US voices concern over UK exit from EU

But that is what YOU are doing.

Pigeonholing those that may not see the EU as the fine idea you do.

You do better when you don't stoop to the low and sarcastic methods of others..

 

Based on that thinking, the wizard is already in charge, so it matters not.

 

Why not just say.

Assure me as to why the self same psychopathic bastards, would not have control of your World Gov.

 

Only if you explain why it matters if as a conspiracy theorist you already believe they pull the strings now....

 

So says the lady that thinks there is no such thing as reality, and no such thing as truth, only a perception of it.

Except when it comes to bad stuff happening to Jews.

Then it's all real and true, and not down to perception.

 

I have argued the case for a reformed EU. Thats MY view. You disagree...Fine.

 

Okay.

Cool.

 

Jack you cannot understand how perception effects what one beleives to be truth.

It is too abstract an idea for you, hence you make foolish statements and attribute them to me.

Must you always revert to Jews? How many times a day do you write the word?

 

Is there reality? Is there truth? Or is it all imagination, and perception?

 

Jack, instinctively I am an internationalist. I've already explained that. In light of that, I've also explained why in my opinion, the notion of the nation state as the supreme arbiter is an outmoded anachronism. The way forward is unifying and integrating national sovereignty's.I've explained my rationale. You need to read what I actually wrote. I'm not going to repeat myself.

 

I read it, and remain unswayed that it would not just be more of the same, by another name, with the same plutocrats on top.

It's not for me, thanks.

 

Are you spamming your own thread?

If you want to start a topic on physics and we can talk Hawkin's theories, fine with me. But not here and not with you simplifying and making it seem like a topic for Latest World News.

 

Side step.

Fair enough.

Do go on...

 

You know what my IDEAL end-point would be in an IDEAL world, Jack. I've explained it enough times on here. Unfortunately, an international socialist revolution ain't gonna happen anytime soon so we have to deal with the here and now. In light of this, I've previously said that in my view a reformed EU as the eventual precursor to a potential World Government is the next best thing. This vision has nothing to do with a plutocracy.

 

It has everything to do with it.

In any kind of one world gov, it would lead to absolute totalitarianism, unabashed.

I already think countries have ceded enough, don't you?

Elected politicians sold off our industries, want to meddle and know more of our business, more of our national wealth is stolen, more jobs for bureucrats, that most people would not know from Adam, it is effectively communism.

I do not want to give even more to the same takers. There is almost nothing left to give anymore.

I do not want to devolve more power, into a tiny elite.

I want power, decision making, and the destiny of each country, to be shared by, and determined by the people of that country.

 

The notion that nation state sovereign supremacy represents a development in an inexorable trend in human progress, which is what your vision implies, cannot be sustained and is in fact incongruous to the notion of human progress for five main reasons:

1. More likely increase in warfare between the nation states of Europe.
2. More likely increase in the everyday physical coercion of the state and the withdrawal of liberties.
3. More likely decrease in workers' rights.
4. More likely increase in the gap between rich and poor worsened by an abandonment of regulatory mechanisms.
5. More likely increase in the concentration of media ownership in the hands of the extremely wealthy.

In order to reverse these trends, the EU needs to be strengthened, not weakened. Why else do you think Murdoch was in favour of the UK pulling out of the EU by attacking Delor's vision of a federal Europe? Why, Jack?

Your vision is a vision of hopelessness and despair.

 

I disagree.

If you honestly think that the EU is what is stopping European countries from warring with one another, I believe that a v misanthropic and somewhat collectively negative outlook, on the people of said nations. People do not want to live in perpetual war. That is what we have had, one way or the other, for decades. I am not happy with the EU weakness over Israel. If even there was a chance to do the moral and legally correct thing, taking actual action against Israel, was that chance. What do they do? Usual fudging.

A true collective might of Europe, an Empire Europa if you will, would not be a spineless cabal of bought punks, too weak to stand up to a nation of 3million adults, that routinely (*)(*)(*)(*) over all the things that Europe held dear, such as the Geneva Convention.

I am sick of the EU dancing around them, I would be impressed if I woke up today, and found out that the EU had decided a collective and absolute trading ban, while normalising relations with everyone else, including Iran.

Now, if a united Europa were to do that, you may have a sell.

They could do. There is nothing to stop them. And they would have solid grounds, ethically and legally.

I am ashamed of the EU.

 

What makes you think that individual States would be any more likely than a strong EU to sanction Israel and normalise relations with Iran?

 

You have a point

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jul/23/israel-eu

 

I think the SNP has said it would put in sanctions against Israel but if you read the Guardian article above, Europe has the potential to stop Israel or to empower her to continue to take over all of Palestine, hence be an accomplice to Israeli's illegal activities. At the moment that seems to be what she is doing. As people in Europe become more aware of what is happening in Israel they like it less. Eventually countries must listen to their people.

 

@TMR;

I copied this from another thread.

It is my basic model of how I would shape things, for Scotland, mainly Scotland.

It was merely intended as a ten point pledge, with a brief bit after, to explain each.

**

1) Immediate withdrawal from the EU. In pragmatic terms, it costs the nation £30mill a day to be in it, you devolve much of your national powers, and I do not consider that the bulk of people of my nation get a direct enough benefit from being in it, when off set against all the cost, and devolution of our own powers. Good relations with those still remaining in it, including trade relations, would naturally remain a position to be encouraged.

2) My country (Scotland), is small, and I would break up the union. It has run it's course, and only fear is holding people back, plus negative propaganda, from those with a vested interest. There is no reason at all why a country of our size needs to be part of this union anymore, and there is no doubt, if you look at Norway, Finland, etc, these are examples of small countries, with a not totally dissimilar culture, who quietly and properly, generally do just fine . Therefore, if they can do it (Denmark too), there is no reason why Scotland cannot.

3) I would not keep the sterling. Why do so? If you are now a country in your own right, have your own currency. It is a good thing, not to be feared, despite those that would fear monger (and they would). Coin your own currency, from your own central bank, and ensure that it was a true central bank, and not the plaything of 'foreign investors', and that no part of it could be owned by the Rothschilds, or by any of their proxy agents. Banks could issue loans, but only with a v small fee, to cover operating costs. Ideally, it would be a non fiat currency, and ways of doing that would be explored.

4) At least to a much larger degree, I would work to make my country more immune to outside economic happenings. So that when financial shysters caused recessions and crashes, we could be buffered from it. Number 3 would be one part of doing that. There would have to be many parts to it, but I would also, on a nationwide scale, encourage far more concepts such as getting whole towns to do trading in time banking.

5) There would be no nukes to purchase, maintain, or host, as we do. None of the costs. Now or in the future. I would see no need. Not when the cost is massive, and would probably pay for many of my other ideas. Nuke war is v unlikley, and, if there were one, and if our airspace were under threat, it would be protected anyway. There would be no logical need for a country of 5millon in N Europe to have them.

6) I would withdraw ALL Scottish soldiers, from any deployment, anywhere they may be, in the ME. Right away. All and every last one. I would draw up a list of all the Scottish soldiers who had died or been badly injured, in conflicts they were lied into, by Blair. Those brought back, who had served for a time, their needs would be met, without quibble, in terms of housing, or any other assistance. I would deploy the best lawyers to bring Blair to trial and have all his assets frozen, as well as all those also complicit, in his cabinet. If found guilty, under the proceeds of crime act, I would liquidate all their wealth, and pay it to the families of the soldiers whose sons were murdered, by lies.

7) I would still maintain a strong and v well trained home guard army though. In the unlikely event of an invasion, or some other requirement. However, I would want the very highest, and not just okay standards. Certainly, it would be seen as an accolodate to be accepted (since they would never be misused, and they would be looked after), but only the best standards, at every level, would be acceptable. It is possible they could still take on a civilian job as well, since they would not be deployed, each day.

We already have a not bad NHS. But. It could be a lot better. Too much money wasted on tiers of management, people often not even from a medical or doctor background. Get rid of all that waste, we can be leaner, and employ more important staff, like doctors, nurses, surgeons, specialits, etc. Let the medical professionals themselves work to reshape it, so that, in 10yrs, it would be the best in the World.

9) We already have pretty good access to education, free from financial prejudice, but again, it can be made better. Too many state schools are run down, shabby looking, and the curriculum is often unimaginative, boring, with classes that are still too large. I would order a study into the country that has the best state schools in the World, or at least, in Europe. I would then engage the services of an expert panel, to revamp the curriculum. Objective? Again, in ten years, the best, most interesting, and most forward thinking education for all.

10) Total break up of all media monopolies, be they press or tv. Just ban it. Instead, I would encourage more indie owned media, but they would have to take a new pledge of journalistic allegiance, to check their sources, and investigate stories correctly. Only the highest and best journalistic standard would be acceptable. If this means lifting the pressures on them, for 24/7 media, good, I would sooner have better quality.

 

Ok, I guess it's a coincidence that European states haven't gone to war with one another for 68 years and Murdoch is a friend of workers rights - awkaaaaay!

 

Germany would no doubt not consider sanctions against Israel. However I beleive that the EU should sanction products generated in the settlements.

My point though is that individual states are as likely to feel US/Israeli pressure as is the EU. I cannot see any difference.

- - - Updated - - -

Sounds like Iran to me.

 

Benefits accrued above as a result of Scottish independence within the context of a reformed EU wouldn't be compromised, rather they would be strengthened. If the Scots vote for independence and remain in the EU, I'll be up there like a shot.

 

See, and there is another thing.

This is the most despised state in the First World, possibly the world, and what do you know, what a freaking shock, the EU, shamefully cosying in with this rogue, terrorist, racist, law breaking state.

It was not so long ago there was even talk of Israel joining the EU, apart from the small matter of them being a nasty little pariah state, they are NOT in or from Europe, are they? No. And that matters, otherwise, why misadvertise it, and call it EUROPEAN.

And of course, in their arse kissing, this doesn't just serve to tar ALL of us in Europe, even more, even if we do not simply like Israel here, we get tarred with that brush,by association.

I won't even get into the massive money laundering and counterfeit money, that goes in and out Israel, to invite THAT into the EU, or do anything less than cut ties with it, is disgusting.

And, rest assured, as you well know, in any partnership with Israel, it is always they who get everything out of it.

Ask Americans..

EU?

Weak.

Increase it, says TMR?

May as well cut our own throats.

One senior EU diplomat, speaking on condition of anonymity, said that despite private complaints of the inconsistency of chastising Israel with one hand while rewarding it with the other, not one minister was prepared to oppose Tuesday's agreement.

"I was struck by the fact that a whole range of relations was offered to Israel – at the request of Israel – as if nothing is happening on the ground," the diplomat said. "Most ministers are too afraid to speak out in case they are singled out as being too critical towards Israel, because, in the end, relations with Israel are on the one hand relations with the Jewish community at large and on the other hand with Washington – nobody wants to have fuss with Washington. So [ministers] are fine with making political statements but they refrain from taking concrete action."

The Brussels-based bureaucrat points out that Europe's 500 million consumers constitute almost 60% of Israel's trade and are an under-utilised bargaining tool.


WEAK.

COWARDS.