I was" kindly accused " to be biased, with regard to the Treaty of Lisbon and the Irish vote last October 3. That is absolutely true, mind you: I have my opinion about - like everyone else, more or less. But should be able to distinguish between opinions and facts.
The fact - objective - is the treaty itself, which I linked in this post:
http://solleviamoci.wordpress.com/2009/10/01/lirlanda-ma-non-solo-ed-il- Treaty-of-lisbon / for those who want to read it in full (good luck: it is an incredible loot. for now I'm giving up, given the slow connection that afflicts me and abstruse language full of references. Example: "iv) the third paragraph is replaced by the following new paragraph 3, the last paragraph becomes paragraph 4 and paragraph 3 becomes paragraph 5: "(continued) omitted from the Official Journal of the European Union).
The views are personal rather and as such objectionable (so much so that the two terms have the same root). But you do not understand why anyone thinks that if the majority gives a particular view, then it is the right one. I do not want to make a speech undemocratic: accept the decisions of the majority (and in fact this government ... I sipped SIC!) While continuing to think that it is almost as far removed as I would like (almost because there would also be worse, not because I am on something agree). Because if the majority decides to throw from the balcony, we must necessarily kill us all? Or do we have instead a duty (which is also a right) to try to understand this reluctance (or bad or poorly informed, if not artfully uninformed) majority that perhaps there are alternatives - and maybe even better?
However, not doing an injustice to the readers, this time publishes articles on both sides (there is to say that she's talked very little, if not in these days following the Irish vote. But no one has did an analysis of the Treaty and what it means: he noted the change in Irish and ... good idea first. Indeed, the second - vote).
begin with a pronouncement that, if I was a bit 'less old and wise (so to speak), enough to be against me:
Lisbon Treaty, a declaration of Berlusconi
I'm happy for the decision of the Irish people to say "yes" to the Lisbon Treaty and I congratulate the Prime Minister Cowen on this success.
The "yes" Irish is a decisive step towards the entry into force of the Treaty, which will allow us to have a stronger and more effective.
I hope that the positive message is that Ireland is also collected from those Member States that non hanno ancora completato la ratifica, nonostante i loro Parlamenti si siano già espressi a favore.
Rimaniamo fedeli all’obiettivo dell’entrata in vigore del Trattato di Lisbona entro la fine dell’anno.
(fonte: http://www.governo.it/Notizie/Palazzo%20Chigi/dettaglio.asp?d=51010 )
Contento lui, ovvio che non sono contenta io! Non per partito preso: semplicemente perché lui è quello del dolo Alfano, dello scudo fiscale, dei tagli alla scuola e delle centrali nucleari, tanto per citare qualche esempio recente, e io no. Pare piuttosto probabile che non saremo d’accordo nemmeno sull’Europa! D’altra parte bisogna ricordare that the signature for Italy was laid by Prodi and D'Alema ( http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2007:306:0135:0145:IT : PDF , C 306/140, where 140 is the page), but then, having fallen to the Prodi government ...
But let's see what he says Il Corriere della Sera:
The referendum on " mini constitution 'European Union - Treaty of Lisbon, the Irish vote yes Prime Minister Cowen, "A good day for us and for Europe. Satisfaction Barroso
LONDON - "The 'yes' won' the Prime Minister announced Irish Brian Cowen. I yes to the referendum on the Lisbon Treaty were 67.1%, 32.9% are not. The turnout was 58%. In 2008, 53.4% \u200b\u200bwere not. Final data were brighter for the supporters of Europe on the eve of what was expected. "The people have spoken, this is a good day for Ireland and for Europe. Together with Europe, we are better and stronger. The treaty will give rise to an Ireland a stronger and better, "Cowen added. In the consultation on 12 June 2008 the Irish (three million eligible voters, 1% of the voters of the EU) had rejected the treaty, effectively paralyzing the application.
BARROSO: SIGN OF CONFIDENCE - The long-awaited Dublin yes to the Lisbon Treaty is "a great day for Ireland and a great day for Europe." So José Manuel Barroso, EU Commission President said the outcome of the second referendum of the Emerald Isle, after the failure of last year. To Barroso the result is a sign of confidence "in the European and" shows that the EU is ready to pay attention "to the doubts of voters Dublin has in fact received the guarantees demanded that the Treaty will not affect addresses some key of its policy like military neutrality or its tax laws and especially on abortion, still strictly prohibited.
SATISFACTION IN EUROPE - The 'yes' to the Irish Lisbon Treaty is a "good news for Europe and shows their" true "commitment to the European project, said the president of the European Parliament Jerzy Buzek, who said he was very happy with the election results. Also met German Chancellor Angela Merkel: "I want to congratulate the Irish people for the outcome of the referendum and also with my colleague Brian Cowen. This is an important step towards the Lisbon Treaty and I can say that Germany, on the day of reunification, is very pleased with the result. " "And 'the culmination of efforts in particular during the French Presidency to respond to the concerns they had expressed the Irish, "is the comment by Sarkozy. From Italy, the head of the Democratic Party foreign policy Piero Fassino spoke of "a vote that gives hope and confidence in, that only if it is able to speak with one voice and act together can meet the challenges of globalization and match public expectations. "
BOTH PARTIES AGREE - Three million voters who voted yesterday to decide the fate of the "mini constitution" the European Union. Polling stations closed at 22, after 15 hours to vote. The turnout would exceed 50%, at least in the capital Dublin. Both the major Irish parties, the Fianna Fail and Fine Gael, were positive to do. Among the first to go to the polls to support the "yes" the president of Ireland Mary McAleese and Prime Minister ("Taoiseach) Brian Cowen, with his wife Mary, then the leader of Fine Gael, Enda Kenny and Labour, Eamon Gilmore. Not met the nationalists of Sinn Fein and some conservative Catholics or small groups of extreme excite. In addition to the millionaire Declan Ganley, who last year organized the campaign this year but no was weakened by the bitter defeat in the European elections, when he attempted to launch into politics.
DEVELOPMENTS - The text of Lisbon will be adottato da tutti i 27 Paesi, ma l’Irlanda era l’unico tenuto, per costituzione, a pronunciarsi per referendum. Finora sono 24 i Paesi membri che hanno completato il processo di ratifica. Il presidente polacco Lech Kaczynski ha promesso la firma subito dopo il sì irlandese. Wladyslaw Stasiak, capo dell'ufficio del presidente, ha confermato che la firma avverrà subito, «senza inutili rinvii». Rimarrà poi da completare la ratifica del trattato soltanto nella Repubblica Ceca, dove la firma resta appesa a un ricorso in giustizia e alla buona volontà del presidente euroscettico Vaclav Klaus.
( http://www.corriere.it/esteri/09_ottobre_03/irlanda-referendum-trattato-lisbona_3e2465f8-aff5-11de-8f2f-00144f02aabc.shtml )
I could go with articles published in other newspapers, but the content is always the same (for those who want to verify, without being exhaustive, here are other links:
http://www.ansa.it / web/notizie/rubriche/associata/2009/10/03/visualizza_new.html_964741356.html
http://www.lastampa.it/redazione/cmsSezioni/esteri/200910articoli/47870girata.asp
http : / / periodicoitaliano.info/2009/10/04/referendum-in-irlanda-si-al-trattato-di-lisbona /
http://blog.irlandando.it/5167-lirlanda-dice-si -al-Treaty-of-lisbon /
happily, but no one taking the trouble to explain exactly what this treaty is, what do you expect and what to change. to think evil is a sin, teach an old hand in Italian politics. Maybe. But how can we think the worst when you try to come to terms with this pearl of democracy and is, for example:
"j) the abbreviation" ECB "shall be replaced by" European Central Bank ';
k) the words' Statute of ESCB 'shall be replaced by "Statute of the ESCB and the ECB,"
always by the Official Gazette ( http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2007:306: 0042:0133: EN: PDF C306/43 )
ma come… prima mi dici che la sigla BCE è sostituita e la riga sotto la chiami ancora BCE? Devo forse capire che la sigla è stata sostituita solo nel paragrafo j)? C’era proprio bisogno di questa sostanziale modifica, chissà quanto ci hanno studiato!!!
A parte la fin troppo facile ironia, è difficile trovare in rete qualcosa di dettagliato che illustri i lati positivi di questo trattato. Ci prova in modo molto succinto Wikipedia (http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trattato_di_Lisbona), ma per il resto vi sono molte generiche asserzioni di maggior democrazia, ma poca sostanza. E ci credo: non basta una laurea in giurisprudenza ed un mese sabbatical to figure it out! It is really the suspicion has been drawn up (the Treaty and all its protocols, annexes etc) so as to avoid cumbersome for someone to read and understand the above ... or the right flea Voltaire, who wrote:
... continues to ignore public opinion in Brussels, as if it were a golden Calcutta and exotic. "( http://lapulcedivoltaire.blogosfere.it/2009/10/la-ue-dopo-il-referendum-sul- Treaty-of-lisbona.html )
On the other hand there are some critical pieces. Perhaps because the maxim "to criticize one must know" it fits better, in fact, those who are against.
Let's see:
"That the Treaty of Lisbon is not the Europe we want", say the feminists
Beatrice Ippolito
the referendum of 12 June 2008, called to give or deny its consent to ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon government, the 53.6% of the Irish answered with a resounding "NO!". Of these the majority were women. "Ungrateful man!" Cried outraged and astonished various European media. The image was circulated was that of a country animated by fierce anti-European sentiments, the result of selfishness and ignorance. In less two weeks October 2, 2009, the Republic of Ireland will once again call on the same Referendar without question, in the meantime, the Treaty has been the subject of any revision or adjustment that would justify disregarding the popular will of a disliked but nevertheless democratically expressed.
Why a new referendum? But the Irish are really is majority euro-skeptics? And it is true that the Irish against Europe and want to stay out?
One fear is that the Irish Catholic ratification of the Lisbon Treaty gives the floodgates to the liberalization of abortion services, ending the singularity maybe that makes Ireland the only country in the EU where abortion is banned as a crime and a sin. Given the predominantly Catholic Irish women, are therefore, for the most anti-abortion?
Feminists Feminist Dubliners the Open Forum, which met at Buswell Hotel last week to discuss the referendum issue, concluded their work by appealing again to say "No!".
Anti-Europe too?
Not really, since all are anxious to stress occurred at the opening of discourse, their belonging to Europe.
E Pro-Europe say they also different personalities of the political and academic Irish, such as Mary Lou McDonald, Irish MEP of Sinn Fein, Patricia McKenna, the MEP of the Greens hours People's Movement - Movement of People, Ailbhe Smith, writer, feminist, director of WERRC ( Centre for research and educational resources / women of UCD, now the Department of Women 's Studies at the UCD School of Social Justice) and others.
"This is not to say" No "to Europe." , - they say. "This is to say" No "to a treaty that focuses on European interests, not people, but the market.".
Tra gli articoli del Trattato, quello più contestato è l’Art. 14 che legalizza la “crescente liberalizzazione dei servizi di interesse economico generale.”. I servizi di interesse economico generale sono, per intendersi, gli ospedali, le scuole, i trasporti, le telecomunicazioni, l’acqua, la luce, il gas e tutto quanto non ancora privatizzato nel servizio pubblico generale.
Ciò che sta a cuore all’Europa del Trattato, sostengono i comitati per il “No” in particolare il capitolo intitolato Public Services &Economic Issues è il libero mercato e la libera concorrenza che ne è il principio ispiratore.
Il principio is reiterated in article 105 TFEU which has as purpose the creation of "... an open market economy with free competition .." - a market economy open to free competition -.
The interest is so that priority Protocol No. 6 of the Treaty is concerned to ensure that "... Intended the market as Set Out in Articles [1 -3] ... That includes a system ensuring competition is not distorted. "- that market as set out in Articles 1 to 3 ... provides a system to ensure that competition does not have to be distorted. -.
In compliance with this principle, "... Such essential public services as water and sanitation, public transport, energy, post and telecoms ... "- essential public services like water, sanitation, public transport, energy, postal services and telecommunications - might therefore be renegotiated as" economic activities "- economic activity -" suitable-for-trade "- subject of marketing.
the economic activity, the European Court of Justice states that any service that has "... the essential characteristic .." - the essential feature - "... that it must be Provided for remuneration ... "- to be supplied subject to the price paid ...".
And to pay need not be end-users, explains the European Commission in a Statement made in November 2007. In other words, nation states have the right to subcontract services to private companies. (The data are drawn from Chapter Creeping Privatization www.sayno.ie always from the site, which we refer for further details.) Is already the case in Italy. Think of the postal services, waste removal companies, etc..
Now, say the feminists Dubliners the Forum in their information leaflet, "... The Majority Of Those working in public services are women ... "- those involved in the civil service are in the majority women. -. Are the women more than men, who turn to public services for health care, exams, pregnancy are women rather than men, those who are looking after care services to children, the sick, the elderly are women, more than men, those working in the fields of education, those women who flock to the more public transport.
The Irish women already know what they mean cuts contributions to the family for children in preschool or disabled, the Irish women who are fighting for Committees in the house know what they have meant further cuts in funds for the redevelopment of neighborhoods Expected popular for decades. E ".. Lisbon, Which deepens the very Policies That Have Caused the economic crisis, Would make the bad situation worse. "- (the (treaty) that accentuates the Lisbon policies that have led to the economic downturn, is likely to make an already bad situation even worse. - because stay to the dictates of the Stability Pact as reaffirmed in article 136, the governments will only effetture spending cuts and privatize services, making the costs fall on workers, particularly women.
As for the Charter of Fundamental Rights, is true, the Treaty makes them his own but without broadening the range of rights to be defended and even Herod did with the introduction of numerous exceptions. E quel che è peggio è che il Trattato tace sui diritti riproduttivi e sessuali; tace sul diritto alla libertà femminile; tace sulla violenza contro le donne; tace sui servizi a sostegno della maternità e dell’infanzia.
Le femministe irlandesi temono anzi che la Corte di Giustizia Europea deponga a favore del mercato e contro i diritti delle donne come ha già fatto con i diritti dei lavoratori sacrificati al diritto delle aziende di non essere danneggiate dalla concorrenza. (caso Vaxholm, caso delle navi traghetto finlandesi, caso dell’azienda italiana Irem che aveva preferito contrattare tecnici italiani specializzati i cui salari più convenienti per l’azienda, innescando una competizione dai risvolti xenofobi)
Altri punti dolenti sono la militarizzazione dell’Europa, la creazione dei “Battle groups” – contingenti militari di combattimento – ,il rafforzamento dei rapporti con la NATO, l’aumento delle spese militari. Di contro, sostengono, gli impegni reali per ridurre gli effetti dei cambiamenti climatici risultano assai fiacchi.
Ce n’è abbastanza, insomma, per dire “No” a Lisbona un’altra volta.
Vedi on line : Campaign Against the EU Constitution
(fonte: http://www.womenews.net/spip3/spip.php?article4804 )
and also Lisbon Treaty & New International Order
Marcello Pamio - June 4, 2008
Today we can safely speak of "New International Order" or "New World Order" without being accused by psychopaths conspiracy, and you know why?
For the simple reason that the likes of George Herbert Walker Bush, John Paul II, Henry Kissinger, Kofi Annan, Bill Clinton, Gordon Brown and many others, have spoken freely and publicly.
George Bush senior spoke exactly New World Order September 11 (symbolic date) 1990, Pope John Paul II did it in his message for World Day of Peace on 1 January 2003, Kofi Annan (former UN Secretary General) in his last speech to the assembly of the United Nations, speaking to leaders of 192 nientepopodimenchè member countries asked the "creation of a new world order" [1].
So if we are visionaries, we are good (so to speak) company! Today
the oligarchic system that strives to control the lives of millions of people have done and is making great strides to achieve this goal. The last in chronological order is the "Lisbon Treaty".
Few will have heard, but has already been voted for by European governments, including Italy.
On 30 May, "the Council of Ministers - Franco Frattini says - unanimously approved the bill ratifying the Lisbon Treaty, the Presidents of the Chambers integrated as a priority in the agenda of parliamentary work" [2] The great statesman
Roberto Calderoli, Minister for Simplification, however, added that "remain the reserve of the League that it will propose a law specifically to allow a referendum on the Treaty [3]
His was a yes but with reservations because "there is - He says - a significant loss of sovereignty "[4].
We'll see if the Northern League will be able to get a constitutional law that would allow us to tell our citizens in this Treaty in a referendum. Today it is not possible popular vote on a treaty. I wonder why?!
The first country to ratify the new treaty was Hungary, followed closely by Slovenia, Malta, Romania, Bulgaria, Poland, Slovakia, Portugal, Denmark, Austria, Latvia and Lithuania. [5]
L ' British Empire in the negotiations got several important exemptions (opting out) has yet to ratify it. By opting-out means the exemption clause, in practice is the exception that - in order to prevent a blockage general - is given to Member States who do not wish to join the other states. England and Denmark have in fact acceded to the third stage of Economic and Monetary Union (EMU), these two countries intelligently collecting the seigniorage on their currency (the pound sterling and Danish krone, respectively), but also on the euro, seen as participating members / owners of the ECB, European Central Bank in Frankfurt (shares "owned" by England and 15.98% Denmark 1.72%).
no coincidence that England has for centuries been the center of power worldwide!
Ma cos’è questo Trattato e perché c’interessa?
Questo Trattato modifica e sostituisce il Trattato dell’Unione europea (1992), noto come Maastricht, e il Trattato istitutivo della comunità europea (1957).
Il Trattato dovrebbe entrare in vigore all’inizio del 2009, e il prossimo 12 giugno sarà una data molto importante per tutti, visto che in Irlanda si effettuerà il referendum. Unico paese in Europa ad aver istituto un voto popolare sull’argomento.
Il Movimento internazionale Diritti Civili Solidarietà denuncia da mesi il pericolo di questo Trattato, chiedendo a gran voce that is not ratified, because if that happens:
- will increase the extraordinary powers of the Commission of the European Union in almost all aspects of life (economic policy and defense), depriving our country of its sovereignty and undermining in this sense, the Italian Constitution, which reads in part by a "sovereignty belongs to the people."
- The Defence Policy of the Treaty provides, in addition to peacekeeping missions, including offensive missions, acting in violation of Art. 11 of the Constitution. Through the strengthening of military forces available to the European Union, is undergoing a attempt to make Europe an arm of NATO. With the creation of a small group of countries which would be delegated to the military initiatives, it would be easier to get around the opposition of those who would avoid confrontation strategy pursued by London and Washington against Russia and China [6].
- In economic policy speaks of a true "dictatorship of the Union and the European Central Bank." Thanks to the Lisbon Treaty, in fact, the bureaucrats of the European Union will have full title to reject any measures adopted by our government, and other European governments, to defend its economy, employment, income, industry el ' agriculture, ed intervenire sui prezzi.
Sembra follia ma purtroppo non lo è.
L'ex ministro e insigne giurista Giuseppe Guarino, ordinario di diritto amministrativo all'Università di Roma, ha diffidato dal ratificare il trattato così com'è, perché esso codificherebbe un sistema di "governo di un organo" o "organocrazia".
Il trattato viola almeno due articoli della Costituzione italiana, l'Art. 1 e 11.
Riguardo a quest'ultimo, le condizioni di parità sono violate dal fatto che paesi come la Gran Bretagna e la Danimarca, membri del trattato, sono esonerati dalla partecipazione all'Euro. Così essi possono, For example, fix the interest rate so favorable for them but bad for the other signatories of the Treaty. Moreover, the Treaty
significantly increases the powers of the European Commission.
For example, in the case of the infringement procedure of the Stability Pact, established by Art. 104, the Commission has so far only had the power to notify the fact of infringement of the EU Council of Ministers, which then decided whether to start the procedure or not. In the new version, has introduced three small changes that move those powers in the Commission. It would be unwise to approve the Treaty, intends to change after its wrong parts, said the prof. Guarino. This sarebbe di fatto impossibile, dato che occorre l'unanimità.
Un altro eminente costituzionalista tedesco, il prof. Schachtschneider, ha sviluppato una lezione dal titolo “La legittimazione della pena di morte e dell'omicidio” in cui sostiene che il Trattato di Lisbona nel suo continuo sostenere una cosa e rimandare ad altra contraria attraverso il richiamo alle “Spiegazioni della Carta dei Diritti Fondamentali” legittima la pena di morte e l’omicidio “per reprimere, in modo conforme alla legge, una sommossa o un'insurrezione” e “per atti commessi in tempo di guerra o in caso di pericolo imminente di guerra” (ben 14 Stati dell’Unione europea sono impegnati nella guerra in Iraq).[7]
“In caso di pericolo imminente di guerra”? Ma noi, grazie alla politica guerrafondaia di Bush & Company siamo dall’11 settembre 2001 quotidianamente in “guerra” contro il terrorismo! Come la mettiamo?
Sarebbe poi di interesse nazionale conoscere – soprattutto nell’ottica della nuova legge sulla sicurezza votata dal governo Berlusconi - cosa s’intende per “sommossa” e “insurrezione”.
Forse il movimento No-Tav può essere considerato una sommossa? O tutti coloro che si battono perché non vengano costruite centrali atomiche o cancro-valorizzatori (leggi inceneritori)?
Who knows, the fact is that with the new security law, these sites will be of "national interest" that can be defended by the army, and the organizers of demonstrations (peaceful) protest could go to jail ! So much for freedom.
But then the great American teacher teaches.
October 17, 2006 The Bush junior signed the "Military Commissions Act (MCA), which introduces the establishment of military courts with power to judge both who is a U.S. citizen who is not.
In one fell swoop, has done away with the oldest of the rights Anglophone society: to oppose the government's power to arrest and detain anyone arbitrarily people: the Habeas Corpus, considered one of the most important principles established by Magna Charta Libertatum (signed by King John Lackland in 1215) [8]
because that's not all on the same day, still the same old Bush signed the John Warner Defense Authorizations Act, which allows the president to deploy troops anywhere in the United States and to take control of National Guard units in any U.S. state without the consent of the governor or magistrate, in order to "suppress public disorder."
All’appello manca la Legge Marziale e poi siamo al completo…
Il Trattato di Lisbona in quest’ottica è l’ennesimo passo in avanti verso la creazione del cosiddetto Nuovo Ordine Internazionale, cioè “maggiori poteri di controllo di pochi su molti”.
La sua ratifica permetterà ai banchieri di Bruxelles di potenziare il loro potere su noi sudditi europei e di conseguenza limitare di molto le nostre libertà individuali.
La sovranità dei popoli sta per essere consegnata totalmente nelle mani di qualche oscuro e potente banchiere...
Dobbiamo sperare quindi to be made a popular referendum (constitutional law) on the Lisbon Treaty!
We do not know whether it can serve some purpose, but we try to send our disappointment by e-mail or letter to the secretariats of the main parties of government and national newspapers.
Secretariat federal policy rsoragna@leganord.org
Institutional Affairs Justice rmarraccini@leganord.org
sanvar@leganord.org
National Secretariat Youth Forza Italy segreterianazionale@forzaitaliagiovani.it
Il Corriere della Sera www.corriere.it / write / bit . shtml
The Republic larepubblica@repubblica.it
Sen. Lidia Menapace contrary to the Treaty of Lisbon
Very important message for both themes rather three: abolition of neutrality (which obliges Switzerland, Sweden, Austria, Finland, Malta to change the form of the statement or not to join Europe) and it's appropriate to keep open the possibility to try to do a 'neutral Europe (which will not even say unarmed, but for example, unable to own nuclear weapons and all nuclear weapons) (therefore a great support to the campaign via the bombs!) death penalty (which we just removed from the military code of war Italian), end of national sovereignty in economics, which is a clause on the grave welfare state. I think we should really do a great botto in proposito. Mandiamo il testo di Liliana sottoscritto e appoggiato dalla rete a Liberazione, al Manifesto, alla segreteria di Rifondazione e a tutta la Sinistra arcobaleno (avete visto che l'unico colore assente è il rosa?), al gruppo della sinistra al parlamento europeo.
Se volete scaricare il Trattato di Lisbona integrale in italiano (287 pagine)
www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cmsUpload/cg00014.it07.pdf
(fonte: http://www.disinformazione.it/trattato_lisbona.htm )
ecco l’articolo citato nel testo:
La legittimazione della pena di morte e dell'omicidio
Pubblichiamo qui il testo del prof. Schnachschenider on the death penalty in Europe. Thanks to my friend Claudio Celani
for translation.
The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the so-called "Constitution" rejected in France in 2005, to which we shall refer hereafter by the abbreviation CFREU) expressly allows the "explanations" of fundamental rights and its "negative definitions" - absorbed in the Lisbon Treaty - as opposed to the abolition of the death penalty in force in Germany, Austria and other countries in accordance with the principle of [constitutional] the dignity of man, the reintroduction of the death penalty in case war or in case of direct danger of war, but also allows the murder to suppress a riot or insurrection.
Decisive for this is not Art. 2 Paragraph 2 of the Charter, which prohibits the death sentence and execution, but the explanation of this item is integrated into the [Lisbon], which dates to the Convention on Human Rights of 1950. According to Art. Par 1 and 6 underpasses. 3 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) in the version of Lisbon, defines the rights, freedoms and principles of the Charter in accordance with the general provisions of Title VII dela Charter, which adjusts exposure and the application of the same , and subjected to due consideration of the "explanations" attached to the Charter, which are indicated sources of these provisions.
The legal significance of the "explanations" bubbling from Section 5 S. 2 of the Preamble of the Charter, which states that the interpretation of this is done "with due regard to the explanations prepared under the authority of the Praesidium of the European Convention." Paragraph 5 S. 2 Paragraph 7 of the Preamble and Art. 52 were resettled in the Charter 12 December 2007. They were already in the shipwrecked Constitutional Treaty of October 29, 2004. This enlargement of the text belies the temporary success of the policy against the death penalty and execution. The "explanations" and also cover their Art. 2 Section 2 of the Charter.
Delegations Union in the field of foreign policy and security policy is sufficient for the interests of efficiency of the missions under Art. 28 (42) Par 1 S. 2 and Article 28b (43) Par 1 TEU, or even the interests of defense, the introduction of the death penalty, for example the delegation to the Council through the Art. 28b (43) Section 2 S. 1 TEU decisions concerning the missions, which allows "to establish the general conditions for implementing valid" for the missions themselves. That is not engaged in or the European Parliament nor national parliaments. Such a decision should be assessed in conjunction with Art. 2 Section 2 of the CFREU, with the explanations. In addition, member states commit themselves l'Art. 28 (42) Par. 3 Sottopar. 2 S. 1 TUE, "a migliorare progressivamente le proprie capacità militari". Le guerre del passato e del presente dimostrano che la pena di morte ad esempio nel caso di soldati che si rifiutano di eseguire gli ordini, tende a incrementare notevolmente le capacità militari di un esercito. L'efficienza di misure militari può essere incrementata, tra l'altro, per mezzo dell'esecuzione di terroristi e sabotatori o anche presunti tali.
La prassi dell'Unione di estendere estremamente i testi sui doveri degli stati membri non autorizza ad escludere anche una tale interpretazione, quando la situazione lo comanda o lo consiglia. Per inciso, il dovere di riarmo di questa prescrizione non è compatible with the pacifist principle, binding of the German Constitution (Preamble of the Basic Law, Article 1 Section 2, Article 26 paragraph 1) and Austria.
In the Declaration concerning the explanations of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, which under Art. 49b (51) TEU ("Attachment") is a constituent part of the treaties, so they are equally binding, it is written
3. The provisions of Article 2 of the Charter correspond to those of the above Articles of the ECHR and its additional protocol and in accordance with Article 52, paragraph 3 of the Charter, the meaning and scope. Therefore, the "negative" definitions contained in the ECHR must be regarded as also in Menu:
a) Article 2, paragraph 2 of the ECHR:
"Death is not regarded as inflicted in contravention of this article when it results from the use of force which had become absolutely necessary: \u200b\u200b
a) To ensure the defense of any person unlawful violence;
b) To effect a lawful arrest or to prevent the escape of a person lawfully detained;
c) To effect a lawful arrest or to prevent the escape of a person lawfully detained;
d) To quell , in accordance with the law, a sommosa or insurrection ";
b) Article 2 of Protocol 6 of the ECHR:
"A state may make provision in its law for the death penalty for acts committed in time of war or of imminent threat of war, such penalty shall be applied only in cases provided by law and in accordance with its provisions ...".
riot or insurrection can be seen even in some demonstrations. Under the Treaty of Lisbon, the use of deadly firearms in these situations is not a violation of the right to life. In war there are currently both Germany and Austria. The wars of the European Union will increase. For this reason, resets the Union - even with the Treaty of Lisbon.
Karl Albrecht Schachtscchneider
Source: http://www.effedieffe.com/content/view/3018/
Not speaking part of Paul Barnard, who have posted here:
http://solleviamoci.wordpress.com/2009/10/02/trattato-di-lisbona-riflessioni-di-paolo-barnard/
and again: ComeDonChisciotte - THE LISBON TREATY AND 'A Trojan
titin Kries and Gisbert OTTO
voltairenet.org /
The German Constitutional Court's verdict on the Lisbon Treaty clarifies the political debate. The judges have not only reported that the new text requires many sacrifices in terms of sovereignty - which is a pleonasm - but they also concluded by saying that his philosophy is incompatible with democratic principles. Therefore, the German Constitutional Court ruled that the ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon is framed in the redefinition by the German Parliament, a set of higher principles, but other states have not shown the same wisdom.
The Lisbon Treaty will increase the anti-democratic and anti-social conditions in the EU. In this Treaty, Member shall transfer almost all their rights in the EU. About 500 million people lose their ability to practice democracy. The EU will intervene in all spheres of life. The gap between rich and poor will open even more. Questo processo è contrario all’Articolo 1 della Legge fondamentale che dichiara inviolabili la dignità dell’essere umano e obbliga la Germania a difendere i diritti umani.
Antidemocrazia fondamentale
Una Costituzione può essere legittimata solo dal popolo, come è stabilito nella legge fondamentale tedesca: “Il potere dello Stato emana dal popolo” (articolo 20 comma 2 frase 1GG) e: “Questa legge fondamentale che vale per tutto il popolo tedesco fino alla riunificazione e liberazione della Germania, perderà il suo valore quando il popolo tedesco, liberamente, promulghi una Costituzione.” (art. 146 GG)
Secondo questo articolo, solo un “popolo europeo” potrebbe legittimare la Costituzione – ma in realtà un “popolo europeo” non esiste. Uno “stato europeo” presumerebbe l’accordo dei popoli d’Europa. Solo i cittadini hanno il diritto di decidere se vogliono trasferire il potere dello Stato alla UE e se così fosse, in quale misura. Contrariamente alla Legge fondamentale, si evitò un referendum su Lisbona perchè il governo sa molto bene che la maggioranza dei cittadini avrebbero votato contro questo trattato. Ma non consultare il popolo è contrario alla clausola di non modificazione dell’art. 79 comma 3 GG: “Non è consentita nessuna modificazione della presente Legge fondamentale che si riferisca the organization of the federation in the provinces, or the principle of participation of the Länder in the legislative, or the principles set out in Articles 1 and 20. "The political elites consciously ignore this basic principle. They try to deceive the public. Through the manipulation of public opinion they want to reach their goals of political power. A public debate in parliaments should not take place. This quest for power is contrary to the Basic Law - for example Article 1 GG "The dignity of human beings is inviolable" and Article 20 GG (Principles of the Constitution). These items are before any policy with a scopo di assicurare la dignità dell’essere umano e garantire un’esistenza degna per tutti, in libertà, e sulle basi della verità.
Senza democrazia non è concepibile uno stato di diritto
Mediante la pianificata integrazione antidemocratica degli stati nella UE, i popoli retrocedono all’epoca precedente alla rivoluzione francese. Si distruggono principi fondamentali dello stato di diritto, tra i quali, in particolare la divisione dei poteri, che protegge i cittadini dagli abusi del potere. E’ una irresponsabilità che si perda questa protezione del diritto, soprattutto, grazie al trattato di Lisbona.
Soprattutto nell’economia, the consequences will be catastrophic more than they already are now. For example, the "right to work" which is part of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, as well as the declaration of human rights in 1948, was eliminated in the Treaty of Lisbon. The right to "adequate remuneration and satisfactory" work, to enable the worker "ensure a dignified existence." Conversely, for the first time in the history of Fundamental Rights was established in the Charter of the EU 'free trade'.
accumulation of power in the EU does not openly declared
was originally intended that the EU could be active only if explicitly called - the principle of so-called "individual permit limited". This principle is ignored among those considered in the decision of the Federal Constitutional Court, because of the permissions assigned to the extremely enlarged EU. With the Treaty of Lisbon, the EU can act to achieve its goals without consulting national parliaments. Even the EU can raise taxes at will. Moreover, for a European Council Resolution, with "soft processes for changes" may change all or part the contents of the Treaty (except for all that concerns the common foreign and security). Il trattato di Lisbona, quindi rappresenta una legge di autorizzazione; la UE si allontana totalmente dai principi costituzionali fondamentali, che sono alla base della cultura europea. Questo inganno alle persone – con profonde ripercussioni nella vita quotidiana – va reso evidente.
Il Capitalismo sfrenato ottiene rango costituzionale
La UE è una zona del capitalismo globale. Le colonne del capitalismo sono le cinque “libertà fondamentali”: la libertà di circolazione delle merci, dei capitali, di residenza, dei servizi come la mano d’opera, sono stabilite in forma estrema nel trattato di Lisbona. Questo sistema di “mercato aperto e di libera concorrenza” where the social aspect is not sufficiently appreciated, will be decisive for our living conditions. The economic order in Germany has a social foundation, which not only considers the principle of efficiency, but also the social aspect: the economy must also have a function of community service. Conversely, the Treaty of Lisbon following a clear line against this principle. The free competition is not just a liberal who creates the current conditions of divestiture, to the detriment of the social.
requirements for the nearly 8 million who receive social assistance Hartz IV, are shameful. The neoliberal system of the market and free competition does not allow a real policy of the State Employer and leads us towards the dictatorship of unbridled capitalism.
The country of origin ruin the national economy
An extreme example of the ruthless competition is the principle of country of origin, which has a negative impact on domestic economies. This principle allows foreign companies to work in Germany under the conditions prevailing in their country of origin. For example, a Polish company with Polish and Ukrainian employees can work with salaries much lower than the German. In addition to salaries, apply the terms and conditions of the country of origin, among other things, on quality standards, warranties etc.. The unlimited competition thus created, threat and even medium-sized businesses in particular co-management companies in Germany. More businesses will close, but also the multinationals will be affected, for example, those of foodstuffs, there is a danger that they offer lower quality products at lower prices, to obtain higher profits.
It weakens the protection of fundamental rights
The Lisbon Treaty legalizes the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU. In this paper, the capital has no social obligation - contrary to the Basic Law, according to which should also serve the common good. Moreover, absent the right to work - a basic right under Art. 23 of the general declaration of human rights.
The EU gives the right to war
Member States would lose more and more sovereignty in the defense due to the integration of armed forces in joint defense. Furthermore, the Lisbon Treaty not only obliges EU member states to rearm, but in art. EUV 43 paragraph 1 is attributed to the law of war, especially in the fight against terrorism around the world and in their own countries. By deleting the prohibition of an offensive war, contained in art. 26 paragraph 1 of the German Basic Law.
support democracy
democratic structures force are the only protection against the treachery of those who decide who obey the capital and lobbying power. Unfortunately, we live in an age where the law is constantly violated. Euphemisms or just lying on the agenda. The mission of the German soldiers in Afghanistan, for example, according to the government is not a war mission, even when of course it is. Lies like this are put into the open. Even the proceedings of a political power to implement the Lisbon Treaty, which would disappear with democracy. The peoples of Europe have the right to live in peace and freedom as a sovereign and free citizens in a genuine democracy.
Titine Kriesi and Gisbert Otto
Source: www.voltairenet.org
Link: http://www.voltairenet.org/article161494.html
05/08/2009 Translation by Umberto CAMMARATA for www.comedonchisciotte.org Adapted from
http://hovistocosechevoiumani.wordpress.com/2009/08/28/comedonchisciotte-il-trattato-di-lisbona-e-un-cavallo-di-troia/
And finally a video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UiWPpU017Hs
Something? All blinded by parochial interests of his own backyard? All in bad faith? Or are there really a cat that lurks? I my son made me the idea. Europe gestita in modo così verticistico non mi sembra un bell’esempio di democrazia… e se è vero che noi italiani in questo momento avremmo solo da guadagnarci, a dover andare al traino di Paesi più democratici del nostro, è altrettanto vero che meno di 27 persone avrebbero in mano il destino di 500 milioni di cittadini… che, per carità, è meglio che continuino a dormire… o no?
E poi in fondo è vero: non sono europeista. Sono una cittadina del mondo, io!
0 comments:
Post a Comment