John Calvin Jones, PhD, JD, professor of law, American University in Bosnia-Hercegovina.

Paper for the 5th Annual Conference on European Integration, Skopje, Macedonia, 20 May 2010

Debt Peonage, Corporate Capitalism, Codex Alimentarius, and Tyranny: an optimist’s guide to Lisbon.
“The purpose of government is to enable the people of a nation to live in safety and happiness. Government exists for the interests of the governed, not for the governors.” Thomas Jefferson Introduction The adoption of the so-called Lisbon Treaty, a previous form of which was called the EU Constitution,1 has brought some changes in the governing structure of the EU and further moved the balance of power from the member state governments to an EU supranational entity. This paper will examine certain facets of the Lisbon Treaty and its provisions that centralize authority in the EU government over the member states in relation to three overlapping, areas: banking and finance; food and medicine; and personal liberty. Part I. EU Financial Power: thinking about Greece and beyond “Give me control of a nation’s money and I care not who makes her laws.” Mayer Amschel Rothschild Starting in 2008, financial collapse and severe economic downturns have been seen in Latvia, Iceland, the United States, and Greece. At the same time, nations of the UK, Spain, Italy, and Portugal have reported unemployment rates over 20%, annual budget deficits in excess of 12% of GDP, and looming national debts. Among other problems, problematics, and issues, given the adoption of the Lisbon Treaty (hereinafter Lisbon), the new rules spell tragedy for the masses. By contrast, certain aspects of Lisbon will bring more economic power and authority to the EU, as an entity, and the individual EU ministers themselves. Arguably all nations and economic blocs like the EU, NAFTA, Mercosur, etc., move through cycles of growth and retraction. But in modern times, under the current debt-based money system, wherein banks can create wealth/debt from nothing via fractional-reserve banking - a practice that has moved from a 9 to 1 ratio to that where some investment banks leverage money to the tune of 100 to 12 – those governments that allow private banks to control the money supplies, leave populations vulnerable (Hudson 2009).3
1

According to authors of a webpage from the Universidad de Zaragoza, in Spain, “The Lisbon Treaty, also referred to as Reform Treaty or Simplified Treaty, among other names, is a replacement for the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe. While the Constitution attempted to replace all earlier EU treaties, the Reform Treaty amends the previous treaties. In This sense the formal title of the treaty is “Treaty of Lisbon amending the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty establishing the European Community.” See The Lisbon Treaty, http://www.unizar.es/euroconstitucion/Treaties/Treaty_Lisbon%20Treaty.htm
2

See commentaries of Max Keiser, Keiser Report, number 35, 20 April 2010. http://maxkeiser.com/2010/04/20/kr35-keiser-report-markets-finance-scandal-and-joe-weisenthal/
3

“The European Union and International Monetary Fund have told [the governments and peoples of Latvia and Iceland] to replace private debts with public obligations, and to pay [these private debts] by raising taxes, slashing public spending and obliging citizens to deplete their savings.” See Michael Hudson, “Recovering from Neoliberal Disaster: Why Iceland and Latvia Won’t (and Can’t) Pay the EU for the Kleptocrats’ Ripoffs,” August 17th, 2009.

1

John Calvin Jones (2010), Debt Peonage, Corporate Capitalism, Codex Alimentarius, and Tyranny: an optimist’s guide to Lisbon

Though some might believe that the adoption of a single currency within the EU was done primarily to facilitate trade, economic growth, and efficiency for common people and small businesses, when seen as a mechanism used by private banks – separate, if not superior to national governments – the question remains, what is the role of the EU? Does the EU serve as an arbiter between the people, member state governments, and banks – which function as a regrettably necessary piece of the economy – or does the EU serve those banks? I argue that we can answer that question by looking at Greece, the most extreme example of an economic problem that is also occurring in countries like Portugal, Spain, Latvia, Iceland, etc. Looking at Greece, Looking in the Mirror In order for Greece to enter the Euro-zone in the year 2000 – with full membership including adoption of the euro as its official currency – the Greek government had to meet EU-imposed rules about fiscal policy. These rules, the so-called Maastricht convergence criteria, mandate that a nation cannot have an annual budget deficit in excess of 3% of GDP and a national debt in excess of 60% of GDP.4 But when their candidacy was being considered, Greek deficits were in excess of proscribed limits. To satisfy the Maastricht criteria, via lowering its deficits on the books, through the assistance of a self-dealing Goldman-Sachs, Greece undertook a series of so-called credit default swaps.5 Over time it would be shown that the swaps were absolutely fraudulent.6 In 2002, the Greek deficit amounted to 1.2 percent of GDP. After Eurostat reviewed the data in September 2004, the ratio had to be revised up to 3.7 percent. By February of 2010, the deficit was at 5.2 percent of GDP.7 By 2009, nearly 10 years after public information revealed a Greek budget deficit and national debt – underestimated by at least $40 billion,8 the EU's Economic and Financial Affairs Council (ECOFIN)9 demanded that the Greek national government undertake

4

Hudson, Michael. 2009. “Recovering from Neoliberal Disaster: Why Iceland and Latvia Won’t (and Can’t) Pay the EU for the Kleptocrats’ Ripoffs.” ISLET, Global Research, August 17th. Posted at: http://michaelhudson.com/articles/countries/090817IcelandLatviaWontPay.html
5

Balzli, Beat. 2010. “How Goldman Sachs Helped Greece to Mask its True Debt.” Der Spiegel, 8 February.

6

Goldman-Sachs brokered exchanges of Greek debts denominated in dollars and yen for those denominated in euro – in the short-term. In theory, with differing interest rates on those instruments and due to particular exchange rates, true debts and future obligations could appear lower than otherwise. But Goldman-Sachs went a step further and made accounting notations with fraudulent and fictional exchange rates. See Max Keiser Report of 19 February 2010 on Russia Today. And one should not be fooled into believing this is a Greece-only problem. In previous years, Italy also used accounting fraud through credit-default swaps to mask its true debt with the help of a U.S. investment bank.
7 8

Balzli (2010).

Max Keiser Report, Russia Today, 19 February 2010. http://www.youtube.com/watch? v=FKCR2k4keMQ&feature=related
9

“Ecofin” is composed of the Economics and Finance Ministers of the EU member states. The commission adds Budget Ministers of member states when budgetary issues are discussed. It meets regularly once a month. http://www.consilium.europa.eu/showPage.aspx?id=250&lang=EN

2

3 . the Greek government cut $14 billion in state spending and saddled Greeks with more taxes (Taking Aim 16 March 2010).10 And the Greek government did adopt severe austerity measures. PhD. 13 In an interview in May 2010.9 allows the European Commission (via ECOFIN) and or the ECB to place the Greek economy in what amounts to receivership. and diesel. As explained in Der Spiegel. like Greece. all was reversed in favor of IMF.9 of Lisbon Treaty. It gives us reason to be skeptical of ECOFIN and EU sincerity about a claim for rules demanding sound fiscal policy. and wage cuts resulted in an effective loss of 25% household income across Greece.13 Much of the Greek national debt is a result of interest accrued through previous borrowing to pay off earlier debts (Taking Aim 16 March 2010). ECONFIN ministers claimed that the government of Papandreou did not cut enough – and that is problematic. since October 2009. However. Skopje. gave grants to the poor. Yet. In fact. This fact that EU accounting and reporting rules purposefully ignore one type of fiscal fraud that ECOFIN would otherwise seek to prevent – in the name of limiting EU-wide inflation – and thus increases the possibility that the EU will impose austerity against a given country is curious. Greece still had a national debt of $400 billion (Taking Aim 16 March 2010). which would otherwise lead an EU-imposed austerity as permitted under Article 126. if deficits and or debts are deemed too high and national policies not effective enough to reduce the shortfalls. The combined effect of the taxes. lay-offs. Taking Aim 16 March 2010). Paper for the 5th Annual Conference on European Integration. One primary target was state spending to create public sector jobs as a means to reduce unemployment. Papandreou declared that Greece has an outstanding debt of 300 billion euro (Casert and Becatoros 2010). those 10-15 year bonds are coming due – and will continue for at least the next five years.a figure which is far higher than the Greek 10 Eurostat’s reporting rules do not record transactions involving financial derivatives. Spending cuts came in the form of a 7% across-theboard pay cut to state employees and raising the age of retirement (Taking Aim 16 March 2010). professor of law. Though at the start of the economic decline in Greece during 2009 the government extended short-term loans to small businesses. ECB. despite the massive cuts in public spending. Greece raised the VAT two percent (Taking Aim 16 March 2010). short-term measure imposed in conjunction with other steps to reduce present and future odious debt. the government of Spain led a self-imposed slash and burn program of public spending. and EU member state preferences of debt serving and austerity (cf. 20 May 2010 austerity measures to be in line with the Maastricht criteria.11 Such included higher taxes on heating fuel. Given that the EU intentionally fails to record credit default swaps – which are only used to push loan repayments into the future – the practice will accrue as a benefit to the EU which will impose fines and taxes on the fiscally unsound member state. at the same time that foreign debts remain on the books. petrol. hence shrink the economy. As the GDP shrinks. spending cuts. as of March 2010. these sin and energy taxes reduce private spending. when taxes accompany deep cuts in public spending.14 These 10-year bonds have yields of well over 6% (some are over 7%) .John Calvin Jones. JD. through ECOFIN could take control of Greek fiscal policy and impose its own terms on Greek national budgets without regard to the interest in the livelihood of working-class Greeks. 12 Article 126. Spain reported a budget deficit in excess of 6% of GDP.12 If tax increases were a reasonable. Taking Aim. American University in Bosnia-Hercegovina. to follow EU and IMF mandates is to place larger percentages of state spending into debt service. Under the treaty. as reported in the Wall Street Journal (2010). and place moratoria on interest fees (cf. Like Greece. the only way for a nation. despite this level of austerity. Macedonia. 11 In January 2010. According to one derivates trader: “The Maastricht rules can be circumvented quite legally through swaps” (Balzli 2010). the EU. as well as higher taxes on alcoholic beverages and tobacco products. then the taxes might yield longer-term benefits to the Greek economy at-large. 16 March 2010). See Sinikka Tarvainen (2010). In an effort to meet the demands of ECOFIN.

hence the Greek people.de/international/europe/0. many EU member states are going to have a fiscal crisis in the area of pensions and related social service spending for the elderly. see also EU Economic Policy Committee.6 billion euros by the end of May to cover maturing bonds. “EU Bets $146 Billion Greek Bailout to Avert Contagion.org/templates/story/story.com/news/2010-04-11/greece-winsmore-than-eu30-billion-in-eu-imf-aid-update1-. James and Jonathan Stearns.spiegel.yahoo. ECOFIN.” Bloomberg. sell off national assets and resources. “Greece Wins EU45 Billion Aid Pledge to Blunt Crisis. Because euro-based EU member state governments cannot affect the supply and value of their national currency.com/news/2010-05-03/eu-bets-146-billion-greek-bailout-to-avert-contagionupdate2-. April 11. 2010. Taking Aim 16 March 2010). Beat. 2010. 2 May.eu/economy_finance/sgp/index_en.possibly brought on by infusing the borrowed money into the Greek economy (cf. in a bind. the few other ways to pay for foreign debts are to raise taxes. And Greece will cut her spending by at least 4%. the “bailout package” was over $1.businessweek. and infirmed – due to declining birthrates. As of mid April 2010. Emma and Jonathan Stearns. posted at: http://ec. (Taking Aim 16 March 2010).” Bloomberg Businessweek. visited March 2010).000. Which option will Greece choose? As of April. This circumstance leaves the Greek government. Raf and Elena Becatoros. http://www. the 27 finance ministers of the EU states and the IMF agreed to provide Greece with a short-term. 3 May. “Euro partners agree on $145B Greek bailout.15 In fact.thenewamerican. and another 20 billion euros by the end of December to pay debt coupons and finance its deficit for 2010 (Neuger and Stearns 2010). (And we should remember that the Greek economic reality is facing other nations – so the policy choices in Greece are likely to be replicated and or imposed in other EU nations).europa. According to ECOFIN (2010). Working Group on Ageing Populations and Sustainability at: http://europa.00. the primary move that these governments can take to reduce deficit spending is to make cuts in government spending. 2010. Online at: http://www.” AP. such social spending cuts are expected. Posted by NPR at: http://www. Yet when a government has already made drastic cuts. 2010. 45 billion euro loan. apparently a deal was settled whereby Greece took on a loan of 110 billion euro – with 30 billion coming from the IMF!18 Of course the agreement also required a cut in Greek domestic spending of 30 billion euro – a 13% cut in GDP (Ross-Thomas and Stearns 2010). by ECOFIN.htm (Updated 11 February 2010.com/index. Codex Alimentarius. etc. sick.” Berlin. Corporate Capitalism.20 14 Balzli. http://news.htm 17 Neuger. “How Goldman Sachs Helped Greece to Mask its True Debt. Stability and Growth Pact.000!19 Roughly $325 billion would come from the IMF (in fact largely subsidized and guaranteed by the United States) and around $600 billion directly from treasuries of 16 EU member states.html 18 Casert. Debt Peonage.eu/epc/working_groups/ageing_en.html 19 http://www. “Euphoria Over Euro Rescue Fades.17 Only three weeks later – in the name of helping the Greek people. 8 February http://www.John Calvin Jones (2010).676634.npr. Greece needed to raise 11. for state workers.” Der Spiegel.16 But Greece spends 51% of its national government on social programs.com/s/ap/20100502/ap_on_bi_ge/eu_greece_financial_crisis/print.000.businessweek. which is controlled by the private ECB directly and by other private banks indirectly. 11 May.php/economy/economics-mainmenu-44/3526-trillion-bailout-of-eurogreece-shows-need-to-audit-the-fed 20 Associated Press. and borrowing more money.1518.php?storyId=123413270 4 . By mid May 2010.000. Ross-Thomas. as a matter of consequence. in the near and long-term. and Tyranny: an optimist’s guide to Lisbon government can earn via investment or recoup through national economic growth . 2010.html 15 16 See Neuger and Stearns (2010).

24 See Consolidated version of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union . in this latest example of borrowing. which will shrink the economy – another 13% .Article 126 (ex Article 104 TEC) posted at http://eur-lex.Part Three: Union Policies and Internal Actions . Macedonia. AP May 2010).51 percent on April 8. First. one of the sanctions is an EU tax. the agreement from April was to supply the Greek government with 30 billion euro in the first year (Casert and Becatoros 2010). professor of law. PhD. along with officials from the IMF and ECB. Taking Aim 16 March 2010). while the national finance ministers agreed.htm (Updated 12 December 2009. 2010). Paper for the 5th Annual Conference on European Integration. the Keiser Report of 15 April 2010. will not cover Greek debts due over the next eight months. But here.24 Article 126. Worse yet. the EU Working Group on Ageing Populations and Sustainability claims that EU nations should work with the IMF and World Bank. subsection 11 announces: 21 See EU Economic Policy Committee. Second. the national government had to rely on commercial loans (Neuger and Stearns 2010). Neuger and Stearns 2010). Skopje. would monitor Greece to ensure that ECOFIN mandates are followed (Taking Aim March 16. it is likely that Greece will increase borrowing for the foreseeable future. visited March 2010). And the debt service will be first on the list of the spending priorities of the Greek national budget. in effect they have made the loan. and other places like Iceland. Consider.Title VIII: Economic and Monetary Policy . in principle. European pledges in February and March of 2010 to provide socalled emergency loans to Greece failed to prevent Greek 10-year bond yields from soaring to 7. some states. When speaking about the issue of the Greek debts supposed loans and coming austerity measures. EU entities have expressed this message in unexpected places. Though Greece has and will take a number of steps to reduce their debt – via cutting social spending and debt service.eu/epc/working_groups/ageing_en.21 And note. people of the EU cannot reject what was announced as a loan pledge. what happens if Greek fiscal moves are deemed insufficient? The Lisbon Treaty holds that should a nation with an excessive deficit (and or debt) fail to satisfy ECOFIN demands. But a chief economist from Goldman Sachs in London claims that even the monies from the EU member states. and Spain. JD.John Calvin Jones. to share in the risk of loaning Greece money. So as to pay off private banks and hedge funds which bought Greek national bonds. American University in Bosnia-Hercegovina. 30 billion euro. 22 According to Neuger and Stearns (2010).do? uri=CELEX:12008E126:EN:NOT 5 . Thus the loan has two aspects which bode well for private banks and injure the public.22 Thus the Greek debt will grow – and grow at a pace that will move the EU and IMF to demand that the Greek government make more radical cuts in social spending23 and ramp up debt servicing as a proportion of the national budget (cf. 20 May 2010 It is unsurprising that the EU preference for member states is take on more external debt – and even make transfer payments from the public to private banks which hold government bonds. Greece is borrowing from the IMF. like Ireland require a parliamentary vote to approve such spending. Neuger and Stearns 2010. For example. the people of Greece will pay fees to the IMF. in that the ECB is transferring the funds to Greece (cf. 23 See Max Keiser. Ironically and arguably the entire amount of the loan package for Greece will come from private hands because around 600 billion euro. Working Group on Ageing Populations and Sustainability at: http://europa. And ECOFIN has mandated that it will conduct three-month reviews of Greek books to ensure that the government follows EU dictates in the form of austerity measures (Taking Aim 16 March 2010). As ECOFIN recently announced. and member states must repay the ECB – the citizenry cannot refuse. Keiser calls the deal Win-Win-Win for banks and Lose-LoseLose for the people of Greece.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ. it. So note. Ireland.Chapter 1: Economic policy .europa. pledged from the EU and other full EU member states will actually come directly from the ECB (cf.

17 February. Moreover member states are without recourse to challenge Council rulings. to impose fines of an appropriate size.27 or Portugal face such external sanction and or endure selfimposed austerity as to depress their own economies? My answer is two main parties: (a) the private banks that hold the debts.com/news/europe/features/article_1523771. “Spain’s economy will take longer to recover than most other EU economies.2% of GDP plus one-tenth of the difference between the nation’s excessive deficit percentage and the maximum level of 3%. 26 The appropriate size is . rather than the EU member states that such a government should serve. or Ireland. “Exposure to Greece Weighs On French. Hence the greater the nation’s need to have deficit spending. to make a non-interest-bearing deposit of an appropriate size26 with the Union until the excessive deficit has. or Spain. the Council may decide25 to apply or … intensify one or more of the following measures: … to require the Member State . and the less their capacity to pay.php/Spanish-EU-presidencystumbles-into-action-News-Feature 28 Fuhrmans. Ireland.. The Ripple Effect As of April 2010. owing bonds issued at 18%!29 France too was bankrupt and could not refinance their debt through common business and banking channels due in part to 700 billion euro exposure of French private banks to Greek public debt.5% of GDP. from both public and private sources.monstersandcritics. http://online. and (b) the EU government itself – in its growing move of autonomy – as a government imposing fees to generate revenue for itself as a separate entity.com/article/SB10001424052748703798904575069712153415820. the Council.html 29 See comments of Joern Berninger on the Keiser Report. Article 12. Note Article 13 of the regulation 1467/97 allows for the Council to turn the deposit into a fine – from which the EU can extract interest – after the first two years.John Calvin Jones (2010). been corrected. As long as a Member State fails to comply with a decision [of ECOFIN]. and Spain (Wall Street Journal 17 February 2010). or Italy. Codex Alimentarius. The [Spanish] government has announced an austerity plan which was expected to be watched closely by other EU member states. may decide with impunity. Corporate Capitalism. These same banks have significant exposure at the level of $900 billion to the five so-called PIIGS. 27 See report of Sinikka Tarvainen. the public was informed that weeks earlier the EU nations had agreed to share debts – acquired from the IMF – but the Spanish government was bankrupt.” From “Spanish EU presidency stumbles into action” 7 January. So who benefits should the people of Greece. the greater their bill to the EU! And while the payment cannot exceed . 2010. posted at: http://www. German Banks. Greece.30 Ralph Schoenman and Mya Schoon (2010) argue that the German and French banks are thus able to leverage their extremely risky and overexposed financial positions in the PIIGS to 25 The ruling body of the EU. See Council Regulation (EC) Number 1467/97. #46 of 27 May 2010.wsj. like a minimum credit card payment.. Vanessa and Sebastian Moffett.28 By late May 2010. the EU can use the EDP as a means to create a constant funding stream. and Tyranny: an optimist’s guide to Lisbon 11. in the view of the Council. nations of Portugal. German and French banks were exposed to over $120 billion to Greek borrowers. Italy. with the European Commission not expecting the country to rise out of the recession until 2011.com/watch/the-keiser-report/keiser-report-46-27-may-2010-guest-dr-joern-berninger/ 30 See Berninger (2010) 6 . To believe that the people of any EU nation would subject themselves to such possibility knowingly and willingly is doubtful.” Wall Street Journal. Debt Peonage. Online at: http://maxkeiser.

JD. and a newly bolstered EU.” The Times (UK). then all policies would reinforce the economic health of each member state and all their citizens. supranational state. would only incur more debt – meaning more debt servicing. gave a speech in which he described how the global financial crisis was good in the fact that it would enable the IMF – along with. wants EU-wide tax.31 To clarify the last comment. this new debt would practically ensure that the EU supranational state would impose fines for fiscal irresponsibility – to be paid to the EU! The last point should be shocking in how clearly it reveals the nature of the purpose and program of the EU as a private. in the name of controlling EU-wide inflation. the estimations of Schoenman and Schoon proved to be perfect predictions as private banks. In the first scenario.co. … In sum. to a lesser degree. front-runner for presidency. as money for public services will be lent with the primary effect of enriching banks. would make sense if the penalty (lowering the money supply) went directly to the debt-holder (further reducing EUwide debt). If the EU were to set forth rules in the name of assisting the states.timesonline. David and Philip Webster. dictated fiscal policy. Such a process takes money out of the hands of the German and French people. treaties. the Belgian. will continue to pay. Hermann van Rompuy. “Herman Van Rompuy. Skopje. and practices the banks will win. In June 2009. a PhD in economics from the University of Chicago and a member of the Board of Directors of the ECB. PhD. Lorenzo Bini Smaghi. Lisbon works to bolster and sustain the political power of the EU in its role as enforcer of economic policies in the interest of private banks.ece (7 January 2010) 7 . like a sport’s league commissioner for team owners. The imposition of an ECOFIN and or EU Commission economic penalty. professor of law. not politicians or the people. France and or Germany subsidize debt servicing in the PIIGS. November 17. Less than two months later. the World Bank – to resume its dominant position in global finance. more austerity. immediately explained that the EU would embark on a program of self-financing [sic] in the form of direct taxation over EU member states – without regard to agreements or consent from the legislatures of the member nation governments. the citizens of the EU. while the hostages.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article6919380. But instead any monies taken as fees and fines simply fill the private coffers of the EU. American University in Bosnia-Hercegovina. with the expanding control of the private European Central Bank. the ramifications are tremendous. a new world monetary order … requires a 31 Note. and further drains on weak and receding economies. This scenario works as a system of paying Peter to pay Paul – and supports the very same private businesses that took on risk that created the economic crisis.John Calvin Jones. 20 May 2010 hold their own governments hostage to the idea that the banks should be subsidized – like their American counterparts (Taking Aim 16 March 2010). after being named as president of the EU. Such would be the worst instance of governments promoting what economists call moral hazard. Paper for the 5th Annual Conference on European Integration. the governments of the PIIGS nations – already enacting austerity programs. empowered by the Lisbon Treaty. Available online at: http://www. At the same time. See Charter. Hence on this count. it is easy to see that the EU is positioned as the enforcer of private banking interests. In the context of the Europe. 2009. On top of that. Macedonia. not sublimate all powers and authorities of each member-state government to the collective economic detriment of EU citizens. the loan receivers. Without a complete rejection of these laws. Smaghi said: “The fact that the crisis has restored the IMF to its place at the heart of the international financial system should provide some hope in this respect … making IMF financing easier. either with direct loans or by serving as a surety for IMF loans to these governments.

2010.John Calvin Jones (2010). Key elements of such a mechanism include a prominent role for the IMF in two essential areas: strong and effective surveillance in crisis prevention. which would never be paid off (Hudson 2009).34 Aside from the inevitable depression that would ripple through Portugal. With little or no way to control the macroeconomic trends nor any means to limit the EU-based directives and actions. As a result the EU would slap on its fines. and or fidelity to the IMF over the EU and or its member states if the ECB were subservient to either the supranational EU government or the member states? And while EU Commissioners are supposed to maintain a certain level of distance from their home countries while working for the good of the EU on the whole (Fairhurst 2007. W. The International Forecaster.7 trillion).. while the governments of Germany and France. 95-96). then the national debts would begin to spiral upward. 32 Maessen. http://www. support. And those same mechanisms which shrink economies and force the people into a lower standard of living – i.. long-time resident of Belgium. and member of the Board of Directors of the ECB express any hope. Debt Peonage.7 trillion to investment banks and insurance companies.html 8 . 2009. Ireland. Bush and continued by the change agent. i. if in line with acts of other mainstream governments would redirect public monies to the private banks. and Tyranny: an optimist’s guide to Lisbon mechanism to keep imbalances in check. “European Central Banksters seek World Currency. to countries in need.com/news/22664/Sovereign_Debt__The_Implications_for_Currencies_and_Gold. 6 March. and have increased liability to bank-held derivatives contracts in excess of $23. 6 July. Posted at: http://beforeitsnews.” Infowars. TARP program. (To date. In the second and scarier scenario. Codex Alimentarius. through a series of statutes passed by Congress since October 2008. increasing taxes and fees. Jurriaan.” Saturday. and Spain – their respective governments would further retract the money supply – through austerity – and incur more private debt. Germany and France pay for the defaults of the PIGS directly to their own banks – the American style. Rather it reads simply as the machinations of one who is working for the good of private banks – not people. “Sovereign Debt . would happen in France and Germany. starting with the presidency of the Republican G. reductions in spending on pensions and social services in health.”32 Why would an Italian national. the American taxpayers gifted $12.The Implications for Currencies and Gold. Greece. and responsible lending.33 Smaghi's comments cannot be seen in line with the principle of fidelity to the EU. 6th edition. to see economic strife and a constant democratic struggle of poor and working people against government elites and EU ministers in service of private banks. with appropriate limits and conditionality. and education now seen in Greece.com/european-central-banksters-seek-world-currency-total-control/ 33 34 See John Fairhurst. likely drawn from the IMF (hence heaping more future debt on the citizens). Corporate Capitalism. policing. Taken on the whole. Law of the European Union.e. Democrat Barack Obama. the powers of the EU supranational state cemented and deepened through the Lisbon Treaty – at least in the area of fiscal control – show us that current and future prospects for EU citizens are bleak.infowars.e. if the governments of Germany and France would seek to ease the levels of austerity via short-term private (IMF) borrowing. we should expect. Total Control. Pearson Longman: London (2007). Additionally. Italy.

or is provided for in a legally binding Union act or is likely to affect common rules or alter their scope. the World Health Organization and the Food and Agriculture Organization.htm 9 .eu/food/international/organisations/codex_en.38 First and foremost Codex Alimentarius is nothing more than a manifestation of corporate proprietary interest along the lines of Western corporate capitalism.eu/food/international/organisations/codex_en. and Consumers.37 Originally created in 1962 by UN and managed with two heads.com/Tips/scott101. preservatives.’ http://eur-lex. Skopje. and medicines through a document / treaty called Codex Alimentarius. PhD.John Calvin Jones. chemical sprays. The Union may conclude an agreement with one or more third countries or international organisations where the Treaties so provide or where the conclusion of an agreement is necessary in order to achieve. JD. one of the objectives referred to in the Treaties.htm (March 2010) 37 European Commission. and guidelines for drugs. has accepted the directives. current and future EU rules in the area of treatymaking authority (now vested in the EU itself35 – rather than member states solely).01004201. was tasked with establishing international standards for food.com. NewsWithViews. American University in Bosnia-Hercegovina.htm (March 2010) 39 http://ec. But in practice. The World Trade Organisation Agreement. supplements. According to the EU itself: “The Codex Alimentarius Commission develops food standards that serve as a reference for international food trade. Drugs. the European Community (and hence now the EU – with the passage of Lisbon).europa. Paper for the 5th Annual Conference on European Integration. Agreements concluded by the Union are binding upon the institutions of the Union and on its Member States.htm 36 European Commission. on the application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures 35 See Lisbon Treaty. as well as powers in particular things like drugs/medicines and food do not bode well for those who favor nature and freedom of choice. and Consumers. Macedonia.eu/food/international/organisations/codex_en.newswithviews. the CAC serves noble intentions of protect consumer food health and eliminating barriers to international food trade (Tips 2009). JD.europa.europa.eu/en/treaties/dat/12007L/htm/C2007306EN. GMO foods. herbicides.htm (March 2010) 38 Scott Tips. medicines. One reason is the imposition of Codex Alimentarius. As presented to the public. 20 May 2010 Part II. Posted at: http://www. http://ec.36 Thus the CAC has rule-making authority over the EU member states. Guidance from the Codex Alimentarius Commission Since 2003. Drugs. the CAC is a body of a few people who seek to dictate food standards – including rules on pesticides.europa. September 14. policy papers. More than 180 countries are members of the CAC [including all 27 EU nations]39 and more than 200 international NGOs and intergovernmental organisations have the observer status. Health. the Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC). and nutrients – in the service of corporate profits. Food. Health. Health. and Medicine Beyond general matters of the economy. within the framework of the Union's policies. the Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC). 2. http://ec. and guidelines of a UN organization. vitamins. drugs. 2009. professor of law. Article 188 L: 1. CODEX ALIMENTARIUS AND THE IDIOCRACY.

Codex guidelines are designed to ensure EU member state adherence to various WTO treaties including the Agreement (Treaty) on Technical Barriers to Trade (Tips 2009) and the SPS (as noted above). we still need to investigate whether or not the profit motive of a few corporations is at odds with public health. through his website and the Progressive Radio Network at: http://www. Toxicologist Robert Verkerk. Tips 2009. Debt Peonage. all it would take to begin enacting them globally would be for one of the participating countries to launch. Tips.” 41 In 2010. guidelines and recommendations’ [but] Codex texts are used by the WTO as a means of resolving international trade disputes and WTO Members are legally obliged to abide by WTO rulings. In practice alas.progressiveradionetwork.” Thus as the EU explains. PhD. standard. who serves as executive director of the Alliance for Natural Health.41 Codex Alimentarius includes thousands of standards and guidelines. One of them. in pushing the Codex Alimentarius and its regulations. the WTO imposes the following rules: WTO member nations are required to take into account the objective of minimizing negative trade effects. are harmful to EU citizens and residents. Taylor’s (2004) dated analysis added this caveat about pre-Lisbon enforcement of WTO agreements as worked through Codex Alimentarius: “… technically . Still if we concede that the WTO and hence Codex Alimentarius is designed to serve corporate interests. an international trade dispute.com/the-gary-null-show-wnye/.40 These declarations overtly reference matters of corporate profits – as an outcome of trade.. Null 40 See The WTO Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS Agreement). Let us examine some of the ways that EU practices. governments – and hence the WTO should be a vehicle to develop standards and rules for the protection and benefit of ordinary people who consume products.John Calvin Jones (2010). Article 5. and other nutrients (Taylor 2004. Null 2010).42 And these levels are at extremely low – if not completely inefficacious (Taylor 2004. Corporate Capitalism. the purpose of the Codex Alimentarius. i. the Vitamin and Mineral Guideline (VMG). 10 . 2009. or policy is to ask what corporate interest does the policy serve? What about the WTO and the Health of Average Europeans? In theory the WTO represents member states. and win. and the CAC is to ensure that WTO rules are followed (cf. and Tyranny: an optimist’s guide to Lisbon (SPS Agreement). Consider. co-authored a piece published in Toxicology which challenged the methodology used by the EFSA in defining safe maximum levels for vitamins and nutrients. and human needs. Taylor 2004). the WTO is little more than a place where states articulate demands of their corporate paymasters. through the vehicle of Codex Alimentarius. if such distinctions result in discrimination or a disguised restriction on international trade (Taylor 2004). and required to avoid arbitrary or unjustifiable distinctions in the levels of risk protection that it considers to be appropriate. judgment. Codex Alimentarius.. MD. not human needs or even consumer safety as defined by government ministries or scientific proof..e. amino acids. PhD. food safety. So one of the first questions one must consider in re any CAC ruling. 42 See and hear commentaries of Gary Null. Once the Codex Guidelines for Vitamin and Mineral Food Supplements are completed therefore. establishes mandates on maximum dosages at which companies can packages or health practioners can recommend for daily consumption of vitamins. In fact. considers that WTO members applying the Codex Alimentarius Standards meet their obligations under [the SPA] Agreement. ‘there is no legal obligation on [WTO] Members to apply Codex standards. paragraphs 4 and 5.

She insists that over the years. Null 2010). is lost or suppressed to the public. etc. at present the EU is not enforcing the Codex maximums per se. See more at www. pharmaceutical drugs. Rath 2001). Codex guidelines declare that producers of natural supplements shall not be allowed to provide claims of their curative effects – lest they face criminal sanction (Rath 2001).dr-rathfoundation. as well as doctors. and even food companies. the CAC's Vitamin and Mineral Guideline takes the perverse position that these substances should be evaluated as toxins that are unnecessary for human health (Taylor 2004). But this directive was drafted by Basil Mathioudakis (Taylor 2004) who also sits on the CAC (Laibow 2009)! Though two particular researchers/authors Gary Null and Scott Tips have neither collaborated nor referenced each other. rather EU officials demand compliance of the EU’s own Food Supplements Directive (Tips 2009) – a necessary move done in the name of harm-onizing WTO rules.youtube. prevent and even reverse disease (cf. vitamins and nutrients are essential for human health – such can restore cell integrity. and or artificial. non-allopathic remedies for a host of so-called autoimmune diseases (cf. see also Rima Laibow (2009) speaking on the Codex Alimentarius and the CAC at: http://www. Summarized in 7 Points http://www. cardiovascular and heart disease.46 43 Note. diabetes. then the standard treatment for what the World Health Organization calls “non-communicable treatable illnesses” will be drugs made by the “illness care industry” (Laibow 2009). in the early 1980s.org/?page_id=157. A loss of public awareness in conjunction with a restriction on free speech is solely for the benefit of pharmaceutical companies that otherwise could not compete against natural.. If knowledge of natural and essential supplements. See her report at: http://www. non-toxic. at the 31st meeting of the CAC.org/PHARMACEUTICAL_BUSINESS/health_movement_against_codex/index. as well as problems with obesity.youtube. JD. to believe that vitamins and food supplements cannot improve human health. health care workers. Codex Alimentarius (World Food Code). PhD.htm (March 2010) 45 Laibow gave a report in 2009 from Duesseldorf.John Calvin Jones. By definition. vitamins. Risk Assessment. chemical fertilizers. American University in Bosnia-Hercegovina.com 44 http://www4.com/watch?v=P30Itrfhn8o 46 Natural Solutions Foundation. However. Null (2010) and Tips (2009) find that the only logical basis to understand why the CAC advises people to consume low levels of natural supplements (and in fact demands that WTO governments criminalize administration of higher dosages or declarations about the efficacy of higher dosages – despite evidence of the medical efficacy of any particular dose of any substance) is to leave the public.45 Taylor (2004) explains the practice this way. chemicals not suitable for human ingestion.44 Rima Laibow (2009) goes further.com/watch?v=P30Itrfhn8o 11 . This level of dose is far in excess of any standard protocol in mainstream American medicine. Note. Laibow (2009) says that mass under-nourishment will result in an explosion of diseases like cancer. he treated persons suffering from AIDS by administering 20grams of liquid vitamin C. Germany.garynull. they reach the same conclusion about the purposes and effects of Codex rules. Skopje. The science of Risk Assessment was developed to examine poisons.43 In fact. professor of law. the CAC guidelines for dosages of vitamins and nutrients are derived through a standard toxicology rubric. Paper for the 5th Annual Conference on European Integration. phytonutrients. according to Gary Null. the CAC has lowered recommended daily allowance guidelines for vitamins and essential nutrients as a means to promote chronic malnutrition in the population world-wide. 20 May 2010 2010).healthfreedomusa. Macedonia.

Ironically. are expected to adopt – in relation to both international and domestic trade (Tips 2009). employ of Codex Alimentarius and implementing legislation does not only proscribe certain substances.51 make rules that member countries. and Tyranny: an optimist’s guide to Lisbon Risk Assessments or Sickness Creation? A policy centered on destroying or perverting public knowledge as a means to prevent people from controlling their health and breaking free from drug companies and other corporate interests is neither an accident nor the result of an unintended consequence. European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products (EMEA). and purchases inside the Netherlands without violating international agreements. Rolf Grossklaus. 12 . the CAC and relevant EU Committees on Food Safety and Medical Products. every year. the Codex Strategic Plan states specifically that these rules will be applied domestically as well (Tips 2009).eu/food/food/labellingnutrition/supplements/index_en. because international treaties on drugs like marijuana (namely the Single Convention and its many amendments) allow for domestic autonomy.erna. And while these standards are to be applied to international trade. is chaired by Dr.htm (March 2010).47 Again. the “Codex Committee on Nutrition and Foods for Special Dietary Uses” (CCNFSDU).europa.org/?page_id=157 48 49 50 See http://ec.John Calvin Jones (2010). The evidence demonstrating what amounts to a misanthropic cabal is abundant.48 This point is made in the EU Food Supplement Directive.aspx (March 2010) This policy strategy. Codex Alimentarius is involved (Tips 2009). constitutional and legal prohibitions on said regulations. the EU European Food Safety Authority has promulgated rules that hold unless the EU has certified a given vitamin or mineral substance as safe. provided those vitamins and mineral forms have already been in use in the EU and that the European Food Safety Authority has not given an unfavourable opinion to a scientific dossier on that substance. Debt Peonage.org/Key-Features. sales. But in the case of the Codex Alimentarius. the EU included.”49 CAC guidelines and standards cover nearly everything that one would ingest. And let the last point be reiterated. Congress used treaties on drug imports and exports to criminalize drug possession. a physician who has claimed that “nutrition is not relevant to health” (Talyor 2004). Are we surprised to learn that one subcommittee of the CAC. article 2/4: “Vitamins and minerals not included in the annexes may be sold in EU Member States at those States’ discretion until December 2009. 51 Various commissions and offices of the EU include the European Food Safety Authority.50 Unknown to the average European citizen. the Netherlands can permit marijuana production. Furthermore Grossklaus owns the Risk Assessment company that is a paid advisor to the CCNFSDU on the issue of what dosages of given nutrients should be declared illegal (Taylor 2004). Summarized in 7 Points http://www.healthfreedomusa. Corporate Capitalism. Codex Alimentarius (World Food Code). But further. Ranging from oils and food additives to pesticides and natural mineral waters. Codex Alimentarius. since 2003. using international agreements to dictate domestic policy outside the normal legislative process is also a common means to avoid domestic. but even demands criminal penalties for excessive [sic] dosages. we see that EU nations will be subject to the dictates of the treaty in re domestic practices though the related treaties and agreements purportedly are designed to regulate international trade. http://www. member states much petition for the right to allow said substance or dosage to be marketed. in pursuit of these Codex policies. In the case of the United States. when the European Community (now the EU) itself became a full 47 Natural Solutions Foundation.

Good for EU? Beyond the obstacles that the EU provides its residents who want supplements.1970471. Paper for the 5th Annual Conference on European Integration. American University in Bosnia-Hercegovina.html 55 Cendrowicz.com/news/health/2010/april/Return-of-Rickets-Has-Experts-Concerned-AboutLack-of-Sun-Exposure. Thus while previously the EU allowed wide-scale prohibitions on GMO crops and or demanded labeling.” April 9. Thus the disease of rickets is reappearing in the U. the EU Commission may adopt legislation – regulations and directives – in the name of bringing the entire EU into compliance with CAC mandates.findingdulcinea. as found by Null (2010). omega-3 fatty acid at a level greater than dictated by Codex (cf. 2010. 52 European Council Decision of 17 November 2003 on the accession of the European Community to the Codex Alimentarius Commission (2003/822/EC). “Return of Rickets Has Experts Concerned About Lack of Sun Exposure. that nation will be subject to WTO fines and EU-based sanctions. Macedonia.John Calvin Jones. In that case. this lack of nutrition has contributed to growing rates of obesity and diabetes in the developed nations.S. JD. Why is that important? The reason. homeopathic medicines. While some member states oppose certain type of GMO crops – particularly maize (Cendrowicz 2010)55 . recently the EU Commission approved use of a GMO potato. Sarah.52 Even after the 2005 decision by the European Court of Justice (from two joined cases C-154/04 and C-155/04) that was seen as a partial victory for consumers. B12. and the like. PhD. the ECJ upheld the idea that the EU could impose a positive list of vitamins. rather than a governmental edict imposing certain prohibitions on human activity – EU Commissioners have near absolute authority to restrict sales of nutrients. Leo. by the EU itself. 2010. Laibow 2009). Another aspect of harmonization is what the CAC calls the upper limit on vitamins and nutrients (Laibow 2009). instead of cooperating with member states. the EU forces member states to align with the preferences of EU Commissioners. These upper limits mean that foods cannot be fortified with vitamins like B6.including Vandana Shiva. 9 March. GMOs. For example. professor of law.8599.com/time/business/article/0. Laibow (2009) and others . 20 May 2010 member of the Codex Alimentarius Commission. we should not be surprised to see that in the new EU. And because EU law is superior to national law. the EU shares the competence with EU Member States in its power to harmonize the relevant legislation (Tips 2009). in violation of Codex/WTO-related rules.the WTO. preamble. the object of the Codex Alimentarius Commission is to harmonise [sic] worldwide health standards. the Alliance for Natural Health challenged EU directives in re restrictions on supplements and other parts of Codex generally. “Is Europe Finally Ready for Genetically Modified Foods?” Time. paragraph 1.53 Via use of the positive list – which is a grant of right. http://www. Of course should any EU member state be found. is that the growing use of GMO crops. using the dictates of the CAC. GMOs are approved.html 13 .time. dietary supplements. That is. http://www. and over 75% of all soy beans used in the EU come from GMO seeds (Cendrowicz 2010). vitamins. 53 54 See press release from the Alliance for Natural Health of 26 July 2005 Amandolare. the other problem for human health is the use of GMO foods. Skopje. and the ubiquity of processed food has left most people in the industrialized world with food that does not provide sufficient levels of essential nutrients and vitamins. this point was made clear. heavily capitalized agriculture. in re Codex Alimentarius.54 As well. has ruled such prohibitions as violations on trade. According to a decision of the EU Council of 2003. and related matters.00.

There is one other option. And if hormones in beef or milk from cows injected with BGH are permitted by the Codex. 2010. the new EU is expanding is grip in the form of a police-state.57 Any change in Codex-based policy or rules can only occur through the very organ that approved the policy in the first place. has adopted the 1950 European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. when seen in another light. Rady. no nation can ban imports or force GMO labels on foods without a sufficient scientific basis for such a restriction on trade (cf. In particular. Among the Romans it was a standing 56 57 58 Ananda. Other questions of individual liberty “Liberty every where [is] crushed between standing armies and perpetual taxes. the EU Commission. Of course the EU will not reach into is own coffers to pay any WTO penalties. who. Along with economic controls exercised from the outside. and Tyranny: an optimist’s guide to Lisbon What is the justification. Debt Peonage.John Calvin Jones (2010). 8 January. and practices might protect civil liberties. have been always the instruments of tyranny at home. And while there is good reason to see that GMO foods are unsafe for direct or indirect human consumption (Ananda 2010). policies. the EU is creating its own army. and terminator seeds are perfectly safe for human consumption.com/word/2152 (March 2010) Federalist #41.56 we have to wonder. sitting on various EU panels and commissions approve any and all GMOs. how long it is until right-minded scientists like Grossklaus. use of hormones in the production of animal proteins.uchicago. can choose to breach international obligations – leaving the EU susceptible to WTO fines and penalties. Rather the taxes will be extracted from the citizens of the EU. EU citizens cannot change this rule via elections. The EU Army According to James Madison (1787) “A standing military force. hence CAC. http://en. with an overgrown Executive will not long be safe companions to liberty.” James Madison (1788) 58 The last section of this paper will examine more tangible and or more traditional concerns about civil liberties. and exercised the European Arrest Warrant.” Truthout. Part III.html 14 . http://press-pubs. “Three Approved GMO’s Linked to Organ Damage. the EU Commission. and now EU rules. democratic leaders to enact and enforce food and drug health and safety rules for the betterment of people and their own health over the demands of corporations to extract wealth and impose sickness and disease on hundreds of millions of people. under WTO. Under WTO and CAC protocols. Though one might believe or argue that these institutions. pesticides.edu/founders/documents/a1_8_12s22. Hence the very same rubric which defines life-giving nutrients as toxins (which are not to be taken in excess of nearly useless limits). Corporate Capitalism. they can easily be used to remove freedom. is used to proclaim that GMO foods. and a loss of autonomy over one’s food choices and food safety. Codex Alimentarius. through failure to implement a WTO preference. to allow GMO foods? The answer is Risk Assessment. The means of defence [against] foreign danger. Cendrowicz 2010).euabc. through no fault of the their own – save some desire from duly elected.

whereby each EU member state has its own military. The troops of the national. However. Frattini’s evaluation pertained to the use of military forces from EU member states in Afghanistan – an overtly illegal invasion and occupation. would be an easier way to deal with civil unrest.ece 62 63 Owen (2009) http://www. has no external military threat. professor of law. French troops were not there in equal proportion to those of other EU nations (cf. 2009. the state used the claim of an external threat to justify the force that would turn on the domestic population. http://www.60 But the statement begs the question.ece The event is known in American history as the Whiskey Rebellion. (under the Constitution of 1789) gained control over its own army – outside the control of the several states – its first action was to put down tax protesters in Pennsylvania.e.” What are riot police but nothing more than military personnel by another name? The wear military uniforms and have military – pacifying weapons like tear gas and even sound cannons. not civilian personnel. Derek. the state has responded with “riot police.S. “Italy’s Foreign Minister says post-Lisbon EU needs a European Army. 2010. February 8. Europe generally. “German minister calls for Lisbon treaty EU army. American University in Bosnia-Hercegovina. Franco Frattini (2009). Richard. PhD.” The Irish Times. In a classic case of that which history had shown men like Madison. Like the U. When the federal government of the U.html (March 2010) 61 Owen.” February 6. Macedonia. Frattini hypothesized that joint EU forces in the form of a navy could better patrol the Mediterranean Sea (Owen 2009). and the EU in particular.com/newspaper/world/2010/0208/1224263954855.S.. Throughout all Europe. Frattini argued that a common EU force would reduce unfair burden sharing – in the project of imperialism – due to the fact that in Afghanistan. called for the EU to proceed with plans for a European army – as called for under the Lisbon Treaty. defense against whom? According to Italian Foreign Minister. JD.62 Frattini alleged that current practices. Owen 2009). whenever a revolt was apprehended. Even now. Guido Westerwelle. the armies kept up under the pretext of defending. citing Agence France Presse. 15 . as Greece has riots and strikes. 2010. But was Madison correct? And even if we agreed with his analysis of history. http://www.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article6917652.timesonline.timesonline. Skopje.” The Times Online.co. In fact. Beyond the illegal occupation of Afghanistan.com/news/prophecy/germany-wants-eu-army-and-meets-with-israel/ 60 Scally.63 59 Church of God News.59 Westerwelle dubbed the creation of such an army “the beginning and not the end” of a common security and defense policy. in terms of personnel or machinery. George Washington in 1794.cogwriter. can stop criminal acts of terrorism – anyway. 2010.”61 What he called the Pacific axis. Neither current nor future military power. And as Frattini dropped the issue as a military matter. German Foreign Minister. http://www. However. security for whom. create inefficient duplications (Owen 2009). military were led by the president. i. might not the army of an enlightened and modern Europe be different? In February 2010.irishtimes. the EU army is a necessary aspect of a “common foreign policy” lest Europe “become irrelevant – bypassed by the G2 of the United States and China. internal and domestic policing via military. “Germany Wants EU Army and Meets with Israel. Paper for the 5th Annual Conference on European Integration. 20 May 2010 maxim to excite a war. federal. have enslaved the people.. 17 November.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article6917652.co. he did say that such a navy could help share the burden felt by Italy in trying to save would-be immigrants from drowning at sea (Owen 2009).John Calvin Jones. Thus the point should be understood clearly.

On the smallest scale it has its inconveniences. suffering. maintaining. Further as seen by most of us who review history of times when foreign agents police civilians. Citizens. Gutted Under Lisbon As amended by the Lisbon Treaty. Subsections 2 and 3 of Article 6 read as follows: 64 UK Independence Party (2008). Codex Alimentarius. Corporate Capitalism. it is unlikely that the EGF would exercise restraint when policing disturbances. and running an EU military. or hunger? As there will be and are economic. Thus the presence of the EGF creates greater potential for serious abuses and use of excessive force – an EU military should be no different. have with few exceptions been the price of her military establishments. prevent war. A standing force therefore is a dangerous. suffering or hunger. the European Gendarmerie Force (EGF). businesses. Such an army will be a mere occupying force. What more integration is necessary? According to Westerwelle. we have good reason to reject the idea that any security can come from the burdensome and dangerous creation of a new EU army. http://www. The primary function of this force is to deal with civil unrest – i. as ethnic tensions grow – immigrant vs. material. etc. To review more words of Madison (1788): “… the liberties of Europe. Article 6 of the EU constitution invokes the idea of protecting freedom and ensuring individual liberty through implementation and accession to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR).64 If the past is prologue. as far as they ever existed. the EU has its own armed police unit. why will security only come if there is an EU army? At present the EU has no internal borders. Criminal Justice Policy (CJP) at 7. But what will be the result? How will a new EU army.pdf 16 . in Orwellian terms. under the control of a single person. Hence on economic and material terms alone the EU army will be a burden on the security of the people of the EU.org/media/pdf/law_final.” Human Rights. we must recognize that these costs come at the expense of human needs. heading the EU supranational state. Muslim v. which is essentially a militarized police force. national.” If Westerwelle’s generation has never experienced war – by which he means a land war in Europe. There is one currency. non-Muslim. the president. the specter is great that in short order. with EU member states taking up arms against each other – under a condition where there was no EU army..John Calvin Jones (2010). is strongly committed to European integration. especially as economic unrest spreads across states of Spain and Italy. its consequences may be fatal. crowd control. which has never experienced war. And in terms of liberty. and capital can travel freely within the Eurozone. the army will be deployed in the name of keeping peace. at the same time that it may be a necessary provision. Debt Peonage.ukip.e. and human costs associated with creating. On an extensive scale. As the UK Independence Party has explained. The UKIP questions why such a force is needed when national police forces already have such means and mandates. the next step is integrating the military.. the true need for a united military of Europe: “United Europe will only be secure if my generation. and Tyranny: an optimist’s guide to Lisbon German Foreign Minister Westerwelle (2010) explains.

there is no guarantee that the EU government or its member states shall not proclaim yet another swine or avian or human influenza outbreak.” World Health Organization. Further. Article 4(3)(d) which purports to prohibit state-sanctioned forced labor or slavery. Macedonia. shall not prohibit the state from extracting labor via compulsory civil obligation. member state government) from EU residents. In 2009 the WHO declared a level 6 pandemic due to the so-called H1N1. a drug addicts or vagrants. What is most remarkable is that while even in the U..65 In response. UN. for each supposed right or freedom articulated. there is no similar provision to allow the state to compel one’s labor without a criminal conviction. 2009. now member states can compel labor of innocents. swine flu. Amend XIII).66 if not dangerous. Such accession shall not affect the Union's competences as defined in the Treaties. And what of a claim that a person is of unsound mind – because they refuse to take vaccines. ordered millions of dosages of useless vaccine – vaccines that even EU officials found to be ineffective.html 66 67 68 http://www. JD.S. That is. state-led and state-sanctioned home invasions and house arrest. or anti-psychotic drugs or due to the side-effects of vaccines? The EU/ECHR provision that a state can arrest and detain a drug addict or 65 Chan. is harmless. Under Article 5(1)(e) governments may detain persons indefinitely with the claim that government seeks to prevent spread of infectious disease. American University in Bosnia-Hercegovina. Statement to the press by WHO Director-General. 20 May 2010 2. as guaranteed by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and as they result from the constitutional traditions common to the Member States. and the like are all permitted. MD. 11 June http://www. New York. PhD. “World now at the start of 2009 influenza pandemic. or if it does. shall constitute general principles of the Union's law. 3. restrictions on movement. Const.int/mediacentre/news/statements/2009/h1n1_pandemic_phase6_20090611/en/index.68 Concerns about HIV aside. or preservation of public morals.rnw. the state can always override the prohibition or assurance of protection in the name of national security.S. by treaty. professor of law. The Union shall accede to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Skopje. Again we must wonder what ruse shall be perpetuated to justify home detentions or mass arrests. ECHR Article 2(2)(c) reads that the government can kill a person – without even an accusation that the person has committed a crime – in the name of quelling a riot or insurrection. For example. in the EU. a simple reading of the ECHR shows that so-called freedoms against government tyranny in the form of execution. which are bound.who. Paper for the 5th Annual Conference on European Integration. public health.67 Of course the specter of a claim that HIV is spreading looms over EU citizens – despite evidence that HIV does not exist. However. denial of public trials.com/archives/h1n1-swine-flu-vaccine-deaths-being-reported-all-over-europe See Gary Null.John Calvin Jones. Fundamental rights. or said person is of unsound mind or an alcoholic. the government may extract forced labor against criminal convicts – duly convicted via due process of law (see U. to follow WHO dictates on pandemics. also see documentary film House of Numbers (2009) 17 . martial law. Deconstructing the Myth of AIDS (2006). However. public security. political speech and political association. this provision can be used by the EU to extract labor either directly or indirectly (via the local. Margaret.nl/english/article/europe-investigate-possible-flu-panic http://organichealthadviser. the EU member states.

by persons not prohibited). Codex Alimentarius. See MSNBC. and personal effects on its head and granting government near carte blanche to enter the home and seize persons and effects. Whereas in the U. would be legally improper? And with the Lisbon Treaty.69 Article 6(1). by what provision can a judge find that a home invasion and seizure of private property. public safety. and Tyranny: an optimist’s guide to Lisbon alcoholic or vagrant is akin to American laws that were designed to target Blacks. Blackmon 2008). the history of the U..uk. convict. 2005. Douglas.” 58 Vanderbilt Law Review 677. and Native Americans for police harassment and constant fear of police (cf. has a parallel provision. This rule is one of the most pernicious. and even the economy.John Calvin Jones (2010).aspx?threadid=1670326&thread=00000071-0000-0000-b67c190000000000&board=00000071-0328-0000-0000-000000000000 18 .S. 17 November 2005 71 Bascuas. justified as necessary in re the national economy. would constitute the crime of murder. immigrants. Constitution. United States v. home. referencing the democratic principle of public trials. corresponding to the 4th Amendment of the U. 2008. morals. But instead of moving justice forward – in the name of protecting a criminal defendant – the EU under Lisbon regresses and enables Star Chamber proceedings in a Kafkaesque system.S. Thus. and punish a person who commits a legal act (legal in the manner of not defined as a crime when commenced within that particular jurisdiction. Padilla et al. “The Unconstitutionality of Hold Until Cleared: Reexamining Material Witness Detentions in the Wake of the September 11th Dragnet.S. is instructive. New York.S.S. filed in the Southern District of Florida. Corporate Capitalism. Title 18 of the United States Code. why should innocent activity be criminalized? What notice or defense does one have when innocence is no defense. and or maiming. “UKIP leader Nigel Farage defiant over Rompuy row. the entry is only supposed to come as justified by a court order.71 the EU rule allows for armed police to conduct home invasions in the name of the economy! Again.S. If all citizens or residents are presumed both to know and obliged to obey the laws of the land in which they are.72 Article 10(2) allows for criminality of speech (or written and non-verbal expression) on multiple grounds: 69 70 Blackmon.70 Article 8(2) of the ECHR. papers. Article 7(2) allows a nation to arrest. Slavery by Another Name. if committed in the U. kidnapping. turning the supposed liberty of one to be free of government invasion of privacy. 72 EU Member of parliament complained after receiving a fine for comments he made in the parliament as contrary to common law rules and guidelines about free speech. Mexican-Americans.. Doubleday Press See Indictment of Jose Padilla. sections 956(a)(1) and (2) declare as criminal. there is no protection for or government assurance of freedom of speech – at least not in the way that any American citizen or UK subject would be familiar. http://news. explains that trials can be made private in the interest of justice! Again. Not surprisingly the U. so long as another jurisdiction defines the act as criminal. The justifications for Constitutional Amendments saying that a defendant has a right to a public and speedy trial were to protect citizens against abuses of the English crown. conspiracy to commit an act outside of the U. 2010. allows for invasions of home and private life in the interests of national security. Debt Peonage.” March 3..msn.com/forum/thread. wherein a judge has been convinced that there is probable cause to believe that a crime has been committed (see Bascuas 2005). Ricardo.

among other things. Outside the EU. mandates that member states take steps to effect timely extradition of accused criminals and criminal suspects. professor of law. The death nail is the European Arrest Warrant (EAW). autism. Macedonia. can be made a crime! If citizens cannot raise political issues. and heretofore common notions of due process. This latter principle is called “double criminality.. for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence. Skopje. at the level of individual freedom and one’s efforts to remain free from tyranny. etc. And though the process currently occurs on a state to state basis. the framework decision that provides for the EAW. liberty. (ii) vaccines are dangerous causing ailments like Guillain-Barre Syndrome. and criminality. (iii) CAC defined vitamin limits are unhealthy. cannot voice discontent.e. Standard requirements for extradition include both bilateral treaties of extradition and an accusation of some serious offense that is also a crime in the place where the fugitive is. Facebook chat groups. for the protection of health or morals. Paper for the 5th Annual Conference on European Integration. should stand trial for an accused crime. the EAW policy of the EU reduces one’s protections to nearly nothing. Here we see the door open for the most perverse systems of governmental control. The grounds by which an EAW is to be issued and then enforced by the receiving nation run roughshod over these principles. justice. Building on a framework decision of 2002. … public safety. throughout the member states of the EU. JD. for the prevention of disorder or crime. bulwarks against tyranny. or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary. American University in Bosnia-Hercegovina. if one nation were to proclaim that a person. Any statements against government policy or government practices like claims that: (i) HIV does not exist. Constitution – i. at present. humanities. the EAW it allows one to be arrested at the whim of any other EU state! And as is consistent with the move toward police-state oppression. even academic departments – in the physical sciences.” The logic of these requirements and or processes is simple. the list of offenses and the process by which one is to be extradited to the “executing” member state run counter to safe guards of liberty enshrined by documents like the Magna Charta and the U. Again. with the enlargement of the EU competencies in the area of justice (criminal law enforcement) and 19 . (iv) EU officials engage in self-dealing or unjust enrichment. outside their jurisdiction. “Extradition”! The European Arrest Warrant In this last section I will provide a review of what is truly the final nail in the coffin in re individual freedom. PhD. for the protection of the reputation or rights of others. that nation would seek extradition. What makes this EU policy so abhorrent is that whereas the ECHR permits one to be arrested in their home nation. and social sciences alike . restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law … in the interests of national security. 20 May 2010 … freedom [of speech] may be subject to such formalities. Simon Says. this provision of liberty means that the EU and her member states can criminalize political parties.John Calvin Jones. And while questions of member state sovereignty might not be so significant. conditions.in universities have no recourse from the exceptions to free speech and free assembly. how can government policy change from below? Article 11(2) permits governments to deny free assembly and association for the same reasons offered in Article 10. It pertains to matters of national sovereignty and the autonomy of each nation to adjudge its own notions of fairness.S. and even death..

. the nation of Poland to issue an arrest warrant for a person in France posting a comment on a website saying that government should allow Muslim women to have abortions. is ready to assume the role of a European Public Prosecutor. That is a conviction in absentia is allowed and hence the EAW cannot be rejected – if the executing country took appropriate safeguards to obtain the conviction in accordance with law. the warrants are issued from a member state to another member state. “EUROPOL officials have exemption from prosecution. Debt Peonage. unlike due process safeguards in Common Law nations. an extradition hearing – by which a court in the receiving would be allowed to judge the fairness of the process by which the arrest warrant was issued. For example. and therefore are free to confiscate and damage property and even kill suspects without any legal consequences. grounds to refuse enforcement of the warrant is that a person were convicted in absentia. If one has been duly convicted in the executing nation – the receiving nation must effect the arrest. Worse yet. even if the conviction is not for an act that would constitute a crime in the receiving nation. Yet there is an exception here. Freedom and Security’. and computer-related crime are not defined by the Directive. Or a court in Belgium could issue an arrest warrant for a person in Hungary creating a political party with a platform in opposition to the use of ECOFIN sanctions against member states. See UK Independence Party (2008). the list of particular offenses to which the EAW applies includes crimes of racism. and Tyranny: an optimist’s guide to Lisbon home affairs (internal security) under Lisbon. Corporate Capitalism. not a nation-state. 73 According to the UK Independence Party. 74 The inclusion of the crimes of racism and xenophobia under the jurisdiction of the EAW has moved the UK Independence Party (2008) to fear that the EU under Lisbon will effectively eliminate free speech. the amorphous nature of the category of crimes within the fields of racism and xenophobia or computer-related crime (i. If the executing nation is seeking an arrest pursuant to a mere allegation of criminality. http://www. Hence the EAW places burdens and responsibilities upon the receiving nation. That is. computer-related crime. through EUROPOL and EUROJUST shall be able to exercise EAWs with complete autonomy. Franco Frattini (currently the Italian Foreign Minister).ukip. e. the EU Directive on the EAW denies such possibility. Here I will only highlight what I see as the worst features. Codex Alimentarius. using the Internet) allow for example.73 So what are the significant aspects of the EAW rules? First.. xenophobia.74 Of course crimes of racism.e.pdf 20 . xenophobia. favors creating a Euro-prosecutor with the authority to direct police of member states. and fraud that affects the financial interests of the EU itself. while under the present framework. EUROPOL operates under the central command of the EU government. When certain factors are present. the receiving country must affect arrest despite a lack of double criminality. EUROJUST.org/media/pdf/law_final. the country that receives the warrant is required to seize the person sought and return him/her to the executing nation. But given that any EU member state or the EU itself can declare that heretofore political speech threatens the peace or national security and thus is a crime and or part of a conspiracy to commit a crime. Note. Criminal Justice Policy (CJP) at 5. if the punishment for the crime can be at least three years in prison.” According to an article published in The Daily Telegraph of 17 March 2007. the EU government itself.g. by 2014. And former EU Commissioner for ‘Justice. made up of prosecutors.John Calvin Jones (2010). thus creating jurisdictional problems and questions about how EU member states and national courts can challenge the jurisdiction of EUROPOL and impose legal limits on EUROPOL personnel. magistrates and senior police officers from each EU member state.

But as Americans say.John Calvin Jones. those who would grab power via the super-national state called the EU have stacked the deck and created extreme rules in a means to frustrate attempts of member states. and structures shall be rectified as to protect individual liberty and promote the general welfare of persons. Hopefully these laws. PhD. 20 May 2010 Conclusion We are told that the Lisbon Treaty has been adopted and is now law in the EU. policies. to reclaim their sovereignty. all the while allowing any member state to imprison citizens and residents forever or for the offense of daring to exercise one’s human rights. and power seem to contradict the core values and preferences of those who would be free. This paper has presented an analysis of a number of policy areas in the EU that severely restrict individual liberty or put personal health and one’s economic well-being at risk. Macedonia. Under the new EU rules nothing is to be amended without agreement of all 27 member nations. “the devil is in the details. rules. 21 . most of us might agree that economic unions provide advantages of efficiency to the greater benefit of all.” The details of the EU governance. JD. Skopje. In theory. Paper for the 5th Annual Conference on European Integration. and more importantly their citizens. From a political science point of view. American University in Bosnia-Hercegovina. professor of law.