A follow up on the yesterday's article about the EU constitution. In today's Telegraph's opinion section, Ambrose Evans-Pritchard is concerned that "while we liberate Iraq, Europe is busy planning to enslave us":

"The EU will no longer be a treaty organisation in which member states agree to lend power to Brussels for certain purposes, on the understanding that they can take it back again. The EU itself will become the fount of power, with its own legal personality, delegating functions back to Britain. Draft Article 9 puts Brussels at the top of the pyramid. "The Constitution will have primacy over the law of Member States," it says.
The new order may also be irreversible. Article 46 stipulates that the terms of secession from the EU must be agreed by two thirds of the member states. In other words, one third can impose intolerable conditions."


We can already see the impact of the EU fiasco in handling the Iraq crisis:

"The EU will have the power to "co-ordinate the economic policies of the member states" and - showing some chutzpah given what happened over Iraq - "define and implement a common foreign and security policy, including the progressive framing of a common defence policy".

And there is a bit about, Tony Blair, our hero:

"Tony Blair was slow to see the threat. Downing Street at first dismissed the convention as a talking shop, but woke up when the French, Spanish, German and Italian governments gave it irresistible authority by appointing to it their foreign or deputy prime ministers.
The Government then fell back to a second self-deception, imagining that France and Spain would join Britain in blocking any major assault on national prerogatives."

[...]

"None of this has happened. France has abandoned Britain, and her own historical attachment to a Europe where national capitals always have the whip hand over Brussels. They seem to be accepting federalism as the price of relaunching the broken Franco-German axis. As for the Spanish, they are silent."


Scary stuff.


http://www.samizdata.net/blog/archives/ ... union.html

Here is the full article - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main ... ortal.html

   

We can either be a "poodle" for the US or a "poodle" for an undemocratic EU.

I know which I prefer.

Britain has much more in common with the US than we do with any EU country.

   

So you prefer it when your country breaks international law, then? Now there's something to be proud of...