MERHBA FIL

WE SWEAR TO FREE MALTA FROM THE SLAVERY, COLONIALISM AND DICTATORIAL ILLEGAL EUROPEAN UNION RULE

TELL YOUR PARLIAMENTARY DEPUTY THAT YOU WANT MALTA TO REGAIN INDEPENDENCE AND FREEDOM

The European Union ordered that in 2011 the Maltese and Gozitan people pay it €68,000,000

€186,000 daily stolen from your childrens mouths

With EU membership, Malta lost its’ soul

By Karmenu Mifsud Bonnici Campaign for National Independence CNI

Three days ago NATO bombed the residential quarters in Tripoli of the Libyan Leader Gaddafi and caused widespread destruction, killed a number of people and caused many more casualties.

This NATO attack was not carried out to implement the United Nations resolution to take all necessary measures to protect the civilian population from the attacks of the Libyan government forces.

The attack was carried out to kill the Libyan Leader and not to protect the Libyan civilian population.

Thus it was not an attack authorized by the United Nations, and it was a barefaced act of aggression that should be condemned by all those who do not approve that a country be attacked militarily.

The NATO attack on the residential quarters of the Libyan leader occurred 25 years after the attack that was carried out in 1986 on the same complex by the American aircraft on the order of President Reagan, with agreement with the British Prime Minister Thatcher and the French President Mitterand.

At the time Gaddafi also escaped, while his adopted child was killed. In 1986, Malta, because it was free and not a colony of the European Union, condemned that attack and presented a criticizing resolution at the United Nations Security Council, by the Maltese representative who at the time was George Agius.

On that occasion the United States of America, the UK and France voted against the resolution that, although obtaining a majority in favour, was not approved because of the American, British and French veto.

The Maltese action of condemnation for the aggression that occurred in 1986, greatly contrasts with the action of Malta today when it approved the NATO aggression of three days ago, and thus destroyed the policy against war and in favour of peace that free Malta had sworn to embrace.

The servility for the European Union led Malta to approve the NATO aggression and of the nations known as warmongers, who have it in their blood to wage wars, and who want to impose on other countries with their military strength, which also includes the nuclear force that America, the British and the French have never refused.

The European Union is supporting NATO in its aggression against Libya, and Malta is agreeing with the European Union, and therefore is supporting the NATO aggression.

The United States, the UK and France admitted officially that the NATO bombings are not going to stop before the Libyan leader steps down.

This means that the NATO attacks are not being carried out to protect the Libyan civilian population but to destroy the Libyan Government.

This was not the purpose of the United Nations resolution that authorized the taking of military measures to protect the Libyan civilian population.

But NATO who are doing what France, the UK and the United States want them to do, are not attacking only to protect the Libyan civilian population according to what was ordered by the United Nations, because they are also bombing cities, among them Tripoli and Sirte and are giving air support to the rebel forces in their offensive against the Libyan Government forces and many civilian people are being killed and many others destroyed by the NATO bombings.

Malta which has the evidence of the destruction being carried by NATO, is approving this aggression, once the European Union is approving it, according to the statements made by the President of the European Council, Van Rompuy, the president of the European Commission Barroso and Lady Ashton which is the representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs.

While Malta is approving the NATO attacks on Libya, a number of countries in the European Union do not agree, because they consider the attacks are an unwarranted interference in a country’s internal affairs.

Among those European Union countries there are Germany and Cyprus, who are not obliged by the constitution to actively work for peace as Malta has a constitutional duty to do, but is not doing, as long as it does what the European Union tells it.

European Union membership has suffocated Malta’s voice to actively work for peace among nations.

Malta in the European Union, lost its identity because it ceded its policy of neutrality and in favour of peace, to embrace the common foreign policy that the European Union is approving the aggression of France, the UK and the United States and now even of Italy that decided to take part in the bombing or Libyan cities.

If main European Union countries, such as Germany, which is a NATO member and does not implement a policy of neutrality, opposed the military intervention against the Libyan Government, why does Malta, that professes a policy of working actively for peace among nations and not a NATO member, did not have the ability to at least do as Germany did and oppose the military intervention against Libya?

After all, in the United Nations Security Council four other big countries opposed together with Germany, China, India, Russia and Brazil, who together have three quarters of all the world population.

Thus, had Malta opposed the military intervention in Libya, would have been agreeing with the vast majority of the world population.

But the servility to the European Union led Malta to deny its conviction that foreign military intervention never led to a good and lasting solution for the internal problems of a country.

Malta could have become aware forthwith that what was being called a popular protest in Benghazi became a rebellion in less than 48 hours to remove the Libyan Government and that France hurried to support the rebellion, so much so that unilaterally and without any agreement with any other European Union country, recognized the rebels in Benghazi as the Government that represents all Libya, instead of the Libyan Government in Tripoli.

Malta should have understood that the reports that the Libyan Government was going to carry out a genocide and that the Libyan aircraft were going to shoot on peaceful demonstrators, were all false allegations created to encourage the countries in the united Nations Security Council to pass a resolution condemning the Libyan Government and to impose harsh sanctions and authorize the taking of military measures to protect the civilian population, including the imposition of a no fly zone.

Malta, instead of keeping away from this conspiracy, hold back and say nothing, hurried to support the sanctions and military intervention in Libya, to as had been said officially, prevent a genocide, and thus Malta made its own the pretext that countries such as France and the UK created to be able to attack the Libyan Government.

On the pretext of a genocide threat, the Maltese Government scandalized the world when it once, twice refused the request of the Libyan Government, to try to seek a cease fire and stop the deaths and wounding.

Because the EU, mostly France and the UK, do not want a cease fire not as a result of an agreement reached after negotiations between the rebels and the Libyan Government.

Whoever really cares about the civilian population, should insist for a cease fire as soon as possible to stop the sufferings that the Libyan people are suffering with war.

But it is better for those who are interested to sell more weapons and armaments for fighting to continue for more weapons and armaments to be destroyed.

His Holiness the Pope more than once called for dialogue and diplomacy to replace weapons in Libya.

But Malta, with all its holiness, does not hear the Pope’s call, because EU membership has made it lose its soul, because it make her support war and made her forget to actively work for peace.

Malta and the European Union double standards

Not everyone in the Nationalist camp thinks the same as Gonzi on the Libyan issue.

There are those who are showing great doubts on the action of EU countries, such as France and the UK, for what is happening in Libya.

Evidence of these doubts is the writing that appeared in the Nationalist official newspaper on 21 April, in the opinion column of Mario Azzopardi.

It appears to us that it is interesting to bring to our readers what appeared in the Nationalist newspaper about Libya, and we hope that Gonzi also examines it carefully and see how wrong he is.

The writer of the Mediarama column wrote on the military coalition that was set up against Gaddafi, as one of the political ironies, because lately Gaddafi, and mostly after promising to abandon the peaceful nuclear programme.

When Sarkozy visited Libya, he agreed to help Gaddafi build nuclear plants for sea water desalination, and France sold Libya warplanes worth billions.

But the writer noted that according to intelligence sources on the internet, among them the “Voltare Network” and the electronic site ComeDonChiscotte, Sarkozy was playing a double game, because he had been since October 2010 planning with the Libyan dissidents how the Gaddafi regime was going to be liquidated.

The writer mentioned that the intellectual Vittorio Sgarbi had said that the military war on Libya was a mistaken conflict, while many other observers had commented on the international media on the schizophrenia that the West had shown and is showing against Gaddafi.

“We now hate Gaddafi even though a couple of years ago we freed one of hiss mass murderers just so he would buy lots of our weapons, which we knew he would use against anyone who threatened his dictatorship. Our justification for toppling him now, is that his neighbouring dictators think he’s worse dictator than them. We passionately believe no-fly zones should be used to deal with aggressors bombing innocent civilians, except when it is Gaza, and we claim the world backs our moral crusade despite more than a half of it, China, India, Brazil, Russia, Germany, being repulsed by it.”

The writer in the Nationalist newspaper continued to say that the BBC journalist Stephen Stuckar, in an interview in “Hard Talk” that he made with P.J. Crowley, who was the Assistant Secretary of the American State, opened up a whole barrage against the USA and NATO war, and repeatedly accused the allies with double standards: bombing Libya but then tolerating the monarchic regime in Bahrain, which had not only opened fire on the civil demonstrators, but imported foreign military troops against the Saudi Arabian people.

Stuckar reminded Crowley that even the dictator Mubarak was repressive and brutal with his opposition, but the United States used to say that he was an important anchor for the American foreign policy.

The BBC journalist continued to press the ex-American Assistant Secretary of State by telling him that Obama had promised to exit America from Iraq, but not only did he not do so, but increased the troops and has now started a war against Libya and the military action in Libya was determined by the harsh military intervention of foreign forces, and that the rebel forces had made their victories on the support of the America and NATO, that is the fall of the Gaddafi regime became possible on the basis of attacks by foreign forces, and that in every scenario that develops in Libya, the United States and NATO have maximum responsibility in what may happen and as the saying goes, “If you break it, you owe it”.

What are the allies going to do, in case of a long drawn internal civil war in Libya, asked Stephen Stucker.

We ask Gonzi and the European Union leaders the same comment and questions, ad like Stucker, we remain without a satisfactory answer.

The Maltese people want Parliament to take steps forthwith to curb immigration in our country

Please sign the popular petition to the Maltese Parliament to take the necessary measure to curb illegal immigration in our country

WE WANT INDEPENDENCE FROM THE EUROPEAN UNION

If yes, help CNI in its work so that the majority of the people would want to get rid of European Union rule.