Onuco, onuco! What a woman you are

piknik-na-skraju-glupoty.blogspot.com 1 year ago

The following text, as announced in my last Loud Text, will be devoted entirely to an article by Zuzanna Dąbrowska, which was published on the portal “To Things”. The title of the article was of the species selfexplantors: "Conservatives or Russia. Suchanov 'connects dots'. As shortly as I saw this title, it became apparent to me that we were dealing with a answer to an article by Clementina Suchanov, which appeared on Oneta on 22 March. It is, of course, an article entitled "Antiabortional global under Kremlin. We uncover the emails of the group where Ordo Iuris operates”. The article was very extended and explained what it is, in fact, Agenda Europe and where it came from.

In another words, the article by Zuzanna Dąbrowska was to be something like a debunk. And at this point, we come to the first thing that I thought about in the context of this article. Well, the article is hidden behind Paywall. If we look at it through the prism of the peasant's right-wing mind, it's a small pointless. Since this article was to be a debunker, at least in the author's founding (and the portal to Things itself) it should be crucial for him to scope the widest possible audience to “disable” all the false things that Clementina Suchanov wrote about.

I had any suspicions after reading the article (because it was already very dense), but the answer to the question "why hide a debunk behind a paywall" was obtained only after reading the full thing. Not to keep you in suspense any longer: the article is written in a tragic way (even if we consider the fact that it appeared in the pages “To the Thing”). Most likely, individual came to the conclusion that if he was hidden behind the paywall, he would only scope those who would not question what was written there. I mean, nobody's gonna want to spend money just so they can bully the article, right? Well, not exactly. Yeah, but it's just a digression, let's get to the article.

For a while, I wondered how I would mention to this article, and I concluded that I did not gotta beat the paywall to compose a brief summary now, so it would look like I would choose quotes that impressed me (and there are plenty of them) and I would mention to each of them.

Let's start with the lead: “The mysterious connections, Kremlin, Catholic fundamentalism – Clementina Suchanov continues the crusade against the Ordo Iuris Institute.”

This is the thesis that will be in the article constantly changing. Well, there's this cool Ordo Iuris who takes care of his Ordo Iurisic activities, and this mean and terrible Clementine Suchanov has gotten into them and invents any uninvented stories about them.

"Antiabortional global under Kremlin. We uncover the e-mails of the group in which Ordo Iuris operates" – the text under the so-sounding title published the Onet portal in March. At the same time, a series of akin articles, devoted to another conservation and pro-life organizations, on the mailing list of Agenda Europe, appeared in abroad media."

We've read so much about the global event under the Kremlin, and these are just any conservative organizations that have been on the Agenda Europe mailing list. It's not a sin and nothing terrible, is it?

"The thesis contained in the text of Suchanov is simply a consequence of the cooperation of respective European services. Apart from Onet, they were Swedish Dagens ETC, Dutch De Groene Amsterdammer, Croatian Novosti, and openDemocracy from the UK. The second was funded by the George Soros Open Society Foundation. According to the donor list for the year 2022, the British journalistic collective has earned a million, 255 1000 dollars."

Ah, yeah, we all knew that Soros was behind everything. most likely a complete case, virtually the same defence strategy (after the Suchanov article appeared on Onet) was adopted by Jerzy Kwaśniewski. The Chronicle's work is to mention that in the position of editor from “To Things” I would not enter into an argument about who is backing whom, due to the fact that individual malicious might remind that a average in which the editor (the editor, after all, Zuzanna Dąbrowska is 100% disgusted with feminists) Dąbrowska is produced in an unmerciful way on public money under the regulation of the United Right. Okay, but what precisely is Agenda Europe?

Mr. George and the argumentum ad Sorosum.

The title “anti-abortion international” is simply a contact and information network established in 2013, comprising anti-abortion organisations from around the world. In addition to abortion, those active in Agenda Europe opposed the sanctioning of "single-sex marriages" and the affirming of those referred to as transgender."

From this description, Agenda Europe is simply specified a typically conservative organization (and I apologize, the “contact and information network”), not besides different from the conservative organizations we are dealing with in our country, right? Now we will decision on to a more extended quote, which (in conjunction with what we could read in Dąbrowska's article) is simply a tiny work of art.

"However, these issues were in the foreground. AE was initiated after a gathering in London, attended by anti-abortion leaders from North America and Europe. The aim was to make a European think tank that promoted Christian values. At the beginning of the operation of the Agenda Europe Peadar O’Scolai of the Irish household & Life organization, it was intended to ask participants to specify "real to accomplish the goals of the pro-life movement", and the Australian Conservative activist Gudrun Kugler was to stress the request for a "development of a pan-European squad to advance Christian values", noting that "there is no expert environment in Europe to analyse current trends, to make responses, arguments, alternatives and definitions". She pointed out that "the implementation of specified complex issues is left to non-governmental organisations or legislators", which deprives the majority of Christians (often silent) inactive in many countries."

I just love this right-wing manner that practically all utmost right-winger speaks for a silent majority. This is, by the way, a very convenient argument. due to the fact that this silent majority can be attributed to any utmost views. In Poland it works on a more or little specified principle: most Poles declare themselves believers. Despite this, highly murderous ideas from spiritual circles (an abortion ban, an in vitro/etc ban) do not find many supporters. How is that possible? Well, it's just that most people who identify as believers don't identify with spiritual fundamentalists and their ideas. This is what the classical would call “obvious obvious”. However, right-wingers (mostly extremes) offer us a completely different explanation. Well, this deficiency of loud support for specified or another ideas is not due to the fact that most believers do not support them, but due to the fact that most believers simply refuse to admit that they do not support them. In another words, support is, but quiet. Why? Why? due to the fact that that's the silent majority. If a akin argument were utilized by anyone else (conjectually: having nothing to do with the right) would be ridiculed. due to the fact that practically only the right uses it – everyone just nods their heads and doesn't want to get into details, due to the fact that as you know in details, the devil lives.

Incidentally, if you've started to think about what the Australian conservative activist was actually doing in this company, then you can halt wondering, due to the fact that Mrs. Gudrun Kugler is Austrian (I find it comic that this mistake appeared not only in the portal version of the article, but besides in the 1 that was thrown into the weekly magazine, seemingly not only GW has problems with correction).

But the spectacularness of this passage does not end there. virtually before (in the article this is virtually the same paragraph) we could read that Agenda Europe is specified ‘contact and information network’. Immediately after that, Dąbrowska begins to explain that the people active in organizing the AE were to embrace a pan-European think tank which would set “real to accomplish the goals of the pro-life movement” and which would in parallel be an environment to deal with, paraphrase a certain “Australian” activist: "fulfilling complex issues". I think we all agree on the fact that this is, to put it mildly, a colossal contradiction. The contradiction which can be referred to as the concrete rescue wheel, cast by Ordo Iuris and Jerzy Kwasniewski. Let us conclude with this peculiar passage, due to the fact that we have yet another, possibly even more spectacular one.

"Left-liberal media became curious in AE in 2017, erstwhile papers leaked as a consequence of a hacking attack on the Spanish non-governmental organization HazteOir. Hackers made them public as part of WikiLeaks. These papers contain details of the 2013 founding meeting, a list of social networking experts with whom the group intended to cooperate on the Internet, and a manifesto entitled ‘Restore the natural order: a programme for Europe’. This drew the critical attention of journalists, on whom the slogans specified as “natural order”, “traditional family” or “Christian values” work like a bull's covering. If something is traditional, it must be fundamentalistic, and this leads straight to the Kremlin, there is no another possibility.”

And it's all clear now. Bad hackers broke into a Spanish non-governmental organization, published any documents, and at the very end came (equally) bad journalists, whose slogans were upset, specified as ‘Natural order’ And they began to talk about the Russian fingers in everything. I bet that the least surprise (for absolutely no 1 but the large majority of people paying for the subscription “To the Thing”) will not be that editor Dąbrowska passes with the fact at specified a advanced velocity that it can bring this to our heads of Inhibitors soon. All right, well, now that we've been eating, we request to thin on this a small more seriously.

A fewer words of introduction first. The full article by Zuzanna Dąbrowska is built around the lie. This lie may be convincing adequate that it is not expressed directly. Well, after reading this article, 1 could conclude that this full Agenda Europe, this is simply a self-contained creation. In a somewhat different way, Zuzanna Dąbrowska tries to convince readers that the AE is practically "suspended in vacuum". Although there are different environments and different people (including the aforementioned “Australia”), that is all. The only derogation from this communicative is to mention the name Hazte Orir. I bet this happened due to the fact that Dąbrowska wanted to “attach” her text in any way and decided that hacking this organization would be perfect for it.

Now it's time for another word of introduction. The full problem with leaning over Russian influences is that at the present time they are to specified a level that the "threshold of entry" into this subject is very, but very high. In my humble opinion, the reason for this state of affairs is that for a very long time no 1 has leaned specifically over the subject, in the consequence that at the minute erstwhile it began to do so, these Russian influences were so advanced that their descriptions (for apparent reasons) were so overloaded with dates, names and names of the organization that the average citizen would simply bounce distant from it, due to the fact that it was a bit as if individual had begun to read the "Malazan Book of the Dead" from the eighth volume. Nevertheless, in order to realize what this lying communicative is, we will gotta effort to get through it all somehow.

The starting point for this effort will be the Hazte Oir organization. The fact that this organization must be connected to Agenda Europe in any way follows the article by Zuzanna Dąbrowska (if after the hack into Hazte Oir, we are not condemned to any conjecture or conjecture). The head of Hazte Oir is his name, Ignacio Arsuaga Rato. It is crucial that the same Ignacio (which can be read on the wiki page dedicated to his person) is besides the head of specified an organization as Citizen GO. On the net we can read that since 2013 Hazte Oir has been a part of Citizen GO. If individual is curious about why Mrs. Dąbrowska did not mention this fact (although the situation with the break-in is dated for 2017), then I would ask specified individual for a small patience, due to the fact that in a minute everything will become clear. As far as Mr. Ignacio is concerned, the same individual organized a gathering of the planet legislature of Families in Madrid in 2012.

Let's start with Citizen GO. Here the substance is simple, like the construction of an average reader who pays for the subscription “To the Thing”. 1 of the founders of Citizen GO was Konstanin Malofieev, who managed to put his protege, Alexey Komov, on the board of the organization. The information on this subject is now so public that you can read about it on the Citizen GO wiki (if individual wants to go further, there are origin links on wiki). Malofieev is simply a Russian oligarch who, among another things, sponsored the Donbast separatists. I am betting that this is what made editor Dąbrowska not eager to mention Citizen GO, due to the fact that it would be a small hard for her to think about why this mean Clementina Suchanov (and another journalists) actually talks about any Russian connections.

Let's keep moving. Just a minute ago, I mentioned that the head of Hazte Oir and Citizen GO organized the 2012 planet legislature of Families in Madrid. Why is that relevant? The fact that the WKR has ties to the Russians has been known for a long time. I found out about it by reading the book Masha Gessen. “There will be what was”. If anyone had any doubts about this matter, it should dispel them that in 2014 the planet legislature of Families was scheduled to take place in (werble) Moscow. Meanwhile, Russia has annexed Crimea, so fraternizing with the Russians could prove problematic. Not to keep you in suspense any longer: but of course, the Moscow drive took place (and it was in the Kremlin). but it was organized under a changed name (the subject of the drive was identical to the 1 to be dealt with by the planet household Congress).

You can already see that the atmosphere around Agenda Europe is getting a small thick and that it may have something to do with the odor of onuc. This, however, did not end, for we must mention another situation. In 2021, there was another leak of information about mediocre Spanish organizations. There's besides a list of transfers leaked this time. She tweeted Clementina Suchanov. On the screens attached to it, you can see transfers that went from CitizenGO to Ordo Iuris. In the name of the transfer he became "sponsorship for AESummit 2016". In the same year Agenda Europe was held in Warsaw.

And again, individual (e.g.Zuzanna Dąbrowska) could say that all of this is the inventions of any kind of ideologicalized leukosis. but there's 1 small problem with this narrative. This problem is called Jerzy Kwasniewski, who admitted that these CitizenGO transfers are real. At the same time, he stated that they were simply organizing there "NGO Summit in Warsaw". The question of why in the title of the transfer stands "AESummit" Mr Jerzy no longer replied. He besides did not complain about the fact that his organization received money from another, in which (what a coincidence) the board sits by Alexey Komov. The chronicle work to mention that Kwasniewski in the same entry stated that Suchanov was sued. It will be further on.

Mr. Jerzy admits that CitizenGO's money received and told about lawsuits

Let us go back to the end of the quote on which we were concerned, and specifically to the passage in which editor Dąbrowska explains that all these connections with the Kremlin are made up, due to the fact that any people simply associate everything conservatively with the Kremlin. The fact in this 1 is as much as we could anticipate from the article that was published (behind the paywall) on the portal “To Things”.

"The mentality of “journalists involved”, specified as Clementina Suchanov, does not let the thought that not everyone who does not agree to the demolition of Christian civilization is “the agent of Moscow”.

It seems to me that it is highly risky for editor Dąbrowska to usage the patch ‘agents involved’'Cause she just happened to be a journalist. To make things funnier, she is so committed that in her article she ignores quite a few crucial facts. But let's get to the point. Dąbrowska builds narratives that indicate that the cremal connections in conservative organizations do not be and are simply a figment of the imagination of these cursed lefties. And that's cool, but those connections are real. The question that is worth asking yourself in this context is: if it is known that these links exist, why do any people so fiercely convince that they do not exist?

Zuzanna Dąbrowska then reports on fragments of the text by Clementina Suchanów (a lot of names appear there) and summarizes this:

"What is significant, at the end of this list of 'black characters', the activist adds a short annotation, indicating that it is only a "deduction based on various materials".

If Zuzanna Dąbrowska were a writer and not an worker of the “To the Thing” she would do something like investigation and know that Clementina Suchanov has long been doing a tour of this peculiar rabbit gap and if she mentions any “different materials” she does not mean “murder, believe me”.

"It must so be remembered that erstwhile we read the text, we are based on the deduction of an highly ideologicalised activist, uncovering her extremist leftist views."

I know that I will repeat myself: the connections that she described (still describes and will most likely describe) Clementina Suchanov and her like people be and would be even if Clementina Suchanov did not have “leftist views”. The fact that describing these connections is so much on a good case of enthusiasts, not mainstream media, only shows that journalists working in these large media simply did not want to contact this subject, due to the fact that it was much more laborious than, for example, heating up the 24/7 subject of the possible disintegration of the United Right and “the exit of the Zion from the coalition”. Immediately after that, Dąbrowska quoted any rather powerfully formulated statements by Clementina Suchanów and most likely did so to emphasize her “leftness”. Quoting these passages is anything senseless (because they don't bring anything into the meritum, which is the Russian connections of certain organizations).

"Suchanov is happy to connect dots to confirm her theories. For any media, she rapidly became an expert on Russian influence in Poland."

First of all, not just Suchanov. Secondly, these dots and their connections would be even if Suchanov did not thin over them. Thirdly, I was a small amused by this ending, due to the fact that in the interview that Suchanov gave us, she told us that for a time practically all interview that was conducted with her began with a phrase “Well, don’t you think that sounds like a conspiracy theory”? The fact that Clementine Suchanov has become an expert for any of the media shows that at any point evidence of Russian associations of certain organizations was already so visible that they could not be ignored. Unless you're an worker of The Thing.

Zuzanna Dąbrowska then gives us a brief lecture on the issue of abortion in Russia:

"It is worth remembering that Russia is not the basis for what we recognise as conservatism over the Vistula River. Polish and Russian conservatism disagree diametrically – Russian conservatism is collectivistic (not individualistic, as in Poland), in Russia even conservatives are afraid to talk openly about the defence of the conceived life, due to the fact that abortion is almost included in the mentality there" - wrote writer and Russian author Maciej Pieczyński on the portal DoRzeczy.pl".

It cost me a lot to refrain from quoting at this point the operative part of 1 of the Polish witches, Ferdinand Kiepski, who started with "Thank you very much for all this valuable information (...)’, but instead, I will go consecutive to the point. Do you know why Dąbrowska mentioned it? Well, in order to build specified an (in her opinion most likely non-versive) intellectual structure, it follows that since no 1 in Russia cares about the ban on abortion, why should the Russians want to introduce it elsewhere? What's the point?! Where's the logic?!

There's 1 small problem with that argument. It is that it is completely meaningless. If we felt that it was not pointless, we would gotta decision on to the agenda over any specified unwritten regulation (known only to Zuzanna Dąbrowska and her colleagues from “To the Thing”), according to which the services of a peculiar country can affect situations in another countries only if the changes they want to origin in a given country cannot lead to the situation in this “changed” country being different from the situation of the “changing country”. It is worth mentioning that this is simply a very convenient narrative. Comfortable, of course, for the right, due to the fact that it almost clearly indicates that if we were to look for Russian influence, then alternatively on the side demanding liberalisation of abortion law, right? In addition, it is clear (also practically direct) that Russia would not support any anti-systemists, as the anti-systemists in Russia (euphemizing) do not have an easy life.

However, the funniest thing about this peculiar communicative is that even if we thought it was actual (and we know it isn't), the LGBT fight, which is dealt with by various specified conservative organizations, does not conflict specifically with what is presently happening in Russia. The chronicle work to mention that in 2013 Citizen GO signed a declaration of support for Russian anti-LGBT changes in law. most likely the most common case in the world.

Now we come to the breaking question that Zuzanna Dąbrowska asks at any point:

“Who is threatened by Ordo Iuris?”

Given their activities to date, mainly activists who are treated with SLAPPs all the time.

Next up comes another equally breaking question:

"It is worth asking whether a individual with specified clear views as Clementina Suchanov is able to objectively, without being obscured by his own views (and this should be required of him erstwhile he acts as an investigative journalist) to describe the action of an organization whose objectives are contrary to its own?"

At this point, let me put a comparatively breaking question: "It is worth asking if a person, with views as clearly defined as Zuzanna Dąbrowska, is able in an nonsubjective way, not obscured by his own views (and this should be required if he is acting as a journalist) to describe the activities of a writer whose goals are opposed to her own?" All right, now that we've had the mundane pleasures (in the form of trolling) behind us, we can decision on to a somewhat more substantive comment, which will be a repetition of something that has already happened here before: the connections that Suchanov describes be and would be even if Clementina Suchanov had no leftist views.

And at this point on the phase comes all the way to Ordo Iurisowato Jerzy Kwaśniewski, whose statements will accompany us to the lonely end of this text (with a tiny break to the message of the previously quoted “Australia”):

"The Institute of Ordo Iuris, as a fresh quality on the Polish and European stage, bringing together efficiency, professionalism and efficient construction of independent backing thanks to thousands of friends and donors, has been selected as a symbol of everything that threatens the extremist social and political revolution – the president of the Institute, Jerzy Kwaśniewski, convinces in a conversation with the “To the Thing” of the Institute.

We have seen about the professionalism of Ordo Iuris (and Jerzy Kwasniewski himself) many times. Let me describe 2 spectacular examples. In October 2018 Jerzy Kwaśniewski explained that the Equality March in Lublin should be banned in the name of “public security” (referring in his entry on the “Law and Constitution”). Jerzy Kwaśniewski himself explained in November 2018 that the ban on organizing the alleged “March of Independence” in the name of public safety is simply a gross violation of the Constitution and freedom of assembly. Another time Jerzy Kwasniewski explained that he was a arrogant man, due to the fact that it was thanks to Ordo Iuris Empik that he was entitled to retreat from the sale of the Polish paper with a homophobic sticker. Immediately after that, an article about the breaking content appeared on the Ordo Iuris website, which said that Empik was actually utilizing preventive censorship. A separate issue is that Joanna Gzyra-Iskandar had a lot to say about the professionalism of OI lawyers, who talked to us about how the lawyer from that organization screamed in the ultimate Court.

Mr Jerzy and his professional message about the prohibition of manifestation

Also, Mr. Jerzy and his equally professional message about the ban on manifestation

By the way, it was only after any time that it occurred to me that specified e.g. sending not rather the grasped lawyers to court could be a deliberate play. Yes, it may be that they simply have no 1 else there, but it is equally likely that they are sent to "die with honor." This means that Ordo Iuris can preach in all way and due to the fact that the institute inactive has a long way to go, which will require titanium labour and immense financial expenditure. You already know where this is going, right?

It is besides interesting that Mr Jerzy mentions “Radical Social Revolution” (whose revolution is opposed by Ordo Iuris). It is interesting that Ordo Iuris is the biggest advocate of the extremist social revolution in Poland. The Chronicle's work is to mention that it was this organization that produced in 2016 a bill amending abortion law, which was so murderous that it was opposed to him, for example the Episcopate, and the colleagues with whom the representatives of Ordo Iuris discussed this subject within the Agenda Europe, explained to our Milusinian that this was, however, a harsh exaggeration (which was very displeased by 1 Ordo Iuris).

Just to be clear, if anyone wants to look somewhere ‘a silent majority’, this is the first signal that this majority has different views than Jerzy Kwaśniewski about, for example, abortion laws, was seen in 2016, but we could clearly see it all in 2020, erstwhile the decision of the Przyłębski Court triggered any of the biggest protests that occurred after the fall of the Polish People's Republic of Poland. Let's just stay on this subject for a while. The changes that came from Western Europe (liberalisation of abortion law, legalization of single-sex marriages/etc) did not happen suddenly, it was not any ‘radical revolution’but a long-term trial. Instead, it would be a extremist revolution of what organizations like CitizenGO/etc stand for. It is safe to presume that the withdrawal of these changes would lead to tremendous social tensions. Let us keep this in mind, for it will be useful for us in the remainder of the text. So far, we will thin over the golden thoughts of Zuzanna Dąbrowska and Jerzy Kwasniewski

"Mec. Jerzy Kwasniewski. Referring to the text on Agenda Europe, Kwasniewski stresses that it was actually a "ordinary mailing list". An highly useful tool a fewer years ago. As the only tracked communication platform of conservative environments grew in the lyrics of left-wing activists to the rank of a mysterious order (...)".

It's time for a brief summary. According to what we have read in the article so far, Agenda Europe was first a “contact and information network”. Secondly, she was a think tank to address the designation of "real to accomplish the goals of the pro-life movement". It was besides intended to be a “general European squad to advance Christian values” and an “expert environment that would analyse current trends, make answers, arguments, alternatives and definitions”. Now it turns out that it was just a simple mailing list. If I were malicious, I would compose that I have the impression that this last definition of what the AE was has something to do with the fact that I have been given an insight into the messages sent under the AE, and there is no way to deny it. Since I am not malicious, I will only compose that I am a small confused in these definitions. However, I am comforted by the thought that Jerzy Kwaśniewski (which he will be virtually about in a moment) is lost in all of this (and this is simply a long time ago).

"Mecenas Jerzy Kwaśniewski emphasizes that Ordo Iuris could not belong to Agenda Europe due to the fact that "it is hard to recognise membership as being on the mailing list". “There was no specified thing as ‘membership’ in the AE,” he adds.

Before I go over this peculiar passage, I'll let myself a small complacency. After reading the article Clementina Suchanov, I besides looked at her long thread on Eloneks (the erstwhile Quarter). There were any screens. 1 of them was the entry of Mr. Jurek (from 2021), in which he explained that they sued Suchanov, among another things, for having written that "they belong to Agenda Europe". I raised this issue in 1 of my Loud Texts, and I wrote there that I think I know what the process strategy will look like. Ordo Iuris in this peculiar case and that these will be linguistic divisions in the subject of what it means, not another word. I am grateful to Mr.Jerzem that his message to “To Things” proved that I was right. It turns out that any members of Ordo Iuris may have been on this mailing list, but since Ordo Iuris did not have a registered membership card, it cannot be said that Ordo Iuris belonged there (the entry utilized a circumstantial phrase “to belong”).

Here I will let a brief appeal/warning. If you are engaged in describing the activities of people who tend to screw up left and right SLAPPami (and have quite a few money for lawyers), then you must be very careful about the wording you use. It may turn out that the point of attachment, which will be utilized by the lawyers of the entity described by you, or that the individual will be reinterpreted with an inaccurate sound that can be interpreted (for procedural purposes). I observed something like this in my hometown of Nad Zalew during the 2010-2014 term. It was then that an article appeared in 1 of the local writings (colported by 1 of the associations) that said that the people appointed by the then authorities to “high” posts received immense prizes (completely undeservedly). This procedure is referred to in the article “taking money out”. You'll never guess what the lawyers representing the authorities of the time have come to, and why this is the term. The trial, of course, was won by the authorities. Did it appear that nothing was incorrect with the money? Of course it didn't, due to the fact that it was 1 of the many abuses of that power. Only that in the course of the trial it did not matter, due to the fact that the court did not consider the ethical dimension of grazing on the public box office and focused solely on the fact that the phraseological relation of "leading money" suggests that the law was broken. The law was not broken due to the fact that everything was done according to the law. Life has added a point to this situation in the form of electoral defeat of previously mentioned municipal authorities. The conclusion is that it is essential to usage terms whose explanation (for SLAPP) will be very difficult. This, of course, will not prevent people who simply have besides much money and time (or who are dealing with SLAPPAmi) from acting, but it will make it much harder for them to court anything.

A small earlier I mentioned that Mr. Jerzy was confused about all of this, and now it is time to decision on. Okay, I realize that Mr. Jerzy will be in court (he or any OI lawyer) explaining that, in fact, it is not known what the word “to belong” means and that if Ordo Iuris did not have a name card/member card of Agenda Europe, then there can be no membership. I realize that perfectly, but I don't realize anything else. Why did Ordo Iuris actually sue Suchanov for writing that they belonged to Agenda Europe? After all, Mr Jerzy himself explained that this was the most average mailing list in the planet and nothing else. Does Mr. George have a habit of suing anyone who mentions that Mr. George belongs to any mailing list? If so, it remains to be enjoyed that the Ordo Iuris activity did not fall upon the period of the glory of Usenet and widely understood newsgroups, due to the fact that most likely then lawsuits would go into tens of thousands.

I realize that the thought was to effort to get Suchanov to compose publically that Ordo Iuris did not belong to Agenda Europe, but Mr Jurek himself explains that it was a simple “mailing list”. In another words, the full “master plan” behind this peculiar suit is to court-martially force Clementina Suchanov to “correct” publically that she wrote that Ordo Iuris belonged to the mailing list.

Attention! The article (can be) sponsored by you!

https://patronite.pl/Piknik-on-country-g%C5%82upoty

I am tempted to compose that I have the impression that at any point Mr. Jerzy simply lied, but I fear that Mr. Jerzy might have wanted to sue me for it, and in his justification for the suit he would have included a thirty-page lecture on what “liar” is, and why due to the fact that his statements (euphemizing) do not constitute a coherent whole, 1 cannot conclude that at any point he “liared”.

The only reasonable explanation for Mr. George's behaviour (or another Ordo Iurisolak, who was liable for producing this peculiar lawsuit) was that individual (responsible for the lawsuit) was aware that sooner or later it might turn out that the participation in this peculiar "mailing list" could start to include in the category "image charges". In this peculiar case, if the court had ruled in Ordo Iuris's head and admitted that the OI ‘did not belong’ to Agenda Europe, Mr Jurek&co could have waved specified a judgement before the eyes of his fans and explained that possibly AE was wrong, but they were not there at all, and here is the judgement of the court confirming it. individual might say, well, what does it substance if their emails are there and any of them have been made public? And individual like that will be right. A small bit, due to the fact that if this had happened, for example, 10 years ago, specified a conviction would not have mattered, but it is 2024 and we live in times that scholars in speech and writing sometimes call "postrecy." I will not dispute why anyone in Ordo Iuris might have assumed that with this AE it is simply a slippery matter, due to the fact that I would have put myself at hazard of a suit and reading a fifty-page justification in the form of a linguistic lecture on alternate meanings specified as “why”, “whoever”, “could” and “possess”. All right, we're stuck in digressions, and we've got a part of the article ahead of us, so delight decision towards the next paragraphs.

Since not Jerzy Kwasniewski himself is alive, it is time for our well-known “Australian”, Mrs. Gudrun, who was the admin (or possibly alternatively “administrator”, due to the fact that the usage of feminists is most likely another variant of the extremist social revolution) on the group from which the emails were drawn.

Gudrun Kugler's group administrator, asked by journalists about Russia's relationships, answers: "I am shocked to hear that the Russians have utilized us". She added at the same time that she did not believe that “the attempts of Russians to influence us in Google Groups were successful.” She besides stated that the Russians "have never played a key function in our group and have alternatively rapidly disappeared".

Before I begin to smite this passage, I will let myself to put it in context. Zuzanna Dąbrowska has so far tried to explain that all these "Russian threads" are the creation of the imagination of Clementina Suchanov (and another "involved journalists"). In the context of the above, it looks a bit unusual to put a quote in the article, which shows that Gudrun Kugler was asked by journalists about the Russians' presence on the “Google Groups” which the aforementioned resident of the “Last Continent” (i.e., had to) administered.

Where did that even come from? After all (if we consider the mention point of Zuzanna Dąbrowska's article) absolutely nothing indicated that the Russians had anything to do with Agenda Europe. Well, Zuzanna Dąbrowska omits another tiny item in her article (probably by specified omission). There were Russians on the Mailing List. Screen of 1 of the e-mails written by 1 Paul Parfientiev published Clementina Suchanov. Who's Parfientiev? possibly he's any average Russian conservative who was just a associate of the Mailing List. Nothing like that. There is an organization in Russia like FamilyPolicy (dot) which is very curious in what is happening in Western Europe. If we go to the "founders" tab, we can go to the planet legislature of Families. But wait, it's even more interesting. If we go into the “senior management” (a pleasance on their part that their website can be viewed in English), then 2 people appear there. Paweł Parfientiev and previously mentioned associate of Russian oligarchy (Malofieev), Alexey Komov.

It seems to me that this is simply a good time for a curiosity in the form of a question: guess whose website was the “analyses” of the Russian organization mentioned above, commanded by Mr Parfientiev and Komov? If your answer was "hmm, I don't know, is it on the website of the Ordo Iuris Institute for Legal Culture?", then you just won a golden onus. Of course, these analyses inexplicably evaporated from our beloved institute, but it was most likely by accident (or e.g. the hosting expired). Fortunately, there are inactive friendly people in this planet who at the right time made screenshots (which, courtesy of my podcast co-host, can be seen below)

Missing Analysis Part 1

Missing Analysis Part 2

Missing Analysis Part 3

Missing Analysis Part 4

At this point, I will make general attention. I'm truly starting to wonder that erstwhile an average man comes into contact with these organizations and starts reading about their interconnectedness, in the first instinct he might think, no, it must be a conspiracy theory. The fact is that the degree of association of all these entities is so large that it may seem unrealistic. Unfortunately, all these connections are not a product of anyone's imagination.

Had it not been for context, Gudrun Kugler's message could have been considered funny. It turns out that the admin of this peculiar "maling list" said that as far as the Russians are concerned, "they disappeared alternatively quickly". I'm sorry, but who, if not the administrator, should know about it erstwhile (and if actually) The Russians disappeared from AE? Besides, I was captivated by the translation that the Russians did not play an crucial function there and that attempts by the Russians to influence the AE were surely not successful. I wonder how Gudrun Kugler would respond if individual asked her what she thought the Russians who were sitting in the AE were going to be. Well, it's a digression. In this peculiar case, it is irrelevant that they were there (according to Gudrun) briefly and (also according to Gudrun) had no influence on anything. It is more crucial that (notice, there will be a capslock) on this “MALING LETTER” was found to be a co-operator of Russian Oligarchy and absolutely no of them were overlooked.

At the end of the article Zuzanna Dąbrowska asks another breaking question. Something tells me that after writing this question, editor Dąbrowska thought to herself, “checks and mats, lefties!” The question was this:

"What, allegedly in line with Kremlin's interests, are the objectives of Agenda Europe? That is unknown.”

It turns out that my Zuzanna Dąbrowska laughs were completely unauthorised. It turns out that it is perfectly oriented in what the Kremlin has goals and how it wants to accomplish them. A small more seriously, trying to answer this question, which Susan Dabrowska seemed highly clever and cunning, could most likely take up a medium-sized book. For the purposes of this text, it is adequate to focus on 1 of the objectives that the Kremlin wants to achieve.

In 1 of the erstwhile tectonic layers of this peculiar wall of text, I mentioned that we should remember that a extremist social revolution to which utmost conservatives want to lead would have caused social resistance, which would have translated opposition into increased tensions and social divisions. The Kremlin has been trying to make social tensions for a long time. An excellent example will be that, for example, erstwhile Americans started (in 2018) analyzing entries about vaccination, it abruptly turned out that Russian disinformation accounts supported both sides of this peculiar dispute. Although "supported" is not the best term, the content published in these accounts attempted to lead to maximum "fire" of the dispute.

Clementine Suchanov has frequently mentioned that any conservatives may not even realize that they have been active in the function of useful idiots. About this the large expert Zuzanna Dąbrowska preferred not to mention in her Very Smart Text, due to the fact that it would argue with her explanation that any conservatives always associate with the Russians.

I bet that this was the case for any members (yes, I know, there were no membership cards, Юрий, Пожалуйста, не) Agenda Europe. This does not explain to the least degree the unreformable folly of people who have not asked a fewer very crucial questions: frack, why are the Russians sitting on our “defensive civilization” group and who are they?

In the last paragraph of Zuzanna Dąbrowska's text, Jerzy Kwasniewski tries to explain what is going on with this beef, which Clementina Suchanov has with Ordo Iuris and how the persecuted institute copes with it:

"Jerzy Kwasniewski points out that Clementina Suchanov has been sued for a series of lies about Ordo Iuris, promoted in her articles, books, interviews". – It is simply a pool of respective sucked from the finger and illogically related expected “proofs”, which in various configurations of Suchanov has been publishing invariably under the motto “new discoveries on Ordo Iuris”. surely these manipulations are harmful to us and require that we give them valuable time, which should be given to more crucial matters. Unfortunately, the trial has been going on for a long time, and its end is not seen for the time being."

There's so much good in that speech that I had problem choosing where to start. So I thought I'd start with legal advice: Mr. Jerzy, this kind of process always goes on for a long time, if you had consulted a lawyer, then a lawyer would most likely explain it to you. The next issue: evidence of connections which Mr.Jerzy is so reluctant to talk about and which he disowns (as he flees to linguistic analyses) exists, so to put it "objectively" and did not invent them Clementina Suchanów. Last case, I was captivated (and very much so) by the despair of Mr. George, who tells (it is interesting whether he had tears in his eyes and whether his voice broke) about the fact that due to this Clementyna Suchanov is Ordo Iuris cannot deal with serious matters. If we translate this from Kwasniewski to ours, it would be a kind of: The kind from the Institute, which this institute deals with almost tape production of SLAPPs, despairs, due to the fact that the institute after producing many SLAPPs (against Suchanów) has to deal with the processes which it has conducted and there is no time to produce another SLAPPs. I'm so touched that I started crying with beech.

The ending of the article is another condition of gold (like the dome of the Council of St. Michael the Archangel in Moscow) thought by Jerzy Kwasniewski, who tries to explain to readers how it is possible that these nasty accusations were made against his beloved institute:

"President Ordo Iuris sees time co-incidence – attacks from the “Russian agents” patches have intensified after the change of power in Poland. – In view of the cut-off of public backing for nearly all conservative organizations, our independency has resulted in the focus around Ordo Iuris many environments that have worked independently so far. present they request to last our support, bringing in the expert cognition and skills essential to defend Poles from the chaos of lawlessness and ideological oppression from the government of Donald Tusk – Kwasniewski convinces.”

This communicative is beautiful. You see, all these attacks came from the fact that now Ordo Iuris is taking under his wing various conservative organizations! Although this communicative has as much to do with the fact as Kwasniewski's another statements, it cannot be denied beauty. If I wanted to choice on you, I would say that the top strength of communicative (or, as Mr Jerzy prefers, "attackers") occurred in 2020, and the institute owes it to itself. At that time, as part of another SLAPP (this time aimed at Marta Lempart) they demanded a judicial ban on her saying that they were funded by the Kremlin fundamentalists. What happened then was the alleged Streissand effect, only that on steroids, due to the fact that practically the full net was swamped with a phrase beginning with “not to say that”. Unfavorable, Ordo Iuris extended the suit and demanded punishment in it for the fact that Marta Lempart spoke publically about the fact that she was not allowed to talk of (...). The continuation of this communicative is alternatively acquainted to you.

So why did Jerzy Kwasniewski say what he said (except that he most likely can't do otherwise)? This is simply a message addressed to the followers, and I apologize to the “fans” of the institute. Jerzy Kwaśniewski is Jerzy Kwaśniewski, but even Jerzy Kwaśniewski must realize that with the change of power the protective umbrella, which over Ordo Iuris extended the United Right, disappeared. This means that Mane Tekel Fares has most likely already appeared on the walls of the institute (although I do not know whether in the first spelling or in the native language of 1 of the “discants” from a certain “ Mailing List”, Paweł Parfientiev). These people (or at least this more acquainted part of them) realize that shortly the walls will begin to approach them. Nevertheless, they presume that they will last this, and the full situation is treated as all others have so far, which is an chance to effort to convince themselves of more donors. Look at this: Ordo Iuris takes in various organizations that don't have money now. The only remedy for this is greater financial support for Ordo Iuris.

All right, the most enduring of you have reached the end of this wall of text, so it's time for conclusions. First, I think it is clear why “To Things” hid this article behind the paywall. Second, the article can be treated as an inept harm controll and a helping hand drawn to a certain institute. Thirdly, I know that publishing is governed by its rights, but this circumstantial article is simply a tool of disinformation, with which the weekly “To Things” tries to convince its readers (contrary to facts) that Russia did not effort to influence conservative movements. Fourth, it should not surprise anyone that “To Things” is trying to convince people that there is no problem with Russian influence in Poland. 5th of all, I'm going to tell you honestly that I've been a small short of writing the walls of text.