NSG Senate Coffee Shop [NSG Senate]

[Greater Pokarnia]

Things are getting really heated over a pair of bills that'll take at least 3 weeks to enter the debate phase in the senate. I'd advise we start discussion over a bill higher up in queue to calm things down a bit.

[The Republic of Lanos]

There are times when we must get off our high-horses and compromise for the sake of peace and democracy.

I can't believe paramilitaries has been the most heated debate in the senate.

At least there was a compromise on that issue.

[Shrillland]

I suppose you are right.

[Costa Alegria]

Is that a threat, Senator?

Take it as you wish. If you think it's a threat, it is. If you don't, then it is not.

We want to know we wont be attacked, which we now have no guarantee of.

Then, when the time comes, you should disarm. There's nothing stopping you from employing paid private security or asking the state for protection.

[Hathradic States]

Quite. The paramilitaries do not immediately mean anti-democracy. But I'm trying to understand both points of view, okay? It's kind of hard to listen to people when they're mad and flipping tables over this shit.

I respect the honourable senator is trying to take the moderate position, but her party is not the only one with Paramilitaries. Suppose the other parties try to use theirs.

The CMP won't without us. And we highly doubt the USLP will.

[Greater Pokarnia]

I respect the honourable senator is trying to take the moderate position, but her party is not the only one with Paramilitaries. Suppose the other parties try to use theirs.

The CMP won't without us. And we highly doubt the USLP will.

The Communists won't either. Ours is a militia with the sole purpose of defending party members, events and party-supported events.

[Ceannairceach]

You expect favoritism in exchange for peace? You do not seem to be a nationalist, sir, but rather a opportunist who seeks to weaken the government to serve his own interests.

The government supports you so far that it gives you a voice equal to everyone else in the Senate. Asking for anything more than that is immoral and thief-like.

We're not fucking talking about favoritism. We're talking about guarantees that our party won't be molested by opportunists.

Should all parties disband their paramilitaries, or be made to do so, then there is no threat of that. Considering the existence of a police force now and the legislative attempt to disarm, the NIFP has no reason to maintain a private, partisan defense force for its own use.

[Zweite Alaje]

There are times when we must get off our high-horses and compromise for the sake of peace and democracy.

I can't believe paramilitaries has been the most heated debate in the senate.

The liberals want to keep attention of they're increasingly immoral proposals.

[Costa Alegria]

There are times when we must get off our high-horses and compromise for the sake of peace and democracy.

Indeed. But such a time has not arrived.

[Hathradic States]

Is that a threat, Senator?

Take it as you wish. If you think it's a threat, it is. If you don't, then it is not.

Sure as hell sounds like one, Himmler.

We want to know we wont be attacked, which we now have no guarantee of.

Then, when the time comes, you should disarm. There's nothing stopping you from employing paid private security or asking the state for protection.

What do you think our PSF is? Private security, on a mass scale.

[Unicario]

We're not fucking talking about favoritism. We're talking about guarantees that our party won't be molested by opportunists.

Should all parties disband their paramilitaries, or be made to do so, then there is no threat of that. Considering the existence of a police force now and the legislative attempt to disarm, the NIFP has no reason to maintain a private, partisan defense force for its own use.

You don't think some of the more radical central-liberal senators won't try to dismantle the NIFP?

Honestly, all we want is the government to give us a guarantee that our party will be protected sufficiently. In my opinion (which is unofficial), that's the only damn problem here.

[Ceannairceach]

You expect favoritism in exchange for peace? You do not seem to be a nationalist, sir, but rather a opportunist who seeks to weaken the government to serve his own interests.

The government supports you so far that it gives you a voice equal to everyone else in the Senate. Asking for anything more than that is immoral and thief-like.

We want to know we wont be attacked, which we now have no guarantee of.

The police force now exists, Senator. Any threats may be handled through them. Your party has a paramilitary now solely to look threatening, since the common defense is handled by the police.

[Hathradic States]

The CMP won't without us. And we highly doubt the USLP will.

The Communists won't either. Ours is a militia with the sole purpose of defending party members, events and party-supported events.

You guys have one? O.o since when?

[The Realm of God]

There are times when we must get off our high-horses and compromise for the sake of peace and democracy.

Indeed. But such a time has not arrived.

The time when certain senators threaten to unleash a horde of chavs whenever an Act they don't like is proposed, is the time to bloody compromise!

[Geilinor]

The Communists won't either. Ours is a militia with the sole purpose of defending party members, events and party-supported events.

You guys have one? O.o since when?

They created it when the other parties made paramilitaries.

[The Republic of Lanos]

There are times when we must get off our high-horses and compromise for the sake of peace and democracy.

Indeed. But such a time has not arrived.

Right now, with your rhetoric and with Realm and Hath agreeing to a landmark compromise on paramilitaries, is the best.

[Ceannairceach]

Should all parties disband their paramilitaries, or be made to do so, then there is no threat of that. Considering the existence of a police force now and the legislative attempt to disarm, the NIFP has no reason to maintain a private, partisan defense force for its own use.

You don't think some of the more radical central-liberal senators won't try to dismantle the NIFP?

Honestly, all we want is the government to give us a guarantee that our party will be protected sufficiently. In my opinion (which is unofficial), that's the only damn problem here.

How will they do that, Senator, without an army of their own? Do you think the disarmament applies only to the NIFP?

Well, regardless, it does not. All parties should disarm. And the police will protect all from radicals and rebels.

[Unicario]

You don't think some of the more radical central-liberal senators won't try to dismantle the NIFP?

Honestly, all we want is the government to give us a guarantee that our party will be protected sufficiently. In my opinion (which is unofficial), that's the only damn problem here.

How will they do that, Senator, without an army of their own? Do you think the disarmament applies only to the NIFP?

Well, regardless, it does not. All parties should disarm. And the police will protect all from radicals and rebels.

It's just a mistrust that is being strengthened with the strong-arming radicalism of several Senators.

[Hathradic States]

We want to know we wont be attacked, which we now have no guarantee of.

The police force now exists, Senator. Any threats may be handled through them. Your party has a paramilitary now solely to look threatening, since the common defense is handled by the police.

More importantly, we have them to look good infront of our buildings and on parades. Our constituents expect the PSF to be there, and to support the police when the police can't be there.

[Greater Pokarnia]

The Communists won't either. Ours is a militia with the sole purpose of defending party members, events and party-supported events.

You guys have one? O.o since when?

Spartacus League (check my sig). As I've said, we only formed it because our political opponents formed paramilitaries and the Royalist Guard's missions statement was "fighting communists". Regardless of what other parties promise to do with theirs we won't be disbanding ours until such time as our political opponents do, either willingly or through senate legislation.

[NSG Senate Administrators]

Let's make sure we're winding this down, shall we? Don't need anymore slurs or name-calling, do we? I'd prefer not to have to remind you again within the next couple hours. Thank you.

[Geilinor]

Should all parties disband their paramilitaries, or be made to do so, then there is no threat of that. Considering the existence of a police force now and the legislative attempt to disarm, the NIFP has no reason to maintain a private, partisan defense force for its own use.

You don't think some of the more radical central-liberal senators won't try to dismantle the NIFP?

Honestly, all we want is the government to give us a guarantee that our party will be protected sufficiently. In my opinion (which is unofficial), that's the only damn problem here.

The Liberal Democrats certainly won't try to dismantle any parties.

[TerraPublica]

The Communists won't either. Ours is a militia with the sole purpose of defending party members, events and party-supported events.

You guys have one? O.o since when?

It's not really a paramilitary. It's more of a loosely affiliated worker's militia who only provide security at party events. It's not a professional fighting force, or anything.

[Hathradic States]

You guys have one? O.o since when?

They created it when the other parties made paramilitaries.

I didn't even know other parties had until the first bill went through. I had thought the NIFP unique.

You guys have one? O.o since when?

Spartacus League (check my sig). As I've said, we only formed it because our political opponents formed paramilitaries and the Royalist Guard's missions statement was "fighting communists". Regardless of what other parties promise to do with theirs we won't be disbanding ours until such time as our political opponents do, either willingly or through senate legislation.

Hmm....maybe we should work to ally our parties on this, then.

[Mishmahig]

You don't think some of the more radical central-liberal senators won't try to dismantle the NIFP?

Honestly, all we want is the government to give us a guarantee that our party will be protected sufficiently. In my opinion (which is unofficial), that's the only damn problem here.

The Liberal Democrats certainly won't try to dismantle any parties.

Dismantling parties has never come up for discussion.