Why I'm thinking of voting yes this time to Lisbon

Scofflaw

molloyjh wrote: »

I respectfully disagree with you there. A few years ago I would have been very much of that opinion, but some of the things I've heard of and seen over the last few years have convinced me that some people this world is better off without, and our society is better off not having to pay for their upkeep! So from that perspective I personally have no issue with the EU leaving the possiblity for the death penalty open in war time. Thinks like the systematic murder of civilians etc deserves no less IMO.

The EU would disagree with you there:

The United Nations, inter alia in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) and in the ECOSOC Safeguards Guaranteeing Protection of the Rights of Those Facing the Death Penalty, has established strict conditions only under which the death penalty may be used. The Second Optional Protocol to the ICCPR provides for states to commit themselves to permanent abolition of the death penalty. The European Union has moved beyond this and espouses abolition for itself and others.

(Source: EU Human rights guidelines)

and

The European Union (EU) is opposed to the death penalty in all cases and has consistently espoused its universal abolition, working towards this goal. In countries that maintain the death penalty, the EU aims at the progressive restriction of its scope and respect for the strict conditions set forth in several international human rights instruments, under which capital punishment may be used, as well as at the establishment of a moratorium on executions so as to eliminate the death penalty completely. The EU is deeply concerned about the increasing number of executions in the United States of America (USA), all the more since the great majority of executions since reinstatement of the death penalty in 1976 have been carried out during the 1990s through today. The following collection of documents includes key policy statements by the EU, actions on specific death row cases in the US and links to international and other agreements cited in the various documents.

(Source: Delegation of the European Commission to the USA - Death Penalty)

The EU has a page criticising the death penalty on the website of every EU Delegation to a state that maintains the death penalty, something I consider both unusual and admirable.

cordially,
Scofflaw

molloyjh

Scofflaw wrote: »

The EU would disagree with you there:



(Source: EU Human rights guidelines)

and



(Source: Delegation of the European Commission to the USA - Death Penalty)

The EU has a page criticising the death penalty on the website of every EU Delegation to a state that maintains the death penalty, something I consider both unusual and admirable.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Fair enough. I spent so long on the internet privacy thing I didn't get time to check up on the death sentence thing. I think I'm just getting bitter and angry as I get on, maybe I should just stop watching the news!!! :pac:

ionix5891

molloyjh wrote: »

Fair enough. I spent so long on the internet privacy thing I didn't get time to check up on the death sentence thing. I think I'm just getting bitter and angry as I get on, maybe I should just stop watching the news!!! :pac:

considering that all the news channels are run by large media companies with private interests and the likes of bbc and rte are propaganda channels for respective governments you just have to learn to keep an open mind and question everything that you hear as theres quite alot of bias in media

molloyjh

ionix5891 wrote: »

considering that all the news channels are run by large media companies with private interests and the likes of bbc and rte are propaganda channels for respective governments you just have to learn to keep an open mind and question everything that you hear as theres quite alot of bias in media

Ah I'm just sick of the stories like the one of those French guys in the UK being stabbed to death (one 194 times) because the bank cards the scumbags robbed from them didn't work. I wouldn't agree with the death sentence for the murder, but for the manner of it. Either way that's off topic. Turns out the original point was inaccurate so from an EU perspective the question is irrelevant. Cheers Scofflaw.

zielarz

After ratification of the Lisbon treaty a new country named European Union will be established. At the moment European Union doesn't exist because it doesn't have a legal entity. If you believe that more EU laws and bureaucracy will help the economy you should vote yes. If you think that EU knows better what's good for you and your country then you should vote yes.

ionix5891

zielarz wrote: »

After ratification of the Lisbon treaty a new country named European Union will be established. At the moment European Union doesn't exist because it doesn't have a legal entity. If you believe that more EU laws and bureaucracy will help the economy you should vote yes. If you think that EU knows better what's good for you and your country then you should vote yes.

a No doom and gloomer using reverse psychology :rolleyes: nooo who would have taught

you want to know whats gonna be good for economy? trying to find few dozen billion euro a year from hostile EU countries in order to pay our fat public sector and the dole :cool:

oscarBravo

zielarz wrote: »

After ratification of the Lisbon treaty a new country named European Union will be established.

Nope.

At the moment European Union doesn't exist...

Nope.

Heaven forbid we'd let, y'know, facts enter into the discussion.

Scofflaw

oscarBravo wrote: »

Nope. Nope.

Heaven forbid we'd let, y'know, facts enter into the discussion.

They haven't so far....

resignedly,
Scofflaw

PHB

zielarz wrote: »

After ratification of the Lisbon treaty a new country named European Union will be established. At the moment European Union doesn't exist because it doesn't have a legal entity. If you believe that more EU laws and bureaucracy will help the economy you should vote yes. If you think that EU knows better what's good for you and your country then you should vote yes.

What you have said here is that the European Union getting the status of legal entity will make it a country.

I have a small question for you:
My tennis club is a legal entity, does that mean its a country? What about any corporation? Are they countries too?

r14

PHB wrote: »

My tennis club is a legal entity, does that mean its a country?

How would I go about applying for citizenship of your tennis club?:D

The problem here is that some people are hard wired to think that "the man" is out to get them. They use anything they can find to try and confuse the issues.

The EU as a legal entity does not exist at the moment but the EC does and it's not spelling the end of the world for us. Lisbon is not as revolutionary as people claim. Edit: found this blog which explains things quite well.

If you think that EU knows better what's good for you and your country then you should vote yes.

The EU has been instrumental in granting us development aid, in implementing a legal guarantee of equal pay for equal work, TUPE, Working time directive. Even the plan that the government announced last week to help people whose pensions have gone down the toilet is simply them implementing an EU Directive. So you know what - I think the EU have done some pretty good things and helped our country no end since we joined and I am going to vote yes!

View

r14 wrote: »

The EU as a legal entity does not exist at the moment but the EC does and it's not spelling the end of the world for us.

Well, in that case the EC must be a "country" - in which case we are just renaming it to the EU in Lisbon. The horror of it all...

r14

View wrote: »

Well, in that case the EC must be a "country" - in which case we are just renaming it to the EU in Lisbon. The horror of it all...

In order to be country/State you need two things. You need sovereignty over a certain geographical area and you need a people. This is why the Occupied Territories of Palestine are not considered a country. While they have a people they do not have sovereignty over a geographical area and so cannot be a State in International Law.

What Lisbon is doing is creating a legal entity called the EU. Like the Palestininan Territories the EU does not have sovereignty over a geographical area. Unlike the Palestinian Territories the EU does contain a cohesive "people". Rather it contains 27 separate nationalities who are members of their own distinct States. For these reasons the EU can never become a "country" as you claim.

Linked to this. During the first campaign it was said (I think by Libertas) that if we voted for Lisbon Ireland would have to leave the UN as the European Foreign Minister would represent all MS at the UN. This is also not true because the UN Charter explictily says that only countries can join the UN and, as I have explained, the EU is not and will not be a country if Lisbon is passed.

All the legal personality does is give the EC/EU the capacity in law to enter into engagements/contracts such as treaties etc. It is no different to the manner in which incorporation gives a company a separate legal personality and so allows the company itself to enter into contracts.

Lisbon is transferring the EC's existing legal personality to a new entity called the EU. No conspiracy or massive upheaval involved.

ionix5891

r14 wrote: »

In order to be country/State you need two things. You need sovereignty over a certain geographical area and you need a people. This is why the Occupied Territories of Palestine are not considered a country. While they have a people they do not have sovereignty over a geographical area and so cannot be a State in International Law.

What Lisbon is doing is creating a legal entity called the EU. Like the Palestininan Territories the EU does not have sovereignty over a geographical area. Unlike the Palestinian Territories the EU does contain a cohesive "people". Rather it contains 27 separate nationalities who are members of their own distinct States. For these reasons the EU can never become a "country" as you claim.

Linked to this. During the first campaign it was said (I think by Libertas) that if we voted for Lisbon Ireland would have to leave the UN as the European Foreign Minister would represent all MS at the UN. This is also not true because the UN Charter explictily says that only countries can join the UN and, as I have explained, the EU is not and will not be a country if Lisbon is passed.

All the legal personality does is give the EC/EU the capacity in law to enter into engagements/contracts such as treaties etc. It is no different to the manner in which incorporation gives a company a separate legal personality and so allows the company itself to enter into contracts.

Lisbon is transferring the EC's existing legal personality to a new entity called the EU. No conspiracy or massive upheaval involved.

pfft go away you with your facts,

prophet Ganley has seen the future and will show us the path to the land of milk and honey and non corrupted (hint: buying power) "elites"

amen

r14

Damn. Well since I can't convince people it's time to come clean.

I'm actually Jose Barroso trying to confuse people with independently verifiable facts so they'll vote yes. Then I can take over the world as President of the new European super power.

(hmm now that I think of it could this be Ganley's secret evil plan )

ionix5891

r14 wrote: »

Damn. Well since I can't convince people it's time to come clean.

I'm actually Jose Barroso trying to confuse people with independently verifiable facts so they'll vote yes. Then I can take over the world as President of the new European super power.

(hmm now that I think of it could this be Ganley's secret evil plan )

his secret evil plan is to make more money by selling more military equipment

unfortunately theres this thing called the EU tying his hands

he aint the first "rich" elite to do so, theres also Rupert Murdoch with his media empire :cool:

Lovecat

I don't understand why we're being asked to vote again. The government decided to put the treaty to the public vote, and the public voted no. Is that not enough? What's the point in putting something to a vote if you're not going to accept the outcome? Personally I think it rather undermines our voting system. I cast my first ever vote on the Lisbon Treaty and I want it to count for something. I didn't realise that the government's policy on voting was "If at first you don't succeed, try, try, try again".
I'm definately votinig no again.

passive

Lovecat wrote: »

I don't understand why we're being asked to vote again. The government decided to put the treaty to the public vote, and the public voted no. Is that not enough? What's the point in putting something to a vote if you're not going to accept the outcome? Personally I think it rather undermines our voting system. I cast my first ever vote on the Lisbon Treaty and I want it to count for something. I didn't realise that the government's policy on voting was "If at first you don't succeed, try, try, try again".
I'm definately votinig no again.

for a variety of answers to your question, and a carbon copy of your question several hundred times over by people who then disappeared when someone explained logically the reasons for a second vote, and the sense it makes, please read: every thread in this forum.

And you've definately made this choice carefully, on matters relating to the treaty, yes?

ionix5891

Lovecat wrote: »

I don't understand why we're being asked to vote again. The government decided to put the treaty to the public vote, and the public voted no. Is that not enough? What's the point in putting something to a vote if you're not going to accept the outcome? Personally I think it rather undermines our voting system. I cast my first ever vote on the Lisbon Treaty and I want it to count for something. I didn't realise that the government's policy on voting was "If at first you don't succeed, try, try, try again".
I'm definately votinig no again.

the government did not decide this (they have enough problems to worry about of their own creation)

the rest of the the EU members decided to ask us (again)

once again please get your facts straight

Lovecat

Whatever.

I decided I didn't like the sound of the lisbon treaty last time and that hasn't changed. Simple as that.

ionix5891

Lovecat wrote: »

Whatever.

I decided I didn't like the sound of the lisbon treaty last time and that hasn't changed. Simple as that.

i sure hope other voters are more intelligent than this specimen :cool:

when reason fails him he puts spuds in his ears and sings La La Ga Nla Ley La

bravo :pac:

Lovecat

Firstly, i'm a woman.

Secondly, I'm highly intelligent. Just not overly interested in politics. People who aren't politically minded are expected to vote too you know. My decision to vote no wasn't just a random decision then and it isn't now.

ionix5891

Lovecat wrote: »

Firstly, i'm a woman.

Secondly, I'm highly intelligent. Just not overly interested in politics. People who aren't politically minded are expected to vote too you know. My decision to vote no wasn't just a random decision then and it isn't now.

my bad hard to tell gender online


anyways please outline your reasoning....


so far it seems you voted/will vote for reasons that have nothing to do with the Treaty as such which is pathetic

Lovecat

Excuse me.

I read all the little books they sent us.
I read every newspaper article on Lisbon I could find.
I decided that overall I would prefer for Ireland to stay more independant and that I didn't trust the EU's democratic values. So I voted no. And please don't tell me I was wrong to think those things. I don't care.

And I'm doing a degree in physics. You need to be fairly intelligent for that.

ionix5891

Lovecat wrote: »

Excuse me.

I read all the little books they sent us.
I read every newspaper article on Lisbon I could find.
I decided that overall I would prefer for Ireland to stay more independant and that I didn't trust the EU's democratic values. So I voted no. And please don't tell me I was wrong to think those things. I don't care.

And I'm doing a degree in physics. You need to be fairly intelligent for that.

i missed the whole Ireland loosing independence or democracy bit in them booklets please care to indulge how this would happen

you didnt happen to just read the Libertas booklet only now did you?


[OT]
On subject of degrees i finished my undergrad and postgrad degrees a while back, a lot of people start college not many finish unfortunatelly...
[/OT]

.

Lovecat

I have EVERY intention of finishing college.

You're not very nice.

Don't ask me to explain my opinions any further to you; you're clearly highly in favour of the lisbon treaty so I can see that it would be pointless.

And, if you'll excuse me, I have a chemistry exam to study for. Don't expect any more replies from me.

ionix5891

Lovecat wrote: »

I have EVERY intention of finishing college.

You're not very nice.

Don't ask me to explain my opinions any further to you; you're clearly highly in favour of the lisbon treaty so I can see that it would be pointless.

And, if you'll excuse me, I have a chemistry exam to study for. Don't expect any more replies from me.

i was only rattling your feathers since your answers are very short, the whole "No means no" cliche reminds me of that SF's Marie Lou and makes me chuckle as its so shallow...

i taught i might be able to milk a good debate or reasons out of you

sorry for trying

sink

Ionix the abrasive approach you have taken will not aid you if your goal is to change anyone's opinion, it will more likely push them in the opposite direction. No one likes to be talked down to regardless of whether they're right or wrong. Try being more cordial and you might meet with more success.

ionix5891

sink wrote: »

Ionix the abrasive approach you have taken will not aid you if your goal is to change anyone's opinion, it will more likely push them in the opposite direction. No one likes to be talked down to regardless of whether they're right or wrong. Try being more cordial and you might meet with more success.

you are right

i just get ticked off very easy

will try to be more "political" next time

turgon

Lovecat wrote: »

I don't understand why we're being asked to vote again. The government decided to put the treaty to the public vote, and the public voted no. Is that not enough?

Surely if it passed the second time round that is the will of the majority and its ok? And some people have changed their minds.

O'Coonassa

If Lisbon passes I will consider it an hostile act by the EU.

In all probability I'll declare war on them at that point.

When their oh so ridiculously shaped continent lies in smoking ruins then they'll be sorry.