28 May, 2019

EU's most powerful officials Selmayr and Tajani Reveal EU's Democratic Skulduggery against Citizen's Rights

Martin Selmayr
Will a new Commission, Council and Parliament solve Europe’s present turmoil?
No.
What is the cause of Europe’s crisis of trust in Brussels, in Whitehall and other parliaments?
A scam against the public. A scam may be defined as getting people to follow rules they never agreed to. A scam leaves people feeling angry and bitter in frustration. They attack those around them and usually not the perpetrators of the fraud. The fraudster gets off, scot free.
Consider what happened immediately after the European Parliament elections. In Brussels, the new party leaders including the UK Brexit Party were called to a conference of party group presidents. Were these democrats eager to engage the public in their discussions about the elections? Were they going to show how the so-called ‘Brussels democrats‘ can democratically change the presidents of the European institutions, including the Commission and European Council?
Judge for yourself. They held a closed door meeting! https://audiovisual.ec.europa.eu/en/video/I-173301
European Parliament President Tajani
After the CLOSED DOOR European Parliament conference of party group presidents, party leaders held a press conference. They called for ‘OPEN, transparent‘ process to chose the European Commission and the European Council president. The leader of the EPP (European People’s Party) said ‘more people voted, they want us to speak for them‘ (in secret!?). The Socialist (S&D) leader said that the European Parliament is ‘place for open transparent discussion‘! The European Left leader said ‘Negotiation must be open, transparent and democratic.’
The acting leader of the Brexit party refused to divulge what went on in the meeting. If Brexit party members believe that UK will leave an undemocratic club, why should they follow undemocratic rules of silence, the rule of cartels and mafias? All politicians whether Scandinavian democrats or Brexiteers seem to get sucked into the Brussels Bog! Schuman said that the Councils, committees and other bodies must be under the control of public opinion not vice versa (Pour l’Europe p145).
The Brexit Party seemed to have forgotten that the main reason for the Brexit movement was the Democratic Deficit. I wrote that in 2014 two years before the referendum. UK politicians have a shocking ignorance about how European Democracy should work:
  • who proposes legislation,
  • who decides, (It’s not the Council!)
  • how many elections should take place (at least FIVE!)
  • how democracy works at three levels of society:
    • governmental or ministers,
    • European association who build the economy, and
    • a parliament whose main function is the protection of individual rights against bureaucracy and technocracy.
And, most outrageous of all, all these new democrats decided in secret by majority on institutional political nepotism. The president of the European Commission — the most important post in Europe — should be one of their buddies, a politician tied hand-and-foot to a political party, and not, as the treaties say, a citizen who is independent of political parties.
That’s poking the public in the eye with a red hot stick. Only two percent of the public have party cards. Politicians thus exclude 98 percent of the public and violate their human and civil rights.
But at least the British know and said so that the Spitzenkandidat system is not in the treaties and has never been ratified by national Parliaments. Maybe that is why Mr Juncker seems never in all his 5 year mandate to have visited UK except for once or twice. In April 2017 he made an evening call to Number 10 Downing Street. Accompanied by his then head of staff Martin Selmayr, Mr Juncker showed Mrs May the 1000 page EU Canada Agreement, CETA, saying that an agreement on a future relationship could be at least as long. He reportedly told Germany's Chancellor Merkel that Prime Minister May was 'living in a different galaxy.' 
At the 21 February 2018 Commission meeting, Mr Selmayr was abruptly promoted in a matter of minutes. First he became Deputy Secretary General of the Commission. Then the Secretary General who was present showed his letter of resignation. Thus minutes or perhaps seconds later, Mr Selmayr became Secretary General, the Eurocrat-in-Chief. The 28 Commissioners agreed this extraordinary coup, apparently without criticism. Mr Juncker is leaving but Mr Selmayr remains.
What does Europe’s most powerful bureaucrat, Martin Selmayr, now say about the exclusion of ordinary people from being candidate for the Commission?
Remember what even the anti-democratic Lisbon Treaty says. (That treaty text was rejected in referendums when it was called the Constitutional treaty. It was forced on the European people without their assent or referendum.) It says:
Every citizen shall have the right to participate in the democratic life of the Union. TEU article 10.3
There are a number of citizens who have been declared candidates for the Commission who believe they should respect the treaties. They are independent and have experience (competence). Those are the only conditions. 'Independent beyond doubt' means honest and trustworthy and not an agent of any lobby or ideological association or interest group.
I showed Mr Selmayr a text. He immediately recognized it as part of the EU Treaties. It was the oath that Commissioners must take before the judges of the European Court declaring solemnly that they are completely independent in carrying out their responsibilities in the general interest of Europeans.
The text is the same as that for the judges of the the European Court of Justice with one exception. It is much more STRICT. Judges must be impartial, Commissioners more so.
The oath says they must affirm:
‘Neither to seek nor to take instructions from any Government or from any other institution, body, office or entity and to refrain from any action incompatible with my duties or performance…’
 It is obvious to any normal person that a political party is an entity, institution or body so described. A Spitzenkandidat describes precisely a person who seeks instructions and takes instructions from the political party. Being a card-carrying party member active in closed-door meetings of a partisan lobby should immediately disqualify anyone from the Commission or from being a judge.
Mr Selmayr told me that an independent citizen would not be liked by his fellow citizens because he would be considered a technocrat. Really? For more than half a century Europe prospered in its economy and democracy because the Commission was independent. It acted like a Jury or non-partisan Judge. It resisted de Gaulle and other autocrats.
Then, after de Gaulle departed, politicians continued his take-over with technocratic institutions with no democratic controls, hundreds maybe more than a thousand committees closed to the public. That is the story from the massive failure of Maastricht to the Lisbon Treaty. None of these treaties was ever agreed by the British people in referendums. Several other countries rejected them. But the politicians-cum-technocrats took no notice! These are exactly the people Robert Schuman said were the greatest danger for Europeans. They would paralyse European democracy. That is exactly what is happening today.
Mr Selmayr said that such an independent citizen would have to convince the political parties in Parliament that he or she is the right person for the job by lobbying them! The Commission is supposed to be impartial, non-political, so how is the person going to do that? Bribe them by acceding to their often undemocratic ideological programmes? Maybe by promising them they can increase their pay, staff or think tanks at the expense of the tax-payers?
Let us also recall that Mr Selmayr was once a supposedly impartial technocrat and bureaucrat as an official in the Commission. He was one of its spokespeople. He suddenly became the political manager of Mr Jean-Claude Juncker’s Spitzenkandidat campaign in the EPP. How did an official take on such a job when Mr Juncker, a private citizen and ex-prime minister, originally had no wish to become the Commission's president. He had set his eyes on the European Council, the illegitimate child of the illegitimate Lisbon Treaty. Are officials, paid by taxpayers, supposed to be not only politicians but managers of politicians? Were does the money come from for travel and campaigns? 
At the 2014 Dublin meeting of the EPP party, Mr Juncker was elected by 382 party apparatchiks out of 812 such activists at the CLOSED DOOR meeting. Mr Michel Barnier came second.

The politicians and their bureaucrats (or bureaucrats and their politicians) have turned the European system into a political cartel. They, as a new Politburo, have decided they will decide for all citizens. The cannot look their citizens straight in the eye or let the public see what is going on.
There is no such thing as a Spitzenkandidat in the treaties. It is a fantasy of politicians. A circus where no citizen actually votes for the Commission. No ballot paper mentions 'President of the Commission'.
The early treaties as agreed by the public define what is European democracy. The treaties say there are only two criteria for being a candidate for the Commission: experience and independence. Independence means that the person is not a lobbyist or tied to any interest group, whether the national government, or any other organisation such as a political party or commercial organisation, association of lobbyists, workers’ union or consumer association. In other words the candidate is unbiased and unprejudiced.
But the politicians willingly exclude all but a few citizens (their own partisans) from holding office. The European Elections are a case in point. It is a scam. The rules do not conform to elementary rules of democracy. They also violate the treaties. The treaties from 1951 define how European elections to the Parliament should take place. But they have never been put into action!
Those who are victims of scams feel betrayed. Scams are an abomination. They are the opposite to justice. But those who perpetrate scams are in a state of moral denial. For them doing the right thing is an abomination. The right thing is the last they want to do or what they have trained themselves to do: control by party cartel.
That is the problem Europe faces with its crisis of Democracy — its Democratic Deficit. The perpetrators who deny real, open and transparent democracy to the people of Europe, will do everything they can to find a way that denies justice and fairness. Anything else would publicise their trickery.
Hence there is a tendency of politicians to drive Europe in the wrong direction. This is self-deception. It may take the guise of political ideology. But the result is the same: people are denied their real voice in decision-making.
Some facts:
Robert Schuman and the founding fathers described Europe’s Community Method for real democracy and wrote the early treaties
  • How the Commission should be selected.
  • How the European Parliament should be elected.
  • How the Council should be administered, its powers, its limits
  • Whether or not there should be such a thing as the European Heads of Government
  • How European can solve its unemployment problem
  • How it can become the most innovative bloc in the world
  • How economic and social matters, immigration and regional affairs can be resolved to the benefit of all by elected bodies.
  • How the Court of Justice can be fully responsive both to the needs of Justice and Democracy.
Instead, due to autocrats like Charles de Gaulle, elections have been postponed since the European Community's beginning years. He took over France in 1957. None of the elections, specified in the treaties, took place. He made sure that none would.
De Gaulle left in 1969 but the deformed system was not remedied. Europeans have had NO ELECTIONS according to the provisions of the treaties. Instead they took over de Gaulle’s closed door system and made it even worse. Far worse than even de Gaulle’s most autocratic dream!
Europe is now replete with more secret committees and closed door decisions than ever before.
Europe will eventually recover its democracy. What is not sure is When. It will take people with civil courage to affront the anti-democrats.
Will this crisis last as long as that caused by de Gaulle -- more than a decade?


09 May, 2019

Fake News, Stealth Coups in US and Europe


A stealth Coup d’Etat may be defined as one that undermines democratic government “of the people, by the people, for the people.
Robert Schuman, the initiator of Europe’s democratic system, took Lincoln’s definition further. In a Democracy, he said, the people must be able to define the proposed objectives and the means to attain them. They must be at the service of the people and be agreed with the people.
The system of democracy he proposed involving the active participation of
    • national government ministers,
    • Europe-wide economic associations and
    • individuals.
It is far from being properly applied today.
Why?
Both Europe and USA are at risk of stealth coups. Democracy, that is open, honest politics, needs constant defence against the tendency of all humans to subtle frauds and major treacherous fakes leading to tyranny. The West is facing the dire consequences of apathy.
Democracy needs defence, as the body needs blood.
Nothing is easier for political counterfeiters to exploit the illusion of good principles, and nothing is more disastrous than good principles (such as open democracy and freedom of expression) being badly applied.’ Schuman wrote quoting philosopher Jacques Maritain.
The most dangerous of these threats, Schuman said, was that unaccountable and rigid bureaucracies would replace the voice of the people.
The Western society today is unsettled by more violence and division. Censorship is subtly being imposed by global information cartels. We should therefore be reminded about what Schuman added. He warned that any democracy that failed to defend Christian values of open, honest politics is likely to fall into tyranny and anarchy. The supposed liberating, democratic leaders of the Russian people became the Soviet ‘Dictators of the Proletariat.’
All founding States of the European Community agreed the basis of European democracy. Their Great Charter said that basis was the Freedom to Choose. This Declaration opposed Soviet dictatorship or Gaullist autocracy that wished to end political parties. In the same year, European Statesmen confirmed that signatory States of the Convention of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms thus defined the borders of the New Europe.
Subsequent politicians tried to bury Europe’s Magna Carta.
In USA, the Mueller Report concluded that there was no Russian collusion with the Trump presidential campaign. No collusion, even less a conspiracy. Only conspiracy is illegal. But is that all we can conclude?
Mueller’s team of 17 lawyers had 13 registered Democrats, the rest being unaffiliated or unknown. Six had donated to the campaign of Hillary Clinton. It is unlikely therefore that any suspicious stone was left unturned.
Yet before the report, half a million articles on internet concluded that Trump was guilty. A majority of television and the press were convinced.
Television commentariat and funny guys were tireless in pressing the Trump-Russia collusion theme. A quarter of a billion interactions on FaceBook discussed and debated Trump’s guilt for allegedly colluding with the Russians. Many Democrat Congress leaders spoke vehemently about Trump’s guilt. Some still do!
Pulitzer prizes were given to New York Times and Washington Post for their investigations into Russian Collusion. But now we know: No Collusion!
Donald J. Trump@realDonaldTrump
So funny that The New York Times & The Washington Post got a Pulitzer Prize for their coverage (100% NEGATIVE and FAKE!) of Collusion with Russia – And there was No Collusion! So, they were either duped or corrupt? In any event, their prizes should be taken away by the Committee!
What evidence would stand up in Court? None. That is the conclusion of more than two years of forensic investigation about lawyers, some of them lawyers who have acted for Hillary Clinton and many of Trump’s most vicious opponents.
It was all Fake News! Massive-scale Fake News. They were shown to be deluded. At best it was a fishing expedition. But nothing fishy! There was nothing to hook. Or was whole campaign a pro-Clinton conspiracy?

Sooner or later, the public eye discerns the real truth. The most deceived or prejudiced take longer for the logic to click. Open discussion of evidence is the principle of natural justice of law courts. Under interrogation and deep analysis, rumours can be torn apart. Analysis is the only answer to Fake News, not censorship.
The careful analysis of facts is the opposite to the mob rule of the social media.
Fake News information campaigns need to be dissected, their deceitful techniques surgically examined. If mob rule on the internet brings a great section of the public to one conclusion, then the other side which says the opposite must be able to examine their assumptions.
Fact one: The conclusion of Mueller’s investigation is that they found no evidence of Russia colluding.
Fact two: A false story was hyped around the media very heavily for three years. Who was behind it? Was it Mrs Clinton? Mr Obama? or a misguided media? Who owns this media? Or are other disinformation agencies acting in the shadows? Are the Obama-nominated chiefs of intelligence agencies acting crookedly anti-Trump?
Trump includes them in the Washington ‘swamp‘. It is illegal for agencies to spy on US citizens. Spying on a presidential candidate is treasonous. The US Attorney General William Barr thinks so and is preparing cases. Were European agencies complicit in this electronic Stasi plot?
Fact three: a score of people at the top of the intelligence services (FBI, CIA, plus more than a dozen other agencies and the Department of Justice) have resigned or been sacked as more of the core material of the Russia collusion fake was exposed as false. Guilt is evident. They were involved in declaring Mrs Clinton innocent of extremely serious security violations and corruption and fabricating a case to stop Mr Trump taking office. Documents have been released under the Freedom of Information Act.  Court cases are being prepared.
One key bit of “evidence” was the “Dirty Dossier” also known as the Steele Dossier. (An anti-Trump British former spy was hired to write it.) This report aimed to show that Donald Trump was involved in scurrilous behaviour with prostitutes in Moscow and that this was a means to blackmail Trump. It does not stand up to any sort of veracity test.
The false dossier was then used as ‘evidence‘ for warrants from the FISA court (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act). Once one target for surveillance is agreed, the intelligence services could then track all communications he had with his contacts, and, even further, follow the contacts. Thus the entire Trump campaign could be penetrated by the Clinton Clan. Very KGB.

The intelligence services could thus track the communications of all the Trump team and make sure he was never elected. The same agents were supposed to investigate Mrs Clinton. They didn’t. Incendiary evidence of Mrs Clinton’s guilt in selling State secrets to foreign powers was brushed aside.
However, crooked warrants allowing the Clinton-biased spy chiefs to tap into communications of the entire Trump campaign provide an electronic paper trail. When the relevant documents are declassified in the next few weeks, the public will be able to judge on the horrendous proportions of this criminal spying conspiracy against the present president and more.
The fake dossier was knowingly introduced as a legal base for this political surveillance. The high officials signing these documents have now been sacked or resigned. Mr Barr is collating information prior to charges.
Much of the media showed their bias against Donald J Trump in the campaign and after. It is willing to slant their articles.Yet the facts have slipped out. Were journalists in the major newspapers and internet media, television and social being used? That should not surprise us. Fake News is a common thread of history. It takes an unusual journalist to buck many layers of editorial and publishing control.
Now European institutions and governments are on the hunt for ‘Fake News‘. They are simply aping the US media. 
The big danger about Fake News is not about click bait but world politics and information domination.
The only sure way to have unbiased journalism is to have independent journalists. The big $5 Trillion InfoTech companies (Google/Alphabet, FaceBook, Twitter, Amazon, Apple) now declare that censorship is their policy. They stop ‘hate speech‘ or ‘dangerous‘ journalists, but they do not define these terms. They ban other journalists from mentioning the names favourably. Thus they define the ‘enemies of the people.‘ No appeal. Banks close down their accounts and credit cards. Thus some veteran journalists are losing the means to survive.
These new media giants have destroyed years of previous archive postings of independent journalists. (Too often they expose fakes!) For others who do not expose them it is different. FaceBook vice president says ‘we do not remove lies or content that is inaccurate — whether it’s denying the Holocaust, the Armenian massacre, or the fact that the Syrian government has killed hundreds of thousands of its own people.’
Who guards the guardians? Who defines these ‘enemies‘? Are the InfoTech companies public service companies or an information cartel? Some politicians in US and Europe love this censorship. It silences their legitimate critics who point out their corruption. ‘Nationalists!‘ ‘Populists!
Dictatorship of the InfoTech giants.
Control of the media is equivalent to control by a dictatorship. Violence and smears were used to stop the truth appearing publicly to counter ideologies.
The USSR had Kominform. It used AgitProp: agitation (violent demonstrations) and propaganda (smears) to seize control of eastern Europe.
That’s when the western agencies developed their own means to spy on people. In early 1950s, US Central Intelligence Agency, CIA, set up its programme to manipulate information for propaganda and political control of media. Called ‘Operation Mockingbird’, it funded students and cultural organisations and magazines as ‘front organisations.
CIA and Marxists both targeted main stream media (MSM). This still threatens independent journalism. But the West had laws against the intelligence agencies spying on their own people. It is scarcely surprising that many journalists today are sympathetic (knowingly or unknowingly) to Marxist and Trotskyist ideologies.
The CIA wanted to keep track of suspects. The US Defence Department research agency, DARPA created LifeLog to collect personal data and compile a massive electronic database of every activity and relationship a person engages in. This was to include credit card purchases, web sites visited, the content of telephone calls and e-mails, preferences in books and magazines, television and radio, and physical location via wearable GPS sensors, biomedical data.
Criticised for privacy law violation, it was closed in early 2004. Simultaneously, in Feb 2004 Facebook was founded with multi-million investments. Coincidence? It was part of the trend for privatising the spying services.
Since then, mega info-tech corporations control global information access systems. How did Google (Alphabet), Amazon, Apple, Facebook, Twitter, Microsoft start up? The technology is derived from defence and intelligence industries.
Contemporary issues in US and Europe
How did the recent public fuss about 'Fake News' arise? The real origin was exposed by a journalist who did real investigative work.
Yes, there is fake news about the origin of fake news! The key is to check the first usages, the chronology and how it was spread. That’s what historians and journalists should normally do.
Fake News‘ was first used to create a smoke screen to hide bureaucratic ‘oversights‘ and corruption. Investigative reporter Sharyl Attkisson showed today’s explosive use of the term ‘Fake News,’ and the call to manage it, originated with President Obama, NOT Donald Trump.
Attacking Freedom of Expression is no public service. It is acting contrary to the people’s rights as it provides political weapons to close down debates.
After the Obama administration launched the campaign, Europeans did the same. Then Google executives helped Hillary Clinton weaponize it as an anti-Trump political device by 'shadow-banning' and manipulating the algorithms. They wanted to deter Trump from pursuing the case of Clinton treason. Calling anything ‘fake news‘ and ‘conspiracy theory‘ was supposed to embarrass Trump. The media would take it off the news agenda.
Instead Donald Trump made it doubly clear that Hillary Clinton should be in jail for selling US classified secrets of State to donors to the Clinton Foundation. People agreed that something stank in Washington. It was too late to hide the initial evidence. Trump was elected. Clinton and many Democrats and Republicans who had played the system lost.
Trump called the bluff of Obama. He exposed the corruption of Clinton and some earlier leaders. He did not stop because of this bad press. Instead he accused the media who took up the Obama slogan of ‘fake news‘ as being purveyors of fake news. These politically active journalists who refused to investigate the ‘cover-up‘, he said, were ‘enemies of the people.’ These were the same people who predicted the Clinton victory as 95 percent certain.
Truth will out. He said any attempt to hide the facts was itself fake news and a failure of journalism. Clinton and the Democrat establishment and some Republicans were trying to hide Clinton emails, destroying evidence, implicating her in the Uranium One, the anti-Trump Steele ‘Dirty Dossier’ and FISA spygate frauds. But copies of many emails exist and will be used in Court.
Real undercover journalism have exposed major InfoTech execs with their anti-Trump activities. They were caught on video saying how they invoke shadow-banning, censorship algorithms and demonetizing popular outlets.
Media is slow to change its prejudices. US President Donald Trump is forced to use Twitter as most of US media plays the news against him. Twitter has banned his supporters as ‘dangerous‘. To whom? The outcome of the 2020 elections? To corrupt business and the trillions that are freely spent in the Department of Defense?
An ex-CIA officer working at the highest levels, Kevin Shipp, exposed shadow government ‘black operations’ and showed that the CIA is just one of 19 US agencies that work outside legal and democratic control. So does much of the defence industries that also lack budgetary control. The Federal Reserve System is able to ‘print’ money now at the touch of a computer button. It ‘created‘ two trillions after the 2008 crash, magically tripling its balance sheet.
The Congressional-military-industrial complex (Eisenhower’s term) has now multi-trillion interests in ‘Fake News’ and censorship.
So are the American people in charge of their own destiny? Are Europeans?
Europe has developed a similar bureaucratic seizure of control and democratic paralysis. Real news has been taken hostage.


Fake News should not be confused with bad reporting. It involves global forces. Robert Schuman, the initiator of the European Community and Europe’s longest peace, warned about such forces. Americans are relative new comers to fake news and disinformation.
For thousands of years ‘Information warfare’ (disinformation) has been more effective than ‘hot war’ or was preliminary to it. Fake news deceives the enemy.
It was used three times in one century in wars between Germany and France.
The German Chancellor Bismarck edited a telegram (the Ems telegram) and then published it on Bastille Day 1870 to make it seem insulting to the French. The French media could magnified the affront to French dignity. The French impetuously declared war, which they lost. With the same fake news, Bismarck also forced German States to unify under Prussian Kaiser Wilhelm.
Today the main danger of truth to power is not just cities or nation states but global cartels.
Last century, before the First World War (WW1), the arms race was ignited by steel and armaments firms who emphasized their patriotism. In reality, international cartels, like Harvey United Steel, were formed which exchanged patents information. ‘Enemies‘ sat on the same board. The Arms Ring fooled War Departments and governments constantly into upgrading their weapon systems.
UK’s Armstrong Vickers, Germany’s Krupp Thyssen, France’s Schneider Creusot, US, Russian and Japanese companies became among the richest companies in a world cartel conspiracy. They owned not only the steel firms and coal mines for blast furnaces but newspapers, banks and controlled central bank policy. Journalists were more or less openly paid by foreign governments to write columns in the main newspapers of their foes. Extraordinarily this continued throughout the war! Well-placed articles by cartels manipulated governments. Governments and people were the victims of this Fake News in two world wars.
In USA Fake News is designed to subvert the freedoms of the Constitution. In Europe Fake News is used to block democracy ever being fully launched.

Robert Schuman created an anti-cartel, peace system called the ‘European Coal and Steel Community’ (ECSC). It also laid down rules for impartial information in the sector. The treaty all people and States agreed to described how elections should take place in this sector to deal with
  • individual rights (by an elected open assembly),
  • associations of industries, workers and consumers (through an open tripartite Consultative Committee) and
  • national rights (through a open Council of Ministers).
Did this stop cartel trying to control of the press? Obviously not! When Charles de Gaulle seized power in 1957, he placed his loyal followers in key positions in radio and television and also in the press.
Then he planned to control all the Community institutions by blocking elections to the European Parliament and Consultative Committees dead in their tracks. He made out that all European decisions should be made in the Council of Ministers where his minister browbeat the smaller and less politically powerful countries to agree to his ‘package deals‘. He wanted to turn the European Commission into a political secretariat.
When de Gaulle left the scene in 1969, what did the politicians do? Did they restore democratic elections? Did they open up the Councils to the press, like good democrats? Not at all. They created a system where multiple little Napoleons ruled the roost to the detriment of the people. The people expressed their growing disgust at the democratic deficit.
The politicians have never allowed a legal European Parliament election YET. From 1950 to 1979 there were no elections. European Parliamentarians were delegated by governments and national parliaments.
In his book Pour l’Europe, published in 1963 Schuman wrote:
It is necessary in the near future to facilitate, according to the Charter of the Community, the election by direct universal suffrage of the members of the Assembly exercising the powers of deliberation and control. Article 138 (of the EEC treaty) moreover gave a mandate to that Assembly to draft such an electoral law. This must be uniform for all Member States. It is certain that the public’s consciousness of a unified Europe would be accentuated and take concrete form if it could affirm its existence regularly by a vote on a European scale. The elector would be integrated in a single electoral body and be able to pronounce their views on goals that attract the whole of the territories joined in unity. This idea needs to be welcomed and put into action without delay.‘ p147.
From 1979 to today politicians have refused to observe the second part of the treaty article that says elections should be Europe-wide. Instead they cut the sentence in half and implemented 28 national elections! They have a system that is biased in favour of governmental parties.
Today they still refuse to act.
Article 223 TFEU (Lisbon)
The European Parliament shall draw up a proposal to lay down the provisions necessary for elections of its members by direct universal suffrage in accordance with a uniform procedure in all Member States or in accordance with principles common to all Member States.

This month’s election continues the politician’s fraud for nearly 70 years! Brexitis the latest red warning light!
When dealing with disinformation we are dealing not just with lax ethics or immoral journalists or even just disinformation by secret services, e.g. KGB /FSB. We are dealing with global forces who work in trillions not billions of dollars: armaments, technocracies, banksters (bankers who make taxpayers responsible for their corrupt practice like the 2008 crash).
Democratic Deficit
Not having proper elections created a Democratic Deficit. Europe has never had its proper elections. The public started complaining about these little Napoleons acting against the public will win in the 1980s. Of course the leaders said they were working for the public good. But that did not include asking the public whether they agreed with them. They have still not held elections that had been in the treaties for decades before de Gaulle.
They also censored European history. Instead of recalling the principles of 9 May 1950, the 1957 Treaty of Rome’s Common Market became the start of Europe. Peace obviously came from people trading with each other, they said. Not true! What was really the democratic foundation of postwar peace was buried.
In 2018 Brussels bureaucracy failed to mark the 70th anniversary of democratic principles and freedoms that rescued the Continent from World War III. They forgot why a customs union was created and Brexiteers still have not been told.
Europe’s main Fake News comes by omission. Its media continuously fails to expose how European leaders have long failed to hold these basic elections and hold open Councils. They failed to expose the neo-Gaullist take-over of the supposedly impartial Commission by the fraudulent Spitzenkandidat system. What happens to citizens who declared they are candidates but are not attached to lobbyist-ridden political parties?
Europe’s media fail to reveal today’s Fake History!
But crunch time is coming. The experience of Europe’s corrupt elites is shaping up to be similar to that of America’s democratic frauds.

04 April, 2019

EU's Juncker praises "Greatest Destroyer of Modern Times"


British Prime Minister David Cameron “is one of the greatest destroyers of modern times.” So declared EU Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker in Saarbruecken on 1 April 2019. What was his crime? Why did Mr Juncker find him so vile, such an enemy of mankind? cameron-reisgnation-getty-e1554410104984.jpg (485×526)





The only explanation Mr Juncker gave was
“We were forbidden from being present in any way in the Referendum campaign” on Brexit.
The EU champion of the free movement of Europeans was apparently prevented and obstructed from entering the United Kingdom. He was not able to take ship or plane, in spite of all the European treaties that assure him of this right of free movement.
But was Mr Juncker prevented from speaking on the issues of the Referendum? Obviously not. He has at his disposal the largest press corps in the world, bigger than Washington’s. The British press and television are there. So are European media and the major outlets from the United States. Mr Juncker could speak and his words will echo as far away as Japan. So why was he hamstrung by Britain?
He has the opportunity to speak to journalists every day in the Commission’s Press Room. It is broadcast worldwide. Radio and television signals, internet messages burst across physical barriers like the English Channel and customs controls. He would certainly be noticed as he has not spoken there much since he made a surprise appearance to announce that his chef-de-Cabinet, Martin Selmayr, had been accelerated into the office of the Commission’s Secretary General, the most powerful bureaucrat in Brussels.
What was Prime Minister Cameron’s crime? How did he so offend Mr Juncker, erstwhile prime minister of Luxembourg? Both should know the ruses of politics, the rules of how to get on in Europe.
Psshhah!
It is clear that Mr Cameron’s great wickedness was the Referendum. He dared ask the British people what they thought of the European Union, the infrastructure added to the European Economic Community. They did not like it one bit.
In contrast, Mr Juncker’s proudest moment was his hand in creating and signing the Maastrict Treaty called the Treaty on European Union.
“Standing before this new Treaty I sensed that this might be the most important signature I ever made,” Mr Juncker said.
This was on the occasion of 25th anniversary on 9 December 2016, just weeks after the British Referendum.
The treaty was remarkable in being a radical rewrite of the democratic principles of the Community system. It led to protests about the Democratic Deficit. It added unaccountable “pillars”, one a bureaucratic structure for internal matters like justice and home affairs. The other was for external affairs.
The Maastricht treaty also added another undemocratic monstrosity: a system for European money called the euro. This violated the sound monetary principles that had been outlined in the 1970 Werner Report (named after a Luxembourg prime minister and written with the help of Bernard Clappier, Schuman’s former Directeur de Cabinet and later Governor of the Banque de France.
Instead of a Community currency governed by democratic institutions, the euro is based on the erroneous Mundell theory. This is designed for a federation not a supranational Community of nations. The euro is run by a closed-door, unaccountable committee called the euroGroup. It is not even mentioned as an institution in the Maastricht and other treaties. Yet it now governs the economy!
So if we look at the vote to ‘Leave the European Union‘ lucidly, literally and legally, the British did not reject the idea of a European Customs Union that they had strongly supported by referendum in 1975. They are on the right track. Keep the Community system. They rejected all the non-democratic, bureaucratic trappings called the European Union. That is defined as the autocratic additions Maastricht to Lisbon so cherished by Mr Juncker. Bureaucracy adds treacle to Europe’s petrol tank.
Europe would boom. Robert Schuman created the idea of a European Customs Union as a step-by-step system to define and build European democracy and set its economy in top gear. A customs union provides the way for all the population to participate freely. Benefits of increased trade and prosperity are sure to follow. So in a real sense, European democracy is identified with the customs union and the single market. So it is an absolute nonsense, logically and economically, to say that a democratic State wants to leave democratically a democratic customs union. Brexit proclaims that Brussels has gone sour on democracy. How?
Schuman proposed this customs union with a democratic assembly governing it in July 1948 when he was first Prime Minister of France. It was designed to help Germany become a more democratic country. In that it succeeded. It was also designed to be so strong and forge friendly links to other countries so that Germany would never leave it. In that Schuman was also right.
Based on Schuman’s founding principles, I wrote at the time of the British referendum — and in fact before 23 June 2016 — that should Britain vote that it wanted to leave the European Union, it would never leave the Customs Union of the EEC or Euratom with its single market for nuclear materials. Those commentaries are printed in my book, “Brexit and Britain’s Vision for Europe.” Copies were sent to Prime Minister Theresa May and four of her Brexit ministers. (Mr Cameron resigned on the 24 June immediately after the results were known.)
It seems extraordinary that Mr Juncker is so negative against what is considered the most vital part of democracy — the voice of the people in a referendum. But who does Mr Juncker admire as the great hero of modern times — the opposite end of the spectrum from the greatest destroyer Mr Cameron?
We do not have to guess. Mr Juncker has already made it well known. He said Karl Marx was the ‘greatest thinker of modern times.’ He was there in Trier to celebrate the 200th anniversary of his birth.
He said that 
Marx “is the mentor of the revolution of the proletariat and working people all over the world. He is the main founder of Marxism, the founder of Marxist political parties, and the creator of international Communism and the greatest thinker of modern times.” (emphasis added)
Marx gave the world war and armed subjugation of central and eastern Europe by a Politburo. Schuman gave Europe lasting peace and prosperity.
World atheistic Communism killed between 44 and 163 million people from USSR to China to Cambodia, North Korea to Africa. It was Marx that proposed the Dictatorship of the Proletariat. He is ultimately responsible for the millions sent to Gulag camps as ‘enemies of the people‘. Who is the greatest enemy and destroyer of the people?
Which side is Mr Juncker on?