Doxycyclilne Side Effects

[Ticket] A small development ...

The vote by MEPs of the FN
some questions, what answers would most likely
.

At the Like our fellow blogger and activist Johan Livernet today that Sunday annoying, it seems appropriate to do a little focus. Indeed, these days, a controversy erupted implausible about a vote of the FN at the European Parliament May 8, 2008. Being partly responsible for this controversy, I wanted make today an update (which does not bind the blog but just the author).

On 26 August 2010, I published the 4th chronic Transatlantic (1) , covering a resolution adopted May 8, 2008. Indeed, work undertaken for over six months by this blog on transatlantic federalism, both institutional and ideological level (see the wonderful article on Clarence Strait Samy (2) ), led us to paring a number of resolutions of the European Parliament (failing to consider, but it is possible that this will come, the U.S. perspective). The Resolution on the Transatlantic Economic Council (TEC or TEC for Transatlantic Economic Council) explains the views and objectives of the European Parliament on the transatlantic partnership and the integration of European and American markets.

In commenting on this post, I had the time to post two links, leading to the site http://www.votewatch.eu (web application that tracks the votes of Members parliament for a given document). In these statistics and records, appeared something incongruous embarrassing: The affirmative vote of the members FN, whose Marine Le Pen Bruno Gollnish, Carl Lang and others. At the time we had just laughed, but had none mentioned.

On December 4, 2010, Edgar, a dear friend to us and which tests are often in agreement with ours, takes the note of 26 August 2010 and summarized its readers ( 3) . He still included the information that the clan National supported this resolution. Several questions were asked in the comment as the information was surreal. It was therefore necessary to resume work, and look more official sources that VoteWatch.eu, work I have undertaken which I transcribed the result in the comment section.

So I indeed found the session PV (4) official site of the European Parliament, which was taken all voting members. It includes the bottom , and interesting documents containing extensive information about the votes made during this session. One we want is called "roll-call votes ( http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//NONSGML+PV+20080508+RES- RCV + DOC + PDF + V0 / / EN & language = EN ). On page 15, we arrive voting members, and we see that two votes were held (both links in the comments that I gave the ticket August 26, 2010). The first, named " am 1 " was approved by the FN, the second named " am 3 " of the same except that Mrs. Le Pen abstained.

So I concluded on 5 December on Edgar's blog:

" Indeed, one must be measured on Marine Le Pen. The two votes on the resolution of interest are described on page 15 and 16, in paragraphs 6 and 7 of the document. And we can see that if Mr. Gollnich also voted positively in the second vote, Marine Le Pen did it, not vote.

I hope you will forgive this "lightness" in this information, I am therefore obliged to qualify. Marine Le Pen has not fully passed this resolution. "

No longer on anything regarding this resolution, I decided also to question one hand Ms. Le Pen itself (by sending a message on December 5 speaks through its mailboxes EP and FN), and secondly, a friend who could help me with this lukewarm vote designations " am 1 "and" am 3 . "Indeed, if we know the votes on the amendments, we do not know the final vote on the resolution.

On 14 December the site ToutSaufSarozy.com
Edgar relays information in a "summary"

December 15, another colleague and blogger who takes Information on the site Infoguerilla.fr (5) under the title "The FN vote ... Globalist . "Curiously, it incorporates information another site, ToutSaufSarkozy. com (6) which gives some summary information on the transatlantic market (which in itself is already a small victory), and provides a link to VoteWatch voted on the first amendment (the object of scandal ... ).

On 15 December, resumed Infoguerilla information, and there
includes an update with some nuances

other words, some had read the article by Edgar, without taking a train station the discussion that took place in grades and hence the comment that we had finally put forward, and had shared information with a look somewhat biased. The same day, discussing with Lazy French Bastard, who is editor of the article Infoguerilla. Com, I insist, nonetheless, we do not forget the nuances outlined on the blog of Edgar, and he made the update on his article:

"Some small details of our friend Liior [...]. He questioned MLP-mail about this, without getting answers. Nevertheless, he said this information has to be tempered by the fact that "Never Marine Le Pen has passed a further resolution for the transatlantic market. It was the only time, and yet, it seems to have just voted for a kernel, and it has failed to resolve . "

On 16 December, the site I Like Your Style launches into an explanation
text.

Having received no response from Marine Le Pen (or team) or my friend regarding this issue right, it took them plunge. And here I came across an article on the site I Like Your Style corroborates prudence he must have with respect to this information (7) . The author explains:

"Only two amendments to the original 5 were subjected to a roll call vote. Once the text is original and amended since it was introduced by a large majority in parliament, it is likely there was no need to resort to a final vote nominal, but rather a show of hands faster. The resolution was finally adopted, but it is impossible to know who voted against the overall text. (It However, it can make a pretty good idea by comparing the different ratings nominal on the topic over the terms of office) "

There was therefore an incomplete picture of what happened that day. The author is careful to show the course of events, different votes, and types of votes.

We can also follow the advice given to us, and try to see what the trend of votes FN when speaking of the Transatlantic Partnership (so we can refer to my Quote me on the site Infoguerilla.fr ): The trend that emerges clearly from the National Bloc (and it's still logical) division is facing the transatlantic partnership some, and indifference to others (as manifested by their abstentions).

can access more details of the amendments voted on that day (highlighted by the article) and see the changes made by the First Amendment (the object of scandal, yet) are simply Common sense, in defense of supporters of the FN.

Some seem to believe today that our goal has been to "destabilize the FN" to "low political maneuvering," forgetting that our blog does not have this vocation, but simply wished to highlight some things we could think of being close to the truth. And we can not accuse us of lying (whether consciously or unconsciously), on any point whatsoever and at any time throughout this study.

whole thing would be a destabilization of the FN
? Or simply a fact
simple, clear and objective?

I was already four times this link ( http://eluspcfsassenage.over-blog.com/article-32229995.html ) leading to a blog communist who, like us, is disappointed the progress of the transatlantic market. It therefore gives the final vote by roll call of the resolution adopted March 26, 2009 (which we did a detailed summary on our transatlantic Chronicle # 11 (8) ), in which it is stated that the FN has voted against .

I never understood why they sent me this link, I put the question in case. I think the supporters of the FN that highlight this text believe that it overrides the text passed a year ago. If so, they will have to forget this idea, because it is false. The worst thing is that I feel like they are trying to make me "discover a scoop. Now I was the first to indicate that it is very unusual for the FN vote positively on such texts. Again, we can not be suspected of bad faith.

We will continue to share information sourced, detailed and verified, for such is the vocation of this blog (which, if it may be wrong on his conclusions that can and should be discussed, no mistake about its beginnings) even if it means hurting some, make some other crazy with joy, regardless of political sensitivities.

So I can proudly say everyone that if we find another gem on Ms. Le Pen or his sidekick Mr. Gollnish, we have much hesitation to go out as if they were Nicolas Sarkozy de Nagy-Bosca, Ségolène Royal or any other political figure: No:).

Notes:
(1) The Theory of Everything, Transatlantic Chronicles # 4 (May 8, 2008 resolution on CET) by Liior: http://theorie-du-tout.blogspot. com/2010/08/billet-chroniques-transatlantiques-4.html
(2) The Theory of Everything, Kirshmann Clarence Streit (1896-1986), father of federalism Transatlantic by Samy: http://theorie-du-tout.blogspot.com/2010/11/clarence-kirshmann-streit-1896-1986.html
(3) The Purloined Letter, The transatlantic market by Edgar: http://theorie-du-tout.blogspot.com/2010/11/clarence-kirshmann-streit-1896-1986.html
(4) Parliament website European PV session for May 8, 2008: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?language=FR&type=PV&reference=20080508&secondRef=TOC
(5) Infoguerilla.fr, The FN vote ... Globalist ! by Lazy French Bastard: http://infoguerilla.fr/?p=7180
(6) ToutSaufSarkozy.fr, Marine Le Pen and Golnisch want to believe calves "patriots" they struggle against globalization. In fact, they speed up: in their golden sinecure of the European Parliament, they voted for the "transatlantic market" in 2015 : http://www.toutsaufsarkozy.com/cc/article04/EkAkFkElpVZDvDMqmT. shtml
(7) I Like Your Style, The Rabbids to storm the parliament by Yoshikuni Hibiki: http://ilikeyourstyle.net/2010/12/16/les-lapins-cretins-a-lassaut-du-parlement-europeen/
(8) The Theory of Everything, Transatlantic Chronicle # 11 (Resolution 26 March 2009 on strengthening the transatlantic relationship) by Liior: http://theorie-du-tout.blogspot.com/2010/11/billet-chroniques-transatlantiques-11.html