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

Ckal

Cow Moolester wrote: »

We weren't ignored.
They gave us legal guaruntees on the things that held us back from passing the Lisbon Treaty and I'm sure they'll be making a better effort now to inform people of what the Lisbon Treaty is about.

I mean why are people saying "Oh they ignored us..they are making us do the referendum again"...Sure it'd be unfair if they were making us vote again on the exact same terms as the last one but they aren't.

The rest of the treaty is pretty fair and will help make the EU more efficient but for the few points that worried Irish voters, they gave legal guaruntees to safeguard our best interests.

But these "legal guarantees" won't be given to us until the Treaty of Croatia, which, for all we know, could be rejected by every other EU member state.

whatisayis

walshb wrote: »

Are you praising Sam or dissing Sam?

! Someone should call the coast guard - I think I see a sinking ship!

Jimpsta

Sam Vimes wrote: »

sorry, not replying. cba anymore, i'm sick of banging my head against a wall

Banging against yourself can be called something else

constitutionus

"legal guarentees" eh?

got some swamp land in florida , just drained, you'd love it

what we "got" is nothing. in fact its the exact same waffle the telegraph printed in its newspaper the day before lisbon 1 to cover what might happen if we voted no.

so cowen and co did ****e.

what theyre going on about is putting something in a treaty TWO years away at least in the accession treay of croatia, AFTER we vote on lisbon.

if your stupid enough to sign ANY contract based on that legal advise your too stupid to live.

tell me, WHATS to stop the people who are happy with lisbon as it is, the gov, from just saying " ta lads, but dont worry about that now, shure weve ratified lisbon anyway !"

jesus the contempt some people have for the irish electorates intelligence is staggering.

walshb

ejmaztec wrote: »

It's quite obvious that I'm praising him. I'm very concerned that you can't understand that. :eek:

I guess it was the fact that you were praising a 'quitter' that had me verify!

tolosenc

walshb wrote: »

I guess it was the fact that you were praising a 'quitter' that had me verify!

He wasn't praising that he was quitting. As with the treaty, READ IT!

Ckal wrote: »

But these "legal guarantees" won't be given to us until the Treaty of Croatia, which, for all we know, could be rejected by every other EU member state.

Well, the legal guarantees aren't necessary, you know that and I know that. It's already there, and the only reason for them is to appease those who believed Libertas, Cóir, etc.

Sam Vimes wrote: »

sorry, not replying. cba anymore, i'm sick of banging my head against a wall

See ya later, man. Thanks for the contributions. I feel exactly the same. The arrogance/ignorance of certain people is soul destroying. I'm out.

Cheque please.

whatisayis

ejmaztec wrote: »

It's quite obvious that I'm praising him. I'm very concerned that you can't understand that. :eek:

In fairness, you're wording was a little bit ambiguous - sort of like the wording in the Treaty.
I do think that it is a shame that Sam has decided to leave because, whether one agrees with him or not, he did try to back up his opinions and seemed to be someone who has tried to understand the Treaty. I certainly know a lot more about the Treaty than I did a week ago because I would read one of his comments and then check it out for myself.

walshb

obl wrote: »

He wasn't praising that he was quitting. As with the treaty, READ IT!



Well, the legal guarantees aren't necessary, you know that and I know that. It's already there, and the only reason for them is to appease those who believed Libertas, Cóir, etc.



See ya later, man. Thanks for the contributions. I feel exactly the same. The arrogance/ignorance of certain people is soul destroying. I'm out.

Cheque please.

Two quitters, you sure you aren't Europe MEPs?


Look, I read what I could of the treaty and I voted NO because I believed
NO was the best choice for me and this country. The vote was not
respected and less than a year later, we are being asked to vote again. This
is as clear as crystal a sign of contempt for this electorate.

AS for the treaty and its reading. The bloody govt don't even know the facts and these
clowns are ASKING us to vote on it?

You mention the arrogance and ignorance of people, where?

So, because some vote NO, they are then automatically arrogant and ignorant?

badabinbadaboom

I think I might actually vote yes next time round.
Every time someone gives a reasoned argument to vote yes, someone just posts a link to indymedia.ie or wise up journal or some other unbalanced load of ****.
Its true the EU is aload of bolox but thats not what we voted on. If you want out of the EU then vote for an anti-EU party nest General election.
I was a no voter before I started reading this thread but your all so concerned about superstates and ilumanati etc etc etc I think I might vote yes just to scare the crap out of ye, and of course all the good arguments given for voting yes anyway.

justcallmetex

Cow Moolester wrote: »

We weren't ignored.
They gave us legal guaruntees on the things that held us back from passing the Lisbon Treaty and I'm sure they'll be making a better effort now to inform people of what the Lisbon Treaty is about.

I mean why are people saying "Oh they ignored us..they are making us do the referendum again"...Sure it'd be unfair if they were making us vote again on the exact same terms as the last one but they aren't.

The rest of the treaty is pretty fair and will help make the EU more efficient but for the few points that worried Irish voters, they gave legal guaruntees to safeguard our best interests.

Jesus wept

tolosenc

walshb wrote: »

Two quitters, you sure you aren't Europe MEPs?


Look, I read what I could of the treaty and I voted NO because I believed
NO was the best choice for me and this country. The vote was not
respected and less than a year later, we are being asked to vote again. This
is as clear as crystal a sign of contempt for this electorate.

AS for the treaty and its reading. The bloody govt don't even know the facts and these
clowns are ASKING us to vote on it?

You mention the arrogance and ignorance of people, where?

So, because some vote NO, they are then automatically arrogant and ignorant?

1. I'm a 19 year old student. Far from an MEP. Thank you very much.
2. October comes after June.
3. It is not contempt. Assurances on the non-issues were sought and received.
4. They didn't read it, but their legal experts did.
5. If that's a serious question - then that is itself anexample of ignorance.
6. No. Just the attitude they have. "I know nothing but I know better."

justcallmetex

badabinbadaboom wrote: »

I think I might actually vote yes next time round.
Every time someone gives a reasoned argument to vote yes, someone just posts a link to indymedia.ie or wise up journal or some other unbalanced load of ****.
Its true the EU is aload of bolox but thats not what we voted on. If you want out of the EU then vote for an anti-EU party nest General election.
I was a no voter before I started reading this thread but your all so concerned about superstates and ilumanati etc etc etc I think I might vote yes just to scare the crap out of ye, and of course all the good arguments given for voting yes anyway.

If you might list the post numbers with said links that would great cause I dont remember seeing any?

Hang on don't bother flicked thru your previous post I notice you met RFTH

Highsider

I think the fact of the matter is here that the vast majority of irish people would prob vote yes if the treaty was explained in full detail to them and we actually got some concessions for ourselves put into it .This unfortunatly is'nt the case and the goverment have being doing a piss poor job explaining the treaty to the people (in lay man's terms) as well as now lying to us about supposed concessions this time around. In all honesty i can't see anything but a no vote this time around if the present trend continue's.

justcallmetex

Highsider wrote: »

I think the fact of the matter is here that the vast majority of irish people would prob vote yes if the treaty was explained in full detail to them and we actually got some concessions for ourselves put into it .This unfortunatly is'nt the case and the goverment have being doing a piss poor job explaining the treaty to the people (in lay man's terms) as well as now lying to us about supposed concessions this time around. In all honesty i can't see anything but a no vote this time around if the present trend continue's.

It's the Economy stupid! They'll get it thru

badabinbadaboom

justcallmetex wrote: »

If you might list the post numbers with said links that would great cause I dont remember seeing any?

Hang on don't bother flicked thru your previous post I notice you met RFTH

RFTH?

justcallmetex

badabinbadaboom wrote: »

I think I might actually vote yes next time round.
Every time someone gives a reasoned argument to vote yes, someone just posts a link to indymedia.ie or wise up journal or some other unbalanced load of ****.
Its true the EU is aload of bolox but thats not what we voted on. If you want out of the EU then vote for an anti-EU party nest General election.
I was a no voter before I started reading this thread but your all so concerned about superstates and ilumanati etc etc etc I think I might vote yes just to scare the crap out of ye, and of course all the good arguments given for voting yes anyway.

They won’t want you! They only want those voting on the Treaty itself not because you clicked a link from Run for the Hills. It's one of the reasons the Yes side like to belittle us with you'll weaken their intellectually superior stance (power only gained from reading about 36 hours of legal jargon telling people you understand all implications of it)I’m sorry to say mate you don’t seem up to it only option for you is to vote No

Ckal

obl wrote: »

Well, the legal guarantees aren't necessary, you know that and I know that. It's already there, and the only reason for them is to appease those who believed Libertas, Cóir, etc.

Just for the record, I don't listen to Libertas. I read their site and I looked at the eight reasons to vote no, but I didn't find any of them that concrete so I wasn't too sure. I had asked people from both sides of the argument what the feck was going on because I wasn't getting any basic information from the yes side that would make me vote yes. I got a novel in the post and I couldn't make head nor tail of it.
I was told (from both sides) after rejection 1 that legal guarantees should be made to help No voters feel more confident about the treaty. Mr. Sarkozy said himself that Ireland will get legal guarantees, so I think that they are necessary. I think we'd like these guarantees in the Lisbon Treaty. Just add them in at the end, all the other countries have agreed that Ireland should get these guarantees. So why wait until the Croatian Treaty? Why can't we just have them now?

I'm sure getting these legal guarantees NOW will help No voters feel more confident. If I had these guarantees right now, I'd definitely vote yes. But there is a chance that the Croatian Treaty will be rejected by x country and we won't get them.

walshb

obl wrote: »

1. I'm a 19 year old student. Far from an MEP. Thank you very much.
2. October comes after June.
3. It is not contempt. Assurances on the non-issues were sought and received.
4. They didn't read it, but their legal experts did.
5. If that's a serious question - then that is itself anexample of ignorance.
6. No. Just the attitude they have. "I know nothing but I know better."

Oh, their legal expers did?

What about us? The ordinary joe soap?

Do we not get the legal expert to read it for us?
Marvelous people who are lecturing us on how to vote but they themselves
can't even bother to read up on what it is they are pushing!

Ludicrous!

So, what if VOTE 2 is rejected? What then?
Are we again branded ignorant and uneducated etc and asked to go
for a third time?

ejmaztec

whatisayis wrote: »

In fairness, you're wording was a little bit ambiguous - sort of like the wording in the Treaty.
I do think that it is a shame that Sam has decided to leave because, whether one agrees with him or not, he did try to back up his opinions and seemed to be someone who has tried to understand the Treaty. I certainly know a lot more about the Treaty than I did a week ago because I would read one of his comments and then check it out for myself.

You're obviously so used to misunderstanding facts, that when something plain and simple is placed before you, you can't see the wood for the trees.

walshb

ejmaztec wrote: »

You're obviously so used to misunderstanding facts, that when something plain and simple is placed before you, you can't see the wood for the trees.

And you are a smart ass. But it comes across as crass to be honest!

badabinbadaboom

justcallmetex wrote: »

I’m sorry to say mate you don’t seem up to it only option for you is to vote No

I dont seem up for reading the treaty? what leads you to believe that?

Nehaxak

Cow Moolester wrote: »

I mean why are people saying "Oh they ignored us..they are making us do the referendum again"...Sure it'd be unfair if they were making us vote again on the exact same terms as the last one but they aren't.

That, that right there is where those of you purporting a yes vote are either intentionally lieing about or completely misinformed.

NO TEXT will be changed whatsoever in the original treaty that will once again be proposed to the Irish people to vote on. NOT A SINGLE WORD of the original text will change.

So, you've answered yourself, it is unfair as we are being asked to vote on exactly the same text of the treaty. Assuraces and wink wink, nudge nudge's don't go down very well with Irish people who are sick to the teeth with corruption and dishonest politicians in their own country, we're not going to bend over and take it up the fine gael from Europe as well.

justcallmetex

badabinbadaboom wrote: »

I dont seem up for reading the treaty? what leads you to believe that?

Because you read one post refering to wise up and all of a sudden your vote is swung kinda makes you seem weak minded

walshb

Nehaxak wrote: »

That, that right there is where those of you purporting a yes vote are either intentionally lieing about or completely misinformed.

NO TEXT will be changed whatsoever in the original treaty that will once again be proposed to the Irish people to vote on. NOT A SINGLE WORD of the original text will change.

So, you've answered yourself, it is unfair as we are being asked to vote on exactly the same text of the treaty. Assuraces and wink wink, nudge nudge's don't go down very well with Irish people who are sick to the teeth with corruption and dishonest politicians in their own country, we're not going to bend over and take it up the fine gael from Europe as well.

Assurances from the same people who won't accept democracy!

Not even down on paper are these lousy 'assurances.'

The treaty is pretty much identical and they are asking for vote 2!

badabinbadaboom

justcallmetex wrote: »

Because you read one post refering to wise up and all of a sudden your vote is swung kinda makes you seem weak minded

I wont even entertain that, there are plenty of other factors.

James Hogan

I voted No before and shall again. To those who argue that "Ireland has done well from the EU and should not be turning its back on Europe now," I agree that since the inception of the original Common Market, yes, Ireland has benefitted from closer economic ties. So let's leave things at that, and not complicate things by becoming politically subservient to a bloated institution with its record of meddling and centralized, authoritarian thinking. The laws and regulations governing Ireland should be products of people who live here and share Ireland's culture and traditions, not unelected foreign bureaucrats. In particular, I don't want any part of Europe's obedient servility in supporting America's wars of aggression.

A further strong reason is the shameful laws that a number of European states have passed, making it a criminal offence to dispute certain aspects of history that the state authorities deemed to be true, and demand that its citizens accept. Political lawyers have no business dictating what constitutes historical fact, and imprisioning people for their beliefs is worthy of the Dark Ages. Again, I want no part of a Europe in which official prosecutors can tell me what I should think, what I can express, and what I'm permitted to debate. I will cast no vote that might be seen as approving a move toward such laws ever being passed over Ireland.

As to the allegation that the "No" voters would return us to being lackeys of England, this is nonsense. Sinn Fein, the most Republican party of all, was the _only_ one to remain solidly against the Lisbon Treaty.

ejmaztec

walshb wrote: »

And you are a smart ass. But it comes across as crass to be honest!

miju

humanji wrote: »

Or, you could read my post. People are crying out over democracy being ignored. But only 28% of people voted no. That means 72% didn't vote not.

what total bull**** typical of Yes camp people to try and justify and what was a democratic result.

and for the record the turnout was 53.1% of the valid electorate so **** off with your bull **** stats and come back when you have something of actual truth and substance

dr.bollocko

Keep the ****ing crankies down. Some people are trying to watch TV here.
Jeez.

dead air

James Hogan wrote: »

A further strong reason is the shameful laws that a number of European states have passed, making it a criminal offence to dispute certain aspects of history that the state authorities deemed to be true, and demand that its citizens accept.

Stop the lights! An individual European state passing a law? End this madness, vote no!

Are you suggesting that if a number of European countries pass similar laws, every other country must follow?

In all seriousness though, are you talking about the holocaust? Because I would reasonably expect that the vast majority of citizens of European countries directed affected by WW2 would surely support the the banning of holocaust deniers. Wouldn't such an deeply engraved national opinion lead a government to pass such laws?