What has been changed ?

prinz

Nigel Farage wrote: »

This is the sort of grossly exaggerated rhetoric that I was referring to. The EU would have continued to function as normal. This doomsday scenario you are trying to paint is very misleading.

Sorry Nigel, but they couldn't run an EU of 27 as "normally" as what was done before. Change was inevitable and required.

Son Of A Vidic

That would indeed be a good party to support if you bothered to check up basic facts. As it is, even the most mis-informed of the political parties probably has a better grip on reality.[/quote]

The above response from the user titled the 'view' to my earlier post is precisely the attitude that insisted we run a democratic referendum the second time. Just because the politicians and their European masters didn't like what the people said. So therefore to balance it out we should hold a third referendum surely. Oh and we all know a portion of our taxes go to Brussels, that is surely rudimentary knowledge. What I am suggesting is there will be an EU tax, there will be further encroachment into our financial affairs by Brussels so wake up!
We have witnessed the creation of a European superstate, Lisbon is essentially the creation of a system which enables national parliaments to be by-passed, oh it's beginning to feel like a United States of Europe.We are turning into a province of Europe.
The E.U. power brokers want to be able to play with the 'big boys' namely China and the U.S. in the future. The creation of a Superstate levels the playing field for them. Therefore we need a 'super army' - lets start of by calling it increased standardisation, cooperation and joint operations amongst member states. You have to learn to look at the bigger picture, don't blindly follow Brian or Enda like sheep. That's the problem with the Irish - the 'oul' parents always voted for Fianna Failures or Fine Gombeens, so they have to stay loyal. No you don't, think for yourselves and make up your own minds in future. We don't need a superstate, we don't need 166 muppets in the Dail, we don't need 41 constituencies, we don't need an Upper House and we don't need the seven Irish soldiers currently in Afghanistan with the NATO mission. Why are they there? Ireland is listed number 37 on the ISAF list of contributing nations to the Afghan mission. Why is an alleged neutral nation contributing to this mission? UN resolution 1386 established ISAF on the 21/12/01, NATO assumed the lead role in ISAF on the 11/08/03. Do you think the Thousands of killed and maimed afghan civilians view ISAF as a humanitarian force for good? Or a pillar supporting a corrupt regime and its favored Warlords. Ah but war is good and profitably, so we tarnish our nations name by associating ourselves with a project started by the 'Warlord' Bush. How did a European Economic Community and it's common market lead us to where we are today?

thegen

Why is the leader of a euro sceptic party so interested in posting here:rolleyes:

Nigel Farage

thegen wrote: »

Why is the leader of a euro sceptic party so interested in posting here:rolleyes:

It's called freedom of speech and debate son. Are you familiar with these principles?

thegen

Nigel Farage wrote: »

It's called freedom of speech and debate son. Are you familiar with these principles?

I'm not your son. Please try not to be so condecending.

I am not discussing the freedom of speech issue. I was wondering why a leader of an euro sceptic party from another state would wnat to post on here, that is all.

MikeC101

Nigel Farage wrote: »

It's called freedom of speech and debate son. Are you familiar with these principles?

Nige, just wanted to say thanks for all those leaflets you sent our way before the Lisbon treaty, nice of you to help out the yes campaign like that, you swung a few voters to the yes side I'd think.

Good job, big guy

On a side note, how is your Latvian lady friend? Haven't fallen asleep on her couch after a few too many brandies recently? Ah, it's all fun and games, I'm sure the wife understands.

sceptre

Nigel, don't be condescending. It's patently apparent that you don't have all the answers so don't behave as though you do. Reasonable civility is required when posting on these forums - read the forum charter again if needs be.

Mike, hang on to the day job. I was disappointed myself when I was in Brussels lately not to run into the real Mr Farage as I wanted to say precisely that (minus the reference to the unfortunately-named Liga as that didn't influence the referendum in the opposite to the desired result at all) to remind the guy that his elbow is between his hand and shoulder and his ass is the thing he sits on.

Folks, kindly remember that your fellow posters are entitled to politeness. Neglecting that rule may result in forum access being withdrawn. Complaints about this ruling may be made by PM to me, not on-thread.

Scofflaw

RandomName2 wrote: »

Do you realise that the EU could have ground to a shuddering halt had Lisbon not been passed?

You mean like it did five years ago?

It could certainly have gone on drifting, as it has been for most of the past 5 years. This isn't a great time for Europe to be concerned primarily with its inner workings.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Dinner

medicman2009 wrote: »

The above response from the user titled the 'view' to my earlier post is precisely the attitude that insisted we run a democratic referendum the second time. Just because the politicians and their European masters didn't like what the people said.

But thats not what happened. A second referendum was held because the concerns held by a large percentage of the No voters have been satisifed.

medicman2009 wrote: »

What I am suggesting is there will be an EU tax, there will be further encroachment into our financial affairs by Brussels so wake up!

Do you have anything to back it up though?

medicman2009 wrote: »

We have witnessed the creation of a European superstate, Lisbon is essentially the creation of a system which enables national parliaments to be by-passed, oh it's beginning to feel like a United States of Europe.We are turning into a province of Europe.

Nothing of the sort has happened. Thats not what Lisbon was about. The German courts even ruled that Lisbon didn't bring about anything close to a United States of Europe or encroach on each nations sovereignty.

medicman2009 wrote: »

You have to learn to look at the bigger picture, don't blindly follow Brian or Enda like sheep. That's the problem with the Irish - the 'oul' parents always voted for Fianna Failures or Fine Gombeens, so they have to stay loyal.

Most yes voters (on this forum at least) made up their minds based on facts and logic, and not because of anything that Cowan or Kenny said or told us to think. It's nothing to with loyalty, and everything to do with looking at the siutation objectivly.

sceptre

Dinner, did you miss my warning up the page to retain civility and not get narky with your fellow posters or did you just deliberately ignore it because you felt like being narky after midnight?

It's a rhetorical question so please don't bother answering, just assume I issued you a personal second on-thread warning just to make doubly sure you couldn't possibly miss it.

On-topic and civil folks, or don't bother.

meglome

RandomName2 wrote: »

Still waiting for a job to be created...

Apart from the EU president (which is genuinely a new job in terms of employment; as previously the head of state would be conducting, as it were, two jobs, tsk, tsk)

Is the white smoke visible yet?

Will the whining ever stop... seriously. There was no promise of jobs, none whatsoever. If everyone automatically believed what they saw on a poster then the No side should have won again, given the doom and gloom on their posters if we voted Yes. However most business leaders and all our business organisations believed it would be good for jobs. How many business leaders were saying it was bad for jobs? I'll wait for you to post the list since I'm not aware of them.

RandomName2 wrote: »

The very fact that there was a second referendum, by definition was going to dent the No side.

How do you figure that? These referenda are automatically the will of the people at the time they are run. So no matter what the will of the people was observed.

RandomName2 wrote: »

The fact that the Yes side no longer looked like isolated Irish entities (whether or not they represented the vast majority of the Irish body politic) but rather frontmen/ partners of the other EU governments, and EU as a whole, made the Yes side appear to be not only more powerful, but coherent, mainstream and knowledgeable than the No side, the latter of which genuinely did consist of isolated Irish political deviants.

The Yes side used the treaty to backup what they were saying. The No side couldn't do this as they were in the main making it up. People realised after the first referendum they were lied to by the No side and didn't want to get fooled a second time.

Does it make you wonder why the No side was full of "isolated Irish political deviants"? I mean really wonder?

RandomName2 wrote: »

So financial crisis and political advertising, then.

Edit: Oh, it's Van Rompuy, who's an incumbent. No new jobs at all then.

Sweet Jesus... let it go.

medicman2009 wrote: »

Fear - got Lisbon through nothing else. I don't think peoples knowledge of the treaty was an issue. Just plain scaremongering did the trick, shame on the Irish people for having the stupidity to fall for it. Our status as equal members of the E.U. was never in question regardless of how we voted. As for the legal guarantees - absolute bull****! Why are senior officers in the defense forces currently negotiating with Canadian officials about our possible contribution to the Afghan mission. Which is a NATO mission the last time I checked, oh but this is just the start of it. Then we have the E.U. tax on the way soon enough, no time is been wasted. From a common market, to a giant monolith. No doubt in the future we'll have to expand our E.U. Rapid Reaction Force into a proper E.U. Army. The Fourth Reich is around the corner!

People have been harping on with the same type of crap since before we joined the EU. And guess what none of this crap has happened due to our membership of the EU after 35 years.

medicman2009 wrote: »

(P.S.) I hold all Left, center and Right wing politicians in the same light - self centered, incompetent muppets. I support the party of my own counsel and conscience, it's not a bad party to support. At least I can sleep soundly at night knowing I wasn't lead like a lamb.

Do you wonder why none of these politicians represent your views? I mean really wonder?

View

medicman2009 wrote: »

View wrote: »

That would indeed be a good party to support if you bothered to check up basic facts. As it is, even the most mis-informed of the political parties probably has a better grip on reality.

The above response from the user titled the 'view' to my earlier post is precisely the attitude that insisted we run a democratic referendum the second time.

For the record, were I a member of the Government, I would not have held a second referendum on Lisbon.

The people never voted to have referenda on EU Treaties, instead when approving the Constitution, they explicitly authorised the Oireachtas to ratify international treaties. Hence, I would have held a referendum intended to overturn the Crotty judgement and restore the authority of the Oireachtas in this area.

However, I am not a member of the Government and they do have the right to hold multiple referenda on the same topic. Indeed, the same Supreme Court that handed down the Crotty judgement ruled that holding a second referendum is perfectly democratic as the final decision remains in the hands of the people.

medicman2009 wrote: »

What I am suggesting is there will be an EU tax, there will be further encroachment into our financial affairs by Brussels so wake up!

Suggest away, maybe they'll even take your suggestion up and act on it. Personally, I try to follow the old adage of being careful what you wish for.

medicman2009 wrote: »

We have witnessed the creation of a European superstate, Lisbon is essentially the creation of a system which enables national parliaments to be by-passed, oh it's beginning to feel like a United States of Europe.

As I said, check basic facts. Tell us how many states do you know where parts of the state have legal opt-outs on the obligation to defend their state from external attack? Or opt-outs on the use of the state's currency? Or....

medicman2009 wrote: »

You have to learn to look at the bigger picture, don't blindly follow Brian or Enda like sheep.

Prior to the final version of Lisbon being decided, I contacted both Brian's and Enda's offices to express my disagreement with certain parts of the then proposals for the final version of Lisbon. So believe me, I didn't follow them blindly.

Likewise, I don't vote based on my parents - instead I try to "stack-rank" parties based on how I agree or disagree with their policies and then vote accordingly.

medicman2009 wrote: »

... we don't need the seven Irish soldiers currently in Afghanistan with the NATO mission. Why are they there? Ireland is listed number 37 on the ISAF list of contributing nations to the Afghan mission. Why is an alleged neutral nation contributing to this mission? UN resolution 1386 established ISAF on the 21/12/01, NATO assumed the lead role in ISAF on the 11/08/03.

The short answer to this is - The missions in Afghanistan are UN approved missions. The Government made a decision to have Irish personnel participate in them as they do with every other UN mission. That is their perjogative. Unless you have a major hang-up about UN missions, I don't honestly see what the issue is here.

RandomName2

meglome wrote: »

Will the whining ever stop... seriously. There was no promise of jobs, none whatsoever.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3515/3913110009_ee82cbee72.jpg
http://thefastertimes.com/westerneurope/files/2009/09/yes-for-jobs-and-investment.jpg
http://blog.irelandforeurope.ie/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/FGPoster2.jpg


Oh. That's good. Because there's another 310 lost today.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/1126/jobs.html

But as long as we're in 'the heart of europe' - right?

Nigel Farage

You are right to raise these concerns randomname2. It disproves further the catalog of lies spun by the Irish Government in a bid to win a flawed referendum. 'Yes To Jobs' was the populist message, yet all that's happened since Lisbon has been passed is Jobs are falling by the wayside.

Furious-Dave

And there is going to continue to be job losses until the economy begins to improve. Businesses are going to continue to "fall by the wayside" until banks are willing and able to start lending again. It seems that only people on the No side actually thought that job creation would be a direct and immediate result of a Yes to Lisbon. Jobs will be created as a result of businesses' faith in the Irish economy and political system being restored and when they start setting up here again. It will also require the Lisbon Treaty actually being signed into law. Am I right in saying that the process isn't even complete yet? It's like someone asking why Nurofen isn't working the very second they swallow it. It's going to take time people. And the last thing we need is some right wing Brit interfering in our affairs!

Scofflaw

Furious-Dave wrote: »

And there is going to continue to be job losses until the economy begins to improve. Businesses are going to continue to "fall by the wayside" until banks are willing and able to start lending again. It seems that only people on the No side actually thought that job creation would be a direct and immediate result of a Yes to Lisbon. Jobs will be created as a result of businesses' faith in the Irish economy and political system being restored and when they start setting up here again. It will also require the Lisbon Treaty actually being signed into law. Am I right in saying that the process isn't even complete yet? It's like someone asking why Nurofen isn't working the very second they swallow it. It's going to take time people. And the last thing we need is some right wing Brit interfering in our affairs!

You're correct, Lisbon isn't even in force yet. Still, you have to bear in mind that the No side apparently believed that the Spanish Yes to the Constitution - which never did go into force - magically created unemployment 4 years later.

In a world where that's possible, why shouldn't Nurofen clear up your headache while you're still reading the label?

amused,
Scofflaw

RandomName2

Furious-Dave wrote: »

And there is going to continue to be job losses until the economy begins to improve. Businesses are going to continue to "fall by the wayside" until banks are willing and able to start lending again. It seems that only people on the No side actually thought that job creation would be a direct and immediate result of a Yes to Lisbon. Jobs will be created as a result of businesses' faith in the Irish economy and political system being restored and when they start setting up here again. It will also require the Lisbon Treaty actually being signed into law. Am I right in saying that the process isn't even complete yet? It's like someone asking why Nurofen isn't working the very second they swallow it. It's going to take time people. And the last thing we need is some right wing Brit interfering in our affairs!

Er.. sort of right.

It has already been signed into law.

But I do not see how 'restoring the political system' ... by this I presume you mean giving up 40 vetoes etc... will help the Irish economy?

Most of the campaign centred on the perception of Ireland - whether or not we looked euroskeptic - and this was meant to be the cornerstone of the Irish recovery. Of course the flip side was the lie of being sidelined in the european market, and in relation to grants, if we continued to refuse Lisbon.

But you are right about the banks. What we need is confidence WITHIN the economy. That is the - oh Christ I actually going to say something about economic cycles. Sure, whatever - Ireland would have been a failed state if Lisbon hadn't been passed.4 legs good, 2 legs better.

RandomName2

Scofflaw wrote: »

In a world where that's possible, why shouldn't Nurofen clear up your headache while you're still reading the label?

Because you can count on placebo when all you are reading is empty rhetoric?

RandomName2

Furious-Dave wrote: »

And the last thing we need is some right wing Brit interfering in our affairs!

Ahem - that's 'right wing European citizen' my good man

Furious-Dave

No, I didn't say "restoring the political system"...I said "faith in the Irish economy and political system being restored" I emboldened and Italicized the operative words to help you along

RandomName2 wrote: »

Ahem - that's 'right wing European citizen' my good man

Just so we're clear, I was talking about Nigel Farage, the real one not the one on here.

Scofflaw

RandomName2 wrote: »

Because you can count on placebo when all you are reading is empty rhetoric?

I can check, but I'm pretty certain the stuff on a Nurofen label isn't empty rhetoric. Nor, I'm equally certain, has Nigel's rhetoric ever cured a headache.

amused,
Scofflaw

meglome

RandomName2 wrote: »

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3515/3913110009_ee82cbee72.jpg
http://thefastertimes.com/westerneurope/files/2009/09/yes-for-jobs-and-investment.jpg
http://blog.irelandforeurope.ie/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/FGPoster2.jpg

I'll try again... THERE WAS NO PROMISE OF JOBS. Personally I can tell the difference between a slogan on poster and some sort of guarantee of jobs in a property bust/world recession.

I'll ask you again (seeing as you missed the points the last time)...

• Post the list of business leaders that thought Lisbon would be bad for jobs.
• If people just blindly followed what was on posters why didn't more vote No given the No posters?

RandomName2 wrote: »

Oh. That's good. Because there's another 310 lost today.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/1126/jobs.html

But as long as we're in 'the heart of europe' - right?

Some people seem to be having trouble separating the position we've put ourselves in (coupled with the world recession) and voting Yes to the Lisbon treaty. The Lisbon treaty isn't some magic fix to the idiocy that has gone on in this country over the last 5 to 10 years. We were fools and we voted for fools who told us (in the main) what we wanted to hear and now we're reaping those 'rewards'.

Maybe we can discuss this further when we get the list of all the business leaders that thought Lisbon would be bad for jobs.

Scofflaw

I have to say that although the people whose posters read "vote X for business" have often been elected, I've invariably been disappointed if I've spent the next few days waiting for an upsurge in clients.

amused,
Scofflaw

RandomName2

Furious-Dave wrote: »

No, I didn't say "restoring the political system"...I said "faith in the Irish economy and political system being restored" I emboldened and Italicized the operative words to help you along

Sorry, I assumed a comma between the word 'economy' and the word 'and'. Not that it changes the point about the economic recovery vis-a-vis Lisbon being predicated on the perception of Ireland. Nor does it make it any way more true.

Furious-Dave wrote: »

Just so we're clear, I was talking about Nigel Farage, the real one not the one on here.

Either way, the statement still stands

RandomName2

meglome wrote: »

I'll try again... THERE WAS NO PROMISE OF JOBS. Personally I can tell the difference between a slogan on poster and some sort of guarantee of jobs in a property bust/world recession.

I'll ask you again (seeing as you missed the points the last time)...

• Post the list of business leaders that thought Lisbon would be bad for jobs.
• If people just blindly followed what was on posters why didn't more vote No given the No posters?

Some people seem to be having trouble separating the position we've put ourselves in (coupled with the world recession) and voting Yes to the Lisbon treaty. The Lisbon treaty isn't some magic fix to the idiocy that has gone on in this country over the last 5 to 10 years. We were fools and we voted for fools who told us (in the main) what we wanted to hear and now we're reaping those 'rewards'.

Maybe we can discuss this further when we get the list of all the business leaders that thought Lisbon would be bad for jobs.

Well, first of all there were promises of jobs - by the government parties. Now, you can say that you can discount what the government parties have to say on the matter, despite their very active part in drawing up Constitution/Lisbon Treaty.

I've already addressed the thing about the no posters (although I forgot to mention that the LIES bumper stickers on the coir posters was a nice touch by the yes side).

You miss your own point. How would the opinion of a business leader matter when the opinion of a political leader doesn't seem to matter? Well, anyway your question is rhetorical, but I am not altogether sure what you mean by business 'leader' in the first place. As far as I can see, most businesses kept quiet about Lisbon - as they would have about divorce. It is not really within the remit of private companies to take part in political campaigns. Of course, you might see Ryanair campaigning on behalf of FG in the next election if O'Leary gets a promise of personal tax breaks...

Forget about the idiots in charge of the country. See Dubai's economic bubble collapsing. Realise that there are economic cycles. It happens man! Okay- investment was squandered, not enough progress was made when the going was good (because recession was always going to happen) the pressure cooker of the property market wasn't eased, and there was no rainy-day fund. I hope you aren't hoping for the main opposition parties to sort it out if you admit 'Yes for Jobs' was nonsense.

MarkK

RandomName2 wrote: »

Well, first of all there were promises of jobs

Yes, the UKIP leaflet promised us jobs in euthanasia clinics.

Nigel Farage

As a collective, the heads of all the large businesses in Ireland campaigned for a yes vote to protect jobs. They stated a No vote would lead to huge complications in the running of their businesses in the single market. This rings pretty hollow at the moment.

ei.sdraob

Nigel Farage wrote: »

As a collective, the heads of all the large businesses in Ireland campaigned for a yes vote to protect jobs. They stated a No vote would lead to huge complications in the running of their businesses in the single market. This rings pretty hollow at the moment.

yes business would flourish under your fascist like regime :rolleyes:

why is it everytime i hear UKIP and your name i think of

V for Vendetta?

:cool:

RandomName2

ei.sdraob wrote: »

yes business would flourish under your fascist like regime :rolleyes:

why is it everytime i hear UKIP and your name i think of

V for Vendetta?

:cool:

I think you are mixing up two different parties... (which, admittedly is also euro-skeptic)

But you are right up to the point that the UK economy would be weaker outside of the EU. Even though the sterling has always (apart from a single day) been stronger than the euro since the inception of the single currency :cool:

ei.sdraob

RandomName2 wrote: »

I think you are mixing up two different parties... (which, admittedly is also euro-skeptic)

But you are right up to the point that the UK economy would be weaker outside of the EU. Even though the sterling has always (apart from a single day) been stronger than the euro since the inception of the single currency :cool:

not at all

BNP and UKIP have quite an overlap in membership/followers and policies

2 sides of same coin, just one is trying hard to package itself as something else in order to gain power (hey just like the other nationalist fascists from our history books) populism is another feature of theirs

as for the UK itself i said time and time again, if they want to leave "off they go so" should be fun to watch

now thanks to Lisbon, Nigel's job is alot easier, he should be happy that we voted this way as now theres a clear protocol on how to exit


anyways im trying to figure out which of our old friends the guy posing as Nigel is :P anyone want to take on bets its another reincarnation of John