Extraordinary Reaction to my thread !!!

isocket

Well now.
A thread I recently started has been closed & I have received an infraction.
I requested users on this forum of the NO opinion to the Lisbon Treaty to download a poster I designed for distribution.
The infraction itself I can accept but the opinions & reaction !?

For those of you who did not see the poster text it reads as follows -

Need a Job?

The Lisbon Treaty will NOT give you one!

Do Not believe the politicians lies!

For a better Europe.

Vote NO.

on Oct. 2nd.

Some of the reactions accuse me of lying!

Can someone please point out exactly where in the treaty it offers job creation?

Further, can you explain how a treaty (constitution) written before the current economic crisis, offers economic recovery for Ireland as claimed by the yes side, IBEC et al?

Also, if there are any true democrats here, how is it democratic to insult the Irish electorate by making us vote TWICE on the same treaty?

If this is a forum for true & honest debate, then lets have one!

PS No, I am not with COIR.

Thank you

Scofflaw

Discussions are fine - using the forum as a free distribution system for campaign material isn't.

moderately,
Scofflaw

Dinner

isocket wrote: »

Also, if there are any true democrats here, how is it democratic to insult the Irish electorate by making us vote TWICE on the same treaty?

It is democratic to find out and then sort the issues that the public have. You no people really need to find a better argument.

Although I don't think there are any...

K-9

You are the one saying it will not create employment.

How will it not?

Time Magazine

isocket wrote: »

Can someone please point out exactly where in the treaty it offers job creation?

Vote YES and Enda Kenny will NOT eat your children!

Let's cut the bullshit, do you know how vacuous your argument sounds?

When people say "Vote Yes for jobs", which of these three do you think it means that:

1. The Lisbon Treaty mandates higher employment levels
2. The Lisbon Treaty will, the document itself, hire some people
3. The Lisbon Treaty will provide an econo-political framework that is conducive to higher employment levels

Also, if there are any true democrats here, how is it democratic to insult the Irish electorate by making us vote TWICE on the same treaty?

We elected 78 Fianna Fáil TDs in 2007 for a five year term. Seems to me that we've changed our mind on that. Would it be undemocratic to have another election?

isocket

Dinner wrote: »

It is democratic to find out and then sort the issues that the public have. You no people really need to find a better argument.

Although I don't think there are any...

Excuse me.
The electorate have already made their minds up in June 2008.
That is the democratic process.
It is a travesty of democracy to then ask us again, in fact it is Fascism!
What part of NO do you not understand?
Obviuosly you are a yes voter, but your argument defies all logic.
Did you vote the last time?
Are you seriously arguing that if the last referendum was a yes vote the powers-that-be would be asking us again?

BlitzKrieg

isocket wrote: »

Well now.
A thread I recently started has been closed & I have received an infraction.
I requested users on this forum of the NO opinion to the Lisbon Treaty to download a poster I designed for distribution.

No you didnt, you said

If you are in ireland do this now!

you didnt specify that this was a message to those of the NO opinion, you just said to download copy and share, no attempt at any form of persausion or justification.

So I gave you my honest answer

no.

Can someone please point out exactly where in the treaty it offers job creation?

Article 166 where the treaty outlines to fund and create vocational training might be a good start?

Further, can you explain how a treaty (constitution) written before the current economic crisis, offers economic recovery for Ireland as claimed by the yes side, IBEC et al?

More efficient EU, faster turnaround on policies, more imediate response as the crisis goes through its ups and downs.

Also, if there are any true democrats here, how is it democratic to insult the Irish electorate by making us vote TWICE on the same treaty?

I can ask you to prove to me how its undemocratic, with sources. Say one example of legaslation from any democracy in the wrold (present or past) where a 2nd referendum on any issue is undemocratic. Failing that an example of how someone's democratic rights whas denied by lisbon 2?

If this is a forum for true & honest debate, then lets have one!

that was what was lacking from your original post.

K-9

isocket wrote: »

Excuse me.
The electorate have already made their minds up in June 2008.
That is the democratic process.
It is a travesty of democracy to then ask us again, in fact it is Fascism!
What part of NO do you not understand?
Obviuosly you are a yes voter, but your argument defies all logic.
Did you vote the last time?
Are you seriously arguing that if the last referendum was a yes vote the powers-that-be would be asking us again?

No, saying No is the final answer and you cannot change your mind is, Fascism.

oscarBravo

isocket wrote: »

The electorate have already made their minds up in June 2008.

...and they have an opportunity to make up their minds again in October 2009.

That is the democratic process.

As is October's referendum.

It is a travesty of democracy to then ask us again, in fact it is Fascism!

Only if you haven't the first clue what fascism is.

What part of NO do you not understand?

The part that means "never, ever, ever ask me this or a similar question again".

Are you seriously arguing that if the last referendum was a yes vote the powers-that-be would be asking us again?

Nobody's arguing that. The powers-that-be are advocating the ratification of the Lisbon treaty. If we had voted "yes" last time, why would they want to reverse that?

You do understand how referenda work in this country, don't you? You know, that "democratic process" you talked about earlier?

humanji

isocket wrote: »

Excuse me.
The electorate have already made their minds up in June 2008.
That is the democratic process.
It is a travesty of democracy to then ask us again, in fact it is Fascism!
What part of NO do you not understand?
Obviuosly you are a yes voter, but your argument defies all logic.
Did you vote the last time?
Are you seriously arguing that if the last referendum was a yes vote the powers-that-be would be asking us again?

You're the one trying to stop people from exercising their right to vote. Isn't that a tad more facist than letting people vote?

isocket

Time Magazine wrote: »

Vote YES and Enda Kenny will NOT eat your children!

Let's cut the bullshit, do you know how vacuous your argument sounds?

When people say "Vote Yes for jobs", which of these three do you think it means that:

1. The Lisbon Treaty mandates higher employment levels
2. The Lisbon Treaty will, the document itself, hire some people
3. The Lisbon Treaty will provide an econo-political framework that is conducive to higher employment levels

We elected 78 Fianna Fáil TDs in 2007 for a five year term. Seems to me that we've changed our mind on that. Would it be undemocratic to have another election?

The Lisbon Treaty is an amalgamation of several Euro treaties.
It is designed to federalise the EU, WITHOUT THE CONSENT of its people.
Hence the total denial of referenda in all 27 member states.
(Notwithstanding the NO votes to the Lisbon Treaties first appearance as the European Constitution by France & The Netherlands).
The Lisbon Treaty is NOT about job creation or economic recovery, it is a LIE to suggest that it is.
Quite simply people are suffering through the collapse of this & other economies, in part caused by EU policies.
The claims by the yes side that suddenly, as if by magic, a yes vote will usher in economic nirvana is a cynical lie & those of you parroting it ought to be ashamed of yourselves.
As a proud Irish citizen, I will be voting NO again, & when we on the NO side win again, DO NOT DARE ask us again.

Ze

Time Magazine wrote: »

We elected 78 Fianna Fáil TDs in 2007 for a five year term. Seems to me that we've changed our mind on that. Would it be undemocratic to have another election?

That is such a YES question. :rolleyes:

No, it would not be undemocratic. We have the chance to vote them out, every 5 years

If we vote YES this time can we vote again on it in a few years like we have becuase of the NO vote?

Simple answer please. I am a simple person.

Time Magazine

Ze wrote: »

That is such a YES question. :rolleyes:

Lol. Since when is "yes" an adjective?

No, it would not be undemocratic. We have the chance to vote them out, every 5 years

So you're saying it's undemocratic if we were to have a GE now? We have to wait until 2012?

If we vote YES this time can we vote again on it in a few years like we have becuase of the NO vote?

Simple answer please. I am a simple person.

Simple answer, of course, is yes. We can change our constitution any time we like. Lisbon also allows us to leave the EU if we so desire.

oscarBravo

isocket wrote: »

The Lisbon Treaty is an amalgamation of several Euro treaties.

No, it's not. It's an amending treaty, which amends two existing treaties.

It is designed to federalise the EU, WITHOUT THE CONSENT of its people.

Please point out the reference to federalisation in the Lisbon treaty.

Hence the total denial of referenda in all 27 member states.
(Notwithstanding the NO votes to the Lisbon Treaties first appearance as the European Constitution by France & The Netherlands).

How its member states ratify treaties is none of the EU's business. For that matter, how each member state ratifies treaties is none of any other member state's business.

The Lisbon Treaty is NOT about job creation or economic recovery, it is a LIE to suggest that it is.
Quite simply people are suffering through the collapse of this & other economies, in part caused by EU policies.

Perhaps you'd like to explain how EU policies have contributed to a global economic collapse?

The claims by the yes side that suddenly, as if by magic, a yes vote will usher in economic nirvana is a cynical lie & those of you parroting it ought to be ashamed of yourselves.

It's a cynical lie to claim that the "yes" side have claimed anything of the sort.

As a proud Irish citizen, I will be voting NO again, & when we on the NO side win again, DO NOT DARE ask us again.

How democratic of you to suggest that people should be denied the opportunity to express their views in a referendum.

oscarBravo

Ze wrote: »

If we vote YES this time can we vote again on it in a few years like we have becuase of the NO vote?

Simple answer please. I am a simple person.

Of course. All you have to do is elect a government that will run such a referendum.

BlitzKrieg

As a proud Irish citizen, I will be voting NO again, & when we on the NO side win again, DO NOT DARE ask us again.

so at the general election when fine gael or a coalition of sorts get elected and they have a policy to ratify lisbon (or whatever treaty it is at the time.)

They are unable to fulfill their mandate to the people that elected them (the majority) because you think they should be allowed to ask us.

there's a word to describe this, you've used it alot.

isocket

oscarBravo wrote: »

No, it's not. It's an amending treaty, which amends two existing treaties. Please point out the reference to federalisation in the Lisbon treaty. How its member states ratify treaties is none of the EU's business. For that matter, how each member state ratifies treaties is none of any other member state's business. Perhaps you'd like to explain how EU policies have contributed to a global economic collapse? It's a cynical lie to claim that the "yes" side have claimed anything of the sort. How democratic of you to suggest that people should be denied the opportunity to express their views in a referendum.

Thank you all for the lively debate.
Unfortunately such a debate is somewhat lacking in the wishes of the leadership of the EU & Irish political class.
But hey!
Don't take my word for it -


"The good thing about not calling it a Constitution is that no one can ask for a referendum on it."
Giuliano Amato, former Italian Prime Minister and Vice-Chairman of the Convention which drew up the EU Constitution, speech at London School of Economics, 21 February 2007

"The substance of what was agreed in 2004 has been retained. What is gone is the term 'constitution' ".
Dermot Ahern, Irish Foreign Minister, Daily Mail Ireland, 25 June 2007

“We were quite happy. We were more interested in protecting the substance… Thankfully they haven’t changed the substance; 90 per cent of it is still there.”
An Taoiseach, Bertie Ahern Irish Independent, 24 June 2007

"The substance of the constitution is preserved. That is a fact."
German Chancellor Angela Merkel, speech in the European Parliament, 27 June 2007

"The difference between the original Constitution and the present Lisbon Treaty is one of approach, rather than content ... The proposals in the original constitutional treaty are practically unchanged. They have simply been dispersed through the old treaties in the form of amendments. Why this subtle change? Above all, to head off any threat of referenda by avoiding any form of constitutional vocabulary ... But lift the lid and look in the toolbox: all the same innovative and effective tools are there, just as they were carefully crafted by the European Convention."
V.Giscard D'Estaing, former French President and Chairman of the Convention which drew up the EU Constitution, The Independent, London, 30 October 2007

"Virtual incomprehensibility has thus replaced simplicity as the key approach to EU reform. As for the changes now proposed to be made to the constitutional treaty, most are presentational changes that have no practical effect. They have simply been designed to enable certain heads of government to sell to their people the idea of ratification by parliamentary action rather than by referendum."
Dr Garret FitzGerald, former Irish Taoiseach, Irish Times, 30 June 2007


Enough said?

Omeceron

We are not voting on the same Lisbon treaty as last time. The last one was rejected, the government renegotiated a new one and thats what we are voting on.

BlitzKrieg

yes

use everything but the treaty itself for your argument.

Ze

Time Magazine wrote: »

So you're saying it's undemocratic if we were to have a GE now? We have to wait until 2012?

Yes. That is what I said. :rolleyes:

If you want to write things like that you are not worth debating with as you obviously know we can have a GE when it can be had, but do hang on to the 5 year thing for some petty argument.

isocket

Omeceron wrote: »

We are not voting on the same Lisbon treaty as last time. The last one was rejected, the government renegotiated a new one and thats what we are voting on.

Do you really want another quote from the EU on that?

Dinner

Since you seem to be of a NO means NO mentality, do you think that divorce should be repealed.

After all it was rejected first time round and NO means NO. (Caps are essential :pac:)

Mena

isocket wrote: »

Do you really want another quote from the EU on that?

Thought you wanted a debate? You're ignoring the points raised by other posters...

isocket

Dinner wrote: »

Since you seem to be of a NO means NO mentality, do you think that divorce should be repealed.

After all it was rejected first time round and NO means NO. (Caps are essential :pac:)

Were we asked twice in the span if 15 months?
Learn the basics of democracy, then we can have an intelligent debate.

isocket

Mena wrote: »

Thought you wanted a debate? You're ignoring the points raised by other posters...

Well I thought some actual quotes from the real players in this might be helpful to you

BlitzKrieg

isocket wrote: »

Were we asked twice in the span if 15 months?
Learn the basics of democracy, then we can have an intelligent debate.

still waiting for those examples of how its undemocratic by the way.

isocket

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

still waiting for those examples of how its undemocratic by the way.

You are answering your own question by quoting me.

But maybe 'their' words might be of further assistance to you -

"Public opinion will be led to adopt, without knowing it, the proposals that we dare not present to them directly ... All the earlier proposals will be in the new text, but will be hidden and disguised in some way."
V.Giscard D'Estaing, former French President and Chairman of the Convention which drew up the EU Constitution, Le Monde, 14 June 2007, and Sunday Telegraph, 1 July 2007

"France was just ahead of all the other countries in voting No. It would happen in all Member States if they have a referendum. There is a cleavage between people and governments... A referendum now would bring Europe into danger. There will be no Treaty if we had a referendum in France, which would again be followed by a referendum in the UK."
French President Nicolas Sarkozy,at meeting of senior MEPs, EUobserver, 14 November 2007

"They decided that the document should be unreadable. If it is unreadable, it is not constitutional, that was the sort of perception....imagine the UK Prime Minister - can go to the Commons and say 'Look, you see, it's absolutely unreadable, it's the typical Brussels treaty, nothing new, no need for a referendum.' Should you succeed in understanding it at first sight there might be some reason for a referendum, because it would mean that there is something new."
Giuliano Amato, former Italian Prime Minister and Vice-Chairman of the Convention which drew up the EU Constitution, recorded by Open Europe, The Centre for European Reform, London, 12 July 2007

Contempt for democracy !!!

free to prosper

Lisbon will created jobs for unelected bureaucrats of the EU Commission.

And a Lisbon yes vote will make Brian Cowen's job secure.

K-9

isocket wrote: »

Were we asked twice in the span if 15 months?
Learn the basics of democracy, then we can have an intelligent debate.

Actually, some would say we are voting again to have an intelligent debate seeing as 42% of No voters didn't know what they were voting on!

Dinner

isocket wrote: »

Were we asked twice in the span if 15 months?
Learn the basics of democracy, then we can have an intelligent debate.

Ah, so NO doesn't actually mean NO. Now we're getting somewhere.

Divorce was run again 9 years after the first one because it was felt that there was a significant shift in public opinion during that time.

Lisbon was rejected. In the year and a bit since the first vote the government and the EU have tackled the issues that the public had.

Is it all democratic so far?

Now, the government feels that since the issues have been solved and there has been a shift in public opinion the only democratic thing to do is to put it to referendum again.

Reject Vote -> Solve issues -> vote again

Perfectly democratic.

Now I don't expect this seems democractic to you because in your world no means no except when it mean ask us again but not until an arbitrary time period has passed.

You're the one that needs to brush up on your democracy because there is NOTHING undemocratic about having a second a referendum. You can thrtow your toys and slogans around all you want. But that won't make it true.

K-9

free to prosper wrote: »

Lisbon will created jobs for unelected bureaucrats of the EU Commission.

And a Lisbon yes vote will make Brian Cowen's job secure.

Well, Libertas convinced many this was a good idea.

Cowen's job is secure as long as the Greens stay secure.