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

whatisayis

Sam Vimes wrote: »

obl said that 4 countries passed the draft constitution by referendum. then you said the 2 of the 4 were required to accept it to get into the EU. i don't see how both of those statements can be true. unless obl means that they had a referendum on getting into the EU and part of that referendum included the draft constitution?

I cannot speak for obl but I will try to clarify my statement. Neither Romania or Bulgaria had a referendum on the draft constitution. As I already said, in 2005 they signed the Accession Treaty. Included in this treaty was a requirement to accept the Lisbon Treaty. The Accession treaty was passed without a referendum in both countries.

whatisayis

thelordofcheese wrote: »

The second audit standards are that no mismanagment can occur anywhere (sound financial management audit). This is, of course, impossible. Mistakes happen and because the EU hands money to governments of countries for them to hand out, open for exploitation. It's a very high bar that they've set themselves and frankly, i don't think they'll ever pass the second one. Mainly because there's always some little shit looking to skim off the top.

I have to admit you make a fair point there.

Sam Vimes

whatisayis wrote: »

I cannot speak for obl but I will try to clarify my statement. Neither Romania or Bulgaria had a referendum on the draft constitution. As I already said, in 2005 they signed the Accession Treaty. Included in this treaty was a requirement to accept the Lisbon Treaty. The Accession treaty was passed without a referendum in both countries.

right so that's the confusion there. he said "4 countries had referendums on the draft constitution" and you said "of those 4, bulgaria and romania...." which i took to mean that romania and bulgaria did have referendums on it

jor el

Coming up to the last referendum on Lisbon, we were told that Ireland's position on neutrality, abortion, taxation, etc was fully protected, as we have a veto that could be used at any time to stop such changes from coming in. The IFA were worried about farming subsidies and so on, and negotiated with the government to get them to commit to using their veto in such circumstances, and then voiced their support for the Lisbon Treaty.

All this sounds great, till you get to the result of the vote, and we said no. This is pretty much the same as vetoing the Lisbon Treaty. So, did Europe accept our veto? No, they did not. Ireland has effectively NO veto, because if the others (or mainly the big five of UK, France, Germany, Italy and Spain) disagree, then we'll be overruled. We, or any of the smaller countries, needs some serious backing if we want to go against the grain on anything.

This does not bode well for any of the other small countries, and especially the new states like Poland, Czech Republic, etc, who should all be very, very worried about this development. Say no, and you'll be ostracized.

It's for this reason, above all of the reasons (be they right or wrong) that I voted no the last time, that I'll be voting no this time too.

Some of what Jim Coor said did actually make sense, and the resulting rejection of our democratic vote, by the rest of the EU, goes some way to show that he might actually be right.

Sam Vimes

jor el wrote: »

C
All this sounds great, till you get to the result of the vote, and we said no. This is pretty much the same as vetoing the Lisbon Treaty. So, did Europe accept our veto? No, they did not. Ireland has effectively NO veto, because if the others (or mainly the big five of UK, France, Germany, Italy and Spain) disagree, then we'll be overruled. We, or any of the smaller countries, needs some serious backing if we want to go against the grain on anything.

if we were overruled, which of course would mean that the lisbon treaty passed despite out objections, why are we having another referendum?

Sam Vimes

tbh i could completely understand the eu asking us to vote again even if it wasn't rejected because of a pack of lies (which it was)

what's happening now is an ill-informed group of maybe 100,000 people are dictating to hundreds of millions of europeans. hardly democratic

it's like giving a small village in connemara the final say in the general election

Biggins

Sam Vimes wrote: »

...it's like giving a small village in Connemara the final say in the general election

Well, seeing that the E.U. is determined to kill off OUR small communities for only exercising our constitution and democratic right, I for one am not going to lose sleep over a E.U. bullies and thugs.

Major fishing port will be 'wiped out' by new EU rule

See: http://www.independent.ie/national-news/major-fishing-port-will-be-wiped-out-by-new-eu-rule-1574954.html

Sam Vimes

Biggins wrote: »

Well, seeing that the E.U. is determined to kill off OUR small communities for only exercising our constitution and democratic right, I for one am not going to lose sleep over a E.U. bullies and thugs.

Major fishing port will be 'wiped out' by new EU rule

See: http://www.independent.ie/national-news/major-fishing-port-will-be-wiped-out-by-new-eu-rule-1574954.html

so do you have a beef with the lisbon treaty or our membership of the eu?

Biggins

Sam Vimes wrote: »

so do you have a beef with the lisbon treaty or our membership of the eu?

The treaty sir.
It's yet another step on the stairs leading to an eventual Federation of a United Europe.
In the meantime, as individual countries lose their ability to govern themselves without being further overruled by a faceless building in another land, the rights of the workers and individuals are being also watered down in an attempt to control the masses and subvert their rights.

thelordofcheese

Biggins wrote: »

The treaty sir.
It's yet another step on the stairs leading to an eventual Federation of a United Europe.
In the meantime, as individual countries lose their ability to govern themselves without being further overruled by a faceless building in another land, the rights of the workers and individuals are being also watered down in an attempt to control the masses and subvert their rights.

Buildings don't tend to have faces.
They're buildings.

Sam Vimes

Biggins wrote: »

The treaty sir.
It's yet another step on the stairs leading to an eventual Federation of a United Europe.
In the meantime, as individual countries lose their ability to govern themselves without being further overruled by a faceless building in another land, the rights of the workers and individuals are being also watered down in an attempt to control the masses and subvert their rights.

so do you have a problem with the treaty specifically or the fact that "step on the stairs leading to an eventual Federation of a United Europe."

what parts of the treaty specifically do you object to?

niceirishfella

thelordofcheese wrote: »

Buildings don't tend to have faces.
They're buildings.

no **** Sherlock!:D

Biggins

Ever hear the expressions "a face of a building", "a faceless tasteless faceade of a building" etc...?

Gee, I know buildings don't have "faces" as such, its expressionism for crying out loud!

I wonder why I don't bother answering many posts here! :rolleyes:

thelordofcheese

Biggins wrote: »

Ever hear the expressions "a face of a building", "a faceless tasteless faceade of a building" etc...?

Gee, I know building don't have "faces" as such, its expressionism for crying out loud!

I guess what i'm saying here is your wording was clumsy and frankly there's no point debating with you due to irreconcilable differences, so i'm just going to belittle you instead.

It's hard to take you seriously when you use phrases like "in an attempt to control the masses and subvert their rights."

thebman

Biggins wrote: »

The treaty sir.
It's yet another step on the stairs leading to an eventual Federation of a United Europe.
In the meantime, as individual countries lose their ability to govern themselves without being further overruled by a faceless building in another land, the rights of the workers and individuals are being also watered down in an attempt to control the masses and subvert their rights.

But under Lisbon, we are free to walk at any time so we aren't locked in like we are at the moment.

So if it does come to that, we can leave at that time.

Biggins

thelordofcheese wrote: »

...It's hard to take you seriously when you use phrases like "in an attempt to control the masses and subvert their rights."

...so the current debate about workers rights and how they are being watered down don't exist for you then, or have you missed the latest recent European Court rulings and their effects on unions and their members rights?

I guess one wants to see and hear only what is convenient for one!

I won't belittle you. Some of us try to be better than that (we fail a lot but at least we try).

Have a good Christmas and good health.

kmick

This has to be a contender for thread title of the year.

the-island-man

ejmaztec wrote: »

One has to think outside the box, which is difficult for some.

I strongly agree with this as we can see it is difficult for Biffo to think outside the box as was seen after the last referendum where he announced that Ireland's future is bound with Europe's clearly a man with little vision!
I hate to say this because this is not the reason i would vote No but it has to be said that if we vote NO again an added bonus is that Cowen will surely resign as Taoiseach!

niceirishfella

kmick wrote: »

This has to be a contender for thread title of the year.

Not with some of "the lord of cheezyness's" posts. Utter tripe and no real value to the thread.

democrates

thelordofcheese wrote: »

I guess what i'm saying here is your wording was clumsy and frankly there's no point debating with you due to irreconcilable differences, so i'm just going to belittle you instead.

It's hard to take you seriously when you use phrases like "in an attempt to control the masses and subvert their rights."

Interesting position for someone with pedo-bear in their sig.

WooPeeA

Sam Vimes wrote: »

tbh i could completely understand the eu asking us to vote again even if it wasn't rejected because of a pack of lies (which it was)

what's happening now is an ill-informed group of maybe 100,000 people are dictating to hundreds of millions of europeans. hardly democratic

it's like giving a small village in connemara the final say in the general election

Have you ever seen the government within millions of people govern 100.000?

thebman

Biggins wrote: »

...so the current debate about workers rights and how they are being watered down don't exist for you then, or have you missed the latest recent European Court rulings and their effects on unions and their members rights?

Do you have evidence to back up that they want to remove worker rights?

From my understanding, Irelands worker rights are already some of the worst in the EU especially in regard to parental leave for Fathers.

the-island-man

Sam Vimes wrote: »

tbh i could completely understand the eu asking us to vote again even if it wasn't rejected because of a pack of lies (which it was)

what's happening now is an ill-informed group of maybe 100,000 people are dictating to hundreds of millions of europeans. hardly democratic

it's like giving a small village in connemara the final say in the general election

That is exactly whats happenning, in a general election you wouldn't let a small village have the final say on who's in goverment why are we the only one's getting the right to vote on what direction the E.U takes from here and don't give me that ball***s about each country having its own system and we must respect that.....before the last general election Gordon Browne the British prime minister promised the people of Britain a referendum on Lisbon! He changed his mind lied to the people! It is obvious that he was pressured by the E.U:(

thebman

the-island-man wrote: »

That is exactly whats happenning, in a general election you wouldn't let a small village have the final say on who's in goverment why are we the only one's getting the right to vote on what direction the E.U takes from here and don't give me that ball***s about each country having its own system and we must respect that.....before the last general election Gordon Browne the British prime minister promised the people of Britain a referendum on Lisbon! He changed his mind lied to the people! It is obvious that he was pressured by the E.U:(

Hang on, didn't Labour promise the people a vote on the constituition and not the Lisbon Treaty?

That is why they weren't given a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty because it isn't the constituition.

justcallmetex

niceirishfella wrote: »

Not with some of "the lord of cheezyness's" posts. Utter tripe and no real value to the thread.

Why don't you know that voting no in TLOC opinion makes you little more than an ignorant fool who never took time to read the treaty and your opinion as a citizen of this nation counts for nothing. I thank God everyday for his ever presence here on boards to lead us on the path to European enlightenment. If only I hadn’t formed my own opinion without reading all his well informed superior posts we might not be debating the kick in the balls of Irish democracy which is the second Lisbon Treaty

I’ve been such a fool!! Forgive me Cheese!!

Sam Vimes

the-island-man wrote: »

That is exactly whats happenning, in a general election you wouldn't let a small village have the final say on who's in goverment why are we the only one's getting the right to vote on what direction the E.U takes from here and don't give me that ball***s about each country having its own system and we must respect that.....before the last general election Gordon Browne the British prime minister promised the people of Britain a referendum on Lisbon! He changed his mind lied to the people! It is obvious that he was pressured by the E.U:(

you've just called the answer to your question bull**** so i don't really know what else to say

edit, an analogy: what's 2+2? and don't give me that bull**** about 4

niceirishfella

justcallmetex wrote: »

Why don't you know that voting no in TLOC opinion makes you little more than an ignorant fool who never took time to read the treaty and your opinion as a citizen of this nation counts for nothing. I thank God everyday for his ever presence here on boards to lead us on the path to European enlightenment. If only I hadn’t formed my own opinion without reading all his well informed superior posts we might not be debating the kick in the balls of Irish democracy which is the second Lisbon Treaty

I’ve been such a fool!! Forgive me Cheese!!

Ahhhhhhh, a lord of muppetry follower! LOL LOL LOL:D:D:D:D Ahhh, sweet devine - you're as deluded as him.:P

wink wink wink

whatisayis

Sam Vimes wrote: »

what parts of the treaty specifically do you object to?

Here's a better one for you - what parts of the treaty specifically do you support?

passive

whatisayis wrote: »

Here's a better one for you - what parts of the treaty specifically do you support?

Actually a "better one" would have been for you to answer his question, then ask him this counterquestion. What you've just said is "yeah, you're right. I don't have a ****ing clue what I'm talking about... but...em... you shut up!"

Accepting the treaty doesn't require having a list of huge benefits from it. I don't necessarily support any of our budgets, but I'd say yes, okay, to them since they're necessary and I didn't have any objections. That's the difference between allowing something and vehemently opposing it. We can say "yeah, go on EU. You've done us nothing but good, there's nothing bad or wrong in this new setup, go for it" without having specific wonderful items of the treaty we love. You, on the other hand, are going out of your way to prevent this happening, and are thus obliged to explain what is is that is wrong with the treaty. Why shouldn't it happen?

But, to amuse you slightly, despite the fact that your views aren't going to change and you actually don't care about the content of the treaty or its effects on our country;

-I'm in favour of the increased powers going to the EU parliament, to which we directly elect people.
-I'm in favour of the citizens initiative, whereby a petition by as few as 1 million people can call on the commission to make proposals.
-I think the formal withdrawal procedures are good, so countries that don't want to be in the EU can leave it, instead of pissing all over everything and throwing tantrums
-I think the Qualified Majority Voting system being brought in on many issues is good. It is fair and works well for us that a certain percentage of states are required as well as a population majority for something to pass. So the populace states don't dominate anything, neither does a combination of small states with special interests. Both the states and the people have to agree (55% of member states, 65% of population)
I think it will be good to have a single president, elected by the parliament (I think, or is it the council?) representing the EU, instead of a number of conflicting roles as we have now.
I really, really, support the Citizen's Rights and Charter of Fundamental Rights aspect.

Also, while I appreciate our neutrality, and the conviction of many people that this should mean apathy and unwillingness to help our friends, I do appreciate that the other states will help us out if/when we should fall victim to a terrorist attack. We are not obliged to provide military aid if this should happen in return, as has been clarified a thousand million times.

In general though, as I said, I don't need to feel strongly about any single aspect of the treaty. It just needs to be "alright, nothing bad or evil in there, continue doing your job, representatives!"

now... you go! and you lose points for opposing things that have nothing to do with the treaty

stevedublin

Our Minister for Europe said "The Irish people should vote NO to Lisbon 2." in Druids Glen this morning!