If the Czeck pesident can hang on, us Brits may get our say. Our turn, and you know how I will be voting.
Please give my regards to everyone.
Best wishes for the future.

Phoenix One UK

They’re going to ask Ireland to vote on Lisbon
and the EU dictatorship again: Say No again.
‘YES’ would make this last day of democracy in Europe, and start of The New world order fascist POLICE state EU.
—
The New World Order is going to have its dictatorial way in the end with – or without an Irish “no – and we deserve it for not reacting in due time against the traitors – just said: “Pth! Conspiracy theory!”
The Lisbon Treaty I. Brainwashed Political Brotherhood Unanimously Keen on Giving up Democracy:
http://euro-med.dk/?p=10745

…corrupt EU now just needs the Lisbon Treaty to bring about its destruction of the last remnant of decency. Therefore, Mr. Barroso now offers 15 million euro to the Irish city of Limerick… if…
Our only hope to avoid the the disastrous Lisbon Treaty lies with one single man, Czech President Vaclav Klaus, the only decent and honest politician left in the EU…
Vote NO- Save democracy and freedom of speech!

VOTE NO: TO THE LISBON TREATY.

Now is the time, for all good men and women, to come to the aid of their Country!
Within the next few weeks, we have coming, the most important vote of our lives. I will outline my main concerns in relation to this 2nd referendum on the Lisbon Treaty.

Guarantees: Not worth the paper they’re written on. Denmark’s stronger protocol promises after their Maastrict no vote have since been over ruled and nullified by the European Court of Justice!

Article 48: The self amending clause or escalator clause. Allows the EU to escalate it’s power into new areas WITHOUT coming back to the people for a vote on any changes. So what we have in fact is a treaty that is not set in stone like our own constitution. It is a flexible treaty free to be amended by the EU elite as they wish. This leaves our country and the other individual member states extremely vulnerable! Would you sign a contract on a deal with someone who could legally adjust that contract to favour themselves AFTER you’d signed it ?

Article 2 ECFR: Under Lisbon, The European Charter of Fundamental Rights AND the European Charter of Human Rights become legally binding. Both of those charters are intertwined and will merge.
Article 2 ECFR “Nobody shall be condemned to death, everybody has a right to life” Article 2 protocol 6 of the ECHR which will merge with the ECFR, “A state may make provision for the death penalty in times of war or imminent threat of war”. There you have a ‘backdoor’ whereby the main article can be diluted or negated entirely and this is typical of the deception we will find upon study of the treaty and it’s additional charters. Who’s to say we are under threat of war, could we trust Tony B’liar who led his nation into war under false pretences and who is in the running to be SELECTED, not elected, as the president of the EU ?

As was stated by our own Charlie McCreevy: 95% of Europeans would vote no to this treaty if given the chance. We the people of this country are their voice, and we owe it to them to make the right decision on Oct. 2nd.
Hasn’t the EU been good for Ireland ? We gave the EU 200 Billion worth of our fishing stock. The fishing industry has been decimated as a result. Now our farming industry is under attack, where our farmers are being forced because of EU law to sell milk cheaper than cost, while at the same time becoming ever increasingly crippled under EU bureaucracy. With this pattern in mind would you trust the EU with the Irish economy and our Government ?

I’m all for co-operation with our European neighbours, I just don’t want them telling us what to do. I am for co-operation, not domination!
Creeping EU Tip-Toe Totalitarianism: Have you noticed how with each successive EU treaty it has gradually moved from economic integration into political integration ? Watch how civil liberties globally are being incrementally eroded due to this fraudulent ‘War of Terror” and now via Phoney Environmentalism. Visit my web-site for more on this. Is it democracy to keep coming back to the people with the same treaty that we’ve already voted on ? Is it democracy not to allow the individual member states a referendum on something so crucially important to their futures and the futures of their children’s children ? Was it democracy for most individual member states to ratify the treaty against the wishes of the vast majority of their own people even though it was ILLEGAL for them to do so due to We the People of Ireland having already voted this treaty down ?

Where is this progressing towards ? The agenda is World Government, for the many of us that are awake to see, which is clearly outlined in the books written by the elite and their insiders, books they don’t count on the general population reading. World Government would not be a bad thing if Angels were going to run it, but the people striving for this are anything but. We are NOT ready for World Government yet, not by a long shot. Again more on this on my web-site.

What this is simply about is POWER going into yet fewer and fewer hands, and those that forget history are doomed to repeat it, because Power Corrupts and Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely!

This progression MUST be stopped dead in it’s tracks, and we can help scupper this agenda by voting NO on the 2nd of October.

There is no question of Ireland being sidelined or pushed out of the EU or the euro-currency if we stand by our No to Lisbon. As Ireland’s EU Commissioner Charlie mccreevy said last December : “There is no provision in the existing treaties to isolate anybody. There is no provision to throw out anybody, unless unanimously all the existing members of the club agreed to throw you out. And I doubt, now or in the future, any Irish Government is going to unanimously agree to throw them selves out.”

http://www.jimcorr.com/

“Europe’s nations should be guided towards the super-state without their people understanding what is happening. This can be accomplished by successive steps, each disguised as having an economic purpose, but which will eventually and irreversibly lead to federation.” Jean Monnet (Founding Father Of The EU in a letter to a friend 30th April 1952).).

On June 12th 2008, the proud and independent minded Irish screamed a loud and clear NO to the treacherous Lisbon Treaty and to further integration into the EU Superstate being constructed around the hopes, dreams and lives of the peoples of Europe. Typically, arrogantly and not surprisingly, the Euro Fascists, whose credentials are appearing ever more Totalitarian in structure and ruthless in application, simply ignored the voice of the Irish voter, demanding there be a another vote, and this time, the rebellious Irish would have to get it right, or else.

On October 2nd this year, once again, the fate of nearly 500 million people will be decided by a country whose population totals only 4.2 million. The people of the Republic Of Ireland will now for a second time, have been the only `citizens` of the European Union given the opportunity to have their say on what is potentially the most fundamental piece of legislation in the history of the `Old Continent.` All the other member states have simply ignored the wishes of their people and left ratification to be `rubber stamped` by their respective parliaments. However, it is necessary, at least at the moment, for all twenty seven member states to complete ratification before the `Treaty` becomes legally binding.

So, if the Irish vote is `NO` for a second time, then legally, according to its own rules, Brussels will not be able to implement the Treaty. However, if the Irish people this time around swallow the massive `Pro Treaty` propaganda and vote `Yes,` then the fate of, and inevitable demise of the Nation States of Europe will be sealed. There will be no more serious obstacles left to Federalisation. The long dreamed of (by the Federalists that is) United States Of Europe will inevitably become a reality.

Many, if not the majority of people on both sides of the Atlantic have been `duped` for decades into believing that the EEC/EU is about a `free trade` zone. This is not at all the case, as the above quote by Monsieur Monet illustrates very clearly. So what are the ramifications of a `Yes` vote by the Irish.
The European Union was founded on lies and deceit at the very highest levels of government. This trail of deception has continued since, and on Thursday 13th December 2007 stopped momentarily in Lisbon Portugal, where the `dignitaries` of the member states of this `trading bloc` signed the `EU Reform Treaty`.

This `Treaty` replaces the EU Constitution rejected in 2005 by both France and the Netherlands. Angela Merkel, the German Chancellor and the former French President `Giscard D`Estaing are among many European ministers who have confirmed that the `Treaty` is but the Constitution by another name. The only differentials being the dropping from the new document those articles relating to the EU Flag, Anthem and Motto. Yet only two days prior to the `Historic event` in Lisbon, sixteen member states `broke cover` and called for an amendment to the `Treaty `and the reinstatement of these three articles, thereby transforming the `Treaty` into the original Constitution. They also want to impose the `single currency` on all those member states still retaining their `indigenous` currencies and are suggesting that a `Europe Day` become a holiday for celebration.

The leader of the United Kingdom Independence Party `Nigel Farage` said, “The full treachery being imposed is at last fully out in the open. The pathetic attempts claiming this wasn’t the Constitution are now blown out of the water. Back comes the flag, the anthem and the motto. It means that what was 96% of the original constitution is now 100%. Let’s not hear any more of the `Reform Treaty`. This is the rejected EU Constitution brought back in all it’s pomp.”

Whilst still in office, the former Danish Prime Minister and current Secretary General of NATO, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, decided against any referendum on the Treaty, leaving it’s ratification to Danish MPs. Since then, nothing has changed here in the `Old Kingdom,` where it’s business as usual as far as the Lisbon Treaty is concerned.

Last year, Mr Fogh Rasmussen stated that the “Treaty` was ‘Good For Denmark.” Denmark had planned to hold a referendum on the Constitution back in 2005, but following the `NO` votes in France and Holland, said plans were dropped. The Danish Justice Ministry have concluded that the `Treaty` does not threaten Danish Sovereignty. Mr Fogh Rasmussen was quoted as saying, “ When sovereignty is relinquished, a referendum is needed, but when no sovereignty is relinquished, Parliament will ratify the text.”

He also confirmed plans to hold another referendum on the `Single Currency` (EURO) and whether to end the `opt outs` agreed at Maastricht relating to defence, justice and home affairs.

So, no threat to sovereignty ? Well let’s consider the implications: If a Sovereign Nation State no longer controls it’s own Economy, Defence, Justice System and Home Affairs, can it truly be called a `Sovereign Nation State` any longer ? The answer is quite simply NO.
The Political and Financial Elite of Europe have been working towards this moment since the end of World War Two. In every member state, the personalities might differ, but the rhetoric is always the same; “No Loss Of Sovereignty, good for the people, good for the economy and so on.”

So let us take a look at what this `Treaty` is really about. What is the difference between this document and the original Constitution? German Lawyer, Klaus Heeger, a researcher and legal advisor to the Independent Democratic group in the EU Parliament has drawn the following conclusions regarding the two documents:

According to his analysis, the Constitution granted the EU 105 new `competences`. The `Treaty` also grants 105 new areas of competence. Out goes the EU symbols (Flag, Anthem, Motto) in comes Climate Change. The remaining 104 areas remain the same.

Decision making by qualified majority replaces `unanimity` in 62 new areas in the Reform Treaty. One more than in the Constitution. Out goes `Intellectual property rights,` in comes energy and climate change. The other 60 stay the same.

His conclusion; The EU Constitution by another name.

This sixth and final `Treaty` is the `death knell` for the sovereignty of the member states of the EU. Do not be mistaken about this, and no matter what your `elected` leaders are telling you to the contrary, this is it. This is the culmination of years of plotting, deception and conspiring against the people of Europe. So what’s the big deal many will ask ? Read on and find out.

This `Treaty` is the EU’s most secret and quickest drafted document yet. Opposition to and recognition that the EU is a Police State in the making is growing and they (the conspirators) know that speed is vital. Tony Blair agreed to it in June 2007 as his final `Stab in Britain’s Back.` Foreign Ministers agreed it’s terms in September 2007 and on 13th December two months later, the representatives of each member state signed the document, and now, all that remains is ratification, and the deed will be done.

So, if the result of the Irish vote is a `Yes` and all other member states do as indicated, ratify this treasonous piece of infamy, and the majority already have; how will our lives be affected ?

Our National Parliaments will become redundant as all power that still remains will transfer to Brussels. It will mean the formal end of those Historic Nations of Europe who are member states of the EU. National Embassies around the world will come under the auspices of EU bureaucrats. The ancient counties and provinces will be merged and combined into `EU Administrative Regions`. (The amalgamations of Kommunes in Denmark is a pre-emptive example of this, along with the `devolved` parliaments of Scotland and Wales, to be soon joined by the eradication of `England` and the setting up of similar regional assemblies there).

The EU will take ownership of Police, Military, Nuclear Weapons, Currency Reserves and North Sea Oil as outlined in the Treaty document. Serving members of our Police and Armed Forces will be required to take an oath of loyalty to the EU. Refusal will result in dismissal. The EU will have complete control of all military matters, equipment and facilities.

Political parties will be abolished, phased out or realigned. Only Pan European parties will be allowed. Independence parties will effectively be outlawed as under the 1999 ruling of the European Court Of Justice (case 274/99), it is illegal to criticize the EU. (Even before the Irish Vote, News from Brussels indicates that plans are afoot already to eliminate any `Euro-sceptic groups within the EU Parliament). The EU will have the legal right to close National Parliaments and Assemblies.

Many people will be made unemployed as the EU rule of `retraining` at a citizens own expense becomes universal (including the purchase of a Certificate confirming said retraining). Hundreds of thousands of small businesses will be forced to close due to the enforcement of endless numbers of impracticable and unworkable EU regulations.

Around 107,000 EU laws will criminalise many, as adherence to this amount of legislation is impossible. We will be subject to frequent fines and even arrest as a result of what will be our inevitable ignorance. Take the following as examples: From January 2006, it became illegal to repair your own domestic plumbing, electrics or even your own car. If you buy a boat over six feet long, built after 1999, you will be required to pay the equivalent in Euros of £4000, or face six months in prison. As the EU `Police State` flexes it’s muscles ever more, each of us will live under the fear and threat of arrest or prosecution for any one of a myriad of offences, even minor ones.

The Large Corporations will do well of course, utilising massive immigration from within and without the EU, paying minimum wages to immigrants at the expense of the indigenous population, thus forcing salaries downwards. Furthermore, these Corporations will have a near Monopoly on employment (along with Government), and will be able to dictate conditions and terms of employment without fear of contradiction.

Top Government Jobs and the inevitable corruption which will accompany this monopoly, will create a new `Class Divide` ensuring the rich and their `fellow travellers` get richer, whilst the majority decline into poverty. Taxes will increase in order to pay for the massive growth in bureaucracy.

There will be no `redress of grievance` through local `democratic` channels because there won’t be any local democracy. Or any democracy at all for that matter. The `EU Administrative Regional Governments` will be unelected (See the EU Regionalisation plan on the EU Website). Our only vote will be to the powerless EU Parliament. We will be ruled by the unelected EU Commissioners, who have no `accountability to the people` at any level.

If we demonstrate or protest, we can be seized and relocated to another EU Region. The EU Arrest Warrant and the various legislation introduced across the EU since 9/11 will give the Authorities absolute power over us. The shootings of innocents `Philip Prout` and `Jean de Menezes` were entirely legal under EU Law. The intimidation and growing `Anti Muslim` vitriol across the EU is becoming reminiscent of the treatment of Jews in pre-war Germany. A Federal European State will become a very unpleasant place to be.

Following Federation, in and around 15 years hence, Europe could collapse under the weight of it’s own Bureaucracy and Corruption. There will be so little production, that no amount of taxation will be able to support the vast, inept, corrupt and wasteful government machinery. Many will be reduced to poverty on the brink of starvation. The complete lack of any `checks and balances` will leave the door open for any would be dictatorship.

The EU as monstrous as it is, is nothing more than a `stepping stone` to `World Government`. Before you dismiss this article as `Scare Mongering` or `Conspiracy Theory`, find out how many of your own country’s leading politicians are members of such `Secret Organisations` as the Bilderbergers, Trilateral Commission, Club Of Rome, and the Royal Institute For International Affairs.

Each and every one of the above are totally dedicated to a `One World` Government and see a Federal Europe as a necessary evolution towards that goal. Their memberships read like a who’s who of the planet’s `power players`. Danish readers for example, might be very surprised to discover which of their country’s Political and Financial Elites attend the Bilderberger meetings, which has been in the forefront of machinations to further European Federalisation. To find out which of your elected representatives are members of any of the above groups, just type in the organisation’s name on any recognised search engine. Then sit back and prepare to be shocked.

We live in an age where people seem to have abdicated all responsibility for their own lives to Government. This has been going on since the end of World War Two, but has accelerated markedly since the 1980’s. This `social irresponsibility` led us to Lisbon on 13th December 2007, where our so called leaders signed away our ancient rights and freedoms in the name of their `great plan`. If we sit back and do nothing, the rest of our lives will become a nightmare of our own making, because in the final analysis, it is we who will have handed over our rights and liberties into the hands of `wolves.`

The future well being of a whole continent lies in the hands of the Brave and Heroic Irish people. They need our support. They need to know they are not alone. It’s time to start writing to your `elected` representatives, time to find the time to research what the EU `Beast` is really about. It’s time to switch off the TV and pick up a book about the EU, or check out the many Internet sites relating to this Totalitarian `Super-State in the making.`

Do something, speak to your friends, neighbours, family; just do something before it is too late, and if the Irish vote yes, it is.

Comments to: http://righteousalliance.blogspot.com/
Reference:

http://www.jimcorr.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=section&layout=blog&id=10&Itemid=77

http://www.bonde.com/index.php/bonde_uk/article/C221/

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2009/0909/breaking45.htm

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2009/0909/breaking45.htm

http://www.freenations.freeuk.com/

http://www.statewatch.org/
——————————————————–

EU summit on Irish Lisbon ‘Assurances’: The Emperor’s New Clothes,

The EU Summit Strategy for dealing with the Irish No vote to Lisbon is similar to the Edinburgh Agreement of December 1992, when Denmark changed it’s No to Maastrict for full Danish opt-outs from some provisions of that Treaty.
First, the European Council will make a ‘decision’ for the Prime Ministers and Presidents of the EU member states.This so-called ‘decision’ did not previously exist as a formal legal instrument of EU summits. It was specially invented to get around the Danish No to Maastrict in 1992 by the Head of the Council Legal Service, Jean-Claude Piris. It is a creative way of giving people the feeling of legal certainty which does not and cannot exist since only properly ratified EU treaties, with their Protocols, can offer binding legal guarantees in EU law.

This ‘decision’ of the EU summit changes absolutely nothing in the treaties. If it did change anything, even the smallest changes could only be validated through new ratification’s by all 27 member states in their national parliaments, or by referendums.
Just as in the 1992 Edinburgh Agreement the Prime Ministers and Presidents state their desire ‘to address those concerns in conformity with that treaty’ (i.e. the Lisbon Treaty).

This is the core sentence of the Summit document. In the so-called ‘Irish assurances’ not one single comma in the Lisbon Treaty will be changed.
Up until now no government has been able to give a single example of a national law which cannot be affected in some way of other by the Lisbon Treaty.

This does not mean that the current generation of politicians has in mind the establishment of European laws in all areas. But in reality they could to this if they wished with a few derogation’s. Decisions of the European Court could also affect every single area of what is currently believed to be a purely national responsibility.
This ‘decision’ of the EU Summit isn’t signed by the Heads of State or Government. In legal form it is simply an Annex to a Summit Declaration.

The ‘decision’ is followed by a common ‘Solemn Declaration’ which may express the intentions of the politicians taking part. It does not prevent politicians at future Summits affecting these ‘assurances’.

Finally, Ireland has its own Irish declaration. A unilateral declaration of this kind has to be interpreted as a statement of position by one state which the others do not necessarily agree with. If they did agree to it, it would have been part of the Joint Declaration or the earlier ‘decision’ in the name of all 27 states.

In 1992 the Edinburgh Agreement was sent to the United Nations to register it as an international agreement, giving it a certain legal value under international law, although not necessarily under EU law. It remains to be seen how the planned Brussels agreement from this June’s EU Summit will be archived.

________

Comments on the Draft text of 15 June 2009 (text from the Irish Times, plus introduction not quoted in the Irish Times but existing in the draft ‘Annex l’).

Annex 1

DECISION OF THE HEADS OF STATE OR GOVERNMENT OF THE 27 MEMBER STATES OF THE EU, MEETING WITHIN THE EUROPEAN COUNCIL, ON THE CONCERNS OF THE IRISH PEOPLE ON THE TREATY OF LISBON.

The Heads of State or Government of the 27 Member States of the European Union, whose Governments are signatories of the Treaty of Lisbon,

Taking note of the outcome of the Irish referendum of 12 June 2008 on the Treaty of Lisbon and of the concerns of the Irish people identified by the Taoiseach,

Desiring to address these concerns in conformity with that Treaty,

Having regard to the Conclusions of the European Council of 11-12 December 2008,

Have agreed on the following Decision:

Section A

Right to Life, Family and Education

Nothing in the Treaty of Lisbon attributing legal status to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, or in the provisions of that Treaty in the area of Freedom, Security and Justice

affects in any way the scope and applicability of the protection of the right to life in Article 40.3.1. 40.3.2 and 40.3.3, the protection of the family in Article 41 and the protection of the rights in respect of education in Articles 42 and 44.2.4 and 44.2.5 provided by the Constitution of Ireland.

COMMENT: True, A Treaty does not change the Irish Constitution. However, the above is a misleading statement since the European Court has already taken decisions affecting Irish abortion law. In the so-called SPUC v. Grogan case of 1991, the European Court of Justice decided that abortion is a normal ’service’ under the treaties which can normally be provided everywhere. Then the Court ‘on balance’ established an argument on proportionality where they accepted the Irish constitutional limits for the time being.

The Court Adovate General wanted to entirely overrule Art. 40.3.1 of the Irish Constitution, but the Court did not go along with that proposal then. The European Parliament has called for legal access to abortion in all member states in a resolution of 2002. The Council of Europe sought similar access to abortion in 2008.

It is unrealistic to expect the Court to take such a decision as long as abortion is forbidden in a big country like Poland. But the example quoted shows the misleading character of the new ‘assurances’. The power to decide will always reside with the Court, even on the most sensitive ethical questions like euthanasia and abortion, which many people believe should be decided at the national level.

Moreover the Lisbon Treaty would make all citizens of the 27 member states into real citizens of the European Union for the first time by conferring on them an ‘additional’ citizenship. Their rights and duties as EU citizens would ultimately be decided by the Court of Justice. It would therefore fall to the Court of Justice to apply the rights set out in the Charter of Fundamental Rights for the 500 million or so citizens of the EU.

Section B

Taxation

Nothing in the Treaty of Lisbon makes any change of any kind for any Member State, to the extent or operation of the competence of the European Union in relation to taxation.

COMMENT: True, EU competence on taxation is not changed. The EU already has certain competencies as regards taxes. The limiting principle is that all harmonisation must be unanimous. The Lisbon Treaty would allow the governments unanimously to change from unanimity to decision by qualified majority (Art. 48 TEU). The treaty also inserts a new sentence on the internal market which would permit the EU to outlaw national tax measures if they can be regarded as disturbing the internal market. (Protocol No.27).

The Lisbon Treaty adds in the avoidance of ‘distortion of competition’ as an aim of the tax paragraph in Art.113 TFEU, thus opening the way for more court cases outlawing distorting tax rules, such as low corporation taxes, different taxation rules for foreign-owned assets, etc.

The Lisbon Treaty also defines the Internal Market as an area without distortions of competition under Protocol No.27 (on the Internal Market and Competition). This should strengthen the hand of the Court in applying the internal market rules, which are decided by qualified majority vote, to get rid of such distortions.

The Commission has proposed a harmonisation of the tax base for corporate taxation based on the article dealing with indirect taxes. This was in the Commission’s annual work programme for 2008, but has been postponed until after the second Irish Referendum on the Lisbon Treaty.

The Lisbon Treaty also provides for totally new taxes to be imposed by the EU to add to its ‘own resources’ by unanimity (Art.311 TFEU). Where are the new assurances here?

Section C

Security and Defence

The Union’s action on the international scene is guided by the principles of democracy, the rule of law, the universality and indivisibility of human rights and fundamental freedoms, respect for human dignity, the principles of equality and solidarity, and respect for the principles of the United Nations Charter and international law.

The Union’s common security and defence policy is an integral part of the common foreign and security policy and provides the Union with an operational capacity to undertake missions outside the Union for peace-keeping, conflict prevention and strengthening international security in accordance with the principles of the United Nations Charter. It does not prejudice the specific character of the security and defence policy of Ireland.

The Lisbon Treaty does not affect or prejudice Ireland’s traditional policy of military neutrality.

It will be for Ireland, acting in a spirit of solidarity and without prejudice to its traditional policy of military neutrality, to determine the nature of aid or assistance to be provided to a Member

State which is the object of a terrorist attack or the victim of armed aggression on its territory. Any decision to move to a common defence will require a unanimous decision of the European Council. It would be a matter for the Member States, including Ireland, to decide, in accordance with the provisions of the Treaty of Lisbon and with their respective constitutional requirements, whether or not to adopt a common defence.

COMMENT: A common defence may be established by unanimity for all, or for those participating in ’structured co-operation’ by a sub-group of member states. Ireland decides its own position. The content is true, but again misleading since Ireland has already opted in favour of participating in the common European Defence Agency and all other military structures and activities of the EU. Denmark has a derogation from these in a Treaty Protocol and does not partake in EU defence matters even though it is a NATO country. The Treaty also provides for a ‘mutual’ defence obligation among all member states.

Nothing in this Section affects or prejudices the position or policy of any other Member State on security and defence.

It is also a matter for each Member State to decide, in accordance with the provisions of the Lisbon Treaty and any domestic legal requirements, whether to participate in permanent structured co-operation or the European Defence Agency.

The Treaty of Lisbon does not provide for the creation of a European army or for conscription to any military formation.

COMMENT: The first European battle groups have already been established,. They have decided upon a joint military force of 60,000 troops. No new treaty is required to increase this number to 600,000 or 6 million EU soldiers. Where is the new assurance?

It does not affect the right of Ireland or any other Member State to determine the nature and volume of its defence and security expenditure and the nature of its defence capabilities.

It will be a matter for Ireland or any other Member State to decide, in accordance with any domestic legal requirement, whether or not to participate in any military operation.

Section D
Final Provisions
Annex 2
Solemn Declaration on Workers’ Rights and Social Policy

The European Council confirms the high importance which the Union attaches to:
Social progress and the protection of workers’ rights;

COMMENT: Yet the 2007 Laval case has already permitted foreign workers to be employed for much lower salaries than the normal rates in Ireland. The Trade Unions in the European TUC proposed that a social protocol be added to the Lisbon Treaty to set this judgement aside. This protocol was fairly weak in its provisions, but even this was not accepted.

* Public services, as an indispensable instrument of social and regional cohesion;

* The responsibility of Member States for the delivery of education and health services;

COMMENT: Yes, they may still be responsible. But the Court has already made rulings on requiring free competition for important areas of education and health. A patients’ directive currently being prepared will bring more detailed EU rules. Where are the new assurances?

* The essential role and wide discretion of national, regional and local authorities in providing, commissioning and organising services of general economic interest.

In doing so, it underlines the importance of respecting the overall framework and provisions of the EU Treaties.

It recalls that the Treaties as modified by the Treaty of Lisbon:

* Aim at establishing an internal market and working for the sustainable development of Europe based on balanced economic growth and price stability, a highly competitive social market economy, aiming at full employment and social progress, and a high level of protection and improvement of the quality of the environment;

* Will give expression to the Union’s values and, through Article 6 of the Treaty on European Union, recognise the rights, freedoms and principles set out in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union;

* Aim to combat social exclusion and discrimination, and to promote social justice and protection, equality between women and men, solidarity between generations and protection of the rights of the child;

* Oblige the Union, when defining and implementing its policies and activities, to take into account requirements linked to the promotion of a high level of employment, the guarantee of adequate social protection, the fight against social exclusion, and a high level of education, training and protection of human health;

* Include, as a shared value of the Union, the essential role and the wide discretion of national, regional and local authorities in providing, commissioning and organising services of general economic interest as closely as possible to the needs of the users;

* Do not affect in any way the competence of Member States to provide, commission and organise non-economic service of general interest;

COMMENT: This is the case as long as all treaty principles relating to free competition, non-discrimination, etc. are respected. In reality there is not a single non-economic service which cannot be affected by judgements of the Court.

* Provide that the Council, when acting in the area of common commercial policy, must act unanimously when negotiating and concluding international agreements in the field of trade in social, education and health services, where those agreements risk seriously disturbing the national organisation of such services and prejudicing the responsibility of Member States to deliver them;

COMMENT: But who decides what is ’seriously disturbing the national organisation of such services’? It is the EU Commission, not Ireland. Again no new assurance. The phrases above hide the fact that new trade agreements will be adopted by majority votes as a general rule. Even the weak derogation’s mentioned can easily be changed from unanimity to qualified majority by the governments.

* Provide that the Union recognises and promotes the role of the social partners at the level of the European Union, and facilitates dialogue between them, taking account of the diversity of national systems and respecting the autonomy of social partners.

________

IRISH DECLARATION ( text only partly available)

It reiterates that the participation of contingents of the Irish Defence Forces in overseas operations, including those carried out under the European common security and defence policy requires (a) the authorisation of the operation by the Security Council of the General Assembly of the United Nations, (b) the agreement of the Irish Government, and (c) the approval of Dáil Éireann, in accordance with Irish law.

COMMENT: The Lisbon Treaty allows the EU to participate in wars without the authorisation of the UN. Ireland decides for itself whether it will participate in such wars with Irish soldiers. This is true but again it gives no new assurance.

Ireland notes that nothing obliges it to participate in permanent structured co-operation as provided for in the Treaty on European Union. Any decision enabling Ireland to participate will require the approval of Dáil Éireann in accordance with Irish law.

Ireland notes also that nothing obliges it to participate in the European Defence Agency, or in specific projects or programmes initiated under its auspices. Any decision to participate in such projects or programmes will be subject to national decision-making and the approval of Dáil Éireann in accordance with Irish law. Ireland declares that it will participate only in those projects and programmes that contribute to enhancing the capabilities required for participation in UN-mandated missions for peace-keeping, conflict prevention and strengthening international security, in accordance with the principles of the United Nations Charter.

COMMENT: But Ireland is already a member of the European Defence Agency. Here there may be something new. How will Ireland both at the same time participate in, and remain apart from, some of its activities?

The situation set out in this Declaration would be unaffected by the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon. In the event of Ireland’s ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon, this Declaration will be

associated with Ireland’s instrument of ratification.

COMMENT: This is of no legal significance. It simply means new wrapping paper around the same Lisbon Treaty and the same legal obligations. Nothing in the Lisbon Treaty will changed.

________

GENERAL COMMENTS

- The vast majority of European laws will still be decided by civil servants behind closed doors under the Commission and Council instead of being adopted by elected representatives of the peoples.

- The non-elected Commission will still retain its monopoly of proposing all European laws instead of these being decided by elected representatives in national parliaments or directly by the voters.

- EU meetings and documents will generally remain private instead of being governed by new rules requiring all meetings and documents to be open and transparent, unless special exception are approved by elected representatives.

- Ireland and the other member states will lose their right to propose and decide their own Commissioner under Lisbon. Instead the Irish Commission and other national commissioners will be decided by the new Commission President, in whose appointment the big states will have a decisive say.

- Ireland will halve its voting strength in the Council of Ministers under Lisbon while Germany will double its voting strength, and France, Britain and Italy will increase theirs by 50% each.

- When Ireland joined the European Community in 1973, Germany, France, Italy and the UK had 3.3 times more votes than Ireland. Now Germany will have 20 times more votes than Ireland and Britain and France and Italy 15 times.

- The Irish ‘assurances’ do not explain how having half as much influence in the EU than Ireland has today would help fight unemployment and resolve its economic crisis in the interests of Irish companies, farmers, fishermen and workers.

___________

For further sources and information on the above comments, see the euabc.eu under the headings workers’ rights, taxation,
abortion, Lisbon Treaty etc.

It looks increasingly likely that, if the Lisbon Treaty is ratified, Tony Blair could become the EU’s first permanent President within a matter of weeks. The Swedish EU Presidency has said that they want member states to nominate a candidate for the position at the European Council meeting on 29-30 October. (European Voice, 23 July; NOTW, 28 September)

A senior French diplomat told well-known French journalist Jean Quatremer this week that no-one will “dare say no” to Tony Blair becoming EU President. He also suggested that public opposition in Europe to the Iraq war will not cause a problem for the former British Prime Minister, because, “only public opinion is concerned about this, not the 27 Heads of State and Government that will vote him in”. Indeed, under the Lisbon Treaty, the future EU President will be voted on by a qualified majority in the Council, meaning no country will have a veto, and MPs will not get a say. (Coulisses de Bruxelles French Foreign Office, 29 September)

There exists a fine line between recognising some groups as terrorists or partisans fighting guerrilla warfare against larger regular forces. In considering the question and examining the actions taken by allied groups within occupied countries during the Second World War, the question clearly answers itself. It depends on your belief and flag.

The drafting of the Terrorist Act 2000 defined terrorism to mean the use or threat of ‘action’ not violence. This interpretation is not only very significant but also makes perfect sense, as the use or threat of use of violence is not the only method of inducing extreme anxiety or fear on a target for the purposes of advancing a cause.

G. Wardloaw defined Political Terrorism as “the use, or threat of use, of violence by an individual or a group, whether acting for or in opposition to established authority, when such action is designed to create extreme anxiety and/or fear-inducing effects in a target larger than the immediate victims with the purpose of coercing that group into acceding to the political demands of the perpetrators.” (Political Terrorism, 2nd edition 1989, page 16).

Tony Blair, Politician, Terrorist or Both?

In comparing the definition of “Political Terrorism” with actions of Prime Minister Tony Blair, one is left to ponder the facts as provided to the global population.

The Prime Minister threatened and used violence in the form of military action against Iraq to establish authority.

The Prime Minister used an action designed to create extreme anxiety and fear-inducing effects on the citizens of Iraq with the purpose of coercing Iraq into acceding to political demands.

The Prime Minister committed the United Kingdom to the invasion and occupation of Iraq by coercing its citizens into believing Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction that could be launched within 45 minutes.

The United Nations did not sanction and opposed the invasion and occupation of Iraq.

Senior members of the Prime Ministers own cabinet did not consider the evidence sufficient to justify the invasion and occupation of Iraq to the point of resigning their positions in protest upon initiation of hostilities.

The occupying forces in Iraq failed to find any evidence of weapons of mass destruction - the stated reason for military action – as admitted before the global population.

The Prime Minister justifies actions stating acting on intelligence given him by the intelligence service, the same evidence produced before the United Nations in the failed attempt to gain their support that was clearly not convincing.

Any action of systematic use of intimidation taken by an individual, group or even the state to coerce a government or community into acceding to specific political demands amounts to terrorism.

By definition, the Prime Minister committed an act of “Political Terrorism” to further his own cause.

Combating Terrorism

There is no question terrorism poses a serious threat to any civilized country, and this publication will not dispute that counter-terrorist strategies are necessary to ensure the protection of our democracy. However, in combating terrorism, it is imperative that the civil and human rights of citizens are maintained, and that the United Kingdom does not allow itself to subside into a dictatorial form of government.

To quote P. Wilkinson: “The primary objective of counter-terrorist strategy must be the protection and maintenance of liberal democracy and the rule of law. It cannot be sufficiently stressed that this aim overrides in importance even the objective of eliminating terrorism and political violence as such. Any bloody tyrant can “solve” the problem of political violence if he is prepared to sacrifice all consideration of humanity, and to trample down all constitutional and judicial rights.”(Terrorism and the Liberal State (1977), page 121)

To quote G. Wardlaw: “To believe we can ‘protect’ liberal democracy by suspending our normal rights and methods of government is to ignore the numerous examples in contemporary history of countries where ‘temporary’, ‘emergency’ rule has subsided quickly and irrevocably into permanent dictatorial forms of government.” (Political Terrorism, 2nd ed (1989), page 69)

Phoenix Flier March 2004
Editor: [Phoenix One UK]

Note: A copy may be also found within the Channel 4 archives.

http://phoenixoneuk.blogspot.com/