How to deal with Europe? Some important topics are never discussed in the media.

To simly Criticize Europe is NOT the best strategy to fight it.
Using equally debatable arguments is undermining the goal even more, as these will be used to discredit you.

In general : fighting for peace, or against evil, is like fucking for virginity. You are guaranteed to lose. Its your opponents game.

The better way is to present altnatives that expose the errors of europe.

Such alternative is not a witdrawal from evolutionairy processes, trying to keep everything just as it was. You will lose.

Allow movement/evolution to happen, you can not stop it. But you can DIRECT it. (Think of martial arts).

How to give europe the direction we want?

By presenting a better direction, formulating articles for a constitution/treaty that can succesfully compete with those we do not want.
By understanding the stategies of deception of our opponents.

We are being deceived in many ways:

The sheeple is asked to vote over documents that are 1000+ pages in judicial language, impossible to comprehend.
This is a deliberate strategy to mislead the sheeple and force them to rely on what the manipulated media advise us.
Such documents are often deliberately designed as Trojan horses that alow rules hidden within it to become law.

The sheeple are asked the wrong questions. Questions that do not cover the whole story but merely the part that will meet approval.
We are basically asked to choose between a united/peacfull and a divided/warring europe.
What is NEVER addressed is the question who will rule. It is implied that the sheeple rule, the democratic way.
However, the sheeple can rule only on the basis of information given. The information comes from the controlled media.
Therefore, the invisible controllers rule, thus the sheeple are both enslaved ánd passified by the democratic illusion. A masterful sceme.

The never discussed but all import issue is the matter of allocation of decision making processes.
The golden rule must be that decisions are to be made at the lowest possible levels.
‘possible’ means simply that only (and all) those who are affected by a decision have a right to vote.
The levels are many, e.g. personal, familial, village/town, regional, national, continental, world.

The level of the nation state has a life span of its own and may be allowed to become redundant in time, but may never be allowed to be murdered before its time by a larger entity such as europe.

If the sheeple wake up and become the people, an alternative becomes possible.
A true united STATES of europe instead of a united europe.
With a constitution that deals only with decision making processes above national and lower levels.
With a constitution that is compact, perhaps two pages, using common language.

The Declaration of Balfour has only 3 short sentences and changed the world history profoundly.
Anyone promoting a much larger Constitution of Europe must be suspected of conspiring to use it as a Trojan Horse.

Article 1
of such a constitution should deal with allocating decision making processes to the lowest possible level
( e.g. what we eat is a personal matter, thusly the codex alimentarius becomes unconstitutional automatically )

Article 2
should disallow for Trojan horses, demanding that the language and volume used in documents must be appropriate for the respective levels of decision making.
( e.g. to have a referendum about a 1000 page constitution that only experts can read becomes unconstitutional automatically )

There is a lot of frustration simply because no one knows what the heck they are voting for. (Trojan horse syndrome…)
This means it will be easy to find wide spread support and enthousiasm for something that alleviates this frustration.
An alternative constitution that is limited and simple to read can do just that.
It will also encourage many yes-voters who feel there is no alternative but to ‘go forward’ to turn away from the United Europe Enslavement Project and support a united europe of free nations/regions/villages/families/individuals where all decision making processes are appropriately allocated.

Be meerderheid in Nederland is inmiddels voor ondertekening van het verdrag.
De "stumperd" Balkenende is democratisch herkozen.

De Volkenbond kan enigszins vergeleken worden met De Verenigde Naties, niet met Europa.

Dat Europa problemen heeft is zeker zo, en dat heeft ze altijd gehad. De oplossing zoeken in het terugtrekken naar de provincie en een eigen munt lost niets op en is ook een erg dure aktie.

Schermen met angstbeelden van geweld en visioenen van de ondergang is een kleingeestige argumentatiemethode die is voorbehouden aan manipulators zoals Bush en de zijnen.

De landen in Europa zullen op zichzelf geen maatregelen nemen tav het milieu en politiek niets kunnen inbrengen tegen de VS of China.

Europa is m.i. nodig ook al vind ik dat er zaken in het verdrag verandert dienen te worden.