Rendered at 13:03:57 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Cloudflare Workers.
elil17 55 minutes ago [-]
For additional context, tensions are already high surrounding the US ambassador after he directly insulted multiple Belgian politicians and also attempted to interfere with local criminal judicial proceedings.
Waterluvian 37 minutes ago [-]
The American ambassador to Canada is also a complete clown. It’s pretty obvious he has an audience of one and absolutely loves the flavour of boot black.
JdeBP 7 minutes ago [-]
I am wondering whether there will be any effect to petition e-7124. It seems unlikely, to me.
The ambassador is a representative of the American President, so that fits.
As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people.
kergonath 13 minutes ago [-]
The American ambassadors to almost anywhere are complete clowns these days. Obnoxious, unfunny, despicable clowns.
mbmbn 44 seconds ago [-]
“ A 250th birthday, paid for by private companies.”
People still don’t get it, and some people, specially these ones that believe themselves particularly knowledgeable about politics, will never get it. Still, I’m going to repeat:
Everything government does is paid by privates. All of it comes from the money they continuously take away from “we the people” to fund their lavish lifestyles and do their little ideological stunts. Every single cent.
nashashmi 13 minutes ago [-]
More and more we see the relationship with authoritarianism (police) and tyranny (those in power) out in the open. We see this with the protests in Germany for Gaza. We see this in Britain with freedom of speech taken away from Palestine supporters. And we see this shamelessly occurring from the Trump world.
I used to balk at those who were too worried at growing government power, but this is a wake up call. Protections have to be in place for the vast majority of people, even if it does allow a few criminals to get away.
blitzar 51 minutes ago [-]
free speech, I fear, is in retreat
nashashmi 17 minutes ago [-]
Europe (which could mean anything from the UK to Belgium to Hungary to Turkey) never had absolute freedom of speech like the US. But yes, even by the US standards to champion freedom of speech, it is in retreat.
blitzar 2 minutes ago [-]
never had absolute freedom of speech like the US, which itself never (since it was colonised) had absolute freedom of speech.
24 minutes ago [-]
N_Lens 49 minutes ago [-]
I'm sorry Mario, your Free Speech is in another Castle!
Chu4eeno 1 hours ago [-]
So Belgians, are Julius E. O. Fintelmann and Samuel Dempsey/The European Correspondent legitimate/trustworthy journalists or bloggers looking for clout?
OgsyedIE 52 minutes ago [-]
Media Bias Fact Check has them at center-left alignment and high factual credibility, like the Washington Post and Guardian.
jojobas 23 minutes ago [-]
[flagged]
mcmcmc 22 minutes ago [-]
If that’s your opinion, I don’t think you know what actual leftism is.
jojobas 8 minutes ago [-]
I was born in U fucking SSR. I don't think you have much to tell me.
kergonath 10 minutes ago [-]
They are social democrats and firmly left of centre. You won’t find anything remotely radical in the Grauniad.
jojobas 6 minutes ago [-]
It might not be radical, but the spin is everywhere, whether they are talking about industry trends, current events or gardening.
romaaeterna 37 minutes ago [-]
[flagged]
sph 32 minutes ago [-]
State-funded journalism - people complain of using taxpayers’ money
Journalism funded by private interests - people complain of bias
Journalism funded by customers - people complain of clickbait to sell more rags
Not sure what your comment is supposed to indicate. That they disclosed a source of funding when most aren’t even bothered to?
mikeyouse 30 minutes ago [-]
They detail the work they did with that grant money here:
Looks like it built an AI editing assistant with Google News and Polis.
jmye 22 minutes ago [-]
What specific point are you trying to make, here? Do you think a news organization should not be acquiring tech tools? Do you think that state-funded journalism matters, in this context, or do you just think those are good bogeyman words?
Come on, be proud of your opinions. Don't hide behind scare quotes and insinuations. Don't be a coward.
kcyb 40 minutes ago [-]
The European Correspondent is a legitimate, though young, news organization. I can recommend their newsletter, they write about a nice mix of topics from all across Europe.
aetch 1 hours ago [-]
Sounds like they had a legitimate question for the ambassador who reacted badly - which is no surprise for someone in this administration.
burgreblast 39 minutes ago [-]
So a long article about them being kicked out and all they detail about their own actions is that "we asked him about it"? I'm not sure what "tacitly threatened" means, either.
If they want sympathy, they probably should lay out the details of their actions more clearly. This just reads as some juveniles went to an event, tried to rile up an official (while filming the response in hopes of getting a juicy clip), then were surprised when they were kicked out.
Chu4eeno 54 minutes ago [-]
I just don't want to jump to any conclusion as I've never heard of this site nor these people before, for all I know they could be known for doing stunts or something.
Though if this really happened as they say, it reflects very badly on Belgium as well.
tokai 45 minutes ago [-]
If you don't want to jump to conclusions, why then didn't you research a bit before posting?
Chu4eeno 43 minutes ago [-]
Because search engines suck, it's hard to find reliable information on relatively niche foreign news sources and I'm lazy.
expedition32 40 minutes ago [-]
When America is sending their diplomats they're not sending their best!
throwaway173738 9 minutes ago [-]
We used to send people who were concerned with building relationships. These days it sounds like we’re sending people to milk relationships dry.
axus 54 minutes ago [-]
The way the journalism business is going, open-source investigators and bloggers looking for clout will be the only independent media left.
masfuerte 5 minutes ago [-]
The American embassy considers them to have sufficient legitimacy to invite them.
elil17 43 minutes ago [-]
Yes, they're a legitimate news organization. They are partially funded by the EU government.
TheEdonian 41 minutes ago [-]
Belgian here, never heard of them/the site
sam_lowry_ 3 minutes ago [-]
Belgian here with some knowledge of the EU-centric media operating out of Brussels.
They are legit but have a tiny audience, this accident made them instantaneously recognizable.
Good for them, we are all fed up with Politico (Axel Springer) + Euractiv (Mediahuis) duopoly.
thinkingtoilet 22 minutes ago [-]
Does it matter? Should they have been kicked out of an event they were invited to for asking a reasonable question? Why are you asking about a news organization and not an extremely fragile man-baby who can't take a tough question?
iso1631 59 seconds ago [-]
Many blogs will omit key facts. For example you could write "I was booted out for asking a question" when in actual fact you'd broken in with some wire cutters and then proceeded to pour champagne over all the soft furnishings.
A credible reporter for a credible outlet writing a credible article won't, whether that's the Washignton Post, the Daily Telegraph, or Le Monde, or if it's BBC, RTL, Al Jazzera.
So it's always worth asking "is this a credible source". It used to be fairly easy, to be a journalist you had to have significant backing from a significant institution.
gspr 56 minutes ago [-]
A natural question to ask – after their very legitimate and important questions have been answered!
(Or are you just trying to derail?)
carlosjobim 18 minutes ago [-]
Judge for yourself. Why are you asking other people to think for you?
itake 46 minutes ago [-]
reminds me of Dan Brown's latest book: The Secret of Secrets.
Imustaskforhelp 54 minutes ago [-]
The Streisand Effect is taking effect in here in terms of surpressing a question has lead to many more people finding out about it, as it should be and I just find some layers of irony about America celebrating its freedom while this whole thing happens because of press freedom.
I did some search on freedom250.org and found this interesting piece of TOS: YOU WAIVE AND HOLD HARMLESS THE COMPANY AND ITS AFFILIATES, LICENSEES, AND SERVICE PROVIDERS FROM ANY CLAIMS RESULTING FROM ANY ACTION TAKEN BY THE COMPANY/ANY OF THE FOREGOING PARTIES DURING, OR TAKEN AS A CONSEQUENCE OF, INVESTIGATIONS BY EITHER THE COMPANY/SUCH PARTIES OR LAW ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITIES.
I am not a lawyer but I am unsure if this terms of service applies to the website or anything in general and if the European correspondent can sue freedom250.org or not
alistairSH 33 minutes ago [-]
Freedom250 is essentially another of Trump's fundraising bodies.
The congressionally created organization that was supposed to run the 250th events was America 250 - it was created in 2016 (IIRC). When Trump was re-elected, he spun up Freedom250, redirected funds to it, and started accepting bribes.
dimitrios1 33 minutes ago [-]
"Belgian police willingly comply with U.S. ambassador's request, and Belgian police stopped your reporting"
FTFY
> a foreign ambassador had Belgian police remove us
Belgian police removed us.
FTFY again.
The article is making a good point, especially the hilarious irony of all the private companies, and US being complicit in limiting press freedom. But it also fails to recognize the agency and complicitness of the Belgian authorities as well, and makes them out to be some sort of innocent bystandards -- "Oh look those poor Belgians being bullied by the big bad US!" If they didn't want to remove you, they simply could have not.
yorwba 6 minutes ago [-]
Renting a venue for an event usually comes with the right to decide who may attend and who may not. So if the embassy indeed rented the park, then as soon as the ambassador decided the journalists weren't welcome, they were no longer allowed to stay and the Belgian police were correctly doing their duty in making sure they complied and left.
So the article isn't strictly alleging that the ambassador did anything he didn't have the right to do, but uninviting journalists from an event after they ask a question he preferred not to answer and involving the police instead of directly telling them to leave is maybe not the best use of those rights.
flohofwoe 2 minutes ago [-]
Did you actually read the article?
The Belgian police got the information that the person would be an 'active threat' which is just absolutely bizarre and explains the somewhat 'hasty' reaction of the police to quickly remove that person from the event before asking further questions. After they realized their mistake they apologized but of course at that point the journalist wasn't allowed back in.
The ambassador essentially swatted the journalist.
CurbStomper 22 minutes ago [-]
[dead]
spwa4 56 minutes ago [-]
Yes, the Brussels state is in desperate need of funds, so they rent out public parks, including the Cinquantenaire, for private events. Of course, during such events the park is not accessible to the public, and there's private security who can hand over anyone to the Brussels police to be escorted out of the park. You know, like you can do in your apartment too.
So if Bill White, the US ambassador, pays to rent out the park for, I think it was 2 weeks, they can have whoever they want removed from this public park. Including any reporters.
carlosjobim 12 minutes ago [-]
The police didn't do something outside of their legal powers, that's not what the question is. It's rather unusual for any ambassador to use force to kick out invited reporters from a function.
FabCH 14 minutes ago [-]
They are not allowed to lie about it though.
Lying to the police that the reporters are an "active threat" is criminal.
gpm 9 minutes ago [-]
Presumably the ambassador has diplomatic immunity unfortunately. Really a concept we should get rid of in the day of video calls - there's no longer a strong enough need for foreign diplomats to be in a country to justify putting them above the law.
philipwhiuk 50 minutes ago [-]
> So if Bill White, the US ambassador, pays to rent out the park for, I think it was 2 weeks, they can have whoever they want removed from this public park. Including any reporters.
That would be by private security not police though. You aren't generally arrested for annoying an event organiser.
Aerroon 42 minutes ago [-]
If you get trespassed then wouldn't the police get involved?
darreninthenet 38 minutes ago [-]
Depends on the laws in Belgium (I've no idea what they are)... in the UK for example trespass by itself is not a criminal matter, even if somebody refuses to leave your property... they need to be doing something else.
n4r9 13 minutes ago [-]
Just to clarify. The UK police can assist you in ejecting trespassers, whom you have told to leave your house, in order to "prevent a breach of the peace". They won't arrest or charge you unless they have reason to suspect criminal activity.
In this case the Belgian police might have been justified in escorting the journalists off the premises. But I'm not sure what grounds they had to detain and question them.
1234letshaveatw 4 minutes ago [-]
They should have claimed the reporters were using AC
* https://noscommunes.ca/petitions/fr/Petition/Details?Petitio...
As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people.
People still don’t get it, and some people, specially these ones that believe themselves particularly knowledgeable about politics, will never get it. Still, I’m going to repeat:
Everything government does is paid by privates. All of it comes from the money they continuously take away from “we the people” to fund their lavish lifestyles and do their little ideological stunts. Every single cent.
I used to balk at those who were too worried at growing government power, but this is a wake up call. Protections have to be in place for the vast majority of people, even if it does allow a few criminals to get away.
Journalism funded by private interests - people complain of bias
Journalism funded by customers - people complain of clickbait to sell more rags
Not sure what your comment is supposed to indicate. That they disclosed a source of funding when most aren’t even bothered to?
https://www.journalismai.info/programmes/innovation/innovati...
Looks like it built an AI editing assistant with Google News and Polis.
Come on, be proud of your opinions. Don't hide behind scare quotes and insinuations. Don't be a coward.
If they want sympathy, they probably should lay out the details of their actions more clearly. This just reads as some juveniles went to an event, tried to rile up an official (while filming the response in hopes of getting a juicy clip), then were surprised when they were kicked out.
Though if this really happened as they say, it reflects very badly on Belgium as well.
They are legit but have a tiny audience, this accident made them instantaneously recognizable.
Good for them, we are all fed up with Politico (Axel Springer) + Euractiv (Mediahuis) duopoly.
A credible reporter for a credible outlet writing a credible article won't, whether that's the Washignton Post, the Daily Telegraph, or Le Monde, or if it's BBC, RTL, Al Jazzera.
So it's always worth asking "is this a credible source". It used to be fairly easy, to be a journalist you had to have significant backing from a significant institution.
(Or are you just trying to derail?)
I did some search on freedom250.org and found this interesting piece of TOS: YOU WAIVE AND HOLD HARMLESS THE COMPANY AND ITS AFFILIATES, LICENSEES, AND SERVICE PROVIDERS FROM ANY CLAIMS RESULTING FROM ANY ACTION TAKEN BY THE COMPANY/ANY OF THE FOREGOING PARTIES DURING, OR TAKEN AS A CONSEQUENCE OF, INVESTIGATIONS BY EITHER THE COMPANY/SUCH PARTIES OR LAW ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITIES.
also it seems to be an wholly owned subsidiary of a Non profit (national park foundation): https://www.nationalparks.org/freedom-250-faqs#:~:text=NPS%2...
I am not a lawyer but I am unsure if this terms of service applies to the website or anything in general and if the European correspondent can sue freedom250.org or not
The congressionally created organization that was supposed to run the 250th events was America 250 - it was created in 2016 (IIRC). When Trump was re-elected, he spun up Freedom250, redirected funds to it, and started accepting bribes.
FTFY
> a foreign ambassador had Belgian police remove us
Belgian police removed us.
FTFY again.
The article is making a good point, especially the hilarious irony of all the private companies, and US being complicit in limiting press freedom. But it also fails to recognize the agency and complicitness of the Belgian authorities as well, and makes them out to be some sort of innocent bystandards -- "Oh look those poor Belgians being bullied by the big bad US!" If they didn't want to remove you, they simply could have not.
So the article isn't strictly alleging that the ambassador did anything he didn't have the right to do, but uninviting journalists from an event after they ask a question he preferred not to answer and involving the police instead of directly telling them to leave is maybe not the best use of those rights.
The Belgian police got the information that the person would be an 'active threat' which is just absolutely bizarre and explains the somewhat 'hasty' reaction of the police to quickly remove that person from the event before asking further questions. After they realized their mistake they apologized but of course at that point the journalist wasn't allowed back in.
The ambassador essentially swatted the journalist.
So if Bill White, the US ambassador, pays to rent out the park for, I think it was 2 weeks, they can have whoever they want removed from this public park. Including any reporters.
Lying to the police that the reporters are an "active threat" is criminal.
That would be by private security not police though. You aren't generally arrested for annoying an event organiser.
In this case the Belgian police might have been justified in escorting the journalists off the premises. But I'm not sure what grounds they had to detain and question them.