Stanisław Michalkiewicz: Oligarchs and bantering
And that's a mess! The seasonal marshal Szymon Holownia has just postponed the session of the Sejm of 10 May, due to the fact that on that day another simpleist of farmers is about to collapse through Warsaw. As we remember, they protest for 2 fundamental reasons. Firstly, against the flooding of the countries of the European Union with Ukrainian agricultural products which not only come here without any restrictions, but in addition, the standards that the European Union strictly enforces in relation to indigenous farmers do not apply to their production.
The second reason is the alleged “Green Deal”, a series of crazy ideas that supposedly aim to “save the planet” – but in fact – to proceed training millions, or possibly billions of people, previously trained as part of a pilot training program launched under the pretext of a criminal coronavirus epidemic.
This time, the additional spice of the full Ukrainian agricultural exports to the EU states adds the arrest of Ukrainian Minister of Agriculture, Mikołaj Solski, who is accused of misappropriating state land worth $7 million. But – as we learn – after payment of bail he was not only released, but “returned to duty”. Apparently, he not only paid bail, but besides shared with whom it was necessary, and the iustitia there no longer resents him.
Besides – how can you blame the minister for wanting to privatize this and this on the side erstwhile in Ukraine it is simply a rule? Otherwise, where would the “oligarch” and even the “parch-oligarch” come from, who not only have private troops, not only teams of deputies for the highest Soviet, but even decide who will be president? This is the fundamental difference between Ukraine and Russia.
In Ukraine, the oligarchs decide who will become president, while in Russia, the president decides who can become oligarch. For Yeltsin, it was different, that is – just as in Ukraine – but the cold Russian checker Putin of all these “oligars” outsmarted what Judenrate “Gazeta Wyborcza”, co-owner of which is the old judaic financial granter Jerzy Soros, can inactive not forgive him that he deprived him of specified big, Russian alimony.
As we remember, this deprivation of the old granter of Russian alimony, which was the origin of the colorful revolutions. The first such, called the “Roses Revolution”, took place in Georgia, where 1 group of strongmen in black leather jackets led in the gathering area of president Edward Szewardnadze there, while the another introduced Michał Saakashvili, most likely an American agent.
The next day, in Tbilisi, he landed under a fake passport driven by Putin from Russia Boris Abramowicz Bieriezowski to find out what can be squeezed out of all of Georgia for an old Granter. It turned out that little, in connection with which, in the following year, the “orange revolution” in Ukraine broke out.
Unlike Georgia, Ukraine was a actual golden apple for the player, so Boris Abramowicz even wanted to settle there, but individual older and wiser had to explain to him that it was unnecessary, since now in Ukraine the business is being watched by president Viktor Yushchenko and his first minister in individual by the beautiful Julia Tymoshenko.
And then, erstwhile president Obama set up a “maidan” in Ukraine for $5 billion, this country became for the “oligarch-poor”—also American—real Eldorado, so European agricultural protests break into a wall of indifference, like sea idols against rocks. What can a thin Bolek, the seasonal Marshal of the Holovnia, do in this situation, if he does not postpone the session of the Sejm, so as not to face these full farmers again?
Meanwhile, in view of the forthcoming elections to the Reichstag, this time called the European Parliament, our beloved leaders must force themselves to invent any points in which they could “beautifully differ”. Because, as we know, actual politics are strictly forbidden from our allies, they must invent substitute themes.
And here, in the last days, the camp “good change” led by erstwhile Chief of State Jarosław Kaczyński stated that the government of Donald Tusk signed a Cyrilograph stating that the law of the European Union is superior to indigenous law, including the indigenous constitution. The dignitaries from Donald Tusk's office caught in the seismic corridors did not know anything about it, although they looked confused about being caught on specified a betrayal.
This confusion is due to ignorance. The point is that as early as 1964, the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg, ruling on Flaminio Costa v ENEL, formulated the rule that Community law (because at the time there was no European Union as a separate entity of global law, which was not proclaimed until 1 December 2009, only “European Communities”) has overriding national rights, regardless of the rank of the law.
For this reason, during a debate held many years ago at the University of Warsaw on the possible entry of Poland into the monetary union (Poland has committed itself to entering the monetary union, i.e. to the adoption of the euro, already in the accession treaty, ratified after the 2003 referendum, only that the date of this accession has not been established), justice Małgorzata Jungnickiel of the Court of Appeal in Warsaw said that courts in Poland will apply the law of the European Union even in the event of its conflict with the Polish constitution.
This is the case, as demonstrated by the fascist regulation in the form of the individual Data Protection Act, which imposes on citizens restrictions on freedom of expression only to situations permitted by law. However, a constitution which, in the case of public authorities, requires them to act “on the basis and within the limits of the law”, states to citizens that anything that is not prohibited is allowed.
Meanwhile, this law introduces the rule that if 1 man wishes to say something to another, he must ask for approval from the third. That is why I call this “fascist” regulation due to the fact that the essence of fascism is the belief that you are allowed anything – for example, to penalize “the speech of hatred”. What is “hate speech”? Yeah, that's any opinion contrary to the current organization line.
And independent courts in Poland are accommodating to these fascist EU regulations as eagerly as in the Stalinist times they were accommodating to russian standards, formulated in Article 58 of the RSFRR Criminal Code, on the basis of which millions of people lost their lives, property, wellness and freedom.
We besides recommend: University of Silesia promotes pseudoscience
