@kroikye I believe you're mistaken. Multiple time Jesus made know that He IS God. For example, read John 14:8-11. He clearly states He is God. If you have any questions concerning Jesus, God, Heaven, Hell, or just Christianity in general, feel free to inbox me :)
I dont believe Jesus IS God , he never claimed divinity himself in his life. The Bible is with its Prophesies a very important book though, I am currently studying the Quran who sees Jesus as a very important Prophet.But rejects the Idea that Jesus IS God, this sounds a bit more credible to me, but I am still studying :)
CNN and Fox use of fake video from soccer incidents and Greek riots to spin lies against Russia's December 2011 elections is insulting + the neocon media in the USA is totally silent about it : what a criminal SHAME ! this is not American ! 2 ) Eutube must talk about the 5 trillion euros in assets that the oligarchs stole from the Russian People in the 90's,they must pay for them or give them back to the Russian People + to distract they try to crash Euro-EU Markets, financialtools1.blogspot.com
@CommanderMethos i am Black myself, and i personally dont like the man.. And im just stating the prophecy, he will come from EUROPE and he will lead the whole world.. keep your eyes open
right current economic crisis was caused by the collapse of the banks which began when the american government allowed leeman brothers to go to the wall. they did this because because they did not fully understand just how much debt the banks owed each other. the banks were allowed to get into this state because the regulations meant to stop it from happening, again, were lifted for impeding prosperity. that is the fault of captalism and the people who didnt think there could be another bust.
Not sure the pope will be THE Anti-Christ. I believe he is a type of anti-christ, a false prophet used by Satan to mislead many. But I agree with the whole EU thing (and I'm British, championofgods---I see this happening). The EU will definitely have a big part to play later on.
Us Turks we don't need European union they don't like us cause of the ottomans cause where Muslims well guess what we don't need EU, EU will kiss our asses soon when the time comes. I don't like the frogs, I don't like Austria racists pricks. I hope another financial crises happens again because turkey wont be affected the EU will. Turkey is the second biggest in NATO so kiss our asses again FUCK EU. EUROPEAN UNION WILL COLLAPSE and turkey will be the super power.
Us Turks we don't need European union they don't like us cause of the ottomans cause where Muslims well guess what we don't need EU, EU will kiss our asses soon when the time comes. I don't like the frogs, I don't like Austria racists pricks. I hope another financial crises happens again because turkey wont be affected the EU will. Turkey is the second biggest in NATO so kiss our asses again FUCK EU. EUROPEAN UNION WILL COLLAPSE and turkey will be the super power.
While people keep looking for that dreaded beast of revelation out of Europe Islam has been beheading the saints up to this day and slowly taking over the world. Sharia anyone?? Your antichrist system, the biggest most militant religion that DENY jesus as God(blashpemy), deny his death(blaspemy) and resurrection is poking you at your faces
I love how american people think that EU is evil and wants to conquer the world, they should look to their own country instead of accusing an alliance that is working towards peace.
@championofgods If you would look at all the videos on my channel, you would know that I am NOT happy with the way MY government conducts itself! The European Union HAS NOT worked...look at the economic crisis they are in! What good did the EU do to stop it and/or fix it? The EU is just another fullfillment of Bible prophecy. The North American Union is knocking on our front door right now and I DONT LIKE IT ONE BIT!!!!
@MrFRO4484 maybe EU has done little to nothing to stop the economic crisis, but it was the USA that started it, not EU.
And its the USA that are trying to impose their beliefs and ideologies on other countries by means of war, not EU. European countries only join EU if they wish to do so... they are not forced, true that once inside they must obey the rules, but all organizations and alliances works that way... you cant say that EU is evil, there are even more evil countries.
@championofgods the e.u. started this mess and yes the e.u. is from the pits of hell !literally!the antichrist is calling the shots world wide !the americans partipated!they dont know that they sold their souls to the devil ! and you said it ,its not germany france!it is the e.u. they have become one just like the bible prredicted! it is to large so 17 nations will leave!we are watching this........ evil! its! ,from the pits of hell!the beast is here!wake up britain!usa!
@jonathanmoreno1000 sorry, but last time I heard, the actual crisis appeared in USA,
And as I can see USA are more evil than EU... USA have a Imperialist Behavior since WW2, and they stick their noses in almost every major conflict in the world...
And they want the monopoly of oil resources, thats why they started "Iraqi Freedom"... so dont rush to USA cause if EU its evil, USA are much more evil...
And tell me, why are u saying that EU is evil... give me facts (facts dont come from bible).
@championofgods we predict the future we have been waiting for this for a long time!i cannot try to convince anyone i only try to reach people that want to know!take care!
@jonathanmoreno1000 if that is true, then soon we will find out all the truth about this... although I am still not conviced that EU is evil and it comes from hell... come on... even church ruled europe for centuries and it was called The Dark Ages or Age of Faith like some call, and that was a evil reign, the world lived in darkness without any real knowledge of the world, and new scientific discoveries were denied
so... its EU more evil than that? (knowing the futures isnt a fact btw) peace
@MrFRO4484 Thats like saying that the USA doesn't work and should disband because of the economic crisis in the 30s (Which BTW was caused by the US as the current crisis was). The EU is the sole guarantor of democracy and human rights on the planet. All your state does is to start wars of aggression, coup democratically elected governments and abuse human rights. If the EU is the one to stop your war against humanity then I'm first to say that I'm proud to be a European.
@championofgods The EU is evil through and through and will be much worse than the US ever was. You've just fallen for the Elite's plan. To destroy the US and rejoice, whilst the EU and China rise as saviours. The EU is destructive, devicive, and enslaves, it's working through the same motions as everywhere else. All in all? To build a society where you live to serve the state, if they allow you to live.
@Blitzbok I never heard anything about EU destroying and enslaving... now US is destroying the middle eastern countries... that seems pretty evil to me and are deceiving the world by saying that they want to liberate the people while they only want oil. Everything you said, it seems that its US that is doing it to other countries... and about serving... well there isnt a US motto that says "dont ask what America can do for you... ask what you can do for america"?
@championofgods You are kidding me right? Just look at their meddling abroad too! I know full well the USA's activities, as a child I hated the USA for these very reasons, until I realized who and what was behind it all. Thinking in terms of nationalism is flawed. Every nation is corrupt and destructive, and the EU is in many ways far worse, and more dangerous. I have numerous videos to recommend. Search for Roman Empire Rules Today and you will get a detailed and credible sourcing of info.
@Blitzbok so, EU is behind USA evil deeds? Come on, you cant possible believe that... How can they be controlled by EU? EU has not so much power...
USA is controlling United Nations though. From my point of view... if one government is evil, then it is USA. No evil deed has been made by EU so far. This conspiracy theory was created in USA cause they fear that EU grows more powerfull than them, cause they fear that EU could be an obstacle to world domination.
@championofgods Why does the EU have so much Prophetic symbolism associated in its images or have its building constructed in the form of the tower of Babylon? For example, the woman riding the beast statue and painting in their lobby comes straight out of the Revelation of Daniel?
I'm an objective thinker... I'd like to understand why you think they would construct themselves around this non-sense or do you feel as though its just coincidence?
@Kwizmatix right, cause if I were to create an evil orgonaztion I would put every prophetic symbols representing my organization so people could see: "hey this organization is evil" *sigh*
@championofgods Or, I wouldn't use any prophetic symbol non-sense because I'd be like WTF if someone presented this to me as the theme of my organization & especially that building itself.
But still, I asked that question because I am sincerely interested in hearing your honest opinion on why you think they would build themselves around such bizaare imagery. A healthy discussion certainly doesn't hurt & If you have an opinion i'd actually like to hear it. Thanks
@championofgods I am British, in Britain we give the EU 45 million pounds a day, it amounts to an average of 50 billion a year, double the amount of money saved on public spending cuts here, and what do we get for it? Nothing, we'd make far more money if we left, we'd have more of our own money to spend as we wish, we'd have our democracy back, and we could trade with anyone, not just Europe, it’s like that for most members, that's the real face of the EU today.
@championofgods And as the Commission continues to buy government bonds, it not only wants to double the bailout fund, and even increase the scope of the bailout fund, so it can continue to buy up its own debt. Portugal goes up next for bailout with debts of up to 325% of GDP, then Spain which will require funds of up to 7x that of Ireland, and once that's done, the money's gone, there won't be anymore, the fund has been bled dry.
@championofgods The Euro was a massive contributor to the economic crash, it's now helping to slow the recovery, we've seen it with the bailout fund, and with it with Article 121 of the Lisbon Treaty with Greece being turned into a protectorate. 3 months before the Portuguese bailout the Commission were patting themselves on the back that the bond auction in Portugal went well the previous week, when the fact was the only reason it was a success was because the ECB was buying up Portuguese debt.
@championofgods The Lisbon Treaty now gives the Commission enormous powers, it can overrule the European Parliament and any of the national parliaments of EU member-states, it can sign treaties on behalf of countries, stop countries from leaving the EU, and can enact emergency laws to practically take countries over. 70% of law in the EU is made by the Commission, people we haven't elected and cannot remove, and since they can now overrule anything we agree democratically, it's more like 100%.
“Public opinion will be lead to adopt, without knowing it, the proposals we dare not present to them directly… All earlier proposals will be in the new text, but will be hidden and disguised.”
- Valery Giscard D’Estaing, author of the European Constitution, aided creation of Lisbon Treaty
“The good thing about not calling it a constitution is that no-one can ask for a referendum on it.”
- Giuliano Amato, former Italian prime-minister, Lisbon Treaty supporter
@championofgods The European Commission is unelected, yet is the most powerful EU institution, it pushed through the Lisbon Treaty to gain more power from the crisis using illegitimate means, the Treaty is a toned down version of the European Constitution that was scrapped for being too extreme, the Commission openly opposed the democratic process when pushing it through, they blocked referendums, denied referendums and bullied the Irish into voting a second time when they disliked the result.
@MouseWarlord The most powerful institution within the EU is and remains the European council (Which consists of democratically elected leaders). Other then that the European commission has no means to block referendums, only states themselves do.
@Teranex Wrong, you have very limited knowledge of the workings of the EU. The European Council comprises of the heads of state/government of the European member states, and it has no formal legislative power. The Commission had the power to bully the Irish government into voting a second time when the referendum result was a no for the Lisbon Treaty, and the Commission does have the ability to block and deny referendums under new Lisbon Treaty legislation, you are factually misinformed
@MouseWarlord While the commison can propose some laws (As its competences are very limited), those have to be accepted by the STATES (CEU) and the Parliament, under the codecison procedure. Other than that its the European Council (Again the states) which set the general direction and polices which the EU will take. Thus the states have far more power then the commission. Other then that many commissioners are representing the interests of the members states rather then the union.
@Teranex It's funny how you replied to yourself there, but I assumed you meant me. I can prove all of it, the Commission is the executive branch, unelected, answers to no one but the treaty it created. Article 48, piece 6 and 7, the self-amending clause, leaders can meet and enact legislation and constitutional changes without any referendum or parliamentary debate.
@MouseWarlord "Article 48, piece 6 and 7"-Yes in case the EUROPEAN COUNCIL (The strongest institution in the EU representing the STATES) reaches a decision my unanimity. Thus you proved me right at 2 points A)The council is stronger then the commission and B)Its the states who can block a referendum and not the commission unlike you claim.
@MouseWarlord Thus no, you are wrong as you did display extremely limited knowledge of where the powers of the states lie within the EU. "Commission had the power"-nice claim bro, can you prove any of it? No? Which article of the Lisbon treaty does give the commission the power to block referendums? What power does the commission have to bully states? Lol you don't know nothing do you (Reposted it, since it disturbs you so much).
@Teranex Incorrect, the Parliament and countries can be bypassed, the Commission is charged by the Lisbon Treaty with being the executive body of the European Union, it proposes legislation, implements decisions, upholds the treaties and the day-to-day running of the EU, it has sole authority and responsibility for the administration of Europe. The Council has no legislative power, it can't do ANYTHING, it's a club for European leaders, it doesn't set direction, that's what the Commission does.
@MouseWarlord "Parliament and countries can be bypassed"-Wrong yet again, they cant be bypassed as the commission doesn't have any legislative power. Thus in order to implement a directive it has to go trough the co-decision procedure which includes (STATES (Council of the EU)+ EU PARLIAMENT), which can further alter any kind of legal act proposed to the commission to any extent they like, while the commission has NO word in it. The president in the US could for example veto a similar situation.
@Teranex Wrong, it doesn't go through the council, nothing does. Of course the Commission has bloody legislative power, I can't believe you said that, stop displaying your ignorance, it's the most powerful institution. As an executive power it direct control over the workings of the EU. The European Council has no legislative or executive power what so ever, the EU admits that, "general direction" is meaningless, and you know it.
@MouseWarlord "Commission has bloody legislative"-The commission has NO legislative power. Give me one source which proves otherwise. "The European Council has no legislative or executive power"-Under article 48 the council can adopt any decision as such having full LEGISLATIVE and EXECUTIVE powers to do so in disregard of all other institutions. "the EU admits that"-Give me a source where the "EU" says that lol. Thus once again you are fully wrong.
That's the real order, although the European Council is merely for show, it has no real authority. But what I don't understand is the fact you know that the EU is undemocratic, that it can bypass referendums and national parliaments, but you're fine with that.
@MouseWarlord "That's the real order"-What are you talking about? "European Council is merely for show"-I have clearly proven otherwise, article 48 is a witness of it. The EU is perfectly democratic, as it has all 3 branches which a nation state has. ECom (Executive), CEU+EP (Legislative) and ECJ (Judicial). You just have a very flawed perception of how the EU works. Seriously ECom has Executive and legislative powers? Where did you read that? You high bro?
@Teranex Perfectly democratic? Then how is it that the European Commission is unelected, yet has executive power, how is it that the only directly elected institution in the EU, the parliament, can only accept or reject legislation proposed by the Commission, but even that is undermined by the fact that the Council (unelected) also has to agree before any legislation is adopted, and the EC can bypass referendums, and sign treaties on behalf of countries without democratic representation?
@MouseWarlord A)The commission is Affirmed by the member states+Parliament, thus it is legitimate. B)Parliament can under the codecision procedure 1)Accept 2)Decline 3)Amend a proposal made by the Commission. As can the CEU. C) Council is elected as it is made up of democratically elected representatives of each member state. You seem to chose to be ignorant of that fact. D) and under the VCDR the country representatives can make such a decision if they all agree (Which happens rarley).
@Teranex C) The Council is not directly elected, because the elected officials in each member state were elected to their particular office, they weren't elected to hold office in another organisation, it should be a completely separate affair, otherwise no they aren't elected D) How does the VCDR have anything to do with this?
@MouseWarlord D)The Vienna convention of diplomatic relations clearly states that there are 3 persons which may represent their state in international relations, what they say in regard to their country becomes LEGALLY BINDING and can be sued upon on a international court.
@Teranex A) In a representative democracy people are elected to have the power to make decisions on behalf of the people, not to hand over the power bestowed on them via the ballot box to someone above them, that's not democracy, because the people didn't vote for them to have the right to make decisions on behalf of them, that therefore does not make it legitimate B) I know, they can't create legislation, they can only reject, accept or amend legislation proposed by an unelected commission
@MouseWarlord A)They can do what they want with the power which was bestowed to them by the people which elected them. Thus as long their decision is within the frames of the constitution of the state it is legitimate. B)Seems you don't as you said that they can just accept or decline it. C)The members of the council are elected by the people of their own RESPECTIVE COUNTRIES OF ORIGIN if you don't recognize that then you clearly don't know who comprises the council.
@Teranex And a nation-state doesn't have to be democratic, and if it is democratic the executive and legislative branches have to be democratically elected. And you seem to like the fact that the EU is now operating is a quasi-federal nation-state itself. And I'm not your "bro"
@MouseWarlord "doesn't have to be democratic"-You have to be in order to be a member of the EU. It is written in the Copenhagen criteria. "have to be democratically elected"-The commission is elected indirectly by "electors" which are represented by the European council and the parliament. If you consider this undemocratic then the president of the US is also undemocratically elected. "seem to like"-Europe has to unite in order to stay a relevant actor in world affairs. Thus i don't oppose it.
@Teranex But you seem to have ignored the fact that the only elected institution merely has half a say in in whether legislation goes through or not. That isn't how a "democratic" institution is meant to operate. You've also ignored the referendum bypassing, public opinion ignoring bullying arrogant nature of the EU. And Europe doesn't need to unite at all, individual nation states throughout history have been extremely successful alone, but even so if it happens it must be done democratically.
@MouseWarlord The commission is DE FACTO elected the same way as the US president (AKA not directly by the people). "as indirect election, it's not election, its not democracy"-Too bad for you as this is considered democratic. The US is the 19th most democratic country and is utilizing this system thus clearly proving you wrong with your statement that this is an "undemocratic" procedure.
@MouseWarlord "has half a say"-All institutions are comprised of elected members EP-elected by the citizens of the EU, CEU/ECouncil-Elected in their own respective states, EC-elected indirectly (ALL democratically legitimate as such its your flawed perception, lack of understanding of EU institutions and has nothing to do with the lack of democracy). Other then that all democratic federative states in the world (USA/Germany/Brazil...) work per the DE FACTO same system as the EU.
@Teranex Which is completely hypocritical since the EU itself is undemocratic. There is no such thing as indirect election, it's not election, its not democracy, an official can only claim to be a democratically elected representative if they are elected by the people. It's not a democracy if the executives aren't elected by the people they're meant to represent, and the US president is elected directly. The commission is unelected, and thus they are illegitimate.
@MouseWarlord "the US president is elected directly."-Lol your lack of knowledge is amusing. In the US people elect electors in each state. The number of electors in each state depends on the population of the state (Example California: 55 electors Alaska: 3 electors). Once elected, the electors elect the president. Before you comment next time open a book or two.
@Teranex You have your European union, just please kick the United kingdom, we did not fight two world wars to become a province of a continental empire. Don't know why you want to unite Europe, everyone who has tried to has failed, even the Roman empire could not keep Europe together, for we Europeans yearn for freedom, and national independence.
@MrGilles1990 A)The problem is the EU cant kick out UK even if it wanted. If that would be a possibility then I think Greece would be dropped way ago. Only you yourself can decide to leave. The Lisbon treaty made it possible, before leaving the union was impossible per the treaty structures. B) I cant recall you fought any of the two wars for your freedom. You entered both wars on your own behalf and no one would have attacked you if wouldn't you enter them (Do prove otherwise please).
@Teranex We unfortunately entered WW1 to stop the German Empire from unbalancing the the power within Europe, thus becoming a threat to our Empire, we went into WW2 because it was clear Germany was going to take over Europe and it was not going to settle with the huge British empire existing. These two costly wars cost us many people, becoming Germany's colony is sacrilege to their sacrifice. PT1
@MrGilles1990 "and it was not going to settle"-Again doesn't change your earlier point that you entered the war to preserve your national sovereignty. And Hitler wouldn't do any harm to Britain. There is no proof of any kind which would suggest so. In both wars it was Britain which declared war upon Germany and not the opposite. "Germany's colony"-Can you back this up with any further arguments? And don't worry your country is already a colony of your "former empire" if you get what i mean.
@MrGilles1990 C) Why unite europe? In order to defend our rights and welfare. Sounds paradoxical right? Well it isn't, as it is the only way to ensure that the European countries are not marginalized in world politics and we can ensure the interests of our citizens and their welfare in face of rising and existing powers (China, USA, Brazil...). We are not in 1910s where European countries controlled 3/4 of the world, this is the 2010s, where Europe is only a shadow of its former self.
@MrGilles1990 " everyone who has tried to has failed"-Till now no one was able to keep europe together with military and oppressive means. That is true. Yet europe is a new kind of "empire" as Barosso said in one of his speeches (Which I'm sure you do recall). UK has 2 choices either end up as a puppet of a stronger power (US) or be an equal partner in the EU. I don't see how you can guarantee the welfare and freedom of your citizens in the long run otherwise.
Then the US President isn’t legitimate. And in response to what you said to MrGilles, Britain fought both wars in defence of the independence and self-determination of European nations, and I’m proud of my country for doing that, and that’s another reason why I especially hate the EU, is because they so far have displayed nothing but contempt for freedom, independence and the self-determination of all peoples and nations.
@Teranex (5) If there is someone making decisions on behalf of the people who wasn’t elected by the people they are not legitimate officials. Article 21 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states “The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government” , do you know nothing of the Consent of the Governed?
@Teranex (4) Christ! Do you think I give a monkeys on how indirect election is generally view as democratic. In a democracy, people elect, in free, open and fair elections, leaders to represent them, in this way, people give their elected representatives the ability to make decisions on their behalf. They don’t elect people to elect more people who may intern elect more people if they wish to make decisions on behalf of people who never elected them.
@MouseWarlord "They don’t elect people to elect more people"-Well thats how the US executive is elected. The US is the 18th most democratic country in the world. Thus it seems you have a "special" perception of what is "democratic".
On EU institutions:
Council of the EU (members: Ministers of national governments)
European council (members: Heads of state/government of national governments)
@Teranex B) (3) Big deal, don’t be so pedantic C) Elected into their particular office in their countries of origin, not to hold office in the Council, thus they are not directly elected D) I don’t care what the VCDR says, no one had the right to make a decision on behalf of me without my democratic representation.
@MouseWarlord "not to hold office in the Council"-By being elected to that particular office in their own country, they automatically become a member of the council (Please look up who the members of the council are per the amended treaty of the EU. You seem to lack fundamental knowledge about the functioning of the EU). "I don’t care what the VCDR says"-Again, thats your problem, my argument stands.
@Teranex (2) and cannot give the power they have been gifted away to officials the people did not wish to represent them. And the constitution is not legitimate unless it has been put to a plebiscite and the majority wish constitutional change, there must then be a re-election, and all representatives (as they were elected under the previous constitution) must be re-elected to remain in power. The Lisbon Treaty did not go through this.
@Teranex (1) I’ve been busy over the last week, so I couldn’t reply sooner, A) Wrong, in a democracy, an elected official cannot pass their power that was bestowed to them democratically onto another individual, otherwise a parliament could hand their power onto a dictator. Democratically elected officials are human beings and have no claims higher than anyone else, and since their power was given to them by a majority who wished them to represent them and opinions, they must honour that.
@MouseWarlord 1)No problem. A) "could hand their power onto a dictator"-There are many examples where exactly that happened in history (Thus yes they can do so). "they must honour that."-I can present 2 points to you in this context 1. it is possible that the people which elected the person oppose a democratic form of government. Thus this person should act in accordance to their interest. 2. If it takes dissolving democracy, to save the people then its a legitimate thing to do, is it not?
@MouseWarlord "legitimate unless it has been put to a plebiscite and the majority wish constitutional change"-That is your opinion, while it doesn't hold true in reality, where in the majority of democratic countries the Constitution can be amended simply by the parliament. And the Lisbon treaty is not a Constitution (And yes i do know its background). B)3) I'm simply stating facts. Are you saying that my statement is wrong?
@Teranex (9) And the US has an indirectly elected president and is the 19th most democratic country in the world (not 18th), but the most democratic country in the world Norway is completely directly elected and a unicameral parliamentary democracy, and so is Iceland the 2nd, and Denmark the 3rd, and Sweden the 4th and New Zealand the 5th, noticing a pattern?
@MouseWarlord "indirectly elected president and is the 19th"-We used different sources probably. It doesn't change the fact that they are democratic, even trough they are employing a system you deem undemocratic. Thus you proved yourself wrong.
@Teranex (8) B) 1) No 2) I know, just because you’re elected for office in your own country, that doesn’t give you the right to assume office in another organisation 3) VCDR is illegitimate, I never voted on it.
I don’t care what the US does, indirect election isn’t democracy, and you know that, representative democracy is when the people elect representatives to make decisions on behalf of them, and I’m not going to bother going through the rest because I’ve done it so many times before.
@Teranex (7) And there must be a re-election afterwards, because the current representatives were elected under the previous system, and in many cases elected in the understanding that they would have different positions, roles and responsibilities. And on the Lisbon Treaty, calling something the European Constitution, then when rejected keeping it almost exactly the same but changing it to the Lisbon Treaty, doesn’t stop it from being a constitution, it’s just had its name changed.
@MouseWarlord "doesn’t stop it from being a constitution"-It does exactly that. If you know anything about statecraft then you should know how significant the difference is. And changes were made. Do check upon that. "that doesn’t give you the right to assume office in another organization"-Where is that written? "VCDR is illegitimate, I never voted on it"-I bet you also never voted on the universal declaration of human rights. Its thus illegitimate lol.
@Teranex (6) “where in the majority of democratic countries” - Again, you assume that I give a toss. Answer me this then, how can constitutional change (change that directly affects the running of nation-states and the democratic process in most cases) be made, without direct democratic representation. The people have the right to decide who represents them, thus they also have the right to choose how they are represented, and how the representative government functions.
@MouseWarlord (5)-So your preposition is that there should be a direct democracy? I mean why do people elect their representatives if per your opinion no decision should be made without the consent of the people? (6)-And where exactly were the people denied their right to chose who represents them? Recall the Lisbon treaty, did the representatives you elected vote on ratifying it or did someone else do that for you? Don't your representatives have a right to do so? If not why did you elect them?
@Teranex (5) or what will solve problems in certain circumstances? Because you believe their dithering and quarrelling is proof of their inferiority, and you know better than all the little people? Only the people may decide upon who rules them and what is done about issues and problems that concern them, no one has the right undermine their choices and opinions, or make decisions on behalf of them without their consent.
@MouseWarlord (4)-A)In all countries which joined the EU there was a referendum. Thus the people joined the union by their free will. B)They are represented in all EU institutions by the people they elected themselves. Thus Representative democracy is ensured. Thus no rights were undermined. C)If the people wanted to end their own state, then they have the right to do so as they are the owners of the "state".
@Teranex (4) a state that is happy to violate their citizens liberty and democracy whenever it feels it to be necessary should be removed, the only legitimate claim to govern is an open grant of power from the governed, if this is denied, the government should be overthrown. But “saving” is interesting. Do you mean to undermine the views and opinions of the people because you believe them to be wrong, or you believe that you know best, because you believe that only you know what is right,
@Teranex (3) No excuse, no matter how imaginative, no matter how urgent the need for action, and no matter how dire the situation can be found or made to undermine the voice of the people, their rights and civil liberties or the democratic process, that's one of the fundamental principles behind liberty, freedom and democracy. It doesn't matter if to you or to anyone else bypassing the democratic process seems necessary,
@Teranex (2) B) In response to your first point, if that should happen, then the people can hand their power over to a dictator, but that’s not democracy, in a democracy, elected representatives cannot hand over their power to unelected individuals, because the people that elected them chose them to represent their views and opinions, and so representatives cannot give the power their have been given to individuals the people did not wish to represent them. In response to the second point, no.
@Teranex Britain has a third option, splendid isolation and the rekindling of the commonwealth, it has worked for us in the past and I am sure it will work for us again.
We would never be an equal partner just a thorn in your side. For Britain has international tendencies, not Euro-nationalist ones."Every time Britain had to decide between Europe and the open sea, it is always the open sea that we shall choose."
You see we are not used to not being our own masters it will never work.
@MrGilles1990 "splendid isolation"-That worked perhaps 200 years ago, but in modern days Britain cannot provide the resources in order to sustain itself. "the commonwealth"-Yes i am sure India would like to have Britain as a Jewel in its crown. "We would never be an equal partner"-You are already an equal partner. And the EU is not ruled by Germany, unlike you suggest.
@Teranex Frau Merkel has installed two puppet governments, in a space of months, that is Germany's power. We are not equal, because we are not liked, at every corner we have to dodge French or German attempts to destroy our industries. Hitler would have invaded Britain, not only because she was an accomplice in the treaty of Versailles but because she was a threat to Germany's imperial aspirations. I don't get what you mean. Britain's destiny has always been an international global one, tbc.
@MrGilles1990 "has installed two puppet governments"-Thats a nice claim. Got any proof? "because we are not liked"-And Germans are liked i guess? "destroy our industries"-And thats the reason why you have a special deal within the union where you have to pay less then any other country.Right? "Hitler would have invaded Britain"-There were no plans to do so. Prove otherwise. "Britain's destiny"-Just a second ago you were speaking about a "splendid isolation" lol.
@Teranex I have proof, Berlusconi out Monti ( A pro EU technocrat willing to do Germany's bidding) Papandreou forced out some non-entity in ( A pro EU technocrat willing to do Germany's bidding). You are talking about the late rebate?, that was handed over by the previous British government. Operation sea lion plan to invade Britain. Splendid isolation is Britains destiny. I like Germans, hard working efficient people who have a great work ethic. Given a choice between Europe and the open sea...
@MrGilles1990 No harm of whatever kind would come to Britain, from Germany, had it not declared war on Germany. You still fail to provide proof, that there were plans of aggression against Britain by Germany even before Britain declared war upon Germany. "Splendid isolation is Britains destiny"-Again its not possible in the current era. It would be possible if Britain would be self sufficient, which it isn't.
@Teranex (1) A) And all of those examples are not examples of democracy, you clearly don’t understand representative democracy, you elect people to represent you, if someone is representing you without your democratic representation, they are illegitimate as leaders. Are you telling me you’d be happy if your country handed all their power over to a dictator, would you still define that as democracy?
@MouseWarlord (1)-Look just because the American system is not democratic for you, that doesn't change the fact that it is international recognized as a democracy. Same goes for the EU. (2)-They can hand over the power to whom ever they want. Can democracy be ended by the will of the people =YES. (3) "to undermine the voice of the people"-even if the people want to end democracy themselves? We have such examples in the time between 1900-1950. Where exactly that happened.
@MrGilles1990 No harm of whatever kind would come to Britain, from Germany, had it not declared war on Germany. You still fail to provide proof, that there were plans of aggression against Britain by Germany even before Britain declared war upon Germany. "Splendid isolation is Britains destiny"-Again its not possible in the current era. It would be possible if Britain would be self sufficient, which it isn't.
@Teranex And why should we unite with a country like Romania for example?, who we share no cultural or historical ties with. This is the main reason why a united Europe could not work, we are too diverse and different. When they tried to unite the Slavs, it did not work, so how on earth would it work with this incredibly diverse continent?
Splendid isolation and a more invigorated commonwealth is our and has always been our destiny. Europe holds us back. If South Sudan can be independent......
@MrGilles1990 "we are too diverse and different"-Thats certainly not true. We share common values. Thats the only imperative needed here. And there are many states which host a high plurality of cultures and work very well. Thats like saying that the British empire didnt work because of its plurality of cultures. "When they tried to unite the Slavs"-When did that happen? It seems I'm not familiar with that historical event. Who is "they"?
@Teranex Yugoslavia. The common values are too general, we don't even get on, taking 27 sovereign countries many of them with hundreds of years of history and turning them into one country is impossible. You have this idea that we must unite to be a global superpower, but we don't. We in the United Kingdom have realised our days as a world power have long gone, we should now take a bow from the world stage, and form alliances with nations that suite our interest and our alone. pt 1
@MrGilles1990 "Yugoslavia"-You do know that Yugoslavia was not democratic and the the state was dominated by Serbs? There was no equal partnership unlike in the EU. "we don't even get on"-Get on lol? Perhaps you don't remember the last 1000 years of European history where we were in constant warfare with eachohter. We are having better relations then we had ever since the fall of the roman empire lol. In consideration to retrospective we "get on" extremely well.
@MrGilles1990 "with nations that suite our interest and our alone"-Thus you are in the EU. And there is no alliance where only one side would suit its interests. "I have proof"-Explain to me how exactly is what you said "proof". "over by the previous British government"-Can you prove that? Like sending me a source? "Operation sea lion"-Yes AFTER Britain declared war on Germany and refused to make white peace (Which Germany was willing to conclude). Hitler saw the British as equals.
@Teranex The EU is not democratic and is dominated by Germany. Tony Blair gave away 20% of the rebate for nothing-The guardian.Hitler saw Britain as equals? I have not heard such bollocks in a long time, Hitler saw Britain as a threat and he played Chamberlain at every turn. Get on as independent nations but not as a unified nation, because Europe is not a nation. Certain EU members do not share our aspirations, they attack us at every moment they can. Plus the UK is a constitutional monarchy..
@MrGilles1990 "The EU is not democratic and is dominated by Germany"-Prove that. "Tony Blair gave away"-Notice taken (I'm surprised you actually decided to prove something you say). "Hitler saw Britain as a threat"-Prove that. "as independent "-are they not? Are they under oppression? "EU members do not share our aspirations"-Yes cause EU is a DEMOCRACY, different opinions (Other then yours) are tolerated. "constitutional monarchy"-Like Sweden, Spain, Benelux countries, Denmark (Your point is?)
@MrGilles1990 "Splendid isolation and a more invigorated commonwealth is our and has always been our destiny"-Those are nice claims. Too bad they don't work out in practice (What do you expect that the Commonwealth countries will bow to you and give you free or very cheap resources on the grounds that you are Britain? Seriously get real).
@championofgods It's not an alliance working towards peace, it's a political and economic union, it seeks the unification of Europe into a single state. It's undemocratic, and has in part caused the global recession, the Euro is a failure, countries like Ireland suffered low interest rates, a false boom and a colossal bust, and now that it's done, it's being used by the EU as a massive power-grab, to make power from national parliaments and exert limitless authority upon the people of Europe.
:O
ERZ69 2 days ago
@kroikye I believe you're mistaken. Multiple time Jesus made know that He IS God. For example, read John 14:8-11. He clearly states He is God. If you have any questions concerning Jesus, God, Heaven, Hell, or just Christianity in general, feel free to inbox me :)
jakedaman33 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
thumbs up
maelstone 1 month ago
thumbs up...
maelstone 1 month ago
thumbs up...
maelstone 1 month ago
I dont believe Jesus IS God , he never claimed divinity himself in his life. The Bible is with its Prophesies a very important book though, I am currently studying the Quran who sees Jesus as a very important Prophet.But rejects the Idea that Jesus IS God, this sounds a bit more credible to me, but I am still studying :)
kroikye 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
CNN and Fox use of fake video from soccer incidents and Greek riots to spin lies against Russia's December 2011 elections is insulting + the neocon media in the USA is totally silent about it : what a criminal SHAME ! this is not American ! 2 ) Eutube must talk about the 5 trillion euros in assets that the oligarchs stole from the Russian People in the 90's,they must pay for them or give them back to the Russian People + to distract they try to crash Euro-EU Markets, financialtools1.blogspot.com
financialtools1 2 months ago
America is done, the NWO leader will be from europe
Gidz69 4 months ago
on another note i thought obama was meant to be the antichrist?
CommanderMethos 5 months ago
@CommanderMethos the prophecy says everyone will like him and he will be a great leader, so i dont think its Obama.. plus he will come from Europe
Gidz69 4 months ago
@Gidz69 thats just racist. besides not many people like burrlessconi either. if you want my opinion its farrage..
CommanderMethos 4 months ago
@CommanderMethos i am Black myself, and i personally dont like the man.. And im just stating the prophecy, he will come from EUROPE and he will lead the whole world.. keep your eyes open
Gidz69 4 months ago
Actually, I think pope benedict will die soon and the following pope will be the antichrist
MamaMario13 5 months ago
right current economic crisis was caused by the collapse of the banks which began when the american government allowed leeman brothers to go to the wall. they did this because because they did not fully understand just how much debt the banks owed each other. the banks were allowed to get into this state because the regulations meant to stop it from happening, again, were lifted for impeding prosperity. that is the fault of captalism and the people who didnt think there could be another bust.
CommanderMethos 5 months ago
these anti christ bastards anlong with the imf are going to make 9 billion euro in profits from irelands bailout rotten dirty european bastards
graham640 8 months ago
Not sure the pope will be THE Anti-Christ. I believe he is a type of anti-christ, a false prophet used by Satan to mislead many. But I agree with the whole EU thing (and I'm British, championofgods---I see this happening). The EU will definitely have a big part to play later on.
ChristineDiana 8 months ago
the european union is trying to take the place of america
1988scottcarey 8 months ago
so Europe is babylon again ?
IDCbitchass 10 months ago
@IDCbitchass sumerian empire and lots of equal justice : )
ukgreaterlondon 9 months ago
The only benefit this claptrap might have had would have been as mild entertainment in my college pot smoking days.
OhMyHat1 10 months ago
1337! Views :D
ReplaysSC2 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Us Turks we don't need European union they don't like us cause of the ottomans cause where Muslims well guess what we don't need EU, EU will kiss our asses soon when the time comes. I don't like the frogs, I don't like Austria racists pricks. I hope another financial crises happens again because turkey wont be affected the EU will. Turkey is the second biggest in NATO so kiss our asses again FUCK EU. EUROPEAN UNION WILL COLLAPSE and turkey will be the super power.
oxbadcoded 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Us Turks we don't need European union they don't like us cause of the ottomans cause where Muslims well guess what we don't need EU, EU will kiss our asses soon when the time comes. I don't like the frogs, I don't like Austria racists pricks. I hope another financial crises happens again because turkey wont be affected the EU will. Turkey is the second biggest in NATO so kiss our asses again FUCK EU. EUROPEAN UNION WILL COLLAPSE and turkey will be the super power.
oxbadcoded 11 months ago
While people keep looking for that dreaded beast of revelation out of Europe Islam has been beheading the saints up to this day and slowly taking over the world. Sharia anyone?? Your antichrist system, the biggest most militant religion that DENY jesus as God(blashpemy), deny his death(blaspemy) and resurrection is poking you at your faces
Vainslain 1 year ago
Wow. I just typed EU and ANTICHRIST in the search bar on a whim, and wouldn'y you know it!
wikiporno 1 year ago
the antichrist is karl t. zu guttenberg !he came into power the same day that the lisbon trety was signed!1/1/2010
jonathanmoreno1000 1 year ago
I love how american people think that EU is evil and wants to conquer the world, they should look to their own country instead of accusing an alliance that is working towards peace.
championofgods 1 year ago
@championofgods If you would look at all the videos on my channel, you would know that I am NOT happy with the way MY government conducts itself! The European Union HAS NOT worked...look at the economic crisis they are in! What good did the EU do to stop it and/or fix it? The EU is just another fullfillment of Bible prophecy. The North American Union is knocking on our front door right now and I DONT LIKE IT ONE BIT!!!!
MrFRO4484 1 year ago 4
@MrFRO4484 maybe EU has done little to nothing to stop the economic crisis, but it was the USA that started it, not EU.
And its the USA that are trying to impose their beliefs and ideologies on other countries by means of war, not EU. European countries only join EU if they wish to do so... they are not forced, true that once inside they must obey the rules, but all organizations and alliances works that way... you cant say that EU is evil, there are even more evil countries.
championofgods 1 year ago
@championofgods the e.u. started this mess and yes the e.u. is from the pits of hell !literally!the antichrist is calling the shots world wide !the americans partipated!they dont know that they sold their souls to the devil ! and you said it ,its not germany france!it is the e.u. they have become one just like the bible prredicted! it is to large so 17 nations will leave!we are watching this........ evil! its! ,from the pits of hell!the beast is here!wake up britain!usa!
jonathanmoreno1000 1 year ago
@jonathanmoreno1000 sorry, but last time I heard, the actual crisis appeared in USA,
And as I can see USA are more evil than EU... USA have a Imperialist Behavior since WW2, and they stick their noses in almost every major conflict in the world...
And they want the monopoly of oil resources, thats why they started "Iraqi Freedom"... so dont rush to USA cause if EU its evil, USA are much more evil...
And tell me, why are u saying that EU is evil... give me facts (facts dont come from bible).
championofgods 1 year ago
@championofgods we predict the future we have been waiting for this for a long time!i cannot try to convince anyone i only try to reach people that want to know!take care!
jonathanmoreno1000 1 year ago
@jonathanmoreno1000 if that is true, then soon we will find out all the truth about this... although I am still not conviced that EU is evil and it comes from hell... come on... even church ruled europe for centuries and it was called The Dark Ages or Age of Faith like some call, and that was a evil reign, the world lived in darkness without any real knowledge of the world, and new scientific discoveries were denied
so... its EU more evil than that? (knowing the futures isnt a fact btw) peace
championofgods 1 year ago
@MrFRO4484 anyone who tries this in canada will be hung for treason.
Disturbedfan009 9 months ago
@MrFRO4484 Thats like saying that the USA doesn't work and should disband because of the economic crisis in the 30s (Which BTW was caused by the US as the current crisis was). The EU is the sole guarantor of democracy and human rights on the planet. All your state does is to start wars of aggression, coup democratically elected governments and abuse human rights. If the EU is the one to stop your war against humanity then I'm first to say that I'm proud to be a European.
Teranex 1 month ago
@championofgods Actually, I am American and I love the idea of a united Europe
PresentAssassin 1 year ago
@championofgods The EU is evil through and through and will be much worse than the US ever was. You've just fallen for the Elite's plan. To destroy the US and rejoice, whilst the EU and China rise as saviours. The EU is destructive, devicive, and enslaves, it's working through the same motions as everywhere else. All in all? To build a society where you live to serve the state, if they allow you to live.
Blitzbok 1 year ago
@Blitzbok I never heard anything about EU destroying and enslaving... now US is destroying the middle eastern countries... that seems pretty evil to me and are deceiving the world by saying that they want to liberate the people while they only want oil. Everything you said, it seems that its US that is doing it to other countries... and about serving... well there isnt a US motto that says "dont ask what America can do for you... ask what you can do for america"?
championofgods 1 year ago
@championofgods You are kidding me right? Just look at their meddling abroad too! I know full well the USA's activities, as a child I hated the USA for these very reasons, until I realized who and what was behind it all. Thinking in terms of nationalism is flawed. Every nation is corrupt and destructive, and the EU is in many ways far worse, and more dangerous. I have numerous videos to recommend. Search for Roman Empire Rules Today and you will get a detailed and credible sourcing of info.
Blitzbok 1 year ago
@Blitzbok so, EU is behind USA evil deeds? Come on, you cant possible believe that... How can they be controlled by EU? EU has not so much power...
USA is controlling United Nations though. From my point of view... if one government is evil, then it is USA. No evil deed has been made by EU so far. This conspiracy theory was created in USA cause they fear that EU grows more powerfull than them, cause they fear that EU could be an obstacle to world domination.
championofgods 1 year ago
@championofgods Why does the EU have so much Prophetic symbolism associated in its images or have its building constructed in the form of the tower of Babylon? For example, the woman riding the beast statue and painting in their lobby comes straight out of the Revelation of Daniel?
I'm an objective thinker... I'd like to understand why you think they would construct themselves around this non-sense or do you feel as though its just coincidence?
Kwizmatix 1 year ago
@Kwizmatix right, cause if I were to create an evil orgonaztion I would put every prophetic symbols representing my organization so people could see: "hey this organization is evil" *sigh*
championofgods 1 year ago
@championofgods Or, I wouldn't use any prophetic symbol non-sense because I'd be like WTF if someone presented this to me as the theme of my organization & especially that building itself.
But still, I asked that question because I am sincerely interested in hearing your honest opinion on why you think they would build themselves around such bizaare imagery. A healthy discussion certainly doesn't hurt & If you have an opinion i'd actually like to hear it. Thanks
Kwizmatix 1 year ago
Comment removed
MouseWarlord 4 months ago
Comment removed
MouseWarlord 4 months ago
@championofgods I am British, in Britain we give the EU 45 million pounds a day, it amounts to an average of 50 billion a year, double the amount of money saved on public spending cuts here, and what do we get for it? Nothing, we'd make far more money if we left, we'd have more of our own money to spend as we wish, we'd have our democracy back, and we could trade with anyone, not just Europe, it’s like that for most members, that's the real face of the EU today.
MouseWarlord 4 months ago
@championofgods And as the Commission continues to buy government bonds, it not only wants to double the bailout fund, and even increase the scope of the bailout fund, so it can continue to buy up its own debt. Portugal goes up next for bailout with debts of up to 325% of GDP, then Spain which will require funds of up to 7x that of Ireland, and once that's done, the money's gone, there won't be anymore, the fund has been bled dry.
MouseWarlord 4 months ago
@championofgods The Euro was a massive contributor to the economic crash, it's now helping to slow the recovery, we've seen it with the bailout fund, and with it with Article 121 of the Lisbon Treaty with Greece being turned into a protectorate. 3 months before the Portuguese bailout the Commission were patting themselves on the back that the bond auction in Portugal went well the previous week, when the fact was the only reason it was a success was because the ECB was buying up Portuguese debt.
MouseWarlord 4 months ago
@championofgods The Lisbon Treaty now gives the Commission enormous powers, it can overrule the European Parliament and any of the national parliaments of EU member-states, it can sign treaties on behalf of countries, stop countries from leaving the EU, and can enact emergency laws to practically take countries over. 70% of law in the EU is made by the Commission, people we haven't elected and cannot remove, and since they can now overrule anything we agree democratically, it's more like 100%.
MouseWarlord 4 months ago
Comment removed
MouseWarlord 4 months ago
@championofgods
“Public opinion will be lead to adopt, without knowing it, the proposals we dare not present to them directly… All earlier proposals will be in the new text, but will be hidden and disguised.”
- Valery Giscard D’Estaing, author of the European Constitution, aided creation of Lisbon Treaty
“The good thing about not calling it a constitution is that no-one can ask for a referendum on it.”
- Giuliano Amato, former Italian prime-minister, Lisbon Treaty supporter
MouseWarlord 4 months ago
@championofgods The European Commission is unelected, yet is the most powerful EU institution, it pushed through the Lisbon Treaty to gain more power from the crisis using illegitimate means, the Treaty is a toned down version of the European Constitution that was scrapped for being too extreme, the Commission openly opposed the democratic process when pushing it through, they blocked referendums, denied referendums and bullied the Irish into voting a second time when they disliked the result.
MouseWarlord 4 months ago
@MouseWarlord The most powerful institution within the EU is and remains the European council (Which consists of democratically elected leaders). Other then that the European commission has no means to block referendums, only states themselves do.
Teranex 1 month ago
@Teranex Wrong, you have very limited knowledge of the workings of the EU. The European Council comprises of the heads of state/government of the European member states, and it has no formal legislative power. The Commission had the power to bully the Irish government into voting a second time when the referendum result was a no for the Lisbon Treaty, and the Commission does have the ability to block and deny referendums under new Lisbon Treaty legislation, you are factually misinformed
MouseWarlord 1 month ago
@MouseWarlord While the commison can propose some laws (As its competences are very limited), those have to be accepted by the STATES (CEU) and the Parliament, under the codecison procedure. Other than that its the European Council (Again the states) which set the general direction and polices which the EU will take. Thus the states have far more power then the commission. Other then that many commissioners are representing the interests of the members states rather then the union.
Teranex 1 month ago
Comment removed
Teranex 1 month ago
@Teranex It's funny how you replied to yourself there, but I assumed you meant me. I can prove all of it, the Commission is the executive branch, unelected, answers to no one but the treaty it created. Article 48, piece 6 and 7, the self-amending clause, leaders can meet and enact legislation and constitutional changes without any referendum or parliamentary debate.
MouseWarlord 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MouseWarlord "Article 48, piece 6 and 7"-Yes in case the EUROPEAN COUNCIL (The strongest institution in the EU representing the STATES) reaches a decision my unanimity. Thus you proved me right at 2 points A)The council is stronger then the commission and B)Its the states who can block a referendum and not the commission unlike you claim.
Teranex 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MouseWarlord Thus no, you are wrong as you did display extremely limited knowledge of where the powers of the states lie within the EU. "Commission had the power"-nice claim bro, can you prove any of it? No? Which article of the Lisbon treaty does give the commission the power to block referendums? What power does the commission have to bully states? Lol you don't know nothing do you (Reposted it, since it disturbs you so much).
Teranex 1 month ago
@Teranex Incorrect, the Parliament and countries can be bypassed, the Commission is charged by the Lisbon Treaty with being the executive body of the European Union, it proposes legislation, implements decisions, upholds the treaties and the day-to-day running of the EU, it has sole authority and responsibility for the administration of Europe. The Council has no legislative power, it can't do ANYTHING, it's a club for European leaders, it doesn't set direction, that's what the Commission does.
MouseWarlord 1 month ago
@MouseWarlord "Parliament and countries can be bypassed"-Wrong yet again, they cant be bypassed as the commission doesn't have any legislative power. Thus in order to implement a directive it has to go trough the co-decision procedure which includes (STATES (Council of the EU)+ EU PARLIAMENT), which can further alter any kind of legal act proposed to the commission to any extent they like, while the commission has NO word in it. The president in the US could for example veto a similar situation.
Teranex 1 month ago
@Teranex Wrong, it doesn't go through the council, nothing does. Of course the Commission has bloody legislative power, I can't believe you said that, stop displaying your ignorance, it's the most powerful institution. As an executive power it direct control over the workings of the EU. The European Council has no legislative or executive power what so ever, the EU admits that, "general direction" is meaningless, and you know it.
MouseWarlord 1 month ago
@MouseWarlord "Commission has bloody legislative"-The commission has NO legislative power. Give me one source which proves otherwise. "The European Council has no legislative or executive power"-Under article 48 the council can adopt any decision as such having full LEGISLATIVE and EXECUTIVE powers to do so in disregard of all other institutions. "the EU admits that"-Give me a source where the "EU" says that lol. Thus once again you are fully wrong.
Teranex 1 month ago
@MouseWarlord You have a flawed perception on how to legislative process in the EU works:
-Council of the EU (Represents the states and it has a LEGISLATIVE role)
-European Parliament (Represents the people and has a LEGISLATIVE role)
-European commission (Represents the supranational element and has a EXECUTIVE role).
-European Council (Strongest institution acting as the EU collective presidency which can bypass referendums and all the institutions listed above).
Teranex 1 month ago
@Teranex
- European Council
- European Commission
- European Parliament
- Council of the EU
That's the real order, although the European Council is merely for show, it has no real authority. But what I don't understand is the fact you know that the EU is undemocratic, that it can bypass referendums and national parliaments, but you're fine with that.
MouseWarlord 1 month ago
@MouseWarlord "That's the real order"-What are you talking about? "European Council is merely for show"-I have clearly proven otherwise, article 48 is a witness of it. The EU is perfectly democratic, as it has all 3 branches which a nation state has. ECom (Executive), CEU+EP (Legislative) and ECJ (Judicial). You just have a very flawed perception of how the EU works. Seriously ECom has Executive and legislative powers? Where did you read that? You high bro?
Teranex 1 month ago
@Teranex Perfectly democratic? Then how is it that the European Commission is unelected, yet has executive power, how is it that the only directly elected institution in the EU, the parliament, can only accept or reject legislation proposed by the Commission, but even that is undermined by the fact that the Council (unelected) also has to agree before any legislation is adopted, and the EC can bypass referendums, and sign treaties on behalf of countries without democratic representation?
MouseWarlord 1 month ago
@MouseWarlord A)The commission is Affirmed by the member states+Parliament, thus it is legitimate. B)Parliament can under the codecision procedure 1)Accept 2)Decline 3)Amend a proposal made by the Commission. As can the CEU. C) Council is elected as it is made up of democratically elected representatives of each member state. You seem to chose to be ignorant of that fact. D) and under the VCDR the country representatives can make such a decision if they all agree (Which happens rarley).
Teranex 1 month ago
@Teranex C) The Council is not directly elected, because the elected officials in each member state were elected to their particular office, they weren't elected to hold office in another organisation, it should be a completely separate affair, otherwise no they aren't elected D) How does the VCDR have anything to do with this?
MouseWarlord 1 month ago
@MouseWarlord D)The Vienna convention of diplomatic relations clearly states that there are 3 persons which may represent their state in international relations, what they say in regard to their country becomes LEGALLY BINDING and can be sued upon on a international court.
Teranex 1 month ago
@Teranex A) In a representative democracy people are elected to have the power to make decisions on behalf of the people, not to hand over the power bestowed on them via the ballot box to someone above them, that's not democracy, because the people didn't vote for them to have the right to make decisions on behalf of them, that therefore does not make it legitimate B) I know, they can't create legislation, they can only reject, accept or amend legislation proposed by an unelected commission
MouseWarlord 1 month ago
@MouseWarlord A)They can do what they want with the power which was bestowed to them by the people which elected them. Thus as long their decision is within the frames of the constitution of the state it is legitimate. B)Seems you don't as you said that they can just accept or decline it. C)The members of the council are elected by the people of their own RESPECTIVE COUNTRIES OF ORIGIN if you don't recognize that then you clearly don't know who comprises the council.
Teranex 1 month ago
@Teranex And a nation-state doesn't have to be democratic, and if it is democratic the executive and legislative branches have to be democratically elected. And you seem to like the fact that the EU is now operating is a quasi-federal nation-state itself. And I'm not your "bro"
MouseWarlord 1 month ago
@MouseWarlord "doesn't have to be democratic"-You have to be in order to be a member of the EU. It is written in the Copenhagen criteria. "have to be democratically elected"-The commission is elected indirectly by "electors" which are represented by the European council and the parliament. If you consider this undemocratic then the president of the US is also undemocratically elected. "seem to like"-Europe has to unite in order to stay a relevant actor in world affairs. Thus i don't oppose it.
Teranex 1 month ago
@Teranex But you seem to have ignored the fact that the only elected institution merely has half a say in in whether legislation goes through or not. That isn't how a "democratic" institution is meant to operate. You've also ignored the referendum bypassing, public opinion ignoring bullying arrogant nature of the EU. And Europe doesn't need to unite at all, individual nation states throughout history have been extremely successful alone, but even so if it happens it must be done democratically.
MouseWarlord 1 month ago
@MouseWarlord The commission is DE FACTO elected the same way as the US president (AKA not directly by the people). "as indirect election, it's not election, its not democracy"-Too bad for you as this is considered democratic. The US is the 19th most democratic country and is utilizing this system thus clearly proving you wrong with your statement that this is an "undemocratic" procedure.
Teranex 1 month ago
@MouseWarlord "has half a say"-All institutions are comprised of elected members EP-elected by the citizens of the EU, CEU/ECouncil-Elected in their own respective states, EC-elected indirectly (ALL democratically legitimate as such its your flawed perception, lack of understanding of EU institutions and has nothing to do with the lack of democracy). Other then that all democratic federative states in the world (USA/Germany/Brazil...) work per the DE FACTO same system as the EU.
Teranex 1 month ago
@Teranex Which is completely hypocritical since the EU itself is undemocratic. There is no such thing as indirect election, it's not election, its not democracy, an official can only claim to be a democratically elected representative if they are elected by the people. It's not a democracy if the executives aren't elected by the people they're meant to represent, and the US president is elected directly. The commission is unelected, and thus they are illegitimate.
MouseWarlord 1 month ago
@MouseWarlord "the US president is elected directly."-Lol your lack of knowledge is amusing. In the US people elect electors in each state. The number of electors in each state depends on the population of the state (Example California: 55 electors Alaska: 3 electors). Once elected, the electors elect the president. Before you comment next time open a book or two.
Teranex 1 month ago
@Teranex You have your European union, just please kick the United kingdom, we did not fight two world wars to become a province of a continental empire. Don't know why you want to unite Europe, everyone who has tried to has failed, even the Roman empire could not keep Europe together, for we Europeans yearn for freedom, and national independence.
MrGilles1990 1 month ago
@MrGilles1990 A)The problem is the EU cant kick out UK even if it wanted. If that would be a possibility then I think Greece would be dropped way ago. Only you yourself can decide to leave. The Lisbon treaty made it possible, before leaving the union was impossible per the treaty structures. B) I cant recall you fought any of the two wars for your freedom. You entered both wars on your own behalf and no one would have attacked you if wouldn't you enter them (Do prove otherwise please).
Teranex 1 month ago
@Teranex We unfortunately entered WW1 to stop the German Empire from unbalancing the the power within Europe, thus becoming a threat to our Empire, we went into WW2 because it was clear Germany was going to take over Europe and it was not going to settle with the huge British empire existing. These two costly wars cost us many people, becoming Germany's colony is sacrilege to their sacrifice. PT1
MrGilles1990 1 month ago
@MrGilles1990 "and it was not going to settle"-Again doesn't change your earlier point that you entered the war to preserve your national sovereignty. And Hitler wouldn't do any harm to Britain. There is no proof of any kind which would suggest so. In both wars it was Britain which declared war upon Germany and not the opposite. "Germany's colony"-Can you back this up with any further arguments? And don't worry your country is already a colony of your "former empire" if you get what i mean.
Teranex 1 month ago
@MrGilles1990 C) Why unite europe? In order to defend our rights and welfare. Sounds paradoxical right? Well it isn't, as it is the only way to ensure that the European countries are not marginalized in world politics and we can ensure the interests of our citizens and their welfare in face of rising and existing powers (China, USA, Brazil...). We are not in 1910s where European countries controlled 3/4 of the world, this is the 2010s, where Europe is only a shadow of its former self.
Teranex 1 month ago
@MrGilles1990 " everyone who has tried to has failed"-Till now no one was able to keep europe together with military and oppressive means. That is true. Yet europe is a new kind of "empire" as Barosso said in one of his speeches (Which I'm sure you do recall). UK has 2 choices either end up as a puppet of a stronger power (US) or be an equal partner in the EU. I don't see how you can guarantee the welfare and freedom of your citizens in the long run otherwise.
Teranex 1 month ago
Comment removed
MouseWarlord 1 month ago
Comment removed
MouseWarlord 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Teranex (6) Brazil isn’t a democracy.
Then the US President isn’t legitimate. And in response to what you said to MrGilles, Britain fought both wars in defence of the independence and self-determination of European nations, and I’m proud of my country for doing that, and that’s another reason why I especially hate the EU, is because they so far have displayed nothing but contempt for freedom, independence and the self-determination of all peoples and nations.
MouseWarlord 1 month ago
@Teranex (5) If there is someone making decisions on behalf of the people who wasn’t elected by the people they are not legitimate officials. Article 21 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states “The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government” , do you know nothing of the Consent of the Governed?
MouseWarlord 1 month ago
@Teranex (4) Christ! Do you think I give a monkeys on how indirect election is generally view as democratic. In a democracy, people elect, in free, open and fair elections, leaders to represent them, in this way, people give their elected representatives the ability to make decisions on their behalf. They don’t elect people to elect more people who may intern elect more people if they wish to make decisions on behalf of people who never elected them.
MouseWarlord 1 month ago
@MouseWarlord "They don’t elect people to elect more people"-Well thats how the US executive is elected. The US is the 18th most democratic country in the world. Thus it seems you have a "special" perception of what is "democratic".
On EU institutions:
Council of the EU (members: Ministers of national governments)
European council (members: Heads of state/government of national governments)
Teranex 1 month ago
@Teranex B) (3) Big deal, don’t be so pedantic C) Elected into their particular office in their countries of origin, not to hold office in the Council, thus they are not directly elected D) I don’t care what the VCDR says, no one had the right to make a decision on behalf of me without my democratic representation.
MouseWarlord 1 month ago
@MouseWarlord "not to hold office in the Council"-By being elected to that particular office in their own country, they automatically become a member of the council (Please look up who the members of the council are per the amended treaty of the EU. You seem to lack fundamental knowledge about the functioning of the EU). "I don’t care what the VCDR says"-Again, thats your problem, my argument stands.
Teranex 1 month ago
@Teranex (2) and cannot give the power they have been gifted away to officials the people did not wish to represent them. And the constitution is not legitimate unless it has been put to a plebiscite and the majority wish constitutional change, there must then be a re-election, and all representatives (as they were elected under the previous constitution) must be re-elected to remain in power. The Lisbon Treaty did not go through this.
MouseWarlord 1 month ago
@Teranex (1) I’ve been busy over the last week, so I couldn’t reply sooner, A) Wrong, in a democracy, an elected official cannot pass their power that was bestowed to them democratically onto another individual, otherwise a parliament could hand their power onto a dictator. Democratically elected officials are human beings and have no claims higher than anyone else, and since their power was given to them by a majority who wished them to represent them and opinions, they must honour that.
MouseWarlord 1 month ago
@MouseWarlord 1)No problem. A) "could hand their power onto a dictator"-There are many examples where exactly that happened in history (Thus yes they can do so). "they must honour that."-I can present 2 points to you in this context 1. it is possible that the people which elected the person oppose a democratic form of government. Thus this person should act in accordance to their interest. 2. If it takes dissolving democracy, to save the people then its a legitimate thing to do, is it not?
Teranex 1 month ago
@MouseWarlord "legitimate unless it has been put to a plebiscite and the majority wish constitutional change"-That is your opinion, while it doesn't hold true in reality, where in the majority of democratic countries the Constitution can be amended simply by the parliament. And the Lisbon treaty is not a Constitution (And yes i do know its background). B)3) I'm simply stating facts. Are you saying that my statement is wrong?
Teranex 1 month ago
@Teranex (9) And the US has an indirectly elected president and is the 19th most democratic country in the world (not 18th), but the most democratic country in the world Norway is completely directly elected and a unicameral parliamentary democracy, and so is Iceland the 2nd, and Denmark the 3rd, and Sweden the 4th and New Zealand the 5th, noticing a pattern?
MouseWarlord 1 month ago
@MouseWarlord "indirectly elected president and is the 19th"-We used different sources probably. It doesn't change the fact that they are democratic, even trough they are employing a system you deem undemocratic. Thus you proved yourself wrong.
Teranex 1 month ago
@Teranex (8) B) 1) No 2) I know, just because you’re elected for office in your own country, that doesn’t give you the right to assume office in another organisation 3) VCDR is illegitimate, I never voted on it.
I don’t care what the US does, indirect election isn’t democracy, and you know that, representative democracy is when the people elect representatives to make decisions on behalf of them, and I’m not going to bother going through the rest because I’ve done it so many times before.
MouseWarlord 1 month ago
@Teranex (7) And there must be a re-election afterwards, because the current representatives were elected under the previous system, and in many cases elected in the understanding that they would have different positions, roles and responsibilities. And on the Lisbon Treaty, calling something the European Constitution, then when rejected keeping it almost exactly the same but changing it to the Lisbon Treaty, doesn’t stop it from being a constitution, it’s just had its name changed.
MouseWarlord 1 month ago
@MouseWarlord "doesn’t stop it from being a constitution"-It does exactly that. If you know anything about statecraft then you should know how significant the difference is. And changes were made. Do check upon that. "that doesn’t give you the right to assume office in another organization"-Where is that written? "VCDR is illegitimate, I never voted on it"-I bet you also never voted on the universal declaration of human rights. Its thus illegitimate lol.
Teranex 1 month ago
@Teranex (6) “where in the majority of democratic countries” - Again, you assume that I give a toss. Answer me this then, how can constitutional change (change that directly affects the running of nation-states and the democratic process in most cases) be made, without direct democratic representation. The people have the right to decide who represents them, thus they also have the right to choose how they are represented, and how the representative government functions.
MouseWarlord 1 month ago
@MouseWarlord (5)-So your preposition is that there should be a direct democracy? I mean why do people elect their representatives if per your opinion no decision should be made without the consent of the people? (6)-And where exactly were the people denied their right to chose who represents them? Recall the Lisbon treaty, did the representatives you elected vote on ratifying it or did someone else do that for you? Don't your representatives have a right to do so? If not why did you elect them?
Teranex 1 month ago
@Teranex (5) or what will solve problems in certain circumstances? Because you believe their dithering and quarrelling is proof of their inferiority, and you know better than all the little people? Only the people may decide upon who rules them and what is done about issues and problems that concern them, no one has the right undermine their choices and opinions, or make decisions on behalf of them without their consent.
MouseWarlord 1 month ago
@MouseWarlord (4)-A)In all countries which joined the EU there was a referendum. Thus the people joined the union by their free will. B)They are represented in all EU institutions by the people they elected themselves. Thus Representative democracy is ensured. Thus no rights were undermined. C)If the people wanted to end their own state, then they have the right to do so as they are the owners of the "state".
Teranex 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Teranex (4) a state that is happy to violate their citizens liberty and democracy whenever it feels it to be necessary should be removed, the only legitimate claim to govern is an open grant of power from the governed, if this is denied, the government should be overthrown. But “saving” is interesting. Do you mean to undermine the views and opinions of the people because you believe them to be wrong, or you believe that you know best, because you believe that only you know what is right,
MouseWarlord 1 month ago
@Teranex (3) No excuse, no matter how imaginative, no matter how urgent the need for action, and no matter how dire the situation can be found or made to undermine the voice of the people, their rights and civil liberties or the democratic process, that's one of the fundamental principles behind liberty, freedom and democracy. It doesn't matter if to you or to anyone else bypassing the democratic process seems necessary,
MouseWarlord 1 month ago
@Teranex (2) B) In response to your first point, if that should happen, then the people can hand their power over to a dictator, but that’s not democracy, in a democracy, elected representatives cannot hand over their power to unelected individuals, because the people that elected them chose them to represent their views and opinions, and so representatives cannot give the power their have been given to individuals the people did not wish to represent them. In response to the second point, no.
MouseWarlord 1 month ago
@Teranex Britain has a third option, splendid isolation and the rekindling of the commonwealth, it has worked for us in the past and I am sure it will work for us again.
We would never be an equal partner just a thorn in your side. For Britain has international tendencies, not Euro-nationalist ones."Every time Britain had to decide between Europe and the open sea, it is always the open sea that we shall choose."
You see we are not used to not being our own masters it will never work.
MrGilles1990 1 month ago
@MrGilles1990 "splendid isolation"-That worked perhaps 200 years ago, but in modern days Britain cannot provide the resources in order to sustain itself. "the commonwealth"-Yes i am sure India would like to have Britain as a Jewel in its crown. "We would never be an equal partner"-You are already an equal partner. And the EU is not ruled by Germany, unlike you suggest.
Teranex 1 month ago
@Teranex Frau Merkel has installed two puppet governments, in a space of months, that is Germany's power. We are not equal, because we are not liked, at every corner we have to dodge French or German attempts to destroy our industries. Hitler would have invaded Britain, not only because she was an accomplice in the treaty of Versailles but because she was a threat to Germany's imperial aspirations. I don't get what you mean. Britain's destiny has always been an international global one, tbc.
MrGilles1990 1 month ago
@MrGilles1990 "has installed two puppet governments"-Thats a nice claim. Got any proof? "because we are not liked"-And Germans are liked i guess? "destroy our industries"-And thats the reason why you have a special deal within the union where you have to pay less then any other country.Right? "Hitler would have invaded Britain"-There were no plans to do so. Prove otherwise. "Britain's destiny"-Just a second ago you were speaking about a "splendid isolation" lol.
Teranex 1 month ago
@Teranex I have proof, Berlusconi out Monti ( A pro EU technocrat willing to do Germany's bidding) Papandreou forced out some non-entity in ( A pro EU technocrat willing to do Germany's bidding). You are talking about the late rebate?, that was handed over by the previous British government. Operation sea lion plan to invade Britain. Splendid isolation is Britains destiny. I like Germans, hard working efficient people who have a great work ethic. Given a choice between Europe and the open sea...
MrGilles1990 1 month ago
@MrGilles1990 No harm of whatever kind would come to Britain, from Germany, had it not declared war on Germany. You still fail to provide proof, that there were plans of aggression against Britain by Germany even before Britain declared war upon Germany. "Splendid isolation is Britains destiny"-Again its not possible in the current era. It would be possible if Britain would be self sufficient, which it isn't.
Teranex 1 month ago
@Teranex (1) A) And all of those examples are not examples of democracy, you clearly don’t understand representative democracy, you elect people to represent you, if someone is representing you without your democratic representation, they are illegitimate as leaders. Are you telling me you’d be happy if your country handed all their power over to a dictator, would you still define that as democracy?
MouseWarlord 1 month ago
@MouseWarlord (1)-Look just because the American system is not democratic for you, that doesn't change the fact that it is international recognized as a democracy. Same goes for the EU. (2)-They can hand over the power to whom ever they want. Can democracy be ended by the will of the people =YES. (3) "to undermine the voice of the people"-even if the people want to end democracy themselves? We have such examples in the time between 1900-1950. Where exactly that happened.
Teranex 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MrGilles1990 No harm of whatever kind would come to Britain, from Germany, had it not declared war on Germany. You still fail to provide proof, that there were plans of aggression against Britain by Germany even before Britain declared war upon Germany. "Splendid isolation is Britains destiny"-Again its not possible in the current era. It would be possible if Britain would be self sufficient, which it isn't.
Teranex 1 month ago
@Teranex And why should we unite with a country like Romania for example?, who we share no cultural or historical ties with. This is the main reason why a united Europe could not work, we are too diverse and different. When they tried to unite the Slavs, it did not work, so how on earth would it work with this incredibly diverse continent?
Splendid isolation and a more invigorated commonwealth is our and has always been our destiny. Europe holds us back. If South Sudan can be independent......
MrGilles1990 1 month ago
@MrGilles1990 "we are too diverse and different"-Thats certainly not true. We share common values. Thats the only imperative needed here. And there are many states which host a high plurality of cultures and work very well. Thats like saying that the British empire didnt work because of its plurality of cultures. "When they tried to unite the Slavs"-When did that happen? It seems I'm not familiar with that historical event. Who is "they"?
Teranex 1 month ago
@Teranex Yugoslavia. The common values are too general, we don't even get on, taking 27 sovereign countries many of them with hundreds of years of history and turning them into one country is impossible. You have this idea that we must unite to be a global superpower, but we don't. We in the United Kingdom have realised our days as a world power have long gone, we should now take a bow from the world stage, and form alliances with nations that suite our interest and our alone. pt 1
MrGilles1990 1 month ago
@MrGilles1990 "Yugoslavia"-You do know that Yugoslavia was not democratic and the the state was dominated by Serbs? There was no equal partnership unlike in the EU. "we don't even get on"-Get on lol? Perhaps you don't remember the last 1000 years of European history where we were in constant warfare with eachohter. We are having better relations then we had ever since the fall of the roman empire lol. In consideration to retrospective we "get on" extremely well.
Teranex 1 month ago
@MrGilles1990 "with nations that suite our interest and our alone"-Thus you are in the EU. And there is no alliance where only one side would suit its interests. "I have proof"-Explain to me how exactly is what you said "proof". "over by the previous British government"-Can you prove that? Like sending me a source? "Operation sea lion"-Yes AFTER Britain declared war on Germany and refused to make white peace (Which Germany was willing to conclude). Hitler saw the British as equals.
Teranex 1 month ago
@Teranex The EU is not democratic and is dominated by Germany. Tony Blair gave away 20% of the rebate for nothing-The guardian.Hitler saw Britain as equals? I have not heard such bollocks in a long time, Hitler saw Britain as a threat and he played Chamberlain at every turn. Get on as independent nations but not as a unified nation, because Europe is not a nation. Certain EU members do not share our aspirations, they attack us at every moment they can. Plus the UK is a constitutional monarchy..
MrGilles1990 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MrGilles1990 "The EU is not democratic and is dominated by Germany"-Prove that. "Tony Blair gave away"-Notice taken (I'm surprised you actually decided to prove something you say). "Hitler saw Britain as a threat"-Prove that. "as independent "-are they not? Are they under oppression? "EU members do not share our aspirations"-Yes cause EU is a DEMOCRACY, different opinions (Other then yours) are tolerated. "constitutional monarchy"-Like Sweden, Spain, Benelux countries, Denmark (Your point is?)
Teranex 1 month ago
@MrGilles1990 "Splendid isolation and a more invigorated commonwealth is our and has always been our destiny"-Those are nice claims. Too bad they don't work out in practice (What do you expect that the Commonwealth countries will bow to you and give you free or very cheap resources on the grounds that you are Britain? Seriously get real).
Teranex 1 month ago
@Teranex No, that wasn't my point.
MrGilles1990 1 month ago
@championofgods It's not an alliance working towards peace, it's a political and economic union, it seeks the unification of Europe into a single state. It's undemocratic, and has in part caused the global recession, the Euro is a failure, countries like Ireland suffered low interest rates, a false boom and a colossal bust, and now that it's done, it's being used by the EU as a massive power-grab, to make power from national parliaments and exert limitless authority upon the people of Europe.
MouseWarlord 4 months ago
@championofgods The EU is run by unelected bureaucrats ,where can you find the democracy in that ?
smudgeronutube 3 months ago
I like truth and you just told it! God bless and peace
Itsmeweelynn 1 year ago
fascinating, well done.
Freelygive333 1 year ago
@Freelygive333 Thanks! If you havent already, watch the documentary "A Lamp In The Dark"
MrFRO4484 1 year ago
@MrFRO4484 sublimal messaging? ; )
i as agnostic want to know if you are agnostic or any other? : )
ukgreaterlondon 9 months ago