Lisbon: Mícheál Martin destroys British eurosceptic on Pat Kenny

nesf · 10-09-2009 6:26pm

FutureTaoiseach wrote: »

Yes. It's an Irish referendum campaign, and should be left to the Irish people to address. Non-Irish members of these groups have no mandate from the Irish people.

Is there a problem with an Irish political party receiving funding from the European political party it is a part of in your view? I completely agree that the non-Irish members of these parties shouldn't be involved much in the debate precisely because they lack a mandate from the Irish people and as such can't be expected to act in the best interests of Ireland, but funding given to an Irish party doesn't pose the same problem.

ei.sdraob · 10-09-2009 6:31pm

FutureTaoiseach wrote: »

I suppose it does. I meant from your point of view, what was the problem?

my problem with them

is that

* unlike all the main Irish political parties supporting Lisbon they are not elected here
* unlike Intel or Ryanair and other companies supporting Lisbon they are not an employer or taxpayer here

they are not a body/company/organisation here in Ireland and dont have a single Irish member

NO side complain about Sarcozy etc going on about the treaty

yet here we have an organisation from outside the country with no members in this country telling the us what to do

do you see anything wrong with that picture?

:pac:

FutureTaoiseach · 10-09-2009 6:40pm

nesf wrote: »

Is there a problem with an Irish political party receiving funding from the European political party it is a part of in your view? I completely agree that the non-Irish members of these parties shouldn't be involved much in the debate precisely because they lack a mandate from the Irish people and as such can't be expected to act in the best interests of Ireland, but funding given to an Irish party doesn't pose the same problem.

I actually oppose European parliament groups funneling money in our referendum campaign. I see this as an internal referendum and want outside politicians to keep out of this issue. I am also concerned that the spirit (if not necessarily the letter) of the McKenna judgement is being violated when you have European Parliament groups funding campaigns in member states because ultimately, European taxpayers' money is where that money comes from. In that context, does it not undermine at least the spirit of the McKenna judgement in terms of taxpayers' money not being supposed to favour one side over another.

nesf · 10-09-2009 7:02pm

FutureTaoiseach wrote: »

I actually oppose European parliament groups funneling money in our referendum campaign. I see this as an internal referendum and want outside politicians to keep out of this issue. I am also concerned that the spirit (if not necessarily the letter) of the McKenna judgement is being violated when you have European Parliament groups funding campaigns in member states because ultimately, European taxpayers' money is where that money comes from. In that context, does it not undermine at least the spirit of the McKenna judgement in terms of taxpayers' money not being supposed to favour one side over another.

But that money is there specifically to help fund member groups to fight battles concerning the EU. I'd agree if this money wasn't specifically for this purpose but it is. It's a perfectly legitimate use of the group's funds.

bill_ashmount · 11-09-2009 2:26pm

marco_polo wrote: »

Your arguments against the Lisbon treaty are getting more persuasive by the day. :rolleyes:

Once more for you.

All i did was point out that he lied. We are talking about his statement not the lisbon treaty.

Why don't you address the fact that he lied instead of puting in a :rolleyes:

marco_polo · 11-09-2009 2:40pm

bill_ashmount wrote: »

Once more for you.

All i did was point out that he lied. We are talking about his statement not the lisbon treaty.

Why don't you address the fact that he lied instead of puting in a :rolleyes:

Because you are being pedantic, and attempting making huge deal about yet another non issue. Since the debate was about the EU and not the entire geographical land mass that is called Europe there is little is no doubt that the intent of the statement was to highlight to the lack of wars between EU member states which was the principal reason for its foundation. To try and paint that as some sort of historal revisionism or denial of the Balkan Wars is astoundingly crass.

PopeBuckfastXVI · 11-09-2009 2:45pm

marco_polo wrote: »

Because you are being pedantic, and attempting making huge deal about yet another non issue. Since the debate was about the EU and not the entire geographical land mass that is called Europe there is little is no doubt that the intent of the statement was to highlight to the lack of wars between EU member states which was the principal reason for its foundation. To try and paint that as some sort of historal revisionism or denial of the Balkan Wars is astoundingly crass.

Not that astounding, when you see where it's coming from.

Incidentally, I personally feel that giving the EU an ability to concoct and conduct a foreign policy is a good response by the EU to accusations that it just 'stood by' during the Balkans.

If, there were ever such horror again post Lisbon, hopefully the foreign policy tools given to us by Lisbon will help prevent, or at least mitigate it.

ei.sdraob · 11-09-2009 2:47pm

marco_polo wrote: »

was to highlight to the lack of wars between EU member states which was the principal reason for its foundation. To try and paint that as some sort of historal revisionism or denial of the Balkan Wars is astoundingly crass.

not only that but UK have dived in head first alongside the yanks into Iraq and Afghanistan

thebman · 11-09-2009 2:50pm

Meh the EU loses out either way in that scenario. If they get involved, they are a superstate imposing themselves on other countries just like the US and have no businesses doing so and this is exactly what the Euroskeptics feared.

If they don't get involved, then why didn't they get involved? Isn't the point of the EU to stop wars?

Either way the Euroskeptics have an angle which is all they are looking for. If two people are determined to blow holes in each others nations then nobody will be able to stop them from at least having a go. It is less likely in the EU because they is better co-operation, that is all.

Rebelheart · 12-09-2009 12:26am

FutureTaoiseach wrote: »

I assume from the anti-UKIP remarks on this thread that the yes campaigners will also call on pro-Lisbon parties in the European Parliament to stay out of our referendum debate?

Well, as somebody who is passionately intellectually and culturally European I am very, very happy that rightwing British eurosceptics are in Ireland advocating that we, the unoccupied Irish people, vote 'No' to Lisbon.

It is about as honest as we can get here. If anything sums up the effective pro-Britishness of the anti-European 'No' campaigners it is this alliance with the very culture, the very ethnicity and the very political experiment which has a long, verifiable, consistent and ingrained hatred of the Irish people throughout, at least, the past four centuries.

The EU has broken that dehumanising dichotomy (for most Irish people). The EU has been, and remains, a source of our freedom from the numerical strength, more cohesive tribalism and stronger nationalist myths of the British people. The 'No' campaigners collectively cannot see this and instead anchor themselves to an Irish nationalism that is, in reality, deeply anglocentric in its ideas, policies, thinking and inspiration. In a sentence, that is their entire downfall.

That alliance between British eurosceptics and Irish 'No' campaigners is a 'Yes' campaigners dream scenario. It shows, quite clearly, that the conception of Irishness held by the 'No' campaigners is inherently connected with Ireland being close to British culture, or more accurately, British domination. Let's just call it the "British Isles" school on Ireland's political future. Thank you for your honesty, 'No' campaigners.

The sooner Ireland is made a proper European country rather than the pathetic, extraordinarily unhealthy, anglocentric, Brit-copying, eternally unoriginal, corrupt polity that it currently is the better. By all means let the EU give us handouts again, but this time let the EU have the cop-on to place a rake of conditions upon that money, conditions such as imprisonment for corruption in public office. And much else. No more handy EU money, please. One of those conditions should be higher taxes to fund better services, such as a French-style health system. We are currently living in cloud cuckoo land on the entire issue of income taxes.

PS: Having said all of that, I get the distinct impression that most of the 'Yes' campaigners are simply supporting the EU for the money and have no more cultural and intellectual open-mindedness than the average Cóir campaigner, or British eurosceptic for that matter. A sad thing for me to say, but nothing I have heard from any 'Yes' campaigner has convinced me that they are ideologically supportive of the EU and breaking the link to Britain. Mícheál Martin was the notable exception in the above interview.

drawderm · 12-09-2009 1:16am

http://www.rte.ie/radio1/podcast/podcast_lisbontreaty.xml

I dare anyone to listen to this ****!!! VOTE NO TO LISBON!!!

drawderm · 12-09-2009 1:39am

English nigel is talking good stuff actually...

Any Irish citizen saying the Brits should keep out of this should think about this,
We are voting for even closer ties with the UK, as well as France, Germany etc. Ireland is the only country in Europe that is allowed to hold a referendum.
This is because out Constitution which the men and women of 1916 died for gives us that right and protects us. If we vote yes to the Lisbon Treaty then we never get another vote on Europe and our constitution is then inferior to the new EU constitution or (Lisbon Treaty)

France and the Dutch did and they voted no. Their Voice was ignored.
The only country that can keep the voice of the people of Europe is Ireland.
We have voted No, France has voted No, the Dutch have voted No.

Obama was elected President of America with 52.3% of the vote, can you imagine if someone sugggested that they re run that election as well!!! because a small minority in power don't like the result?

But yet we ARE TOLD we must vote again!!! Please think!!!

VOTE NO TO LISBON, PROTECT IRISH AND EUROPEAN DEMOCRACY!!!

drawderm · 12-09-2009 1:43am

OK... Intel or Ryanair, you forgot to remind everyone that these two companies refuse to recognise Trade unions. Very interesting that these are in favour of the Lisbon Treaty lol

VOTE NO, Protect Democracy in IRELAND

FutureTaoiseach · 12-09-2009 2:12am

drawderm wrote: »

OK... Intel or Ryanair, you forgot to remind everyone that these two companies refuse to recognise Trade unions. Very interesting that these are in favour of the Lisbon Treaty lol

VOTE NO, Protect Democracy in IRELAND

Especially in a context of ECJ's rulings such as Viking, where the Charter's limitations on workers' rights (Article 28) were cited. Aha.

wrote:

Any Irish citizen saying the Brits should keep out of this should think about this,We are voting for even closer ties with the UK, as well as France, Germany etc. Ireland is the only country in Europe that is allowed to hold a referendum.This is because out Constitution which the men and women of 1916 died for gives us that right and protects us. If we vote yes to the Lisbon Treaty then we never get another vote on Europe and our constitution is then inferior to the new EU constitution or (Lisbon Treaty)

I have some sympathy for that view, but in the context of a referendum campaign, outside involvement just plays into the other side's hands. In the last referendum campaign, the Dublin Philosophical Society invited (of all people) Jean Marie Le Pen to take part in a debate on Lisbon. It was an obvious attempt to smear the no campaign with fascism, and the invitation was not accepted. While Nigel Farage is no fascist, he does come from a country that used to rule Ireland, and in that context, and despite good relations in the post-Troubles period, that means there's still a minority here that clings to an anti-English mindset that some on the yes side could try to exploit. One thing is clear. The yes camp rarely talk about the Treaty in terms of individual provisions, whereas the no side rarely don't talk about it. The Irish people should decide based on what is in this Treaty - not some fuzzy, psychobabble about being at the 'heart of Europe', which is a Narnia that has no tangible meaning to me.

K-9 · 12-09-2009 2:31am

drawderm wrote: »

OK... Intel or Ryanair, you forgot to remind everyone that these two companies refuse to recognise Trade unions. Very interesting that these are in favour of the Lisbon Treaty lol

VOTE NO, Protect Democracy in IRELAND

Interesting ICTU and SIPTU are, despite being extremely pissed of over the Pensions levy and the partnership talks.

nesf · 12-09-2009 2:45am

drawderm wrote: »

OK... Intel or Ryanair, you forgot to remind everyone that these two companies refuse to recognise Trade unions. Very interesting that these are in favour of the Lisbon Treaty lol

VOTE NO, Protect Democracy in IRELAND

Quit putting a slogan at the end of all your posts please.

meglome · 12-09-2009 2:58am

drawderm wrote: »

OK... Intel or Ryanair, you forgot to remind everyone that these two companies refuse to recognise Trade unions. Very interesting that these are in favour of the Lisbon Treaty lol

VOTE NO, Protect Democracy in IRELAND

Yeah those bastards in Ryanair and Intel, who do they think they are providing thousands of jobs, then forcing people to work there... oh wait.

anonymous_joe · 12-09-2009 3:39am

meglome wrote: »

Yeah those bastards in Ryanair and Intel, who do they think they are providing thousands of jobs, then forcing people to work there... oh wait.

Yeah! Paying them too. The fupping backstards.

I always think it's nice seeing our politicians tearing amateurs apart. It's a bit like football - you never realise how good someone is until you see them competing with someone at a lower level. McDowell versus Gerry Adams springs to mind as well.

The irony of a No Campaign that claims to speak for the leaders of the 1916 Rising being in bed with UKIP - an anti-republican party is basically epic.

FutureTaoiseach · 12-09-2009 4:32am

anonymous_joe wrote: »

Yeah! Paying them too. The fupping backstards.

I always think it's nice seeing our politicians tearing amateurs apart. It's a bit like football - you never realise how good someone is until you see them competing with someone at a lower level. McDowell versus Gerry Adams springs to mind as well.

The irony of a No Campaign that claims to speak for the leaders of the 1916 Rising being in bed with UKIP - an anti-republican party is basically epic.

1916 was about independence. It was not about swapping the British Empire for the European Empire. I agree UKIP should stay out. But so should Sarkozy and Merkel and the hundreds of MEPs from other countries converging on Ireland to demand we vote yes. That too is interference.

meglome · 12-09-2009 5:59am

FutureTaoiseach wrote: »

1916 was about independence. It was not about swapping the British Empire for the European Empire.

Oh dear jesus. The British took whatever they wanted from Ireland, the EU has done so such thing, it has given us a **** load of money for free. The EU has never forced us to do anything and has done everything through negotiation. Do you get sick of spouting this same crap day in and day out? Really I'd hate myself if I told so many lies.

FutureTaoiseach wrote: »

I agree UKIP should stay out.

With the damage they'll do to the No campaign I'd imagine you would.

FutureTaoiseach wrote: »

But so should Sarkozy and Merkel and the hundreds of MEPs from other countries converging on Ireland to demand we vote yes. That too is interference.

Maybe you can give me a list of all these 'hundreds' of MEP's coming here to demand a Yes vote? Because if I had to guess from your usual posting I'd say you're making it up.

ei.sdraob · 12-09-2009 9:40am

meglome wrote: »

Maybe you can give me a list of all these 'hundreds' of MEP's coming here to demand a Yes vote? Because if I had to guess from your usual posting I'd say you're making it up.

and none of them are gonna be sending any leaflets thru doors

unlike UKIP

whose main aims are

* withdraw UK from EU
* make nationalists in north swear allegiance to the queen
* put up borders around norther ireland

sick sick puppies they are, the cheek of them to try to influence the Irish people

@FutureTaoiseach

there is no European Empire. there is no emperor.

EU is not even federation, but a union of sovereign states

in the past decades EU membership has done more good to this country that people can just look around to see, what has forced membership of the British Empire has done but rape and pillage the country?

Wacker · 12-09-2009 2:40pm

My jaw almost dropped at the stupidity displayed at 5:34, when Nigel asked "Which war did it stop?" Em... doesn't he realize that wars that don't happen don't get names?

nesf · 12-09-2009 3:11pm

FutureTaoiseach wrote: »

But so should Sarkozy and Merkel and the hundreds of MEPs from other countries converging on Ireland to demand we vote yes. That too is interference.

FT, you were left back into this forum on the condition that you stop spreading misinformation. The above is treading extremely close to this line, if you want to make a statement like the latter then provide proof if you wish to continue posting here.

realismpol · 13-09-2009 3:15am

Hey on a totally unrelated note do you know that RTÉ is a statutory body run by a board appointed by the Irish government.

Funny how those debates on rte in the second referendum seem to be populated by very weak representatives on the no side..Just a thought..

meglome · 13-09-2009 3:27am

realismpol wrote: »

Hey on a totally unrelated note do you know that RTÉ is a statutory body run by a board appointed by the Irish government.

Funny how those debates on rte in the second referendum seem to be populated by very weak representatives on the no side..Just a thought..

I for one would be delighted for the No side to get more airtime. Groups telling that many lies should get shown up at every possible turn.

nesf · 13-09-2009 3:28am

realismpol wrote: »

Funny how those debates on rte in the second referendum seem to be populated by very weak representatives on the no side..Just a thought..

That would be because the only mainstream political party calling for a No is Sinn Fein and they haven't been to the forefront of the No campaign for some reason. That leaves the less appealing groups as the only options to put in front of the camera. Though with Libertas back that'll change.

anonymous_joe · 13-09-2009 3:30am

FutureTaoiseach wrote: »

1916 was about independence. It was not about swapping the British Empire for the European Empire. I agree UKIP should stay out. But so should Sarkozy and Merkel and the hundreds of MEPs from other countries converging on Ireland to demand we vote yes. That too is interference.

That damned European Empire. Forcing us to take all that money to rebuild our infrastructure. Damn them!

realismpol · 13-09-2009 3:37am

anonymous_joe wrote: »

That damned European Empire. Forcing us to take all that money to rebuild our infrastructure. Damn them!

Yes u know the way that goes we get a few roads here and there they get our right to free democratic will and self determination...you know down with that sort of thing..

anonymous_joe · 13-09-2009 3:46am

realismpol wrote: »

Yes u know the way that goes we get a few roads here and there they get our right to free democratic will and self determination...you know down with that sort of thing..

What, that European Parliament thing, which we elect MEPs too?

Or what?

Are we somehow being led by a shadowy council of dastardly mittel-Europeans?

realismpol · 13-09-2009 4:04am

anonymous_joe wrote: »

What, that European Parliament thing, which we elect MEPs too?

Or what?

Are we somehow being led by a shadowy council of dastardly mittel-Europeans?

Are we? I woudn't go far as to say dastardly. That would attribute some sort of intelligence. I mean our own taoiseach has admitted he didn't read the treaty in the first campaign despite urging a yes vote. woof woof!

Lisbon: Mícheál Martin destroys British eurosceptic on Pat Kenny

Comments