Analysis Another blow to the New World Order:
“The Irish people have spoken; Lisbon is dead” By Mike Whitney Online Journal Contributing Writer
Jun 18, 2008
“Public opinion will be led to adopt, without knowing it, the proposals that we dare not present to them directly . . . All the earlier proposals will be in the new text, but will be hidden and disguised in some way.” V.Giscard D’Estaing*, Le Monde, June 14, 2007
Irish voters delivered a knockout punch to European elites and corporatists last Friday by rejecting plans for an EU Superstate.
The so-called Lisbon Treaty was nothing more than a dolled-up version of the failed European Constitution that was defeated by French and Dutch voters in 2005. The treaty was loaded with the typical “democratic” gobbledygook to conceal the vicious neoliberal policies at its heart. If it had passed, the treaty would have paved the way for greater privatization of public services, diminished workers rights, less state control over trade policies and civil liberties, and an aggressive plan to militarize Europe.
Ireland’s entire political and corporate class stood solidly behind the treaty, but the Irish people shrugged off the fear-mongering and bogus promises of prosperity and voted No. The referendum results showed 53.4 percent voted No, while 46.6 percent voted Yes. Despite the massive public relations campaign; the vote was not even that close.
A spokesperson for the No campaign put it like this: “The Irish people have spoken. Contrary to the predictions of social and political turmoil, we believe that hundreds of millions of people across Europe will welcome the rejection of the Lisbon Treaty. This vote shows the gulf that exists between the politicians and the elites of Europe, and the opinions of the people. As in France and the Netherlands, the political leaders and the establishment have done everything they could to push this through – and they have failed. The proposals to further reduce democracy, to militarize the EU and to let private business take over public services have been rejected. Lisbon is dead. Along with the EU Constitution from which it came, it should now be buried.” [Socialist Worker online]
Europe’s political class tried to ratify the treaty via a stealth campaign which intentionally obscured the implications of the new regime that would be put in place. Former Irish Taoiseach, Dr Garret FitzGerald*, summed it up like this in the Irish Times on June 30, 2007: ”The most striklng change [between the EU Constitution in its older and newer version] is perhaps that in order to enable some governments to reassure their electorates that the changes will have no constitutional implications, the idea of a new and simpler treaty containing all the provisions governing the Union has now been dropped in favour of a huge series of individual amendments to two existing treaties. Virtual incomprehensibilty has thus replaced simplicity as the key approach to EU reform. As for the changes now proposed to be made to the constitutional treaty, most are presentational changes that have no practical effect. They have simply been designed to enable certain heads of government to sell to their people the idea of ratification by parliamentary action rather than by referendum.”
Hmmm. In other words, European policymakers figured the only way they could pass the pro-business treaty was to make it as unreadable as possible. It’s no wonder, too. According to multiple sources, the treaty contains language that would restore the death penalty and override national decision making on critical issues. So much for sovereignty!
The observations of blogger Paul from Dublin seemed to epitomize the feelings of a great number of people who expressed deep suspicions over the agenda behind the treaty: “I am also deeply concerned at the direction the EU is going. Whereas it seemed originally to be an idealistic and benevolent project for Europe, accentuating all that was best about Europe, in recent times it seems to have fallen into the hands of the globalist gangster capitalist cabal of neo-liberals, following the US philosophy of every man for himself, and the devil take the hindmost.
“I also discovered some very sinister organisations none of which the mainstream media informed us about. Organisations such as the Transatlantic Economic Council, the Transatlantic Policy Network & the Streit Council which seeks a union between the US and Europe, and whose agenda is clearly a political as well as an economic union. In the fall 2007 journal of that body, a world bank economist said that you could not have economic integration without political integration.”
Whether Paul is right to be skeptical or not is beside the point. The truth is that many Europeans think that the EU no longer operates in the best interests of the people. Clearly, this had a dramatic affect on the election’s results.
News of the defeat has not been well received in England where the neoliberal government of Gordon Brown has already indicated that it will reject the election results and “press ahead” in an effort to ratify the treaty. Neither Brown nor his friends in Brussels are likely to be deterred by anything as trivial as the will of the people. Labour MP and former Europe Minister Denis MacShane summed it up like this: “I personally think that a vote in a foreign country should not determine the democratic decisions taken in the British Parliament.”
MacShane’s view is apparently shared by EC President Jose Manuel Barroso who said that EU member states should continue ratifying the Lisbon treaty, even though more than half of Ireland’s 43 constituencies rejected it outright. So much for democracy.
Also, French President Nicolas Sarkozy and German Chancellor Angela Merkel issued a joint statement Friday saying they hoped the remaining countries would continue the ratification process: “We are convinced that the reforms contained in the treaty of Lisbon are necessary to make Europe more democratic and more efficient.”
The No vote makes matters particularly difficult for Sarkozy who is scheduled to take over the EU’s rotating presidency next month and was hoping to beef up Europe’s military capability while making big changes to the EU’s immigration policies. The failed referendum will derail the French president’s plans to play a bigger role in the war on terror or to help out in security operations in Afghanistan, Africa or Asia. In the final analysis, the No vote will hurt Washington as much as Euro-elites who were hoping for a blank check for more “free market” looting and foreign adventurism.
BRUSSELS PLAN: “Quarantine the Irish” According to the UK Guardian: “Germany and France moved to isolate Ireland in the European Union yesterday, scrambling for ways to resuscitate the Lisbon Treaty a day after the Irish dealt the architects of the EU’s new regime a crushing blow.Refusing to take Ireland’s ‘no’ for an answer, politicians in Berlin and Paris prepared for a crucial EU summit in Brussels this week by trying to ringfence the Irish while demanding that the treaty be ratified by the rest of the EU.
The Franco-German plan is to get all 27 EU states to ratify the treaty as soon as possible, to quarantine the Irish and then come up with some legal maneuver enabling the treaty to go ahead.
‘We’re sticking firmly to our goal of putting this treaty into effect,’ said the German foreign minister, Frank-Walter Steinmeier. ‘So the process of ratification must continue.’
Angela Merkel, the German chancellor, who devoted most of last year to getting the EU’s members to agree on the Lisbon Treaty after the failure of the EU’s proposed new constitution in 2005, said: ‘We must carry on.’” (EU tries to isolate Irish after Treaty rejection, UK Guardian)
THE LUCK OF THE IRISH
The Irish have plenty to celebrate today. They’ve thrown a spanner in the plans of the bankers and corporate mandarins who want to replace representative government and national sovereignty with their own skewed vision of Capitalist Valhalla; a Euro-Utopia where short-term profits always take priority over the needs of ordinary people. Bravo, Ireland.
Communism is supposedly a Russian, Chinese sort of thing. At least this is what most people have been led to think. Like many views foisted upon us, this too is also incorrect. The simple truth about communism is that it was designed and built in England, albeit with the use of immigrant labour. This of course at a time when we still built things. Who, for instance, do you think paid for that half-wit Marx to sit on his tush for 20 years grinding out his dozy manifesto at the British Lending Library? Answers on a postcard please to . . .
The ultimate capitalists ultimately back communism. They ought to, they paid for it (using money stolen from the masses via usury based central banking systems) and want it above all other things. It lays the foundation for the globalist feudal society they are seeking to bring about via their useful idiots in the EU and soon, no doubt, the NAU (North American Union).
The following article by Lord Christoper Monckton, former policy advisor to Margaret Thatcher, recently appeared in Executive Intelligence Review. It clearly articulates some of the key aspects of the erosion of Britain under the retarded ideology that is socialism. A good primer for anyone coming to this for the first time as well as for those more seasoned in their understanding.
“EU’s Lisbon Treaty Means Dictatorship”
by Lord Christopher Monckton
With the fall of the Berlin Wall, the Communist species of fascism has spread westward by stealth to infect the European Union, whose complex treaties—now hated and feared by the overtaxed, over-regulated peoples of Europe—more closely parallel the Soviet Constitution than they do any constitution of liberty or democracy. . . .
The new “President of Europe” (it may well be Tony Blair, who did his best to buy the job at UK taxpayers’ expense by agreeing to increase the UK’s tribute to the dismal empire of Brussels by a staggering $50 billion a year) will have all the powers of the General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. The European Commission, like the Politburo to which it is functionally identical, has the sole power to propose and hence to reject European legislation. Like the Politburo, it is unelected and self-perpetuating. Any Commissioner (and it is neither joke nor coincidence that the German word for “Commissioner” is “Kommissar”) has the power to issue an edict which has the immediate force of supreme law throughout the subject territories, no longer known as “member States” but as “regions”—effectively, regional Soviets subsidiary to, and now utterly subservient to, the Supreme Soviet in Brussels. The European Parliament, like the Duma or People’s Congress of the Soviet Union, has no power to propose legislation, and its decisions can be (and often are) overridden by the Kommissars.
The Parliaments of the “regions,” such as the UK Parliament, have no power to amend or reject any of the Kommissars’ edicts, whose undemocratic nature may be deduced from their official name—”Directives.” On 200 occasions in the past decade alone, the legislative scrutiny committee of the House of Commons has rejected European directives, but the functionally-Communist regional gauleiters Blair and [British Prime Minister Gordon] Brown have enacted every one of the Directives, regardless of the will of the people’s elected representatives.
Civil Rights Trampled
As of last December, the power which I once had as a Deputy Lieutenant of London to order the troops on to the streets to assist in civil emergencies or disasters was taken away by order of a Kommissar, and Britain no longer has the legal right put her army on to her own streets without that Kommissar’s express permission. As of this year, under the pretext of compliance with a European anti-terrorist Directive, the right to a fair trial before a properly-constituted and impartial court was abolished in the UK for any criminal case defined as “serious”: and even offences as trivial as dropping litter in public places are now treated by the regional gauleiters as serious. Without a hearing, without the right of legal representation, the gauleiters can imprison any UK citizen for five years at a time, confiscate his house, freeze his bank accounts, close or compulsorily take over any business which he may own, or extradite him to any overseas country (including the most unspeakable dictatorships) even in the absence of any prima facie evidence whatsoever against him.
The news media say little about any of this, for it is now regarded as almost an offense to speak out against the gauleiters or against the European dictatorship, which in any event deploys an annual propaganda budget of $2.5 billion — an amount of which the late Dr. Goebbels could only dream. The BBC alone received $300 million from the Kommissars last year. It very seldom utters a word of criticism against the European Union. What do the British people think about this?
The few who know about it — and it is no coincidence that they are the same few who know what a false and dishonest scam the “global warming” scare is—are horrified. The people as a whole are now so uneasy about what is happening that, even though few know the full details, they are now making it clear in every opinion poll that they do not want the Lisbon Treaty. Indeed, it is now certain that if there were a referendum on the Treaty in the UK, it would be crushingly defeated.
The two functionally-Communist parties in the regional legislature at Westminster—the majority Labour party and the “Liberal” “Democrats”—each made written promises in their manifestoes for the last national elections that they would give the British people a referendum on the Treaty before it was ratified.
Recently, the leaderships of both parties, knowing that any referendum would reject the Treaty overwhelmingly, have accordingly reneged on their promises, and samizdat debates are now being held on the question whether their failure to honor those promises and their consequent transfer of our own elected representatives’ powers to the unelected hands of the alien power that the European Union has become constitutes treason.
It is indeed treason: but the UK courts are now mere rubber-stamps for the dictators. In the British constitution, the largest body of Members of Parliament not belonging to the governing party used to be known as “Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition.” However, the Conservative Party under its current weak, vapid, and policy-averse leadership has consistently failed to oppose the inexorable and soon-to-be-final extinction of what was once our democracy. In the absence of any Parliamentary opposition, millions of Britain’s leading minds have already fled overseas, taking their wealth and their talent with them, in a brain drain not seen since the ghastly days of Harold Wilson and the dominance of the Communist-led trades unions. I myself spent ten years overseas, but have recently returned and shall be doing my best to fight to regain my nation’s independence and democratic liberties.
Britain Now a Police State
Britain is now a closed country—a police state, with a Secret Police to rival the KGB. Our Secret Police was secretly founded by the present Government in 1998, and now its privileged and untouchable members mount dawn raids just like the KGB and then lie through their teeth in court to secure convictions against any citizen who has offended the regional gauleiters or the European Kommissars. There are “security” cameras every few inches—more of them than in any other nation. At current rates of growth, there will be a “security” camera for every UK citizen within a decade. In a sinister sequence of more than 90 criminal justice Bills in ten years, the present Government has removed every last one of the rights and freedoms of which Britain was once justly proud. We are no longer allowed even to demonstrate outside Parliament. It was the ninetieth of those Bills—passed with very little attempt at opposition—that took away the right of criminal trial.
Now, our “leaders” fawn as sycophantically upon our new, grim, European masters as their predecessors once did during the long and foolish period of appeasement that tempted Hitler to rearm unopposed and then to provoke the Second World War. This time, though, it is sycophancy by stealth. Not so long ago, a UK Cabinet Minister who refused to sign a European “Directive” was told by his own civil servants that if he did not sign it he could and would be stripped of his office and have all his possessions confiscated. Instead of resigning and going public, he cravenly and secretly signed. His story has never been made public. Another UK Cabinet Minister, who had agreed with a Directive and had written to congratulate the Kommissars on it, was summoned to Brussels and told that, although all the “regions” and the European Parliament had agreed the Directive, the Kommissars of Europe (who had proposed it, for they alone have the power to do so) had decided that it was not of any consequence and that it would not be enacted into law. When the astonished Minister was asked why, he was told that the Kommissars had wanted to make it clear to elected Ministers in all of the “regions” where the real power in Europe now lay—and it was not in their elected hands. He told me, “I had once been wholeheartedly in favor of the European Union. But it was at that moment that the scales fell from my eyes.” He died an implacable opponent of the new Europe.
And my own view? I am in favor of European democracy, and therefore firmly opposed to the atheistic-humanist, bureaucratic-centralist dictatorship that the European Union for which I once voted has so stealthily become. In Scotland, where the current “regional” gauleiter wants us to be independent of Westminster (which makes one tenth of our laws) but still subject to the dismal empire of Brussels (which makes nine-tenths of our laws), I lead a small but rapidly-growing movement in the Highlands and Islands which is aiming for independence from both Edinburgh and Brussels, but continuing loyalty to the Crown. We want our freedom back, and we are quietly planning to take it back, whether the gauleiters of the UK or the dictators of Europe like it or not. We will rise up and be a nation again.
England has been wiped off a map of Europe drawn up by Brussels bureaucrats as part of a scheme that the Tories claim threatens to undermine the country’s national identity.
The new European plan splits England into three zones that are joined with areas in other countries.
The “Manche” region covers part of southern England and northern France while the Atlantic region includes western parts of England, Portugal, Spain and Wales.
The North Sea region includes eastern England, Sweden, Denmark, the Netherlands and parts of Germany.
The goal of the EU is nothing less than the eradication of national borders and sovereign identity.
German ministers claimed that the plan was about “underlying the goal of a united Europe” to “permanently overcome old borders” at a time when the “Constitution for Europe needs to regain momentum”.
As time goes on and these elites get closer to their goal of an communist super state, more of these issues will start coming to light. These issues are not new however, it is just people are thick and cannot see the forest for the trees, too busy coming up with excuses to not have to get off of their arses and do something.
People really do not understand the gravity of the situation. If the Lisbon Treaty Constitution is ratified none of these other issues (10p tax, NHS, immigration etc) will matter.
It is a Constitution. It does contain all of the elements of the previous Constitution. Pro-EU shills like to simple dismiss this as ‘anti-EU propaganda’ but what else is one to think when the man responsible for the original Constitution admits the following about the Reform Treaty;
Valéry Giscard d’Estaing, the architect of the abandoned European Constitution, has admitted that the document has been rewritten by EU leaders in a different order just to avoid the need for referendums.
“Looking at the content,” he wrote “the result is that the institutional proposals of the constitutional treaty….are found complete in the Lisbon Treaty, only in a different order and inserted in former treaties..”
He made clear that the purpose of the rewritten Treaty (now called the Lisbon Treaty) was to make people think the new version did not merit being put to the people in referendums.
Got that? More evidence for this can be found within an great article in The Spectator.
Germany
“The substance of the Constitution is preserved. That is a fact.”
(Angela Merkel, German Chancellor, Telegraph, 29 June 2007)
Spain
“We have not let a single substantial point of the Constitutional Treaty go… It is, without a doubt, much more than a treaty. This is a project of foundational character, a treaty for a new Europe.”
(Jose Zapatero, Spanish Prime Minister, speech, 27 June 2007)
Ireland
“90 per cent of it is still there… these changes haven’t made any dramatic change to the substance of what was agreed back in 2004.”
(Bertie Ahern, Irish Taoiseach, Irish Independent, 24 June 2007)
Czech Republic
“Only cosmetic changes have been made and the basic document remains the same.”
(Vaclav Klaus, Czech President, Guardian, 13 June 2007)
Finland
“There’s nothing from the original institutional package that has been changed.”
(Astrid Thors, Finnish Europe Minister, TV-Nytt, 23 June 2007)
Denmark
“The good thing is…that all the symbolic elements are gone, and that which really matters – the core – is left.”
(Anders Fogh Rasmussen, Danish Prime Minister, Jyllands-Posten, 25 June 2007)
Austria
“The original Treaty for a Constitution was maintained in substance.”
(Austrian government website, 25 June 2007)
Belgium
The new treaty “takes up the most important elements of the Constitutional Treaty project.”
(Guy Verhofstadt, Belgian Prime Minister, Agence Europe, 24 June 2007)
Italy
“As for our conditions… I outlined four red lines with respect to the text of the Constitution: to keep a permanent president of the EU, to keep the single overseer for foreign policy and a common diplomatic service, to keep the extension of majority voting, to keep the single legal personality of the Union. All of this has stayed.”
(Romano Prodi, Italian Prime Minister, La Repubblica, 24 June 2007)
Lithuania
Lithuania has “100 percent fulfilled the tasks set forth before the meeting, including the primary objective of preserving the substance of the Constitutional Treaty.”
(Office of the President of Lithuania, official press release)
Luxembourg
“The substance has been preserved from Luxembourg’s point of view.”
(Jean-Claude Juncker, Luxembourg Prime Minister, Agence Europe, 24 June)
Slovenia
With the new treaty, the EU gets “content that is not essentially different from the Constitutional Treaty… All key institutional solutions remain… Some symbolic elements will be cleared up and some formulations toned down.”
(Janez Jansa, Slovenian Prime Minister, Government Communication Office, 23
June 2007)
The author of the EU Constitution
“This text is, in fact, a rerun of a great part of the substance of the Constitutional Treaty.” (Valery Giscard d’Estaing, Telegraph, 27 June 2007)
European Parliament
The European Parliament “welcomes the fact that the mandate safeguards the substance of the Constitutional Treaty.”
(European Parliament resolution, 10 July 2007)
The European Commission
“It’s essentially the same proposal as the old Constitution.”
(Margot Wallstrom, EU Commissioner, Svenska Dagbladet, 26 June 2007)
A detailed analysis of the constitional treaty can be found on OpenEurope.co.uk (downloaded here). Please visit these sites for lots of additional information.
Speaking of additional info, Lord Christoper Monckton, the former policy advisor to Margaret Thatcher has written an article titled;
I strongly suggest you read it in its entirety as it offers an insight in to the legal functioning of the EU. I shall post a quote to offer you a little example of the ‘rights’ you will have under the ‘New World Order‘ regime (my emphasis).
As of this year, under the pretext of compliance with a European anti-terrorist Directive, the right to a fair trial before a properly-constituted and impartial court was abolished in the UK for any criminal case defined as “serious”: and even offences as trivial as dropping litter in public places are now treated by the regional gauleiters as serious. Without a hearing, without the right of legal representation, the gauleiters can imprison any UK citizen for five years at a time, confiscate his house, freeze his bank accounts, close or compulsorily take over any business which he may own, or extradite him to any overseas country (including the most unspeakable dictatorships) even in the absence of any prima facie evidence whatsoever against him.
With the EU’s exponentially growing list of ‘regulations’ you can imagine it being impossible not to find yourself breaking them. Point 9 from EU Truth explains further;
9. Businesses closing under EU regulation
The EU’s 111,000 regulations, when fully enforced, will transform Britain from a free market economy into a Soviet style command economy, closing hundreds of thousands more businesses. They will also control our personal lives far more closely than were those of Soviet citizens. (In a Parliamentary answer to Lord Stoddart in January 2003, the government admitted there were 101,811 EU regulations, growing at 3,500 pa).
The cost of Britain’s 8,500 quangoes is £124 billion a year, and they raise an additional £40 billion from us in charges, according to the Cabinet Office. The Public Bodies Directory 2006 describes only 882 of them. Most exist to enforce EU regulations; nearly all should be closed.
This is just the tip of the iceberg. I cannot stress the importance enough of NOT voting for Labour/ Conservative or Liberal Democrat and not being distracted by fluff entertainment and irrevelent stories about bulemic politicians and the latest lies pouring forth from Gordon Brown’s treasonous cakehole. Use your vote while you still have one.
“I think that Europe is confronted with a much bigger danger than the average person knows. In November, French President Nicolas Sarkozy had a closed meeting in Strasbourg with some French European Parliamentarians, and said that if there were a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, in every country where such a referendum would take place, it would be lost. (He added:” There is a cleavage between people and governments. A referendum now would bring (our) Europe into danger.“)
So, on Dec. 13, the heads of state had the summit in Lisbon and signed the so-called reform treaty, the Lisbon Treaty. And there can be no doubt that the strategy was to say, “Let’s ratify it as quickly as possible, through the parliaments, without public debate—neither in the media nor in the parliaments—of any significance, because if such a debate would take place, it would not go through.”
Comment: This is confirmed by theleaked email as seen below
The most important is, that it would change the relation of the European states, from an alliance of states into a single federal state, which from that point on, once it’s ratified, would be ruled as an oligarchy, without the participation of the national parliaments.
For example, the so-called General Clause means that the European Council and the European Commission would have to decide policies in all areas, except foreign policy and security policy. The European Parliament would be heard, but have no say, and the national parliaments have no say whatsoever. So parliamentarians, rather than fulfilling 80% of the Brussels guidelines, would fill 100% of the guidelines.
Then you have the so-called Solidarity Clause, which really is a bombshell, because it means that if there is the need to fight against terrorist actions in any country—and the notion “terrorist action” is not defined,
it’s a very vague notion—each country, even if it disagrees, has to participate in military action, in wars of aggression, in peace missions in third countries—so, out of area of the European Union—and it basically means there is no more veto right for those countries that do not agree. So, without public debate, or debate in national parliaments, the European Union is being transformed also into a defense alliance with the explicit obligation for rearmament and out-of-area interventions.
Now, if you look at the fact, that of the 27 European Union countries, 22 are also in NATO, where the Solidarity Clause naturally exists also, you have an intertwining of NATO and the European Union, in an almost 90% fashion, and that, if you think about the implication of that, then you understand why
Russia and China have, for a while, equated NATO’s eastward expansion with the European Union’s eastward expansion. The Russians, I know from many discussions, look at NATO’s policy of encirclement of Russia as the potential road to World War III.
If you have a Bloomberg (New York´s mayor and billionaire) fascist government in the United States and a Lisbon dictatorship in Europe, I have the distinct fear that we are on a road to World War III. And how quickly this can go, you not only see in the demand of U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates for more troop engagement in Afghanistan in the south; you see it in the quick action of the European Union in moving on the independence of Kosovo, long before the independence of Kosovo was declared, and where you had complete disagreement among European Union members, but the European Union bureaucracy anyway deployed 1,800 soldiers and police, and therefore, they said, “We don’t care what the opinion of the members is all about.“
Death penalty in case of crime against the EU state Professor Schachtschneider pointed out that it also reintroduces the death penalty in Europe, which I think is very important, in light of the fact that, especially Italy was trying to abandon the death penalty through the United Nations, forever. And this is not in the treaty, but in a footnote, because with the European Union reform treaty, we accept also the European Union Charter, which says that there is no death penalty, and then it has a footnote, which says, “except in the case of war, riots, upheaval”—then the death penalty is possible. Schachtschneider points to the fact that this is an outrage, because they put it in a footnote of a footnote, and you have to read it, like really like a super-expert to find out!”
Now referenda on this treaty are being effectively blocked by European politicians , who prefer to keep the contents of the treaty secret, which they can easily do, since the system is apparently in complete control of ourastonishingly silent media. One reason for keepimg the Treaty secret may be the selfamending clause in article 48, pieces 6 and 7 making it possible to change the Constititutional Reform Treaty to the liking of the eurocrats at any time without asking us. This Treaty makes the EU dictatorship legal!
Only Ireland can save Europe from the dictatorship enclosed in the Constitutional Reform Treaty already discarded by French and Dutch voters. Developments in Ireland on the referendum 60% of Irish people are still weighing their options for the 12 June referendum on the Treaty of Lisbon, according to a poll published ahead of a visit to Ireland this week by German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Commission President José Manuel Barroso.
Only 28% of Irish citizens are certain to vote in favour of the Lisbon Treaty, while 12% said they would reject it, according to the poll, published by the Irish Sun newspaper on Monday (14 April).
But although the number of undecided voters has decreased from 72% to 60% compared to a similar poll in December, the outcome of the referendum is still far from certain.
But the same poll also confirmed what has regularly been shown by EU-wide surveys – that Irish voters are the most positive about effects of the European Union. Some 89 percent surveyed said membership of the bloc had been good for the country .
In an attempt to rally support for the treaty, Merkel delivered a pro-European speech at the National Forum of Europe in Dublin yesterday (14 April), saying that “the Lisbon Treaty offers the best preparation for Europe’s future” and allows the EU to “continue to flourish”.
Promises from Margot Wallström leaked Bertie Aherns likely successor, former foreign minister Brian Cowen, has pledged to make securing a “Yes” vote his top priority
His efforts might, however, be complicated by an Irish government memo leaked to the Irish Daily Mail on Monday (14 April). The document stated that Commission Vice-President Margot Wallström had told Irish Foreign Minister Dermot Ahern “that the Commission was willing to tone down or delay messages that might be unhelpful” in advance of the referendum.
Margot Wallström notes that themedia have been relatively quiet on the rtification process so far. “We need to remain close touch considering the media crossover”.
If any one has forgotten it: Margot Wallström is the 1 vice president of the EU Commission – and the supreme in charge of EU Communication!!! In fact she is the supreme in charge of EU censorship. Any similarity to Carlo Pontis Queen of Heaven is EU-intended!
Declan Ganley, chair of anti-treaty organisation Libertas, said that the most damning part of the email “was the admission that the Government hoped that very few people would actually read the text of the Treaty, and would simply vote with the politicians they trust.”
The memo according to an article in the Irish Daily Mail on Apr. 14, 2008 According to this article the Irish government has elaborated a plan to deceive Irish voters through a misinformation campaign to make sure the Lisbon Treaty is passed, when it is put to the public. Foreign Minister Dermot Ahern has been assured that the EU will tune down or delay any announcements that would be“unhelpful” Amongst the items reported in the memo are
1. The Government have ruled out a delay in the referendum to October for fear of the French Presidency . They fear “unhelpful developments” during the French presidency
2. That Dermot Ahern has sought – and received -guarantees that the European Commission will tone down or delay any announcements that might damage the Yes campaign.
3. That developments in the area of Common Defence pushed by the French Presidency would damage the Yes campaign.
(Irish voters rejected the EU’s Nice Treaty in 2000 largely on the back of a heated debate about neutrality and European defence issues.)
4. Concerns of losing support by the Agriculture community as a result of the latest WTO discussions.
5. An intention to not discuss the treaty but focus on the overall benefits of EU membership
6. A plan to fool No campaigners over the date of the referendum by playing with the date of the referendum – the memo suggests May 29th as the referendum date.
Bruno Waterfield of The Telegraph confirms the story on Apr. 15, 2008, adding: “The fact that the EU Commission is “willing tone down or delay messages” is firmly denied here in Brussels, though often with a knowing simper or wink. Confirmation on the policy is mounting up. On Tuesday, there was more evidence of operation apathy with the announcement that a consultation on EU budget reform (that’s farm subsidies and Britain’s £3 billion annual rebate) was being extended until June 15 – after the Irish referendum. The extension means the cancellation of a “political conference” that had been scheduled for May 27 – an event that would meant pushed an intense EU policy debate into the public realm”. The rebates are expected to be cut.”
Comment: Ireland is, in fact, the key to our future. Here is a video : “The End of Nations” (1 h. and 22 min.) from the Irish No-Campaign. If you see the video from the 58 minutes point to the end, you will see the shocking explanation for the EU being so keen on this treaty – a necessity for coming enlargements.
Herein is stated: “providing information to another Member State to enable that Member State to initiate, in accordance with its law, legal proceedings or proceedings for confiscation in cases where it appears that tracts, pictures or other material containing expressions of racism and xenophobia are being stored in a Member State for the purposes of distribution or dissemination in another Member State.” Comment I see this as a clear signal that whatever a blogger legally writes in Denmark can be destroyed by the verdict of e.g. a British judge, if it is offensive according to British law. Legal proceedings even mean that a British judge will be able to convict the Dane according to British law and vice versa. It could, of course be of help, if it were to tackle the many racist pronouncements and the hate speech by immigrants against native Europeans. However, that is not the way it works! These decisions – like The EU Charter of Fundamental Rights – is directed against indigenous Europeans protesting against being exposed to the immigrants´racism and violence in order to secure the multicultural, pseudoreligious world state of the New World Order.
The Framework Decision on Racism and Xenophobia of the European Council on 19th April 2007
Pending the lifting of some Parliamentary reservations, the Council reached a general approach on this Framework Decision.
The text establishes that the following intentional conduct will be punishable in all EU Member States:
– Publicly inciting to violence or hatred , even by dissemination or distribution of tracts, pictures or other material, directed against a group of persons or a member of such a group defined by reference to race, colour, religion, descent or national or ethnic origin.
– Publicly condoning, denying or grossly trivialising
– crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes as defined in the Statute of the International Criminal Court (Articles 6, 7, 8 ) directed against a group of persons or a member of such a group defined by reference to race, colour, religion, descent or national or ethnic origin, and
– crimes defined by the Tribunal of Nüremberg (Article 6 of the Charter of the International Military Tribunal, London Agreement of 1945) directed against a group of persons or a member of such a group defined by reference to race, colour, religion, descent or national or ethnic origin.
Member States may choose to punish only conduct which is either carried out in a manner likely to disturb public order or which is threatening, abusive or insulting.
The reference to religion is intended to cover, at least, conduct which is a pretext for directing acts against a group of persons or a member of such a group defined by reference to race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin.
Comment: Not the violence or the burning of the car are punishable by 1-3 years of imprisonment – but reporting about it and stating that this behaviour is in accordance with the Holy Quran, which actually commands this kind of behaviour (e.g. sure 2:190-193, 2: 216, 2:218, 3:82, 3:119, 3:122, 3:151, 8:39, 9:5, 9:29, 9:133 etc.)
Member States will ensure that these conducts are punishable by criminal penalties of a maximum of at least between 1 and 3 years of imprisonment.
The Framework Decision will not have the effect of modifying the obligation to respect fundamental rights and fundamental legal principles, including freedom of expression and association, as enshrined in Article 6 of the Treaty of the EU.
Member States will not have to modify their constitutional rules and fundamental principles relating to freedom of association, freedom of the press and the freedom of expression.
After its adoption, Member States will have 2 years to comply with the Framework Decision.
Statement to be inserted in the minutes of the Council at the time of the adoption of the Framework Decision:
“On (date) the European Council of Ministers has adopted a Framework Decision on Combating certain forms and expressions of Racism and Xenophobia by means of criminal law. The aim of this Framework Decision is to approximate criminal law provisions and to combat racist and xenophobic offences more effectively by promoting a full and effective judicial cooperation between Member States.
The Framework Decisions deals with such crimes as incitement to hatred and violence and publicly condoning, denying or grossly trivializing crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. The Framework Decision is limited to crimes committed on the grounds of race, colour, religion, descent or national or ethnic origin. It does not cover crimes committed on other grounds e;g; by totalitarian regimes. However, the Council deplores all of these crimes.
The Council invites the Commission to examine and to report to the Council within two years after the entry into force of the Framework Decision, whether an additional instrument is needed, to cover publicly condoning, denying or grossly trivializing crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes directed against a group of persons defined by other criteria that race, colour, religion, descent or national or ethnic origin such as social status or political convictions.
The Berlin declaration adopted on 25 March 2007 stated that “European integration shows that we have learnt the painful lessons of a history marked by bloody conflict“. In that light the Commission will organise a public European hearing on crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes committed by totalitarian regimes as well as those who publicly condone, deny, grossly distort or trivialize them, and emphasizes the need for appropriate redress of injustice and – if appropriate – submit a proposal for a framework decision on these crimes.”
Comment This ritual language is symptomatic of the illuminist (explanatory statement) background of these globalists, i.e. our elected prime ministers!!!, in their pseudoreligious striving for their multicultural world state. Danes and the Irish still have the option to preserve our protection against this dictatorship.
However, our governments will try to wring this protection away from us – through our very last referenda.
After that we shall have no other expediency than to be silent and let Islam have a free hand without protests.
According to paragraph 52, subsection 1 of the EU “Charter of Fundamental Rights” the EU has a free hand to prosecute the freedom of expression, if it is in the interest of the EU!!!
We’ve been brought into a stage of non-existence - a stage with where we're so unhappy with being human we'll give it all up. If you really truly think that that's the case, then give up now and switch on your television set and watch some soap or some happy comedy that's screaming in its canned laughter and go on your merry way. However, for those who can think and understand and have a potential of humanity, go further because you can't give it up. You must go further. This is the crucial battle.
Alan Watt
Communism is supposedly a Russian, Chinese sort of thing. At least this is what most people have been led to think. Like many views foisted upon us, this too is also incorrect. The simple truth about communism is that it was designed and built in England, albeit with the use of immigrant labour. This of course at a time when we still built things. Who, for instance, do you think paid for that half-wit Marx to sit on his tush for 20 years grinding out his dozy manifesto at the British Lending Library? Answers on a postcard please to . . .
Pending the lifting of some Parliamentary reservations, the Council reached a general approach on this Framework Decision. 
The reference to religion is intended to cover, at least, conduct which is a pretext for directing acts against a group of persons or a member of such a group defined by reference to race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin. 
Comment
