AI-Jane Political, And Economic Forums

Full Version: Belgium | The A$$hole of Europe
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Quote:In Belgium, hate speech law converges with blasphemy law

On the political level too some are attempting to increase the legal sensitivity for ‘Islamophobia’. Senators Fauzaya Talhaoui and Bert Anciaux, for instance, introduced a draft resolution on 21 February 2013, aimed at the ‘the fight against Islamophobia’. Following the definition offered by the Runnymede Trust, the Senators understand ‘Islamophobia’ to entail the ‘strong presence’ of any of eight elements, including: ‘Islam as monolithic and static’; ‘Islam as inferior to the West and as barbaric, irrational and sexist’; and ‘Islam as violent, providing support to terrorism, and actively involved in a clash of civilisations’. Such ‘Islamophobic’ ideas, Talhaoui and Anciaux contend, “incite to discrimination and racism, and require unequivocal condemnation and judicial prosecution”. They argue that the police and that the office of the public prosecutor should be instructed to treat the issue as an absolute priority.

Looks like the idiots are running the asylum in Belgium.
I believe that is one of the reasons why Mr. Farage is so down on the EU and Belgium in particular. S5
Belgium may be particular, but the same problem exists in nearly every EU country, and what about the US? And we cannot skip Canada either, see here.
Now, about that fence.........................................
Quote:Thrown in Prison for Shredding the Koran

A Bruges, Belgium criminal court convicted a man for shredding a Koran on March 6, 2013. The court imposed a four-month prison sentence and a 600 euro fine upon him. He now additionally faces a revocation of a previous suspension of an 18-month prison sentence for having set a fire in a wood. This case highlights yet again the greater restrictions on speech in free societies outside of the United States and how these restrictions can limit open debate about Islam.

The man, identified in print only as Arne S., attended a demonstration on June 8, 2012, in Ostend, Belgium, before retiring to a café. There Arne exchanged words with a dozen Muslims and tore apart a Koran before them. As described in a Belgian press account, Arne's counsel at trial claimed that the Muslims had thrown the "sacred book" at Arne, striking him in the head. Arne's lawyer, Olivier Ryde, thus claimed that no infraction of Belgium's law on hate speech had occurred. No reports of assault charges against the Muslims have appeared.

Arne's case demonstrates that Belgium, like many other European countries, has laws against what is commonly called "hate speech." In particular, Article 22 of the Belgian Law of May 10, 2007, Aiming to Struggle Against Certain Forms of Discrimination, prohibits incitement of hatred, discrimination, violence, and/or segregation against persons of various protected classes in public settings defined by Article 444 of the Belgian Penal Code. Article 3 of the May 10, 2007, laws defines these protected classes

based upon age, sexual orientation, civil state, birth, fortune, religious or philosophical conviction, political conviction, trade union views, language, actual or future state of health, handicap, physical or genetic characteristic, or social origin.

Cheradenine Zakalwe of the website Islam versus Europe has asked in relation to Arne, "Is Sharia already in force in Europe?" Yet Arne is not the first individual in Europe convicted of destroying a "sacred book," nor is the Koran the only book in Europe that qualifies for this designation. Poland's supreme court ruled on October 29, 2012 that a lower court was wrong to exonerate the Polish heavy metal musician Adam Darski on blasphemy charges for having ripped apart a Bible as a "book of lies" during a September 2007 concert.

In Darski's case, though, the European Union's (EU) executive body, the European Commission (EC), came to Darski's defense. An EC statement on October 31, 2012 expressed the traditional justification for free speech that "[t]his right protects not only information or ideas that are favorably received or regarded as inoffensive or as a matter of indifference, but also those that offend, shock or disturb." It remains to be seen whether the EC will make the same defense à la Voltaire for Arne's anti-Islam sentiments.

Controversies about blasphemy aside, Belgium's equation of "religious" and other "convictions" with physical characteristics such as a person's place of "birth" is troubling. Such a conception of "hate speech" encompasses not just the debatable proposition of proscribing animus expressed against individuals, but also the prohibition of at least certain forms of opposition to ideas like Islam. In effect, an individual's identification with an idea like Islam helps shield this belief from attack in a kind of ideological umbrella.

The cases of Arne, Darski, and others continue to show that criticism and/or condemnation of Islam can be legally perilous in European societies traditionally restrictive of free speech out of deference to group sensibilities and social harmony. Now that Muslim communities have established themselves in an often politically correct modern Europe, rejection of Islam is no longer a merely academic matter involving distant peoples. Precisely the proximity of Islam to Europe, however, demands unfettered critical evaluation of this faith now more than ever. Modern expansive notions of "hate speech" and traditional concepts of blasphemy, now applied not just to Europe's historically dominant Christian faith but also to an increasingly prominent Islam, can only hinder this necessary inquiry into Islam.

When I first read this I assumed it happened in one of the Arab Spring countries, but I was wrong the incident took place in the a$$hole of Europe.
Quote:Sharia Compiant Belgium | Widow loses half of dead hubby's pension to 2nd wife in Morocco

The National Pensions Office recently sent a letter to a widow Brussels of Moroccan origin to announce it more than half his widow affect. The other half will now be paid to another wife living in Morocco, reported Friday RTBF. Asked by Belga, the National Pensions Office says it is merely applying bilateral agreements between Belgium firstly and secondly Morocco, Algeria and Tunisia.
In the case mentioned, the Board of Pensions applies Belgian Moroccan law allows polygamy, he said. If remarriage is contracted in Morocco, Algeria or Tunisia, the new wife will be entitled to a portion of any widow is free to settle in the country of their choice, says the Pensions Office.
In other words, the NPO should, in case of death of a spouse after remarriage in the three countries mentioned above, divide the pension between different widows, even if they are established in Belgium, a country that does not recognize polygamy.

Stirthepot Have fun with this one.
Well Ronald, I'll agree with one thing here: Belguim is definitely The A$$hole of Europe, and that's saying a lot, considering the rest of them in comparison. S5
Now, you understand why I left Belgium S5

Anyway I don't care if we jail poeple for shredding a Coran here, muslims will start shredding the Coran themselves soon, in the their own countries.
Well, you never did say why, so.......................................
Well, it was not for this reason but I'm glad to be in another country where there is not that much non-sens.
Is Belgium afraid of Muslims or just so confused they don't know who they are anymore?
Belgium must be the only country in Europe that recognizes bigamy.
Palladin Wrote:Is Belgium afraid of Muslims or just so confused they don't know who they are anymore?
I think we don't know who we are anymore. We are definetely not afraid of muslims.
To be Belgian is culturaly very complex, very difficult to explain.

WB Wrote:Belgium must be the only country in Europe that recognizes bigamy.
Curiousely Belgium recognizes only one spouse except if the second (or thrid or forth...) one is abroad, in a country where polygamy is recognized.
If more than one spouses are in Belgium, only one will be legaly recognized. If one is abroad, in her country (usualy they are women) then Belgium will recognize that their is another spouse in another country where it's legal.

There was a case when a Marrocan woman had to give half her husband's inheritage to a second one left in Marroco, by decision of a Belgium tribunal!
I don't know if the woman who lost half her husband's fortune to the much younger and recently married second whife has declared praise on Allah and His Prophet Muhamad... The article didn't elaborate.
(01-11-2014, 03:50 PM)Fredledingue Wrote: [ -> ]
Palladin Wrote:Is Belgium afraid of Muslims or just so confused they don't know who they are anymore?
I think we don't know who we are anymore. We are definetely not afraid of muslims.
To be Belgian is culturaly very complex, very difficult to explain.

What they are are Frogs without the French citizenship. That alone should make any Frog less than stable. Frogs have enough problems, without being homeless. S13
Which part of Belgium is the crazier, the French or Flemish?
You're right, that country is made up of more than just Frogs. As for who is the crazier, I cannot answer that one. That's one country in western Europe I have never visited.
I don't know where it's crazier. It's crazy everywhere.
On one side there is this crazy Bart De Wever who thinks the Flamish nation is superior and will do better alone without the rest of Belgium and on the other side this crazy Elio Di Rupo (Italian descent) who is an old school socialist homosexual.
Both are disgusting characters but everybody vote for them.
Between them there is Didier Reynders, excellent politician, but like every politician he lacks the guts to cut governement spendings.