Treaty amending the constitutional basis of the European Union
POPULARITY
5 episodes with lisbon treaty
3 episodes with lisbon treaty
3 episodes with lisbon treaty
2 episodes with lisbon treaty
2 episodes with lisbon treaty
2 episodes with lisbon treaty
This is the 1st Episode of a weekly call with Arnold Beekes where we discuss current events and what we can do to deal with it. We also share game-changing initiatives that contribute to better living for all. About my Co-Host:Arnold Beekes Innovator, certified coach & trainer and generalist. First 20 years in technology and organizational leadership, then 20 years in psychology and personal leadership (all are crucial for innovation). ============ What we Discussed: - Reflecting on a friend Steve Cotter who passed ( 1:45 mins) - Why we started this collaboration (2:30 mins) - Is Geo Engineering causing illness (4:45 mins) - Do not attack those with a Different belief system (10:45 mins) - Challenge Everything ( 12 mins) - Do not let the Ego get in the way (13:50 mins) - The Pros & Cons of Ai ( 16 mins) - A lot of information given to us is a guesstimate (19:30 mins) - The dangers of using technology all the time (22:30 mins) - Are Tarrot Cards useful (25 mins) - Gifted people that can read your past and future (28:45 mins) - The Protests in Romania after the Elections (31 mins) - Lisbon Treaty in Ireland (36 mins)====================How to Contact Arnold Beekes: https://braingym.fitness/ https://www.linkedin.com/in/arnoldbeekes/ ===============Donations https://www.podpage.com/speaking-podcast/support/------------------All about Roy / Brain Gym & Virtual Assistants athttps://roycoughlan.com/------------------
This is the 1st Episode of a weekly call with Arnold Beekes where we discuss current events and what we can do to deal with it. We also share game-changing initiatives that contribute to better living for all. About my Co-Host: Arnold Beekes Innovator, certified coach & trainer and generalist. First 20 years in technology and organizational leadership, then 20 years in psychology and personal leadership (all are crucial for innovation). ============ What we Discussed: - Reflecting on a friend Steve Cotter who passed ( 1:45 mins) - Why we started this collaboration (2:30 mins) - Is Geo Engineering causing illness (4:45 mins) - Do not attack those with a Different belief system (10:45 mins) - Challenge Everything ( 12 mins) - Do not let the Ego get in the way (13:50 mins) - The Pros & Cons of Ai ( 16 mins) - A lot of information given to us is a guesstimate (19:30 mins) - The dangers of using technology all the time (22:30 mins) - Are Tarrot Cards useful (25 mins) - Gifted people that can read your past and future (28:45 mins) - The Protests in Romania after the Elections (31 mins) - Lisbon Treaty in Ireland (36 mins) ==================== How to Contact Arnold Beekes: https://braingym.fitness/ https://www.linkedin.com/in/arnoldbeekes/ =============== Donations https://www.podpage.com/speaking-podcast/support/ ------------------ All about Roy / Brain Gym & Virtual Assistants at https://roycoughlan.com/ ------------------
This is the 1st Episode of a weekly call with Arnold Beekes where we discuss current events and what we can do to deal with it. We also share game-changing initiatives that contribute to better living for all. About my Co-Host:Arnold Beekes Innovator, certified coach & trainer and generalist. First 20 years in technology and organizational leadership, then 20 years in psychology and personal leadership (all are crucial for innovation). ============ What we Discussed: - Reflecting on a friend Steve Cotter who passed ( 1:45 mins) - Why we started this collaboration (2:30 mins) - Is Geo Engineering causing illness (4:45 mins) - Do not attack those with a Different belief system (10:45 mins) - Challenge Everything ( 12 mins) - Do not let the Ego get in the way (13:50 mins) - The Pros & Cons of Ai ( 16 mins) - A lot of information given to us is a guesstimate (19:30 mins) - The dangers of using technology all the time (22:30 mins) - Are Tarrot Cards useful (25 mins) - Gifted people that can read your past and future (28:45 mins) - The Protests in Romania after the Elections (31 mins) - Lisbon Treaty in Ireland (36 mins)====================How to Contact Arnold Beekes: https://braingym.fitness/ https://www.linkedin.com/in/arnoldbeekes/ ===============Donations https://www.podpage.com/speaking-podcast/support/------------------All about Roy / Brain Gym & Virtual Assistants athttps://roycoughlan.com/------------------
A European election candidate for this region believes Ireland needs to opt out of the EU migration pact to retain control over the number of Asylum Seekers entering the country. In March, Justice Minister Helen McEntee received approval to opt into measures of the pact which will include a greater emphasis on returning unsuccessful International Protection Applications to their country of origin. Under the Lisbon Treaty, Ireland is one of three member states that can opt-out of EU laws on freedom, security and justice, unless it voluntarily decides not to. Leader of Ireland First and Ireland South Candidate, Derek Blighe says the Government is losing all control of the situation.
Krzysztof Bozak, a Polish Member of Parliament and Deputy Speaker of the Sejm joins Hearts of Oak to outline his political journey, beginning with his participation in a youth movement and the founding of the Confederation of Freedom and Independence Party. Krzysztof lifts the veil on the Law and Justice Party's EU stance, economic policies, and immigration management. He tells us of the significance of upholding conservative and nationalist values amidst mainstream narratives. Krzysztof highlights his role in the Polish Parliament and his openness to collaborating with like-minded international entities. This interview offers deep insights into Polish politics, party distinctions, and the importance of ideological integrity in a changing political landscape. Krzysztof Bosak began his political career as an activist and spokesman for the organisation All-Polish Youth. In 2005, he became one of the youngest Polish MPs in history, elected as a candidate of the League of Polish Families, a conservative party, at the age of 23. Krzysztof is now the leader of Confederation of Freedom and Independence Party, Member of Parliament and Deputy Speaker of the Sejm. Connect with Krzysztof... X/TWITTER twitter.com/BosakKrzysztof (English account) twitter.com/krzysztofbosak Confederation of Freedom and Independence Party WEBSITE konfederacja.pl X/TWITTER https://konfederacja.pl/ Interview recorded 30.4.24 Connect with Hearts of Oak... X/TWITTER twitter.com/HeartsofOakUK WEBSITE heartsofoak.org/ PODCASTS heartsofoak.podbean.com/ SOCIAL MEDIA heartsofoak.org/connect/ SHOP heartsofoak.org/shop/ TRANSCRIPT (Hearts of Oak) And I'm delighted to be joined by a member of the Polish Parliament, that is Krzysztof Bozak. Krzysztof, thank you for your time today. (Krzysztof Bosak) Thank you for the invitation and welcome everybody. Great to speak with you. I had the privilege of meeting you back, goodness, 18 months ago, I think, with Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff , a good friend of both of ours. And you are a member of the Polish parliament and I'm looking forward to understanding a little bit about the Polish parliament setup. Each country is different but you are the president of the national movement and you're the leader of the confederation or confederation of Freedom and Independence Party, and you're the Deputy Speaker of the House, which is called the Sejm. And your a husband, father, you're a Christian, and I want to delve into all of those. But Krzysztof, you became a member of the Parliament back in 2005. You were very young back then. Tell me why you got involved in politics. How did that happen and how did you end up standing as a member of parliament and being elected? It's a long story. In fact, this time I was the youngest MP in this term and I started being involved in politics by a youth movement, a Catholic Eurosceptic and Catholic Nationalist youth movement. Since I was in high school. I was 17 or 18 years old when I joined. It was the time of the debate about joining the EU. All mainstream parties, mainstream medias, mainstream bishops, mainstream everything was in favour of joining EU. And a small minority of speakers and social leaders were against defending principles of independence, sovereignty, traditional values, and so on. And I was sure that they are right and I joined this movement, being against joining European Union at that time. I joined a youth movement, then in 2001 a conservative pro-family, pro-life Eurosceptic party was created. It was League of Polish Families. It was kind of coalition of very different right-wing conservative or Eurosceptic or nationalist groups. And four years later I became the youngest MP being elected from my home town and constituency. From the 10th place on the list. So I was not a leader of the list, I was on the 10th place and people elected me from this list as the only MP in this constituency. So it was a very big success and a very big surprise for many people. And it was short term, only two years, because this was a time of big political instability. We had two government changes. It was, let's say, right-wing government, many scandals, and after two years, earlier elections, and my political party didn't succeed. League of Polish Families disappeared from Polish politics. Law and Justice political party took everything, every right-wing voters. We were against, we were competitors of law and justice, competitors from the right. They were centre-right from our perspective. and after that for 12 years I was outside the Parliament involved in social movement and working in right-wing NGOs, in think tanks like Republican Foundation, defending the same values on the social level with my colleagues and people who didn't lose faith in being active and trying to create truly right-wing political movement. We tried many times different attempts to get into the Parliament we have 5% threshold and proportional system so it's quite hard if you do not have support from big business big media or big money and we succeed in 2019 I went back to Parliament this time as a co-leader of of Confederation, Freedom and Independence. It is a coalition now, coalition of three political parties, three political movements. My movement, national movement, still the same values, still the same political tradition. So national conservative Catholic tradition, national democratic tradition of Polish political independence movement, and we created this national movement as a new political party ten years before, in 2013. So for six years we were outside the parliament, and after that we made a coalition with conservative libertarians and traditionalists. So conservative libertarians were created by long-term defender of economic freedom and civil liberties. Janusz Korwin-Mikke, now he's not in his political party, he's pleaded, but he created this political party and now they have a younger leader, Sławomir Manczan from Next Generation, very popular young businessman and tax advisor and also a big defender of economic freedom and conservative values. So this is the second pillar first is national conservative Catholic second is let's say conservative libertarian and the third is citizens movement traditionalist movement of Jagger Brown is a quite popular right-wing movie a documentary movies director an artist and intellectual who who were involved in politics also a few years before, first being on anti-communist and right-wing position, and then shifting more to the right and building the coalition with us. So now we have Confederation as a coalition, or let's say umbrella party, coalition party, for these three different movements and many smaller groups who joined us. And we work collectively, we have collective leadership and we challenge law and justice from the right. We were in opposition during eight years of law and justice government. From our perspective they are not very conservative and they are, I know that sometimes media call them nationalists, but from our perspective they were a typical centre-right political party. And we made an alternative right party for Polish voters and now we even extended the number of voters who support us. So now we have 18 MPs and more than 7% in polls and now we fight to get into the European Parliament. Because for now there are only people from Law and Justice and their allies parties. And we believe that Polish voters deserve to have better representation in European Parliament. Built by truly critical to European Union politicians, not supporters of EU who change only some narrative, but they always vote in favour of you. Well, tell us about the... Because when I, as a Brit, maybe read the newspapers here in the UK, it would have talked to the Law and Justice Party as being an extreme right party. In a similar way, they mock Orbán in Hungary. But I'm curious to see where you fit in, Because when I went over and met with you, I begun to understand the Law and Justice Party were maybe not as wonderful as the West may think. So what makes the Confederation different than the Law and Justice Party? Yeah. It's a very complicated topic, but I think that it's easier to propose some metaphor or some example. So it's quite similar in my opinion like in the United States where you have mainstream Republicans and you have Trump supporters and for example Rand Paul or some people who are more nationalist-oriented. So, in Polish politics, law and justice is like mainstream republicans. They use some words, some phrases, some ideas of conservative or even pro-national right, but they use it intentionally rather for propaganda and they act like centre-right politicians. When they were in government in Poland, they even introduced many policies. We can say that these policies that they developed on social level or in economic policy, these are rather social democratic policy, not conservative or right-wing or not nationalist in any way. So, to go into the details, we criticise them because they supported European integration on the new level. First, many years ago, they supported Lisbon Treaty. They negotiated Lisbon Treaty being in government. Then their president signed the Lisbon Treaty. They made a propaganda with mainstream and center-left and leftists that the Lisbon Treaty is good for Poland. And we believe the opposite, that it was a disaster. Our situation is much worse in the EU under the Lisbon Treaty than before. Then, during the last eight years, they supported the European Green Deal and their Prime Minister accepted the European Green Deal in the European Council. Now farmers oppose, they even criticise in the current electoral campaign. They made a pledge that they will stop the European Green Deal, but they do not say that their prime minister accepted it on the European Council in 2019 then in 2020 their prime minister Morawiecki accepted fit for 55. So they increased the goal of reducing these emissions 15 percent percent more and they introduced many new policies in European union and it is all possible because they are accepted in European council on a 2020 meeting in fact prime minister Morawiecki also proposed us as a polish prime minister in Brazos creating new pan-European taxes it's completely It's completely against our Constitution, it's completely against our values. We believe that our phrase is that we need small taxes and only paid in Poland and they three or five new pan-European taxes and they accepted it and we paid this to Brussels, not to Warsaw and we have no influence on how this will be used, this money. Then they accepted European debt, we strongly opposed any idea of giving this right to Eurocrats in Brussels to introducing their own debt and building their own sources of income by that. And they, of course, accepted. Then they accepted also in 2020 a special pan-European COVID fund called Next Generation EU, even this phrase, next generation EU is evil and of course they accepted it and they made a campaign in Poland that it's a big success of Poland and that we will have billions of euros because of this success of Prime Minister Morawiecki and law and justice. And there was a small minority of their MPs who criticised this but they were silenced in the party and in the media and in fact from the perspective of Polish voters we were the only one independent voice in Parliament. I took part in this debate in Parliament and criticised this next, please check this by some search engines, what is this, next generation EU. This is not only a European debt program. It is paid by European taxes and by European debt for many years, but it's also a new attitude towards European funds. They accepted that we will have funds only under many new political conditions. So now we got some milestones, they call these milestones, and this is the list of tasks, of political tasks, and they program Polish policy by Polish so-called democratic government from Brussels without any base in constitution. We have more than 100 milestones and these are the conditions to get this money. So, we made a new debt. This is not our debt, this is the European debt. And to use this debt, we have conflict with EU for almost 3 or 4 years. And they now lecture us on every issue from this list of 100 milestones. And Prime Minister Morawiecki from the Law and Justice Party in the Polish parliament said that he is not ashamed of this deal because, for example, Italians have more than 400 milestones, tasks. So it's a nightmare from the perspective of somebody who is in favour of Polish independence and sovereign policy and democracy and even democracy in Poland. They made a secret agreement in Polish parliament with leftists to support this, because even in their own political camp, they call it United Right, which is false, because the right in Poland is not united. But they use this phrase united right and theywere afraid that not every MP will support this but because it was so controversial so they made a secret agreement with leftists. They took some leftist agenda in this deal and they made majority with leftists to push it through the parliament. Then they never discussed all this deal and this 100 milestones in parliament. We had never any debate on this issue. In fact, this negotiations were secret also against people in government. Not every member of government knew what they discussed in Brussels. Now we know this only from media. They never introduced this deal in parliament and explained what's going on. Then they accepted very, in my opinion, bad new rule called rule of law conditionality. So now without base in European treaties, Eurocrats in Brussels can lecture us what is rule of law. They can stop money for us. So these were some examples of their EU policy. There are many more, for example, their member of European Committee was in favour of European Green Deal. He even said that it's in line with political agenda on agriculture of law and justice. So they had a big conflict, of course, with EU on this rule of law. And in this conflict they it was completely complete disaster for Polish state because they started this conflict and then they missed everything because they never finished any reform of courts in Poland and they made even leftists stronger in Poland because they tried to make some compromise with Brussels. This compromise was never accepted by Brussels because it was not, let's say, 100% what Brussels wanted. But in fact we have a very big mess in courts and in law about courts and about independence of judiciary. And now after this conflict and these reforms never finished as I said the situation is worse than when it started worse on the sovereignty worse on the justice and the time that you need to wait in the court for the justice. And worse, from the perspective of the power of liberal lobby in judiciary and right-wing people who, trusted law and justice government are in a very bad situation now because they took some positions or some propositions, and now they are nowhere, in the middle of nowhere. It's a very sad story. Then we have economic policy. Their economic policy was, in fact, social democratic. So they raised taxes, they raised debts, they extended public spending. They tried to centralize every policy. They took money from local governments. they put this money to their national budget and they try to influence every policy by their political nominees and they work like, let's say, Maybe not autocratic, but it was a typical one-party government which tried to centralize and control everything. It's the opposite that I understand the pro-national policy or conservative policy. It was, in my opinion, it was elitist and even social democratic when you analyse. For example, they were strongly against home-schooling and against independent schools. They proposed some legislation to ban homes chooling. After some protests of conservatives and leftists united, they stepped back. But after protests in their party and outside and from many directions. But their first goal was to centralize everything under the government rule. And we said that it's stupid because they will not rule for forever and after them the left will come to the government and exactly this is what we have in Poland. Now we have center-left government, liberal and leftists, and the left took Ministry of Education, everything was centralized. And now they try to switch, oppose every institution and every policy that law and justice created. And we said that it will be so. And now we see the consequences of their stupid policy, which was not conservative, not Christian, not supporting any citizens' movement. They believed only in their political party and that's all. This is their philosophy. Then we have a very important issue for us in Poland, let's say, immigration. Law and Justice government was introduced in Poland, open borders policy. They were against illegal immigration and at the same time they opened borders. For biggest immigration, legal immigration in Poland since maybe 300 years. Last time that we have so big immigration was maybe in 16th or 17th century. Now we have millions of legal immigrants in Poland, the majority of them are Ukrainians, but there are also people from different Asian and especially Asian countries. They didn't want immigrants from Africa, but they invited people from Asia. They made, being anti-Russian party, they made a special easier way for Russian citizens to come to Poland, to be a part of our labor market. They opened our market for people from Belarus, from Central Asia, from Caucasus. Now Georgian immigrants are the biggest group when you analyze crimes in Poland, they are in the first place. When you analyse people who smuggle illegal immigrants, Ukrainians are in the first place. We have, it's strange, but there is no official statistics how many immigrants do we have in Poland. Nobody can count them, because these are millions and they opened borders for legal immigration, but they didn't build any administration to control the immigration. So, in fact, the best data that we have is not from the government, but from telecom operators, from big telecom business who can say how many people use different languages on their phones. So this is how we know. Or from banks, because these people from abroad open bank accounts. But it's not all. It's not started with the war in Ukraine. This is what I would like to underline. We had much more than a million Ukrainian people in Poland before the war. They were intentionally invited and government worked also on some agreements with some Asian countries to increase legal immigration to Poland. These were also Muslim countries. During the law and justice government, Muslim population in Poland increased, in my opinion, more than ten times. In fact, to be honest, it is still small, but they started this. So now we have information that a third mosque will be built in Warsaw, and the biggest one, of course, with the money from abroad, because they never, they always criticized any foreign influence, and they never proposed any legislation to stop the influence by money from abroad, for the politics, or for example, to found Islam, or Muslim movement in Poland. Then, when the war in Ukraine started, they opened borders for refugees and in fact not only for refugees but for everybody with Ukrainian passport because they made some legislation. Giving every privilege that Polish citizens have for everybody with Ukrainian passport, even for people who came here from Western Europe. It's strange, but it's true. They made a special amendment, because their first goal was always to encourage as many foreigners to live and work in Poland as it is possible. It has two reasons. First is that they believe in multicultural society. It is a part of, this is some branch of Polish pre-modern tradition, that we had a commonwealth with different nations and some of them are from this tradition and they believe that they can rebuild this commonwealth with different nations in encouraging these nations to build some community, not let's say Polish community, but they call it a Republican community, a new commonwealth of nations. From our perspective, it sounds very similar to globalist agenda, but they say, no, no, no, it's not a multiculturalism by globalists, This is our tradition of Polish multiculturalism. We as a national movement completely do not believe in this concept. We believe it's anachronic, pre-modern, and it didn't work. In fact, we had a commonwealth with different nations, but these nations don't want commonwealth with us. These nations like Belarusians, Lithuanians, Ukrainians, all of them wanted independent states. And it's normal, it's normal that every nation want to have their own independent states. So, some of law and justice politicians are people older age with their heads in the clouds, reading historical books and believing in some ideas, for example, from 17th, 16th or 18th century. And in my opinion they don't understand nothing from our times and especially they don't understand that mass immigration is a big threat for the society. In Poland this process started, especially in bigger cities. Warsaw under the Law and Justice government became much closer to London when we analysed the population. There are not many African people, but many people from Asia, as I said, and especially from Russia and Ukraine. The situation is changing very fast. They made a legislation and as I said, they gave every privilege, every policy for Polish citizens. They gave it also to the people with Ukrainian passports. And these are many millions of people who would like to live abroad. We are the only European nation that pays for everything. And, of course, we have nothing in exchange. We have some agenda towards Ukraine, but they did nothing from our agenda, and we gave everything. And this is what we're against because we believe that it's impossible for one country to have two nations on the payroll, and this is how it works now. Then you have also Ukraine and supporting Ukraine agenda. At the beginning of the war we were not against, because we believed that this horrible Russian attack, is a crime and is a threat, but after two years we see that their government gave all that we have to Ukraine and the result is still not clear and other European nations do not act this way. They negotiate some things for them. Americans are also not very fast to give everything what they have. And now, for example, our army do not have enough weapons because they gave new weapons from Polish army to Ukraine. And at the beginning they said that Americans or Germans will give us in change new equipment, all the equipment and the thing, but they didn't. So it's very hard being a Pole and seeing all of that. It's very hard not to be critical to law and justice and their government. In fact, we are not surprised. We know these people for many years. We know that during the debate about joining EU they were in the same camp as leftists, as centrists, progressives and all of them. In fact, they were never national or truly traditionalist or truly conservative right. They are a mix of people of different ideas and their leader of law and justice. It's not easy to understand this, being a foreigner, but to understand the situation you should know that the leader of law and justice Jaroslaw Kaczynski. He always were against Polish nationalist tradition. He is rather from the tradition of Polish patriotic socialism. We had some pre-war tradition from interwar period of Polish, let's say, Polish patriotic socialists and this is their first choice. They do not talk about this last decades because they know that people would like to vote right-wing party, not patriotic left-wing party. But the leader is rather from, let's say, centrist or centre-left patriotic republican tradition, the leader of law and justice. The members of the party are very mixed and very different. I would not say that every MP is bad. There are many probably MPs with good views but they vote bad or act bad being in government. I will give you one more or two more examples. For example, we had a very big debate in Poland about pro-life. Law and justice was always pro-life in declaration but when they got majority they did everything thing not to vote on pro-life bill so two times polish pro-life movement collected more than hundreds of thousands of signatures having majority so-called pro-life majority people had to collect hundreds of thousands of signatures to put citizens bill to parliament and they voted against. They voted against for two times, then we as right-wing MPs, some of their MPs and every MP from Confederation made written request to Constitutional Court and Constitutional Court with some nominees, right-wing nominees from Law and Justice waited few years to analyse this request, but after they analysed this, they made a judgement that it is against Polish constitution to kill unborn babies with some disabilities or health problems. And this is how the situation changed, not by the voting in parliament, And of course, people who are in favour of law and justice say that this was their secret plan to organise this this way. But I do not believe. In my opinion, it was rather by accident. They never wanted. And now their former prime minister Morawiecki said that he is against this sentence of the court, of constitutional court. That they should defend this. Yes. But they said that they are against because they are afraid of public opinion, people who like abortion, they want centrist voters and so on. So they do not defend, they controlled every media in Poland and they didn't defend this issue. Another example, their prime minister supported long-term EU LGBT strategy. Being prime minister voted in favour. Another example, their minister who was responsible for European funds sent a secret letter to local governments that if they want European funds they should cancel Anti-LGBT and pro-family statements. Many local councils made some statements that they are against LGBT propaganda in schools and they support normal family policy. It was then criticized by, of course, progressive media and some LGBT organizations, but there was nothing against citizens' rights. It was nothing against civil liberties or something. It was a declaration that we don't want propaganda in schools or something like that. And we know that they made this letter to local governments. We know that only from LGBT organizations because they published this, being proud that the so-called right-wing government is pushing the pressure with the EU to local governments to be not too much conservative. Yes, so it shows how they work and they say one thing and they do the opposite and it was always like that. We know we know these people for four decades So we are not surprised about normal polish voter don't know all of these facts because you need, hundreds of hours to follow every information and analyse everything to to gather these details and to understand what's going on and if you follow only mainstream media, even mainstream Catholic media in Poland. In progressive mainstream media, you had an attack on law and justice, that these are nationalists, they are xenophobic, they are anti-European, they want to go back to the Middle Ages or something like that. So people said, okay, these are good people, yes, they are very conservative. And if you listen to some right-wing media or Catholic media, They are true conservatives. They fight very hard, tough fights in the EU and so on. And you had nowhere to have the truth about how they rule, how they govern the country. Everybody analyzed only what they said. And their speeches were quite good. I can agree. For example, two days ago, I listened to the speech of their leader and to their convention about EU policy and I could take this and it could be my speech, yes, but it has nothing to do with their government, what they did in Brussels. This is the problem and I think it's a problem in many countries. It's a problem also in Hungary. Orban is also very pragmatic, yes, he's not a nationalist. And there's a problem in Italy with the Meloni government. It's not an independent agenda of independence. And in many other countries. So this is how it works. And this is why we believe that Polish politics deserve a truly right-wing party with truly conservative and truly pro-national and sovereign agenda and people who are against political correctness. This is what gathers us in Confederation. We are against political correctness. We don't want to be influenced in any way by anybody from mainstream. And we are proud that we are anti-mainstream. Of course, I had many debates in mainstream media, so I always go when they ask me and I always discuss. And I believe that my views are not radical or far-right or anything like that. But I don't want to give up my principles and my beliefs. I don't want, I would rather, I would like to be rather outside politics, like being 12 years outside the parliament, than joining this, let's say, fake right political parties and saying good speeches and voting bad things. I don't want that. Well, Krzysztof, thank you for giving us such an overview of Polish politics. And I wish that we had politicians like yourself in the UK with conviction, with beliefs that actually stood on a biblical principle on a lot of these issues. And I just the final thought is as deputy speaker, I mean, that is a that is a prestigious, important position. You must be Donald Tusk's kind of worst nightmare, that you stand for everything he is against. I'm sure it was difficult to actually get in that position, was it? I'm sure there was opposition. I know we only have a few minutes, but I'm just curious to know the opposition from people like Tusk to actually having you, a nationalist, a Christian, in that position. It's a little bit different, in my opinion. To understand the situation, you should know that the main line of political difference, is in Poland between Civic Platform and Donald Tusk as a leader, and Law and Justice and Jarosław Kaczyński as a leader. It's not, on some level of course it's a, let's say, ideological and political different, but they have many things in common. This is our, let's say, talking point, yes, that they are not so different on the level of agenda of political program. When you analyze their EU policy, they could exchange their ministers, and in fact, they're exchanged in these two political parties many members of cabinets. In fact, Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki before was an advisor to Donald Tusk. And there are many examples, I will not go into the detail because it's not so important. It is important to understand that it's a, let's say, ambition conflict between Kaczynski and Tusk. It's obvious that they hate each other. It started in 80s in the opposition movement. They have very bad opinion about each other, very bad. This is a true conflict, a true personal conflict. Both of them try to be pragmatic and in fact they are very pragmatic, very. But not on this one issue, not all about them themselves. This is their weak point that they become very emotional. So going back to the situation in the chamber and me as a deputy speaker Donald Tusk and don't care he don't care he hate yaroslav kaczynski and me I'm the guy from the different generation, in my opinion he do not believe in anything he is a pragmatic politician after so many years in politics. He was a liberal, he was a classic liberal in 80s, maybe early 90s. So on the level of defending economic freedom, I think he understands everything what we say. And he's a former classic liberal. Maybe he started on the same positions as Viktor Orban, but during years in politics, he lost belief probably in any principle. And now probably the only thing that he believes is pragmatism and power. Being in power and being pragmatic. This is how I understand him. So, in my opinion, he used left-wing politicians as tools. He gave them the platform, as you say in English, he gave them the platform, he gave them the space, even in government, he gave them a very important part of administration because he doesn't care. Not because he supports these ideas, he doesn't care. In my opinion, he personally believes that these are stupid people with stupid program but he didn't care. So he also didn't care about my views, in my opinion. Of course, some of his members in his political party care a lot and hate very conservative people. This is, let's say, a pro-abortion lobby in his party, very strong now, because his party started as centre-right party. It is interesting that Civic Platform, the party of Donald Tusk, started in 2001, all these three parties that I talked about, so League of Polish Families, Law and Justice and Civic Platform, all these political parties started in 2001 and entered the parliament. League of Polish Families after seven years was kicked out from parliament by voters unfortunately, but Law and Justice and Civic Platform stayed there and both Law and Justice Party and Civic Platform started as centre-right political parties very similar to each other, so similar that some politicians in 2001 didn't know which one to join so it was like a lottery or you had colleagues here so you go there you have colleagues here you go there it was a time of big changes in Polish politics so a civic platform the party of Donald Tusk started as a platform with principles of defending western civilization defending Christian values defending economic freedom defending some some conservative values maybe not everything but some and being pro-EU this was the starting point and after 20 years, they are centre-left political parties with very big pro-abortion, progressive lobby inside, former post-communist politicians, former leftist politicians inside, Green Party inside, because they built a civic coalition, they extended civic platform into civic coalition. And in this coalition, you have people who split it from the post-communist left, you have Green Party, you have some citizens' movement, and It's a central left spectrum. And Donald Tusk is a leader for everybody because now he tried to be pragmatic, not to be too close to any special views, yes? So for me it's completely not a problem. It's a problem with some MPs who are trying to be a little bit offensive or sometimes aggressive but I have my attitude which is always being very calm and polite to everybody no matter what are his views. I try to be polite and with respect to everybody this is I believe that how we should act in democratic politics and in Parliament and it works, because in fact even left-wing MPs or pro-abortion MPs have a good opinion about me as a deputy speaker, because I do not interrupt their speeches, I'm not nasty, counting their time. They could cooperate on this normal level with me, in my opinion, much better than, for example, with deputy speakers from law and justice, they were horrible, they were nasty, they were aggressive. They used their seat to, not to push their agenda, but to push their emotions against other people. So they were, there were attempts to push me from the seat, to kick me from the seat, the left put this request, but nobody voted in favor of this request, because nobody believed that it's a good decision to take this position from me and give it to anybody else. I think it's a result of maybe 20 years of my work in public debate and people know who I am, people know that I have my views, but people even who do not believe in my views, they respect that I didn't change them for many years, that I, in fact, in my opinion, many people from centre-left also respect me, that I didn't join law and justice. Because they have very bad opinion about law and justice, also about how they ruled when you analyse what they did with public money. Yes, this is another story, what they did with public money, how they used this for themselves. Their interests. Not very many bad stories. And we were not involved in all of that. So in my opinion, I have, I am lucky because I have a big respect. Of course, not everybody like me and especially not everybody like my views. But I have no reasons, I have no reason to say that I'm in a bad situation. Well, Krzysztof, I do appreciate your time. I'm so thankful to have you on. I know you've got great demands on your time being in that high profile position and being a high profile figure in the country. So thank you so much for giving us your time to explain to our UK and US audience a little bit about Polish politics. So thank you. Thank you very much for this invitation and this conversation and to finish this conversation with some good accent I would like to invite everybody who are true conservative people to come to Poland to meet us. We are very open to extend our international contacts. What I would like to say is that on the level of personal contacts. If some of you have some contacts with people from law and justice, it's not bad for us. As a normal people, we talk with each other normally in Parliament and outside Parliament. So we are critical to their leadership and to their prime minister, but taking normal MPs, we talk like normal people. And it is possible to have contacts with law and justice, for example, in European Parliament and with us in Poland or when we enter the European Parliament. So I would like to encourage everybody from truly right-wing movement to build contacts with Polish people, with Polish conservative organisations, political parties, editorial houses, NGOs, social movements. We have a big social movement, very many organizations and many good people. And please, come to Poland, have this contact, maybe also some people from the States. I believe that we should support each other. I always put some time and my energy to build this contact, so maybe some of my colleagues from abroad will watch this interview. I hope so. And me personally and our colleagues from Confederation, we are always very open to support every good people with good ideas to defend the principles that we believe, also conservative, traditional, Christian, Pro-freedom, pro-independence, and other good principles. So, this is my word and I believe that despite all these bad tendencies that we see in Western world, in Europe, we should have hope and we should defend good principles and good values, because this is our duty and this is how I believe, this is what we should do. So I have very big respect for every people who work in politics and on social level in countries that are less conservative than Poland, because I know how it feels when your country is going in the wrong direction. I talked with people from different countries and I know how it feels and I have big respect if you do a good job and give hope to your people, to your nations. Exactly. Well, thank you, Krzysztof, for your time. Greatly appreciate it. And I'm sure we will speak soon. Thank you very much.
Last week the Irish people delivered a blow to the corrupt Irish government. They voted an overwhelming No to a referendum that would have redefined family and women. The proposed referenda altering the nation's constitution enjoyed the support of Ireland's elites, but the attempt to embed woke values in it has backfired. The Government asked voters to remove the word 'mother' from the Constitution and they answered with a resounding No. They also rejected by a huge margin the attempt to foist the extremely nebulous term "durable relationships" on the Constitution. The government worked in conjunction with every political party and legacy media outlet to tell and coerce the people into accepting these changes. The people refused. John Waters returns to Hearts of Oak to analyse why this referendum was proposed and what the rejection means, not only for the government but for the people of Ireland. John Waters is an Irish Thinker, Talker, and Writer. From the life of the spirit of society to the infinite reach of rock ‘n' roll; from the puzzle of the human ‘I' to the true nature of money; from the attempted murder of fatherhood to the slow death of the novel, he speaks and writes about the meaning of life in the modern world. He began part-time work as a journalist in 1981, with Hot Press, Ireland's leading rock ‘n' roll magazine and went full-time in 1984, when he moved from the Wild West to the capital, Dublin. As a journalist, magazine editor and columnist, he specialised from the start in raising unpopular issues of public importance, including the psychic cost of colonialism and the denial of rights to fathers under what is called family 'law'. He was a columnist with The Irish Times for 24 years when being Ireland's premier newspaper still meant something. He left in 2014 when this had come to mean diddly-squat, and drew the blinds fully on Irish journalism a year later. Since then, his articles have appeared in publications such as First Things, frontpagemag.com, The Spectator, and The Spectator USA. He has published ten books, the latest, Give Us Back the Bad Roads (2018), being a reflection on the cultural disintegration of Ireland since 1990, in the form of a letter to his late father. Connect with John... SUBSTACK johnwaters.substack.com/ WEBSITE: anti-corruptionireland.com/ Recorded 18.3.24 Connect with Hearts of Oak... WEBSITE heartsofoak.org/ PODCASTS heartsofoak.podbean.com/ SOCIAL MEDIA heartsofoak.org/connect/ *Special thanks to Bosch Fawstin for recording our intro/outro on this podcast. Check out his art https://theboschfawstinstore.blogspot.com/ and follow him on X https://twitter.com/TheBoschFawstin?s=20 TRANSCRIPT (Hearts of Oak) And it's wonderful to have John Waters join us once again from Ireland. John, thanks so much for your time today. (John Waters) Thank you, Peter. Pleasure to be with you. Great to have you on. It was ages ago, goodness, talking about immigration. That was a good 18 months ago. Always good to have you on. And people can follow you, on your Substack, johnwaters.substack.com. That's where they can get all your writings. You've got one of your latest ones, I think, Beware the Ides of March, part one. Do you just want to mention that to give people a flavour of what they can find on your Substack? Yeah, it's a short series. I don't know. I think it's going to be probably two, maybe three articles. I have several other things that are kind of related to it. It's really the story of what happened, what has been happening since four years ago really, as opposed to what they told us, what happened, what we've been talking about. It's essentially, this was not about your health. It was about your wealth, and that's the message so I go through that in terms of its meanings. And in the first part which has just gone up last night; it's really about the the way that the the predator class the richest of the rich in the world are essentially. Coming to the end of their three-card trick which has been around now for 50 years. Which is the money systems that emerge after the untethering of currencies from the gold standard. And that's essentially been a balloon that's been expanding, expanding, expanding, and it's about to blow. They're trying to control that explosion. But essentially, their mission is to ensure that, not a drop of their wealth is spilt in whatever happens, right? And that everybody else will lose everything, pretty much. They don't care about that. In fact, that's part of their wish. And so it's that really what I'm kind of talking about and how that started. We now know that the beginnings of what is called COVID were nothing to do with a virus. There was a bulletin issued by Black Rock on the 15th of August 2019, Assumption Day in the Christian calendar, which is the day that the body of our Blessed Virgin was assumed and received into heaven. But, the word assumption has lots of other meanings. I think there was a lot of that at play on that particular day when they were assuming the right to dictate to the world what its future should be. That was really the start of it. And then the COVID lockdowns and all of that flowed inexorably. There's a lot of stuff we could go into, but we won't. I don't think about vaccines and all the rest of it. They're part of that story. But the central part was that this was completely fabricated and completely engineered and it was a fundamental attack on human freedom in the west particularly. And has been largely successful so far but, now as I think we're going to talk about it, in Ireland there's beginning to be that little bit of a pushback. I'm hopeful now. Well, obviously I've really enjoyed your your writings on Substack. I don't have the patience for the writing, but you are a writer a journalist and that is your bread and butter. People obviously can support you financially on Substack if they want to do that after reading your writings. Let's go into Ireland: we saw this referendum and it's interesting. We'll get into some of the comments on it, but really there were two parts of this referendum and it was focusing on family and the woman's position or the mother's position. Do you want to just let us know how this referendum came about? OK, well, first of all, you've got to see it in its context, which is in a series of attacks on the Irish Constitution going back. Going back, you could say 30 years. It depends in the context of the European Union and the various referendums that we had about that, the Nice Treaty, the Lisbon Treaty, in which the Irish people were basically told when they voted ‘no', that's the wrong answer. You're going to have to think again, and you're going to have to vote again. And they did, and it passed, because they were just bullied into doing it. In the past decade or so, a dozen years, we've had three critical referendums which attacked, the Irish Constitution which has a series of fundamental rights articles right in the centre of it, articles 40 to 44. That's been informally called by judges over the years: the Irish Bill of Rights, which is all the personal fundamental rights, all the rights that derive essentially from natural law in the greater number of them. That, in other words, they're inalienable, imprescriptible, they are antecedent. They're not generated by the Constitution or indeed by the people. Certainly not by the government or anybody else. So, now there was an attack on Article 41 in 2012, which was purportedly to put in children's rights into the Constitution. That was completely bogus because it was a successful attempt attempt to transfer parental rights to the state. That's what it was when you look closely at it. And I was fighting all these referendums. Then in 2015, we had the so-called gay marriage or the marriage referendum. Which essentially, people don't really get this; they talk about Ireland having legalised gay marriage. No, no, we didn't. That's not what we did. We actually destroyed marriage by putting gay marriage as an equivalent concept in our constitution. And then there was the infamous Eighth Amendment referendum in 2018, which was to take out an amendment which had been put in some 40 years before, 30 years before, in 1983, to guarantee, to, as it were, copper fasten the right to life of the unborn child. And there's a very subtle point that needs to be made about this, not very subtle really, but legally it is, which is that this was an unlawful referendum because this was one of those inalienable, imprescriptible rights. Even though the article in which it was couched on was only introduced in 1983, and all it was, was a kind of a reminder, that these rights exist, because these rights already exist as unenumerated rights. And as a result of that the referendum was actually unlawful and should never have taken place, because the Irish people had no right to vote down the rights of a section of its own population. Which was the unborn children waiting to emerge into the world to live their lives in peace and whatever would come their way in that life. But nevertheless, to have a law, to have essentially an illegal, unlawful law, quote unquote, created that prevented them from even entering this world. It seemed to me to be the greatest abomination that has ever happened in our country. So, this was a continuation of this. There are different theories about what it was about. There were two amendments, as you said, Peter. The second one that you mentioned was the mother in the home. And this was a guarantee to women, to mothers, that they would be protected from having to go out, if they wished, to go out into the workplace and work. And if they wanted to mind their children, then the state would take care of them. It's not specific, but nevertheless, it placed on the state a burden of responsibility to give women this choice. Now, of course, the government and its allies, its proxies, try to say that it's really an attack on women, that it says there are places in the home, this kind of caricaturing of the wording and so on. In fact, it's nonsense because there's another article, Article 45, which explicitly mentions the right of women to have occupations in the public domain and to go and work and earn a living for themselves. So, this was a complete caricature. And I think people understood that. The other one then was a redefinition of the family, which is Article 41. Again, all of this is 41, which defines the family, always has, as being based on marriage. That has been the source of some dissension over the years, some controversy, because more and more families were outside marriage, as it were. There were small F families, as it were, rather than a big F family, as arises in the Constitution. And they claimed to be sorting this out. But of course, they weren't sorting it out at all. When you actually catalogued the various categories of family who might theoretically benefit from such a change, none of them were benefiting at all. I went through this microscopically in the course of the campaign several times on videos and so on. So, really what it was, was to leverage the progressive vote, I think. That was one object, to get people excited again. They were getting nostalgic for 2015 and 2018 because they were becoming more and more popular. That was certainly one aspect. But, there were other aspects, which is that they were introducing into the constitution, or supposedly, that along with marriage, that also would be included something called durable relationships. And they refused or were unable to define what this meant. The result of it is that there were all kinds of proposals and suggestions that it might well mean, for example, polygamy, that it might mean the word appear durable appears in European law in the context of immigration. There was a very strong suspicion, which the government was unable to convincingly deny, that this was a measure that they needed to bring in in order to make way for what they call family reunification, so that if one person gets into Ireland, they can then apply to have their entire families brought in after them. That's already happening, by the way, without this. They say that something like an average of 20 people will follow anybody who gets in and gets citizenship of Ireland. They bring something like an average of 20 people with them afterwards. So this was another aspect of it. There were many, many theories posited about it. But one thing for sure was that the government was lying literally every day about it, trying to present this progressive veneer. And more and more, what was really I think staggering in the end in a certain sense, was that the people not alone saw it in a marginal way, they saw it in an overwhelming way, this was the start, I mean I don't think a single person, myself included predicted that we would have a 70-30 or whatever it was roughly, 3-1 result. For now, I mean, that was really miraculous and I've said to people that it was actually a kind of loaves and fishes that it was greater than the sum of all its parts, greater than anything that we thought was possible. It was like a miracle that all of the votes just keep tumbling out, tumbling out, no, no, no, no, no. And I've been saying that that no actually represents much more than what it might technically read as a response to the wording that was on the ballot paper, that it was really, I think, the expression of something that we hadn't even suspected was there, Because for four years now, the Irish people have labored under this tyranny of, you know, really abuse of power by the government, by the police force, by the courts. And a real tyranny that is really, I think, looks like it's getting its feet under the table for quite a long haul. And accompanied by that, there was what I call this concept, this climate of mutism, whereby people weren't able any longer to discuss certain things in public for fear that they would get into trouble, because this was very frequently happening. I mean, since the marriage referendum of 2015, Before that, for about a year, the LGBTgoons went on the streets and ensured that everybody got the message that we weren't allowed to talk about things that they had an interest in. And anybody who did was absolutely eviscerated, myself included, and was cancelled or demonised or whatever. That has had a huge effect on Irish culture, a culture that used to be very argumentative and garrulous, has now become almost paranoid, and kind of, you have this kind of culture of humming and hawing. If you get involved in a conversation with somebody and you say something that is even maybe two or three steps removed from a controversial issue, they will immediately know it and clam up. This has been happening now in our culture right across the country. When you think about it, I've been saying in the last week that actually for all its limitations, locations, the polling booth, that corner of the room in which the votes are being cast with the little table and the pencil and a little bit of a curtain in some instances, but even not, there's a kind of a metaphorical curtain. And that became the one place in Ireland that you could overcome your mutism, that you could put your mark on that paper and do it convincingly and in a firm hand. And I think that's really the meaning of it, that it was a no, no, no, no, no to just about everything that this government and its proxies have been trying to push over on Ireland for the last few years, including the mass immigration, essential replacement of the Irish population, including the vaccines, which really have killed now in Ireland something like 20,000 people over the past three years. I would say a conservative enough estimate not to mention the injuries of people; the many people who are ill now as a result of this and then of course we have the utterly corrupt media refusing to discuss any of this and to put out all kinds of misdirection concerning. John, can I just say, there's an interesting line in one of the articles on this. It said the scale of rejection spelled humiliation for the government, but also opposition parties and advocacy groups who had united to support a yes, yes vote. Tell us about that. It's not just the government, well the government is made up obviously of the three parties, the unholy alliance, of Fianna Fáil, Fianna Gael and, sorry, what was the other? The Green Party. Sorry, the Greens. The Green Party are a fairly traditional element in Irish politics, not so much in the ideology, but in the idea of the small party, because they're They're the tail that wags the dog. They have all the ideological ideas. The main parties have virtually no ideology whatsoever. Like they've been just catch-all parties for a century or whatever their existence has been. But yes, that idea, you see, what we've noticed increasingly over the last, say, 10, 15 years, particularly I think since 2011, we had an election that year, which I think was a critical moment in Irish life, when in fact everything seemed to change. We didn't notice it at the time, but moving on from that, it became clear that something radical had happened in the ruins of Irish culture, as it were, both spellings actually. And so, as we moved out from that, it became clear that really there was no opposition anymore. That all the parties were just different shades or different functions within a singular Ideology. Like the so-called left parties were, it's not that they would be stating the thing. They would sort of, they would become almost like the military wing of the mainstream parties, enforcing their diktats on the streets. If people went to protest about something outside the Houses of Parliament, the Leinster House, these people would up and mount a counter protest against them and call them all kinds of names. Like Nazis and white supremacists, all this nonsense, which has no place in Irish culture whatsoever. It is a kind of a uni-party, as they say, is the recent term for it. But, my own belief is that actually this is a somewhat distraction in the sense that we shouldn't anymore be looking at individual parties because, in fact, all of them are captured from outside. And the World Economic Forum is basically dictating pretty much everything that everybody thinks now. I mean, our so-called Taoiseach, God help us, I hate to call him that because it's an honourable title. It's a sacred title to me. And to have this appalling creep going swaggering around claiming that title for himself, it seems it's one of the great obscenities of of modern Ireland. But he, Brad Kerr. He is a member of the World Economic Forum. So is Martin, the leader of Fianna Fáil. They've been switching over the Taoiseach role for the last four years. Yeah, because that's quite strange. I mean, many of our viewers will not be from Ireland and will be surprised at the confusion system you have where they just swap every so often, because the three of them are in cahoots. That's the completely new thing. That's never happened before. But what it's about, you see, those two parties are the Civil War parties. Civil War back in 1922. Those parties grew out of it, and they became almost equivalent in popularity. They represented in some ways the divide of that Civil War. And for the best part of 100 years, they were like the main, they were the yin and yang. They were the Tweedledum and Tweedledee of the political system. And gradually, in the last 30, 40 years, the capacity of either of those parties to win an overall majority has dwindled and basically disappeared, evaporated. So now they need smaller parties. And that's been true for about 30 years. And as I say, what actually happens then is that the smaller party, no matter how small, if it's big enough to actually make the difference numerically, then it has the power to take over certain areas of policy in which the big parties have no interest whatsoever. And that's how you get things like migration, because they don't care about that. That's how you get social welfare policies, all that kind of stuff. This is kind of what's happened in the last, particularly since 2020, where there was a complete unanimity. I could name, with the fingers of one hand, the people in the parliament, a total of over200 people in between the two houses, that who actually have stood up and actually in in any way acquitted themselves decently in the last four years. The rest have just been nodding donkeys and going along with this great tyranny against the Irish people and the contempt that Radcliffe and his cronies show for the Irish people. Literally, almost like to the point of handing out straws and saying, suck it up, suck it up, suck it up. And this is where we are now, that our democracy has been taken away, for sure. I mean, that last week was a really a bit of a boost but that was only because they couldn't fix that. It was a referendum and they couldn't possibly predict what the turnout would be in order to ready up the votes in advance but I have no doubt that they would be trying to rectify that they're giving votes now to in local elections which we have to every immigrant who comes into Ireland so by the time that the Irish people get to the polls it'll all be over. These are people who don't even know how to spell the name of the country they're in many cases and this This is what's happening. The contempt these people have shown for our country is beyond belief. It is dizzying. It is nauseating. But the Irish people are told to shut up. And of course, the media, without which none of this will be possible, by the way. I mean, if we had decent, honest media, they would be calling the government out every day. But they're not. And so it remains to be seen now what effect this will have. I don't have any confidence that it's going to put any manners on this government because they are beyond arrogant, beyond traitorous, beyond redemption in my view. But at the same time, there is a possibility that in the next elections, we have three elections coming up now in the next year, in the next few months, actually, I would say,almost certainly. Well, we know for sure there's the European elections, European Parliament elections, and the local local elections are happening in June. Then there's a very strong probability that the general election will take place sometime in the autumn because it has to happen before this time next year. And of course, the longer they leave it, the less flexibility and wiggle room they'll have in order because, events, dear boy, events can take over and they don't want to do, they don't like events, you know. I think what will be very interesting then is will something emerge in these elections, which would, if you like, will be a kind of an equivalent to that no box on toilet paper in the form of independence, perhaps, or in the form of some form of new movement, some actual spontaneous voice of the Irish people might well be something that could happen. I hope so. And I feel so as well. I think that this is the moment that it happened before, Peter, back in 2011, when there was the really appalling events that happened in the wake of the economic meltdown, when the troika of the IMF, the World Bank and the European Commission, three entities, arrived as a kind of a coalition or a coalition. A kind of a joint policing visitation, shall we say, to basically take possession of Irish economic sovereignty. And that was a great humiliation, a moment of extraordinary sorrow and grief and rage in the Irish people. And that moment, I think, if you lit a match in Ireland at that time, the whole place would have gone up. But, what happened then was a bogus movement started and pretended that it was going to go and lead an alternative movement against these cretins, these cretinous thugs and traitors who are the mainstream parties. And instead, then at the very last minute, they blocked the hallway, as Bob Dylan said, they stood in the doorway, they blocked up the hall, and nobody could go through until the very last moment when they stepped aside. said they weren't going to run, and ushered in Mr. Enda Kenny, who became possibly the greatest destroyer in Irish history since Oliver Cromwell. Yeah. When I grew up in the 80s with Gareth Fitzgerald and Charles Hawkey back Fianna Gael, Fianna Fáil, there did seem to be a choice. And now it seems to be that there isn't really a choice for the voters and they've come together. Is that a fair assessment of where Ireland are? Yes, 100%, Peter. But, I think it's very important to, whereas we can go into the whole walk thing, as these parties are now, fixated with woke, contaminated with it. They're saturated with this nonsense and really assiduously pushing it. But I always remind people that none of this is spontaneous, that woke is not a spontaneous, naturalistic movement from the people or even any people. Of course, there are people pushing it, but they're just useful idiots. This has been, this is top-down, manipulation of an orchestration of our democracies. And it's happening everywhere now. These massive multibillionaires pumping money into this, into basically destructive political elements, Antifa, the LGBT goons, and so on and so on. Terrorist groups, essentially. Let's not mess around. They're terrorist groups. And using these to batter down the democratic structures of Western countries. That's what's happening. And you see, the people that we are looking at who are the puppets. They're the quokka-wodgers, I call them. That's the name for them, actually, the quokka-wodgers, people who are simply like wooden puppets of the puppet masters. They're filling space, placeholders. They're indistinguishable. It doesn't matter. I mean, rotating the role of Taoiseach is irrelevant because essentially, you could just have a showroom dummy sitting on the chair for the full four years. It doesn't matter who it is, except the only difference it makes is that the quality of the dribble that emerges from the mouths of Martin and Varadkar is somewhat variegated in the sense that, Varadkar is capable of saying the most disgusting things because he has no knowledge of Ireland. He's half Irish. He's an Irish mother and an Indian father. He has no love for Ireland whatsoever. He did a speech there the other day, apparently in America, where he was saying that St. Patrick was a single male immigrant. Nobody, I think, at the meeting where he said it, had the temerity to point out to him that actually St.Patrick was a victim of people traffickers. And that's exactly what's happening now. He's their principal ally in the destruction of Ireland. Well, how does that fit? Because interesting comment about Varadkar's background, his parents Indian. We, of course, here in the UK and England, it's the same with Sunak. And then in Wales, you've just got the new first minister. I think was born in Zambia, I think, Africa. And then, of course, you've got in Scotland and in London, Pakistani heritage. You kind of look around. And I think my issue is not necessarily that you've got that different background. My issue is the lack of integration and understanding of what it means to be this culture and this community and a lack of understanding. I think that's where Varadkar seems to have torn up the rule book and what it means to be Irish and wants to rewrite it. Oh, well, they're actively saying now that really there's no such thing as Irish culture and that, the people who live in Ireland, those people have been here for hundreds or maybe thousands of years. That they have no particular claim on this territory. Trade. This is something that the great Irish patriot, Wulff Tone, mourned about. He said, this country of ours is no sandbag. It's an ancient land honoured into antiquity by its valor, its piety, and its suffering. That's forgotten. People like Varadkar don't know the first thing about this and care less. They're like Trudeau in Canada, a completely vacant space, empty-headed. Narcissists, egomaniacs psychopaths. They are. And they are and traitors like they are really doing things now. I did a stream last week; there was somebody in America in Utah, and I was saying in the headline, I found myself saying this that what is happening cannot possibly be happening. That's really the way all of us feel now that this is like just something surreal real, that is beyond comprehension, because it wasn't possible for us to forget, to predict. That a person could be elected into the office of Taoiseach, who would be automatically a traitor, who would have no love for Ireland. It seemed to be axiomatic that in order to get there, you wanted to care, you had to care and love Ireland. These people have no love for Ireland. They are absolutely the enemies of Ireland now. You mentioned the two other referendums that happened or in effect on same-sex marriage and life or the lack of sanctity of life and those went through this this hasn't. Does that mean there is a growing resentment with the government. Is it a growing opposition and desire for conservative values where kind of is that coming from I know it's probably difficult to analyze it because this just happened a week ago but what are your thoughts on that? It's difficult. It's difficult because there are different explanations going around. I can only tell you what I believe, and it's based on just observation over a long time. I believe that it is. I've been saying, for the last two years about Ireland in this context. That the Irishman, Paddy, as he's called, and we don't mind him being called that. You can imagine him sitting in the pub, in a beautiful sunny evening. The shadows of the setting sun coming across the bar. Oh, I'm dreaming that. I can have this picture in my mind, John. And he's got a dazzle, as we say, a dashing of beer, and he's sticking it away. And then there's a couple of young fellas there, and they start messing, pushing around and maybe having a go at some of the women in the bar or whatever. And Paddy will sit there for a long time, and he'll sort of have a disapproving look but he won't say anything, but there will be a moment and I call it: the kick the chair moment. When he will just reef the chair from under him and he will get up and he'll get one of those guys and he'll have him slapped up against the wall and he will tell him the odds. That's the moment I think we've arrived at, that all of the contempt all of the hatred, these people go on about introducing hate speech law there is nobody in Ireland that is more hateful than the government towards its own people. 100 percent. The most hateful government, I think, in the world at this point. They are abysmal. They're appalling. So, this is the moment when I think people took that in. They took it in. They took it in. We suck it up. OK. But then one day they said, no, no more. And that's what happened on Friday week, last Friday, Friday week. That's what happened because, you can push people so far. A lot of this has to do with Ireland's kind of inheritance of post-colonial self-hatred, whereby they can convince us that we're white supremacists, even though we have no history of slavery or anything like that, except being slaves ourselves, our ancestors being slaves. But there is, as Franz Fallon wrote about many years ago, back in the 50s, the pathologies that infect a country that's been colonized are such as to weaken them in a terrible way in the face of the possibility of independence, that they cannot stand up for themselves. And you can see this now. I mean, all over Irish culture now on magazines, on hoardings, in television advertisements, there's nothing but black faces. You would swear that Ireland was an African country. This is part of the gaslighting, that attack that has been mounted against the Irish people. And people, Irish people, you see genuinely because they don't. They don't understand what's happening because the word racist is a kind of a spell word, which is used, I call it like a, like it's like a cattle prod, and as soon as you say something, and a big space opens up around you because nobody wants to be near somebody who's a racist. But in fact, we need to begin to understand that these are just words and sticks and stones and so on. If we allow this to happen it means that we will lose our metaphysical home that our children and our grandchildren will be homeless in the world that's what's going to happen, because it's already clear from a lot of these people who are coming in that they're shouting the odds and saying that basically Irish people just better get up and leave their own country, because they're not welcome anymore. These are outsiders who've been here a wet weekend. They're being trained in this you asked me. I forgot to mention this thing Ireland has something like 35,000 NGOs 35,000 Wow And and these people, in other words they're non-governmental organization. what's a non-government at mental organization? That's a government which works that's in organization which works for the government, but pretends not to. Ireland has been governed now to non-government mental organizations and these people are bringing in these foreigners and they're training them. They're coaching them how to attack the Irish people, how to make a claim on Ireland. I read an article somebody sent me last week where some guy who came here from Chechnya, and he was saying how great it was that you could come to Ireland and become Irish within hours. Whereas, you could never become Japanese or Chinese, which, of course, is true. I mean, if I went to Japan, I think it would take about 10,000 years before a relation of mine might be Japanese. And rightly so. Rightly so. There's nothing racist about that. That's just the way things are. That's every country, including the African countries, want to uphold their own ethnicity, integrity and nationhood. Why the hell can Ireland not do the same? It seems we can't. And our own government telling us and our own media is telling us that we can't. Some background, there were 160 members in the Dáil of the Irish Parliament and the government is 80. I was quite surprised at that, because you talk about a government wanting extra seats to get a bigger majority, but it seems though you look who's the opposition and you've got Sinn Féin and they are even more captured by the woke agenda than anyone. So you kind of look; it's kind of the government are rubbing it in people's noses, because they don't actually need a majority or a big majority, because everyone else seems to be fitting into this agenda. Yeah, that's a really important point, Peter. It's really important because, you see, what happened in 2020 is really instructive. We had an election in 2020 in February. I actually ran myself. The only time in my life I've ever run for an election because things were looking so bad. I ran in the worst constituency in Ireland, actually, Dundee, which is the only constituency which voted yes in this referendum. So, that'll just show you how demoralised I was, let's say. But, what happened then was that the government, outgoing government, was basically hammered. Varadkar for government were hammered. There was a standoff for for several months when there was negotiations and then something happened that was totally, not likely but each of the parties Fianna Gael, and Fianna Fáil, in the previous election and for years, and decades, before that has said that they would never ever ever coalesce with the other. Then they did. What we had then was from from from February through until late June of that year: we had Radcliffe running a kind of a caretaker government in the period when the most draconian and radical and unprecedented laws were introduced into Irish society. Nothing like them ever before, the COVID laws. And then in July, Martin, they went into coalition then, and we had Martin, Fianna Fáil and Fianna Gael in coalition doing the same thing, implementing the same policies without question. And anybody who did question, as I did, and others, we got hammered and treated like dirt in the courts, in the media, you name it. That's the thing; those parties, they know that no matter what happens, they can rig up the arithmetic. That there's nothing for further. There's nowhere as things stand unless you get a huge tranche of independents who have the power to nullify whatever power these small parties will have. But you see, one of the factors involved here now, they don't have a this election for the general election where they'll be able to get immigrants and Ukrainians and all these people to vote. But that's probably in a very short order, possibly by the next general election, they will have organised that. And means that increasingly, just as in terms of the birth rate, Ireland is already being overtaken. The population is already beginning to be, you know, you can see that the incoming population is growing at a much faster rate than the Irish population, in the indigenous population because we have European demographics. We had very briefly, some time ago. Surges after John Paul visited in 79 and so on. We had much higher birth rates than the rest of Europe, but not anymore. And so essentially what we're looking at right across Europe is a replacement of population. Intimidation and the way you can really know this is that they've decided that the word replacement is a hate word and and when they say that you're over the target because, whenever something becomes dead obvious they make it quasi-illegal they make it into a crime. I've seen that. Can I ask it's it's weird because there's a positive and a negative I see. The negative is that there doesn't seem to be a vocal opposition to what is happening or a grouping that is standing for family, for the rights of women, a pro-women party. And so there doesn't seem to be that on one side. But yet, on the other side, the people have rejected what they were told to vote for, not only by the politicians, by every political party, but also by the media. Everything was telling them to do one thing and they've done something else and yes, I mean that rebelliousness, I love, but I'm wondering in the middle of that, there a group movement that can appear to begin to stand up, because Ireland doesn't really have a populist movement; like we're seeing in every European country. Except Britain and Ireland. We're left on the sidelines. Yeah, yeah. Really there was never be this is ironic given that that Edmund Burke was an Irishman. There's been no real conservative party. I mean, they've been called, Fine Gael and Fine Fáil were called conservative parties, but they had no philosophy whatsoever. When Hardy came to Hardy, they switched to the woke side. There's no intellectual, interesting party that puts forward family-related policies, say like Viktor Orban does in Hungary or anything like that. It's purely a kind of reactive opposition. That's very, very dismaying because, we desperately need. One of the problems I think here, Peter, is ironically, that is a residual effect of the war against the Catholic Church, which has succeeded in, particularly the clerical abuse scandals, have succeeded in making people very wary of speaking about, what you might call Catholic issues, whether that's expressed in family or abortion or whatever. So, those issues tend to be leveraged by the leftist and liberal parties to actually agitate people so as they actually will go against whatever the church is recommending. That's been the pattern going right back in the last, certainly in the last decade or so, that that was very strong in the referendums. You see that this is a real problem because, if you go on the media in Ireland, if you would go on, if you would be let on, on the national broadcaster now, you would be harangued and harassed if you were proposing. Nobody would say: “OK, well, what do you got to say?” And then: ”OK, well, I don't agree with that," but here's my position.” And that's gone. You're just harangued and you're sneered at, not necessarily just by the opposition that's in the studio, but by the presenter, probably foremost among them. That's the way that these things have gone now. And you have all these newspapers campaigning, activists. They purport to be, I guess, in the referendum recently, they purported to be covering it. But in fact, they were fighting for the yes side. And this has been the standard approach like that. They tell all these lies. I mean, like there's a very important lie that I want to just call out, which is the Tune Babies Hooks lie, which happened about 10 years ago. Where there was allegations made that 800 babies had been killed by nuns in Tum and buried in a septic tank. There's been a commission of inquiry that has spent 10 years investigating this and they have not found one skeleton, one bone of a child in a septic tank. Yet, the news has not gone around the world anything like to the extent that the first story went round. And people still out there that I meet think it is absolutely gospel truth that nuns killed 800 children and buried their bodies in a septic tank. That is a complete and utter lie. And they have failed after 10 years of trying. And yet that issue was used, was leveraged in the 2018 referendum to defeat the voice of the church, to nullify what the church was saying on the abortion question, because the implication was, well, they don't care about children. This is what goes on in Ireland. It is obscene. It's utterly obscene. And one feels, distraught in the face of it. Grease stricken to see what has become possible in our beautiful country. Yeah, well the media or the virus and we've seen that time and time again. John I really do appreciate coming on. When I saw that result I was so happy, especially seeing the depression on Varadkar's face that even brought more joy. I'd seen them pull back, and of course, they haven't given up, and they will come back I'm sure they will try and mix this type of thing part of their their manifesto moving forward. But, it is a moment to celebrate, I think, in the pushback. Thanks so much for coming on and sharing it, John. Thank you very much, Peter. Nice to talk to you
The end time prophecies of the Chernobyl Nuclear Accident, Tearing down of the Berlin Wall and the Signing of the Lisbon Treaty or the rebirth of the Holy Roman Empire have been fulfilled in my lifetime and most people missed them. I will explain, in detail, one of the next prophecies to occur so you don't miss it on this edition of the Endtime Show! --------------- 📚: Check out Jerusalem Prophecy College Online for less than $60 per course: https://jerusalemprophecycollege.com 📱: It's never been easier to understand. Stream Endtime+ and access exclusive content: https://watch.endtime.com/browse 🏥: Try Hope Health Share, an affordable, alternative solution: https://hopehealthshare.com ☕️: First Cup Coffee: use code ENDTIME to get 10% off: https://www.firstcup.com ⭐️: Birch Gold: Claim your free info kit on gold: https://www.birchgold.com/endtime 🍴Ready Pantry: https://www.ReadyPantry.com/ENDTIME and save an extra 10% off your entire order + FREE shipping on all orders (use code “ENDTIME”). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
José Manuel Barroso's path from academia to politics is a journey fuelled by curiosity and lifelong learning. Starting as a law professor in Portugal, he rose to become the Prime Minister of Portugal in 2002 and later served as the President of the European Commission from 2004 to 2014, steering through critical events like the Lisbon Treaty, the 2008 financial crisis, and the European Sovereign Debt Crisis. Discover how José's upbringing influenced his curiosity and love for learning, and how these traits played a pivotal role in his successful political career. Explore how his commitment to curiosity has shaped his leadership style and guided him through challenging situations and crises. Join us for these insightful conversations and more with José Manuel Barroso in the Season 5 premiere episode of The Curious Advantage Podcast. Continue this curious conversation with us over on our LinkedIn page and share your thoughts and feelings on this episode. Get your copy of The Curious Advantage on Amazon The Curious Advantage Audiobook is also available on audible Follow The Curious Advantage on LinkedIn Produced by Aliki Paolinelis, Jessica Wickham & Edited by Roman Pechersky, Danny Cross. About the Curious Advantage Podcast Series The Curious Advantage Podcast series is brought to you by the authors of the book The Curious Advantage, Paul Ashcroft, Simon Brown & Garrick Jones and it is about how individuals and organisations use the power of curiosity to drive success in their lives and organisations, especially in the context of our new digital reality. It brings to life the latest understanding from neuroscience, anthropology, history and behaviourism about curiosity and makes these useful for everyone. About ‘The Curious Advantage' Book The Curious Advantage is an exploration of the idea of Curiosity and its increasing importance for thriving in the digital age. Taking the widest possible exploration of things Curious – historical, contemporary, neuro-scientific, anthropological, behavioural, semantic and business-focused. At the heart of the book is our model of Curiosity, called 'Sailing the 7 C's of Curiosity'. This model provides individuals with a practical framework for how to be successfully Curious and use Curiosity as a power skill to unlock their own potential. To find out more visit: curiousadvantage.com
In this week's Centre for European Reform podcast Camino Mortera-Martinez, head of the Brussels office, joins Charles Grant, director of the CER, and Heather Grabbe, senior advisor at the Open Society Foundation, to discuss the prospect of EU enlargement. They talk about the likely timeline of the accession process, the countries with prospects of joining and which of these will struggle to meet the EU's criteria. Camino and Charles then debate whether the Lisbon Treaty will be used for this next round of accession or if treaty change might be required.
In this episode of the Liberal Europe Podcast, Leszek Jażdżewski (Fundacja Liberté!) welcomes Stefan Lehne, Senior fellow at Carnegie Europe in Brussels, where his research focuses on the post–Lisbon Treaty development of the European Union's foreign policy, with a specific focus on relations between the EU and member states. They talk about EU foreign policy, the European response to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, why the EU Council should turn to majority voting on foreign policy, and how to adapt EU institutions to the tasks ahead in light of the prospective enlargement. Find out more about the guest: https://carnegieeurope.eu/experts/634 This podcast is produced by the European Liberal Forum in collaboration with Movimento Liberal Social and Fundacja Liberté!, with the financial support of the European Parliament. Neither the European Parliament nor the European Liberal Forum are responsible for the content or for any use that be made of it.
Today's guest is Erwan Fouéré, Associate Senior Research Fellow at the Centre for European Policy Studies, where he focuses on the EU's role in the Balkans, with a specific focus on Macedonia. Prior to joining CEPS, Erwan served for 38 years with the EU institutions in various capacities, including at Headquarters and the European External Action Service. His most recent appointment was as Special Representative for the Irish 2012 Chairmanship of the OSCE. In this episode, Alon and Erwan discuss a multitude of issues surrounding the European Union and the Western Balkans region, including the enlargement of the EU, particularly in relation to the Western Balkans, and the lack of consistency within EU foreign policy regarding enlargement. In addition, they examine the impediments to progress within the EU itself: the unanimity rule and what steps can be taken to mitigate its negative impacts, and what can be done about member states such as Poland and Hungary, which are departing from democratic governance and the values of the EU itself. A full transcript of the episode can be found here: http://alonben-meir.com/audio/on-the-issues-episode-76-erwan-fouere/ Full Bio: After having pursued a career spanning 38 years with the EU institutions, during which he assumed various responsibilities both at Headquarters and more particularly in the EU's External Service, Erwan Fouéré has joined CEPS as an Associate Senior Research Fellow. His area of research is on the EU's role in the Balkans, seen from various angles (security & stability, enlargement, domestic politics), with a specific focus on Macedonia. More generally, he will also assess the impact of the Lisbon Treaty on the EU's performance, with specific reference to the role of EU Special Representatives. Prior to joining CEPS, Erwan Fouéré's most recent appointment was as Special Representative for the Irish 2012 Chairmanship of the OSCE, with special responsibility for the Transdniestrian settlement process. He was the first to assume joint responsibilities of EU Special Representative and Head of Delegation in the EU External Service when he was appointed in this double capacity in Macedonia (2005), where he served for five years up to his retirement from the EU Institutions. Before that, he was Head of Delegation in Slovenia leading to accession, the first Head of Delegation in South Africa (1994) and the first Head of EC Delegations in Mexico and Cuba (1989). He was also Deputy Head of the Delegation for Relations with Latin America based in Caracas (1984). At headquarters, he worked successively on the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE) and relations with East European Countries, on international relations in the field of the environment, and on EU relations with the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). He was a post graduate research assistant at the Max Kohnstamm Institute for European Affairs (1970-72), and a Guest Scholar at the Brookings Institution (1983). He has lectured at several European universities on EU Foreign and Security Policy, and was a regular contributor to EU Masters Course of Human Rights (2000-2010).
We know what you're thinking - why hasn't my favourite republican podcast done an episode about the KEY event in the communist calendar: The Eurovision Song Contest?! It's TOMORROW NIGHT and THEY HAVEN'T SPOKEN ON IT YET - WELL WORRY NO MORE!!! HERE IT IS!!!!!!We talk everything from Johnny Logan to Dana, the American influence to the growing stalinisation of the competition, Riverdance to the event's typically European centrist claim of being "unpolitical" (and thus being explicitly political). We answer the question on everyone's lips: how big an impact did Dustin the Turkey have on the Lisbon Treaty? And finally we shine a much needed spotlight on Eurovision's elusive Soviet cousin: Intervision. DUN DUN DUNEnjoy, don't cancel us x
This final "Brexit Musing" episode features John Bruton, the former Irish Prime Minister (Taoiseach) and former EU Ambassador to the United States who will share his wisdom on what Brexit means and his thoughts moving forward with regard to not only the UK and EU, but also the U.S.John Bruton served as Taoiseach from 1994 to 1997.He was born in 1947 and graduated from University College Dublin in 1968 with a Bachelor of Arts degree in economics and politics. He was called to the Bar of Ireland in 1972. He holds Honorary Degrees from Memorial University of Newfoundland, the University of Missouri, and the National University of Ireland.He was first elected to Dáil Éireann in 1969 at the age of 22 as a member of the Fine Gael Party, joining its front bench in 1972, becoming Party Leader in 1990, and leading it into government in 1994. He served as Minister for Finance (1981-1982 and 1986-1987), Minister for Industry & Energy (1982-1983), Minister for Industry, Trade, Commerce & Tourism (1983-1986) and was a Junior Minister from 1973-1977.As Taoiseach he was deeply involved in the Northern Irish Peace Process leading to the 1998 Good Friday Agreement. While Taoiseach, he presided over the successful Irish EU Presidency in 1996 and and chaired the European Council meeting that year which finalised the Stability and Growth Pact underpinning Economic and Monetary Union and the management of the Euro.He was appointed EU Ambassador to the United States in October 2004, and served for five years.He was a member of the Praesidium of the Convention that drafted the proposed European Constitution, signed in Rome on October 29, 2004, which is the base for the Lisbon Treaty now in force.Currently he is a member of the boards of Ingersoll Rand plc, the Irish Diaspora Loan Origination Fund, and Smart Invest ltd, and a number on non profit boards.He also has a unique insight into the processes surrounding the United Kingdom's exit from the European Union, and of the economic policy of the Euro.
It is an oddity of Irish politics that in 2001, when nearly 53% of voters opted to reject the EU's Nice Treaty, the Irish Government tried a 'second time lucky' approach, holding a second referendum on the same question. It passed, with 62% in favour. The same series of events occurred with the Lisbon Treaty later in the decade. Why is it that Ireland was the only member state of the EU which had to vote by referendum on the Nice and Lisbon Treaties? We discuss the case which led to this constitutional requirement, Ireland's relationship with the EU and the value of holding such votes.
In this podcast, Professor Kim Talus from Tulane University discusses the latest controversies surrounding the OPAL gas pipeline, which links the Nordstream gas pipeline to Eastern Europe, and the implications of the recent judgment from the European Court of Justice for the interpretation and application of EU energy law. On 10 Sept 2019, the General Court of the ECJ annulled an earlier Commission decision to modify the exemption of the OPAL pipeline, by drawing on the principle of energy solidarity introduced by the Lisbon Treaty, as laid down in Article 194 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU. In this podcast, Professor Talus gives a brief overview of the case, discusses the salient features of the judgment, particularly the meaning of the principle of solidarity, and reflects on the consequences of such an interpretation.
As we celebrate the 10th anniversary of the Lisbon Treaty, we debate the question: Has the ECI been an instrument of democracy? With us Pablo Sanchez, one of the champions of the first successful ECI Right2Water; EESC member Antonio Longo, who explains what the EESC has done over the years to help make the ECI simpler and more transparent, and prof. Alberto Alemanno, outlining the ECI's sticking points and proposing a radical overhaul of citizen participation in the EU. A Bulle Media production for the EESC.
50 years of European foreign policy cooperation: what is it for? 17 October 2019, 17.00 – 18.45 Venue: European Studies Center, St. Anthony´s College, Oxford Speakers: Ben Tonra (University College Dublin); Richard Whitman (University of Kent); Alexander Kmentt (Kings College London). Chair: Heidi Maurer (DPIR, University of Oxford) Co-sponsored by NORTIA: Network on Research and Teaching in EU Foreign Affairs. -------------------------- What did 50 years of foreign policy cooperation, 25 years of Common Foreign and Security Policy, and 10 years of Lisbon Treaty reforms deliver for the international identity of the EU and its member states? Is the EU foreign policy system, with the current status of the High Representative as quasi-Foreign Minister and the European External Action Service fit for the changing international system? Can the EU deliver as non-traditional foreign policy actor in an increasingly contesting international arena? This seminar is to scrutinize the past, current and future state of European Foreign Policy cooperation and of the EU as an international actor. In light of the appointment of the next High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and the looming of a no-deal Brexit in October 2019, our roundtable participants are going to reflect on challenges and opportunities for European action in international affairs. CONTENTS ------------------------------------------ 0:00 - 0:36: Introduction by Heidi Maurer ------------------------------------------ ROUND 1: Looking back – what do we see? ------------------------------------------- • What are the main achievements of European foreign policy cooperation in the past 50 years? • The EU is (still) a peculiar foreign policy actor. What are the three aspects that in your view made the EU different? 0:36 – 11.56: Alexander Kmentt, former Austrian PSC 12.41 - 20:10: Ben Tonra, University College Dublin 20.36 - 34.36: Richard Whitman, University of Kent 34.36: Heidi Maurer synthesizes main observations of round 1 ROUND 2: looking forward – The EU fit for purpose as international actor? Is the EU foreign policy system, with the current status of the HR/VP and the role of the EEAS fit for the changing international system? Can the EU deliver as non-traditional foreign policy actor? • If yes, what advantages should we Europeans be aware of? What threats should we consider? If no, what weaknesses should we acknowledge, what opportunities for innovation should we envision? • What short / mid / long term recommendations for EU innovation in foreign policy would you give? 35.56: Heidi Maurer 37.29 - 45.41: Alexander Kmentt on future outlook 46.21 - 51.21: Ben Tonra: What can we fix and is there something to fix? 51.26-58.06: Richard Whitman 58.06-59.34: Heidi Maurer's final summary 59.34: Q&A / Discussion
We're back to our roots with our latest Fake News Round Up, debunking the latest Fake News from viral posts on the Lisbon Treaty to unfounded allegations against a former PM. This month we are also looking at Westminster corruption case largely unreported by the media - a £700 million loan from the taxpayer for a private project in the Middle East, to a company currently accused of serious fraud and bribery amounting to £55 million... www.notanotherfakenewscast.com
Remainiacs on a Friday, like it's 2017 or something? As the clock ticks down to Zero Hour, will the Government’s performative anti-Brussels bolshiness come back to bite it? What are the real factors that are making the GNU the most endangered animal in politics? Project Fear comes true, but still can’t cut through. How to shut up people who shout “LISBON TREATY!” as if it’s some magic word to dispel all anti-Brexit argument. And what are we going to spend all that Get Ready For Brexit ad money on?Produced and presented by Andrew Harrison with Alex Andreou, Naomi Smith and Ian Dunt. Audio production by Sophie Black. Remainiacs is a Podmasters production.Get every new episode of Remainiacs a whole day early when you back us on the Patreon crowdfunding platform. You’ll also get our monthly Ask Remainiacs special episode plus smart merchandise, an exclusive weekly column by our panel, and discounts on #RemainiacsLive tickets too. #OwnTheRemoanremainiacs.comGet your free download of our theme tune ‘Demon Is A Monster’ by Cornershop. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.
The Irish Passport is opening up the floor to listeners in this episode, and taking questions on everything from recent Irish political history, to life as a returned member of the diaspora. Several people got in touch with practical questions about a United Ireland. Is the republic prepared for the possibility of loyalist violence? And would people born in Northern Ireland still be able to claim British citizenship in a unification scenario? Naomi O'Leary and Tim Mc Inerney delve into the history of countries that broke off from the British empire to ask what we can learn from precedent. Is it true that the Irish people were told to vote again after rejecting the European Union Nice and Lisbon Treaties? We speak to the Jean Monnet Professor of European Integration John O'Brennan and discover the complex truth of an argument often used in the Brexit debate. A listener in the United States who is Irish by descent got in touch to say he was considering a move to Ireland, and would like to hear from people who had already done the same. We hear from people who moved to Ireland as adults and discover the country through fresh eyes: the good, the bad, the ugly, and the beautiful. Special thanks to everyone who responded, including: Tadgh Jenkins, Shana Slow, Kevin from New York, Kath O'Meara, Stevie Nolan, and Guy Le Jeune. To hear a full interview with Professor O'Brennan and additional responses from people who moved to Ireland, support us on: https://www.patreon.com/theirishpassport Featuring editing by Alan Meaney http://alanmeaney.ie/ . Season 3 of The Irish Passport podcast is made with the kind support of Biddy Murphy, online sellers of genuine Irish goods. Check them out on www.biddymurphy.com. Follow us on Twitter and Facebook: @PassportIrish. Support this podcast
David and Helen take a step back to unpick the tortuous history of how we got to the Brexit referendum in the first place. Does the justification Cameron offers in his new memoirs stack up? What was he trying to achieve? And why did we end up with an in/out vote when the political risks were so great? A conversation linked to David's review of Cameron's book in the current 40th anniversary issue of the LRB. https://www.lrb.co.ukTalking Points: Why did Cameron call for an in/out referendum?He wanted to reconfigure Britain’s relationship with the EU, not abolish it.Let’s take the story back to 2004-2005 and the new constitutional treaty.The key question was consent.In Britain, there was a push for a referendum. Although Blair was initially opposed, he made a u-turn. But the Dutch and the French voted the treaty down before it could happen.Then came the Lisbon Treaty. Brown decided that this was different than the constitutional treaty and he ratified it without a referendum.This creates a political problem. The Conservative Party opposed both the Lisbon Treaty and the way it had been legitimated.The constitutional treaty made the EU wary of using referendums to legitimate treaties.But Cameron thought there would be another treaty—was this a mistake?The European Union Act of 2011 required a referendum for any treaty that would increase the power of the EU.By December 2011, Cameron had two issues: the domestic politics of consent, and the risk of being a permanent minority on financial service matters.In 2011, it became clear that the ECB would pursue a policy that would make it more difficult for London’s clearing houses to be the center of European trading. Ultimately, Britain could not fundamentally reconfigure its relationship with the EU. Cameron’s attempt to renegotiate became a perfect example of British weakness and fueled the Leave campaign.For what is Cameron personally culpable?He knew that Leave could win, but he didn’t make contingency arrangements for leaving.When Leave won, the UK entered a constitutional crisis and Cameron just walked away.Mentioned in this Episode:David’s review of Cameron’s memoirCameron’s Bloomberg speechMacron’s 2017 Sorbonne speechMore on ChiracAnd as ever, recommended reading curated by our friends at the LRB can be found here: lrb.co.uk/talking See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.
@thinking_muslim For over three years, Britain’s political establishment and much of the country has been in, what can only described as political meltdown. The 2016 referendum called by David Cameron resulted in the extraordinary outcome to leave the EU, despite all political predictions to the contrary. Since then Britain has been battling with the issue, triggering Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty, negotiating a deal that was rejected on three separate occasions by Parliament, the resignation of Theresa May and now what seems like a flailing Boris Johnson administration. Is Britain on a course to make the worst political decision since the Suez Crisis in 1956, that may potentially tip it into a recession and in the words of former PM John Major, reduce its influence in the world. Dr Imran Waheed joins me in conversation to explore Britain’s uneasy relationship with Europe, its current predicament and to speculate about what comes next. As always, please subscribe to The Thinking Muslim on your favourite Podcast app and follow me on @thinking_muslim for regular updates.
In Betrouwbare Bronnen aflevering 42:Merkels vertrouweling Elmar Brok 'Mister Europe' was overal bij. Nu neemt hij afscheid als EuroparlementariërFinancieel econoom Sylvester Eijffinger hoorde in Sintra waar het naartoe gaat met de euro, de ECB en de opvolging van Draghi***Jaap Jansen en PG Kroeger spraken in Brussel met 'Mister Europe’, zoals de BBC hem noemt. Na bijna 40 jaar verlaat hij het Europees Parlement, wat hij decennia domineerde: de CDU-politicus uit Bielefeld, Noordrijnland-Westfalen, Elmar Brok.Achteloos, bescheiden vertelt hij over de sleutelrol die hij speelde en de reeks staatslieden uit heel de wereld die hij sprak, adviseerde en regelmatig ongezouten de waarheid zei. Maar ook over zijn onverminderde waardering voor Margaret Thatcher, van wie hij een portretfoto met zijn zoon op haar schoot nog steeds koestert. “She was consistent in her ideas and she was pro-Europe.”Ik was er bijSleutelfiguren in Broks politieke leven waren Helmut Kohl en Angela Merkel. Twee volstrekt verschillende mensen qua naturel, maar beiden even doortastend en visionair. Ze zochten zijn raad, zijn netwerk en zijn politiek vernuft intensief. “I did not bother them every day, but they could call me”, zegt hij sereen. Brussel en Berlijn weten dat beide Kanseliers dat permanent deden. “I was there, I could give advice to Chancellors, I had certain contacts and could bring things together. I was involved in all Treaty changes since Maastricht. Getting rid of the democratic gap in the EU. It's not my achievement, but I could take part in that achievement.”Zijn band met Nederland blijkt zeer intens. Het was een toenmalig collega-Europarlementariër van het CDA die hem op 9 november 1989 in de vooravond thuis belde vanuit een vergadering van een juridische commissie van dat parlement in Berlijn. “I was alone at home in Bielefeld and a Dutchman from Rotterdam called me, Jimmy Janssen van Raay. He said: ‘Elmar, the Wall is falling!’” Hij deed de televisie aan en zag het ongelooflijke gebeuren: “The most impressive moment in modern European history.”Mijn God!Brok pakt Nederland hard aan in het gesprek. Mark Rutte, die hij regelmatig sprak, en zijn eigen zusterpartij het CDA krijgen er van langs om hun wankelmoedigheid ten aanzien van de toekomst van Europa. Hij verwijt hen uit angst voor de PVV te zijn gaan schuiven. “I was unhappy. Not only with Mark Rutte, but also with my CDA. A classical pro-European country, the Netherlands, was walking to the right. The lesson it taught: you should keep down Wilders and these groups. I was in committees in the ‘Tweede Kamer’. Oh my God! It sounded as if I was in enemy country! Very scary it was. Now I have the feeling that the Netherlands is going back a little bit more to the moderate way.”De Kamermotie tegen het beginsel van ‘an ever closer Union’ – die onlangs steun kreeg van VVD en CDA – doet Brok zuchtend het hoofd schudden. Anders dan Amerikanen, Zwitsers en Duitsers snappen Nederlanders niet wat ‘een federale Unie’ inhoudt. Zijn korzelige college staatsrecht en historie hierover zal in Nederland zelden zo scherp gehoord zijn. “An ever closer Union means that we work closer together in certain areas. For example in foreign policy, migration, internal and external security, climate change, banking. And in a democratic way. That's what we understand as an ever closer Union. For Germans, federalism is in our DNA. It does not mean centralisation! That's the English interpretation of the word. For us it means décentralisation: you only do things on a central level that cannot be done in a decentral way. Subsidiarity in other words. And that is the opposite of a superstate!”Waarom Poetin doet wat hij doetRuslandkenner Elmar Brok vertelt uit zijn eigen discussies met Gorbatsjov, Jeltsin en Poetin. Onder meer over de gebeurtenissen in de loop van 1989 toen in de Sovjet-Unie hongersnood dreigde en Helmut Kohl alle vleesvoorraden in de koelcellen van de EU opkocht en naar het oosten liet vervoeren. Toen wist Gorbatsjov dat Duitsland zijn vertrouwen verdiend had. Hij was tegen de ‘Wiedervereinigung’ en wilde natuurlijk dat de DDR bleef bestaan, maar liet het gebeuren toen de mensen dit van onderop doorzetten. De troepen van het Rode Leger bleven in de Oost-Duitse kazernes. Rusland greep niet in.Broks portret van Poetin en zijn politiek is adembenemend. "He changed in 2012, when he was not convinced anymore that a democratic and transparant Russia would support him.” Toen de jongeren in Kiev in 2014 afdwongen dat in Oekraïne vrije verkiezingen en een Europees gezinde democratie kwam, besefte Poetin: als hij dit zou tolereren zou ook zijn macht over Rusland in verval raken. Alle handelingen va Poetin staan sindsdien in dit teken. De greep naar de Krim, MH17, de oorlog in Donbass en het omkopen van anti EU-partijen en politici.Powerplay liveMiddenin het gesprek werd duidelijk dat Elmar Brok als strateeg en ‘mannetjesmaker’ nog altijd onmisbaar is in Europa. De luisteraar van Betrouwbare Bronnen is getuige van een opmerkelijk moment. Broks telefoon rinkelt. Hij begint meteen met ‘Hallo Manfred!’ indringend advies te geven aan zijn ‘Fraktionsvorsitzende’, EVP-topman Manfred Weber. Hij vertelt hem over een vertrouwelijk achtergrondgesprek met een topman van de Duitse Groenen in Brussel, die binnen de Groene Eurofractie de baas zijn.In het vervolg van Betrouwbare Bronnen doet Brok een aanbod aan de andere partijen in het EP: steun Weber als de democratisch gekozen opvolger van Juncker en de EVP helpt de macht van het parlement te vergroten tegen zowel de Europese Raad van regeringsleiders als tegen de Europese Commissie als ‘executive’. Fijntjes steekt hij een politiek mes tussen de ribben van de liberalen Macron en Vestager. “It's written in the Lisbon Treaty: the European Parliament elects the Commission President. I myself wrote the amendment to the Treaty! The European Peoples Party has double so many parlementarians as the liberals of Macron. At the moment, we debate the right of initiative for the EP. With Weber we would get such a thing. Margrethe Vestager has said: ‘the Parliament has nothing to do with the candidate’. So she is not a reliable candidate.” Powerplay in de Europese top waar de luisteraar van Betrouwbare Bronnen getuige van is.Grote landen beseffen dit nauwelijks nogElmar Brok háát Brexit. Omdat hij in Edinburgh studeerde in de jaren zestig, leeft hij erg mee met de Britten, zijn vrienden sinds die studentenjaren. Hij waarschuwt dat heel de Unie schade zal ondervinden van het uittreden van het VK, maar geen volk zal zo lijden als de Britten zelf. “You can not get the benefits from going out that you will not have when you remain inside the Union,” zegt hij kortaf.Zijn schets van de komende decennia in de EU is al kort en bondig. “Kleine landen weten het al eeuwen. Grote landen beseffen dit nauwelijks nog.” Niemand kan de enorme vraagstukken van deze tijd nog in zijn eentje, als natiestaat, oplossen of zich daaraan onttrekken als soevereine afzondering.Democratie kan imploderen, je moet haar verdedigen!Het gesprek eindigt in diepe emotie en zorgen. Eenvoudig en ontroerend vertelt Elmar brok over zijn partijgenoot uit Hessen, Walter Lübcke. De twee generatiegenoten lijken zelfs op elkaar met die walrussnor en gedrongen gestalte. Brok trad in mei tijdens de Europese verkiezingscampagne nog bij hem op in diens kiesdistrict. “He was very convinced about the poiicies on migration. This brought him the hate of right-wing people. If hatred becomes a normal thing for certain people, then it becomes practice. This is the danger for every democracy.”De neonazi-moordaanslag op deze katholiek-sociale regio-politicus raakt Elmar Brok dan ook diep. Hij vertel voor het eerst hoe hij zelf met zulk terrorisme geconfronteerd werd als jong politicus. “In the time of the RAF I had personal threats already. They wanted to kidnap my children. I never said that publicly. It's most clever not to say this. Nowadays with the new media, in shitstorms people can be totally destroyed. We are in a dangerous situation, but we cannot get rid of an invention like social media. Here I have some problems, I have no answer.”“Would good people go into politics? Will you take the risk to say certain things? It's a real danger. I'm very, very much afraid that people are hesitating to go into politics. They say: ‘don't do it, look after your children!’ This development is very dangerous. Democracy can implode, very fast. That should be a lesson. If you want to have freedom and democracy, you have to defend it."***Sylvester Eijffinger, hoogleraar financiële economie in Tilburg, was deze week met bankpresident Klaas Knot de enige Nederlander op het exclusieve ECB Forum on Central Banking onder leiding van Europese Centrale Bank-president Mario Draghi.Wat Draghi daar zei, wekte meteen de woede van Donald Trump. Ten onrechte, meent Eijffinger. Draghi's woorden werkten overigens meteen als geruststelling voor de Europese markten, zoals eerder zijn woorden dat hij zou doen 'whatever it takes' om de euro stabiel te houden. "Dit was whatever it takes, part two."Eijffinger dringt aan op een grondige evaluatie van het ECB_beleid om lessen te trekken voor de toekomst. "De vraag is of de bank niet teveel heeft gefocust op inflatie. Je moet opnieuw definiëren wat je bedoelt met prijsstabiliteit. Want de ECB heeft het doel van 2 procent inflatie nooit gehaald, het is blijven steken op 1 à anderhalf procent. De ECB moet een nieuwe koers bepalen.De Tilburgse hoogleraar zou het voor de afwikkeling van Brexit verstandig vinden als Brexit-onderhandelaar van de Europese Commissie Michel Barnier de nieuwe Commissie gaat leiden. Als de Fransman Commissiepresident wordt, kan de Duitser Jens Weidmann de ECB gaan leiden. Weidmann is minder havik dan dan vroeger: "Hij is flexibeler geworden."***Tijdlijn BB 42:00:00:00 - Intro met quotes Brok en Eijffinger00:04:20 - Elmar Brok (deel 1)00:35:30 - Elmar Brok (deel 2)00:51:07 - Sylvester Eijffinger (deel 1)01:19:29 - Sylvester Eijffinger (deel 2)01:43:58 - Uitro01:44:39 - Einde
Security and defence policy in the European Union is predominantly a competence of the Member States. At the same time, a common security and defence policy, which could progressively lead to a European defence union, is enshrined in the Lisbon Treaty and significant progress has been made in that direction. This briefing discusses the EU's deliveries in the area of security and defence policy and analyses public expectations and perceptions of the EU's actions in this policy field. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/en/document.html?reference=EPRS_BRI(2019)635533 Source: © European Union - EP
Security and defence policy in the European Union is predominantly a competence of the Member States. At the same time, a common security and defence policy, which could progressively lead to a European defence union, is enshrined in the Lisbon Treaty and significant progress has been made in that direction. This briefing discusses the EU's deliveries in the area of security and defence policy and analyses public expectations and perceptions of the EU's actions in this policy field. http://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/en/document.html?reference=EPRS_BRI(2019)635533 Source: © European Union - EP
Nick Westcott (Director Royal African Society and Associate at SOAS) gives a talk for the Middle East Studies Centre on 1st February 2019. Chaired by Eugene Rogan (St Antony's College). Since the Lisbon Treaty came into force in 2011 and the European Union pledged to reinforce its foreign policy cooperation, it has struggled to articulate and implement a policy on the Middle East which effectively protects and furthers its interests in the region. It responded swiftly but not very successfully to the Arab Spring; it played a supporting role in the fight against Islamic terrorism, and championed the Iran nuclear deal; but otherwise became a bystander in the growing conflicts in the region; it tried hard to maintain stability and add some momentum in the Israel-Palestine peace process; but it became increasingly obsessed after 2015 with the challenge of migration from and through the region. The paper assesses why it has struggled to formulate a policy, what it has managed to achieve nonetheless, how national and European policies have interacted, why it is increasingly important for the EU to have a coherent policy on the region, and makes proposals for what that policy should be and how it could be made effective.
David Noakes, discusses the history and agenda of the E.U. Ten EU truths we must tell the public; 1. The leaderships of the Conservative, Labour and Lib Dem parties have been taken over by pro-Europeans. These leaderships implement the EU's policy, and ignore the wishes of their voters. That's why your vote doesn't make a difference. 2. The six European Union treaties give it the constitution of a dictatorship, and the laws of a police state. Dictatorships lead to oppression and poverty. Politicians conceal the EUs Constitution is similar to the old Soviet Union's. 3. The Queen has signed all six EU constitutional treaties. These treaties make it clear the EU will abolish the nations of Britain and England (and our Lib-Dem, Labour and Conservative parties, Lisbon Treaty clause 8A-4). 4. The EU is illegal under British law. Five Prime Ministers and the Queen have committed six acts of Treason by signing the EU treaties which will abolish our nation and replace it with the EU; they secretly repealed two of the five laws of treason in the 1998 Crime and Disorder Act (s36.3) to escape a prosecution. 5. The police state growing around you, and reported on by some national newspapers, is the EU police state. We've been in the EU for 36 years, we are harmonizing our laws with the EU, the emerging police state is the result. 6. Political correctness, the undermining of parents, the family and teachers, the teaching of sex and homosexuality to under tens, the promotion of single parent families etc. etc. is subversion by the EU or its Common Purpose organization over the last 34 years, using the 200+ techniques of the German Frankfurt School. 7. The EU will be an economic disaster. We now lose £45 billion a year trading with Europe; before we joined we broke even. The EU's 120,000 regulations cost us £100 billion a year (Better Regulation Commission Annual Report 2005); they will bring us a soviet style command economy and poverty. Our politicians lied to us. 8. If you have voted Conservative, Labour or Lib Dem over the last 35 years you have voted for the EU police state, and for the abolition of your own party. 9. German Chancellor Angela Merkel forced the Reform or Lisbon Treaty on us (passed by Westminster 21st January, 138 majority) which replaced the British Constitution with the EUs on 1st January 2009. Westminster is now powerless and defunct. The EU treaties dont allow for a British General Election, due by 5th May 2010, when the EU will have the power to abolish Westminster. You will then be imprisoned inside the EU police state, and ruled by unelected EU dictators, who will control the nuclear weapons of what used to be Britain and France. 10. Britain is the fifth largest economy amongst the world's 200 nations. Forget elections and parties, whose leaderships are controlled by the EU. Fight the direct anti EU campaigns on the eutruth website to get Britain back before its too late. We need a General Strike against the EU. Start by visiting your local MP and warn him he will lose his £240,000 salary and expenses when the EU closes Westminster. source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J75BKicnVBo God bless.
European Parliament - EPRS Podcasts, What Europe does for you
Young politicians have recently been elected to the highest positions of power in several EU countries, yet many young people still choose to stay away from politics. If you're a young activist, or simply follow politics, the European Union has taken steps to encourage your participation in political life, in line with the obligation introduced by the Lisbon Treaty.Source: © European Union - EP
[Original release: 30 January 2017] On 24 January 2017, the UK Supreme Court ruled in the case Miller and Dos Santos vs. Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union. The Court decided that the Government does not have a prerogative power to trigger Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty. Instead, an act of parliament will be needed to begin the process of the UK leaving the EU. In this episode, we bring back Professor Alison Young, an expert in constitutional law, to talk about the aftermath of this decision - what it means and what we can now expect from the Brexit process. Produced by: Dr Kira Allmann Interview(s) with: Professor Alison Young Music by: Rosemary Allmann
Just under 18 months have passed since the UK government triggered Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty, formally beginning the UK's exit from the European Union. With only seven months left to sign a withdrawal agreement, Ben discusses the state of the negotiations with Georgina Wright, from Chatham House's Europe Programme. Among other issues they tackle the Irish border question, Michel Barnier's approach to the negotiations and how the EU member states are responding to the challenge of Brexit. Listen from 7:00. The global financial system has long allowed wealthy individuals to escape the confines of their domestic tax systems and hide their money in foreign havens. Oliver Bullough is an investigative journalist whose new book Moneyland explores how the institutions of Europe and the United States have become money-laundering operations, undermining the foundations of Western stability and allowing dictators in the Global South to siphon away their country's resources for personal gain. Agnes meets Oliver to find out more. Listen from 27:37. Read the Expert Comment: An Orderly No-Deal Brexit Would Still Come With Costs Read the book: Moneyland: Why Thieves And Crooks Now Rule the World and How to Take it Back
Just under 18 months have passed since the UK government triggered Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty, formally beginning the UK's exit from the European Union. With only seven months left to sign a withdrawal agreement, Ben discusses the state of the negotiations with Georgina Wright, from Chatham House's Europe Programme. Among other issues they tackle the Irish border question, Michel Barnier's approach to the negotiations and how the EU member states are responding to the challenge of Brexit. Listen from 7:00. The global financial system has long allowed wealthy individuals to escape the confines of their domestic tax systems and hide their money in foreign havens. Oliver Bullough is an investigative journalist whose new book Moneyland explores how the institutions of Europe and the United States have become money-laundering operations, undermining the foundations of Western stability and allowing dictators in the Global South to siphon away their country's resources for personal gain. Agnes meets Oliver to find out more. Listen from 27:37. Read the Expert Comment: An Orderly No-Deal Brexit Would Still Come With Costs Read the book: Moneyland: Why Thieves And Crooks Now Rule the World and How to Take it Back
This week, Theresa May made Brexit official, triggering Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty. Our friend Godfrey Bloom, a legendary voice for British sovereignty and a founding member of UKIP, joins Mises Weekends to discuss what happens next. Is globalism truly on the decline? And does the rise of Marine Le Pen mean Frexit may also be possible?]]>
This week, Theresa May made Brexit official, triggering Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty. Our friend Godfrey Bloom, a legendary voice for British sovereignty and a founding member of UKIP, joins Mises Weekends to discuss what happens next. Is globalism truly on the decline? And does the rise of Marine Le Pen mean Frexit may also be possible?
This week, Theresa May made Brexit official, triggering Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty. Our friend Godfrey Bloom, a legendary voice for British sovereignty and a founding member of UKIP, joins Mises Weekends to discuss what happens next. Is globalism truly on the decline? And does the rise of Marine Le Pen mean Frexit may also be possible?
Jon Henley is joined by Jill Rutter, Daniel Boffey and Dan Roberts in the week that Britain formally invokes article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty – the EU's exit clause. How quickly can a deal be done? What will be covered in the talks? And what will be the main sticking points?
UK PM Theresa May is set to trigger Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty at the end of the month. That would mark the beginning of the two-year long divorce process from the EU. The question on everyone’s mind is if the M&A boom/inward investment will dry up during the two-year period. To add to this, the economy also faces the risk of Scottish referendum. Simon French, Chief Economist at Panmure Gordon joins us to discuss the impact of the uncertainty in the M&A space and economy as a whole. French says the more clarity (regarding Brexit deal) the more there will be the change in behaviour of consumers and business and vice versa. #UK, #M&A, #investments, #economy, #fundamentals, #macro
Parliament has given the government the power to trigger Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty and the formal process of the UK’s departure from the EU should begin before the end of this month. What should British negotiators be seeking from the talks? What should any deal mean for immigration, trade and wider cooperation? Are the difficulties of getting out so great that we should reconsider our decision to leave? Earlier this week, Rob Lyons was joined by Ian Dunt and Luke Gittos for a lively and passionate discussion of the issues. Ian Dunt is editor of Politics.co.uk and author of Brexit: what the hell happens now? Luke Gittos is law editor for spiked, an author and a regular speaker at the Battle of Ideas festival.
On 24 January 2017, the UK Supreme Court ruled in the case Miller and Dos Santos vs. Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union. The Court decided that the Government does not have a prerogative power to trigger Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty. Instead, an act of parliament will be needed to begin the process of the UK leaving the EU. In this episode, we bring back Professor Alison Young, an expert in constitutional law, to talk about the aftermath of this decision - what it means and what we can now expect from the Brexit process. Join us in person or on Facebook Live tomorrow, 31 January, at 5:15 PM GMT, for a conversation on Brexit and human rights. Professor Alison Young will be discussing Brexit with Professors Paul Craig, Timothy Endicott, and Nick Barber. Produced by: Dr Kira Allmann Interview(s) with: Professor Alison Young Music by: Rosemary Allmann [Original release: 30 January 2017]
Jon Henley is joined by Jolyon Maugham, Philip Syrpis, Jennifer Rankin and Owen Bowcott to discuss the legal challenges to the government's use of Article 50, and how the EU will interpret the Lisbon Treaty's exit mechanism in the coming negotiations
Britain has hit a fresh snag on its way out the European door. As we know, Britain must trigger Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty to leave the EU. But today's court ruling that parliament must vote on Article 50 has the potential to severely complicate an already complex process, if not to derail it entirely. Denis Staunton reports on the significance of the ruling and what it means for Prime Minister Theresa May. If and when Brexit does proceed, a high price will be exacted by Europe for continues access to the common market, predicts former director of communications to David Cameron, Craig Oliver. Before the court ruling came down, Mark Hennessy talked to Craig, who has released a book, "Unleashing Demons: The Inside Story of Brexit". He tells Mark why he feels the referendum was an inevitability, and where he believes it all went wrong.
Business Connections Live - The UK's Leading Online Business TV Channel
How Will Triggering Article 50 Impact SMEs How will Triggering Article 50 Impact SMEs. The UK will have two years to negotiate the terms on which it will leave the EU after invoking Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty. So how leaving the EU will potentially affect SMEs? On this edition of Business Connections Live we discuss Contracts – Trademarks – Tax – Employees and the free movement of workers. When will the UK leave the EU? Our guest is Christian Bjärnram, Partner, ebl miller rosenfalck Commercial lawyer This edition of Business Connections Live will be a valuable insight into how Brexit will have an impact on SMEs, their customers and their employees. On this edition of Business Connections Live, Christian will explain: • Brexit • Triggering of Article 50 • When is Brexit • How it potentially affects SMEs o Contracts o Trademark o Tax o Employees • When will the UK leave the EU Learn the business fundamentals on: • How Article 50 is triggered • When will it have an impact on SMEs • How will it impact SMEs • Preparing your SME for Brexit For more great information visit our Guests website or follow them on Social Media. Website: http://www.millerrosenfalck.com/ Website: http://www.ebl-law.com/ Twitter: @MillerRosenfalc LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/miller-rosenfalck-llp Contact Business Connections Live The UK’s Leading Online Business Channel: Visit our Website Follow us on Twitter for the latest news Live Shows on Youtube Mondays Mid-day GMT Follow us on our Google+ page Follow us on our Facebook page You can Email the studio here We are always looking for Industry experts…
Part one: Host Ciarán Hancock and Markets Correspondent Joe Brennan are joined on the line by BBC business reporter Joe Lynam to get the latest understanding of short and long-term impact of Brexit. The drop in sterling aside, the much-anticipated "short, sharp shock" hasn't quite materialised. What is the current mood among the Conservative party, and what awaits Britain and Ireland after Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty is invoked next March?Part two:In the wake of the closure of Clerys last June, it has come to light that Boston-based equity firm Gordon Brothers paid themselves €3.65 million shortly before the the store closed its doors and 460 people lost their jobs. Business Affairs Correspondent Mark Paul talks us through the recent developments.Part three: The latest in the EY Entrepreneur of the Year Awards nominee profiles features Stephen Vernon of Green Property and Colin Culliton from TPI Group. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
Part one: Host Ciarán Hancock and Markets Correspondent Joe Brennan are joined on the line by BBC business reporter Joe Lynam to get the latest understanding of short and long-term impact of Brexit. The drop in sterling aside, the much-anticipated "short, sharp shock" hasn't quite materialised. What is the current mood among the Conservative party, and what awaits Britain and Ireland after Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty is invoked next March? Part two: In the wake of the closure of Clerys last June, it has come to light that Boston-based equity firm Gordon Brothers paid themselves €3.65 million shortly before the the store closed its doors and 460 people lost their jobs. Business Affairs Correspondent Mark Paul talks us through the recent developments. Part three: The latest in the EY Entrepreneur of the Year Awards nominee profiles features Stephen Vernon of Green Property and Colin Culliton from TPI Group.
Podcast: Invoke Democracy Now's Rob Killick speaks to Rob Lyons Since the vote to leave the European Union in June, the government has equivocated about when it will trigger Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty, initiating the two-year process to exit the EU. Meanwhile, a host of individuals and organisations, from law firms and business tycoons to high-profile politicians and rock stars, are doing everything in their power to overturn the referendum result. In this week’s Podcast of Ideas, Rob Lyons talks to Rob Killick, a founder of Invoke Democracy Now, a group campaigning for Britain to leave the EU without delay, about the urgency of triggering Article 50 and how Brexit has reinvigorated the democratic spirit while giving an aloof political establishment the shock of a lifetime in the process. To keep up with the Institute’s podcasts subscribe here. To find out more about Invoke Democracy Now! follow them on Facebook or Twitter.
With returning guest Tim Meyer, we talk about Brexit. Topics include referenda, democracy, comic book villains, the dynamics of union and separation, treaties and executive actions, Iceland, the roles of crisis and convenience. And a dramatic technical difficulty. This show’s links: Tim Meyer’s faculty profile Oral Argument 2: Bust a Deal, Face the Wheel (guest Tim Meyer) About the treaties and protocols of the European Union Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty (aka the Treaty on European Union) Laurence Helfer, Exiting Treaties Timothy Meyer, Power, Exit Costs, and Renegotiation in International Law Owen Bowcott, Theresa May Does Not Intend to Trigger Article 50 This Year, Court Told About the royal prerogative in the United Kingdom Scot Peterson, A Flexible Constitution Is Not Comforting in Troubled Times Iain Watson, EU Referendum Petition Signed by More than 2.5m About the US-Iraq Status of Forces Agreement About the UK Human Rights Act of 1998 (and its relation to the European Convention on Human Rights); Patrick Stewart, What Has the ECHR Ever Done for Us? (video); Charlie Peat, Theresa May Ditches Her Plans to Take Britain out of European Convention of Human Rights About the European Free Trade Association and the European Economic Area About Norway-EU Relations (including information about the Norwegian EU referenda) About the 2014 Swiss immigration referendeum About Otto von Bismarck Special Guest: Tim Meyer.
In a week where Hal Robson-Kanu forgot he was Hal Robson-Kanu for a few seconds, the Team are back together to over-perform in the international tournament that is the world of football. After a format change that required degree level competence in mathematics to comprehend it fully, this summer’s European Championship left us with a knock-out stage so unbalanced that it made the rising levels of inequality in modern Britain look positively insignificant. In this week’s Question that No One is Asking, we try to decide where each of the semi-finalists would finish in the Premier League? Before that though, in accordance with Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty, the team discuss a number of talking points from the previous week in football: To begin with, at the risk of appearing like an actual football podcast, we’ll quickly recap the quarter final matches and allow Paddy to bask in the sunshine of four correct predictions. Sky, who has nothing to do with the Murdoch empire, wants to talk about stats—football analytics are in vogue at present, but how useful are they actually in the grand scheme of things? And as we approach the business end of the season, the Team’s own transfer market specialist, Simon ‘Paddy’ Patterson has all the up-to-date news on the ins and outs of the capitalist orgasm that is the transfer season. All this and much more beside in this week’s episode of A Team of John O’Sheas.
The segment of the BBC Radio 4 World at One programme broadcast on 29 February 2016 featuring Professor Catherine Barnard discussing the possibility of Great Britain invoking Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty. The complete programme and further information is available at http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b071skpk Provided courtesy of the BBC.
The segment of the BBC Radio 4 World at One programme broadcast on 29 February 2016 featuring Professor Catherine Barnard discussing the possibility of Great Britain invoking Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty. The complete programme and further information is available at http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b071skpk Provided courtesy of the BBC.
The segment of the BBC Radio 4 World at One programme broadcast on 29 February 2016 featuring Professor Catherine Barnard discussing the possibility of Great Britain invoking Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty. The complete programme and further information is available at http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b071skpk Provided courtesy of the BBC.
The segment of the BBC Radio 4 World at One programme broadcast on 29 February 2016 featuring Professor Catherine Barnard discussing the possibility of Great Britain invoking Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty. The complete programme and further information is available at http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b071skpk Provided courtesy of the BBC.
After surging forward through the latter part of the twentieth century after the defeat of fascism, decolonisation and the fall of the Berlin Wall, democracy appears to be in something of a retreat. According to the Economist, even though 45 per cent of the world’s population live in countries that ‘hold free and fair elections’, there is now widespread recognition that ‘democracy’s global advance has come to a halt, and may even have gone into reverse’. After many years of trying to spread democracy abroad, the US and other Western powers seem to have lowered their sights following the tragic, contemporary debacle in Iraq. Elsewhere, the ‘Arab Spring’ has fared little better. Even in the established democracies of the West, democracy appears to have lost its enduring appeal, with declining voter turnout and a hollowing-out of once mass-membership political parties. It was once claimed that only democracies could develop economically; now, democracy is blamed for gridlock. The contrast between the failure of the US Congress to agree a budget and the ability of China to get things done is much remarked upon. Very few in the developed world openly discount democracy as an ideal, but nearly everyone agrees the reality is flawed. Some would reform it in various ways: lowering the voting age, using more new technology, etc. Occupy activists oppose ‘representative democracy’ altogether, preferring ‘direct democracy’. Some argue for limits on democracy in favour of the considered opinion of experts. Elected governments in Greece and Italy have even been replaced by interim technocratic administrations during the European economic crisis, and democratic mandates can be annulled when people vote the ‘wrong way’, as when the Irish voted ‘No’ to the Lisbon Treaty in 2008 or when the Muslim Brotherhood was voted into power in Egypt. And far from being cheered as a historic democratic exercise that ousted an entrenched Gandhi dynasty, this year’s election in India provoked fears that 815million voters were expressing atavistic religious prejudice. If anything sums up the contemporary concern with democracy, it is the word ‘populism’. In Europe, it is the fear of people voting for the wrong sort of political party: the Front National in France, the PVV in the Netherlands, UKIP in the UK. In America, it is the fear of what used to be called the ‘moral majority’: conservative voters out of step with the liberal consensus on social issues. Are populist political movements simply throwbacks, appealing to the bigotry of greying voters? Or do they give voice to the frustrations of citizens who feel increasingly cut off from an aloof and deracinated political class? Will the twenty-first century see the demise of democracy in favour of technocratic governance? What has so tarnished our view of what used to be the foundational principle of Western civilisation? Speakers Professor Ivan Krastev Chairman of the Centre for Liberal Strategies in Sofia; permanent fellow at the Institute for Human Sciences in Vienna Professor Chantal Mouffe Professor of political theory, University of Westminster; author, Agonistics: thinking the world politically Brendan O'Neill editor, spiked; columnist, Big Issue; contributor, Spectator Dr David Runciman professor of politics, Department of Politics and International Studies (POLIS), Cambridge University; author, The Confidence Trap: A History of Democracy in Crisis from World War 1 to the Present Chair Claire Fox director, Institute of Ideas; panellist, BBC Radio 4's Moral Maze
In this episode we take a look at the protests and anger growing across the globe. I talk about the politics and manipulation of crisis we are seeing all over the media today. Topics: Strange Deaths of those involved with the Boston Bombing, and the Trillion Dollar Farm Bill, Stockholm Riots, Social Media monitoring, XBox One Surveillance, DHS engaging IRS protesters, Monsanto Protests, Bilderberg Meeting, Lisbon Treaty Treason, Bankster Paradise, Woolwich Slaying, and other current events.
As the Lisbon Treaty comes into effect, creating the political entity of United Europe looked for by Bible students for hundreds of years, one of the first things it will do is condemn Israel. Leaked documents reveal what is at the heart of Europe - "evil thoughts" that will eventually bring them into the land and see them destroyed on the mountains of Israel.
What would happen if Britain chose to leave the European Union? The new Lisbon Treaty contains a clause whch sets out the exit process for the first time. But, as Chris Bowlby reports, the final deal between Britain and its former EU partners would depend a lot on the mood of their 'divorce' - amicable or acrimonious.
Bomb Scare, Social Media Games, Narcissistic Tweets, Rewriting the Bible, Lisbon Treaty, Copenhagen Treaty, Balloon Boy, More Microsoft Failures
Cutting Through the Matrix with Alan Watt Podcast (.xml Format)
--{ New Tower of Babel Rules the Rabble: "Voting on Treaties and Alliance Counts on Propaganda Forming Compliance, People Risk Losing Everything Dear, In Return for Security, Hyped Up by Fear, Massive Psy-Ops Campaign, All Kinds of Knavery, Frightened People Voting, Towards Their Own Slavery, Europe's Now Ruled by Secret Committee, Tyranny Power, its Plans are Not Pretty, On Course, On Track, There's No Time-Lag, Masters of Europe have it All in the Bag" © Alan Watt }-- Stanford Prison Experiment, Emulation of Guard and Prisoner Roles, Obedience to Authority - Adolf Hitler's "Mein Kampf", the Big Lie. 3 World Trading Blocs - European Union (Super-Soviet) - Ireland, 'NO' Votes to EU Lisbon Treaty - Constant Fear Essential for Compliance - the "Noble Lie" - New Dictatorial European Superstate, Legal Personality, Countries as Provinces - Tony Blair for EU President - Isaiah Berlin - United Americas for "Security" and "Prosperity". Crime Pays for Those at the Top - Payoffs for Politicians, Book Deals, Board Seats - Blair gets 24-hour Tax-Funded Security for 4 Million-Pound Home. Monitoring of All Computers and Internet by NSA, Access Key for Microsoft Windows - Complete Predictability in Totalitarian System. H1N1 Influenza, Common and Swine Flu Shots - Flu Vaccine Mist Spray and Injections arrive in U.S. - Mercury (Thimerosal) in Multi-Dose Swine Flu Bottles. New York under Surveillance Network. China's Antique Weather Modification and Modern Methods by U.S. Air Force. Effects of Anti-Depressants. (Articles: ["So as Ireland votes 'yes' to Lisbon treaty, our 1000 years of history ends like this" (dailymail.co.uk) - Oct. 5, 2009.] ["EU embryonic Home Office set up in secret talks under Lisbon Treaty" by Bruno Waterfield (telegraph.co.uk) - Oct. 4, 2009.] ["Tony Blair criticised for asking to keep 24-hour armed guard" by Lawrence Conway (thisislondon.co.uk) - Oct. 5, 2009.] ["NSA Had Access Built into Microsoft Windows" by Duncan Campbell (nationalexpositor.com) - March 27, 2008.] ["First doses of H1N1 flu vaccine arrive" (cnn.com) - Oct. 5, 2009.] ["Washington OKs mercury in swine flu vaccine" by Herb Weisbaum (komonews.com) - Sept. 24, 2009.] ["Surveillance Will Expand To Midtown [New York City], Mayor Says" by Kareem Fahim (nytimes.com) - Oct. 4, 2009.] ["China weather "magic" conjures blue sky for parade" (reuters.com) - Oct. 1, 2009.]) *Title/Poem and Dialogue Copyrighted Alan Watt - Oct. 5, 2009 (Exempting Music, Literary Quotes, and Callers' Comments)
Cutting Through the Matrix with Alan Watt Podcast (.xml Format)
--{ Oligarchy on Roll Against the Prole: "Soviet Scientific Dictatorship Unfurls its Plan To Direct the Lives of Woman, Child, Man, Under Various Guises, Sustainable, Ecology, Treating Us like We'd Each had a Lobotomy, Behind Philanthropists' Smiles is Eugenicists' Sneer, Terrifying the Lessers, Always Hyping the Fear, More like Robots, Showing No Soul, Graphs and Statistics, Means to Their Goal, No Depth to Deception, No Lie's too Low, No End of Force to which They Won't Go, They're On a Roll, No Negotiation, They Get the World, You're Just Earth Compostation" © Alan Watt }-- Beria (NKVD), Soviet Union, Bertrand Russell, Alteration of Society by Scientific Indoctrination - Credit Card Era, Consumerism to Sustainability - New World Soviet (Rule by Councils), Global(ist) Leaders. TOTAL Information Network, Everyone Monitored - Mass Surveillance Grid in EU - Government Spending Your Tax Money - Programming through Fiction - DNA Database - Amalgamation of Americas, 2005-2010. Europe: Will Make Arrests on Data Predicting Future Actions (Pre-Crime Arrest) - Predictability in Totalitarian Society - Computer Models, Pentagon's "Virtual World" of You - Everyone is Potential "Criminal" - Legal Today, Illegal Tomorrow - Economic Depression, Immigration, Destruction of Nationalism - Britain, Official Decrees, "Child Protection" Database and Mandatory Vetting by ISA Agency - Scientific Dictatorship. Dictatorial European Union, Lisbon Treaty, EU as Legal Personality (Corporation) - Gorbachev, Communism's Next Phase (Blend with West). Leaders Given to Public - Elitist Ecologist-Eugenicists pushing Depopulation - Jacques Cousteau - Jane Goodall in "Green" Sudbury, Optimum Population Trust - Paul Ehrlich and John Holdren - America into Marxism Phase. (Articles: ["EU funding 'Orwellian' artificial intelligence plan to monitor public for 'abnormal behaviour' " by Ian Johnston (telegraph.co.uk) - Sept. 19, 2009.] ["Euro project to arrest us for what they think we will do" by John Ozimek (theregister.co.uk) - Sept. 23, 2009.] ["Now Big Brother targets helpful parents as 1 in 4 Britons are to be vetted for giant new child protection database" by James Slack and Matthew Hickley (dailymail.co.uk) - Sept. 12, 2009.] ["Long Live The New Union?" by Gabriel O'Hara (wiseupjournal.com) - Sept. 25, 2009.] ["Population: Enough of us now" by Paul Ehrlich and Anne Ehrlich (newscientist.com) - Sept. 25, 2009; Magazine issue 2727.]) *Title/Poem and Dialogue Copyrighted Alan Watt - Sept. 25, 2009 (Exempting Music, Literary Quotes, and Callers' Comments)
Cutting Through the Matrix with Alan Watt Podcast (.xml Format)
--{ Fear Tactics Working--Elites Smirking: "World Rulers Fearfully Praying People Stay Oblivious to the Spraying, Dying of Allergies, Intensified Fears, Though They've been Sprayed Over Ten Years With Metallic Particles Suggested by Teller, H-Bomb Inventor, Scientific Feller, In Conjunction with HAARP, He did Find Could Make Populations Pliable, Dull of Mind, Easily Led in Confused Disorder Into Regimented New World Order, Punch-drunk with Crises, We've Become Accepting of Tyranny Since 2001, Those Still Conscious Notice Lately All This Horror Under 'Peace and Safety' " © Alan Watt }-- Daily Aerial Spraying, Sky Photographs, Polymer Mush, Metallic Particles in Atmosphere - Sudden Rise in Mystery Illnesses, Allergies, Autism, Asthma - Bacterial-Viral Warfare. Global Warming/Climate Change Excuse - Media Newscasters - New Feudal System, More Sophisticated Slavery - Voting for P.R. Images. Headline Conclusion - BBC-British Propaganda - Stampeding the Herd - U.K. Mental Health Poll, "Culture of Fear" - Pavlov, Russian Schools. Tidy Planet, Plato - CCTV Surveillance, Thoughtcrime - Fear of Crime (Falling Rates), Perception - Statistic Offices, Anxiety Disorders - Monsanto, GM Food in Canada. Right to Vote in "Democracy", Legal Contract - Toronto Amalgamation Vote - Ireland, Lisbon Treaty Vote, EU Diplomatic Corps. - Managerial Dictatorship, Parallel Government. Existence, Needing "Purpose" to Live (Serving World State). Piracy Nonsense, Pillaged Seas, Fishing Fleets. Freemasonry, Serpent Eating Tail, Higher Noble Orders - Selection Process, Degrees - Albert Pike, "Morals and Dogma" book - Obedience of Superiors' Orders - Neoplatonism. (Articles: ["Rise in multiple allergy patients" by Sue Emmett (news.bbc.co.uk) - April 14, 2009.] ["UK society 'increasingly fearful' " (news.bbc.co.uk) - April 13, 2009.] ["EU trains a new diplomatic corps - without waiting for Lisbon Treaty" by Bruno Waterfield (telegraph.co.uk) - April 12, 2009.] ["Analysis: Somalia Piracy Began in Response to Illegal Fishing and Toxic Dumping by Western Ships off Somali Coast" by Amy Goodman (democracynow.org) - April 14, 2009.] ["Bouncers hired to control classes in school because they're cheaper than supply teachers" by Mark Ellis (mirror.co.uk) - April 13, 2009.]) *Title/Poem and Dialogue Copyrighted Alan Watt - April 14, 2009 (Exempting Music, Literary Quotes, and Callers' Comments)
Cutting Through the Matrix with Alan Watt Podcast (.xml Format)
--{ Screamin' Bad Dreams on Monsanto's Genes: "Natural Seed Almost Gone, Not Comin' Back, Now Agricultural Secretary, Tommy Vilsack, With a Global Mission, Genetic Canto, His Life Spent Serving His Master Monsanto, Genetics, Eugenics, Legality, Conservation, Spearheading the Way to Depopulation, In the Manual of War, Food is a Weapon, Advice, Think Twice 'fore Munchin' That Melon, Monsanto's Invincible, So Goes the Report, No-one's Successful Against Them in Court, Every Judge Got the Word to Avoid This T-Rex, They're Part of the Military-Industrial Complex" © Alan Watt }-- Freedom of Speech, Radio Networks - IPCC, Crisis Computers - Genetically Modified Food, Canada, Health Database, Pharmacy. Club of Rome, Man is Enemy of Planet - Environmental Reporters - Wheat Fungus, Standardized Seed, United Nations - Australia - Norway Seed Ark. Ireland, Lisbon Treaty, Rejected EU Charter, Contaminated Meat Recall - Layers of Bureaucracies - Mafia Extortion, Public Acceptance, Perpetual Children. Casualties of War - Arthur Koestler, Chemical Lobotomy for "World Peace". Mandatory Volunteerism for Youth, Internal Army - Bush and Obama - Bill Amendments, National Service Corps (Military), Prohibited Activities. Life-long Politicians - Conditioning for All-Powerful Government - Decadent Rome, Ruling Class - Bible, Genesis, Begetting, Selected Breeding - Prince Charles. George W. Bush's Farewell Speech, "Significant Disappointment". 'Con', Constitution, What is Self-Evident - Madoff, Kashkari - Andy of Mayberry, Aunt Bee - Old Testament, Condemnation by Your Words - Binary, Rabin, 0-1. (Articles: [" 'Stem rust' fungus threatens global wheat harvest" by John Vidal, environment editor (guardian.co.uk) - March 19, 2009.] ["German ambassador defends Lisbon Treaty remarks" by Mary Fitzgerald (irishtimes.com) - March 20, 2009.] ["SEC. 125. PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES AND INELIGIBLE ORGANIZATIONS." March 18, 2009 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD--HOUSE H3607 [PDF File] (gpo.gov).] ["H.R.1388 Title: To reauthorize and reform the national service laws." (thomas.gov).] ["MP Galloway will fight Canada ban" [British Member of Parliament refused entry to Canada by JDL] by Sue Turton (channel4.com) - March 20, 2009.] ["Bush sets the record straight" [Bush's Farewell] (channel4.com) - Jan. 12, 2009.]) *Title/Poem and Dialogue Copyrighted Alan Watt - March 20, 2009 (Exempting Music, Literary Quotes, and Callers' Comments)
Cutting Through the Matrix with Alan Watt Podcast (.xml Format)
--{ 800-Year-Old Right Discarded: "Modified Humans by Modified Food, Forbidden to Heat by Fallen Dead Wood, Four-Year-Olds to be Taught by the State The Joys of Sex, Make Love Not Hate, All Kinds of Values, Rutting Incorrigible, Ensuring Mating for Life is Impossible, Clueless Adults Play, Gorge the Belly, In a Changing World, Lost in the Telly" © Alan Watt }-- Mainstream Media - Economics, Malthusian Population Control, Predictions - Brave New World - Department of Defence predictions, Rioting. John Maynard Keynes - Socialism - New Economic System - Tokens, Credits - "Illumined Ones" - Government in Your Bank Account. Ireland, Lisbon Treaty, EU - Villains, Peasants, Nobles - Magna Carta, Forest Charter, Firewood, Ministry of Forestry, Licenses, Crown Land. Habitat Areas, Movement off Rural Areas into Cities, USSR, China. Bertrand Russell, Experimental Schools - Winston Churchill, United Europe - UK, Pre-Pubertal Sex Education, Sexually-Transmitted Diseases, Syphilis, Gonorrhea. Slogans, "Carbon Footprint" - Rising Food, Water, Energy Costs. Britain, Uniting of India, British Model of Democracy, Gandhi. Media, Created Culture, Belonging to "Tribe", Bonding Substitute - Gangs, Masonic Symbolism, Drugs, Hell's Angels. (Articles: ["EU plans to force second Lisbon vote" by Richard Oakley (timesonline.co.uk) - Oct. 18, 2008.] ["Health and safety axe on 800-year-old right to collect firewood" by Jaya Narain (dailymail.co.uk) - Oct. 27, 2008.] ["Give young children sex education" ITN (itn.co.uk) - Oct. 23, 2008.] ["Earth on course for eco 'crunch' " (news.bbc.co.uk) - Oct. 9, 2008.]) *Dialogue Copyrighted Alan Watt - Oct. 29, 2008 (Exempting Music, Literary Quotes, and Callers' Comments)
In this lesson, lesson 111, we discuss the rejection of the Lisbon Treaty by Irish voters. An event which dominated current affairs in Europe recently. This very complicated document, aimed at facilitating the functioning of the EU, will not come into force - at least not for now. So then, what next for Europe ?
See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.
© 2020-2025 Ivy Podcast Discovery LLC
