Ireland to survive, or soon to become enslaved by EU Socialists in Brussels?

The first and most pressing political challenge for the new taoiseach [Irish leader] will be to secure the passage of the Lisbon Treaty in the referendum to be held on June 12.

Though European issues often tend not to be rated by the electorate, it would be difficult to overestimate the importance placed by the government on passing the treaty.

Belief in the treaty is shared by all other parties in the Dáil apart from Sinn Fein, and all parties will campaign on the issue.

However, should the treaty be rejected by voters, it will be seen as Cowen’s failure, and will bring to an abrupt end any honeymoon period.

It would also provoke a crisis in Brussels over the future of the European project and, most likely, a backlash against Ireland. It would be an enormous blow to Cowen’s government.

It has often been forgotten or ignored at home, but Bertie Ahern’s reputation in Brussels and among his fellow prime ministers on the European Council was - and is - stellar.

He is regarded as a senior European statesman, an expert negotiator and deft dealer at intergovernmental level.

Unlike many of the hyperbolic claims made on his behalf at home for domestic political consumption, Ahern’s international reputation is attested to by those with no vested interest.

Peter Sutherland, a former (Fine Gael-appointed) European commissioner and now chairman of Goldman Sachs and BP, summed up Ahern’s reputation in Europe.

‘‘Bertie was successful in a very significant way in European politics. He received consistently positive commentary everywhere I went for the manner in which he conducted the Irish presidency. This was crucial to the agreement around the original constitutional treaty, which now forms the basis of the Lisbon Treaty, and I would like to pay testimony to that. He ran a fantastic presidency.”

Ahern - a contender for the job of President of the Council, which is created by Lisbon - will campaign for the treaty, but it will be Cowen’s show. Irish people are generally well-disposed towards Europe, showing up consistently in pan-European surveys as among the most pro-European countries in the EU.

However, the memory of the defeat of the first referendum on the Nice Treaty still haunts the government, and Cowen - who is still joint director of the campaign with Dermot Ahern, though most of the work is being done by Dick Roche - will front a major campaign in his first weeks as taoiseach.

Key to success for the Yes side is turnout. About the same number of people voted against the Nice Treaty on both occasions - at 35 per cent turnout, it was defeated; at 50 per cent, it passed.

Recent polls in this newspaper have showed a 2:1 majority in favour of the Lisbon Treaty, although the number of undecided voters remains high, at almost a quarter.

So, the last stand against a Brussels-imposed European Socialist superstate will take place in Ireland, probably sometime in the summer of this year. It's the only European country to give its own people the right to vote in a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, which would essentially destroy the sovereignty of Europe's distinctive nations and turn decision-making power over to Brussels, with a sham European Council "President" as dictator. Decisions of individual nations within the EU would be overruled, and they would no longer have control over their own affairs-- Brussels would decide what's best for them. Requirement for unanimity would give way to simple majorities, aka the Big 3 (France, Germany and the UK) having total control over all the most important decisions of the smaller nations of Europe, including Ireland.

And of course, in an appropriately dictatorial move, almost all nations have deprived their citizens of the right to vote: the Dutch and others rejected the last EU Constitution, and the Brussels junta-- er, EU Parliament couldn't dare allow the people living in these countries to have their own voice.

Can you imagine critical concerns for Ireland being handled by a collection of arrogant bureaucrats across the Channel? The Irish having to lick the boots of the self-infatuated Nicolas Sarkozy, goose-step for the repugnant Angela Merkel or kowtow to the repulsive Tony Blair?

Well, if this referendum passes, that's exactly what'll occur. The very survival of the nations of Europe depends on Ireland rejecting the Lisbon Treaty.

Despite what this newspaper says, polls on the issue have been all over the map, and in fact there's a very strong anti-treaty movement being organized in Ireland:

http://www.libertas.org/

I'll certainly be assisting. Unless we live in Ireland, we can't donate directly of course, but if we have family or friends in Ireland, we can provide support to them in a variety of ways. I have a lot of Irish blood in my veins, and the old country fought for too many centuries to be free, only to hand over its sovereignty like a bunch of bleating sheep to the Socialist fools in Brussels who want to destroy Europe by facilitating the Muslim invasion, while standing in the way of everything the USA tries to do for the people of the world.

This referendum concerns us in the USA as much as it does the Irish and other small countries where a lot of us have heritage-- a corrupt, centralized EU Socialist bureaucracy would be far more dangerous to the US than any other threat, and I'll be actively assisting Libertas here any way I can. I'd encourage anyone else with some connections in Ireland, or just a desire for freedom, to do the same.

Owl, you make a very good point here but I’d respond thusly: Remember that the original US Constitution delegated an enormous amount of latitude to the individual states in running their own affairs. The original 13 states had much of the character of independent nations, and while the Constitution of course provided greater central authority compared to the Articles of Confederation (especially on defense matters), it still gave a lot of leeway to the states themselves. That’s one of the reasons why it remained palatable to most of the states, even though RI had to be dragged into it.

This highly centralized, bureaucratic state of the USA that we all know and (definitely don’t) love, which essentially gives the federal government veto power over the states, is a creation of the post-Civil War era— and that was essentially imposed on the people.

By analogy, the balanced original US Constitution is maybe more akin to the Maastricht Treaty, which did create the Brussels bureaucracy but also gave authority to the individual countries to run their own affairs. And it requires unanimous consent on big issues of importance. The Lisbon Treaty would foster a loss of sovereignty much like what happened in the USA after 1865, except even worse, since Europe’s nations really are ancient countries whose distinctiveness would be wiped out, chiefly by the mass Muslim immigration that the EU bureaucrats are anxious to initiate.

This is why the Brussels bureaucrats hate the unanimity clause. For example, on the Kosovo issue, Spain, Greece and 4 other countries all refused to recognize Kosovo, and because of this, the EU was unable to issue a common statement accepting Kosovo as a nation— the lack of unanimous consent means that the EU itself rejects Kosovo, a major blow to the Islamofascists there.

The Lisbon Treaty would override this provision and allow a few well-placed bureaucrats to give EU recognition even over the bitter objections of the people.

Even worse, on issues like the accession of Muslim Turkey and North African Arab nations to the EU— which would give free migration rights to almost 150 million young Muslims into Europe and essentially turn the EU into Muslim Eurabia overnight— the big nations would be able to override the smaller ones like Ireland, which would be the first to be affected, by making a fiat decision in Brussels which the countries themselves would be helpless to reject.

Countries like Ireland, the Netherlands, Denmark and Austria are small nations with less than 10 million people, and such free immigration rights for Muslim nations would destroy them instantly with a demographic wave, essentially just surrendering to the same Muslim armies that Europe’s ancestors fought and died against in previous centuries.

That’s why these countries have overall been the most vigorously against Turkish/N. African EU accession, and also against the Lisbon Treaty. Would-be EU dictators such as Tony Blair and Angela Merkel know this, which is why they’ve worked hard to ensure that the people in most of these countries are denied the right to vote on the Lisbon Treaty. The Dutch and Austrians would reject it as they did the prior attempt in 2005.

Of course, even the British and people in other big nations would reject it— which is why the elites have conspired to deny them a vote. The UK in fact is fast on its way to becoming the first majority-Muslim nation in Western Europe (though France and idiot Angela Merkel’s Germany are fast on their heels), so the British people have no illusions about what awaits them.

Only Ireland stands in the way, and the EU bureaucrats have therefore tried to bribe the Irish thus far with massive subsidies that have made the Irish “the most pro-European” of the EU countries, as the article says.

But the gloss is off the rose as the Irish economy now declines, and more Irish see the truth of what would befall them upon surrendering their sovereignty.

The Irish shed their blood for centuries to be free, but if Lisbon is approved, then Ireland will soon be overwhelmed and destroyed for good, buried under a massive wave of immigration from Turkey, North Africa and the Middle East.

Libertas is working overtime to warn the Irish of just that danger, and it’s why I among others am supporting them.

“Countries like Ireland...are small nations with less than 10 million people, and such free immigration rights for Muslim nations would destroy them instantly with a demographic wave”

Thank you for your very cogent points.

Its interesting to me that you cite the danger of a demographic wave. I have a friend from Scotland living in the States who is very pro-EU and I have been discussing with him this very issue.

My point to him (in the context of Polish and muslim workers in the UK) is that for the EU economy to run properly, there must be a free-flow of goods or labor (labour :) across previously soverign borders. Otherwise you get what has happened in Italy where the entire country has taken a 20-30% permanent hit to their bottom-line incomes. Not good for my relatives there, I tell you.

Additionally, the way the treaty is structured, the small states become vassels of the 3 big states whenever they agree on some issue. France, Germany and the UK will pretty much run everything that they agree on. Again, not good.

You gave me some good points to bring up in my ongoing discussions. My friend is a tough nut to crack (being Scots and all), but I’m bringing him around slowly.

I have yet to actually encounter a European who has actually read the treaty (or the failed constitution) and this fact alone should give every supporter pause. Like you, I am able to read my US constitution in a matter of an hour or so and I can apply my own interpretations to it without having to consult a lawyer. Not true with Lisbon.

If I was an Irish voter, I would at least try to educate myself by reading the treaty. Not being able to understand it carries its own self-evident warning.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.