Do you honestly think the Lisbon Treaty was negotiated for the people's good???

ionix5891

thehighground wrote: »

1. Spain hasn't been a democracy for very long (and didn't they do well with the fishing
2. Luxembourg is at the heart of the EU - its population is half a million and most of them probably work for, or derive their livelihood from the EU anyway. Turkeys don't vote for Christmas.

Also Population of:
Spain 40m, Luxembourg: 0.5 million.
France 60m, Netherlands 17m.

:rolleyes:

on one hand the NO voters want their wishes respected in other countries on another hand yee wave off 2 countries and the wishes of their 40 million people as irrelevant?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypocrite

thecaptain

PH01 wrote: »

Aren't politicians elected by the people? They represent us all. And when they negotiated treatys they do so on our behalf.
They've reached a consensus - you get some of the things you want but usually not everything.

In general it's for the people's, all the people's good.

i bet you have a garage of rubber nails at home

thecaptain

Kaiser_Sma wrote: »

First of all i don't think you don't know what globalisation is. The european union by definition is an effort in globilization. If your speaking purely from an economic perspective, then globaliztion does not benefit the few. With exceptions it is primarly protectionism (the exact opposite to globilization) which benefits the few. Of course from a nationalistic perspective, a protectionist environment is beneficial to your countrymen, the rest of the world bedamned.

I think you'll find that not everything in politics can be ground down to the endless struggle between the enlightened prolitariat and the evil machine of the political elite.

globalisation is founded on trade agreements, so it is protestionism in disguise. it fools the gullible, like yourself.

is_that_so

thehighground wrote: »

1. Spain hasn't been a democracy for very long (and didn't they do well with the fishing
2. Luxembourg is at the heart of the EU - its population is half a million and most of them probably work for, or derive their livelihood from the EU anyway. Turkeys don't vote for Christmas.

Also Population of:
Spain 40m, Luxembourg: 0.5 million.
France 60m, Netherlands 17m.

Sigh. This looks like the type of halfwitted argument some people could be convinced to vote No on. It also displays an utterly shameful ignorance and as posted crass hypocrisy towards an answer that doesn't suit you.

PHB

Irish and Proud wrote: »

IMO, this Lisbon Treaty is really another step towards the goal of Globalisation, which as many of us know, is for the good of a few. If the EU politicians were really concerned about the people they supposedly represent, then citizens would be given a greater role in the shaping of a future Europe - like facilitating referendums in all 27 countries. I would take aspects like the citizens initiative and the greater role for the European Parliament in EU decision making with a few grains of salt – this I think is merely a PR exercise to blind us from the truth. My suspicion is that the Lisbon Treaty is aimed at exercising much greater control over the people of Europe - something that would be done gradually!

VOTE NO 2 LISBON 2

If we were not obliged to have a referendum, and the EU forced it on us, you'd go absolutely ****ing nuts

kevteljeur

I'm curious about the reaction of the 'No' side if we were to have an EU-wide referendum: 860,000 people in Ireland vote no, and let's say across the EU, 60% vote yes - call it 95,000,000 people or so. There are people here who would be screaming that this would be undemocratic.

Right now, with the status quo, every Irish person gets more of a say than every German person, thanks to weighting of the votes in favour of the small countries. I think this is very, very undemocratic.

ionix5891

kevteljeur wrote: »

I'm curious about the reaction of the 'No' side if we were to have an EU-wide referendum: 860,000 people in Ireland vote no, and let's say across the EU, 60% vote yes - call it 95,000,000 people or so. There are people here who would be screaming that this would be undemocratic.

Right now, with the status quo, every Irish person gets more of a say than every German person, thanks to weighting of the votes in favour of the small countries. I think this is very, very undemocratic.

how dare you poke a hole in Sein Feins warped view of democracy thats uglyly reflected in some of the comments on this site

towel401

kevteljeur wrote: »

I'm curious about the reaction of the 'No' side if we were to have an EU-wide referendum: 860,000 people in Ireland vote no, and let's say across the EU, 60% vote yes - call it 95,000,000 people or so. There are people here who would be screaming that this would be undemocratic.

Right now, with the status quo, every Irish person gets more of a say than every German person, thanks to weighting of the votes in favour of the small countries. I think this is very, very undemocratic.

that would be a good idea, certainly better than just having it ratified by politians in all the other countries.

EU-wide referendum screams of superstate though but its probably too late to stop the assimilation now. Its a good time to just give up and accept that the super state is coming within the next few decades. We could in theory leave the EU or join the EEA but nobody would ever approve of that because they are all afraid the economy will collapse if we leave. Voting down lisbon might slow things down ever so slightly but they won't just stop because Ireland isn't playing along.

ChocolateSauce

Irish and Proud wrote: »

Do you honestly think the Lisbon Treaty was negotiated for the people's good???
VOTE NO 2 LISBON 2

Yes.

ionix5891

towel401 wrote: »

We could in theory leave the EU or join the EEA

why oh why would we want to do that? implement all of the EUs laws without having a say in them?

marco_polo

towel401 wrote: »

that would be a good idea, certainly better than just having it ratified by politians in all the other countries.

EU-wide referendum screams of superstate though but its probably too late to stop the assimilation now. Its a good time to just give up and accept that the super state is coming within the next few decades. We could in theory leave the EU or join the EEA but nobody would ever approve of that because they are all afraid the economy will collapse if we leave. Voting down lisbon might slow things down ever so slightly but they won't just stop because Ireland isn't playing along.

And what make you think that the EU would be willing to let us negotiate a Bi-lateral agreement for ourselves for one thing upon withdrawl from the union. They are under no obligation to do any such thing, or indeed agree for us to join the existing agreement they have with current EEA countries.

Irish and Proud

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

I love the irony.

They tried to make the meetings public with lisbon, those dastardly meanies furthering their goals.

Yeah, but the Lisbon Treaty itself wasn't discussed so openly, so might you not consider that it (making EU meetings public) would be a little on the late side then, when the EU enjoys far greater power over its people? If you think I'm talking baloney, then why have the people in all other 26 EU countries been excluded from having a say on Lisbon? Let's look at the following again:


"Public opinion will be led to adopt, without knowing it, the proposals that we dare not present to them directly" ... "All the earlier proposals will be in the new text, but will be hidden and disguised in some way."

- V.Giscard D'Estaing, Le Monde, 14 June 2007, and Sunday Telegraph, 1 July 2007


"The substance of what was agreed in 2004 has been retained. What is gone is the term 'constitution'."

- Dermot Ahern, Irish Foreign Minister, Daily Mail Ireland, 25 June 2007


The good thing about not calling it a Constltution is that no one can ask for a referendum on it."

- Giuliano Amato, speech at London School of Econmics, 21 February 2007


"The Constitution is the capstone of a European Federal State"

- Guy Verhofstadt, Belgian Prime Minister, Financial Times, 21 June 2004


Now, you were saying... :rolleyes:


VOTE NO 2 LISBON 2

Irish and Proud

theozster wrote: »

Yes.

Really?


VOTE NO 2 LISBON 2

molloyjh

Irish and Proud wrote: »

Yeah, but the Lisbon itself wasn't discussed so openly, so might you not consider that it (making EU meetings public) would be a little on the late side then, when the EU enjoys far greater power over its people? If you think I'm talking baloney, then why have the people in all other 26 EU countries been excluded from having a say on Lisbon?

What "far greater power" are you waffling about? There's a lot of talk in your posts with very little substance. If you're going to make bold claims like that, at least attempt to back them up with something.

marco_polo

I can't possibly compete with big red letters

is_that_so

Irish and Proud wrote: »

Yeah, but the Lisbon Treaty itself wasn't discussed so openly, so might you not consider that it (making EU meetings public) would be a little on the late side then, when the EU enjoys far greater power over its people? If you think I'm talking baloney, then why have the people in all other 26 EU countries been excluded from having a say on Lisbon? Let's look at the following again:


"Public opinion will be led to adopt, without knowing it, the proposals that we dare not present to them directly" ... "All the earlier proposals will be in the new text, but will be hidden and disguised in some way."

- V.Giscard D'Estaing, Le Monde, 14 June 2007, and Sunday Telegraph, 1 July 2007


"The substance of what was agreed in 2004 has been retained. What is gone is the term 'constitution'."

- Dermot Ahern, Irish Foreign Minister, Daily Mail Ireland, 25 June 2007


The good thing about not calling it a Constltution is that no one can ask for a referendum on it."

- Giuliano Amato, speech at London School of Econmics, 21 February 2007


"The Constitution is the capstone of a European Federal State"

- Guy Verhofstadt, Belgian Prime Minister, Financial Times, 21 June 2004


Now, you were saying... :rolleyes:

Sigh. Random quotes are not an argument and prove nothing more than you are good at digging them up. It also provides credence ,as been commented on other threads, and as if it's needed, that some No supporters are incapable of offering anything constructive to the debate.

My quote :rolleyes:

A man uses "quotes" the same way a drunk uses a lamp post , for support and not illumination - After Mark Twain.

Irish and Proud

molloyjh wrote: »

What "far greater power" are you waffling about? There's a lot of talk in your posts with very little substance. If you're going to make bold claims like that, at least attempt to back them up with something.

Well maybe if you read all of the post - there's plenty of circumstantial evidence mate!


VOTE NO 2 LISBON 2

marco_polo

Irish and Proud wrote: »

Well maybe if you read all of the post - there's plenty of circumstantial evidence mate!

But you don't need circumstantial evidence, it should be very easy to locate hard evidence for these "far greater powers" being conferred because everything is in the treaty already.

ionix5891

Irish and Proud wrote: »

Well maybe if you read all of the post - there's plenty of circumstantial evidence mate!


VOTE NO 2 LISBON 2

can you please list this evidence?

remember innocent until proven guilty (well unless you are from across the pond)

sorry mods but i think i will have to make the sentence bellow bold
VOTE YES 2 LISBON 2

Moriarty

Irish and Proud: you've been challenged to provide evidence of your claims. Either provide the evidence or retract your statements. You have until midnight tonight before I consider you soapboxing and ban you.

Also, slogans are not welcome here. Neither are BIG RED LETTER SLOGANS. Please stop posting them.

Irish and Proud

Irish and Proud wrote: »

IMO, this Lisbon Treaty is really another step towards the goal of Globalisation, which as many of us know, is for the good of a few. If the EU politicians were really concerned about the people they supposedly represent, then citizens would be given a greater role in the shaping of a future Europe - like facilitating referendums in all 27 countries. I would take aspects like the citizens initiative and the greater role for the European Parliament in EU decision making with a few grains of salt – this I think is merely a PR exercise to blind us from the truth. My suspicion is that the Lisbon Treaty is aimed at exercising much greater control over the people of Europe - something that would be done gradually!

The follow section of the above seems to have proved rather controversial:

"...I would take aspects like the citizens initiative and the greater role for the European Parliament in EU decision making with a few grains of salt – this I think is merely a PR exercise to blind us from the truth. My suspicion is that the Lisbon Treaty is aimed at exercising much greater control over the people of Europe - something that would be done gradually!"

Now for a start, the above content is clearly stated as opinion, not fact! The actual fact is that I don't trust the EU at this particular moment - no matter what reasons I have for holding such an opinion, I genuinely hold that opinion and have every right to express it!

Now as the referendum commission has stated in its Lisbon Treaty 2008 booklet, the citizen's initiative is where the EU Commission is required to consider any proposal brought foward by any party with at least one million signatures on the part of EU citizens. So basically, I take it that the commission has only to acknowledge the said proposals. IMO, this is totally meaningless!

About the truth, again I stated suspicion, not fact. I genuinely have grave reservations about the EU since that Danish voted no to Maastricht. I remember the way in which politicians reacted at the time (comments like: "Tough Luck Denmark" by Pat Cox of the PDs - does he still chair the EU parliament?). The general mood was that Denmark was a nuisence. I certainly did not like the sound of it - to me, it seemed like the EC's (as it was then) colours were coming true. Just look at the way the EU elite reacted to Ireland when she voted No to Nice. IMO, both cases were clearly a form of bullying. Again, that is my opinion and I'm perfectly entitled to it!

Finally, about the slogans, I take it that the same rules are being applied to those seeking a Yes vote!

Fair is Fair!

ionix5891

Irish and Proud wrote: »

Finally, about the slogans, I take it that the same rules are being applied to those seeking a Yes vote!

Fair is Fair!

an now my big bold letters are more patriotic than yours

Irish and Proud

Irish and Proud wrote: »

I read a few of the posts and to say the least, some of you guys seem so naive!

Can you not see what is happening in the USA (the type of state that the EU seems to be becoming - or trying to! )? Do you not think the American industry and the political elite look rather cosy together? - Is this the model you want for the EU? - If in doubt, just look at the Bush administration, the oil industry, arms industry, fast food chains, health sector etc. as well as much of the media! Yes, Bush was elected by the people (well on the second term that is!), but on what grounds??? Mind you, Barack might stir things up a little over there - I really hope he wins!!!

Well, most people I speak to would agree that the US political system is very corrupt. If in doubt, just compare the welcomes that the Irish people gave to Clinton up to 2000 and then Bush in 2004 - does that not speak volumes in itself? Of course, unless this forum is like a court case, then the abundant circumstantial evidence regarding the US (under Bush) should more than suffice.

Regarding the EU:

"the type of state that the EU seems to be becoming - or trying to! "

Now again, the above is not a statement of concrete fact, but the word "seems" should have been accompanied with "IMO" in order to make the statement completely normative. In light of this, I will modify the above statement to:

"IMO, the type of state that the EU seems to evolving into - or trying! "

Well, I am of the opinion that comments made by EU politicians/officials such as "Public opinion will be led to adapt..." (an example of what I've already posted on this thread), gives rise to serious concern that a large gulf exists between the EU/political institutions and the people. Just look at the promised referendums on EU Reform that didn't materialise - the French people were promised, the British people were promised... and so on, and look what happened. Mind you, Ireland got a referendum, because our constitution required it. So, if the people of the EU are being disregarded in this way, the direction in which the EU is taking would surely be a cause for concern!

Irish and Proud wrote: »

Now, in the EU, would it not be plausible that many EU politicians are feeling the heat in their own countries over corruption, and that by creating an EU super-state that over-rides the laws of the said countries, they create a safe haven for themselves? Also, the EU commission offices were raided by police only last year - what does that say about the EU? Also, would it not seem plausible that many of the EU leaders are rather power hungry and would like to be in the mix of what dictates world affairs? I suppose the answer is that EU leaders are beyond that sort of thinking - well, if that's the case, why is the rattle flying out of the pram when the Irish people vote No, and why don't the people of other EU countries have the right to a vote in relation to Lisbon.

The last sentence should obviously by ended with "?". Now apart from that, there is not one statement of fact contained in the above. In fact, one statement is suggestive while all the rest are in the form of questions. So, what backing up do I actually need here in order to comply with the forum rules? As the Yes camp repeatedly lectured to us No campaigners, "...read the ruddy thing!"

Irish and Proud wrote: »

Also, do you honestly think that most EU meetings take place behind closed doors, because they are looking after the best interests of the people - and especially, giving the people what they want? :rolleyes:

Oh, come on guys!

Again, the above is purely circumstantial and suggestive in nature!

All in all, apart from one minor change, I can see nothing wrong with this particular post. However, I will be doing more research in order to avoid being tripped up - As a No campaigner, I don't exactly feel very welcome here, but if you think I'm going to be put off by this...

Regards!

P.S. - I take it that nobody is posting any slogans - I was warned!

Irish and Proud

molloyjh wrote: »

What "far greater power" are you waffling about? There's a lot of talk in your posts with very little substance. If you're going to make bold claims like that, at least attempt to back them up with something.

I'm talking about the areas of competence discussed by the referendum commission in their info booklet: Lisbon Treaty 2008

These would include policing and security - Ireland and Britain do have opt-outs, but Ireland can completely withdraw from opt-out provisions with the consent of the Dail and Senate, but complete withdrawl regarding the said area would not require a referendum. In any case, was the scope of EU policing clearly defined - to me, it seemed rather open ended - like what defines a terrorist threat? I will be doing more research though!

Regards!

Irish and Proud

Irish and Proud wrote: »

Yeah, but the Lisbon Treaty itself wasn't discussed so openly, so might you not consider that it (making EU meetings public) would be a little on the late side then, when the EU enjoys far greater power over its people? If you think I'm talking baloney, then why have the people in all other 26 EU countries been excluded from having a say on Lisbon? Let's look at the following again:

I will modify the above to the following:

"Yeah, but IMO, the Lisbon Treaty itself wasn't negotiated so openly, so might you not consider that it (making EU meetings public) would be a little on the late side then, if the No camp's fear was justified and the EU enjoyed far greater power over its people? If you feel that I'm talking baloney, then you might consider why the people in all other 26 EU countries have been excluded from having a say on Lisbon? Also, let's look at the following again:"

I believe that the above substitute statement is fully normative, as was always the intention concerning the intial text - many apologies in light of any inappropriate wording regarding the initial statement!

Irish and Proud wrote: »

"Public opinion will be led to adopt, without knowing it, the proposals that we dare not present to them directly" ... "All the earlier proposals will be in the new text, but will be hidden and disguised in some way."

- V.Giscard D'Estaing, Le Monde, 14 June 2007, and Sunday Telegraph, 1 July 2007


"The substance of what was agreed in 2004 has been retained. What is gone is the term 'constitution'."

- Dermot Ahern, Irish Foreign Minister, Daily Mail Ireland, 25 June 2007


The good thing about not calling it a Constltution is that no one can ask for a referendum on it."

- Giuliano Amato, speech at London School of Econmics, 21 February 2007


"The Constitution is the capstone of a European Federal State"

- Guy Verhofstadt, Belgian Prime Minister, Financial Times, 21 June 2004


Now, you were saying... :rolleyes:

I stand by these quotes!

Regards!

is_that_so

Irish and Proud wrote: »

I stand by these quotes!

Regards!

How can you stand by something you didn't say and yet again I repeat my comment in relation to what benefit they offer to any of your points.

Irish and Proud

is_that_so wrote: »

How can you stand by something you didn't say and yet again I repeat my comment in relation to what benefit they offer to any of your points.

I mean that I stand by my actions in displaying the said quotes on this thread. Also, do these quotes not point to any secrecy regarding how EU business is done? - If there is any secrecy involved, does this not help to back up my concerns regarding the EU?

Regards!

is_that_so

IMO if you consistently read information that subscribes only to your own point of view then you are not informing yourself and you run the risk of not getting the full picture. That in turn colours how you see something. If you really want to be informed , read both sides, even things you see as "biased".
Quotes serve no real purpose IMO except they are used as foundation for adopting a position and not as the logic of an argument.

dresden8

No voter rapidly turning Euro-sceptic from the Brouha-ha over the last couple of weeks.

But, yes Lisbon was negotiated for our own good. The difference is that I don't like where things are going. A common trading area is good enough for me.

It's ridiculous to assume that "they" are out to get us. The rich will always look after their interests, in whatever system they find themselves, the unions will always try to get as much as they can, the gravy train will roll as long and as wide as it can. Nations will try to protect their own narrow interests.

Friendly conflict is good. Keeps everybody honest. (Except the MEPs who have decided we shouldn't know how they are screwing their expenses.)

Irish and Proud

PHB wrote: »

If we were not obliged to have a referendum, and the EU forced it on us, you'd go absolutely ****ing nuts

Eh, did I miss something there??? :rolleyes:

If any undemocratic government was forced to hand power over to its people, then I'd have absolutely no objections. So if the EU forced referendums on countries under its remit, then surely the ordinary people would have the final say on treaties such as Lisbon - what would I be complaining about?

Regards!