EU President says world government is the ultimate goal

Telegraph

http://i.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/m...y_1526855c.jpg

Quote:

---

The newly elected first President of the European Union, Belgian Prime Minister Herman Van Rompuy, proclaimed in his acceptance speech that a new "global governance" is only way to solve the current crises facing the world:"We’re living through exceptionally difficult times – the financial crisis and its dramatic impact on employment and budgets, the climate crisis which threatens our very survival, a period of anxiety, uncertainty and lack of confidence.Yet these problems can be overcome through a joint effort between our countries. Two-thousand and nine is also the first year of global governance with the establishment of the G20 in the middle of the financial crisis. The climate conference in Copenhagen is another step toward the global management of our planet.". Mr Van Rompuy is also a Euro-Federalist who wants one nation and one flag for Europe, he has also called for a Euro Tax to be introduced while Europe has just left/is still in a recession with thousands of jobs being lost daily.

---

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hXWeOa-FuyM

Herman Van Rompuy was never elected as President of Europe, yet will have the power to introduce a 'Euro Tax' on the people of Europe whilst calling for national flags to be scrapped for for the European Union to offically become one nation under one flag. Meanwhile Baroness Ashton who was elected as European Foreign Minister, Nigel Farage has found out was a member of the Nuclear Disarmanment Campaign in the Cold War and was the finance secretary of that group, the group had links to the Communist Party of Great Britain which called for an end to western style capitalism and democracy. Ashton has never been elected to a public office in her life.

Nigel Farage (out-going UKIP leader) was told to 'tone down' when he stated this in the European Parliament, the video can be found here.

I wonder if the people of Europe and around the world want world government and for Mr Van Rompuy to push ahead with his world government? - didn't think so.

We need to get out. Every point Farage made was valid and he shut the president up rite at the end.
I think it could be ok for smaller countries who will benefit from the EU, I think us on the other hand will not. :@

You can't disagree with anything Farage said, so it will be interesting to see what the EU-huffers have to say on this :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GommeInc

You can't disagree with anything Farage said, so it will be interesting to see what the EU-huffers have to say on this :rolleyes:

---

Well no you can't disagree with anything he says, but you can easily counter what he says.

He says that they are not elected. That is true, they are not directly elected by the people of europe. But the positions that the president and the high representative hold, they have no powers whatsoever. The 'president' of the european council is rightfully elected by the european council. He does not represent the people of europe, nor does he serve the people of europe. He serves the european council who serve the people of europe. This distinction is important. The european council is made up from the heads of each EU country. All the president can do is try and direct the comission to do what the council wants. He also reports to the parliament. He has no powers of veto. The low-key EU president was picked because, he has history of keeping belgium together (the french and flemish sections of belgium were very very split), he has somewhat re-united it. He is low-key, as to not overshadow the leaders of the bigger nation states, like GB, NS, AM, B and is quite clearly pro-integration, but has little to no world-recognition, yet it makes it easier for the EU to be represented. The 6-month rotating presidency idea is pretty archaeic as there are now 27 states.

The 'barrage of laws to be passed' is purely opinion and can only be proven over time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alexxxxx

Well no you can't disagree with anything he says, but you can easily counter what he says.

He says that they are not elected. That is true, they are not directly elected by the people of europe. But the positions that the president and the high representative hold, they have no powers whatsoever. The 'president' of the european council is rightfully elected by the european council. He does not represent the people of europe, nor does he serve the people of europe. He serves the european council who serve the people of europe. This distinction is important. The european council is made up from the heads of each EU country. All the president can do is try and direct the comission to do what the council wants. He also reports to the parliament. He has no powers of veto. The low-key EU president was picked because, he has history of keeping belgium together (the french and flemish sections of belgium were very very split), he has somewhat re-united it. He is low-key, as to not overshadow the leaders of the bigger nation states, like GB, NS, AM, B and is quite clearly pro-integration, but has little to no world-recognition, yet it makes it easier for the EU to be represented. The 6-month rotating presidency idea is pretty archaeic as there are now 27 states.

The 'barrage of laws to be passed' is purely opinion and can only be proven over time.

---

No one asked them to 'serve us' - and quite frankly, them idiots in Brussels forming some sort of superstate or new world order in my name is the upmost of hypocrisy. On the barrage of laws passed, its already been proven; 84% of laws come from the European Union. They have said it time and time before, the President and the Foreign Minister will represent the European Union on the world stage, no longer will it be the United States, Peoples Republic of China and the United Kingdom, it would be the USA, PROC and EU.

We do not want European Union and federalists like you, Herman Van Rompuy and Cathy Ashton need to accept that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alexxxxx

Well no you can't disagree with anything he says, but you can easily counter what he says.

He says that they are not elected. That is true, they are not directly elected by the people of europe. But the positions that the president and the high representative hold, they have no powers whatsoever. The 'president' of the european council is rightfully elected by the european council. He does not represent the people of europe, nor does he serve the people of europe. He serves the european council who serve the people of europe. This distinction is important. The european council is made up from the heads of each EU country. All the president can do is try and direct the comission to do what the council wants. He also reports to the parliament. He has no powers of veto. The low-key EU president was picked because, he has history of keeping belgium together (the french and flemish sections of belgium were very very split), he has somewhat re-united it. He is low-key, as to not overshadow the leaders of the bigger nation states, like GB, NS, AM, B and is quite clearly pro-integration, but has little to no world-recognition, yet it makes it easier for the EU to be represented. The 6-month rotating presidency idea is pretty archaeic as there are now 27 states.

The 'barrage of laws to be passed' is purely opinion and can only be proven over time.

---

So to sum it up, the President is pointless :/ If he doesn't serve the people directly, then he shouldn't be, nor should there ever be, a President of Europe - it's a pointless title. Besides, why do we need them? Europe has been doing quite well without all this control :/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GommeInc

So to sum it up, the President is pointless :/ If he doesn't serve the people directly, then he shouldn't be, nor should there ever be, a President of Europe. Besides, why do we need them? Europe has been doing quite well without all this control :/

---

I know for a fact the President gets paid more than Gordon Brown, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom and I have also heard that he gets paid more than Barack Obama - so either hes very important and powerful and we are being told outright lies, or hes not very powerful at all and is on a grossly bloated wage of our money which goes to show the greed and eliteism of the European Union.

..personally i'll go for the first one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

I know for a fact the President gets paid more than Gordon Brown, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom and I have also heard that he gets paid more than Barack Obama - so either hes very important and powerful and we are being told outright lies, or hes not very powerful at all and is on a grossly bloated wage of our money which goes to show the greed and eliteism of the European Union.

..personally i'll go for the first one.

---

Meh, it's going to be either/or :P Both stupid reasons to be honest, and it does suggest the EU is only out there to make money. It's strange, for a continent that was socialist for most of its life, it's worse tha America in the capitalism department :/

No thanks.

i dont like the flag idea