Libertas are now friends of Immigrants?? but not Turkey

Oafley Jones

Phil the Drill wrote: »

So we just sit here while cowen, lenihan and the rest of the mafia family actively destroy the economy then?

Somebody needs to take the bull by the horns here, its no surprise Libertas get support if they are seen to be in some sort of control

If they can't control Caroline Simons, what hope do they have for the country?

molloyjh

Phil the Drill wrote: »

So we just sit here while cowen, lenihan and the rest of the mafia family actively destroy the economy then?

Somebody needs to take the bull by the horns here, its no surprise Libertas get support if they are seen to be in some sort of control

Just because some of us are anti-Libertas, that doesn't make us pro-FF. It's a fair leap of logic that you're making there.

Libertas, as has been pointed out a couple of times, do not have a plan or policies. All they hace are slogans, and those slogans are massively misleading, if even based in reality at all.

Neither do they have control over their own candidates (also pointed out) after seeing Caroline Simons outburst re the fire in their campaign office and that comment on the Jewish group, not to mention the blue card system that another of their candidates (names escapes me) was on about.

I'm generally willing to give people the benefit of the doubt, but Phil you haven't even attempted to address the issues people have raised with Libertas, favouring instead to give out about someone else entirely. If you can't defend them, much less promote them, then maybe its time to rethink your position on them, no?

PopeBuckfastXVI

Phil the Drill wrote: »

So we just sit here while cowen, lenihan and the rest of the mafia family actively destroy the economy then?

Somebody needs to take the bull by the horns here, its no surprise Libertas get support if they are seen to be in some sort of control

Libertas are running in the elections to the European Parliament. They will have no control or influence on internal Irish economic or social policy, save that which is exerted through an EU they are seeking to weaken.

This is not a General Election, you're barking up the wrong tree if you want to use Libertas to save our economy.

Keep the powder dry for the GE and boot out FF when you get the chance.

Phil the Drill

molloyjh wrote: »

I'm generally willing to give people the benefit of the doubt, but Phil you haven't even attempted to address the issues people have raised with Libertas, favouring instead to give out about someone else entirely. If you can't defend them, much less promote them, then maybe its time to rethink your position on them, no?

Ok, they are PRO-EU first off, they support the EU as it is a serious reason why there has been no wars and an increase in trade and standards of living since it was founded. This stance I and many others agree with. This is a fact despite what some newspaper reports claim.

Secondly they want to get rid of the CAP which is a rediculous system that pays farmers billions every year to not produce... anyone not see a problem with this? Why not let the markets decide if a farmer has a job instead of just paying them to keep an empty field?

The subsidaries themselves allow for a system where a milk producer can rely on EU payments for an income indirectly allowing retailers to push the price so low on produce that they claim all the profits. The retailers let the EU pay the farmers so they dont have to. This is wrong and Libertas want to get rid of this which I support.

The CAP also puts quotas on other things like our fishing industry. Ireland has 40% of the sea stocks and 4% of the quota. Is this fair?

Third, they want a vote across the EU on the treaty, this will most likely fail because the treaty/constitution does not take people into acount only business and the EU power structure itself. If it were a good idea the French and Dutch would have passed it and there would be no need to sneak it in th back door through the lisbon treaty. Declan Ganley has actually read the treaty btw which is what the Cowen and the others didnt do.

I love the idea of the EU, I'd fight for it but its going in the wrong direction and if we let them enshrine corrupt principles in a treaty then it will only get worse from then on.

A true patriot defends his country even from his own corrupt government, call that an extremist if you want

ionix5891

Phil the Drill wrote: »

Ok, they are PRO-EU first off, they support the EU as it is a serious reason why there has been no wars and an increase in trade and standards of living since it was founded. This stance I and many others agree with. This is a fact despite what some newspaper reports claim.

Secondly they want to get rid of the CAP which is a rediculous system that pays farmers billions every year to not produce... anyone not see a problem with this? Why not let the markets decide if a farmer has a job instead of just paying them to keep an empty field?

The subsidaries themselves allow for a system where a milk producer can rely on EU payments for an income indirectly allowing retailers to push the price so low on produce that they claim all the profits. The retailers let the EU pay the farmers so they dont have to. This is wrong and Libertas want to get rid of this which I support.

The CAP also puts quotas on other things like our fishing industry. Ireland has 40% of the sea stocks and 4% of the quota. Is this fair?

Third, they want a vote across the EU on the treaty, this will most likely fail because the treaty/constitution does not take people into acount only business and the EU power structure itself. If it were a good idea the French and Dutch would have passed it and there would be no need to sneak it in th back door through the lisbon treaty. Declan Ganley has actually read the treaty btw which is what the Cowen and the others didnt do.

I love the idea of the EU, I'd fight for it but its going in the wrong direction and if we let them enshrine corrupt principles in a treaty then it will only get worse from then on.

A true patriot defends his country even from his own corrupt government, call that an extremist if you want

for a true "patriot" ( now you sunk so low you are reverting to bush/cheyney like arguments! )

you obviously havent been following the news

http://en.mercopress.com/2009/05/26/eu-summit-agrees-to-scrap-failed-rules-on-fishing-quotas

btw please please point us to a Libertas document that outlines their position on fisheries and agriculture

djpbarry

Phil the Drill wrote: »

Secondly they want to get rid of the CAP which is a rediculous system that pays farmers billions every year to not produce...
…
The CAP also puts quotas on other things like our fishing industry. Ireland has 40% of the sea stocks and 4% of the quota. Is this fair?

Where are Libertas’ proposals for reform of EU agricultural and fisheries legislation? I’m not saying that reform is not needed, but throwing everything out and starting from scratch doesn’t seem like the most sensible approach to me.

Phil the Drill wrote: »

Third, they want a vote across the EU on the treaty, this will most likely fail because…

…that’s not how most EU member states do things. But Libertas wants to force everyone to do things the way Ireland does. Real democratic, eh?

Phil the Drill wrote: »

Declan Ganley has actually read the treaty…

But I suspect he had his euro-sceptic glasses on when he did so, as his interpretation of the treaty seems to be rather imaginative.

Phil the Drill wrote: »

I love the idea of the EU, I'd fight for it but its going in the wrong direction and if we let them enshrine corrupt principles in a treaty then it will only get worse from then on.

Which corrupt principles are these?

Phil the Drill

ionix5891 wrote: »

for a true "patriot" ( now you sunk so low you are reverting to bush/cheyney like arguments! )

you obviously havent been following the news

http://en.mercopress.com/2009/05/26/eu-summit-agrees-to-scrap-failed-rules-on-fishing-quotas

btw please please point us to a Libertas document that outlines their position on fisheries and agriculture

Ionix You dont really say much except aim remarks at people do you?

here have a listen to actual words tramsmitted with expression and tone instead of looking for a document that you can interpret as you see fit and twist as you seem to do

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Go-Rjw8np90

Phil the Drill

"Throwing everything out and starting from scratch doesn’t seem like the most sensible approach to me"

Its throwing everything out, its normal reform, no need to over dramatise things.

"thats not how most EU member states do things. But Libertas wants to force everyone to do things the way Ireland does. Real democratic, eh?"

... Yes it is how they do things... they were all doing it that way until the constitution was voted down and then it changed and they passed it anyway. very democratic indeed!!

"But I suspect he had his euro-sceptic glasses on when he did so, as his interpretation of the treaty seems to be rather imaginative."

He is not a euro sceptic, he was actually reading it to see could he as a business man find a way to expand his business within the EU from the new rules and found out how anti-democratic it is

"Which corrupt principles are these?"

Here is a few

1) The corrupt principle that we cant vote on anything else again EVER in relation to the EU, including an EU president that represents us that we cant have a say in.

2) The principle that we wont be able to decide our own tax, military or civil law policies

3) The principle that our veto can be taken away by other states voting to take it

4) The principle that our say disapears for 5 years every 15 years. This is different from germany losing their commissioner as they hold a larger voting weight than we do so can still influence the EU without a commissioner when we cant

5) The corrupt principle that says a recent report carried out by the EU using our taxes to investigate corruption in EU expenses claims is now kept under lock and key and nobody is allowed to see the results

Just to name a few... What is corrupt about Declan Ganley?

real answers please...

oscarBravo

Phil the Drill wrote: »

here have a listen to actual words tramsmitted with expression and tone instead of looking for a document that you can interpret as you see fit and twist as you seem to do

Why is Libertas the only party that seems to have an ingrained reluctance to actually, y'know, write down their policies?

oscarBravo

Phil the Drill wrote: »

"thats not how most EU member states do things. But Libertas wants to force everyone to do things the way Ireland does. Real democratic, eh?"

... Yes it is how they do things... they were all doing it that way until the constitution was voted down and then it changed and they passed it anyway. very democratic indeed!!

Are you claiming that every treaty has been ratified by referendum in every member state before Lisbon?

"Which corrupt principles are these?"

Here is a few

1) The corrupt principle that we cant vote on anything else again EVER in relation to the EU, including an EU president that represents us that we cant have a say in.

Factually inaccurate.

2) The principle that we wont be able to decide our own tax, military or civil law policies

Factually inaccurate.

3) The principle that our veto can be taken away by other states voting to take it

Factually inaccurate.

4) The principle that our say disapears for 5 years every 15 years. This is different from germany losing their commissioner as they hold a larger voting weight than we do so can still influence the EU without a commissioner when we cant

First, the "Irish" commissioner never represented Ireland, and as such didn't have "our say". Second, the reform of the commission has, unfortunately, been deferred - largely because of Libertas FUD prior to the referendum.

Do you actually believe any of the tripe you're spouting here, or are you consciously astroturfing for Libertas?

Hitman Actual

Phil the Drill wrote: »

"Which corrupt principles are these?"

Here is a few

1) The corrupt principle that we cant vote on anything else again EVER in relation to the EU, including an EU president that represents us that we cant have a say in.

You're going to have to elaborate on that one; it's one big incorrect generalisation. What part(s) of the Treaty are you referring to, specifically.

Phil the Drill wrote: »

2) The principle that we wont be able to decide our own tax, military or civil law policies

Again, very general, but here's a summary of what I think you're talking about:

• Direct Tax: Currently protected under Article 94 TEC, will be protected under Article 115 in Lisbon with the exact same wording.
• Military: Miltary/Defense decisions all will require unanimity.
• Civil Law Policies: You're talking about JHA here, I think? We have opt-outs in relevant areas.

Phil the Drill wrote: »

3) The principle that our veto can be taken away by other states voting to take it

Impossible. What part of the Treaty are you talking about? The Passarelle Clause? Unanimity is required for that.

Phil the Drill wrote: »

4) The principle that our say disapears for 5 years every 15 years. This is different from germany losing their commissioner as they hold a larger voting weight than we do so can still influence the EU without a commissioner when we cant

He/She is not our Commissioner, the commissioner directs policy for the EU as a whole. And we have our say in the EU through the European Council (heads of state), Council of Ministers (i.e. minister for agriculture, etc), and the European Parliament.

Phil the Drill wrote: »

5) The corrupt principle that says a recent report carried out by the EU using our taxes to investigate corruption in EU expenses claims is now kept under lock and key and nobody is allowed to see the results

Source? Actually, while we're at it, can you give us a source for all your claims, preferably with reference to the Treaty.

BlitzKrieg

1) The corrupt principle that we cant vote on anything else again EVER in relation to the EU,

Article 48 section 4 and 7 say otherwise. Key words to look out for would be *constitutional requirements*

including an EU president that represents us that we cant have a say in.

President of the European council, not EU and he will be representing the council at the other institutions, he has no powers over the people or for the people, he is a speaker to represent issues and concerns brought up by the European Council. He has no voting power, no veto power and no executive power.

2) The principle that we wont be able to decide our own tax, military or civil law policies

there is no need for me to point you anywhere for this (well maybe article 48 section 6 for the military comment) because there is nothing in Lisbon even close to what you are suggesting.

3) The principle that our veto can be taken away by other states voting to take it

*sigh* again where?

4) The principle that our say disapears for 5 years every 15 years. This is different from germany losing their commissioner as they hold a larger voting weight than we do so can still influence the EU without a commissioner when we cant

A) THe commissioner does not represent the state
This has been changed already
C) IRELAND & Germany are still equally represented as national bodies in the european council, its only different in parliament because it is the democratic institute and you know there are more germans then irish people so they get more representation there.

5) The corrupt principle that says a recent report carried out by the EU using our taxes to investigate corruption in EU expenses claims is now kept under lock and key and nobody is allowed to see the results

This would be the same report from 2004 that led to the EU passing a series of changes to its expenses laws in 2005 which close the areas being exploited off and set a standard pay rate when this election is finished. This same report if released now would be full of claims and examples that are now four years out of date and will lead to the same confusion and unwarranted bell ringing you are showing us right now with Lisbon. And above all this has absolutely nothing to do with Lisbon, it was a parliament decision, it could be an issue for your candidates, in which case Kathy Sinnott should be the first one booted out the door because she was the ONLY ONE CAUGHT abusing these powers. But wait...whats this? Libertas endorses Kathy Sinnott as the one to vote for in the Ireland South Constituency, that she is a good thing for europe. My gods it cant be double standards by libertas can it???

ionix5891

Phil the Drill wrote: »

interpret as you see fit and twist as you seem to do

i learned from Libertas

BlitzKrieg

Just to name a few... What is corrupt about Declan Ganley?

How about the simple fact that libertas are not a political party but are registered as a company instead. The means that Declan Ganley has no democratic mandate to be leader of Libertas, nobody voted him, he only answers to share holders and therefore his politics can be sold to the highest bidder, not to mention he cannot be held accountable for his politics so he can change his position on anything and everything (like he has) all he wants.

Scofflaw

oscarBravo wrote: »

Do you actually believe any of the tripe you're spouting here, or are you consciously astroturfing for Libertas?

Certainly the 40%/4% fish thing is a Libertas hallmark. Shows up in a recent rash of letters to newspapers in the NW, too, with a tagline of "so vote for Ganley".

Actually, Irish waters produce about 10% by value of the EU's catch in EU home waters. The 40% figure refers to the NE Atlantic FAO area, which includes our waters, UK waters, Dutch waters, Belgium's waters, Danish waters, Finnish waters, German waters, half of French and Spanish waters, Latvian waters, Lithuanian waters, Polish waters, half of Portugese waters, and Swedish waters. UK waters alone produce 3 times what ours do. Also, we get about 45% of the catch in our own waters. It's still not a perfect balance between what our waters produce and what we get, but it's - as usual - a far cry from the claims being made.

I'm also rather impressed that Phil is of the belief that other member states ratified by referendum. Is that a widespread belief, or is it internal Libertas agit-prop?

cordially,
Scofflaw

molloyjh

I've come to the conclusion that there is no point in dealing with the likes of Phil on these issues. The number of times we've gone through some of those same points he has brought up is staggering and yet we still face them in every new thread on the EU/Lisbon/Libertas. Some people just have their blinkers on and fact just doesn't matter. Ganley presents his "information" in a much more market friendly way and the fact that its serious horse sh!t seems to be irrelevant. Those points Phil raised are laughable in the extreme they are so far from reality. 10-15 minutes actually googling them would prove that. Yet he, and others like him, choose to believe the sh!t they are being shovelled rather than look into it for themselves. We could spend our entire time on these boards responding to their points, but most will never change their stance. They'll revert to type and close their eyes.

I thought Ireland had sunk as far as we could when we re-elected FF in the last GE. The fact that some people (so many people) are allowing themselves to be led by the likes of Ganley makes me think we still aren't at the bottom yet. It would be a very sad reflection on Ireland should any of the Libertas candidates be successful.

thebman

It seems laughable that anyone would defend libertas not writing policies on their website by saying people would only attack them. If they are nonsense they would be torn apart but if they were sound policies they would hold up to examination and a attempts to twist them could be easily corrected.