Posts Tagged ‘European Parliament’
At the European Parliament on Islam and terror: Landslide victory of Marine Le Pen Front National Party
Posted by: adonis49 on: December 8, 2015
At the European Parliament on Islam and terror: Landslide victory of Marine Le Pen Front National Party
What follow are 20 files of bashing the French National Front.
But before, a reminder of France total animosity to our region, regardless of which political party is a victor:
My attitude is that the FN cannot do worse in our region (Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, Palestine) than all the successive political parties in France. Almost all the French institutions have been brainwashed to hate the Syrians and antagonize any Syrian regime. Why?
1. The Syrians were the only people who resisted and opposed French mandated power.
2. France bombed Damascus with by artillery guns and war planes for 6 months in 1924
3. France ceded 6 villages and cities to Turkey in 1926 (against its pledge to preserve the integrity of the Syrian lands), a large swath of land that current Turkey wants to transform into a No-Fly Zone on the northern borders with Syria
4. France ceded over 4,500 sq. km to Turkey (The Eskandaron province, Alexandrette) on the seashore in 1936 (against its pledge to preserve the integrity of the Syrian lands)
5. France was the main country that supported Israeli settlements in the decades of 1920’s
6. France built the atomic plant and bombs for Israel in the early 1960
7. France was the main war planes suppliers to Israel till 1968
8. France and Germany are still supplying Israel with modern nuclear submarines (over 6 of them)
En 20 fiches techniques, nous vous proposons une expertise complète du programme du Front national et de sa candidate Marine Le Pen.
Meet Spain’s Activist Iglesia of Podemos: Positioned to Become New PM
Posted by: adonis49 on: February 19, 2015
Meet Spain’s Activist Iglesia of Podemos: Positioned to Become New PM
“If we don’t have democratic control of economy, we don’t have democracy,” says Pablo Iglesias of Podemos. “We know that it’s very important to occupy the institutional powers in order to change things.”

Talks between Greece and Eurozone finance ministers over Athens’ debt broke down Monday when the newly elected leftist Syriza government rejected a deal to extend the terms of the current bailout.
The Greek Syriza party was elected last month on a promise to roll back the crippling austerity measures in Greece’s international bailout.
While Syriza has taken power in Greece, the grassroots Spanish party Podemos is also quickly gaining popularity in Europe’s fifth largest economy.
On January 31, as many as 150,000 people rallied in Madrid to show support for the Podemos party, which translates into “We can.”
Podemos only became an official party last March, but a recent poll by El País found 28% of the population supports the party, enough to possibly win Spain’s next general election.
Last May, Podemos surprised many when it received 1.2 million votes and 5 seats in the European Parliament elections.
The party grew out of the “indignados” movement that began occupying squares in Spain four years ago. The indignados rallied against austerity cuts, rising unemployment and Spain’s political establishment.
Transcript
This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.
On Monday, I sat down with Pablo Iglesias, the secretary general of Podemos. He is a 36-year-old political science professor, longtime activist, who was elected to the European Parliament last year.
If Podemos wins Spain’s national elections later this year, he could become Spain’s next prime minister.
Iglesias is in New York. I began by asking him to talk about Podemos.
PABLO IGLESIAS: Probably we are the answer, the answer to austerity policies in our country. I never thought it was possible, a political phenomenon as us in our country, and probably we are the result of the disaster of these policies of austerity in Spain.
And probably, we are the expression of the hope now. People in my country is starting to understand that in democracy, when something is going wrong, you can do the things well.
And probably we are a new opportunity, a new opportunity of change in Spain. And we are pretty happy to be an instrument of the people for the political change.
AMY GOODMAN: What exactly does austerity mean?
PABLO IGLESIAS: Austerity means that people is expulsed of their homes. Austerity means that the social services don’t work anymore.
Austerity means that public schools have not the elements, the means to develop their activity.
Austerity means that the countries have not sovereignty anymore, and we became a colony of the financial powers and a colony of Germany.
Austerity probably means the end of democracy.
I think if we don’t have democratic control of economy, we don’t have democracy. It’s impossible to separate economy and democracy, in my opinion.
AMY GOODMAN: Can you explain what the indignados movement is, what it means?
PABLO IGLESIAS: The indignados movement is probably the best expression of organic crisis in the political regime in Spain. In Gramscian terms, that means these demonstration in Puerta del Sol and in other places in Spain means the end of—the end of the consensus with this political regime in Spain.
Even if the electoral expression of that new situation was not immediately, I think that it was the basis, it was the key element, that allow us finally to get this support we are getting now.
AMY GOODMAN: So, you’ve won in the European Parliament. What is your strategy going forward?
PABLO IGLESIAS: The first thing is to make visible the problems that European citizen have. And we use all the time the European Parliament in order to give visibility to social groups and to give visibility to problems, in order to open a discussion in the society.
And in fact, the media attention to the European Parliament since we are there is great, is growing, and we are happy with that.
AMY GOODMAN: Podemos has organized citizens’ assemblies.
PABLO IGLESIAS: Yes, we have circles. Circles are the local agrupación of people of Podemos. And we have more than 1,200 in Spain and overseas.
In the United States, there is a circle, a Podemos circle. And we will—I will meet them today. And tonight, we have a meeting with them and a conference. And I’m—
AMY GOODMAN: And what do these circles do?
PABLO IGLESIAS: The circles are activists, and they organize campaigns. They have meetings with civil society, with civil society in their cities and in their districts. They are the basis. They are the most important instrument of Podemos in order to have relationship with society.
AMY GOODMAN: Pablo Iglesias, can you explain the political landscape in Spain—the PP, the socialists, your own party, Podemos, even the other parties, Esquerda Unida—
PABLO IGLESIAS: Unida.
AMY GOODMAN: —and why your party rose up and pulled away support from these other parties?
PABLO IGLESIAS: Probably, we have been able to change the chess party, the chess game, because we don’t accept this old distinction, distinction between left and right.
Obviously, I am a leftist, but I think that this game that separate the political field, between center-left and center-right, sometimes is something very useful to make the banks win.
And we say we have a program. We have a program defending democracy.
We want social services. We want public education. We want sovereignty. And we are sure that there is a majority of the society that is supporting us. So it’s not a problem for us the past of the people.
If you in the past vote for the right, no problem for us. If you support our ideas, if you support the possibility of a political change in Spain, if you support democracy, you can be with us. In fact, the two messages of the 15-M movement in our country—
AMY GOODMAN: That was May 15th.
PABLO IGLESIAS: Yeah, exactly, May 15. It was: We want democracy, and we don’t feel represented by this elite of all politicians. So, we think that there is a big difference between the old situation and the new situation.
And people in Spain is starting to understand that the old political elites are not able to improve the situation and to resolve the economic and political problems in my country.
AMY GOODMAN: Pablo, how did you move from being a movement to a party? How was that decision made?
PABLO IGLESIAS: For necessity, because we understood very well that if you need to change the things, you need political power. And we were activists, and we used to work in social fields in the civil society, but we know that it’s very important to occupy the institutional powers in order to change things.
It’s quite important to be in the Parliament. It’s quite important to win the elections.
AMY GOODMAN: Would you describe the socialists and the PP sort of like the Republicans and Democrats in the United States?
PABLO IGLESIAS: Yes.
AMY GOODMAN: They’re the two main parties.
PABLO IGLESIAS: Yes.
AMY GOODMAN: How have they responded to the rise of Podemos?
PABLO IGLESIAS: Using the same language. It’s something quite ironic that the center-left and the center-right party use the main—the same words in order to attack us.
And I’m sure that the voters of the socialist party don’t like that, and many of our voters came from the socialist party. But unfortunately, in my country, they showed that they support the same economic policy, and that was a disaster in my country. They both develop austerity policies that bring our country to a terrible situation now.
AMY GOODMAN: What is that situation? Can you describe unemployment and other issues?
PABLO IGLESIAS: Yes, yes. My country have three big problems: inequality, unemployment and debt.
And the socialist party and the popular party in my country understood that the best way to improve the situation was austerity. After five years, or even more, even six years, the situation is worse than before. So, we think that in democracy, if something doesn’t work, you can change. And we are saying, we want to organize another way to improve the situation.
AMY GOODMAN: Did you take Podemos’s name from President Obama’s whole “Yes, we can” sort of mantra leading into his election?
PABLO IGLESIAS: Of course not. The expression, “Yes, we can,” came from the Latinos in the ’70s fighting for their rights. And it was a good example for us. Obama was quite clever using that, but it’s not a creation of Obama.
AMY GOODMAN: My colleague Juan González, co-host on Democracy Now!, just wrote a column in the New York Daily News about these U.S. firms that are buying housing in Spain, raising rent and evicting tenants.
He particularly looked at Blackstone Group, Goldman Sachs, Apollo Management, Cerberus, which have quietly been buying up tens of thousands of residential properties in Madrid and Barcelona at low prices. Now, protesters have gathered outside Blackstone Group in the last weeks in the United States to protest what not only these companies are doing here, but what they’re doing in your country.
PABLO IGLESIAS: Yeah, in our country, and the government is doing nothing. That’s the reason because we need to win the elections. It’s completely unacceptable that these people are getting houses, and many Spanish families are without a house, in a very difficult situation. I think we need a government ready to protect the people against these kind of people.
AMY GOODMAN: Can you explain the system in Spain that people here would find unusual, that you owe mortgage payments even after you’ve been evicted from your house?
PABLO IGLESIAS: Exactly, exactly.
AMY GOODMAN: Explain this phenomenon, these rules in Spain that have actually led to suicides.
PABLO IGLESIAS: Yeah, yeah, exactly. When you don’t have enough money in order to pay to the bank, you have to give your house. And after that, you have to pay for the interest, and you have to pay for your debt. And even you don’t have a house, and you have to give a very big part of your salary, if you have a salary, because you have a work, to the bank. This is completely absurd.
There are many families in Spain in a desperate situation because they don’t have a house and they have to pay to the banks. And the banks are the—have some responsibility with the crisis, not the families. So, it’s a completely unacceptable situation.
AMY GOODMAN: What should happen?
PABLO IGLESIAS: Because the government—the government organized a legislation for the banks, a legislation very good for the banks and very bad for the families.
AMY GOODMAN: If you were prime minister, what would be the three major first steps you would take?
PABLO IGLESIAS: The first things is to finish with the evictions of the families. And this is quite easy. Using the European law, we could stop that in the first week. I think it’s very important to organize a restructuration of the debt. It’s impossible to assume for a government the level of the debt now. And a fiscal reform. In my country are just the middle and small companies that pay taxes, and the workers; and the rich, the rich companies and the top companies, have very little fiscal pressure. So it should be very important to make a fiscal reform.
AMY GOODMAN: Pablo Iglesias, you would not only be dealing with domestic policy, but foreign policy. I mean, when Prime Minister Aznar was in office, he supported President Bush—
PABLO IGLESIAS: Yeah.
AMY GOODMAN: —in invading Iraq. But Prime Minister Zapatero, who came next, he pulled the troops out.
PABLO IGLESIAS: Yeah.
AMY GOODMAN: Where do you stand on issues in the Middle East, on what should happen with the Islamic State, ISIS, ISIL, and other conflict areas?
PABLO IGLESIAS: I think we need a new leadership that defend the peace. And I think that use military in order to confront terrorism sometime was not useful. And I think that the policy of the United States regarding Middle East sometimes bring more problems than solutions.
I think that in Europe we need a European system of defense. I don’t like the military sovereignty of Europe depending of the NATO. And I think that we have to protect—to protect the peace.
AMY GOODMAN: The situation of Ukraine now?
PABLO IGLESIAS: I think that Europeans need a good relationship with Russia. I don’t like the political system in Russia; I’m not a supporter of Vladimir Putin. But I think Europeans, we don’t need a prebellic situation with Russia. I think some European powers were supporting a coup d’état in Ukraine, and that is not a good move. And now Europeans are in danger.
AMY GOODMAN: What about the Western Sahara? It’s not as well known in the United States, but it’s certainly a major issue in Spain.
PABLO IGLESIAS: I think we have a responsibility with Sahara, and we should support autodermination of Western Sahara, and I think they have the right to have their own country.
AMY GOODMAN: Israel-Palestine?
PABLO IGLESIAS: It’s a completely—a complete disaster.
Israel is violating the international law all the time. And I think that the international community should have some pressure to Israel in order to respect the international law and go back to the borders of the—before the war.
AMY GOODMAN: Podemos has been compared to Syriza. You’ve described some of the ways you’re similar. How are you different?
PABLO IGLESIAS: We are different because we just have one year of history, and Syriza is a very well-organized political party. And we have different history and a different political context. I think the economic situation in Greece is different in respect to Spain, and the economic situation, too. But we think they are the possibility of change in Greece, and we admire them so much, and we are friends, and we will collaborate with them.
AMY GOODMAN: And do you have any words of advice for President Obama, now in his second term? He can’t run again. Whether he will be a lame-duck president or a legacy president remains to be seen.
PABLO IGLESIAS: I don’t know. I don’t know what could I say to President Obama. There is something that I like. We both love The Wire, the HBO series. And I like Omar, too. And I read that Obama like this character, this character Omar. And I don’t know.
AMY GOODMAN: Why do you like The Wire?
PABLO IGLESIAS: I think it’s probably the best TV series in order to explain how the power works, how the power works in politics, in media, in the organization of the work. I think it’s a masterpiece. I used to teach political geography in my faculty, and all the time I was saying to my students, “You have to see this TV series, because it’s great in order to understand how the power works.”
AMY GOODMAN: Do you have anything like that in Spain?
PABLO IGLESIAS: Not in that level. I think that The Wire is the best series.
AMY GOODMAN: Pablo Iglesias, leader of the Podemos party in Spain, which is leading in at least one poll for the national elections in Spain. He is speaking today in New York at the CUNY Grad Center, 365 Fifth Avenue, at 1:00 p.m. We’ll also be posting an interview with Iglesias in Spanish on our website later this week at democracynow.org.
Note:
“If we don’t have democratic control of economy, we don’t have democracy,” says Pablo Iglesias of Podemos. “We know that it’s very important to occupy the institutional powers in order to change things.”
The proposed budget for the EU for 2011 is 143 billion Euro, or 1.25 billion in addition to the one of 2010. The money is to be allocated as follows: 45% for growth and employment, 31% for agriculture, 11% for rural development, environment and fishing; 6% for international action and aids; 6% for administrative expenses; and just 1% youth, security, and justice.
The socialist bloc in the European Parliament want the increase but the right-wing (majority in the Parliament) want a decrease in the budget. The diplomatic services, agreed upon in the Lisbon treaty cost already 9.5 million Euro and additional 100 posts are programmed to be included in the services. Three supervisory authorities are contemplated related to banks, insurance, and financial markets. A center for crisis detection is in the pipeline. The financing of long-term projects such as the thermonuclear fusion reactor and the positioning satellite Galileo are uncertain. The creation of a unified data-base for fighting against terrorism is no longer in the budget. The functioning of the European Commission is at the heart of the major critics of this budget: It costs 8.5 billion Euros and the expense of paying for the retreat of the personnel of over 61 of age has reached 1.3 billion Euros.
The European Union (EU) describes Modern Europe; (Nov. 7, 2009)
The European Union is the most striking political and social achievement in the 20th century. The backbones of most of the UN peace keeping forces around the world are European contingents; the EU is the highest contributor in humanitarian budgets and for reforming obsolete public institutions in the under-developed States.
This post will cover a few statistics and then a short description of the EU administrative and legislative institutions. The follow up post will cover what is working, then analyzing what need to be ironed out, and then how the world community is expecting modern Europe to lead.
The founding six States are Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Belgium, and tiny Luxemburg; that was in 1951 with the objective of regulating the industrial output of coal and steel and resolving differences on egalitarian terms instead of purely diplomatic processes using the “community method”. The treaty for Agricultural Common Policy (PAC) intended to insure food sufficiency was signed in 1962 which encourage exportation. Total suppression of tariff on borders was abolished in 1968. As Nixon floated the dollars and de-linked it from gold in 1972, the EU of the Six created a mechanism to reducing fluctuation among the six States and called the “European monetary snake”. In 1973, Denmark, Ireland and Britain were included in the union. The European Parliament was elected by the universal vote in 1979 by the nine States.
By 1986, Spain, Portugal, and Greece adhered to the union of the 12 States and a unique market is launched for free circulation of goods, people, capitals and services. The fall of the Berlin Wall enhanced this union to expand into the east. The treaty of Maastricht opens the way for a unified monetary system; it expands the power of the European Parliament and contemplates extending foreign policies and defense to the union institutions.
In 1995, Sweden, Austria, and Finland enter the union of the 18 States. The accord of Schengen of 1995 eliminates borders’ controls among the citizens. In 1999, 11 States adopt the Euro for common money which was introduced on the market in 2002. By 2004, eight central European States join the EU; they are: Estonia, Hungry, Latonia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia, and Cyprus. In 2007 there was a serious proposal for a European Constitution.
The founding Six States constitute about 50% of the EU population of 330 millions of the 27 current States; over 55% of its total economy amounting to 10 trillion euros. Germany contains 16.5 % in population, followed by France 13%, then Italy 12%, then Spain 9%. The economy of Germany represents 20%, France 15.5%, Italy 12.5% and then Spain 9% of the total. England and France are about equal in population and economy.
The EU established institutions for the union such as The Commission, The European Council, the Council of Ministers, the European Parliament (all located in Brussels), and the Court of Justice. The EU is NOT a Federal State; it is a much better political concept that preserves higher democratic representations and elaborate dialogues that enrich the cultural content of any joint agreement among the States. The institutions are being developed and elaborated toward a more effective executive power in times of emergencies such as defense, finance, and foreign policies. Currently, the EU has a unified security system and unified money with open borders.
The Commission is constituted by representatives of each States; the members are nominated by each State and it is up to the European Parliament to confirm nominated members; the President of the Commission is selected by the European Council and there is a trend to reducing the numbers for efficient collective work; it has weak executive power.
The Council of Ministers has legislative power and may reject the initiatives of the Commission. The presidency rotates among States every semester. The voting power of each minister is proportional to the State’s population.
The deputies of the European Parliament are elected based on distinct election laws in each States. The Parliament shares with the Council of Ministers the legislative responsibilities.
The European Council is represented by the States’ government Chiefs; it has the power of selecting the target objectives for the Commission. The High representatives for foreign policies and common security are members in the Commission.
Each State has a justice in the Court of Justice located in Luxemburg. The jurisprudence of this Court supercedes State’s jurisprudence in matters proper to its competence.
Modern Europe: Re-defines Christianity
Posted by: adonis49 on: November 5, 2009
Modern Europe re-defines Christianity; (Nov. 5, 2009)
A few years ago, the European Parliament was considering attaching a clause in the Constitution that Christianity is the foundation of Europe’s civilization. It didn’t pass and Europe saved its modern identity as promoter of human rights and human dignity. How could a religion (one of the many in Europe), one of the various attributes in the vast matrix of a civilization be the exclusive characteristics of Europe? Europe is a heterogeneous society of Nordic, Slavic, and Mediterranean climate and cultures and was dominated intermittently by several Empires.
Modern Europe has extended to its citizens a minimum of human rights. This respect to human dignity was not the case until late in the 20th century. Respect of man did not evolve historically as a continuum but in bounds. Retrospective historical studies tend to discover just the illusion of human respect for rights and dignity.
Europeans claiming Christianity to be the foundation for Europe’s new trend for “mercy, forgiveness, and kindness” (trying to attach these attribute to Europeans) forget that for many centuries the strongest faith in Europe was the taste for violence such as in the Inquisition, the chasing out of the Moslems and Jews from Spain, the Crusading campaigns, the conquest of overseas lands with the benediction of Papal Rome, the division of the conquered lands among the European monarchs by Papal decrees, the religious mass massacres among the Christian sects and factions with Papal consent, the so many wars in Europe where the Catholic Church was an integral party, and the worst of all the Dark Age in Europe that lasted from 400 to the 15th century because the central religious power in Rome was apprehensive of rational thinking and forbade the influx of scientific works that might rob it of its temporal power.
There are Europeans claiming that it was Christianity that set the foundation of the individualistic character in Europe, a non-conformist attitude to the collective norms, rituals, and traditions, the will for self-realization rather than clinging to the behavior of rank and file; these chauvinistic Europeans are also relying on entrenched illusions. The Christian Church was the personification of harassing free thinkers and burning who defied the Christian central dogma for many centuries. Once baptized as a Christian at birth, you had no other alternatives but to obey the Christian laws. Christianity was the most exclusive religion among all religions: It coerced colonized people by force into Christianity. As “Saint” Augustine wrote “It does not matter the faith of a new convert; what counts is what time and rituals will produce in the long run on him and his descendents.” This is exactly the tactics of western globalization “Promote the consumerism of technological gadgets and the world will acquire faith in the superiority of western civilization”
It is paganism that disseminated liberal thinking of individuality. A pagan could worship any other idol in foreign lands (with different name but with the same potency in his mind) and he was never persecuted. A pagan could switch idols that suited his interest of the period and his community would not persecute him or ex-communicate him on his God’s preferences.
The modern principle of universality (which means that individuals of all genders, races, colors, and origins have the same mental potentials and capabilities as human and that the differences reside in societies) was never a Christian dogma. Christianity never had this meaning of universality in its dictionary of laws; a slave was a slave by birth and should accept his condition and offers his miseries and plights as sacrifices to God Jesus who suffered for the entire humanity and forgiveness of the “original sin” that never existed. The discovery by the Europeans of the universality of mankind was due to the de-colonization process, an implicit discourse on the role of society during the 20th century.
How could equality and fraternity have emerged from Christianity in order to claim that Europe’s roots are Christian? Lactance in 314 wrote “People are born equal. In societies where people are not considered equal then justice is not served. Yes, within the Christian communities there are rich and poor, masters and slaves by the flesh but they are equal in the spirit.” How sweet! Lactance was repeating St. Paul’s ejaculation that added oil to the machinery of the caste system. Gregory “the Great” considered charity what was offered to nobles reduced to poverty because of the huge suffering they felt of being considered within the rank of the poor classes; thus, the true poor people by birth were so used to their way of life that they didn’t need much charity to survive.
The Western Christian Churches (Catholic and Protestants) supported and maintained the caste system of nobility and the “others” non-noble classes. The feudal lord had the right to crush his vassals with all the might he possessed as a father had the rights over his kids.
There are many Europeans who claim that it was Christianity that promoted the separation of the spiritual off the temporal power on the basis of Jesus saying “Give to Caesar what is due to Caesar and to God was is due to God”; this is total nonsense. Most of the wars in Europe were launched by monarchs against the temporal influence of Papal Rome in state matters. Neither the Catholic Church not the various Protestant sects relinquished their temporal “rights”.
Protestantism had this indirect advantage that it weakened the central power of Papal Rome; thus, Islam scientific manuscripts were permitted to enter Europe; this new openness to rational discovery was the main catalyst for the Renaissance period and the qualitative jump into modernity. It does not mean that the previous sentence of Jesus had no influence in the mind of modern Europe; it does not mean also that Christianity willingly relinquished its temporal influence based on that sentence. The Prophet Mohammad also urged Moslems to acquire knowledge even from China; it worked for four centuries; it does not mean that Moslems remembered that encouragement most of the time.
There are Europeans, when pressed to give an identity (other than their State), they might opt for their religious denomination (with utmost reluctance in Europe) and thus, when a European says that he is Christian it is sort of family name, the latest in heritage, as cathedrals, old churches, and the paintings, sculptures, and music of the Renaissance period. Christianity cannot be used as identification because it won’t do: most of the US citizens also claim to be Christians, as is the case with Latin Americans; does this means that they could also be considered Europeans or European civilization roots?
Modern Europe is democratic, secular, with laws guaranteeing free religious beliefs, free speech, gathering, and opinions, human rights, sexual liberty, welfare states, open borders and travel. Modern Europe is anathema to the principles and practices of Christian Churches. Christianity must be glad that the modern European civilization is giving it not just a mere face lift but a totally different identity.
Note 1: This topic was inspired by the last chapter in the French book “When the world became Christian” by late Paul Veyne.
Note 2: Ten years a go, Europe was the scene of large genocide; not just between “Christians and Moslems” but among Christians of Catholics, Protestants, and Orthodox on the basis of “ethnic cleansing” in former Yugoslavia.