Welcome to my talk page! Feel free to discuss my actions, my personality, my lifestyle and whatever else you can think of here; critical comments are, of course, appreciated. If you just want to chat, that's fine, too!
Remember the Vijesti incident? How its journalists were regularly threatened and beaten and how Ivanovic (chief editor) accused Djukanovic to be behind it all? Well, the case is over. The battered Zeljko Ivanovic has to pay one million euros to Milo Djukanovic for 'verbally falsely accusing an esteemed statesman'. The appeal will probably not work, so they shall complain over to the Strasbourg. The alternative is near bankruptcy, leading to the government's takeover of the media. Its recent establishment of a TV station alludes to a more rapid move by Djukanovic, as the media are (again) getting more liberal and out of control. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 23:21, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, the Movement for Changes is once again changing its policies and returning back to the pre-Constitution non-compromise with Djukanovic. They demonstratively with SNP CG and SL left yesterday the session when the proposal for the oath speech for President's inauguration was adopted. The three will also not be present at the actual inauguration tomorrow, Medojevic also expressed some form of remorse for his not fully successful political acts and called for restoration of cooperation within the Unified Opposition.
Except the Liberals, who support Vujanovic and after this presidential election no longer exist as a political party...no one expects them (neither do they themselves) to keep their one seat after 2009. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 23:41, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
nods Well, I hope we get rid of Milo the regular way soon -- he's too young for me to wait until he dies of natural causes. ;) —Nightstallion08:09, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
And as for Bosnia, Miroslav Lajcak is becoming increasingly popular amongst the Serbs and hated amongst the Bosniaks. Bosniak leaders are even considering bringing the Croats on their side against Lajcak, who is deemed as far too pro-Serbian by them. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 23:41, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Over the years it is the Serb politicians who were a destabilizing factor in BH and they were mostly on strike, but Lajcak's recent international reports differ greatly. He stated that Srbska's call for independence is just words and just a reaction to the constant nationalist rhetoric coming from Bosniac politicians, who openly call for RS's cancellation. He commended the attempts of decrease of the strong Serb nationalism in Banja Luka by the new Social Democrat cause and greatly criticized the Sarajevo-based Bosniak leaders, calling them threats to BH's stability. He deems that their political representatives do not call for unification of the country, but in specific are aggressive to RS calling its abolition in specific. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 10:21, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well that doesn't matter, the point is that he is making too dangerous moves, might be understood provoking and there are 48% Bosniacs and only 37% Serbs. When a significant SDA party leader notes that he should move the OHR from Sarajevo to Banja Luka... --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 19:44, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Mh. Well, the result will be that both major ethnicities don't really like him, but that the opinion regarding the OHR evens out in all of the country, whereas before, Serbs were very much against it and Bosniaks very much in favour, no? —Nightstallion19:45, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes.
Is that good? For instance, the UNMIK tends to satisfy the Albanians as much as it can, but is hated by the minorities. With a 80+% of support amongst the population, it had no greater problem in administering. BH's multi-ethnic situation makes things harder. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 19:53, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
In 5 municipalities SRS, DSS, NS, SPS and others form local governments. By the end of the week the Radicals and the two coalitions shall complete in Belgrade. This outright means only support and no participation for G17+ definitely. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 22:50, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
BTW, SPS-PUPS-JS today terminated on Palma's proposal negotiations with DSS-NS and SRS on the grounds of too big differences regarding the SAA, about to start them with DS. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 13:21, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The Montenegrin Passports shall be in Latin, while IDs default in Latin, with the exception that they will be made in Cyrillic if it's the exclusive desire of the Citizen.
How does it then work to the Constitution and other facts that Cyrillic is the official script, and then Latin next to it, when Latin is used as some sort of a sole script of a (yet unstandardized) Montenegrin language, and then Cyrillic plainly treated as a minority language (members of minorities can choose to have their basic info parts of IDs written in their native language, e.g. in Albanian)? Even Medojevic protested, claiming that this is a manner to further separate the two currents in the country, so that officials would know who is who. Before there were numerous incidents of people not employed or fired from work because they were for Serbia, a Cyrillic script in the ID is a perfect way to find out and discriminate (either way). The fact that this is not allowed for passports also means that this is internally for Montenegro itself. And in the end, this would most probably force many sovereignist Montenegrins who favor Cyrillic to opt the Latin ID, precisely because of fear of getting the confusion, right? Is it an attempt to replace the dominating script with another, or not? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 23:12, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That's what I was saying -- a logical extension of trying to establish a Montenegrin language. Not that I like the way he's doing it, for precisely the reasons you've just stated. —Nightstallion06:12, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This just came in, a witness from the coastal city of Bar that witnessed for B92 on its research on Serbian Football Mafia was hours ago assaulted in his house, his cheek was pierced and jaw broken, and his head pounded greatly. He claims amnesia and does not remember who attacked him, but also claims he had forgotten everything regarding the mafia. While most neighbors claim they heard nothing, one claims it was actually the police that broke in. --PaxEquilibrium (talk)
The Forza Italia issue is here again between me and C mon. I think that it is unlogical to state that Forza Italia's primary ideology is "Conservatism", as its successor party, The People of Freedom, is liberal-conservative. --Checco (talk) 14:13, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Would you mind to intervene in talk page? I found many source which caracherize Forza Italia as a liberal-conservative party (obviuosly all in different languages from Italian, as here in Italy is frequently regarded as a liberal, christian-democratic and even "liberal-socialist" party). I would like anyway to move those refs from the infobox to the text and also to simply the ideology in the infobox. Usually we use to list different ideologies one after the other, why do we need such complication in this case (and also in The People of Freedom and the Union for a Popular Movement)? --Checco (talk) 16:55, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There is plenty of sources now and, in general, I don't understand why these three parties (FI, PdL and UMP) should have such complicated ideology characterizations in the infoboxes. In any case, I respect your decision of not entering the discussion again, but I think also that C mon is a little bit biased on the issue and it is difficult to discuss in this way. --Checco (talk) 17:06, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
ICTY
...just opened another sealed charge regarding the Haradinaj case.
It officially asked the UNSC to prolong its mandate until the trials of Karadzic and Mladic are over, as it is expiring very soon. The request is particularly interesting, as it would also enable the court to file new charges, a dream of the young Belgian lawyer fulfilled, which the ICTY could do only until the end of 2004.
No, I couldn't find a TV station which broadcast it -- will watch the final on Saturday, though. Anything interesting in the first semi-final? —Nightstallion12:42, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Unlikely.
Nope, except that I turned out right when I said that they didn't need such a huge construction. They've built up the largest thing so far to be used in EuroVision, and it turned out as I thought - it was almost half empty. As much as amusing is the local peoples' megalomania for greatness (see the Temple of Saint Sava, one of the greatest world's religious structures), illusions aside, it's quite damaging financially to the common folk.
Major party purges in DSS, Vojislav Kostunica is practically the sole person who was at the top between 1992 and 2000. Old school DSS is quite. There was no Board or General Assembly decision, the party bodies do not even meet at all (possibly because of fear of non-ratification of a coalition with the Radicals, or at least a stalwart opposition). Kostunica has become with his clique the sole body of the party.
In the negotiations, the Radicals agreed that they can have the seat of Prime Minister, the Ministries of Finances, Internal Affairs, Foreign Affairs, Education, Kosovo-Metohija and the Information Agencies, which is more than he had before. :D He has 8% of the parliament's deputies!!! --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 16:58, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
So, basically the party doesn't really have much of a future any more, does it? Seems to me the anti-Europeans would be joining SRS now and the pro-Europeans (if there any) either DS or G17+ or SPS... —Nightstallion10:58, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Old school DSS founder Vladeta Jankovic is out of the picture. When asked, he stated that he would sooner commit suicide than DSS go with SRS, because - pardon me, but for dramaticizatio I shall quite - Seselj has countless times attacked his father and verbally "fucked his mother". On the other hand, the latest (100th) book of Vojislav Seselj is called "Political Partnership of Whore Del Ponte and Whore Del Kostunica". When asked, Kostunica (who was in 2001 over in Washington, practically licking Condoleeza Rice's cheeks and hugging George Bush, and drinking together with Javier Solana champagne as well as exchanging jokes in 2003 in Brussels) completely ignores this. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 11:20, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
BTW, Kostunica's passing technical government has just officially condemned yesterday's scandalous statement of Vojislav Seselj from the Hague (that the murderers of Zoran Djindjic deserve the praise and glory of assassins of Franz Ferdinand and other great assassinations in Serbian history). --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 01:00, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Vojislav Kostunica announced considerations of withdrawal from political life in an effort to save the party, should he fail to form the new government. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 11:00, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The event would be a savior from fraction onto two parties, one pro-European and another pro-Radical, since the division is already starting to be noticeable. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:11, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yep. Or Kostunica becomes the new-old Prime Minister and it lives on together with SRS, SPS and NS in a coalition that keeps running together on all levels and continually winning known as the "Serb List"... --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 17:16, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
SPO is in coalition with the For a European Serbia of the Democratic Party, yes. It will have several seats (four or more) in the parliament and one Ministry
SDPO is no longer in the national political life, only a fraction [one of its two Presidents, the Mayor of Kragujevac] as an individual on G17+'s list in the European Coalition, will be an MP
No, the party is the core party of a Coalition of four ethnic Hungarian political parties. The other three are the Democratic Party of Vojvodina Hungarians, the Democratic Fellowship of Vojvodina Hungarians and the Hungarian Civic Alliance. It's an all-out ethnic Hungarian minority political alliance, also supported by the Neo-Nazi Juvenile Movement 64 Counties, among others, this minority Coalition is gathered by the success of their presidential candidate back from the presidential election
For DHSS it's completely th same as the last time, on LDP's list, one guaranteed place for its leader
No activity from LS
Check under DHSS
Called the people to go out and vote freely, expressed that there is no room for SD in the political life "of the false dilemma between neoliberalism (DS) and nationalism (SRS)"
I'm getting to them, don't worry. ;) The Democratic Alternative merged into it and took SDP over. SDP is now inactive as a political party.
So far anyone could get up a political party. Last year a new law was passed, demanding a total of ten thousand signatures for registration, and all had to do that. It ticked off an abundance of tiny political parties. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 11:23, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The League of Social Democrats comprises the coalition For a European Serbia together with Democratic Party, G17 Plus, Serbian Renewal Movement and Sanjak Democratic Party.
The Liberal Party of Kosovo no longer exists as a political party, and as for the People's Movement, I have no knowledge of it.
They do not. Serbs, Goranis, and in general most minorities, boycott Kosovar elections and institutions as the Albanians in turn boycott Serbian. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 11:34, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. During the last two days I read many article on Serbian, Montenigrin and Kosovar parties and I saw that almost all of them need wikification and update. Would you do it? --Checco (talk) 12:17, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
In general we should organize our work in a better way: there are a lot of countries, whose articles about parties are far from being updated. Serbia and Montenegro are just two examples. --Checco (talk) 19:02, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This time I write to give you a BIG THANKS for your support and a HUGE APOLOGY for all the trouble created with my contributions in non-numismatics related articles. I was honestly just trying to bring more traffic to the commemorative coins articles (which for me is, obviously, fascinating), but after a lot of thoughts I have realized that there is any sort of Wikipedians out there. Hence I have changed my views.
I will continue putting information here and there of commemorative coins as long as is notable and relevant enough, but I will not fight any more if the content is removed or changed. I might try in the talk page to ask for a consensus, but will not die for it. Instead I will concentrate all my efforts in trying to finish the "Euro gold and silver commemorative coins" series; which is already in a very good shape, thanks to people like you.
BTW, I have proposed Euro gold and silver commemorative coins (Belgium) for peer review, hoping that can be promoted to a featured article. The final goal will be to create a Euro Coins Collector's Portal with all the series and information from articles that you have contributed, and (if possible) get it promoted to a featured Portal. If you are interesting in helping in this process, please comment here. I hope it gets promoted, and after this learning process, I am planning to propose immediately Euro gold and silver commemorative coins (Ireland) and Euro gold and silver commemorative coins (Austria), which are almost completed from my stand point.
The United Nations-sponsored Brussels-based International Association of Democratic Lawyers yesterday issued its newest resolution in Tokyo. It condemned the unilateral declaration of independence of Kosovo and its recognition by a number of Countries, deeming it contradicting to the Charter of the United Nations and the Helsinki Final Act.
Serbia vetoed adoption of a resolution at the Summit of the Process and Cooperation of countries of Southeast Europe in Bulgaria, which could be interpreted as if Kosovo is independent. They also stopped the Foreign Minister of Kosovo from addressing it. After the UNMIK representer gave him the word, they demonstratively left the Summit, but also in the room only the Albanian foreign minister remained together with the Kosovar. Serbia sent an official demand to Ban Ki Mun to replace that UNMIK emissary.
After this, and the recent joint call for new negotiations of Russia, China and India, Vuk Jeremic announced that next to the call for opinion of the International Court of Justice, a draft resolution is being prepared for the UN General Assembly. Jeremic stated that it will include some form of condemnation of Kosovo's unilateral declaration of independence and its recognition by a number of countries, also calling for new negotiations between Belgrade and Pristina. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:21, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Still no consensus on it in the UN. This might bring to its delaying, for at least three months, the Slovenian EU Presidency reports. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 22:15, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Discussing over UMIK's status after 15 June 2008 - the day when the Constitution of the Republic of Kosovo comes in act and a new reality is created with the crucial moment of Kosovo de facto turning into a country - UNMIK brought the decision that there will be no change after all. Most expected that it would decide to transfer authority to the EULEX and only remain at the top, serving solely as a representer for Kosovo in international politics. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 22:19, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Image copyright problem with Image:Democratic Union logo.png
Thanks for uploading Image:Democratic Union logo.png. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check
That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.
A huge secret weapons stash was uncovered by the Serbian police in the municipality of Presevo, enough to arm a small army. Rifles, machine guns, mines, pistols, mine throwers, hand grenades and a lot of ammunition were discovered along with KLA uniforms and Kosovar, Albanian and American flags. Two members of a local terrorist unit were arrested, indicted for committing raiding attacks across southern Serbia. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:12, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Of course it's legit. Heck, don't forget that there was a whole war down there. Although the number of armed conflicts and terrorist incidents decreased to 0 since 2005. No one knows how many more bases remain down there, but a huge stash like this really did come as a surprise. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 20:35, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ach so, it's a remnant of the previous conflicts -- I was afraid that it might be a preparative cache for a new attempt to drive the rest of the Serbs out of Kosovo... —Nightstallion08:00, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well yes, that's there to prepare for a future conflict when tensions raise.
Yes, but they committed themselves to attacking buses in Vranje, raiding local villages and clashes with the police and armed forces in the region, not connected to Kosovo (except the local Liberation Army was actually a branch of the KLA). --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 09:18, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There has been one occasion of witness intimidation regarding Seselj's case. Although yet not so systematic as with Haradinaj's Brammertz issued grave warnings to Serbian officials of the fear that it might go the wrong way, since the identity of this protected witness has been revealed. Serge warns there is a possibility, because of the tragically poorly done case on Seselj's alleged crimes, of his acquittal.
The genocide case Croatia vs. Serbia begins today.
After some symbolic retributions for war damage in Konavle and mutual friendship messages between the Croatian and Montenegrin governments, including understandings for their territorial dispute over Prevlaka and President Stjepan Mesic's proclamation of an honorary citizen of Podgorica, Montenegro was dropped from the case and the charges directed solely towards Serbia.
SDP HR's preelectoral promise was dropping the case altogether in the spirit of reconciliation in the Balkans, which was also the call of the democratic Serbian authorities. However, HDZ - who advocated it - won the election. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 17:24, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The Serbian defense upholds that FRY wasn't a UN member state before 2000, and that only in 2001 the Genocide Convention was signed, calling (again) for national reconciliation. They draw upon the 1999 case FRY vs. 26 NATO member states for aggression and retributions which was rejected, precisely because of the status in which Yugoslavia was, for the very same reasons. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 18:22, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The BH was filed in 1996, and accepted, and the Croatian was filed in late 1999 - right after it was decided that the court had no supervision in early 1999 over the FRY vs. NATO. The Court made a decision with the Bosnian case that it was filed before it was concluded that the court was not authorized, so it continued the trial. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 21:06, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
And the greatest part of the Croatian charge is for 1991 and 1992 - when there was no FRY, but the greater SFRY. This would also mean that Croatia should've not left out Montenegro, but should've filed charges for genocide against Bosnia and Herzegovina and Macedonia too. The Bosnian case concentrated itself for the period between 1992 and 1995, on the Serb Republic, and not Serbia, therefor failing in most of the cases (they attempted to present that the Republika Srpska was effectively a Serbian puppet-state and worked more under Belgrade than Banja Luka, which was disproved at the court). --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 21:11, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well it could be rejected, and it's more than obvious that they will fail to prove that the Republic of Serbian Krajina was, as they claim, a puppet-state of Serbia (and its leaders were found responsible for expulsion of 78,000 Croats and various individual massacres), but they will concentrate on the 1991 and 1992 events. Vojislav Seselj's videos are a part of their evidence, in which Seselj claims that his volunteers - those of the Radicals - have never ever committed a single crime, and that those crimes were committed intentionally by Slobodan Milosevic and that they were planned in Belgrade (as he claimed for the Srebrenica). They will probably have to drop the Siege of Dubrovnik, and problems arise at the moment when most commanders were Montenegrin Generals, including with the devastating happenings over at Vukovar, and only Serbia is filed, rather than Montenegro. The Serbian defenders say that there was absolutely no planned or orchestrated genocide to exterminate the Croatian nation, and that they will successfully prove it at the court, as the ICTY never found any genocide in Croatia.
In essence the charge was raised as a response to the ICTY's claims that the Croatian state core conspired, planned, prepared and conducted an organized expulsion of all Serbs from Croatia, in an attempt to justify the retaking of the Krayina.
Yeah, but SPS local boards are most against DS. They have even issued warnings not to go with those who want to sell Kosovo and national traitors. The Presidency declared itself 10/12 for as I've told you before, but on the local is this horrific difficulty and the possibility that the party will not pass such a thing.
Palma's proposal to cease negotiations with DSS and SRS failed, and new rounds will continue. However, it was accepted that after all negotiations with that side are over, so they start with DS, before a coalition treaty is signed. This means a LOOONG time before the next government, like the last time. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 19:36, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No, we have not. The final results are expected to be announced in a week or so. Nobody expects, though, that they will be much different from the preliminary reports. The United National Movement seems to have obtained 120 of 150 seats.--KoberTalk06:21, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't really understand what precisely the new system means. Are there now 75 constituency seats and 75 proportional ones? And has the Republican Party won 2 constituency seats? —Nightstallion09:30, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
FL vs. FA
Hi there,
I remember you mentioned a while back that there has been discussions about making the 2 euro commemorative article an FL instead of an FA, but it is an FA as of now. Can I see some of those discussions? I am getting the same question about Euro gold and silver commemorative coins (Belgium) and I am not sure.
What I am asking is if there is any page where the discussion to promote the 2 euro commemorative article to either an FA or an FL, since the article is currently an FA I wanted to know based on what terms this was decided. Can you help? Thanks Miguel.mateo (talk) 22:21, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Brammertz's report is the most negative (regarding Serbia) one since the very first report Carla del Ponte made in the end of 2000. The Belgian lawyer seems to be angered by the fact that Rassim outright admitted to him that the Hague is not a priority. Rassim stated that he does not understand why 'frankness is being punished' and stated the reason why he told him cooperation with the ICTY will be strained because of Kosovo and the elections - Rassim says he wanted to build a bridge of trust and honesty with the new prosecutor, and intends to create no hidden image. He claims intensified cooperation with the ICTY, even the one on the level which was last year (it's lower), is technically impossible and outside the reaches of his or anyone's affection at all.
Therefore, Rassim will use the right to submit to the UN a separate report for the first time, written by himself just now. The act is never standardly considered as friendly towards the Prosecutor, as it might be understood as undermining his authority, or even might be interpreted as offensive. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 11:47, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding Kosovo, Jaap de Hoop Scheffer failed to convince Ban Ki Mun to allow UNMIK to hand over authority to the EULEX. UNMIK shall remain, and EULEX will probably become a branch of the mission, taking over the Economy in the UN's name. The only possibility to change the status, would have to be in the Security Council, and that can only happen by adopting a new resolution and replacing the old one.
The Patriots stated that they want to see a European Serbia and asked the Foreign Ministers of the EU to amend the SAA, writing into it that Kosovo is an integral part of the Republic of Serbia and is as such recognized, basically rewriting a sentence from one resolution on Cyprus. After messages from Brussels that the process is very long and hard, making huge technical problems to amend the treaty, Kostunica accused Brussels that it does not want Serbia in the European Union.
After the most recent developments (Kosovo Flag raised up instead of UNMIK's in Brussels, and open statement of the Slovenian Foreign Minister that this is a historic moment, since it recognizes Kosovo as a new and equal European nation), the Patriots are drawing nearer to completion of a coalition treaty. DSS, SRS and SPS have reached and concluded a coalition treaty, negotiations with PUPS are drawing to completion, they wanted special guarantees for the retired. The last remaining link in the chain is JS (NS authorized DSS completely to negotiate in its name), and negotiations with Palma were not yet led. And you know what that remaining point is - the SAA. A recent call from the European Union for Belgrade to establish "good neighborhood relations" with Kosovo, to which Kostunica responded that this is the first time in history that it is asked from it to establish good neighborhood relations with its own part. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 17:42, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, just take a calculator and see who is closer. I don't think Palma will be able to take up the pressure, if he is alone and outnumbered by both the Socialists and the Retired. There is but one greatest flaw. The coalition treaty includes a request of PUPS - automatically increasing pensions to 70% of wages during employment. This is absolutely impossible to achieve under any circumstance by anyone. The only option is for someone to give Serbia a gift of one billion Euros. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 13:52, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A (very) draft discussion on the policy on political parties has been started by me here - User:Doktorbuk/pp. If you can assist with this discussion, or know how to help me get this policy looked at, advanced, and accepted by the larger Wiki community, please let me know. Many thanks doktorbwordsdeeds19:01, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, Nepal is now a republic. The new govt is still not formed, I think its a negotation that will not have an easy resolve. Maoists want all top posts, other parties are unwilling to concede to this (as the same time as they are ambigious over participating in the govt at all). The govt need to be formed by 2/3-majority, meaning no govt can be formed without maoist support, but maoists need support of at least 2 of the remaining major parties (NC, UML, MJF). The nominated seats are still vacant. See [2]. result.nepalelectionportal.org/searchpp.php has a full listing of CA members. Some 5-6 seats will hold bye-polls, as one individual has won in more than one seat. --Soman (talk) 16:36, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
They double-members will have to chose which seat they vacate by June 8, [3]. I suppose after that the process will be initiated. Perhaps 1-2 months from now elections will be held? --Soman (talk) 08:58, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Could you be so kind as to let me know when the date is set? I want to make sure we've got the correct and final election results in the article. ;) Thanks! —Nightstallion09:13, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Mh. First, it would be "by-election" -- and second, usually we have the info in the main election article if they are elections which were a result of the actual election and not of resignations or similar things (we also have the info on Pakistani by-election and Zimbabwean by-elections, both with dates in June, in their main election articles). —Nightstallion11:00, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Socialists
...want the seat of Prime Minister or Speaker in secret negotiations with Tadic. On the side, they also mentioned that they'd like the free return of the Milosevics from Russian exile and releasing Milanovic, the Director of the Serbian national television, from prison. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 16:44, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There are rumors Macedonia and Montenegro might recognize Kosovo, or at least that they are considering that, some time in June. The important date in Macedonia are the elections (1 June), and in Kosovo the Kosovar Constitution (16 June). --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 16:46, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
They certainly won't get PM, but will they be given the speaker's post? I've heard about the two demands -- why do they want to free someone who knowingly did not evacuate a building about to be bombed?
Yeah, that sounds logical. I'd personally expect another wave of recognitions after the constitution comes into force (on 15 June, though, I believe...?). —Nightstallion08:44, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There are various controversies on his role, Tomislav Nikolic and Aleksandar Vucic had the leading role as Ministers in the government for not evacuating, and fact is that they were even indicted, while this guy received a long sentence. It's one of those times, always someone guilty has to be blamed, and all went to him, since the charges against NATO were dropped for non-jurisdiction of the ICJ.
One of the reasons of his position would be promote the multi-ethnic character of Serbia (which, as you noticed Bojan Pajtic's article, I'm sure you are aware of). He's hard working and generally very, very good at managing things, which I guess you can conclude from the Vojvodinian election results. His only flaw is that he lacks actual charisma, speech capabilities, and his opponents often talk about his physical 'ugliness'. Ultra-nationalists frequently combined this with his ethnic origins to try to present him as some sort of a mutant.
Talking about ethnic origins, some public controversies regarding Boris Tadic, alluding to the possibilities of his mother's ethnic background, possibly identical to his mother-in-law's (which is Croat). --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 12:22, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Pajtic's successor would be a certain Dusan Elezovic, President of the Democratic Party's municipal board and so far unknown to the broader political scene. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 12:24, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The parliamentary session of Belgrade's Civic Parliament was scheduled for 14 July. The Patriots object this greatly, calling it stalling. The Radicals are organizing mass demonstrations 'against Yellow terror, tyranny and dictatorship'. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 13:09, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Presence of UNMIK in form of an International Office as a mediator between Kosovo and other factors shall be the one after 15 June. It is also revealed that Kremlin is seriously pressing Ban Ki Mun, as well as that he plans to raise some dialog with Tadic over the Kosovo problematic.
He is currently the European Parliament's Reporter for Serbia.
LDP called UNMIK to recognize the local elections in Kosovo, claiming that one step always draws another, nearer to Serbia's recognition of EULEX. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 10:06, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This may be old news to you, but there's a proposal ([4],[5]) to alter Rule 29 and raise the threshold required for European Parliament group formation from this:
20 MEPs for at least one fifth of the member states (currently six countries).
to this:
30 MEPs for at least one quarter of the member states (currently seven countries).
That'll kill IND/DEM (not enough MEPs) and UEN (not enough countries), and reduce the probability of ED splitting off from EPP-ED to form MER. It's bizarre to see PES and EPP-ED, who presumably have a committment to European diversity, actively trying to suppress it. I'll throw it in the article when I have time, tho' I'm currently trying to upgrade the IND/DEM article.
Regards, Anameofmyveryown (talk) 17:03, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The proposal came close (14/15) in the Constitutional Affairs committee on 27 May but it's due to be voted on by Parliament in July [6] in the next sitting (starts Jun 4/Brussels [7]). The threatened groups will probably vote against it en masse (turkey's don't vote for Xmas) but EPP-ED/PES want it, so if they can get all their MEPs to vote for it, it'll probably happen. PES is the most cohesive large group so they'll all vote for it, so the question becomes "Will EPP-ED vote as a bloc?" EPP-ED is the least cohesive large group (in the 99 Parliament, the Conservative/Christian Democrat split was very pronounced: I remember reading something by Hix about it, possibly on the Santer Commission) but this increases their power and influence so my guess would be that yes, it'll pass. But that's just my guess.
Ironic: the traditional weakness of proportional representation voting systems is they lead to a fissiparous parliament, with lots of little parties and coalitions. But the implications of the proposed Rule 29 change will lead to fewer groups (down from seven to five). Presumably most of UEN will move in with EPP-ED (no surprise there, and in accordance with historical trends) or ALDE, but I don't know what the Eurosceptics will do - ALDE will reject them out of hand (I think Europhilia is actually in their constitution, but don't quote me), they'll find cold comfort in a europhile EPP-ED, they'd be very uncomfortable in PES, and a Green/Regionalist/Eurosceptic alliance would be interesting in the Chinese sense. One possibility is a my-enemy-is-your-enemy union between ED and IND/DEM, with eurosceptics and eurosceptic conservatives uniting, but that depends on ED's desire to grow a pair and leave EPP-ED, which will mean them leaving a loveless marriage of convenience ([8], [9]) for the more-honorable-but-harder existence a a unified-but-less-powerful group.
Actually, I've already mentioned this in European Parliament election, 2009, but it would be great if you could flesh out the text and mention it in other relevant articles. I agree with your analysis -- the national conservatives will mostly move in with EPP or ED, possibly some with ELDR or EDP if the political views match (Fianna Fail, I'm looking at you), but the eurosceptics basically only have a chance to either join forces with ED or to form a grand group of the rejects with the fascists and neo-Nazis. —Nightstallion08:43, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This will severely divide the two major ethnic groups. The NATO is nowhere near satisfied with the events, and states that of the five Albanian parties, one must be a component part of the new government. If the ethnic Macedonians unite amongst each other and leave out the Albanians, that will further nurture the segregation of the two peoples, and Skopje will also lose sympathies from the West, which is precisely what many of the Albanians want. So far there were only serious squabbles amongst the ethnic Albanian political parties, with even assassination attempts reported. This ought to unite them. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 20:48, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, technically of course -- but Greece is unlikely to deny Macedonia NATO accession while allowing progress on the EU front... —Nightstallion14:44, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I certainly hope not... Have you read the latest study, BTW, that there's less crime in the Balkans than in Western Europe? —Nightstallion15:17, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As the matter of fact, I do - from both domestic sources and Englishmen that regularly pay Serbia and Croatia a visit (that I personally know) and who claim that they feel a lot safer in there then in their homes. But let me also clarify you the reasons. Mugging here is really a rarity and murders only happen in cases of insanity or love (if the latter doesn't include the first), but the fact remains in networks of strong organized crime until a while ago actually sanctioned by the governments. The first type of crime is actually not a characteristic of Communist countries, and that's the result of that heritage. Over the years of the 1990s and the transition it included, these people were either removed, or, as with most cases, went completely clean and became wealthy tycoons. In some cases they themselves turned into the very democratic institutions and took over the state reforms, like in Montenegro. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 18:52, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A Prime Minister or political finances source is truly completely official rather, and when someone who has become rich as a war profiteer, black market smuggler or mafia boss becomes a wealthy businessman, he is no longer a criminal and thus there is no more organized crime. The saddest thing is that most of these people will die as if nothing had happened before.
When someone observes this entire case in the Balkans, he / she would perhaps conclude that this actually works out for the future generations...and then again, is it, considering the circumstances, moral to consider that? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 20:25, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Let me give you an example - Serbia. In normal countries, robbers brake into banks and steal money, right? However, in Serbia there was no such thing. There were no thieves. In Milosevic's Serbia, banks robbed the people. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 00:08, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Editors needed for Tag & Assess 2008. To coincide with the summer holidays, it will be gearing up from 15 June. As usual, barnstars galore!
Partner peer reviews: for a thirty-day trial period, we'll be running joint peer reviews with Wikiproject Video Games. The idea is simple: we help with their reviews; they help with ours. This way both wikiprojects benefit from new reviewers and new ideas!
We're notable: A new book, Simon Fowler's 2007 Guide to Military History on the Internet (UK:Pen & Sword, ISBN 9781844156061) rates Wikipedia as "the best general resource" for military research (p. 7). Of the military pages, he says: "The results are largely accurate and generally free of bias" (he also suggests people join the wikiproject). When rating WP as the No. 1 military site (p. 201) he says "Wikipedia is often criticised for its inaccuracy and bias, but in my experience the military history articles are spot on."
A-Class reviews: the usual four-day review period may now be extended by up to three days (ie seven days in total) in the following circumstances:
the article has no opposes but has insufficient support for promotion or
the article's nominator requests more time to resolve matters arising during the review.
The special projects department has opened. It will focus on specific ad-hoc high-priority tasks and implement them with informal, short-term groups of editors.
The Contest department has completed its fourteenth month of competition, which saw 16 entries. The top scorer this month is Cam with 21 points, followed by Redmarkviolinist with 11 points. Woody, Dreamafter, Kyriakos, Nousernamesleft and Outdawg also fielded entries. Blnguyen remains the overall leader, with 188 points in total. You are encouraged to submit articles you're working on as entries.
A discussion has been opened into the structuring of top level operational categories, starting with Category:World War II. All interested editors are invited to help establish a consensus.
In the late 1980s and early 1990s he was a Slovenian nationalist, by definitions the Serbs interpreting some of his statements in speeches as being plain Serbophobic. He was the Minister of Defense in 1990 and 1991, responsible for secretly building up the Territorial Defense Force and leading the 11 Day war against the Yugoslav People's Army. The controversial thing is the actual war's beginning, the Federal Minister of Defense (Croatian, IMHO) ordered a unit of unarmed members of the Yugoslav armed youth to march into Slovenia and hold a march in Ljubljana, the Federal government thought that such a demonstration would renew Yugoslav Pan-Slavism and replace Slovene nationalism. However, Kacin warned that any intrusion would be considered aggression on Slovenia, and ordered the attack on them, they were all killed. To this day controversies float over this case and various investigations, especially since Slovenia entered the EU when it became a more open society.
And in the end, there were constant rumors, but true, never proven, that Slovenia was in the late 1980s and early 1990s financing separatists in Kosovo, there goes Kacin's statement that Slovenia must do everything in its power to induce a war in Serbia itself, in order to assist the breakup of Yugoslavia. Kacin has been for years assigned by the EU for Serbia and Montenegro. Over those years, the majority of his work was dedicated to lobbying Kosovar independence. When asked by Belgrade regarding, he says that he was assigned only for Serbia and Montenegro without Kosovo, then again this contradicts with the fact that his every single statement is regarding Kosovo, and that it would seem that he is assigned for Kosovo without Serbia and Montenegro. No real work on other fields, whenever he comes to Belgrade the only thing he talks about is that Serbia should recognize Kosovo and that European integrations are impossible if it doesn't, claiming that Kosovo will then enter the EU far before Serbia.
Here is an interesting thing in his recent interview:
QUESTION: For Serbia it means that you openly stood on the side of Kosovo separatists.
ANSWER: I do not support any separatist anywhere, I support sovereignty and territorial integrity of the independent state of Kosovo. The Republic of Kosovo. I do not support dull separatist that want to tear apart the independent country of Kosovo. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 00:40, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hello yet again. I regretfully inform you that the bot we were using to update the user status at Wikipedia:Highly Active Users, SoxBot V, was blocked for its constant updating. With this bot out of operation, a patch is in the works. Until that patch is reviewed and accepted by the developers, some options have been presented to use as workarounds: 1) Qui monobook (not available in Internet Explorer); 2) User:Hersfold/StatusTemplate; 3) Manually updating User:StatusBot/Status/USERNAME; or 4) Not worry about it and wait for the patch to go through, which hopefully won't take long. If you have another method, you can use that, too. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Useight (talk) 22:24, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Kosovo
Ban Ki Mun, EU and Russia are working to form up a new resolution to officialize the EULEX. Ban claims that is the best solution, as looking beside the UN SC for solutions once more will further incriminate the reputation of UN as an interntional institution. It would reaffirm the territorial integrity and sovereignty of the Republic of Serbia, which would appease both China and Russia and several loud non-permanent members. Britain and France seem to be willing to accept that, by the United States is the problem.
SPS-PUPS-JS declared unsatisfied with the provisions of DSS-NS and SRS regarding the SAA (a SRS-DSS expert team held a lesson to explain the Socialists why the SAA is bad for Serbia), but its board decided today to continue negotiations with the Patriots in the following week. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 18:02, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
And how exactly would reaffirming the integrity of Serbia work, while Kosovo is becoming detached from it?
It's just rewriting 1244, except affirming territorial integrity and sovereignty of the "Federal Republic of Yugoslavia" is replaced with "Republic of Serbia".
Well, it seems that it is 125:125, a most peculiar situation! It will be very interesting to see if this further complicates (will there be Palma's abolition of seats, trials that could go all the way to the Constitutional Court, or even repeated parliamentary elections). --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 11:53, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The only remaining alternative is for Ban Ki Mun to merge the two missions, replacing Rucker with the EULEX head as the new Special Representative of the UNMIK.
Have reached the bottom point since the end of the war: On the international meeting in Zagreb, Foreign Minister Vuk Jeremic, aside from other things, stated that Operation Storm had featured ethnic cleansing of Serbs from Croatia. He also announced opening a second consulate in Croatia, in Knin, aimed ad assisting the return of most of the displaced refugees. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 13:08, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
One last question for today: where do you think I can find help for my pet project, Politics of Italian regions? I am sure that, as there are articles about every single by-election in Canada, we should have also altricles about the politics and the elections of Italian regions, but I can't do the entire work alone... --Checco (talk) 15:56, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It is one year that I try too woo it.Wiki editors on the cause, but no-one wants to do it and most of them don't bother to tell me that they don't. In my opion we need to choose if those articles are useful or not. I obviuously consider them useful, especially because it.Wiki does not have such articles. I need someone who can be interested in doing it, as he is interested in working on Brazilian or Spanish elections... --Checco (talk) 16:10, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
WikiProjects on Politics and other related topics? Can't think of anything else, sorry... But yes, they're definitely useful. —Nightstallion16:16, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry to take up space on your talk page, 'stallion, but instead of scattering my responses 'cross Wikipedia, I'd thought I'd do it here.
European Alliance
Quotes on the European Alliance Group in the Committee of the Regions
“
Within the COR, EFA aligned with a group of independents from English local authorities plus Ireland’s governing party, Fianna Fail, to establish the European Alliance as a party group from 1999-2004. The group had clear parallels with the organisation of regionalists in the European Parliament, with the need for a formal alliance with non-regionalists to establish political groups that would be recognised and funded by European institutions. The EFA parties were a minority within the European Alliance, but then so were Fianna Fail and the Independents. Clearly, without this group, each would be unattached members of the COR and lack committee places and political clout. The EFA members within the COR were not marginal figures within the sphere of multi-level governance. EFA members of the COR included: Paul Van Grembergen of SPIRIT, the Flemish Minister for Interior, Housing, Civil Service, Foreign Trade and Urban Policy; Keith Brown of the SNP, a local council leader; Juan José Ibarretxe of PNV, who is President of the Basque Country; Dino Viérin of the Union Valdotaine, who is President of the Autonomous Region of Val D’Aosta.9 Thus, four of the European Alliance’s COR delegation of ten members came from the EFA parties. Amongst the alternate COR members, the EFA was represented by politicians from SPIRIT, Plaid Cymru, the PNV and the SNP. Similarly, though the European Alliance was a relatively loose grouping of regionalists and non-regionalists, it developed some programmatic coherence as necessitated by European institutional rules plus the need for group coherence within the COR. The European Alliance had eight main principles, which were closely aligned with long-standing EFA policy positions:
• Environmental and Sustainable development as defined in the Brundtland Report from the UN with the full implementation of the Kyoto Protocol.
• Peace, détente;
• Freedom and right of self-determination;
• Defence of all languages, cultures and local government;
• An open Europe of autonomous regions and nations;
• Openness and grass-roots democracy;
• Sound management of all European structures, in order to prevent fraud and waste.
• The defence of human rights (European Alliance 2004).
European Alliance members were committed to ‘actively support and vote for an open Europe of regions and nations and the highest possible standards for environmental protection, workers' health, consumer protection, veterinary rules, social welfare and democratic principles. The members commit themselves to work together to obtain and defend such rights and equality of treatment. At the same time, they acknowledge the full political autonomy of the individual members and groupings.’ (European Alliance 2004). Thus, similar to previous quasi-regionalist political groups, the European Alliance simultaneously adopted common positions and allowed members to act autonomously: another uneasy balancing act for the parties involved. However, this version of the European Alliance ran for only one term. From 2004, the organisation was reconstituted as the Union for Europe of the Nations-European Alliance group and the EFA-DPPE parties left. Despite EFA-DPPE representation in the COR and the presence of EFA parties in regional parliaments and some governments, the regionalists found themselves institutionally marginalised within the Committee of the Regions.
The European Democrat Group was originally named Group of Independent Representatives and founded in 1970 by British and Scandinavian members of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe. It then had about 35-40 members from England, Ireland, Norway, Denmark, Turkey, Sweden and Switzerland.
At that time the only other existing groups in the Parliamentary Assembly were the Socialist Group and the Christian Democrat Group. But the Secretariat of the Group of Independent Representatives was the first one to be created in 1977. The proposal for a renaming of the Group was submitted on 6 July 1978. In September 1980 the European Democrat Group was officially created.
I can't commit to completing/creating the PACE groups, nor the CoR groups, nor the NATO Parliamentary Assembly groups until 2009 at the earliest: I still haven't finished the EP groups and after that, I have to return to the election pages. I am also currently up to my elbow in rewriting IND/DEM: I've read their press releases, collated academic sources, sourced their policy positions on the Constitution Treaty/Treaty of Lisbon & Turkish accession (go on, guess) and deduced their MEPs at formation (Lega Nord joined a day late) and at present, but I still have to work out their other policy positions and fit them on the Hix-Lord scale, so lots still to do. User:Checco, the quotes and sources above are sufficient for you to make a start on completing European Democrats with respect to PACE and, should you wish, do an article on the CoR European Alliance. Don't forget to insert inline citations (just listing the sources at the bottom is not enough: this is not the Transnational Radical Party) and don't just do a cut-and-paste job.
I don't think I have the knowledge and the skills to write those articles. If Nightstallion doesn't either, we will wait for Anameofmyveryown until 2009... By the way, if I understood correctly, it is very interesting to know that EFA is allied with UEN at PACE through EA: an European regionalist party, which excludes non-progressive parties from its membership and from its subgroup in the EP, is allied with right-wing national-conservatives at PACE! --Checco (talk) 07:22, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The JS board has brought the decision to not participate in the forthcoming negotiations with the Patriots. They are convinced their coalition partners will see the SRS' and DSS' true viewpoints on European integrations in the following and decide for a coalition with DS.
Ivica Dacic criticized Palma greatly, but said that if the division inside the coalition really cannot be transcended, it shall be broken and new elections scheduled. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 02:08, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The Assembly of the Serbian People of Kosovo and Metohija shall have 45 Deputies. 43 are elected by municipal parliaments, while the remaining two are reserved one for Romani and the other for the Slavic Muslim minority.
The local DSS, SRS, SPS, G17+ and DS political leaders have reached a joint agreement to schedule its Constitutive Session for 15 June 2008, because of the Kosovar Constitution. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 02:26, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Here how it was. In communist age the Slavs of Islamic faith were "Muslims by ethnicity" in Yugoslavia. In Kosovo there is an autochtonous little Serb-related Slavic civilization, known as the Gorani, and they gained the liberty to call themselves that way (although up to half outright opted to be Serbs) after 1990. There are most Slavic Muslims. There are some others, but those do not form majority anywhere and aren't significant in numbers. With the birth of the Bosniac nation in 1993 and establishment of a Bosnian political party in Kosovo, many of them opted to become ethnic Bosniaks. Yet others, simply still consider themselves Muslims in ethnic sense. In any case "Slavic Moslem" covers all of them in general nowadays. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 17:55, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
They were considered Romas since...well, forever. Some with the dawn of the 21st century have identified them as separate ethnic groups from the Romanis. Egyptians are Romanis of Egyptian origin (collectively descend from Egyptian colonists brought by the Ottomans) and the Ashkalis are Albanized Romanis. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 20:23, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
nods Well, the Serbs were supposed to be autonomous within Kosovo anyway, so I see no big problem with that in principle, apart from the fact that I'm not sure the Romani or Muslims should be in there. shrugs Don't forget the article. ;) —Nightstallion11:45, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Terrorism
Two such incidents today:
1) Albanian terrorists detonated with heavy explosives a police car in a police station yard in southern Serbia
2) Political dissidents and other opponents made an assassination attempt on Kosovo Prime Minister Hashim Thaci and after a shooting between his bodyguard and the unit, they fled. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:17, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
At a guess, it may have something to do with the treaty of Nice. Europarties were governed by Article 138a (Maastricht), now Article 191(1) EC (Nice?), (aka 191a) and the Regulation (EC) No 2004/2003, so in about 2004, the parties got more organised (see [10]). Around about this time, EFA's old site ([11]) was dropped ([12]) and a new one ([13]) was set up ([14]) after Nelly Maes became leader. Prior to that point, sources ([15]) had used dppe-efa and efa interchangeably. User:Mais oui! changed the Wikipedia entry to European Free Alliance on 21 August 2005 ([16]) although it.wikipedia still mentions the dppe part ([17]).
EFA sources
If you're going to work on the European Free Alliance article, then the following sources may help you:
Of course not. He has no control of the Church. Will be very interesting if / when he takes it over too, I can't wait to see what'll happen. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 20:25, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You....swine! <grin> You asked "hey, why did the DPPE-EFA become EFA?". So I checked it out. To do this checking out required me to read the f*****g Treaties of Maastricht, Amsterdam, Nice and Rome. Well, bits of them at least. But they were big bits, and this is European legislation I'm talking about, not Dr. f*****g Seuss. I'll be having "having regard to the provisions of..." nightmares for days. Aaaargh! I had to rewrite the Europarty article to get the sequence of events right (not sure about the treaty of Amsterdam bit: the funding issue may have gone back to Maastricht, but the timeline roughly matches). Double aaarrgh!
So anyway, returning to the land of the sane, I think the sequence of events looks like this:
Year
Event
Translation
1992
Treaty of Maastricht
"Hey, wouldn't Europarties be a great idea!".
1997
Treaty of Amsterdam (I think)
"Hey, lets fund them out of the Community budget!".
1997-2001
The Europarties start co-ordinating associated national parties on an loose, distributed basis.
The Europarties go apeshit and throw money at the national parties like it's Christmas time.
2001
Treaty of Nice
"What the fuck are you doing? Stop that! That's not what you're supposed to be doing with the money!"
2003
Regulation (EC) No 2004/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 November 2003
"Hey peon! We fund you, remember? What gets funded by the EU gets controlled by the EU. Capisce?"
2004
The Europarties formalise their organizational structure.
The Europarties clean up their act and start acting like panEuropean parties, not offshore accounts for whatever.
2005?
Hannan goes to the ECJ
"Hey, you living embodiment of the Fourth Reich and sons of Satan. I hate you and all your works. Please give me money. I'll be good, really. Really, really, really. Oh, go on. I want lots of Eurocash as well. Kissy, kissy?"
2005?
FN, Lega Nord and Vlaams Belaang (yep, them again) appeal.
"So. We hear that there's some money going. Nice courthouse. It'd be a pity if something happened to it..."
2004-2007
Decision of the Bureau of the European Parliament of 29 March 2004, Regulation (EC) No 1524/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2007, and others passim
"So, assorted Eurosceptics/fascists: you think you're goodfellas, huh? Well just remember this: don't fuck with us, we're the EU. We write the legislation, remember? What goes on at a European level stays at a European level. Oh, and we want Eurofoundations. Nothing political: just lots of academic stuff. Graphs and whatnot. Off you go..."
This is the monthly newsletter of WikiProject Tropical Cyclones. The Hurricane Herald aims to give a summary, both of the activities of the WikiProject and global tropical cyclone activity. If you wish to change how you receive this newsletter, or no longer wish to receive it, please add your username to the appropriate section on the mailing list. This newsletter covers all of May 2008.
Please visit this page and bookmark any suggestions of interest to you. This will help improve monitoring of the WikiProject's articles.
Storm of the month
Cyclone Nargis
Cyclone Nargis was the costliest and deadliest natural disaster in the history of Burma (Myanmar). It formed on April 27 in the central Bay of Bengal, and after initially tracking north-northwestward it turned to the east. Quickly strengthening to reach peak winds of at least 165 km/h (105 mph), Nargis made landfall in the Ayeyarwady Division of Burma on May 2 near peak intensity. The cyclone killed at least 80,000 people and potentially over 300,000. Passing near the metropolis of Yangon, the cyclone destroyed thousands of buildings, and damage was estimated at over $10 billion (USD). In the wake of the storm, the ruling military junta of Burma initially refused foreign aid, and after they allowed foreign assistance, the government was criticized for its poor handling of the aftermath of the storm.
Other tropical cyclone activity
Northwestern Pacific Ocean – Typhoon Rammasun was the strongest tropical cyclone worldwide during the month, though it did not affect land. Tropical Storm Matmo formed east of Luzon in the middle of the month and lasted for three days. Severe Tropical Storm Halong (Cosme) was the deadliest storm in the Pacific basin, causing 58 deaths and $94 million (USD) in damage after hitting Luzon on May 17. At the end of the month, Typhoon Nakri formed and reached peak intensity over open waters before becoming extratropical in early June.
Eastern Pacific Ocean – Tropical Storm Alma was was the easternmost forming Pacific tropical cyclone on record. Forming from a trough on May 29, it became a strong tropical storm before making landfall near León, Nicaragua, killing at least two people.
Project News
Several other languages are active in the realm of tropical cyclone articles, though as much as ours. The French Wikipedia has 76 storm articles, the Spanish Wikipedia has 99 storm articles, and the Portuguese Wikipedia has 116 storm articles. Each of the projects have several storm articles we do not have, and the coverage on non-notable storms outside of the Atlantic is better, particularly in the Southern Hemisphere.
During the month, User:Potapych finished working on Template:Infobox Hurricane Small, which is used for the small Infoboxes in season articles; he has updated several season article already with the changes.
Rucker has decided to return the property of the High Dechani 14th century monastery, confiscated by the Communists after World War II. However, the day before yesterday the local Albanian administration refused to hand it over. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 10:32, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No point I'm afraid. The remaining local Serbs held a gathering and decided to collectively move out of Dechani to Serb-inhabited areas (mostly enclaves) today. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 12:48, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
One good news though, the local Pristina court sentenced several days ago to 40 years a terrorist that blew up a train from Nish, killing 11 passengers and wounding 10. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 13:20, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The main DS board approved a coalition with SPS and authorized Tadic to negotiate it. The form of the government would be 12 Ministries for DS, 5 for G17+, 5 for SPS, 1 for SPO and 1 for the Bosniacs. Due to restructuring of positions within the government, Rasim Ljajic might likely become Prime Minister, rather than Bojan Pajtic. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 13:48, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, DS will manage to lead some sort in coalition with LDP, I guess. But the small parties are precisely because of that scared of repeated elections, and they thus might not allow them. For one thing, it's a too big risk for LDP, as it'll once more be a much bigger probability to not pass the threshold. For one thing it would further bring Kostunica's downfall, but I do not think the Socialists would risk weakening such a good result like this one. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 13:55, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You mean the SPS would rather agree to a coalition with ZES than risk a worse result in repeated elections? I just hope Palma will not be convinced be SPS-PUPS to agree to a coalition with SRS... —Nightstallion13:59, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
He most surely won't. He will either convince PUPS, or Ivica Dacic will strip him of his seats before the constitutive session, which has just been scheduled for 11 June 2008. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:03, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You mean the Radicals are now the "we don't talk to those", the Populists are now the "we don't like them, but have to accept they're important for now" and the Socialists are now the "we have to talk to them, as they are the best we have as partners"? —Nightstallion16:03, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sort of. What I meant to say is that the Radicals are now the serious organized cunning plotting corrupted responsible statists, the Populists are now ultra-nationalists and chauvinists of big proportion and the Socialists can now go with everyone. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 17:51, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
With the difference that the plotting corrupts are now the second largest force, while the ultra-nationalists are slowly shrinking to oblivion... —Nightstallion18:07, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Meh. It's conservative (a minus for me) and not really that pro-European (against common EU policies on taxes, migration, defense & security, ...). The PSD is post-communist, which I don't like *that* much, either... PDL seems to be a bit more centrist and pro-European than PNL, but they're still conservative... And while UDMR is a minority party (which I generally support; I'm quite favourable to left-wing nationalism like SNP, Plaid Cymru, ERC, ...), it's still Christian democratic and a bit too broad to have a real ideology... What do you think? —Nightstallion10:21, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
(reindent) I know that there aren't any real true good choices at all (and I know that from first had ;) in Romania, but always pick the lesser evil. Yes, I was very intrigued by UDMR (frankly tempted to name it ;-) but it's a Hungarian minority political party. Left-wing nationalism? Due to SPS, I do not favor it, which again narrows me down to PNL. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:48, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, SPS is not left-wing nationalist in the sense that I mean -- left-wing nationalism is a group of ideologies which are primarily regionalist or independentist and on the left of the political spectrum, like the pro-independence movements in Catalonia, Scotland, Wales, but not like the nationalist movements in Flanders or like the SPS (who are not regionalist or independentist). —Nightstallion15:33, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Rucker (for the 2nd time) prolonged the terms of the Presidents of the 5 Serb municipalities in Kosovo for half a year. They uphold they shall refuse that. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 18:38, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
For the second time (already did it once), yes. This agitates the Albanians though, they're calling it highly undemocratic and comparing it to dictatorial authoritarian powers of the OHR in BH. Especially when repeating. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:48, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, they have the choice of extending the old ones' terms or of accepting the newly elected ones... sighs And of course it's like the OHR in BIH -- the Kosovans need a similar institution if the Albanians want to have any chance of keeping the Serb-populated territories within their new state... —Nightstallion15:33, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hashim Thaci has stated that he is negotiating with the NATO and does not exclude the possibility of usage of force, especially a way to reintegrate North Kosovo. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 16:13, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
But on the outskirts of the capital city...in a private apartment...!
It's not as a surprise though, Rasim Ljajic told the public during the last year that they are very close to tracking down Stojan Zupljanin. Can't be said about Ratko Mladic, of whom all trail in Serbia has been lost in 2005 (!).
Then they should invest more effort, the remaining three could also be in Serbia. I'm not surprised that Zupljanin was caught, Ljajic announced that, but they've lost track of Ratko Mladic in 2005 in Serbia, there were stories about searching Goran Hadzic last year but he was no where to be found, Ljajic even offered him through the media to surrender ("in package" with the other two caught that year), telling him that the best thing he can do for his family right now, but nothing. Radovan Karadzic was last seen in Montenegro a long time ago as well.
Nope. You are referring to 2007, and one of them was hiding in the Republic of Montenegro and the other was arrested in the Republic of Srbska. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 21:09, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, okay. You meant it was the first arrest in Serbia for years.
The shock wouldn't come if he was arrested, say, in a village on the border of Bosnia...but this.
No. I am still intrigued by all those rumors that Ratko Mladic was arrested in Romania or Bosnia last year though...if you ask me frankly, something smells horrible bad altogether about Mladic.
I am convinced that Karadzic is not anywhere in Serbia, what's more, I'm becoming sure he ill never be found.
As for Goran Hadzic, anything may change with him, even despite there is no information currently, over the following months (hope not years). --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 21:18, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think that Karadzic will in 2026 be announced that he died of old-age illness 9 years before that, when they discover a corpse in Argentina and identify it. I'm sure Hadzic will show up in the end somewhere. As for Mladic...I just don't know what think. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 21:47, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Kosovo
Another good thing. Return of confiscated and usurped property after 1999 has finally started. First 100 of the 40,000 cases have just been successfully finished. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 23:03, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
And while I am very much aware of Communist propaganda, by God I miss its incrediblyoh-so-muchinspiring music, I really, really do. Today's political marketing is totally a-musical. The Democrats use modernist music, the Populists some trash patriotic overworking, the Radicals steal music from the Lord of the Rings or Pirates of the Caribbean, while the Liberals copy Obama... --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 19:07, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I'm an Icelander and I noticed that the image that is used here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Lisbon#Enlargement_and_secession falsely implies that Iceland and Norway are about to join EU. The fact of the matter is that EU has been mentioned as an option in local discussion but there are no plans of even beginning discussion to join EU. The current government has made that quite clear and if Iceland is to join EU, it will not happen the next 10-15 years. So I'm asking why you did that revision and putting up false information about Icelands stand against the EU?
This is an highly political matter and is taken quite seriously and can send a scewed image of us.
I previously asked the creator of that image to remove Iceland of that list but with no success. It would be rather sad if administrators here are enforcing false information here without the creators citing any reference.
The image states that Iceland is 'debating' membership, but it is not debating it any more then other countries that are outside the EU so by that all countries outside the EU could be colored yellow. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ohlynsson (talk • contribs) 19:07, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I'm born and raised politically aware Icelander and the only serious talk about EU is the stability of the Euro since the currency fluctuation here has been way too much. We, along with Norway and Lichtenstein are members of EEA and that gives us access to the inner markets of EU, so the only real reason for us to join EU is for the Euro. But we have also been discussing other options as tying the currency to other currencies or to abandon the floating currency. So the discussion here is more about the currency/food prices then membership to EU.
I find the image to give wrong image of our standing to the EU, as our only current interest to the EU is the Euro. I care much for the integrity of wikipedia since I use it much for science and history reference and that's why I'd like our stand to the EU to be portrayed as accurately as possible. We are in fact in just as much debate to join the EU as other countries that are not in the EU - discussing the pros and cons - and that's why it feals like that colouring is way out of line.
Sincerely, Óli. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.213.139.3 (talk) 13:36, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Erm -- so? All the countries which are discussing the pros and cons of joining the EU should be coloured correctly, yes. The map in the article I linked to does that, and the image you object to will soon do that, too. That should be fine then, right? —Nightstallion17:24, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Negotiations coming to a close
PUPS and JS are ready to go with ZES on repeated elections. As DS can only gain from them and SPS possibly not pass the census, their Kostunicoid policy ends - as all the minorities have firmly stood on Boris Tadic's side. They gave up the PM request and, in nominal terms, accepted the Democrats' offer. DSS (lol!) is very furious with the 'official' negotiations that are led and is terminating them. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 11:22, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The Retired leader stated "We have received DSS' legal analysis on the pensions, and we are awaiting the continuation and the remainder." Kostunica angrily responded: "Do it yourselves!" --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 12:52, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The Irish are not the problem, they're just a symptom. The problem is that for decades, the European elite has declined to listen to the people at all -- this has been becoming a larger and larger problem steadily over the last twenty years, and now we're at a full-blown crisis. I'm personally really rather down right now -- I hope the European leaders have some kind of idea as to how they will restore trust into the EU in the voters, e.g. by some kind of regular directly democratic input from the European people(s), but I'm really very pessimistic right now. :( :( :( —Nightstallion18:20, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have a strange theory. I have a feeling Western Europe is going quite "bad", and that the roles might change soon, with Eastern Europe actually leading the EU (refer to the elections in Serbia and Poland). Austria and Slovenia already "took over", perhaps Poland and Serbia shall be the leaders of the EU in the near future? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 19:20, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Then I probably have a worse opinion on him then he really deserves, but he's far too eccentric to be mayor of a huge capital city. Regarding the allegations on racism, I've heard far far more stories than his Wikipedia article states on the controversy section. But you know me. I always search for perfectionists. I hate Bozidar Djelic (good to see that he's not the PM candidate) just because he became incredibly rich because of the State over the years. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 19:56, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Don't get me wrong, I don't really like him -- but I don't know whether I liked Livingstone much better... Either way, he's certainly far less terrible than Alemanno, that's certain. —Nightstallion20:03, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No merger between SRS and SSJ shall occur. The Radicals tricked SSJ, giving them only two seats instead of five, because they won so little seats (they expected 90 minimum). Either SSJ will brake off from their parliamentary club in the parliament, or they shall be dragging in courts... --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 00:08, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
.svg?lang=en){kind=small}
.svg?lang=en){kind=small}
