• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Only one week into Lisbon, but the EU demands even more power..

Republic_Of_Public

Republic_Of_Public

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 16, 2009
Messages
2,922
Reaction score
343
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
MUST READ!

The European Federal Superstate, despite its crashing failures in implementing its own 10 Year Plans, looks not at itself for its shambles. It just decides it doesn't have enough power to make failure succeed.

Mary Ellen Synon takes us through the new power grabs unleashed by the usual Socialists, not to mention the fact that the supposedly freedom-granting EU doesn't give member states the real freedom to arbitrarily leave (or leave at all without suffering the EU's institutionalised spite).

Doubtless there are those out there who would dismiss this as typical right-wing reactionary rubbish, or some such hyperbole. But the truth needs no varnish.

_______________

The Spaniard with a plan, God help us all - Mail Online - Euroseptic: Mary Ellen Synon in Brussels

Sovereign? It's later than you think. We're shackled. - Mail Online - Euroseptic: Mary Ellen Synon in Brussels
 
Last edited:
Republic_Of_Public said:
MUST READ!

The European Federal Superstate, despite its crashing failures in implementing its own 10 Year Plans, looks not at itself for its shambles. It just decides it doesn't have enough power to make failure succeed.

Mary Ellen Synon takes us through the new power grabs unleashed by the usual Socialists, not to mention the fact that the supposedly freedom-granting EU doesn't give member states the real freedom to arbitrarily leave (or leave at all without suffering the EU's institutionalised spite).
Click to expand...

So you know what it is like to live under the constitution.

for a "group of formerly soveriegn nations" that constantly bashes the America, you sure are trying hard to be like us.
 
You're picking on the wrong guy. I never wanted to live under it in the first place. Nor did most people in the UK, which is why the government reneged on its promise to ask permission.

And it's usually only the rowdy Left who take so much time to bash America.
 
Last edited:
DarkWizard12 said:
for a "group of formerly soveriegn nations" that constantly bashes the America, you sure are trying hard to be like us.
Click to expand...

Given what power the EU doesn't have over its member states, and the marked cultural and linguistic diversity amongst the member states, they're not in danger of becoming anything like us for a few centuries yet.
 
Republic_Of_Public said:
Doubtless there are those out there who would dismiss this as typical right-wing reactionary rubbish, or some such hyperbole. But the truth needs no varnish.
Click to expand...

Any chance you could show me the truth from a source more credible than the Daily Mail?

I'm not arguing with your view, I'm actually interested in reading about what you're talking about, but taking the Daily Mail seriously is a lot like taking the National Inquirer seriously.
 
TacticalEvilDan said:
Any chance you could show me the truth from a source more credible than the Daily Mail?

I'm not arguing with your view, I'm actually interested in reading about what you're talking about, but taking the Daily Mail seriously is a lot like taking the National Inquirer seriously.
Click to expand...

Of course he does not, because like the Mail, everything he says is twisted, out right false or even a lie. His lack of knowledge about the EU and how it works, before and after Lisbon screams out with every comment he makes just like the Daily Mail. Where as the Daily Mail does it to sell newspapers to people like the OP, the OP does it due to ignorance.
 
Wikipedia's pretty neutral. The very fact a nation state has to beg to go home if the weather turns bad is a grim enough foreboding to me.

[ame]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Withdrawal_from_the_European_Union[/ame]



And, well, PeteEU would say that. The apparently arrogant always bandy the word 'ignorance' about to describe people who don't think as they do.

Now I challenge him to refute that the EU isn't always power hungry, without inflicting screeds of text.
 
Last edited:
Republic_Of_Public said:
And, well, PeteEU would say that. The apparently arrogant always bandy the word 'ignorance' about to describe people who don't think as they do.
Click to expand...

Hardly. I respect very much the sceptics that use fact and figure to back up their views. However you do not. The two articles you post are opinion pieces with zero fact. What do they base their views on, and where do they get their information? It is another hit piece by the Daily Mail's anti-Europe anti-world, British are superior team.

For one, the Spanish have taken over the running of the EU yes. The Mail writes it as they are second fiddle to the EU president.. no they are not. They are the ones who set the agenda like the Swedes before them. There has been no change on that front. But reading the Mail one could easily think that the EU President has all the power.. hardly.

Now I challenge him to refute that the EU isn't always power hungry, without inflicting screeds of text.
Click to expand...

Eh? How can I refute that without text? How about you prove your views with actual fact and figures that are not doctored to prove your point? And how about learning about how the EU actually works first though?
 
As if my link to Wiki wasn't enough, you get more facts in the Mail comments section:

Why doesn't Britain simply follow the legal advice of wise German Judges ?

" Without the expressly declared will of the peoples,the elected bodies are not competent to create a new subject of legitimisation,or to delegate the existing ones,in the constitutional areas of their states "
( Paragraph 347,German Constitutional Court ruling,June 2009 ).

This paragraph gives Germany the right to leave the EUSSR if push comes to shove,why doesn't Britain insist on the same right ?

Posted by: Little Deutschlander | 07/01/2010 at 02:19 PM

I care more about what the EU does rather than how. Your demand for facts and figures usually tries to drive people down alleys, away from the big picture. It's like asking how a rapist goes about his work to deflect argument about his morality.

There's no denying that people weren't asked about joining a federal Europe. Whatever the new empire's benefits or drawbacks, people still feel disgruntled at not being asked permission for all this to take place.
 
Republic_Of_Public said:
As if my link to Wiki wasn't enough, you get more facts in the Mail comments section:

Why doesn't Britain simply follow the legal advice of wise German Judges ?

" Without the expressly declared will of the peoples,the elected bodies are not competent to create a new subject of legitimisation,or to delegate the existing ones,in the constitutional areas of their states "
( Paragraph 347,German Constitutional Court ruling,June 2009 ).

This paragraph gives Germany the right to leave the EUSSR if push comes to shove,why doesn't Britain insist on the same right ?

Posted by: Little Deutschlander | 07/01/2010 at 02:19 PM
Click to expand...

And? How come you are blaming the EU for something that the British establishment did or did not demand? How about putting the blame where it is due.... the British political establishment and not blaming someone who has zero influence on it.. gezz.

And anyone can leave the EU if they so wish. Problem is that no one but the most brain dead wish that because those with half a brain understand the huge benefits has for ones country.

I care more about what the EU does rather than how.
Click to expand...

Eh? So you only want to discuss the sensationalist stuff brought up by the British media, which is often false or pure spin with no facts? But you are not willing to discuss or even learn how the EU works and discus if the way the EU works is good or bad?? You do know that with the Lisbon treaty the people of Britain got more influence in EU than ever before right?

Your demand for facts and figures usually tries to drive people down alleys, away from the big picture. It's like asking how a rapist goes about his work to deflect argument about his morality.
Click to expand...

How can you talk about the big picture if you dont understand the what generates that big picture? Look at this post.. You attack the EU for something that is solely up to the British political establishment lol.. Time and time again you have attacked the EU for things that have nothing to do with the EU... so again.. how about learning about the EU first before you start attacking it?

There's no denying that people weren't asked about joining a federal Europe.
Click to expand...

Of course not, because there is no federal Europe, not even close. Next you are going to claim that NATO and the UN are federal since the UK lost sovereignty to them long ago.. how about the postal union?

Whatever the new empire's benefits or drawbacks, people still feel disgruntled at not being asked permission for all this to take place.
Click to expand...

Again we are back to what YOUR British political establishment did/does and it has nothing to do with the EU. Like it or not the EU has next to no influence on British politics and never has had. The EU does not choose your PM, or your parliament, you do. And all the unpopular laws and rules, put in place by the EU.. guess who has to sign off on them first? Your own government... so again, take your anger towards your own political establishment first.
 
You're right about the EU Superstate. Despite what we've seen so far in terms of centralist control, the main part is still yet to kick in!

The British Establishment were and are in collusion with the EU. They are indeed to blame, though it's no laughing matter. And now, as even the House of Lords says, that the EU is now the supreme executive body of this land, it is them I attack primarily.

No leading political party ever wrote that they would surrender sovereignty to the EU in their manifestos. And they almost always deny that they shall continue to. But they all do. Other than voting BNP or UKIP, what's a citizen to do when faced with a fait-accompli by all the viable parties?

And as I've said this a gizillion times in the past already, I can only say I have no interest in being led around in this particular circle once again.

And so to close, here's a video for everybody on the latest Euro wage claim scandal. Packed with the facts a Euro fanatic just loves to hate!


[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-J_B4vquGTM"]YouTube- Epidemic EU Fraud and Debt No Barrier To Eurocrat Wage Claims![/ame]

VIDEO TEXT:

EU member states too poor to dish out even more bloated wages to its civil servants face being SUED! This despite the fact that the European Union is already grabbing countless billions of Euros a year from its hapless citizenry.

Money which could be used to directly help nations through the recession is lost, fiddled, used to bankroll top-heavy EU centralisation and chronic wastes of resources.

...And as the full EU Superstate is still in gestation, you can be sure that we ain't seen nothing yet!
___________
 
Last edited:
Republic_Of_Public said:
The European Federal Superstate, despite its crashing failures in implementing its own 10 Year Plans, looks not at itself for its shambles. It just decides it doesn't have enough power to make failure succeed.
Click to expand...

Not correct, a lot of the Lisbon strategy goals were met, and will contrinue into the next decade. Those objectives of the Lisbon strategy has done a lot of good for some nations, while some nations havent really followed up on them. Not surprisingly the UK lay in shambles and ruins because its anti reform, they have been among the worst at implementing the strategy.

Republic_Of_Public said:
Mary Ellen Synon takes us through the new power grabs unleashed by the usual Socialists, not to mention the fact that the supposedly freedom-granting EU doesn't give member states the real freedom to arbitrarily leave (or leave at all without suffering the EU's institutionalised spite).
Click to expand...

The new thing in the Lisbon treaty is that it establishes the right for nations to leave the EU, and have set up a procedure to do so.

Republic_Of_Public said:
Doubtless there are those out there who would dismiss this as typical right-wing reactionary rubbish, or some such hyperbole. But the truth needs no varnish.
Click to expand...

Its not rubbish, its propaganda, its untrue.
 
1. Who decides and enforces the strategy? Not us. We can only debate, negotiate and compromise. The argument could be made that that's inevitable in a co-operative, but more and more people question the need to be in the EU so deeply that we have to concess on issues deeper than trading agreements.

2. And why did it take so long to put that in? And even then we have to await permission to leave if we wanted, permission which would possibly never be granted given that the EU worked so hard and without much scruple to get Lisbon accepted in referenda. Suppose permission was consistently denied - would there be a constitutional crisis if majority public will and EU will were at odds?

3. Seems pretty trenchant to me.
 
Republic_Of_Public said:

The European Federal Superstate
Click to expand...


1) The EU is not "federal"
2) federal >< superstate

usual Socialists
Click to expand...

1) the president of the Council is conservative
2) the main party in the European Parliament is conservative; its president is a conservative

EU doesn't give member states the real freedom to arbitrarily leave
Click to expand...

1) Greenland has done it in 1985
2) The Lisbon Treaty introduces an exit clause for MS who would like to leave
3) When there was a referendum in UK about a withdrawal from the EU, nearly 70% of the Brits chose to remain in the EU
 
It's a pretty good superstate which calls for a 'new world order':

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a7D21rPpBrk"]YouTube- EU Calls For 'New World Governance'[/ame]

And unless I'm missing something, I also find it ominous that the head of the EC likened the EU to an empire, albeit one built up without war:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c2Ralocq9uE"]YouTube- Barroso: European Union is 'empire' (short version)[/ame]

It wouldn't matter if the president were a fascist, he can only really act within the boundaries set by the system if he wants to stay in it.

Greenland didn't leave arbitrarily as such (not to my knowledge), plus the EU wasn't as centralised back then.

"3) When there was a referendum in UK about a withdrawal from the EU, nearly 70% of the Brits chose to remain in the EU"

That's pathetic. As people like you refuse to acknowledge, that was about a common market, not an EU.
 
Last edited:
Republic_Of_Public said:
It's a pretty good superstate which calls for a 'new world order':

YouTube- EU Calls For 'New World Governance'
Click to expand...

No.

Governance is different than government; Governance (the full name of this concept is "multi-level governance") means that
- instead of the traditional pyramidal (hierarchical) system, you have a network of institutions
- these institutions are also private
- decisions are not taken only at the national level, some are decided at a supranational level, others are decided at the subnational, regional level
- none of these levels decide alone, all of them have some influence

Governance has nothing to do with a "superstate", which would mean that all the decisions are taken by a new "state" where the current nation-states would have no influence.

But if you think that the EU is a "superstate", feel free to list the "superstate" elements that you find in the EU institutions/treaties. I'd be pleased to read that list.

Furthermore you didn't answer to this one:
1) The EU is not "federal"

And unless I'm missing something, I also find it ominous that the head of the EC likened the EU to an empire, albeit one built up without war:

YouTube- Barroso: European Union is 'empire' (short version)
Click to expand...

He calls the EU an empire because of its size. If you listen to what he says, he actually says that the 27 member states freely chose to be part of that union. Furthermore, the "empire" comparison is a bad one, since the EU is not even a federation, it could not be an empire.

But if you like labelling the Union as an empire, feel free to make a list of "imperial" elements. I'm curious.


It wouldn't matter if the president were a fascist, he can only really act within the boundaries set by the system if he wants to stay in it.
Click to expand...

So if you admit that the president of the council, the president of the parliament and the majority of the Eurodeputees are right wing, why do you call the EU "socialist"? Just because you like labelling people you disagree with as "socialists"?

Greenland didn't leave arbitrarily as such (not to my knowledge), plus the EU wasn't as centralised back then.
Click to expand...

It still left


"3) When there was a referendum in UK about a withdrawal from the EU, nearly 70% of the Brits chose to remain in the EU"
That's pathetic. As people like you refuse to acknowledge, that was about a common market, not an EU.
Click to expand...

Since the 50's, it had always been clear that the EEC would not be an economical union, that the "economical" measures were just steps towards further integration, political integration. That was written everywhere. If the Brits were too stupid to realize that, maybe we should reject them from the EU.

And you forgot to answer to that one
2) The Lisbon Treaty introduces an exit clause for MS who would like to leave
 
Last edited:
bub said:
1) The EU is not "federal"
2) federal >< superstate



1) the president of the Council is conservative
2) the main party in the European Parliament is conservative; its president is a conservative



1) Greenland has done it in 1985
2) The Lisbon Treaty introduces an exit clause for MS who would like to leave
3) When there was a referendum in UK about a withdrawal from the EU, nearly 70% of the Brits chose to remain in the EU
Click to expand...

sometimes I wish I could thank myself
 
As far as I'm concerned a supranational organisation making decisions on behalf of national politicians and civil servants is some kind of empire. We're voluntary colonies of a non-existent mother country.

What would we need to do to leave today? Beg? Pay large penalties? Perform a humilation ritual? They won't let us go just like that, not these days.

As for the British being too stupid, it would have made no difference whether we were kept pacified by media and politicians or not. The Big 3 all want the same in the end on Europe.

Or maybe you advocate the further election of UKIP and BNP politicians (plus a smattering of communists) to provide a democratic 'Eurosceptic' counterweight?
 
Last edited:
Watch the telly:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BSQiPY3VVyA&feature=related"]YouTube- This Sceptic Isle (1/6)[/ame]
 
Republic_Of_Public said:
As far as I'm concerned a supranational organisation making decisions on behalf of national politicians and civil servants is some kind of empire. We're voluntary colonies of a non-existent mother country.

What would we need to do to leave today? Beg? Pay large penalties? Perform a humilation ritual? They won't let us go just like that, not these days.

As for the British being too stupid, it would have made no difference whether we were kept pacified by media and politicians or not. The Big 3 all want the same in the end on Europe.

Or maybe you advocate the further election of UKIP and BNP politicians (plus a smattering of communists) to provide a democratic 'Eurosceptic' counterweight?
Click to expand...

So let me sum up the debate so far

A) You make allegations that the EU is both "federal" and a "superstate" (two terms that are exclusive: superstate means "centralization" while federal means "decetralization")

A1) I say that the EU is not federal. No reaction from you.

A2) I say that federal >< superstate.
- you post something about Multi-Level Governance, which is the contrary of a "superstate"
- you claim that it is an empire, which is false since the member states freely chose to join and are free to leave; Barroso called it like that because of its size.
- you say that it is an "empire" because the EU can take decisions on your behalf. However, the word "empire" refers to a strong, centrally-controlled nation-state. The EU is not centrally-controlled (subsidiarity principle, laws are made at the regional or national level when it is possible) nor a nation-state. Furthermore "empire" means that the territory is conquered and controlled by force, which is not the case in Europe.
- in fact you use the word "empire" for the same reason that you use the word "socialist": because you want to make the EU look evil.



B) You claim that the EU is socialist

B1) the president of the Council is conservative

B2) the main party in the European Parliament is conservative; its president is a conservative
- you claim that the system is socialist. I ask you to provide elements that would show that the EU is socialist - no reaction from you

C) you claimed that MS don't have the "real possibility" to leave



C1) Greenland has done it in 1985 - it wasn't the EU yet - ok

C2) When there was a referendum in UK about a withdrawal from the EU, nearly 70% of the Brits chose to remain in the EU - it wasn't the EU yet - ok but they knew the EEC would be more and more politically integrated

C3) The Lisbon Treaty introduces an exit clause for MS who would like to leave - you say that UK would have to beg - no they would just have to negociate
 
Republic_Of_Public said:
Watch the telly:

YouTube- This Sceptic Isle (1/6)
Click to expand...

I'm sorry I couldn't watch the whole video due to slow connection, but I think the 52 first seconds are enough to get the whole point: they compare the EU integration to a battle for UK's independence.

What a sick comparison.

1) The UK choose to enter the UE and is free to get out
2) He talks about EU regulations that would destroy UK's sovereignty...but apparetly he know NOTHING about how the EU works since the EU laws are made only when they are necessary, and this principle (subsidiarity) is controlled by the NATIONAL PARLIAMENTS
3) EU is not "foreign", it's also UK! UK has got like 75 votes in the Parliament, they've got a commissaire at the commission...they've got their share of power.
 
Your whole line of argument seems to rest on the sentiment that the interests of politicians are the same as the People. Their motivations are different.

As Lefties have been told time and again, most people want to return to a 'mere' (Jaques Santer) collection of trading nations with Britain retaining full independence. Governments have defied and misled the people by taking us into an organisation which only allows us a 'share' of our once full powers.

Round and round the mulberry bush.
 
Republic_Of_Public said:
Your whole line of argument seems to rest on the sentiment that the interests of politicians are the same as the People. Their motivations are different.

As Lefties have been told time and again, most people want to return to a 'mere' (Jaques Santer) collection of trading nations with Britain retaining full independence. Governments have defied and misled the people by taking us into an organisation which only allows us a 'share' of our once full powers.

Round and round the mulberry bush.
Click to expand...

So in a few words you don't have any single argument.

Hey on your avatar pic you look like a good friend of mine! That's disturbing!
 
bub said:
So in a few words you don't have any single argument.

Hey on your avatar pic you look like a good friend of mine! That's disturbing!
Click to expand...

He never has. He reads the propaganda from anti Europe xenophobia sites and media in the UK and believes every word he reads instead of actually reading up on the EU.
 
PeteEU said:
He never has. He reads the propaganda from anti Europe xenophobia sites and media in the UK and believes every word he reads instead of actually reading up on the EU.
Click to expand...
Very convincing :roll:

Some of us actually remember the epic fail of Lisbon. Forcing it down peoples throat is not going to make the EU more popular, au contraire.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom