Tarte

Was ist denn das für ein Quatschkommentar? Die EU gab es bei der Gründung des Europarats noch nicht. Die EU wurde selbst erst Jahrzehnte später gegründet. Sie hat den Europarat 1949 nicht gegründet.

Das zeigt eher deine Denkmuster als ein etwaiges Fehlverhalten der EU.

Gesetze verabschieden tut der Europarat auch nicht. Das ist eine Menschenrechtsorganisation. Er hat auch viel mehr Mitgliedsstaaten als die EU.

Please do note the official warnings of the BFS (Federal Office for Radiation Protection). Contamination of forests with Caesium-137 is a health risk in many southern Bavarian forests. It's half-life period is 30 years. The disaster was in 1986. That means it's still roughly half of it there and the layered forest grounds preserve radiation well.

If you're a mushroom forager on vacation in southern Bavaria - just don't do it. Or at least inform yourself which types of mushrooms you shouldn't eat in particular for radiation reasons.

General information and warnings (2022):
https://www.bfs.de/DE/themen/ion/notfallschutz/notfall/tschornobyl/umweltfolgen.html#doc6055566bodyText3

Specifically regarding mushrooms (2019):
https://www.bfs.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/BfS/DE/broschueren/ion/info-wildpilze.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=7

Spain is already phasing out nuclear energy currently and Sweden wants to do it after sufficient renewables are built. Among many other states.

Nuclear is just not profitable compared to renewables. France is exporting at a loss if one would consider all associated costs (privatization of profits and socialization of losses is creating bad incentives).

There are still large areas in southern Germany where you’re not allowed to eat wild mushrooms and every boar that is hunted must be tested for radiation. That is because of the fallout from Chernobyl 38 years ago and 1400 km away.

The article is badly researched.

This “red-green” coalition banned new reactors, announced a shutdown of existing ones by 2022

The red-green coalition did not announce the 2022 date. They (Greens/SPD) announced a soft phase-out between 2015-2020 in conjunction with building renewables. This planned shift from nuclear to renewables was reverted by Merkel (CDU = conservatives) in 2010. They (CDU) changed their mind one year later in 2011 and announced the 2022 date; but without the emphasis on replacing it with renewables. This back and forth was also quite the expensive mistake by the CDU on multiple levels, because energy corporations were now entitled financial compensation for their old reactors.

He drove me back into using RSS after more than a decade for staying up to date. Much better for the mental health. Thankfully, since Wordpress and also some other CMS have the RSS feature enabled by default, many websites have it even if they’re not advertising it.

Wishing you all the best!

I‘m fine with discussion. But I see little value in discussing a text with someone who has not read it. We don’t have to guess their intentions when they already wrote it down quite clearly. Neither do I see a reason to doubt their intentions based on timing. Antisemitism (violence against Jews) in Germany has been sharply on the rise in the last few years and it is the job of the Landeszentrale to debunk some of the myths that foster it.

The main point of the paper is to correct these five myths about Israel and that is what it does. It is very focused on this and one-sided, obviously. One might think it is bad taste to ignore current events. Maybe. But it does exactly what it says and I found it informative.

Are we supposed to learn and debate history while a people is exterminated?

Yes. That might be a good first step. It takes about one hour. There is much one can critique Israel for - let’s stick to the truths.

Are we reading the same link? You're doing quite some mind acrobatics here by picking various small quotes/passages from only the start of the text and putting your own spin on it. This narrative is in your head, not in the article.

This is for the most part a very good brochure and the uninformed people here that only read a faulty summary or headline should probably read it, then make up their mind instead of being instinctively angry. Especially the part where it talks about the misconceptions with the typical „expansion comparison maps“ and what they really show was informative.

That is the relevant date, isn’t it? This news piece was written after he became president.

do you think russia has been boycotting zelensky even before he was presient? Why would they make such an effort

Your example is from two years after he became president. Not from the time before.