Is Paul Martin secretly running the EU?
“Before the French and Dutch referendums, I predicted that, if our neighbours voted “No”, the EU would ignore the result and implement the constitution as though nothing had happened. The Brussels elites have followed the script to the letter […] Two weeks after the referendums, the European Parliament voted through dozens of Bills that cited the constitution as the source of their authority. One which happened to catch my eye was a report proposing that the British and French representatives on the UN Security Council be merged into a single EU seat. The judicial basis for such a development, said the report, was “the European Constitutional Treaty, which creates a legal personality for the Union and a European Minister for Foreign Affairs”. No one was so indelicate as to point out that, without the constitution, the EU has no treaty-making powers. Instead, we carried on as though nothing had changed.
[…]
Almost to a man, Commissioners and MEPs have decreed that the process should continue. The EU is going ahead as though the French and Dutch electorates had voted “Yes”, harmonising criminal justice, creating a European Public Prosecutor, establishing a diplomatic service, treating the Charter of Fundamental Rights as justiciable. The constitution is not being smuggled in through the back door; it is swaggering brazenly across the porch.”
Via the Corner, where there’s more on the upcoming Luxembourg vote.
Europe’s finished its casual fling with democracy.
They always favored oligarchies or royal tyrannies anyway……what will Britain do?…the cradle of modern democracy. They have always been spooky at going all the way with the new world order EU council…will they sell off Parliament’s sovereignty for a few soft Euros?
Against the will of the people, imagine that. So do you think the people know this is happening, or is it like here where they whitewash it, water it down so know one knows what happened until it’s to late.
This, and your post above this one, some how ties together with a blog i read about a year ago. There seems to be some background movement to inflict socialism/marxism on the world, but it isn’t clearly evident yet.
But when Bush ignores the world community and invades Iraq anyway, that’s okay with all of you.
“Bush ignores the world community and invades Iraq”
Yup, 100%, it was the right thing to do, Saddam was a psycho against his people. If you can’t fathom the logic behind it, then your maturity hasn’t reached an acceptable level yet. Democracy is the key to freedom which is the key to reducing terror. Same thing should happen in Africa, but the rest of the world likes to feed on the misery.
“But when Bush ignores the world community and invades Iraq anyway, that’s okay with all of you.”
It is with me. Especially when over 40 members of the world community send troops and take part.
So in other words, Rob and Michael, you were for unilateral action before you were against it.
Don’t know about Michael, but I was ALWAYS FOR IT. Murdering your own people when your a dictator is not cool. Bush has it right, you have it wrong.
I was for it when Bush 41 did it, I was for it when Clinton did it, I am still for it for Bush 43.
As was the US Congress who voted approval to use military force. Democracy is obeying the wishes of your own citizenry – not the dictatorships of others.
(Even when they wrap themselves in the Marxist ideology you so crave, Robert.)
“But when Bush ignores the world community and invades Iraq anyway, that’s okay with all of you.”
You’re damn right. It’s OK with me too. I want him to also invade Zimbabwe, North Korea, Syria, Iran, and any other country in the world that kills, starves and tortures its own citizens.
I also want PRESIDENT Bush, when he catches his breath, to arrest, detain, harass and intimidate every Islamic fundamentalist and apologist in the world. And if it ain’t too much to ask, I hope MR Bush will also annoy, harass and detain the ‘odd’liberal (just for fun).
Do you people always dodge the point? Are you for or against people taking unilateral action? If you’re for it, then there is no reason for this idiotic post. If you’re against it, then you should be against it even when Bush does it. So where do you lie on the issue of unilateral action, flip-floppers?
The unilateral action is a totally different question, are you trying to deflect the issue, as is typical of the left.
Who gives a shit what the Useless Nations says, when they had so many resolutions against Iraq to begin with. What your marxist brain is telling you is that you didn’t want to give up the Oil for Food money being scammed by France/M Strong and company, at the expense of Iraq innocent peoples lives. In other words, your side was accepting the deaths of MILLIONS of innocent Iraq people at the hands of an evil dictator.
What part of that do you NOT comprehend? No one here is flip flopping except for you. We are retaining our original position, the Bush position.
One of Tony Blair’s former ministers and now EU commissioner Peter Mandelson, known for his rarified air of silken menace, recently expressed the view that the Age of Mass Democracy was drawing to a close.
The similarities between the way the EU and the current regime in Canada operates are very similar to say the least. In fact Canada and the EU have much in common. In the EU only France and Germany count. Everbody else is on the periphery. In Canada, only Ontario and Quebec count. The others just make up the numbers.
Now here’s a thought. If Jaques Chirac switched places with Paul Martin, who would get the better deal ?
“Are you for or against people taking unilateral action?”
I didn’t consider that a dodge. I thought it should be self-evident. The answer is “yes” and any country that would answer “no” is announcing its willingness to commit suicide.
Interesting use of terminology.
First it�s �voted through dozens of Bills�
and then the one that caught his eye is �a report proposing that the British and French representatives on the UN Security Council be merged�
I presume he�s talking about B6‑0328/2005 which was passed on the 9th of june. Except of course this isn�t a bill. Or indeed any form of legislation.
It�s a resolution suggesting that the SC nations in the EU should think about , at some point in the future, merging the 2 seats.
Ditto with the �creating a European Public Prosecutor�,�diplomatic service� etc.
It has no legal authority or weight at all.
Anyone who suggests it does (by calling it say �a bill�) is either incompetent to discuss the EU or is deliberately attempting to mislead the reader.
McClelland, give me a break. The EU is pretending to be a democratic entity when ingoring the fact that the people don’t want it. It’s the same kind of irony that sees many communist countries called “the peoples …” when the people don’t want anything to do with communism.
Sovereign nations ALWAYS have the choice to do whatever they want unilaterally. They just have to deal with the consequences of what they do (I know that the ‘consequences’ thing is hard for liberals to understand, but bear with me).
So Mr. Bush acted ‘unilaterally’ (ie with the support of dozens of other countries) to do what he had every right to do and what sovereign nations have done since the dawn of time. He was quite clear that he understood some nations were not on-side and did not pretend to act on their behalf.
The EU, on the other hand, is preaching from an authority that has been rejected by more than one of the nations it claims to represent (including the citizens of one of the original countries most involved in the idea in the first place). They simply do not have the authority to do what they are doing.
Hopefully you can see that these situations are entirely different.
If McClelland could see the difference, he wouldn’t be a dipper.
Ontario and Germany
Quebec and France
Does anyone else see the scary scary connection?
Welcome to the new reich.
All hail ???(HMMM should it be PMPM or more likely Layton)
Lester B Pearson said
“If you cant censor the truth,
you shoot the messenger.
Failing that you label him inept,
Failing that you commence to make up stories.
All in a days work for a SOCIALIST.”