Captain of the Boeing 737 Marek Terzijský for Horizont ČT24: "The pilot, or in this case the plumber, must pull the yoke rather carefully because the aircraft's wing can quickly and swiftly reach a critical angle of attack and it can stall at high speed, at which point the aircraft becomes completely uncontrollable... For a layperson who has never flown a plane and has watched Air Disasters, choosing a nearly nosedive crash... Really, hats off." (translated)
The head of the office of Ukrainian President Kyrylo Budanov warned that Europe would be seriously threatened without the United States, highlighting the dangers to European security due to Russian attacks on Ukraine. (translated)
Is the caviar socialist Nika Kovač @nikakolac from the Institute @8Marec with her fighting secured another flight worth several thousand euros in "bourgeois" business class? Notorious Nika was spotted again on a flight from New York to Europe at the end of last week. Interestingly, she did not travel in economy but in business class, which can only be afforded by wealthier people. Business class tickets are usually several times more expensive than economy class tickets, especially on intercontinental flights. (translated)
I understand that you are not an economist, but after all, you have an entire army of "advisors" at your disposal... Because this is no longer information relayed by Moody. This is your RHETORIC. Just like with the debt. "In four years, the government increases debt by a trillion." The thing is, four years have not yet passed 🤷♂️ You are already linking the executed debt with a FUTURE FORECAST and then dividing that amount by the number of residents, announcing that a newborn has "26 thousand zł of debt." How do you come to such absurd conclusions?? I won't say it's not impressive... But public debt is not a personal obligation that is assigned to a child's account. And then there's the Constitutional Tribunal. You sign a law, still consider it unconstitutional, and send it to the Tribunal. The same Tribunal that the ECtHR has found to violate the right to a court set by law in the Xero Flor case, and the Grand Chamber of the CJEU in case C-448/23 stated that it does not meet the requirement of an independent and impartial court due to serious irregularities concerning its composition. And just minutes earlier, you said: "I'm not looking at legal loopholes." The Constitution and the legality of state organs are not "legal loopholes," Mr. Guardian of the Constitution 🤦♂️ And in the end, you say that you don't want "constant political war"... After a speech in which words fall: - blackmail, - the government’s ATM, - the government's financial catastrophe, - the prime minister's political plan and unsubstantiated claims that the government deliberately maintains high fuel prices to profit from them. I won't judge intentions. I assess the content. And the content of the official statement by the person holding the highest office in the state should withstand confrontation with documents 🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️ Here - in many key areas - it does not withstand. I will no longer dwell on this speech, as I believe it is a waste of time. I'll just say this. I don't know who prepared this text for you. However, I do know that you read it, you delivered it, and you take responsibility for every word. And you repeated nonsense and manipulations that have long circulated in the statements of people from your Chancellery — which I have already corrected multiple times. The worst part is that many of them don't even take long to verify. You just need to open the documents from your own Chancellery. I really don't envy you. It only pains me your slogan: "First Poland, first Poles." Because Poland and Poles should truly come first - even before political interests, party narratives, and the need for another conflict. You cannot appeal to the good of citizens while simultaneously playing with their trust in the state, providing them from the highest office with half-truths, insinuations, and political assessments cloaked as facts. This is not about whether someone likes this government. It's about accountability for words. Especially from this office 🫣 (translated)
"In the event of a direct attack on the Russian Federation (...) then, of course, the question of whether the Russian Federation will use all types of weapons that our country has at its disposal will inevitably and immediately be on the agenda." Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Thursday that the world is going through a dangerous period and that it is crucial to ensure that weapons of mass destruction are never used; however, he warned that Russia would consider the use of all types of weapons if there were an attack on the Russian enclave of Kaliningrad. (translated)
In his speech in Moscow, Putin stated that any direct attack on Russia could provoke an inevitable response using all available weapons, including weapons of mass destruction, and warned of the danger of escalation of the conflict. (translated)
The article focuses on the incident involving Flydubai flight, which sparked a debate about cockpit security and the effectiveness of protective measures against internal threats, demonstrating how robust security can also be double-edged if the threat comes from the pilot himself. (translated)
The police are preparing for an illegal tuning event that will take place on October 2nd and 3rd in Prague and Brno, and is planning a number of security measures including the deployment of special units, drones, and mobile noise meters to ensure safety on the roads and order in the streets. (translated)
A man in special police uniform threatened with bombs in front of the police station in Petrinja, and after the incident he was placed in detention due to the danger of repeating the criminal act. (translated)
Britain offered a nuclear umbrella to the countries of the Joint Expeditionary Force (JEF) as a security measure against threats from Russia, thereby strengthening cooperation among these states outside the framework of NATO. (translated)
Mr. Grzegorz, I read the entire justification. And I agree with one thing – legal analysis cannot be replaced with the label of a "neo-judge," because that is not an argument 🤷♂️ However, the justification itself, although extensive and internally organized, in my opinion leaves two very serious legal problems. The first concerns Article 281 § 2 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The provision states that in preparatory proceedings, a "blanket warrant" can be issued at the request of the prosecutor or in the absence of their objection. Here, the prosecutor filed an objection. The court does not challenge the wording of the provision. It consciously deviates from it, considering that the binding objection of the prosecutor would violate the court's jurisdictional independence. It references Article 8 § 1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, Article 178 paragraph 1 of the Constitution, Article 6 of the ECHR, Article 47 of the KPP, and part of the case law of appellate courts. This is a legal argument. But there is also an opposing line of case law, based precisely on the linguistic interpretation of Article 281 § 2 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which the court itself notes in the justification. I wrote about this yesterday. So it is not the case that there is no problem. There is a very serious dispute about the limits of interpretation contra legem and whether the court can practically deprive the premise, which the legislator explicitly included in the provision. The second problem I have is with the prognostic assessment. The court acknowledges that Romanowski left Poland, did not appear for the hearing concerning the temporary arrest, was outside the reach of Polish authorities, and even informed in his own application that he has a passport issued under a different identity 🤷♂️ The court considers these circumstances to be burdensome but then assumes that they cannot determine the assessment because one should look at it primarily prospectively. 🤔 And this is where I have the greatest doubt. The prediction of a suspect's future behavior does not occur in a vacuum. Its foundational material is, after all, their past behavior. 🤷♂️ If a person involved in the proceedings previously did not comply with procedural mechanisms, left the country, and remained outside the reach of the authorities, then their later declaration that from this moment they will comply with the conditions of the "blanket warrant" must be subjected to particularly rigorous assessment. The court may conclude that despite this, the risk has currently diminished. But it should convincingly demonstrate why specific past behaviors have lost their prognostic significance. Because if we are to predict a person’s future behavior while disregarding their past behavior, then a rather fundamental question arises - on what basis are we actually building this prediction? 🤷♂️ Therefore, I would not dismiss this ruling with the label of a neo-judge, but I would also not say that the problem ends with the justification sounding rational. A rationally constructed justification can still lead to a legally debatable result. In my opinion, this is exactly the kind of case we are dealing with here. The argumentation of the court is clear and can be recounted, but both the way of breaking the literal wording of Article 281 § 2 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and the prognostic assessment of the suspect's behavior leave significant legal doubts. If I were to rule on this matter, I would not grant the application. Firstly – due to the prosecutor's objection and the content of Article 281 § 2 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Secondly – even accepting a different interpretation of this provision, I would not find sufficient grounds for a positive prognostic assessment. This is not about punishing Romanowski for the past. It is about assessing whether his past behavior allows rationally to assume that from this moment he will respect the obligations arising from the "blanket warrant." In my opinion – it does not allow 🤷♂️ And that is precisely why there is an appellate review. (translated)
Mr. Rafal, but these theses are based on facts, not on someone's authority. I know this may be a novelty for you, but I try to describe reality, not create an alternative to it. (translated)
WhatsApp is introducing new parental controls that will allow monitoring of teenagers' activities on the platform, but parents will not have access to the content of messages, which raises questions about the effectiveness and acceptance of this measure among families. (translated)
"Iako teško ozlijeđen u trenutku velike opasnosti, ostao je odlučan zaštititi tuđe živote. Njegova hrabrost i brza reakcija spriječile su katastrofu. Pozdravljam njegovu ustrajnost i molim se za njegov brzi oporavak"Indijska predsjednica Droupadi Murmu izjavila je da je zemlja ponosna na kapetana Machchhara. #heroj #pilot #zrakoplov
“Od deset građana Hrvatske koji su dali krv u europskom istraživanju najpoznatijih PFAS spojeva, kod čak šest njih pronađene su povišene referentne vrijednosti tih po zdravlje opasnih spojeva, a među sedam Gospićana koji su sudjelovali u istraživanju, povišene vrijednosti ima čak njih petero. Kod svih 110 testiranih u EU pronađena je trifluoroctena kiselina (TFA), spoj iz skupine PFAS”“Od deset građana Hrvatske koji su dali krv u europskom istraživanju najpoznatijih PFAS spojeva, kod čak šest njih pronađene su povišene referentne vrijednosti tih po zdravlje opasnih spojeva, a među sedam Gospićana koji su sudjelovali u istraživanju, povišene vrijednosti ima čak njih petero. Kod svih 110 testiranih u EU pronađena je trifluoroctena kiselina (TFA), spoj iz skupine PFAS”, otkrio je danas Gordan Bosanac, zastupnik Možemo! u Europskom parlamentu. #PFAS #toksičneKemikalije #zdravlje
Research on the presence of PFAS compounds in the blood of Croatians has shown alarming levels of toxic substances, with as many as 60% of tested citizens having elevated values of these dangerous chemicals. (translated)
Canceled! The army has been waiting for 185 armored vehicles since 2018. They were supposed to serve primarily as ambulances, engineering, or explosive ordnance disposal vehicles, which are essential for its operation. Today we learned from the media that the ministry canceled the tender. Meanwhile, we have repeatedly heard assurances that (translated)
​- Suočen s najvećom opasnošću, pokazao je ogromnu hrabrost i nepokolebljivu odlučnost da zaštiti živote drugih - izjavio je Modi. #heroj #avion #otmica
The Football Association of the Czech Republic apologizes for the mistake when the incorrect national flag was displayed on the large screen during the Bulgarian national anthem before the qualifying match between the U21 teams of Czech Republic and Bulgaria. It was an individual failure, for which we, as the organizers of the match, take responsibility. We will take appropriate measures to ensure that a similar situation does not occur in the future. (translated)
A very nice issue of Reflex has just come out today. I would be glad if you would give it a chance. Here is my editorial on it: HOW SHOULD WE REMEMBER VÁCLAV HAVEL? I often say that I am "as old as the revolution," by which I obviously mean the Velvet one. And this alone brings a whole set of advantages. Your age always reflects the anniversary of the fall of the communist regime in Czechoslovakia, so you remember it well. I am not burdened by the sins of the past, having to decide whether to collaborate with the regime or not. Likewise, I do not have to blame myself for missing the harsh onset of capitalism and coupon privatization. I had to learn to speak first. And to walk. Those of us born in the early '90s sometimes tend to refer to ourselves as "Havel's children." But how can I identify with a person I didn't properly experience in adulthood, yet who so fundamentally shaped the state I grew up in? And how should I, as well as our entire nation, actually remember Havel? I cannot remember Havel like many other older journalists do. I leave it to my more experienced colleagues. I have only one small personal memory of him. I was about eight years old, and we were on a school excursion in Prague. My classmate and I were lagging at the end of our class line. There was a long queue at Wenceslas Square, and we walked along it. We got a bit distracted and created a gap. And into that gap stepped a crowd of people, in the middle of which walked Václav Havel. We both started staring at him and quickly exclaimed, "Good day, Mr. President," and he replied to us with his typical stammering 'r': "Hello, boys," and then disappeared into a bookstore to sign his books. The queue was standing there for him. It was the year he was dealing with health complications, delivered the famous Rudolfín speech, and signed the absolutely fundamental Czech-German declaration. But I only remember the "hello, boys." And that’s all. When he died in 2011, I was starting in the media, so I was only responsible for some minor media outputs around the funeral. Otherwise, I perceived him as the person whose picture hung next to the blackboard throughout my school life. On television, he appears either as a "gumshoe" in a satirical sketch or giving some speech that is too complicated for my child self to listen to. My opinions of him have therefore formed mostly indirectly, like for most people in our country. Through plays and compulsory reading in school, recordings of speeches, and the exceptional film Citizen Havel, where he allowed us to peer candidly into his private life. I never succumbed to the need to idolize him; I was most fascinated by the fact that despite such a rich life, he was essentially a "normal guy" who enjoyed life and who, even in the presidential office, could fulfill his dreams. A smoke with the Rolling Stones, meditation with the Dalai Lama, a beer with Clinton. None of that made him a better politician. Personally, it made him a human to me. The point of Havel's legacy and its breadth is, in my opinion, that everyone can remember him in their own way. Some remember him as the best person in history, others as a brilliant politician who is missed by the Czech Republic. Others see him as a naive believer in truth who preferred grand gestures over political pragmatism. Some as a womanizer, others as a great world author of absurd drama. Historians and philosophers still debate his legacy to this day. So vehemently that due to one "ezonomist" and pseudophilosopher on an electric unicycle, his name was removed from the library's title. But I would like to highlight one thing about him that seems increasingly rare in today's world. He managed to grow old without becoming bitter. He did not turn into a grump shouting at the clouds. He did not allow himself to be dominated by eternal contrarianism and being against all mainstream opinions at any cost. At the same time, he wasn't afraid to confront the mainstream until the end. I would wish for all of us to grow old like Havel. It’s a pity he was given only 75 years. I would have liked to listen to him even at ninety, which he would have celebrated this year. (translated)
