Open Letter on the Conferences of Shame

On March 6 last we posted on the file in Articles entitled "Transnational Bankruptcy" the news that - after the US, Israel and Canada - Italy has announced it too is pulling out of the racist hate-fest commonly referred to as Durban II.

At this moment the UK, France and the Netherlands are sitting on the fence, hoping against hope that antisemitism and Anti-Zionism will be struck from the final declaration.

From the shameful spectacle of the first Durban instalment, we know this is just not going to happen. The UN is increasingly a soapbox for entities actively combating universal values.

One group of Irish have had it. Tom Carew, Chairman of the Ireland-Israel Friendship League, has just submitted an open letter to the Irish Government.

We suggest that sympathetic readers whose governments belong to the fence dwelling nations, draft and send similar pamphlets to their leaders:

Canada, Israel, Italy, and USA [under President Obama] have already refused to
attend the UN "Durban II" Conference on Racism in Geneva in April, which is a follow-up to "Durban I" in 2001, which, on Arab and Muslim insistence, condemned only Israel, and, on African insistence, demanded huge Western reparations for slavery. As a result, USA and Israel walked out of "Durban I".

The current text of the Draft Outcome Document, for signature by all attending states, is "not salvageable", said the US State Dept. It:

[a] introduces the dubious, newly-invented notion of "defamation of religion", on Muslim insistence, which assaults freedom of speech, but does not endorse freedom to leave, practice or propagate any religion of your choice;

[b] again singles out only one State - Israel, for condemnation, as happened in 2001 at "Durban I";

[c] demands huge Western reparation for slavery;

[d] has a planning body chaired by Libya, that also includes Iran, Pakistan and Cuba on it; and

[e] includes attempts to counter Western efforts to combat terrorism.

The Canadian Immigration Minister, Jason Kenney, in a recent speech in UK, declared that the conference platform "runs counter to Canada's tradition as an international champion of tolerance". Canada, last year, was the first State to declare it would boycott "Durban II".

It seems worthwhile for all of us to urgently ensure that no EU state, nor the EU as such, takes any part in this hypocritical and sinister charade. Specifically, we urge the European Presidency to act according to its own guidelines and therefore boycott Durban II, and encourage European nations to follow suit. The chief planners for Durban II are a 20-strong panel, chaired by Libya and comprise a diverse group that includes countries ranked among the worst offenders of human rights, among them Iran, Pakistan and Cuba.

As such, one example of what may be expected at the upcoming Durban II conference can be seen through the results of a recent committee tasked with drafting for Durban II, whereby Iran and Syria asked that provisions against Holocaust-denial be deleted. Syria also requested that mention of the Holocaust should be minimized as the Syrians claimed that there is "no agreement on the consensus on the percentage of those who perished in the Holocaust."

The fact that Holocaust denial is gaining a prominent place at a United Nations-sponsored conference ostensibly devoted to combating racism is troubling and beyond hypocritical. It is nothing short of a Kafka-esque scenario when some of the world’s worst human rights abusers are not only let off the hook, but chair an international conference on the issue.

For over a year, European leaders have made important statements that they will not tolerate the virulent Anti-Semitism that was on display at the first Durban conference in 2001. The Durban II committees have had ample time to prevent a repeat of the debacle from the first Durban conference.

However, with only a few weeks left before the UN conference convenes, and no wholesale improvements on the draft language expected, Europeans are waiting for their elected officials to show their leadership on human rights and Anti-Semitism by announcing that they will not take part in Durban II.

Tom Carew
Chair
Ireland-Israel Friendship League
Dublin

- Filed on Articles in "Transnational Bankruptcy" -

Proudly Introducing ... GlobSoc!

Reading a single news item about France taking over the EU Presidency, one surreal comment after another bizarre statement vy for attention. It is astonishing to realize to what extent European leaders - in the worst of Hegelian traditions - have managed to insulate themselves from the electorate.

Times Online article "Nicholas Sarkozy embarks on a mission to save the European Union" for example is illustrative of the chasm that separates them from Europe's citizens.

'Super Sark': “The question is how we give Europe a way of protecting its citizens in their daily lives,” he said on France3 television. “There is no shame in talking about protection.” Europe needed to be protected against the effects of globalisation, he added, warming to one of his favourite themes. “Europe worries people and worse still, citizens are asking if it is not the nation state that protects them better than the Union.”

Oh dear, where to start on this one? With the qualification of globalization as a threat, whereas the EU is its main promoter; or with the brazen call for protectionism, at a time when we all know that protectionism stifles economic growth?

Or should we begin by nailing the suggestion to the wall that an as yet non-existent federation could be primary in people's lives, while the nation state - officially at least - is still the operative unit? As if the latter has already passed out of common consciousness, and the federal behemoth has long taken its place! Both suggestions are factually untrue, but in all probability the statement reflects the Eurocratic state of mind.

In a recent essay "Is the Nation State Obsolete?" published on The Brussels Journal, essayist Fjordman quotes British philosopher and author Roger Scruton, who is posing the crucial query that our leaders have answered for us without prior consultation:

“Democracies owe their existence to national loyalties – the loyalties that are supposedly shared by government and opposition, by all political parties, and by the electorate as a whole. Yet everywhere the idea of the nation is under attack – either despised as an atavistic form of social unity, or even condemned as a cause of war and conflict, to be broken down and replaced by more enlightened and more universal forms of jurisdiction. But what, exactly, is supposed to replace the nation and the nation state?”

Those who follow developments relative to transnational progressivism know the answer well: extrapolating the current geopolitical trends one arrives at four or five gigantic post-democratic, multi-cultural and multi-ethnic 'empires' in competition for power and influence, pending the imposition of a global, collective dictatorship: GlobSoc!

Returning to Super Sark saving the EU, it is at least encouraging to note that contrary to some, the German President Horst Köhler can muster respect for the rule of law as he abstained from signing the documents until a legal challenge is heard by the Constitutional Court! He must be his mother's pride and joy! To his Chancellor Merkel he's merely an embarrassment. She's more appreciative of her counterpart Gordon Brown ... he has pushed ahead with the ratification while it was still subject to a High Court ruling! That's post-democratic expediency for you!

That's right, Ms Merkel, by all means: put further enlargement on hold until the treaty is signed and sealed, and stop all thought processes lest we come to realize we are witnessing a massive act of treason, unparalleled in human history.

Given the breadth and length of this single news item it is perhaps best to give the sensitive subject of the French-led Mediterranean Union a miss for the moment. The ongoing integration of Europe, North Africa and chunks of the Middle East warrants a library in itself. Let's limit the contribution here to providing a link to the shocking content of the Eurabia dossier.

Postscript: After the tiny minority of Irish dared challenge the dictatorship of the majority and plunged Europe headlong into crisis; and also the Czech Republic voiced its reservations; today the proud nation of Poland is expressing des qualmes and pangs of the conscience.

EURSOC: Polish President "Kaczynski said it would be "pointless" to sign the treaty, even though Poland's parliament ratified it last month. A conservative nationalist (often at odds with Poland's government), he is said to be keen to defend the EU's principle of unanimity on major issues. Treaties can only enter into force if approved by every member state; Ireland has said no, so Lisbon cannot be passed. "If one breaks the rule of unanimity one time, it will never exist again," he told a Polish newspaper. He's quite right in this respect, and it is unusual that he has not been supported by other smaller nations, who traditionally defend unanimity as one of the few bulwarks the EU's less powerful states have against the giants."

EURSOC has more good news ... "The Herald Tribune reported yesterday that a Provençal town has recently started accepted the Franc currency once again - and the gimmick has proved very popular ...

- Filed on Articles in "Building the State of Europe" -

Irish Reject "Treaty of Lisbon," Ratification Continues

Yessssss! Thanks, Paddy! Now let's see with what anti-democratic engineering feat from hell the neotots will push through EU statehood come hell or high water ... a gap of seven percent is considered too close to call???

Update: EU Observer: "Brussels calls for Lisbon treaty ratification to continue" ... of course ... "This vote should not be seen as a vote against the EU … commission president Jose Manuel Barroso said in Brussels (...) "the treaty is alive" and "we should go on and try to find a solution."

The Times of Ireland: "Lisbon Treaty looks likely to be rejected"

The Lisbon Treaty looks set to be rejected by the Irish people as counting of votes continues around the country this afternoon.

With 29 of 43 constituencies declared, the No vote is leading by 53.5 per cent to 46.5 per cent. All but six constituencies have rejected the treaty, with a national running total of 527,591 voting in favour of Lisbon and 608,156 votes against.

Tallies from early on in the count this morning showed the No campaign appeared to be winning in most constituencies across the State, with significant majorities emerging from rural and urban working class areas in particular.

Minister for Foreing Affairs Micheál Martin, who is also director of Fianna Fáil’s referendum campaign, said there was a perceived lack of information on the treaty. "People were on the doorstep were saying 'I still don't know enough about this treaty'."

This was a "significant" factor, the Minister claimed. The Minister said he was not blaming the Referendum Commission but said there was a sense that the treaty "just didn't register" and "lacked a clear tangible".

In his own constituency, Cork South Central, the treaty was rejected by more than 55 per cent of the electorate there.

Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs Éamon Ó Cuív conceded defeat this morning for the treaty in the constituency, Galway West, while Fine Gael leader Enda Kenny also conceded defeat for the treaty in Mayo early on in the count.

The founder of Libertas, Declan Ganley, who campaigned for a No vote, said: "The Irish people have rejected the Lisbon Treaty. "it is a great day for Irish democracy", he added.

"This is democracy in action . . . and Europe needs to listen to the voice of the people," Mr Ganley said. He added that the Taoiseach, Brian Cowen, "has a mandate to go back to Europe and do the best job possible".

Polling stations closed at 10pm last night after 15 hours of voting in the referendum, the result of which will determine the future development of the European Union and its institutions. Voting began at 7am, and stations in 43 constituencies were open until 10pm.

Turnout was reported at about 40 per cent by 9pm, up from 20 per cent in some constituencies by mid-afternoon. In general, turnout was reported to be higher in city areas than in rural areas.

By the time polls closed at 10pm last night, around 50 per cent of the three million people registered to vote were understood to have cast their ballots.

There is concern in other EU countries about the impact of the decision by Irish voters, and the French and German governments are expected to make a joint statement later today once the Irish result is known.

Ireland was the only country to hold a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty. >>>

Updates:

- Flanders Fields: "Barroso's Empire Turns Green!"

- Filed on Articles in "The Lisbon Treaty" -

The Irish Lisbon Referendum: updates throughout

Ireland is the only EU country that granted its citizens the right to vote on the EU Lisbon Treaty. They now have the power to ditch the pseudo constitution that will turn the EU into a state instead of a supranational 'club.' An analysis of the treaty and what it all means is available on the Articles File.

- Caption: a four petaled shamrock: Dutch for good luck -

The Irish Times: "Voters go to polls in Lisbon referendum"

Voting begun early this morning on the Lisbon Treaty referendum with Ireland's electorate deciding the future structure of the European Union.

Polling stations opened at 7am and will stay open until 10pm to encourage as many people as possible to vote.

For first time in the State's history more than three million voters will be eligible to cast their ballots in a European referendum. The electorate stands at 3,051,278 as of February 15th, 2008.

Every person who is an Irish citizen and is included in the register of electors, which came into force on February 2008, 15th, is entitled to vote. Those included in the supplement to the register can also vote. (...) >>>

Update:

The Irish Times: "Polls close in Lisbon Treaty referendum"

Polling stations closed at 10pm tonight after 15 hours of voting in the Lisbon Treaty referendum, the result of which will determine the future development of the European Union and its institutions.

Voting began at 7am and statons in 43 constituencies were open until 10pm to encourage as many people as possible to vote.

Both the No and Yes sides of the treaty debate expressed confidence today that the result will go in their favour, but the result may be tight with 17 per cent of voters still undecided in a poll last weekend.

The result is expected by late afternoon tomorrow. (...) >>>

- Filed on Articles in "The Treaty of Lisbon, the Constitution of the State of EU" -

Resistance to EU Post-Democracy Widening

It could well be on instructions of their master's voice, but from this location there's remarkably little media coverage devoted to the upcoming Irish E.U. Referendum on the Lisbon Treaty to be held on 12th June. Ireland being the only nation whose government granted their people a say in the matter, the entire anti Euro camp is on top of the Irish to vote against the treaty.

Resistance to transnational progressivism is widening, and is coming from unexpected quarters from time to time. Consider this post in "Asthma Care," a blog affiliated to a Leftist organization with German roots, the Dr Rath Health Foundation, devoted to cellular vitamin treatment and "Health, Peace and Social Justice" (the question rather is, who is not involved in political activism these day?).

It would appear that the good doctor - after campaigning against the war in Iraq - is now focusing on evil pharmaceutical corporations and the mob connections of former EU commissioner Frattini. Vitamins, while good in and of themselves, do not protect against severe cases of paranoia. He's now got his scalpel into the post-democratic tendencies of the neotots in Brussels. In passing we meet a old acquaintance: the EU's own fifth columnists of Common Purpose.

Asthma Care Blog: "Lisbon treaty- does it affect our health options?"

Six non-governmental organizations (NGOs), collectively representing consumers from all 27 European Union (EU) countries, are strongly urging Irish voters to vote ‘No’ in Ireland’s upcoming referendum on the Lisbon Treaty. Rather than resulting in Europe becoming “more efficient”, as the treaty’s supporters claim it would do, the NGOs are deeply concerned that a ‘Yes’ vote in Ireland on June 12 and the treaty’s subsequent enforcement by Brussels would only further worsen the EU’s growing democratic deficiencies. The supposed political and procedural efficiencies that would result from the treaty’s ratification, they argue, can only be achieved via the further compromising of democracy, personal privacy and freedom of choice - all three of which are now increasingly under threat in the EU. (...)

There are powerful moves through EU directives to curb our right to buy or treat ourselves with natural therapies, food supplements and alternative medicines. Little do people know that 110,000 EU laws which have quietly been transposed into UK law will be enforced after the new Lisbon Treaty is ratified and most certainly by 1st January 2009. Something very sinister called Common Purpose has now infiltrated every institution in Europe to prepare people for membership of the European Union.

The six organizations are campaigning for citizens to have the right to vote in referendums whenever significant changes to laws affecting them are made at either national or European level. The campaign, the European Referendum Initiative, is being backed by the Alliance for Health, Peace and Social Justice (Dr. Rath Health Foundation) >>>

Update:

EUX: "Outcome of Irish EU vote too difficult to call"

A new poll published on Sunday shows a lead of 42 percent for the 'Yes' camp in the campaign for the Irish referendum on the European Union's Lisbon Treaty, while the 'no' campaign now is seen at 39 percent (...) the 'no' vote is gaining in support (...) the yes side is still ahead (...) the outcome of Thursday's referendum now has become too difficult to call. (...) >>>

- Filed on Articles in "The 'Lisbon Treaty', the Constitution of the State of The EU" -

Ryanair and the EU ...

Michael O'Leary, the charismatic boss of Ryanair, is an angry man. Reacting to the multiple legal actions taken against its low cost aerial company, he didn't hesitate to accuse EU's institutions of corruption.

Well, a honeymoon between Ryanair and EU isn't for tomorrow. Proof is that all available actions against Ryanair have been tried, especially the ones for receiving illegal allowances from airports managements, while all actions taken by Ryanair against other companies for the same reasons (Alitalia, Lufthansa, Air France) have not.

Yet Ryanair keeps on growing, despite all endeavours to pull it up short. Ryanair employs 4,800 people and is Europe most profitable carrier. In 2008 the number of passengers is expected to overtake British Airways' worldwide total.

O'Leary's USP is simple: low fares. Ryanair's average ticket costs €41 (£27), compared to €62 (£41) on easyJet, or €268 (£178) on British Airways.

The EU's attitude towards Ryanair is more than questionable. Perfect example is the merger between Ryanair and Aer Lingus. The EU anti trust authorities rejected in June Ryanair's takeover bid for rival Irish carrier Aer Lingus, ruling that a combined operation would create a Ryanair monopoly in Ireland.

Yet the EU in this decade has approved a string of other European mergers involving Air France, Dutch carrier KLM, Lufthansa and the defunct Swissair. Clearly there is a double standard: the European Commission refuses a merger for "local reasons" while weeks before, it approved the merger of four big companies operating all over Europe. Indeed, the same logic wasn't applied when the merger Thomas Cook/ My Travel and TUI/ First Choice was approved, creating a real monopoly over seaside resort tourism within Europe.

With regard to Ryanair and Aer Lingus, O'Leary claims the move is politically motivated and is made to appease politicians in Dublin. The Ryanair boss says he will appeal against the expected decision at the EU's Court of First Instance.

He says "This decision is politically motivated, designed to appease the narrow interests of the Irish government, which was the only party, other than Aer Lingus itself, to object to the merger," O'Leary told media sources.

Ryanair has been subjected to a series of EU investigations into its deals with far-flung, small airports, most recently when investigators began probing whether Ryanair's exceptionally cheap contracts with three airports in Germany and Finland violated competition laws. The EU is also looking into Ryanair's contracts with airports on the Mediterranean islands of Sardinia and Malta.

But while Ryanair is investigated, Michael O'Leary only gets refusals when requesting other companies to be investigated for the same reasons. So Ryanair is suing the European Commission over its refusal to conduct a probe into German government funding for a Munich airport terminal, whether it amounts to illegal state aid for Lufthansa AG.

For the past two years Ryanair has accused European leaders of demonstrating bias in favor of the continent's national flag carriers, citing a range of government financial support, benefiting Lufthansa, Air France, Alitalia and Olympic Airways of Greece.

O'Leary said Lufthansa and its partner airlines enjoyed "exclusive use" of the terminal, which was built with more than €1 billion (US$1.4 billion) in state aid. He said the terminal had run up losses exceeding €100 million (US$140 million) annually.

"No private investor would have invested in the loss-making facility and then granted exclusive access to just one airline. Lufthansa is therefore receiving substantial state aid at Munich Airport, which distorts competition in the European air transport market," O'Leary said.

"Munich Airport's refusal to allow Ryanair to use this facility has subjected passengers in Bavaria to the stranglehold of Lufthansa's high fares and fuel surcharges," he said. Ryanair mounted a similar lawsuit last week against the European Commission, alleging it has ignored a previous Ryanair complaint against French government policies that allegedly favor Air France. That lawsuit was also filed in the European Court of First Instance.

"The French government's operation of massively discounted domestic airport fees in France — almost all of which supports Air France — amounts to approximately €1 billion (US$1.4 billion) of illegal state aid benefiting Air France, yet the commission has refused to do anything about this for the last eighteen months," O'Leary said.

Ryanair also applied to the regional administrative Court in Lazio, Italy for an immediate injunction to overturn the recent unlawful attempt by ENAC (the Italian civil aviation Authority) to restrict capacity at Rome Ciampino Airport by almost 30% from November 2007.

The Irish airline says that in so doing, the Italian authorities are trying to support the terminally ill Alitalia by blocking low fares and competition in Rome. Ryanair has also submitted a complaint to the European Commission, asking it to immediately intervene on behalf of consumers to prohibit this unlawful reduction of capacity at Rome’s secondary airport.

When asked if he was not considering buying Alitalia, O'Leary answered that he was not interested, even for free! Too much trade union and political influence over this company, he said. And he has a point.

What we see with Ryanair is the evil role played by the EU. While the worst performing companies get protection, the best are taking a beating. The EU prefers spending time and money to keep ill managed carriers afloat, instead of encouraging brilliant businessmen.

And what about European citizens! Their tax money is wasted, while the EU tries to force them into expensive air travel!

The EU: ill advised, incompetent, corrupt, an illegal super state.

- Filed on Articles in "The Economics and Monetary Dossier", cat. Economics -