I made a comment about freedom of speech in the topic about the Reuters article. Several people disagreed and one individual use gay pride (praids) as an example.

I hope that the following (posted on the Reuters topic) is helpful in discussing that despite Latvia’s freedom of speech, certain individuals/municipalities may abuse their authority and limit a message.

Post:

Re Latvia recognizes the freedom of assembly and allows all kinds of speech.

Latvia does have some express limitations on speech - re former Soviet rule, etc.

Smaller governmental entities have a second type of limitation - whether the assembly poses some danger to the public. (In the U.S. the burden of limiting speech on this found is pretty high.)

It is important to recognize the reality that this second limitation is sometimes used as a pretext to try to limit certain speech that a group doesn’t like. Taking the example provided - gay pride in Riga. (I am speaking with ltd knowledge of the underlying fact.) Riga determined it did not want to allow a gay pride event. It is important to realize that there is a history of a few events - both public and in the Reval Hotel. These were met with tremendous hostility - the throwing of eggs, excrement, etc. I don’t remember whether any people were hurt. BUT, this background provides a rationale for limiting a proposed event in a certain forum. If the court reviews this and overturns it, it means that the burden was not met. (I will not get into my thoughts about the general attitude about homosexuality in Latvia.)

I again admit that this limitation is sometimes used as a pretext to limit certain speech.

This process, however, is legitimate and it is in effect throughout the U.S. The same issues of whether a municipality is stifling free speech comes up all of the time and initial decisions that preclude an event are often overturned. This does NOT mean that there is no freedom of speech and assembly in the U.S.

It is imperative not to confuse the actions of a few individuals in a municipality with the actions and rights provided by the country. Latvia protects freedom of speech and assembly.

Vilis

Plenty free….........and other than the “O” word, not much
concern for Politcorrectum…..............

European Union
  Wikisource has original text related to this article:
Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union

Currently, all members of the European Union are signatories of the European Convention on Human Rights along having various constitutional and legal rights to freedom of expression at the national level. The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union has been legally binding since December 1, 2009 when the Treaty of Lisbon became fully ratified and effective. Article 11 of the Charter, in part mirroring the language of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the European Convention on Human Rights, provides that

  1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers.
  2. The freedom and pluralism of the media shall be respected.

The European Court of Justice takes into account both the Charter and the Convention when making its rulings. According to the Treaty of Lisbon, the European Union accedes to the European Convention as an entity in its own right, making the Convention binding not only on the governments of the member states but also on the supranational institutions of the EU.

Is this anything to with the attempted / proposed exhibiton “Stolen Childhood”?
The ruSSkies just don’t ever stop in attempting to demonise Latvia.
Link:  http:// english.ruvr.ru/2012_03_29/70024558

There are several lines that send me straight to the toilet; but this one takes the cake
Closing paragraph:
” might have happened that the exhibition “The Stolen Childhood” could at least make the Latvian people think about the pain of war. In the country, where 39 % of the working population supports the marches of legionaries, somebody should day and night remind the people about the past, in order never tohear the phrase “History repeats itself”.”

” ...could at least make the Latvian people think about the pain of war”
Holy shit! As if we don’t already know ... especially experienced from the SSoviet ruSSians.

Peter b- what, pray tell, is the the “O” word?

Vinde- if you believe that freedom of speech is genuinely safe and protected in either the US of A or Latvia, I think that you have your head in the sand. This freedom is under real assault here and in America.

We regularly see the power of the state used to suppress legitimate speech. Whether those decisions are eventually overturned is immaterial, as the idea gets through- “say what we want (or don’t speak up) or you will face the power of the state and spend your time and money defending yourself.”

I have lived here for ten years and am quite active in several spheres that bring me into contact with state power. We have seen the results of speaking up. Sometimes it is state functionaries informing me that I do not have the right to voice an opinion because I am not a citizen (though I am husband to one and father to a second and pay all my taxes) and other times it is our one of our NGOs having projects audited capriciously on the orders of functionaries who we have challenged.

Sorry, these rights are in danger.

I think we do know the pain of war pretty darn good… but I don’t think Māris derives any sensible conclusions from it, whether those lines from the exhibit sicken him or not. Especially from SSoviet ruSSians? Really? I guess those German Nazis were a lot nicer. And those Soviet Latvians were sweet.

/P

PC
“I think we do know the pain of war pretty darn good… but I don’t think Māris derives any sensible conclusions from it, whether those lines from the exhibit sicken him or not. Especially from SSoviet ruSSians? Really? I guess those German Nazis were a lot nicer. And those Soviet Latvians were sweet.”
I’ll take all that with a pinch of salt.
Conclusions ... what’s to definitevely conclude? These ruSSian SSoviet sympathisers are going to keep up their diarhettic diatribe even after the cows come home. They know they are lying through their teeth, but that’s their method ... always has been ... constant repetition to instill belief.
Those lines were not from the exhibit, but from one of the two organisers of the exhibit, who were banned from entering Latvia.
Every country in the world has the legislation to ban people from entering, and occassionally does so.
Your ‘guessing’ conclusions are so way off the mark, they make me wonder about your leanings and intention.
Do you snuggle up to Bhackmann?
Or are you expanding on your artistic /  poetic freedom of speech licence?
I’m using mine .. by using SSoviets and ruSSians and now the naziSS.
Or to put it another way ... SSoviets = SShitler = SShit.

By the way .. I drove through Roya last year .. I think I must have blinked.

Gradually it became clear to me that the line separating good from evil runs not between states, not between classes, and not between parties—it runs through the heart of each and every one of us, and through all human hearts. This line is not stationary. It shifts and moves with the passing of the years. Even in hearts enveloped in evil, it maintains a small bridgehead of good. And even the most virtuous heart harbors an uprooted corner of evil.

(Aleksandr Isayevich Solzhenitsyn)

PC
How very artistically poetic in response… if it was a response.
I’m sure my father who spent over a year in Salaspils as a political prisoner of the naSSis’ would congratulate you for your incredible insight by accusing me of being a naSSi and communiSSt lover.
I’d like to give you a straight Ozzie answer in my poetic language, but I would be banned.
In the meanwhile, dig up Jeff Jeffries on youtube .. and you might get the picture of how I should express myself to your guessing game.
Let me remind you of something else ... on wicki you are said to be living with an artist. Now.. does your painter partner ever expect everyone to understand her imagery?
Ie .. no conclusions ... make of it what one will.
And yes, over time, one may understand what one doesn’t today.

You confine yourself to pellucid, expository prose, Māri? Sometimes I’m in the mood for mud wrestling here, sometimes not. I reacted to sentences like this one: The ruSSkies just don’t ever stop in attempting to demonise Latvia. All you do is demonise ‘the’ Russkies, & you do so in the same wretched way that certain Russkies demonise, say, ‘eSStonia’. I’m not at all fond of demagogues like Bäckman (and have no idea why you think I’d snuggle up to him or his ilk), and I doubt that you have Nazi sympathies… but the idea that we ‘especially experienced’ the pain of war from ‘SSoviet ruSSians’ doesn’t hold up, to my mind. What’s more especial about the pain the Soviets wrought, Russian or not, vs. the pain the Nazis wrought? The Soviet occupation lasted longer, yeah… and we could add tragedies like conscripts dying in Afghanistan. The Soviets were among the winners of the war… but some latter-day Germans love to demonise Latvia, too. I wouldn’t paint the stark miniatures you do, and I try not to use such a broad brush. I do think not a few Latvians who don’t know their history too well (and I’m not including you in this—I don’t know what you know) are indeed prone to glossing over German evils, and Latvian involvement in those evils. N.B., that involvement was actually minimal—‘the Latvians’ didn’t ‘kill their neighbors’. Some Latvians did, just as numerous Latvians were at the forefront of creating the Soviet Union in the first place. I think there is a real danger in oversimplification. Playing eternally victimized angels and incessantly pointing to ‘the Russkies’ (or ‘ruSSkies’) isn’t healthy.

Visu gaišu,
/P

P.S. For the record, my Wiki page says ‘lived’, past tense… I left my partner, and Daugavpils, in January 2011.

PC
if you want to self indulge at whim at mud wrestling that’s your concern. Keep it to yourself.
Strange that you allow yourself such privileged activities, yet try to deny others the same.
As for my language, well, that’s my mode of language.
Less is more.

Past tense .. ok.

Every russian was not a ruSSian & every german was not a naSSi & every Latvian was neither of the two.

End of this nonsensical topic .. hopefully.

To all

I didn’t mean an end to this thread, but an end of the personaling attacks.

The thread is a valid point / a question.
As for ‘conclusions’ ... what’s the point of doing so?
Everybody has their own interpretation, usually via their own personal experiences and that becomes their (albeit temporary) conclusion, or the next question, where hopefully the next step is revealed.
We all live in different worlds, with our own different levels of understanding for whatever it is we are searching for.

This LOL site is about reaching out, questioning ... ie not for being blasted into the ground.
Nothing is black & white where Latvia;s history is concerned.
Each and all of us (the 2nd generation) have our own shades of grey, hopefully to be illuminated.
We (most ?) were not there at ‘the coalface’; therefore the questions / the threads ... lookling for answers.

Israeli ambassador gets Radio Naba’s radioshow “Tēvijas laikmets” shutdown
http://nra.lv/latvija/70304-pec-skandaloza-sizeta-uz-laiku-sledz-radio-naba-raidijumu-tevijas-laikmets.htm
http://twitdoc.com/view.asp?id=45149&sid=YU5&ext=PDF&lcl=nelp.pdf&usr=TevijasLaikmets&doc=89994066&key=key-25qth06mh76zrqgfdnyx

Roberts Klimovičs responds //vimeo.com/40143485

point counter-point:      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZJn4TzaYEM
                        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yq8UU-Iq7ow
remedy Jer:31           http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wUiSuYqMGk0

Two corrections: not the ambassador, but the TV and Radio council in reaction to a letter from the Israeli ambassador and other embassies and NGOs. And not shut down the programme, but suspended it. How is the show different from the Nazi propaganda that Jews are to blame for the Soviet crimes in order to incite “locally organized pogroms”? 

And what does freedom of speech really mean? Does freedom not mean also taking responsibility for what is being said or dealing with consequences?

Latvijas Radio ģenerāldirektors apturējis studentu radio NABA raidījumu “Tēvijas laikmets”, kura saturs sadusmoja Izraēlas vēstnieci Latvijā, jo vēstīja arī par ebreju dalību latviešu izsūtīšanā uz Sibīriju. Tā kā NABA ir Latvijas Radio piektais kanāls, ģenerāldirektoram ir šādas tiesības. Arī mediju eksperti, kuri jau analizējuši raidījuma saturu, uzskata, ka tas ebrejiem kā tautībai piedēvē kolektīvo vainu. Tikmēr raidījuma vadītāji uzskata, ka šis ir mēģinājums aizbāzt viņiem muti, un pēc šīs cenzūras turpinās darboties interneta vidē.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNYQ6o9IZWQ

Rīga, 18.apr., NOZARE.LV. Saistībā ar ažiotāžu ap “Radio Naba” 20.marta raidījumu “Tēvijas laikmets” tas uz laiku slēgts, biznesa portālam “Nozare.lv” apstiprināja radio vadītājs Madars Štramdiers.
Viņš norādīja, ka pēc Izraēlas vēstnieces Latvijā Hāgitas Ben Jakovas vēršanās Nacionālajā elektronisko plašsaziņas līdzekļu padomē (NEPLP) iesaistījušās arvien vairāk puses, tāpēc nolemts raidījumu pagaidām slēgt. Kā norādīja Štramdiers, domstarpību risināšanā iesaistījies arī Latvijas Radio, kas nodrošina frekvenci “Radio Naba”, dažādas organizācijas un citu valstu vēstniecības.
Raidījuma atgriešanās “Radio Naba” ēterā būs atkarīga no rezultāta. Proti, pēc viņa vārdiem, tiks sagaidīts NEPLP lēmums. Štramdiers gan norādīja, ka NEPLP izvērtējuma vēl aizvien nav, savukārt likuma pārkāpumu var noteikt tiesa. Vaicāts, vai soda gadījumā radio vai arī raidījuma veidotāji varētu vērsties tiesā, viņš norādīja, ka vēl nevar prognozēt, vai jautājums nonāks līdz tiesai. Patlaban arī neesot skaidrs, kuram būtu jāatbild. No vienas puses, vēršanās notiek pret raidījuma vadītājiem, bet vienlaikus atbildība jāuzņemas arī radio.
Ar raidījuma vadītājiem pārrunas notikušas vairākkārt. Tajās secināts, ka likumpārkāpums nav saskatāms, taču pieļauts, ka raidījums bija diskutabls, sacīja Štramdiers.
Viņš piebilda, ka sākusies vēršanās arī pret “Radio Naba”, izsakot aizdomas, ka radio pārstāv raidījumā izskanējušo pozīciju. “Mums ir 43 raidījumi,” uzsvēra Štramdiers un piebilda, ka šādām aizdomām nav pamata.

FYI: History of Philadelphia radio station 88.5 WXPN (University of Pennsylvania)

In 1974, a live call in show called the “Vegetable Report” and other programs contained obscene language that caused the FCC to suspend the station’s license and impose a $2000 fine. (For more details of the incident, see the Citypaper article referenced below) For the next 20 years, WXPN was particulary cautious about the use of obscenity on air, even to the point of editing explicit lyrics or avoiding certain songs altogether. In order to get their license back, WXPN agreed to remove students from on-air positions and use semi/professional volunteer staff. Some WXPN purists consider this period of the late 70s and early 80s the golden years of the station, with a very eclectic mix of folk, rock, jazz, and ethnic music.

FCC fines of The Howard Stern Show