10 Countries admitted to the EU

[The Gaffer]

* ACH! TRIPLE POST DELETED!!*

[The Gaffer]

* DOUBLE POST DELETED *

[The Gaffer]

This looks like routine EU bashing by the xenophobic British press.

One of the problems the EU has is that it has no sanction against member states which break the rules.

crimes for overfishing, deliberate polluting, money laundering and price fixing

Consider fishing. French and Spanish fleets routinely ignore quotas while the British strictly enforce them. As a result, our fishing fleet has been devastated and the stocks are still going down. Our fishermen have to sit on the dole and watch French and Spanish trawlers come in and hoover up their livelihoods. Thus, law-abiding member states are punished and the ones who flout the rules get off scot-free.

There is no point in having rules if you can't enforce them. Once the rules have been agreed, why would you need a right of appeal to not enforce them? This is NOT the same as not having a right of appeal against a conviction.

[The Gaffer]

Thought it would be interesting to compare a different report of the same story:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4245412.stm

[Jonathan]

Originally Posted by The Gaffer

This looks like routine EU bashing by the xenophobic British press.

I agree with you. The article you posted is more informative whereas the one Inked posted only seem to describe how angry some of the memberstates are without further going into what thecourt ruling actually means.

Basically it means that it becomes illegal to go against EU policies, policies which deal with environmental pollution, the internal EU market, data protection, protection of intellectual property, monetary matters etc. (see the Gaffer's article). These are all policies that the EU members have agreed on, and in 2003, they also agreed "that for major environmental infractions only criminal law is apt to be dissuasive, and if they want to make it a law across the board, they will have to do it through a directive" (see the Gaffer's article again).

Also, as the Gaffer already said, the fact that governments don't have the right to appeal can't be compared to a person's right to appeal against a conviction.

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

Wow. I'm not a member of an EU nation, but I think they're taking the trade alliance too far with this. Now, it makes a lot of sense that you have to have a certain, acceptable level of human rights in order to join. But "harmonising criminal law across Europe" suggests the EU wants to be more than a trade alliance. So when does an alliance become a nation?

The EU started out as a trade alliance but it has evolved a lot since then. Even it's still mainly an economical union, the EU is also very much a political organization and in a few ways also a military alliance (an attack on one member is an attack on all, peace keepers serving under the EU flag etc.).
They EU doesn't "wan't" to be more than a trade alliance, it is more.

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

It doesn't seem as though Europe is one nation. Having been there, there's huge cultural and social differences in the countries I visited (some more than others). But hamonising criminal law... I mean, all of the Canadian provinces don't necessarily have the same criminal laws. (Such as at what age someone is no longer a minor.)

The cultural and social differences are huge. However, as I and the Gaffer have already pointed out, harmonising criminal law focuses on such things as the business climate and the environment within the union, both of which affect all the member nations.


[edit] By the way! This discussion shouldn't be held in this thread, which is about the new Eastern European members. Perhaps Thoughts about the European Union is a more suitable thread?

[The Gaffer]

Glad you agree, Jonathan. I also agree t'other thread would be better for this discussion.

On topic, I am still waiting for the influx of improverished Poles and Slovenes predicted by our friends in the fourth estate.

Saw an interesting programme last night about Slovenia, where anti-accession people argued that, wait for it, they would be overwhelmed by an influx of rich foreigners who would buy up property and drive prices up.

[Jonathan]

Originally Posted by The Gaffer

Saw an interesting programme last night about Slovenia, where anti-accession people argued that, wait for it, they would be overwhelmed by an influx of rich foreigners who would buy up property and drive prices up.

Really? Haha, that cracked me up

The only impact of the expansion of the EU I can think of is that we get less Polish berry gatherers over here since they joined the union.

[inked]

Does this means the Times is unreliable? Or, merely that it doesn't agree with either of you?

[Nurvingiel]

The Times isn't a British magazine is it? I thought it was American.

Well, when I read "harmonizing criminal law", I immediately thought of only one aspect of criminal law, not corporate crime. That's what I get for not doing research.

[Jonathan]

Originally Posted by inked

Does this means the Times is unreliable? Or, merely that it doesn't agree with either of you?

A paper doesn't have to be unreliable but it can be slanted

The Times in the UK is a conservative newspaper and the conservatives in Britain seem to be quite EU sceptic. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

[The Gaffer]

Originally Posted by inked

Does this means the Times is unreliable? Or, merely that it doesn't agree with either of you?

Both

The Times is one of the world's oldest newspapers, based in London since 17-oatcake. Is now owned by Rupert Murdoch and is certainly at the conservative end of the spectrum: a broadsheet with distinct tabloid tendencies.

[inked]

Gaffer,

Here's the word from one of the Lord's Curmudgeon of the Established Church of England. I do believe he get's a prize for the size of his foot in his mouth!

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...787421,00.html

For an amusing commentary from this side of the pond, check out
www.mcj.bloghorn.com and see the article titled LAUGHINGSTOCK for September 19 date.

I am sure you will enjoy.

PS Did English Bishops get this foot-in-mouth-disease from the French or did they give it to the French? That old conundrum about language and syphillis updated, what?

[The Gaffer]

Sorry I missed this post earlier. Unfortunately I couldn't get your other link to open (came up as unavailable) as I'm sure it would have been a hoot.

English bishops have a long history of dissent, as I'm sure you know, going right back to Beckett's "turbulent priest".

An alternate report puts a slightly different spin on the story: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/st...573106,00.html

Sounds like they are right on the money. It is good to see a Christian group asserting a different version to the fundamentalist bollocks we are accustomed to seeing (i.e. thou shalt not kill except for arabiacs hoarding your rightful oil supply and criminals with learning disabilities, of course)

[inked]

http://www.narniafans.com/?id=684
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

[inked]

Turkey's still trying to get into the EU, right?

Consider this...http://www.compassdirect.org/en/news...idelement=4267

[Mercutio]

Originally Posted by inked

http://www.narniafans.com/?id=684
.

.
.
.

Classic

[Jonathan]

Originally Posted by inked

Turkey's still trying to get into the EU, right?

Consider this...http://www.compassdirect.org/en/news...idelement=4267

What does this have to do with the EU?

[inked]

Depends, Jonathan. Do you want people who lip synch freedom and do as they do or people who really mean what they say in the EU? Or, do you prefer hindsight and, golly gee, Mr. Ed, I wish I had known that.

It's your EU.......for now.

as in this little report:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/791263.stm

or, if you have the inclination, this historical review and prospectus:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatc...ves/010631.php

[Jonathan]

I dunno, the EU isn't supposed to be an exclusive club for Christians. Besides, we aren't exactly more muslim-friendly than the Turks are christian-friendly. And everything is relative - how do you measure deprecation of christianity or islam and when does it reach a level when it makes a Turkish membership impossible?

[inked]

Nothing to do with the specific religion, Jonathan, only the freedom to practice it. See the Muslim thread for what Islam means by freedom of religion ... it's called sharia.

or, freedom of the net, like this:
http://michellemalkin.com/archives/004791.htm

and, Norway's Mullah makes it absolutely plain:
http://lobsterhouse.blogspot.com/200...ims-islam.html

und, "channel-scmannel, ve hat plans fur du"
http://www.westernresistance.com/blo...es/001787.html