A piece of sovereignty legislation proposed by William Hague is just a smokescreen to pacify the public, while the EU globalists continue with the superstate plan.

It was reported in the newspapers today that “the sovereignty of Parliament is to be enshrined in law”[1].

Foreign secretary and 1998 Bilderberg attendee William Hague said:
‘A sovereignty clause will place on the statute book this eternal truth – what a sovereign Parliament can do, a sovereign Parliament can also undo.’

To the casual reader this clause appears to give parliament the power to override Europe and even pull back the reigns…however Mr Hague continues:
‘It will not alter the existing order in relation to EU law.’

So essentially this clause is nothing more than a string of meaningless semantics.

Under the Lisbon Treaty that was signed without the democratic people’s consent, the EU already has more than enough power to usurp national sovereignty, and of course that’s exactly what it’s already doing. Never-mind the David Cameron mantra of “no more powers to the EU”. They don’t necessarily need any more powers!

A common definition of sovereign is:
“The quality of having supreme, independent authority over a territory.”

At least 70% of our laws (a generous estimate) are now made by the superstate. That does not make us sovereign no matter how hard you spin it. It means we are tied by a hook to other nations, whether it’s for our benefit or not, and no longer have control over the country’s policy or laws. When we are fined £150 Million For Not Flying Eu Flag, you know something is up.

The notion that we will now get to vote on future powers to the EU is an insult to democracy. We she be allowed to vote on ALL powers to the EU by default.

Future powers? That’s like saying we now have the choice not to get shot, after our head has already been blown off.

Europe Minister David Lidington said:
‘We are saying to people very clearly that they do not have to fear that there will be a gradual erosion and eventual loss of Parliamentary sovereignty.’

This is a very clever approach – notice how they keep saying “Parliamentary sovereignty” instead of national sovereignty. In other words, no matter what happens to the country at the hands of the EU, parliament is still sovereign, not the country as a whole. Well doesn’t this become redundant when all of the powerful members of parliament and government are pro-EU?

That’s like saying a gang of school bullies have the power to stop punching a weaker kid in the stomach. It doesn’t mean they will, after all they are bullies and have already made the decision to punch the kid. Our parliament are traitors and long ago made the decision to give away power to the EU.

Lidington’s assertion that we don’t have to fear losing sovereignty is nothing but a blatant lie.

The EU website itself states:
The main goal of the EU is the progressive integration of Member States’ economic and political systems and the establishment of a single market based on the free movement of goods, people, money and services.

To this end, its Member States cede part of their sovereignty under the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) which empowers the EU institutions to adopt laws.

So the entire goal of the EU is to progressively hand over sovereignty to the superstate.

And this was echoed quite clearly by new European Union Ambassador to the United States, Joao Vale de Almeida, when he visited Washington earlier this year. He said:
“Our delegations now cover a wide spectrum of issues well beyond the economic dimension, trade dimension and regulatory dimension, to cover all policies in the union, including foreign policy and security policy.”[2]

In other words obscure ambassadors unknown to the general British public are now mandated not only to negotiate trade and economic issues, but also foreign policy.

If a country no longer has full control of lawmaking, trade or foreign policy, what does it have control over? Calling this system sovereign is just another case of political doublethink; saying one thing and meaning the other.

So what is the collective foreign policy of the EU? According to de Almeida: “On the foreign policy side, Iran is top of the list.” – Ohhh you mean the sovereign nation that hasn’t broken international law, has abided by the the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty by the UN’s own admission, and who has continually stated that it doesn’t wish to create nuclear weaponry and would openly debate the like of President Obama on the subject?

Not that pro-Zionist William Hague who said earlier this year “I’m a natural friend of Israel” would prevent this offensive against Iran if we weren’t in the EU, but at least we’d have a fighting chance of holding him accountable. Now the decision whether to attack the country seems to be held in Europe and the US, not in the hands of the British people who will once again lose their sons if the war goes ahead.

Once again the mainstream media are framing the debate on this new legislation.

The Daily Mail article claims:
…some Tory Eurosceptics warned that the move did not go far enough and would not halt the flow of power to Brussels.

Tory Eurosceptics? You’re having a laugh!

This illusion of a debate on Europe has been cleverly acted out by new Prime Minster David Cameron for the last few years. As we wrote in our June article David Cameron Is Not Eurosceptic:

David Cameron is not a Eurosceptic; he’s acting. As long as he pretends to be slightly wary of the European super-state he can prevent the rise of opposition parties that make it their main goal to pull out of Europe and keep British sovereignty; that’s if they haven’t already been labeled as isolationists or far right nationalists…

To expose Cameron’s charade UKIP offered to disband if David Cameron agreed to hold a referendum on the ratified Lisbon treaty…Of course, Cameron rejected the offer; yet the media still have the gall to call him Eurosceptic.

And if there are any real Eurosceptics in the Tory party, you’re in the wrong party! The conservatives are responsible for bringing the EU in to being:

Belgian viscount and current Bilderberg-chairman Étienne Davignon confirmed in an interview with the EU Observer that it was Bilderberg that helped create the EURO currency.

Two years later, the European Economic Community (EEC) was born. Britain entered at the behest of conservative Ted Heath in 1973.

It also just so happens that Conservative Ken Clarke, who is openly pro-EU, sits on the steering committee of the Bilderberg Club with the likes of Henry Kissinger and David Rockefeller.

So enough of these mystery conservative Eurosceptics that aren’t quite sceptical enough to call for a referendum, but are sceptical enough to frame a media debate.

Unfortunately for those that were hoping we were going in a step in the right direction regarding the EU. All we have really got is a nicely worded smokescreen that means nothing in action.

The coalition government and Labour are 100% pro-EU. Unless we can get a fourth party that has the right policies, without the racial baggage, we aren’t going to win back our national sovereignty. And it certainly isn’t going to happen without an educated public.