Talk:Rywin affair

POV edits by Molobo and anonymous IP (possibly Molobo)

Michnik did admit to private friendship and meetings with Urban and Kwasniewski.PiS doesn't want to "purge" left or liberals since, only corrupted officials and infromal cliques, since its future coalition partner PO, includes liberal minded politicians anyway. Molobo

Sorry Molobo, but the bulk of your changes are either POV, off-topic, or both. If at all, then this should be discussed in Adam Michnik and Law and Justice, respectively, as it has little or nothing to do with the affair this article is about. Urban is indeed a special case, but he is completetly irrelevant to the article because of his marginal, pariah-like role in the Polish public. There is nothing sensational or even "scandalous" about Michnik's "friendship" with Kwasniewski, either - given that he even made his peace with General Kiszczak. Apart from that, we should not take PO's slogans and wordings at their face value. When speaking of "liberals" I was obviously not referring to the PO's ilk of market-liberals with a conservative outlook on society, but to the "left" half of the cardinal liberal-conservative cleavage in Polish politics, with whom the PO is calling for a showdown. They do not intend to get rid of a few "corrupt officials and cliques", but to restage the wojna na górze. Otherwise they would hardly be pushing the idea of a "Fourth Republic", would they? That is the message they are trying to get across, occasional understatements notwithstanding, and that is why their potential electorate supports them. You are welcome to address the issue in a NPOV manner on Law and Justice, but it is simply out of place here, POV or no POV. --Thorsten1 18:44, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

PS: As always, please do remember to sign and timestamp your edits properly.

Oh dear Thorsten-what you are doing is just showing your own personal point of view.Urban isn't a pariah as he controls one of influential newspapers NIE, and the point was not that of if he is in politics(which he is anyway) but whetever Michnik was involved with former communists who are involved in one way or another in the affair. Secondly-it is more accurate to describe Michnik as leftis dissident, neither is he legendary(besides his symphatisers) nor is his stance anti-communistic totally as he supported many communist ideas in his life as ideologists. Third-the writing "the most radical" report is a POV, since one could state that the most radical report was the one that didn't found any group involved.Thus minority report is more neutral, objective statement. Fourth-what you think of PO or PiS is your own private matter.The fact remains that nobody is calling for complete purge of "left" or "liberals" but of corrupt cliques and informal relationship associated with this groups . Besides you are rather misinformed as they are people with liberal outlook on society in PO, and it has distanced itself from many of PiS actions.Thus your statement about the the supposed desire to purge Poland of left parties is only your personal view. Molobo

If you consider NIE "influential" I suppose you live in a different country than the Poland I know. Quite irrespective of Urban's role in Polish society, his role in the affair was marginal, too. If you think otherwise, please feel free to provide details on his involvement in the affair - because that is what the article is about, and not about any "friendship" between Urban and Michnik, which may or may not have been accidentally discovered during the investigations. "it is more accurate to describe Michnik as leftis dissident," What is the best way to describe Michnik's political position as a dissident prior to 1989 is simply not an issue in an affair in the 2000's. Please take this to Adam Michnik, if you see it fit. "neither is he legendary(besides his symphatisers)". I will certainly not fight over the attribute "legendary" - feel free to replace it with "well-known", "prominent" or some such - but regardless of that, if Michnik is not a "legendary" dissident I daresay there aren't any legendary dissidents. Although I take it that you would consider Maciej Giertych more legendary... ;-) "nor is his stance anti-communistic totally as he supported many communist ideas in his life as ideologists." I think there is no denying that Michnik played a prominent role in the anti-communist opposition for most of his adult life up to 1989. As for whether or not he "supported many communist ideas in his life" - why don't you discuss this where it belongs, i.e. in Adam Michnik? As long as you keep it NPOV, I am sure such information would be a good addition. I for one would be curious. "writing "the most radical" report is a POV, since one could state that the most radical report was the one that didn't found any group involved." I did not write "the most radical report", but "the most radical minority report", i.e. the minority report that departs most radically from the majority report. That is a difference. "Fourth-what you think of PO or PiS is your own private matter." I see, and what you think is the objective truth, right? "The fact remains that nobody is calling for complete purge of "left" or "liberals" but of corrupt cliques and informal relationship associated with this groups." So that is what constitutes a "Fourth Republic" then? "Besides you are rather misinformed as they are people with liberal outlook on society in PO, and it has distanced itself from many of PiS actions." Maybe there are, and I guess it depends on what you define as a "liberal outlook on society". The fact remains that PO is generally seen as an heir to the conservative AWS, and not to the liberal UW and if any single attribute describes them, it not liberal but conservative. "Thus your statement about the the supposed desire to purge Poland of left parties is only your personal view." If you consider the PO a "left party", then this speaks volumes on your own political position. Maybe that is what they teach you at Rydzyk University, but not many political scientists elsewhere will support that description. Anyway, I am digressing myself. Why don't we continue the discussion on Talk:Law and Justice? --Thorsten1 20:21, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

1.NIE is one of the leading newspapers, and has contributed to discovering affairs in landscape of politics in Poland. 2.Urban was involved in the affair, so the point stays. 3.It seems you are conviced I am somebody you knew before since the allegations about my support for Giertych, studying in Rydzyk university.You are confusing me with somebody else, whom I don't know. 4."the most radical minority report", i.e. the minority report that departs most radically from the majority report." Good then I shall use the phrase you use.The term "radical" is rather negative in the context. 5.Wikipedia's entry on Law and Justice describes it as centre right. 6.Again proove that somebody calls for purge of liberals and left parties rather then corrupt officials, groups and informal corrupt relationships and cliques.Your claims about the "purge" are simply POV. 7.Nobody of course called PO a left party, which you falsly accuse me of, but the fact that it includes people with liberal outlook on some social issues.Which doesn't mean that the person must belong to leftist party I am glad to inform you. 8. "I see, and what you think is the objective truth, right?" So far no purge of liberal and left has happened, and no such demands have been issued, thus it is your POV, and rather radical one. Molobo

Molobo, I am glad to see that your recent edit was somewhat more acceptable than the previous ones. Still, a number of problems remain.

"1.NIE is one of the leading newspapers, and has contributed to discovering affairs in landscape of politics in Poland." Urban's NIE is certainly not a "leading newspaper", but a nihilistic, vulgar special interest publication; its editor is a professional provocateur who relishes causing a stir. People who read it do so for the thrill, not because they consider it a serious source of information.

"2.Urban was involved in the affair, so the point stays." Fine, but how was he involved? You seem to make much of his dining with Michnik, but fail to explain his supposed role in the affair. There is plenty of documents to mine - the minutes of the Rywingate hearings are available at http://isip.sejm.gov.pl/KomSled.nsf/; the names Michnik and Urban occur in the same document four times [1]. The Michnik-Urban connection might be of interest to the article Adam Michnik, but vague allusions that appear to have nothing to do with the actual bribery scandal will have to be removed.

"3.It seems you are conviced I am somebody you knew before since the allegations about my support for Giertych, studying in Rydzyk university.You are confusing me with somebody else, whom I don't know." No, I am not mistaking you with anyone particular. I just can't help noticing that your arguing is very generic of a particular political POV associated with the Radio Maryja/Leage of Polish Families milieu. Your sympathetic edit of League of Polish Families last night tells me I am on the right scent.

4."the most radical minority report", i.e. the minority report that departs most radically from the majority report." Good then I shall use the phrase you use. Be my guest. "the minority report that was the most departed from the majority report" sounds awkward. "The term "radical" is rather negative in the context." No, it is absolutely neutral.

"5.Wikipedia's entry on Law and Justice describes it as centre right." These terms are, of course, highly relative. From the LPR's angle, even Law and Justice is left-wing. Law and Justice is clearly right of PO (as you yourself acknowledged), which can be described as centrist at best - many would rather consider them somewhat right-of-centre. Anyway, thanks for pointing me to the inaccuracy on Law and Justice - I shall see to that some time.

"6.Again proove that somebody calls for purge of liberals and left parties rather then corrupt officials, groups and informal corrupt relationships and cliques.Your claims about the "purge" are simply POV." Just peruse the public statements of Law and Justice's representatives; you will find much evidence of a simple, populist reduction of Polish society in terms of "us and them" (my i oni), where "they" are the enemy that needs to be purged in order to establish a Fourth Republic. Take this randomly selected statement in an interview with Law and Justice vice chairman Kazimierz Ujazdowski on the 1989 Round Table talks: "As it turned out, its purpose was to introduce a whole range of pathologies of communist origin; that is why the Round Table's anniversary may rightfully be of interest to Aleksander Kwaśniewski's camp" [2]. There you have it in a nutshell - the portrayal of the Third Republic as an inherently "pathological" political freak, the martial thinking in terms of "camps", according to which "Kwaśniewski's camp", including everyone from the post-communists to the liberal UW/PD stock (who you deny has an anti-communist background) is a morally corrupt clique. So Law and Justice's project is not simply about removing a few "corrupt officials", but about redefining Poland as a whole.

"7.Nobody of course called PO a left party, which you falsly accuse me of," I am not accusing you of anything. I simply intepreted this somewhat muddled statement of yours: "they are people with liberal outlook on society in PO [i.e., Law and Justice's prospective coalition partner, Citizens' Platform] [...]. Thus your statement about the the supposed desire to purge Poland of left parties is only your personal view." If these two sentences are not meant to characterise PO as a "left party", what are they supposed to mean?

8. "So far no purge of liberal and left has happened." Obviously not, but then Law and Justice is not in power yet, so they have not yet been obliged to live up to their populist slogans. And, of course, I wouldn't call Lech Kaczyński's banning the Warsaw equivalent of the Christopher Street Day, while at the same time approving a counter-demonstration by the right-wing hate-group Młodzież Wszechpolska, a "purge". But it is a clear indication of things to come should Law and Justice emerge as the strongest political force from the 2005 Sejm election. If you can come up with a word that describes Law and Justice's proposals for Poland more neutrally and equally concise as "purge", I will certainly not object. "and no such demands have been issued" - see above. Anyway, these are interesting topics to discuss in Law and Justice - not here, where Law and Justice only gets a passing reference. --Thorsten1 10:43, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

Thorsten wiki is for presenting facts.Your personal views about Law and Justice or Mlodziez Wszechpolska are of no importance here.--Molobo 01:54, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

removing POV tag with no active discussion per Template:POV

I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:

This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:

1. There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
2. It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
3. In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.

Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 00:36, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Shuttup you smarmy little turd — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.231.115.40 (talk) 09:39, 3 June 2014 (UTC)