Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

GORDON BROWN SIGNS TREATY


chemical-licker

Recommended Posts

You'll be better off , all this pseudo-imperialist shenanigans ( is that the word ? ) with the US does not help your cause . Europe will curb your foolish US led obedient dog-like behaviour. Time to join the new global economic power .

I don't know about that. Europe seemed very concerned about our bananas at one time - is this the sort of thing they will worry about? :blink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 75
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Lotus Flower

    7

  • chemical-licker

    6

  • stevewinn

    6

  • ships-cat

    6

Your bananas get measured , or you go to fight imperialist wars with G W Bush and the world scorns and despises you. You decide .

Blimey, all I want to do is eat my bananas, I couldn't give a rat's butt if they are too long, too short, green, yellow or too curly :lol:

See, when put like that together with your quote Anubi, it shows how stupid it all is :lol:

Edited by Lotus Flower
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as I am aware, the Queen does still have the power to remove the Government.

Blimey that would make headlines in England wouldn't it!!! :lol:

I'm all for that. Parliment isnt about the people these days.

Edited by atom286
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was an issue many years ago about the curvature of bananas. I do not think their size, dimension nor shape is really a pressing issue. You will get a nice banana in the tesco store I am sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was an issue many years ago about the curvature of bananas. I do not think their size, dimension nor shape is really a pressing issue. You will get a nice banana in the tesco store I am sure.

:lol: very good

(That's only if the EU allow them to be sold mind)

*runs*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's necessarily wrong with a superstate like the EU? I think the idea is good, although I think they were too quick to expand it to the Eastern European countries. At the same time, superstates have been pretty endemic throughout history - what do you call an empire, like the Roman Empire and so forth? These are all empires that were popular with large parts of their populace outside of the original "nation" that formed them (such as Rome-dominated Italy).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's necessarily wrong with a superstate like the EU?

What's wrong with the concept of dictatorship? you never know, you might get a nice, honest and just dictator.

Then again on the other hand..

I think the idea is good, although I think they were too quick to expand it to the Eastern European countries.

Yes, I agree, the EU was too quick to expand! Still, it would've been nice to have been asked. I could've told them... :innocent: we're we asked though? No...

Let's just hope it's a good dictatorship and not a self-serving bloated corrupt entity..

I'd check out the accounts of the EU for the past 13 yrs;if only they would just let me see them, few problems there..

I'm having trouble finding them. Anyone...?

At the same time, superstates have been pretty endemic throughout history - what do you call an empire, like the Roman Empire and so forth? These are all empires that were popular with large parts of their populace outside of the original "nation" that formed them (such as Rome-dominated Italy).

Yep, and we all know what happened to the Romans...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No empire is forever.

What's wrong with the concept of dictatorship? you never know, you might get a nice, honest and just dictator.

Then again on the other hand..

Better than a life of mediocrity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What we need is a modern day Oliver Cromwell, bloody European Union, a load of mickey mouse countries living in hope, that such nations as the UK will carry them forward, ****ing disgrace to think the Greatest Nation in Europe/world will be giving up its powers to a Union of countries who couldnt run a p*** up in a brewery.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

a load of mickey mouse countries living in hope, that such nations as the UK will carry them forward, ****ing disgrace to think the Greatest Nation in Europe.

I doubt they are hoping we will carry them forward we are not that great. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

actually by the uk joining the european union it sures it up alot...it will make the currency even stronger...btw are you keeping the pound?...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What we need is a modern day Oliver Cromwell, bloody European Union, a load of mickey mouse countries living in hope, that such nations as the UK will carry them forward, ****ing disgrace to think the Greatest Nation in Europe/world will be giving up its powers to a Union of countries who couldnt run a p*** up in a brewery.

Well said.

Instead of signing the death warrant of Britain the Quuen should dissolve our Parliment along with Canadas, Austrailia's, New Zealand's and any others she still is head of state of. Then lets get Britain, the British people and their empire back on track.

Europe is a damned disgrace.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not British nor European, but I want to say I'm sorry for you guys. I can't even imagine what it would be like if the whole America joined into one 'super state' where countries lose their sovereignty and we get rules from some entities we didn't vote.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not British nor European, but I want to say I'm sorry for you guys. I can't even imagine what it would be like if the whole America joined into one 'super state' where countries lose their sovereignty and we get rules from some entities we didn't vote.

I'm assuming that's a satirical poke at the USA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not the UK. It's those idiotic, conceited subjects that are suffering from delusions of grandeur, that are against it. I wouldn't worry too much. No matter how die-hard even their politicans are against it, they will not commit economic suicide by seperating the UK from the Union.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

actually by the uk joining the european union it sures it up alot...it will make the currency even stronger...btw are you keeping the pound?...

I believe that the Pound Sterling has consistently out-performed the Euro on international exchanges. Indeed, the pound is currently worth about 1.4 Euro's, and shows no sign of loosing ground.

Why is the UK so much against the EU ?

There are a number of reasons. Many see the EU as a corrupt, unnacountable (in practice), bloated beurocracy that exists primarily to expand it's own power at the expense of individual Nation States, and ultimately seeks to create a "United States of Europe", with each member-state relegated to a 'region', and the national parliaments surrendering all legislative power.

Another reason is that many see it as a con trick on the British Public. We where allowed a refferendum back in the 1970's on wether or not to join a "European Common Market"... a sort of trade association with Germany and France. However, this agreement contained the seeds of the current EU Superstate, as the politicians of the time have (now) admitted to fully understanding, even though they gave assurances at the time that this was not the case.

Since 1970, the British People have been denied ANY vote or refferendum as the powers of the EU have grown and grown. Gordon Brown promised a refferendum on the new Treaty... which is a re-write of the Constitution that was rejected by French and Dutch voters several years ago. In the event, he lied, and refused a refferendum, and signed the Treaty.

Hence, many are hostile to the EU as they see it as having been foisted on them without their permission, and by being misled by their (supposed) political representatives. The feeling is.... "if they have had to LIE so much to get the EU formed and expanded, then what is it that they are hiding ?".

Meow Purr.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is the UK so much against the EU ?

the reasons why im against the EU, is this, we're a country who for hundreds of years had leaders who had the empire building attitude, who led the world, we dared to move forward, to push the United Kingdom to the best it could be, with their aim being to make the Kingdom the best in the world, now we have leaders who have no back bone and think for some reason we cant control our own future or destiny, i want a United Kingdom were we make our own rules, we govern our own nation we do whats right for the country, and we stand alone and proud of our country, if other EU countries have no pride in their nations then let them sign their sovereignty to the EU, but not the UK, we can be independent and still trade will the EU but we can also trade with the world, the UK should always stand shoulder to shoulder with the United States, Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the Common Wealth, The UK has already lost control of our borders thanks to the EU and now we even have to pay fines to the EU for using our own land fill/Rubbish sites,you couldnt make it up,

A copy of the proposed EU budget for 2008 seen by The Sunday Telegraph reveals that bureaucrats in Brussels will spend swathes of their £84 billion budget, including £10.5 billion of British money, on politically correct initiatives which would seem to have little benefit to Britain. Of its £84 billion budget, £20 million is to be spent on a common approach to criminal justice, the document submitted this month by the European Commission reveals. It says the money will be spent promoting "judicial cooperation with the aim of contributing to the creation of a genuine European area of justice in criminal matters". It will also be used to "promote the adjustment of the existing judicial systems in member states to the European Union being a territory without border controls, with a single currency, and with free movement of persons, services, goods and capital". A "common foreign and security policy", first envisaged by the ditched EU Constitution then partly salvaged by the EU Treaty, will receive £135 million.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml...8/26/neu126.xml

EU polls would be lost, says Nicolas Sarkozy

Referendums on the new European Union Treaty were "dangerous" and would be lost in France, Britain and other countries, Nicolas Sarkozy has admitted.

The French president's confession that governments could not win popular votes on a "simplified treaty" - drawn up to replace the EU constitution rejected by his countrymen two years ago - was made in a closed meeting of senior Euro-MPs.

"France was just ahead of all the other countries in voting no. It would happen in all member states if they have a referendum. There is a cleavage between people and governments," he said. "A referendum now would bring Europe into danger. There will be no Treaty if we had a referendum in France, which would again be followed by a referendum in the UK."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml.../14/wfra114.xml

Edited by stevewinn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe that the Pound Sterling has consistently out-performed the Euro on international exchanges. Indeed, the pound is currently worth about 1.4 Euro's, and shows no sign of loosing ground.

It is not outperforming, too be part of the European Community the pound had to be pegged (within a low margin of fluctuation) to the ECU (European Conversion Unit), which was the inner-European trade unit and the predecessor of the Euro. This was also in the interest of Britain as that made the calculation of prices for both British sellers/buyers and other European sellers/buyers overviewable. There is no sense being in a common market if you have to change your prices every month to adjust to the monetary fluctuation. The problem there was that Mr. Heath and Mrs. Thatcher insisted the exchange at too high a level. This was what made Mr. Zoros and his hedge-fund rich. So the value had to be corrected. Now it is still pegged within a certain corridor.

As you see, nobody told anybody in Britain that being part of a common market means leveling the playing field for all ... but then again, common sense should have told Britons in the 70s that a market with different rules for participants does not work, even a common market of different countries.

BTW, France and Italy and Germany might have been the founding members of the EU (in '56), but Britain did not join them in some kind of market, it joined the EU which is defacto a political/economic construction that has the previous countries as members, but it is not any of those countries, it is independent from them as juridical person.

The Germans are still moaning that they want their strong d-mark back, nobody told them that it does not really matter, cause it was pegged to the ECU and therefore not as strong as they thought. Same with the pound or the Danish krone, it does not really matter if they don't have the Euro, their currency is pegged to the ECU.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is not outperforming, too be part of the European Community the pound had to be pegged (within a low margin of fluctuation) to the ECU (European Conversion Unit), which was the inner-European trade unit and the predecessor of the Euro. This was also in the interest of Britain as that made the calculation of prices for both British sellers/buyers and other European sellers/buyers overviewable. There is no sense being in a common market if you have to change your prices every month to adjust to the monetary fluctuation. The problem there was that Mr. Heath and Mrs. Thatcher insisted the exchange at too high a level. This was what made Mr. Zoros and his hedge-fund rich. So the value had to be corrected. Now it is still pegged within a certain corridor.

As you see, nobody told anybody in Britain that being part of a common market means leveling the playing field for all ... but then again, common sense should have told Britons in the 70s that a market with different rules for participants does not work, even a common market of different countries.

BTW, France and Italy and Germany might have been the founding members of the EU (in '56), but Britain did not join them in some kind of market, it joined the EU which is defacto a political/economic construction that has the previous countries as members, but it is not any of those countries, it is independent from them as juridical person.

The Germans are still moaning that they want their strong d-mark back, nobody told them that it does not really matter, cause it was pegged to the ECU and therefore not as strong as they thought. Same with the pound or the Danish krone, it does not really matter if they don't have the Euro, their currency is pegged to the ECU.

Fair point about the 'level playing field' questionmark, but here's the rub. We did NOT join the EU... we joined the European Economic Community. We where happy (ish) that this would result in some amalgamation of duties and import tarrifs etc. (hence the level playing field).

What we did NOT vote for - indeed have been repeatedly denied refferendums on - is the creation and expansion of the European Union, which - as an example - is now 'harmonising' laws relating to our justice system and border controls.

Meow Purr.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What we did NOT vote for - indeed have been repeatedly denied refferendums on - is the creation and expansion of the European Union, which - as an example - is now 'harmonising' laws relating to our justice system and border controls.

Meow Purr.

But that is not the fault of the EU...

When Britain joined there was already a political institution called "European parliament" which was supposed to be the political law making institution of the EU, and it was understood that it would harmonize all European laws over time (that is what it was created for).

That British politicians failed to inform the British public, for fear that they could scare away those who still live in the imperial past, is hardly anything one can blame the EU for. What you see there is the continuation of something started way before Britain even joined, and if you look at the Treaty of Rome, something that was intended all along.

But see the bright side, after signing the new treaty anybody can announce that they are leaving... at any time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But that is not the fault of the EU...

When Britain joined there was already a political institution called "European parliament" which was supposed to be the political law making institution of the EU, and it was understood that it would harmonize all European laws over time (that is what it was created for).

That British politicians failed to inform the British public, for fear that they could scare away those who still live in the imperial past, is hardly anything one can blame the EU for. What you see there is the continuation of something started way before Britain even joined, and if you look at the Treaty of Rome, something that was intended all along.

But see the bright side, after signing the new treaty anybody can announce that they are leaving... at any time.

My anger is not ultimately directed at the EU per se, but at the politicians who have taken us into it against the wishes of what I believe would be the majority of Britons.

Meow Purr.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.