OBAMA TO ATTACK SYRIA
REGARDLESS OF
CONSEQUENCES:

KERRY STATEMENT A CLOWNISH
DIATRIBE OF SYRIA:

The determination of the Obama government to mount a military strike on

Syria on the basis of spurious allegations on use of chemical weapons will have grave consequences for world peace and security and only exacerbate the tragic civil war

there with more death and destruction in the name of "humanitarian intervention".

US Secretary of State, John Kerry, went on public media today with a prepared statement of purported "evidence" possessed by the US that the Assad Government in Syria had carried out a chemical attack on civilians in Damascus last week.

No such thing. Kerry's meandering statement of abuse of the Syrian Government laced with references to dubious You Tube videos, anecdotal reports by unidentified "medical sources", "reporters on the ground" and unverified "intelligence" was a farrago of stale propaganda being peddled by his new Al Qaeda jihadist friends for months now and contained no concrete evidence from any independent reliable sources to prove anything other than the Washington Government is using these discredited and false flag concoctions as an excuse to join the civil war in Syria with an attack on the military assets of the Syrian Government and assist the rag-tag collection of terrorists causing mayhem and murder in Syria for the past two years.

 

Deprived of the fig-leaf of "international" action by yesterday's democratic decision by the House of Commons in London to disallow British forces to participate in military aggression against Syria, Washington's Imperialist agenda of regime change in Damascus, like Libya previously, is exposed to full view. Discounting the efforts of the United Nations as they did in Iraq in 2003 and accusing Russia and China of "obstructionism" although both allowed the resolution on Libya to pass, Kerry ignores the US veto on every single resolution of the Security Council condemning Israeli war crimes against the Palestinian people including the use of chemical weapons such as white phosphorous against the civilian population of Gaza in 2009. No bombing missions or condemnations allowed on Zionist Israel.

Kerry's deviant logic in claiming that Iran was developing nuclear weapons because of being attacked with chemical weapons by Saddam Hussein in the Iraq-Iran war of the 1980's (weapons supplied to Iraq by US companies in a savage irony to Kerry's condemnation of Syria) is worthy of a Dr Goebbels propaganda outburst.

Kerry's statement would be laughable except that it is the preliminary to an aggressive military strike on Syria for political gain in which unknown numbers of people in Damascus will be killed to advance US imperialist aims and to save face for Mr Obama's "red line" speech last year. The stultifying hypocrisy of this shows how far the NATO war criminals will go to pursue their imperialist agenda.

 

 

Irish Foreign Minister and Deputy Prime Minister, Eamon Gilmore said yesterday that a solution to the Syrian crisis should be sought by diplomatic means; Mr Gilmore said “the appropriate place” for an international response to the alleged use of chemical weapons by the Assad regime was “through the United Nations and particularly through the United Nations Security Council”.

 

Answering press queries on the safety of Irish peacekeeping troops in the UN Golan Heights mission Mr Gilmore said: " The safety and security of Irish troops in the Middle East region has been paramount in the Government’s discussions with the United Nations on the Syrian crisis".

Mr Gilmore said the matter had been a central point when he spoke to UN secretary general Ban Ki-moon about the situation in Syria. “We have been assured by the United Nations that every arrangement that is possible will be put in place to ensure their safety and security. But it is obviously something that we will continue to discuss with the UN,” he said.

Some 115 Irish troops are to be sent to the Golan Heights area, between Israel and Syria, next month to join three others serving the area. A further 360 Irish troops are stationed in Lebanon as part of a UN force and there are concerns military personnel could be at risk from reprisal attacks should the US and other allies launch air strikes on Syria.

 

 

 

 

 

Syrian War Tragedy worsens:

OPPOSITION MOUNTING

TO NATO PLANS FOR ATTACK

ON SYRIA:

 

CAMERON FAILS TO GET PARLIAMENTARY MAJORITY

IN HOUSE OF COMMONS FOR MILITARY ACTION;

71 TORY BACKBENCHERS REVOLT;

LABOUR DEMANDS DELAY UNTIL UN INSPECTORS'

REPORT IS PUBLISHED; WASHINGTON ISOLATED AS NATO

ALLIES DECLINE TO SUPPORT ILLEGAL WARFARE; GERMANY,

ITALY AND SPAIN DECAMP; CYPRUS PROTESTS USE OF

BRITISH BASES FOR ATTACK ON SYRIA:

 

 

The plans for an attack on Syria by the US and Britain began to unravel today as mounting popular opposition domestically and political forces demanded evidence be provided to back up Washington and London's crude propaganda attempts to slander the Damascus government with responsibility for an alleged chemical attack in east Damascus last week which supposedly caused several hundred civilian casualties in the rebel opposition controlled suburb of the city.

Anti-War coalitions in the US and Europe have begun mobilisation against the criminal intent of the Washington and London elites and demonstrations have already been mounted in Times Square, New York, London, Glasgow, and several European cities which will be reinforced this coming weekend by further events in opposition to a new war in the Middle East with horrendous unforeseen consequences for the entire region and global peace and security.

In London, British Premier, David Cameron, faced an open revolt by as many as 70 Conservative Party Mp's who demanded more time and further evidence be presented to parliament before a vote would be taken and the  British opposition Labour Party leader, Ed Miliband,  scuttled Cameron's plans by announcing just after 5pm today that he would instruct his MPs to vote against the government motion if a separate Labour amendment – calling for any action to be delayed – was defeated.

                                                       House of Commons, Westminster.

Within two hours, Downing Street issued a statement, as it published its motion for the debate, that a second vote would have to be held before Britain joins any military action. The motion states: "Before any direct British involvement in such action a further vote of the House of Commons will take place."

An enraged Cameron turned on Miliband accusing him of having suffered a giant "wobble" after he had appeared to indicate on Tuesday night that he would be prepared to support military action, subject to legal approval. But Labour hit back and said that the Prime Minister had been resisting a second vote until Miliband tweeted his plan to table his own amendment.

A Labour source said: "We will continue to scrutinise this motion but at 5.15pm David Cameron totally ruled out a second vote, an hour and a half later he changed his mind. Ed Miliband was determined to do the right thing. It has taken Labour forcing a vote to force the government to do the right thing."

Downing Street spinners immediately said Cameron offered a second vote because he wants to act in a consensual way. A spokesperson said: "The Prime Minister is acutely aware of the deep concerns in the country caused by what happened over Iraq. That's why we are committed to taking action to deal with this war crime – but taking action in the right way, proceeding on a consensual basis."

"So this motion endorses the government's consistent approach that we should take action in response to Assad's chemical weapons attack; reflects the need to proceed on a consensual basis, taking account of the work done by weapons inspectors; and reflects the Prime Minister's respect for the UN process – something he made clear to President Obama several days ago."

The Government move is likely to take the heat out of Thursday's parliamentary debate that will be opened by Cameron at 2.30pm and wound up by Nick Clegg (Liberal Democrat), the Deputy Prime Minister, at 10pm. The debate will be preceded by a meeting of the cabinet that will receive a recommendation from the National Security Council that Britain should join the military strikes. Dominic Grieve, the British Attorney General, advised the NSC that such action would be legal under international law. The shadow of War Criminal Blair's calculated deception of the House of Commons in 2003 over the preparations for War in Iraq loomed large over events in London today with newspaper polls reporting 74% of voters opposed to any new war in the Middle East.

The National Security Council reportedly also discussed a specific plan for a British contribution to military action. This focused on a "limited one-off" operation and the measures that might have to be taken to protect British interests in the region, including the defence of the UK's sovereign base in Cyprus, which is thought to be potentially within range of President Assad's Scud missiles. The Cyprus Government is extremely alarmed at the possibility of longer range Syrian missiles being fired at the British bases in Akrotiri and hitting cities and towns in Cyprus by random off-target events.

Some sources in London speculated that it was possible the US would act without British support – which would be a huge embarrassment for Cameron. It would also be politically difficult for the White House. US officials have previously been at pains to stress that the US would not act unilaterally, but in concert with partners. The US claims that "it knows" that the Assad government was the author of a chemical attack, as stated by Vice-President Biden and Secretary of State John Kerry yesterday in bellicose statements threatening use of force against Syria, is based on the dubious and partisan reports from Israeli "intelligence" of alleged interception of Syrian military cables discussing such an event. The US has failed to produce any concrete evidence from independent sources to back up it's slanderous claims. Not much different from the kind  of "intelligence" presented to the UN in 2003 as justification for the War and invasion of Iraq and later found to be entirely spurious.

 UNITED NATIONS:

Russia and China refused to collaborate today with British attempts to rush the UN Security Council into making a premature decision on using military force against Syria.

The permanent representatives of Russia and China to the United Nations left the closed meeting of the Security Council on Syria after its end, there was no demarche, the Russian Permanent Mission to the UN told waiting Press representatives.

It was reported earlier in the day that the Russian and Chinese officials had walked out of the UN Security Council meeting in New York after US Permanent Representative Samantha Power had called for an immediate action in Syria. The permanent members of the UN Security Council – Russia, Britain, China, the US and France – had been invited to the closed meeting. An hour later the Russian and Chinese diplomats left the meeting and headed to the Security Council’s main conference room where debates on Haiti was taking place.

Western countries could have, until the end of the day, submitted to the Security Council a draft resolution that would give the green light to an armed operation in Syria. Russia and China, which have the right of veto in the Security Council, have spoken up strongly against the use of force. However some Western countries have made it clear that they might take measures without waiting for the U.N. Security Council’s decision as they did in 1999 in Kosovo.

Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Gennady Gatilov said this would be a gross violation of international law. “Certain states are ready to use force even before UN experts make public the results of their investigation. Our country will be committed to international law,” he said. “Modern international law allows the use of force only in exceptional cases: for self-defence and if so authorised by the UN Security Council. Some states see priorities in a distorted way.”

Meanwhile, Syria has formally asked the UN to investigate three chemical attacks  which the Syrian Government believes were carried out by rebels in the suburbs of Damascus on August 22, 23 and 24.

Syrian Bishop warns intervention could spark ‘world war’ :

A Syrian Chaldean Catholic bishop on Monday warned that an armed intervention in Syria could unleash a “world war”, while the Vatican’s official newspaper called for more “prudence” from Western powers. “If there is an armed intervention, that would mean, I believe, a world war. That risk has returned,” Monsignor Antoine Audo of Aleppo told Vatican Radio.

“We hope that the pope’s call for real dialogue between the warring parties to find a solution can be a first step to stop the fighting,” he said. Bishop Audo is also the head of the Syrian arm of the international Catholic charity Caritas and has repeatedly warned about the human cost of the war.

 

 

                                                 Monsignor Antoine Audo of Allepo, Syria.

The Vatican daily, L’Osservatore Romano, meanwhile criticised Western powers in an editorial. “The drumbeat of an armed intervention by Western powers is becoming ever more insistent and ever less restrained by prudence,” it said. “Several representatives of these countries say they are convinced that the accusation that the Syrian Army used chemical weapons is founded – a question which the United Nations is investigating,” it said.

Pope Francis on Sunday called for the international community to help find a solution to the civil war.

“I launch an appeal to the international community to be more sensitive to this tragic situation and to commit itself to the maximum to help the dear Syrian nation find a solution to a war which spreads destruction and death,” he said.

Attacks on Christians, Chaldeans, Copts and other religious minorities are daily occurrences in Syria, Iraq and Egypt with no expressions of outrage from either Washington or London.




LIES, HYPOCRISY, WAR CRIMES:



The Union of Liars, Hypocrites and War Criminals = NATO, were planning their own chemical attack in Syria according to the London Daily Mail last January:

 

"London, Jan 30 (ANI): The Obama administration gave green signal to a chemical weapons attack plan in Syria that could be blamed on President Bashir al Assad's regime and in turn, spur international military action in the devastated country, leaked documents have shown.

A new report, that contains an email exchange between two senior officials at British-based contractor Britam Defence, showed a scheme 'approved by Washington'.

As per the scheme 'Qatar would fund rebel forces in Syria to use chemical weapons,' the Daily Mail reports.

Barack Obama made it clear to Syrian president Bashar al-Assad last month that the U.S. would not tolerate Syria using chemical weapons against its own people.

According to Infowars.com, the December 25 email was sent from Britam's Business Development Director David Goulding to company founder Philip Doughty.

The emails were released by a Malaysian hacker who also obtained senior executives resumes and copies of passports via an unprotected company server, according to Cyber War News.

According to the paper, the U.S. State Department has declined to comment on the matter. (ANI)"

Details from Cyber War News here:

http://www.cyberwarnews.info/reports/a-look-into-the-britam-defence-data-leak-files/

ROME:

                                                          Italian Foreign Ministery, Rome.

Italian Foreign Minister Emma Bonino says Italy will not support force in Syria
without UN mandate:

"Italy will not take part in any military solutions without a UN Security Council mandate," Foreign Minister Emma Bonino told parliamentarians in Rome.

"

Even the option of a limited intervention risks becoming unlimited," the minister said, adding that Italy was "already stretched and even over-stretched" militarily in other parts of the world.

"There is no military solution to the Syrian conflict. The only solution is a negotiated political solution," she said, calling for "great determination" in pursuing negotiations between the warring sides.


LONDON

 

 

National demonstration: No attack on Syria

Stop the War Coalition, 31 August 2013.

National Demonstration: assemble Saturday 31 August, 12 noon, Temple Place, London (nearest tube Temple)

The national demonstration on Saturday will gather at Temple Place (near Temple tube) and march via Parliament and Downing Street, ending in central London for a political rally to say No attack on Syria.

Called by Stop the War and CND.

 

Statement on Syria

Stop the War Coalition, 27 August 2013.

The Stop the War Coalition strongly opposes any military attack on Syria. While we oppose all use of chemical weapons, the latest alleged such attack in Damascus should not be used as a pretext for further exacerbating an already bloody civil war.

It seems that the Western governments have already made up their minds about this attack before it has even been reported on by UN weapons inspectors. They are demanding that ‘something must be done’ even though their record of ‘doing something’ has been nothing short of catastrophic.

There have been numerous western interventions in the Middle East and South Asia over the past 12 years. While the attacks on Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya were all argued for on humanitarian grounds, they have all increased the levels of killing and misery for the ordinary people of those countries. They were in reality all about regime change. This is also what Syria is about.


PARIS

French National assembly will debate Syria crisis:

                                                                                  French President, François Hollande

The French parliament will hold an emergency session to debate the Syria crisis on September 4, minister Alain Vidalies said on Wednesday.

The announced debate comes as France and US/UK threaten a potential military intervention in Syria following an alleged chemical weapons attack last week in the Damascus suburbs that the governments in Washington and London are blaming on the Assad regime.

"There will be a special debate in the (lower house) National Assembly and in the (upper house) Senate," said Vidalies, who is in charge of relations between the Government and parliament.

It is as yet unclear whether a military operation will take place over last Wednesday's alleged attack and if it does, when it will happen. But, under French law, a one-off military intervention does not need parliamentary approval.

French President François Hollande gave a militant speech on Tuesday warning the Syrian regime of Bashar al-Assad that France was "ready to punish" those responsible for the chemical weapons attack. Hollande further warned that the Syrian civil war posed "a threat to world peace." Stressing a "responsibility to protect civilians," Hollande also said that "chemical massacre cannot remain without a response from France."

Neither Hollande or the French Government have produced any evidence associating the
Assad regime with a chemical attack in Damascus but, have seen fit only to parrot Washington and London's disputed claims.

Hopefully, more sober elements of French politics will come to the fore in the debate.



IN WHOSE INTEREST?

 

Stock shares of perennial Defence contracting powerhouse Raytheon hit nearly $77 apiece Tuesday as news of a possible US strike in Syria intensified. The US has said if it strikes Syrian government targets for alleged use of chemical weapons, it would likely use Tomahawk cruise missiles from warships positioned in the Mediterranean. Raytheon is responsible for making and selling the bulk of the long-range, subsonic missiles to the US government.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ireland says no to US demands for Snowden arrest:

                                                     The High Courts of Justice, Dublin.

DUBLIN HIGH COURT
REJECTS US APPLICATION
FOR SNOWDEN ARREST
WARRANT:


Ireland has denied the U.S. an arrest warrant for whistle blower Edward Snowden in case he lands in this country. The High Court in Dublin ruled that Washington DC security chiefs failed to show where alleged crimes had been committed by the former intelligence contractor.The US applied for a provisional arrest warrant on Friday through its Dublin embassy.

Officials made the move after former NSA employee, Mr Snowden, contacted 21 countries, including Ireland, seeking asylum. There were concerns by US Officials that the fugitive intelligence officer, who has been living in the transit section of Moscow's Sheremetyevo-2 airport, would pass through Shannon Airport en route to South America. A request for asylum in Ireland can only be considered if Snowden makes an application on arrival in the country according to Government sources but, on a previous occasion asylum was granted to hundreds of Bosnian refugees although they had not yet arrived in Ireland

Judge Colm Mac Eochaidh refused the request for an arrest warrant on the grounds that no information had been given by the US authorities about where the alleged offences took place. The ruling also stated that the decision was taken because the US failed to show where the theft of government property took place or what had been stolen.Judge Mac Eochaidh said offences may relate to theft of information and its misuse rather than to physical property but that assumptions could not be made that it took place in Hawaii.

Former NSA analyst Mr Snowden has requested asylum across the globe, in Austria, Bolivia, Brazil, China, Cuba, Finland, France, Germany, India, Italy, Ireland, the Netherlands, Nicaragua, Norway, Poland, Spain, Switzerland and Venezuela.He is wanted for allegedly leaking details of secret surveillance operations in the UK and US and has been in diplomatic limbo since his arrival in Moscow from Hong Kong on June 23.

RUSSIA RESPONDS

Russian president Vladimir Putin said Mr Snowden would have to stop leaking US secrets if he wanted to get asylum there. Russia’s foreign minister has rejected American demands to extradite Edward Snowden. Sergei Lavrov said Snowden had not crossed the Russian border and insisted that Russia has nothing to do with him, his relations with US justice, or his travel plans. He angrily criticised American demands for Snowden’s extradition and warnings of negative consequences if Moscow fails to comply.

Mr Lavrov said that accusing Russia of “violation of US laws and even some sort of conspiracy” with regard to Snowden is “absolutely ungrounded and unacceptable”. He would not specify the location of Snowden, who booked a Havana-bound flight from Moscow a week ago but, did not show up on the plane.

 

SHITTER SHATTER BATS FOR US SPY AGENCIES:

The Irish Justice Minister Alan Shatter says there's nothing to prevent the US from making a fresh application to the Irish courts for the extradition of whistleblower Ed Snowden, should he enter the state following the refusal by the High Court to issue a provisional arrest warrant, in the event Snowden arrives in Ireland seeking political asylum.

                                                                  Shatter at a party conference

 

Responding to the High Court judgement, Minister Shatter said the Irish and U.S. authorities are in close contact with regard to Snowden.He said it was worth noting that the High Court refused to issue the arrest warrant "on the basis of specific information, rather than a determination as to whether an individual should or should not be extradited " Once again Shatter displays his contempt for the Irish public with a partisan propagandist claim on behalf of a foreign government. Also, he has no right commenting on a legal case before the courts in any manner whatsoever which amounts to contempt of court for which he should be called before the Justice hearing the case to account for his disgraceful remarks.

Shatter, a known pro-Zionist and apologist for Israeli war crimes in Gaza and the West Bank Palestinian Territories, including the piratical attacks on Irish ships travelling to Gaza; the illegal detention, kidnap, assault and stealing of property from Irish citizens on board shows that he is unfit to be a minister in the Irish Government and should be dismissed forthwith by An Taoiseach if the government had any respect for itself or the people it purports to govern under the Irish constitution.

Leaks

Edward Snowden leaked classified US intelligence documents to the media last month. Once he was unveiled as the NSA whistleblower, he fled to Hong Kong and from there to Moscow, where he has been residing in a transit area of the city's airport for weeks. He has subsequently released intelligence claiming that the US has been monitoring secret, official EU communications. Snowden has sought political asylum in dozens of countries - several of which have refused. However, Bolivia, Venezuela and Nicaragua are enthusiastic to grant him asylum, if he can get out of Moscow - and is given uninhibited passage through international airspace.

A diplomatic incident a week ago when an aircraft carrying Bolivian President Morales was forced to break its journey and land in Vienna because of rumours that Mr Snowden was on board has provoked outrage throughout Latin America at the high-handed and lawless activities of Washington in its attempts to apprehend Mr Snowden.

Apart from the brass-necked effrontery of the US Administration in seeking the assistance of Irish courts in their vindictive campaign of intimidation against Mr Snowden while they continue to commit acts of murderous violence across the globe against the civilian populations of the several countries they are engaged in military actions in, the provocative intervention of Shatter on their behalf must be condemned and opposed vigorously by all progressive and democratic forces here.

Cameron EU Speech Flops

CAMERON SPEECH ON EU-

BOX-OFFICE POISON IN 

BRUSSELS:

This week in the House of Commons, and later at the Global Elite gathering at Davos, In Switzerland, Brit Premier, David Cameron, made his long-awaited public statement on Britain's position in the EU and his vision of the British Conservative Party way of pursuing it in the future.

His speech committing the Conservative Party to a "IN-OUT" referendum on EU membership in 2017, had been postponed for a week, supposedly due to the hostage crisis in Algeria. But,In fact, it was a speech that had been brewing for years, ever since  his taking over leadership of the Tories, for fear that it would rip the party apart. In the end, it is primarily the fact that the Tories are already being pulled apart by  more rabidly expressed opposing positions on the EU  in recent times that forced his hand. This was well demonstrated by the hoots and hollers of the Tory Neanderthals on the back benches of the Commons chamber.

The "Financial Times" Philip Stevens, commented that this was “politics on a tightrope”, motivated by Cameron’s hope that his commitment to a referendum would “forestall a historic split in his own party comparable to its 19th century ruptures over the Corn Laws and imperial trade preferences in the early 20th”. Raucous support from the back-benches didn't hide the dismay in other quarters at Cameron's guff. The Lib-Dem half of the coalition government at Westminster attacked the speech and disclaimed support for it.

More worryingly for Cameron, and the British ruling class as a whole, has been condemnation of the prospect of a British referendum by other EU members and, more especially, by  President Obama in Washington. Although the referendum is not scheduled for another four years and is dependent on the Tories winning the 2015 general election, a dim prospect at the moment with the Tories on only 33% compared with Labour on 39%, Cameron has been attacked for injecting further uncertainty into the European project when it is already in crisis. Philip Gordon, US assistant secretary of state for European affairs, publicly made clear Washington’s displeasure recently when he stressed that Britain’s continued membership of the EU was “in the American interest”.

Cameron’s remarks were intended to try and appease constituencies none of which can be described as progressive; the back-bench Tory Eurosceptics and the UK Independence Party,  who have been yapping more loudly at Cameron's heels since he became Prime Minister, each of which just as reactionary as the other. To his EU partners, Washington and a substantial section of British and international  big business opposed to such a risky move, Cameron pledged that in such a referendum he would campaign for British membership with all his “heart and soul”, a mealy mouthed pledge which went down like a lead balloon.

Cameron presented his move as a means of saving the European project, rather than damning it. Europe’s crisis, he stated, stemmed from its lack of competitiveness and flexibility in the “new global race of nations” now underway, and the challenge posed by the “surging economies in the east and south”.

"With “Europe’s share of world output … projected to fall by almost a third in the next two decades”, Cameron condemned “complex rules restricting our labour markets” and “excessive regulation” on business as “self-inflicted” wounds. Cameron cited German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s earlier pronouncement that Europe’s system of welfare and social provision is unsustainable and has to go.

His proposals essentially consist of a demand that the austerity measures that have created a social catastrophe in Ireland, Greece, Spain, Portugal, Italy  and elsewhere must be extended and deepened across the continent, in line with the levelling down of wages and working conditions to the levels of sweatshop Asia.

This is why that, even while demanding a “loosening” of the EU so as to protect the City of London, the citadel of British Finance Capital, Cameron supports further fiscal and political consolidation within the Euro zone. He claimed that the Euro zone countries needed “the right governance and structures to secure a successful currency for the long term”— that is; it must have the economic and political mechanisms in place to enforce the diktats of finance capital, while stressing that Britain had no intention of adopting the Euro-currency itself.

On the continuing decimation of the living standards of the working class across the EU, Cameron, the EU, Washington and Monopoly Capital are all united. All of which makes Cameron’s posing as the defender of “democratic accountability and consent” hypocritical cant. Cameron hypocritically referenced “growing frustration” with the EU across the continent that has led to “demonstrations on the streets of Athens, Madrid and Rome” In Britain too, he said, “democratic consent for the EU … is now wafer-thin”. Whereas, democratic consent for the vicious austerity programs being enforced across Europe by Cameron, Merkel, Draghi, Barosso and Rumpoy doesn't exist at all.

But, Cameron’s proposed referendum has nothing to do with establishing the democratic right of working people to oppose and defeat the vicious austerity that has brought millions onto the streets. The opposite is the case. He, with the others, wants to consolidate a right-wing bloc pledged to even more draconian economic measures, in which the interests of Finance Capital, both domestic and foreign are protected while abolishing the remaining legal rights of ordinary workers. Hence his attack on legislation limiting working hours.

This is the kind of  EU to which Cameron is committed. While various European foreign ministers criticised Cameron’s speech, it was not on its substance that they did so, but, for his lack of a united approach with the EU -Wall St. elite and for opening up another nest of worms with his dodgy referendum pledge.

Referring to Cameron’s demand to renegotiate the terms of EU membership, German Foreign Minister, Guido Westerwelle, said that “cherry picking was not an option” while his French equivalent Laurent Fabius complained, “If you join a football club, you can’t say you want to play rugby.” Merkel, however, said that Berlin would listen to “British wishes” over EU membership in the hope of finding a “fair compromise”. Only on Tuesday, Merkel and French President, Francois Hollande, had vowed to speed up Euro zone integration and promote European "competitiveness" (code for low wages) in terms similar to Cameron’s. Quoted on the 50th anniversary of the Franco-German Alliance, both stressed the need for “budget discipline” and "labour reforms", more coded language for the further reduction of workers' rights throughout the EU.

Cameron did succeed in creating a dilemma for the British Labour Party, whose leader, Ed Milliband, opposed the idea of the referendum but had no concrete proposals to substitute for the austerity mania currently sweeping Europe. This, itself, is indicative of the inability of European Social Democracy as a whole, including the Irish Labour Party here, of mounting any kind of challenge to the rampage of neo-liberalism led by Wall Street and its cronies in London and Frankfurt. The Global Financial Elite don't need Social Democracy anymore to act as a semblance of democracy and social justice in the Capitalist World. They have decided to use the economic crisis brought on by their own insatiable greed and power mania to gut the organised workers' movement and abolish what has been described as the "European social model" in short order. There is only one reply to this audacious power-grab; massive popular resistance and internationalist solidarity of the working class everywhere.

Also on YouTube :   

http://youtu.be/KXLX40kYGcs

FearFeasaMacLéinn 

 Áth Cliath/Dublin

Eanáir/January 27 2013