures and you know it.
Yes, tell me. What would be the similarities? Do they try to outlaw political opponents? Do they prosecute politicians for having a podcast? Oh no, those are the ruling parties that use those Nazi techniques.
You're wrong. The party has nothing to do with neo-nazi gangs. That is the lie the ruling parties try to spread. Do you honestly believe that more than 30% percent of the population would vote for a neo-nazi party??
The founder was 15 when WWII started, so I guess he was probably not a major player in the collaboration. When one of the members of the party was asked whether they were xenophobic, he said they were not xenophobic but maybe islamophobic in a sense that they are afraid of the influence the Islam is getting in Europe. Is that being racist? Or is that being just realist if you consider that Belgium (just like its neighbouring countries) is becoming the epicenter of muslim terrorism.
BTW, the current leader of the Belgian socialists has his roots in an obscure and dangerous extreme-left movement. And the German Vice Chancellor Joschka Fischer was a leader in several street battles fought by the anarchist Putzgruppe. And these politicians weren't 15 when they did these thing.
The government voted a law tailored specifically for this political party and then prosecuted for actions in the past (before the law was voted!). And even then, the basis for the conviction was very dubious. No other government since the Nazis have ever done things like this. The only real reason the party was prosecuted was because they gained lots of votes in the elections (more than 30% in the biggest city of Flanders). Do you also deny that a member of parliament was convicted for having a podcast? Yeah, there was some law forbidding politicians to make podcasts (you call that democratic?), but it was not enforced on any of the politicians in power. Even the prime minister had a podcast at that time. The nazis also made laws to enable prosecution of their political opposition. Even the prosecution of the Jews was backed by all kinds of laws. Belgium is no democracy. Maybe you don't see that there's a huge problem because you vote for one of the parties in power that do all these undemocratic things.
In Belgium, even the biggest political opposition party has been prosecuted since years. The prime minister said literally: I will search the whole country to find a courtyard that wants to outlaw them. One member of parliament got a huge fine 'because he had a podcast'. It's a horrible repressive country to live in.