I hope this is not the typical British gentleman nowadays

[Speelgoedmannetje]

Nigel Farage attacks Van Rompuy
He says himself he doesn't know Van Rompuy, yet he is full of sh*t about him. Oh, and besides that he considers the country he's visiting as not being a country. This just can't be, he must have a personal disorder like Gilles de la Tourette or something. :shocked:
I might agree on him on the undemocratic part, but this ranting is just barbaric.

 

[Robert]

I hope this is not the typical British gentleman nowadays

T'was ever thus....

Seriously though, the UKIP are a minority party and I'd be careful of taking anything they say as an indication of general British opinion.

 

[redrumloa]

While I agree with you 2 about the tone, weren't you both giddy over Chavez standing on US soil calling the president of the United States "The Devil"?

 

[Speelgoedmannetje]

While I agree with you 2 about the tone, weren't you both giddy over Chavez standing on US soil calling the president of the United States "The Devil"?

Giddy?

Let me get this right, overall, there can be a lot of criticism on the ways of the European Union. I surely am not happy with many undemocratic aspects of it. If this man would come up with solid evidence this Van Rompuy being corrupt in any way, he could have stated that as blatant as it is, and I would applaud him for it.
But he doesn't even know the function of the person he is attacking, the persons' motivations, goals, he knows NOTHING! That's the big difference. Chavez condemns the US meddling in his politics, and uses too strong words for that. Chavez at least has a reason, this person has not.
Plus I personally don't pay for Chavez' incompetence. For this person I do pay (yes, NL is per capita the biggest investor in the EU, and the EU pays him). And what do I see? Incompetence!

 

[Speelgoedmannetje]

I hope this is not the typical British gentleman nowadays

T'was ever thus....

Seriously though, the UKIP are a minority party and I'd be careful of taking anything they say as an indication of general British opinion.

Hm, ok.
Well, this whole rudeness trend has gone too far and too contra-productive. I'm fed up with it. My ears don't want those shreeking decibels.

 

[Robert]

I hope this is not the typical British gentleman nowadays

T'was ever thus....

Seriously though, the UKIP are a minority party and I'd be careful of taking anything they say as an indication of general British opinion.

Hm, ok.
Well, this whole rudeness trend has gone too far and too contra-productive. I'm fed up with it. My ears don't want those shreeking decibels.

Let's just say UKIP are not famed for their subtlety. This blowhard reinforces some preconceptions for lots of people, me included.

 

[Speelgoedmannetje]

Let's just say UKIP are not famed for their subtlety. This blowhard reinforces some preconceptions for lots of people, me included.

Well, here in NL, since a while, blowhards are on the rise as well :roll:

 

[smithy]

His main point, which was lost amongst his posturing to the electorate, is that nobody voted for this EU president. It is right that what this president symbolises should be vigourously insulted.

His speech only feels out of place because the EU parliament is so horribly self-congratulating back-slapping.

 

[Speelgoedmannetje]

His main point, which was lost amongst his posturing to the electorate, is that nobody voted for this EU president. It is right that what this president symbolises should be vigourously insulted.

His speech only feels out of place because the EU parliament is so horribly self-congratulating back-slapping.

You are missing the point. My point is that there is difference in (harsh) critics and blatant slander. The difference is backing up your points. The first thing he said he essentially didn't care to back up his points. Adding to that with claiming the country hosting the EU has no rights of existance is just extremely rude and not tolerable.

 

[Robert]

His main point, which was lost amongst his posturing.....

Precisely. If you come across as an ignorant, hectoring areshole then people will tend to disregard your point, even if it is valid.

 

[Speelgoedmannetje]

His main point, which was lost amongst his posturing.....

Precisely. If you come across as an ignorant, hectoring areshole then people will tend to disregard your point, even if it is valid.

Ergo he is doing his job badly, and I thoroughly hate people who don't care to do their jobs properly. Especially when in positions that come with great responsibility.

 

[smithy]

His main point, which was lost amongst his posturing to the electorate, is that nobody voted for this EU president. It is right that what this president symbolises should be vigourously insulted.

His speech only feels out of place because the EU parliament is so horribly self-congratulating back-slapping.

You are missing the point. My point is that there is difference in (harsh) critics and blatant slander. The difference is backing up your points. The first thing he said he essentially didn't care to back up his points.

It would only be slander if it were untrue - Farage's points were sound and are well understood:
1. Herman's (I've forgotten his surname) speech was underwhelming given his the stature of his position.
2. Nobody voted for him
3. That he is the "silent assasin" of Europen democracy
4. The crisis in Greece has allowed to the EU assert control over the democratic government.

Farage did go on to say that Herman is a capable politician.

Adding to that with claiming the country hosting the EU has no rights of existance is just extremely rude and not tolerable.

He actually said that Belgium was almost a non-country, which is true in many ways. It's a divided country that almost fell apart last year.

 

[Speelgoedmannetje]

He actually said that Belgium was almost a non-country, which is true in many ways. It's a divided country that almost fell apart last year.

Political troubles does not magically make a country non existant. That's just insane!
Van Rompuy has been elected by the European Parliament, which we recently have cast OUR votes for. So yes, WE have voted for him. That some people just fill in blindly the ballot for the old christian, liberal or socialists party without caring to know whom they work with in the European Parliament (For instance, if you voted Christian Democrats, your vote will join the votes for Silvio Berlusconi, while I know many won't agree with this).
Plus, the European Parliament have voted especially for him because of his role he played in the political unrest in Belgium. I know what's going on in Belgium but the allmighty uncaring 'Brit' only has eye for what's local British and, and the EU as something it can get money from. Dutch and German money that is.
Belgium is btw. one of the countries which founded the EU, and the UK has more than once showed its interests being marginal. That makes this speech even more ridiculous in my eyes.

 

[Speelgoedmannetje]

It would only be slander if it were untrue - Farage's points were sound and are well understood:
<snip>
3. That he is the "silent assasin" of Europen democracy

That IS slander, sorry it just is. And truth can only be determined according to evidence. :roll:

 

[smithy]

He actually said that Belgium was almost a non-country, which is true in many ways. It's a divided country that almost fell apart last year.

Political troubles does not magically make a country non existant. That's just insane!
Van Rompuy has been elected by the European Parliament, which we recently have cast OUR votes for. So yes, WE have voted for him.

No, the EU parliament had no voice in his appointment. He was appointed by the Council of Ministers who may or may not have been voted in (our dear leader, Gordon Brown was not). Unlike Mr Van Rompuy, Nigel Farrage was voted in.