Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Catalan independence referendum, 2017
Comments
-
-
-
Celia Late Troop wrote: »own state backed militia
This is just incredible, the fact that the Police in Catalonia are acting as body guards to Puidgemont clearly shows they are not impartial
new Soviet Catalonia
Carles Puidgemont, the "socialist"
(...) these corruption charges are the reason why Puidgemont became president of Catalonia in 2015.
Madre mia de l'amor hermoso, que nivel ! ...
It looks like reading the political pages of "Hello! Magazine "
Anyway... :rolleyes:
To rise a bit the level and reach a status more appropriate for the Politics topic , here is a good article about " self determination " and the meaning of it in international laws.
Written by Aidan Hehir, Reader in International Relations, University of Westminster.
The author bases his argumentation from the Article 1.2 of the UN Charter , which recognize the principle of self-determination " making this a right which transcends any state’s domestic laws " :
Art 1.2 : " To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace".
For him, the host state’s approval is not essential if a country is to declare independence.
About the " oppressive behavior " of the host state : " making the legitimacy of self-determination conditional on oppressive behaviour by a host state does not make sense"
(...)
https://theconversation.com/self-determination-is-legal-under-international-law-its-hypocritical-to-argue-otherwise-for-catalonia-86558?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=twitterbutton0 -
Madre mia de l'amor hermoso, que nivel ! ...
It looks like reading the political pages of "Hello! Magazine "
Anyway... :rolleyes:
To rise a bit the level and reach a status more appropriate for the Politics topic , here is a good article about " self determination " and the meaning of it in international laws.
Written by Aidan Hehir, Reader in International Relations, University of Westminster.
The author bases his argumentation from the Article 1.2 of the UN Charter , which recognize the principle of self-determination " making this a right which transcends any state’s domestic laws " :
Art 1.2 : " To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace".
For him, the host state’s approval is not essential if a country is to declare independence.
About the " oppressive behavior " of the host state : " making the legitimacy of self-determination conditional on oppressive behaviour by a host state does not make sense"
(...)
https://theconversation.com/self-determination-is-legal-under-international-law-its-hypocritical-to-argue-otherwise-for-catalonia-86558?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=twitterbutton
Catalonia didn't declare independence, a group of politicians did after an illegal election. That is the fundamental difference, the majority of people in Catalonia want to remain part of Spain, only a minority of people in Catalonia want to be independent and as international law tells us, the right to self determination does not apply to internal minorities within a state.
The author is also factually incorrect, when he saysSpanish government’s refusal to allow a referendum to take place
The Spanish government and constitution does allow a referendum but it has to be within the existing legal framework, not by holding illegal referendums and making unilateral UDI's.0 -
-
Advertisement
-
Celia Late Troop wrote: »Catalonia didn't declare independence, a group of politicians did after an illegal election. That is the fundamental difference, the majority of people in Catalonia want to remain part of Spain, only a minority of people in Catalonia want to be independent and as international law tells us, the right to self determination does not apply to internal minorities within a state.
The author is also factually incorrect, when he says
The Spanish government and constitution does allow a referendum but it has to be within the existing legal framework, not by holding illegal referendums and making unilateral UDI's.
At this level, I don't see the point of continuing the debate when, in one post :
- you say enormities like :
1- " the right to self determination does not apply to internal minorities within a state " ( to who then, already established states ??? )
2- "The Spanish government and constitution does allow a referendum" ( you could have add " promote " too ! )
- you still mix " election " with " referendum " , after more than 110 pages on this thread :eek:
I'm here to debate seriously.
If not, I go to the " soccer " forum ! ...:rolleyes:
And commenting fake news from rag newspapers doesn't interest me, to be honest....
Happy to debate around the subject with other serious posters, though ...
.
.0 -
At this level, I don't see the point of continuing the debate when, in one post :
- you say enormities like :
1- " the right to self determination does not apply to internal minorities within a state " ( to who then, already established states ??? )
This is an established precedent in international law that:The right of self-determination is conventionally thought not to extend to internal minorities within a state. It’s conventionally thought only to apply to colonized people, people subject to overseas colonization, peoples who are subject to an apartheid government or peoples under military occupation https://scholar.princeton.edu/astilz/home.As a matter of international law you become a state by being recognized by other states,” said Anna Stilz, professor of politics at Princeton University.
Not one other country, nation or state has recognised Catalonia.2- "The Spanish government and constitution does allow a referendum" ( you could have add " promote " too ! )
- you still mix " election " with " referendum " , after more than 110 pages on this thread :eek:
As we've been over numerous times, You were the one who gave us the link to Joan Vintró, Professor of Constitutional Law. Institute of Public Law. University of Barcelona where he writes in his paperAs explained above, it is clear that the call for a referendum on the collective future of Catalonia linked to the beginning of a constitutional amendment is possible within the constitutional framework and the law. http://idpbarcelona.net/docs/blog/legality_referendum.pdf
Are you now changing your position and no longer agree with Joan Vintró?
With this in mind, after 110 pages you are still arguing that the referendum on Oct 1st was legal and is a mandate for independence. :eek:I'm here to debate seriously.
If not, I go to the " soccer " forum ! ...:rolleyes:
And commenting fake news from rag newspapers doesn't interest me, to be honest....
Happy to debate around the subject with other serious posters, though ...
.
.
I'm adopting the same approach as you. I've been trying to engage with you on the merits and you seemed to be involved in a war of images and news stories from Catalan pro independence websites so I'm just providing articles to with an opposing view. To use your own words, not one of the articles I've provided have been proven to be fake...0 -
-
Celia Late Troop wrote: »This is an established precedent in international law that:
(...)
Dishonest way to put only the first sentence of the quote, then.
" colonized people, people subject to overseas colonization, peoples who are subject to an apartheid government or peoples under military occupation " are de facto " internal minorities within a state "
Irrelevant ...Celia Late Troop wrote: »Not one other country, nation or state has recognised Catalonia.Celia Late Troop wrote: »Are you now changing your position and no longer agree with Joan Vintró?
Dishonest again, you were talking of the Spanish Governement and the ConstitutionCelia Late Troop wrote: »With this in mind, after 110 pages you are still arguing that the referendum on Oct 1st was legal and is a mandate for independence.
Still didn't get the point, apparently....Celia Late Troop wrote: »I'm just providing articles to with an opposing view. To use your own words, not one of the articles I've provided have been proven to be fake...
Here is a quick one from your last link ( no time to look for all of them ... )
" When Artur Mas narrowly won a re-election in September 2015, he failed to secure enough support to get himself reinstated, and CUP, whose 10 seats gave it the role of kingmaker, demanded a different premier on the grounds that Mas’ name was too closely associated with corruption"
Check your sources !!!0 -
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
More evidence of links between Catalan separatism and Russia interference.Ivan (@Ivan226622) is smiling in his Twitter profile picture. He is seated at a table in a busy restaurant with three women. By way of introduction, he says: “I love technology and business news...please join me now!
”
Since signing up to the social media platform in November 2012, Ivan has tweeted 597,000 times, or an average of 326 times a day. He has 1,323 followers. Then there is Rick (@rickrick888). Rick describes himself as the Lion Of Judah; he joined Twitter in March 2009 and has tweeted an average of 198 messages a day since then. He has 1,905 followers. Finally, there is Bobbit (@bobbit2266) who says he lives in “The Universe,” and who joined Twitter back in October 2009. He has 1,473 followers and sends out an average of 143 tweets a day.
But there’s a hitch. Although Ivan, Rick and Bobbit all look like different people with real lives, they all tweet about the same thing at the same times. Their messages go out 24 hours a day and their sources are always the same: mainly the Russian news outlets RT and Sputnik. And from September 29 to October 9, the three Twitter profiles each tweeted out 139 news items about Catalonia created by RT and Sputnik, the majority of them attacking the institutions of the Spanish state. https://elpais.com/elpais/2017/11/13/inenglish/1510570815_085847.html0 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
There is an obvious lack of knowledge about the contemporary history of the peninsula.
Adding to this, the ignorance of the language(s) which doesn't help neither ...
But asking a voluntarily provocative question like this one won't fill this lack, though ...
Nevertheless,it is clear that the strategy of using the words " kale borroka "from Cronica Global is all but innocent .
I won't extent myself about it now, I might one day though...
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2017/07/terrorism-basque-nationalism-bar-brawl-altsasu-170708112843906.html
To answer to the question before any twisted thoughts arrives : no.
But it could be a good moment for the journalists of this paper to ask themselves why they have been targeted.( I don't know their political position, editorial lines, etc.... )
So now we're talking about ETA???To answer to the question before any twisted thoughts arrives : no.
But it could be a good moment for the journalists of this paper to ask themselves why they have been targeted.( I don't know their political position, editorial lines, etc.... )
Sounds like victim blaming to me or a nod and a wink type of "No, I don't agree with the attacks" 0 -
-
-
-
Celia Late Troop wrote: »But we're talking about Catalonia and the independence movement and you insist on talking about PP to justify the actions of the separatists.
Simple comparison .
" justify" ? see 4)Celia Late Troop wrote: »Do you think it's acceptable for the Mossos to be so open about their political affiliations? Regardless of what they think about what happened on Oct 1st, they should represent all the people in Catalonia.
Twisting again...
from " a few Mossos on holidays " of the article, you conclude : "The Mossos " :P.
From "Brussels" in the article , you conclude " all around Belgium " .
Could be time to stop these gross falsifications , no ?
Other example of their work :
Escorting Arrimadas ( C's , unionists ) out of the Parliement few days ago :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_syiCsctGE
And I don't think the Mossos that day did all vote for her ,or did they ?:rolleyes:
I still have to see some stories where the Mossos hasn't defend someone from the unionists side, based on the fact that he was from the unionist side.Celia Late Troop wrote: »This is the problem we had in Northern Ireland for years where Catholic communities couldn't depend on the RUC to be impartial.
That is the problem : seeing the Catalan problem with Irish glasses0 -
Are you serious with this ?
If one day you are in a pub and take a kick , you probably think these two things :
1st : This man was a pr.ck !
2nd : Why did he do that ?
If you skip the second question, you've missed an opportunity to educate yourself.
The example is valid whoever the guilty one is ...
And for the little story, a lot of people felt " I am Charlie " after their tragic events .
But some were " Charlie " before that.
Long before that ...
Before you even knew they existed ....;)I have no axe to grind either way in the dispute
Unless it has changed lately, I don't think objectivity is a prerequisite for writing on boards.ie .At this stage it is obvious that you have no objectivity what so ever .0 -
If one day you are in a pub and take a kick , you probably think these two things :
1st : This man was a pr.ck !
2nd : Why did he do that ?
If you skip the second question, you've missed an opportunity to educate yourself.
The example is valid whoever the guilty one is ...
And for the little story, a lot of people felt " I am Charlie " after their tragic events .
But some were " Charlie " before that.
Long before that ...
Before you even knew they existed ....;)
Unless it has changed lately, I don't think objectivity is a prerequisite for writing on boards.ie .
Your analogies are simply ridiculous . There is no justification for an attack on a news outlet , none , full stop . You either aceept that or you don't , but if you don't your grasp of democracy is tenuous at best .
No objectivity it is not a requirement to post , but it is you desire any credibility0 -
Today saw a communique from the Spanish association " Juezas yJueces para la Democracia " , formed by Spanish Judges .
Pretty scary situation coming from the judges themselves ...
The unexpected statements of the Minister of Justice in relation with the so-called "proces", are not very respectful of the separation of powers and judicial independence. Mr. Català predicts with total certainty the procedural future of the investigated and anticipates without any blush the dates and the content of the judicial resolutions
(...)
In the face of the unacceptable interferences of political power in the independence of our courts, the inaction and silence of the General Council of the Judicial Power must be criticized, especially when it is the organ whose precise mission is to defend the independence of judges. Judges and Judges for Democracy reaffirms once again its commitment to judicial independence. It is essential to keep justice away from any suspicion of bias or manipulation, demanding a strong and independent judicial power. And, in a state of law, it is necessary to respect the function developed by the Constitutional Court, starting with the Government itself.
In English :
https://translate.google.ie/translate?sl=es&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.juecesdemocracia.es%2F2018%2F02%2F05%2Fcomunicado-las-injerencias-politicas-poder-judicial-tribunal-constitucional%2F&edit-text=&act=url
Original in Spanish :
http://www.juecesdemocracia.es/2018/02/05/comunicado-las-injerencias-politicas-poder-judicial-tribunal-constitucional/0 -
-
Advertisement
-
Advertisement