Freddi Forsyth on Ireland

Discussion in 'The Intelligence Cell' started by jonwilly, Oct 12, 2009.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:


    Cameron is dogged by the referendum debate

    Friday October 9,2009
    By Frederick Forsyth

    I WILL not prattle on about the Irish referendum. Six days later all has been said. But what saddened me most was the toe- curling humiliation of a once gutsy people. I speak as the only son of the eldest son of a man from Youghal, Co Cork, who married an irish girl (first time, not the CO), saw his two sons born in Dublin, lived for five years at Enniskerry, Co Wicklow, and retains great fondness for the Old Sod – as some used to call the late Charles Haughey.

    Some years ago, when the Celtic Tiger was still gorged via the EU with other people’s money (mainly ours) i was asked to talk in Dublin about the EU. My audience was jovial, kindly mannered and totally dismissive. They were mainly businessmen and for them the party was going to go on for ever. Today ireland is effectively bankrupt. Hence last week’s vote.

    First, the Irish have been lied to, start to finish, by their own politicians. i don’t know why they do it. Ireland has some good, truthful, intelligent and patriotic folk yet every election they seem driven to vote in the most corrupt bunch of thieving shysters in Europe. Maybe next time they’ll pick good ’uns but it never seems to happen.

    Two, the Yes campaign spent an estimated 100 million euros on propaganda. The No campaign could only rustle up one million. In democratic campaigns all publicity budgets are capped to give protagonists a level playing field.

    Finally, the Irish were literally browbeaten into submission with the full connivance of their own government. They were told the four concerns that caused so many to vote No 15 months ago had been written out. Lies. The treaty text is identical and will remain identical. And they were told if they disobeyed their masters across the water their economy would be destroyed, with massive damage to the Irish people. That at least was true. So they folded and capitulated.

    And I got to wondering: if they are now a colony again, which they are, what was the point of all those struggles for Irish independence? Why did Daniel O’Connell and Padraig Pearse have to die? They got their sovereign homeland in 1920 and after 90 years of independence have now voted to bow their necks to the foreign yoke again.

    And here is the real rub; Ireland now has less autonomy under Brussels than she used to have under london. like so many, the Emerald isle is bought and paid for. When will our own politicos wake up to the stark reality that you can have democracy and sovereignty in your own national homeland or absorption into the EU? You cannot have both because they are mutually incompatible. So which, for us, is it to be? well, up in Manchester David Cameron has been hag- ridden all week by the one issue he wanted to avoid: as Hamlet might have asked: to referendum or not to referendum? That is the question.

    With enemies and saboteurs in Paris, Berlin and Brussels, aided by our own renegades across the water; opposed by the British lying left and back-stabbed by our own tiny but noisy phalanx of EU-quislings, he is between a rock and a hard place.

    But if he could only see it, the precedent is absolutely clear. In 1973 the act of accession to the Treaty of Rome was passed by our Parliament into British law. That happened under Edward Heath and is a fact. In 1975 a new premier, Harold wilson, disputed some of the terms of membership and personally went to Paris to renegotiate the offensive tariffs against Commonwealth foodstuffs. That is a fact, and Rome was just as fundamental a treaty as Lisbon.

    He secured some piffling concessions on Australian tinned rabbit, came back and put the new terms to the entire British people by referendum. That is a fact. all David has to do is ask his in-party scholars to peruse the unreadable text of Lisbon, select a few singularly offensive clauses and announce that he will at once send William Hague to Brussels to renegotiate them.

    Securing concessions or failing to secure them, he will put the “new” terms to the people exactly as Harold Wilson did. The nation would rally to Cameron and how could labour call Harold Wilson, one of their all-time icons, a Europhobe?

  2. FF's article seems to support the contention prevalent amongst the eurocrats in Brussels, that intregration and the coming of the European state are foregone conclusions. So far they have been proved correct because we have been sleep-walking in that direction. Does Europe even register on the average joe's radar? It's all a bit abstract compared to other issues like the recession or global warming. The Irish referendum reveals a more sinister turn of events, where an issue like the recession can be used to railroad people into changing their minds.

    I particularly liked FF's take on Ireland as a colony and how they now have less autonomy than they did prior to independence. O tempora, o mores!

  3. But "Europe". in this case exemplified by what FF calls "Creeping Code Napoleon, is a feature on average Joe's concerns. The average Joe does not see it. Testament to the success of brainwashing.

    Look no further than the Baron Castleshortt threads.