Always More EU

How the EU uses crises to build its centralised power. BBC:

Migrant crisis: EU to prioritise new border force

Hungary and Poland insist that the new EU border force must not undermine national sovereignty.

The European Commission plan says the EU must have authority to deploy the force even to a country that did not request it, if necessary. But it would still operate alongside national border staff.

Politico:

Jean-Claude Juncker: EU needs ‘a security union’

Speaking to reporters a day after terror attacks struck at the heart of the EU, including a bombing that killed at least 20 people in a metro station a short distance from the Commission’s headquarters, Juncker said Europe needs to do a better job of coordinating its response.

“We feel we need capital markets union, energy union, economic and monetary union, but we also think that we need a security union,” he said during a joint press conference with French Prime Minister Manuel Valls.

“We need everything that will allow us to achieve a security union,” Juncker said, adding that the Commission had come up with proposals for, among other things, the protection of external borders that he hoped EU countries would adopt soon. Last December the Commission drew up a proposal for an EU border and coast guard that the Commission hopes will be operational this autumn.

Always “More EU”.

And awful threats of what might happen if it shrinks,

BRUSSELS chief Jean-Claude Juncker warned Britain could spark World War Three if it votes to leave the European Union.

from someone who is quite open about the need for lies:

At the height of the eurozone crisis, Mr Juncker was described as the “master of lies” for organising a meeting of finance ministers to talk about whether Greece could remain in the single currency and then trying to deny it was taking place.

Germany’s Suddeutsche Zeitung accused Mr Juncker of “taking the lead on the deception” and warned he had managed “to fritter away the last remaining trust the people of Europe still have”.

Mr Juncker has never hidden his view that the compromises and deals being worked out in EU meetings or leaders or ministers need be protected from public scrutiny, by lies if necessary.

“When it becomes serious, you have to lie,” he said.

The EU expands its powers with every new crisis. But it never resolves any of them. It’s like a disease  slowly killing its host.

Advertisements

About Frank Davis

smoker
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to Always More EU

  1. jaxthefirst says:

    Not so very long ago, I read an excellent book entitled “Scared to Death,” by Booker & North which focused on the nature of health scares of all kinds which, these days, seem to be churned out with depressing regularity, often instigated and given impetus by vested single-interest groups (sometimes just by a vested single-interest person), and it analysed how these scares were started, how they continued and their long-term effects.

    The book wasn’t particularly about the EU, but inevitably the influence of the interfering, “we know best,” EU was featured very heavily in many of the chapters, and the utilisation of “crises” is one of the EU’s biggest (and most well-masked) power-grab tactics. Whenever a “crisis” – whether it’s Lysteria in cheese, Salmonella in eggs, “passive smoking,” Dioxins in poultry feed, or (of course) “global warming” – blows up, the response of the national authorities in whichever country is unfortunate enough to be experiencing the “crisis” takes – perhaps inevitably – more than 10 seconds to occur, the EU steps in, all shocked and concerned-looking and says, in effect: “You clearly can’t cope with this problem, so we’ll take over that side of things and run it for you,” – whether “that side of things” are food regulations, public health and hygiene rulings, or environmental regulations. And of course, once the EU has got control of any area, it never, ever, gets returned to the national authorities again. That, as we know only too well, is the way of the EU – it exists to empower itself at the expense of member countries’ authorities, not the other way around

    So, yes, it’s absolutely par for the course that in the face of the terrorist “crisis” it should apply exactly the same power-grabbing tactics to steal for itself yet another area of control away from national authorities and into its own greedy, voracious pockets, even when, ironically, it is the EU’s own lax and laissez-faire “free movement of people” policies which has contributed at least partly to creating the crisis in the first place.

    It’s a book which is well worth a read for anyone who wants to understand more about the insidious way that the EU has managed to gain control of so many facets of our lives, and also for anyone who is interested to know how all these hysterical “scares” actually work, from beginning to end. It has a very good and informative section on the ins and outs of the creation – yes, the “creation” – of the “dangers of second-hand smoking,” too, as a bonus.

  2. waltc says:

    “When it becomes serious, you have to lie,” Beautiful. Frame it. The credo of Our Betters.
    As for WW3, I’ve noted here before that when the EU was born I predicted it would either end in Oceania or in WW3. Having alteady crept too far towards Oceania , if it can’t be stopped by peaceable democratic disunion, it will, indeed, end ib a European war as nations seek to free themselves from its yoke. Mr Junker should visit the Berlin Wall.

  3. Lepercolonist says:

    Most antismoking laws in the U.S. are based on exposure of SHS to employees. A clever circumvention is used by a bar in Monterey, California. ( Warning: this article was published in 1998.)

    Nonetheless, some bar owners are finding some clever ways to cope with the new law. For instance, Bosso”s Two Cushion Club in New Monterey has creatively circumvented the law by making all four bartenders co-owners.

    “We”re allowed to smoke because we have no employees,” says Bosso”s co-owner Darrell Proffitt. “That is the only way we could figure out, and our lawyer could figure out, how we could have a place where people can come to smoke and have a drink.”

    http://www.montereycountyweekly.com/news/local_news/like-it-or-not-smokers-and-bar-owners-find-ways/article_2142ad0b-6352-5902-9dc4-e6c944e7e905.html

  4. smokingscot says:

    O/T

    Following on from my witter about politicians getting it dead wrong, and the interesting figure of 55% (+/- 2%)

    https://cfrankdavis.wordpress.com/2016/03/24/majority-back-smoking-rooms-in-pubs/#comment-127990

    This time it’s the PM of New Zealand. Voters have rejected his desire for a new national flag – by 57%. (Given the offering, can’t say I blame them – PC in the extreme).

    http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/03/zealand-flag-referendum-160324090836660.html

  5. Rose says:

    It’s always interesting to go for a wander round Frank’s blog archives.

    Look what I found – Globalink’s Tobacco Control Strategy Guides

    Edited highlights

    Question 3. What messages are most likely to move our target audience to do what we want?

    Creative Epidemiology

    Numbers That “Sing”

    “Tobacco control advocates can develop motivating messages by presenting statistics in ways that convey scientific truths and also move an audience emotionally. This technique has been called “creative epidemiology” or “social math”—mathematics applied for a social purpose.

    Over a decade ago, public health economist Ken Warner used this technique in a message on the death toll of smoking: “Smoking kills more people than heroin, cocaine, alcohol, AIDS, fires, homicide, suicide, and automobile accidents combined.”

    This message is logically sound; it is based on scrupulous scientific data. But it conveys much more than facts.

    First, the message compares deaths from tobacco with deaths from other causes that readily command public action throughout the world, such as illicit drug use and AIDS. This comparison carries the “moral authority” that smoking merits at least the same level of public action. Second, the message associates death from smoking with death from other terrible scourges that arouse our compassion and fear. It thus meets all of Klein’s criteria for an effective advocacy message: It is logically persuasive, morally authoritative, and capable of evoking passion.

    Here are a few more examples of health messages that take the cold numbers from statistical studies and make them “speak to the heart.”

    Words That Connect with Underlying Value Systems

    “Tobacco control advocates have also drawn from research in the academic field of cognitive linguistics to create useful messages.

    A leading scholar in this field, George Lakoff, has an important lesson for advocacy: People generally do not come to their feelings about political issues by analyzing them in the context of a political philosophy—liberal or conservative. Instead, they form these preferences unconsciously: They relate political issues to familiar words and images that carry imbedded values and feelings.

    For instance, Lakoff observes that we almost all speak—and, unconsciously, think—of our country and our government as our “family.” As a result, we apply the same moral standard to questions of governance that we apply to the raising of children.

    Conservatives elevate the moral value of the strict father within the family, Lakoff notes. They deeply believe that children develop character and virtue only through building moral strength, individual responsibility, self-reliance, and discipline. Virtue comes only from respect and obedience to authority, tradition, and heritage. Grown children can survive in a harsh world only through hard work, competition, common sense, and earning.

    For conservatives, then, “freedom” means the capacity for an individual to be justly rewarded for hard work—or to be reasonably punished for dependency, self-indulgence, decay, or degeneracy.

    As Lakoff writes of this belief system: “An important consequence of giving highest priority to the metaphor of moral strength is that it rules out any explanation in terms of social forces. . . . If moral people just have the discipline to say no to drugs, . . . then failure to do so is moral weakness.”

    What does this mean for tobacco control advocates who are developing messages targeted at conservatives? The words we choose to support our policy objectives must speak to their highly esteemed positive family values. Also, we must speak of those who resist our policies, such as the tobacco companies or politicians, in words that evoke negative conservative family values.”

    Responsive-chord Messages

    “Advocate Tony Schwartz uses a technique in his message development that he calls “responsive-chord” communication. That is, the message strikes a “responsive chord” in its audience. Schwartz finds that an electronic message is delivered through the connection between its medium and “the stored information in the minds of those who receive the communication.”

    A good illustration of a responsive-chord message is an advertisement run by tobacco control advocates in California. Philip Morris had initiated a campaign to force a public vote in favor of Proposition 188, a proposed law that would have lowered California’s high cigarette tax.

    The tobacco control ad did not openly urge citizens to vote against the proposal. It simply displayed two columns under the heading, “Who is for? And who is against Proposition 188?” Under the “For” column, the advertisement listed all the US tobacco companies. Under the “Against” column were the American Cancer Society, the American Lung Association, the American Heart Association, and the American Medical Association.

    Proposition 188 was overwhelmingly defeated. The advertisement worked because the public trusted the cancer, lung, heart, and medical societies. By contrast, the names of the tobacco companies evoked untrustworthiness in viewers’ minds. The ad struck a responsive chord, even though it did not analyze the content of the proposed law.”

    https://web.archive.org/web/20101029220014/http://strategyguides.globalink.org/guide01_07.htm

  6. Fed up says:

    You can tell they’re all in it together by the way they support one another. Even Obamadingalinglong is coming soon to the UK to give us a speech about staying in the EU. As if we can’t make up our own mind. What are we, bunch of schoolkids? What are they, members of a special global elite club?

    Watched one of Jesse Ventura’s Conspiracy Theory progs last week on catch up. Apparently, the global elite have been building an underground city in an area called The Ozarks, so they can survive nuclear war. No room for us of course….

No need to log in

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s