Mayor Thielemans is worried that the demonstration will upset the large immigrant population of Brussels. Over half the inhabitants of the Brussels region are of foreign origin, many of them from Morocco. According to the mayor there is a real danger of violence between demonstrators and Muslims living in the neighbourhood. The latter might not tolerate native Europeans protesting against their continent becoming Eurabia.So, as of September 11 — the day planned for the demonstration — it will be illegal for people to gather for a peaceful protest (peaceful as far as the protesters are concerned) because the non-natives are restless.
The arrogance of the EU masters has finally reached escape velocity from the hard-won right of citizens to express their views without fear. The EUrocrats no longer even feel compelled to cover up their suppression of free speech; all they need to do is point to the danger of a tribal mob making trouble because it won't like what it hears.
It will be a historic day, this September 11: the official beginning of a post-democratic, post-European Europe. The new Jacobins, mad daddies of a radical leftist-Islamic ruling class, have taken over the palace.
The protest sponsors haven't given up; they're looking for ways to circumvent the EU rulers, including showing up with blank signs. This is getting interesting. It coincides with other evidence that Europeans are waking up from their coma and even starting to take action to reverse the sinking of their culture into dhimmitude.
By the way, did your mainstream newspaper/TV station/radio station report this story? I'd be surprised. Not nearly as important as "30 Years After His Death, Elvis Lives on in the Digital Age," the page 1 head of the bubble-gum chewing USA Today.
I've had a look at the proposed Free Europe Constitution as suggested by my good friend Anonymous, and am not impressed. What do they mean by "Free Europe means human development in its richest diversity and is therefore good"? (Italics in the original.) "Human development" is bureaucratic babble that is either meaningless or signifies social engineering. "Richest diversity"? More bureaucratese, but I inherently distrust anything with the word "diversity" in it.
Also: "Decisions in the EU should be made by agreements between governments. Delegation of national legislative power to EU institutions is possible; withdrawal of such powers, both in specific cases and generally is equally possible." Agreements between governments have been happening for thousands of years: they're called treaties. Who needs the EU? The next sentence says that national governments can delegate their powers to the EU (but also withdraw the delegation) — but why give away power at all? The citizens of a country should retain all power over legislation that will affect them, not only on the national level but on the regional and local level as appropriate.
Finally, I see no mention here of uncontrolled immigration, the most disastrous result of the current EU setup.