EU President Says: Time For New World Order
DriftingByTheStorm
Posts: 8,684
Why do they always talk about new world order?
and in the same breath with global government, err -- governance.
EU Calls For ‘New World Governance’
video included.
and in the same breath with global government, err -- governance.
EU Calls For ‘New World Governance’
video included.
article wrote:This video shows Sarkozy (French President holding EU Presidency) and Barroso (EU Commission President) calling for a New World Order, “New World Governance”, “New Global Order”.
The two also talk about how the EU and globalists are determined to use crises to setup the final stages of what they call the “New World Order”.
CNN: “Barroso outlined no specific proposals but said a solution needed to be based on transparency, responsibility, cross-border supervision and global governance”
Least we forget with a crisis there is always a silver lining. for the elite few. historically against the general public’s interests and rights. The current banking chaos lead the global banking elites profits being guaranteed by the tax payers and lends to global leaders calling for a restructuring and centralisation of the global financial system and currencies.
Bloomberg: “European Central Bank council member Ewald Nowotny said a tri-polar global currency system is developing between Asia, Europe and the U.S. and that he’s skeptical the U.S. dollars centrality can be revived.”
If I was to smile and I held out my hand
If I opened it now would you not understand?
If I opened it now would you not understand?
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
Don't you agree that with all the actual mess, it's time to move and so something big ?
It's not always time to foresee to do some things in the future.
It's sometimes time to act and do something.
2007: Copenhagen, Werchter
2009: Rotterdam, London
2010: MSG, Arras, Werchter
2012: Amsterdam, Prague, Berlin
2014: Amsterdam, Stockholm
please, Brer Fox, please don't throw me into the briar patch
If I opened it now would you not understand?
Yeah, I guess if you enjoy tyranny, then go for it.
a North American Union, a NWO, are specifically unconstitutional.
Looks like we're gonna be screwed.
yes, let's move to something bigger so the collapse can be even greater! Why does acting always have to lead to greater size and scope? When the govts involved can't handle their problems, why on earth would we combine all of those incompetent governments together to try and make things better??
Like the EU countries live under tyranny?
naděje umírá poslední
naděje umírá poslední
"A New World Order" is exactly what's needed in the economy. The current one definitely sucks ass, as is now evident to all. Will be interesting to see what remains when the dust settles.
Peace
Dan
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
well, I'm pretty sure the citizens are footing the bill for the cost of running the administration. Which means they are being taxed without adequate representation.
Furthermore, the EU makes laws that subject the people.
In this country, that is specifically forbidden in the bill of rights, Article 3 I believe. Only a popularly elected congress, representative of the people, shall have the power to enact law.
The EU, or a US equivelant, is stricly forbidden by the US Constitution and it's supporting documents. It is a direct violation of the sovereignty of a given nation.
May I refer your to the stamp act of 1765 (among others) for more information as to why this is so essential to maintaining a tyrany-free society.
As you are not a citizen of this country, you're not expected to understand.
But to "re-territorialize the economies I suppose, and do away with every financial tool of the last 2-3 decades and a good chunk of international trading" is pretty much what we need right now, even if it's gonna hurt like hell. This nation must reassert its sovereignty or we'll be right back to colonial-era subjugation to a foreign power.
This is not a left-right issue. This is a matter of violating the US Constitution.
Then let me assure you that although the EU can suggest and implement legislation, it is up to the national governments to do anything about it (ratifying it). Which manifests itself in that if there is a regulation that, say Germany, doesn't like, they ignore it. The EU have no power to enforce it's regulation unless the individual governments ratify it locally. So they may whine about it, but have little real power.
The US is far more federalized and centralized than the EU is. If the EU is a tyranny, it is less so than the US federal government. The main difference being that the EU states have real autonomy, and is not under an enforced central rule. At least as of right now.
That said, I dont care much for alot of what the EU entails, and certainly not the tendency to centralization and federalization. But talking of tyranny is just hyperbole and hysteria.
Peace
Dan
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
In this country, there is a clear seperation of powers. States rights versus Federal rights. Now, the globalist movement in the US congress is surely acting to weaken states rights and embolden federal rights. But that's another issue.
So no, the EU is actually much more centralized that the US government.
And when the EU makes muti-lateral agreements, they are enforced. Now, that may still preserve the rights of a given nation to enact LAW, for now. But we can see that this is in theory only. We see where they are going.
We are very much on top of this issue here in the states, and we're looking to cut that crap right now.
Once we dissolve the Fed and reform it on a constitutional basis, we will have a clear path to reasserting our sovereignty.
The US have been in the forefront when it comes to international integration (and de-regualtion) of economies. I am not convinced that a nationalization of the economy (which IS what you're talking about, and is uaually associated with socialist governments) is very feasible or even desirable by anyone, now that the international networks are in place. For America to isolate itself, would probably definitely destroy you and your economy. America's prosperity have been tied to international trading of goods, and having a favourable position in this network.
Hehe, I'm starting to sound like my enemy.
Hate the system if you want, but abolishing it is not as easy, or in the greatest extent, may not even be desirable. For an american patriot, that is. The world might go on fine without you.
Peace
Dan
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
Rejecting multi-lateral agreements which violate our sovereignty, and free trade versus isolation, are two seperate issues.
Your agument is saying we can't have free trade without globalization, and I don't see it that way
I favor free trade among nations, just not multi-lateral agreements which violate the sovereignty of this nation. I will not be subject to enforceable "agreements" which my congress did not approve.
Peace
Dan
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
A world governance that is actively being pursued? pretty much.
I disagree with the fundamentals of the first part of your argument, as I have already expressed.
Please see H.C.R. 40 to answer the second part of your argument.
Having said that I think the fear of a nwo is overrated considering we already have a nwo : it's called international finance and is backed by international banks and worldwide markets. It's kind of the reason why the crisis is international.
Having said that, Sarkozy is an ass.
Peace
Dan
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
Something we can all agree on!
naděje umírá poslední
I dont think they (Sarkozy et al) are talking about NAFTA in this regard... Or even "freer trade" through removal of more "obstacles" at all. (Which is what NAFTA's about) They are just stating the obvious. If we are to go on with the globalized trade networks, we need globalized regulations of some sort. Having global trade with local/minimal/no regulations are proving to be a bad idea.
That said, I wouldn't support NAFTA either from the look of it, and I'm deeply sceptical to the EU and the reduction of democracy it entails. But this crisis isn't really about that, it's more fundamental to the economic system and the pursuit of free, unregulated trade.
Peace
Dan
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965