The BEST Guide to POLAND
Unanswered  |  Archives 
 
 
User: Guest

Home / News  % width posts: 88

The spiritual heirs of the Polish Communist Party


Ironside 47 | 9,563
22 Mar 2012  #1
Poet and writer Jaroslaw Marek Rymkiewicz ( age 77) have to apologize to the publisher of "Gazeta Wyborcza" and pay five thousand zł fine, because he said that the editors of "GW" hate Polish and Christianity as "the spiritual heirs of the Polish Communist Party."

Well he was right, wasn't he?
Anyway, what about freedom of speech ?
He should has a right to express his opinion.

culture.pl/web/english/resources-literature-full-page/-/eo_event_asset_publisher/eAN5/content/jaroslaw-marek-rymkiewicz
pawian 155 | 8,612
22 Mar 2012  #2
Well he was right, wasn't he?

Probably he wasn`t. I read a few of his articles and he sounded like just another PiS-oriented activist who calls a traitor everybody who disagrees with Jarosław Kaczyński and other similar maniacs.

Anyway, what about freedom of speech ?
He should has a right to express his opinion.

Slander/libel are crimes in democratic countries.
jon357 63 | 14,076
23 Mar 2012  #3
Well he was right, wasn't he?

No, he wasn't.

Slander/libel are crimes in democratic countries.

Quite, and if the right wing want to ban communist symbols, songs etc as hate objects they have to understand that the law applies to them too.
Varsovian 92 | 634
23 Mar 2012  #4
Ironside
Of course he's right to say that! Only someone who is utterly naive would view GW as anything else. I don't know how this bloke expressed himself however.It's the sum of their chosen stories and the slant given in them. Some articles are balanced, though. As for Michnik, he was undeniably given special treatment by the Communists.
jon357 63 | 14,076
23 Mar 2012  #5
Special treatment? You do know how long he was jailed by them?

And no, the country's best selling newspaper isn't a 'spiritual heir of the communist party'!!
Varsovian 92 | 634
23 Mar 2012  #6
Jon Jon, you really should know that trite argument doesn't cut the mustard with someone who has the slightest bit of knowledge. That sounds like spin from a hired politico.

A few pointers to those who might otherwise naively believe you: While other prisoners lived in appalling conditions, Michnik was allowed to finish his studies - Kuron being allowed to have one on one seminars. Michnik travelled around Europe staying in consular accommodation when normal Poles couldn't even get out of the country. When Warsaw University students held a protest in 1988, Michnik was there. Me too. He didn't have to run from the Zomo.
OP Ironside 47 | 9,563
23 Mar 2012  #7
No, he wasn't.

OK!

Quite, and if the right wing want to ban communist symbols, songs etc as hate objects they have to understand that the law applies to them too.

What about freedom of speech then ?

Slander/libel are crimes in democratic countries.

An Opinion is not slander, especially in politics.

the country's best selling newspaper i

hey ho ? It isn't bestselling newspaper !
pawian 155 | 8,612
23 Mar 2012  #8
A few pointers to those who might otherwise naively believe you: While other prisoners lived in appalling conditions, Michnik was allowed to finish his studies - Kuron being allowed to have one on one seminars. Michnik travelled around Europe staying in consular accommodation when normal Poles couldn't even get out of the country.

Don`t be silly. Michnik was detained a few hundred times by communist secret police and spent about 6 years in prison altogether.

When Warsaw University students held a protest in 1988, Michnik was there. Me too. He didn't have to run from the Zomo.

Oh, I see. It seems like a personal issue between you and Michnik based on primitive envy. When Michnik was in the slammer throughout 1980s, you enjoyed life in communist Poland. :):):):):):) How many times did you perform in school celebrations of 1 May ? :):):):)

When martial law was declared, in December 1981, he was at first an internee, but when he refused to sign, a "loyalty oath" and assent to voluntarily leave the country, he was jailed and accused of an "attempt to overthrow socialism". He was in jail without a verdict until 1984, because the prosecutor's office prolonged the trial on purpose.

Adam Michnik demanded to end proceedings against himself or have his case dismissed. Meanwhile, he wanted to be granted the status of a political prisoner, and went on a hunger strike in jail. In 1984 he was released from jail, under an amnesty.

He took part in an attempt to organize a strike in the Gdańsk shipyard. As a consequence, he was rearrested in 1985 and this time sentenced to three years imprisonment. He was released in the following year again under another amnesty.

OP Ironside 47 | 9,563
23 Mar 2012  #9
Don`t be silly. Michnik was detained

Sure he was a hero who singlehandedly destroyed Soviets Union, as a first human in history landed on Mars,
No, the thread is not about Michnik and whether he was detained or not but about his and his newspaper political stance and an attitude towards Catholics and Polish traditions,

Oh, I see. It seems like a personal issue between you and Michnik based on primitive envy.

What is based your attitude to Michink and why do you think that your attitude is superior not based on self-interest .
pawian 155 | 8,612
23 Mar 2012  #10
Sure he was a hero who singlehandedly destroyed Soviets Union, as a first human in history landed on Mars,

Nope. Such heroes were Walęsa and the Pope. :):):):) plus Gorbachov doing the inside job. :):):):):)

No, the thread is not about Michnik and whether he was detained or not but about his and his newspaper political stance and an attitude towards Catholics and Polish traditions,

Yes, I am sorry, but it was Varsovian who started writing bullshyt. I had to react..... :):):):):)

Excuse me, please.

What is based your attitude to Michink and why do you think that your attitude is superior not based on self-interest .

My attitude is superior because it is based on my personal experience, historical knowledge and emotional intelligence. :):):):)

A forgotten note to Varsovian:

Man, start reading books on the modern history of Poland. Then you will learn some facts and such ignorant entries of yours won`t take place:

Michnik was allowed to finish his studies - Kuron being allowed to have one on one seminars. Michnik travelled around Europe staying in consular accommodation when normal Poles couldn't even get out of the country.

They were allowed by communists to function as normal people in 1970s in order to receive Westers credits. Gierek`s regime tried to look civilised and pretended to follow the democratic standards and abide by human rights. In 1980s the " idyllic cohabitation" of Michnik and Jaruzelski`s regime ended because communist Poland was bankrupt and Western loans were halted anyway, that is why Michnik was imprisoned for 4.5 years without a sentence.

PS. Actually, a lot of normal Poles were allowed to go travel abroad in 1970s.

Come on. Have you ever read at least one historic book in your life?

I hate such ignorance.
OP Ironside 47 | 9,563
24 Mar 2012  #11
So do I!
When somebody pretend that court ruling is anything other than disgrace.

In times of tyranny and injustice, when law oppresses the people,it is time to make things right. Down with tyranny.
pawian 155 | 8,612
24 Mar 2012  #12
:):):):):)

I did a little more research on Rymkiewicz. I already wrote he sounds like another PiS activist.

But his Ode to Jarosław Kaczyński is really beyond any limits:
wierszeosmolensku.blogspot.com/2010/11/ur.html

That is nuts!
OP Ironside 47 | 9,563
24 Mar 2012  #13
That is nuts!

Even a nut have a right to express an opinion.
Regardless what party he is supporter.
What is nut is judges whose ruling is really beyond any limits of decency! Contrary to Rymkiewicz those judges are danger to the Polish interdependence and liability to the justice in Poland.
Varsovian 92 | 634
24 Mar 2012  #14
Compare Michnik's conditions in jail with the fate of ordinary mortals who ended up there and you will see the massive, undisputable difference. Something you fail to see through your intentional blindness.

Normal mortal student thrown in jail - kicked off course, endures harsh conditions in jail.
Michnik - received good conditions in jail. Bed, study materials, received visits from his course leader, finished his course.

You can't see the difference?

Normal mortal student in 1988 - faced by large numbers of charging zomo, he runs.
Michnik, wearing skullcap to indicate who he is, calmly watches as zomo run right past him - protected by his cloak of invisibility borrowed from Harry Potter (idea picked up later by JK Rowling.
pawian 155 | 8,612
24 Mar 2012  #15
What is nut is judges whose ruling is really beyond any limits of decency! Contrary to Rymkiewicz those judges are danger to the Polish interdependence and liability to the justice in Poland.

Nope, the ruling was all right as Rymkiewicz wasn`t able to prove that the paper`s editors hate Polish and Christianity as "the spiritual heirs of the Polish Communist Party."

The editors took an offence, sued him and won. It is normal in a democratic country.

A remark:

Where was Rymkiewicz in 1968 when Michnik went to prison for the first time?

Where was Rymkiewicz during Solidarity times of 1980s when Michnik spent 4.5 years in prison?

The answer is: nowhere near those important events. He was a poet and literature interpreter, making career at the communist university.

Today he spits venom on people who weren`t afraid to oppose communism openly.

Isn`t it pathetic?

Compare Michnik's conditions in jail with the fate of ordinary mortals who ended up there and you will see the massive, undisputable difference. Something you fail to see through your intentional blindness.
Normal mortal student thrown in jail - kicked off course, endures harsh conditions in jail.
Michnik - received good conditions in jail. Bed, study materials, received visits from his course leader, finished his course.

Sorry but this is too ridiculous to discuss. (:(:(:(:(
OP Ironside 47 | 9,563
24 Mar 2012  #16
Nope, the ruling was all right as Rymkiewicz wasn`t able to prove that the paper`s editors hate Polish and Christianity as "the spiritual heirs of the Polish Communist Party."

Editors didn't proved they aren't ! That is the crux of the matter. You cannot prove it one way or the other !

he editors took an offence, sued him and won. It is normal in a democratic country.

I haven't said a word about that have I? I have no issue with that, what I find revolting is the court ruling and people who were judging in this case. What are their names?

A remark:

Well, I know you don't like Rymkwicz because he supports other party than you, but you needn't be so open about that as it has nothing to do with the court ruling.
Alligator - | 261
24 Mar 2012  #17
Editors didn't proved they aren't ! That is the crux of the matter. You cannot prove it one way or the other !

In Polish law, as in any other modern democratic law, there is the presumption of innocence. One is concidered innocent until proven guilty.
The editors don't have to prove anything, not to judges and definetly not to you.
OP Ironside 47 | 9,563
24 Mar 2012  #18
Not if they are suing sunshine !
Anyway - an opinion is unprovable.
I may think that you are an a-h but I have no way to prove it.
Alligator - | 261
24 Mar 2012  #19
Alligator: In Polish law, as in any other modern democratic law, there is the presumption of innocence. One is concidered innocent until proven guilty.
The editors don't have to prove anything, not to judges and definetly not to you.

Not if they are suing sunshine !

I wanted to remaind you about this basic law, because your every post show that you never heard of it.
Perhaps you have some sensational facts about GW being

"the spiritual heirs of the Polish Communist Party."

. Why don't you present them here andprove that Rymkiewicz was right.
Please, remember to use facts. You clearly have problems in that department.

If you want to talk about legal matters then allow me to enlighten you.
In civil proceedings plaintiff and defendant have the initiative in presenting the claims and allegations and evidence in support of thereof. The role of the court is only to settle the dispute. That means that GW gave judges sufficient evidence to counter Rymkiewicz slander and that also means that Rymkiewicz was just expressing his slanderous views without any evidence to support them.

Anyway - an opinion is unprovable.

However, court can prove that some opinions are slanderous.
OP Ironside 47 | 9,563
25 Mar 2012  #20
I wanted to remaind you about this basic law, because your every post show that you never heard of it.

That is your opinion !Same may find it slanderous !

Please, remember to use facts . You clearly have problems in that department.

I think that you have many problems not only in department of comprehension but it only my opinion and I cannot prove it. However I hope that you have nothing to do with the law in Poland for the sake of justice.

Perhaps you have some sensational facts about GW

You seems to not been able to grasp that an opinion that GW editors are the spiritual heirs of the Polish Communist Party is not about facts.

It is about an opinion!!!!!! In general, an opinion is a subjective belief, and is the result of emotion or interpretation of facts.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion

Do I have to spell it for you??

That means that GW gave judges sufficient evidence to counter Rymkiewicz slander and that also means that Rymkiewicz was just expressing his slanderous views without any evidence to support them.

No it mean that judges bended backwoods to accommodate powerful editors with many friends in high places.They think that can get away with it.

What evidence could they produce ?It is all about iinterpretation of facts!
Slanderous ? How you can prove without doubt that an opinion is slanderous ? ????

In this way you would render all public debate impossible because if somebody wouldn't like your opinion about something,would surly sue you ?
Anyway GW produced a lot of articles which could be labeled as slanderous. Some even included lies.
kondzior 8 | 944
25 Mar 2012  #21
Hey Ironside, I do remember you applauding the court for giving a fine to Doda, just because she had an opinion about the Bible. Dobule standards anyone?
OP Ironside 47 | 9,563
25 Mar 2012  #22
Hey kondzior are you praying to Michnik ?
kondzior 8 | 944
25 Mar 2012  #23
Hey Ironside, what my pryings got to to with anything?
pgtx 29 | 3,160
25 Mar 2012  #24
There is no need to make it personal.
Alligator - | 261
25 Mar 2012  #25
You seems to not been able to grasp that an opinion that GW editors are the spiritual heirs of the Polish Communist Party is not about facts.
It is about an opinion !!!!!! In general, an opinion is a subjective belief, and is the result of emotion or interpretation of facts.

In court proceedings everything is about the facts and proofs.
The proof is an information that have support in reality and the carrier of that information is evidence.
Rymkiewicz was not able to prove that his information have support in reality and he did not procure any evidence.

Btw, how nice of you to use wikipedia, when we talk about Polish law. I see that I'm talking with a true expert, who have knowledge and authority to judge Polish judges ;/

Slanderous ? How you can prove without doubt that an opinion is slanderous ?

Common sense?

In this way you would render all public debate impossible because if somebody wouldn't like your opinion about something,would surly sue you ?

To prove that a certain opinion is slanderous or not is not an easy task, you need to procure evidence. (remember? evidence? facts? reality?)

Hey Ironside, I do remember you applauding the court for giving a fine to Doda, just because she had an opinion about the Bible. Dobule standards anyone?

Ups... busted
and here is evidence:

WhyMedSchool: I can't believe she was fined as this seems a pretty blatant disregard for freedom of speech, not to mention that she's also correct.

I think that you are walking piece of trash !
How about that ? Do you regard that as my right to speak freely or do you find that offensive and insulting whether I'm right or not?

She should pay much more than 5 000 zl and so should her former lover !

jon357 63 | 14,076
25 Mar 2012  #26
Hey Ironside, I do remember you applauding the court for giving a fine to Doda, just because she had an opinion about the Bible. Dobule standards anyone?

That's what I thought. If the Polish far-right want communist symbols and songs banned as offensive under the law, they also need to understand that accusations are similarly offensive under the law.
OP Ironside 47 | 9,563
25 Mar 2012  #27
Hey Ironside, what my pryings got to to with anything?

I don't know about your prying but if you don't pray to Michnik and GW isn't your bible then your comparison fails.

In court proceedings everything is about the facts and proofs.

Shouldn't than even attempt to rule in this case as it is clearly not about facts. It is about an opinion and political debate.

The ruling itself is political and has nothing to do with facts.

Btw, how nice of you to use wikipedia, when we talk about Polish law.

I'm using wiki to avoid debate about the word "opinion"!

I see that I'm talking with a true expert, who have knowledge and authority to judge Polish judges ;/

I see that I'm talking to an Egyptian priest. Mystery, secret knowledge and sacred procedures mastered only by the blessed few. I didn't know that Poland has social structure of ancient Egypt and court rulings are above judgment and taboo. One can only bow and accept - you wish!

In democracy there is freedom of speech and almost everything is open to debate by a free citizens, especially when the case is political as it is.

To prove that a certain opinion is slanderous or not is not an easy task,

Yes it is almost impossible.

Ups... busted

Phew?

and here is evidence:

You mean that post taken out of context ? It is about freedom of speech, there is nothing about an opinion, but about provocation, publicity stunt and religion beliefs.

Nothing to do with the case above. Sorry to burst your bubble !
Well, I'm not really sorry !:)

If the Polish far-right want communist symbols and songs banned as offensive under the law, they also need to understand that accusations are similarly offensive under the law.

err ? come again ?
Alligator - | 261
25 Mar 2012  #28
I don't know about your prying but if you don't pray to Michnik and GW isn't your bible then your comparison fails.

The only thing that fails here is your logic.

Shouldn't than even attempt to rule in this case as it is clearly not about facts. It is about an opinion and political debate.
The ruling itself is political and has nothing to do with facts.

Freedom does not mean anarchy.
Freedom of speech like every other freedom has its limits. Everyone in Poland is entitled to exercise their freedom, as long as they do not undermine the rights and freedoms of others.Freedom of speech does not mean the freedom to purposefuly lie and offend anyone, to violate someone's dignity. One can not use the freedom of speech law, when he is lying, slandering, saying something that violates someone's personal rights.

The dignity of every human is also protected by Polish law. Therefore I praise the court for ruling against Rymkiewicz and for having the courage to speak the obvious (at least obvious for some on PF).

What is nut is judges whose ruling is really beyond any limits of decency!

In times of tyranny and injustice, when law oppresses the people,it is time to make things right. Down with tyranny.

what I find revolting is the court ruling and people who were judging in this case. What are their names?

Your comments show that state and law doesn't mean much to you, unless they are on your side. You are demonstarting complete contempt for the law, the principles and values that are foundations of Poland. This posts are written by a supporter of PiS, a party of declared state worshippers. I don't think that Poland needs such love ;/

You mean that post taken out of context ?

No it wasn't taken out of context. If anybody is bored enough to read all your posts on that thread then here you can do it:

polishforums.com/news-politics-4/poland-fines-singer-bashing-bible-56606/

As I said, if the law is not on your side, then it is a bad law, isn't Ironside?

JonnyM: A false comparison. She was giving her opinion on a book.

that is not a book by many is regarded as the book.
Should I then make that comparison more valid by insulting his mother or parents?
Maybe lifestyle or something he holds dear?
The point is nobody should be able to insult people or their beliefs without consequences. Sadly some people seems to think that is doesn't apply to the religion.

Not quite, if someone chooses to make rude and unharnessed remarks about something that many people deem holly that is clearly offensive, no buts about that !
If somebody does it on purpose then there is no doubt in my mind that he/she should be fined.
It has nothing to do with criticizing religion and everything with respect where there is no respect there is nothing.

As long as you are not abusing or insulting somebody's beliefs - you should have a right to express your opinions in a non insulting way.

It is amusing that you decided to defend Rymkiewicz The Hypocrite. I guess you founded common ground....

Rymkiewicz asked by Piotr Rogowski (Agora attorney) "Can you judge people by the views of parents?", Rymkiewicz said that "you can draw conclusions as to their education". When asked by a lawyer, whether in the Stalinist years he was in the Union of Polish Youth (Związek Młodzieży Polskiej), Rymkiewicz confirmed. "The point is not what I did at age 15" - he added. "And why do you think that the essence of the case are the views of parents, editors of "GW"? - asked Rogowski.

"Michnik criticized Luxemburg for underestimating the independence aspirations of Poles" - said Rogowski. "I do not read Michnik" - Rymkiewicz said. When asked by a lawyer, Rymkiewicz admitted that his parents were in the Communist Party.

Here is link to article (in Polish)

wsieci.rp.pl/opinie/rekiny-i-plotki/Kolejna-odslona-procesu-Gazeta-Wyborcza-Marek-Rymkiewicz-
pawian 155 | 8,612
25 Mar 2012  #29
"Michnik criticized Luxemburg for underestimating the independence aspirations of Poles" - said Rogowski. "I do not read Michnik" - Rymkiewicz said. When asked by a lawyer, Rymkiewicz admitted that his parents were in the Communist Party.

OMG. :(:(:(:(:

Iron, stop defending Rymkiewicz. He isn`t worth your time and energy, really. The guy seems obsessed with his cheap envy of people who fought openly against communism and rotted in prisons, while he was making a career at a communist university.

Alligator, I agree with this:

Freedom of speech like every other freedom has its limits. Everyone in Poland is entitled to exercise their freedom, as long as they do not undermine the rights and freedoms of others.Freedom of speech does not mean the freedom to purposefuly lie and offend anyone, to violate someone's dignity. One can not use the freedom of speech law, when he is lying, slandering, saying something that violates someone's personal rights.

xzqbq7 2 | 104
25 Mar 2012  #30
It is amusing that you decided to defend Rymkiewicz The Hypocrite

in my humble opinion it is utterly stupid to take 77 year old poet to court for slander which while may not be provable, is nevertheles common knowledge

among population. What does he have to lose in court? On the other hand it motivates him to write more, if anything to express his frustrations.

And poems live forever.

What does it prove? That Michnik lost his sense of reality? Or after all he is stupid? Opinions welcome.


Home / News / The spiritual heirs of the Polish Communist Party
BoldItalic [quote]
 
To post as Guest, enter a temporary username or login and post as a member.