So the Lisbon Treaty has been accepted in Ireland by way of their democratic referendum and respect to their constitution and citizens. However, as the legal technocrats in many other EU countries (who under the guise of ‘democracy loving politicians’) have left such a binding democratic tool out of their constitutions, the worst undemocratic instance has been created in European politics since the fall of the Berlin Wall.
Nigel Farage following the ‘Yes’ vote in Ireland – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=APC5IEfn9j4
Death Penalty re-introduced in Europe through ratification of the Lisbon Treaty – “Professor Schachtschneider, explained that the undisclosed paragraph means on ratification of the Lisbon Treaty the DEATH PENALTY will be reintroduced to Europe. The Death Penalty will be applicable for the crimes of RIOTING, CIVIL UPHEAVAL and DURING WAR. (When are we not at war and who will define riot and upheaval?)” – http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?t=838456
The Lisbon Treaty is still an impostion on 500,000 million citizens of soveriegn Nations. Unless the referenda are carried out in every Country, the Lisbon Treaty remains a symbol of oppression, a symbol of tyranny imposed by the ones (the legal technocrats) who have placed aside the democratic principles which their own forefathers have fought to create.
What should one conclude when a Spanish MEP says “people should know that NO to Lisbon is not good answer enough” – IS THIS DEMOCRATIC ? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sIBIw33n7ac&feature=channel_page
Or when a columnist in Malta says “Under the new rules, Malta will lose its right of veto in some 50 areas of EU policymaking. Although the veto is almost never used by member states, it is still considered a potential safeguard. However, with 27 EU member states and the possibly more in future, it does not make sense to have a situation whereby a country of 400,000 people can stop a decision that has an impact on 500 million.” – IS THIS WHAT THE CITIZENS VOTED FOR IN 2004 ? IS THIS DEMOCRATIC KEEPING OF A COUNTRY ? – http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20091004/local/the-lisbon-treaty-whats-in-it-for-us
The legal technocrats which govern most of the 27 EU Countries, who have not offered a referendum to the citizens for the adoption of the Lisbon Treaty, but passed it by stealth through their parliaments, are afraid of being left out of the E.U. (the stick) and are doped by the phantom of the alleged riches (the carrot).
The signs of things to come are evident !!!
If all is being changed, even the EU flag has been discarded, is it still moral to remain part of the European Union ?
For a moral and Christian perspective the opinion of Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone is quite important (as opposed to the others who have been sold the idea that an automatic improved economy will result once the Lisbon Treaty is ratified).
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ireland/6251741/Vatican-issues-Lisbon-Treaty-warning-to-Irish-voters.html
Vatican issues Lisbon Treaty warning to Irish voters
The Vatican has made an unexpected last-minute intervention on the eve of Ireland’s Lisbon Treaty referendum with a warning the European Union threatens the country’s “identity, traditions and history”.
By Bruno Waterfield in Galway
Published: 6:41PM BST 01 Oct 2009
As Irish voters go the polls for a second time on the treaty, “No” campaigners have seized on comments made by Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, Vatican Secretary of State, during the Pope’s visit to the Czech Republic.
The comments followed unhappiness in the Vatican that the EU refused to recognise Europe’s Christian heritage in the text of the Lisbon Treaty.
The EU has also upset Catholics in the past by ruling abortion provision should be treated as a “medical service” no different from any other treatment.
“Individual European countries have their own identity. The EU prescribes its laws or views to them and they do not have to fit with their traditions and history. Some countries are logically resisting this – for example, Ireland,” said Cardinal Bertone.
“If Europe recognised homosexual couples as equal to marriage, for example, it would go against its own history. And it would be right to stand against it. The Church wants to encourage states in this.”
Coir, a Catholic group that has claimed that religious faith and Ireland’s anti-abortion laws are under threat from the EU, welcomed the comments.
“We are very pleased that Cardinal Bertone has come out and said explicitly that the EU is imposing secular values on Ireland,” said spokesman Brian Hickey. “It is because the EU has a secular agenda that we are resisting the Lisbon Treaty.
Noel Treanor, the Bishop of Down and Connor, last week lined up with mainstream political parties to tell churchgoers that they could vote for the Lisbon Treaty “without reserve and in good conscience”.
But Declan Ganley, the leader of Libertas, which is campaigning for a No vote, said Cardinal Bertone represented the Church’s true position.
“I welcome these comments and encourage all practicing Catholics to take them on board before they cast their ballots,” he said.
The Irish are voting on the treaty for a second time after rejecting it in a referendum last June.
Brian Cowen, the Irish Prime Minister, has promised voters that he has secured “legal guarantees” from the EU that Ireland’s traditional Catholic stance on the family and abortion will remain untouched.
“Europe has listened to the concerns of the Irish people as expressed by them in last year’s vote,” he said.
Many shoppers in Galway, which registered a strong No vote last year, yesterday (THURS) rejected the claim that Europe, or Mr Cowen, had listened.
Sean Boyle, an unemployed man, aged 27, from Donegal, said: “It is still the same treaty, nothing has changed. We have already had our say – it was no.”
Sorcha O’Sullivan, Magaretta Cooney, Georgia Bull, Michelle Daly and Eimear Costello, five Galway based female students, agreed.
“Why don’t they listen? No still means no,” said Miss Costello.
Irish bookmakers have predicted a pro-treaty vote, a verdict backed up by opinion polls which give the “Yes” camp 55 per cent of the vote.
“It is looking like a foregone conclusion at this stage,” said Leon Blanche of Boylesports, which has already paid out to Yes vote backers.
Michael Martin, Ireland’s foreign minister, said the government would beat off popular anger over its handling of the economic and resentment over a rerun referendum to win the day.
“We are confident and hopeful that we will win the vote,” he said.
http://www.azzjoninazzjonali.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=227:will-democracy-triumph-in-the-eu&catid=39:an-articles&Itemid=78
Will democracy triumph in the EU?
Friday, 02 October 2009 08:43 Josie Muscat
“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 Monet (1952)
Democracy is about the free expression of the people’s will and equally, the readiness of governments to respect that same will. If either is missing then there is no democracy except in shell form. When the European Union refused to accept the verdict of the Danes in 1992 who rejected Maastricht, the verdict of the French and Dutch people in 2005 who rejected the proposed European Constitution, followed by the Irish in 2008, then the European Dream that our MEPs pay lip service to in their posh and rarefied Brussels world, is nothing but the death of national parliaments as we know them.
An EU timeline
Following the loss and destruction of World War II, when Europe tore itself apart, European leaders decided to cooperate with each other in order to prevent a similar disaster. French Foreign Minister Robert Schuman announced a plan for France and Germany to pool coal and steel production and invited other states to join them. Solidarity in production, he said, would make war between France and Germany “not merely unthinkable but materially impossible”. The cry was to cooperate not to compete, and after the devastation of the war it made sense.
So the European Coal and Steel Community was created in 1951 with six members; Germany, France, the Benelux states and Italy. This very manageable number allowed the individual states to gather around the table on an equal basis and discuss how to create a huge trading area that would be to the benefit of all their citizens. This worked so well that the same six countries, in 1957, signed the Treaty of Rome which brought into existence the European Economic Community intended to create a common market customs union plus free movement of capital and labour.
In 1960 an alternative to the EEC emerged when Austria, Denmark, Norway, Portugal, Sweden, Switzerland and the UK set up EFTA, the European Free Trade Association. Like the EEC, EFTA aimed to establish free trade but it opposed uniform external tariffs and saw no need for supranational institutions.
In 1973, Britain, Ireland and Norway joined the EEC and the signposts towards a European state became clearer. In 1986 the EU flag was unveiled and a year later, the Single European Act entered into force. It abolished national vetoes in a host of areas relating to the single market, increased the legislative powers of the European parliament and marked the first commitment by member states to create a European Union. In 1991 the Treaty of Maastricht turned the Economic Community into a Union. It got a rough ride. The Danes rejected it in June 1992 and only accepted it in a second vote in May 1993 after receiving an opt-out on monetary union like the UK. In France it squeaked home by just 50.4 to 49.7. There was also evidence of public discontent in other countries including Germany and the UK.
The fall of communism had created a queue of free countries all needing help in order to build and restructure. They turned to the EU money and in 1997 the Treaty of Amsterdam opened the door to the East European countries. More national vetoes were abolished. Laws on employment and discrimination were strengthened and the social chapter of the Maastricht treaty became an official part of EU law.
In 2002 the euro came in and soon after, the first attempts to introduce an EU Constitution appeared. However in 2005, voters in referendums in both France and the Netherlands rejected their governments’ plans to ratify the EU constitution. The Federalists though, were not to be so easily put off. They rebottled the first Constitution and labelled it the Treaty of Lisbon/The Reform Treaty and asked for its ratification. In 2008 however, in a national referendum as demanded by the country’s Constitution, Ireland narrowly rejected the Treaty of Lisbon.
But the European Federalists are now used to this sort of thing. They ganged up on Ireland and forced it to have a second referendum, which will take place today. Barroso has visited Ireland and dangled e14.8 million of European taxpayers’ money in front of their eyes at a time of deep recession. Other leaders have spoken more threateningly.
Malta and Federation
Why is all this important to us in Malta? Ireland is many times Malta’s size and yet it has witnessed a flagrant invasion of its internal affairs. What is happening to Ireland is a clear sign of what will happen to anybody who dares to buck the Federalists. Jean Monet, one of the founding fathers of the EU made that amply clear from as early as 1952. This was not to be a Europe of the people. The people were to be tricked into forming a super-state that would have the power to ignore all dissent by the money at its disposal. It was money that secured an Irish “yes” after their rejection of the Treaty of Nice. It is money that will now secure their acceptance of the rejected Constitution. And it is money, vast amounts of it, that holds together the thousands that feed off the Brussels gravy train.
Malta did not hold out, as Ireland did, in order to receive monies that we are desperate for. Our parliament ratified the Treaty of Lisbon in double quick time with the eager consent of the two parties that, ironically, at the moment are arguing over which of the two obtained real independence for Malta. They dare speak of Malta’s Independence when, before we joined the EU, they passed a law that made our Constitution subservient to the European Parliament.
A new parliament building for what?
The Treaty of Lisbon has thrown a stop to the nation state of course. In view of the constant rejections of the people of Europe, in view of the ever dwindling number who bother to vote in EU elections, Lisbon offers national parliaments the right to challenge a piece of European legislation that they consider unnecessary. The Commission will in future send draft laws directly to national parliaments. But notice how difficult it will be for Malta to reject anything unless her objections are seriously supported by other states.
If a third of the member states express concerns, the Commission will have to explain why the legislation is needed, or else submit a redrafted version. If half of them are unhappy, a majority of member-states or MEPs can insist that the draft be dropped altogether. But the Irish referendum is demonstrating that “NO” votes don’t count in the EU. And we are all aware how poorly supported Malta’s burden-sharing proposals have been. If the level of support there (five minnows plus France) is what we can expect, then Malta’s real parliament has moved to Brussels and we certainly do not need a new one to house what will become the equivalent of an EU Local Council.
A Europe of united states
We at Azzjoni Nazzjonali do not accept the idea of a federal Europe for the simple reason that our small size will render us invisible when the big issues come along. If the EU ignored the vast populations of France, the Netherlands, Denmark, and Ireland twice, it will certainly not let any of its plans be thwarted by what they consider a tiny group of Christianised Arabs on its perimeter. What Azzjoni Nazzjonali wants is not a United States of Europe but a Europe of united states, gathered round a table amicably thrashing out their problems. We want a Europe of networks not one where Malta is looked upon as a mere hindrance that can always be relied to shut up if enough euros are thrown its way. This is not what the Maltese people voted for in 2004. This is certainly not what the Maltese people celebrated in 1964.
And Azzjoni Nazzjonali is not alone in this regard. The German High Court has asked Parliament to pass a law saying that if an EU law goes against German interests, it has to be debated in parliament. The Czech president has refused to ratify the Treaty of Lisbon and is hoping the British elections will return the Tories to power, for they have promised to hold a national referendum if the Treaty of Lisbon had not, by then, been ratified by all the member states.
The Irish will probably today once more bow their heads to their paymasters. After all they have received enormous sums of money from the EU, millions which helped their country to emerge from poverty and mediocrity. But like everybody who allows money to illuminate his vision, the Irish and all the rest of us in the EU will live to rue the day. As I said at the beginning, democracy depends on the free expression of the people and the willingness of the ruling class to accept that they are there to represent the people’s will. The EU is not driven by people. It is not driven for people either. The EU is driven by elites who have managed to secure the European nations’ treasure chests and are doing very well out of it.
No system of government will endure unless it is based on acceptance by a clear majority of the people. Less and less Europeans are bothering to vote in EU elections. More and more Europeans are increasingly becoming jaundiced about the EU. The clear rejection of democratic values by the Brussels elites when obstacles to their greed and ambition are put in their way, makes it amply clear that the EU is not driven by the citizens of Europe. It is a repackaged old dream. Charlemagne tried it, the Popes tried it, Napoleon tried it, Hitler tried it. They all failed but at a huge cost in terms of lives.
The irony of it all is that the recipe for recovery has turned out to be no different from that of disaster. The EU, as cast, has no future. What I do not yet know is what the cost of its failure will be when it comes about in the fullness of time.
Josie Muscat is Leader, Azzjoni Nazzjonali
Glasgay! supports the right to freedom of expression and offers audiences a diverse view of LGBT life 
