New Tory xenophobia

8 comments from readers

Derek Bennett
08 March 2008 at 11:09

Whenever I read or hear the demented ramblings of Denis MacShane, I have to wonder why he loathes and hates his fellow British citizens and his own country so much. What have we done to upset him that he wants to relegate our nation into a few regions of the EU and our once free Parliament reduced to little more than a rate capped council?

Mr MacShane waffles on about Russia and its lack of democracy, yet in reality he should take a look at the actions of his own political party and the EU. His is the party that promised a referendum on the EU constitution, and despite Mr MacShane's heroes in the EU stating openly that the Treaty of Lisbon is 90 or 98 per cent the same as the EU constitution, his despicable party has denied the people what they promised and have tried to deceive us that it is not the same – sorry Mr MacShane, that won’t wash.

Many consider the EU to be a new Soviet, especially when they look at how it works, its lack of accountability and democracy, yet Denis MacShane in his strange way of thinking considers it to be a wonderful construct. He also berates the Conservatives for being sceptical about the EU ‘s Lisbon (Constitutional) Treaty. In my opinion they are not sceptical enough, we should quit the EU now before we as a nation cease to exist, that is why I support UKIP which does not live in the same EU fantasy world as Mr MacShane.

DarylS
08 March 2008 at 11:22

You support UKIP because you are ignorant and xenophobic. You are backwards. If you consider the EU a "new Soviet" then you have know understanding about either. The EU staying out of Iraq shows exactly how much safer our citizens would be within Europe. Our country now is an embarrassment. Have you exchanged Sterling for Euro's lately? You will end up a little out of pocket!

Derek Bennett
08 March 2008 at 14:41

Rather than opposing my considerations why membership of the EU is not good for the UK, either through constructive or reasoned arguments, Daryl S could only enter into a personal rant aimed against me in which he stated I am “ignorant” and “xenophobic”. Considering Daryl knows nothing about me I fail to understand how he can jump to such insulting conclusions.

To clear Daryl’s ignorance about me, my opposition to the EU comes after studying it closely for the last 18 years. I was one of the many who, during the 1975 referendum on continued membership, voted in favour of remaining in the then Common Market. That was our one and only referendum on this issue and what we have today is not what I was told I was voting for in 1975.

Maybe Daryl should begin to study the EU a little closer, then he will see it lacks democratic accountability. I too opposed the war in Iraq, and like a democrat I have the right, come election time, to punish the Government that made such a bad decision. However, the EU does many things we do not like such as the EU directive on postal services which is forcing the closure of so many post offices, or the enforced privatisation of our railways or an EU wide ID card which is on its way – how do we get shot of the people imposing these things? The simple answer is – you can’t. The EU Commission is unaccountable and unelected and the MEPs have no real power or influence.

I doubt that Daryl has sat in on voting session in the EU Parliament and witnessed the debacle, as I have, the whole thing chaos. There are no real debates and in a voting session which may last between an hour to an hour and a half the MEPs, by a show of hands, will vote on two to three hundred amendments and EU laws – this is not democracy it is legislation on an industrial scale. Maybe Daryl can tell me how, as a member of the electorate, he can vote to change this?

As to his outrageous accusation that I am xenophobic, maybe he should ask my friends from varying cultures and races if they think such. Has Daryl learned another European language as I have tried to do? Does he love Italy and its people as I do? Has he friends on Malta as I have? I love Europe for its differences in language and culture, I respect the right for the people of other countries to remain self governing and to have their own currencies – I have no right to impose my will on them. The real ant-Europeans are those such as Denis MacShane and obviously the ignorant ranting Daryl who seem quite happy to see the EU ride roughshod over our freedoms all across Europe.

newmania
08 March 2008 at 22:31

You support UKIP because you are ignorant and xenophobic. You are backwards.

You are backwards is 'era ouy' :)

Derek Bennet appears to be one of many who have only recently depaired of the Eurpean project. Denis McShane is talking yesterday`s language on the EU which is a dead idea in this country.

Expensive , undemocratic , protectionist bureaucratic and socialist it as much the future as the Eurovision Song Contest is the future of song ...god I hope not

The idea of being ruled by foreigners was only sold on the basis that it woud make us richer in return . As the word has grown and Europe become a small place that fear has receded. There was never any love for it and now it is hatedand pointless.

Cooperation..why not ...gopd relations , yes of course ...being submerged in a corrupt super state ....no no no no no no.

Anne Palmer
11 March 2008 at 14:17

Denis, in my eyes, you are ALL weak men and women in Government for not one of you has the courage (guts) to tell the people exactly what the Treaty of Lisbon is about and the drastic affect it will have on all the people of this Country, and forever. The leaders in most of the other Countries at least have the guts to say they want a Political Union, a federal Union and that they want the EU to speak with one voice in everything especially Foreign Policy and Defence. They want one Army, all things that would violate the solemn Oaths of allegiance each of you make before, even though elected, you can take your seats in Parliament.

Re the Treaty of Lisbon Quote, "The mandate is, however, so detailed and incomprehensible that it is almost impossible to unravel. "that was the aim" admitted one diplomat "to leave as small a margin as possible for the unexpected to happen".... "But what is an innovation?" And in the end, there was no debate. Everybody at the table agreed to keep the Constitution except for the "most visible" and symbolic elements". End of Quotes.

As for what happened in our Parliament recently? The Labour Government has succeeded where the Conservatives failed and that is bringing the whole of Parliament down to the lowest level unimaginable in the past. All of you get tarred with the same brush and all of you cannot possibly expect to be paid must longer for not doing the job you were elected to do and paid for, nor continue to collect such large expenses. I do not belong to any political Party or organisation, and I have read ALL the Treaties (and amendments) which is more perhaps than many MP's have done.

Anne Palmer

TheElitesWin
12 March 2008 at 07:43

Don't any of you understand! It’s just the next step to the new world order, that's why America is trying to unify Canada and Mexico. It is far easier to govern the world when it is collectively broken up into small segments has in the Tri-lateral commission. I despise Brown and Blair, because they know exactly were we are headed.

Anne Palmer
12 March 2008 at 11:58

You are a bit late TheElitesWin, this was started a few years ago. Here is some reading-bits that I can bring to mind,

All this has been on going since 2005, The Transatlantic Policy Network Just google in the titles

The New transatlantic Agenda,

Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America

The North American Future 2025 Project Council of Canadians 0n (6 pages)

A fairly up to date one here and then ask yourself, is it the beginning of the Final war of this World?

Thursday, February 14, 2008 (If The New Statesman will allow it to be printed? I do not know if they will.

Planning Underway for an EU-USA Common Market

Bill Hahn

JBS

http://www.jbs.org/node/7067

Wednesday February 13, 2008

The Transatlantic Policy Network seeks EU-style integration for the European Union and the USA by 2015.

Follow this link to the original source: "Creating a Transatlantic Common Market"

Even with all of the recent attention given to the North American Union (NAU) and its deep integration of trade markets in Canada, Mexico and the USA, it seems another effort at trade integration is underway. This time the plan is for greater integration of the European Union and the United States, and much like the Security and Prosperity Partnership of the NAU, the Transatlantic Union (TAU) is being quietly created.

According to an exclusive at TheNewAmerican.com, a little known NGO (non governmental organization) called the Transatlantic Policy Network, has been working behind the scenes to advance plans to merge the United States with Europe. The article states, "Working carefully, if quietly, since the early 1990s, the organization has moved quickly to gain the agreement of leaders on both sides of the ocean that further integration is necessary and desirable. Now, the organization is much closer to achieving its goals than anyone would suspect."

(Article continues below)

A paper published early last year by the organization entitled, "Completing the Transatlantic Market," states: "It is time for a complementary, top down approach to transatlantic cooperation through a joint commitment by the European Union and the United States to a roadmap for achieving a Transatlantic Market by 2015 and creation of an overarching framework for dialogue and action to achieve that goal."

The big difference between the NAU and the TAU is that Congress has already passed legislation embracing the TAU concept. H. Res. 390 was passed in late 2003 and states that the "United States and the European community are aware of their shared responsibility, not only to further transatlantic security, but to address other common interests such as environmental protection, poverty reduction, combating international crime and promoting human rights, and to work together to meet those transnational challenges which affect the well-being of all." To do this, TheNewAmerican.com points out that laws and regulations would need to be harmonized before any integration could begin.

While Americans were alarmed at this step in the NAU, especially considering how Mexico would need to be brought up to the US and Canada’s standards, we need to be similarly alarmed at the effort to meld the US into a transatlantic common market. Remember that the EU started as a common market that has now morphed into EU citizens not being able to vote on a new constitution, not having local representation (Parliament is forced to regularly travel to Brussels to approve or disapprove a mountain of legislation that they have not seen before) and not having individual national sovereignty for each of the 27 member countries. Rather, all countries are lumped together under a centralized EU bureaucracy.

The political union of Europe did not appear over night, but it did evolve from a European common market. Likewise, the U.S. would not likely undergo a political merger with Europe in the short term. But the natural progression, as demonstrated by the experience of Europe since World War II, is for economic union of the type required for a common market to lead, inexorably, to political union at some point in the future. This is just the sort of entangling alliance the Founding Fathers warned us about. They intended the USA to be independent of Europe. Present day Americans would do well to heed their wisdom.

gnuneo
01 August 2008 at 01:31

there is also clear convergence between Chinese political/economic structures (State Capitalism, or 'Ultra-Capitalism'), and the direction of Western economies.

this is of course hardly surprising, as the tearing up of the Bretton-Woods finance-capital movements restrictions has led the transnational corporations to work in every country in the world - and the owners of those companies, feudalists in open practice, are the true rulers of the world, not the prancing clowns we get to periodically vote between.

soon to 'break away' from the EU (or larger structures) would be like Yorkshire trying to break away from the UK - with the national companies closing down the Yorkshire-based plants and factories, to end any local economy, and destroy the nascent Yorkish democracy.

how would Yorkshire therefore (to continue the analogy) break this stranglehold holding it as part of the UK? By developing its own, locally owned industries and resources, by supporting local cooperatives even in industry and manufacturing, by creating its own mutual banking systems so it cannot be externally bankrupted, and by building the kind of school system that trains its young citizens to become adult citizens, ready to take their place in cooperative companies.

http://www.educationfutures.org/Respect.htm

you will perhaps note, that every single one of these proposals, are the exact opposite of the kind of policies we have seen since Thatcher came to power in 1979. That was the year when the UK was taken over by a foreign, revolutionary Govt dedicated to the destruction of the UK itself. Is the EU anti-democratic? Oh yes, but the first finger pointed can be aimed directly at Downing Street itself.