Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
The new legal action, running to over 200 pages, is concerned with economic as well as political issues, which the complainants say are not addressed by the Lisbon Treaty.

For example? Well, it says in the article...uhm...well, it doesn't say...it just repeats the innuendo.

By the end of the article, one feels like it is a fait accompli rather than something the courts could rebuff with a parenthetical statement during the hearing on the 11th.

Not that I like bashing the press, but I get the taste of an interesting topic on EuroTrib, yet too often go to the website to find that I am no better off than after reading the excerpt on ET.

Never underestimate their intelligence, always underestimate their knowledge.

Frank Delaney ~ Ireland

by siegestate (siegestate or beyondwarispeace.com) on Wed Jan 28th, 2009 at 03:01:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]
It even feels to me like the journalist (Honor Mahony, one would suppose from the name, is a native English-speaker) has just copied in communication from the parties bringing the action. There's a clumsy feel to the English, and the use of prognosis (generally a medical term concerning the course of a disease, and thus heavily loaded in this context) instead of forecast, and of the verb proof (what the court is supposed to do instead of just examining their case; I don't know if it's legal jargon, but I can't find a trace of this use in any dictionary) stand out to me.

Anyway, it's EUObserver quietly passing on a rather Euroskeptic view, as often.

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Wed Jan 28th, 2009 at 04:13:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series