Quote:
Originally Posted by Bakkels
Skybird for some reason believes that under some EU law, in cases of discrimination you're considered guilty unless you can prove you're innocent.
|
No, it is not a law written black on white, it is a consequences that comes as an implicit indirect implication, which is the reason why it is valid, but still escapes people's attention. If it would be formulated as a EU law, people would be on the street - at least I hoped. The implication is based in appendices to the Lisbon dictate paper and cross-references to the EU declaration of human rights.
There also is no politician admitting that the currency union in fact has been turned into a one-sided transfer union of timely unlimited duration. And while the ECB's independence was destroyed when Trichet accepted to bow to poltiical pressure to buy debts and bonds of troubled states, it got sold to us that this is a move to strengthen the independence. We also have won in democracy on EU levels, while in fact the democracy deficits have been increased. And while the people of Europe were locked out over the European constitution,t hey said they spoke in the name of the Eurpopean people.
Do you really not understand how the game is played?
De facto, the example I explained above already show that I am right and you are wrong. If such an event springs into my face and you still expect me to say that we do not have the reversing of the burden of evidence, then I cannot help you - without it, both the claim and the sentencing would not have been possible, would it!? Obviosuly, the simple claim of discrimination has been enough to assume somebody as guilty - not because his guilt was proven, but his innocence was not proven. This would not have been possible by German laws before Lisbon.
All this in a EU-wide climate where any critcal questiuon about islam is being linked to racism, islamophilia, hate-crime.
Currently in I think 7 or 8 countries in the eU court processes are being held against politicians, journalists and diplomats who have quoted from Islamic scripture those passages the public should be prevented to pay attention to, or asked critical questions about it'S ideology. Wilders is just one of many. The freedom of speech and free opinion is under fire - in order to enforce acceptance of Islamic ideology in Europe although it is in total opposition and hostility to Western freedoms and values, and in the end necessarily must want - and does want - these to be destroyed.