Today, Belgian police blocked me — a sitting Member of the European Parliament — from entering the European Parliament for nearly an hour.
They were on the phone with Brussels Mayor Philippe Close, who was personally directing their actions. We have video footage of the incident.
The Mayor prevented me from delivering over half a million European citizens’ signatures for the @SaveEuropeAct initiative.
This is unacceptable.
The EU is a union of 27 member states. No single country — and certainly not one socialist mayor of a single city — has the right to decide which MEPs from other nations can carry out their democratic duties.
My team and I will launch a formal investigation into the mayor’s conduct.
@Handre I also used to hate my government for high taxes.
But lately I hate them even more for importing gazillion of immigrant desperados and doling them out my hard earned money.
@StefanMolyneux Apparently muslims in the middle east pose such a threat, they have to be bombed.
But a soon as they illegaly arrive to Europe, there is nothing to worry.
@IstrianMario There are at least 250 000 "citizens" in Slovenia.
At least criminals like above should be stripped of citizenship and deported to their home countries.
This is properly insane: quite literally the worst example of censorship I've ever heard of anywhere.
I checked the actual ruling (which you can see here: https://t.co/dBKFWZ2ZWm) and, to be clear, it isn't just censorship in the conventional sense - blocking access to a website or removing content from platforms - this is the criminalization of information relayed by private citizens, with prison sentences attached.
And the most insane aspect if that it does NOT matter if the information relayed is accurate or not. It just matters that it originates from RT or other media outlets banned in the EU.
In other words, truth isn't a defense anymore in the EU, it literally doesn't matter. It's purely based on the identity of the speaker.
The ruling is actually explicit about this: the regulation, quoted by the Court says that the prohibition applies to "any content," and they draw no distinction based on what the content actually says. If it originates from banned outlets, it's banned.
It is, quite simply, a complete unraveling of the entire post-Enlightenment legal and philosophical project where entire generations of Europeans fought to move from "who says it" to "is it true" as the operative question.
Think about the absurdity of it: if RT publishes a video saying the sky is blue and you share it on a publicly accessible website in the EU, you'd fall within the scope of this ruling, making you liable to criminal prosecution.
Completely and utterly absurd. But that's the EU today for you 🤷
@Kristjan17971 Sramota za vse, ki kot papige ponavljajo to maloumno propagando.
Še otrokom je jasno, da so ga nagnali zaradi nasprotovanja masovni imigraciji in VDL.