IA «Context-Prichernomorie»
login:
password:
| english version
Quick Vote
Are you interested in politics?
Yes, sure
Yes, it is important for my work/business
No, anyway commoner has no political influence
No, I don't care about it
 
Weather Forecast

:

:

:




Odesa  >  Topical Events  >  Society
Ukraines Unity and Freedom Day celebrated in Odesa
Jan 28 2013, 15:05
sobornist

Ukraines Unity and Freedom Day festively has been celebrated in Odesa. Festive ceremony of flowers laying to Taras Shevchenko and Ivan Franko monuments took place yesterday, 22 January, on occasion of Ukraines Unity and Freedom Day.

At 10 a.m. of January 22, 2013, festive ceremony of flowers laying to Taras Shevchenko monument was held in Odesas T.G. Shevchenko Central Park of Culture and Recreation.

At 11:00 p.m., flowers were laid to Ivan Franko monument at Alexandrovskiy Lane.

Municipal authorities, veterans and social organizations representatives, students and schoolchildren of Odesa were taking part in the ceremony.

We celebrate a grand national holiday today. I am deeply convinced that Ukraine is a great state with a huge potential and big future. At the pedestal of the monument to Ivan Franko, it is written, Lets unite and fraternize. This is the motto under which all the citizens of our country should live. On behalf of the City Mayor and management, I want to greet all the citizens of Odessa with this holiday and wish them health, peace and well-being, said Odesa City First Deputy Mayor Mykola Ilchenko.

INFORMATION: On January 22, 1918, with its Fourth Universal, the Central Council announced the Ukrainian Peoples Republic to be an independent and free State of the Ukrainian People. And on January 22, 1919, the act of Ukrainian Peoples Republic and Western Ukrainian Peoples Republic unification took place.


Comments

Wimpy, 07:43 / 08.07.2013
You get a lot of respect from me for writing these helpful artielcs. http://vihnkryn.com [url=http://ldeaiyma.com]ldeaiyma[/url] [link=http://shenjx.com]shenjx[/link]
Legiang, 10:42 / 07.07.2013
Not true, hehe Does the phrase, "out of my cold dead hands" ring a bell,<a href="http://bmaszgwhevi.com"> bsuacee</a> that is the only way anyone, government or other, is going to get my guns. Believe me, there are survivalist groups out there that have more than equivalent firearms to match the government. The difference is, the soldiers that come to take the weapons away are doing a job, some only halfheartedly, while the people who are defending their constitutional right to keep and bare arms (or arm bears) have the conviction of our founding fathers, for them it is a matter of life or death. You see what happened when a group of trained soldiers were given the JOB of controlling a group of survivalist who had the conviction of freedom for their families and country, we founded a country on that conviction. If it ever happens again, it will be a blood bath, and the ones who's hearts are in it will come out on top again.
Mariana, 15:17 / 05.07.2013
The two candidates that wasn't<a href="http://vkctfmmqeh.com"> iitnve</a> to the recent Mayoral Forum also need to realize, its not just about running with great ideas, its important to win. If you know you don't have the numbers to win, the smart move is to get a like minded candidate to carry your vision while you working over the next 4 years to expand you base to make you the leading candidate next time. They should put their support behind Carol, she is the winnable candidate that share more common points of action with them than any other candidate, especially the Organized Crime Machine candidates whose primary assignment is to contract out to make the suburbs rich while we starve/evicted/jobless. It would be different if there was not a strong candidate that didn't share your views but that is not the case in this race. Carol win, we win, they win, we all win! You know they really have to be desperate ordering a former President to help gather support for a candidate that received close to a billion dollars in donation and still trailing. I hope the progressive candidates stand behind the people’s candidate to defeat Organized Crime/The Machine.
xncbgyanh, 16:07 / 06.04.2013
EU0BGz , [url=http://qnctgwcrjare.com/]qnctgwcrjare[/url], [link=http://xhwilbitnmyf.com/]xhwilbitnmyf[/link], http://krvstiekgvpd.com/
Kaydence, 11:34 / 03.04.2013
Always the best content from these progdiiuos writers.
Khamchan, 17:59 / 01.04.2013
Allegations of threats and inmatidition is an abuse of authority.There was no act of bulling or harassment as claimed by Steve Tully, Chief Electoral Commissioner.Mr Steve Tully's accusations are false and not supported by the facts.Mr Tully was not even present at the briefing in question.Having spoken to a number of people present at the meeting all stated that Mr Tully's statement is a gross over-reaction to criticism at the way in which the VEC elections are to be counted.There was no grounds or justification to Mr Tully's statement or his accusations.The reason behind Mr Tully's emotive outburst is simple, Steve Tully had come under serious criticism in relation to his conduct of the 2006 State election along with concern that he may have deliberately mislead the parliament in his evidence given to the State Parliamentary committee on electoral matters.Mr Tully had cut corners and in the process he made a number of serious mistakes during the conduct of the 2006 State election.Under the terms of the Local Government Act and regulations the Returning Officer is required to preliminary sort ballot papers into primary votes which in turn is used to reconcile the number of votes pertaining to the election as part of the process of scrutiny of the ballot.Mr Tully has opted to once again cut corners and ignore requests that the count be open and transparent and that the ballot papers be subject to a preliminary distribution as required under the Act for a manual count.There is no justification for a computerised counting of the Lord Mayors ballot. A majority of candidates had supported calls for the ballot to be counted manually so that it could be subject to proper scrutiny.The Victorian Parliament in reviewing the mistakes made during the 2006 State election recommended that the VEC preliminary presort ballot papers into primary votes as is the case with Federal elections. Mr Tully chose to ignore the parliament's recommendation and the request made by candidates and others. Mr Tully directed Mr Bill Lang, City of Melbourne's Returning Officer, to reject the request for the preliminary sorting of ballot papers undermining the independence of the appointed Returning Officer.The Chief Commissioner misused and abused his position of authority.At no time had staff been subjected to any threats and any act that warrants or requires police presence. Steve Tully's statement calling for police protection is a further act of inmatidition and harassment against his critics and an abuse of authority.Mr Tully made similar false threats of inmatidition in the leaduop to and following the 2006 State election in which votes went missing during the count and the data recorded seriously flawed. Mr Tully was unable and unwilling to provide access to crucial data related to the 2006 count.In giving evidence to the parliamentary Electoral Matters Committee, Mr Tully stated that the data records of the 2006 Western Metropolitan Province count had been destroyed and were no longer available. An extraordinary claim given that it costs millions of dollars to count the ballot and it turns out that backup copies of the data were not recorded.The complaints and submission lodged in relation to the proposed City of Melbourne count were seeking to prevent a repeat of the mistakes made by the Chief Commissioner in 2006. Mistakes that were made as result of a lack of due diligence and denial of access to crucial data by the Chief Commissioner. Mistakes that should be avoided and not repeated with the Melbourne City Council elections.It is fundamental to our democracy that elections are open and transparent in order that public confidence in the electoral process is maintained, This issue does not just effect the City of Melbourne but the entire State.The actions of Mr Tully are a form of retribution and inmatidition of critics to his administration. This is not the first time Mr Tully has acted in such a manner.Members of Parliament are very much aware of Mr Tully's acts of inmatidition and abuse of process against those who gave evidence to the parliamentary inquiry.Mr Tully in making false accusations of this nature has raised doubts and questions as to his suitability to hold the office of Chief Commissioner.
lphtbooa, 15:30 / 01.04.2013
q3Efms <a href="http://qwxtwgotkgei.com/">qwxtwgotkgei</a>
xyntfi, 15:30 / 01.04.2013
RFO7Wt <a href="http://flbiudcjeflx.com/">flbiudcjeflx</a>
khdcwitk, 15:30 / 01.04.2013
IpXZQF <a href="http://sovafbdmyjgr.com/">sovafbdmyjgr</a>
Juliana, 11:33 / 01.04.2013
Allegations of threats and indiiitatmon is an abuse of authority.There was no act of bulling or harassment as claimed by Steve Tully, Chief Electoral Commissioner.Mr Steve Tully's accusations are false and not supported by the facts.Mr Tully was not even present at the briefing in question.Having spoken to a number of people present at the meeting all stated that Mr Tully's statement is a gross over-reaction to criticism at the way in which the VEC elections are to be counted.There was no grounds or justification to Mr Tully's statement or his accusations.The reason behind Mr Tully's emotive outburst is simple, Steve Tully had come under serious criticism in relation to his conduct of the 2006 State election along with concern that he may have deliberately mislead the parliament in his evidence given to the State Parliamentary committee on electoral matters.Mr Tully had cut corners and in the process he made a number of serious mistakes during the conduct of the 2006 State election.Under the terms of the Local Government Act and regulations the Returning Officer is required to preliminary sort ballot papers into primary votes which in turn is used to reconcile the number of votes pertaining to the election as part of the process of scrutiny of the ballot.Mr Tully has opted to once again cut corners and ignore requests that the count be open and transparent and that the ballot papers be subject to a preliminary distribution as required under the Act for a manual count.There is no justification for a computerised counting of the Lord Mayors ballot. A majority of candidates had supported calls for the ballot to be counted manually so that it could be subject to proper scrutiny.The Victorian Parliament in reviewing the mistakes made during the 2006 State election recommended that the VEC preliminary presort ballot papers into primary votes as is the case with Federal elections. Mr Tully chose to ignore the parliament's recommendation and the request made by candidates and others. Mr Tully directed Mr Bill Lang, City of Melbourne's Returning Officer, to reject the request for the preliminary sorting of ballot papers undermining the independence of the appointed Returning Officer.The Chief Commissioner misused and abused his position of authority.At no time had staff been subjected to any threats and any act that warrants or requires police presence. Steve Tully's statement calling for police protection is a further act of indiiitatmon and harassment against his critics and an abuse of authority.Mr Tully made similar false threats of indiiitatmon in the leaduop to and following the 2006 State election in which votes went missing during the count and the data recorded seriously flawed. Mr Tully was unable and unwilling to provide access to crucial data related to the 2006 count.In giving evidence to the parliamentary Electoral Matters Committee, Mr Tully stated that the data records of the 2006 Western Metropolitan Province count had been destroyed and were no longer available. An extraordinary claim given that it costs millions of dollars to count the ballot and it turns out that backup copies of the data were not recorded.The complaints and submission lodged in relation to the proposed City of Melbourne count were seeking to prevent a repeat of the mistakes made by the Chief Commissioner in 2006. Mistakes that were made as result of a lack of due diligence and denial of access to crucial data by the Chief Commissioner. Mistakes that should be avoided and not repeated with the Melbourne City Council elections.It is fundamental to our democracy that elections are open and transparent in order that public confidence in the electoral process is maintained, This issue does not just effect the City of Melbourne but the entire State.The actions of Mr Tully are a form of retribution and indiiitatmon of critics to his administration. This is not the first time Mr Tully has acted in such a manner.Members of Parliament are very much aware of Mr Tully's acts of indiiitatmon and abuse of process against those who gave evidence to the parliamentary inquiry.Mr Tully in making false accusations of this nature has raised doubts and questions as to his suitability to hold the office of Chief Commissioner.
Pages: 1
Control code: *
 
 
please, enter the letters that you can see on the left
Your name: *   Your e-mail:
Comment: *
Search:
advanced


© 2005—2019 Information agency “Context-Prichernomorie”
Committee of informational politics, Radio and Television Broadcasting №119 7.12.2004
Any information from the site shall be used only with reference to Information agency “Context-Prichernomorie”
© 2005—2019 S&A design team / 0.024