Bush's UN Boy Says Vote No - Mercenary Author Says Vote No

(KP, please note - cherchez l'argent}

Monday's Irish Times had a piece on the charming John Bolton - Bush's former boy at the U.N.

Of course he is telling us to vote no.

Why?

Because to vote Yes may pave the way to an EU Defence force. And we don't want that do we?

Not cos we are Ostriches listening to Bob Marley.

No cos as Bolton said a YES vote would undermine NATO.

Or in other words, would undermine what Ms Laffen wittily referred to as the 'Veritas' of Libertas.
.
Tony "Yo Blair" played the poodle.

And Ganley would have us do the same thing.
e digging

Meanwhile in the Sunday Business Post (for those who absurdly deem it rerlevent) my sister reports that Mr Fred Forsythe -Author of many books such as the Dogs of War - those were the days in Africa when 250 of the boys could find tinpot puppet and take over a country - has taken time out to write a piece in the Irish Times urging a NO vote
He was until recently a shareholder in a company (Aegis Defence Systems) with some 20,000 personnel in Iraq, the 2nd largest military force in the country.

HERE WE GO AGAIN:

Office of the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction: criticised the frim for failing to fully comply with the terms of its contract.

The vast majority of the in depth reporting on the skullduggery, piracy and theft that went down in Iraq has been focussed on US firms.

A wider examination is called for.

Forsyth said he gave the article to Dav Cochrane and never heard of Dec Ganley.

Someone had told him that Dav was obviously a sound fellow.

{KP - a family feud? KP- why i am angry?)

LOTS OF DOTS.



ALSO THE LADY WHO RANG, I RANG BACK AND LEFT A MESSAGE. THEN NEPHEW WIPED MY PHONE SO LOST YR NUMBER. MINE AGAIN IS 086 0720108

I saw the Forsythe article and wondered where it came out of. Was it commissioned or inspired?

Kate P wrote:

I saw the Forsythe article and wondered where it came out of. Was it commissioned or inspired?

I'll try and get a link for it. Kevbar, sorry, I thought you might have imagined it.

Well this is the business end of it. FF lived in Enniskerry for 5 years apparently and feels an affinity?

Quote :

Well, across the Irish sea a team of scholars wrapped in icy towels has actually translated the impossible text into layman's language, and pretty unnerving stuff it is. It also explains my first question: why the French and Dutch said "No thanks" in 2005. But it is even more unnerving if you happen to be Irish.

For years, Irish governments have been able to tell the people: for every euro we pay in, we get six out. Very persuasive. But all that ends with this treaty. Ireland, wealthy, bursting at the seams with money, is to become a net contributor. You will have to start paying for the EU as we have for 35 years. There will be big tax hikes.

At a second level, the Lisbon Treaty insists (there is no more consultation after this document) that the farmers' May Day is over. The bouncy castle is to be punctured.

You might also ask: why this referendum at all, and why in June when we have until December 31st to ratify? Of course, your marvellous Constitution answers the first question. But hold: the Constitution says there must be a referendum to endorse any transfer of sovereignty. So why are politicians right across the continent saying there is no such transfer? Someone is not telling the truth; someone is trying to govern us by deception and ruse. The translated text reveals huge transfers of sovereignty, none more so than that in future the Irish need never be consulted again.

As for the month of June, that is easy. On July 1st France takes over the leadership and France has a fanatical agenda on which she will not be gainsaid and as ever has German support. She intends to get her way and in pole position is her determination to "harmonise" the tax base from Dublin to Warsaw.

When they say "harmonise" they mean "standardise". And Franco-Germany never "harmonises" towards the other guy. It is the other way around. France's Business tax rate is 34.43 per cent and she will not lower it. Germany's is 38.6 per cent.

The key to Ireland's booming business success is her own corporation tax rate: 12.5 per cent. It cannot stay like that once Brussels has the power to change it by decree. The treaty on which you will vote will soon confer that power-by-decree. This should never have slipped out at all and the French finance minister who boasted of it has been told to shut up . . . until July.

But there is a fourth hidden reef beneath the water. France is passionate that the EU of the future shall be a fully armed power with a war machine at its disposal. President Sarkozy does not intend to delay moving fast forward from the old St Malo agreement. Are there opt-outs for the present EU's four neutral states? There are not.

The pro-treaty faction may argue that the Irish can insist they never have to fight. But you can hardly be a member of a war-conducting alliance and claim to be neutral. Irish soldiers have been peace-keepers in UN helmets, and much appreciated, but French ambitions go a lot further than that.

So on agriculture, payment-drain, business taxes and neutrality, there are hidden snares in this text. Perhaps the Irish might think of saying: "Much as we love the EU, we would like to go back to the drawing board on this document until we fully understand ever line in it. So for the moment, thanks but no thanks."

It would take great integrity and moral courage. But if the Irish would do this on June 12th they would convey upon the other 500 million Europeans denied a voice a gift beyond rubies.

Quoted from the IT Monday interview with Bolton:

THE LISBON Treaty will threaten Nato and undermine democracy, a former senior Bush administration official has claimed.

Quote :

John Bolton, known for being one of the US president's most outspoken hawks, also said he would be stunned if any links between the US military and the anti-treaty campaign were proved.

The controversial former US ambassador to the UN, regarded as a key proponent of the Iraq war in the run-up to the invasion, said he could not understand why Irish people would support the treaty.

"I don't understand why people voluntarily give up more power to bureaucrats," he said. "The only people you elect have a very limited role and I think this treaty will further enhance the power of institutions in Brussels without extending democratic authority to people." Mr Bolton said a Yes vote in Thursday's referendum could affect the military alliance of European countries with the US.

"I think there is a risk that it would undercut Nato," he said, speaking before a talk on transatlantic relations at University College Dublin at the weekend.

"Because if the European Union has its own military capability . . . people would say if Europeans can take care of their own defence, we don't need Nato anymore. I think that would be a huge mistake."

Mr Bolton said he was surprised at allegations of links between the No campaign and the US military.

"I would be stunned [ if it was proven] and, if there were anybody in the US military trying to do it and they were found out, they would be fired," he insisted.

US president George Bush appointed Mr Bolton US ambassador to the UN in 2005, an organisation he had openly criticised. He had to step down just over a year later when the Democrats took control of the Senate.

Despite his role as undersecretary of state for arms control and international security from 2001 to 2005, he said he never talked to Mr Bush about the Iraq invasion.

"I don't think I ever talked to the president about Iraq," he said.

Mr Bolton is now a fellow at the conservative think tank, the American Enterprise Institute. - (PA)

Link to SBP on provenance of FF's article here

I wonder has DC made a comment on it? Was he asked to comment before it was published?

Forsythe said he had given it to Cochrane for review and not for it to be submitted for publication. I think Forsythe had ofver 2% of the shares in Aegis - the article references it. Where did Forsythe hear of Cochrane? Was it from one of the founders of Rivada perhaps? One of the former US military men? Or from one of Rivada'a Irish employees?

Forsythe was blunt about neutrality saying neither he nor his country had ever been neutral.

Does DC have a reputation as a reviewer of political articles that would have tempted a man like FF to ask for his opinon?

As I say, I wonder if DC has commented on FF's rather curious explanation and if he was given a chance to respond before the SBP published the article above.

Is David Cochrane's employer, Rivada, a subsidiary of Rivada in the USA? If so then David Cochrane and Frederick Forsythe are both directly linked with the Military Industrial Complex for financial gain - one an employee and the other a shareholder.

At this stage, you could pretty much serve up Libertas with chips, wrapped in a greasy copy of The Irish Sun, and you'd have a handy takeaway meal.