Used the Belgian government a terrible psychological weapon by bother against opponents, and are police and justice manipulated and used against the population to opponents to suppress.
It will for many seen to be incredible, but the government can its managers and representatives in the respective services for law and order, easy to manipulate or to set under pressure. The weapon of blackmail means to be or not to be promoted with other words, is clearly and widely used by the government, while also were in the past dabblers in public contract by promotion set on a higher function, a phenomenon where of the population for decades was witness to.
Etienne Schouppe (CD & V) was from 1987 to 2002 CEO of SNCB.
Schouppe was a year chairman of the subsidiary company ABX (until November 2003). On his departure he received addition to his annual salary of 750,000 Euro a golden handshake of 2 million Euro.
After his departure he left for SNCB a debt behind of 1.8 billion euro.
On 20 Mar 2008 Schouppe became State Secretary for Mobility in the Leterme government I.
In the elections on June 13, 2010 became Schouppe not elected.
However, on the end of 2012 he returned to the national politic level, and he was appointed co-opted senator after Peter Van Rompuy was moved to the Flemish Parliament.
Such political adventures and escapades are rife but as usual at the expense of working people, and gives colors to the Belgian politics.
Shall we talk about J. L. Dehaene who is crowing on his dunghill at Vilvoorde, with pockets full of money, shamelessly Dexia with a bankrupt bequeathed to the people.
Crime commissioned by the government:
The phenomenon of the "Gang of Nivelles" or the affair "Marc Dutroux" or shall we make mention about the "Pink Ballets" or death of Gendarme "Peter De Vleesschauwer" which leave too many questions unanswered, while government involvement or this of our nobility not only is clear but obviously can’t be denied, even not the frequent and extreme failure of our system for law and order. It is clear and undeniable that many act in good faith in the system and the high integrity take as paramount importance, while others are under pressure to convert and, whether or not voluntarily and knowingly, allow them to abuse. Also today is the invocation of term of limitation and procedural errors, to safeguard serious criminals from prosecution or punishment a thorn in the side of Jan audience, and rightly so.
Services of law and order and the police are they friend or enemy?
1st case: On September 28, 2011 around 18:00;
At Malines is the outside temperature 25 ° to 26 ° Celsius and the driver of a 125 cc Motor-scooter on the intersection Guido Gezellenlaan and Oscar Van Kesbeeckstraat, comming from Edgard Tinellaan, ready to strike off to the Guido Gezellenlaan, was on the red light by a motorcycle cop approached and made aware that a new law Since September 1 remain valid about the clothing for motorcyclists. The addressed driver has seen the heat, namely a T shirt and no coat with long sleeves, low shoes instead of some higher protective footwear and no gloves, which however, is required by the new guidelines. The driver does have a long pants seen his two legs in post surgical compression stockings, as a result of an operation a few months before on his legs was performed, and which he was forced to wear to prevent Phlebitis or vein inflammation until two years after surgery.
The motor cop appeared to have understanding and would like to let this once, but warned the motor driver that he next had to wear his clothes according to the new rules.
However, a few weeks later a formal report with fine and claim € 50 with precisely entry as follows:
Malines: September 28, 2011 Date of facts.
To have as a driver or as a passenger of a motorcycle on public roads no gloves, jacket with long sleeves, long pants or coveralls worn and no boots or ankle boots that protect the ankles (Art. 36 all 4 of the Royal Decree of 1 December 1975, Article 29 paragraph 2 of the Law on road traffic police - KB coordination of March 16, 1968)
The aforementioned statement in the formal report was correct, except at the mention of "no pants"
Here, even the most simple-minded will understand that the involved police officer was rebuked and receive order to make a formal report on, while the good man has afterward forgot that the driver indeed wore long pants, despite it was immensely hot, especially on a motor-scooter with overall windshields and upper windscreen, sitting out of the wind or any cooling. By the resistance of the concerned driver of the motor-scooter, was by the police court the fine reduced to € 10 + court fees, an acceptable compromise because the driver further lack of his clothing, due to the heat and high temperature, spontaneously had admitted.
2nd case: Concerning the same Motor driver as above.
On March 11, 2013 at 15:50;
Karin Liekens, Female Agent of police in the zone Malines notes that in the Groenstraat 30 at 2800 Malines, the driver of a motorcycle 125cc XXXXXXX license XXXXX etc
During the school end, the driver of the mentioning motorcycle drives his vehicle on the sidewalk instead of the road. The pavement was clearly visible and clear formed and separated of the roadway. In this way, the driver passes a slow moving traffic jam.
After receiving the formal report, the involved driver sends the next response of resistance:
Formal Report Nr ME.89.Il418969/2013 made by Karin Liekens, female agent of police zone Malines presented on 11/03/2013 at 3:50 pm determine that in the Groenstraat 30 at Malines the driver of Motorcycle * with plate ******* and so on …..
The determination was done in Groenstraat near the n° 30 between the outputs of nursery and primary school in Malines. The named motorcycle stands daily at the school end at the edge of the sidewalk on the right side. If the place in front of n° 30 isn't free, this driver set his vehicle in front of a garage either with the knowledge and consent of the occupant for the gate of N° 34, to pick up his child of the primary school. The driver of the vehicle in question was allegedly caught in moving on the sidewalk while the rider the waiting cars of parents who pick up their children, would pass.
Between the time of the school end at 15:35 as the first gate being opened and 15:45 when the third gate is opened until 16:00 the Groenstraat consequently quite busy and next blocked until the end, and slide the row of waiting car always a place ahead as the front car children has taken and drive-through. Since there are many parents at the same time their children will pick up daily and thus near the gate waiting, there are plenty of witnesses, including local residents, to confirm that this motorcycle there at the school end for the n° 30 or n° 34 is parked daily.
The formal report that was prepared however set:
"During the school end the driver of said motorcycle rode with his vehicle on the sidewalk instead of on the road. The pavement was clearly visible and regularly of form separated from the roadway. In this way, pass the driver a slow moving traffic jam”.
The formal report is only one certain agent stated, however, who by the motorcyclist was not noticed. The motorcyclist was not accosted by a cop, why not? This agent seems to have not seen that the motorcyclist his vehicle for the house n° 30 stationed? How can that be if the police agent was at the place present?
The cop apparently didn't know that this row of cars stopped more than slow driving.
The cop in question should have seen that if the footpath is free, all two-wheeled vehicles are obliged either to wait, or run the risk of scattered over a short distance along the footpath to drive, which is seen children along the same output of secondary education in the St. Jacob Street via the Groenstraat passes, hardly otherwise, unless you wish to extend chaos and congestion. These are therefore obliged to part of the footpath to ride, just with bikes or with light motorcycles.
How can all these detail’s escape if the officer personally was at the place?
(For so far the resistance of the director concerned)
This statement of objection was ignored by the prosecutor.
The real circumstances, the Groenstraat at Malines.
According to the travel direction is the road to n° 32 almost 6,5 m wide and has a parking lane of 1.5m while the road farther narrowed to 5m width and the lane the full length is 3m width. The lane after the end of school for 25 to 30 minutes by passing parents, children, two-, three-and four-wheelers or cars is used, so this can only gradually and by slow traffic until the last school gate at n° 22.
Situation of right side of Groenstraat in Malines (one-way street)
While it is clear that both cyclists and small motorcycles that pass can’t help but here and there, a short piece possibly, on the edge of the right sidewalk has to pass. Both pedestrians and others should find a path on a route that partially on the sidewalk and partly goes in the right lane of the road, as the right footpath is only one meter wide and used by parents that their bicycle or tricycle is stationed at lack of alternative when picking up children as by the primary school or nursery school. It is therefore impossible that a large 125cc Motor Scooter which covers 75cm width on the footpath could struggle through here. Such Motor driver would inevitably touch parked bicycles, parents and children, and cause accidents, while Motor driver certainly not on the sidewalk, but at most on the border and separation of sidewalk and roadway could move, the motor would be half over the footpath and only tight or insufficient space remaining for pedestrians and parked bikes and small motorbikes, but would be blocked by tricycles or carrier-tricycles.
The actual use of this footpath through a Motor driver at such time is impossible. It is absurd even if the street or sidewalk would be empty because the footpath is too narrow, and it is therefore dangerous near to houses and house doors would pass.
Left side of Groenstraat in Malines. (One-way traffic)
The fact is that up to n° 30, means at left side of the street, no bike or motorcycle on the footpath can drive, certainly not until n° 32, while the footpath till there is used as car parking for residents or visitors. The footpath is 2.5m wide and has no more than maximum 1m free passage for pedestrian and school leavers, between parked cars and houses. This free passage of up to 1m is theoretically available if the parked cars close past the edge of the sidewalk stand, without taking into account mirrors of parked cars or windowsills of the houses. This makes that the real free space is less than 80cm. A Motor driver could not pass, even not on a different moment. It is therefore quite clear that no one can drive with a bicycle or motorcycle, between the houses and parked vehicles up to house n° 30 to avoid a traffic jam. It's beside the fact that on this route, by children who leave the kindergarten, is use and the same route also is just by students of secondary or primary school that the street has to leave in the direction of the "Van Benedenlaan". Between the line of waiting cars and parked cars remains not enough room for a Motor-Scooter to pass, this would mean that the Motor driver involved beside the parked cars on the highway would have driven, which was excluded by lack of space, and unless pedestrians done by none. From the n° thirty a limited space remains on the footpath between bollards to prevent directly near the school there cars would be parked while this space is used daily by the Motor driver in question faced n° 30 to park his motorbike on the verge of the footpath, when he retrieves his son from conscious primary school. Due to circumstances, the motorcyclist can't leave the place before all waiting parents with their children and all vehicles are going, and the street is free at the school gate.
The formal report was therefore prepared for an unknown reason and without there being any such offense or could be which calls into question, why?
Surprisingly, this is the second time that a Formal is drawn against the involved Motorcyclist, in addition to the irregularity of the first case in the second this happened without any infringement or justification. In addition, in the second case there was not even a police officer who had approached the motorcyclist. The active cop Mv. Karin Lieten seemed not to know that the Motard in question there daily, and also that fateful day, around 15:40 for house number 30 stationed his vehicle if the primary school ends at 15:45.
Here the question is more than justified if this is an illegal response to the fact that the Motocyclist concerned a fervent opponent of the government coalition and the royal family is, but also as a independent researcher and columnist in the fields of Philosophy, Psychology, Criminology and Politics, regularly criticize the federal government and monarchy.
On the other hand it is up to the people to show respect for those who take their job seriously and correctly, especially as far as services for law and order is concerned, since they will never pose a threat to fair and proper citizen. This means that comments to potty business or so-called errors especially about servants for law and order as cops better are left behind where they harm nobody.
That would give police by their illegal parking as a bad example seen, is often caused them to let behind their vehicle in the immediate vicinity where they should be, either for personal or official reason, as they at any call as soon as possible in their vehicle should be, and making such so-called bad examples are more than justify.
Where government officials intentionally and irresponsible, or by ignorance make failure, it makes sense that their victims this publicly make, given it is clear that in Belgium within public services and government every one quickly run up against and opposit unreasonable and unconditional collegiality. It is for the government itself to act, what if this does not happen is evidence of maladministration or criminal intent for the population, and involvement of the government itself or responsible is proved.