Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Referendum on Lisbon Treaty
Options
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
Double speak. .oscarBravo wrote: »Nope, unless you're incapable of distinguishing shades of grey.
Are you joking? I am very capable of such and recognise clearly when someone is trying to pull the wool over my eyes. You are deliberately speaking double speak and then trying to play with the definition of content and intent when the outcome is the same. It is not a court but a forum.
The content of the Lisbon Treaty is meant in full to recreate the intention of the constitution. The intent of the Lisbon Treaty is constitution by stealth.
Is that put a little more correctly for you?oscarBravo wrote: »You can argue that the intent of Lisbon is broadly similar to that of the proposed Constitution, and I'll agree.
Do you agree?The author of the failed Constitution, Valery Giscard d’Estaing, on the Lisbon Treaty: “All the earlier proposals will be in the new text, but will be hidden and disguised in some way.”
.......
“What happened to democracy?”
‘Aha! It was in the way.’oscarBravo wrote: »Could you do me a favour and source these quotes (and those cited earlier)?The author of the failed Constitution, Valery Giscard d’Estaing, on the Lisbon Treaty: “All the earlier proposals will be in the new text, but will be hidden and disguised in some way.”
These quotes were separate and were separated by text and context. The first above is a widely referenced text as you can expect given who said it, its not hard to find. I don’t know you and I am unwilling to do you a favour. Look it up yourself.
This was sarcasm – it was not attributed to anyone – in fact you can quote me as its source.“What happened to democracy?”
‘Aha! It was in the way.’Although they have changed the name, the contents are almost exactly the same. This is a deeply dishonest process.oscarBravo wrote: »I've already pointed out that this isn't the case. You neatly failed to quote the part of my post where I did so.oscarBravo wrote: »the Lisbon treaty is a different animal from the proposed Constitution. To pick just one rather significant point: the proposed Constitution would have effectively revoked the Rome and Maastricht Treaties, as well as the Charter of Fundamental Rights.
Was it this part I neatly failed to quote? Sorry I didn’t do so because it was clearly wrong.And there was me thinking that the Charter of Fundamental Rights was included in Part II of the Constitution.
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2004:310:0041:0054:EN:PDF
I have also quoted many European leaders who disagree with you. Perhaps they know something you don’t?The Lisbon Treaty in legal content is intended to be a constitutional foundation of a federal super state where we will continue to have less and less protection from drug dealers, thieves, paedophiles, rapists, and murderers - home grown and foreign, and where our population will be further pushed into low income, low security, multinational factory jobs while the expense of day to day living rockets.oscarBravo wrote: »You can't just say this. You have to back it up with reference to the text of the treaty.
I tell you what you tell me how it isn’t so and how the EU has not helped in the main this come about…..And if any of us say any thing (horror) we must be bigots, racists, snobs or some other despotic hate mongerers.oscarBravo wrote: »Who said so?
You did. At the end of this post when I point out exactly the circumstances your argument would have come from, you immediately cry out that I am using abusive words (eh like stupid naïve easily led and fantastical) and try and bring about a situation were you are now a victim and try to plead a ban – this is the usual from EU people not getting their way to try and either bring about a situation where you are the victim or I am a despot.I hate to be so blunt but your opinion is either a combination or a culmination of being stupid, naive or easily led or you are another fantasist politician who thinks we are naive stupid or easily led..oscarBravo wrote: »And you're hovering on the edge of a ban for personal abuse. If you can't make a point without name-calling (you've even resorted to putting abusive words in the mouths of those who disagree with you), you must not have a point worth making.
Personal abuse? I don’t know you. I did not use abusive words or insult and it seems you are unable to take plain fact and its presentation.Ireland isn't part of the Schegen agreement. As such, Ireland's agreements and policies are their own.
Not for long PHB with a yes vote you can vote that part of our sovereignty away too
0 -
-
Advertisement
-
-
I think that many of the quotes attributed to Valéry Giscard d'Estaing are translations of his letter
http://www.lemonde.fr/opinions/article/2007/10/26/la-boite-a-outils-du-traite-de-lisbonne-par-valery-giscard-d-estaing_971616_3232.html
where the translation to english allows newspapers to add their own spin.
Do you think all the EU leaders I quoted have been ‘spun?’
Its mad how " no of course it is not the same, it is transparent and easily understood" can be spun into “All the earlier proposals will be in the new text, but will be hidden and disguised in some way.”
Sorry oscarBravo this is not to peeve you off any more but you were wrong and I did quote where OTK had pointed this out:oscarBravo wrote: »the Lisbon treaty is a different animal from the proposed Constitution. To pick just one rather significant point: the proposed Constitution would have effectively revoked the Rome and Maastricht Treaties, as well as the Charter of Fundamental Rights.And there was me thinking that the Charter of Fundamental Rights was included in Part II of the Constitution.
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2004:310:0041:0054:EN:PDFThe Lisbon Treaty in legal content is intended to be a constitutional foundation of a federal super state where we will continue to have less and less protection from drug dealers, thieves, paedophiles, rapists, and murderers - home grown and foreign, and where our population will be further pushed into low income, low security, multinational factory jobs while the expense of day to day living rockets.
It may indeed be an assertion in the context of a widely held testimony.
Has the EU weakened protection of its citizens and the answer must be yes given the rise in serious crime across the EU and falling rates in detection. What about paedophilia? Yes again since one of its states Denmark legalized paedophilia and this remained unchallenged by the EU. The free travel of criminals across the EU has allowed criminals from other states come here and rape and murder our citizens.
Has this free travel helped society here in Ireland.? No. Has it helped earn a lot of money for the very few? Yes. Will Ireland have to pay long term for this? Yes.
Has the EU helped the entry of multinationals into our country – yes. Have these jobs been long term secure jobs with a pension? No. (And before you say it our governments have allowed them come in use up our resources and grants, pay no tax and in some cases pollute our environment before leaving).
The EU has brought many things to us and many of them unwelcome. The Lisbon Treaty is another one of them. It will further bring us out of sovereignty and into federal superstate enslavement.
I could go on but it is becoming off topic. There are a lot of concerns about the Lisbon Treaty and the fact that the Irish public is to be the subject of a farce posing as a referendum is a disgrace.oscarBravo wrote: »You can argue that the intent of Lisbon is broadly similar to that of the proposed Constitution, and I'll agree.
The content of the Lisbon Treaty is meant in full to recreate the intention of the constitution. The intent of the Lisbon Treaty is constitution by stealth. Do you agree?0 -
-
-
-
I think that many of the quotes attributed to Valéry Giscard d'Estaing are translations of his letter
http://www.lemonde.fr/opinions/article/2007/10/26/la-boite-a-outils-du-traite-de-lisbonne-par-valery-giscard-d-estaing_971616_3232.html
where the translation to english allows newspapers to add their own spin.
Very true.
D'Estaing is an arrogant old gob****e all the same. A real arrogant pompous Grand Ecole dickhead.
An accurate and complete translation of his Le Monde Article was provided for us by the London Independent .
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/valeacutery-giscard-destaing-the-eu-treaty-is-the-same-as-the-constitution-398286.html
Its more harmful to the anti Lisbon side when read in full rather than quoted selectively via the Daily Mail ...and not attributed to the Daily mail .
He did use "illisable" = unreadable in essence ......as distinct from Not To Be Read
The Independent !The Treaty of Lisbon is thus a catalogue of amendments. It is unpenetrable for the public.
In other words the celeb obsessed gob****es that will vote for it will not understand it. Quite so .
Some knobbing around was done to keep the French happy. This bit was removed from main text to an appendixThe concessions given to French opponents of the constitutional treaty are more symbolic than substantial. The expression "free and undistorted competition" has been taken out at the request of President Sarkozy.
So he can get the thing passed. HoweverIt reappears at the request of the British, in an annexed protocol to the new treaty which stipulates that "the internal market, such as is defined in Article 3 of the treaty, includes a system guaranteeing that competition is undistorted".
The Irish will likely provide this system for the whole of the EU, its called Comreg
0 -
-
-
Do you think all the EU leaders I quoted have been ‘spun?’
And you accuse OB of being naiveHas the EU helped the entry of multinationals into our country – yes. Have these jobs been long term secure jobs with a pension? No. (And before you say it our governments have allowed them come in use up our resources and grants, pay no tax and in some cases pollute our environment before leaving)
To be fair, the irish govt. has always bent over backwards to entice multinationals into this country, the EU just made it a little easier for them, I don't disagree with what you said, just that the blame lies with the Irish govt. not the EU.The EU has brought many things to us and many of them unwelcome. The Lisbon Treaty is another one of them. It will further bring us out of sovereignty and into federal superstate enslavement.
Many of the things it brought have benefited our country greatly, I do not understand Lisbon, nor would I claim to, I do not understand its implications. Until I do I am voting No. If someone can come forward and make sense of it all, there is a chance of a yes vote. Until then,
Status quo to them. 0 -
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
Advertisement