Posted on 06/13/2008 9:43:59 AM PDT by RogerFGay
After the proposed EU Constitution was soundly defeated by the people of Europe in 2005, promoters repackaged it as the Lisbon Treaty. This extraordinary anti-democratic move was intended to secure passage without public referenda. The Irish Constitution however, provided requirements that led to a referendum on the renamed constitution anyway. Not surprisingly, the proposed constitution / treaty met defeat once again. (55% - 45%)
The propaganda campaign in Ireland followed the same pattern as the European campaign in 2005. The YES campaign lacked any reason for Europeans to accept the dictatorial power structure that the constitution / treaty would create. So they avoided discussion on the actual content of the treaty and instead claimed passage would create an idyllic Europe – up to and including improvements in the weather. Naturally, they misrepresented their opposition as well; describing them generally as a small fringe group with ulterior motives and possibly influenced by foreign powers. In addition, they claimed rejection would throw Europe into crisis. (Three hours and counting; the sky over Europe hasn’t fallen yet.)
No sooner than the Irish NO was being reported, than pundits began describing the next effort at passage. Ireland is such a small country, says one Stockholm University professor, that it should not stand in the way. It would be different if Germany or France rejected the treaty. She expects Brussels to put pressure on politicians to change the Irish constitution to allow passage without a referendum, as has been done in other European states.
The comments characterize the typical disdain for truth and democracy that has been shown throughout the process. France did indeed reject the proposal in 2005. So did The Netherlands. Because passage requires acceptance by every state, these rejections were final. Other states had no reason to take continuation of the process seriously.
Former Soviet dissident Vladimir Bukovksy has likened the EU process to that of the former Soviet Union. Rather than accept the result of the democratic process, they will continue to ask the question until they get the answer they want. What we have seen in Europe is even more extreme than his description. If the people reject it, the powers in Brussels will do everything they can to pass the measure without asking again.
Time for the remaining decent folks in Europe to sharpen the pitchforks and oil the torches....
“She expects Brussels to put pressure on politicians to change the Irish constitution to allow passage without a referendum, as has been done in other European states.”
Truely frightening....
Bump for a clear, if disgusting, report.
Funny. That's the same thing the democrats do.
A modern day St. Patrick, driving the snakes out of Europe? Could it be?
“She expects Brussels to put pressure on politicians to change the Irish constitution to allow passage without a referendum, as has been done in other European states.”
Can you say DICTATORSHIP? If the Irish politictians change the constitution without any voice of the Citizens - I feel for the people of Europe!!
In WW2 it took Russia and the USA to fight to meet each other in the middle of Europe to stop fascism. I suspect this will happen again in the future.
Don't the EUrocrats get the idea - the people of Europe don't really want a European superstate. Do they like the idea of crossing borders without ID checks and not exchanging their Marks/Francs/Liras? Sure. But they aren't wild about all the side effects of it.
Maybe, as soon as they get off their minimum 5 weeks of paid vacation per year.
Moonbat: “It would be different if Germany or France rejected the treaty.”
The French people DID reject the EU Constitution. So it was repackaged as a treaty and they weren’t allowed to vote on it again. Nor was anyone else in Europe—except the Irish, who insisted on holding a vote despite being told they were ungrateful idiots.
My apologies to all snakes except Carville
Freedooooommmmm!
(From unelected Eurocrats!)
That, unfortunately, does not appear to be one of the features of the EU constitution/treaty/powwow/whatever they're calling it these days, that is up for negotiation. The one unchanging aspect of it is the centralization of an unacceptable (to the voter) amount of power. Little wonder its proponents don't want it put to a vote!
You got it. The way they’re trying to force this into law against the will of the people gives away the whole intent of the proposal. They should decide everything, and not have to care about what anyone effected thinks about it. From the disturbed minds of control freaks comes a dangerous proposal for dictatorship.
Well, yes. It’s bad enough to vote once and then you and your children and your childrens’ children never get a chance to vote again. It’s even worse when you lose your freedom and don’t even get a chance to vote it away.
That, of course, is the single worst thing about the EU. It is an unelected bureaucracy with no accountability. There is no way to “throw the rascals out,” short of a revolution. They lay down the law telling you to jump, and you are supposed to reply, “How high?” And once in, no way out.
The sinister thing is that the North American Union appears to be a very similar sort of idea, and I don’t think they plan to ask us to vote on it any step of the way. Meantime the Supreme Court is abandoning the Constitution and adopting international law. They pulled back a little on that when Sandra Day O’Connor left, but no doubt it will return with a vengeance when obama or McCain appoints three more liberals to the Court and cheers them on.
Perhaps, there are some EUrotopians the Irish don't like. The treaty/constitution makes dislike of foreigners a crime.
yitbos
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.