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

passive

stevedublin wrote: »

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

And the No side whine about being held at gunpoint...

WooPeeA

stevedublin wrote: »

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

He should be fired then. His job is to represent the government and its statements, not doing his own independent politics.

stevedublin

WooPeeA wrote: »

He should be fired then. His job is to represent the government and its statements, not doing his own independent politics.

at least he'll have gone out with a bang.

passive

WooPeeA wrote: »

He should be fired then. His job is to represent the government and its statements, not doing his own independent politics.

I don't know if the "no to lisbon" thing is true, but Dick Roche was held a gunpoint this morning in a robbery. It's possible the guys who held him up made him say "No to Lisbon." 'tis likely enough they're Shinners anyway

But I can't find this in any news sources, so I'm not sure where that poster is coming from...

ben bedlam

stevedublin wrote: »

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

Didnt hear that from any news sources either.

Otacon

passive wrote: »

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!"

I am happy enough with the way the EU is at the moment. If I could have voted last time, it would have been 'No' as there was no compelling argument made as to why things should change. Why should I change my vote?

ben bedlam

Otacon wrote: »

I am happy enough with the way the EU is at the moment. If I could have voted last time, it would have been 'No' as there was no compelling argument made as to why things should change. Why should I change my vote?

The actual Lisbon Treaty has'nt changed, so neither should your vote

stevedublin

stevedublin wrote: »

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

I was joking.

passive

Otacon wrote: »

I am happy enough with the way the EU is at the moment. If I could have voted last time, it would have been 'No' as there was no compelling argument made as to why things should change. Why should I change my vote?

I doubt you know all that much about "the way the EU is at the moment" to be honest or you'd know that changes need to be made to the way it is run due to the increase in membership, at the very least.

This is why the Yes campaign has it more difficult. The No campaign can yell all kinds of absurd and untrue stuff about the EVILS that Lisbon will do, but the Yes side are stuck saying "wait, what? no! it won't do any of that. It's just normal stuff, administration and institutional reform. There's nothing shiny or exciting in it"

you shouldn't have to be dramatically talked into going for it. It's a simple document that makes changes to procedure, and your attitude shows why having a referendum on it is absurd. We should have referendums about abortion, the death penalty, a woman's place being in the home etc. Things people care about. Asking people to choose Yes or No to something unspectacular is the cause of all the lies, BS and apathy in response, and these are costing our country and the union from running properly and being more efficient in these difficult times.

And regarding the EU fat cats and corruption you all detest; here's the renowned no-campaigner Kathy Sinnott ripping me, you and the EU off by signing the parliament attenance

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=

for her daily allowances on a Friday morning before flying home at 7am

Watch the intro explanation then skip to 2:20

democrates

passive wrote: »

I don't know if the "no to lisbon" thing is true, but Dick Roche was held a gunpoint this morning in a robbery. It's possible the guys who held him up made him say "No to Lisbon." 'tis likely enough they're Shinners anyway

A vast amount of smuggled John Player Blue from China were siezed in South County Dublin recently, may be unconnected but usually when sales are so rudely interrupted a robbery will follow to pay off the suppliers.

Sam Vimes

whatisayis wrote: »

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

i'm not particularly for it, as people have said there's nothing all that spectacular in it to get excited about. i just don't see any reason not to go for it. it's just boring restructuring to make things more efficient

personally i don't need a compelling reason to go for it, i need a compelling reason not to go for it. many reasons were provided but half of them had nothing to do with the treaty itself (e.g. fishing ports, fianna fail and general dislike of the eu) and the other half were lies

nomorebadtown

WooPeeA wrote: »

The Lisbon will provide a democracy to EU. Finally every man will have an impact on politics of the Union by voting for their representatives who will hold real power in their hands.

Looking at unelected elite and doing nothing as we have to do today will become a relic of the past.

didums

unelected elite? hello?.. go ahead, vote yes (as if it matters which way you vote), we are european citizens and are completely disenfranchised either way, we used to have a democracy pipedream and i guess at least now we can see things for how they really are. is this how we are encouraging young people to use their vote? oops, wrong answer, try again!

ven0m

20goto10 wrote: »

The independent report uncovered why we voted no. And there is nothing in the treaty that can be changed to address our concerns. So again, why should we automatically deserve respect? We have sabotaged the treaty and put a lot of really important agendas which the treaty is setup to resolve on hold while we have our little hissy fit. Thats what I call arrogance.

We sabotaged nothing. We held a fair democratic process that was carried out according to all EU laws on democratic voting. A legitimate result was returned.

The second this nation returned an unpopular vote, Senior European politicians went about an incredibly nasty media campaign belittling every single voter in this country by slamming the Irish nation for delivering a 'No' vote.

Anyone who shows that level of contempt for a legitimately delivered democratic mandate is nothing short of a despot, because only despots cry about democratically delivered results that do not go their way.

thelordofcheese

niceirishfella wrote: »

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

If you've got a problem, either report my posts or say something, quit sniveling in the background.

Sam Vimes

ven0m wrote: »

We sabotaged nothing. We held a fair democratic process that was carried out according to all EU laws on democratic voting. A legitimate result was returned.

The second this nation returned an unpopular vote, Senior European politicians went about an incredibly nasty media campaign belittling every single voter in this country by slamming the Irish nation for delivering a 'No' vote.

Anyone who shows that level of contempt for a legitimately delivered democratic mandate is nothing short of a despot, because only despots cry about democratically delivered results that do not go their way.

but do not you see any problem with that? they analysed the reasons we voted no and discovered that there was nothing in the treaty that could be changed to address those concerns....because we voted no for reasons that had nothing to do with the treaty. we may as well have voted no to lisbon because we disapprove of george bush

democrates

passive wrote: »

you shouldn't have to be dramatically talked into going for it. It's a simple document that makes changes to procedure, and your attitude shows why having a referendum on it is absurd. We should have referendums about abortion, the death penalty, a woman's place being in the home etc. Things people care about. Asking people to choose Yes or No to something unspectacular is the cause of all the lies, BS and apathy in response, and these are costing our country and the union from running properly and being more efficient in these difficult times.

To describe it as mere changes to procedure is hardly fitting to its import, if it were so trivial saying no would be no great problem. EU leaders have spent five years hammering this out, it is very important, they are very keen to have it adopted, and it will affect the lives of citizens in member states.

The wider context of the vote is whether we believe the EU is going in the right direction, do we want deeper political union and increasingly centralised government, where decisions may at times be imposed by qmv against our interests, or do we think the way forward is an EU based exclusively on co-operation between member nations.

Sam Vimes

democrates wrote: »

To describe it as mere changes to procedure is hardly fitting to its import, if it were so trivial saying no would be no great problem. EU leaders have spent five years hammering this out, it is very important, they are very keen to have it adopted, and it will affect the lives of citizens in member states.

The wider context of the vote is whether we believe the EU is going in the right direction, do we want deeper political union and increasingly centralised government, where decisions may at times be imposed by qmv against our interests, or do we think the way forward is an EU based exclusively on co-operation between member nations.

maybe we don't want that but the eu is moving towards more centralised government and ireland isn't going to change that direction. what you're talking about is a debate on whether or not we should be members of the eu, not the lisbon treaty.

passive

ven0m wrote: »

The second this nation returned an unpopular vote, Senior European politicians went about an incredibly nasty media campaign belittling every single voter in this country by slamming the Irish nation for delivering a 'No' vote.

oh wah wah, the big mean boys said hurtful things. Link me some examples to this "incredibly nasty media campaign." All I remember was some shock and irritation that we'd thrown a spanner in the works and rejected a treaty that we ourselves (i.e. our elected representatives) had a huge role in composing. That we did so for reasons unrelated to its content was probably pretty f*cking incredible for those involved.

Anyway, when did we become a nation of whingebags? man up and respond to criticism with decent arguments, not petty actions like rejecting things to "teach them a lesson."

justcallmetex

WooPeeA wrote: »

He should be fired then. His job is to represent the government and its statements, not doing his own independent politics.

Free country, man entitled to express any opinion he likes without fear of "The Party".

democrates

Sam Vimes wrote: »

maybe we don't want that but the eu is moving towards more centralised government and ireland isn't going to change that direction. what you're talking about is a debate on whether or not we should be members of the eu, not the lisbon treaty.

I am not taking the "yes to lisbon or leave" artificial frame for this discussion which is bad enough, it would also be failing to recognise the golden oppertunity we have here.

We voted no, the EU has had to add an IE service pack, if we vote no again, they will have to take a strategic review to protect any last vestige of democratic legitimacy given how clear it has become that they are going against the will of citizens not just in Ireland but in any nation where people have been asked.

I'm stunned at the level of elitist thinking we are seeing, how readily people are to accept their wishes on critical issues of national importance being ignored by government.

ven0m

Sam Vimes wrote: »

but do not you see any problem with that? they analysed the reasons we voted no and discovered that there was nothing in the treaty that could be changed to address those concerns....because we voted no for reasons that had nothing to do with the treaty. we may as well have voted no to lisbon because we disapprove of george bush

Again, some of you still can't understand that it is our constitutionally protected right to vote on ANYTHING put before us at a voting booth in any way for whatever reason.

This is a fundamental part of a democracy & democracy as a tool of governance.

Jesus h effing christmas, how hard is that for alot of you to comprehend or understand? You're still trying to inject moral authority into voting, i.e. you should only vote if you understand, or should abstain if you don't .... that's not how democracy works, it's not how our constitution was formed ...

Honestly, some of you have such an inability to grasp the simplest fact relating to democracy, it makes me wonder how in god's name you can make your way thru Lisbon when you can't so much as grasp something as fundamentally simple as 'your right to vote how you please'.

ven0m

passive wrote: »

oh wah wah, the big mean boys said hurtful things. Link me some examples to this "incredibly nasty media campaign." All I remember was some shock and irritation that we'd thrown a spanner in the works and rejected a treaty that we ourselves (i.e. our elected representatives) had a huge role in composing. That we did so for reasons unrelated to its content was probably pretty f*cking incredible for those involved.

Anyway, when did we become a nation of whingebags? man up and respond to criticism with decent arguments, not petty actions like rejecting things to "teach them a lesson."

It is not about whinging. If there's anyone who was whinging it was Sarkozy & his cronies. If it wasn't for British, Irish & American servicemen & women, he'd be saluting a German flag every morning before Bratwurst.

ven0m

justcallmetex wrote: »

Free country, man entitled to express any opinion he likes without fear of "The Party".

Not according to Biffo, who threatened any party member with expulsion who did not toe the party line for the last referendum.

Which is hilarious, as I'm pretty sure that constitutes bullying & harassment in the workplace.

passive

ven0m wrote: »

It is not about whinging. If there's anyone who was whinging it was Sarkozy & his cronies. If it wasn't for British, Irish & American servicemen & women, he'd be saluting a German flag every morning before Bratwurst.

Sorry, those examples I asked for?

And yeah, we sure showed the French up in our epic stand against Hitler and the holocaust. We have every ****ing right to talk.. about that thing.. we don't talk about.. the.. emergency? or something...

passive

ven0m wrote: »

Again, some of you still can't understand that it is our constitutionally protected right to vote on ANYTHING put before us at a voting booth in any way for whatever reason.

This is a fundamental part of a democracy & democracy as a tool of governance.

Jesus h effing christmas, how hard is that for alot of you to comprehend or understand? You're still trying to inject moral authority into voting, i.e. you should only vote if you understand, or should abstain if you don't .... that's not how democracy works, it's not how our constitution was formed ...

Honestly, some of you have such an inability to grasp the simplest fact relating to democracy, it makes me wonder how in god's name you can make your way thru Lisbon when you can't so much as grasp something as fundamentally simple as 'your right to vote how you please'.

I'm confused... You think a functioning democracy should have people voting between "A" and "B" based on their militant feelings about Purple?

ben bedlam

ven0m wrote: »

Again, some of you still can't understand that it is our constitutionally protected right to vote on ANYTHING put before us at a voting booth in any way for whatever reason.

This is a fundamental part of a democracy & democracy as a tool of governance.

Jesus h effing christmas, how hard is that for alot of you to comprehend or understand? You're still trying to inject moral authority into voting, i.e. you should only vote if you understand, or should abstain if you don't .... that's not how democracy works, it's not how our constitution was formed ...

Honestly, some of you have such an inability to grasp the simplest fact relating to democracy, it makes me wonder how in god's name you can make your way thru Lisbon when you can't so much as grasp something as fundamentally simple as 'your right to vote how you please'.

Completely agree. Every Irish citizen over 18 is entitled to vote whatever way they wish, for whatever reason they wish. End of.

ven0m

passive wrote: »

Sorry, those examples I asked for?

And yeah, we sure showed the French up in our epic stand against Hitler and the holocaust. We have every ****ing right to talk.. about that thing.. we don't talk about.. the.. emergency? or something...

Excuse yourself & your incredible ignorance, but ALOT of Irishmen & women fought in the British forces in WW2, including members on both sides of my own family. I'd suggest you button it before you make ignorant comments like that in future about something you know sweet F.A. about.

As for your examples:

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2008/0715/breaking86.htm

Explain why Sarkozy felt the need to make such statements as the ones in the above article publicly to the media? If you did that in a work place, you'd be done for bullying & harassment. Go find more yourself. Everyone saw them in the papers, on Sky News in press gatherings etc. Don't troll & play it like you didn't see them either, everyone did.

passive wrote:

I'm confused... You think a functioning democracy should have people voting between "A" and "B" based on their militant feelings about Purple?

It's not for anyone to question a fundamental of democracy. Either you believe in it as a system or you don't. If you don't, go form a political party to fight for this to be changed constitutionally here, as well as around the world - otherwise piss off busting my balls over it. I didn't design democracy. you just don't like that someone has told you how it is, & you'd rather be an emo about it.


Honestly - I know I shouldn't, but I'm thankful that democracy will even let someone like 'passive' vote. Shows how far the world has come, & yet still how far it still needs to go.

Ckal

ven0m wrote: »

Excuse yourself & your incredible ignorance, but ALOT of Irishmen & women fought in the British forces in WW2, including members on both sides of my own family. I'd suggest you button it before you make ignorant comments like that in future about something you know sweet F.A. about.

+1. My great grandfather fought for Britain in the war. And I agree with everything else you posted.

passive

ven0m wrote: »

Excuse yourself & your incredible ignorance, but ALOT of Irishmen & women fought in the British forces in WW2, including members on both sides of my own family. I'd suggest you button it before you make ignorant comments like that in future about something you know sweet F.A. about.

oh, excuse me! I didn't realise your family were involved! I thought for a second we were discussing the Irish Nation in the same way you were belittling the French Nation (i.e "he'd be saluting a German flag every morning before Bratwurst."). There are definitely no examples of French people resisting the Nazis in any way. I do apologise, monsieur!

As for your examples:

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2008/0715/breaking86.htm

Explain why Sarkozy felt the need to make such statements as the ones in the above article publicly to the media? If you did that in a work place, you'd be done for bullying & harassment. Go find more yourself. Everyone saw them in the papers, on Sky News in press gatherings etc. Don't troll & play it like you didn't see them either, everyone did.

em... I asked for examples of, and I quote, "an incredibly nasty media campaign belittling every single voter in this country."
You sent me a link in which Sarkozy allegedly said "The Irish will have to vote again," when speaking about the fact that we were probably going to have to vote again... I think we might have crossed some wires here?

"If you did that in the workplace you'd be done for bullying and harassment"

Mr bullyboss: Venom, I need you to sign these new terms of employment! Everyone else has agreed to them.
Ven0m: No! I don't wanna, they're stupid! I don't agree with nothing in them!
Mr bullyboss: wtf!? em... I think Ven0m is going to have to reconsider and make a different decision. He hasn't explained anything he finds wrong with the new terms, so we can't fix them. Ven0m, can you decide on that again?
Ven0m: NO! YOU'RE BULLYING ME! OPPRESSION!

It's not for anyone to question a fundamental of democracy. Either you believe in it as a system or you don't. If you don't, go form a political party to fight for this to be changed constitutionally here, as well as around the world - otherwise piss off busting my balls over it. I didn't design democracy. you just don't like that someone has told you how it is, & you'd rather be an emo about it.

Honestly - I know I shouldn't, but I'm thankful that democracy will even let someone like 'passive' vote. Shows how far the world has come, & yet still how far it still needs to go.

If you feel that people who have researched the issues and made careful decisions based on what is actually relevant should only "even" be allowed vote, while blindly supporting people who vote "for whatever reasons they feel like" I worry very much for your mental health

my point of view is that people voting for stupid reasons, like lies, racism, scaremongering etc are an unfortunate consequence of democracy, and something we should struggle against by educating the electorate and helping people make rational decisions, rather than, as you present it, the most wonderful magical aspect of the coin toss that democracy should be.

Otacon

passive wrote: »

I doubt you know all that much about "the way the EU is at the moment" to be honest or you'd know that changes need to be made to the way it is run due to the increase in membership, at the very least.

This is why the Yes campaign has it more difficult. The No campaign can yell all kinds of absurd and untrue stuff about the EVILS that Lisbon will do, but the Yes side are stuck saying "wait, what? no! it won't do any of that. It's just normal stuff, administration and institutional reform. There's nothing shiny or exciting in it"

you shouldn't have to be dramatically talked into going for it. It's a simple document that makes changes to procedure, and your attitude shows why having a referendum on it is absurd. We should have referendums about abortion, the death penalty, a woman's place being in the home etc. Things people care about. Asking people to choose Yes or No to something unspectacular is the cause of all the lies, BS and apathy in response, and these are costing our country and the union from running properly and being more efficient in these difficult times.

...so there are no reasons to vote 'Yes@? OK, I will vote 'No' then.