Funny events in anti-woke world

[dreng3]

But it was exactly like that in the case of important mine in Turów I described. UE court demanded immediate shutdown. Sorry, but You are just ignoring the facts.

I decided to do a little looking into this, here's what I found so far skimming a few articles and wikipedia.

Then mine was actually set to shut down in 2020, but the Polish government allowed the mining company to extend the deal to 2044, which is already a failing if you're aiming to slowly phase out coal.

Then the mining company set about expanding the mine causing the Czech goverment to sue over environmental damage and damage to wells in villages across the Czech border, a case the Czech won. The court issued an injuction demanding that the mine be shut down and the Polish goverment kept the mine running, citing that it would harm jobs and energy security.

However, according to this research ( https://zklaster.pl/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/presentation_13.10_en.pdf ) there would actually be more jobs and savings on electricity over 25 years, roughly the point the mine was set to shut down anyway.

Seems a shit decision on the part of the Polish government if you ask me.

 

[The Rogue Wolf]

From the "I never thought leopards would eat MY face" department: House Republicans are getting death threats for not supporting Jim Jordan for Speaker.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/19/politics/republicans-threats-jordan-speaker-bid-votes-congress/index.html

Who'd have thought that cultivating a voter base of rabid crazies would ever come back to haunt you?!

 

[BrawlMan]

From the "I never thought leopards would eat MY face" department: House Republicans are getting death threats for not supporting Jim Jordan for Speaker.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/19/politics/republicans-threats-jordan-speaker-bid-votes-congress/index.html

Who'd have thought that cultivating a voter base of rabid crazies would ever come back to haunt you?!

Bitches-in-boxstands only care for themselves and no one else. Even when their goals align to 100%. They're more selfish than The Thing (the John Carpenter version/original novel version). Even they cared more for each other than these Republicans and people on the far Ultra Right.

 

[Casual Shinji]

Who'd have thought that cultivating a voter base of rabid crazies would ever come back to haunt you?!

But that twitter engagement though!

 

[Adeptus]

I decided to do a little looking into this, here's what I found so far skimming a few articles and wikipedia.

Then mine was actually set to shut down in 2020, but the Polish government allowed the mining company to extend the deal to 2044, which is already a failing if you're aiming to slowly phase out coal.

Then the mining company set about expanding the mine causing the Czech goverment to sue over environmental damage and damage to wells in villages across the Czech border, a case the Czech won. The court issued an injuction demanding that the mine be shut down and the Polish goverment kept the mine running, citing that it would harm jobs and energy security.

However, according to this research ( https://zklaster.pl/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/presentation_13.10_en.pdf ) there would actually be more jobs and savings on electricity over 25 years, roughly the point the mine was set to shut down anyway.

Seems a shit decision on the part of the Polish government if you ask me.

OK, but did You found anything about moment when Polish goverment take actions to remove any associated risks connected with mine, Czechs accepted them and withdrew their complaint, but court said "Nope, injunction is still in power, shut down the mine at this moment?".

 

[dreng3]

OK, but did You found anything about moment when Polish goverment take actions to remove any associated risks connected with mine, Czechs accepted them and withdrew their complaint, but court said "Nope, injunction is still in power, shut down the mine at this moment?".

Quick read shows a pretty dirty looking deal, 45 million euros to be allowed to continue poisoning the Earth, between Poland and the Czech Republic.
I also happened upon several NGOs protesting the decision to withdraw the complaint.

But, quite frankly, it still disproves your original complaint, that EU unjustly demanded that the mine be shut down from one day to another.
As it happed a legal complaint was filed and processed and an injuction was delivered.
Furthermore, as the research provided demonstrates, the Polish government made a bad deal when it agreed to not only let the mining continue but also allowed the mining company to expand operations.
It demonstrates that the government at the time was incapable of managing the need to transition energy sources away from dirty coal and towards sustainable sources.

 

[Silvanus]

I see that Silvanus observes this discussion. So there is hope that he will precise his vague, unfounded accusations and answer my questions concerning them, as honesty demands?

There would be very little point in my doing so, because the walls of text and sealioning would obviously continue.

Everything I said is quite easy to find.

 

[Adeptus]

There would be very little point in my doing so, because the walls of text and sealioning would obviously continue.

Everything I said is quite easy to find.

This is most lame way of "argumenting".
"Of course there are sources and evidence supporting my claim. No, I am obviously not giving them. But they totally exist. Burden of proof? What a silly idea".
Imagine if I would make claim like "Most of gay men are harming children. Sources? Details? Evidence? Explanation what I mean by harming children? Nope, it is obvious. All of this is very easy to find. And this is EOT, don't try argue with me, it will be sealioning". I guess You would be - rightly - disgusted. And nope, answer "but this is something different!" would ba an absurd. The same rules apply to all unfounded, vague accusations.

If answers to my questions are so easy to find, than find them and write here. Or is it too difficult for You?
But in fact, I agree. Finding these answers is very easy.

Did any member of the PiS, apart from the one guy from Jarocin county I already mentioned, expressed willingness to ban religious buildings? If that so, who (s)he was and can You quote his/her claim or give any source?
NO.
Were any draft of the legislative act banning religious buildings made? Were possibility of making such draft even discussed?
NO.
Has anyone been banned in practice from building a religious building? If that so, can You give source or at least some... any details?
NO.
If by "religious buildings" You meant "mosques", are You aware that in the Poland there is significant community of Muslims which is obviously allowed to use existing mosques and build new ones? Do You have any examples when they were harrased by Polish authorities or their freedom of religion was being violated in any way?
NO.

Yep, it is really simple.

 

[Adeptus]

Quick read shows a pretty dirty looking deal, 45 million euros to be allowed to continue poisoning the Earth, between Poland and the Czech Republic.
I also happened upon several NGOs protesting the decision to withdraw the complaint.

But, quite frankly, it still disproves your original complaint, that EU unjustly demanded that the mine be shut down from one day to another.
As it happed a legal complaint was filed and processed and an injuction was delivered.
Furthermore, as the research provided demonstrates, the Polish government made a bad deal when it agreed to not only let the mining continue but also allowed the mining company to expand operations.
It demonstrates that the government at the time was incapable of managing the need to transition energy sources away from dirty coal and towards sustainable sources.

Quick read shows a pretty dirty looking deal, 45 million euros to be allowed to continue poisoning the Earth, between Poland and the Czech Republic
And what is dirty here?

I also happened upon several NGOs protesting the decision to withdraw the complaint.
And why assumption that these NGOs have right? Why assume that Czech were right when forming complaint, but obviously they were not right when recognizing that causes of complain were eleminated?

But, quite frankly, it still disproves your original complaint, that EU unjustly demanded that the mine be shut down from one day to another
But this is exactly what happened.

As it happed a legal complaint was filed and processed and an injuction was delivered.
Yes. And I desrcibed it in that way from the start. Doesn't change anything in my point.


It demonstrates that the government at the time was incapable of managing the need to transition energy sources away from dirty coal and towards sustainable sources.
I totally agree. Goverment was incapable of doing it. Because it was impossible to do in given time.

 

[Silvanus]

This is most lame way of "argumenting".

I'm not trying to "argument". I had thought that was clear. I gave my perspective on a shitty far-right party, but I have no interest in responding to gigantic walls of sealion text to justify myself.

 

[Adeptus]

You accused group of people of semthing vaguely evil. In such situation, having no interest in "sealion" demands to precise Your accusations and giving any arguments/evidence/source for Your accusation, is dick move. If you don't want to justify your accusations, don't make them. It is simple honesty - moral and intellectual.

You didn't give Your perspective. You accused group of people of doing bad things, which they were not really doing. This is not "perspective". This is stament about facts. Unfounded and false one.

You love phrase "selion" so much. But You are not aware that in the comic from which it originates, woman is just expressing her subjective opinion. "I could do without sea lions". She is not accusing sea lions of commiting some bad action, like banning freedom of religion. Like You did. You are just using word "sealion" as some magical spell which enables You to falsely accusing people without any justification.

What would be Your reaction if someone wrote " Most of gay men are harming children. Sources? Details? Evidence? Explanation what I mean by harming children? Nope, it is obvious. All of this is very easy to find. And this is EOT, don't try argue with me, it will be sealioning. I just gave my perspective, I am not interesting in arguing"? This is not rhetorical question.

 

[dreng3]

1. And what is dirty here?

2. And why assumption that these NGOs have right? Why assume that Czech were right when forming complaint, but obviously they were not right when recognizing that causes of complain were eleminated?

3. But this is exactly what happened.

4. Yes. And I desrcibed it in that way from the start. Doesn't change anything in my point.

5. I totally agree. Goverment was incapable of doing it. Because it was impossible to do in given time.

I'll just number your points in the quote and deal with them one by one.

1. The original complaint was that the expansion would lead to contamination of wells in villages on the Czech side, but ultimately the resolution was a stack of money and some handwaving about "improved infrastructure" and "environmental safeguards" and as far as I can find there have been no news about said improvements being made. Essentially it seems like the Czech government is willing to risk contamination of wells and harm to citizens as long as there are fat stacks involved.

2. I've already posted research demonstrating that it would have been better, in the mid- to long run, to slowly shutter the mine and focus on clean energy. As noted in point 1 I don't think the Czech government is correct in claiming that there are no dangers.

3. A, legitimate, case was brought before the court, the court issued an injuction, later on the two parties came to an agreement (not one I think is legitimately good, mind you) and the injuction was no longer needed. People settle ongoing cases around the courts all the time, doesn't make the courts any less legitimate.

4. I don't get your point, if the proper procedure was followed and everyone was given notice in due time then your complaint holds no value.

5. The government didn't even try. Leasing the mining company the land for another 20 years, knowing that one would achieve better results by starting a transition to green energy is a failing in and of itself, but allowing the company to expand the mining operation, and championing them when the case is brought before the courts, is pure incompetence.

 

[Adeptus]

I'll just number your points in the quote and deal with them one by one.

1. The original complaint was that the expansion would lead to contamination of wells in villages on the Czech side, but ultimately the resolution was a stack of money and some handwaving about "improved infrastructure" and "environmental safeguards" and as far as I can find there have been no news about said improvements being made. Essentially it seems like the Czech government is willing to risk contamination of wells and harm to citizens as long as there are fat stacks involved.

2. I've already posted research demonstrating that it would have been better, in the mid- to long run, to slowly shutter the mine and focus on clean energy. As noted in point 1 I don't think the Czech government is correct in claiming that there are no dangers.

3. A, legitimate, case was brought before the court, the court issued an injuction, later on the two parties came to an agreement (not one I think is legitimately good, mind you) and the injuction was no longer needed. People settle ongoing cases around the courts all the time, doesn't make the courts any less legitimate.

4. I don't get your point, if the proper procedure was followed and everyone was given notice in due time then your complaint holds no value.

5. The government didn't even try. Leasing the mining company the land for another 20 years, knowing that one would achieve better results by starting a transition to green energy is a failing in and of itself, but allowing the company to expand the mining operation, and championing them when the case is brought before the courts, is pure incompetence.

1. The original complaint was that the expansion would lead to contamination of wells in villages on the Czech side, but ultimately the resolution was a stack of money and some handwaving about "improved infrastructure" and "environmental safeguards" and as far as I can find there have been no news about said improvements being made. Essentially it seems like the Czech government is willing to risk contamination of wells and harm to citizens as long as there are fat stacks involved.

It was not habdwaved by general claim about "improved infrastructure", there were specific actions pointed.

Czechy wycofały z TSUE skargę przeciwko Polsce w sprawie kopalni Turów (opis) | EuroPAP News

europapnews.pap.pl

"In the agreement, Poland undertook, among others: to complete the construction of an underground wall to prevent the outflow of groundwater from the Czech territory, as well as to build a protective wall and other measures to improve air quality in the region. Until mining is completed, the agreement provides for monitoring noise levels, air quality, landslides and groundwater levels. Part of the funds received from Poland is to finance monitoring stations and the analysis of incoming data"


A, legitimate, case was brought before the court, the court issued an injuction, later on the two parties came to an agreement (not one I think is legitimately good, mind you) and the injuction was no longer needed

Exactly. Injunction was no longer needed, but despite this, the court refused to repeal it. And it is still not repealed. Court decided to ignore Czech's withdrawal of the complaint. That's my point. Yes, it sound bizarre - and that's exactly why I treat it as unjust harassment against Poland. You write that if the proper procedure was followe, than everything is all right. But problem is that proper procedure was not followed. If it was, I would not have reson for complaining.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

 

[SilentPony]

WAT?!

 

[Gordon_4]

 

[Ag3ma]

WAT?!

I've googled, and it turns out Nazi propaganda occasionally portrayed the Jews as an octopus (with respect to conspiracies of global control).

I've got to say, as tropes go, that's a little obscure to expect people to know.

 

[Satinavian]

"The demand would not have been to shut it all down instantly and without an alternative. No country did so"
But it was exactly like that in the case of important mine in Turów I described. UE court demanded immediate shutdown. Sorry, but You are just ignoring the facts.

A court shutting down a single mine because of water contamination issues is certainly not the same as people demanding a country instantly stops coal for climate reasons.
Also yes, if the court has made that decision based on EU pollution regulaions, any remedies must convince the court, not the original complainers. None of that is in any way strange or unfair.

And yes, previous gouvernments also dragged their feet. But Poland has under PiS thrown a couple of wrenches into various attempts to get tighter international emission regulations or higher CO2 prices and made sure certain deadlines are very late. That might have been of national interest considering how much coal Poland still used and intended to use, but it hurt global measures.

I've googled, and it turns out Nazi propaganda occasionally portrayed the Jews as an octopus (with respect to conspiracies of global control).

I've got to say, as tropes go, that's a little obscure to expect people to know.

Now that is stupid.

The "octopus taking over the world" is a common trope for every supposed spreding menace. I have seen it Communism, imperial Russia, Germany, the British Empire, Capitalism and many more. It stands for "this sinister whatever has spread so far and has its tentacles in so many things". While obviously used with jews as well, it is not connected to jews.

 

[Gordon_4]

The "octopus taking over the world" is a common trope for every supposed spreding menace. I have seen it Communism, imperial Russia, Germany, the British Empire, Capitalism and many more. It stands for "this sinister whatever has spread so far and has its tentacles in so many things". While obviously used with jews as well, it is not connected to jews.

Par exemple.

 

[thebobmaster]

Even better example.



For those who don't recognize it, that is the logo of Marvel's Nazi group, HYDRA.

As in, literally as far away from a pro-Jew group you could get in fiction.