NATO, intra- EU military intrusions and the Czech crisis.

From the low farce of the G20 meeting in London we must turn our attention today to the NATO Strasbourg meeting and other matters of reality and substance. France has re-joined the integrated Nato military command a plan that has clearly been under consideration for some considerable time as the changeover of French trainee fighter pilots to English at the start of the year clearly demonstrates. Will this strengthen Nato or the EU as the main European defence force - I fear the latter. The Pentagon must see a combined EU defence force as a military convenience and a strategic desirability. Hence the danger of the apparent inconsequence of the loss of European democracy! Which brings us to the sudden release of agreements covering armed military units deployed in other EU states and the crisis in the Czech Republic (presently holding the rotating EU Presidency and the key to the EU Lisbon Treaty, lest we forget) please read all my posts of yesterday,particularly the one linked here, for background and other links. Why did President Sarkozy make mention of the Renault factory in the Czech Republic in his car manufacturers bail-out plan for France (read here and here)? Given the hysteria sweeping the corridors of power in the EU and the barely hidden plans to replace the elected representatives with a government of appointees in the Czech Republic, long enough presumably to ratify the Lisbon Treaty and to pass the military agreements which will permit (possibly retroactively) the exertion of military muscle, could the answer perhaps be that public opinion in the nations that may be called upon to supply such military muscle has to be turned against the Czechs? Impossible? Then this sudden announcement reported from the South Devon Herald Express would have to be pure co-incidence:

AVX staff in Paignton received 90 days' notice on Monday, with the American company opting to decamp its manufacturing interests to the Czech Republic where labour costs are cheaper.

Union representatives had thought they were going to discuss wage increases when called in by bosses, so the bad news was a major shock.

Surely European history is not about to be repeated and the Czech people sacrificed in the name of a false peace on the altar of advancing totalitarianism - if so the hypocrites who signed this letter to The Times this week claiming the EU as a bringer of peace and this broadcast statement by Martin Schulz, linked here will be more quickly exposed than ever seemed possible

What can be done? The Irish now hold the key! Will they actually sign the military agreements, even with the extensive opt outs they have obtained, surely these are unacceptable assaults on their much valued neutrality? If they do nothing now and with their credit rating already reduced this week the pressure to go along with such ploys must be excruciating, if they let the EU have their way then surely we are all 500 million of us doomed for Lisbon to be so desired by those in such power it must hold many more as yet unseen horrors. Ireland's leaders must step up now and clearly state that the second referendum will not proceed. A golden opportunity has been presented by Liberal MEP Andrew Duff, who was one of three charged with including the Irish guarantees in the Croatian Accession Treaty who has declared such a move as legally impossible, read here. Come On Leaders of Ireland the Democrats of Europe now depend upon YOU!! (Update 0905 GMT. Since posting the above I have come across an Oped in the Wall Street Journal, linked here, by the former Czech Prime Minister, Mirek Topalanek, which is worth reading in full, if that is not possible then this quote is noteworthy: I have personally experienced what the promises "voluntary membership," "fraternal help," and a "temporary stay" of the Warsaw Pact troops meant: forced dictatorship, violent occupation, and unlimited intimidation. From my perspective, the importance of U.S. input in NATO does not lie so much in the force of the first nuclear superpower, but rather in the ethos of supranational responsibility for democracy with which the U.S. soldiers disembarked in Normandy, or dropped food on West Berlin for its inhabitants. Hear, hear indeed but let us not forget Canada and Norway too, other democracies still as yet beyond the manipulations of the increasingly grotesque EU!)

EU armed forces could be deployed in Britain

My thanks to Anne Palmer for bringing this matter to my notice. Anne has provided much material which requires time to carefully review but for the moment I have extracted the following from the linked material to provide proof of this posting's headline and the gravity and detail of the plans already laid. Statewatch link. Presented to Parliament by the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs by Command of Her Majesty March 2009 Cm 7572 £5.50 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE MEMBER STATES OF THE EUROPEAN UNION CONCERNING THE STATUS OF MILITARY AND CIVILIAN STAFF SECONDED TO THE INSTITUTIONS OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, OF THE HEADQUARTERS AND FORCES WHICH MAY BE MADE AVAILABLE TO THE EUROPEAN UNION IN THE CONTEXT OF THE PREPARATION AND EXECUTION OF THE TASKS REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 17(2) OF THE TREATY ON EUROPEAN UNION,1 INCLUDING EXERCISES, AND OF THE MILITARY AND CIVILIAN STAFF OF THE MEMBER STATES PUT AT THE DISPOSAL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION TO ACT IN THIS CONTEXT (EU SOFA) WHEREAS: (1) The European Council has decided, in pursuit of the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP), to give the EU the capabilities required to take and implement decisions on the full range of conflict prevention and crisis management tasks defined in the TEU. (2) National decisions to send forces from Member States of the European Union (hereinafter "Member States") into the territory of other Member States and to receive such forces from Member States in the context of the preparation and execution of the tasks referred to in Article 17(2) of the TEU, including exercises, will be taken in accordance with the provisions of Title V of the TEU, and in particular with Article 23(1) thereof, and will be the subject of separate arrangements between the Member States concerned. Foreign Office Document link AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE MEMBER STATES OF THE EUROPEAN UNION CONCERNING CLAIMS INTRODUCED BY EACH MEMBER STATE AGAINST ANY OTHER MEMBER STATE FOR DAMAGE TO ANY PROPERTY OWNED, USED OR OPERATED BY IT OR INJURY OR DEATH SUFFERED BY ANY MILITARY OR CIVILIAN STAFF OF ITS SERVICES, IN THE CONTEXT OF AN EU CRISIS MANAGEMENT OPERATION The following letter was sent by Anne to the editor of the Daily Mail on 30th March but naturally enough was not published:

Dear Editor

As my true allegiance is to our Queen (Crown) and this Country I cannot possibly accept any part of the Treaty of Lisbon particularly without it being put to the people.

Should the people, in not knowing the full contents of this Treaty accept it, I cannot because I am now aware of its treacherous contents. I therefore crave protection from our Sovereign Lady, Queen Elizabeth II. Legislation that is coming forth from the EU at present is contrary to our Constitution and "Lisbon" would of course take precedence over our Constitution. (Forever) According to R v Thistlewood 1820, to destroy the Constitution is Treason. The Treaty of Lisbon can be withdrawn providing not all 27 Countries have ratified it, and it be put to the people. Anne Palmer. Full address