We've beenj telling you all this for years.
AND YOUR STILL DEAF!.
WE REMIND YOU OF CICERO STATEMENT!
Cicero
Treason From Within
11-3-8 - "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear. The traitor is the plague."
-
- --Marcus Tullius Cicero
11-3-8
Dr Richard North
Review on EU - THE EU SCEPTIC MOVEMENT AND EXIT STRATEGY FOR UK.
So it came to pass that Ann Winterton won the parliamentary lottery and got to ask the first question at PMQs today. She chose to ask the prime minister:
"When the Lisbon treaty comes into force, the European Council will become a formal institution of the European Union. As the UK member of that institution, will the Prime Minister confirm that he is bound by its rules and is thus obliged to further the objectives of the European Union in preference to those of the United Kingdom?"
The prime minister replied: We joined the European Union in the 1970s, and we hold by our obligations to the European Union, but that does not prevent us from representing the national sovereignty of this country.
Unfortunately, the "mice" got at the question in the early edition (on-line), with the Hansard converting the "European Council" into "Council of the European Union", which is the current name for the Council of Ministers.
As originally recorded in Hansard, therefore, the question did not make sense. The "Council of the European Union" (aka Council of Ministers) was one of the original community institutions, set up by the Treaty of Rome. The European Council – starting as an informal meeting of the heads of states and governments – did not exist then, and has never formally been integrated into the community structure, until now.
Having now checked the original video recording, Ann most definitely said "European Council". For some bizarre reason Hansard had changed what she had said. To the spoken version though, Brown's answer was revealing – as much for what he did not say as what he did.
"Will the Prime Minister confirm that he [as a member of the European Council] is bound by its rules, and is thus obliged to further the objectives of the European Union in preference to those of the United Kingdom?" he was asked. Did he answer the question?
What he does tells us is that: "we hold by our obligations to the European Union". Yet theconstitutional Lisbon treaty will amend Article 9 of the TEU to incorporate the European Council as an institution of the Union. As such, it:
... shall aim to promote its values, advance its objectives, serve its interests, those of its citizens and those of the Member States, and ensure the consistency, effectiveness and continuity of its policies and actions.That "obligation", according to Mr Brown, "does not prevent us from representing the national sovereignty of this country." Well, we can all be mightily reassured by that. The prime minister is not stopped from representing the national sovereignty of this country.
But, what of the question of whether advancing the objectives of the EU and serving its interests takes precedence over serving the interests of its citizens and those of the Member States?
Bearing in mind that the European Council is also obliged to "ensure the consistency, effectiveness and continuity of its [the EU's] policies and actions" – with no mention of member states, where does that leave the prime minister, as member of the European Council?
Answer, of course, there was none. He can represent us ... but his duties and obligations are clear. And, as we all know, EU law takes precedence over UK law. The prime minister, and his successors, are duly obligated to obey.
COMMENT THREAD
PMQs today were described as "very sombre", with the prime minister opening the pro
ceedings by making tributes to the 37 soldiers killed in Afghanistan since the House last sat. That, inevitably, set the tone for the rest of the session.
Ann Winterton got to ask her question about the constitutional Lisbon treaty and we'll look at that later, when we have the Hansard transcript.
The Guardian covered the session, and missed the point – as you would expect it to – and gave more attention to Tony Wright, (Cannock Chase) who had a "good, pithy question".
What is more dangerous, he asked, politicians becoming generals, or generals becoming politicians? There's a laugh, recorded the newspaper, then telling us: "Brown says he thinks he knows who Wright is talking about and he says he wants to thank Sir Richard Dannatt (who has just joined the Tories) for his service."
You expect stupid questions from politicians, so we weren't disappointed, but to realise quite how stupid, you have to read this.
Interestingly, The Times publishes a poll on Afghanistan today, which records that calls for British troops to leave have risen sharply, standing at 36 percent – up from 29 percent in mid-September.
The poll also asked about attitudes to Dannatt joining the Tory ranks. Nearly half the public (48 percent) believes he was wrong to have become involved in party politics within six weeks of retiring as head of the Army, with 42 percent saying he was right.
However, Tory voters (62 per cent) back him, the only group to do so, which is very illuminating. This is the group you would expect, instinctively, to deplore the blurring of the line between the military and party politics. It demonstrates, more than anything, the power of tribalism and the way it distorts judgement. And we think, compared with the Afghanis, that we're civilised?
Following PMQs, there was a statement by the prime minister on Afghanistan, during which, as expected, the troop level was raised to 9,500. We will also report on this in detail once the Hansard transcript is up on the net.
COMMENT THREAD
It's interesting how they do catch up ... eventually. TheDaily Mail is running a piece headed: "Whatever happened to global warming? How freezing temperatures are starting to shatter climate change theory".
In the freezing foothills of Montana, it tells us, a distinctly bitter blast of revolution hangs in the air. And while the residents of the icy city of Missoula can stave off the -10C chill with thermals and fires, there may be no easy remedy for the wintry snap's repercussions. The temperature has shattered a 36-year record. Further into the heartlands of America, the city of Billings registered -12C on Sunday, breaking the 1959 barrier of -5C.
Closer to home, we are informed, Austria is seeing its earliest snowfall in history with 30 to 40 centimetres already predicted in the mountains. Such dramatic falls in temperatures provide superficial evidence for those who doubt that the world is threatened by climate change. But, the paper continues, most pertinent of all, of course, are the growing volume of statistics ...
Actually, you could have read most of the snow news (and more) here, here, here and here. We've been at it since Saturday. We missed Austria (although the Mail missed Tibet) but there are details here. It is indeed the earliest Autumn snowfall in years. Furthermore, there are predictions of snow down to 400m in the provincial capitals of Innsbruck, Salzburg and St Polten, which would be the first time it has snowed this low before 20 October since records began. This is – as we pointed out elsewhere is not normal.
However, that the Mail is even talking in these terms about "climate change" is significant, and it is happening in other newspapers as well. On Sunday, the Sunday Times review section ran a big feature (not on-line but front page pictured) and the Australian press is having a go. The Financial Post is picking up the vibes as well and gradually, it seems, the media is getting the message – global warming is a crock.
Needless to say, the politicians and that fool Rowan Williams are way behind the curve – and still the evil b******s are trying to tax us to death. But otherwise, the tide is turning ... or the cold draught of reality is blowing in, whichever you prefer. I wonder how long it will actually take the politicians to wake up – but then, they have much more important things to worry about. They really are blowing it, in a very different way.
Meanwhile, today there will be PMQs. The very first question to Gordon Brown will be on theconstitutional Lisbon treaty. Staying in wondering mode, what's the betting on whether the media pick it up and report it?
Posts
