It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The treaty would also strengthen the role of EU foreign policy chief. Finland is pitching Olli Rehn, current EU enlargement commissioner, for the post. Other possibilities, according to media reports, include outgoing German Foreign Minister and defeated Chancellor candidate Frank-Walter Steinmeier, Greek Foreign Minister Dora Bakoyannis and former Austrian Foreign Minister Ursula Plassnik.
(other than tony blair) Other presidential contenders tipped in the European press include Dutch Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende, Luxembourg Prime Minister Jean-Claude Juncker and former Finnish Prime Minister Paavo Lipponen.
Although the President may not hold a national office, such as a Prime Minister of a member state, there is no such restraint on European offices. For example, the President may be an MEP, or most notably the Commission President (who already sits in the European Council). This would allow the Council to combine the position, with its powers, of both executive bodies into a single Presidential position.[6]
Were the post not to be combined, there are concerns that the dual-presidential system would lead to "cohabitation" and infighting between the two offices. While it is comparable to the French model, where there is a President (the Council President) and Prime Minister (the Commission President), the Council President does not hold formal powers such as the ability to directly appoint and sack the other, or the ability to dissolve Parliament. Hence while the Council President may have prestige, it would lack power and while the Commission President would have power, it would lack the prestige of the former.[12] This problem may be increased further if the permanent President were to be strengthened by a democratic mandate, as mentioned above
Originally posted by Foppezao
It is not going to be Blair, like people said The US voted for Obama it would be strange if Europe would vote for Blair again and cause a revival of the Bush/Blair era, besides he doesnt get support from the social democrats and was a eurosceptic.
If you've seen the happy/joy meetings in the recent past between Balkenende and Obama it seems like the decision is already made [behind the curtains] maybe at the last Bilderberg. Yet it seems in return Balkenende had to promise more troops to Afganistan and stay longer in Uruzgan..
Its pretty interesting over here, most people are fed up with the government of Balkenende and would like to have elections yesterday! Those might come if he leaves to Brussel. That would mean the right wing PVV would be the biggest party, a landslide..It is a dillema for Balkende's own party and especially the coalition parties to let him go and have a representation for our country and possible new elections[and might loose] or to wait longer for new elections and remain in power and see another candidate become president...It is also possible another CDA member becomes PM but then the trust may be gone from parliament..
I like the candidate of Junker , he is the most experienced PM in Europe, was already in charge during the euro transition.
[edit on 1-11-2009 by Foppezao]
Originally posted by bigyin
Blair is a lying, sycophantic, hypocrital, con man ... he will likely get the job
Originally posted by d0p3d
Originally posted by Foppezao
It is not going to be Blair, like people said The US voted for Obama it would be strange if Europe would vote for Blair again and cause a revival of the Bush/Blair era, besides he doesnt get support from the social democrats and was a eurosceptic.
If you've seen the happy/joy meetings in the recent past between Balkenende and Obama it seems like the decision is already made [behind the curtains] maybe at the last Bilderberg. Yet it seems in return Balkenende had to promise more troops to Afganistan and stay longer in Uruzgan..
Its pretty interesting over here, most people are fed up with the government of Balkenende and would like to have elections yesterday! Those might come if he leaves to Brussel. That would mean the right wing PVV would be the biggest party, a landslide..It is a dillema for Balkende's own party and especially the coalition parties to let him go and have a representation for our country and possible new elections[and might loose] or to wait longer for new elections and remain in power and see another candidate become president...It is also possible another CDA member becomes PM but then the trust may be gone from parliament..
I like the candidate of Junker , he is the most experienced PM in Europe, was already in charge during the euro transition.
[edit on 1-11-2009 by Foppezao]
Agreed, altho 66% of the Dutch seem to be in favour of Balkenende taking the job according nu.nl. Wich would make the transition to a new Prime-Minister more easy I guess (propably Verhagen then)
Originally posted by stumason
reply to post by fritz
Well said Fritz!
The EU, led by the French and Germans is, in my book, their final attempt to dominate Europe and kill off the British.
Do not forgter that for the past few hundred years, they have both tried to dominate the continent on their own, with the Brits siding with the other and fending them off. Now they have teamed up against us and we signed it all away without a whimper.
Originally posted by stumason
reply to post by Foppezao
Haha! How productive? We contribute billions every year and get very little back, while the French farmers get paid 40+Billion Euro's to sit on their arses and take 4hr lunches, or we aren't allowed to fish our own waters, yet Spanish trawlers can haul what they like! We are the 3rd largest economy in Europe for crying out loud!
It isn't a matter of being "productive", it's a matter of our national soveriegnty being usurped by unelected Eurotrash who see the UK as nothing more than a fly in the ointment.
We didn't sign up for a "unified Europe", we didn't sign up to have 75% of our laws dictated by an unelected commission, we didn't sign up so that our industries could all be outsourced and stripped down.
We signed up for a "common market", a free trade zone.
Where did we sign up to be part of this European super state?
Answer: We didn't. And we're lied to by our own politicians who obviously are eyeing up the top jobs for themselves. See Messrs Blair, Kinnock and Mandleson.
So you can take your "productive" argument, whatever that may be exactly as I'm pretty damn sure that the country you reside in pales in comparison to what the UK has achieved and how productive we are, and do the proverbial shoving..
EDIT: We didn't fight two world wars to give up our soveriegnty to Europe now. No bloody way.
[edit on 1/11/09 by stumason]
Originally posted by Foppezao
Most of us pay[netto payer], and back in the seventies some former industrial areas in the UK got structural EU funds as well, cities such as Liverpool would have died...Yes that was the time when you wondered who actually won the war since Germany was doing much better economically.
Originally posted by Foppezao
But i was actually talking about contributing in treaties, most of the time the UK blocks and vetoes everything, you so angry to be violated by Europe and wont allow a Dutch member of parliament in your country while the muslims take over your country using the backdoor and thats all ok...
Originally posted by Foppezao
And if you do wanna stop those immigration flows, you should really work together wth the continent..
you silly Island inhabitants