VIA GLENN:
BY PASSING A NEW TREATY WITHOUT THE SUPPORT OF EVERY MEMBER NATION THE EU HAS IN EFFECT ABROGATED THE EU TREATY - WHICH REQUIRES CONSENSUS.
THIS EXPOSES THE NEW "TREATY" AS A LOSE-LOSE PROPOSITION:
- IF IT STANDS, THEN IT PROVES THAT THE EU IS AN UNLAWFUL TYRANNY OVER ITS MEMBER STATES - WHICH SHOULD PROMPT THE CITIZENS OF ITS MEMBER NATIONS TO JUSTIFIABLY IGNORE AND CIVILLY DISOBEY ALL EU LAWS AND REGULATIONS.
- IF IT FAILS, THE THE EURO COLLAPSES.
IF I WAS IN A EURO-CURRENCY NATION, THEN I SHOULD WANT TO DIVERSIFY MY ASSETS OUT OF EURO'S AND INTO SWISS FRANCS AND GOLD AND DOLLARS.
6 comments:
None of the leaders of the EU/Fourth Reich have been voted in so it starts at the very beginning: it is an illegitimate dictatorship!!
We may be able to vote for individual MEPs but not the leaders or any other person who holds power like that leftist ignoramus scum Baroness Cath Ashton,the Foreign Representative and a former CND apparatchik and wife of a prominent Labour insider, Peter Kellner. The whole mess is illegitimate!!
I think you and Glenn are wrong here. As far as I know there is nothing in the EU treaty that abrogates the rights of member states to enter into bilateral or multilateral agreements. The agreement to save the Euro laid out now can be considered outside the EU regime...and may create a 2 tier system in the EU
BTW the leaders of the individual member states are elected...it is the EU commissioners who are appointed.
ns: u r wrong.
and neither glenn or i are originating the argument; eu lawyers are.
this is not a bilateral or multilateral agreement outside of the eu; it is an amendment to the eu treaty and that violates the eu treaty.
excerpt:
The euro-zone 17 in combination with six other countries quickly began moving forward on their own. But is such a move legal? European Union lawyers have their doubts that the kind of euro-zone fiscal union within the EU would be allowed.
Changes to the EU treaty, after all, must be unanimous. Furthermore, EU officials in Brussels say, because monetary union is regulated extensively in the Lisbon Treaty, reform can only be implemented within the existing legal framework. The legal services experts of the European Commission, the European Central Bank and the European Council, which represents the member states in Brussels, are all in agreement. A treaty concluded only by the 17 euro-zone governments would be illegal, they say.
additional excerpt:
European Council President Herman Van Rompuy agrees. He too feels that it would be difficult to legally enshrine the new supervisory powers of the EU institutions if they were approved only by the 17 euro-zone countries
EUROPEAN SOCIALISTS WHO SAY THE DEAL IS NOT AN EU TREATY AMENDMENT ARE LIKE OBAMA WHO SAYS THE HEALTHCARE INSURANCE MANDATE IS NOT A MANDATE BUT A TAX.
AS LINCOLN SAID,
JUST BECAUSE YOU CALL A DOG'S TAIL A LEG DOESN'T MAKE IT A LEG.
THE "DEAL" GIVE UNELECTED EU BUREAUCRATS POWER OVER BUDGETS OF THE NATIONS WHOSE LEADERS SOLD OUT.
IT'S THE EFFECTIVE END OF DEMOCRACY ON THE CONTINENT.
PEOPLE WHOSE ELECTED GOVERNMENTS DON'T CONTROL THEIR OWN BUDGETS ARE NOT LIVING IN A DEMOCRACY.
BTW:
THE LEADERS OF GREECE AND ITALY WERE NOT ELECTED.
AND THE LEADERS OF GERMANY AND AND DENMARK DO NOT COME OUT OF PARTIES THAT HAVE MAJORITIES; THEY HAVE COALITIONS WITH OTHER PARTIES WHOSE PLATFORM ARE VERY DIFFERENT IN SIGNIFICANT WAYS.
BUT IF THE ELECTED LEADER MUST NOW DO THE BIDING OF SOCIALIST SCUM LIKE BARROSO AND LUMPOY, THEN FOR ALL INTENTS AND PURPOSES THEY ARE NOT REPRESENTATIVES OF THEIR PEOPLE, BUT TOOLS OF THE EU.
APPARATCHIKS, NOT DEMOCRATIC LEADERS.
Post a Comment