European News and Poland Thread 2

So many lies and inaccuracies in Crnogorac3's comments about Ireland - trying to address all of them would violate forum rules on the number of quotes allowed.

However, let's just deal with one, the proposed changes to the Incitement to Hatred law. Yes, that's right. We have an existing law which has been in place since 1989. The revised/new law was drafted after public consultation. The views submitted by individual citizens and groups can be seen online on the government portal. It's common practice in Ireland for the government to consult with the public on these matters and to draft the law accordingly to try to get a balance between different and sometimes opposing views.

One of the outcomes of that public consultation was:

"The new legislation should contain robust safeguards for freedom of expression, such as protections for reasonable and genuine contributions to literary, artistic, political, scientific or academic discourse, and fair and accurate reporting."

also

"Not every hate incident is serious enough to be a crime - many incidents are better dealt with outside the criminal sphere and proper measures to ensure this happens will be needed."


Not true.

From the text of the new hate law:

"any material or behaviour is not taken to incite violence or hatred against a person or a group of persons ...... solely on the basis that that material or behaviour includes or involves discussion or criticism of matters relating to a protected characteristic."


The people of Ireland live in a democracy because 1) the constitution of our country cannot be changed without the consent of the people by referendum. 2) When a major change is proposed to a law that is of serious relevance to the public eg abortion, we have the Citizens' Assembly which is used to draft the new law. The people decide the content and wording of the law. Then it's voted on by the people. 3)We have the public consultation process whereby the public are invited to make their individual submissions regarding new laws and those submissions are published for everyone to see.

In many countries around the world that call themselves democracies, including the USA and Poland, sweeping changes are introduced with no public consultation at all.

"Consulting" is not a referendum. No referendum = no democracy.
Second point: hate is a feeling felt by either the hater or the hated. So, in Ireland, a person can end up in jail on the basis of feelings. Guess what...The same in is true in North Korea.


As opposed to by machines. Who are "the people"?

Democracy is when the voters control the government by a direct, legally binding referendum the voters are legally able to organize with or without the government's approval. Period.

Being able to vote is not democracy. They had elections in the USSR and communist Poland. We even had two parties - just like the Brits now and the Americans.

In a democracy, the government is afraid of the voters, not the other way around. In a democracy, the voters can overrule the government as they go along, not just once every four years by voting for another bunch of parasites who are free to lie to get elected and cannot be legally forced to do what they promised.

Every system has its dark side. Did you, Atch, ever post to expose the dark side of Ireland?

Second question: If majority of Irish voters decided to stop all immigration, can they force the issue through a legally-binding referendum? Yes or no and no bs.

Consulting is different to referendums. Public consultation is usual for certain things that don't need a referendum. The referendums are a separate process. We've had about about thirty five of them I think. How many have you had in the USA? We have two types, ordinary and constitutional. An ordinary referendum doesn't relate to amending the Constitution. An ordinary referendum is held if the President decides that a Bill contains a proposal of such national importance that the will of the people should decide its outcome.

As to consultation, a good example of that would be the suggestion by the government that some single sex schools should amalgamate and become co-educational. Most schools in Ireland are single sex. They suggested it in a suburb of north Dublin. Teachers and parents in the schools were consulted. They said 'no'. End of story.


No they didn't. What they had were not 'free and fair' elections. You have a fair bit of something very akin to gerrymandering in the USA too. I wouldn't call it a fair electoral system by any stretch of the imagination.

The dark side of Ireland doesn't need any exposing. It's already well known to anyone with an interest in the country.


I don't think it would take a referendum but yes, it could be done.

My questions are:

1. Did YOU ever expose here the dark side of Ireland?
2. Can the Irish voters stop all immigration through a legally-binding referendum - even if the government is opposed to it?

The US is a joke and we can cover it later.

That depends on what YOU would consider to be our dark side.


Well, the right to who should have Irish citizenship was amended by referendum in 2004 to say that children born in Ireland should not automatically acquire Irish citizenship unless they have at least one parent who is an Irish citizen. That referendum was passed by about 80% in favour.


Referendums in Ireland usually come about as a result of social and cultural change and in response to public will. If there was sufficient demand for such a referendum the government wouldn't oppose it because if they did they'd be out on their ear in the next election. Anyway it would take the whole parliament, not just the government. The government alone cannot decide on whether or not to hold a referendum.

The bottom line is that Ireland is the only country in the world where same sex marriage and abortion have become law through referendum, decided by the people. I know it bothers you that we actually have a say in what happens in our country but not everybody can enjoy the luck of the Irish :)

Anything you are against.


You are an evasive snake. I asked this:

1. Did YOU ever expose here the dark side of Ireland? (anything you are against) Yes or no.
2. Can the Irish voters stop all immigration through a legally-binding referendum - even if the government is opposed to it? Yes or no.

Essays later.

Actually Atch represents all of those who want to destroy everything that the Irish flag stands for.

He's not an Irish nationalist.


And what exactly does it stand for? I'm all ears.

@Atch


Well the Irish people can add ******** in the streets legally and it will be a third valid argument against democracy

Foolish answer. The dark side of any country is not simply what a single individual is against. It's well known and documented social, cultural and political issues which are of concern to all sensible people. We have plenty of issues in Ireland but none of them would be of any interest to you.

Name the top three you don't like, including names.

What do you mean, including names?? Names of whom?

I've said that Mick Wallace and Clare Daly are a disgrace but you wouldn't know who they are - and their pal Ming Flannagan is a national embarassment.


The people of Ireland are a bit more eloquent than that with a clear, reasoned argument to make. We also have much more poetic terms of abuse like poxbottle, gombeen man, gouger etc.


I haven't the remotest interest in Donald Trump, nor do most Irish people. Now as to issues in Ireland that concern me, those would be the same ones that most Irish people are concerned about but some of my own personal favourites are our homegrown scumbags, leniency of Irish courts when sentencing, the rise of violent crime in rural areas, the lack of good public transport (an hour and a bloody half to travel 50km by train to Dublin!!).

Did you ever mention those "issues" here before I dragged them out of you now?


It took me ten seconds to know what they are - and the process, who you are.
Their sin is that they want an end to the war through negotiations - an unpardonable sin to the Russia-hating, suicidal morons.

Did you listen to Mick's speech on this subject?

I did actually. Your homework is to spend the evening looking for them.


You have no idea about them. Not everything revolves around the war in Ukraine you know. Clare Daly was ok when she started out but has gone progressively more bananas and Mick Wallace is seen as greedy and dishonest due to his tax evasion, diddling his employees of their pensions and other unsavoury things. As one Irish forum user said with typical dry Irish wit:

"I find that Mick is a useful 'barometer' to determine my stance on something. If he supports something then it is generally something to be opposed. If he opposes it then it is generally something to be supported.

If he has no opinion then time to dig deeper as he is probably hiding something."

Why I love Russia...

German man deported from Russia for 'LGBTQ propaganda'
The language teacher had earlier been found guilty of promoting same-sex relations online

God must hate West so He made West go insane. The only hope is that one day soon West will learn that men really cannot get pregnant and that "transgender women" are men.

Translation: He was looking for a relationship online. Usually that would be shocking news, but since Russia has recently convicted a man to 25 years for criticizing Putin's genocidal war of agression, it is only of interest to people who wish for similar conditions in the West.

Translation: looking for a same-sex fu*ck online is promoting same-sex fu*cking - a very bad idea in a country that is still sane.

Did he consider that he could get the other guy pregnant and have a weird baby nobody would want?

So... what happens to an orchestra playing music by Tchaikovsky?

Why is allowing two consenting adults to have the kind of relationship they want to have a bad idea? What they do is none of your buisness.

Aren't you the person who is otherwise so big on the idea of "liberty"?

I'm pretty sure he's never said anything good about the idea of "liberty" he hates freedom and democracy and longs for a dictatorship that he could approve of....

He wants liberty to do the kind of things he deems important (like being allowed to praise Hitler and dehumanize people) but of course not the liberty to do the kind of things he disapproves of.

There is no reason why gay couples should hide and not live their life the same way other couples do.


Going by the way you usually refer to other people it sure is.

If it would be so I would pack my bags already.....I am not interested to end my life in a GDR v2!

But right now you can still say your part....if it's published or censored depends on the media though.....they still can decide for itself what to let through! ;)

@Bratwurst Boy
Wait whaaa, media outlets are not the private property of every bafoon or idiot walking the streets in America? Especially one who got nothing inteligent to say? :O

Even tho they are NOT public media? :O

But, their right to critisize their government surely means they can throw away any decent behaviour and throw tantrums where ever they want? I mean, the "opression" of behaviour! How insufferable it must be that they do not dictate media what to write or how the government acts! The horror! They can only vote on representatives? Ooooooutrageous?! xD

In russia you'd be okay... until you said something that the government has decided (retro-actively) is bad and then you'd disappear.

And still you spit on the west and lick russias @ss..... no accounting for taste!

Just like in "communist" Poland and the USSR. I remember voting for my "representatives" in 1960 in Warsaw. What a thrill...Still shaking from excitement...
BTW, learn the difference meaning "representative" and a party apparatchik pretending to be your "representative".

OK, here we go...

A representative is a person who represents only you and nobody else. See "lawyer".

A scumbag that was selected by his party as a reliable ass-licker represents everything except you because he is on the take and free to ignore you the first second after being sworn in.

Please study the above, my dear naive Polish boy, and be ready for a test tomorrow.

Really?
I don't believe that you were old enough to vote back then.

Just turned 18.

After which you are free to vote for a different candidate in next election. You have lived many decades in a democracy yet seem to be unfamiliar with its' basic rules.