The European Parliament's biggest political group, the centre-right
European People's Party (EPP), will not be supporting a resolution
defending human rights in Saudi Arabia.
The resolution to be voted on Thursday (8 October) singles out the
plight of Ethiopian migrant workers in the Kingdom but also highlights
imprisoned women rights defenders and others.
Read more at:
EPP to oppose Saudi Arabia human rights resolution
Showing posts with label European Parliament. Show all posts
Showing posts with label European Parliament. Show all posts
10/9/20
2/27/18
Northern Ireland: European Parliament will fight to keep Northern Ireland subject to EU law after Brexit, says Guy Verhofstadt - by James Crisp
Guy Verhofstadt declared on Tuesday the European Parliament would fight to ensure that Northern Ireland remains subject to EU law after Brexit and heaped yet more pressure on Mrs May in a crunch week for the Prime Minister.
British MEPs accused the parliament’s Brexit coordinator of "intolerable interference" in UK affairs and of trying to topple Theresa May’s government.
Mr Verhofstadt, the parliament’s Brexit coordinator, told MEPs in the Constitutional Affairs Committee that it was the only way to prevent a hard border between Ireland and Northern Ireland.
Read more: European Parliament will fight to keep Northern Ireland subject to EU law after Brexit, says Guy Verhofstadt
British MEPs accused the parliament’s Brexit coordinator of "intolerable interference" in UK affairs and of trying to topple Theresa May’s government.
Mr Verhofstadt, the parliament’s Brexit coordinator, told MEPs in the Constitutional Affairs Committee that it was the only way to prevent a hard border between Ireland and Northern Ireland.
Read more: European Parliament will fight to keep Northern Ireland subject to EU law after Brexit, says Guy Verhofstadt
5/29/16
Focus on the future: America’s Worst Laid Plans – by Michael Brenner
The United States has been pursuing an audacious project to fashion a global system according to its specifications and under its tutelage since the Cold War’s end.
For a quarter of a century, the paramount goal of all its foreign relations has been the fostering of a system whose architectural design features the following:
–a neo-liberal economic order wherein markets dictate economic outcomes and the influence of public authorities to regulate them is weakened;
–this entails a progressive financializing of the world economy which concentrates the levers of greatest power in a few Western institutions – private, national and supranational;
–if inequality of wealth and power is the outcome, so be it;
–security provided by an American-led concert that will have predominant influence in every region;
–a readiness to use coercion to remove any regime that directly challenges this envisaged order;
–the maintenance of a large, multi-functional American military force to ensure that the means to deal with any contingency as could arise;
–all cemented by the unquestioned conviction that this enterprise conforms to a teleology whose truth and direction were confirmed by the West’s total victory in the Cold War.
Therefore, it is inherently a virtuous project whose realization will benefit all mankind. Virtue is understood in both tangible and ethical terms.
American ‘Destiny’
The motto: There is a tide running in the affairs of man; so, now is the time for America to steer the current and fulfill its destiny.
The project has registered some remarkable successes (at least by its own definitions). The Washington sponsored Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and its counterpart`, the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTPI), ensconce a privileged position for corporate interests that supersedes that of governments in binding international law.
The towering financial conglomerates have emerged from the great financial panic and Great Recession, which they caused, not only unscathed but bigger, stronger and with a stranglehold over macro-economic policy across most of the globe.
The United States, the progenitor of neo-liberalism and its operational guide, has seen its democracy converted into a plutocracy in all but name. The more things change, the more they must be made to seem the same.
These tenets of neo-liberalism have been codified into an orthodoxy whose dogma permeates the intellectual fiber of academia, the media and the corridors of state power. Challengers are ruthlessly put down – as witness the crucifying of Greece’s first Syriza government. Political leaders who deviate find themselves the object of international campaigns to oust them, e.g., Honduras, Venezuela, Bolivia, Paraguay, Brazil, Argentina, Iran and Russia.
As an indirect consequence of the project’s successes, political resistance now comes not from the Left but rather from a recrudescent nationalist Right as is occurring in Europe – the rebellion in both the East and the West against the European Union’s brave new world of technocracy of, by and for the corporate elites.
Trumpism represents the analogous phenomenon decked out in stars-and-stripes garb. This exacerbates the tensions generated internally by the guided globalization project. Within the decision centers of Washington power, that could either provide new impetus to the external dimension of establishing a global order under American aegis – or handicap it.
Whichever proves to be the case, the turn toward authoritarianism and xenophobia within the liberal democracies shows how ill-conceived and ineptly executed the design for a new world order is. For it has overreached at home and abroad.
Read the full report: : America’s Worst Laid Plans – Consortiumnews
For a quarter of a century, the paramount goal of all its foreign relations has been the fostering of a system whose architectural design features the following:
–a neo-liberal economic order wherein markets dictate economic outcomes and the influence of public authorities to regulate them is weakened;
–this entails a progressive financializing of the world economy which concentrates the levers of greatest power in a few Western institutions – private, national and supranational;
–if inequality of wealth and power is the outcome, so be it;
–security provided by an American-led concert that will have predominant influence in every region;
–a readiness to use coercion to remove any regime that directly challenges this envisaged order;
–the maintenance of a large, multi-functional American military force to ensure that the means to deal with any contingency as could arise;
–all cemented by the unquestioned conviction that this enterprise conforms to a teleology whose truth and direction were confirmed by the West’s total victory in the Cold War.
Therefore, it is inherently a virtuous project whose realization will benefit all mankind. Virtue is understood in both tangible and ethical terms.
American ‘Destiny’
The motto: There is a tide running in the affairs of man; so, now is the time for America to steer the current and fulfill its destiny.
The project has registered some remarkable successes (at least by its own definitions). The Washington sponsored Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and its counterpart`, the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTPI), ensconce a privileged position for corporate interests that supersedes that of governments in binding international law.
The towering financial conglomerates have emerged from the great financial panic and Great Recession, which they caused, not only unscathed but bigger, stronger and with a stranglehold over macro-economic policy across most of the globe.
The United States, the progenitor of neo-liberalism and its operational guide, has seen its democracy converted into a plutocracy in all but name. The more things change, the more they must be made to seem the same.
These tenets of neo-liberalism have been codified into an orthodoxy whose dogma permeates the intellectual fiber of academia, the media and the corridors of state power. Challengers are ruthlessly put down – as witness the crucifying of Greece’s first Syriza government. Political leaders who deviate find themselves the object of international campaigns to oust them, e.g., Honduras, Venezuela, Bolivia, Paraguay, Brazil, Argentina, Iran and Russia.
As an indirect consequence of the project’s successes, political resistance now comes not from the Left but rather from a recrudescent nationalist Right as is occurring in Europe – the rebellion in both the East and the West against the European Union’s brave new world of technocracy of, by and for the corporate elites.
Trumpism represents the analogous phenomenon decked out in stars-and-stripes garb. This exacerbates the tensions generated internally by the guided globalization project. Within the decision centers of Washington power, that could either provide new impetus to the external dimension of establishing a global order under American aegis – or handicap it.
Whichever proves to be the case, the turn toward authoritarianism and xenophobia within the liberal democracies shows how ill-conceived and ineptly executed the design for a new world order is. For it has overreached at home and abroad.
Read the full report: : America’s Worst Laid Plans – Consortiumnews
1/2/16
EU warns in weak statement of "dangerous consequences" of Saudi cleric execution
 |
| Is the EU a toothless tiger? |
The European Union's foreign policy chief warned today, Saturday January 2, that Saudi Arabia's execution of a prominent Shi'ite Muslim cleric risked "dangerous consequences" by further inflaming sectarian tensions in the region.
The kingdom executed cleric Nimr al-Nimr on Saturday alongside dozens of al Qaeda members, signalling that it would not tolerate attacks, whether by Sunni jihadists or from its Shi'ite minority.
EU foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini, reiterating the bloc's opposition to the death penalty and mass executions in particular, said Nimr's case raised serious concerns over freedom of expression and the respect of basic civil and political rights in Saudi Arabia.
"This case has also the potential of inflaming further the sectarian tensions that already bring so much damage to the entire region, with dangerous consequences," she said, urging Saudi authorities to promote reconciliation between different communities in the country.
Note EU-Digest: A very weak statement by the EU in reaction to Saudi Arabia's barbaric behavior in total disrespect of basic human rights laws.
The weak statement condemning Saudi Arabia by the EU foreign policy chief of the EU was obviously inspired by the fear of economic reprisals by Saudi Arabia (oil deliveries and EU weapons industry sales boycott) and of course, not to anger their "big boss" the US, who are backing the totally unreliable, so-called, "Islamic Nations Military alliance", under the leadership of the Saudi's, which supposedly will combat ISIS, but in reality have quite a different political objective.
It is high time the EU reviews its overall global foreign policy objectives and for the short term specifically takes a critical look at the Middle East policies, which to say the least, have been a total disaster so far.
Read more: EU warns of "dangerous consequences" of Saudi cleric execution | Daily Mail Online
9/10/15
European Parliament backs Juncker′s refugee plans
European lawmakers have backed European Commission President Jean-Claude
Juncker's proposals for coping with a massive influx of migrants. The
vast majority of the people on the move have been heading for Germany.
Members of the European Parliament meeting in Strasbourg on Thursday voted overwhelmingly to support Juncker's proposals, with 432 voting in favor of the non-binding resolution and just 142 against, with 57 abstentions.
A statement posted on the European Parliament's website said the lawmakers backed the Commission's proposal to relocate 120,000 asylum seekers from Italy, Greece and Hungary. This came a day after it backed an emergency proposal for relocating 40,000 asylum seekers.
It also said that a majority of lawmakers believed that the bloc's "Dublin rules," which determine in which member state any given migrant is required to register, should be amended through a "fair, compulsory allocation key" taking into account "the integration prospects and the specific cases and needs of asylum seekers themselves."
The MEPs also expressed support for the idea of drawing up a common EU list of safe countries of origin and a compulsory resettlement plan under which members states would be required to take in refugees from third countries.
Read more: European Parliament backs Juncker′s refugee plans | News | DW.COM | 10.09.2015
Members of the European Parliament meeting in Strasbourg on Thursday voted overwhelmingly to support Juncker's proposals, with 432 voting in favor of the non-binding resolution and just 142 against, with 57 abstentions.
A statement posted on the European Parliament's website said the lawmakers backed the Commission's proposal to relocate 120,000 asylum seekers from Italy, Greece and Hungary. This came a day after it backed an emergency proposal for relocating 40,000 asylum seekers.
It also said that a majority of lawmakers believed that the bloc's "Dublin rules," which determine in which member state any given migrant is required to register, should be amended through a "fair, compulsory allocation key" taking into account "the integration prospects and the specific cases and needs of asylum seekers themselves."
The MEPs also expressed support for the idea of drawing up a common EU list of safe countries of origin and a compulsory resettlement plan under which members states would be required to take in refugees from third countries.
Read more: European Parliament backs Juncker′s refugee plans | News | DW.COM | 10.09.2015
1/28/15
Thank You Greece! - by Maria Helena dos Santos André
In a time when in Paris Marine Le Pen is
“Ante Portas”, when xenophobic populists are marching through the
streets of Dresden, when in London the UKIP sets the tone for an ever
more anti-European hysteria, and when in Helsinki the Finnish government
becomes the most ardent proponent of more austerity for Greece, for no
other reason but the fear of a success of the “Real Finns” at the next
ballot box, the Greek people have given a clear signal, voting against
more austerity and for the European values of democracy, the welfare
state, tolerance and inclusive societies.
They have rejected the ruling by
European and international technocrats. They have said no to their
national oligarchic establishment that has led the country into the
current situation. But they also resisted the siren calls of Golden
Dawn. They have given their confidence to an untested party, with no
experience in government, a party that has presented an electoral
programme proposing better governance, more democracy, greater social
justice and an end of austerity policies that have destroyed the economy
and created unprecedented hardship while the public (and private)
debt continued to increase. The Greek voters have sent a clear message
to the rest of Europe: they want to be part of Europe, they can’t bear
more austerity; they need a sustainable solution to their debt problem;
they want to be a respected partner in the European Union and play an
active role in the common search for a Greek and European recovery.
Europe should not see the victory of
Syriza as a threat. Instead, it should be seen as a clear signal from
the people and as an opportunity for Europe as a whole to reconsider its
crisis response, which has already lead the continent into what may
become a decade of deflationary stagnation, even with the last
intervention of the ECB. There is no easy solution to the deep crisis in
Europe but one thing is certain: continuing with policies that do not
work, because they concentrate exclusively on fiscal prudence, is the
opposite of what must be done. We must give priority to growth,
investment, employment and redistributive policies.
Anyone guided by realism will recognize
that Greece cannot, at the same time, serve its tremendous debt burden
and recover economically and socially. Insisting on servicing the debt
without a strong economic recovery might be popular in some European
capitals but it will just not work. Debts that cannot be paid remain
un-payable even if creditors continue to insist that it should be paid.
The debt crises in Germany in the last
century offer great lessons in this respect. After World War I, the
victorious powers insisted that Germany should pay reparations
independently of its economic performance. The results are well known:
hyperinflation in the twenties, brutal austerity in the early thirties
resulting in the rise of Hitler who immediately stopped servicing any
foreign debt when he came to power.
After World War II, the Allies
recognized that Germany had to become prosperous first and should pay
afterwards. That reasoning lies behind one of the most generous debt
restructuring agreements in history in 1953, when more than 50% of the
German debt was written off, repayment was stretched out over more than
half a century and debt payments were made conditional on the existence
of a trade surplus. The last payment of debt from World War I was
actually made as late as in 2010 and payments at no time exceeded 5% of
German export earnings.
Read more: Thank You Greece!
12/14/14
Syria: U.S. Says Europeans Tortured by Assad's Death Machine - by Josh Rogin
The U.S. State Department has concluded that up to 10 European
citizens have been tortured and killed while in the custody of the
Syrian regime and that evidence of their deaths could be used for war
crimes prosecutions against Bashar al-Assad in several European
countries.
The new claim, made by the State Department’s ambassador at large for war crimes, Stephen Rapp, in an interview with me, is based on a newly completed FBI analysis of 27,000 photographs smuggled out of Syria by the former military photographer known as “Caesar.” The photos show evidence of the torture and murder of over 11,000 civilians in custody. The FBI spent months pouring over the photos and comparing them to consular databases with images of citizens from countries around the world.
Last month, the FBI gave the State Department its report, which included a group of photos that had been tentatively matched to individuals who were already in U.S. government files. “The group included multiple individuals who were non-Syrian, but none who had a birthplace in the United States, according to our information,” Rapp told me. “There were Europeans within that group.”
The implications could be huge for the international drive to prosecute Assad and other top Syrian officials for war crimes and crimes against humanity. While it’s unlikely that multilateral organizations such as the United Nations or the International Criminal Court will pursue cases against Assad in the near term, due to opposition by Assad’s allies including Russia, legal cases against the regime could be brought in individual countries whose citizens were victims of torture and murder.
Rapp declined to say which European countries’ citizens were found in the Caesar files, but said that there could be many more European and international citizens identified as the work to analyze the photos continues. Meanwhile, the drive to begin prosecutions against Assad and his cronies in European countries can now move forward.
Read more: U.S. Says Europeans Tortured by Assad's Death Machine - Bloomberg View
The new claim, made by the State Department’s ambassador at large for war crimes, Stephen Rapp, in an interview with me, is based on a newly completed FBI analysis of 27,000 photographs smuggled out of Syria by the former military photographer known as “Caesar.” The photos show evidence of the torture and murder of over 11,000 civilians in custody. The FBI spent months pouring over the photos and comparing them to consular databases with images of citizens from countries around the world.
Last month, the FBI gave the State Department its report, which included a group of photos that had been tentatively matched to individuals who were already in U.S. government files. “The group included multiple individuals who were non-Syrian, but none who had a birthplace in the United States, according to our information,” Rapp told me. “There were Europeans within that group.”
The implications could be huge for the international drive to prosecute Assad and other top Syrian officials for war crimes and crimes against humanity. While it’s unlikely that multilateral organizations such as the United Nations or the International Criminal Court will pursue cases against Assad in the near term, due to opposition by Assad’s allies including Russia, legal cases against the regime could be brought in individual countries whose citizens were victims of torture and murder.
Rapp declined to say which European countries’ citizens were found in the Caesar files, but said that there could be many more European and international citizens identified as the work to analyze the photos continues. Meanwhile, the drive to begin prosecutions against Assad and his cronies in European countries can now move forward.
Read more: U.S. Says Europeans Tortured by Assad's Death Machine - Bloomberg View
8/27/14
Ukraine crisis: Nato plans (not approved by France, Germany, Spain and Italy) east European bases to counter Russia - by Ian Traynor
NAT)O says it is to deploy its forces at new bases in eastern Europe for the first time, in response to the Ukraine
crisis and in an attempt to deter Vladimir Putin from causing trouble
in the former Soviet Baltic republics, according to its secretary
general.
Anders Fogh Rasmussen said the organisztions's summit in Cardiff next week would overcome divisions within the alliance and agree to new deployments on Russia's borders – a move certain to trigger a strong reaction from Moscow.
He also outlined moves to boost Ukraine's security, "modernise" its armed forces and help the country counter the threat from Russia.
Rasmussen said: "We will adopt what we call a readiness action plan with the aim to be able to act swiftly in this completely new security environment in Europe. We have something already called the Nato response force, whose purpose is to be able to be deployed rapidly if needed. Now it's our intention to develop what I would call a spearhead within that response force at very, very high readiness.
"In order to be able to provide such rapid reinforcements you also need some reception facilities in host nations. So it will involve the pre-positioning of supplies, of equipment, preparation of infrastructure, bases, headquarters. The bottom line is you will in the future see a more visible Nato presence in the east."
Poland and the three Baltic states have been alarmed at the perceived threat from Russia and have been clamouring for a stronger Nato presence in the region. They have criticised what they see as tokenism in the alliance's response so far.
But the issue of permanent Nato bases in east Europe is divisive. The French, Italians and Spanish are opposed while the Americans and British are supportive of the eastern European demands. The Germans, said a Nato official, were sitting on the fence, wary of provoking Russia.
Note EU-Digest: This kind of rhetoric and sabre rattling will only increase the problems as it will be seen as provocative by Russia. The only solution seems to be a negotiated settlement which clearly defines the borders of Russia and EU-Member States and protects all ethnic minorities.
Read more: Ukraine crisis: Nato plans east European bases to counter Russia | World news | The Guardian
Anders Fogh Rasmussen said the organisztions's summit in Cardiff next week would overcome divisions within the alliance and agree to new deployments on Russia's borders – a move certain to trigger a strong reaction from Moscow.
He also outlined moves to boost Ukraine's security, "modernise" its armed forces and help the country counter the threat from Russia.
Rasmussen said: "We will adopt what we call a readiness action plan with the aim to be able to act swiftly in this completely new security environment in Europe. We have something already called the Nato response force, whose purpose is to be able to be deployed rapidly if needed. Now it's our intention to develop what I would call a spearhead within that response force at very, very high readiness.
"In order to be able to provide such rapid reinforcements you also need some reception facilities in host nations. So it will involve the pre-positioning of supplies, of equipment, preparation of infrastructure, bases, headquarters. The bottom line is you will in the future see a more visible Nato presence in the east."
Poland and the three Baltic states have been alarmed at the perceived threat from Russia and have been clamouring for a stronger Nato presence in the region. They have criticised what they see as tokenism in the alliance's response so far.
But the issue of permanent Nato bases in east Europe is divisive. The French, Italians and Spanish are opposed while the Americans and British are supportive of the eastern European demands. The Germans, said a Nato official, were sitting on the fence, wary of provoking Russia.
Note EU-Digest: This kind of rhetoric and sabre rattling will only increase the problems as it will be seen as provocative by Russia. The only solution seems to be a negotiated settlement which clearly defines the borders of Russia and EU-Member States and protects all ethnic minorities.
Read more: Ukraine crisis: Nato plans east European bases to counter Russia | World news | The Guardian
5/28/14
European Parliament: Will the Euro-skeptics unite in Brussels?
The mainstream media likes to lump together under the label “far
right” all European political parties opposed to the European Union and
to pro-immigration policies. Because I see big differences among these
parties, I have always rejected this approach.
The question is now one of more than academic and rhetorical significance. The so-called far right parties will have substantial representation in the newly-elected European parliament. If these various parties find enough in common to unite, they could play quite a significant role.
To this end, Marine Le Pen, head of France’s Front National Party, has been wooing leaders of “far right” parties throughout Europe. The results have been mixed.
Nigel Farage of Great Britian’s UKip Party has refused to work with the Front National. He reiterated his stand today, stating that a deal with Le Pen’s party “isn’t going to happen.” Farage added, “We’ve got to find a group of people that we think are part of our political family with views that are consistent with classical liberal democracy.” (emphasis added). The Front National manifestly is not such “a group of people.”
Le Pen’s outreach program was far more successful when it came to Geert Wilders and his Freedom Party in Holland. Wilders agreed last year to ally his party in the Euro-elections with the Front National and with Austria’s extremist anti-EU party.
The alliance struck me as unnatural. For example, Wilders is a friend of Israel; the Front National has a long history of anti-semitism.
Lucas Hartong, the most senior member of the European parliament from Wilders’ party, also found the alliance unnatural. He refused to campaign in the EU elections and warned that Wilders’ alliance with the Front National and the Austrian extremist bunch would prove to be an electoral disaster.
Exit polling indicated that Hartong was right. It showed Wilders’ party finishing fourth in the elections. Now it appears that the party came in third (or maybe tied for second) and will take 4 of 26 seats. Still disappointing, but not disastrous.
Wilders’ party suffered when Jean Le Pen, father of the Front National and of Marine, decided to speak out on election eve. The aging racist opined that the Ebola virus will solve Europe’s problem with immigration from Africa.
Read more: Will the Euro-skeptics unite in Brussels? | Power Line
The question is now one of more than academic and rhetorical significance. The so-called far right parties will have substantial representation in the newly-elected European parliament. If these various parties find enough in common to unite, they could play quite a significant role.
To this end, Marine Le Pen, head of France’s Front National Party, has been wooing leaders of “far right” parties throughout Europe. The results have been mixed.
Nigel Farage of Great Britian’s UKip Party has refused to work with the Front National. He reiterated his stand today, stating that a deal with Le Pen’s party “isn’t going to happen.” Farage added, “We’ve got to find a group of people that we think are part of our political family with views that are consistent with classical liberal democracy.” (emphasis added). The Front National manifestly is not such “a group of people.”
Le Pen’s outreach program was far more successful when it came to Geert Wilders and his Freedom Party in Holland. Wilders agreed last year to ally his party in the Euro-elections with the Front National and with Austria’s extremist anti-EU party.
The alliance struck me as unnatural. For example, Wilders is a friend of Israel; the Front National has a long history of anti-semitism.
Lucas Hartong, the most senior member of the European parliament from Wilders’ party, also found the alliance unnatural. He refused to campaign in the EU elections and warned that Wilders’ alliance with the Front National and the Austrian extremist bunch would prove to be an electoral disaster.
Exit polling indicated that Hartong was right. It showed Wilders’ party finishing fourth in the elections. Now it appears that the party came in third (or maybe tied for second) and will take 4 of 26 seats. Still disappointing, but not disastrous.
Wilders’ party suffered when Jean Le Pen, father of the Front National and of Marine, decided to speak out on election eve. The aging racist opined that the Ebola virus will solve Europe’s problem with immigration from Africa.
Read more: Will the Euro-skeptics unite in Brussels? | Power Line
5/21/14
EU-Digest Poll European Parliamentary Elections
Our EU Digest Poll in relation to this weeks EU Parliamentary Elections which was closed today showed the following results.
The Poll shows a potential strong showing by the so-called Eurosceptic parties while traditional pro-EU political parties will remain in power.
Our new poll which runs through June 22 asks the question:
"Do Corporations Have Too Much Influence On Global Governance?"
EU-Digest
The Poll shows a potential strong showing by the so-called Eurosceptic parties while traditional pro-EU political parties will remain in power.
Our new poll which runs through June 22 asks the question:
"Do Corporations Have Too Much Influence On Global Governance?"
EU-Digest5/20/14
European Parliamentary Elections: Netherlands' Geert Wilders cuts up EU flag in Bruxelles - by Nikolaj Nielsen
 |
| The Mouse which roared |
In a publicity stunt amid the dozen or so cafes at Place Luxembourg, overlooked by the parliament’s tall glass structures, Wilders cut out a yellow star before unfolding the Dutch flag in its place.
The nationalist, who runs the Dutch Freedom Party, is convinced he will be able to form a new group of eurosceptic MEPs following the upcoming European Parliament elections. He wants the Netherlands to leave the Union, regain its sovereignty, and shut down its borders to asylum seekers.
His other goal - to pull apart the EU from within by forming the anti-EU faction in parliament - will require at least 25 MEPs from seven EU member states.Wilders says he will be meeting with other eurosceptic politicians next week in Brussels to work out a deal.
“It is our task to try to work together to overstep our differences, to not get into fights about our leadership, to overstep ‘our shadows’ as we say in the Netherlands,” he said.
He was short on details.
Note EU-Digest: Europe gets a taste of the type of politicians which represent the Eurosceptic group running in the elections for the European Parliament.
Read more: EUobserver / Netherlands' Geert Wilders cuts up EU flag
5/18/14
Saudi Arabia - Human Rights: 2 Years Behind Bars on Apostasy Accusation
Saudi authorities should immediately release two citizens held
without charge for two years because of their religious beliefs, Human
Rights Watch said today. Officials arrested Sultan al-`Anzi, 33, and
Sa`ud al-`Anzi, 35, on May 14, 2012, and have not responded to multiple
requests from Human Rights Watch and an organization for the Ahmadiyya
Muslim religious group for information on their whereabouts and
condition.Activists with knowledge of the case say that the two men had adopted the Ahmadiyya interpretation of Islam. Saudi religious authorities encouraged them to abandon their belief, and three months later, officials detained them. Human Rights Watch wrote to King Abdullah on August 13, 2012, urging him to order the men’s release, but received no response.
“Not only have Saudi authorities interfered with the personal beliefs of these two men, but they’ve left them sitting in jail for two years in legal limbo with no end in sight,” said Sarah Leah Whitson, Middle East director at Human Rights Watch. “The kingdom’s repression of religious dissidents stains its human rights record.”
Saudi authorities detained the men in the northern city of `Ar`ar on an arrest warrant issued by the governorate that specified the accusation of apostasy, a person who saw the warrant told Human Rights Watch.
On May 14, 2012, the day of the arrest, investigators from the prosecution service questioned the two men individually about their Ahmadiyya beliefs. Four days later, investigators questioned the men again, and prosecutors then told each of the men that they were charging them with apostasy, another person with knowledge of the case told Human Rights Watch.
Read more: Saudi Arabia: 2 Years Behind Bars on Apostasy Accusation | Human Rights Watch
5/2/14
European Elections: Candidates spar in live EU TV debate
With flashes of wit, much earnestness and a certain reluctance to go
for the jugular of their opponents, four candidates for the European
Commission presidency broke new ground on Monday night by holding a live
televised debate designed to drum up public interest in the May 22-25
elections for the European parliament.
If social media are one measure of that interest, the debate may have worked. Halfway through the 90-minute programme, broadcast from the Dutch city of Maastricht, an organiser announced that 10,000 tweets a minute were coming in.
The harder question to answer is whether any candidate did enough to convince potential voters that the elections will truly make a difference in a EU blighted by a long recession, mass unemployment and a squeezed welfare state.
Although the debate never turned nasty, Ska Keller, the Greens candidate, got in a sharp jab at Jean-Claude Juncker, the centre-right candidate, when she accused him of “presiding over a tax haven” during his time as prime minister of Luxembourg. An indignant Mr Juncker rejected the charge and managed later to slip in the image-softening remark that one reason why he favoured a EU-wide minimum wage was that he remembered his father’s tough life as a steelworker.
Guy Verhofstadt, a former Belgian prime minister who is the centrist, liberal candidate, turned his fire on JosĂ© Manuel Barroso, the outgoing Commission president, saying Mr Barroso had never taken a decision without first flying to Berlin and Paris to get the green light. “The Commission needs to lead,” he thundered.
He also put Mr Juncker on the spot by challenging him to explain why his centre-right group still included Silvio Berlusconi, the former Italian prime minister, who caused outrage last weekend by suggesting Germans denied the existence of Nazi concentration camps. But Mr Juncker hit back with the succinct sentence: “I was sickened by the statements of Mr Berlusconi.”
Martin Schulz, the centre-left candidate, made a valiant effort to distinguish himself from the other three by repeating on several occasions that he was against a Europe of “banks and speculators”.
When the debate moved on to Europe’s insurgent far-right parties, he spoke with some passion in saying he found it “unimaginable” as a German that “a Nazi party could sit in the European parliament and make propaganda for the party of Adolf Hitler”.
Read more: Candidates spar in live EU TV debate | Brussels blog
If social media are one measure of that interest, the debate may have worked. Halfway through the 90-minute programme, broadcast from the Dutch city of Maastricht, an organiser announced that 10,000 tweets a minute were coming in.
The harder question to answer is whether any candidate did enough to convince potential voters that the elections will truly make a difference in a EU blighted by a long recession, mass unemployment and a squeezed welfare state.
Although the debate never turned nasty, Ska Keller, the Greens candidate, got in a sharp jab at Jean-Claude Juncker, the centre-right candidate, when she accused him of “presiding over a tax haven” during his time as prime minister of Luxembourg. An indignant Mr Juncker rejected the charge and managed later to slip in the image-softening remark that one reason why he favoured a EU-wide minimum wage was that he remembered his father’s tough life as a steelworker.
Guy Verhofstadt, a former Belgian prime minister who is the centrist, liberal candidate, turned his fire on JosĂ© Manuel Barroso, the outgoing Commission president, saying Mr Barroso had never taken a decision without first flying to Berlin and Paris to get the green light. “The Commission needs to lead,” he thundered.
He also put Mr Juncker on the spot by challenging him to explain why his centre-right group still included Silvio Berlusconi, the former Italian prime minister, who caused outrage last weekend by suggesting Germans denied the existence of Nazi concentration camps. But Mr Juncker hit back with the succinct sentence: “I was sickened by the statements of Mr Berlusconi.”
Martin Schulz, the centre-left candidate, made a valiant effort to distinguish himself from the other three by repeating on several occasions that he was against a Europe of “banks and speculators”.
When the debate moved on to Europe’s insurgent far-right parties, he spoke with some passion in saying he found it “unimaginable” as a German that “a Nazi party could sit in the European parliament and make propaganda for the party of Adolf Hitler”.
Read more: Candidates spar in live EU TV debate | Brussels blog
2/27/14
Ukraine: Europe And New Leaders Are Ukraine's Only Salvation
The people of Ukraine have sacrificed loss of life, torture, and
bodily injuries to give their country a second chance. If Ukraine
returns to its normal state of dysfunctionality, corruption, and
instability, these sacrifices will have been for nothing.
Yes, Ukraine must focus on its immediate financial crisis and counter Russian machinations and threats, but its fate hinges on, to use hackneyed phrases, the creation of a rule of law and a stable democracy. Ukraine’s political elite and bureaucrats, of all political persuasions, have shown themselves incapable of these tasks in the past. Ukraine must turn to new and young leaders – patriots not politicians — willing to follow guidance and discipline from their neighbors to the West.
The now-quarter-century history of transition from one-party communist rule to democratic capitalism draws an unmistakable dividing line between success and failure. No former Soviet republic, with the exception of the three Baltic States, can claim success. In contrast, the communist satellite nations of central and southeastern Europe either have made successful transitions to democracy and rule of law or are on course to do so. They share one common feature: They have become (or are scheduled to become) members of the EU. The requirement to follow Europe’s rules of the game has been their motor of success.
The Ukrainian people, even in the “Russian” East and South, clearly understand that the EU carries the promise of a “civilized” life in place of the corruption, illegality, and arbitrariness under which they lived since independence. All Ukraine prefers a European to a Russian life.
The Yanukovich regime did not invent dysfunctional rule, but rather carried it to its extreme. It rejected association status with the EU not because of Putin’s bribes but because Yanukovich understood that Europe would not tolerate the corrupt and anti-democratic nature of his regime. Joining the EU would have spelled the end of his political career.
Ukraine’s path is clear for those wishing it success. It must concentrate on joining the EU as quickly as the accession process allows. For its part, the EU must provide all possible assistance to expedite Ukraine’s accession. Mobilizing EU members to this task will not be easy given the consensus nature of decision making. The EU should not waste its time trying to draw in Russia as a cooperative partner. Putin clearly has another agenda.
Read more: Forbes: Europe And New Leaders Are Ukraine's Only Salvation
Yes, Ukraine must focus on its immediate financial crisis and counter Russian machinations and threats, but its fate hinges on, to use hackneyed phrases, the creation of a rule of law and a stable democracy. Ukraine’s political elite and bureaucrats, of all political persuasions, have shown themselves incapable of these tasks in the past. Ukraine must turn to new and young leaders – patriots not politicians — willing to follow guidance and discipline from their neighbors to the West.
The now-quarter-century history of transition from one-party communist rule to democratic capitalism draws an unmistakable dividing line between success and failure. No former Soviet republic, with the exception of the three Baltic States, can claim success. In contrast, the communist satellite nations of central and southeastern Europe either have made successful transitions to democracy and rule of law or are on course to do so. They share one common feature: They have become (or are scheduled to become) members of the EU. The requirement to follow Europe’s rules of the game has been their motor of success.
The Ukrainian people, even in the “Russian” East and South, clearly understand that the EU carries the promise of a “civilized” life in place of the corruption, illegality, and arbitrariness under which they lived since independence. All Ukraine prefers a European to a Russian life.
The Yanukovich regime did not invent dysfunctional rule, but rather carried it to its extreme. It rejected association status with the EU not because of Putin’s bribes but because Yanukovich understood that Europe would not tolerate the corrupt and anti-democratic nature of his regime. Joining the EU would have spelled the end of his political career.
Ukraine’s path is clear for those wishing it success. It must concentrate on joining the EU as quickly as the accession process allows. For its part, the EU must provide all possible assistance to expedite Ukraine’s accession. Mobilizing EU members to this task will not be easy given the consensus nature of decision making. The EU should not waste its time trying to draw in Russia as a cooperative partner. Putin clearly has another agenda.
Read more: Forbes: Europe And New Leaders Are Ukraine's Only Salvation
1/29/14
Immigrants Benefit Host Nations' Economies, so Why Is Public Perception Negative? - by Anna Leijonhufvud
Immigrants like Almira are often seen as having a negative impact on the host country, such as when they allegedly take jobs from the native-born. But as anti-immigration views have gained traction--even in government policy in some cases, as in the U.K.--an increasingly large body of work suggests that assumptions that immigrants are harmful to a country's economy are unfounded.
"There is overwhelming evidence that migrants have a positive impact on the economy," said Peter Sutherland, the U.N. secretary-general's special representative for migration and development. Sutherland was on the panel for the World Economic Forum's Open Forum session titled "Immigration: Welcome or Not?"
Also on the panel was former U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan, who agreed with Sutherland that immigrants often bring lots of advantages with them. To make his point, Annan referred to a poster showing Albert Einstein trying to cross the border into a country with a sack of clothes on his back. The caption read: "The sack of clothes is not the only thing that the immigrant brings."
While many of the leaders speaking at the WEF appear convinced, the evidence that immigrants have a positive effect on their host countries' economies has not yet had much impact on public perception.
Editors Note: The question is why European Governments are not making sure they change this Public perception about the benefits of immigration ? Instead they are letting populist, nationalistic politicians like Geert Wilders in the Netherlands, Marie Le Pen in France and others in Europe control the debate.
Read more: Immigrants Benefit Host Nations' Economies, so Why Is Public Perception Negative? | Student Reporter
1/7/14
NSA Spying: Edward Snowden did us all a favour, it's time to curb the snooping - by Brian Stewart,
For some of us, the great shock of the past year was the revelation that whistleblowers like Edward Snowden were not, after all, wildly exaggerating the dangers of intelligence agencies run amok.
Even those who encouraged Snowden's revelations seem stunned by how far the state's assault on privacy has gone.
And the great challenge for Western democracies this year — assuming they are up for it — will be to wrestle back oversight control over a too-secretive world that most of us barely comprehend.
Getting the spy genie back into so many bottles, however, won't be easy.
Jacob Appelbaum, an independent security expert and Snowden confidante, told technology experts in Hamburg last week that the U.S. National Security Agency's high-tech spying gear is "even worse than your worst nightmares."
He says new exposes will show the NSA can turn iPhones into eavesdropping "bugs" and has unlimited ability to break into our computers.
True or not, that deep pessimism is echoed by British security analyst and former MI5 whistleblower Annie Machon. She sees a nightmare reality in which all governments have let secret agencies spy on virtually anyone they want and on each other without limits.
"Indeed, not only have we learned that we are all under constant electronic surveillance, but these politicians are targeted, too," she wrote in a recent column for RT publication. "We are all now targets."
Read more: Edward Snowden did us all a favour, it's time to curb the snooping - World - CBC News
Even those who encouraged Snowden's revelations seem stunned by how far the state's assault on privacy has gone.
And the great challenge for Western democracies this year — assuming they are up for it — will be to wrestle back oversight control over a too-secretive world that most of us barely comprehend.
Getting the spy genie back into so many bottles, however, won't be easy.
Jacob Appelbaum, an independent security expert and Snowden confidante, told technology experts in Hamburg last week that the U.S. National Security Agency's high-tech spying gear is "even worse than your worst nightmares."
He says new exposes will show the NSA can turn iPhones into eavesdropping "bugs" and has unlimited ability to break into our computers.
True or not, that deep pessimism is echoed by British security analyst and former MI5 whistleblower Annie Machon. She sees a nightmare reality in which all governments have let secret agencies spy on virtually anyone they want and on each other without limits.
"Indeed, not only have we learned that we are all under constant electronic surveillance, but these politicians are targeted, too," she wrote in a recent column for RT publication. "We are all now targets."
Read more: Edward Snowden did us all a favour, it's time to curb the snooping - World - CBC News
1/6/14
The Netherlands: Sharia proponent Haitham al-Haddad Upcoming Visit To Almere Causing Major Controversy
 |
| Haitham al-Haddadi coming to the Netherlands |
He comes to Almere on Februari 7 at the invitation of the Organization of Muslim Youth Almere.
Show van Dijk member of the PVV ( Freedom Party) political fraction in the Almere City Council said that the Muslim Clerc Haitham al-Haddad should not be allowed to speak in Almere. He noted that Haitham
al-Haddad in the past has made some very radical statements about
non-muslims which are unacceptable in a secular and multi-cultural
society like the Netherlands. Also the SP (Socialist Party) representative in the Almere City Coincil said they were against Haitham al-Haddad presentation in Almere.
The VVD (Conservative), Liveable Almere ( Right-Wing) and Green
(Liberal) political fractions in the City Council stated that based on
Dutch laws guaranteeing the right to freedom of expression, Haitham al-Haddad should be allowed to give his talk on Sharia Law, as
long as the content of his talk does not violate Dutch laws and the
politicians suggested that the format of the presentation not be one of a
formal lecture, but rather an open discussion..
It
might be good to note that all aspects of a Muslim's life are governed
by Sharia. Sharia law comes from a combination of sources including the Quran (the Muslim holy book), the Hadith (sayings and conduct of the prophet Muhammad) and fatwas (the rulings of Islamic scholars).
In Europe so-called Islamic "peace judges" or arbiters are settling criminal
cases, not just in Germany but in many other European countries as well.
Muslim immigrants generally prefer their own judges and do not trust secular
Western legal systems. Thus, Islamic shadow justice systems are making
inroads into Western societies.
"Under Sharia law to settle disputes can
be innocent, but it can also undermine Western ideas of fairness," Der
Spiegel reports.
Journalist Joachim Wagner, author of a new German study
on parallel justice, says that the world of the Islamic shadow justice
system is "very foreign, and for a German lawyer completely
incomprehensible. It follows its own rules. The Islamic arbitrators
aren't interested in evidence when they deliver a judgment, and unlike
in German criminal law, the question of who is at fault doesn't play
much of a role." The arbitrators "talk with the perpetrator's family who
are generally the ones who have called the arbitrator, and with the
victim's family," Wagner says. "They ask: Why did this happen? How bad
is the damage? How serious is the injury? But for them, a solution of
the conflict, a compromise, is the most important thing."
Reportedly, at least 85 Sharia
courts now operate in the UK, dispensing rulings that are often illegal, per British jurisprudence.
Muslim states which embrace Sharia Law are able to enforce public
morality and as a result have greatly reduced women’s mobility and their participation in the
public
sphere.
In 2008, a Dutch-Turkish woman was raped by her nephew. But the
Dutch-Turkish Imam Bahauddin (Bahaeddin) Budak advised her not to inform
her relatives about it. If she would go pulic about the crime and sue
her nephew in court, her life might be in danger.
He also advised her to
forgive the perpetrator. Such crimes are very common among Turkish,
Moroccan, Pakistani, Iraqi and Iranian immigrants in Europe many of whom
still regard women as sex objects. There is also a strong tendency to
cover up crimes such as rape. Women who dare to talk about it in public,
or who report such crimes to the police, very often face serious
repercussions, since the so-called "honor of the family" is at stake.
In
too many cases, these defenseless victims are subsequently even killed
by family members.
Budak was also a Muslim religious teacher at the "Inholland university
of applied sciences" in Amsterdam. Inholland's director Cor de Raadt had
Budak temporarily suspended, but a lot of Dutch Muslims complained
about De Raadt's decision and showed solidarity with Imam Budak.
A
Dutch professor in Theology at Amsterdam University noted: "Sharia Law
is an archaic law which should not even be qualified as a law. It does
not belong in any shape or form in Europe, or for that matter in any
other self respecting Democratic society".
Almere-Digest
12/31/13
NSA turns "Get Smart" TV comedy into a reality show - Catalog Reveals NSA Has Back Doors for Numerous Devices - by Jacob Appelbaum, Judith Horchert and Christian Stöcker
 |
| Get Smart Comedy Show |
A document viewed by SPIEGEL resembling a product catalog reveals that an NSA division called ANT has burrowed its way into nearly all the security architecture made by the major players in the industry -- including American global market leader Cisco and its Chinese competitor Huawei, but also producers of mass-market goods, such as US computer-maker Dell.
These NSA agents, who specialize in secret back doors, are able to keep an eye on all levels of our digital lives -- from computing centers to individual computers, and from laptops to mobile phones. For nearly every lock, ANT seems to have a key in its toolbox. And no matter what walls companies erect, the NSA's specialists seem already to have gotten past them.
This, at least, is the impression gained from flipping through the 50-page document. The list reads like a mail-order catalog, one from which other NSA employees can order technologies from the ANT division for tapping their targets' data. The catalog even lists the prices for these electronic break-in tools, with costs ranging from free to $250,000.
In the case of Juniper, the name of this particular digital lock pick is "FEEDTROUGH." This malware burrows into Juniper firewalls and makes it possible to smuggle other NSA programs into mainframe computers. Thanks to FEEDTROUGH, these implants can, by design, even survive "across reboots and software upgrades." In this way, US government spies can secure themselves a permanent presence in computer networks. The catalog states that FEEDTROUGH "has been deployed on many target platforms."
The ANT division doesn't just manufacture surveillance hardware. It also develops software for special tasks. The ANT developers have a clear preference for planting their malicious code in so-called BIOS, software located on a computer's motherboard that is the first thing to load when a computer is turned on.
Another program attacks the firmware in hard drives manufactured by Western Digital, Seagate, Maxtor and Samsung, all of which, with the exception of the latter, are American companies. Here, too, it appears the US intelligence agency is compromising the technology and products of American companies.
Note EU-Digest : NSA turns "Get Smart" TV comedy into a reality show. Get Smart is an American comedy television series that satirizes the secret agent genre. Created by Mel Brooks with Buck Henry,[1] the show stars Don Adams (as Maxwell Smart, Agent 86), Barbara Feldon (as Agent 99), and Edward Platt (as Chief). Henry said they created the show by request of Daniel Melnick, who was a partner, along with Leonard Stern and David Susskind, of the show's production company, Talent Associates, to capitalize on "the two biggest things in the entertainment world today"—James Bond and Inspector Clouseau.[2] Brooks said: "It's an insane combination of James Bond and Mel Brooks comedy."
Read more: Catalog Reveals NSA Has Back Doors for Numerous Devices - SPIEGEL ONLINE
12/5/13
Europe & Growth Pact: A Child Of The Economy, An Orphan Of Politics
As we move towards the future, the situation is bleak. The decisions made at successive European summits do not seem likely to address the structural defects of the Eurozone. The disappointment with the Europe of today is that it deals with a constitutional problem as if it were merely an economic one. The fiction of the sustainability of Europe, a child of the economy, but an orphan of politics, continues to undermine European integration.
It is certainly true that the proposed banking union shows real progress. But only part of the union’s supervision has been defined, and it comes into force in 2014. Its other elements – the resolution of banking crises and deposit insurance – remain under national jurisdiction, and their European future is even more uncertain. There must be real solidarity, something which Europe lacks most of all.
We have the Growth Pact and the Treaty on Stability, Coordination, and Governance. To which future are they leading us?
As it was signed, the Growth Pact – investment projects financed primarily by existing structural funds and the European Investment Bank’s increased capital (10 billion Euros) – is not likely to transform activity in the Eurozone. We are talking about 120 billion Euros; even this is mobilising funds which have not yet been used, to enable the EIB to lend 60 billion Euros by leveraging its capital increase.
Whether or not a start has been made is a mystery. This is why the European recovery seems more symbolic than real, a remake of the addition (fiercely negotiated in 1997) of the words “and growth” to the Stability Pact. Because, at the moment, EU regulations and conditions for assistance to countries considered fragile have plunged these countries into depression and have delayed Eurozone recovery. Have we really helped Greece, given that its GDP is currently more than 20% lower than it was on the 1st January 2008?
It is difficult not to view the Growth Pact as the soothing balm applied to smooth the roughness of the “fiscal compact.” Therefore, we have a treaty which establishes the fiscal solitude of each of the Eurozone member states through a promise of greater solidarity if they show themselves to be capable of solving their own problems. It forces, or rather, it requires states to self-impose sanctions or risk facing penalties, to have fiscal rules that are found in no other democracy in the world. In fact, it aggravates the European democratic deficit, making member states even more federal, and, at the same time, even more the orphans of a federation.
Since the end of World War II, economists have been debating the question of whether to emphasise rules or discretion in economic policy. In the forties, Milton Friedman had already advocated adopting monetary rules and suggested enshrining balanced fiscal rules in the constitution. But it was the “revolution” of rational expectations and the neo-classical school which established in a “definitive” way the superiority of rules over choice. Much attention was given to this conclusion, which inspired monetary policy management in many countries. But no country gave up its fiscal sovereignty, or indeed its monetary sovereignty, since in all countries (except in Europe) central banks are accountable to national parliaments. The neo-classical school’s demonstration would only apply to a world without imbalance, where economic policy resembled Don Quixote’s fight.
But how was Europe, probably without knowing it, able to endorse such a doctrine?
The reason is that adopting this doctrine binds governments’ hands so strongly it prevents them from acting, even in circumstances like today where inaction is irresponsible. Social suffering worsens, unemployment soars, recession threatens the Eurozone and depression takes hold in many countries. Can we then do nothing to fight against these ills and against budget deficit reduction as the sole macroeconomic policy?
Read more: Europe & Growth Pact: A Child Of The Economy, An Orphan Of Politics
11/30/13
Google in the Netherlands: Privacy changes BREAK data law, says Netherlands - by Kelly Fiveash
broke data protection law in the Netherlands when the ad giant
tweaked its privacy policy in March 2012, says the country's privacy
watchdog.\
The Dutch Data Protection Authority said on Thursday that Google had breached the country's rules because it had failed to adequately inform all its users in advance about the changes it was making to its service.
"Google spins an invisible web of our personal data, without our consent. And that is forbidden by law", said Dutch DPA chairman Jacob Kohnstamm.
The regulator said it had invited the company to a hearing. It will only decide on any enforcement action after discussions have taken place with Google.
The DPA said that, during its seven-month probe, the watchdog determined that Google burrowed deeply into the personal data of Dutch netizens by knitting together services across the web for the purposes of targeted advertising.
"Some of these data are of a sensitive nature, such as payment information, location data and information on surfing behaviour across multiple websites. Data about search queries, location data and videos watched can be combined, while the different services serve entirely different purposes from the point of view of users," it said.
The watchdog concluded that Google had not sought the consent of users before cutting and shutting its privacy policies together in order to combine personal data across its massive online empire.
Read more: Google in Dutch: Privacy changes BREAK data law, says Netherlands • The Register
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)