Posted by Ivo Cerckel on November 24th, 2014
Upon assuming their mandates in the EU parliament, Podemos’s MEPs showed that we can attack the oligarchic nightmare with which thalidomide monsters are faced in the EU, due to the 1957 need of the EEC caste of the thalidomide scandal for its lunatic 1985 product-liability directive.
The EEC needed thalidomide, but the EU rejects the drug’s victims.
POINT OF ORDER
According to Chambers Giant Paperback Dictionary, “monster” can be defined as a deformed person, plant or animal.
Hence, anyone deformed by thalidomide, including this blogger, is by that definition a “monster.”
This blogger is also such a monster.
If he uses the noun “monster”, this is for the reason which makes you, dear reader, afraid of it.
END OF POINT OF ORDER
“Podemos” means “we can” in Spanish.
The Spanish Podemos (“yes, we can” change things by sweeping away the corruption of the “caste” of the elites) movement is an anti-establishment movement which emanates from the “indignados” who in the 2011–12 Spanish protests demanded a radical change in Spanish politics. “You can – but you don’t want to” … attack the “oligarchic nightmare” with which you are faced, was the battle cry then.
The movement complains of the post-Franco (Franco ruled Spain from 1939 until his death in 1975) oligarchic regime and has morphed 10 months ago into a populist far-left wing political party, whose supporters nevertheless include former supporters of the ruling centre-right Partido Popular (PP) of Mariano Rajoy, the prime Minister of the King of Spain.
As it stressed before and during the campaign for the elections for the EU parliament in May 2014, Podemos wants to encourage the Spaniards to come to realise that they can change things and that if the voter puts Podemos into power, the party will show the world how to change these things.
The action plan of Podemos is a response to the collapse of an unjust, cynical and oligarchic society under the weight of corruption.
The citizen is being scandalised by the corruption of the regime which has brought about its collapse. This collapse has resulted in austerity by which the citizen is being crushed.
Podemos wants to replace corruption and austerity by the renationalisation of recently privatised state enterprises, the orderly restructuring of debt, the revision of the 1978 constitution and the repeal of the monarchy.
Podemos offers a consistent approach to post-crisis economic management by recognising a simple truth about the eurozone in late 2014, that is, by recognising that it is logically inconsistent for the single currency to enter a secular stagnation and not restructure its debt, said Wolfgang Münchau on 23 November 2014 in the Financial Times, a newspaper.
Münchau added that what Podemos still needs to do is to offer a coherent vision of life after a debt restructuring. (1)
Podemos’s hobbyhorse or favourite subject is the corruption of the “caste” of the elites.
The party promises a new politics, beyond the left-right paradigm.
Ergo, as indicated above, former PP supporters feel at home in Podemos.
In May 2014, Podemos won 5 of the 54 Spanish seats in the EU parliament.
Upon assuming their mandates in said parliament in November 2014, Podemos’s members of the European parliament (MEPs) immediately attacked the oligarchic nightmare with which thalidomide monsters are faced in the EU.
Indeed, as La Verdad, a regional newspaper located in the Spanish city of Murcia, reported on 19 November 2014, two of Podemos’s MEPs, Lola Sánchez and Pablo Echenique, have donated 6’000 euro of their salaries to the Spanish thalidomide monsters (this blogger is also such a monster, be it from another EU member state) to allow them to a file a petition before the EU parliament. (2)
The Spanish news agency EFE explained on 21 November 2014 that the petition is to be filed “en breve” (this blogger who doesn’t speak Spanish supposes this means “shortly” or “before long” and that this does not mean “through an express procedure”) before the committee on petitions of said parliament. (3)
As a Spanish MEP, who’s not prepared to invest her capital in thalidomide monsters, of another party had said on 30 October 2014, the petition will invoke, or will complain of, the unequal treatment of thalidomide monsters by the different EU member states. (4)
The Spanish thalidomide monsters do not understand why they are to file the petition, they are filing the petition “because that was recommended by all MEPs [they] have recently met, who said they were going to support, to denounce the situation of the Spanish [ONLY] victims, “con respecto a” (this blogger does not speak Spanish. does this mean, vis-à-vis, with regard to, or with respect to?) the other EU member states and the world”. (5)
This blogger understands that article 227 (ex article 194 TEC) of the treaty on the functioning of the European union provides that any citizen of the EU, or resident in a member state, may, individually or in association with others, submit a petition to the EU parliament on a subject which comes within the European union’s fields of activity and which affects them directly.
This blogger further understands that a petition may take the form of a complaint or a request and may relate to issues of public or private interest.
This blogger quoted a Spanish MEP as saying that the petition will invoke, or will complain of, the unequal treatment of thalidomide monsters by the different EU member states. (4, again)
As the blogger understands it, the complaint will come under two headings.
One the hand, the complaint will complain that the number of thalidomide monsters recognised in Spain is (proportionally to the Spanish population) too low vis-à-vis the number of monsters recognised in other EU member states.
On the other hand, they will complain of the fact that Spanish monsters did not and are still not receiving compensation or pensions. (4, again) (6) (7)
Under the first heading the complaint should argue that in Germany approximately 2’700 victims are recognised and enjoying pensions, in the UK of NI-and-GB approximately 500 victims are recognised and enjoying pensions, in Italy approximately 300 victims are recognised, whereas of the estimated 1’000 victims in Spain only 24 victims are recognised by the health Ministry of the King of Spain.
Under the second heading, the complaint should argue that whereas no Spanish victim did yet receive any compensation, the victims in Germany and in the UK of NI-and-GB are enjoying pensions.
As a non-recognised thalidomide monster from the southern Low Countries (his father, a medical doctor, gave thalidomide on purpose, that is, in bad faith, to his (this blogger’s) mother), who had to flee fourteen years ago to South-East Asia, where life is much cheaper, this blogger hopes that this petition may be beneficial for him also, although two quotations above make him doubt
The quoted EFE press release, the first quote which makes this blogger doubt, said indeed that the petition would “denunciar la situación de las víctimas … españolas [ONLY]“. (3, again)
The second quote which makes this blogger doubt is that the Spanish thalidomide monsters themselves do not understand why they are filing this petition but are only filing it “because that was recommended by all MEPs [they] have recently met, who said they were going to support, to denounce the situation of the Spanish [ONLY] victims, “con respecto a” the other EU member states and the world”. (5, again)
To repeat, with these two caveats (the snippets just quoted from the documents referred to in notes (3) and (5)), this blogger who suffers the nationality of the southern Low Countries, where he was born out of parents with both the same nationality of the same Low Countries, hopes that this petition may be beneficial for him, as a non-recognised thalidomide monster who is still waiting for his first Belgian franc of compensation, also.
The blogger understands indeed that the application of EU law does not vary according to the member state of the nationality of the subject to whom that law is to be applied.
That’s what equal treatment of EU subjects is about, isn’t it?
ANALYSIS TO CONDUCT
The blogger will now sketch the analysis which the committee on petitions of the EU parliament will have to conduct prior to replying to the petition.
Thalidomide first appeared on the West-German market in 1957, that is the year that the original founding treaty of an international organisation was signed at Rome, Italy, and that organisation was called the … European Economic Community.
Why did the EEC legislator, the “caste” of EEC heads of state and guv’mint gathered in the EEC council, then wait three decades to adopt its 1985, that’s ten years after Franco’s death, five months before Spain’s accession to the EEC, product-liability directive, formally Council Directive 85/374/EEC of 25 July 1985 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning liability for defective products?
Why did that “caste” wait so long to make European law become the corner stone (“la pièce maîtresse”) of national consumer-protection legislations? (8)
Was that not in order not to make it too obvious that the thalidomide scandal was necessary to achieve this?
Was that not in order to hide this co-incidence?
STRUCTURING, NOT RE-STRUCTURING, THE DEBT TO THALIDOMIDE MONSTERS
But in the Spanish city of Cádiz, it’s the lunatics who are running the asylum, said this blogger’s 20 November 2014 comment in English in La Vanguardia, a newspaper. (9)
Are the lunatics also running the EU parliament’s asylums in Brussels and Strasbourg?
A non-lunatic anti-establishment movement as a response to the failure of the oligarchic regime, that’s just what the EU needed – at this moment – and long before that.
“Yes, we can” change things by sweeping away the corruption of the “caste” of the elites and by attacking the oligarchic nightmare with which thalidomide monsters are faced in the EU due to the EEC’s 1957 need of the thalidomide scandal for its lunatic 1985 product-liability directive.
Upon assuming their mandates in the EU parliament, Podemos’s MEPs immediately responded to one of the failures of the oligarchic regime, that is, to the nightmare of an unjust, cynical and oligarchic EEC, now EU, which needed thalidomide for its lunatic policies but which rejects the thalidomide monsters.
November 23, 2014 2:53 pm
Radical left is right about Europe’s debt
It is logically inconsistent for the eurozone to enter secular stagnation and not restructure
Lola Sánchez y Pablo Echenique donan 6000€ a las víctimas de la Talidomida
Víctimas de la Talidomida recurren ante el Supremo la anulación de indemnizaciones
EFE – Madrid
21/11/2014 – 15:04h
Avite recuerda que está trabajando en la elaboración de una petición para presentarla “en breve” ante la Comisión de Peticiones del Parlamento Europeo en Bruselas, para denunciar la situación de las víctimas españolas, con respecto a las del resto de países de la Unión Europea y del mundo.
UPyD se reúne con la Asociación de Víctimas de la Talidomida en España
30 octubre, 2014|
Existen grandes disparidades en el trato a las víctimas de la talidomida entre los Estados Miembros. En España, de hecho, no tienen ningún tipo de indemnización, mientras que en países como Alemania tienen una pensión vitalicia. UPyD ya impulsó desde el Congreso de los Diputados en la pasada legislatura iniciativas para que se pusiera una solución a este colectivo.
MATO SE REUNIRÁ CON LAS VÍCTIMAS DE LA TALIDOMIDA
22/11/2014 – http://www.teinteresa.es, MADRID
Además, Avite informa de que está trabajando en la elaboración de una petición para presentarla en breve, ante la Comisión de Peticiones del Parlamento Europeo en Bruselas, “porque así nos lo recomendaron todos los eurodiputados con los que recientemente nos hemos reunido, la cual nos dijeron que iban a apoyar, para denunciar la situación de las víctimas españolas, con respecto a las del resto de países de la Unión Europea y del mundo”.
Justicia para los hijos de la Talidomida
MAITE MARTÍNEZ BLANCO – domingo, 09 de noviembre de 2014
Sin duda, esta decisión de los magistrados ha caído como un jarro de agua fría en los afectados, pero no tirarán la toalla. Mientras preparan el recurso al Tribunal Supremo, tratarán de llamar a la puerta de Europa. Mañana una delegación de víctimas españolas se reunirá en el Parlamento Europeo con eurodiputados y les contarán lo injusto que es que en España apenas se haya reconocido como talidomídicos a 24 personas, cuando «en Alemania hay 2.900 víctimas indemnizadas, 500 en Gran Bretaña o 300 en Italia», enumera Rafael Basterrechea, vicepresidente de Avite a La Tribuna de Albacete.
JUSTICIA PARA LOS AFECTADOS POR LA TALIDOMIDA
Izaskun Bilbao Barandica | 17 noviembre 2014
De las más de 35.000 personas que sufrieron los efectos de este medicamento en Europa sobreviven una cinco mil. De ellas cerca de mil son españoles o españolas que encuentran pocas o ninguna facilidad para operar ante sus tribunales nacionales y que tampoco encuentran caminos para obligar a las autoridades alemanes a integrarlos en el acuerdo al que legaron con sus víctimas nacionales en 1970. Ha llovido desde entonces, pero el problema no se ha resuelto. Hay aspectos del mismo irreparables, los daños psíquicos y físicos que sufren las víctimas. pero las indemnizaciones que les corresponden pueden aliviar sus problemas de dependencia y financiar los tratamientos y asistencia que necesitan para vivir con normalidad. Por eso me he comprometido con ellos para colaborar en que mi grupo se sume al movimiento mediante el que el Parlamento Europeo debe apoyar a los afectados en sus reclamaciones frente a las autoridades alemanas de las compensaciones que merecen estas víctimas.
Jean-Sylvestre Bergé and Sophie Robin-Olivier, “Introduction au droit européen”, Presses Universitaires de France, 2008, 1st ed., section 377
Un municipio de Cádiz declarará “non grata” a la farmaceútica Grünenthal
Los visitadores médicos ni siquiera podrán acceder al municipio de Olvera a ofrecer sus productos
Andalucía | 19/11/2014 – 12:29h
4 días atrás
Are the lunatics in power in Cádiz?
Legal tabloids tell us that thalidomide is an example of the development-risk defence which allows producers to escape liability if they prove that the state of scientific and technical knowledge at the time when they put the product into circulation was not such as to enable the existence of a defect to be discovered, as defined at present “a contrario” (“argument based on the contrary” – denotes any proposition that is argued to be correct because it is not disproven by a certain case, says Wikipedia) in article 15(1)(b) of the 1985 EEC Product Liability Directive, formally Council Directive 85/374/EEC of 25 July 1985 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning liability for defective products.
Dr. Herman Cousy, professor emeritus from the law department of the K.U. Leuven,
has demonstrated in 1996 that the thalidomide scandal cannot be considered to be an example of the development-risk defence
by saying on p. 163, in note 28,
of his paper “The Precautionary Principle: A Status Questionis” published in the “Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance – Issues and Practice”, also available on the website of the “Geneva Association”, l’”Association Internationale pour l’Etude de l’Economie de l’Assurance”, the leading international think tank of the insurance industry, that :
“One often cites the Thalidomide (Contergan) case as an example of a development risk situation, although it appears that when thalidomide was brought onto the German market, the product had been banned in France. Can it be readily upheld, under such circumstances, that the conditions for a development risk situation were fulfilled?”
This means that the primary causeof the thalidomide scandal in Spain is the fact that after the French Leviathan had banned thalidomide, its neighbour across the Pyrenees did not prevent the product being brought onto “its” markets nor did it immediately order the withdrawal of thalidomide from “its” markets, once the product appeared there after the French ban.
The primary cause is opposed to the (Aristotelian) efficient of the thalidomide scandal, the tablet. For Aristotle, 25 centuries ago, the efficient cause is the being in act who brings about the change. And Aristotle went on to give the example of the sculptor who makes the … statue. Was this example devised 25 centuries ago with thalidomide monsters in mind?
The thalidomide scandal in Spain was caused by the Spanish Leviathan.
The thalidomide scandal in Spain was not caused by Grünenthal.
Are the lunatics in power in Cádiz?