Lisbon 2: prepare to bend over and recieve ur destiny!

Darragh29 · 12-12-2008 12:18pm

sk8board wrote: »

Its still counts as influence

'As long as we are EU members'. You don't think that the other 26 members can collectively vote to marginalise us? When we promote pieces of legislation and they get mysteriously shot down every time? When we go cap in hand for this reason and that reason, and theres no money with our name on it.

Like any club of any size, you play by the rules, or you leave. If we vote No this time around, we're too small and insignificant to survive on our own.

and for the tin-foil hat brigade; don't think we wouldn't become the 51st state, in all but name. Its nearly happened before, and we joined Europe instead.
Look at Iceland; who bailed them our with the EU balked? Russia!

We cannot be voted out the EU, unless we vote ourselves out. While your speaking of rules, the rules of this particular club is that the Lisbon Treaty must be passed unamiously by all member states in conjunction with their constitutional requirements or it cannot come into force. This is the rule of the club, so this treaty should be, according to that rule, in the bin. There is no rule that says we are too small to "survive on our own", this is nothing more than scaremongering...

What really scares me is that this whole EU machine seems to be running on countries building up brownie points with each other and slapping each others backs nudge budge and wink wink, but once a country disagrees with a particular approach, all of a sudden, the faces turn deadly serious and it would appear that offence is taken, it's like watching a gang of dons having a nervous dinner with Al capone and Al capone would appear to be looking for his baseball bat right now...

ben bedlam · 12-12-2008 12:20pm

SheroN wrote: »

What about all the "get a better deal for Ireland" and "save our commissioner" posters the last time round from the NO campagin?

These concerns look like being addressed before the second vote and people are still whinging?

It's not really being re-run if there's major changes to the treaty?

The Lisbon treaty is a binding legal document. If one letter, comma or full stop in that treaty is changed the document becomes a new treaty that MUST be re-ratified by all member states. This will not happen, since so many states have alreeady ratfed Lisbon. The "assurances" that Cowen will be peddling over the next few months are therefore meaningless, since the EXACT SAME DOCUMENT MUST BE PRESENTED TO THE IRISH PEOPLE AGAIN,REGARDLESS OF EU ASSURANCES ON NEUTRALITY ETC.

SheroN · 12-12-2008 12:21pm

ben bedlam wrote: »

The Lisbon treaty is a binding legal document. If one letter, comma or full stop in that treaty is changed the document becomes a new treaty that MUST be re-ratified by all member states. This will not happen, since so many states have alreeady ratfed Lisbon. The "assurances" that Cowen will be peddling over the next few months are therefore meaningless, since the EXACT SAME DOCUMENT MUST BE PRESENTED TO THE IRISH PEOPLE AGAIN,REGARDLESS OF EU ASSURANCES ON NEUTRALITY ETC.

That's ok then. I voted yes the last time, so I won't have to bother reading a new document.

ben bedlam · 12-12-2008 12:26pm

Correctamundo, its the same tripe again.

"If you don't know, vote no"

Dave! · 12-12-2008 12:27pm

http://www.rte.ie/news/2008/1212/eulisbon.html

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/mhsnaucwcwey/

An agreement has been reached in Brussels this morning that paves the way for Ireland to hold a second referendum on the Lisbon Treaty.

The Taoiseach Brian Cowen met with French President Nicolas Sarkozy and British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, with the three hammering out a deal on the legal assurances that Ireland will get on the issues of abortion, tax and neutrality in return for holding another referendum on Lisbon.

The new text of the agreement is now going back to the full summit of leaders where it is expected to get full agreement.

Ireland will have its legal guarantees, but on condition Lisbon is ratified and the guarantees will then be enshrined in the Accession Treaty for Croatia.

Under the deal Ireland will also retain its EU Commissioner despite the views of some member states that a smaller commission was their preferred option.

The Taoiseach is expected to give details of the agreement at a news conference in the next few hours.

There ya are, there's no longer mandatory abortions or child-eating -- which were of course key parts of the original treaty -- so would ye ratify it now? We'll keep the commissioner too.

Ckal · 12-12-2008 12:30pm

There were just as many people who voted yes for the same reasons why people voted no. Very little information was given to the public. And the information that was given out was too complex. People just want to look at bullet point reasons and facts, they don't want to have to sit down and read a book, which is what we received through the mail.

Apart from the novel we received, the only other things we saw were campaign posters saying "Vote Yes for a better Ireland!" and "Vote No for a better deal!" which gave little information about what the treaty was really about. Thank Christ Libertas supplied eight reason to vote no.

If I knew nothing about x treaty and I was asked to vote for it, I'd vote no. I don't know what I'm voting for. So why would I agree to something like this? And why would yes voters agree to something they have no knowledge of? Oh yes, because they're being stupid.

Yes voters (not all, btw) are arrogant, whining spas. Yes voters have admitted that they voted for Lisbon because they back FF. Then they have the cheek to turn around and say "No voters only voted no because they had no knowledge of the treaty. What a bunch of biffers!" - It makes YESers look like a bunch of knobs, which some are.

SheroN · 12-12-2008 12:30pm

Dave! wrote: »

http://www.rte.ie/news/2008/1212/eulisbon.html

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/mhsnaucwcwey/

There ya are, there's no longer mandatory abortions or child-eating -- which were of course key parts of the original treaty -- so would ye ratify it now? We'll keep the commissioner too.

They'll find something else to whinge about with regards to the treaty. It's being used a mechanism to get one over on the 'man'.

niceirishfella · 12-12-2008 12:30pm

The Latest -

12/12/2008 - 11:07:50
An agreement has been reached in Brussels this morning that paves the way for Ireland to hold a second referendum on the Lisbon Treaty.

The Taoiseach Brian Cowen met with French President Nicolas Sarkozy and British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, with the three hammering out a deal on the legal assurances that Ireland will get on the issues of abortion, tax and neutrality in return for holding another referendum on Lisbon.

The new text of the agreement is now going back to the full summit of leaders where it is expected to get full agreement.

Ireland will have its legal guarantees, but on condition Lisbon is ratified and the guarantees will then be enshrined in the Accession Treaty for Croatia.

Under the deal Ireland will also retain its EU Commissioner despite the views of some member states that a smaller commission was their preferred option.

The Taoiseach is expected to give details of the agreement at a news conference in the next few hours.

sk8board · 12-12-2008 12:30pm

Darragh29 wrote: »

There is no rule that says we are too small to "survive on our own", this is nothing more than scaremongering...

with the greatest of respect, I'd like to hear your version of ireland from '79 - '09 if we were not on the EU gravey train. There is no way we could have done 20% of what we've achieved without the backing of the EEC, EC, EU.
Look at the current financial instutions; they can't survive only as zombies with alliances and mergers. Country are just bigger versions of same.

Darragh29 wrote: »

What really scares me is that this whole EU machine seems to be running on countries building up brownie points with each other and slapping each others backs nudge budge and wink wink, but once a country disagrees with a particular approach, all of a sudden, the faces turn deadly serious and it would appear that offence is taken

The EU machine is a political organisation, not a federal organisation. Brownie points fuels every Political organisation in the world. Its how things work, and how things get done.

Ganleys version of putting manners on Europe requires applying strict rules and regulations to everything, making it a federalist state. And we certainly don't want that.
Look at the US, NOTHING every gets done. Everything gets debated and discussed, but nothing every gets passed.
Just last night we had another example.

Much as it pains most of it to hear, a political europe is what we need to keep.
While not all politicans are corrupt so to speak, every single private businessman is concerned with profit. Again look to the legality surrounding lobbying in the US as an example.

Hrududu · 12-12-2008 12:31pm

Correctamundo, its the same tripe again.

"If you don't know, vote no"

What? If you don't know then you should either educate yourself or don't vote.

passive · 12-12-2008 12:31pm

ben bedlam wrote: »

Correctamundo, its the same tripe again.

"If you don't know, vote no"

"if somebody tells you to vote blindly instead of informing yourself, punch them in the face, take their wallet, buy yourself a nice sandwich and sit down and read up on it, then make a choice, be it Yes, No, maybe, or another sandwich"

walshb · 12-12-2008 12:33pm

Ckal wrote: »

There were just as many people who voted yes for the same reasons why people voted no. Very little information was given to the public. And the information that was given out was too complex. People just want to look at bullet point reasons and facts, they don't want to have to sit down and read a book, which is what we received through the mail.

Apart from the novel we received, the only other things we saw were campaign posters saying "Vote Yes for a better Ireland!" and "Vote No for a better deal!" which gave little information about what the treaty was really about. Thank Christ Libertas supplied eight reason to vote no.

If I knew nothing about x treaty and I was asked to vote for it, I'd vote no. I don't know what I'm voting for. So why would I agree to something like this? And why would yes voters agree to something they have no knowledge of? Oh yes, because they're being stupid.

Yes voters (not all, btw) are arrogant, whining spas. Yes voters have admitted that they voted for Lisbon because they back FF. Then they have the cheek to turn around and say "No voters only voted no because they had no knowledge of the treaty. What a bunch of biffers!" - It makes YESers look like a bunch of knobs, which some are.

I have been trying to portray this for days, and still folks are coming on saying
the NO side are stupid for voting NO when they knew nothing, conveniently forgetting that the YES side voted YES when they knew nothing. I know what I think is more stupid!

SheroN · 12-12-2008 12:33pm

Ckal wrote: »

There were just as many people who voted yes for the same reasons why people voted no. Very little information was given to the public. And the information that was given out was too complex. People just want to look at bullet point reasons and facts, they don't want to have to sit down and read a book, which is what we received through the mail.

Apart from the novel we received, the only other things we saw were campaign posters saying "Vote Yes for a better Ireland!" and "Vote No for a better deal!" which gave little information about what the treaty was really about. Thank Christ Libertas supplied eight reason to vote no.

If I knew nothing about x treaty and I was asked to vote for it, I'd vote no. I don't know what I'm voting for. So why would I agree to something like this? And why would yes voters agree to something they have no knowledge of? Oh yes, because they're being stupid.

Yes voters (not all, btw) are arrogant, whining spas. Yes voters have admitted that they voted for Lisbon because they back FF. Then they have the cheek to turn around and say "No voters only voted no because they had no knowledge of the treaty. What a bunch of biffers!" - It makes YESers look like a bunch of knobs, which some are.

The socialist party were calling for a no vote. Hence there were a lot of knobs on the No side also.

ben bedlam · 12-12-2008 12:33pm

Wow, what a deal! "We'll give you Irish your legal assurances in a new treaty AFTER you ratify Lisbon for us". I for one trust the EU completely and know that they are people of their word!

ShooterSF · 12-12-2008 12:33pm

Dave! wrote: »

http://www.rte.ie/news/2008/1212/eulisbon.html

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/mhsnaucwcwey/

There ya are, there's no longer mandatory abortions or child-eating -- which were of course key parts of the original treaty -- so would ye ratify it now? We'll keep the commissioner too.

No. Ive listed some of my reasons above. This is bollix, either claiming that all no voters were this idiotic or they're pandering to the lowest levels.
Also these "Ammendments" will be passes with the Accession treaty for Crotia. Great lets tack on a few new rules to a treaty that allows a country to join so that we can't block the new rules.
Why not put them into the lisbon treaty instead? Ah but then its a new treaty and everyone has to ratify and the English might even get a referendum hmmm.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i · 12-12-2008 12:34pm

sk8board wrote: »

If its NO, we should do the honourable thing and resign ourselves from Europe so the others can move forward and dig themselves out of their respecitive recessions. Otherwise we'll be marginalised, and that will be much worse.
We'd be on the EU bus, but we'd be in the boot or tied to the roof.

Honour doesn't put food on the table.

The lisbon treaty is the only way out of this recession?

SheroN · 12-12-2008 12:35pm

ShooterSF wrote: »

No. Ive listed some of my reasons above. This is bollix, either claiming that all no voters were this idiotic or they're pandering to the lowest levels.
Also these "Ammendments" will be passes with the Accession treaty for Crotia. Great lets tack on a few new rules to a treaty that allows a country to join so that we can't block the new rules.
Why not put them into the lisbon treaty instead? Ah but then its a new treaty and everyone has to ratify and the English might even get a referendum hmmm.

What does the SF stand for in your name?

Darragh29 · 12-12-2008 12:36pm

I can see the smugness that was associated with the yes side appearing through the mist again... One thing I notice about the yes side this time around is that they have gotten rid of their biggest gimp, Dick Roche and have replaced him with Michael Martin.

Ckal · 12-12-2008 12:37pm

SheroN wrote: »

The socialist party were calling for a no vote. Hence there were a lot of knobs on the No side also.

I agree completely. There were plenty of knobs on both sides. But YESers have to stop being ignorant when the same proportion of them are guilty of doing to same thing: Voting Yes when they knew nothing about it.

passive · 12-12-2008 12:38pm

SheroN wrote: »

What does the SF stand for in your name?

Yeah.. I tried that earlier.. apparently not what we presume

Darragh29 · 12-12-2008 12:38pm

ShooterSF wrote: »

No. Ive listed some of my reasons above. This is bollix, either claiming that all no voters were this idiotic or they're pandering to the lowest levels.
Also these "Ammendments" will be passes with the Accession treaty for Crotia. Great lets tack on a few new rules to a treaty that allows a country to join so that we can't block the new rules.
Why not put them into the lisbon treaty instead? Ah but then its a new treaty and everyone has to ratify and the English might even get a referendum hmmm.

These declarations mean nothing, at the end of the day, the treaty is what we will be voting on. Even more importantly, the treaty is what every other government has accepted in the light of the fact that they didn't have the balls to put it to their electorate.

SheroN · 12-12-2008 12:38pm

Darragh29 wrote: »

I can see the smugness that was associated with the yes side appearing through the mist again... One thing I notice about the yes side this time around is that they have gotten rid of their biggest gimp, Dick Roche and have replaced him with Michael Martin.

And I see the No campaign begining to froth at the mouth again.

Darragh29 · 12-12-2008 12:39pm

Ckal wrote: »

I agree completely. There were plenty of knobs on both sides. But YESers have to stop being ignorant when the same proportion of them are guilty of doing to same thing: Voting Yes when they knew nothing about it.

The yes people are trying to make out that they are better educated and of a higher social class by saying that they are voting yes...

SheroN · 12-12-2008 12:39pm

Do people honestly think that after the treaty is ratified that the EU will turn around and tell Ireland to shove their legal assurances up their hole?

Really now?

thewing · 12-12-2008 12:40pm

I can't wait to vote no and shove it down their throats again the cheeky fookers...

SheroN · 12-12-2008 12:40pm

thewing wrote: »

I can't wait to vote no and shove it down their throats again the cheeky fookers...

That's the spirt. That'll learn them.

hobochris · 12-12-2008 12:41pm

I will be voting NO. People have already voted on this and said No, They can dress this up however they like, the bullying tactics of other goernment representatives speak volumes IMO. I dont know about anyone else but I WILL NOT BE BULLIED INTO VOTING HOW THEY WANT ME TO VOTE. I voted NO last time after doing some research on the treaty. I will be voting no this time aswell.

Correct me if im wrong, but didnt Sarkozy try the same heavy handed tactics with his own people and in turn were the not riots in France?

Darragh29 · 12-12-2008 12:41pm

SheroN wrote: »

Do people honestly think that after the treaty is ratified that the EU will turn around and tell Ireland to shove their legal assurances up their hole?

Really now?

Sure they wouldn't ask us to vote on something and then throw our decision out the window, would they now???

Ckal · 12-12-2008 12:41pm

SheroN wrote: »

Do people honestly think that after the treaty is ratified that the EU will turn around and tell Ireland to shove their legal assurances up their hole?

Really now?

Well, in fairness, they shoved our referendum to the side. So yes, I think they are capable.

passive · 12-12-2008 12:41pm

ben bedlam wrote: »

Wow, what a deal! "We'll give you Irish your legal assurances in a new treaty AFTER you ratify Lisbon for us". I for one trust the EU completely and know that they are people of their word!

remind me about that time they lied to us? and about all the reasons we'll be unable to leave if they don't keep their word or in any way harm our country?

Lisbon 2: prepare to bend over and recieve ur destiny!

Comments