No2Nice man Justin Barrett and the Neo-Nazi right wingers

Meh

Originally posted by Cork
It will be as accountable and as democratic as the EU. For those who don't know - the EU is not democratic or accountable.

What's undemocratic about the European Parliament? What's unaccountable about the European Commission (it's directly accountable to the Parliament)? And the members of the Council of Ministers are directly accountable to the democratically elected governments in their respective countries.

sceptre

Ray Crotty was a crank, albeit a crank with a purpose. His purpose was to stop the SEA coming into effect. He failed in his main target but succeeded in another. In the process he gave us a situation where any EU treaties would have to be approved by the Irish people in a referendum before being passed. For that I'm truly thankful. Cork, I don't know if you're even old enough to remember the middle 80s - if you were you'd probably think more before you type.

Justin Barrett himself has pleaded guilty but ignorant. If he's guilty of anything more than being an idiot, it is indeed by association - association with a neo-Nazi group rather than with an anti-Nice lobby.

What loyalists did up North is irrelevant to the argument you're espousing.

And FF could go into coalition with FG in the morning if they both wanted to. They don't want to. So what? That's nothing to do with the argument either.

With regard to IBEC and the unions, of course they disagree on many things. They're representing two different groups which frankly don't have a lot in common. If they actually agreed on a lot of things it would be safe to assume that someone was getting a payoff. It's their privilege to agree on this point if they think that Nice would be good for the country. Given that they appear to have made a considered opinion based on the evidence (and given that they largely stick to economic arguments), I've a great deal of respect for their opinion, even if I don't happen to agree with it.

Originally posted by Cork
No, I am saying that if they can agree on a shoddy treaty like the Nice treaty - they should agree more.

FF can not go into coalition with FG
FG can not go into coalition with FF
Labour does not know - what it wants.
IBEC and the unions tend to disagree alot




What about Enda Kenny's ****** remarks?
Is Justin Barrett guilty by association?

People like Raymond Crotty were statesmen. What do you call a 6000 strong Rapid Reaction force? An army? No...................Its a differant animal entirely.

It will be as accountable and as democratic as the EU. For those who don't know - the EU is not democratic or accountable.

Cork are you obsessed with Fine Gael or something? maybe you should join:D
Referring to Enda Kenny's remarks on whatever has nothing to do with Justin Barrett.
Anyway aren't they on opposing sides on the Nice Treaty issue, so whats the association?
I have no time for Enda Kenny anyway, if I wanted to be a model politician, he wouldn't be a good role model to follow.

Of course IBEC and the unions disagree a lot, one represents employee's and the other employers.
But crucially they agree on this and they have done their homework.

We had loyalists up North tageting the SDLP - because they were part of a "Pan Nationalist Front".

Eh??
It's a tad silly now to be intimating that there is a "pan Nice Front" campaigning for a yes vote, if thats what you are trying to say.
The groups making up the no campaign do not agree on everything either.
A lot of them would be pro choice on abortion, whereas thats not Justin Barrets cup of tea.

This Yes Brigade and their lavish campaign have indeed lost the arguement. They have lost the trust of the Irish people.

and where is the evidence for this???
you are again making un substantiated statements.
Is it just the Rapid reaction force you are against??
Thats fair enough...you do realise that we are to be no part of that??
Can you say what else is, in the treaty that you object to?
and please give a reason , other than "it's a shambles" or" this treaty is a mess"
mm

mike65

Cork and Pigman dispite thier bluster are the ones who are loosing the arguments with foolish, arguments regarding matters that are not germain to Nice in the slightest. ie Enda Kenny, Tribunals, and such like.

Tomorrow a poll will be published that'll show the Yes vote ahead, though I'm not sure about the actual %.

Heres a poll from Thursday-
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/europe/2316403.stm

When you shout and wave your arms around, the games up.

Mike.

Cork

Our president Mary Mc Aleese had some very interesting views on the same Single European Act. I suggust that you could well inform your self on them.

We would not be having this referendum only for Raymond Crotty taking on the "establishment" and winning his court case - forcing CJH in putting the SEA to referendum.

Maybe Justin Barrett is guilty of association? Maybe certain Irish individuals were right not to shake hands with Gerry Adams? Maybe the DUP are right not to share a studio with Sinn Fein?

You know - guilt by association is pretty serious.

NICE REMOVES OUR VETO ON HARMONIZING TAXES IN THE EUROZONE

NICE REMOVES OUR VETO ON THE RULES FOR EU STRUCTURAL AND COHESION FUNDING:

CAPITAL WILL MOVE EASTWARD IN AN ENLARGED EU TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE[ LOW-COST, CHEAP-LABOUR EAST EUROPEAN ECONOMIES, WHILE THEIR MIGRANT LABOUR
WILL MOVE WEST./QUOTE]

IRELAND ALREADY HAS OPEN ACCESS TO THE EAST EUROPEAN MARKETS, as the EU

There is not a single economic reason to vote Yes - The Yes crew have lost this arguement weeks ago.

I'm sure Mary Mcaleese has interesting views on hats aswell, but I don't want to know.
Why are you bringing her into it and not elaborating??
Theres enough said about Justin Barrett already, it has nothing to do with the pro's and cons of this treaty.

NICE REMOVES OUR VETO ON HARMONIZING TAXES IN THE EUROZONE

Are you talking about QMV?
As has been said before , whats to stop any European country lowering their taxes as it is??

NICE REMOVES OUR VETO ON THE RULES FOR EU STRUCTURAL AND COHESION FUNDING:

what are you saying here exactly?? Is it that we should always receive more from Europe than we contribute??
You need have no worries, there, as we in Ireland are good at regionalisation.

CAPITAL WILL MOVE EASTWARD IN AN ENLARGED EU TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE[ LOW-COST, CHEAP-LABOUR EAST EUROPEAN ECONOMIES, WHILE THEIR MIGRANT LABOUR

Looks like you are pulling quotes from some literature there without any evidence or even comment on why that might happen.
That statement implies that businesses in Ireland are going to lie down and go asleep, if Nice is passed and won't at all try to take advantage of 100 million plus potential new customers.

But what you are really saying by putting that up is that you are against enlargement altogether.

IRELAND ALREADY HAS OPEN ACCESS TO THE EAST EUROPEAN MARKETS

You are also implying that you are against enlargement by stating this.

What little credibility I had in your statement that the yes argument has failed has now been blown out of the water.
mm

mike65

Pigman where do you get these quotes?

ah I see...

From Pigman-

NICE REMOVES OUR VETO ON HARMONIZING TAXES IN THE EUROZONE:
Articles 1.11 and 2.1 of the Treaty of Nice remove the veto we have at present on harmonizing company taxes in the eurozone, thereby abolishing the principal incentive we have for keeping foreign capital in Ireland and attracting new foreign investment here. At present Ireland can veto any such EU development, but under these provisions of Nice for so-called'enhanced cooperation,' eight or more EU States can harmonise taxes among themselves, even if the others disagree. British politicians have calledIreland a tax haven,like the Cayman Islands. Germany, with its high tax rates, wants a level playing-field for company taxes in the eurozone and wants Ireland to raise its low, 12.5%, tax rate to remove the incentive for German and other companies to move here. Ireland can still opt out if the other eurozone States go ahead with harmonizing company taxes under 'enhanced cooperation', but it will then be faced with becoming a second-class EU Members outside the core eurozone group. Ratifying Nice thus faces us with the invidious choice of either undermining a fundamental basis of Ireland's economic success - the attractiveness to foreign investors of its low company tax rates - or being relegated to second-classEU membership status outside an inner core of avant-garde EU States.

In other words the veto does remain but I'll try and confuse ppl with the above speculation.

Tax laws are protected by the veto according to the Referendum Commision or are they lying?

Mike.

dahamsta

This stinks of dirty tricks. They wait till now and then pull out this sort of political journalism.... you have to question the timing. For shame Irish Times, I expected better.

On this particular topic, I wouldn't, although I've found that no matter what I read these days there's a bias one way or the other; sometimes even both, with pro-Nice propaganda on one page and anti-Nice on the next, either directly or from someone else by proxy. And for the most part, at least in my view, it really is pure propaganda; transparently so. I go back to work after lunch these days with a splitting headache.

I've yet to hear anything from the YES camp that isnt a threat or a vague FUD scare story.

Indeed. Unfortunately though, the exact same could be said for the NO camp. They're both hysterical, they're both threatening, they're both propagating FUD. It's a wonder they don't drive the entire country insane.

I've leaned heavily towards No until recently, but now I'm finding myself jealous that my ma won't be around to vote, I wish I was going on holidays too. I'm seriously considering not voting because I don't feel qualified to vote, I don't believe I understand the issues well enough to do so, and I don't trust anyone to explain them to me any more. That's really painful to me, because I've been a vicious proponent of democracy since I matured enough to understand what it really means. But what's a guy to do?

As to the topic in hand, well, I see it like this: If Justin Barrett knew what he was doing, then the man is a fascist; if he didn't know what he was doing, then he's either ignorant or a fool (there's a difference). Either way, he doesn't deserve our attention. The fact that he's got it speaks more about modern society than the event itself. And yes, I see the irony. I imagine he does too, which should demonstrate which side of the fence I fall on.

adam

gandalf

Err Mike when you say Pigman I assume you mean Cork as they both use the same Avatar

Gandalf.

mike65

Oops! You're right Gandalf, that said the quote I attribute to pigman (from another thread) is correct, so both
Cork and Pigman are singing off the same hymesheet.

Mike.

Cork

The Treaty of Nice is no treaty of Rome.

I am in favour of the EU. The Nice treaty is the blue print of a Europe not based on equality. The justin Barrett thing is a red herring? Was John Hume wrong to meet with the IRA?

McCarthyism is alive and well.

mike65

According to days papers Barret has also consorted with the Italian right-wingers Forza Nuova a number of times.
Forza were behind the mayhem at the Genoa G8 meeting,
Forzas leader Roberto Fiore was part of the terror cell that killed over 80 in the imfamous Bologna railway station blast in 1980.

This from www.forzanuova.org (the translation is very rough)-

STRONG IRELAND And POWERS

For the ennesima it turns the Ireland is to the taken ones with a referendum.
This time the question regards the Treaty of Nizza, that it represents a step in ahead towards the United States of Europe and involves the loss "of wealth, being able and freedom" from part of the Irishes (as said one synthetically slogan in occasion of the first referendum) to advantage of international the strong powers.
A year it makes, an alliance of tradizionalisti catholics and nationalists (very represents to you from the historical group of Youth Defence), together to frange of the left extreme, had made useless the attempt to make to pass the treaty through a first referendum. This text, beyond to the regarding aspect the increase of the European community, is of fact the premise to an European constitution, where but the aspects of religious and cultural identity are omitted all. The other result is the movement, more and more radical, of the powers outside from the orbit of the national states.
As it was from attending, "protreaty", with in head you leave yourself and industrial fields, have invested million euro in order guaranteeing the result, without but to hold account of the rebellious spirit of the Irishes who, seems they are orients to giving to you for the second one turns a poderoso "Not" like result.
In the within of the lead dirty war from "liberals" against "nationals", the greater exponent of the forehead nationalist Justin Barrett, has been attacked in a press campaign of the type of those to which have been we accustom we to you in the past. FN and NPD represent, in the mind of the accusatory ones, the friends of which Barrett it would have to be vergognare. Costoro but forgets the great tradition about own pride of the Irishes that, little attention to the scandals crafts them and to the impositions from the high, they could vote newly against the Treaty of Nizza, throwing all the process of European unification to the ortiche, with great desperation of the international oligarchies.

Mike.

Cork

Mike 65 - I think u should do about what grouping FF are aligned to in tthe EU.

It is not the issue & niether is Justin Barrett.

If we vote No – We will loose influence?

When – we voted No before – we were told that we would have to vote again and vote Yes.

We have very little to no influence on the EU.

Loosing MEPs and our veto in certain areas will even lessen our influence.

"It is not true that voting NO in the Irish referendum would block EU enlargement. On October 8, the President of Slovenia, Milan Kucan, during an official visit to Malta stated categorically: "The Irish referendum on the Nice Treaty should not and would not prevent enlargement." (The Times of Malta)

This should therefore now make clear to everybody in Ireland that there is no such significance in the Irish referendum.

On the countrary, had they been given a choice, the countries wishing to join the EU would themselves have objected to provisions of the Nice Treaty which make the EU a two-tier organisation, with the big countries forming a Federation, and the other member countries being left out of the inner ruling group.

Like you, the Maltese people are against the setting of an European army that has as a normal objective military operations outside the borders of EU member countries.

This goes against the tradition of neutrality of Ireland, a tradition that is accepted by all political parties and all sections of public opinion as the firm foundation of the Irish State. And no Irish Government would dare to smash this foundation without the consent of the Irish electorate in general elections.

In Malta's case neutrality is very clearly entrenched in the Constitution that by a vast majority proclaimed Malta to be a republic. And no democratic Government can temper with neutrality without an affirmative vote of not less than 2/3 of the Maltese representatives in Parliament.

We and you cannot vote Yes in the impending referendum because there is today a basic radical difference in the EU as conceived by the original Peace-seeking founders and the way it has been altered by the Nice Treaty and by what, alas, seems to be contemplated in the drafts so far published by the Convention for the Future of Europe.

Ireland will be doing Europe a great service if she goes on fighting for a Europe that will again make possible European neutrality as the foundation for Peace and Prosperity of all mankind in the years to come.

Cork

Getting back to Justin Barrett.

Was John Hume wrong to meet with the IRA?

Is he Guilty of association?

Originally posted by Cork
The Treaty of Nice is no treaty of Rome.

I am in favour of the EU. The Nice treaty is the blue print of a Europe not based on equality. The justin Barrett thing is a red herring? Was John Hume wrong to meet with the IRA?

McCarthyism is alive and well.

Are you saying there Cork that you think that justin Barrett meets these people to convert them to Democracy or something??

and could you expand on what McCarthyism has to do with this??
To put a bit of perspective on this, I think the fact that Barrett is associated with these people casts doubt on his ability to put foward the "no" case as a whole.
It doesn't affect the No case, except it muddies their waters.

It attaches him to a set of ideals that could be his view of the way Europe should go.
People like , might think that he wants extremist ideologies to thrive in Europe and that that couldn't happen if Nice is passed.

You haven't answered my previous question by the way ie:
Is it enlargement you are against??
mm

mike65

Cork, I don't see the comparison, Hume was trying to broker a deal with respect of Sinn Fien entering the democratic process more fully.

Barrett is meeting neo-fasicts bodies in at leat two counties to spead his views on abortion, he's not looking to turn these groups into democrats.

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=de&u=http://www.idgr.de/lexikon/bio/b/barrett-justin/barrett.html&prev=/search%3Fq%3DForza%2BNuova%2BJustin%2BBarrett%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26oe%3Dutf-8

Mike.

Originally posted by Cork
Mike 65 - I think u should do about what grouping FF are aligned to in tthe EU.

It is not the issue & niether is Justin Barrett.

If we vote No – We will loose influence?

When – we voted No before – we were told that we would have to vote again and vote Yes.

We have very little to no influence on the EU.

Loosing MEPs and our veto in certain areas will even lessen our influence.

Small countries cannot lose influence, there will be a lot of them.

"It is not true that voting NO in the Irish referendum would block EU enlargement. On October 8, the President of Slovenia, Milan Kucan, during an official visit to Malta stated categorically: "The Irish referendum on the Nice Treaty should not and would not prevent enlargement." (The Times of Malta)

That is quite correct, but if the Nice Treaty is torn up, another will have to be negotiated. There is no guarantee that Ireland would get as favourable a deal with a new negotiation.

On the countrary, had they been given a choice, the countries wishing to join the EU would themselves have objected to provisions of the Nice Treaty which make the EU a two-tier organisation, with the big countries forming a Federation, and the other member countries being left out of the inner ruling group.

Enhanced co operation if this is what is being referred to there is open to all members.
And anyhow as I said above I fail to see how smaller states would lose influence when there are more of them.

This goes against the tradition of neutrality of Ireland, a tradition that is accepted by all political parties and all sections of public opinion as the firm foundation of the Irish State. And no Irish Government would dare to smash this foundation without the consent of the Irish electorate in general elections.

In Malta's case neutrality is very clearly entrenched in the Constitution that by a vast majority proclaimed Malta to be a republic. And no democratic Government can temper with neutrality without an affirmative vote of not less than 2/3 of the Maltese representatives in Parliament.

Both points are irellevant as this referendum if passed would prevent Ireland involving itself in E.U military alliances, effectively copperfastening neutrality.

You cannot argue that the Nice treaty is giving us a "guilt by association" end to neutrality if the E.U rapid reaction force is set up, because most of the E.U's population already lives in countries alligned to NATO.

Ireland will be doing Europe a great service if she goes on fighting for a Europe that will again make possible European neutrality as the foundation for Peace and Prosperity of all mankind in the years to come.

Essentially that is an argument to tear up the Nice Treaty, and further use all our influences to have NATO disbanded.
I've no problems with anyone wanting to campaign for the latter,but not at the expense of the progress offered by the Nice Treaty.
mm

Cork

Is it enlargement you are against??

No

Amsterdam envisaged a more gradual EU enlargement, with 5 new States joining the EU and then taking part in a grand conference to review the EU institutions (Although Amsterdam does not legally preclude a "Big Bang" enlargement of 10 new Members or more.)

This treaty - we will loose inflence big time. Ireland becoming a leader of small nations is wishful thinking.

bonkey

Cork...

can you explain how enlargement can occur without us losing influence?

I'm only asking cause youre not against enlargement but have a problem with loss of influence.

jc

Cork

The creation of mechanisims aka Nice that can create a two tier Europe would be out.

I would see a community of equal nation co-operating.

I too would see a more accountable EU & EU comission.

I know - ye will all take pot shots at this posting. I would love to have posted something more elaborate but I think respect and equality would be the conerstones.

An unaccounable and 2 tier Europe - would not be on my agenda.

Typedef

During the first vote on the Nice Treaty (a vote I participated in and a vote the government of this country neglected to acknowledge) the Yes to Nice side were comparing the No side to the British conservatives, pointing out that the British Tories also, are not in favour of the EU as a political entity (favouring some economic aspects of the EU, but not the political aspects). I notice now in this farcical misnomer of democracy that the Nice Treaty re-run is that it is no longer fashionable to compare the No side to British Tories, no, instead just six days before a very important vote to the future of this country, it has become popular to compare the No side to German Neo Nazis.

I suppose you have to give the great intellectuals who waited two years and waited through two Referenda of which Mr Barrett was a prominent orator, credit, for the sheer theatre of this orchestrated smear campaign.

Seriously from the perspective of the people exponenciating this campaign, it makes perfect sense. If you don't have to deal with the significant losses of power to this country entailed in the Treaty of Nice and instead resort to playground tactics of smearing members of the opposing side, you don't have to attempt and argue the public around to reversing a decision made via plebiscite on a legitimate and unimpinged Referenda, no, instead all you have to do is sling the mud, and give bad press, and as if by magic, one simply doesn't even have to bother rationalising the Treaty or it's text, because on that front in my view the government, IBEC and the main political parties have failed miserably.

Now I hate to be the one to cast a stone here, but I will. The supporters of the Nice Treaty, who rationalised it's re-run (within a year of the last vote), bemoaned the fact that the public were 'misinformed' about the Treaty of Nice. Funnily enough to my mind, what Justin Barrett did two years ago or what he has for breakfast in the morning, has no place in the discussion of a Treaty who's outcome is very important to the future of this country. Unless someone can give a valid, semi-intellegent reason why Justin Barrett's breakfast should influence my decision on Nice? In fact talking about him, when really Ireland collectively should be talking about the Treaty text, is in itself misleading and deflects form the proper debate that should be taking place on this issue. So now, illucidate me as to the perils of a mininformed public, when in reality that argument only has validity for the Yes side, when it works in said side's favour.

I notice the Irish independant has pronounced itself pleased with forecasts of a 60-40 majority in favour of the Treaty, telling people that this shows the country is ready to 'protect jobs'. Well here is to an impartial press. Isn't it just great we live in the Western world, where the press is objective and non-partisan, because hey, it has scruples.
Give me a break, if I needed mindless propaganda and utterly biased political views I could go to the party conference's of any of the four main political parties, where I don't need 'yet more' mindless propaganda is from papers like the Irish Independant and the Irish Times, who pat themselves on the back for being allegedly 'objective' and then turn around and try to tell the readers of the same papers how to vote. What utterly hypocritical people must run the papers in question, what a parody it is to claim to be so objective and to actually be forcefeeding mindless quasi-retarded political drivel down the throats of anyone unfortunate enough to even glance at the Times and the Independant.

"I hear you knocking but, you can't come in. Come back some other night and try again"

ReefBreak

I notice the Irish independant has pronounced itself pleased with forecasts of a 60-40 majority in favour of the Treaty, telling people that this shows the country is ready to 'protect jobs'. Well here is to an impartial press. Isn't it just great we live in the Western world, where the press is objective and non-partisan, because hey, it has scruples.

You may not have reading the papers recently, but there are sections in most of them called "Opinion" columns - they're not meant to be impartial (and that includes the Editorial). I believe they've been around for, oh, I don't know, a couple of hundred years. I can only imagine you've made this slightly silly comment because you don't like what's being said, e.g. that voting Yes might actually be a good idea? That a larger European market might actually be good for a small, open economy that exports large amounts of products and services to Europe?

I can bet you would not have made this comment if the opinions were of the No to Nice variety.

bonkey

Originally posted by Typedef
The supporters of the Nice Treaty, who rationalised it's re-run (within a year of the last vote), bemoaned the fact that the public were 'misinformed' about the Treaty of Nice. Funnily enough to my mind, what Justin Barrett did two years ago or what he has for breakfast in the morning, has no place in the discussion of a Treaty who's outcome is very important to the future of this country. Unless someone can give a valid, semi-intellegent reason why Justin Barrett's breakfast should influence my decision on Nice? In fact talking about him, when really Ireland collectively should be talking about the Treaty text, is in itself misleading and deflects form the proper debate that should be taking place on this issue. So now, illucidate me as to the perils of a mininformed public, when in reality that argument only has validity for the Yes side, when it works in said side's favour.

I couldnt agree more. His own personal motives are not the issue here. What is the issue is the cause and the continued mud-slinging is pointless. Inevitable, but pointless.

Neither side have, in general, carried themselves well in this affair, and the media has helped exacerbate this. This is just another example of that.

jc

Originally posted by Cork
No

This treaty - we will loose inflence big time. Ireland becoming a leader of small nations is wishful thinking.

If you are not against enlargement Cork , why did you post this:

IRELAND ALREADY HAS OPEN ACCESS TO THE EAST EUROPEAN MARKETS

and then say :

There is not a single economic reason to vote Yes

And regarding:

Ireland becoming a leader of small nations is wishful thinking

Perhaps Ireland having the best growth rates in the E.U and having the degree of wealth it has today(Thanks to the E.U) was wishfull thinking back in 1973 also??
mm

Originally posted by Typedef
During the first vote on the Nice Treaty (a vote I participated in and a vote the government of this country neglected to acknowledge) the Yes to Nice side were comparing the No side to the British conservatives, pointing out that the British Tories also, are not in favour of the EU as a political entity (favouring some economic aspects of the EU, but not the political aspects). I notice now in this farcical misnomer of democracy that the Nice Treaty re-run is that it is no longer fashionable to compare the No side to British Tories, no, instead just six days before a very important vote to the future of this country, it has become popular to compare the No side to German Neo Nazis.

I suppose you have to give the great intellectuals who waited two years and waited through two Referenda of which Mr Barrett was a prominent orator, credit, for the sheer theatre of this orchestrated smear campaign.

Seriously from the perspective of the people exponenciating this campaign, it makes perfect sense. If you don't have to deal with the significant losses of power to this country entailed in the Treaty of Nice and instead resort to playground tactics of smearing members of the opposing side, you don't have to attempt and argue the public around to reversing a decision made via plebiscite on a legitimate and unimpinged Referenda, no, instead all you have to do is sling the mud, and give bad press, and as if by magic, one simply doesn't even have to bother rationalising the Treaty or it's text, because on that front in my view the government, IBEC and the main political parties have failed miserably.

Now I hate to be the one to cast a stone here, but I will. The supporters of the Nice Treaty, who rationalised it's re-run (within a year of the last vote), bemoaned the fact that the public were 'misinformed' about the Treaty of Nice. Funnily enough to my mind, what Justin Barrett did two years ago or what he has for breakfast in the morning, has no place in the discussion of a Treaty who's outcome is very important to the future of this country. Unless someone can give a valid, semi-intellegent reason why Justin Barrett's breakfast should influence my decision on Nice? In fact talking about him, when really Ireland collectively should be talking about the Treaty text, is in itself misleading and deflects form the proper debate that should be taking place on this issue. So now, illucidate me as to the perils of a mininformed public, when in reality that argument only has validity for the Yes side, when it works in said side's favour.

I notice the Irish independant has pronounced itself pleased with forecasts of a 60-40 majority in favour of the Treaty, telling people that this shows the country is ready to 'protect jobs'. Well here is to an impartial press. Isn't it just great we live in the Western world, where the press is objective and non-partisan, because hey, it has scruples.
Give me a break, if I needed mindless propaganda and utterly biased political views I could go to the party conference's of any of the four main political parties, where I don't need 'yet more' mindless propaganda is from papers like the Irish Independant and the Irish Times, who pat themselves on the back for being allegedly 'objective' and then turn around and try to tell the readers of the same papers how to vote. What utter hypocritical people must run the papers in question, what a parody it is to claim to be so objective and to actually be forcefeeding mindless quasi-retarded political drivel down the throats of anyone unfortunate enough to even glance at the Times and the Independant.

"I hear you knocking but, you can't come in. Come back some other night and try again"

Thats all fine and Dandy, and I agree with you in every respect regarding the smearing of Justin Barrett.
It does not add one thing to the yes side that, in Barretts own words, that this smear came out of the Fianna Fáil press office.

But then thats spin doctors for you, and the Damned press.
Poor old Brian Lenihan(R.I.P) suffered the same fate, he could have been President, were it not for the damned press and the spin doctors digging and stirring the Dirt.

I Completely disagree with you though regarding governments holding multiple referendums though.
They can hold as many as they like, it's extremely democratic.
No body is forcing anyone who voted no the last time to vote yes this time.
All they are doing is campaigning for a yes vote on a different referendum albeit different only wrt defence and neutrality.
Clearly the Yes campaign is much more organised this time after it got a bloody nose the last time.

I notice the Irish independant has pronounced itself pleased with forecasts of a 60-40 majority in favour of the Treaty, telling people that this shows the country is ready to 'protect jobs'. Well here is to an impartial press. Isn't it just great we live in the Western world, where the press is objective and non-partisan, because hey, it has scruples.

I have to agree with Reefbreaks comments on that staement.
But I will give you the benefit of the doubt , in that you would probably say the same thing if they were blatantly opposing this treaty.
mm

sceptre

Originally posted by Man
But I will give you the benefit of the doubt , in that you would probably say the same thing if they were blatantly opposing this treaty.

Personally I would. The Indo in particular annoy me greatly with their editorialising masquerading as news. It's nothing to do with whichever political party they currently support (I don't personally know as I haven't even looked at the thing in months) - in the past they've been totally FG, totally FF, whichever. The Sun and the Mirror annoy me in the same way (and for other reasons). I've little problem with a newspaper nailing its colours to the mast solidly as being interested in the welfare of a particular group (like the Guardian and even the (crappy) Daily Mail do) - it's when they act as apologists for a particular party as opposed to a particular creed that it gets my goat up.

Like I said, I've not been near an Indo in months so perhaps the ethos of editor-journalism has vanished from the news columns (as opposed to the editorial sections) - I suspect not.

Cork

Well here is to an impartial press. Isn't it just great we live in the Western world, where the press is objective and non-partisan, because hey, it has scruples.

I agree - all the establishment are really come together - and it is great to see.

The IFA, the Unions, FF, Labour, IBEC & FG - I think - that this is "Official Ireland".

This treaty is mutton dressed as lamb. My main problem is that the council of ministers is not accountable. This treaty is no "treaty of Rome" for the applicant countries.

I don't believe Bertie on the Rapid Reaction force. But I think the big winners in Ireland after this vote will be SF & the Greens.

Slutmonkey57b

Doesn't anyone else find it strange that the no2nice group now includes terrorists, terrorist apologisers (Shinners), neo-nazi supporters and religious fascists (Barrett) and has poster up all over town featuring:

A bloke with a gun to his head!!

Let's see, which political groups are most likely to put a gun to your head in this debate - IBEC and the ICTU, or Sinn Fein and Youth Defense?

Hmmm. Irony. Tasty, tasty irony.

MyCarthyism is alive and well? Well yes... McCarthyism was the opression by extreme right wingers of... everyone who disagreed with them... A bit like Youth Defense and the Shinners then.

Typedef

You are entitled to your opinion Slutmonkey57b, though me saying that and being a No voter probably bursts your right wing conspiracy bubble to bits.

I could start screaming about foreigners if it makes you feel better though. Like why haven't we let in more of them? Since Ireland is so affluent and there are many, many crisis points around the world I think it is an absolute scandal that Ireland hasn't taken in more Nigerian refugees for example.

I'm sorry if that opinion doesn't fit into your tert little box that all No voters are in fact Neo-Nazi right wing conspirators.
Please feel free to call me and anyone else who votes like me a Nazi, Terrorist, right wing Catholic zealot or any other arbitrary smear that springs to mind, god forbid you would have to address the issues raised by the No side elsewise.

Kind Regards
Typedef.

http://www.no2nice.org.
Do not let the process of Irish Referenda become subservient to a Supra National Federalist edict. Requantify Ireland's democratic voice and vote No the the Nice Treaty.

Cuidado con el gato baby

Meh

Originally posted by Slutmonkey57b
Let's see, which political groups are most likely to put a gun to your head in this debate - IBEC and the ICTU, or Sinn Fein and Youth Defense?

I haven't had a gun put to my head by either side in this campaign. I've made up my own mind as to how I'm going to vote.

McCarthyism was the opression by extreme right wingers of... everyone who disagreed with them... A bit like Youth Defense and the Shinners then.

Again, I don't know what's happened to you, but nobody's been oppressing me because of my opinions on Nice...