too much time being wasted?

ei.sdraob

Seems like yet again we are being dragged into much into defending our sanities by refuting lies from the NO side

everyday it gets worse and worse

yesterday one member even proclaimed that Lisbon would legalise pedophilia :eek: no joke!


same happens on radio and tv debates, too much time spend refuting clear lies instead of telling people why voting YES would be beneficial



i think we need more threads like this

10 'REAL' reasons to vote yes to Lisbon



can posters just post one reason to vote YES and please try to provide references to backup your claim

and please dont try to get sidetracked by certain new members who love hijacking threads


/

Euro_Kraut

ei.sdraob wrote: »

yesterday one member even proclaimed that Lisbon would legalise pedophilia :eek: no joke!

Seriously? Who?

moondogspot

ei.sdraob wrote: »

yesterday one member even proclaimed that Lisbon would legalise pedophilia :eek: no joke!

Are the Yes camp really getting that desperate to have to resort to comments like that?

ei.sdraob

Euro_Kraut wrote: »

Seriously? Who?

moondogspot wrote: »

Are the Yes camp really getting that desperate to have to resort to comments like that?

desperate?

it was @noodedog who made the accusation that Lisbon would legalize pedophilia (he now edited his post but i have it quoted in my reply to him)


see here

http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=62250051&postcount=2828


http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=62250225&postcount=2831


i now have heard everything

Sam Vimes wrote: »

OMG we had to resort to the truth :eek: how desperate :rolleyes:

he eventually backtracked and edited his post

but its still quoted in my reply for future generations to laugh and cry




anyways can we get back on topic please


/

BlitzKrieg

moondogspot wrote: »

Are the Yes camp really getting that desperate to have to resort to comments like that?

nope it was an actual post yesterday. It has since been edited because of the reaction to it.

It can be found here:http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055615489&page=71


a quote of the original post

Originally Posted by noodledog

VOTE YES! - If you think they should legalise paedophilia. Look it up, that's true. Not a crime.
Vote yes if you don't like Ireland as a soverign nation.
Vote yes so the intel lobby can make weapon systems on our soil.
Vote yes so 9% of our GDP can go to 'DEFENSE DEVELOPMENT'.
I think it's self explanatory that our neutral days are also numbered.

roosh

ei.sdraob wrote: »

Seems like yet again we are being dragged into much into defending our sanities by refuting lies from the NO side

everyday it gets worse and worse

yesterday one member even proclaimed that Lisbon would legalise pedophilia :eek: no joke!


same happens on radio and tv debates, too much time spend refuting clear lies instead of telling people why voting YES would be beneficial



i think we need more threads like this

10 'REAL' reasons to vote yes to Lisbon



can posters just post one reason to vote YES and please try to provide references to backup your claim

and please dont try to get sidetracked by certain new members who love hijacking threads


/

How's about the lies, empty rhetoric and fallacious arguments being put forward by our next government? Whatever about "failed politicians" doing this, one would have to question the current incumbents and those who want to be the next government using the exact same tactics.

I can think of a number of reasons to vote Yes:

• If you like being treated like a fool
• If you beleive that lack of open debate about major issues is the way forward
• If you are willing to accept that the same sort of approach by the No campaign, is suitable for the Yes campaign

roosh

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

nope it was an actual post yesterday. It has since been edited because of the reaction to it.

It can be found here:http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055615489&page=71


a quote of the original post

how's about we look at the actual yes and no campaigns as opposed to individual posters on a message board?

oscarBravo

mangaroosh wrote: »

how's about we look at the actual yes and no campaigns as opposed to individual posters on a message board?

How about we look at the treaty and its implications instead of campaigns that compete to insult our collective intelligence?

roosh

oscarBravo wrote: »

How about we look at the treaty and its implications instead of campaigns that compete to insult our collective intelligence?

Lets do that, but also bear in mind that we are not just voting on the treaty itself. The votes we cast do cast aspersions on the particular campaigns. While the No can be dismissed and indeed has been as "failed politicians" etc. we have to look at the behaviour of our current government and the behaviour of all the major political parties. Like it or not, we are voting on that also.

I for one would like to hold the elected officials of this country to a higher standard, than they are currently exhibiting.

As for the Treaty, we will have reduced voting rights in the Council of Ministers, countries such as Germany will gain greater voting rights, so we lose out on the double. This makes Ireland a weak ally in Europe and gives greater power to Germany and the likes to shape future policy and legislation.

The QMV favours the larger countries becaues they will be better allies than smaller ones such as ourselves.

Sam Vimes

mangaroosh wrote: »

Lets do that, but also bear in mind that we are not just voting on the treaty itself. The votes we cast do cast aspersions on the particular campaigns. While the No can be dismissed and indeed has been as "failed politicians" etc. we have to look at the behaviour of our current government and the behaviour of all the major political parties. Like it or not, we are voting on that also.

No we're not. And it's especially ridiculous to suggest that we can vote no without being associated with the no campaign but we can't vote yes without being associated with the yes campaign

ei.sdraob

on one hand you say

mangaroosh wrote: »

we have to look at the behaviour of our current government and the behaviour of all the major political parties

on the other you say

mangaroosh wrote: »

The Lisbon Treaty should be considered on its merits.

so which is it?



oh and thanks for derailing a thread i dont know why i bothered


/

ei.sdraob

Sam Vimes wrote: »

No we're not. And it's especially ridiculous to suggest that we can vote no without being associated with the no campaign but we can't vote yes without being associated with the yes campaign

that exactly what hes doing


http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=62258917&postcount=22

oscarBravo

mangaroosh wrote: »

The votes we cast do cast aspersions on the particular campaigns.

I reject this premise utterly, unless you accept that a "no" vote is a vindication for Cóir's lies. Do you?

turgon

On of the differences in Lisbon between a truth and a lie is that the former is infinite (it will be true indefinitely) whereas the latter is finite - it will be proved wrong eventually. So it is in the No sides interest to drag the debate on given that the Lisbon Debate is also finite. Their goal is to have the lies last as long as the campaign.

roosh

ei.sdraob wrote: »

on one hand you say



on the other you say



so which is it?



oh and thanks for derailing a thread i dont know why i bothered


/

context, context, context. the Treaty should be considered on its merits not based on how we have faired under the EU.

When casting our votes, we need to realise the merits of that also, and the message it will send to our politicians.

Apologies if you feel I derailed the thread, but you asked for reasons to vote Yes, I provided some, they are not all positive. If you wanted positive reasons perhaps you should have specified.

Also, where you claim that the No campaign is guilty of lying etc. in the interest of fairness and balance you might like to highlight the fact that the Yes campaign has adopted the exact same approach.

The difference being, that those in the Yes campaign, using the tactics you appear to deplore, are our elected officials, and probably future government. One would hope that we would hold these people to a higher standard than we do "failed politicians".

This isn't about which one of us is right and which is wrong, this is about being fair and balanced and not just accepting what is thrown at us. The onus has to be on the Yes to provide more than just empty rhetoric and fallacious arguments, because not only are they our elected officials and probable future government, but because it is they that are looking to change things.

panda100

Too much money being wasted more like?!

The money being spent by the establishment party's and big business to secure a Yes vote is just obscene.

oscarBravo

mangaroosh wrote: »

Also, where you claim that the No campaign is guilty of lying etc. in the interest of fairness and balance you might like to highlight the fact that the Yes campaign has adopted the exact same approach.

The "yes" campaigns have come up with some highly debatable slogans, but I haven't seen any brazen, bare-faced lies to compete with the €1.84 minimum wage or the suggestion that Lisbon will allow the introduction of abortion.

Both campaigns are dismal. One is deliberately and unarguably dishonest. They're not "the exact same approach".

roosh

Sam Vimes wrote: »

No we're not. And it's especially ridiculous to suggest that we can vote no without being associated with the no campaign but we can't vote yes without being associated with the yes campaign

If we vote Yes, we show our politicians that their approach, which is as bad, if not worse than the No campaign - there may perhaps be one claim by the No campaign that isn't completely fallacious.

These are our elected officials, we need to be holding them to a higher standard of politics than we do those on the No side. Those on the No side will not be running the country. If we vote Yes we show that this current approach works and is therefore acceptible. If we vote No, then the onus is again on those elected officials to change their approach, which will hopefully be to one where there is more open debate and transparency on the issues - the very thing that Lisbon hopes to espouse

moondogspot

oscarBravo wrote: »

The "yes" campaigns have come up with some highly debatable slogans, but I haven't seen any brazen, bare-faced lies to compete with the €1.84 minimum wage or the suggestion that Lisbon will allow the introduction of abortion.

Both campaigns are dismal. One is deliberately and unarguably dishonest. They're not "the exact same approach".

That's your opinion. My opinion is that the other side are definitely no saints either, that's for sure.

Scofflaw

mangaroosh wrote: »

If we vote Yes, we show our politicians that their approach, which is as bad, if not worse than the No campaign - there may perhaps be one claim by the No campaign that isn't completely fallacious.

These are our elected officials, we need to be holding them to a higher standard of politics than we do those on the No side. Those on the No side will not be running the country. If we vote Yes we show that this current approach works and is therefore acceptible. If we vote No, then the onus is again on those elected officials to change their approach, which will hopefully be to one where there is more open debate and transparency on the issues - the very thing that Lisbon hopes to espouse

That was the first vote, same as Nice. This time we need to decide on Lisbon, not our government.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Sam Vimes

mangaroosh wrote: »

If we vote Yes, we show our politicians that their approach, which is as bad, if not worse than the No campaign - there may perhaps be one claim by the No campaign that isn't completely fallacious.

These are our elected officials, we need to be holding them to a higher standard of politics than we do those on the No side. Those on the No side will not be running the country. If we vote Yes we show that this current approach works and is therefore acceptible. If we vote No, then the onus is again on those elected officials to change their approach, which will hopefully be to one where there is more open debate and transparency on the issues - the very thing that Lisbon hopes to espouse

And if we vote no we'll be showing the extremists that if they lie enough they can trick us. It'll be the third time they will have succeeded. How can you say that we should vote on the merits of the treaty and then say the behaviour of our politicians is relevant? I think you're confusing a European referendum with a general election, that's when we show our approval of our government

And do you think it's acceptable to deny 26 other countries a treaty they've ratified because we don't like Fianna Fail?


Also, on the upcoming children's rights referendum FF will be supporting a yes vote. Will you vote no as a protest then?

roosh

oscarBravo wrote: »

The "yes" campaigns have come up with some highly debatable slogans, but I haven't seen any brazen, bare-faced lies to compete with the €1.84 minimum wage or the suggestion that Lisbon will allow the introduction of abortion.

Both campaigns are dismal. One is deliberately and unarguably dishonest. They're not "the exact same approach".

"Its simple, I want a stronger voice in Europe - Vote Yes"

all evidence appears to point towards a weakened voice. Someone posted an explanation of how this wasn't the case, but I am hoping to get a link to something official that verifies this, because the Referendum Commission Booklet doesn't verify this.

The two approaches are very similar, both based on fallacious arguments. The thing is, that we have to hold our elected officials to a higher standard. If we vote Yes we tell them that it is OK to fob us off like this in future.

As it stands, the way I see it, is that our voting rights will be weakened under Lisbon. This is reason enough alone for me to vote no. If I am wrong about this, then some official source explaining how I am wrong might convince me to change my opinion. But that is endemic of the problem, the lack of transparency, the lack of open debate.

BlitzKrieg

As for the Treaty, we will have reduced voting rights in the Council of Ministers, countries such as Germany will gain greater voting rights, so we lose out on the double. This makes Ireland a weak ally in Europe and gives greater power to Germany and the likes to shape future policy and legislation.

The QMV favours the larger countries becaues they will be better allies than smaller ones such as ourselves.

There's a thread done on this here: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055311438&highlight=IRLConor that breaks it down very specifically showing the change in weights.

In the end the only country who actually gets an increase in voting power is Malta.

The increase in requirements to pass in Pop and the removal of the weighted votes works in ireland's favour as our voting in one of the two of the double majority is now equal to Germany and every other state. The increase of the blocking minority to 4 stops the 3 big countries from ganging up on the smaller ones.

roosh

Scofflaw wrote: »

That was the first vote, same as Nice. This time we need to decide on Lisbon, not our government.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Its not our government that we are deciding on, and it isn't just Lisbon either, we are deciding on what is and what is not acceptible politics in this country. If we vote Yes we accept rhetoric, fallacies, lack of open debate, lack of transparecny, in all of politics, not just our government.

As for Lisbon, from the information I have been provided with, it appears that our voting rights will be lessened while those of other countries will be strengthened, meaning that we weaken our stance. Again, this is based on the information, or lack thereof that I have been provided with.

Sam Vimes

mangaroosh wrote: »

Its not our government that we are deciding on, and it isn't just Lisbon either, we are deciding on what is and what is not acceptible politics in this country. If we vote Yes we accept rhetoric, fallacies, lack of open debate, lack of transparecny, in all of politics, not just our government.

If we vote No we accept rhetoric, fallacies, lack of open debate, lack of transparency, and blatant lies in all of politics, not just our government. Neither side is innocent here.

If you don't approve of politics in this country, the time to voice your opposition is during a general election. This treaty contains benefits for Ireland and for the whole European Union not only would it be ridiculous to deny ourselves theses benefits to punish Fianna Fail, it would be shameful to deny everyone else in Europe these benefits to punish Fianna Fail. It's not their fault our government is useless.

And again, will you be voting no to the upcoming children's rights referendum to show what is and what is not acceptable politics in this country?

Scofflaw

mangaroosh wrote: »

Its not our government that we are deciding on, and it isn't just Lisbon either, we are deciding on what is and what is not acceptible politics in this country. If we vote Yes we accept rhetoric, fallacies, lack of open debate, lack of transparecny, in all of politics, not just our government.

As for Lisbon, from the information I have been provided with, it appears that our voting rights will be lessened while those of other countries will be strengthened, meaning that we weaken our stance. Again, this is based on the information, or lack thereof that I have been provided with.

Voting on Lisbon will not change the standards of politics and political debate in Ireland - and the claim that we should vote on another issue than the one decided by the vote is part of those low standards. Sam Vimes' point is also very good - voting No is a vote for every future referendum to be dominated by lies.

As to the voting rights, you've also been provided with information indicating that the claim our voting rights are reduced is false. We can continue to provide that information as often as you like, but I somehow doubt you'll actually change what you're claiming.

regards,
Scofflaw

roosh

Sam Vimes wrote: »

And if we vote no we'll be showing the extremists that if they lie enough they can trick us. It'll be the third time they will have succeeded. How can you say that we should vote on the merits of the treaty and then say the behaviour of our politicians is relevant? I think you're confusing a European referendum with a general election, that's when we show our approval of our government

And do you think it's acceptable to deny 26 other countries a treaty they've ratified because we don't like Fianna Fail?


Also, on the upcoming children's rights referendum FF will be supporting a yes vote. Will you vote no as a protest then?

Do you know one sure fire way to ensure that extremists don't trick people, its by providing open and honest information about the issues and allowing them to make up their own mind. That way, at least there can be no criticism levelled at those who provided the information. Not providing it feeds right into the hands of those extremists.

AS for denying those other 26 countries - how many of them actually got to vote on this?

Also, don't confuse this with a challenge on the incumbent government, it is has to do with how politics in this country is carried out. It has nothing to do with one particular party and ones fondness or otherwise for them. All the major political parties in this country, form whom our next government will almost definitely come, have fed us nothing but [I'll say it again] empty rhetoric, fallacious arguments and scaremongering. All of them. If we vote yes we approve this method of politics, not just for FF but for all the major political parties. We let them know that they can fob us off with a similar shoddy approach that the No campaign are using. The difference being, the No campaign won't be in governement the next time round - someone from the Yes campaing will. This is about more than just Lisbon.

Lisbon evaluated on the merits of the information I have been provided with, suggests we would weaken our voice in Europe.


I better point out, I have absolutely no political allegiance whatsoever.

roosh

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

There's a thread done on this here: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055311438&highlight=IRLConor that breaks it down very specifically showing the change in weights.

In the end the only country who actually gets an increase in voting power is Malta.

The increase in requirements to pass in Pop and the removal of the weighted votes works in ireland's favour as our voting in one of the two of the double majority is now equal to Germany and every other state. The increase of the blocking minority to 4 stops the 3 big countries from ganging up on the smaller ones.

Nice one.

Sam Vimes

mangaroosh wrote: »

Do you know one sure fire way to ensure that extremists don't trick people, its by providing open and honest information about the issues and allowing them to make up their own mind. That way, at least there can be no criticism levelled at those who provided the information. Not providing it feeds right into the hands of those extremists.

The information has been provided, just not by the government. You are right though but that does not tell me which way I should vote on the Lisbon treaty because it has nothing to do with our government

mangaroosh wrote: »

AS for denying those other 26 countries - how many of them actually got to vote on this?

I don't care how many of them got a vote. It was ratified in accordance with their laws and after the travesty these referendums have been I wish our laws were the same as theirs. The fact is that millions of people in those countries want this treaty and they should not be denied it because of Fianna Fail.

mangaroosh wrote: »

Also, don't confuse this with a challenge on the incumbent government, it is has to do with how politics in this country is carried out. It has nothing to do with one particular party and ones fondness or otherwise for them. All the major political parties in this country, form whom our next government will almost definitely come, have fed us nothing but [I'll say it again] empty rhetoric, fallacious arguments and scaremongering. All of them. If we vote yes we approve this method of politics, not just for FF but for all the major political parties. We let them know that they can fob us off with a similar shoddy approach that the No campaign are using. The difference being, the No campaign won't be in governement the next time round - someone from the Yes campaing will. This is about more than just Lisbon.

Again, will you be voting no on the children's rights referendum as a protest against Irish politics? No of course you won't, that would be ridiculous because children's rights have nothing to do with Irish politics, just like the Lisbon treaty.

mangaroosh wrote: »

Lisbon evaluated on the merits of the information I have been provided with, suggests we would weaken our voice in Europe.

If you believe that then vote no, that's a reason to vote no. Punishing our politicians is not a reason. But I feel it incumbent upon me to point out that our voice is not actually weakened as has been pointed out to you


edit: seriously mangaroosh, why can't you wait until the next general election, ie the appropriate time to express your view on the people who run the country?

oscarBravo

mangaroosh wrote: »

AS for denying those other 26 countries - how many of them actually got to vote on this?

All of them, in accordance with their respective constitutional requirements.

roosh

Scofflaw wrote: »

Voting on Lisbon will not change the standards of politics and political debate in Ireland - and the claim that we should vote on another issue than the one decided by the vote is part of those low standards. Sam Vimes' point is also very good - voting No is a vote for every future referendum to be dominated by lies.

The thing is, it would not be voting on another issue, rather taking everything into account. Part of that is the fact that every single one of our political parties has effectively fobbed us off in this referendum. That also has to be taken into account. They speak of the embarassment that would come with another No vote, perhaps they might be embarassed enough to run a factual campaign next time, instead of adopting the same shoddy approach as the No campaign. These are our politicians. Is this good enough? I would hope not.

As for Sam's point, I beleive it would be more relevant to suggest that if we voted No, it would show the political parties that they have to change their approach, that they have to provide more open, honest and transparent debate on the issue. As it stands both the Yes and No vote is a vote for rhetoric and fallacy. The difference being the consequence of a No vote may be a change in approach from the politicians in this country, to a more open an honest approach - because they would have to change their approach, and there doesn't seem to be any other options.

Scofflaw wrote: »

As to the voting rights, you've also been provided with information indicating that the claim our voting rights are reduced is false. We can continue to provide that information as often as you like, but I somehow doubt you'll actually change what you're claiming.

regards,
Scofflaw

I'm currently going through that information, and it is certainly infinitely more enlightening than anything that has come from the official Yes campaign. Again, indicative of the lack of transparency that has been endemic from the politicians of this country, when it comes to a major issue.

I am as of yet open to voting Yes, in fact I kind of want to vote yes - this is a fact. The problem is I am having trouble justifying it based on the information that has come, at the risk of sounding like a broken record, from the political parties of this country, not just the incumbent government, but the probably future one. If we accept this kind of politics now, what choice will we have in the future, when the choice will be similar to this one, rhetoric vs rhetoric. The difference is, as I see it, if we vote No, the politics will have to evolve somewhat. If we vote Yes, it won't, and personally I think it is needed.