Posted on 12/16/2007 11:20:57 AM PST by BGHater
When we saw Mr Brown emerging from his surreptitious signing of this treaty, we should have been under no illusions as to the significance of what he has set his hand to.
This was the day when our country finally abandoned any pretence to exist in its own right in the world or to run its own affairs.
More than ever, we are to become just a small, subordinate part of this highly questionable new entity which is already in the process of changing our lives - as through its insistence on virtually unlimited immigration - in ways which even ten years ago would have seemed unthinkable.
The fact that we have been denied the right to pronounce on whether we want it or not makes this arguably the most shameful betrayal in our island history.
It was no accident that the document Mr Brown signed yesterday was originally called a "Constitution", because it does mark a further very significant step towards what was always intended to be the ultimate goal of that process - the emergence of the EU as a fully-fledged government in its own right, as a direct counterpart, for instance, to the United States of America.
More obviously than ever before the nations making up what they now like to call just the "Union" will be simply provinces of a "country called Europe" with ever less power to run our own affairs.
So what are ten of the most obvious ways in which this treaty will change our lives irrevocably?
1 For a start, the treaty will make us more formally than before "citizens of the European Union".
For years we have carried "European Union passports"
But now we are to become citizens of this "Union" before anything else - just as the inhabitants of Texas are above all American citizens - with rights and duties overriding those attaching to our subordinate role as citizens of Britain.
2One of the most conspicuous ways in which this "country called Europe" will project itself on the world stage, and to us as its citizens, is that it will for the first time have a permanent President, a powerful figurehead in office for up to five years.
We shall not yet be allowed to choose that President ourselves - he or she will be chosen for us by the "heads of government", the 27 prime ministers making up the European Council - but there will soon be pressure for "our" new President to be elected by all the "Union's" 490million "citizens".
3Alongside him will be the EU's foreign-minister - the so-called "High Representative" - parading on the world stage as the 'Union's' chief international spokesman.
He will have his own diplomatic corps and worldwide embassies, intended gradually to replace those of individual countries such as Britain - and he will be able to exercise the further new right given by the treaty empowering the Union to make any kind of international treaty in our name.
4The "Cabinet" of this new government will be the European Council - which is given a wholly new status by the treaty, with its members placed under a wholly new obligation - to put the objectives of the Union above those of their own country.
So when Gordon Brown or his successors attend future Council meetings, they will not do so representing Britain's interests but as servants of the "Union"
5Remembering that power to propose-EU laws is already exercised solely by the unelected European Commission, another innovation is that for the first time each country will no longer have the right to be represented by its own Commissioner.
That means that, on occasions, laws affecting all our lives will be put forward entirely by officials from other countries.
6The new treaty greatly extends the powers of the unelected Brussels government to dictate laws and policies overriding the wishes of elected national parliaments - although in some cases it has already been exercising those powers even before the treaty is signed.
7The treaty will, for example, give a huge boost to setting up a "Common Defence Policy", based on interlocking all our armed forces and defence industries so that it becomes impossible for any country to act independently.
8The EU-wide police forces will not be far behind.
This week our Foreign Secretary was unable to deny that we might one day see armed Romanian or Latvian policemen of the EU Gendarmerie Force, already taking shape, operating on the streets of Britain.
9The treaty will set up a "Common Energy Policy", making it impossible-for Britain to act independently in looking after its own national needs, just when this is becoming more critical than ever before.
10Another very serious threat to Britain's interests - as yet another City think-tank was warning this week - lies in the new opportunities the treaty will give our "partners" to introduce intrusive and politicallymotivated financial regulations which would undermine the one area of economic strength in which we still reign supreme: All those banking and financial services centred on the City on which all our national prosperity ultimately depends.
On the dotted line: Gordon Brown signing the Treaty of Lisbon yesterday
“The EU gives me open boarders, a common currency and the right to vote i.e. in other European countries if I have my residence there.”
But why does the EU have to involve itself in domestic issues of the member states like abortion and immigration?
Why can’t the EU simply be an economic entity that protects against free trade from outside the bloc, why does it have to be a political union?
The over zealous regulations over domestic issues is what makes Americans wonder why Continental Europeans think the EU is a good thing. An economic union makes more sense in the view of Americans.
I thought the Ukraine had something akin to an “amicus” vote, but not a recognized independent vote. I’ll have to go back to my history books to check on that.
When I was a kid (in the 50s) we’d sometimes get sets of flags of UN nations. They included the flags of Ukraine and Byelorussia—as I recall, they looked like the USSR flag with some kind of design on the bottom or side. When I asked why “Russia” got three votes and we only got one, the teacher’s reply was something like “because it is so big”. In high school I was told that Stalin insisted on extra votes as a price for the USSR’s joining the UN—he felt that his side would lose every vote. Remember, this happened before most of the ‘third world’ were independent and had seats in the UN.
Why should the EU restrict itself to economic issues without any need? I have no problem with the fact that my own nation, Germany, will loose many of its responsibilities to Europe. The old national model is somehow outdated. The national boarders do not reflect the internal coherence of the people. I am living in southern Germany. My neighbors in Austria, Switzerland or France are ethnically much closer to me than someone from Berlin i.e.. Half of my family is living in France. Beside of that I speak fluent French, German and a little bit English (Hehe! - Latin does not count here ;) ). People from Alsace-Lorraine are for sure as important for me than the people from the Uckermark, the area in north-east Germany where chancellor Merkel is coming from.
A European Union just reflects the realities. It is rather a problem that some political dinosaurs fail to give up their national power.
The over zealous regulations over domestic issues is what makes Americans wonder why Continental Europeans think the EU is a good thing.
What Americans might not know is that the inconsistent and overdrawn national regulations are usually the problem. My mother i.e. owns a small factory for sanding blocks. She is exporting to all European countries. We saved trunkloads of money after the idiotic national laws for import were replaced by European legislation. Common European rules are a basement for success.
But why does the EU have to involve itself in domestic issues of the member states like abortion and immigration?
Even with such issues like abortion or immigration it does not make any sense to solve them on a national base in Europe.
If abortion i.e. is banned in Germany after a certain point in time (12th week after start of pregnancy), a woman who want to get rid of her baby simply has to catch a train for the Netherlands. They make it anytime (by law until the 22nd week - practically...) and anywhere. This does not make any sense to me.
Isn't it better to kick out illegal immigrants on the boarders of the EU instead of giving them the possibility to utilize the differences of European national laws?
We Europeans need to be better organized than in the past. The ridicolous national concepts are outdated and not sustainable. Therefore we need the European Union. It is indispensable. The points were discussion is badly needed are the future legitimation of the EU (European parliament etc.) and the values that it shall stand for.
Nope. Being a political or military superpower is neither effective nor desirable for us Europeans. Why? It would require huge investments into defense if we should enable us to project power. You Americans have to spend billions and bazillions and last but not least thousands of American lives for maintaining your superpower status. Projecting power means lots of conflicts in areas far from our real interest zones. We Europeans can live with a defense that is suitable for our continental needs.
In economical regard the EU is already a superpower. The US has a GDP (purchasing power parity) of $13.06 trillion (2006 est.)and a real growth rate of 2.9% (2006 est.) while the European Union as a whole has a GDP of $13.08 trillion (2006 est.)and a real growth rate of 3.2% (2006 est.) (source: CIA-factbook). That means we already have a slightly bigger economy in Europe than in the US. Nevertheless much has to be done. We have i.e. great differences in per capita income among member states (from $7,000 to $69,000). Therefore you will feel our main efforts rather in our own backyard than in animosity with the US.
P.S.
This American blahblah about Eurabia is quite ridicolous from our side of the big pond. Most muslims in Europe are social underdogs with practically no education. They are simply far too dumb and for sure not enough to build up a "caliphate". 3.7% of the German population are Muslims from Turkey i.e.. If they should try they would loose their welfare check immediately. As far as I know you Americans have also your problems with your minorities. Maybe you remember the L.A. riots in 1992. The damage and the blood toll there was higher than the one in the recent riots in Paris i.e..
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.