I was startled to read in the Christian Science Monitor:
It’s the End of Britain as we know it….if ratified, it will become the decisive act in this creation of a federal European superstate with its capital in Brussels. Britain would become a province and its “Mother of Parliaments,” a regional assembly…
The Eurocrat elite in Brussels might not admit it, but the Treaty of Lisbon is essentially a constitution for a “country” called Europe. More bluntly, it’s a cynical repackaging of the EU Constitution rejected by French and Dutch voters in 2005.
This is being done without a popular vote, despite the fact that Tony Blair promised the UK such a vote.
The BBC site is more reassuring about the treaty:
If it contains the same substance, why is the Lisbon Treaty not a constitution?
The constitution attempted to replace all earlier EU treaties and start afresh, whereas the new treaty amends the Treaty on the European Union (Maastricht) and the Treaty Establishing the European Community (Rome).
So why no popular vote? It seems that if even one of the 27 countries rejects the “treaty”, the treaty is void.
Apparantly, the popular votes that turned down an earlier consitution must have taught the Eurocrats a lesson, because only Ireland is planning to hold a popular vote on the treaty… Even Denmark, which rejected the previous treaty, has decided since there is no threat to Danish sovereignty with the new treaty, they don’t have to vote on it again.
So this writer to an Irish paper urges voters to affirm the treaty, but asks why has there been so little publicity about the treaty in the Irish press?
Indeed. Why the lack of discussion? Google news has about 40 articles on the Lisbon treaty, six of these about the Irish vote and the rest about which countries presidents are going to say yes. Discussion? Must be around here somewhere…
And that’s the problem: I may read three newspapers a day, but where are the “naysayer” articles so I can find a good discussion about the Lisbon Treaty? This BBC article is….soothing and reassuring… this article says the treaty has cleared the House of Commons…
This article has one naysayer, who objects to the “process” and thinks that it should come to a vote. She is the only one who points out the new treaty is a sham, and that it would allow bureaucrats in Brussels to make criminal law and decide public spending, while eliminating the national veto.
Everyone else however thinks it’s all hunky dory.
But is it?
Most alarmingly, though, is that the Lisbon Treaty can be extended indefinitely without recourse to further treaties or referendums.
So Europe is busy rushing toward their utopia, with little public input, and few US or even European publications seem to bother to have a discussion on it.
It’s enough to make one paranoid about a wicked New World Order.
In the US, elections might get hysterical about a lot of issues, but most of them will be hashed out before next November.
One would think that giving away sovereignty by our European allies should be worthy of a headline or two in US papers, and lots of words and arguments in European papers. But no, it seems to be very polite, a discussion between gentlemen, with no loud mouths allowed to spoil the party.
Nancy Reyes is a retired physician living in the rural Philippines. Her website is Finest Kind Clinic and Fishmarket.