Malaysian Airlines Flight 17 Crashes in Ukraine

Round up of news items in the aftermath of the Dutch referendum:

_http://www.dutchnews.nl/news/archives/2016/04/dutch-reject-the-eu-treaty-with-ukraine-in-referendum/
_http://www.dutchnews.nl/news/archives/2016/04/88395-2/ [Minister says referendum law needs revising; 30% threshold ‘an issue’]
_http://www.dutchnews.nl/news/archives/2016/04/top-lawyer-considers-legal-action-over-criminal-referendum/
_http://www.dutchnews.nl/features/2016/04/ukrainians-react-to-the-netherlands-no-vote/

_http://www.nltimes.nl/2016/04/07/interior-min-referendum-law-needs-revision/
_http://www.nltimes.nl/2016/04/08/interior-min-investigating-referendum-subsidies/

This next one is off topic really but I didn't think it deserves a new thread of its own:

_http://www.nltimes.nl/2016/04/07/opponents-of-us-eu-trade-deal-ttip-launch-dutch-referendum-bid/

Opponents of US-EU trade deal TTIP launch Dutch referendum bid

Posted on Apr 7, 2016 by Janene Pieters

Open_the_Door_to_Transparency-_-StopTTIP_-_15543248792-1280x575.jpg

Protest against TTIP (Photo: greensefa/Wikimedia Commons)

Inspired by the no-camp’s success in the Ukraine referendum, opponents of the US-EU trade deal TTIP and the Canadian version CETA are now also trying to get a referendum vote on this issue.

An online petition [Dutch only] for a TTIP Referendum already has more than 75 thousand signatures. A total of 600 thousand signatures are needed for a referendum. The petition was launched by organizations Meer Democratie, Mileudefense (the Dutch Friends of the Earth), foodwatch and the Transnational Institute, according to Het Parool.

The European Parliament is still negotiating on the TTIP trade deal. Negotiations on CETA are already completed and will be presented to the EU Member States next year.
Click to expand...

EDITED to add one extra item
 
For archiving purposes -- background analysis of the Dutch referendum implications by Gilbert Doctorow (Russia Insider):

http://www.sott.net/article/316043-Dutch-Referendum-may-bring-EUs-pro-NATO-foreign-policy-to-a-shuddering-halt
 
EU to propose visa-free travel for Ukraine despite Dutch vote
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-netherlands-eu-ukraine-idUSKCN0X70SJ

The European Commission will propose this month granting visa-free travel to Ukrainians despite a Dutch referendum vote against an EU-Ukraine agreement partly motivated by hostility to migration, a senior EU source said.

Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker promised Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko in March that the EU executive would put forward the eagerly awaited proposal in April, offering Ukrainians the most tangible benefit of closer ties at a time when a free trade deal has not yet borne fruit for their economy.

"It may look as if we're ignoring the Dutch voters, but we have to keep our word to Ukraine, which has met the conditions," the source said.


- Like expected of course, slowly but surely they are going to ignore the deal which will not serve the people of the EU or the people of Ukraine. But what else is new.
 
For archiving purposes -- background analysis which was mentioned elsewhere by angelburst29:

http://sputniknews.com/politics/20160412/1037882055/ukraine-eu-dutch-referendum.html
 
Source: _http://www.nltimes.nl/2016/04/14/senate-force-netherlands-ukraine-deal/

Senate to force Netherlands out of Ukraine deal

Posted on Apr 14, 2016 by Janene Pieters

The Dutch government may be forced by the Senate to remove its signature from the association agreement between the EU and Ukraine. The governing coalition of VVD and PvdA do not have a majority in the Senate, and all other parties seem set to vote for withdrawal from the deal. Prime Minister Mark Rutte stated that the cabinet will make a decision on what to do about the deal in June, Trouw reports. [Dutch only]

During a debate in the Tweede Kamer, the lower house of Dutch parliament, on Wednesday Rutte told the parliamentarians that the Dutch government must first discuss the matter of the Netherlands voting “no” in the Ukraine referendum with other EU leaders. And that will only be possible after the British chose whether or not to leave the EU in their referendum on June 23rd.

On Tuesday Foreign Affairs Minister Bert Koenders stated that a decision can be expected by September.

But this is not enough for the Eerste Kamer, the Dutch Senate, according to Trouw. All parties in the Eerste Kamer, except for the PvdA and VVD, want the Netherlands to withdraw from the association agreement with the Ukraine as soon as possible.

“I do not envy the prime minister, but he will have to negotiate in Brussels from the position that the Netherlands has withdrawn its support for the agreement”, GroenLinks faction leader Rik Grashoff said. He and a number of his fellows in the Eerste Kamer believe it the only way to show the Dutch population that their votes did not mean nothing.

First exploring the possibilities and then only coming up with a solution in June “feeds discontent among citizens”, According to SGP leader Kees van de Staaij.
Click to expand...
 
Just archiving again, posted here by angelburst29:

_http://www.fort-russ.com/2016/04/dutch-prime-minister-ready-to-go.html

Dutch Prime Minister Ready to Go Against the Will of Voters for the Sake of Ukraine

Translated by Ollie Richardson for Fort Russ
14th April, 2016

Novorosinform

Prime Minister of the Netherlands Mark Rutte, during a debate in Parliament, said that the authorities will take into account the results of the referendum on the association with Ukraine, but won't refuse the ratification of the agreement, reports TASS.

"There are three options", he said. "First, the Cabinet will refuse to consider the results of the Advisory referendum. This is not the option that will be chosen by the government. The second will take full account of the voting results (i.e, refuse to ratify). And that's not the option that the government will choose either. The third option, which the government will choose, is that the authorities will try to do something given the fact that the majority of voters voted against the document", said Rutte.

"If we refuse to ratify, we will lose the opportunity to make significant changes to the agreement with Ukraine", said the Prime Minister.

However, he promised that the Dutch government will completely abandon the association if the negotiations with the European countries "leads to nothing."
Click to expand...
 
Source: _http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/661195/Dutch-referendum-Brussels-ban-MPs-Ukraine-deal-Brexit-EU (seven illustrations omitted)

GAGGED: Brussels tells Dutch MPs they CAN'T debate referendum result as it may fuel Brexit

BRUSSELS has effectively banned Dutch MPs from discussing their country's historic referendum result because it is exposing the EU's undemocratic core and boosting calls for a Brexit.

By Nick Gutteridge
PUBLISHED: 00:00, Fri, Apr 15, 2016 | UPDATED: 11:03, Fri, Apr 15, 2016

The European elite have gagged elected politicians in the Netherlands, ordering them to suppress the Dutch people's democratic voice until after our own referendum is done and dusted on June 23.

In an astonishing statement delivered to the Dutch parliament this week Prime Minister Mark Rutte admitted he had been ordered by other EU leaders not to mention the referendum for the next two months.

He also blocked any decision from being taken on the future of the EU's expansionist deal with Ukraine, which Dutch voters overwhelmingly rejected in last week's historic referendum.

The entire opposition movement had demanded a law ratifying the treaty in the Netherlands be immediately withdrawn, arguing the "people have spoken". Dutch voters crushed the pro-Brussels 'Voor' movement last Thursday, with nearly two-thirds voting against the Ukraine deal.

But Mr Rutte's Government - which has a narrow majority - outvoted them and instead chose to postpone any decision on whether to accept the will of its own people until after the UK referendum has taken place.

He told the parliament chamber that bureaucrats in Brussels are increasingly worried about the British vote and consequently want any "open and public discussion" about their own referendum result suppressed until after it is over.

He said: "Our political estimation, based on the first signals we received from our European partners, is that they want that [the UK referendum] out of the way first."

He added that only open and public debate in Brussels about the Dutch referendum will resolve the issue, but said the earliest that can take place is after the UK referendum.

His stance provoked fury amongst opposition MPs, with eurosceptic Geert Wilders raging: “The people have spoken. The people were clear. The people said No."

Even parties that had initially backed the agreement with Ukraine - which aimed to bring Kiev into the EU's sphere of influence - blasted Mr Rutte's decision not to pull the plug on it immediately.

Sybrand Buma, of the centre-right Christian Democrats, blasted: “Real people went to real polling stations to really say No.

“I find it dramatic, but we can't say in hindsight 'it's disappointing, we are going to do what we want.'”

His left-wing Green colleague Rik Grashoff added: “I don't envy the prime minister, but he is going to have to negotiate in Brussels with the position that the Netherlands has withdrawn its support for the treaty.”

In response Mr Rutte argued that he needed to embark on behind closed doors talks with other EU leaders to see if a stitch-up could be achieved to save the Ukraine deal.

And Eurosceptic opposition MP Marianne Thieme said Rutte is trying to fool No voters that some renegotiation of the treaty is what they wanted.

She said: “The citizen should be taken seriously. In this debate, the prime minister is feeding the public distrust in politics."

On an historic night last Thursday an overwhelming 61.1% of Dutch voters rejected the Ukraine land grab plot, which aims to bring Kiev into the EU's sphere of influence.

But Brussels bureaucrats almost immediately indicated they are plotting to railroad through the deal anyway, granting visa-free access to 45 million Ukrainians.

This week UKIP leader Nigel Farage stunned Eurocrats into silence during a rousing speech in the European Parliament, during which he said the Dutch referendum result heralds the end of the EU project.
Click to expand...


Source: _http://www.nltimes.nl/2016/04/15/wilders-threatens-lawsuit-over-ukraine-referendum-inaction/

Wilders threatens lawsuit over Ukraine Referendum inaction

Posted on Apr 15, 2016 by Janene Pieters

PVV leader Geert Wilders wants to take Prime Minister Mark Rutte to court. According to Wilders, the Prime Minister is breaking the law by not immediately responding to the “no”-vote in the referendum on the association agreement between the EU and Ukraine.

Wilders told the Telegraaf that he researched the law of ministerial responsibility and based on what it says, Rutte can be prosecuted. He called the lack of response a “professional misconduct”, which could [lead to] a prison sentence of up to three years, according to Wilders.

The PVV leader and other PVV members therefore filed a complaint with Tweede Kamer president Khadija Arib, asking her to investigate.

The majority of people who voted in the Ukraine referendum on April 6th, voted against the association agreement between the country and the EU. Earlier this week Prime Minister Mark Rutte promised a response on the outcome by June.
Click to expand...
 
A Dutch petition demanding another referendum - this time on the controversial Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) negotiations between the European Union and the United State - has gone past the 100,000 mark and is rapidly gaining support.

Dutch Set to Deliver Second EU Bombshell Referendum Over TTIP Deal
http://sputniknews.com/europe/20160415/1038074644/ttip-deal-dutch-referendum.html

People in the Netherlands delivered a blow to the European Union last week in a referendum over Ukraine's accession to the EU, which developed into a vote of confidence in the EU. On a turnout of about 33 percent, 61 percent voted against the Approval Act.

Both petitions use the Dutch system, whereby 300,000 signatures are needed to force a referendum and, although the Ukraine one was started as a joke by a satirical magazine, the TTIP vote could prove more damaging and controversial.

The TTIP negotiations are due to create the biggest trade pact in the world, between the European Union and the United States. However, the talks have been beset by controversy — not least over the massive lobbying by multinational companies and worries that they are likely to be able to sue governments for loss of trade.

Critics of the TTIP deal point to the fact the European food regulations are different from — and some say more stringent than — those in the US.

They also fear strict European environmental regulations will be flouted under the proposed deal, which critics say has been dominated by big business lobbying. Concerns have also been raised that EU regulations in every sector will be rendered powerless, because multinational companies will hold more powers under TTIP.

States Sued Crucially, at the heart of the TTIP is a controversial proposal for an investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanism, which would allow companies to sue governments if their regulations or laws affected their profits. Thus, if a US multinational company lost profits because their product or service was banned by law for health or other reasons, they would be able to sue a government — or the EU — for loss of earnings.

Under ISDS, in April 1997 the Canadian parliament banned the import and transport of MMT, a gasoline additive, over concerns that it poses a significant public health risk. Ethyl Corporation, the additive's manufacturer, sued the Canadian Government for US$251 million, to cover losses resulting from the "expropriation" of both its MMT production plant and its "good reputation."

Tobacco giant Philip Morris is currently suing Uruguay and Australia over tobacco packaging and the Dutch insurance company, Achmea, is suing the Slovakia for trying to reverse health privatization.

The Dutch petitioners say: "Large companies can sue governments in special tribunal. Europe will have to accept the often poorer American standards for consumer protection, social rights and environmental protection. Then we will see the introduction of US legislation in Europe without citizens or parliaments having any say over it."
 
For archiving purposes"

Senate to force Netherlands out of Ukraine deal
http://www.nltimes.nl/2016/04/14/senate-force-netherlands-ukraine-deal/

The Dutch government may be forced by the Senate to remove its signature from the association agreement between the EU and Ukraine. The governing coalition of VVD and PvdA do not have a majority in the Senate, and all other parties seem set to vote for withdrawal from the deal. Prime Minister Mark Rutte stated that the cabinet will make a decision on what to do about the deal in June, Trouw reports.

During a debate in the Tweede Kamer, the lower house of Dutch parliament, on Wednesday Rutte told the parliamentarians that the Dutch government must first discuss the matter of the Netherlands voting “no” in the Ukraine referendum with other EU leaders. And that will only be possible after the British chose whether or not to leave the EU in their referendum on June 23rd.

On Tuesday Foreign Affairs Minister Bert Koenders stated that a decision can be expected by September.

But this is not enough for the Eerste Kamer, the Dutch Senate, according to Trouw. All parties in the Eerste Kamer, except for the PvdA and VVD, want the Netherlands to withdraw from the association agreement with the Ukraine as soon as possible.

“I do not envy the prime minister, but he will have to negotiate in Brussels from the position that the Netherlands has withdrawn its support for the agreement”, GroenLinks faction leader Rik Grashoff said. He and a number of his fellows in the Eerste Kamer believe it the only way to show the Dutch population that their votes did not mean nothing.

First exploring the possibilities and then only coming up with a solution in June “feeds discontent among citizens”, According to SGP leader Kees van de Staaij.
 
Source: _http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/malaysia-airlines-partly-responsible-for-mh17-say-australian-families/news-story/f2d8ddeab71a5e6cc3bace6754420ede

Australian families take legal action against Malaysia Airlines over MH17 tragedy

April 18, 2016 12:00am
Robyn Ironside National Aviation Writer News Corp Australia Network

SEVEN of the 23 Australian families who lost loved ones when MH17 was shot down over Ukraine, are suing Malaysia Airlines for flying over a known conflict zone.

The families from Queensland, New South Wales and Victoria who don’t wish to be named, lost sons, brothers, husbands, mothers and fathers in the 2014 atrocity that claimed a total of 298 lives.

Under an international law known as the Montreal Convention, they are seeking damages for financial loss and psychological harm suffered in the wake of the tragedy.

Flight MH17 was en route from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur on July 17, 2014 when the Boeing 777 was struck by a Russian-made Buk missile.

Eight other airlines, including Qantas, made the decision not to use Ukrainian airspace because of the worsening conflict but a number of others continued to fly over the war zone.

The families’ solicitor, Carneys Lawyers’ partner John Dawson, said the final report on the tragedy by the Dutch Safety Board made it clear the risks of flying over Eastern Ukraine were real and easily identifiable on any proper risk assessment.

“In terms of its obligations under international law the airline had responsibilities to its passengers and to their families,” Mr Dawson said. “A proactive risk assessment should have led to a different decision.”

Although it is hoped an out-of-court settlement can be negotiated between the families and Malaysia Airlines, statements of claim have been prepared and will be lodged in the Federal Court of Australia shortly.

The claims accuse the airline of failing to monitor the situation in Eastern Ukraine in the months leading up to the disaster, and failing to perform its own risk assessment of the worsening conflict.

Under the terms of the Montreal Convention the claims must be brought within two years.

“Had the respondent (Malaysia Airlines) assessed the risks then it would not have used a flight route over the conflict zone,” states the claim. “The respondent (Malaysia Airlines) failed to warn the passengers of the risks of a route over the conflict zone and/or failed to inform the passengers about the flight route over the conflict zone.”

To date not one claim by an Australian or New Zealand next of kin bereaved by MH17 has been settled and paid by Malaysia Airlines.

Sydney’s Tim Lauschet is also taking action in the Supreme Court of New South Wales, for the loss of his mother Gabriele and psychiatric injury.

In a statement, Malaysia Airlines said it was “committed to engaging the next of kin in good faith with regard to ensuring a fair and equitable compensation”.
Click to expand...
 
Source: _http://www.dutchnews.nl/news/archives/2016/04/dutch-overnment-wins-time-to-renegotiate-ukraine-treaty-in-narrow-vote/

Dutch government wins time to renegotiate Ukraine treaty in narrow vote

April 19, 2016

MPs have narrowly voted in favor of giving the cabinet more time to find a solution for the Dutch ‘no’ vote in the recent referendum on the EU’s treaty with Ukraine.

The Socialist Party put forward a motion calling on the cabinet to immediately withdraw its support for the treaty, which won the support of most of the opposition.

The two coalition parties and two independent MPs voted against, giving the cabinet a narrow win of 76 votes to 71. One MP from the ruling Labour party sided with the opposition, news agency ANP said.

Prime minister Mark Rutte told MPs last week that he stood no chance of winning any concessions on the treaty from Brussels if Dutch support had formally been withdrawn.

Opposition MPs say the prime minister must respect the result of the April 6 vote. Some 61% of those who took part voted against ratifying the treaty.

Officially the result of the referendum is advisory but Rutte has already said that setting aside the outcome is not an option.
Click to expand...
 
Two days ago, I came across this article, (link below) then placed it in a tab and went on to several other news sites - to check for additional information. I did come across an article on the Dutch Referendum here: "Brussels tells Dutch MPs they CAN'T debate referendum result as it may fuel Brexit" but noticed the article was already Posted, although it was from a different website.

But the site I was on -(Dutch-English) which I can not locate now - had another article of interest. The article gave the name of a female, who was on the Dutch government’s committee, who actually took off right after the votes for the referendum was announced without giving anyone notice, as to why she was leaving or without any type of notification. A week later, it was discovered, she was now in New York City (USA) working in Hillary Clinton's - Campaign for President Office???

I placed the article in a tab and went on to other information. Before shutting down (for it was late at night), I clicked off the tabs - not realizing there was an article I wanted to save ....... I have tried to back track and looked high and low, yet I can't find the article?

If anyone comes across the information, would you kindly - Post it?

EU Refuses To Discuss Dutch Referendum Result Until AFTER Brexit Vote
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/04/18/eu-ukraine-agreement-what-happens-next/

It’s almost two weeks since the rejection of the European Union (EU)-Ukraine Association Agreement by Dutch voters, but what happens next remains unknown.

Observers and interested parties are beginning to wonder when the Dutch government will finally decide how it will handle its electorate’s rejection of the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement in the citizen-initiative referendum of 6 April.

In the public vote prompted by the activist organisation GeenPeil, 61 per cent voted against the EU’s expansionist policy towards Ukraine. As Breitbart London previously reported, the referendum was on a technical issue to do with the politico-trading bloc’s relationship with Ukraine, and probably long-term membership for the Eastern European country. Despite that, Dutch voters are understood to have treated the plebiscite as a vote on their confidence in the EU and, to some extent, their own country’s membership of it.

As such, the Dutch government’s reaction to the non-binding “consultative” referendum is particularly sensitive and it shows no signs of rushing that response.

On 19 May an EU-Ukraine summit is due to be held in Brussels. The date was set back in March, before the Dutch referendum, but at the moment is set to go ahead. When announcing the date, Ukraine’s President Petro Poroshenko said he hoped that such EU-Ukraine summits would be held on a regular basis.

It is unlikely that Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte or any of his ministers, finding themselves caught between the rock of their own referendum and the hard place of Britain’s forthcoming one, will bring anything of much use to that event.

Diplomatic sources referred to by Politico’s Playbook suggest that total paralysis will rule the day this side of the UK’s In/Out referendum on 23 June, with no moves likely until after Slovakia takes over from the Dutch EU presidency at the beginning of July.

The sight of a national government rejecting its electorate’s stated position following a referendum is not something the British government and its friends in the EU will want on display while the UK’s referendum campaign is in full swing.

the very earliest anyone expects an indication of how the Dutch government will react to its voters’ inconvenient move is at the meeting of EU heads of state or government at the European Council meeting on 28 and 29 June.


Victory for Eurosceptics as Dutch reject EU-Ukraine deal in referendum
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/06/dutch-slow-to-polls-in-eu-ukraine-pact-vote/

7 April 2016 - Eurosceptics were celebrating on Wednesday night after a Dutch referendum dealt another blow to the EU, with 61 per cent of people who voted rejecting a free trade deal with Ukraine.

Although the referendum was only advisory – the agreement with Ukraine came into force on Jan 1 – the result was a blow to Mark Rutte, the prime minister.

The Dutch government said on Wednesday night it may have to reconsider ratifying the treaty.

"It looks like the Dutch people said no to the European elite and no to the treaty with the Ukraine," said Geert Wilders, the anti-Islam, anti-EU MP. "The beginning of the end of the EU."

1. Jean-Claude JunckerPresident of the European Commission, the EU’s executive arm. Former Prime Minister of Luxembourg for 18 years. Federalist and bon viveur
2. Donald TuskPresident of the European Council, the summit of 28 member states. Tough former Polish Prime Minister, still finding his feet in Brussels
3. Frans TimmermansFirst Vice President of the European Commission. Former Dutch foreign minister. Realist who embraces Britain’s desire for greater competitiveness and less ideology
4. Martin SchulzPresident of the European Parliament. Veteran German socialist and furious critic of Cameron’s renegotiation
5. Mario DraghiPowerful Italian president of the European Central Bank and former Goldman Sachs banker. His institution was criticised for pushing Greece to the brink of a euro exit this summer
6. Federica MogheriniHigh Representative, the EU’s foreign secretary. Former Italian socialist foreign minister.
 
angelburst29 said:
But the site I was on -(Dutch-English) which I can not locate now - had another article of interest. The article gave the name of a female, who was on the Dutch government’s committee, who actually took off right after the votes for the referendum was announced without giving anyone notice, as to why she was leaving or without any type of notification. A week later, it was discovered, she was now in New York City (USA) working in Hillary Clinton's - Campaign for President Office???

I placed the article in a tab and went on to other information. Before shutting down (for it was late at night), I clicked off the tabs - not realizing there was an article I wanted to save ....... I have tried to back track and looked high and low, yet I can't find the article?

If anyone comes across the information, would you kindly - Post it?
Click to expand...

That's interesting. I looked for it, but couldn't find anything on it, let me know if you remember her name. There are quite some 'shady' people in the Dutch government's committee.
 
Oxajil said:
angelburst29 said:
But the site I was on -(Dutch-English) which I can not locate now - had another article of interest. The article gave the name of a female, who was on the Dutch government’s committee, who actually took off right after the votes for the referendum was announced without giving anyone notice, as to why she was leaving or without any type of notification. A week later, it was discovered, she was now in New York City (USA) working in Hillary Clinton's - Campaign for President Office???

I placed the article in a tab and went on to other information. Before shutting down (for it was late at night), I clicked off the tabs - not realizing there was an article I wanted to save ....... I have tried to back track and looked high and low, yet I can't find the article?

If anyone comes across the information, would you kindly - Post it?
Click to expand...

That's interesting. I looked for it, but couldn't find anything on it, let me know if you remember her name. There are quite some 'shady' people in the Dutch government's committee.
Click to expand...

I'll keep searching because now, it's like a mystery to be solved. I really didn't take note of her name, although the way she just picked up and left, without any kind of notification and someone on the committee located her in NYC working for Hillary - was a shock. My first thought was that Hillary had something to do with the outcome of the referendum results?
 
[quote author=Angelburst29]I really didn't take note of her name, although the way she just picked up and left, without any kind of notification and someone on the committee located her in NYC working for Hillary[/quote]

I believe you are speaking about Wassila Hachchi. She was a politician and indeed suddenly left to campaign for Hillary Clinton in the US. All I know about her is that she claimed 250 thousands euro's and counting of 'wachtgeld' Which means you can get very rich in a short time by doing absolutly nothing. All you need to do is stop working as a politician and don't ever find a job again. She has a job in the US, but didn't report it. So she is still claiming money.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Trending content

Back
Top Bottom