Are we that blind and forgetful?

Biggins · 12-11-2008 12:21pm #1

THE PRESIDENT of the Czech Republic, Vaclav Klaus, has warned of a shift towards "supranationalism" in Europe which he says is suppressing freedom and democracy.

He mentioned this during a visit to a dinner with Mr Ganley of Libertas.
News Source:http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2008/1112/1226408554928.html

Fine Gael's foreign affairs spokesman Billy Timmins said the Minister for Foreign Affairs should lodge a formal complaint with his Czech counterpart over Mr Klaus's "inappropriate behaviour in creating a very definite perception that he is strongly sympathising with groupings and individuals who are opposed to Irish Government policy".

I would like at this juncture to point out to Fianna Gael whom have gotten very blind all of a sudden or even more stupider, that this is the same Irish government that is ignoring the voted mandate that the Irish people have set out at the last referendum!

Where does the public lodge a complaint when we are ignored when the Irish government sympathises with the EU and overrides the will of the people!

Fianna Gael - Kop yourself on you idiots. Pick a side and friggin' stick to it.
No wonder your a useless party.
The government ignores our (referendum) mandate but that's ok...
...But you give out against a foreign leader whom is opposed to an idea that the charlatans in the Dail are trying to force onto the public! (...wait - isn't that called bullying by the way?)

And by the way, I most defiantly am not a F.F. supporter - I'm not supporting Libertas.

It just pisses me off when someone/party ignores (for the sake of self-interest?), whats being forced on the people against their clear wishes but gives out with the government bullies when someone else actually stands up for the wishes of the people when our own elected wasters won't do it!

Fianna Gael - conveniently blind and silent when it suits them.

Sorry Fianna Gael - some of us, are all NOT that blind, clearly forgetful and stupid as ye are.

Villain · 12-11-2008 12:28pm

Its funny you have a foreign President on a state visit getting hassle for respecting the mandate of the Irish voters!

Permabear · 12-11-2008 12:30pm

This post has been deleted.

nhughes100 · 12-11-2008 12:33pm

Well Fine Gael decided to back Lisbon so on the Lisbon issue we can tar them all with the same brush - Sinn Fein were the only party to oppose it, the Greens as usual didn't have an opinion either way.

Biggins · 12-11-2008 12:37pm

F.Gael should get off the fence!

They give out about someone that speaks up about a mandate which is wished for by the Irish public (but ignored!), yet F.Gael side with the bullies and now seemly are kissing their ass on this issue.

What the hell is going on today in Irish politics!

Hypocrisy of the highest order!

mike65 · 12-11-2008 12:38pm

Sure the Government Press officials shut the Irish media out of the Vaclav Klaus press conference on Monday.

Mike

passive · 12-11-2008 12:47pm

Biggins wrote: »

...But you give out against a foreign leader whom is opposed to an idea that the charlatans in the Dail are trying to force onto the public! (...wait - isn't that called bullying by the way?)

Okay, for a start it's Fine Gael, not Fianna Gael. Regarding the bullying issue; as has come up before, this is not the playground and we are not 7. We don't need to throw a tantrum or lash out at teacher because we're being asked not to play on the grass. The grass is muddy and will ruin our nice clothes.

Mr Klaus going out of his way to meet with Declan Ganley is extremely disturbing and inappropriate. Even as a No supporter, you cannot deny the fact the Libertas's questionably funded campaign printed out and out lies and confused the people willfully to muddy the waters and prevent an informed decision from being made. This man is opposed to the European Union and wants to use us as an instrument in its weakness and demise. You're playing right into his hand.

Pick a side and friggin' stick to it.

They're the opposition, yes... But if there was some horrible disaster or crisis and Fianna Fail proposed measures and began taking action to help the people and sort out the problems, Fine Gael would not, and should not, oppose them on this for the sake of it. They're allowed make intelligent choices that benefit the Irish people (Voting Yes to Lisbon, for example) rather than attacking the Govt at every opportunity and using issues like this to score points and gain supporters (like, oh, I don't know, Sinn Fein?)

Biggins · 12-11-2008 12:55pm

passive wrote: »

Okay, for a start, you politically informed mastermind, it's Fine Gael, not Fianna Gael. Regarding the bullying issue; as has come up before, this is not the playground and we are not 7. We don't need to throw a tantrum or lash out at teacher because we're being asked not to play on the grass. The grass is muddy and will ruin our nice clothes.

Mr Klaus going out of his way to meet with Declan Ganley is extremely disturbing and inappropriate. Even as a No supporter, you cannot deny the fact the Libertas's questionably funded campaign printed out and out lies and confused the people willfully to muddy the waters and prevent an informed decision from being made. This man is opposed to the European Union and wants to use us as an instrument in its weakness and demise. You're playing right into his hand.

They're the opposition, yes... But if there was some horrible disaster or crisis and Fianna Fail proposed measures and began taking action to help the people and sort out the problems, Fine Gael would not, and should not, oppose them on this for the sake of it. They're allowed make intelligent choices that benefit the Irish people (Voting Yes to Lisbon, for example) rather than attacking the Govt at every opportunity and using issues like this to score points and gain supporters (like, oh, I don't know, Sinn Fein?)

You clearly missed my point (I'm ignoring the spelling issue).

I might not agree with Mr Klaus but F. Gael are forgetting about our mandate being ignored but giving out when someone else speaks about it - not even up for it - just about it.

F. Gael are ignoring what convenient - that the shower in the Dail are ignoring the referendum result - they are very silent on that matter
...but are speaking up and annoyed when someone else does what they are supposed to do, ie: represent by coincidence, the wishes of the Irish public.
I have the right to agree or disagree with Klaus but at least he is voicing at a higher level what the Government and F. Gael is ignoring.

F. Gael have the right to side with any policy that in the best interests of the Irish public, even if the public disagree with it.
but - and this is my main point - they are ignoring the over-riding of the mandate of the public, staying silent and dumb, and giving out only when someone else does their job and agrees with with the public!
(that's called Democracy in practise by the way!)

They stay quiet - say nothing abut the bullying, say nothing about the quiet sliding in of the E.U. Constitution by hidden legal means, they say nothing when more E.U. imposed Big Brother laws are slipped in.. etc...

...but they speak up and are enraged when someone actual sticks up for the Irish public!

seamus · 12-11-2008 12:58pm

Wait, the government have ignored the referendum results and are going ahead with Lisbon? Why was I not informed?

Oh wait, no they haven't.

The government, or any else for that matter, are allowed to be in support of a treaty that's been defeated at referendum. They're just not allowed to implement it.

The will of the people has been carried out - Lisbon has not been ratified. Where's the confusion here?

The Czech PM is getting stick because he's making a very clear statement to the EU as to where his intentions lie.

Villain · 12-11-2008 1:00pm

Passive incase you forgot the majority of the Irish electroate supported many views held by Libertas.

As for the funding issues, well if he shouldn't be talking to people who are members of political groups who have questions over where their money came from in the past you might want to tell him Brian Cowen is a member of Fianna Fail

Villain · 12-11-2008 1:03pm

seamus wrote: »

Wait, the government have ignored the referendum results and are going ahead with Lisbon? Why was I not informed?

Oh wait, no they haven't.

The government, or any else for that matter, are allowed to be in support of a treaty that's been defeated at referendum. They're just not allowed to implement it.

The will of the people has been carried out - Lisbon has not been ratified. Where's the confusion here?

The Czech PM is getting stick because he's making a very clear statement to the EU as to where his intentions lie.

Perhaps Seamus you need to read the views expressed by Dick Roche and other members of the Government since the vote was cast

seamus · 12-11-2008 1:03pm

Villain wrote: »

Passive incase you forgot the majority of the Irish electroate supported many views held by Libertas.

Let's clarify that. The majority of those who voted "No", believed the same falsehoods that Libertas were touting.

Perhaps Seamus you need to read the views expressed by Dick Roche and other members of the Government since the vote was cast

Any member of government is perfectly entitled to express their view.

Biggins · 12-11-2008 1:10pm

seamus wrote: »

Wait, the government have ignored the referendum results and are going ahead with Lisbon? Why was I not informed?

Oh wait, no they haven't.

Dear Gawd, even main parties on all sides have admitted that there will be more than likely another expensive referendum to try and get us to say "Yes" again.
In the meanwhile, in the media, through our letter boxes, etc we are getting promo items for the EU espousing what good they are doing for us.

...and I might add that Mr Cowan has admitted that he is trying to change parts of Irish law so that he can without a further referendum, bring in part of the Constitution/Treaty without the need for another vote. This is on record and has been reported on.

Don't tell me, the government is sticking with the results of the referendum!

We are getting away for the main point of this thread though.

The hypocrisy of F.Gael.

oscarBravo · 12-11-2008 1:12pm

Biggins wrote: »

Don't tell me, the government is sticking with the results of the referendum!

The referendum asked whether the constitution should be amended.

The answer was "no".

The constitution wasn't amended.

Have I missed something?

Villain · 12-11-2008 1:13pm

seamus wrote: »

Let's clarify that. The majority of those who voted "No", believed the same falsehoods that Libertas were touting.

That may be the case but we can't be caertain.

seamus wrote: »

Any member of government is perfectly entitled to express their view.

And anyone is welcome to pretend that view isn't shared among the rest of the Government, do you honestly think the rest of FF don't want any referendum? or at least wanted one before they went and made a shambles of the budget any referendum would be lost again because the electorate have no other way of expressing their anger at the Government rightly or wrongly.

seamus · 12-11-2008 1:15pm

But you're trying to make it out like this is some sort of coup, that the government are taking control and completely ignoring their constitutional duties.

They are not doing anything which they have not already got the power to do. We (being the people, probably not me and you) voted them in, therefore we gave them this power and therefore gave them the right to operate like this within that power.

You can call it underhanded and unethical, but the simple fact is that there is nothing illegal or unconstitutional about it.

The Irish people voted "No" to changing the constitution, and they are not doing that. Ergo, the will of the Irish people is not being ignored.

We voted in a pro-EU government, so they're trying to be pro-EU. If we don't want a pro-EU government, we should stop voting them in.

That may be the case but we can't be caertain.

There were a number of polls released (and posted here, don't have the link to hand), that showed 75% (or thereabouts) of No voters, voted based on issues which had nothing to do with the treaty.

Biggins · 12-11-2008 1:16pm

oscarBravo wrote: »

Have I missed something?

Yes, the current changes that are coming to parts of Irish law, changes that are right now under review and closed door discussion, that will bring in parts of the constitution/treaty without the need for a vote.

This has been reported on and Mr Cowan admitted it is going on.

We voted on the entire contents of the constitution/treaty - not just parts of it.
We said "No" as a final vote, to the lot of it - even if we might have agreed with some aspects.

Villain · 12-11-2008 1:17pm

oscarBravo wrote: »

The referendum asked whether the constitution should be amended.

The answer was "no".

The constitution wasn't amended.

Have I missed something?

If it ended there OscarBravo you would be spot on, but they will keep asking the question until they get the result they want, or try and bring aspects of the treaty without changing the Constitution.

For its worth I'm not surprised at FG, they support the treaty so obviously they are going to attack the views held by Vaclav Klaus, just because a party is in opposition doesn't mean they will represent the majority of voters.

oscarBravo · 12-11-2008 1:19pm

Villain wrote: »

That may be the case but we can't be caertain.

True, largely because many people who voted "no" have a habit of getting defensive when they're asked why they did so.

...any referendum would be lost again because the electorate have no other way of expressing their anger at the Government rightly or wrongly.

Yeah, that shows them. Far more effective than talking to their elected representatives and expressing their anger directly, or - perish the thought - not voting for them.

oscarBravo · 12-11-2008 1:22pm

Biggins wrote: »

Yes, the current changes that are coming to parts of Irish law, changes that are right now under review and closed door discussion, that will bring in parts of the constitution/treaty without the need for a vote.

This has what, precisely, to do with a referendum on a constitutional amendment?

We voted on the entire contents of the constitution/treaty - not just parts of it.
We said "No" as a final vote, to the lot of it - even if we might have agreed with some aspects.

I'm not sure what was written on your ballot paper, but mine asked if I wanted to amend the constitution.

Villain wrote: »

If it ended there OscarBravo you would be spot on, but they will keep asking the question until they get the result they want, or try and bring aspects of the treaty without changing the Constitution.

Or, in the interim, the EU decides to work around us - or suspend our membership.

All of which is a hell of a lot more likely than us ever getting a straight answer as to why people voted "no".

Villain · 12-11-2008 1:28pm

oscarBravo wrote: »

Yeah, that shows them. Far more effective than talking to their elected representatives and expressing their anger directly, or - perish the thought - not voting for them.

I did say rightly or wrongly, but sadly people feel the only way they get to the government is through the ballet box and as a general election is some way off the only vote they will get is the local and European elections and then another referendum.

As for talking to their elected representatives and expressing their anger directly, I have done that and I can tell you you might as well be talking to the wall, take the education cuts and the cervical cancer vaccine cutbacks, my local TD seems to think this is tough but ok. You can't get through to these people and sadly many people would use a referendum to get their across.

I mean if we had another referendum net month we would have FF TD's calling at doorsteps night and day looking for a yes vote, what do you think most people would say to them? DO you think they would say

" oh your not here to discuss the local issues or the assault on childrens education or the cervical cancer vaccine cutbacks or the state of the health system, you just want me to talk about Lisbon and then vote Yes, em ok yea sure TD"?

Biggins · 12-11-2008 1:32pm

oscarBravo wrote: »

This has what, precisely, to do with a referendum on a constitutional amendment?

That they are trying to insert parts of the constitution/treaty into other parts of Irish law if they can't (so far) get it into the constitution. I can't believe you can't see that.

oscarBravo wrote: »

I'm not sure what was written on your ballot paper, but mine asked if I wanted to amend the constitution.

...as did mine. The public said "No" - so the constitution/treaty parts were rejected in its entirety. Again to repeat the above: they are trying to insert parts of the constitution/treaty into other parts of Irish law if they can't (so far) get it into the constitution.

oscarBravo · 12-11-2008 1:34pm

Villain wrote: »

As for talking to their elected representatives and expressing their anger directly, I have done that and I can tell you you might as well be talking to the wall, take the education cuts and the cervical cancer vaccine cutbacks, my local TD seems to think this is tough but ok.

Then you should explain to your local TD that you won't be voting for him; that nobody in your family will be voting for him; and in fact you're going to pick a prominent opposition candidate and start canvassing for him. Ideally, follow up by doing just that.

You can't get through to these people and sadly many people would use a referendum to get their across.

Which is a great idea, apart from the twin flaws that (1) it doesn't work - the feckers are still running the country - and (2) it has the unfortunate side-effect of defeating a referendum for reasons that have nothing whatsoever to do with the referendum itself. It's a bit like setting fire to an ambulance because your neighbour pissed you off: your neighbour's no worse off, and we're short an ambulance.

I mean if we had another referendum net month we would have FF TD's calling at doorsteps night and day looking for a yes vote, what do you think most people would say to them? DO you think they would say

" oh your not here to discuss the local issues or the assault on childrens education or the cervical cancer vaccine cutbacks or the state of the health system, you just want me to talk about Lisbon and then vote Yes, em ok yea sure TD"?

I don't know what anyone else would say, but I'd say "I'll be voting yes, but I won't be voting for you in the next election, and here's why..."

oscarBravo · 12-11-2008 1:38pm

Biggins wrote: »

That they are trying to insert parts of the constitution/treaty into other parts of Irish law if they can't (so far) get it into the constitution. I can't believe you can't see that.

I can, and it doesn't add up to a claim that the referendum result is being ignored.

By the same token I could claim that the referendum was a protest vote against the government, and the fact that the same government is still in power means that the vote was ignored. Doesn't make it true.

The public said "No" - so the constitution/treaty parts were rejected in its entirety. Again to repeat the above: they are trying to insert parts of the constitution/treaty into other parts of Irish law if they can't (so far) get it into the constitution.

European law gets transposed into Irish law all the time without referendum.

I actually don't agree with the approach of trying to implement parts of the treaty piecemeal. I can't imagine that there's any point in even doing so. The treaty gets ratified or it doesn't; that's the nature of the treaty.

Villain · 12-11-2008 1:44pm

oscarBravo wrote: »

Then you should explain to your local TD that you won't be voting for him; that nobody in your family will be voting for him; and in fact you're going to pick a prominent opposition candidate and start canvassing for him. Ideally, follow up by doing just that.

That has been said and will be followed through with it.

oscarBravo wrote: »

Which is a great idea, apart from the twin flaws that (1) it doesn't work - the feckers are still running the country - and (2) it has the unfortunate side-effect of defeating a referendum for reasons that have nothing whatsoever to do with the referendum itself. It's a bit like setting fire to an ambulance because your neighbour pissed you off: your neighbour's no worse off, and we're short an ambulance.

Oh I agree with you Oscar thats why I used the word "sadly", if you want me to think that people would view another referendum as a single issue and not use their vote to show their anger at the Government I'm sorry I jsut can't see it happening, in an ideal world maybe but in reality it would never happen

oscarBravo wrote: »

I don't know what anyone else would say, but I'd say "I'll be voting yes, but I won't be voting for you in the next election, and here's why..."

I may well say the same but I know many many others who wouldn't even give the TD a chance to talk and tbh it would be a fair cheek to call to a voters door looking for their vote on one matter while at the same time ignoring what their views on other matters.

Biggins · 12-11-2008 1:45pm

IF you can't see the first point, thats an insight ability issue that we could argue for ever...
We will have to agree to disagree on that one or we will get no where...

On the second point "European law gets transposed into Irish law all the time without referendum" - maybe so but those laws are not part of something that has been rejected by a vote - but are instead now it seems, re-worded and in the near future, inserted elsewhere where applicable into standard non-votable on, Irish state law.

JoeTheDumber · 12-11-2008 1:48pm

I think the 2nd referendum, the 2nd "GO", will be brilliant.

Even the dumbest of idiots will have to admit "we are being had here, this whole thing is a farce".

JoeTheDumber · 12-11-2008 1:51pm

oscarBravo wrote: »

True, largely because many people who voted "no" have a habit of getting defensive when they're asked why they did so.

I voted NO. And here's why. The EU is a joke, a corrupt, totalitarian bureaucracy run by gangsters.

JoeTheDumber · 12-11-2008 1:53pm

seamus wrote: »

We voted in a pro-EU government, so they're trying to be pro-EU. If we don't want a pro-EU government, we should stop voting them in.

Name a party which is not pro EU.

seamus wrote: »

There were a number of polls released (and posted here, don't have the link to hand), that showed 75% (or thereabouts) of No voters, voted based on issues which had nothing to do with the treaty.

What a joke BIFFO never even read the treaty, your leader never even read it, and yet you come out with this tatter.

seamus · 12-11-2008 2:08pm

JoeTheDumber wrote: »

Name a party which is not pro EU.

Sinn Féin

What a joke BIFFO never even read the treaty, your leader never even read it, and yet you come out with this tatter.

What's that got to do with anything? If Biffo didn't read it, that's his problem.

The reasons for the no vote given ranged from, "I don't understand it" to "I don't want my child conscripted".

Villain · 12-11-2008 2:13pm

seamus wrote: »

Sinn Féin
What's that got to do with anything? If Biffo didn't read it, that's his problem.

The reasons for the no vote given ranged from, "I don't understand it" to "I don't want my child conscripted".

Do you usually agree to sign off on legal documents you don't understand or take the word of people you don't trust that you should sign off on them

Are we that blind and forgetful?

Comments