/* */

PDA

View Full Version : Czech Bans Anti-minority Party



S<Chowdhury
02-20-2010, 12:50 PM
The Czech Republic has banned a far-right party for fueling hatred against minorities, the first such a move since the independence of the central European country.

“This ruling needs to be understood as a preventive one, to maintain the constitutional and democratic order in the future,” Judge Vojtech Simicek said in a 120-page ruling cited by The New York Times Friday, February 19.

Describing it as xenophobic, anti-Semitic and homophobic, the court said the far-right Workers’ Party posed a threat to the Czech democracy.

The ruling, adopted Wednesday, said the party follows the example of Adolph Hitler’s Nazi policies and had links to white supremacist and racist groups.

“Society must realize that the causes for the Workers’ Party lie deeply within itself,” judge Simicek said.

Established in 2003, the far-right party is not represented in the Czech parliament.

In 2009, it won a surprising 1.07 percent of votes in the European parliament election.

The far-right party openly calls for the overthrow of the Czech political system and an abolition of all Czech parliamentary parties.

Some of its top officials have been associated with neo-Nazi groups such as Narodni odpor, Czech subsidiary of international militant neo-Nazi group.

The ban follows attacks by party supporters against minorities last year, which saw the killing of young child in a gas bomb attack, prompting the government to seek its outlaw.

The Czech Republic is home to around 50,000 Muslims.

In 2004, Prague acknowledged Islam as an official religion, giving Muslims rights on an equal footing to Christians and Jews.

Fight Rightists

The ruling was widely welcomed by different political parties in the Czech Republic.

“In a democratic society, the battle against extremism never ends,” Czech Interior Minister Martin Pecina, who filed the ban petition, told a news conference cited by the BBC News Online.

“Either we act immediately and stamp out extremism as soon as it appears, or we can wait for police cars to be set on fire and petrol bombs to be thrown.

“Each step - like the one taken today - significantly weakens the neo-Nazi movement.”

Czechs said that the ban would help put an end to violence against minorities.

“I think it's vital to show the whole of society that extremist groups like the Workers' Party advocate the suppression of the rights of ethnic and other minorities,” said Gabriela Hrabanova, head of the government's Council for Roma Community Affairs.

While immigrants make up less than 1 percent of the country’s 10.2 million population, ethnic minorities account for nearly 4 percent.

“All of us - including Romanies - have a place in this society,” Hrabanova said.

“I call on the whole of Czech society to reject these racist and extremist views.”



Read more: http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/S...#ixzz0g51Gmd1N
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
The_Prince
02-20-2010, 02:55 PM
a gas bomb attack? the media never reported this as a major story, i wonder how many other attacks by such right wing groups against minorities arent being reported.

another instance is the case about two migrant workers getting kidnapped by russian neo-nazis a few years back, with one of them getting beheaded, and the other shot in the head, all filmed on tape.
Reply

Dagless
02-20-2010, 03:19 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by The_Prince
a gas bomb attack? the media never reported this as a major story, i wonder how many other attacks by such right wing groups against minorities arent being reported.

another instance is the case about two migrant workers getting kidnapped by russian neo-nazis a few years back, with one of them getting beheaded, and the other shot in the head, all filmed on tape.
Hmm I didn't even hear about that one, must have been straight to dvd. Its weird that these kinds of stories don't filter through to Al Jazeera or Press TV.
Reply

Trumble
02-20-2010, 03:47 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Dagless
Hmm I didn't even hear about that one, must have been straight to dvd. Its weird that these kinds of stories don't filter through to Al Jazeera or Press TV.
Not really. There's no chance of editors not going with this story if they knew about it ("CHILD MURDERED IN NAZI GAS ATTACK" or something similar) but I can't find this reported anywhere. If it didn't make the wires, CNN, the BBC or seemingly anywhere else outside the Czech Republic, I doubt Al Jazeera would have had a local correspondent to pick it up. It's even less likely Press TV would have had. Obviously the other case must have been reported somewhere, or The_Prince wouldn't know about it!

All that aside, the banning of what is obviously a racist party with links to the worst kind of violence has to be good news, doesn't it?
Reply

Welcome, Guest!
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up
Dagless
02-20-2010, 04:10 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Trumble
Not really. There's no chance of editors not going with this story if they knew about it ("CHILD MURDERED IN NAZI GAS ATTACK" or something similar) but I can't find this reported anywhere. If it didn't make the wires, CNN, the BBC or seemingly anywhere else outside the Czech Republic, I doubt Al Jazeera would have had a local correspondent to pick it up. It's even less likely Press TV would have had. Obviously the other case must have been reported somewhere, or The_Prince wouldn't know about it!

All that aside, the banning of what is obviously a racist party with links to the worst kind of violence has to be good news, doesn't it?
Of course there is a chance of editors not going with the story. Over the years the coverage of the Israel/Palestine issue has been far more informative on Al Jazeera and Press TV, whereas BBC, CNN, etc. filter down a lot. It depends on interests and what they can get away with. Before the internet, news stations used to blanket out huge stories, its much harder to do now though.

Both brothers obviously heard it somewhere which means that some news organisation reported it, even if it was a local one the bigger stations could have picked it up from that - they do not physically need correspondents there.
Reply

Trumble
02-20-2010, 04:19 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Dagless
Of course there is a chance of editors not going with the story. Over the years the coverage of the Israel/Palestine issue has been far more informative on Al Jazeera and Press TV, whereas BBC, CNN, etc. filter down a lot
What does this story have to do with the Israel/Palestine issue? I would expect Al Jazeera to give more time to Israel/Palestine than BBC or CNN simply because, to be frank, the issue is of more relative importance to a greater proportion of their viewers. Press TV, of course, just report what the Iranian government wants them to report and so are irrelevant in this context.

Trust me, any British editor would jump at any story where they can use 'Nazi' or 'neo-Nazi' to describe terrorists/criminals in an incident like this. The word is still very emotive here.
Reply

Dagless
02-20-2010, 04:26 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Trumble
What does this story have to do with the Israel/Palestine issue? I would expect Al Jazeera to give more time to Israel/Palestine than BBC or CNN simply because, to be frank, the issue is of more relative importance to a greater proportion of their viewers. Press TV, of course, just reports what the Iranian government wants them to report and so are irrelevant in this context.

Trust me, any British editor would jump at any story where they can use 'Nazi' or 'neo-Nazi' to describe terrorists/criminals in an incident like this. The word is still very emotive here.
I'm using it as an example of how not all stories are picked up regardless of importance.
War is relevant to all viewers. It wasn't so much the time restrictions since the BBC reported on it but went with softer/more filtered down versions. This was due to self serving/country serving interests because usually the BBC give very in-depth reports.

It would depend on exactly when it happened. If it showed minorities in a sympathetic light during a period when we (the west) were attacking countries or trying to stir up resentment in order to get a new law approved then it probably wouldn't have been shown on most mainstream channels. If Islamic radicals are the enemy, you can't suddenly make white nazi's the enemy as well.
Reply

Supreme
02-20-2010, 04:46 PM
Brilliant news, now all Britain needs to do is follow its lead and ban the BNP...

Sorry, just daydreaming.
Reply

S<Chowdhury
02-20-2010, 05:06 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Supreme
Brilliant news, now all Britain needs to do is follow its lead and ban the BNP...

Sorry, just daydreaming.
Talking of the BNP they were actually linked to far right Czech Party -

Czech far-right party linked to BNP runs Euro election TV ads demanding 'Final Solution' to gypsy problem
Reply

The_Prince
02-20-2010, 05:26 PM
i found about the neo-nazi beheading in russia because i was watching a youtube documentary about them, and it was reported by journey pictures, and i realized i was actually a FEW YEARS LATE. yeah how conveniant, such stories arent reported at all except in some documentary, if the same case happened and Muslims were doing the killing it would be all over yahoo, cnn, and every mainstream news outlet.

and heres a test for you, just go ask anyone if they know about the incident, and i rest my case.
Reply

Amadeus85
02-20-2010, 05:49 PM
They were banned, is it good or bad? I guess that it's good. Pity that europeans dont ban also communistic parties, trotzkiest parties.

Those who believe in conflict of races are as stupid as those who believe in conflict of classes. It's same materialistic view of the world. Same mistake.

Europe will rebirth only in Jesus Christ. Race and blood won't replace God. Religion of race and blood is as mistaken as belief in communism.
Reply

Amadeus85
02-20-2010, 05:56 PM
They were banned, is it good or bad? I guess that it's good. Pity that europeans dont ban also communistic parties, trotzkiest parties.

Those who believe in conflict of races are as stupid as those who believe in conflict of classes. It's same materialistic view of the world. Same mistake.

Europe will rebirth only in Jesus Christ. Race and blood won't replace God. Religion of race and blood is as mistaken as belief in communism.
Reply

Trumble
02-20-2010, 06:34 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Amadeus85
They were banned, is it good or bad? I guess that it's good. Pity that europeans dont ban also communistic parties, trotzkiest parties.

Those who believe in conflict of races are as stupid as those who believe in conflict of classes. It's same materialistic view of the world. Same mistake.
I'd argue that they are at least different mistakes! Even assuming Marxist historical materialism is wrong, it does at least describe real and significant differences between groups of people in terms of their economic wellbeing and relative freedoms. Skin colour or ethnic origin has no such moral relevance.

I'd also argue that it's naive in the extreme to deny the reality of 'conflict of classes'. History is full of it. What Marx got wrong was not that it happened and indeed was happening, or indeed generally the reasons for it, but what he thought to be the inevitable consequences of it. History - particularly that of industrial production and technology - just didn't go the way he thought (or hoped) it would.
Reply

Amadeus85
02-20-2010, 06:39 PM
Trumble, You think that european communistic and trozkiest parties should be banned?
You think that racist, xenophobic parties should be banned?
Reply

Trumble
02-20-2010, 08:22 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Amadeus85
Trumble, You think that european communistic and trozkiest parties should be banned?
You think that racist, xenophobic parties should be banned?
"No" in the first case and "it depends" in the case of the second.

I see no reason to ban a party that advocates a particular political ideology just because I happen to disagree with it. I disagree even more with assorted versions of conservatism or libertarianism, yet wouldn't I wouldn't want to ban parties that supported those, either. All those positions can, and have been both advocated and contested by reasonable argument.

Racism and xenophobia, however, are irrational and cannot be defended by reasonable arguments. However, in itself that's no reason to ban anybody either.. half (at least) of all politics consists of irrational arguments! The difference happens when a particular view is expressed by means that causes harm to others. Obviously physical violence causes harm, but so does incitement of the racial and religious hatred that could cause violence and prejudice. Parties or groups responsible for either should be banned in the public interest.
Reply

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 12-13-2013, 10:54 AM
  2. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-09-2010, 06:03 AM
  3. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 05-25-2009, 02:37 PM
  4. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04-14-2008, 09:46 PM
  5. Replies: 54
    Last Post: 09-13-2007, 07:20 AM
British Wholesales - Certified Wholesale Linen & Towels | Holiday in the Maldives

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!