Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Proponents of the No vote

Options
1235»

Comments

  • Options
    #122
    namloc1980
    Registered Users Posts: 18,292 ✭✭✭✭namloc1980


    gambiaman wrote: »
    it's what your post deserved and required.
    Nothing more nothing less.

    You are peddling lies.

    That is a very serious accusation you have made based on an opinion I have. Not impressed.


  • Options
    #123
    Euro_Kraut
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,957 ✭✭✭Euro_Kraut


    realcam wrote: »
    I'm not going to engage again in a debate in this forum, both sides are hardened and this debate here cannot be won anyway. But I have enough listening to the crap about the 'No' people all being effectively ignorant retards who don't know what they're doing.

    On a discussion forum I do not think it is helpful to state that you do not wish to engage in any further discussion.

    I would love to see where posters have stated that all of the NO side are 'ignorant retards'.


  • Options
    #124
    sceptre
    Registered Users Posts: 19,608 ✭✭✭✭sceptre


    You guys with the one or two word replies, where you're not being ironic please stop it as you're wasting space. Where you're being ironic you're wrestling a metaphorical pig - you'll get dirty and the pig may be enjoying it as pigs like wrestling in the dirt. Three days more and you can all go to sleep again.


  • Options
    #125
    Sir Oxman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,492 ✭✭✭Sir Oxman


    Sam Vimes wrote: »
    It's his opinion. How can an opinion be a lie?

    You do know that there are reasons to vote yes for this treaty besides doing FF a favour right?


    He's repeddling a lie that's been peddled on the airwaves and in the print media - that it's become his perceived opinion doesn't make it less of a lie - what if a fidgety no voter came along read that and went over to the darkside? Eh?..course he could be a bird.

    And to answer your second part, no. Tell me one benefit ireland will get from voting yes.
    Not opinion, just the facts.


  • Options
    #126
    namloc1980
    Registered Users Posts: 18,292 ✭✭✭✭namloc1980


    gambiaman wrote: »
    He's repeddling a lie that's been peddled on the airwaves and in the print media - that it's become his perceived opinion doesn't make it less of a lie - what if a fidgety no voter came along read that and went over to the darkside? Eh?..course he could be a bird.

    And to answer your second part, no. Tell me one benefit ireland will get from voting yes.
    Not opinion, just the facts.

    We will be GUARANTEED a commissioner representing us on the Commission. FACT


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #127
    Sir Oxman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,492 ✭✭✭Sir Oxman


    namloc1980 wrote: »
    That is a very serious accusation you have made based on an opinion I have. Not impressed.

    No it's not - it's putting it up to you to tell me and others how we will be punished by not voting yes.

    Please tell me, it may change my vote if you scare me enough.


  • Options
    #128
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users Posts: 17,797 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    A Primal Nut wrote: »
    It isn't necessary to have a referendum on every issue...thats not necessary in democracy.

    But should it be? Or should it never be necessary? Where do you draw the line between what the people should have control over and what they shouldn't? The "representative democracy extremists" as they appear to me on this board seem to miss the very obvious problem that you can agree with some policies but not others, and this is why a party system is so utterly useless. I personally don't want a Sinn Fein domestic policy, but the foreign policy aspect of being opposed to Lisbon I do approve of. These extremists would have us saddled with every single one of their policies just in order to not allow Lisbon to be passed - hence why it's a good thing we get to decide directly instead, and therefore elect our government on other issues.


  • Options
    #129
    Sir Oxman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,492 ✭✭✭Sir Oxman


    namloc1980 wrote: »
    We will be GUARANTEED a commissioner representing us on the Commission. FACT


    Unlike a lot of No campaigners, I don't see the benefit of that seeing as Commissioners are meant to be non-nationals or non-nationalistic as such.
    They are meant to be good Europeans.

    The Commisioner argument doesn't scare me or sway me in the least.
    We've sent some of our dumbest to fill our seat,.

    Now, any jobs out there come Saturday?

    PS Surely the Commissioner is not meant to represent ireland only?...


  • Options
    #130
    namloc1980
    Registered Users Posts: 18,292 ✭✭✭✭namloc1980


    gambiaman wrote: »
    Unlike a lot of No campaigners, I don't see the benefit of that seeing as Commissioners are meant to be non-nationals or non-nationalistic as such.
    They are meant to be good Europeans.

    The Commisioner argument doesn't scare me or sway me in the least.
    We've sent some of our dumbest to fill our seat,.

    Now, any jobs out there come Saturday?

    You asked for one benefit and you got it....but it didn't suit your agenda so you belittle it. :rolleyes:

    The heads of Intel and Pfizer in Ireland both said today that a No vote would seriously hamper FDI into Ireland in the future and would make existing foreign operations in Ireland consider their positions.


  • Options
    #131
    Sam Vimes
    Registered Users Posts: 21,611 ✭✭✭✭Sam Vimes


    gambiaman wrote: »
    He's repeddling a lie that's been peddled on the airwaves and in the print media - that it's become his perceived opinion doesn't make it less of a lie - what if a fidgety no voter came along read that and went over to the darkside? Eh?..course he could be a bird.
    So the fact that 91% of economists, 90% of businesses, the majority of trade unions and these people agree with him is irrelevant is it? Are they all lying?

    Just because you don't want to believe something doesn't make it a lie.

    And again, unless you believe that he has a crystal ball, has seen that a no vote won't damage the country and is still saying it will, it makes no sense to say he's lying. The only thing you can logically say is that he's wrong
    gambiaman wrote: »
    And to answer your second part, no. Tell me one benefit ireland will get from voting yes.
    Not opinion, just the facts.

    Here's lots:
    http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055694548

    http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=61327732&postcount=1


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #132
    Sir Oxman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,492 ✭✭✭Sir Oxman


    namloc1980 wrote: »
    You asked for one benefit and you got it....but it didn't suit your agenda so you belittle it. :rolleyes:

    The heads of Intel and Pfizer in Ireland both said today that a No vote would seriously hamper FDI into Ireland in the future and would make existing foreign operations in Ireland consider their positions.


    No, namloc1980.
    I do not see it as a benefit to me or my country.
    Nothing about agendas.
    Give me a tangible, real-life benefit of voting yes (like one actual job, after all that's all I see on the YES posters - promises promises and threats)

    Your second point really does not make sense - you are making the no voters main point that we are being systematically bullied by the big boys (in this instance, richer-than-nations multinational concerns).
    We're being threatened/scared/cowed - why is the question people should be asking right now.
    IS our lowlow corpo tax not good enough now?


  • Options
    #133
    Sir Oxman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,492 ✭✭✭Sir Oxman


    Sam Vimes wrote: »
    So the fact that 91% of economists, 90% of businesses, the majority of trade unions and these people agree with him is irrelevant is it? Are they all lying?

    Just because you don't want to believe something doesn't make it a lie.

    And again, unless you believe that he has a crystal ball, has seen that a no vote won't damage the country and is still saying it will, it makes no sense to say he's lying. The only thing you can logically say is that he's wrong



    Here's lots:
    http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055694548

    http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=61327732&postcount=1


    Thanks for the links, I've already read them.

    Tell me again, how are we going to be punished?

    EDIT: Oops, sorry Sam Vimes, got you and namloc mixed up.
    I realise you didn't say we would be punished in this thread.

    Admin benefits, nothing else to me.
    Railroading a nation multiplies the EUs democratic deficit exponentially.

    All my opinion of course.


  • Options
    #134
    namloc1980
    Registered Users Posts: 18,292 ✭✭✭✭namloc1980


    gambiaman wrote: »
    No, namloc1980.
    I do not see it as a benefit to me or my country.
    Nothing about agendas.
    Give me a tangible, real-life benefit of voting yes (like one actual job, after all that's all I see on the YES posters - promises promises and threats)

    Your second point really does not make sense - you are making the no voters main point that we are being systematically bullied by the big boys (in this instance, richer-than-nations multinational concerns).
    We're being threatened/scared/cowed - why is the question people should be asking right now.
    IS our lowlow corpo tax not good enough now?

    You are entrenched in your views but whether you like it or not an Irish rejection of Lisbon will be percieved poorly outside this country and will affect how people view Ireland. It's not threats....it's REALITY. The no side don't seem to like reality!

    Also have a read of these....it might enlighten you

    http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055694548

    http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=61327732&postcount=1


  • Options
    #135
    K-9
    Registered Users Posts: 43,311 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    Pride Fighter wrote: »
    If we vote no the Nice system in Europe will prevail. Nice requires unanimouty by ALL member states. As we are in the EU we have a veto. The veto is the franchise entrusted to us in the upcoming referendum on Friday. Lets use it.

    QMV exists under Nice.

    Can you give examples of cases going against our wishes seeing as the veto is SO important?

    It's a simple question.

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • Options
    #136
    Sir Oxman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,492 ✭✭✭Sir Oxman


    namloc1980 wrote: »
    You are entrenched in your views but whether you like it or not an Irish rejection of Lisbon will be percieved poorly outside this country and will affect how people view Ireland. It's not threats....it's REALITY. The no side don't seem to like reality!

    Also have a read of these....it might enlighten you

    http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055694548

    http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=61327732&postcount=1


    Please, I am open to persuasion believe it or not. I won't take instant umbrage over you thinking you know I'm entrenched.

    So, I should vote yes beacuse i should be scared how the world and companies see me and my fellow Irish people who may vote out for a second time a purely administrative treaty (apparently)?

    Realpolitik for sure but I don't buy it.
    I wonder how the Czechs are doing...

    Sorry, if you or M Martin or D Roche can guarantee just one toilet cleaners job that will be created by us voting yes, I'll vote yes.
    Jobs, jobs, jobs. I can't get that out of my head (seeing as it's been put there since the date was announced)

    PS Will we get a third vote if it's yes, come Friday? Or will that be it seeing as it'll be the will of the people?
    Like, if we get a million signatures and send them to Brussels will they let us vote again...


  • Options
    #137
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    hatrickpatrick wrote: »
    Now in Ireland if you want to change this, you write to your TD, you form protest groups, you agitate and lobby against it to try to force the government to roll back.

    How can we change this when it's from the EU though? Writing to your MEP is no use, all the MEPs in Ireland alone couldn't do it. Forming a protest group or March - why change a law just because one country is protesting about it?

    One prime example of how the bigger a government gets, the less direct control the people have over it.

    Actually, it's a prime example of judiciously picking the basis of your comparison and begging the question.

    If there is legislation for something at a European level, then your decision to restrict the basis of your campaign against it to Ireland alone is rather obviously self-defeating. Whether there is a European demos or not, MP3 players are hardly restricted to Ireland.

    There seems to be, in your post, an assumption that the only legitimate field of political action is the nation, and so your finding is essentially just that acting only within the nation makes it hard to challenge European legislation. That's a tautological conclusion, I'm afraid.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • Options
    #138
    Boskowski
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,361 ✭✭✭Boskowski


    Euro_Kraut wrote: »
    On a discussion forum I do not think it is helpful to state that you do not wish to engage in any further discussion.

    I suppose that's a fair enough comment to make, but you surely will agree that this is discussion is going nowhere.
    Euro_Kraut wrote: »
    I would love to see where posters have stated that all of the NO side are 'ignorant retards'.

    Well they haven't explicitly said it like THAT, but that's what I'm reading between the lines. The 'Yes' side is sitting on a high horse here stating that people go for 'No' because they don't understand the treaty and didn't make an effort to do so or else they go for 'No' for all the wrong reasons. This is not true for everyone is what I say.


  • Options
    #139
    Sam Vimes
    Registered Users Posts: 21,611 ✭✭✭✭Sam Vimes


    realcam wrote: »
    Well they haven't explicitly said it like THAT, but that's what I'm reading between the lines. The 'Yes' side is sitting on a high horse here stating that people go for 'No' because they don't understand the treaty and didn't make an effort to do so or else they go for 'No' for all the wrong reasons. This is not true for everyone is what I say.

    The only reason I've seen for voting no that has any validity is an objection to the move to QMV in some areas but even in that there is widespread misunderstanding such as the idea that a few big countries can force things on us, that this is brand new or that it applies in all areas. Nevertheless it is an ideological objection that can be considered to hold validity so I have dealt with it in some detail here:
    http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=62307115

    Every other issue I have come across in all my time on this forum is either an issue that has nothing to do with the treaty like an objection to the government or the "arrogance" of people on the yes side (really all that's happening is that people are being proven wrong and don't like it), or at the very least has some level of misunderstanding of the facts, ranging from mistaking "president of the European Council" (a role that already exists) with "EU president" to nonsense about the death penalty and EU armies.

    If you feel I'm wrong in this assessment, please give me what you feel are the problems with the treaty. Before you do though I would ask that you ensure that what you're saying is correct. In the hopes of making this more likely, here's a list of things about the treaty and the EU that are not true:
    €200 billion in fisheries
    €1.84 minimum wage
    Forcing us to engage in military action in a terrorist attack
    European superstate
    Abortion, gay marriage and EUthanasia
    Death penalty
    Massive conspiracy to pretend the guarantees are binding
    Treaty is unreadable
    Treaty is designed to be unreadable
    Corrupt surveys to make up fake issues and pretend to address them
    Ratification through parliament in other countries is somehow undemocratic or unusual
    EU "didn't allow" other countres to have referendums
    Keep voting until you give the right answer
    Ryanair allowed buy Aer Lingus in exchange for the campaign
    Rigged polls to make it look like the yes side are ahead
    Lisbon allows Turkish accession (with fake video)
    Lisbon makes EU law superior to Irish law
    Losing the right to referendums
    We will no longer have a constitution in Ireland
    Self-amending and escalator clause
    Privatisation of healthcare and education
    More military spending
    Lavelle case could happen here
    Charter of human rights allows the EU to take the homes, assets and children of people with mild intellectual disabilities and alcoholics
    Voting weight halved
    QMV is brand new
    Loss of veto in all areas
    Allows EU to raise our corporation tax
    Conscription into a non-existent EU army
    EU commission diverted €10 million to yes campaign
    Treaty is the same as the constitution dressed up to avoid referendums
    Fake polls made up by Coir
    2nd vote undemocratic. (The reasons that many people voted no have been addressed and the supreme court has ruled that it's not)


  • Options
    #140
    deathofan80sman
    Registered Users Posts: 26 ✭deathofan80sman


    Q. Is it not possible that in a future referendum where our tax or neutrality positions are proposed to be changed due to EU moves to get unanimity in relation to same that we will be held once again as guilty of not appreciating the 'good will' in Europe that we depend upon? I mean the 'good will' argument a trump card, is it not?




    first post..

    yours
    do8m


  • Options
    #141
    Euro_Kraut
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,957 ✭✭✭Euro_Kraut


    realcam wrote: »
    Well they haven't explicitly said it like THAT, but that's what I'm reading between the lines.

    Why did you use those exact words than if it was not what you meant? You even put the all in bold letters.
    The 'Yes' side is sitting on a high horse here stating that people go for 'No' because they don't understand the treaty and didn't make an effort to do so or else they go for 'No' for all the wrong reasons. This is not true for everyone is what I say.

    I find it odd that you seem to get upset about the notion of NO voters are being tarred with the one brush but think its okay to tar all YES voters with the same brush. And the 'tarring' is based on your perception of Yes voters rather than what they have actually said.

    The reality is that hotheads on both side do not represent the majority of voters (or posters on this site). Its up to the more sensbile among us to rise above the din.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #142
    Boskowski
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,361 ✭✭✭Boskowski


    Euro_Kraut wrote: »
    The reality is that hotheads on both side do not represent the majority of voters (or posters on this site). Its up to the more sensbile among us to rise above the din.

    You know what? You actually talk an awful lot of sense. I go with that...:)


  • Options
    #143
    Sam Vimes
    Registered Users Posts: 21,611 ✭✭✭✭Sam Vimes


    deathofan80sman wrote: »
    Q. Is it not possible that in a future referendum where our tax or neutrality positions are proposed to be changed due to EU moves to get unanimity in relation to same that we will be held once again as guilty of not appreciating the 'good will' in Europe that we depend upon? I mean the 'good will' argument a trump card, is it not?

    No the goodwill argument is not a trump card. If there are genuine objections to the treaty of course we can vote no, then our leaders can go back to Europe and renegotiate to get the parts that we object to removed. The problem with this no vote is that the government will be going back to the EU with the big list of lies and misconceptions that I mentioned in my above post and there will be nothing the EU can do to resolve our issues because they're imaginary. Those issues don't make us look like a responsible people who have legitimate objections, they make use look paranoid and terrified of our neighbours. It will seem that we consider the EU to be a mechanism that is acting in bad faith and not in the interests of the Irish State.

    And that will effect both goodwill and confidence in the Irish market moving forwards


  • Options
    #144
    douglashyde
    Registered Users Posts: 694 ✭✭✭douglashyde


    Voltwad wrote: »
    Ploggers?

    hahahaha


  • Options
    #145
    deathofan80sman
    Registered Users Posts: 26 ✭deathofan80sman


    Sam Vimes wrote: »
    No the goodwill argument is not a trump card. If there are genuine objections to the treaty of course we can vote no, then our leaders can go back to Europe and renegotiate to get the parts that we object to removed. The problem with this no vote is that the government will be going back to the EU with the big list of lies and misconceptions that I mentioned in my above post and there will be nothing the EU can do to resolve our issues because they're imaginary. Those issues don't make us look like a responsible people who have legitimate objections, they make use look paranoid and terrified of our neighbours. It will seem that we consider the EU to be a mechanism that is acting in bad faith and not in the interests of the Irish State.

    And that will effect both goodwill and confidence in the Irish market moving forwards


    I really do get the yes perspective on some of the statements from some no-side quarters being calculatedly dishonest. But I was asking are we now perpetually at the mercy of pontentially jeopardising the 'goodwill and confidence in the Irish market moving forwards'...could there ever again be a referendum required in Ireland, say on neutrality, that jars w the aspired policy of Big Europe and if so wouldn't the threat of losing that 'goodwill and confidence in the Irish market moving forwards' be a very effective persuader? The goodwill is not enshrined in the treaty of lisbon...it's an implied positive threat.




    yours

    do8m


Advertisement