Posted by John Ray on Tue, 18 Jan 2005 11:20 | #

Sounds flaky to me

(Sorry)

Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 18 Jan 2005 12:19 | #

So you should be.

Posted by Braveheart on Tue, 18 Jan 2005 18:59 | #

This is the (general) background: http://www.bpb.de/popup_druckversion.html?guid=0L60RY

See headline: „Ausschaltung politischer Gegner“ (Elimination of political adversaries)

Terror gegen politische Gegner in besonders drastischen Formen angewandt.
Translation: Terror in very drastic forms was inflicted to political adversaries.

Dabei bestimmten unmittelbare politische Eingriffe und völlige Willkür im Strafmaß die Verfahren.
Translation: The trials were characterised by direct political interventions and complete arbitrariness in sentence.

...early fifties: 20.000 political prisoners in DDR…

Posted by seelow heights on Tue, 18 Jan 2005 21:08 | #

Is this where the concept of “hate crimes” originated?

Posted by Braveheart on Wed, 19 Jan 2005 08:41 | #

Interesting question. Comparing with Belgium, I even see some resemblances. Perhaps they don’t shoot you any more, but one can lose one’s job in confrontation with the establishment…

My opinion. Where does all this originate? As soon as freedom of speech is restricted, often with the false argument that one should be “polite” to each other, the abuses start…

God bless America that they don’t give in.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 19 Jan 2005 14:36 | #

I agree with Braveheart:  criminalizing speech some may consider “insensitive” is at the root of the problem, and that whole undertaking by the left must be overthrown.  It is clearly only a tool used to advance particular political ends, such as that of imposing race-replacement population transfers on white communities in Europe and the U.S. that don’t want race-replacement population transfers forced on them.  As we see in Belgium, those who don’t want it are simply not allowed to not want it:  if the political parties representing their point of view in this regard say what they stand for they are outlawed, and the threat of fines, arrest, jail, and loss of their social security pensions hangs over the heads of their leaders and even their rank-and-file party members.  This is intolerable governmental tyranny.  Incidentally, the criminalization of Holocaust denial falls in this intolerable category.  Writing books exposing the Marxist point of view was never criminalized in the U.S. or Europe as far as I’m aware.  Neither should the writing of books exposing the Holocaust-denial point of view.  Furthermore, in addition to being very wrong in principle, the criminalization of Holocaust-denial is wrong in practical terms, as a strategy:  the only way for people to know the Holocaust happened is to let those who claim it didn’t expose their views.  Otherwise, people who aren’t themselves experts or historians must say, instead of “Yes, the Holocaust happened,” “Yes, it is claimed the Holocaust happened.”  Until those who deny the Holocaust are permitted to expose their views, ordinary people don’t know but that maybe the Holocaust didn’t happen.  Around the world, as we all know, there happen to be many who believe the Americans never walked on the moon, but the whole thing was staged in some film studio.  What if that point of view were criminalized, not allowed to be spoken or published on pain of jail, deportations, and other sanctions?  Obviously, the result would be millions more adherents.  In a sense, the way ordinary people know Americans walked on the moon has to do with the fact that those who claim the contrary are allowed to speak.

Posted by Braveheart on Wed, 19 Jan 2005 15:00 | #

Yesterday there was an appeal in Belgium to outlaw preventively, even before publication in April 2005 thus, the translation in Dutch of US Laura Schlessinger’s book “The Proper Care & Feeding of Husbands”. The person who demanded this, is named Smagghe (VLD party member).  If this is confirmed, I have a new topic for writing an essay…just to show to what idiocy the Belgian anti-racism and non-discrimination legislation can bring us….

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 19 Jan 2005 16:34 | #

Don’t wait till it wends its way through the courts, Braveheart—can you do a log entry on it now, and tell us more details?  It sounds like a real shocker. 

For those in other countries who may not know who Laura Schlessinger is, she’s a very popular conservative radio talk-show host and author in the U.S.  I heard her say the following once in an interview, on the subject of her conversion from women’s-lib-style liberalism to conservatism.  She said the change happened immediately upon giving birth and being with her baby:  “For the first time, I realized there was something in life more important than me and my personal desires.  In that instant all that feminism stuff just fell off me like so much dandruff.”

Posted by Braveheart on Wed, 19 Jan 2005 17:24 | #

Smagghe is a controversial VLD member of the provincial counsel of Flemish Brabant (Vlaams Brabant) in Belgium and has already caused quite a stir in other files, see for instance (in Dutch) http://www.oradio.be/detail.php?record=357

Formerly, he wanted to deny access to recreation domains to trouble-causing foreigners only because their skin had the wrong colour. For such an utterance, Flemish Interest would be charged immediately AND certainly be banned.

He formerly was member of the Greens and then became member of the conservative VLD. He is homo. Is this the reason he is against the book? It is a little bit confusing to me. I have not yet enough information about his motives. So I will certainly wait until I get more information, confirmation etc. about the issue. I must see not to throw away the little credit I collected on this blog.

By the way, I suppose it will be the Minister of the Interior who has to decide.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 19 Jan 2005 18:35 | #

“He is homo.”

That probably explains it.  Laura Schlessinger has been frank in her criticism of the homosexualist agenda in the U.S.  I don’t remember the exact quote of hers, but something she said on the subject a couple of years ago got the homosexual activists furious with her, and as a result they worked behind the scenes to get her television talk show cancelled, ending up succeeding, so that it was cancelled not long after it started.  (She’s still on radio however.)  In a last ditch effort to save her TV show she even made a public apology to the homosexual community, but to no avail—they never forgave her, and they continue to despise her.  I’d bet that’s why this man wants her book banned.  I haven’t seen it, but in it she probably repeats the same criticisms of the homosexualist agenda that got homosexuals so incensed.

Posted by Braveheart on Wed, 19 Jan 2005 20:26 | #

What would make the issue different is when there would be some official intervention. OK he is a politician, but I wait for a reaction from the Minister (preventive) or the Thought Police (afterwards). Up to now this did not happen in Belgium.

Posted by JOHN RAY on Thu, 20 Jan 2005 13:53 | #

Why do you say the VLD is conservative?  They are liberals!

Posted by Braveheart on Thu, 20 Jan 2005 16:05 | #

Difficult question. VLD is the abbreviation of Flemish Liberal Democrats. But why does a word have in Belgium another meaning as in the rest of the world?  I SUPPOSE this is because in Flanders fifty years ago or so, the VLD members mostly spoke French and in French the word “liberale” has more to do with the economy (free, no regulations) than with human nature. A “liberal” economy must be seen in contradiction to a “socialist” economy. Also to note in French “professions liberales” are doctors, lawyers, notaries…

Traditionally VLD were conservative and the defenders of trade and industry, free market and law and order. Alas much of their traditional electorate is now disappointed. The Belgian government is dominated by the French-speaking Walloon socialists, who dominate absolutely everything in Wallonia to such an extend that they cannot be “missed” . This gives them a position of power in the whole of Belgium. Something only Flemish Interest seems able to break (if they continue their growth and they are not banned again of course, or taken away their income…).

And since VLD leading spirit Verhofstadt, who is more interested in his personal career, became prime-minister, things became even worse. He wanted to broaden his party.  What a fantasy. Now they are not only following the wrong policy, they are even attracting the “wrong” people, so that they slide to the left. All this led to serious tensions with the more conservative part of the VLD party (Jean-Marie Dedecker and Coveliers).

BTW, one of those “wrong” new people is Mr. Smagghe, the official VLD spokesman for the gay people, who wants to ban US Laura Schlessinger’s new book (see above). I meanwhile already found out that the plot is more complex than simply gays against her and that this has also to do with their efforts to ban another fundamental Muslim book, see at (in Dutch) http://www.gaybelgium.be/content/EEpypZEFVVEDtqUdOd.shtml  . Change money… you understand? I follow the case to see whether there will be an official reaction.

And how would you define “liberal” in the rest of the world in a few sentences?

Posted by Guessedworker on Thu, 20 Jan 2005 16:27 | #

I think “mistaken” covers pretty much all the bases.