Zak From Greenland, joined Sep 2003, 1993 posts, RR: 8 Posted (10 years 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1805 times:
poland(not even a member untill 2004) and spain are obviously willing to block the eu constitution. the reason is that the eu constitution gives countries a number of votes in correlation to their number of cititzens opposed to the current system, where spain(and if kept poland too) have an almost similar number of votes like germany and france while only having roughly half the population. it is sad that a country that is not even in the eu yet already tries to milk it for benefits and starts undermining the process of further democracy. and spain under aznar is just a well known sad case, but only for a few more months till reelections. similar case to berlusconi(who has been very nice towards the eu suprisingly)
Andreas From Germany, joined Oct 2001, 6104 posts, RR: 33 Reply 1, posted (10 years 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 1783 times:
Well yes, one could be tempted to put it like that, but I don't think it is necessary to point the finger at other countries, that has never been Germany's way in the EU, and hopefully we are not starting right now.
Of course it upsets other countries to give away some power to the big ones, it's natural, and you have to cope with it. That's the task for diplomacy usually, but right now it seems to become the territory for flamethrowers, and especially for American college kids who have never been to Europe and will have another Euro-bashing field day with your post!
The only thing that I hope will NOT be the result is a so-called "core-EU", that goes it's own way inside the EU...Tony Blair obviously does have similar thoughts and seeks to talk to Chirac and Schroeder.
btw: Not that I give a flying you-know-what about eurobashers from the US of A or elsewhere in the world
Zak From Greenland, joined Sep 2003, 1993 posts, RR: 8 Reply 3, posted (10 years 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 1772 times:
yes i agree with your posting for the most part andreas, however what the constitution does is strenghten the democracy in the eu. i fail to comprehend how a country that gets the honor to be allowed in (isnt always that way like turkey experiences) already tries to undermine what is obviously in line with the majority of eu member states. poland doesnt lose power because it never had any in the eu as new member. it should simply accept its position because BEING in the eu is better then not being in. so no matter what deal they get they should accept it, especially since the deal is geared towards a more citizen and less national state oriented eu, which is what should be the ultimate goal. you dont have countries like luxembourg complaining, even though luxemburg is the country that profits most from the current system. nor do you have uk complaining who will loose power aswell due to their small number of citizens compared to france and germany.
in spain a good number of people regret x'ing for PP(aznars party) on the ballot, similar to people in italy in regard to king silvio, therefore i see it as different case. i hope poland will understand that together is what counts in the eu and not screwing other countries for your own advantage. if they dont i will gladly support a core eu, because we can not allow a stop of progress because countries were not ready to commit themselves fully to the european cause. and if all thats left of the eu is francallemagne and BeNeLux, so be it
TWFirst From Vatican City, joined Apr 2000, 6346 posts, RR: 53 Reply 4, posted (10 years 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 1757 times:
I guess I don't understand why the EU doesn't adopt a bicameral parliament, with one house having representatives elected based on population, and the other house having equal number of representatives for each member.
Yes, that is the same structure as the US Congress, but so what? The original US colonies had the very same argument, and that's why we have what we have.
Andreas From Germany, joined Oct 2001, 6104 posts, RR: 33 Reply 6, posted (10 years 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 1751 times:
TWFirst: I guess that or something similar is exactly what we're aiming at, but we are just not there right now. We need a constitution, that regulates the power of such parliaments and that is the core of the currently ongoing argument.
Sonic From Lithuania, joined Jan 2000, 1670 posts, RR: 1 Reply 7, posted (10 years 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 1750 times:
"Honour to be admitted in EU"? I can say that it is a honour for EU that Poland joins it and it would be the same. In reality, it is not honour for anybody, but it's fact that a country decides to join an organisation because (the government of) it thinks it will be 'profitable'. If some laws of the organisation, global; situation, etc. are changed, country may rethink it's priorities and decide not to join. And even if it decides to join, it of course will try to make the organisation so that it would be more applicable for it.
Would it be good if, for instance, in NATO only other countries would have to help USA in it's wars, but USA wouldn't have to help other countries if war is declared on them? Probably many states would "loose that honour" and leave NATO then...
And actually you Zak want the same what Spain and Poland wants, more power. You say it's democratic? But this is one of the main reasons Turkey is not permitted in, because it has high population, would have many votes.
BTW, there I can't comment for Poland, but I can say that EU will be bad for my own country, Lithuania. I explained the reasons many times, but I will repeat main ones: influx of immigrants, emmigrating skilled Lithuanians, closedown of Ignalina Power Plant and leaving Lithuanian energetics dependent on RUssia, tax system reformed according to EU and thus becoming leftist, Lithuanian bussinesses bankrupted because of no barriers influence of EU companies, other Lithuanian companies bought out, money and licence plates with non-Lithuanian symbols, foreigners buying land in Lithuania, EU citizens able to vote in Lithuanian elections, decitions for Lithuania done by EU (non democratic, because not only Lithuanians elects EU parlaiment thus they wouldn't represent nation's will), etc. EU will get Lithuanian market while we will get (almost) nothing. We will anyways be a province of EU, thus there are completely no reasons to join in my opinion.
Sonic From Lithuania, joined Jan 2000, 1670 posts, RR: 1 Reply 8, posted (10 years 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 1740 times:
TWfirst, I do agree with your idea, but I think tricameral parliament with the following houses would be better:
House of People (having one member per million of EU citizens. Elected either by proportional represantation completely, or half by proportional, half by majoritarian system. Each country would have it's own electoral region, thus parties candidating could be either local, regional, or pan-European. If a party candidates in more than one country it has to propose different lists for each of the countries. If half of representatives would be appointed by majoritarian system, than some bigger countries would be partitioned into electoral regions themselves for these elections)
House of States (having members not elected directly, but instead sent by each member state government (or, if member state has different laws, there could be elections for these representatives too, but it would be a local matter). There would be either fixed or semi-fixed number of representatives per country. By semi-fixed I mean system like it is now, when there are different amounts of representatives per country, but the number is not fully dependant on population. House of States would try to protect different states and their rights)
House of Nations (representing nations of EU. Every nation having more than certain amount of people in EU would have certain number of seats here. House of Nations would be elected directly by people, each voting for candidates to his own nation seats regardless of where in EU he/she would be. So, for instance German living in Spain would still vote in German Nation elections. It might be hard to organise, but possible with new technology, and also it is needed because emmigration/immigration between countries is on high levels in EU. House of Nations would protect cultural rights of nations rather than territorial rights of states like House of States would do. Minority nations (if they have enough population; e.g. Turks (Turkish Cypriots and immigrants), Catalans, Baskians) would also have their own seat(s).).
Cyril B From France, joined Jun 2001, 396 posts, RR: 3 Reply 9, posted (10 years 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 1733 times:
An hour ago, the polish president told that he will probably veto the constitution if Poland does not keep the voting rights it virtually acquired thanks to the Nice treaty. (The Nice treaty will only apply from 2005 to 2009, with the new constitution due to apply in 2009)
Under nice treaty, voting rights inside the Council of ministers (executive body of the EU) are the following:
Germany, France, Italy and UK: 29
Spain, Poland : 27
It means that Poland and Spain, with a combined population of 79 millions, have 54 votes, compared to Germany's 82 millions people and 29 votes!
That's obviously an anti democratic voting system.
The germans, french, italian and british have the right to get the power they deserve. What the poles want is not a fair representation (as they claim), it's a disproportionate power compared to their real power!
The worst it that the poles and the spanish are showing absolutely no flexibility, and they will probably sink this constitution. And if the consitution is not adopted, the EU (with 25 members next year) will not be able to work.
Thanks Poland, thanks Spain, you will break more than 50 years of hard work! (but they don't care, they are not the ones who worked to build the EU...)
Sonic From Lithuania, joined Jan 2000, 1670 posts, RR: 1 Reply 10, posted (10 years 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 1721 times:
So, Cyril B, you want all power in hands of French and German, to some extent British and Italian (although British would still probably be marginalised, at least in foreign politics), and all other smaller nations as some workhorses? Should these smaller nations work for Germany and France and get nothing in return? Yes, Germany would have less votes than Poland and Spain combined, but more votes than either Poland or Spain alone. By the way, probably if (this is hypothetical) on some decition number of votes by all other states would be equal, and only Poland, Spain and Germany would be left to cast votes, and Poland+Spain would vote for one decition, while Germany - for another, it should be so that Polish+Spain vote would overrule German one, regardless of Germany having bigger population. After all, it is a Union of all countries, of all nationalities, or at least this is what people in Brusseles tends to claim. So, I am not saying that smaller countries should have same power as larger, but at least they should have some power and if all small countries wants one thing, while the 2 bigger ones wants another, it should be as majority of countries wants. Otherwise it would be an occupation (people of one region deciding for other regions) and not a democracy. Dor smaller countries it would be same democracy as for Chechny ain Russian Federation.
And EU won't be able to work if it is nor controlled by Germany and France, was this what you wanted to say in the last paragraph of your post?
Andreas From Germany, joined Oct 2001, 6104 posts, RR: 33 Reply 11, posted (10 years 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 1714 times:
Sonic I'm afraid you do not really understand how EU works..."do what Germany wants" or be "our workhorse", "work for us and get nothing in return"???? Who told you this nonsense? Was that the anti-EU propaganda in your country? Wow! Obviously the got away with ridiculous lies.
You get a lot of money, in fact tons of it, and yes, about one third of it comes from Germany, so much for your completely laughable workhorse theory. Other than that I advise you to read all those threads about EU in the last months, of course you don't have to like it, the American southern states didn't like it, too, and the rest is history, EU fortunately doesn't work that way but applies rather peaceful methods, and if a country does not want to join...very well don't join!
Cyril B From France, joined Jun 2001, 396 posts, RR: 3 Reply 12, posted (10 years 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 1710 times:
The EU must become democratic.
As the two parts of the legislative body of the EU, the parliament (who discusses law) and the council of minister (who passes law), must reflect the size of the member states in order to be democratic.
What you ask for is the possibility for one or two countries to block a measure that a majority of countries wants to pass. Today, that's already impossible, and under the current voting system, a law needs 62 votes (on a total of 87) to be passed.
Under the proposed voting system, a law will need to be voted by a majority of countries representing 60% of the population of the EU in order to be passed. That's simple, and that's democratic, as the number of states and the size of the people are both important.
And, by the way, remember that EU measures do not apply to sovereign areas like defense, foreign policy, taxes, budget...
EU members are sovereign countries free to define their policies, so don't tell me that the EU is a kind of franco-german reich who dictates all euro countries what to do. That's what all anti-EU are telling and its not true.
Sonic From Lithuania, joined Jan 2000, 1670 posts, RR: 1 Reply 13, posted (10 years 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 1698 times:
Andreas, I am sorry if I sound radical, I am not one, and I was not denying everything EU, just posted some criticism. Sorry again if it appeared otherwise. And my opinion exacly wasn't formed by any propaganda, because the only propaganda you could receive here wa pro-EU one. Because of this, about 92% of people voted for joining EU in referendum. This was achieved mainly though (in my opinion) immoral decitions, like giving beer for votes, and also government-paid 'agitation' campaign, which didn't mentioned any bad sides of EU. Also, referendum rules were changed just for this one referendum. No representation of eurosceptics was in state TVs or Radios which in theory should represent all nation. Before propaganda started about 55% of people were pro-EU.
As for money EU will give to Lithuania: many of this are private investions to things like shops, media industry, etc, also importing of EU goods without taxes. This will be very dermiental because the oldest Lithuanian companies are only 13 years old and they (most of them) won't be able to compete EU ones. Which will lead them to either becoming niche companies, go bankrupt or being bought-out by foreign companies. Profits will after this be brought away of Lithuania. True, jobless rate in Lithuania will probably lower (although it is already lower than German one), but should Lithuania be a nation of workers without big and succesful companies? Some are now quite strong (Vilniaus Prekyba, Lifosa, Achema, Ekranas, Tauras, etc.), but after barriers falling completely they would suffer. Tauras, a TV manufactorer, for instance will have to pay taxes for importing now tax-free cinescopes from Taiwan, which will impair their abilities to make a cheap product which makes them popular. Vilniaus Prekyba, a shop group, will suffer as more European shop chains will enter the market. And so on. Lithuania's economy is too young and weak to join EU. It will only be exploited (in my opinion), rather than get anything.
Andreas From Germany, joined Oct 2001, 6104 posts, RR: 33 Reply 14, posted (10 years 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 1684 times:
Well my opinion about the advantages for Lithuania joining the EU is somewhat different from yours obviously, and I don't think your country needs more time. As so many of your neighbouring countries are going to be members, it would be fatal for you to stay away, Lithuania is not comparable to Norway, a country that can afford to stay out.
EU does have its disadvantages, but there are advantages, too, so life will be different for you, but not in a negative sense, but in a positive way. Ok ok, I'll stop now, I'm beginning to sound like a politician ...
And don't worry I never thought you're a radical, I've read many of your posts and these usually provide facts, which is not always the case here on this forum, as we all know, subsequently I have a lot of respect for you!
Sonic From Lithuania, joined Jan 2000, 1670 posts, RR: 1 Reply 16, posted (10 years 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 1678 times:
Cyril B, the democracy you talk about is kind of "colonialist democracy", where central regions have the deciding power. It can be so in homogenous country, but definitely not in multinational union. Each nation has it's own views which should be equally represented or, if not equally, than at least in the same proportions they are now. There can't be a true "majority rule" in such organisation. Imagine if number of votes in UN would directly depend on population - then China and India would be almost deciding decitions... Would this be right in your opinion? EU is organisation of states and nations, not directly of people, just like NATO, UN, etc. Thus nations/states should have votes, not people directly.
Zak From Greenland, joined Sep 2003, 1993 posts, RR: 8 Reply 17, posted (10 years 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 1668 times:
"if Poland doesn't want democracy in the EU, they should simply not join it"
yup thats the point. but what do you expect from someone like kwasniewski. after all he was the posterboy of the communist party back when the commies tried to save the 1 party state when the unionists revolted. he quickly became pro democratic stuff when the eastern block collapsed, hes not a democratic person by heart, he is just in it for the best deal. and that clearly shows with his current attitude. i think the eu should not move an inch towards him, if he doesnt want to support the democratic future of the eu he should also not expect to get all the treats he gets from "old yurop". he has to pick a side and stick with it.
Sonic From Lithuania, joined Jan 2000, 1670 posts, RR: 1 Reply 18, posted (10 years 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 1665 times:
Andreas, I don't think it would be fatal to stay away if nearby countries joins. Probably it would have an impact, for sure, but still there is the eastern markets (Ukrainean, Byelarussian, Russian) which are currently the most targetted by Lithuanian companies (so are Latvian and Estonian markets). Lithuanian architactural design companies, just as an example, are quite frequently hired in mentioned eastern countries because they has quality and are cheaper than western ones. Same goes for quite many companies and export - currently, it is easier for us to tap these markets than to go into crowded EU markets. Also, Lithuanian knowledge of the bussines culture in these Eastern Culture helps (actually, this is the reason why so many well-doing companies fails in these countries - it is because they, like in Europe, tries to do everything in order. While in a countries like Belarus (also Russia, Ukraine) you in some cases couldn't even get a permission to build something without giving "a little gift" to some officer and drinking with some other officer. In interviews bussinesmen who expands to these markets always says how important it is and that by such measures everything is speeded up by several months and costs are lowered. Well, we had such things in Lithuania not so much time ago, thus we tend to know them quite well).
Advances in the east may not be impaired by joining EU, I am just saying that for Lithuania the EU market is not everything it has. It is the most eastern oriented country of all Baltics and because of it was hit by Russian crisis in 1998 hardly. Lithuanian GNP currently is growing on 9% (in first half of 2003), which is one of biggest growths in the world for that period. It is without EU. I am not saying that it won't grow like that in EU, but just claiming that we are anyway growing economically. Thus it is not like we would be a starving third world country with no hope if not EU which comes and saves us. I doubt EU would even admit such a country.
And yes, I always try to provide facts, I am glad you like it . While writting that post you replied to I was watching a TV show and thus wanted to write it all during commercials. Because of this reason it wasn't too full of facts...
Racko, according to you claim, China should be unhappy because in UN it gets only 1 vote in security council. So, France and UK, having only 1/7th or so of Chinese population, combined has 2 votes, while China only one. You think it's unfair? But I think most of international organisations works this way. Of course, just like in EU currently (or UN for that matter with permanent SC members) some members are privilegised more, but to make everything completely dependent on population, like in a single country, is not a good thing in my opinion.
Sonic From Lithuania, joined Jan 2000, 1670 posts, RR: 1 Reply 19, posted (10 years 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 1660 times:
Zak, any politician, regardless werether "democratic in heart" or not, would want that their country would be important. Dictators would want so because they would want power for themselves. Democratic politicians - because they wants power for people. People of their country, not people of neighborhood countries or faraway countries. Because in Poland, as far as I know, representatives for EU parliament will be elected in popular elections, it is a democratic country. It is nothing bad that a leader of it wants that it would be an important state, not a mere province of huge Union. Every leader would want it so. Espcially leader of a country, politics of which were more or less controlled by a bigger Union for 50 years.
I can't comment of Kwasniewski's feelings. I guess his real feelings are irrelelevant, his actions are what's important, as with all politicians. One can be a nazi in heart but act like ordinary rightist and nobody would probably notice (if no emotional references are made in speeched). Same goes for communist and socialdemocratic.
Cyril B From France, joined Jun 2001, 396 posts, RR: 3 Reply 20, posted (10 years 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 1657 times:
What some guys needs to understand is the fact that, contrary to the UN who is an organisation of worldwide cooperation (and where each country have one voice), the EU is a regional organisation of integration, whose role is to define common policies in some areas like trade, industry, agriculture, immigration... and to form, in some decades, a federation. (like it or not, that's the goal of the EU, everyone knows it).
The poles and the spanish acts as if they were not aware of this. Of course they are, but still they won't leave the EU because they badly need fresh euro money. So in order to get money without loosing some power, they will prevent the system from working.
Every country must make steps towards the other countries...
In the proposed consitution, France's weight inside the EU will also be reduced compared to Germany's one. But you don't see the french goverment threatening to veto the whole constitution. Each country must get a fair representation of its population. That's democracy.
If Poland and Spain does not agree and wants to block the whole integration, they have to leave the EU AND GIVE THE MONEY BACK!
Zak From Greenland, joined Sep 2003, 1993 posts, RR: 8 Reply 21, posted (10 years 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 1653 times:
"regardless werether "democratic in heart" or not, would want that their country would be important"
thats the point, and i think that also shows why you are against the eu idea.
its not about countries. read what cyril wrote in reply20 right before this posting. its about the federal structures of the eu. you obviously dont get it hence dislike the eu, and its similar for kwasniewski regardin his actions.
Sonic From Lithuania, joined Jan 2000, 1670 posts, RR: 1 Reply 22, posted (10 years 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 1639 times:
Cyril B, I am of course aware about the plans of turning EU into federation, and this is one of the points why I oppose whole idea. However, it is the fact that majority of population doesn't knows this. In the euro"agitation" campaign I mentioned previously, these things were just silenced. That campaign was mostly aimed at workers and farmers, which are still educated my old Soviet system mostly and doesn't understands much about economics or international politics, yet makes the majority of people. In that campaign it was said (of course, indirectly) that Lithuania will almost rule whole EU. Some people even now believes that "whole Union will be ours when we will join", I spoke to several such people myself. Example of this agitation could be advertisements which said that "After joining, Lithuania will have as many votes in EU council [probably bad spelling] as such rich and powerful countries as Ireland(...)". Of course, not many people knows much about Ireland, just knows that it's a Western country and they already forms and opinion as I mentioned before.
Thus, these politicians became slaves of their own agitations. I am quite sure this happened in Poland also. Kwasniewski also probably told his people what power Poland will get with joining Union, and now he must not destroy his political career by loosing that power. Of course, he can't leave Union for which he agitated all people to vote for.
Thus, as one Lithuanian politician did said (leader of "Young Lithuania" political party, which was the biggest party not to support EU), we are buying a cat in a basket (according to a popular Lithuanian saying). We don't know what EU will be in future, it is still not decided, yet we want to join it. Probably we wouldn't like future EU at all?
Cyril B From France, joined Jun 2001, 396 posts, RR: 3 Reply 23, posted (10 years 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 1630 times:
Sonic, I understand your point, but that's a national problem, not a european one.
If your government didn't held a true democratic debate about whether is was good or bad to join the EU, it's your problem, not France or Italy's one.
Eastern Europe countries pushed hard to enter the EU (despite the fact that some countries, like Poland, didn't met all conditions required to join), signed the treaty, got billions € in aid from the EU ... and now they say "hey, I don't want of that system".
Poland's behaviour indicates that, in fact, this country is not ready to enter the EU: you can't ask to enter a club and say at the same time that you will oppose the way the club works.
Sonic From Lithuania, joined Jan 2000, 1670 posts, RR: 1 Reply 24, posted (10 years 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 1612 times:
No, Poland doesn't opposes the way club works. It's opposite - Poland wants the club to stay as it is. After all, when Poland and other countries were starting their plans to join the organisation, there were no plans for this new constitution. This is probably the reason why people weren't informed about it - government(s) were so eager to join the Union that they didn't wanted to say something negative about it. However, they still have the point - if the Union is going to be reformed in 2009, when they will be full members, they of course will have a right to say what they thinks about it. Again, Polish wants to keep EU as it was when they first thought of joining it, it's not as they would want to change it as you are claiming.
And these "Billions of Euros" (sorry still haven't that Euro symbol on my keyboard, only have $ symbol) of financial aid isn't quite right. Yes, there is aid, but:
1.Part of this aid would be given anyways (e.g. humanitarial aid for country schools, etc.), and non-EU states also gives it.
2.Other part of this aid is beneficial for current EU members themselves (e.g. Via Baltica road project which connects no two or more major Lithuanian cities, but runs through Lithuania and is to be build for easier Warshaw-Helsinki access. Lithuania will also have to contribute for building of this road)
3.Some aid is not worth it's consequesness (for instance, aid to Lithuanian farmers: farmers of current EU states gets much more. Of course, without EU aid would be even smaller, but in this case taxes would protect Lithuanian market from EU-made food and thus it would be better for our farmers, since they almost doesn't export anyway)
4.Some aid is there only to help bear with joining EU consequesness and doesn't even fully covers them (e.g. help (definitely not a 100% one) to close down Ignalina Power Plant, which could work for many years, but EU wants it to be closed because they does not want cheap energy from Lithuania (I mean realpolitik here)).
I am not saying that all aid is bad, but add up other bad sides of EU which I mentioned before here and you'll see that it is not such a good deal.
25 JoseMEX: >>in spain a good number of people regret x'ing for PP(aznars party) on the ballot
26 Teahan: It's opposite - Poland wants the club to stay as it is. After all, when Poland and other countries were starting their plans to join the organisation,
27 Sonic: Teahan, this is what I want to say - EU, and the world, moves forward, and Poland knows it. However, since Poland will be in organisation by 2009, Pol
28 Klaus: The keywords here are fairness and democracy. And in both respects the position of Spain and Poland is ... just sad.
29 Teva: Sonic, I totally agree with you, regarding integration in Europe. All the countries who joined the club have seen their economy completely detroyed by
30 Ryanb741: I think there should be a duel with giant rubber mallets over a pool of custard whilst standing on a pole. If you are knocked off the pole your policy
31 Bobrayner: Some aid is there only to help bear with joining EU consequesness and doesn't even fully covers them (e.g. help (definitely not a 100% one) to close d
32 Sonic: Teva, as I told before, we adapting to changing world's economies. As for other countries you mentioned - please note that market economy was "strong"
33 Paulc: As long as somebody says no to this constitution - that is all that matters. It is just an excuse to take more power from national governments and giv
34 Zak: "Nuclear Power Plant is much less hazardous (I mean, under normal circumstances) than gas power plants. Latter does more damage to the enviroiment," i
35 L-188: I guess the central debate is: How much power should an individual independent country surrender to a central body. similar to the US vs. UN Debates t
36 Arsenal@LHR: EU members are sovereign countries free to define their policies, so don't tell me that the EU is a kind of franco-german reich who dictates all euro
37 Paulc: Arsenal@lhr I am sure that Blair hasn't ! or perhaps he is wanting to go down as the biggest traitor this country has ever seen. If this constitution
38 Arsenal@LHR: Yep, it's time to boot out Blair. I cannot understand the man at the moment, why is he so desperate to sign up to this death bed? Why is he denying th
39 Cyril B: You obviously haven't read the constitution yet. I have read this constitution. The project of constitution Giscard gave Berlusconi some weeks ago hav
40 Arsenal@LHR: What you say is just anti-EU propaganda based only on misinformation. If you really knew how the EU works and how it will work tomorrow, you wouldn't
41 Sonic: Arsenal@LHR and Paluc, thanks for support Zak, you probably didn't read my post to the end... I do of course know about Chernobyl disaster, I've just
42 GKirk: The UK should leave the EU and form a super alliance with the USA
43 Paulc: Arsenal@lhr gullible is the right word - or perhaps the french population have become so 'brainwashed' regarding the eu that they believe everything t
44 GKirk: Perhaps the french just want to surrender to somebody - it has been a while since the last time and it might as well be to Brussels instead of Germany
45 Arsenal@LHR: Sonic Your concerns are not alone. We in Britain have the same fears, when people from outside your own country, foreigners, start making your laws, d
46 JAL777: Perhaps the french just want to surrender to somebody - it has been a while since the last time and it might as well be to Brussels instead of Germany
47 Zak: latest news are that today blair chirac and schröder met to reassure their firm stance to each other. poland has pulled back its threat of veto and g
48 Teahan: Arsenal@LHR: And i'm not making this up, supremacy is the exact word they use in the foreign policy and justice section of the draft constitution. Not
49 Sonic: Arsenal@LHR, I understand what you mean. I want that my own nation would rule my country and all it's decitions, this is democracy. If somebody electe
50 Sonic: Teahan, this is also a great concern. Lithuania for instance is forced to include to it's constitution article which reads something like "Any EU law
51 Zak: "many Germans for instance believed that nazi regime was good back in interwar period too" good job at proving yourself wrong there. "nazi" germany ex
52 Sonic: Zak, I do obviously know when the nazi regime was in power in Germany. OK, I had to say latter part of interwar period, not all that period. I mention
53 Cyril B: The only thing I can say is: most European countries (France, Germany, Belgium, Italy, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Austria, Portugal, Sweden, Finland
54 Arsenal@LHR: EU Law is already supreme over national law. Nothing new there. No it isn't, only in certain areas does EU law have supremacy over member state law, t
55 Cyril B: Double standards. You are the same people that cried foul when George Bush made his "you're either with us or against us" speech. Now you're doing the
56 Arsenal@LHR: It's simple, you are giving us a false ultimatum. GWB told the rest of the world they are either with his country or not. You have said Britain, Polan
57 LOT767-300ER: "The UK should leave the EU and form a super alliance with the USA " Well join just like we did in Iraq. Signed, Poland. Personally, Im laughing that
58 Boeing4ever: Somebody said earlier that the EU needs a bicameral legislature. Looking at the mess here...I couldn't agree more. One house based on equal representa
59 Indianguy: Think Trojan Horse! Exactly how much does Poland owe Germany and France collectively anyway? Such ingratitude!
60 L-188: I really would like a Pole to answer Indianguy's guy in relation to Germany. Preferably one that was born in the 1920's or 30's.