A late breaking contender for Frenchman of the year
Step forward Etienne Chouard, teacher of economics, law and IT, despite your nausea-inducing website.
The teacher is interviewed in Libération on the EU Constitution, and he does not mince his words. He frames it in terms that make British eurosceptics, maybe even British euronihilists sound quite mealy-mouthed:
L: The new EU treaty was adopted in Lisbon on Friday. Is the text similar to that [The French] rejected in 2005?
EC: It is not an amended version, it is the same thing and I will fight it. They have removed three (sic) insignificant details: the flag, the anthem, the reference to money and the word 'constitution', as if taking away the label removed the danger. And so they will impose on us by parliamentary terms that which we rejected in the referendum. For me it is a rape ('viol' can also be rendered as 'violation', but context makes the word I've chosen appropriate. C) A political rape is a cause for civil war. And the journalists who defend this have been cowed. They are not doing their jobs.
....
Chouard goes on to demand a referendum for five reasons: the confusion of executive powers with 'special legislative procedures', the loss of judicial independence, loss of monetary sovereignty, the automatic revision of the constitution without reference to the people, and that no organ of the EU is accountable for its acts.
And so to the pay-off:
L: Will opposition grew, especially on the internet, as it did in 2005?
EC: That depends on journalists. In 2005 there could be a debate because there was a referendum. But if your rulers decide to rape you, that is, to never ask your opinion, and to gag the victim, indeed one can no longer shout out.
The teacher is interviewed in Libération on the EU Constitution, and he does not mince his words. He frames it in terms that make British eurosceptics, maybe even British euronihilists sound quite mealy-mouthed:
L: The new EU treaty was adopted in Lisbon on Friday. Is the text similar to that [The French] rejected in 2005?
EC: It is not an amended version, it is the same thing and I will fight it. They have removed three (sic) insignificant details: the flag, the anthem, the reference to money and the word 'constitution', as if taking away the label removed the danger. And so they will impose on us by parliamentary terms that which we rejected in the referendum. For me it is a rape ('viol' can also be rendered as 'violation', but context makes the word I've chosen appropriate. C) A political rape is a cause for civil war. And the journalists who defend this have been cowed. They are not doing their jobs.
....
Chouard goes on to demand a referendum for five reasons: the confusion of executive powers with 'special legislative procedures', the loss of judicial independence, loss of monetary sovereignty, the automatic revision of the constitution without reference to the people, and that no organ of the EU is accountable for its acts.
And so to the pay-off:
L: Will opposition grew, especially on the internet, as it did in 2005?
EC: That depends on journalists. In 2005 there could be a debate because there was a referendum. But if your rulers decide to rape you, that is, to never ask your opinion, and to gag the victim, indeed one can no longer shout out.
Labels: EU fun and games, France
This entry was posted
on Monday, October 22, 2007 at 1:12 pm.
You can skip to the end and leave a response.
» Post a Comment