![]() ![]() The company said the Romanian court’s ruling was an attack against a local company, which is proud of its Hungarian identity, language and symbols. The producer of ‘Igazi Csíki sör” employs about 140 people in Transylvania. ![]() ![]() The Romanian ruling directly contradicts an EU court, which ruled in favor of the Hungarian product and against Heineken on 9th of December 2016. In January, a Romanian regional court ruled in favor of Heineken against the local Hungarian beer in their age-long legal dispute over the brand copyrights. ‘Igazi Csíki Sör’ (‘The real beer of Csík’), has a similar name to a Romanian beer owned by Heineken, “Ciuc beer” (“Csík” means “Ciuc” in Romanian language and refers to a small region of Transylvania with massive ethnic Hungarian majority). The dispute between the two brewers stems from the ‘Igazi Csiki Sör’ name. This last symbol is the most interesting, in the sense that, perhaps not coincidentally, there is in fact a company which has been in conflict with the Hungarian government, and whose logo just happens to have a red star in it: Heineken.įollowing the lengthy legal battle over copyright issues between ‘Igazi Csiki Sör,’ a small brewery run by members of the Szekler Hungarian minority in the Transylvania region of Romania, and the Netherlands-based beer multinational, several Hungarian government officials, including PMO head János Lázár, called for a boycott of Heineken products. But they’re probably more concerned about getting the taste of boot polish out of their mouths.Yesterday, a proposed bill was introduced into the Hungarian parliament that would amend a current law in order to ban the commercial use of “symbols of tyranny” these would include the swastika, arrow cross (the Hungarian Fascists’ symbol), Hammer and Sickle, and the Red Star. People who feel obligated to defend the largest and most powerful organization on the face of the planet ought to consider that an abusive father can still make his kids macaroni and cheese for dinner after he has spent the past half hour throwing empty liquor bottles at them. We’re sure a lot of the kids in those concentration camps had direct lines to Hirohito himself. In all fairness, perhaps a government can be tyrannical for the right reasons sometimes. You could say the same about one which roasts children alive, places its own citizens in concentration camps, codifies racism, and spies on Quakers. You might also argue that any government which reads its citizens’ private correspondences is oppressive. And giving me a speeding ticket for doing 62 in a 55 is absolute horse****. Maybe she offered seed and stem removal for an extra dollar?) Had the CIA carried out its 1962 plan to commit terrorist attacks in order to drum up support for war against Cuba, the alphabet boys would have acted with exceptional cruelty. (Although we do wonder why she didn’t just charge an even thirty. Sentencing a mother of four to 12 years in prison for selling $31 of marijuana is arguably very cruel. ![]() It is awfully good of the police to arrest perpetrators of property crimes, when they are allowed to, and we’d certainly be happy to see the Coast Guard if we just flipped the official Libertas Bella catamaran 12 miles off the coast of Naples Beach.īut the government does check the tyranny boxes when it wants to. Tyranny (n): cruel and oppressive government or ruleīefore we dive into the tyranny quotes, let us first ask: Is the United States government tyrannical? Not constantly, no. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |