Monthly Archives: May 2005

France votes "NO" to new world order’s proposed EU Constitution

Valid French concerns over loss of national sovereignty, loss of national identity, and loss of control of their country’s political destiny to unelected EU bureaucrats in Brussels (Belgium) at European Union headquarters.

Americans would likewise be wise to REJECT the Bush II administration’s new world order “C.A.F.T.A.” agreement (Central American Free Trade Agreement), and even more so, the Bush II administration’s new world order* *”F.T.A.A.” agreement (Free Trade Area of the Americas) – another step after the disastrous 1994 N.A.F.T.A. trade agreement, toward a Western Hemispheric version of the Common Market/European Economic Community/European Union.

* * President George H.W. Bush State of the Union Address given to the U.S. Congress at the United States Capitol on January 29, 1991:

“What is at stake is more than one small country, it is a big idea – a new world order, where diverse nations are drawn together in common cause to achieve the universal aspirations of mankind: peace and security, freedom, and the rule of law.” “The world can therefore seize this opportunity to fulfill the long-held promise of a new world order ­where brutality will go unrewarded, and aggression will meet collective resistance.”

‘Writing for The New American in the February 7, 2005 issue, William F. Jasper writes:

“Trade agreements such as the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), and the GATT Final Act, which created the World Trade Organization (WTO), have been designed specifically to destroy national independence and establish the basis for regional and global government.
“Pending trade agreements, such as the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) and the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA), have been crafted to accelerate this betrayal of America’s independence,” Jasper concluded. ‘
(source: The Times Examiner, May 18, 2005, Greenville, South Carolina, p. 2)
( Jasper’s entire article: )

Just say “NO” to the “New World Order” (“Novus Ordo Seclorum” – on the reverse side of the 1782 Great Seal of the United States, printed on the back of every U.S. one dollar bill ! –

“… where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.” 2 Corinthians 3:17

Steve Lefemine
Independent * candidate for U.S. House of Representatives
US House District #2, South Carolina
* American Christian for a Biblically-based constitutional republic


Posted 5/29/2005 5:05 AM
Updated 5/30/2005 6:49 AM

French vote against new EU constitution

By Noelle Knox, USA TODAY

PARIS ­ The French sent shockwaves across Europe on Sunday, voting against a new constitution designed to turn 25 countries into a more united states of Europe.

The extent of the damage to the power and the future of the European Union will become more apparent in the coming days and months. Holland will vote on the constitution on Wednesday, but with the rejection from France the treaty appears dead in the water.

“Invevitably, this creates a difficult context to defend our interests in Europe,” President Jacques Chirac said as exit polls by Ipsos showed the No-vote carrying 55% of the votes vs. 45% for Yes. But he said the government would listen to the French people.

France rejects Europe’s first constitution

MAIS NON: In a referendum, French voters reject the European Union’s first constitution, a charter that aims to strengthen the EU and needs ratification by all 25 member states to take effect.

THE IMPACT: The ‘no’ is a repudiation of French President Jacques Chirac and casts doubt on increase European integration. Possible responses are a repeat vote, analtered constitution and some even warn of the decline of the European project.

EUROPEAN ANGST: The vote reflects fears of a loss of the French identity, faltering economies in EU states and the perceived arrogance of leaders.

The repercussions for France’s own government may be more immediate. France is not only one of the founding members of the EU, as the trade and legal alliance is known, but one of the leading authors of the constitution.

Chirac risked his reputation on the referendum, and now appears to have lost all hope of standing for re-election in 2007. And his prime minister, Jean-Pierre Raffarin may soon be out of a job, says Daniel Hofnung, the representative for the anti-globalization group Attacin the Paris suburb Ivry sur Seine. (Related story: Chirac encouraged a ‘oui’ vote)

“The Chirac government was very unpopular, and has already lost other regional elections,” said Hofnung, who voted No.

At the EU headquarters in Brussels, there is concern that Sunday’s vote could paralyze decision-making, delay the new seven-year budget and slowing the process for adding new members like Turkey.

The results also are a setback for the USA, says Ronald Asmus, executive director of the German Marshall Fund’s Transatlantic Center in Brussels.

“If you look at the things America needs today, it’s a strong, outward looking Europe that can deliver on three things: homeland security, furthering democracy and cooperation on the war on terror,” he said. “These are thing the EU is increasingly doing or willing to do, and that’s why we needed this.”

The constitution would have given the EU a permanent president and a foreign minister, as well as changed the voting rules for the member states.

The treaty was signed by European leaders in October, and had already been ratified by nine countries before France shot it down.

In France, the EU constitution, which is more than 300 pages long, had become entangled with domestic concerns about unemployment, diminishing welfare benefits, competition from cheaper Eastern European countries and immigration problems.

“I voted ‘No’ in all conscience, having read the text, due to the lack of will to solve Europe’s number one problem today, which is unemployment,” said Armel Bompart, a civil servant in Strasbourg, France.

Many people in France also have felt the EU expanded too quickly when it added 10 new members from Eastern and Central Europe last spring. These countries all share a long, and in some cases bloody, history and the majority of French said with their votes on Sunday that they want to slow the pace of change and renegotiate the treaty.

The debate has both captivated and divided France. The opinion polls were neck-and-neck for weeks, with a large percentage of people undecided at the 11th hour.

Etienne Proust, an engineer who lives in Paris, said it was the hardest political choice he has ever made. He eventually voted yes, while his father voted no, and his mother marked her ballot both the yes and no, effectively canceling but symbolizing her ambivalence.

“I was 80% for the No (camp),” Proust said. “But I realized I would never be completely happy with any constitution, and it is important we start somewhere.”

But in the end, the No-campaign was more convincing, and voter turnout was expected to top 70%.

“If you look at every sentence, every turn of phrase, practically every article has a mention of (financial) markets,'” Anne-Marie Latremoliere, a graphic designer, said after casting a “no” ballot at a polling station near the Bastille in Paris. “We want Europe to be a beautiful place, and this is certainly not it.”

Contributing: The Associated Press

© Copyright 2005 USA TODAY, a division of Gannett Co. Inc.