[flagged]
The American embassy considers them to have sufficient legitimacy to invite them.
The US ambassador had Belgian police stop our reporting
51–60 of 377 posts
Re: The US ambassador had Belgian police stop our reporting
#52Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you get trespassed then wouldn't the police get involved?
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.
They should have claimed the reporters were using AC
Re: The US ambassador had Belgian police stop our reporting
#53[flagged]
Belgian here, never heard of them/the site
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.
P.S. This is just IMO, but De Wever should not have gone to the event, he lost a lot of political capital there. He should have given the ground to Theo Francken and Vansina to do their clown thing and instead he should have traveled 100km to the Florennes airbase to assist at BAFS-2026 that happened at the same time.
Re: The US ambassador had Belgian police stop our reporting
#54free speech, I fear, is in retreat
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.
never had absolute freedom of speech like the US, which itself (since it was colonised) never had absolute freedom of speech.
Re: The US ambassador had Belgian police stop our reporting
#55"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 B…
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.
Re: The US ambassador had Belgian police stop our reporting
#56[flagged]
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?
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.
Re: The US ambassador had Belgian police stop our reporting
#57[flagged]
Re: The US ambassador had Belgian police stop our reporting
#58Re: The US ambassador had Belgian police stop our reporting
#59Re: The US ambassador had Belgian police stop our reporting
#60[flagged]
You seem to have a strange idea of both money and government.