Register to Comment
Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 43
Like Tree18Likes
  1. #31
    stopdoingstuff stopdoingstuff is online now
    stopdoingstuff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    12,116

    Quote Originally Posted by kvran View Post
    I believe they meant independent in political sense, not truly aligned with any political party not in a financial sense. If accepting EU funding makes someone a front and nobody has posted how much or how important it is to there funding then none of the notable eurosceptic or national parties are independent. Nigel Farage is on the EU payroll, his livelihood depends on the EU.
    I do not claim that they are a front and I do not claim that simply accepting EU money makes an organization inherently bad or sinister. I simply claim that the group Europe4all received EU funding to promote a message and that this means that it is misleading to call them independent. In the case of Europe4all, the funding comes directly from the EU Lifelong Learning Program, so the group is funded specifically to achieve the objectives of EU policy. In this sense, there is no way that the group can in any credible way be described as independent.
    Europe 4 All - News Europe 4 all
    We present to you the final newsletter of the Europe 4 All project – E4A, funded by the EU Lifelong Learning Program.
    As for the likes of Nigel Farage, his livelihood, even to the extent that it is derived from his EU salary and benfits, is not dependent on the EU itself but on the votes of his constituents.



    Quote Originally Posted by kvran View Post
    What ideologies support the abuse of human rights etc.? Should the Italian mafia get funding or a terrorist organisations if they got enough votes? I don't see how this change IF implemented would affect the existing parties or limit ideological diversity. BNPs, True Fins and company want tighter controls on immigration and such which wouldn't fall under the proposed changes.
    No illegal organization can run for office so they couldn't possibly get funding. As for what these rules will mean, if they will not impact any groups in parliament and will therefore make no material difference, then why have the rules at all? Why write rules that won't be applied?

    Quote Originally Posted by kvran View Post
    The enforcement of the proposed addition of the respect of human rights as being dependent on receiving funding would be near impossible to enforce and could only be used in extreme cases, the burden of proof would be on the respective EP committee and the commission. BUT if the proposal is to go ahead I would prefer to see a clear process for ascertaining when a party has broken the rules and led by an independent institution like ECJ. There is also a lot of waste or misuse of the funds for national purposes etc. that will be also reformed in the proposed changes.
    Quite sensible.

    Quote Originally Posted by kvran View Post
    The crisis began with a failure of the Greek government to run the country responsible and while it's a totally off topic debate, it's a bit lazy to say the EU alone is responsible for the situation in Greece when the bailout wasn't decided through supranational institutions but by unaccountable suprnational institutions (IMF and (ECB) and the Government of EU member states. The commission and parliament had no formal role.
    It is off the topic so we can get into it elsewhere. But it does have to be said- nothing helps extremism like a failure of the established institutions to reflect the concerns and interests of the masses.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  2. #32
    shenana shenana is offline

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    409

    You better watch out so that, you don't mis-interpret the pillars in which the union operate otherwise i don't mind taken court action.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  3. #33
    Cassandra Syndrome Cassandra Syndrome is offline
    Cassandra Syndrome's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    24,808

    Quote Originally Posted by Trainwreck View Post
    This is a humourous one, from that pest to the EU, Daniel Hannan. :

    They have a lovely graphic to symbolise the inclusiveness the EU wants to engender in a new Constitution. Nice to see the hammer and sickle in there.

    I can only look forwrd to some good old fashion Communist values to be written into an EU constitution.

    The prejudice racists. They left out the Anarchist logo.



    I'm off to complain to the European Commission's Discrimination Complaints department.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  4. #34
    kvran kvran is offline

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    1,152

    Quote Originally Posted by FireWolf View Post
    @kvran

    The thing with funding is that Europe4All is a project, not a group of parties in EP. It means that they are not entitled to receive funds as parties in EP, but they need to apply like NGOs and similar organizations and projects.

    In order to have funds granted for your project, the project must have such aims which are appealing to the body that will grant those funds.

    As an example, if you come to them with a project titled "The Final Solution", stating that Jews are the source of all problems in Europe, so you need money to build concentration camps and gas chambers, you probably will not get a cent (not to mention that you will end up in jail). On the other hand, if you come with a project titled "Europe for all"... well, now you're talking ! Here is the money you need.

    As far as I can see from their website, they are leftists. They propose "re-appropriation" of natural resources, social property and that kind of means to achieve social happiness. In general, they follow the concept of state socialism and are against neoliberalism. It might explain "hammer and sickle" on that poster together with various religious symbols...
    I don't deny that. My only point was to call an organisation a front as the poster did in the first post I responded to is flippant. The organisations don't directly reflect the interests or policies of the EU. They will obviously fall into a cosy, liberal sort of feel good area like Europe4all. EU funding favours organisation that are transnational, promote a sense of European citizenship and fill a democratic deficit in the EU. They are often consulted at the formation stage of EU policy so it's in the Commission interests to have broad opinions. If the civil society organisations funded by the EU reflected the politics of the EU, they wouldn't be left wing, they would be conservative civil society organisations as the EU is dominated by the conservatives in the council, parliament and commission. Yet here we see funding for a far left organisation.

    On Nigel Farage my point was that his personal interests and his political aims conflict. He may be democratically elected but if he was to achieve his aims, he would lose a well paid job. I am pointing out that taking EU funding doesn't make somebody a front because a broad spectrum of organisation, parties and NGOs recieve funding.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  5. #35
    kvran kvran is offline

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    1,152

    Quote Originally Posted by stopdoingstuff View Post
    I do not claim that they are a front and I do not claim that simply accepting EU money makes an organization inherently bad or sinister. I simply claim that the group Europe4all received EU funding to promote a message and that this means that it is misleading to call them independent. In the case of Europe4all, the funding comes directly from the EU Lifelong Learning Program, so the group is funded specifically to achieve the objectives of EU policy. In this sense, there is no way that the group can in any credible way be described as independent.
    Europe 4 All - News Europe 4 all
    I was looking at a different site europe4all.org. Funny though the site you links suits my argumentation better. Two things, firstly the poster that started this thread has nothing to do with that organisation. They don't know who created the poster but they didn't.

    Quote Originally Posted by stopdoingstuff View Post
    As for the likes of Nigel Farage, his livelihood, even to the extent that it is derived from his EU salary and benfits, is not dependent on the EU itself but on the votes of his constituents.
    Nigel Farage is only an example as to why any organisation that receive EU funding isn't automatically a front. Europe4all is an organic civil society organisation dependent more on its members than the EU for its existence.

    The second thing is as little as it may matter the site also contains a disclaimer saying the opinion are that of the author and not the commission. The website you links makes the organisation seem a lot more legit and worthwhile as they completed a project to measure individual integration for those seeking employment which should be an asset to the commission in future identifying groups that need to be targeted by employment policy as they are not benefiting from increased professional opportunities that integration has brought.

    Quote Originally Posted by stopdoingstuff View Post
    No illegal organization can run for office so they couldn't possibly get funding. As for what these rules will mean, if they will not impact any groups in parliament and will therefore make no material difference, then why have the rules at all? Why write rules that won't be applied?
    You implied that the new rules would affect right wing MEPs such as those from the BNP. These rules would only be used on extreme cases like if an MEP was implicated in supporting racist attacks or using his position as an MEP to incite hatred.

    EU funded civil society organisations have a simple test, they need to have a European citizenship dimension as in enhancing integration by bringing national organisations together, they should be relevant to groups the Commission works with and they should help make up the democratic deficit in the EU.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  6. #36
    kvran kvran is offline

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    1,152

    Quote Originally Posted by Cassandra Syndrome View Post
    The prejudice racists. They left out the Anarchist logo.



    I'm off to complain to the European Commission's Discrimination Complaints department.
    No flying spaghetti monster or jedi either. I wonder how big the star would have to be to incorporate every symbol.

    BTW the website of the organisation say they didn't create that poster and they don't know who did.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  7. #37
    Lempo Lempo is offline

    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    3,151

    Bad taste. According to the Wikipedia article about "Hammer and Sickle"

    The foreign ministers of Lithuania, Latvia, Bulgaria, Hungary, Romania and the Czech Republic called for an EU-wide ban on communist symbols in 2010, urging the EU "to criminalize the approval, denial or belittling of communist crimes" and stating that "the denial of such crimes should be treated the same way as the denial of the Holocaust and must be banned by law".
    and I would say those guys kind of know what they are talking about.

    There might also be a compatibility issue with the European Day of Remembrance for Victims of Stalinism and Nazism.

    Or maybe it's just a personal problem of mine that the guy who had camps to kill people in and who conspired in carving the Eastern Europe into spheres of influence to be taken with force is the worst person who ever lived, and rightfully too, but the other guy who had camps to kill people in and who conspired in carving the Eastern Europe into spheres of influence to be taken with force is promoted as a f*ing hero. Apparently they had a bit of a conundrum with that in Nuremburg too when wording the charges.

    The five-handed star in the poster btw... is it supposed to be red?
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  8. #38
    Al. Al. is offline

    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    2,743

    Quote Originally Posted by kvran View Post
    BTW the website of the organisation say they didn't create that poster and they don't know who did
    ...and yet they have no problem using it. Sure, why not use an anonymous symbol without even thinking about it? That makes 'em sound really trustworthy.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  9. #39
    FireWolf FireWolf is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    65

    Quote Originally Posted by kvran View Post
    EU funding favours organisation that are transnational, promote a sense of European citizenship and fill a democratic deficit in the EU. They are often consulted at the formation stage of EU policy so it's in the Commission interests to have broad opinions. If the civil society organisations funded by the EU reflected the politics of the EU, they wouldn't be left wing, they would be conservative civil society organisations as the EU is dominated by the conservatives in the council, parliament and commission. Yet here we see funding for a far left organisation.
    Well, it sounds nice, but I don't think it works really. Again, what will happen if I come to EU institutions asking for funds for a project that promotes European citizenship in transnational fashion, but in this form: "Europe to Europeans ! One Europe, one nation, one leader ! Europe is a cradle of democracy so let us make one democratic super-state with one European nation and one government." I don't think I would receive any funds. It is too much of "Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Führer". Don't you think so ?

    On the other hand, as @Lempo said, this far left stuff is considered evil as much as Nazism in some states. Although state socialism is not equivalent for Communism, to be honest, these guys sound way too much like communists.

    So let summarize: if you come up with "Ein Eurovolk, ein Euroreich, ein Euroführer" you might end up in jail, and if you come up with some sort of New Age Eurocommunism v.2.0. you will get funds - what does it tell us about European Commission ?
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  10. #40
    ScreeOrTalus ScreeOrTalus is offline

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    4,324

    Quote Originally Posted by FireWolf View Post
    Well, it sounds nice, but I don't think it works really. Again, what will happen if I come to EU institutions asking for funds for a project that promotes European citizenship in transnational fashion, but in this form: "Europe to Europeans ! One Europe, one nation, one leader ! Europe is a cradle of democracy so let us make one democratic super-state with one European nation and one government." I don't think I would receive any funds. It is too much of "Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Führer". Don't you think so ?

    On the other hand, as @Lempo said, this far left stuff is considered evil as much as Nazism in some states. Although state socialism is not equivalent for Communism, to be honest, these guys sound way too much like communists.

    So let summarize: if you come up with "Ein Eurovolk, ein Euroreich, ein Euroführer" you might end up in jail, and if you come up with some sort of New Age Eurocommunism v.2.0. you will get funds - what does it tell us about European Commission ?
    The influence of Jews is the key to understanding this.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Sign in to CommentRegister to Comment