EU prepares ‘solidarity clause’ framework for military use against citizens

I posted the actual Solidarity clause press release and the website of Eurogendor, which has been around since 2004 and has yet only done humanitarian work, furthermore the recent Solidarity Clause is for combatting terrorism, that is a good thing.

Here it is again, with some of the summation from analysis of the clause by Swedish Institute of International Affairs. www.ui.se

www.ui.se...

Published by Swedish Institute of International Affairs. www. ui.se

An Analysis of Article 222 of the Treaty on the 
Functioning of the European Union

a reply to: Bassago

originally posted by: oblvion

Sounds like you guys need a 2nd amendment right to make them fear for their well being.

When SHTF guns always appear dont you worry.

The important thing is the will of the people to use them. The guns follow.

Its not the legal guns thats win revolutions.

originally posted by: MarlinGrace

originally posted by: oblvion

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: Bassago

Well...

That's it then. You know, if the EU police are going to be involved in quelling disputes between the British people and their government, they are going to get butchered in the streets. The only reason there are not massive fatalities amongst the British police force, every time there is a confrontation between themselves and protesting groups of people (for example, during the student riots of a few years back), is because the British people recognise that our police force at least keeps up the pretence of policing by consent.

No consent will ever be given for a force of people controlled from outside our country exclusively, as this new organisation would be, to do the same work here. Many of us refuse to accept the right of the EU to meddle in the affairs of our government and our law, and are appalled at the attempts they have seen in the media and so on. If they actually try to put their will forward through a unified police force, that force will be bludgeoned into mush if they step out of line.

Sounds like you guys need a 2nd amendment right to make them fear for their well being.

Funny I was thinking will all of the UK anti-gunners wish they had a 2nd amendment now. This is why we have it.

Not really.

Soons as there trouble guns will flood the street like they always do in such circumstances.

Organised crime/ Foreign goverment intervention.

Its always happens and where people get the militrary grade weapons dont the watered down civilian versions.

a reply to: Bassago

I'm very sorry BUT, YOU are allowing this to happen. England and the EU, as a whole, has become such a Socialist cesspool
you don't care as long as the government gives you something, minimum wage, good retirement pension, long mandated vacation, low bank fees..... however, you'll agree to high food high fuel costs, constant surveillance, restrictions of your movements, allowing Muslims to take over your country, Sharia Law, it just goes on and on. IF, you want change then, you MUST affect change. When the Police and/or Soldiers from another country are moving you into camps "for you own safety" IT"S TOO DAMM LATE. I'm in the US, so I can't give you the answers to your problems but, all of you better get busy and come up with something.

originally posted by: Bassago
"Loosely defined crisis." That should just about cover anything TPTB and elites want. Good luck EU.

Yeah, so I guess we don't need mobile, deployable bridges in case of a flood, for instance, or military helicopters to save people from drowning.

It's not like you people ever call the national guard in when there's a flood or something down in some armpit county of some bible belt state.

I'm sure the police or firefighters can deploy emergency mobile bridges too.

a reply to: pistolerooo

Well thanks for your opinion but I'm in the US as well. While you used the word "you" or a derivative of it almost a dozen times this does not directly effect me. I simply posted it as informational and a discussion topic about affairs going on across the pond.

As I stated in the OP the US has it's own problems with militarized police forces.

a reply to: pistolerooo

Sorry what EU country has adopt Shari law?


People do spew a lot of nonsense

originally posted by: theabsolutetruth
I posted the actual Solidarity clause press release and the website of Eurogendor, which has been around since 2004 and has yet only done humanitarian work, furthermore the recent Solidarity Clause is for combatting terrorism, that is a good thing.

Here it is again, with some of the summation from analysis of the clause by Swedish Institute of International Affairs. www.ui.se

Hey, you are spoiling here fun. Anyway if you started, I'd blame you and go further:
-Greenland left the EU (or at that time European Communities) and no-one bothered to make problems.
-During both Euromaidan and later Russian invasion on Ukraine the EU presented high level of impotence. The problem was the lack of ability to threaten to deploy some units (earlier there was a scandal that the EU was unable to deploy anything of reasonable size to fight Islam terrorism in CAR and Mali). The problem is exactly lack of some mobile force.
-Any country of the EU where semi-military unit might be deployed is... Latvia (sorry Brits for disappointing you). Putin might try to use local Russian (former colonizers from the SU times, nowadays non citizen but holding permanent residence permit) to set this country on fire as he did with eastern Ukraine.
-For making recently an idiotic scandal with first eurozone reforms and now with EU Commission president election, I don't think that EU would mind to have Britain rather in European Economic Area, where it would enjoy free trade, still have to follow the most of EU regulation, but would be unable to make mess.

originally posted by: jude11
It will be interesting to see if Brits or Americans cave first to welcome their new overlords. It won't matter tho...whoever starts,the other will follow because the work was proven successful.

Peace

To quote a quite famous Englishman...

"Even though large tracts of Europe and many old and famous States have fallen or may fall into the grip of the [EU] and all the odious apparatus of [EU] rule, we shall not flag or fail.
We shall go on to the end. We shall fight in France, we shall fight on the seas and oceans, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our island, whatever the cost may be. We shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender"

That about covers it i think.

a reply to: Shadow1024

As I said before the thread is specifically about EUROGENDFOR and the recent EUROGENDFOR Solidarity Clause which is mostly about COMBATTING TERRORISM, and being effective after manmade or natural disasters. Fact!

If the terrorists were citizens of a nation they are still terrorists and combatting terrorism is a GOOD THING.

The good non terrorist citizens of the nations covered by the Solidarity clause should be thankful there is such an organisation making sure they aren't in fear of getting shrapnel in their rice krispies and that they can travel safely on the tube trains etc.

The thread title is totally misleading, it should be in the hoax bin yet it has 20 flags (probably by people that don't like the EU generally and didn't actually bother finding out the facts of the Solidarity clause itself, despite the fact I posted it on the thread) and people mostly posting things that are entirely irrelevant to the Solidarity Clause.

Which part of the Solidarity clause are you disagreeing?

Governments keep threatening their citizens with military use against them are going to wake up one morning and find themselves tied to a stake surrounded by lots of mature oak.

originally posted by: theabsolutetruth
a reply to: Shadow1024

As I said before the thread is specifically about EUROGENDFOR and the recent EUROGENDFOR Solidarity Clause which is mostly about COMBATTING TERRORISM, and being effective after manmade or natural disasters. Fact!

The thread title is totally false, it should be in the hoax bin yet it has 20 stars on it's opening post and people mostly posting things that are entirely irrelevant to the Solidarity Clause.

Which part of the Solidarity clause are you disagreeing?

None, I treat the clause as reasonable. So I say that you "spoil fun" for the rest people here, who put great effort in to presenting it as something sinister.

a reply to: Shadow1024

Such fantasists should refrain from instilling fear and hatred into people. The truth is infinitely better.

a reply to: oblvion

Gun deaths in Europe are less than those in the US, we don't have a gun culture here, we leave that to less developed countries

a reply to: theabsolutetruth

I agree, this site used to be about exchanging ideas about genuine news, and theories of conspiracy, not blatantly slanting things to make them seem something they are not.

a reply to: theabsolutetruth

As I said before the thread is specifically about EUROGENDFOR and the recent EUROGENDFOR Solidarity Clause which is mostly about COMBATTING TERRORISM, and being effective after manmade or natural disasters.

So you are saying "loosely defined" is OK with you because it's mostly about terrorism or natural disasters. Of course mostly is not completely. Are you really OK with turning military forces on EU citizens. Really? The word "terrorist" nowadays within western context is pretty much becoming anything that rocks the boat of the status quo. If you doubt that then truly you are asleep.

a reply to: Bassago

Governments in all nations, including the US can enforce military action against citizens anyway, in the event of just cause.

The Solidarity clause is about COMBATTING TERRORISM and action in the event of any man made or natural disasters.

Have you seen the news recently, try googling ISIS recruitment video, then ask yourself about nations working together cohesively in combatting terrorism.

Making accusations about the Solidarity clause being 'against the people' just fantasy. Perhaps it is you that is asleep!

If a jihadi terrorist was your neighbour would you not want action taken against them in preventing any potential disaster?

Try googling Boston bomber, that might be closer to your area. Here in the UK and Europe there are far too many terrorists. More than 500 were recruited and went to Iraq and Syria as part of ISIS, some were recognised in videos, there are reportedly more than 300 of them recently returned to the UK.

Less than an hour from here the London bombings happened, if action had been taken against them their actions would have been prevented.

Do you know they work as part of cells, sometimes spanning various countries and networks.

Prevention is the answer to stopping them.

Stop criticizing governments and EUROGENDFOR for taking constructive action in combatting terrorism.

a reply to: theabsolutetruth

try googling ISIS recruitment video

Try googling Boston bomber

Don't care and I'm not convinced Boston wasn't a false flag anyway, DHS was running a backpack bomb drill during the event you know. We'll just have to agree to disagree.

Since you brought up the US what we actually need is a way to stop the militarization of our police forces as they've killed more than 5000 citizens since 9/11. Good god we don't want to add the military on top of that. Guess I feel strongly about this. A great man once said:

They who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
-Benjamin Franklin 11 Nov 1755

a reply to: Bassago

Without governments and military (organised civilization) there would be chaos and far less freedom and ''liberty'', ask the Iraqi's.

People in the US are far more free than those under jihad rule sharia rule, communist rule, dictatorships etc and should be thankful for the freedom they have instead of the total lack of freedom some others endure on a daily basis.

Can your wife /mother / female relatives go outside without wearing something on their heads, are they forced into underage marriages, can they sing, dance, talk to men, drive, work, study, inherit and consider themselves beings in their own right or the property of their male relatives or husbands?

Ask yourself if you would prefer giving up small 'liberties' for the sake of security?

The US under government is preferable to lawless societies.

So they aren't perfect but that is another thread another time.

Terrorism is contrary to liberty it is the antithesis of a libertarian society. The sort of terrorism facing many nations is all about denying people their freedoms. Anyone keen on keeping their freedom and liberty should be against terrorism and all for constructive measures combatting terrorism such as the Solidarity clause.

The Solidarity clause is a good thing as it prevents such things as terrorism.