European Politics Thread.

[Garcia 0]

I don't like EU...to me it seems like a way of copying USA, though in Europe

Why USA, and not UK, or Germany, or Switzerland or any number of other federation type constructs?

America and Europe have quite different ideas of what they are and should be. The only similiarity is the elementary idea that free trade benefits all involved and that harmonizing laws and regulations makes life easier. It's not very controversial to say that working together gives better results at a lower cost.

i think what he's trying to say is the running of the countries in the EU would be more centralized, which is the wrong way to go about it, i think.

How does the EU leadership know about any problems my local authority have with the local area? Fortunatley, my local authorities is doing a very good job in governing the city of Nottingham and the Nottinghamshire County. But could laws and regulations introduced by the EU affect my area?

I can no longer take vitamin and mineral supplements because of the EU, or if its not introduced yet, it will be. I know that is not a governance of local area thing, but its something brought in that will effect people all over.

Well...dunno if it's right to say that it'll be Europes version of USA. It's just that I get the feeling they want to make Europe to United Nations of Europe. Like, first they get the Euro in. Ok, the Euro can be a good thing. Makes it all easier, but I would rather keep my NOK (which I will, since we're not part of EU) And then this constitution thingy. What's next? Same language? Then same goverment? (yes I know it's worst case scenario thingy and a long shot)

I'll just go eat pizza

[denoir 0]

How does the EU leadership know about any problems my local authority have with the local area? Fortunatley, my local authorities is doing a very good job in governing the city of Nottingham and the Nottinghamshire County. But could laws and regulations introduced by the EU affect my area?

The main foundation of the EU is the principle of subsidiarity which states the following (Nice Treaty):

Quote[/b] ]

Under the principle of subsidiarity, in areas which do not fall within its exclusive competence the Union shall act only if and insofar as the objectives of the intended action cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States, either at central level or at regional and local level, but can rather, by reason of the scale or effects of the proposed action, be better achieved at Union level.

In plain language it means that every decision should be handled on a level as local as possible.

Something that concerns all citizens of Nottinghamshire County should be handled by Nottinghamshire country authorities. Something that concerns all citizens of the UK should be handled on UK national level. And something that concerns all citizens of Europe should be handled at Union level.

The second very important part of the EU is to make sure that the rights of European citizens are protected. It's sort of a stability guarantee if some crazy national government gets elected. It's the reason why we don't have a Patriot Act in any EU state. Sure there were attempts at both local and Union level, but they got shot down by the European parliament and thus the individual rights of many Europeans were protected. Even if it was against the wish of their national governments.

It is a far more complicated, a far more costly and a far more bureaucratic system to maintain. But ultimately it brings stability and protects us from dumb-ass politicians making hasty decisions. On Union level there must be an agreement between the member states who not seldom have quite different views on things. So for a law to pass it needs to be some form of compromise - it has to pass through the bureaucracy and that way questionable decisions are eliminated.

A dictatorship will always be faster and more efficient than a democracy at decision making, but that doesn't make it better. The same way, national governments can make very fast very wrong decisions. The EU serves as a very good filter that kind of stuff.

For the day-to-day operations, things are still handled on a level as local as possible, without any Union involvement.

[denoir 0]

Well...dunno if it's right to say that it'll be Europes version of USA. It's just that I get the feeling they want to make Europe to United Nations of Europe. Like, first they get the Euro in. Ok, the Euro can be a good thing. Makes it all easier, but I would rather keep my NOK (which I will, since we're not part of EU) And then this constitution thingy. What's next? Same language? Then same goverment? (yes I know it's worst case scenario thingy and a long shot)

I'll just go eat pizza

Don't worry about the European Union, I have full plans to reinstate the Swedish-Norwegian Union, through an invasion at a suitable time  

[Garcia 0]

Well...we will have some trouts ready to throw at you. You know...we don't got much defences left Norwegian Army managed to use about 1 billion NOK too much last year, but they keep taking stuff out of action. We now got no tanks left in active duty in the north...so soon all we got is rocks and sticks We go fighting others war in Iraq, but we can't afford to defend our own country...

Goooooooo Norway!!

[brgnorway 0]

Well...dunno if it's right to say that it'll be Europes version of USA. It's just that I get the feeling they want to make Europe to United Nations of Europe. Like, first they get the Euro in. Ok, the Euro can be a good thing. Makes it all easier, but I would rather keep my NOK (which I will, since we're not part of EU) And then this constitution thingy. What's next? Same language? Then same goverment? (yes I know it's worst case scenario thingy and a long shot)

I'll just go eat pizza

Don't worry about the European Union, I have full plans to reinstate the Swedish-Norwegian Union, through an invasion at a suitable time  

With today's oilprice we'll buy you long before it comes to that....

[Necromancer- 0]

Well...we will have some trouts ready to throw at you. You know...we don't got much defences left Norwegian Army managed to use about 1 billion NOK too much last year, but they keep taking stuff out of action. We now got no tanks left in active duty in the north...so soon all we got is rocks and sticks We go fighting others war in Iraq, but we can't afford to defend our own country...

Goooooooo Norway!!

Who wants Norway anyway?

[Garcia 0]

Well...we will have some trouts ready to throw at you. You know...we don't got much defences left Norwegian Army managed to use about 1 billion NOK too much last year, but they keep taking stuff out of action. We now got no tanks left in active duty in the north...so soon all we got is rocks and sticks We go fighting others war in Iraq, but we can't afford to defend our own country...

Goooooooo Norway!!

Who wants Norway anyway?  

Everybody! Since UN said Norway is the best country to live in And because we have oil!

[EiZei 0]

.. and where a big mac hamburger costs 5.5e.

[Garcia 0]

big mac sucks anyway

[mattxr 9]

Fast Food Sucks All together... erm what we discusing?

[Bordoy 0]

mcdonalds is for chavs.

[D.murphy man 0]

ok this has gone Waayy of topic but i love mcdonalds and i dont consider myself a 'chav'

any way in an attempt to stop the mods crashing our party with a swift click of the locked button... ermm politics... eroupean.. hmm i know! lets discuss the new 24 hour licenceing in britian for pubs and clubs! all i got to say about that is 'yay!'

[Bordoy 0]

I'm against the new licensing laws. Lets cut down on drinking....................by keeping doors open for longer lol.

[D.murphy man 0]

ah i dont think it was so much about making us drink less, but rather help the police out by stopping all these drunks being kicked out at the same time and roaming the streets causing trouble/ eating up police recources.

[da12thMonkey 1943]

Having all the drinkers kicked out at the same time of night ensures that most of the night's incidents will be over by about midnight-1am and that the police will fairly close to any incidents since they have a fairly good idea of what time of night they're likely to take place and can be in position to deal witht them. By giving 24 hour licenses, people can choose when they want to go home (typically this as late as 3am in my case if there's a lock-in at the pub ) so the police will have to stay around in town/city centers for longer than they used to, dealing with incidents at times when usually there were none and having to travel back and forth from the station, back into the centre after their arrests all night long. I should imagine this would mean there will be fewer police on the street at any one time, since at the moment they just bung you in a van for half an hour to an hour while the pubs are still closing so they can be around to arrest people during this time, then take you to the station once things have quietened down or the van is full.

It's not a good idea to extend licensing hours IMO.

[Supah 0]

We, on the mainland, who have always had longer opening hours dont have the same trouble with binge drinking Great Britain does have with the restrictive licensing law

[ozanzac 0]

Not sure about the rest of my country, but at least in my hometown.

The Rule of thumb, is that pubs serving after 12:00 midnight in an urban environment, as part of their liquor licencing, must provide liceneced security personell during peak periods. (Friday & Saturday Nights, during Special Events & Public Holidays)

Entry to pubs is restricted after 1:30am, and last drinks generally start to wind down at around 3:30 am.

Works effectively, for a town with 9 pubs, population of 18,000 people, and 2 or 3 local police cars.

[D.murphy man 0]

We, on the mainland, who have always had longer opening hours dont have the same trouble with binge drinking Great Britain does have with the restrictive licensing law

I agree, here in britian we seem to have a binging culture where its ok to go out and drink as much as you possibly can intill you can no longer walk where as in mainland eroupe they dont see alchol as somthing special, that they must drink vasts amounts of as quikly as possible. Most properly because the laws on alchol arnt so restrictive. Over here its like telling a child not to eat too many sweets, once you tell it that the childs gonna try and get there hands on as much sweets n chocolate as they can

But relaxing the laws now in britian wont change the attitude instantly and might in the short term cause more proplems. Maybe they should consider somthing similar to the anti smoking campiangs??

Also one thing i found intresting which was on the news a few das back was a new survey that showed that Brits are the heavyst drinkers on holidays in eroupe (mainly in spain) closely followed by the austrailians and the irish. Or at least somthing along thoughs lines if i remember correctly.

[Bordoy 0]

Quote[/b] ]I agree, here in britian we seem to have a binging culture where its ok to go out and drink as much as you possibly can intill you can no longer walk where as in mainland eroupe they dont see alchol as somthing special, that they must drink vasts amounts of as quikly as possible. Most properly because the laws on alchol arnt so restrictive. Over here its like telling a child not to eat too many sweets, once you tell it that the childs gonna try and get there hands on as much sweets n chocolate as they can

I think people are pressurised into drinking like having sex is shown as the best thing ever.

It's a social and has start from the bottom-up.

[Badgerboy 0]

We, on the mainland, who have always had longer opening hours dont have the same trouble with binge drinking Great Britain does have with the restrictive licensing law

It's not the licensing laws that cause the drink problems here in the UK, its just that a majority of the population are socially inept bastards.

God knows why there is this air of thuggery, but it really pisses me off. Shrieking dog faced women shouting at 2am, and pissed blokes bouncing off cars and windows, while attempting to fight everyone they come across.....

And if I was to stun them with an iron bar, gaffer tape them up, and dump them in the river, I'd be the criminal!

Bah. I'm moving to Hong Kong....

[Bordoy 0]

We, on the mainland, who have always had longer opening hours dont have the same trouble with binge drinking Great Britain does have with the restrictive licensing law

It's not the licensing laws that cause the drink problems here in the UK, its just that a majority of the population are socially inept bastards.

God knows why there is this air of thuggery, but it really pisses me off. Shrieking dog faced women shouting at 2am, and pissed blokes bouncing off cars and windows, while attempting to fight everyone they come across.....

And if I was to stun them with an iron bar, gaffer tape them up, and dump them in the river, I'd be the criminal!

Bah. I'm moving to Hong Kong....

At least you'll get cheap bra's

[Badgerboy 0]

Well, the company I work for actually makes them! They are based in Hong Kong and China, and I run all the IT operations in the UK.

Usually get a few trips a year to HK, and hopefully might be going over for a few years soon. This EU business is causing some grief though, as well as the US getting shirty. About 50% of our retail products ship to the US.

[Bordoy 0]

Kenneth Clarke has stated that the UK will not join the Euro currency for at least 10 years.

That's fairly realistic.  In addition you have to realize that he lost two elections in a row because of his overt pro-EU position. It's unlikely that he'll repeat that.

Quote[/b] ]I would like to see David Cameron become the leader of the party.

If David Cameron is elected, the Tories won't get to power in the next 12 years. He like many of the other candidates are basically Thathcherists whose vision of Britain is completely out of touch with reality. The Tories need to move more to the center or they won't get elected. Old-school right-wing conservatism doesn't work anymore in Europe, including the UK. The same goes for old-school left-wing socialism - a trend that Labour understood nearly a decade ago and transformed accordingly.

I've changed my mind. David Cameron has a too soft approach on drugs.

Not sure who i would like to see incharge but has to be one of Ken Clarke, David Davis or Liam Fox.

[xawery 0]

Del Ponte accuses Vatican of protecting Gotovina

I read this in my Dutch paper, NRC Handelsblad. The Telegraph was the only English-language paper I could find that reported this as well. While I cannot say whether the Telegraph is a reliable paper, I can certainly vouch for the NRC.

Sorry about the poor formatting, by the way.

Quote[/b] ]

Vatican accused of shielding 'war criminal'

By David Rennie in The Hague

(Filed: 20/09/2005)

One of the most wanted war criminals is being shielded by the Roman Catholic Church and the Vatican hierarchy, the United Nations' chief prosecutor for former Yugoslavia said yesterday.

Carla del Ponte, the chief prosecutor of the UN international criminal tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, said she believed that Gen Ante Gotovina was being sheltered in a Franciscan monastery in his native Croatia.

The Vatican could probably pinpoint exactly which of Croatia's 80 monasteries was sheltering him "in a few days", Mrs del Ponte told The Daily Telegraph at her offices in The Hague.

Instead, she had been "extremely disappointed" to encounter a wall of silence from the Vatican. Frustrated by months of secret but fruitless appeals to leading Vatican officials, including a direct appeal to Pope Benedict XVI, Mrs del Ponte has decided to make the matter public.

Gen Gotovina, still regarded as a hero by many Croats, is the most important war crimes suspect still at large from the Yugoslav conflict, after the Bosnian Serb leader Radovan Karadzic and his military commander, Gen Ratko Mladic.

She said: "I have information he is hiding in a Franciscan monastery and so the Catholic Church is protecting him. I have taken this up with the Vatican and the Vatican refuses totally to co-operate with us."

In July, Mrs del Ponte travelled to Rome to share her intelligence with the Vatican's ''foreign minister'', Archbishop Giovanni Lajolo.

He refused to help, telling her the Vatican was not a state and thus had "no international obligations" to help the UN to hunt war criminals.

Mrs del Ponte complained: "They said they have no intelligence and I don't believe that. I think that the Catholic Church has the most advanced intelligence services."

Gen Gotovina, 49, has been a fugitive since 2001 when he was indicted on charges of crimes against humanity and war crimes. America has placed a Å2.8 million bounty on his head.

A former French foreign legion officer, he is accused of overseeing and permitting the killing of at least 150 Serb civilians and the forced deportation of between 150,000 and 200,000 others after Operation Storm, a 1995 offensive to reimpose Croatian control over the Krajina region. Gen Gotovina's whereabouts are of interest not only to lawyers and historians. They are at the heart of a political mystery that has divided the European Union.

In February, the Balkan intrigue took a poisonous turn for Britain when the general's allies inside Croat intelligence "outed" several war crimes investigators in Croatia as serving MI6 and United States intelligence officers.

The next month, Britain led a successful campaign to halt the planned opening of talks with Croatia on joining the EU. Those accession talks remain on hold until Croatia is found to be "fully co-operating" with the tribunal, an assessment to be made by Mrs del Ponte.

In the past few days, Austria, Croatia's most fervent supporter within the EU, launched a fresh attempt to demand that the Balkan nation be allowed to begin accession talks early next month.

The Croatian authorities have promised to raid any monastery sheltering Gen Gotovina. But Mrs del Ponte feels little closer to catching him, largely because of the Vatican's refusal to help. Archbishop Lajolo had even refused an appeal for the Vatican to act as a secret back-channel of communication to the Croatian Church, she said. "I asked to have an interlocutor in the Vatican, so I can share the information that I have, but no, no possibility."

Mrs del Ponte survived a Mafia assassination attempt during her career as a Swiss federal prosecutor. She now works in The Hague, protected by armed UN guards.

As a Roman Catholic, she said she was "doubly disappointed" by the Vatican. She asked the Vatican to repudiate a recent statement by Mile Bogovic, the Bishop of Gospic and Senj, denouncing the tribunal as a "political court" determined to distort Croatia's past, and referring to Gen Gotovina as "a symbol of victory".

Archbishop Lajolo told her that the Holy See had no direct authority over individual bishops.

She added: "Mgr Lajolo said to me: 'Let me know in which monastery Gotovina is hiding.' I said, if I knew, I would not be here in Rome."

Mrs del Ponte finally wrote to the Pope directly. Several weeks later, she has received no reply.

At the Vatican, Monsignor Maurizio Bravi, the private secretary to Archbishop Lajolo, confirmed that the meeting with Mrs del Ponte had taken place. But he said: "I cannot give you any information on this."

Back in The Hague, Mrs del Ponte was asked if she felt the Church was motivated by historic links to the Croatian nationalist cause or out of a desire to avoid the secular world. "I don't want to envisage an answer to your question," she said. "But my disappointment is big."

The original article.

Well, this is an interesting development, isn't it?

[denoir 0]

I think that Carla del Ponte is basically doing what any prosecutor should do - try all possible ways to find ad get the convicted accused. I don't see much controversy in that.

The big question is however how much the EU and others should listen to exclusively her, rather than the actual court, as she has to be biased per definition.

I think that the EU handling of the situation has been extremely short-sighted and that they have been going about entirely the wrong way to get Gotovina on trial. Thanks to the bad handling of the case according to the latest Eurobarometer, the popular support for the EU has dropped from some 70% to below 30% in the last six months. That makes Croatia the most EU-sceptic state in Europe, and they haven't even joined yet.

As I said, Del Ponte is just doing her job as a prosecutor - she has no interest in the wider political consequences of her actions and she is and should be biased per definition. The EU should however know better. It should be aware that there are political consequences to it and that this is doing long term damage to relations of the Union to a certain future member state.

So far the consequences have been that the Croats really dislike the Union and local support for ultra-nationalist right wing parties has rocketed. Many people that really don't give as shit about Gotovina are interpreting this as an issue of national soverginity and they think that Croatia is being humiliated by the Union. That's a very bad start.

It should be noted though that the EU is pretty much divided on the issue. There are three primary countries that have been pushing the current EU agenda and it's the UK, Sweden and Netherlands. France and Germany have been neutral in the question while Austria, Italy, Hungary and Poland have been on the Croatian side. That makes this Vatican thing even more interesting as UK, Sweden and the Netherlands have absolutely no ties to the Vatican, something that cannot be said for many other EU countries.