Wise Up Journal
by Greg O’Brien

“The Irish Alliance for Europe has formally launched its campaign for a Yes vote in the Lisbon Treaty Referendum. The Alliance describes itself as a non-party civic society organisation which brings together trade unionists, business people, academics and politicians.”
RTE: Alliance launches Treaty Yes campaign

“Civic” and “society” are defined in the dictionary as:
“Civic: of or pertaining to citizenship; civil: civic duties
Society: an organized group of persons associated together for religious, benevolent, cultural, scientific, political, patriotic, or other purposes” 1

We can now assume that this group is an organization of patriotic or benevolent individuals who have come together to fulfill their civic duties for this country by campaigning for a Yes vote. We can also assume that their loyalties lie first and foremost with this country and not with foreign entities or organizations, so let’s look at some of the key individuals and what they say:

“Chairperson Ruairi Quinn said the Alliance had a vital role in correcting what he said were ‘distortions and misrepresentations’ about the Treaty created by its opponents. He told the launch that the Treaty is the best possible deal for Ireland and it protects Ireland’s vital interests and voice in Europe, while improving EU structures and allowing Europe to move forward” – RTE

It’s not clear what ‘distortions and misrepresentations’ Ruairi Quinn is referring to here, the No campaigners are the ones whom quote treaty articles the most most, while the Yes camp use sweeping generalisations about the supposed “benefits” of the EU (not the treaty). He also claims that “it protects Ireland’s vital interests and voice in Europe”, but again it’s difficult to understand what he’s talking about, is Quinn referring to praise from the other political leaders denying their citizens a vote, or is it QMV where our voting weight will plumit to 0.8% and will make our voice so insignificant as to be worthless. The Irish politicians would be patted on the back by their EU counterparts if they pull off a yes vote but this will quickly disappear with the long-term debilitating effects of the new voting system. It appears that from day one Ruairi Quinn has already indulged in distortion and misrepresentation while accusing the No side of same, we should prepare for more of the same.

“Garret Fitzgerald described opponents of the Lisbon Treaty as ‘nitpickers of the extreme right and left’. Describing Irish influence in the drawing up of the treaty, he said it was our treaty more than anyone else’s.” – RTE

Here’s what Garret Fitzgerald said about the treaty in June 2007, as reported in The Irish Times:

“Virtual incomprehensibility has thus replaced simplicity as the key approach to EU reform. As for the changes now proposed to be made to the constitutional treaty, most are presentational changes that have no practical effect. They have simply been designed to enable certain heads of government to sell to their people the idea of ratification by parliamentary action rather than by referendum”

It seems that Dr. Fitzgerald is now contradicting his earlier statement even though nothing of any significance has changed in the treaty since, and he now describes anyone who tries to look into the significance of the treaty as a ‘nitpicker’ of the ‘extreme right and left‘. Are we now to assume that if we look at this treaty too closely we are to be branded as extremists and should we just ignore the small print and trust the “authorities” on the matter? Authorities such as Angela Merkel (German Chancellor)? She said, “The substance of the constitution is preserved. That is a fact.”2 or should we listen to an authority who helped draft the constitution, Giscard D’Estaing (former French President) who explained why they made slight of hand changes to this treaty, “to head off any threat of referenda by avoiding any form of constitutional vocabulary,”3 he said.

“Dr Fitzgerald said if the people turn it down, it would be absolutely incomprehensible to other member states, and would lose Ireland the good-will of 26 governments” -RTE

Again a contradiction of his earlier statement unless by “other member states” he’s referring to the political class who are in contempt of their citizens by not allowing a referendum and selling the idea of ratification by parliamentary majority. Many on the Yes side are suggesting we ignore the ratification process in the other member states and focus exclusively on the debate here, and some on the No side have gone along with this. However it’s not the role of either side to decide on the parameters of the debate, it’s up to each individual to decide if this is an important issue or not and vote accordingly.

It will be interesting to see which of the Trade Unionists will be involved in this organization given the recent “Laval case” and the ruling by the ECJ, which will have further legitimacy under Lisbon. This will have profound effects on workers’ pay and conditions across Europe, and the Trade Unions’ silence so far has been deafening. It’s now time they came out and stated their position on this issue to their members and explain objectively how the treaty will affect them instead of more spin about the need for further integration.

Two of the key individuals in this campaign, Garret Fitzgerald and Pat Cox are both reported to have been attendees at Bilderberg meetings, which is a highly secretive organization of the world’s elites that has been around for 50 years with almost no reporting by the mainstream media:

Wikipedia: Garret Fitzgerald (1975 and 1977, while he was Foreign Affairs Minister)

Pat Cox (2001, while he was an MEP)

In 1991 Chairman of Bilderberg David Rockefeller described the media’s lack of coverage and the elites intentions of global governance:

“We are grateful to the Washington Post, the New York Times, Time magazine, and promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during these years. But the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government which will never again know war but only peace and prosperity for the whole of humanity.”

The secrecy and many unanswered questions about this elite group concerns many people that the globalists have far more sinister intentions, as global planning such as the “prosperity for the whole of humanity” should not be done in private without the oversight of the world’s citizens by an elite (some of whom are war criminals). Jim Tucker has been tracking the Bilderbergs for 27 years believes they are a covert world government, in his new book “Bilderberg Diary” he exposes how these elites set the prices of nearly all the worlds’ natural resources, how they control and manipulate most governmental institutions around the world. These elite member own and influence the central banks that print our currencies, allowing them to manufacture the booms and busts in the global economy. The elite gain great power over 3rd world governments and resources using the IMF funded by tax money from ordinary citizens, not to mention the influence of their tax free foundations and corporations.

Before the well funded Irish civic society organization sets out the reasons why we should vote yes to the anti-Democratic treaty we need to ask some serious questions about the motivation behind their campaign. Are they really interested in the future of this country or do they have another agenda, and where are their real allegiances?

  1. Dictionary.com Unabridged (v1.1)
  2. “The substance of the constitution is preserved. That is a fact.”- German Chancellor Angela Merkel, European Parliament, 27 June 2007
  3. “The difference between the original Constitution and the present Lisbon Treaty is one of approach, rather than content … the proposals in the original constitutional treaty are practically unchanged. They have simply been dispersed through old treaties in the form of amendments. Why this subtle change? Above all, to head off any threat of referenda by avoiding any form of constitutional vocabulary … But lift the lid and look in the toolbox: all the same innovative and effective tools are there, just as they were carefully crafted by the European Convention.”
    – V.Giscard D’Estaing, former French President and Chairman of the Convention which drew u the EU Constitution, The Independent, London, 30 October 2007