Good lord.
So that's the word I was looking for.
Thanks, psycho.
So that's the word I was looking for.
Thanks, psycho.
Cro-Report!
- Thread starter Ratty Sr.
- Start date
Will you people stop this nonsense already and stop derailing the thread? Honestly, when engaging in a pissing contest, at least make sure you have a grasp of the topic. That goes for both Jebus and Sander. Now, it's inaccurate to say that term "Eastern Europe" bears only geographic connotations, and it's even more inaccurate to say it has political connotations. With Cold War over, Iron Curtain gone and old socio-economic and political models dissolved, there are no more grounds to define "Eastern Europe" in political context. Eastern Europe is defined by its culture and ethnicity, and by its historical heritage, and these terms of definition date from early medieval times. Eastern Europe is primarily Slavic, while Western Europe is predominantly Germanic. Eastern Europe was shaped in Byzantine, Russian and Ottoman sphere of influence, unlike Western Europe. Trying to find correlation with geography is naive and futile, because geographic context is completely separate from the historical, cultural, ethnic, social or political context. I can hardly believe that PsychoSniper was the first one to recognize the distinction. Congrats, PsychoSniper.
Okay, that's it. From now on, everyone shuts up.
*stitches his mouth shut*
Okay, that's it. From now on, everyone shuts up.
*stitches his mouth shut*
Yes, you are right that it's a cultural and historical definition, but that doesn't mean it can't (and isn't) used in a (purely) geographical sense at times. And to say that it doesn't have polticial connotations is, quite simply, wrong. I don't know whether it's because you live in Croatia where that may not be the case, but Eastern Europe still has the connotation of "poor" and "backwards" (even when this isn't true, I doubt, for instance, that anyone here will realise that Talinn, the capital of Estonia, is rich enough to have free wireless internet access everywhere), and Western Europe isn't seen like that, or in a much lesser sense while that isn't even true ((Northern)Ireland, Spain, Portugal), and as such it does have political connotations. When you try to make a peacemaker/clarification post, get it right next time.
People, everyone - we seriously need to let this thread die. Obviously, we're all wrong and all right, so we could probably piss eachother off for days on end on this.
Please. Let's "agree to disagree", or however the cliché goes.
Please. Let's "agree to disagree", or however the cliché goes.
Ratty, what does "c***" mean in Croatian? Is it something along the lines of "XXXX" ?
Lets XXXX a Croatian!
*mumbles through stitched mouth*Sander said:
I agree, but those are social and economic connotations you just named. In a political sense, "Eastern Europe" ceased to exist when communism fell and former Soviet block countries, gathered around Warsaw Pact, became democratic and oriented towards united Europe (well, more or less...
). Surely you agree. That's not to say that such distinction won't become common in a few years time - Russia is already headed down the path of totalitarism, and it will try to extend its influence upon its neighbors (primarily Belarus and Ukraine), effectively creating a new eastern block.And you misunderstood a part of my post - I didn't say term "Eastern Europe" can't be used in geographic context, I said geographic context can't be correlated with political, historical or otherwise context, simply because circumstances change, but geographic determinants don't.
This thread won't die, because I intend to update it occasionally with news from Croatia. But this lengthy discussion about "Eastern Europe" is rather pointless, yes. I declare it officially dead.
EDIT: Fixed a spelling error. Thank you for alerting me, Murdoch.
Well, I'll be damned! Dutch intellectual Theo Van Gogh was murdered with a Croatian gun! It was confirmed that HS-2000 ("HS" is an abbrevation of "Hrvatski samokres", which means "Croatian revolver"), manufactured by a Croatian company IM Metal, was indeed the handgun with which Van Gogh was shot. It is unknown how the islamic extremist got hold of the weapon. Who knows, maybe OA provided it.
The Vault Dweller
always looking for water.
Ratty said:Well, I'll be damned! Dutch intellectual Theo Van Gogh was murdered with a Croatian gun! It was confirmed that HS-2000 ("HS" is an abbrevation of "Hrvatski samokres", which means "Croatian revolver"), manufactured by a Croatian company IM Metal, was indeed the handgun with which Van Gogh was shot. It is unknown how the islamic extremist got hold of the weapon. Who knows, maybe OA provided it.
He must be a Fallout fan...somehow in the Wasteland Universe anyone can get a hold on any weapon from any time period and region.
Hopefully this wont lead to a lawsuit.
Sincerely,
The Vault Dweller
Hey, I didn't name it. Sue IM Metal.
Confrontation between the President and Prime Minister regarding the POA affair!
Remember the first post in this thread? About the counter-intelligence agency POA and their illegal surveillance and interrogation of a freelance journalist Helena Puljiz? Well, this event, and all events that ensued, have been the central topic in Croatian politics and media for the past three weeks. After two parliamentary committees, Committee for Civil Oversight of Security Services and Committee for National Security, deemed that, apart from "minor procedural mistakes", there was nothing illegal or even controversial about the five-hour torture the young journalist endured in POA offices, it seemed the whole affair, like so many others, would become covered up and ignored by the government institutions.
However, the story keeps getting more and more dramatic. When they decided to ignore this crude breach of procedure and democratic principles, the government forgot about one important factor - Stipe Mesic, the president of Croatia. Though presidential powers were significantly reduced with a series of constitutional amendments in 2000, Croatian president still has more powers than any other European president or monarch, except maybe the president of France. Stipe Mesic is the commander-in-chief of armed forces, he has considerable authority in foreign policies and is generally an important democratic figure. For the past four years, he has performed his duties with great success, acting as an influential sentinel for the government, keeping the sometimes rebellious military under leash and promoting Croatian interests abroad. Since the day he won the election in 2000, he has been by far the most popular person in Croatia, beloved among people, and his moral and democratic authority is unquestionable. Though he has little power in executive branch and none in legislative branch, his sheer popularity makes him a force to be reckoned with.
For this particular story, it is important to point out that Croatian president is also co-chief of the Croatian intelligence services, responsible for appointing heads of intelligence agencies in cooperation with the prime minister. In the past months it has been blatantly obvious that prime minister Sanader and his corrupt government have turned POA, the largest and most powerful agency, into their political police. Instead of tracking down terrorists and war criminals and investigating organized crime, POA agents spend time and government resources surveying, interrogating, blackmailing and generally terrorising journalists and Sanader's political opponents. Though president Mesic reluctantly agreed to put his signature on Podbevsek's appointment to position of POA chief some months ago, it was really only a matter of time before illicit practices of the agency exceeded his tolerance threshold.
With the Puljiz incident, it finally happened. Last week, Mesic summoned Podbevsek to his office, where he requested some explanations. The next day, Mesic made a very clear and unambigous decision: Podbevsek must go. He signed a decree of Podbevsek's relief of duty, and proceeded it to the prime minister, whose signature is also required if the decision is to take effect. He offered a very resolute and reasonable explanation for his decision: "If a citizen comes to an institution, even an intelligence agency, he has the right to tell his story, so he may say partial truth, or even improvise. Helena Puljiz told her story and I don't have a single reason not to believe her! However, the Service has no right to tell stories. The Service must have evidence! And no matter what Puljiz says, if they disagree, they must state their evidence. But, after five and half hours of talking to her, they don't have a single note! That means they have no evidence and are in violation of a sublegal act. This wouldn't have happened if Podbevsek had sanctioned those who abused their authority. Some apparently still haven't realised that we want to live in a democratic environment, were every man is protected in his rights and interests. When one man's rights are in jeopardy, everyone's rights are in jeopardy! And that's why I'm raising an alarm. We must stop such things at their root, and there can be no compromise!"
However, Sanader disagrees - he refused to sign president Mesic's decree! Stating the rulings of two parliamentary committees (both of which are really government lapdogs) as "evidence" that POA did nothing against the law, Sanader continues to protect his man Podbevsek and defy the president's authority, thereby trying to give legality to increasing government oppression. He insists on ignoring the public opinion, which is overwhelmingly against his position, and opinions of non-government institutions, such as HHO (Croatian Helsinki Committee).
The brief status quo was further shifted out of balance yesterday - namely, another parliamentary committee stated its ruling. The Committee for Human Rights of the Croatian parliament stated that human rights of journalist Helena Puljiz were violated by POA agents when she was illegally hauled in for questioning! After this ruling, even members of the two committees that formerly declared POA wasn't at fault (thus effectively accusing her of lying and permitting security services to survey and prosecute whom they will without any sanctions or limitation - this demonstrates horrible arrogance and hipocrisy of Croatian institutions, unacceptable in a society that strives to be democratic) suddenly changed their positions by 180° degrees. Vlatko Cvrtila, president of the Committee for Civil Oversight of Security Services, now openly stated that POA's actions in the Puljiz incident were a crude breach of law and procedure, and that he would demand Podbevsek's immediate removal.
With the president and all parliamentary bodies against him, Sanader finds himself in a dangerous situation. If he persists to defend Podbevsek, his government will be perceived as undemocratic (or rather, even more undemocratic than originally thought...), which could have disasterous consequences, not only for public support of his government (which is already dropping rapidly), but also for Croatia's foreign positions (remember, on December 17 the European Commission is supposed to set a firm date for beginning of negotiations of Croatian entry into the European Union, and it won't look good if Croatia displays itself as a country with fragile democracy and no public control over secret services). If, on the other hand, he relents, it will be a serious drawback in his plan to turn Croatia into a police state...
Remember the first post in this thread? About the counter-intelligence agency POA and their illegal surveillance and interrogation of a freelance journalist Helena Puljiz? Well, this event, and all events that ensued, have been the central topic in Croatian politics and media for the past three weeks. After two parliamentary committees, Committee for Civil Oversight of Security Services and Committee for National Security, deemed that, apart from "minor procedural mistakes", there was nothing illegal or even controversial about the five-hour torture the young journalist endured in POA offices, it seemed the whole affair, like so many others, would become covered up and ignored by the government institutions.
However, the story keeps getting more and more dramatic. When they decided to ignore this crude breach of procedure and democratic principles, the government forgot about one important factor - Stipe Mesic, the president of Croatia. Though presidential powers were significantly reduced with a series of constitutional amendments in 2000, Croatian president still has more powers than any other European president or monarch, except maybe the president of France. Stipe Mesic is the commander-in-chief of armed forces, he has considerable authority in foreign policies and is generally an important democratic figure. For the past four years, he has performed his duties with great success, acting as an influential sentinel for the government, keeping the sometimes rebellious military under leash and promoting Croatian interests abroad. Since the day he won the election in 2000, he has been by far the most popular person in Croatia, beloved among people, and his moral and democratic authority is unquestionable. Though he has little power in executive branch and none in legislative branch, his sheer popularity makes him a force to be reckoned with.
For this particular story, it is important to point out that Croatian president is also co-chief of the Croatian intelligence services, responsible for appointing heads of intelligence agencies in cooperation with the prime minister. In the past months it has been blatantly obvious that prime minister Sanader and his corrupt government have turned POA, the largest and most powerful agency, into their political police. Instead of tracking down terrorists and war criminals and investigating organized crime, POA agents spend time and government resources surveying, interrogating, blackmailing and generally terrorising journalists and Sanader's political opponents. Though president Mesic reluctantly agreed to put his signature on Podbevsek's appointment to position of POA chief some months ago, it was really only a matter of time before illicit practices of the agency exceeded his tolerance threshold.
With the Puljiz incident, it finally happened. Last week, Mesic summoned Podbevsek to his office, where he requested some explanations. The next day, Mesic made a very clear and unambigous decision: Podbevsek must go. He signed a decree of Podbevsek's relief of duty, and proceeded it to the prime minister, whose signature is also required if the decision is to take effect. He offered a very resolute and reasonable explanation for his decision: "If a citizen comes to an institution, even an intelligence agency, he has the right to tell his story, so he may say partial truth, or even improvise. Helena Puljiz told her story and I don't have a single reason not to believe her! However, the Service has no right to tell stories. The Service must have evidence! And no matter what Puljiz says, if they disagree, they must state their evidence. But, after five and half hours of talking to her, they don't have a single note! That means they have no evidence and are in violation of a sublegal act. This wouldn't have happened if Podbevsek had sanctioned those who abused their authority. Some apparently still haven't realised that we want to live in a democratic environment, were every man is protected in his rights and interests. When one man's rights are in jeopardy, everyone's rights are in jeopardy! And that's why I'm raising an alarm. We must stop such things at their root, and there can be no compromise!"
However, Sanader disagrees - he refused to sign president Mesic's decree! Stating the rulings of two parliamentary committees (both of which are really government lapdogs) as "evidence" that POA did nothing against the law, Sanader continues to protect his man Podbevsek and defy the president's authority, thereby trying to give legality to increasing government oppression. He insists on ignoring the public opinion, which is overwhelmingly against his position, and opinions of non-government institutions, such as HHO (Croatian Helsinki Committee).
The brief status quo was further shifted out of balance yesterday - namely, another parliamentary committee stated its ruling. The Committee for Human Rights of the Croatian parliament stated that human rights of journalist Helena Puljiz were violated by POA agents when she was illegally hauled in for questioning! After this ruling, even members of the two committees that formerly declared POA wasn't at fault (thus effectively accusing her of lying and permitting security services to survey and prosecute whom they will without any sanctions or limitation - this demonstrates horrible arrogance and hipocrisy of Croatian institutions, unacceptable in a society that strives to be democratic) suddenly changed their positions by 180° degrees. Vlatko Cvrtila, president of the Committee for Civil Oversight of Security Services, now openly stated that POA's actions in the Puljiz incident were a crude breach of law and procedure, and that he would demand Podbevsek's immediate removal.
With the president and all parliamentary bodies against him, Sanader finds himself in a dangerous situation. If he persists to defend Podbevsek, his government will be perceived as undemocratic (or rather, even more undemocratic than originally thought...), which could have disasterous consequences, not only for public support of his government (which is already dropping rapidly), but also for Croatia's foreign positions (remember, on December 17 the European Commission is supposed to set a firm date for beginning of negotiations of Croatian entry into the European Union, and it won't look good if Croatia displays itself as a country with fragile democracy and no public control over secret services). If, on the other hand, he relents, it will be a serious drawback in his plan to turn Croatia into a police state...
PsychoSniper
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
President Mesic said:
I absoutley agree with President Mesic, for Croatia to be a stable democracy civil rights muct be respected.
EDIT-fucking markups
That's nothing, in southeastern Europe, almost every assassination related to criminal underground that happened in the past ten years was carried out with one, single weapon - Agram 200 submachine gun, manufactured in Croatia. It's a small and incredibly effective weapon, moreso than Uzi. Terrorists would love it.Big T said:
Actually, it's not that much of a coincidence, if we consider the following two facts:Big T said:
1) Ever since the war began, Croatia has been a reasonably large manufacturer of relatively cheap, but powerful and modern weapons.
2) Certain structures in Croatian Army, police and secret services have connections that are questionable, to say the least. Many high-ranking army officials began their military careers in the Foreign Legion. Many more were involved in large internation car and weapon smuggling operations, as well as international drug trade. Assassinations, criminal stories, corruption and political intrigues abound. Former president of Argentine even landed in prison for his connection with selling weapons to Croatian generals. And let me tell you, if someone dug deep into CIA and Pentagon files regarding Croatian war, a lot of shocking stuff would be revealed. Hell, the dirt might even incriminate Clinton! Though leftist media here have been raving about the illegal operations involving the Army and Ministry of Defense since 1991, I can't say I disapprove of it. After the hypocritical assholes from UN issued an embargo on weapon export to Croatia (which was France's and UK's way of saying: "Yeah, we approve of Serbs slaughtering your civilians and burning down your cities, and you're idiots if you think we'll lift a finger to stop them."), weapons smuggling and drug trade were the only ways to arm the Croatian military and finance the war. We had to survive, somehow.
Hmmm. I would apologise on behalf of my country, but in 1991 I was 8 years old, so it's not really anything to do with me.Ratty said:
Also of note, in 1991 the Conservatives were still in power (in the UK I mean) and we were just coming out of Thatcherism.
I shudder to think how we would have acted had it happened a year or two earlier.
I would, however, protest about you equating the UN with "France and UK", but I don't want to get into it as my knowledge of the time/events is severely limited.
PsychoSniper
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
Meh, the UN is worthless. The world would be better off without it.