Reply #5: I have a question: [View All]

[dmr]

I don't really know much about the EU, but alarm bells went off when I was reading my newspaper this morning. The AP article, which was quite lengthy, is not online, so I can't post a link.

This is what the article said, and my questions follow:

The other 26 members are ratifying it through their parliaments, in part fearful of what happened to its predecessor, an even bigger, more ambitious constitution that French and Dutch voters torpedoed in 2005.

To become law, the treaty must be unanimously approved by all 27 EU nations. But Ireland's constitution requires EU treaties be put to a vote -- a risky policy for the EU, whose powerful commissioners are not popularly elected and seem distant from the ordinary European.

Question: French and Dutch voters torpedoed this in 2005, but now those voters don't have a say because appointed commissioners now make the decisions for them? What happened to their voting rights? Were they taken away? By whom? Did the "powers" change the ratifying rules to accommodate ratification? If so, how did the people react to this?

As I said, I know little of the EU. I am sure it has its merits, but when I read about "powerful commissioners" who are not "popularly elected", I begin to wonder who and what all this really benefits, and what it will mean to a nation's sovereignty; and what will happen or bring to the regular everyday people of society.

Quietly here, there is talk of an NAU - and what does it mean for us.

Quite frankly it worries me that a handful of people could end up legally controlling a globe of people, their lands, possessions and freedoms.