Poor migrants from Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan

[yellowperil]

What about those that have already crossed borders ?

 

They will either scatter in all directions or decide there is safety in numbers and try to stand their ground against any sanctions now imposed upon them or any force that may be used to bring order.

Either way it wont be pretty.

A bit of forethought was what was needed instead of the bleeding heart kneejerk reactions because of pictures of a poor dead child on a beach.

[L00b]

Someone else's opinion? Christine Legarde was the Finance Minister in Sarkozy's government when the bailouts were deemed necessary. She is currently the head of the International Monetary Fund. I think she may be in a more informed position than anyone on SF.

That's as may be...but since we're discussing opinions about a matter of legal interpretation here, personally I'll continue to take a fully-considered decision by the German Constitutional Court in September 2011 over a reported opinion of a lay politician in December 2010.

Fair enough; but that goes both ways. Fair enough?

Always

 

Article 14 sub-paragraph 12 of which legal text, btw?

Edited September 15, 2015 by L00b

[Berberis]

Someone else's opinion? Christine Legarde was the Finance Minister in Sarkozy's government when the bailouts were deemed necessary. She is currently the head of the International Monetary Fund. I think she may be in a more informed position than anyone on SF.

 

She, a committed supporter of the EU has admitted that the rules were broken and you are getting upset because I haven't said btw it's article 14 sub-paragraph 12?

 

I was trying to find out if you actually had formed your opinion on the treaty or what someone else had said. What is obvious is its the latter.

 

So yet again I ask, what part of the Treaty of Lisbon rules out Bank bail outs. Btw is't not article 14.

Edited September 15, 2015 by Berberis

[Zamo]

''When I was a kid, all you could hear on Sunday morning was church bells. Now all you see are minarets.'' - just isn't true. It's total piffle.

 

What is true is we have become increasingly less religious over the decades. We now have about 800,000 people attending a Church of England ceremony on Sundays, which is half what it was back in the 60's.

 

So what has the steady move towards a more secular society meant? Have we seen a breakdown in morality? Are we less tolerant? No, we have actually become a fairer, more tolerant and prosperous society. And the same pattern can be seen across Western Europe.

 

We don't see the same pattern across the Muslim world. The Muslim world remains intolerant, factional and violent. The poor are many and they really are poor. The worst places are where the migrants and refugees are coming from and I, like most people, don't welcome the cultural practices and beliefs they bring with them because they are the mother of the dysfunctionality they flee. Couple that with a massive financial burden and it is a big 'no thank you' from most people.

 

It is a reality that is dangerous to ignore.

[Harrystottle]

OK, so article 125 of the Treaty of Lisbon's opens with "The Union shall not be liable for or assume the commitments of central governments".

 

This would seem to me to be saying the EU isn't going to be liable if anybody gets into debt.

 

This opinion was shared by the Financial Times

http://lexicon.ft.com/Term?term=no-bail_out-clause

 

the German think tank CEP

http://openeuropeblog.blogspot.co.uk/2010/07/is-eurozone-bailout-legal.html

Which incidentally noted that "The public has been deceived on several points, arguing that the aid scheme will not be limited to three years, as the Commission claims, but would be “installed indefinitely”. Which is interesting.

 

By Huntspost

http://www.huntspost.co.uk/hunts-life/euro_bailout_fund_breaks_lisbon_treaty_1_1080437

 

By the aforesaid Christine Legarde and by many, many more. In fact I would say that article 125 was deliberately designed to reassure people that a rich country like Germany wouldn't be responsible for a fellow Eurozone member's debts.

 

But as Loob says, the German Constitutional court thought differently, which appears to me to be a contrary verdict.

 

So now we might be able to get back to Syrian refugees?

[Berberis]

OK, so article 125 of the Treaty of Lisbon's opens with "The Union shall not be liable for or assume the commitments of central governments".

 

This would seem to me to be saying the EU isn't going to be liable if anybody gets into debt.

 

This opinion was shared by the Financial Times

http://lexicon.ft.com/Term?term=no-bail_out-clause

 

the German think tank CEP

http://openeuropeblog.blogspot.co.uk/2010/07/is-eurozone-bailout-legal.html

Which incidentally noted that "The public has been deceived on several points, arguing that the aid scheme will not be limited to three years, as the Commission claims, but would be “installed indefinitely”. Which is interesting.

 

By Huntspost

http://www.huntspost.co.uk/hunts-life/euro_bailout_fund_breaks_lisbon_treaty_1_1080437

 

By the aforesaid Christine Legarde and by many, many more. In fact I would say that article 125 was deliberately designed to reassure people that a rich country like Germany wouldn't be responsible for a fellow Eurozone member's debts.

 

But as Loob says, the German Constitutional court thought differently, which appears to me to be a contrary verdict.

 

So now we might be able to get back to Syrian refugees?

 

If the article was limited to what you have quoted and not just a section of a paragraph, I would agree, however it does go on to state that they should not take on such projects unless there are mutual financial guarantees. This I fear is the sticking point in the article that undermines your point.

[L00b]

So what has the steady move towards a more secular society meant?

Urban NIMBYs moving to small villages in the countryside and, within months, petitioning to stop the (centuries old-) daily ringing of the angelus by the local Church.

 

I s**t you not

We don't see the same pattern across the Muslim world.

No, but then again, there is no reason why refugee should all be tarred with the same brush. Not all are Muslims. Provided that respective countries can avoid ghettoization (I'd actually advocate for forcefully avoiding ghettoization if need be), integration can be achieved.

 

With ref to the earlier-posted above, I doubt the small north-eastern France village I'm on about will get many (if any) refugees around their end. Far too small and rural. There is no cultural issue at all: the local Muslim family (yes, it's that small there is only one, eastern Turk origin, might actually be Kurds IIRC) is extremely well integrated, from a long date. They live a stone's throw away from the church and didn't sign the bell-related petition

Edited September 15, 2015 by L00b

[Berberis]

Urban NIMBYs moving to small villages in the countryside and, within months, petitioning to stop the (centuries old-) daily ringing of the angelus by the local Church.

 

I s**t you not

 

A quick google search will back this up L00b. Its a real shame, especially considering the other post on here about people living rurally are more happy.

 

---------- Post added 15-09-2015 at 16:15 ----------

 

the local Muslim family is extremely well integrated,

 

This is the key to the problem in the EU I fear. Integration. It seems many feel it is their duty to disengage from the rest of the none muslim society as much as possible by creating little enclaves mirroring outside cultures and territories. The Sharia Law patrols in a London borough is a good example. It seems the people who integrate the least are the least tolerant themselves.

[L00b]

A quick google search will back this up L00b. Its a real shame, especially considering the other post on here about people living rurally are more happy.

I've heard about similar instances here, but my post was about a real instance I have direct knowledge of, in the village in which my parents live.

 

Urban types freshly landed from the Paris area, got surprised that countryside is, erm, countrysidey. Much laughs were had

It seems the people who integrate the least are the least tolerant themselves.

For social observers, it's an interesting paradox.

 

It's also the reason why hands-free multiculturalism can fail: unenforced secularism leaves the door wide open to those with socio-political aims and agendas, to quietly build their power base as they please using religious beliefs and fervour. Political correctness and liberal hand wringing (to an extent) and the permanent need to maintain a clean political image for any elected person of any ilk (to a much larger extent) do the rest.

 

Until it runs into the socio-cultural norms and problems inevitably ensue. The burka ban in France is a case in point (the "security" reasons for it were PR hogwash, noone was fooled...but neither was it a case of the Gvt pandering to the FN vote: the purpose of that legislation is to enforce integration, the Gvt telling salafist fundies to get on their bike, no ifs or buts).

 

As were the Sharia Law patrols in Tower Hamlets. These were equally 'extreme' and statistically non-representative as the Burka wearers in France. The patrols also seemed to be the work of convert nutjobs (the guilty suspects' names tell a story all in itself: Jordan Horner, Ricardo MacFarlane and Royal Barnes) and were uniformly and promptly condemned by Muslim representatives and speakers.

Edited September 15, 2015 by L00b

[Berberis]

Urban types freshly landed from the Paris area, got surprised that countryside is, erm, countrysidey. Much laughs were had

 

First hand experience of similar here too. My parents own a farm/stables and newly arrived people in the village who bought a house overlooking some of the land complained about it being messy. They were unhappy with the view and wanted my parents to tidy it up for them. I think they thought they where living on some Darling Buds of May episode. They also complained about the noise of a tractor occasionally. They were informed the it was a working farm and they can either get used to it or bugger off.