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 -

New euro 'empire' plot by Brussels


Still Waters

Recommended Posts

"Eurozone rescue plan starts to unravel as cracks begin to show"

Groundbreaking plans to avert the Euro crisis have started to unwind – less than 24 hours after they were made.

After a night of talks, the 17 member states agreed a rescue deal that would wipe half of Greece’s debt, force banks to save more and increase the eurozone bailout fund from €440billion (£368billion) to €1trillion (£880billion).

However, French president Nicolas Sarkozy was met with a cool response yesterday when he asked China for its help to bankroll the plan. Following a phone call with Chinese president Hu Jintao, China’s official government news agency said lending to Europe was ‘filled with difficulties’.

It added: ‘China will need time to evaluate this plan very carefully.’

Details of the fund will be worked out by finance ministers over the coming weeks.

link :- http://www.metro.co.uk/news/879979-eurozone-rescue-plan-starts-to-unravel-as-cracks-begin-to-show

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 202
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Blackwhite

    32

  • stevewinn

    32

  • questionmark

    30

  • itsnotoutthere

    15

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

"Eurozone rescue plan starts to unravel as cracks begin to show"

Groundbreaking plans to avert the Euro crisis have started to unwind – less than 24 hours after they were made.

After a night of talks, the 17 member states agreed a rescue deal that would wipe half of Greece’s debt, force banks to save more and increase the eurozone bailout fund from €440billion (£368billion) to €1trillion (£880billion).

However, French president Nicolas Sarkozy was met with a cool response yesterday when he asked China for its help to bankroll the plan. Following a phone call with Chinese president Hu Jintao, China’s official government news agency said lending to Europe was ‘filled with difficulties’.

It added: ‘China will need time to evaluate this plan very carefully.’

Details of the fund will be worked out by finance ministers over the coming weeks.

link :- http://www.metro.co.uk/news/879979-eurozone-rescue-plan-starts-to-unravel-as-cracks-begin-to-show

Only a short time ago China, Russia and a block of South American countries were in negotiations to create a new alternative reserve currency for the world. At the time they were offering to buy up Irelands debt, which I suspect was a sweetner for Europe to throw their lot in with the new Reserve currency. I suspect that China will use this as leverage over the EU to push this plan forward. Those not tied to such an alternative currency (such as the USA and Britain) would see their currencies plummet in value as the artificial buoyancy of the American Dollar fell off a cliff.

I suspect that China has been playing a very long game which is about to come to fruition. I wouldn't count on them not throwing their lot in with Europe and cutting the parasitic American economy loose.

We shall see.

Br Cornelius

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Only a short time ago China, Russia and a block of South American countries were in negotiations to create a new alternative reserve currency for the world. At the time they were offering to buy up Irelands debt, which I suspect was a sweetner for Europe to throw their lot in with the new Reserve currency. I suspect that China will use this as leverage over the EU to push this plan forward. Those not tied to such an alternative currency (such as the USA and Britain) would see their currencies plummet in value as the artificial buoyancy of the American Dollar fell off a cliff.

I suspect that China has been playing a very long game which is about to come to fruition. I wouldn't count on them not throwing their lot in with Europe and cutting the parasitic American economy loose.

We shall see.

Br Cornelius

You wish...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For those who think I might be making this up;

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123780272456212885.html

http://ipezone.blogspot.com/2009/04/russia-still-keen-on-alternative.html

http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/85424/20101124/china-russia-drop-dollar.htm

As I said people are sick of America taking advantage of the Dollars special status, and they are actively seeking to marginalise it. Watch this space.

If it does happen the world socio-political map will change overnight. The Military Industrial complex in America maybe so scared that they start some more wars. The stakes are so high that anything could happen.

Br Cornelius

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Uk is in a better position to leave Europe than any other member state. The politicians of this country seem to have forgotten all about something called the Commonwealth!, we can leave the EU, renegotiate trade deals with them and, focus on trade and stonger links with the commonwealth nations.

The Commonwealth has the potential to far outstrip stagnating Europe in terms of trade and global influence. India, Canada and a whole host of developing wealthy nations are on the rise, Europe is in a freefall decline and it seems to be that it will become indebted to China!

Britain must leave the EU and strenghten the Commonwealth if we are to have a prosperous future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Uk is in a better position to leave Europe than any other member state. The politicians of this country seem to have forgotten all about something called the Commonwealth!, we can leave the EU, renegotiate trade deals with them and, focus on trade and stonger links with the commonwealth nations.

The Commonwealth has the potential to far outstrip stagnating Europe in terms of trade and global influence. India, Canada and a whole host of developing wealthy nations are on the rise, Europe is in a freefall decline and it seems to be that it will become indebted to China!

Britain must leave the EU and strenghten the Commonwealth if we are to have a prosperous future.

Even if it did lead to a better place (which is a big if), the transition to the brave new world of the Commonwealth would lead to an immediate contraction of the economy so sever you would be coping with it for at least a decade. It would look like the fall of communism all over again.

The EU is still the wealthiest and most stable trading zone in the world, despite it current troubles. If the Commonwealth was such a fantastic idea, there is absolutely no reason why Britain would not have been pursuing this option in parallel with the EU - there was nothing to stop them.

The reason why the commons were whipped into line was because anti-EU sentiment doesn't equate to economic common sense, and even the anti-European Conservative party know that the pain and lose embodied in a withdrawal would be massive. Democracy has its flaws when people's intellectual level is dominated by reading the Sun newspaper.

Br Cornelius

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trade with the Commonwealth is strong and does run parallel with EU Trade. example: The UK is Canada's second biggest world trading partner If you are exporting to Canada, UK products benefit from preferential tariffs under Commonwealth agreements. This market access is beneficial to UK businesses and gives them an advantage over other EU countries. the same agreements exist with the remaining Commonwealth countries. So we get the best of both worlds. hence why successive governments dont want to give a referendum on leaving the political union. but their will come a point in time when these advantages start turning to negatives, possible sooner rather than later - the way the shambolic running of the Eurozone is turning out.

The News this morning - after the euphoria of the grand statements from Sarkosy/ Merkel has died down and question are asked. the 1 Trillion euro fund cash box - has no money in it. Italy are slipping down the slope - Portugal Spain NEXT. the EU is creating bigger and bigger problems down the road. IF the EU is to save itself it needs to send the PIIGS to the slaughter.

that's enough for now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trade with the Commonwealth is strong and does run parallel with EU Trade. example: The UK is Canada's second biggest world trading partner If you are exporting to Canada, UK products benefit from preferential tariffs under Commonwealth agreements. This market access is beneficial to UK businesses and gives them an advantage over other EU countries. the same agreements exist with the remaining Commonwealth countries. So we get the best of both worlds. hence why successive governments dont want to give a referendum on leaving the political union. but their will come a point in time when these advantages start turning to negatives, possible sooner rather than later - the way the shambolic running of the Eurozone is turning out.

The News this morning - after the euphoria of the grand statements from Sarkosy/ Merkel has died down and question are asked. the 1 Trillion euro fund cash box - has no money in it. Italy are slipping down the slope - Portugal Spain NEXT. the EU is creating bigger and bigger problems down the road. IF the EU is to save itself it needs to send the PIIGS to the slaughter.

that's enough for now.

Exactly the attitude why the Commonwealth never worked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly the attitude why the Commonwealth never worked.

The EU can only dream.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The real problem with the commonwealth is that it is made up of unequal members. If real free trade was allowed between member states, those poor countries with low wages and low regulations would undercut the rich countries such as the UK, Canada and Australia. This fundamental imbalance will prevent the Commonwealth from been anything more than talking shop for pals.

Br Cornelius

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The real problem with the EU is that it is made up of unequal members. If real free trade was allowed between member states, those poor countries with low wages and low regulations would undercut the rich countries such as the UK, France and Germany. This fundamental imbalance will prevent the EU from been anything more than talking shop for pals.

Br Cornelius

There you go corrected it for you :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There you go corrected it for you :)

The situation is somewhat different to the imbalances within the Commonwealth. Do you honestly think that the commonwealth could ever become a free trade zone ?

If you do then I will have to consider all you comments in a very skeptical light in future.

Br Cornelius

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The situation is somewhat different to the imbalances within the Commonwealth. Do you honestly think that the commonwealth could ever become a free trade zone ?

If you do then I will have to consider all you comments in a very skeptical light in future.

Br Cornelius

The commonwealth works well in that it attempts to give poorer countries an opportunity to grow their way out of the poverty. which should be praised and encouraged. a free trade commonwealth has massive potential much more potential than the EU could ever dream of - but would be difficult to achieve.

as it stands the commonwealth works well for the UK and its commonwealth members. like i've said in a previous post, the UK has the best of both worlds - trade with the EU and the commonwealth. we are in a great position to take advantage of both. we just need to steer clear of the entanglement of the political European union.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The commonwealth works well in that it attempts to give poorer countries an opportunity to grow their way out of the poverty. which should be praised and encouraged. a free trade commonwealth has massive potential much more potential than the EU could ever dream of - but would be difficult to achieve.

as it stands the commonwealth works well for the UK and its commonwealth members. like i've said in a previous post, the UK has the best of both worlds - trade with the EU and the commonwealth. we are in a great position to take advantage of both. we just need to steer clear of the entanglement of the political European union.

I think you dodged the issue there. England only thinks the Commonwealth works because they would never really consider setting it up as a free trade zone. How could Britain possibly compete against India if there were no import tariffs set up to block the import of cheap cars, cheap everything. What would we be exporting to India in return - some highly specialist high tech items which they would rapidly work out how to make cheaper and steal our markets. Its just foolish dreaming to think that we can gain from the commonwealth on equal terms. It just won't happen.

The Commonwealth was a product of Empire which served the British well to extract valuable resources from our subject nations, we no longer write the rules which would allow that to happen again - we are equals around a big table with far to much to lose by opening up our markets.

Br Cornelius

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you dodged the issue there. England only thinks the Commonwealth works because they would never really consider setting it up as a free trade zone. How could Britain possibly compete against India if there were no import tariffs set up to block the import of cheap cars, cheap everything. What would we be exporting to India in return - some highly specialist high tech items which they would rapidly work out how to make cheaper and steal our markets. Its just foolish dreaming to think that we can gain from the commonwealth on equal terms. It just won't happen.

The Commonwealth was a product of Empire which served the British well to extract valuable resources from our subject nations, we no longer write the rules which would allow that to happen again - we are equals around a big table with far to much to lose by opening up our markets.

Br Cornelius

dodged what issue? a commonwealth free trade zone?, i've addressed it head on, i said in my reply it would be difficult to achieve. and the old saying goes if it isnt broke dont fix it.

the commonwealth in its current frame work - works and works well for the UK and at the risk of repeating myself, Britain gets the best of both worlds. trade with the EU and commonwealth. a finger in both pies. - exporting to Canada, Australia etc... our products benefit from preferential tariffs under Commonwealth agreements. This market access is beneficial to our businesses and gives them an advantage over other EU countries and rightly so. The UK should be seeking all advantages over EU countries in trade and investment.

i cannot understand why the europhiles are so against the UK renegotiating its position within the EU. If the UK negotiated a Swiss style agreement. what is so wrong with that? why cant the UK be part of the EU free trade agreement only?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

dodged what issue? a commonwealth free trade zone?, i've addressed it head on, i said in my reply it would be difficult to achieve. and the old saying goes if it isnt broke dont fix it.

the commonwealth in its current frame work - works and works well for the UK and at the risk of repeating myself, Britain gets the best of both worlds. trade with the EU and commonwealth. a finger in both pies. - exporting to Canada, Australia etc... our products benefit from preferential tariffs under Commonwealth agreements. This market access is beneficial to our businesses and gives them an advantage over other EU countries and rightly so. The UK should be seeking all advantages over EU countries in trade and investment.

i cannot understand why the europhiles are so against the UK renegotiating its position within the EU. If the UK negotiated a Swiss style agreement. what is so wrong with that? why cant the UK be part of the EU free trade agreement only?

It will not happen. If they want to renegotiate they will be shown the door. The UK is already on thin ice with the other member states in wanting to avoid as much of the "leveling" agreements that already exist. They will say good riddance and bring up the barricades. Then the British might actually understand where their interests are.

Also trading with Canada and Australia is not as good as trading with real neighbours - costs are greater and profits are lower. How about free trade with India, do you think they will accept anything less than parity. Are you proposing a two tier commonwealth with the rich trading in one block and the poor in the other. It just don't work.

Br Cornelius

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It will not happen. If they want to renegotiate they will be shown the door. The UK is already on thin ice with the other member states in wanting to avoid as much of the "leveling" agreements that already exist. They will say good riddance and bring up the barricades. Then the British might actually understand where their interests are.

Also trading with Canada and Australia is not as good as trading with real neighbours - costs are greater and profits are lower. How about free trade with India, do you think they will accept anything less than parity. Are you proposing a two tier commonwealth with the rich trading in one block and the poor in the other. It just don't work.

Br Cornelius

What barricades do you talk of? European companies sell us more than we sell them, we are their largest client. So are they going to cut off their nose to spite their face, No they will not. and even if the EU were childish enough to try and put trade barriers in place, firstly the UK has a couple of good trusted friends in Europe. Portugal our oldest ally, the Danish, the Dutch, Norway and Sweden - they wouldn't agree to such restrictions and you seem to forget Britain is a member of the WTO and so protected by trade agreements.

Replacing Britain’s EU membership with that of EFTA/EEA would mean that there would be no loss of Britain's trading relationship with other EU states. plus our financial contribution to the EU would decrease, in fact we'd possibly get more out than we put in. Membership of EFTA/EEA would also mean that the UK will regain full responsibility for Justice and Home Affairs. :w00t:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What barricades do you talk of? European companies sell us more than we sell them, we are their largest client. So are they going to cut off their nose to spite their face, No they will not. and even if the EU were childish enough to try and put trade barriers in place, firstly the UK has a couple of good trusted friends in Europe. Portugal our oldest ally, the Danish, the Dutch, Norway and Sweden - they wouldn't agree to such restrictions and you seem to forget Britain is a member of the WTO and so protected by trade agreements.

Replacing Britain's EU membership with that of EFTA/EEA would mean that there would be no loss of Britain's trading relationship with other EU states. plus our financial contribution to the EU would decrease, in fact we'd possibly get more out than we put in. Membership of EFTA/EEA would also mean that the UK will regain full responsibility for Justice and Home Affairs. :w00t:

Now, once Britain is out of the solidarity community (the EU), why would the Europeans want to favor the British unemployed for the unemployed at home? While I doubt there will be barricades what will happen is a Swiss deal if Britain wants to be in the free trade zone: You have to obey all EU laws and regulations but you will not get a say in what they are unless you have full membership, just like the Swiss have to (so they can claim to be "neutral").

If Britain wants out it is completely or just get the disadvantages and none of the advantages.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The real problem with the commonwealth is that it is made up of unequal members. If real free trade was allowed between member states, those poor countries with low wages and low regulations would undercut the rich countries such as the UK, Canada and Australia. This fundamental imbalance will prevent the Commonwealth from been anything more than talking shop for pals.

Br Cornelius

Unlike the EU the Commonwealth is NOT a politcal union and it hasn't, and never has, had any plans of becoming a superstate.

It doesn't have a single currency, its own parliament or its own capital. The Commonwealth is merely an intergovernmental organisation like the UN rather than an actual political union like the EU. And long may that continue.

Also, unlike in the EU, members of the Commonwealth are all seen as equals. Tiny Vanuatu is seen as the equal of giant India. This is unlike what occurs within the EU.

Edited by Blackwhite
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The cynical lie that leaving the EU would destroy Britain: The majority of people now want out of this bloated dictatorship, we at least need a referendum

By Simon Heffer

29th October 2011

Daily Mail

A tumultuous week for the European Union, and our relations with it, included the publication on Monday of a remarkable opinion poll.

It showed a majority of the British respondents in favour of leaving the EU: 49 per cent, against 40 per cent who wished to stay in.

How times have changed. When the same polling organisation, ICM, asked that question ten years ago, only 19 per cent wanted to go, while 68 per cent wanted to stay.

The intervening decade has forcibly acquainted the British public with many of the unpleasant realities of rule from Brussels. It has reminded people that a developed, supposedly sovereign democracy like Britain ought to be able to make its own decisions about matters of fundamental importance.

Thanks to the EU, this is not always so. Europe can over-ride our justice system. It can over-ride our immigration policy.

It inflicts regulation on us that suppresses growth and prosperity. It costs taxpayers and businesses an extraordinary amount of money.

Above all, the EU’s inability to govern itself with probity and economic prudence has made it an object of our contempt. It is not just that fraud and corruption prevent its accounts being signed off year after year: it is also that its arrogant belief in a one-size-fits-all currency has gone horribly and predictably wrong (which many in Britain predicted), with serious consequences for all EU member states, in or out of the euro.

It has been clear for years that many feel our submission to Brussels has gone too far, and that there should be a renegotiation of our relationship to allow for key powers to be repatriated to Westminster.

The new ICM poll suggests that frustration at thus far being denied such a renegotiation has forced more people towards outright opposition to the EU.

The EU and its propagandists have always been effective at pressuring the citizens of member states into believing that any attempt to leave the warm embrace of Brussels would result in disaster, with the offending nation suffering isolation, penury and irrelevance.

However, a pamphlet published this week by David Campbell-Bannerman, a Tory MEP (who is a descendant of Henry Campbell-Bannerman, Britain's Liberal Party Prime Minister from 1906 to 1908) , seeks to argue (against party policy) the contrary. Its title says it all: ‘The Ultimate Plan B: A Positive Vision Of An Independent Britain Outside The European Union.

article-2054839-0E93495600000578-197_233x423.jpg

David Campbell-Bannerman's strongest argument is that there would be no economic downside to our departure from the EU

Coinciding as it does with the ICM poll findings, his thesis deserves to be studied carefully. Firstly we need to break out of the mindset that anyone who tries to make the case for Britain leaving the EU is mad — or, to judge from the contempt in which such a view is treated on certain BBC programmes, downright evil.

Mr Campbell-Bannerman’s strongest argument is that there would be no economic downside to our departure. As the EU sells more to us than we do to it, it would be very much in its interests to enact a free trade agreement with us were we to leave. In 2009, our trade deficit — the excess of what we bought over what we sold — in manufactured goods with the EU was a shade under £35 billion.

Better than that — and here, at last, there is something to be said for the 2007 Lisbon Treaty — such a free trade agreement would not be a matter of conjecture. Article 50 of Lisbon requires the EU to make a trade arrangement with any nation deciding to leave it.

So the claim that there would be inevitable and large job losses is cast into doubt. He also argues that — with the ascent of China, India and Brazil — Britain would do well to leave a trading bloc whose share of world GDP is forecast to fall to 15 per cent in 2020, down from 36 per cent in 1980.

Just as the EU took no account of its role in a post-Soviet world, it seems incapable of understanding how to remain competitive in relation to rising powers such as China.

Britain also enjoys trading relationships elsewhere in the world that are not shared by other EU countries. We send 18 per cent of our exports to the U.S.: Germany sends only 7 per cent. And the biggest external investor in Britain is America.

Mr Campbell-Bannerman rests much of his case for leaving the EU on the liberation it would bring from over-regulation of every aspect of our lives — one of the reasons for the EU’s poor competitiveness. He says that more than 100,000 regulations and directives have been imposed upon us since we joined the EU in 1973.

For example, the working-time directive — designed to limit the number of hours we can work, and which is estimated to cost £11.9 billion a year in lost productivity — would go if we left the EU. So, too, would a host of environmental orders such as the EU renewables directive, which insists we derive 20 per cent of our energy from renewables such as wind power, at an estimated £22 billion a year.

The Open Europe think tank reported last year that EU regulations had cost Britain £124 billion since 1998. This figure is not a partisan invention, but based on the Government’s assessments.

But the truth is the ‘bonfire of regulations’ that ministers talk about would be possible only if we left the EU or had a successful renegotiation to repatriate such powers.

This week, as desperation mounted among eurozone leaders, Angela Merkel has taken up Nicolas Sarkozy’s line that the peace of Europe is preserved only by the existence of the EU. In fact, as Mr Campbell-Bannerman points out, the peace of Europe has long been preserved by Nato with its huge American involvement.

He also dismisses as a myth the idea that British influence in the world would disappear if we left Europe. Our membership of the G8 and G20, our seats on the UN Security Council, the World Trade Organisation and the IMF are not dependent on our being in the EU.

We remain one of the top ten manufacturing nations in the world. We have the sixth largest economy, and London (despite EU attempts to handicap it) remains the world’s financial centre.

Leaving the EU, Mr Campbell Bannerman says, would mean ‘Britain would take back control over its own destiny, defence, economy, foreign relations, environment, transport, fishing, farming and market controls’.

It would also avoid the proposed Financial Transactions tax that the EU proposes, and which our Prime Minister has called ‘an attack’ on the City of London.

Britain would save its net contribution to the EU of £6.7 billion a year. This equates to 44 new hospitals, 268 schools or 62 bypasses a year; or a penny off income tax or VAT.

Those who argue that withdrawal need not damage Britain have a right to put their case. Instead of dismissing them as ‘cranks, gadflies and extremists’, as Michael Howard did when leading the Conservative Party, it might be politic to debate the points that now even a Tory MEP makes.

If Mr Cameron believes what he says about the importance of the UK being in the EU, he will take the advice of this newspaper and call a referendum on whether or not the public would like him to renegotiate our terms of membership.

This might, at least, buy him some goodwill — by making the country feel not just that he’s aware of the depth of feeling on the issue, but also that he is prepared to do something about it.

He should see that a persistent refusal to do this is hardening sentiment in this country and in his own party against Europe, and against a political class that seems resolved to ignore public opinion.

And he should realise that the longer he leaves it before allowing us a say, the worse the outcome is likely to be for him.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2054839/The-cynical-lie-leaving-EU-destroy-Britain.html#ixzz1cI4jcis0

Edited by Blackwhite
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unlike the EU the Commonwealth is NOT a politcal union and has never had any plans of becoming a superstate. It doesn't have a single currency, its own parliament or its own capital. The Commonwealth is merely an intergovernmental organisation like the UN rather than an actual political union like the EU. And long may that continue.

Also, unlike in the EU, members of the Commonwealth are all seen as equals. Tiny Vanuatu is seen as the equal of giant India. This is unlike what occurs within the EU.

And yet fundamentally the Commonwealth offers none of its members anything of real value, unlike the EU. Its a lovely notion to compare the two, but really they are two entirely different beasts. You may imagine that striking out alone offers huge value to the UK, but alone is a very isolated and vulnerable to the vagueries of the world market. And as Questionmark pointed out, if you want to be in a trading zone you get all the obligations and none of the influence in the EU.

Even David Cameron understands that its a dumb idea which will leave Britain out in the cold in more ways than one.

Taking an opinion piece from the Daily Mail hardly supports your case in any meaningful way. Rantings from the Ultra-right Euroskeptic fringe of British politics. I had the great misfortune to read a whole edition of the Mail about a year ago - the most depressing fear mongering, hate filled rag I have ever had the misfortune to come across.

Br Cornelius

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And yet fundamentally the Commonwealth offers none of its members anything of real value, unlike the EU.

The EU offers no advantage to Britain

As for the Commonwealth, the member states cooperate within a framework of common values and goals as outlined in the Singapore Declaration. These include the promotion of democracy (something which the EU wouldn't recognise even if democracy walked up to it and slapped it on the face every day of the week), human rights, good governance, the rule of law, individual liberty, egalitarianism, free trade, multilateralism, and world peace. The Commonwealth is not a political union, but an intergovernmental organisation through which countries with social, political, and economic backgrounds are regarded as equal in status.

The Commonwealth's objectives were first outlined in the 1971 Singapore Declaration, which committed the Commonwealth to the institution of world peace; promotion of representative democracy and individual liberty; the pursuit of equality and opposition to racism; the fight against poverty, ignorance, and disease; and free trade. To these were added opposition to discrimination on the basis of gender by the Lusaka Declaration of 1979, and environmental sustainability by the Langkawi Declaration of 1989. These objectives were reinforced by the Harare Declaration in 1991.

The Commonwealth's current highest-priority aims are on the promotion of democracy and development, as outlined in the 2003 Aso Rock Declaration, which built on those in Singapore and Harare and clarified their terms of reference, stating, "We are committed to democracy, good governance, human rights, gender equality, and a more equitable sharing of the benefits of globalisation." The Commonwealth website lists its areas of work as: Democracy, Economics, Education, Gender, Governance, Human Rights, Law, Small States, Sport, Sustainability, and Youth.

The Commonwealth has long been distinctive as an international forum where developed economies (such as the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, Singapore, and New Zealand) and many of the world's poorer countries seek to reach agreement by consensus. This aim has sometimes been difficult to achieve, as when disagreements over Rhodesia in the late 1960s and 1970s and over apartheid in South Africa in the 1980s led to a cooling of relations between the United Kingdom and African members.

Through a separate voluntary fund, Commonwealth governments support the Commonwealth Youth Programme, a division of the Secretariat with offices in Gulu (Uganda), Lusaka (Zambia), Chandigarh (India), Georgetown (Guyana) and Honiara (Solomon Islands).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commonwealth_of_nations#Objectives_and_activities

You may imagine that striking out alone offers huge value to the UK, but alone is a very isolated and vulnerable to the vagueries of the world market.

Try reading the article I posted above before going on yet another rant at how Britain will suddenly becomed doomed if it leaves the wondrous EU utopia.

Even David Cameron understands that its a dumb idea which will leave Britain out in the cold in more ways than one.

Who cares what Cameron thinks? The British people should be the boss, not him. He should listen to the British people who are demanding an EU in/out referendum.

Taking an opinion piece from the Daily Mail hardly supports your case in any meaningful way. Rantings from the Ultra-right Euroskeptic fringe of British politics. I had the great misfortune to read a whole edition of the Mail about a year ago - the most depressing fear mongering, hate filled rag I have ever had the misfortune to come across.

I'd rather believe Britain's most popular newspaper than the Loony Lefty rantings of the BBC and The Guardian, who are almost always wrong and out of touch with public opinion.

Britain needs to get out of the EU; the Government needs to give us the referendum which the majority of the British people want. And, once out of the EU, Britain will become a much better place.

Edited by Blackwhite
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The EU offers no advantage to Britain

As for the Commonwealth, the member states cooperate within a framework of common values and goals as outlined in the Singapore Declaration. These include the promotion of democracy (something which the EU wouldn't recognise even if democracy walked up to it and slapped it on the face every day of the week), human rights, good governance, the rule of law, individual liberty, egalitarianism, free trade, multilateralism, and world peace. The Commonwealth is not a political union, but an intergovernmental organisation through which countries with social, political, and economic backgrounds are regarded as equal in status.

Try reading the article I posted above before going on yet another rant at how Britain will suddenly becomed doomed if it leaves the wondrous EU utopia.

Who cares what Cameron thinks? The British people should be the boss, not him. He should listen to the British people who are demanding an EU in/out referendum.

I'd rather believe Britain's most popular newspaper than the Loony Lefty rantings of the BBC and The Guardian, who are almost always wrong and out of touch with public opinion.

Britain needs to get out of the EU; the Government needs to give us the referendum which the majority of the British people want. And, once out of the EU, Britain will become a much better place.

Your a hard case. The real right wing deal. I suspect that's why no British Government will offer a referendum, it knows the hardships of the economic collapse (which had everything to do with domestic mismanagement and nothing to do with the EU) is pushing the British public towards extremist irrational opinions - led by the nose by the Daily Mail like pigs to the slaughter.

For an excellent analysis of why all the imagined advantages of a EU pull out would infact be disadvantages;

http://daryan.blog.co.uk/2011/10/29/the-case-against-a-english-pull-out-of-the-eu-12088507/

And again I will restate that I think all this is simply a smoke and mirrors campaign to attempt to distract the public from the dire straights successive British Governments have led their nation into (without any help from the EU).

Br Cornelius

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your a hard case. The real right wing deal.

I'm no different from the MAJORITY of the people in the United Kingdom who want out of the EUSSR. There is nothing unusual about my views. If you were in the UK it'd actually be YOUR views which would be unusual.

I suspect that's why no British Government will offer a referendum,

No British Government will offer a referendum because they are all too cowardly because they know what the answer to that referendum will most likely be. If the British Government was sure that most Brits wanted to stay in the EU then they would give us the referendum. The fact that they aren't giving us a referendum shows that they are sure the British people will vote to leave the EU. They are cowards.

The most disgraceful party in all of this are the Liberal Democrats who, in the run up to the 2010 General Election, promised the British people an EU in/out referendum if they came to power. Now that they are in power, they are refusing to give us the in/out referendum. They are a bunch of cowardly, left wing hypocrites.

it knows the hardships of the economic collapse (which had everything to do with domestic mismanagement and nothing to do with the EU) is pushing the British public towards extremist irrational opinions - led by the nose by the Daily Mail like pigs to the slaughter.

Stop talking a load of nonsense, you silly left wing twerp. It isn't extremist to want to leave the EU. Leaving the EU is a desire shared by the majority of the British people.

If it's extremist for me to want Britain to be independent of the EU, to be a free, sovereign, independent nation in the early 21st Century then logic dictates that it was also extremist for those Irish republicans to want independence for Ireland (those Irish reoublicans who gave their lives for Irish freedom from Britain will be turning in their graves to see Ireland now being ruled from Brussels rather than London).

For an excellent analysis of why all the imagined advantages of a EU pull out would infact be disadvantages;

http://daryan.blog.co.uk/2011/10/29/the-case-against-a-english-pull-out-of-the-eu-12088507/

Why should I believe that article rather than that excellent Daily Mail article and that excellent pamphlet written by David Campbell-Bannerman?

And again I will restate that I think all this is simply a smoke and mirrors campaign to attempt to distract the public from the dire straights successive British Governments have led their nation into (without any help from the EU).

Whatever "dire straits" Britain may be in at least we're nowhere near as bad as Ireland.

And, once out of the EU and free from the needless red tape and bureaucracy of Brussels which strangle the British economy, our economy will beging to flourish once more.

Britain will be better off out of the EU.

Edited by Blackwhite
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.