I'm from the Netherlands. That may sound like a weird statement to start a column with-- don't worry, at the end of this week's Sunday Eve Column you'll understand why I put my nationality so bluntly up front.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-06-29
Except it's the law in Netherlands and not in other countries.
Exactly, it might be the same as the similar paragraph in the US constitution, but it is completely different at the same time. The US constitution says:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
The American paragraph speaks for the government; while the Dutch variant speaks of the whole society; not only the government, but also individuals.
They seem the same, but are completely different at the same time.
Member since:2005-07-06
Kindof on a tangent, but if the US government stayed what it was supposed to be: "Of the people, by the people, and for the people", then it would be saying the same thing...
Things have gotten bad when people can say "the government" as if it was someone other than a group that we were all supposed to be a part of.
Member since:
2006-02-27
First, the part of the Netherlands constitution is no different then what the constitutions of most democratic countries have.
Except it's the law in Netherlands and not in other countries. And that it's an expression of the beliefs of the people of that nation. And that that nations beliefs hold that level of equality and democracy as a given. So other than being different in most real ways it is exactly the same. Like orange juice is the same as water, only different.
Secondly, and this is in no way a dis on the Netherlands, just wanting to explain something. What may sound like big news or well known in the Netherlands, will probably be a completely unknown thing to much of the world.
Except I knew what he was talking about. I do not live in Netherlands. I have never been to Netherlands. I live in the US. I simply pay attention to the news.
Furthermore, if you had a company, would you want your employees leaking info, especially if it could cause the competition to react early and thus torpedo your product before launch and maybe destroy your company?
He has a company. You are visiting it right now.
If a site was called "defenseinsider" and got leaked rumors on military hardware from people who broke NDAs, do you think the Government and contractors have no right to track down that person?
They have the right to track that person down. That they have that right is not in question. The question is do they have the right to compel a reporter to provide them that information? Having an NDA does not confer special rights beyond the two people who enter into that contract.
Would you want to live in a country where every company that has the money to pay lots of lawyers can be sure they can silence their detractors? Do I have the right to expect newspapers to be able to publish information that is not contained in carefully worded press releases? Should all information only come from the official sources? Do you trust the official sources to always tell you everything you need to know?