All 3 entries tagged Eu
April 21, 2008
Paul Joseph Watson
During an attempt to assault activists who asked him a question in Dublin, a European MEP tripped and fell on his face and the entire incident was caught on camera, but that didn't stop the media from reporting that an "anti-EU gang" of thugs had screamed abuse and assaulted Proinsias de Rossa - in a crass attempt to smear opposition to the European Union.
The video shows de Rossa being approached slowly by the cameraman and another We Are Change Ireland activist who asks, "Why did you do it?" to which de Rossa responds, "When are you going to grow up?"
Earlier, de Rossa had called for Irish citizens to support the sovereignty-stripping EU Lisbon Treaty, which is a re-packaged version of the European Constitution that was already summarily rejected by voters upon introduction.
The two begin walking down the street and de Rossa is the first to physically put his arm on the activist as he moves him out of the way to cross the street.
De Rossa then lunges for another cameraman behind him and then begins running towards him.
De Rossa clearly then appears to trip and fall to the ground as he reaches out for the cameraman.
We Are Change Ireland flagged down a police van themselves to report the incident and, even as media reports are forced to admit, after questioning eyewitnesses, the police made no arrests. If anyone should have been arrested for assault it was de Rossa himself.
Watch the video.
Bearing in mind what actually happened as seen on the video, look at how the media reported the incident.
Under the headline Anti-EU gang assaults Irish MEP, the BBC reported, "Irish former minister Proinsias de Rossa was knocked to the ground after a public meeting in Dublin on Monday night, according to the Labour Party."
The Labour Party being bastions of honesty, of course.
"Labour leader Eamon Gilmore said the MEP was confronted by a group of men who screamed abuse at him before knocking him over and pinning him down," added the report.
Watch the video again. Who exactly knocks de Rossa to the ground? The invisible man? It is clearly de Rossa's out of control temper and his shock at the audacity of citizens asking questions of a politician that led to him falling flat on his face.
The Belfast Telegraph went a step further, claiming de Rossa had been "attacked".
Again - police investigated the incident and interviewed eyewitnesses before making no arrests, proving that no "assault" or "attack" on de Rossa ever took place. No crime had been committed.
The Associated Press seized on the purported "assault" to smear anti-EU groups.
"The episode highlighted hostility in Ireland's hard left to the European Union, which requires a "yes" vote from Ireland for the treaty, the product of several years' negotiations, to become law," according to the report.
Again this reflects a fundamental ignorance of the fact that We Are Change Ireland were born out of the 9/11 Truth Movement, which revolves around the central issue of the 9/11 attacks, and not any prescribed political partisanship.
Why were the media so keen to perpetuate such a giant fraud and smear the activists as violent thugs while exalting the pro-EU MEP as an innocent victim?
Because a "no" vote in Ireland, the only EU member nation to allow a referendum on the issue, would signal the death knell for the Lisbon Treaty, and the press - especially the BBC who routinely propagandize for the expansion of the EU and have received over £141 million in loans and grants from Brussels - have to engage in dirty tricks and smear campaigns to try and reverse public opinion which has always been anti-European Union.
January 24, 2008
October 30, 2007
Tony Blair vowed to give us a referendum on the EU Constitution. He later resolved to issue multiple referendums and a multi-million pound propaganda campaign until we voted yes. Then, before leaving office, he endorsed “a less ambitious new treaty that would not require a referendum”. Brown has accordingly “ruled out” a referendum on the resurrected EU Constitution (aka the “Reform Treaty”), ignoring the hundreds of thousands of citizens who signed last-minute petitions.
Vague rhetoric about the protection of British parliamentary sovereignty is pure spin. The long-term plan has always been to create a federal European state, and Brown is doing nothing to inhibit or expose it.
“It is psychological terrorism to suggest the spectre of a European superstate” said Italian President Giorgio Napolitano at a Sienna news conference last June. “Those who are anti-EU are terrorists”. As much as I am alarmed by this language, I can see how people might sympathise with the underlying conception. That some of the most publicised opposition to the EU has come from shrill, rabble-rousing tabloids like The Sun, and smug, ignorant characters like Robert Kilroy-Silk, has taught euro-curious liberals and centrists to equate warnings of a federal Europe or “superstate” with populist fear-mongering.
In fact, a centralised European government has clearly been the agenda for many years and has largely been actualised. There is a European Commission – an unelected executive accompanied by 54,000 similarly unelected bureaucrats. There is a European Parliament, whose members are unaccountable to even the fraction of people who voted for them as, in a paralysis of paperwork, they rubberstamp the Commission’s proposals. There is a European Court of Justice. Angela Merkel, the same German Chancellor who drafted the new “Reform Treaty”, has endorsed a common European army.
The new treaty itself proposes a European head of state, an EU diplomatic corps and foreign minister, a common system of criminal justice, and, as it happens, supranational treaty-making powers normally held by sovereign nations.
Still, many assume that the EU will always be securely intergovernmental. Where’s the proof that the project is geared towards supranationalism? First, the EU’s embryonic history reveals that the key founding ideologues behind the project, Jean Monnet and Arthur Salter, were obsessed with the idea of devising a self-perpetuating, clandestine, supranational bureaucracy that would construct a United States of Europe, acquiring powers from nation states through incremental osmosis. This mirrors the current attitude of such figures as former French President and author of the EU Constitution, Valery Giscard d’Estaing, who wrote in Le Monde that by making cosmetic changes to the Constitution “public opinion will be led to adopt, without knowing it, the proposals that we dare not present to them directly”. Though fairly transparent to most, the morphed “Reform Treaty” follows d’Estaing’s plan to “camouflage” the “innovations of the Constitutional Treaty…by breaking them up into several texts”.
Second, documents recently uncovered by BBC Radio 4 from the archives of Hugh Gaitskell, Labour Party leader from 1955 until 1963, showed that the first elitist “Bilderberg” conference in 1954 had already decided upon a political European Union. This demonstrates how the 1951 European Coal and Steel Community and the 1957 European Economic Community (renamed the European Community in 1992) were simply necessary stepping-stones. Remember, we had a referendum in 1973 on an “Economic Community” not a “European Union”.
So what’s the problem with a politically unified, federal Europe? The European Council on Foreign Relations, newly created this month, states in its manifesto: “individual European countries regard the world as beyond their control. But if it speaks with one voice, the Europe Union can help shape the world order.” I recognise the appeal of this rallying language, especially at a time when the US government is the bad cop and it seems like we need a unified, alternative foreign policy.
Unfortunately, the US government’s foreign policy does not simply reflect the madness of a rogue group in the Whitehouse, but also the madness of a wide range of multinational corporations and political personalities, well-represented in the USA’s own Council on Foreign Relations, which itself advocates a “harmonised” North American Community.
Political globalisation is a contrived mechanism of unaccountability. The consolidation of political power into “one voice” really means “no voice”, unless you are a corporate spokesman with access to global councils. Brown himself was headhunted for the 1991 Bilderberg conference. His refusal now to give us a referendum on the “Reform Treaty” is an undemocratic symptom of an entirely undemocratic project.