Read article 35! A radiostation is not allowed to have ties with a political party. According to article 31 paragraph 4 a podcast is a radio station. If Verstrepen would have send a letter, he would never have had permission to have a podcast!
He tried to avoid this by using an American provider to host his podcast, but that didn't help.
Yes, Mr Verstrepen broke the law, and he knew he did. But this law is simply ridiculous. Yes, it is needed to regulate radiostations because the number of frequencies is limited, but the number of podcasts isn't. Why is a politician allowed to have blog, but not to have a podcast? Can anyone explain that to me? Sometimes, the only way to bring ridiculous regulation under attention is breaking it.
They where ruled rascist afther there political opponents altered the law to make it possible to condemn them. Yes, there is a minority of Flemish nationalists who like marching as there is a minority of socialist who gather in "volkshuis de vuist" (peoples house The Fist) and like to recall the good old days when they fought against king, church and capitalists. But i don't believe 34 percent of the people in Antwerp would vote for a real fascist party.
Yes, they demand amnesty. Not for war criminals but for the ordinary soldiers who happened to fight on the "wrong side". They are also victims of the NAZI-regime that deceived them. Belgium is one of the last places in Europe where those people did not yet receive amnesty. Don't forget the Vlaams Belang is not the only party to ask this. It was the christian democrat MP Suyckerbuyck who wrote a proposal for a decree on this mather in 1997. How can we ever leave the tragedy of the second world war behind if we are not prepared to forgive each other 60 years later?
But that is not what this post is about. The question here is: should a government apply the same rules to podcasts as they apply to radiostations? (while the number of radio frequencies is limited but the number of podcasts isn't). Can a government demand you to get a radiolicense for your podcast? Because that is what happened, Verstrepen got finned not because his podcast would have been racist, but because a political party is not allowed to have a radiostation and a podcast is considered a radiostation.
According to Flemish law a podcast is a radiostation. That means you need a license to have a podcast and podcasts are not allowed to have ties with political parties. That's what his story is about: a government trying to get control over the internet.
They do not "control" Antwerp. They are the biggest party of Antwerp, but are in the opposition like they are everywhere else in Flanders. And they are not fascist. If you call a mainstream right wing party like Vlaams Belang fascist then either you don't know the party or you are minimizing the crimes commited by fascist regimes.
Slashdot Mirror
Read article 35! A radiostation is not allowed to have ties with a political party. According to article 31 paragraph 4 a podcast is a radio station. If Verstrepen would have send a letter, he would never have had permission to have a podcast! He tried to avoid this by using an American provider to host his podcast, but that didn't help. Yes, Mr Verstrepen broke the law, and he knew he did. But this law is simply ridiculous. Yes, it is needed to regulate radiostations because the number of frequencies is limited, but the number of podcasts isn't. Why is a politician allowed to have blog, but not to have a podcast? Can anyone explain that to me? Sometimes, the only way to bring ridiculous regulation under attention is breaking it.
They where ruled rascist afther there political opponents altered the law to make it possible to condemn them. Yes, there is a minority of Flemish nationalists who like marching as there is a minority of socialist who gather in "volkshuis de vuist" (peoples house The Fist) and like to recall the good old days when they fought against king, church and capitalists. But i don't believe 34 percent of the people in Antwerp would vote for a real fascist party. Yes, they demand amnesty. Not for war criminals but for the ordinary soldiers who happened to fight on the "wrong side". They are also victims of the NAZI-regime that deceived them. Belgium is one of the last places in Europe where those people did not yet receive amnesty. Don't forget the Vlaams Belang is not the only party to ask this. It was the christian democrat MP Suyckerbuyck who wrote a proposal for a decree on this mather in 1997. How can we ever leave the tragedy of the second world war behind if we are not prepared to forgive each other 60 years later? But that is not what this post is about. The question here is: should a government apply the same rules to podcasts as they apply to radiostations? (while the number of radio frequencies is limited but the number of podcasts isn't). Can a government demand you to get a radiolicense for your podcast? Because that is what happened, Verstrepen got finned not because his podcast would have been racist, but because a political party is not allowed to have a radiostation and a podcast is considered a radiostation.
According to Flemish law a podcast is a radiostation. That means you need a license to have a podcast and podcasts are not allowed to have ties with political parties. That's what his story is about: a government trying to get control over the internet.
They do not "control" Antwerp. They are the biggest party of Antwerp, but are in the opposition like they are everywhere else in Flanders. And they are not fascist. If you call a mainstream right wing party like Vlaams Belang fascist then either you don't know the party or you are minimizing the crimes commited by fascist regimes.