How will history record the Lisbon Referendum?

Sam Vimes · 01-10-2009 3:03pm

fligedlyflick wrote: »

with good reason.

So why are you so sure they will act democratically and responsibly in this regard that you call any suggestion that a no vote will have consequences "rubbish" and "lies"?

K-9 · 01-10-2009 3:04pm

fligedlyflick wrote: »

they are leaving veiled threats, whats to stop them enacting them, i think it's called bullying

The only threats and bullying I see are No posters and campaigners.

MrMatisse · 01-10-2009 3:04pm

Daftendirekt wrote: »

And?

You have to read it.

Amused,
Really-Stressed

MrMatisse · 01-10-2009 3:05pm

K-9 wrote: »

The only threats and bullying I see are No posters and campaigners.

Buy some glasses.

fligedlyflick · 01-10-2009 3:05pm

should they not exorcise their own beliefs and be democratic?
they ignored my last vote, they are threatening repercussions if we reject again.
now you point out the similarities between undemocratic and threatening so-called citizens if we do no abide by their wishes

oscarBravo · 01-10-2009 3:06pm

fligedlyflick wrote: »

should they not exorcise their own beliefs and be democratic?
they ignored my last vote, they are threatening repercussions if we reject again.

Who ignored it? Who's threatening?

yiddo_til_i_die · 01-10-2009 3:09pm

meditraitor wrote: »

They are intitled to do this because in a free democratic country every decision can be challenged. The lisbon treaty will not change this

You cant please all the people all the time, trying to get a balance between what is best for the majority and not marginalising a minority is not so easy.

And on that point I have not seen a single post from the NO side that explains to me how Europe/EU membership has made things worse for the countries involved.
I have only seen a lot of nonsense about what Europe might do, the basis for these fantasies has been slapped down time and again on this forum not through scaremongering but good honest debate based on facts.

If you have no basis for your fears but ignorance it is only your own fault if you get slapped down time and again.

I don't think there is any denying that the EU were kind of subversive in trying to get the treaty ratified, regardless of how democratic and legal it appears to be, they still took the EU Constitution that was rejected by france and holland, pretty much just changed the name and then ratified it anyway without listening to what the people said.

your man Giscard d'Estaing said in an article he wrote for Le Monde [6]and published in that newspaper on 15 June 2007, that "public opinion will be led to adopt, without knowing it, the proposals we dare not present to them directly",

"This approach of 'divide and ratify' is clearly unacceptable. Perhaps it is a good exercise in presentation. But it would confirm to European citizens the notion that European construction is a procedure organised behind their backs by lawyers and diplomats."

In the following paragraphs he goes on to appeal for an "honest treaty" and "total transparency" to allow citizens to hear the debate for themselves

Sam Vimes · 01-10-2009 3:09pm

Sorry I think you may have missed my question. I'll repost the conversation thread to remind you:

fligedlyflick wrote: »

they are leaving veiled threats, whats to stop them enacting them, i think it's called bullying

Really-Stressed wrote: »

'opposed to the idea that they might punish us for a no vote'

If they did that they would be undemocratic

Sam Vimes wrote: »

Most of the no campaign are already calling them undemocratic bullies.

fligedlyflick wrote: »

with good reason.

(Thanked by Really-Stressed)

So why are you so sure they will act democratically and responsibly in this regard that you call any suggestion that a no vote will have consequences "rubbish" and "lies"?

MrMatisse · 01-10-2009 3:12pm

Sam Vimes wrote: »

Sorry I think you may have missed my question. I'll repost the conversation thread to remind you:

So why are you so sure they will act democratically and responsibly in this regard that you call any suggestion that a no vote will have consequences "rubbish" and "lies"?

Im assuming they will act so.

They must also be lining up the british and czechs for a spanking for being bold children too.

oscarBravo · 01-10-2009 3:12pm

yiddo_til_i_die wrote: »

your man Giscard d'Estaing said in an article he wrote for Le Monde [6]and published in that newspaper on 15 June 2007, that "public opinion will be led to adopt, without knowing it, the proposals we dare not present to them directly",

"This approach of 'divide and ratify' is clearly unacceptable. Perhaps it is a good exercise in presentation. But it would confirm to European citizens the notion that European construction is a procedure organised behind their backs by lawyers and diplomats."

In the following paragraphs he goes on to appeal for an "honest treaty" and "total transparency" to allow citizens to hear the debate for themselves

If you're going to copy and paste from Wikipedia, at least have the decency to credit the source and provide a link.

yiddo_til_i_die · 01-10-2009 3:14pm

Furious-Dave wrote: »

Children don't always want to eat their vegetables now do they? Though the parents know that the veg is good for them and make them eat it.
Is it worth risking the future of our country just so that the principles of democracy are upheld?

hahahhahahahhahahahahahahaha

here comes the aeroplane

Sam Vimes · 01-10-2009 3:14pm

Really-Stressed wrote: »

Im assuming they will act so.

They must also be lining up the british and czechs for a spanking for being bold children too.

And yet you posted this:

Furious-Dave wrote:

I don't recall ever implying that I think the electorate are stupid. The analogy of children eating vegetables fits fine IMO. Children don't know why the vegetables are good for them and may not like the taste, but it's got nothing to do with being stupid. And from what I've seen a lot of people still don't know what the treaty is really about and how it will benefit them. Are we being told that if we don't ratify Lisbon we will be permanently impoverished?
Edited: My dad was at a conference recently at the Institute of International and European Affairs, and in a speech Brendan Halligan said that if the negative consequences of rejecting the Lisbon Treaty do occur, it could be 20 years before Ireland recovers. But hey, at least we upheld the principles of democracy, and that's all that matters right?

Brian Cowen doesn't have to read treaties, though he probably should. He has advisers to do that and summarize it for him.

Really-Stressed wrote: »

Utter Rubbish

You seem to be contradicting yourself....

fligedlyflick · 01-10-2009 3:16pm

Sam Vimes wrote: »

Sorry I think you may have missed my question. I'll repost the conversation thread to remind you:

So why are you so sure they will act democratically and responsibly in this regard that you call any suggestion that a no vote will have consequences "rubbish" and "lies"?

they are rallying us for a yes vote under duress, nothing monumental will happen, how would they go about it?
would they kick us from the eu? declare war on us? refuse us vital help if needed? no, but they like to have that shadow over us.
it's getting what they want or else we'll threaten something that has no substance

MrMatisse · 01-10-2009 3:18pm

Sam Vimes wrote: »

And yet you posted this:

You seem to be contradicting yourself....

was refering to the vegetables comments.

Likes his greens, hes a good boy,
Really-Stressed

yiddo_til_i_die · 01-10-2009 3:18pm

RandomName2 wrote: »

Priceless!

The electorate are stupid children! Will to power! The strong man of Europe shall shepherd the general flock.

And do the parents actually look at the vegetables or do they close their eyes when they are buying their groceries (has Brian Cowan STILL not read the damn treaty?)

Do the children sacrifice lose a certain amount of power to their parents if they eat the vegetables.

Are they told that if they don't eat the vegetables they will be permanently impoverished?

and do those children not grow up, remain greatful to their parents, but develop the capacity to work together with their parents, but actualy maintain a say when it comes to making family decisions, do the children not eventually repay their parents when they are in old age, and indeed return the favour to their own children without the expectation of anything in return?

Sam Vimes · 01-10-2009 3:22pm

fligedlyflick wrote: »

they are rallying us for a yes vote under duress, nothing monumental will happen, how would they go about it? would they kick us from the eu? declare war on us? refuse us vital help if needed? no, but they like to have that shadow over us.
it's getting what they want or else we'll threaten something that has no substance

Those are the very same questions I ask you and you respond by saying they will break legally binding agreements. If they can break them on Saturday what's to stop them breaking them today?

They wouldn't even have to break the rules. The ECB doesn't have to give us that €54 billion they just gave us and an awful lot of our influence depends on goodwill. I'm sure you've seen in jobs how someone can be treated badly without ever breaking the rules. All of these things are possible if the EU is full of undemocratic bullies who like to "spank" countries for not falling into line. You insist that they will do all this undemocratic and evil stuff vis a vis forcing things on us we don't want and reneging on agreements and ignoring us at the bargaining table if we vote yes but that they'll act like perfect little angels and make no attempt to make our lives difficult if we vote no and any suggestion to the contrary is "rubbish" and "lies".

I'm afraid I'm not the one talking rubbish mate

yiddo_til_i_die · 01-10-2009 3:23pm

Sam Vimes wrote: »

Did you ever wonder why the poles only flocked to Ireland and the UK and not the rest of Europe?

It's because the Irish and UK governments could have chosen to require them to have work visas just like the rest of Europe did but they chose not to because they wanted cheap labour. your problem is with the Irish government, not with the Nice treaty and certainly not with Lisbon

But the government were the ones who negotiated the treaty on our behalf, I think doubt over their judgement and ability is a fairly legitimate concern

Sam Vimes · 01-10-2009 3:25pm

Really-Stressed wrote: »

was refering to the vegetables comments.

Likes his greens, hes a good boy,
Really-Stressed

So you acknowledge then, that the idea that the EU will only behave in a democratic and bullying manner if we vote yes but will act like perfect little angels if we vote no is rubbish?

Sam Vimes · 01-10-2009 3:29pm

yiddo_til_i_die wrote: »

But the government were the ones who negotiated the treaty on our behalf, I think doubt over their judgement and ability is a fairly legitimate concern

Yes they negotiated the treaty but that wasn't a requirement of the treaty, it was their decision alone

yiddo_til_i_die · 01-10-2009 3:29pm

P. Breathnach wrote: »

One thing to which we can look forward with glee:
- in a few years' time we may have another referendum on a further set of revisions to the EU treaties;
- Sinn Féin will oppose it, while representing themselves as pro-EU, just that this new treaty is in some way a step too far;
- they will say that the EU undir the Lisbon Treaty is perfectly satisfactory, and we should keep that model.

that guy Crotty, the Lawyer from cork who was the expert legal witness said that ratifying the Lisbon treaty would realistically be the last of its kind, because of Article 48 the self amending clause

Daftendirekt · 01-10-2009 3:30pm

Really-Stressed wrote: »

You have to read it.

Amused,
Really-Stressed

I know. And?

I see two articles about Giscard d'Estaing saying the Constitution is the same as Lisbon.

If you're claiming that because Giscard d'Estaing claims Lisbon is identical to the Constitution, that makes it a blueprint for a federal Europe, I don't buy it.

Sam Vimes · 01-10-2009 3:31pm

yiddo_til_i_die wrote: »

that guy Crotty, the Lawyer from cork who was the expert legal witness said that ratifying the Lisbon treaty would realistically be the last of its kind, because of Article 48 the self amending clause

Article 48 is not a self amending clause. Please educate yourself:
http://www.lisbontreaty2009.ie/lisbon_treaty_faq.html

yiddo_til_i_die · 01-10-2009 3:35pm

Furious-Dave wrote: »

I don't recall ever implying that I think the electorate are stupid. The analogy of children eating vegetables fits fine IMO. Children don't know why the vegetables are good for them and may not like the taste, but it's got nothing to do with being stupid. And from what I've seen a lot of people still don't know what the treaty is really about and how it will benefit them. Are we being told that if we don't ratify Lisbon we will be permanently impoverished?

that is the impression that is being given off. Saying Yes to Jobs and Recovery implies that No is against them.

people for Ireland have a poster that actually has a sign post that indicating recovery one way and ruin the other.

Furious-Dave wrote: »

Edited: My dad was at a conference recently at the Institute of International and European Affairs, and in a speech Brendan Halligan said that if the negative consequences of rejecting the Lisbon Treaty do occur, it could be 20 years before Ireland recovers. But hey, at least we upheld the principles of democracy, and that's all that matters right?

Brian Cowen doesn't have to read treaties, though he probably should. He has advisers to do that and summarize it for him.

whoah dude, are you seriously implying economic recovery comes before democracy? that is a seriously dangerous precedent to advocate. That's why the Nazi's got to power in Germany man.

Sam Vimes · 01-10-2009 3:36pm

yiddo_til_i_die wrote: »

that is the impression that is being given off. Saying Yes to Jobs and Recovery implies that No is against them.

No it doesn't. That's called a straw man logical fallacy. No means fewer jobs

yiddo_til_i_die · 01-10-2009 3:37pm

Furious-Dave wrote: »

Edited: My dad was at a conference recently at the Institute of International and European Affairs

what does the old man do? sounds pretty interesting

fligedlyflick · 01-10-2009 3:40pm

Sam Vimes wrote: »

Those are the very same questions I ask you and you respond by saying they will break legally binding agreements. If they can break them on Saturday what's to stop them breaking them today?

I'm afraid I'm not the one talking rubbish mate

nothing only this bribery and sweet talking they reckon appeals to irish people, anything to get lisbon through.

and sam, i never said you were talking rubbish, i can hold a modicum of decorum on here

fligedlyflick · 01-10-2009 3:42pm

yiddo_til_i_die wrote: »

whoah dude, are you seriously implying economic recovery comes before democracy? that is a seriously dangerous precedent to advocate. That's why the Nazi's got to power in Germany man.

hitler could pass laws every 10 seconds when he tried to "enslave" europe, he did'nt need a treaty

yiddo_til_i_die · 01-10-2009 3:42pm

fligedlyflick wrote: »

the yes voters can tell their grandchildren,
"i remember when north west province was called ireland and we had our own government, unfortunately i bought into the lies at the time about recession and job creation and the blank refusal by the yes parties to discuss the more sinister side of the treaty, i am ashamed for selling our sovereignty for 30 pieces of silver"

the 30 pieces of silver comment is a bit harsh. I know what you are driving at but prob a bit too far.

you are right in a sense though, we have to think about future generations and what this will mean for them, because when we have children they will be European Citzens, to the same degree as they are irish citzens, with the european courts deciding which takes precedence.

Sam Vimes · 01-10-2009 3:46pm

fligedlyflick wrote: »

nothing only this bribery and sweet talking they reckon appeals to irish people, anything to get lisbon through.

and sam, i never said you were talking rubbish, i can hold a modicum of decorum on here

You said:

fligedlyflick wrote: »

yes for jobs isn't rubbish no?

lets say we reject again, the country is suddenly hit by drought, will lisbon 3 advertise itself as a rainmaker?
your just playing on current insecurities and you lot will never admit that FACT

So please tell me how you are so certain that the EU is an undemocratic bullying threatening organisation while being equally certain that they will not use their power to prevent the creation of a single job in Ireland if we vote no?

Could they not, for example, give corporations looking at Ireland incentives to set up somewhere else or refuse to allow the change of the fisheries policy that our fishermen want? Just two of many possible things an undemocratic bullying organisation can do with the power they currently have if we piss them off.

yiddo_til_i_die · 01-10-2009 3:50pm

turgon wrote: »

14 words to make everyone ignore you.

technically he has a point. We don't have any legal guarantees if we ratify the Lisbon Treaty, we have a single guarantee to make the other guarantees legal, onle once we ratify a new treaty though.

The European Council agreed that after the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, the provisions of the Decision would be attached to the EU Treaties as a protocol, which will give full Treaty status to the legal guarantees. This will be done at the time of the conclusion of the next EU accession Treaty, which is likely to be in 2010 or 2011.

http://www.lisbontreaty.ie/guarantees/

under Article 48 though:

Article 48
1. The Treaties may be amended in accordance with an ordinary revision procedure. They may also be amended in accordance with simplified revision procedures.

with that self amending clause, there isn't too much need for a new treaty.

How will history record the Lisbon Referendum?

Comments