Fri 24 Apr 2009
The following is from the EU sponsored “Blogactiv” – that links to the EU (http://blogactiv.eu/)- and turns down euroscepticism, written by J. Clive Mathews, who has worked for the EU Commission. But all right. Let us see what the aplogetics for dictatorship can produce to soothe us.
The most certain way of keeping todays intention to form an EU superstate secret is to speak half the truth openly. Then everybody will believe the whole truth is a joke!!
“As I’ve set out several times, I don’t see an EU superstate as a realistic possibility at any point in the next hundred years - not even the next three hundred years.
The Euromediterranean superstate germ, The Union for the Mediterranean is rarely mentioned by the EU.
Indeed, it’s arguable that Russia and India continue to hold together largely due to fear of “the other” - In all cases, the sense of identity - “I am Russian”, “I am Indian”, and all the rest - emerged due to a growing sense that another group of people were both somehow different and a threat.
But what is the European Union’s threat? Who is “the other” Immigration - Islam? Russia?
(Or the “Climate threat", the financial crisis or the War on Terror – made for that purpose by the New World Order).
But whatever the “threat” - real or simply perceived!!! - might turn out to be, it is hard to see a truly European identity. You can legislate to create political and economic integration, you can forge agreements between different territories and different cultures - but you cannot legislate or negotiate to build a sense of identity.
Thus foxes are speaking to the geese: Here is from The Mail 8 April 2009: Britain is willing to provide all our Armed Forces to fight under the EU flag in future wars, as part of an EU 'force catalogue UK minister Caroline Flint revealed'. This would help form a 60,000-strong, joint EU military reaction force to police the world's trouble-spots. So, the Superstate negated above is quite a different construction: It does not care about EU identity or national identity. It is a dictatorship functioning like the Soviet Union over many peoples – issuing a lot of unifying laws and giving itself all the emblems of a superstate: An EU flag, a national anthem, a parliament, a government (the Commission), an EU police force (Europol is to become an EU agency under the Parliament), An EU gendarmerie, an EU Army, a common foreign policy, common rules in every way of our lives eg. the Framework Decision on Racism and Xenophobia, an omnipotent and de facto legislative EU Court of Justice. So, J. Clive Matthews is lying: the EU superstate is already there.
Then follows a statement that we have got it all wrong by misquoting St. Jean Monnet for dirty propagandistic reasons:
“There will be no peace in Europe, if the states are reconstituted on the basis of national sovereignty… …The European states must constitute themselves into a federation.”
“Europe’s nations should be guided towards the superstate without their people understanding what is happening. This can be accomplished by successive steps, each disguised as having an economic purpose but which will irreversibly lead to federation.”
Matthews asserts that Monnet never actually said this.
Yes, Monnet is, indeed, dangerous. First about the quotations:In Wikipedia I find the 2 above quotations– the first as authentic, the latter by the British Conservative Adrian Hilton, as his perception of Monnet´s intentions. Monnet is said to have often expressed these sentiments.
The Young European Federalists write: Monnet: “The veto is the profound cause and at the same time the symbol of the impossibility of overcoming national egoism.”
Here is a quotation fron the The Council on Foreign Relations´critique of Monners Memoirs:“ “Once nation-states and their leaders find themselves bound by rules, infringement of which will destroy common policies that are to their own advantage,…little by little this method of conducting policy in common will spread to all sectors of interstate relations until the members of the Community no longer deal with each other on a bilateral basis. At this point they will have become a federation just as the provinces of France were assembled in a national state at a moment favorable to this change in their status.
Only, in the twentieth century, it is not so much the different geographical portions of a future federation that are joined as it is the different functions of states that are gradually abandoned to common decision-making. The nature of that decision-making will itself have changed … to having a political content when decisions are taken on a federal basis (e.g., by majority vote). Then a federal government will be in existence for all practical purposes.”
So something indicates that Blogactiv does not speak the truth: Monnet really wanted a superstate.
Monnet was cooperating with the Dulles´brothers and the founder of the Bilderbergers, Joseph Retinger – all New World Order globalists – to establish the European Coal and Steel Union. The leaders of the European Movement: Retinger, Spaak and Schuman were paid hirelings of the Bilderberger and founding CFR-member Alan Dulles, who led the American Committee for a United Europe (ACUE).
The man behind the European Movement, Joseph Retinger, was also the founder of the Bilderberg Club on behalf of i.a. David Rockefeller..
The European Coal and Steel Union was dubbed the Monnet-plan by the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) . And from 1955-1975 Monnet was the leader of ACUSE (Action Committee for the United States of Europe!!!).
J. Clive Matthews: Here we are told that civil servants of e.g. Romania are responsible for legislation controlled in e.g. Poland and Italy and then rubberstamped by the EU to be valid in all EU states!!
And so in the normal course of events, yes - dozens of new laws will likely come into force every week without having been so much as glanced at by an elected official.
When it comes to the EU, the real fear of competence creep was epitomised by this glorious clause (Article 308 EC): In other words, the EU could grant itself whatever powers it liked. Or, at least, it could after unanimous agreement from the governments of the member states in the Council. But, for more powers to pass to the EU, even with the existence of the “competence clause”, you’d still need unanimous agreement between the governments of all 27 member states, plus a majority in the European Parliament. Hardly that scary
The Lisbon Treaty amended that same article (now Article 352) to clearly delineate (in line with the subsidiarity principle introduced with Maastricht back in 1992) just where competences lie between the EU and member states, as well as explicitly excluding common foreign and security policy as an area where the competence clause could be used to grant the EU more powers.
Oh yes, and Article 352 also introduced a new clause obliging the Commission to involve national parliaments in any moves to grant the EU more powers.
Is there a danger that some of these laws will be bad ones? Of course there is. But at least they are generally being drawn up by civil servants who are experts in their field (rather than members of parliament who tend to be generalists), and at least they can be corrected with ease.
The EU is not a true liberal democracy, but shares many of its forms and functions.
So, the author thinks in earnest? that the national governments and parlamentarians as well as the EU parlamentarians represent the best interests of their peoples impartially: They are just wittingly or unwittingly participating in the conspiracy for world government - nay, the EU is behind the demand for a UN Parliamentary Assembly (UNPA).
“The EU is ”the best and truest friend of the UN, wanting to strengthen The UN´s role in global governance, in order to solve global crises (Financial, “climatic”, terror – made by the globalists themselves) by global means. “We are faced with a series of great opportunities brilliantly disguised as impossible situations” (EU Commissioner Benita Ferrero Waldner 14 Apr. 2009).
Matthews´article is a manipulative difference between the author and everything the most competent EU expert Professor Karl Albrecht Schachtschneider states: that the self amending function of the Lisbon Treaty is high treason.
Once more the fox speaks to the geese: The Lisbon Treaty is to secure national parliamentary democracy and better laws – secured by the legislative European Court of Justice which dictates unacceptable verdicts against national law time and again!! It is ridiculous!
And eveen more so: Democratic transparency – yes, democratic honesty-no
EUObserver 9 April: New rules on public access to EU documents have prompted one of the European Commission's key departments to circulate a memo warning officials to be careful about what they write in emails . For its part, the European Commission defended the memo. As a way of avoiding officials having to blank out parts of documents they release to the public, the transparency guide suggests writing two accounts of meetings, a "factual" or neutral one that can be released to the public and a more "personal/subjective" one with assessments and recommendations for follow up that need not be disclosed.
The EU disregards democracy – the EU is now secrettly training 500 diplomats for the EU External Action Service to rival national embassies – part of the Lisbon Treaty which may never enter into force (The Telegraph 12 April).
The EU is brainwashing school children intensively – in particular through “innovation” and “creativity” -in the so-called annual “Spring Day for Europe”. This is an old-fashioned Hitler method.
10 Responses to “ EU´s Blog: “EU No Genuine Democracy - But A Bureaucracy” ”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.