This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Is it time to consider boycotting a country and a government that is using violence and intimidation against the citizens of Catalonia?
5
1
In reply to alastairmac:
Probably best to ask the Catalonians. I'd be interested in hearing what the majority who were against independence have to say.
Probably best to ask the Catalonians. I'd be interested in hearing what the majority who were against independence have to say.
2
3
In reply to Removed User:
I gather that regardless of their views on independence over 70% of Catalonian voters ( both pro and anti independence ) wanted to hold a referendum and exercise their democratic right to do so. I think the issue is one of democracy not independence. Is there any defence for a state battering and terrorising its citizens for wanting to vote?
I gather that regardless of their views on independence over 70% of Catalonian voters ( both pro and anti independence ) wanted to hold a referendum and exercise their democratic right to do so. I think the issue is one of democracy not independence. Is there any defence for a state battering and terrorising its citizens for wanting to vote?
Post edited at 21:09
16
1
In reply to alastairmac:
Like I said I'd like to hear both sides of the story.
Aren't you surprised that there has been no coverage of the majority view?
..and no I'm not going to change the subject.
Like I said I'd like to hear both sides of the story.
Aren't you surprised that there has been no coverage of the majority view?
..and no I'm not going to change the subject.
1
1
In reply to Removed User:
I think any decision on independence is a matter for Catalonian voters. The refusal of the Spanish government to let them exercise their right to vote, and the brutal treatment of those that are defending that right, is surely a matter for all of us that believe in democracy?
I think any decision on independence is a matter for Catalonian voters. The refusal of the Spanish government to let them exercise their right to vote, and the brutal treatment of those that are defending that right, is surely a matter for all of us that believe in democracy?
11
1
In reply to Removed User:
Why do you think the majority do not now want independence? The only major poll I am aware of was in July when remain was backed 49% to 41%.
Do you think that is still the case after the last week?
Why do you think the majority do not now want independence? The only major poll I am aware of was in July when remain was backed 49% to 41%.
Do you think that is still the case after the last week?
6
1
In reply to Removed User:
I suspect the ones who were battered by the police for turning up to vote would have quite a lot to say.
> Probably best to ask the Catalonians. I'd be interested in hearing what the majority who were against independence have to say.
I suspect the ones who were battered by the police for turning up to vote would have quite a lot to say.
9
1
In reply to alastairmac:
I was doorstepped by Catalan TV on the eve of the last election to ask what I thought about Corbyn, May, Brexit and Indyref2. I got in a good chat with the reporter re Scot and Cat independence and she said that there was probably a small majority in Catalunya who wanted to stay with Spain, but that "everyone" really wanted a referendum as soon as possible to clear the matter up.
> I gather that regardless of their views on independence over 70% of Catalonian voters ( both pro and anti independence ) wanted to hold a referendum and exercise their democratic right to do so.
I was doorstepped by Catalan TV on the eve of the last election to ask what I thought about Corbyn, May, Brexit and Indyref2. I got in a good chat with the reporter re Scot and Cat independence and she said that there was probably a small majority in Catalunya who wanted to stay with Spain, but that "everyone" really wanted a referendum as soon as possible to clear the matter up.
4
In reply to alastairmac:
The thing is they don’t have a right to a referendum independence. The constitution specifically protects the unity of the Spanish nation.
The Rajoy government should have seen this coming and have negotiated terms on which a referendum could be offered. But that would have opened the door to a basque referendum, a Galician referendum etc. Not to mention - perhaps more importantly - being deeply unpopular with the right wing of his supporters. And a lot of Spaniards who aren’t all that right wing too.
The thing is they don’t have a right to a referendum independence. The constitution specifically protects the unity of the Spanish nation.
The Rajoy government should have seen this coming and have negotiated terms on which a referendum could be offered. But that would have opened the door to a basque referendum, a Galician referendum etc. Not to mention - perhaps more importantly - being deeply unpopular with the right wing of his supporters. And a lot of Spaniards who aren’t all that right wing too.
3
1
In reply to Bob Hughes:
Much as I'm appalled by the nature of the violence used around the time of the vote, I'm not sure the Catalan leaders are doing their people any favours. There is almost zero chance that an independent Catalonia would ever get widespread international recognition and pushing the Spanish government into such a difficult position so quickly seems sure to backfire in terms of achieving renegotiated amicable terms of autonomy any time soon. Certainly seems like the government should have been quicker to head the situation off but I really can't see those with strong hopes for genuine secession in Catalonia ending up anything but disappointed.
Much as I'm appalled by the nature of the violence used around the time of the vote, I'm not sure the Catalan leaders are doing their people any favours. There is almost zero chance that an independent Catalonia would ever get widespread international recognition and pushing the Spanish government into such a difficult position so quickly seems sure to backfire in terms of achieving renegotiated amicable terms of autonomy any time soon. Certainly seems like the government should have been quicker to head the situation off but I really can't see those with strong hopes for genuine secession in Catalonia ending up anything but disappointed.
8
1
In reply to Bob Hughes:
I think you'll find the Charter of the the United Nations enshrines the "rights of all peoples to freely determine their political status". Surely if a nation of 7 million citizens want to vote on their political status it's wrong on any level to denny that by force. That can only end badly.
I think you'll find the Charter of the the United Nations enshrines the "rights of all peoples to freely determine their political status". Surely if a nation of 7 million citizens want to vote on their political status it's wrong on any level to denny that by force. That can only end badly.
7
In reply to Removed User:
We don't know the majority view, 90% of those who voted, voted in favour of independence, however with voter turnout around 45%, at in part because of the confiscation of ballots and intimidation and violence by the state directed at voters, we don't know what the majority view is. I was in Catalonia last week, I saw plenty of flags and bill posters, heard a few songs, but all was peaceful, until they tried to vote. I heard a range of views, although the vast majority in favour of the vote and a majority of those in favour of independence, of course that was a small sample of people in Barcelona and Girona and may not have been representative, so what is the majority view, a free and open vote may have found that out.
We don't know the majority view, 90% of those who voted, voted in favour of independence, however with voter turnout around 45%, at in part because of the confiscation of ballots and intimidation and violence by the state directed at voters, we don't know what the majority view is. I was in Catalonia last week, I saw plenty of flags and bill posters, heard a few songs, but all was peaceful, until they tried to vote. I heard a range of views, although the vast majority in favour of the vote and a majority of those in favour of independence, of course that was a small sample of people in Barcelona and Girona and may not have been representative, so what is the majority view, a free and open vote may have found that out.
5
In reply to Bob Hughes:
The english language wiki entry for the Spanish Constitution does a good job at explaining how it tries to juggle Spain's unity with the communities' self-governance, and even touches on one of the ain events that started the chain reaction that led to last Sunday's referendum and how the whole thing is a legal minefield. Worth a read.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_Constitution_of_1978
And further reading https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statute_of_Autonomy_of_Catalonia
> The thing is they don’t have a right to a referendum independence. The constitution specifically protects the unity of the Spanish nation.
The english language wiki entry for the Spanish Constitution does a good job at explaining how it tries to juggle Spain's unity with the communities' self-governance, and even touches on one of the ain events that started the chain reaction that led to last Sunday's referendum and how the whole thing is a legal minefield. Worth a read.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_Constitution_of_1978
And further reading https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statute_of_Autonomy_of_Catalonia
1
In reply to Removed User:
One can talk about more than one thing in parallel, no?
> Like I said I'd like to hear both sides of the story.
> Aren't you surprised that there has been no coverage of the majority view?
> ..and no I'm not going to change the subject.
> Aren't you surprised that there has been no coverage of the majority view?
> ..and no I'm not going to change the subject.
One can talk about more than one thing in parallel, no?
1
2
In reply to alastairmac:
The level of violence was very low, I've seen worse in the UK.
There's a large element of people crying wolf over this, which is the aim of the separatists.
So a boycott by the British? Just ridiculous pompous posery.
> Is there any defence for a state battering and terrorising its citizens for wanting to vote?
The level of violence was very low, I've seen worse in the UK.
There's a large element of people crying wolf over this, which is the aim of the separatists.
So a boycott by the British? Just ridiculous pompous posery.
1
14
In reply to alastairmac:
That's the "Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples". It's not a free pass for spliting countries, but more specifically for "Trust and Non-Self-Governing Territories", i.e. Colonies, and it's introduced with:
Recognizing that the peoples of the world ardently desire the end of colonialism in all its manifestations,
Convinced that the continued existence of colonialism prevents the development of international economic co-operation, impedes the social, cultural and economic development of dependent peoples and militates against the United Nations ideal of universal peace,
Affirming that peoples may, for their own ends, freely dispose of their natural wealth and resources without prejudice to any obligations arising out of international economic co-operation, based upon the principle of mutual benefit, and international law,
Believing that the process of liberation is irresistible and irreversible and that, in order to avoid serious crises, an end must be put to colonialism and all practices of segregation and discrimination associated therewith,
Welcoming the emergence in recent years of a large number of dependent territories into freedom and independence, and recognizing the increasingly powerful trends towards freedom in such territories which have not yet attained independence,
Convinced that all peoples have an inalienable right to complete freedom, the exercise of their sovereignty and the integrity of their national territory,
Solemnly proclaims the necessity of bringing to a speedy and unconditional end colonialism in all its forms and manifestations;
And to this end Declares that:
> I think you'll find the Charter of the the United Nations enshrines the "rights of all peoples to freely determine their political status".
That's the "Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples". It's not a free pass for spliting countries, but more specifically for "Trust and Non-Self-Governing Territories", i.e. Colonies, and it's introduced with:
Recognizing that the peoples of the world ardently desire the end of colonialism in all its manifestations,
Convinced that the continued existence of colonialism prevents the development of international economic co-operation, impedes the social, cultural and economic development of dependent peoples and militates against the United Nations ideal of universal peace,
Affirming that peoples may, for their own ends, freely dispose of their natural wealth and resources without prejudice to any obligations arising out of international economic co-operation, based upon the principle of mutual benefit, and international law,
Believing that the process of liberation is irresistible and irreversible and that, in order to avoid serious crises, an end must be put to colonialism and all practices of segregation and discrimination associated therewith,
Welcoming the emergence in recent years of a large number of dependent territories into freedom and independence, and recognizing the increasingly powerful trends towards freedom in such territories which have not yet attained independence,
Convinced that all peoples have an inalienable right to complete freedom, the exercise of their sovereignty and the integrity of their national territory,
Solemnly proclaims the necessity of bringing to a speedy and unconditional end colonialism in all its forms and manifestations;
And to this end Declares that:
1
In reply to Removed User:
I would phrase it, I'd be interested in hearing what the majority who did not vote have to say. People may not have voted because overwhelmingly the signs where for yes (I travelled extensively through Catalunya, and Sí was everywhere) so maybe the majority who were for independence, and thought they did not need to vote. The reality is we will never know. Only those who vote have a voice in a democracy. So the lesson is vote or what you think is irrelevant.
> I'd be interested in hearing what the majority who were against independence have to say.
I would phrase it, I'd be interested in hearing what the majority who did not vote have to say. People may not have voted because overwhelmingly the signs where for yes (I travelled extensively through Catalunya, and Sí was everywhere) so maybe the majority who were for independence, and thought they did not need to vote. The reality is we will never know. Only those who vote have a voice in a democracy. So the lesson is vote or what you think is irrelevant.
Post edited at 22:39
1
In reply to winhill:
What kind of parallel universe are you living in? Over 800 civilians required hospital treatment as a result of the police action. But you've seen worse in the UK? Aye right.
What kind of parallel universe are you living in? Over 800 civilians required hospital treatment as a result of the police action. But you've seen worse in the UK? Aye right.
16
In reply to winhill:
That'll by why 800 people needed hospital treatment after meeting the Spanish police?
youtube.com/watch?v=APsHNIrS7-s&
See here, at police jumping onto people on the ground, and dragging them by their hair and similar, and you call it very low?
> The level of violence was very low.
That'll by why 800 people needed hospital treatment after meeting the Spanish police?
youtube.com/watch?v=APsHNIrS7-s&
See here, at police jumping onto people on the ground, and dragging them by their hair and similar, and you call it very low?
Post edited at 23:04
7
In reply to winhill:
where in the UK exactly ? the cinema ?
> The level of violence was very low, I've seen worse in the UK.
where in the UK exactly ? the cinema ?
12
In reply to Stichtplate:
Orgreave or Wapping maybe, I can't think of anything in the last 20 years.
> where in the UK exactly ? the cinema ?
Orgreave or Wapping maybe, I can't think of anything in the last 20 years.
In reply to The New NickB:
In the same ballpark maybe, but it was good while ago and the police didn't deploy baton rounds.
Edit: and IIRC nowhere near 800 casualties.
In the same ballpark maybe, but it was good while ago and the police didn't deploy baton rounds.
Edit: and IIRC nowhere near 800 casualties.
Post edited at 22:57
3
In reply to Stichtplate:
Both were brutal, Orgreave particularly so, but I am agreeing with you. A time we have thankfully left behind. In both cases the government response was disproportionate, but they were doing a lot more than just trying to vote.
> In the same ballpark maybe, but it was good while ago and the police didn't deploy baton rounds.
> Edit: and IIRC nowhere near 800 casualties.
Both were brutal, Orgreave particularly so, but I am agreeing with you. A time we have thankfully left behind. In both cases the government response was disproportionate, but they were doing a lot more than just trying to vote.
3
In reply to alastairmac:
The Cornish have certain rights protected under this;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Framework_Convention_for_the_Protection_of_Na...
The Cornish have certain rights protected under this;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Framework_Convention_for_the_Protection_of_Na...
In reply to Stichtplate:
Battle of Bogside 1969ish. Is probably the most recent similar episode in UK.
Or Bloody Sunday 1971.
Happily we don't seem to go in for that sort of thing now.
Battle of Bogside 1969ish. Is probably the most recent similar episode in UK.
Or Bloody Sunday 1971.
Happily we don't seem to go in for that sort of thing now.
Post edited at 23:07
1
4
In reply to rogerwebb:
Christ, thats going back, just how historical are we getting here ?
Winhill's original, dubious statement was that he'd seen worse violence in the UK. I doubt that he was in Derry 50 years ago.
> Battle of Bogside 1969ish.
Christ, thats going back, just how historical are we getting here ?
Winhill's original, dubious statement was that he'd seen worse violence in the UK. I doubt that he was in Derry 50 years ago.
6
In reply to Stichtplate:
The other dubious statement is that the level of violence in Catalonia was very low, one only needs to see the pictures of middle aged women with bloodied faces and similar.
> Christ, thats going back, just how historical are we getting here ?
> Winhill's original, dubious statement was that he'd seen worse violence in the UK. I doubt that he was in Derry 50 years ago.
The other dubious statement is that the level of violence in Catalonia was very low, one only needs to see the pictures of middle aged women with bloodied faces and similar.
Post edited at 23:21
3
In reply to Big Ger:
What are you on about ? The only people denying rights to people from Cornwall are people from Devon.
oh, and welcome back.
> The Cornish have certain rights protected under this;
What are you on about ? The only people denying rights to people from Cornwall are people from Devon.
oh, and welcome back.
1
In reply to Stichtplate:
Winhill's comment is crass and belittles the appalling use of violence to prevent voting (whether legal or not) in 21st century Europe.
It is though worth remembering that in recent history (memory for me) our own government has been capable of such ill judged behaviour.
Winhill's comment is crass and belittles the appalling use of violence to prevent voting (whether legal or not) in 21st century Europe.
It is though worth remembering that in recent history (memory for me) our own government has been capable of such ill judged behaviour.
7
In reply to alastairmac:
Just on a point of accuracy, the “over 800” number refers to people who have been seen by doctors. That could be anything from a splinter to losing an eye to a rubber bullet. Only 4 people were actually admitted to hospital, two of those minor and two serious (the rubber bullet victim was one of the serious cases). So the over 800 number does seem to overstate the seriousness.
> What kind of parallel universe are you living in? Over 800 civilians required hospital treatment as a result of the police action.
Just on a point of accuracy, the “over 800” number refers to people who have been seen by doctors. That could be anything from a splinter to losing an eye to a rubber bullet. Only 4 people were actually admitted to hospital, two of those minor and two serious (the rubber bullet victim was one of the serious cases). So the over 800 number does seem to overstate the seriousness.
3
In reply to Bob Hughes:
thank god for written constitutions say I
> The thing is they don’t have a right to a referendum independence. The constitution specifically protects the unity of the Spanish nation.
thank god for written constitutions say I
1
In reply to alastairmac:
Well, the Police claimed 400 on their side 'injured', but yes I've experienced worse and friends have experienced much worse in the UK.
I used to go to a lot of demos in the 80s, The Miner's Strike, Greenham, CND demos, Stop the City, Bash the Rich, Stop the Poll Tax, saw a few and was involved in a few running battles with the Police. As a lad I got caught up in the 1981 riots, the Police responded by unleashing the dogs and letting them go in first. A local Labour councillor got savaged by a police dog and was set to sue. Then a picture emerged of him holding a brick in his hand, against a backdrop of smashed and burning shops, so he could get charged with rioting. He claimed, with a straight face, that he was moving it out of the road for safety reasons and both sides let the matter drop.
It's easy to think it wouldn't happen in the UK but that's because it already has. Our democracy is supposed to be 500 years old and Spain's is not even 50, so yes we've recently learned some lessons but at that rate of development they're doing better than us.
> What kind of parallel universe are you living in? Over 800 civilians required hospital treatment as a result of the police action. But you've seen worse in the UK? Aye right.
Well, the Police claimed 400 on their side 'injured', but yes I've experienced worse and friends have experienced much worse in the UK.
I used to go to a lot of demos in the 80s, The Miner's Strike, Greenham, CND demos, Stop the City, Bash the Rich, Stop the Poll Tax, saw a few and was involved in a few running battles with the Police. As a lad I got caught up in the 1981 riots, the Police responded by unleashing the dogs and letting them go in first. A local Labour councillor got savaged by a police dog and was set to sue. Then a picture emerged of him holding a brick in his hand, against a backdrop of smashed and burning shops, so he could get charged with rioting. He claimed, with a straight face, that he was moving it out of the road for safety reasons and both sides let the matter drop.
It's easy to think it wouldn't happen in the UK but that's because it already has. Our democracy is supposed to be 500 years old and Spain's is not even 50, so yes we've recently learned some lessons but at that rate of development they're doing better than us.
1
6
In reply to rogerwebb:
What rubbish, no one in Spain was shocked by the bit of police violence, it's reportage.
> Winhill's comment is crass and belittles the appalling use of violence to prevent voting (whether legal or not) in 21st century Europe.
What rubbish, no one in Spain was shocked by the bit of police violence, it's reportage.
9
In reply to alastairmac:
Catalonia isn't a nation.
> I think you'll find the Charter of the the United Nations enshrines the "rights of all peoples to freely determine their political status". Surely if a nation of 7 million citizens want to vote on their political status it's wrong on any level to denny that by force. That can only end badly.
Catalonia isn't a nation.
7
In reply to winhill:
Sounds like a bit of good old fashioned police brutality didn't do you any harm.
Sounds like a bit of good old fashioned police brutality didn't do you any harm.
2
2
In reply to winhill:
Balderdash. One might ask my Spanish teacher's relatives in Spain.
> What rubbish, no one in Spain was shocked by the bit of police violence, it's reportage.
Balderdash. One might ask my Spanish teacher's relatives in Spain.
Post edited at 00:32
In reply to baron:
Responding to provocation with violence and strengthening the position of those who oppose the government. Polarising the debate, undercutting the centre ground and the possibility of compromise, ceding control of the situation to extremists (on all sides).
Responding to provocation with violence and strengthening the position of those who oppose the government. Polarising the debate, undercutting the centre ground and the possibility of compromise, ceding control of the situation to extremists (on all sides).
Post edited at 00:40
1
In reply to Timmd:
It's just not true, it's Trump/Corbyn era fake news.
It's utter rubbish.
Why are people like you crying over it so much?
> That'll by why 800 people needed hospital treatment after meeting the Spanish police?
It's just not true, it's Trump/Corbyn era fake news.
It's utter rubbish.
Why are people like you crying over it so much?
1
9
In reply to winhill:
where as your views are based on exhaustive research and empirical evidence of course.
> It's just not true, it's Trump/Corbyn era fake news.
> It's utter rubbish.
where as your views are based on exhaustive research and empirical evidence of course.
3
In reply to winhill:
Can you prove what you claim? From my posts on here, you've hopefully noticed that I'm always happy to be proven wrong, and that I don't mind admitting if I am. It's a way of learning something new.
So go ahead, post whatever it is which makes you say it's fake news. If one is wrong, it's always best to know, and know how and why.
I'm sure everybody wants to see your posts explaining why it isn't true, with sources and evidence. I'm pretty curious.
> It's just not true, it's Trump/Corbyn era fake news.
> It's utter rubbish.
> It's utter rubbish.
Can you prove what you claim? From my posts on here, you've hopefully noticed that I'm always happy to be proven wrong, and that I don't mind admitting if I am. It's a way of learning something new.
So go ahead, post whatever it is which makes you say it's fake news. If one is wrong, it's always best to know, and know how and why.
I'm sure everybody wants to see your posts explaining why it isn't true, with sources and evidence. I'm pretty curious.
Post edited at 01:15
3
2
In reply to Stichtplate:
"On Monday, the Catalan health service issued several documents in Catalan, French, and English admitting that the figure of 893 represents people “who have been seen by doctors.” It's clear that just because someone sees a doctor does not mean that they are hurt or sick.
In total, four people were admitted into hospitals for treatment, two with minor conditions and two in serious condition. One man was hit by a rubber bullet in the eye, surely fired by the Civil Guard or the National Police, because the Catalan police do not have this equipment. The other is a man who suffered a heart attack during one of the police interventions.
On Tuesday, a woman claimed the police had broken several of her fingers. Her story led Pep Guardiola, the Manchester City soccer team coach, to speak out: “They broke one woman’s fingers. There were over 700 people injured, people who went to cast a vote, not to rob a bank!” The broken fingers turned out to be inflammation in one finger, as she herself has since admitted. Doctors have prescribed three days of rest."
> where as your views are based on exhaustive research and empirical evidence of course.
"On Monday, the Catalan health service issued several documents in Catalan, French, and English admitting that the figure of 893 represents people “who have been seen by doctors.” It's clear that just because someone sees a doctor does not mean that they are hurt or sick.
In total, four people were admitted into hospitals for treatment, two with minor conditions and two in serious condition. One man was hit by a rubber bullet in the eye, surely fired by the Civil Guard or the National Police, because the Catalan police do not have this equipment. The other is a man who suffered a heart attack during one of the police interventions.
On Tuesday, a woman claimed the police had broken several of her fingers. Her story led Pep Guardiola, the Manchester City soccer team coach, to speak out: “They broke one woman’s fingers. There were over 700 people injured, people who went to cast a vote, not to rob a bank!” The broken fingers turned out to be inflammation in one finger, as she herself has since admitted. Doctors have prescribed three days of rest."
7
In reply to winhill:
Can you post the document up? You don't say whether this is people who went to the doctors as a result of being involved with 'meeting' the Spanish police (or not), or whether everybody who saw the doctor not being hurt or sick, is something you've added as an extra to make things seem less serious (to support your claim that it's Trump era fake news).
It's quite common for it to not become clear straight away that a finger (or other body part) isn't broken at first, and just bruised. What about the 700 injuries?
I'm thinking that the lack of clarity isn't 'spin' in the Trump sense, but more the result of a period of chaotic events. I'd go as far to suggest that calling it 'Trump era fake news', when the reality is that it's quite plausibly simply just the result of confusion, could itself quite reasonably be called spin. Spin in the Trump sense, even.
Don't do yourself, what you're accusing others of doing, it undermines your credibility.
Please provide links....
> "On Monday, the Catalan health service issued several documents in Catalan, French, and English admitting that the figure of 893 represents people “who have been seen by doctors.” It's clear that just because someone sees a doctor does not mean that they are hurt or sick.
Can you post the document up? You don't say whether this is people who went to the doctors as a result of being involved with 'meeting' the Spanish police (or not), or whether everybody who saw the doctor not being hurt or sick, is something you've added as an extra to make things seem less serious (to support your claim that it's Trump era fake news).
> In total, four people were admitted into hospitals for treatment, two with minor conditions and two in serious condition. One man was hit by a rubber bullet in the eye, surely fired by the Civil Guard or the National Police, because the Catalan police do not have this equipment. The other is a man who suffered a heart attack during one of the police interventions.
> On Tuesday, a woman claimed the police had broken several of her fingers. Her story led Pep Guardiola, the Manchester City soccer team coach, to speak out: “They broke one woman’s fingers. There were over 700 people injured, people who went to cast a vote, not to rob a bank!” The broken fingers turned out to be inflammation in one finger, as she herself has since admitted. Doctors have prescribed three days of rest."
It's quite common for it to not become clear straight away that a finger (or other body part) isn't broken at first, and just bruised. What about the 700 injuries?
I'm thinking that the lack of clarity isn't 'spin' in the Trump sense, but more the result of a period of chaotic events. I'd go as far to suggest that calling it 'Trump era fake news', when the reality is that it's quite plausibly simply just the result of confusion, could itself quite reasonably be called spin. Spin in the Trump sense, even.
Don't do yourself, what you're accusing others of doing, it undermines your credibility.
Please provide links....
Post edited at 01:48
6
In reply to Chris Harris:
I think whether or not Catalonia is a nation is a matter for the Catalan people don't you? Who else can claim with any validity to be able to grant and define nationhood?
I think whether or not Catalonia is a nation is a matter for the Catalan people don't you? Who else can claim with any validity to be able to grant and define nationhood?
2
In reply to winhill:
To gain a sense of perspective on foreign events I'll often try to imagine them them happening over here. So, try to picture the SNP unilaterally announcing indy ref 2 and the UK government shipping tens of thousands of English police North of the border, closely followed by footage of English riot squads storming polling stations across Scotland, fighting uniformed Scottish fireman and firing baton rounds into crowds of protesters.
you say that the events in Catalonia aren't shocking and that you've seen worse over here. I say that's bollocks.
To gain a sense of perspective on foreign events I'll often try to imagine them them happening over here. So, try to picture the SNP unilaterally announcing indy ref 2 and the UK government shipping tens of thousands of English police North of the border, closely followed by footage of English riot squads storming polling stations across Scotland, fighting uniformed Scottish fireman and firing baton rounds into crowds of protesters.
you say that the events in Catalonia aren't shocking and that you've seen worse over here. I say that's bollocks.
12
In reply to Chris Harris:
The crucial issue is that this is a matter of opinion and debate (but hopefully not conflict).
That's often the case at the period a nation is created.
Just like the US, Slovenia, Croatia, Baltic states etc were not a legally recognised nation until they broke the law and decided to become one.
> Catalonia isn't a nation.
The crucial issue is that this is a matter of opinion and debate (but hopefully not conflict).
That's often the case at the period a nation is created.
Just like the US, Slovenia, Croatia, Baltic states etc were not a legally recognised nation until they broke the law and decided to become one.
Post edited at 09:05
5
1
1
In reply to Bob Hughes:
Maybe they could have had an advisory referendum, they can be ignored in the event of a close result...
> The thing is they don’t have a right to a referendum independence. The constitution specifically protects the unity of the Spanish nation.
> The Rajoy government should have seen this coming and have negotiated terms on which a referendum could be offered. But that would have opened the door to a basque referendum, a Galician referendum etc. Not to mention - perhaps more importantly - being deeply unpopular with the right wing of his supporters. And a lot of Spaniards who aren’t all that right wing too.
Maybe they could have had an advisory referendum, they can be ignored in the event of a close result...
1
In reply to Stichtplate:
I've shared some of my experience of police in the UK, if the best you can do is bollocks then that was a waste of time.
> you say that the events in Catalonia aren't shocking and that you've seen worse over here. I say that's bollocks.
I've shared some of my experience of police in the UK, if the best you can do is bollocks then that was a waste of time.
8
In reply to Timmd:
Not overly critical, just more hysteria.
Try not to focus on right or wrong, numbers of injuries etc, just try to recognise when the hysteria comes on and turn away from it.
> In hindsight, the tone of my post was overly critical in places.
Not overly critical, just more hysteria.
Try not to focus on right or wrong, numbers of injuries etc, just try to recognise when the hysteria comes on and turn away from it.
5
In reply to winhill:
There's nothing like graciously accepting an apology....?
The figures of the numbers injured may be hard to define, and over stated even as a result of chaotic circumstances, but the 'actions' of the Spanish police are less debatable. If one looks, there is footage of women with bloodied faces, having their hair tugged as well as their arms to remove them from sitting on the ground, and police actually jumping onto people who are sitting on the ground, and seeming to actually relish it.
It could seem that the level of violence and the number of injuries, are two different things.
That is, a group of baton waving police charging into a group of civilians, with only a small number of injuries, would still count as a high level of violence.
> Not overly critical, just more hysteria.
There's nothing like graciously accepting an apology....?
> Try not to focus on right or wrong, numbers of injuries etc, just try to recognise when the hysteria comes on and turn away from it.
The figures of the numbers injured may be hard to define, and over stated even as a result of chaotic circumstances, but the 'actions' of the Spanish police are less debatable. If one looks, there is footage of women with bloodied faces, having their hair tugged as well as their arms to remove them from sitting on the ground, and police actually jumping onto people who are sitting on the ground, and seeming to actually relish it.
It could seem that the level of violence and the number of injuries, are two different things.
That is, a group of baton waving police charging into a group of civilians, with only a small number of injuries, would still count as a high level of violence.
Post edited at 10:53
3
1
In reply to alastairmac:
The only parallel l can draw is if the Cornish wanted a vote in independence.
Whether the result would be legally binding or not is almost irrelevant. Would we expect the police to behave similarly? Let's perhaps ask Offduty.
If l saw people being treated that way by our UK forces for doing something peaceful, I'd be tempted to pick up arms and stand with them, and l'm hardly an anarchist.
Disgusting and very difficult to watch.
The only parallel l can draw is if the Cornish wanted a vote in independence.
Whether the result would be legally binding or not is almost irrelevant. Would we expect the police to behave similarly? Let's perhaps ask Offduty.
If l saw people being treated that way by our UK forces for doing something peaceful, I'd be tempted to pick up arms and stand with them, and l'm hardly an anarchist.
Disgusting and very difficult to watch.
5
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Elsewhere on the site
Loading Notifications...