Leaders in Europe about to PICK a president, page 1

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 3 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 3 times

Topic started on 19-11-2009 @ 08:42 AM by Vitchilo

Seriously, I'm about to burst into flames, I'm so mad... I don't live in Europe, but Europe falling deeper in the NWO hole makes me mad as hell.

news.bbc.co.uk...

European Union leaders will gather in Brussels later to select their first full-time president and foreign affairs high representative.

The heads of the 27 EU member nations are divided over which candidates to choose, and after-dinner negotiations are expected to last into the night.

Former UK prime minister Tony Blair had been an early favourite for president.

But France and Germany look set to back a less prominent figure, the Belgian Prime Minister Herman van Rompuy.

Germany has denied reports it is openly backing his candidacy, despite comments attributed to its ambassador to Belgium suggesting otherwise.

Reinhard Bettzuege was quoted as telling the Belgian De Morgen newspaper: "The German government is in favour of Prime Minister Van Rompuy, and if his candidacy fails it will not be because of Berlin."

Lisbon Treaty

German officials say the diplomat was misquoted, but the newspaper insists its report is accurate.

The EU leaders will dine together on Thursday evening before beginning negotiations.

They are widely expected to strive for a balance in the two posts, with one likely to be filled by a candidate from one of the bigger EU states, the other from a smaller country.

Similarly, the presidency is expected to go to a centre-right politician and the post of foreign affairs chief to the centre-left.

Both jobs were created under the long-stalled Lisbon Treaty, which will come into force on 1 December, and both are meant to give the EU a stronger voice in the world.

The BBC's Europe editor Gavin Hewitt said Mr Blair had been an early front runner for the presidency, but some leaders feared he would overshadow them and so the mood shifted in favour of a lower-profile name instead.

Despite Gordon Brown continuing to argue in favour of his predecessor, the camera-shy Mr van Rompuy, who is not well-known outside his own country, is now widely tipped, our correspondent added.

The EU president will chair regular meetings of the European Council at which decisions are taken about the political position of the bloc.

However, correspondents say the High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, as the post is officially known, could have an even more powerful role.

Whoever is chosen will have a seat as vice-president of the European Commission, as well as a budget worth billions of euros and a new diplomatic service of up to 5,000 people.

'Excellent candidate'

Mr van Rompuy is seen as a consensus-builder and has been described as a pragmatic rather than a charismatic figure

During his time as budget minister in Belgium's Christian Democrat-led government, he took a tough stance on balancing the economic books, drastically reducing the country's public debt.

Also in the frame to be president are Dutch Prime Minister Jan-Peter Balkenende, former Latvian president Vaira Vike-Freiberga and Luxembourg's Prime Minister Jean-Claude Juncker.

Mr Blair, meanwhile, has not put himself forward for the role, but has not ruled himself out either.

Currently working as Middle East envoy for the US, UN, EU and Russia, he has been described by Mr Brown as an "excellent candidate".

The UK's Foreign Secretary David Miliband had been tipped as a possible contender for the job of EU foreign affairs chief, but he has said he is not available.

BBC correspondent Oana Lungescu says former Italian prime minister Massimo D'Alema has emerged as one of the favourites for the post.

But his communist past makes him unpopular for many Eastern Europeans, our correspondent says - so several other candidates have been mentioned, including British EU trade commissioner Baroness Ashton and another commissioner, Olli Rehn of Finland.

The president will be CHOSEN, NOT ELECTED... as was the Lisbon treaty, this will be IMPOSED on Europe.

I'm gonna go even more nuts if they choose that SOB Blair. THIS GUY DESERVES TO BE IN FREAKING JAIL FOR ALL HIS CRIMES, AM I THE ONLY ONE GETTING THIS OR WHAT?

After they have fallen, to compete here in North America, we'll have to form an Union... then all unions will be too much in competition and there will be losers, so we'll need a world government so everyone is equal right? That's their plan anyway.

YouTube Link

Today is an historic day.

EDIT: Just went for a 10 minutes physical rant going nuts on the punching bag... feels good. Just imagining Blair's face gave me more than enough energy.

[edit on 19-11-2009 by Vitchilo]

reply posted on 19-11-2009 @ 08:48 AM by andy1033

Yep it is historic. As long as he is not english i do not care.

Will be interesting, its happening people, and people just need to accept that the european union is here. If you wanted to stop it people should of listened years ago.

reply posted on 19-11-2009 @ 08:53 AM by Knowledgeseeker5434

Im hopeing for sarcozy to be their president, I believe that one an somes up all of europe into one man.

reply posted on 19-11-2009 @ 08:58 AM by Redwookieaz

This is insane! People in all of Europe and here in America as well should be in the streets of our capitols! This is so wrong, this is not liberty or freedom! They are appointing a president for the people of Europe whom I'm guessing the bulk of truly didn't want this Lisbon treaty to begin with! And things are almost as bad here. It's time that we all got off our behinds and did something, anything! Just don't go down with no fight at all!

reply posted on 19-11-2009 @ 09:03 AM by Knowledgeseeker5434

I really dont see why people are against unifications. I know all about the so called NWO. But whos to say it would be a bad thing. Think about it, no more passports, no more international currency, No more war between countries. And if theres no more war, then that gives mankind the money and time it needs to focus on more important matters. Just think about the world in 200 years if there wasent a single need to spend money on weapons and no more war. I think humanity's only chance to survive to to become a single world government. I see this all the time, paranoid people hating the slightest idea of a Unified government of nations, but to tell you the truth it one of the greatest ideas ive heard. Its no wonder Europe is a better country to live in with its euro being worth more than the american dollar.

reply posted on 19-11-2009 @ 09:04 AM by Vitchilo

reply to post by andy1033

Will be interesting, its happening people, and people just need to accept that the european union is here. If you wanted to stop it people should of listened years ago.

Yeah it's 1943, the nazis have taken over France, lay down, if people wanted to stop Hitler, they should have listened in 1939?

NEVER SURRENDER TO TYRANNY.

Knowledgeseeker5434 : Are you a little 13 years old? No? Then think like there's a real world around you.

[edit on 19-11-2009 by Vitchilo]

reply posted on 19-11-2009 @ 09:04 AM by PC equals Newspeak

Another step in Europe's loss of national sovereignty

[edit on 19/11/09 by PC equals Newspeak]

reply posted on 19-11-2009 @ 09:22 AM by octotom

reply to post by Knowledgeseeker5434

I think that the idea with this retooling of the EU council presidency (remember, there has been an EU president for a while now), is that the president would be someone other than a national leader.

The way that it works now, the presidency is a rotating one, where the leader of an EU nation holds it. Currently, it's Sweden. Before that, it was Germany before that France (I think).

reply posted on 19-11-2009 @ 09:26 AM by PsykoOps

It's irrelevant who they pick. They could go to the street and pick a random peron. If powers want that peron on a leash they can do it easily whoever he/she is.

reply posted on 19-11-2009 @ 09:29 AM by pieman

Originally posted by Vitchilo
After they have fallen, to compete here in North America, we'll have to form an Union

wtf are you talking about. there is a union of states in america, strangely enough the name is fairly self explanatory, it's called the united states of america. you might have heard of it!!

as regards the undemocratic nature of the election, it's not that far from a system that allows you to pick between two candidates who seem to be exactly the same person in a different suit.

as andy pointed out, the time for marching in the streets has long passed.

[edit on 19/11/09 by pieman]

reply posted on 19-11-2009 @ 09:29 AM by octotom

reply to post by Knowledgeseeker5434

I really dont see why people are against unifications. I know all about the so called NWO. But whos to say it would be a bad thing.

Consolidating all the world's power into a few people who are fallible can be a very dangerous thing.

no more passports,

I doubt that they'd let people globe trot with no way to keep track of them. Look at America. There are politicians that want to have people be checked for ID during intra-nation travel!

no more international currency,

How is each nation, if you're implying so, having it's own currency a bad thing? Even if there was a one world currency, the poorer places would still have less and the richer more.

No more war between countries.

To have civil war instead! Do you think the world would last that long without people lashing out because they feel like they should be in power; or feel like it would make sense for people closer to them to govern them as opposed to people on the opposite side of the world on another continent?

Its no wonder Europe is a better country to live in with its euro being worth more than the american dollar.

The Euro is worth more because there is not as much debt here. It has nothing to do with Europe being better. America is ranked as a better place to live than some EU countries as well, such as Germany, according to a UN report I read the other day.

Besides, better is subjective. My better can be your worse.

reply posted on 19-11-2009 @ 09:31 AM by Britguy

Originally posted by Knowledgeseeker5434
I really dont see why people are against unifications. I know all about the so called NWO. But whos to say it would be a bad thing. Think about it, no more passports, no more international currency, No more war between countries. And if theres no more war, then that gives mankind the money and time it needs to focus on more important matters. Just think about the world in 200 years if there wasent a single need to spend money on weapons and no more war. I think humanity's only chance to survive to to become a single world government. I see this all the time, paranoid people hating the slightest idea of a Unified government of nations, but to tell you the truth it one of the greatest ideas ive heard. Its no wonder Europe is a better country to live in with its euro being worth more than the american dollar.

That is a very naive viewpoint.

The world is a mess, but it is those same people who would become the global leaders (some may argue that they already are) that are currently behind many of the wars over the last century or more. Ok, not the individual people, but certainly well placed families and organisations. The war business makes them too much money for it to be eradicated, and anyone not wanting to be governed by a banking oligarchy and seeking independence will be dealt with harshly.
Yes, it would be nice to have a single authority and no warfare, where we all lived equally, had the same standard of living etc, but that just will not work. The elites will always need to keep the poor that way, who else will produce their goods at slave labour costs? Who will fight their wars of aggression for profit?

No, they can take their world governance and stick it where the sun don't shine.

As for Tony B-Liar - he bailed on his country to pursue personal profit and, I suspect, to make himself available for this EU presidency, which he was tipped for looooong ago.

reply posted on 19-11-2009 @ 09:31 AM by Vitchilo

wtf are you talking about. there is a union of states in america, strangely enough the name is fairly self explanatory, it's called the united states of america. you might have heard of it!!

Maybe you didn't hear but America is toasted financially. The solution they gonna present to us is an union of north America or perhaps all of America to compete with the European union and the coming Asian union.

reply posted on 19-11-2009 @ 09:33 AM by Knowledgeseeker5434

reply to post by Vitchilo

Find it funny people like you resort to insults, instead of having an inteligent conversation.

reply posted on 19-11-2009 @ 09:40 AM by Libertygal

Originally posted by pieman

Originally posted by Vitchilo
After they have fallen, to compete here in North America, we'll have to form an Union

wtf are you talking about. there is a union of states in america, strangely enough the name is fairly self explanatory, it's called the united states of america. you might have heard of it!!

North America consists of more than just the United States...

It's kind of like... well, a continent...

Just sayin, is all.

[edit on 19-11-2009 by Libertygal]

reply posted on 19-11-2009 @ 09:46 AM by BetweenMyths

Originally posted by Vitchilo

wtf are you talking about. there is a union of states in america, strangely enough the name is fairly self explanatory, it's called the united states of america. you might have heard of it!!

Maybe you didn't hear but America is toasted financially. The solution they gonna present to us is an union of north America or perhaps all of America to compete with the European union and the coming Asian union.

onlinejournal.com...

In the 2007 autumn issue of the Streit Council journal “Freedom and Union,” Jim Costa, a member of the US Congress and also a member of the Transatlantic Policy Network (TPN) advisory group, affirmed the target date of 2015 for the creation of a Transatlantic Common Market.

reply posted on 19-11-2009 @ 10:04 AM by pieman

Originally posted by Libertygal
North America consists of more than just the United States...

It's kind of like... well, a continent...

Just sayin, is all.

you might have misunderstood my point, i'm aware that america is more than just the US, equally, europe is more than just the EU.

my point is that a federal union of states already exists in north america. there is no need for the establishment of a NAU, the USA is just another name for the exact same thing.

reply posted on 19-11-2009 @ 10:05 AM by Libertygal

You can also consider the NAU is about complete. It was formed under Bush. Here is the website, but it is called something else.

www.spp.gov...
Security and Prosperity Partnership

This is between the US, Canada, and Mexico.

Even Obama has embraced this.

08/10/09 Joint Statement by the North American Leaders

08/10/09 Press Conference by President Obama, President Calderon of Mexico, and Prime Minister Harper of Canada

08/10/09 North American Leaders' Declaration on H1N1

08/10/09 North American Leaders' Declaration on Climate Change and Clean Energy

"In order to facilitate these actions, we will work cooperatively to develop and follow up on a Trilateral Working Plan and submit a report of results at our next North American Leaders Summit in 2010."

Lots of conspiracy in this one, itmakes me cringe.

The only thing stopping the whole super highway deal is Texas, who said a big fat no.

www.rightsidenews.com...

Lou Dobbs exposes the truth about the NAFTA Superhighway in an explosive investigative report broadcast on CNN

(But the video to the article was scrubbed!)

But here is another one

YouTube Link

[edit on 19-11-2009 by Libertygal]

reply posted on 19-11-2009 @ 12:19 PM by infinite

Baroness Ashton, Current British EU Commissioner for Trade, is to become the first European "Foreign Minister" after recieving backing from the European socialists political parliamentary grouping.

Belgium Prime Minister is the significant figure to receive the Presidency

reply posted on 19-11-2009 @ 12:20 PM by AlwaysQuestion

I was going to post this in a thread on its own, but figured it would sit nicely in here....

Herman van Rompuy (odds 4/6 favourite)
No one had heard of the Belgium prime minister until last week, and he's only had that job for eleven months, but he's now the front runner. He's obviously not a fool, as Belgium was about to split in two and going broke when he took over, and he has sorted out most of the mess. But he is a unrepentant federalist, who announced this week in a speech to the secretive Bilderberg conference that it was high time the EU started imposing its own taxes. He also believes in replacing 'national symbols' such as licence plates, identity cards, sporting events, flags and national anthems with their EU equivalents. He owns a mongrel dog called Louis, spent last summer touring the Australian outback in a campervan, and is famous for composing Japanese haiku poetry, such as: 'A lost fly/flies wanderingly in a plane/Thus she is flying twice/'

This is from the Daily Mail on an article on how Herman has seemingly come from no-where to be a front-runner in the EU presidency (reminds me of another new president!!)... anyway, the bit I want to highlight is this sentence:

But he is a unrepentant federalist, who announced this week in a speech to the secretive Bilderberg conference that it was high time the EU started imposing its own taxes.

Is this why he has just become the number 1 guy for the job?

Pages: << 1 2 3 >> ^^TOP^^