To anyone who still doubts that freedom, democracy and any sense of reason have already left western Europe, read this.
The Belgian francophone regulatory council for journalism ("CDJ") has ruled that media outlet "21 News" violated the media code for not respecting the media firewall ("cordon sanitaire médiatique") by ...
publishing Vice President J.D. Vance's speech at the 2025 Munich Security Conference...
"without context."
So Which "context" should they have provided? Well, CDJ ruled that they should have identified the author as "antidemocratic or liberticide" ("identifier l’auteur du discours ou le parti qu’il représente comme antidémocratique ou liberticide"). The media outlet should also have "corrected" J.D. Vance's statements, lest the public may perceive them as truthful and turn "hostile to European democratic institutions" and be "incited to racism, discrimination, hate or violence against migrants."
At how many levels is this wrong? To consider the democratically elected government of your most important transatlantic ally, which represents a majority of the popular vote, openly "antidemocratic," while none of the European or Belgian politicians were elected by majority, is doublethink of the finest kind. To label a speech that urged European countries to return to respect the first and most divine individual liberty of Freedom of Speech as "liberticide" is even worse. To attack your closest ally in such an unprovoked and baseless way, is a sign of lack of both basic decency and intelligence.
I suggest CDJ and likeminded European institutions muck their own stable before lashing out at other countries. Any country that runs a political firewall ("cordon sanitaire") around one or more parties, is not a democracy. Any country that runs a media firewall, does not have a free or objective press. Institutions in such a country may call themselves "democratic," but they represent nothing other than the despicable toolset of a repressive, totalitarian regime. If J.D. Vance's speech turns European populations hostile against such institutions, than it will have done a good job. Let European institutions harvest the distrust they earned by their own behaviours.
On the heels of the "Union of Equality" strategy, the European Commission has now launched an "EU Anti-Racism" strategy, which is equally ill-positioned:
It seems that the European Commission lives in a bubble in which it still is 1960 and 2020 simultaneously. In their world, problems from the 1960s still exist, such as society-wide racial discrimination and gays being beaten up in the streets if they dare and express their orientation. But it is also still 2020. As everybody is apparently still waking up from lockdown boredom, demands for the most insane "solutions" to these long-bygone problems are widely supported. Sure.
In reality, both strategies are nolutions to noblems. All they accomplish is to further stifle speech, stigmatize the sane of mind and build a democracy shield that shields the European Commission from any actual democracy.
The US Supreme Court stated the obvious: that providing counseling, psychological support or sharing experiences does not constitute "conversion therapy." In their verdict, they dismiss the likening of speech to "'long-abandoned, aversive' physical interventions" and they acknowledge the abuse of the term "conversion therapy" to "evoke physical techniques such as “‘electric shock’ therapy aimed at changing an individual’s sexual orientation or gender identity," wile referring to much broader implications, such as speech:
In Europe, reason is much slower to return, as outlined above. In Malta, a former homosexual who became christian needed to fight a three-year court battle for merely sharing his own experience on TV, which was deemed "conversion therapy:"
Fortunately, he won, and we will witness many others do the same. In a culture where children are being force-fed the "merits" of "being" in the alphabet soup "community," many children are misled to believe that they "are" alphabet soup, whereas in reality they are just regular, straight persons. They will be coming forward, sharing their opinions. Detransitioning will soon be one of the "coolest" things to do.
Today, the Finnish Supreme Court convicted a politician and a bishop merely for expressing their sincerely held religious opinions. Their pamphlet was considered 'hate speech.'
What this illustrates, is that any law that bars 'hate speech' is really there to end civil and religious liberty and to subject all to the anti-religion of woke. 'Hate speech' laws have no place onn this planet and it is everybody's civic duty to oppose them.
To anyone who still doubts that freedom, democracy and any sense of reason have already left western Europe, read this.
The Belgian francophone regulatory council for journalism ("CDJ") has ruled that media outlet "21 News" violated the media code for not respecting the media firewall ("cordon sanitaire médiatique") by ...
publishing Vice President J.D. Vance's speech at the 2025 Munich Security Conference...
"without context."
So Which "context" should they have provided? Well, CDJ ruled that they should have identified the author as "antidemocratic or liberticide" ("identifier l’auteur du discours ou le parti qu’il représente comme antidémocratique ou liberticide"). The media outlet should also have "corrected" J.D. Vance's statements, lest the public may perceive them as truthful and turn "hostile to European democratic institutions" and be "incited to racism, discrimination, hate or violence against migrants."
The source:
https://www.lecdj.be/fr/reunion-de-fevrier-2-au-cdj-1-plainte-partiellement-fondee-21news-1-plainte-non-fondee-rtbf-investigation/?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
At how many levels is this wrong? To consider the democratically elected government of your most important transatlantic ally, which represents a majority of the popular vote, openly "antidemocratic," while none of the European or Belgian politicians were elected by majority, is doublethink of the finest kind. To label a speech that urged European countries to return to respect the first and most divine individual liberty of Freedom of Speech as "liberticide" is even worse. To attack your closest ally in such an unprovoked and baseless way, is a sign of lack of both basic decency and intelligence.
I suggest CDJ and likeminded European institutions muck their own stable before lashing out at other countries. Any country that runs a political firewall ("cordon sanitaire") around one or more parties, is not a democracy. Any country that runs a media firewall, does not have a free or objective press. Institutions in such a country may call themselves "democratic," but they represent nothing other than the despicable toolset of a repressive, totalitarian regime. If J.D. Vance's speech turns European populations hostile against such institutions, than it will have done a good job. Let European institutions harvest the distrust they earned by their own behaviours.
On the heels of the "Union of Equality" strategy, the European Commission has now launched an "EU Anti-Racism" strategy, which is equally ill-positioned:
https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/f4acc4d4-689e-4db8-8c89-c7243b76ab88_en?filename=JUST_template_comingsoon_standard_0.pdf
It seems that the European Commission lives in a bubble in which it still is 1960 and 2020 simultaneously. In their world, problems from the 1960s still exist, such as society-wide racial discrimination and gays being beaten up in the streets if they dare and express their orientation. But it is also still 2020. As everybody is apparently still waking up from lockdown boredom, demands for the most insane "solutions" to these long-bygone problems are widely supported. Sure.
In reality, both strategies are nolutions to noblems. All they accomplish is to further stifle speech, stigmatize the sane of mind and build a democracy shield that shields the European Commission from any actual democracy.
The US Supreme Court stated the obvious: that providing counseling, psychological support or sharing experiences does not constitute "conversion therapy." In their verdict, they dismiss the likening of speech to "'long-abandoned, aversive' physical interventions" and they acknowledge the abuse of the term "conversion therapy" to "evoke physical techniques such as “‘electric shock’ therapy aimed at changing an individual’s sexual orientation or gender identity," wile referring to much broader implications, such as speech:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/24-539_fd9g.pdf
In Europe, reason is much slower to return, as outlined above. In Malta, a former homosexual who became christian needed to fight a three-year court battle for merely sharing his own experience on TV, which was deemed "conversion therapy:"
https://www.ewtnnews.com/world/europe/ex-gay-christian-convert-wins-court-battle-in-malta-over-ban-on-conversion-therapy
Fortunately, he won, and we will witness many others do the same. In a culture where children are being force-fed the "merits" of "being" in the alphabet soup "community," many children are misled to believe that they "are" alphabet soup, whereas in reality they are just regular, straight persons. They will be coming forward, sharing their opinions. Detransitioning will soon be one of the "coolest" things to do.
Today, the Finnish Supreme Court convicted a politician and a bishop merely for expressing their sincerely held religious opinions. Their pamphlet was considered 'hate speech.'
https://www.theepochtimes.com/world/christian-pamphlet-is-hate-speech-finlands-supreme-court-rules-6004135
What this illustrates, is that any law that bars 'hate speech' is really there to end civil and religious liberty and to subject all to the anti-religion of woke. 'Hate speech' laws have no place onn this planet and it is everybody's civic duty to oppose them.