German small video on the planned Euro-currency treaty
 

A small video - and this time its a big tragedy because it is right to the point, short and precise: but it again is in German. It is about and asks some critical questions on the planned European currency treaty that the Bundestag should sign in 2 and a half weeks from now on.

If you listen to this video and how it analyses parts of that treaty'S text, you must realise how bad and "evil" this plan indeed is. It is an utmost, total and complete disaster.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6JKl...layer_embedded

EUSSR, here we come. The polit bureau already is installed, the ruling in the name of the people (EUSSR style) has begun. It'S all as democratic as in "German Democratic Republic". Hallelujah - long live democracy!

To summarise the video's major points: the treaty on the ESM, European Stability Mechanism, features these points:

- a new European office, to which we must transfer any unlimited ammount of multi-hundreds-of-billion treasuries that it demands, within a time limit of 7 days (and why not, since parliaments and governments shall not consider and discuss it anyway, but should just push the transfer button on command),

- this new office can sue everybody, even nations and govcernments, but nobody can sue this office, it is completely immune to any legal prosecution,

- all people running this office also are totally immune to any legal prosecution,

- by no EU or national law, by no no national constitutions can this office be held responsible for anything. No governments, no parliaments, no private persons can hold this office legally responsinble for anything, or can sue it

- no national government can ever do anything against the ESM, never, later elected governments also have their hands bound and cannot break out,

- all european national budgets are controlled by and rest in one single hand - a hand that is not elected, and has no democratic legitmation whatsoever, and is not responsible towards the European peoples.

A Europe without sovereign democracies. In other words: a dictatorship, plain and simple.

In the movies and SciFi literature, there are movies like "Colossus" or "Terminator" where man creates computers so powerful that they take over global government and make mankind subject to their supression. The ESM treaty has parallels to this story, just that it is not computers taking over, but an Eurocratic office ruling by dictators' means, moving itself outside any reach for resistence or just questions, with no democratic legitimation needed, irreversibly. Nobody can hold it responsible for anything.

Such a tyrannic Europe must be prevented AT ALL COSTS.

I feel like in an Philip K. Dick novel.

Skybird, I do have a question

Some Americans claim that if people can move freely within north america, large numbers of Mexicans will come north.
We don't hear western Europeans talk about people from Latvia or Poland flooding into their countries as often, even though people move freely within the EU.

Why is this so? Do people from less privileged areas "flood" into countries like Germany or France?

We currently see - at least that is claimed - a wave of young people from Spain and Portugal moving to Germany, hoping to find jobs and a perspective here that they cannot find in Spain. German companies also actively recruit craftsmen and "young talents" in Spain, because they say there is a lack of these in Germany, due to high demand by the industry, but low birth rates.

Since integration and living-together with these, or people from Russia, Poland, Holland, Denmark, usually is no problem due to the relative cultural closeness, many Germans do not even realise such movements. Nor do I. The language barrier is something that these newcomers voluntarily and all by themselves try to reduce usually, and usually successful. In border areas to neighbouring countries, there is also a lot of bilateral cooperation on private, business and official level, and a lot of cross-border-job-hopping on a daily basis.

Bigger problems are people moving in from European countries that are culturally more distant, from Bulgaria Romania for example. These people fit in less enthusiastically, also often do not match the criterions for the kind of willing, well-educated and well-trained migrants that indeed are needed. On the social level, they are often seen as migrants into the social security systems, benefitting from them,. but not contributing to them. Which holds quite some truth. Subgroups like Sinti and Roma even actively reject integration and adaptation, and thus face the same antipathy from the local residents like Muslim/Turkish migrants that for the most also refuse integration and adaptation. But as a German you are not allowed to remind any of these of their own responsibility for their situation. On the other hand, the right-winged extremists get plenty of propaganda-fodder from this cirumstance - mkaing it even less acceptable for the opinion mainmstream to criticise these kinds of migrants, becasue criticising them has the smell of yourself lining up with the ringhtwingers. The EU's view is that many of these migrants are just "victims", and they all must be allowed to benefit from German security systems, even if they never contributed anything to it, and do not plan to ever do that. The French and the dutch have comparable problems, also colliding with the EU.

We have currently just normal migrant fluctuation with Central and Northern and Eastern European states, which is not surprising, since these states financially and economically are better set up than those critical money patients we have in the south, the so-called olive-area: Italy, Greece, Spain, Portugal. Fins and Swedes and Norwegians have little reason to move to Germany for economical reasons (in fact Germans move to these countries, especially academically trained people, doctors), also Poles and people from Latvia. With Greeks, Spaniards and Italians, it is different - there the crisis of the youth is obvious and drives them to the streets in existential fear.

The most obvious migration "flood", as you called it, we do see from non-Euzropean regions, however. Turkey, Iran, Kurdistan and Afghanistan are leading the list for Germany, with Iranians usually fitting in much better than the others, they are a different people, really, also many of them came for different reasons, and belong to a medium and upper social class in their former Iranian society. What Turks are for Germany, in France are the Algerians and I think the Maroccans, in England obviously the Pakistani: the dominant single migrants groups to these countries. And all of them mean troubles. It'S like I alwys say: we do not have a problem with migration in general. But with some ethnic subgroups. Most Germans see that very pragmatic, I think: migrants in general are welcomed if they fit in and integrate. Then they really can be an enrichment to Germany. If they do not integrate and do resist the demand to fit in, we tend to not like them. And integration behaviour sorted by places of origin shows huge differences. That'S why I say we have problems with some groups pf migrants, and no problems with others.

Just curious: how comes you had this question on migration patterns on your mind when reading a thread about the European debt and transfer union? Or am I just slow today?

I remembed reading this:
http://www.cracked.com/photoplasty_3...s-crapped-bed/

picture number 7, combined with the poor state of the economies of many nations in Europe made me curious

Hmm, Sky, while I do share more and more certain aspects of your viewpoint on the EU, I do have to point out, that whatever the video said, is mostly wrong. ESM isn't an entity like the Parliament or Commission, so the question of legal prosecution is the same as with the ECB or any Central bank at any point of time. That economic policymakers should be responsible to the people? Absolutely! That the ESM is suddenly evil incarnate that will control the budget of all Euro members? Absolutely not!

You should be more worried about the 6-pack of laws concerning economic governance and the Euro Plus pact about, which concerns itself with increasing competitiveness and certain fiscal measures. The ESM is nothing more than the EFSM in a new dress, with some new additional powers (very problematic, I fully support you in that), but it does nothing that would erode national sovereignty that hasn't already been done. Turning Europe into Germany on the other hand, which is what the packs of laws really are, is something that I, as an European citizen and someone who doesn't consider the German model to be sustainable, cannot support. Is the debt system capable of surviving? No. Can the German model? Also not likely, since you have criticised it yourself.

I would also like to point out to the newest Der Spiegel article on the question of a transfer union. The simple summary? Turn Europe into the USA or Switzerland, as no other model works. My response? Over my cold, dead body.

As always, we come to the same conclusion that things are bad, democracy is eroding (as it always is when appropriated by anyone), the economy is short of collapsing and the future is uncertain. So I've turned quite sanguine about the whole affair. Until the Revolution comes, there is little else for me to do. :03:

I wonder how far the EU can push before Germany finally quits. :hmmm:

You may want to check the treaty text yourself.

http://www.openeurope.org.uk/docs/draftesmtreaty.pdf

In reply to you, I just give the English translations of those passages they also mention in the video, in German:

Article 9, section 3:


Members according to the contribution key defined in Article 11 and in Annex 1.

Article 27, section 2&3:

2. The ESM shall have full legal personality; it shall have full legal capacity:
(a) To acquire and dispose of immovable and movable property;
(b) To contract;
(c) To institute legal proceedings and
(d) To enter into a headquarter agreement and/or protocols as necessary for ensuring that its
status, privileges and immunities are recognised and given effect.
3. The ESM, its property, funding and assets, wherever located and by whomsoever held shall enjoy immunity from every form of judicial process except to the extent that the ESM expressly waives its immunity for the purpose of any proceedings or by the terms of any contract, including the documentation of the funding instruments.

Article 27, section 4:
4. The property, funding and assets of the ESM shall, wherever located and by whomsoever held, be immune from search, requisition, confiscation, expropriation or any other form of seizure, taking or foreclosure by executive, judicial, administrative or legislative action.

Article 27, section 5:
5. The archives of the ESM and in general, all documents belonging to it or held by it, shall be inviolable.

Article 30, section 1
1. Governors, alternate Governors, Directors, alternate Directors, the Managing Director and staff members shall be immune from legal process with respect to acts performed by them in their official capacity and shall enjoy inviolability in respect of their official papers and documents except when and to the extent that the Board of Governors expressly waives this

immunity.

What else do you need? Total immunity. Total right to claim any financial payments from nations they want. Total secrecy of decision-finding processes. No responsibility or legitimation. No checks, no balances. No public counter-control. No/rien/zero/keine rights for voters, citizens, electorates; nobody this gremium owes even the smallest ammount of responsibility or explanation.


DRAFT TREATY ESTABLISHING THE EUROPEAN STABILITY MECHANISM (ESM)

in other words:

a blue-print for dictatorial powers.

European people, citizens, electorates, elections, parliaments, checks and balances? Not wanted anymore.

why is this being allowed to happen?: because we are sorry worried about money that we will give up all our freedoms just to have it.

Maybe I'm not reading it right. But this to me just prevents others from suing the person holding office and holding them personally liable.

I look at the rules governing the board of directors I'm a member of. It states I cannot be held personally liable either. In short if the company misses a payment or is sued because of a slip and fall. They can't come after me personally or my personal accounts. But nothing stops them from suing the pants off the corporation.

So this is a scare story about the text of a draft version of a document that may be signed in the future in a form that may or may not be the same as the draft version and may pass if more than 95% of the involved parties all agree to the form as it is eventually presented:yawn:
Its a conspiracy I tell ya:rotfl2:

I disagree. Reading the whole trewtay, the original intention may be this or that, it does not matter - the implication still is like I said. There is also the implication that the payments to the ESM is not limited to 700 billion, but de facto is unlimited when demanded by the ESM, and that paying nations do not have any right to refuse theye payments, and thus also are not given the time to check and discuss them in palriament. Any call of the ESM must be obeyed in almost zero time. The ESM also can sue anyone and anybody it weants to sue, but it is totally imune to be sued itself, thus it must not fear to ever be held responisble for its decisiuons. Further, since its ducoments and protocos are also given total immunity, it never must fear to be checked and questioned, not even in a far away future. It also means that the electorate ineurope will never be allowed to learn what is going on and why behind those locked doors.

It has become commo9n practice by the EU to decide on the fate of Europe and to install the Eurocraty by decisions behind locked door, by explicit exclsuioon of the public or asking the people for their will. The debt crisis we have, and the Euro-crisis, also is a crisis over lacking trust - lacking trust in the Euro, the finance system and stockmarket - and lacking trust into the trustworthiness of the EU itself.

This ESM treaty is insanity, this is the demand to be given dictatorial power and total immunity. It is de facto a "Selbstermächtigungsgesetz" in favour of this new EU gremium, while national parliaments, after the dictate of Lisbon, again are expected to will a "Selbstentmächtigungsgesetz" regarding the constitutional powers of national parliaments. Imagine this: just a handful, maybe three dozen people of a population of 480 million people, demand to be given the power to rule and decide and act and do like they want, without needing to give justification to the public, without needing to ask the parliaments, without needing to seek legitimations whatever. Isn'T is rightly said that power corrupts, and that absolute power leads to absolute corruption?

Do we really see a record of performance on behalf of the Eurocrats and heads of states as that we want to give them even more far-reaching powers like this, and even accept ourselves to have democratic principles and rights being taken away from us? Do we really talk about people that deserve this immense trust of ours, when we look back on how they did over the past years?

I DON'T THINK SO. Their performance has been a mess, many of them act highly corrupt, and on EU-level they act absolutely conspiratory and enforce upon us from top down what we do not even get asked about, and they do not deserve our trust, not in the smallest ammount.

The fallacy is that money is not creating value by itself, it needs to be a repüresentation of material value for which it just is a counting unit. But we have created a fictional theory on m oney that thinks that money is already a precious asset in itself. But it isn'T. As long as there is less real value than money, as long as we allow money biubbles over fictional, non-existent real assets being created and initiating snowballing process, we will continue to run into a dead end like a column of lemmings.

We may like it or not, and we may suffer from it or not, personally - but the deletion of fictional, theoretical "value" is a necessary and needed correction to a system that has run amok and is totally on the loose. We need to return to an understanding of "value" that bases on real, physical value, no interest rates of interest rates of fictional investements into speculations over assumptions on future ammou7nts of abstract stock "values".

I fear the path to that will be such that most of us will economically and financially suffer from it, and dearly.

For the record, I stumbled over the video in a small article on a website almost unknown, but over the cause of this day, the content of it has reached the mainstream media outlets like Die Welt as well. They write that they had confronted all parties in the Bundestag with the claims and quotes in it. The Socialists refused to comment alltogether. Greens said they were adressing the questions raised, but did not say how. The Merkelians (former conservative party CDU) said it all is just misleading and meaningless.

In other words: no party in the Bundestag was able to counter the claims raised, nor was any party especially enthusiastic over being approached on this issue. It seems they hate to be reminded of certain implications.

They all should get fired immediately. For factual incompetence, misleading and betrayal of the public, failure to meet their parliamentary and constitutional duties, high treason, and irresponsible behaviour.