Daniel Hannan MEP: EU double standards on Tibet & Lisbon

Daniel Hannan, MEP for South East England, gives a speech on the 12th March 2009 in the Strasbourg European Parliament.

Category:

News & Politics

[paulcooke100]

I love the Tibetan flag on his desk. Guaranteed to get this video blocked in China

[Apocholypse]

lol, here you are again.. Yea, i will vote conservative though my favourite party is UKIP, because they all seem so clever. Though, i'm not anti EU, just want a reasonable EU...

[xxksaoXX]

@harj2009 It has the democratic right to rule because according to the referendums the majority of people wish to be part EU. The EU also has the right to rule because of elected representatives in its legislature, although it doesn't have as much power as the 'real power makers' it still has significant political power in the EU. The 'real power makers' in the EU are the heads of Government of their respective countries, that is fact.

[harj2009]

@xxksaoXX you said some bullshit about the homicide rate in sindh, and that somehow means the people are occupied . Tibet,Kashmir etc etc EU hypocrisy

in 10 yrs the eu with its own anthem,army,police,president,p­arliament with no democratic right to rule.75% of laws in the UK come from europe. the EU commission the real power makers are not elected.Germany,france and to an extent the UK,so a few head of states with less than 30% of votes in their own country rule over 500 million people

[xxksaoXX]

@harj2009 Your first sentence doesn't make sense.

We don't sign away democracy, it required a referendum to go into the EU and there was a second about continued membership of the EU, both were unanimous Yes votes. The EU is 100% elected, just not 100% directly elected. The Upper chamber of the EU is made up by the leaders of the respective member countries and lower chamber is directly elected by the electorate (us). The USSR had nothing close to this whatsoever.

[harj2009]

@xxksaoXX no u said there were more deaths in sindh so some how that place has no right to eixt 't hence there are deaths caused by the fighting'

u have no idea what your talking about.you dont need to sign away democracy get free trade

[xxksaoXX]

@harj2009 I've repeated myself because I can't read? Nice comeback /sarcasm. You made the point originally about crime rate i merely carried it on.

The EU provides a lot of free trade that boosts the economy of the member states. The President is not directly elected but is indirectly elected by the heads of government of each of the member states. Therefore you can hardly make a comparison to the USSR.

Please do research a bit about both the USSR and the EU before you make comments like that.

[harj2009]

@xxksaoXX uve repeated your self because you cant read.the crime rate of a country is irrelevant to the discussion of if a act passed by british parliament is legal,just and moral

u make shit up like sidhsduiasds whatever

the point i was making is Tibet,Kashmir,etc all need to be heard

the eu does suck its a nanny state.unregulated trade my ass. the EU parliament has no power to repeal laws and the president is chosen by a politburo of 26 people, the most powerful person is unelected

[xxksaoXX]

@harj2009 If only you had. I've repeated myself because you clearly don't understand.

Anyway the EU doesn't suck, it gives its member states a lot of unregulated trade which is always good. If you honestly knew anything about history or how the USSR worked you wouldn't make such a comparison.

[harj2009]

@xxksaoXX ive clearly defeated your argument , know you resorting to talking to repeating your self.

Its irrelevant how the two nation theory was agreed, what matters is that was the settlement the british agreed. If you agree to something you follow it through. Kashmir would be in pakistan. Hyderabad wanted to join pakistan but it had a hindu majority so it joined India, the wish of the king was irrelevant.

The point I was making is the EU sucks, its double standards and a a mini USSR

[xxksaoXX]

@harj2009 Why is it irelevant? Its part of Pakistan as unlawfully as Jammu and Kashmir are part of India (If not more)!

[harj2009]

@xxksaoXX nope Hyderabad, the PM of the King wanted to join pakistan, and Hyderabad remained independent until 1954. Goa and Sikkim two other regions which were never under british control, invaded by the Indian Army once the British left.

the two nation theory was what the British Parliament ordered , it doesnt matter how it got there, that was the doctrine used. sindhudesh, I think you mean sindh is a province in pakistan, and yes it has law and order problem but thats irrelevant