A YES vote for Lisbon is a YES vote for ushering in the New World Order.

Ciaran500

Where is this in the Lisbon treaty?

javaboy

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Topic Definitely on target.

The FIRST thing that will be introduced when this poisonous NWO pact is ratified will be to roll out the pan European National ID in card ASAP. Europe cannot let the States go ahead with theirs without doing one here, what about all the "terrorists" at large.

Our Government is only waiting for the EU to call the shots as they cannot afford it themselves, so they say.

What legislation is stopping them from rolling it out now?
What exactly in the Lisbon treaty would allow it? An actual quote from the treaty would be nice although I'm aware you haven't read it so I'm not holding out much hope.

What exactly is the point of posting this rubbish? Why do the NWO conspiracy theorists always have to exaggerate things and make up scary pictures? Is it perhaps because there is no real substance to their argument so they resort to making stuff up? Why can't you make your case without resorting to cheap gimmicks?

May not be visible on the card. I presume blood group and would be optional as may be required in an accident. Only a sample, Im sure the Real Real ID would be no more different than the current US driving license except for the implant.

You said "this is the proposed Real ID card". Yet it's clearly not because as Ciaran500 pointed out, there are several things on that picture of a card that won't be on the real Real ID card. But instead of admitting you're wrong, as usual you are trying to wriggle out of it.

Will you please admit that that is not a genuine sample of a Real ID card but is in fact some scaremongering propaganda from some dodgy source and that you were wrong to say it was the proposed card?

starn

Gareth37 wrote: »

Why make a personal attack on the man. He is giving out information on a conspiracy theory, nobody has to accept his theories but I don't think it should become personal ridicule.

Sorry, just trying to get people to stick to the real issue being discussed.

No your right sorry. I didnt mean it as a attack. ill go back an delete the post

Run_to_da_hills

Ciaran500 wrote: »

Where is this in the Lisbon treaty?

Do you honestly think the EU Parliament is going to mention about pan European Chipped National ID cards in treaty that could be jeopardized by a referendum. ROFL.

starn

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Do you honestly think the EU Parliament is going to mention about pan European Chipped National ID cards in treaty that could be jeopardized by a referendum. ROFL.

So why is the card relevent to a discussion on the Lisbon Treaty

javaboy

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Do you honestly think the EU Parliament is going to mention about pan European Chipped National ID cards in treaty that could be jeopardized by a referendum. ROFL.

So why do they have to wait for Lisbon to be passed before they can roll it out then if it's not even mentioned in the treaty?

Run_to_da_hills

starn wrote: »

So why is the card relevent to a discussion on the Lisbon Treaty

One of the manifestos of the NWO is to control everyone on this planet with chipped ID cards prior to the verichip implant. The process must be done in steps. Once the Lisbon EU Constitution gets passed new security measures will be drafted in forcing Ireland to accept any new security measures laid down.

The UK which is the Guinea pig for the EU NWO superstate has already started the Chipped ID card and data process. They have a huge data base which they share personal information with their bedfellows in Europe and the US

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/7765106.stm

javaboy

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

One of the manifestos of the NWO is to control everyone on this planet with chipped ID cards prior to the verichip implant. The process must be done in steps. Once the Lisbon EU Constitution gets passed new security measures will be drafted in forcing Ireland to accept any new security measures laid down.

The UK which is the Guinea pig for the EU NWO superstate has already started the Chipped ID card and data process. They have a huge data base which they share personal information with their bedfellows in Europe and the US

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/7765106.stm

javaboy wrote: »

So why do they have to wait for Lisbon to be passed before they can roll it out then if it's not even mentioned in the treaty?

starn wrote: »

So why is the card relevent to a discussion on the Lisbon Treaty

javaboy wrote: »

What legislation is stopping them from rolling it out now?
What exactly in the Lisbon treaty would allow it? An actual quote from the treaty would be nice although I'm aware you haven't read it so I'm not holding out much hope.

You're still dodging our questions. Perhaps a bigger font.

• Why can't they introduce these cards now?
• What exactly is in the Lisbon treaty that will allow for these cards?
• Will you admit you were wrong to claim that other card was the proposed Real ID card?

Run_to_da_hills

javaboy wrote: »

So why do they have to wait for Lisbon to be passed before they can roll it out then if it's not even mentioned in the treaty?

Do you honestly think that the Lisbon treaty would mention security measures concerning the acceptance of chipped Ids would get their support from Ireland.

This was NOT Even mentioned at all and the treaty was still rejected, they wouldn't have a hope in hell of passing it if it was. However one of the manifestos on the Lisbon treaty was "security", however they kept a lid on ID card issue because they know better.

The same subject was brought up a three years ago by the UK and EU commission/. It is only a matter of time before it will raise its ugly head again.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/07/13/uk_eu_id_proposal/

javaboy

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Do you honestly think that the Lisbon treaty would mention security measures concerning the acceptance of chipped Ids would get their support from Ireland.

This was NOT Even mentioned at all and the treaty was still rejected, they wouldn't have a hope in hell of passing it if it was. However one of the manifestos on the Lisbon treaty was "security", however they kept a lid on ID card issue because they know better.

If the treaty doesn't mention them, how does it make allow for their introduction?

Please answer my three questions in the post above or you will lose any credibility you have in my eyes.

King Mob

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

However one of the manifestos on the Lisbon treaty was "security", however they kept a lid on ID card issue because they know better.

Where exactly in the Lisbon treaty does it mention, or even hint, that rfid tags are part of it security plan?

Run_to_da_hills

javaboy wrote: »

If the treaty doesn't mention them, how does it make allow for their introduction?

Please answer my three questions in the post above or you will lose any credibility you have in my eyes.

The Lisbon Treaty Enshrines EU law as superior to Irish law

No provision of this Constitution invalidates laws enacted, acts done or measures adopted by the State that are necessitated by the obligations of membership of the European Union referred to in subsection 10° of this section, or prevents laws enacted, acts done or measures adopted by the said European Union or by institutions thereof, or by bodies competent under the treaties referred to in this section, from having the force of law in the State.”

The Treaty can be changed without another referendum

Article 48 of the Treaty enables changes to be made to it after ratification without the constitutional requirement for another referendum in Ireland. This is confirmed by the independent Referendum Commission on its website which states: there “may” be a requirement for a referendum to implement such changes.

Hands over power in 60 areas of decision making to Brussels

The Lisbon Treaty provides for more than 60 areas of decision making from unanimity at present to qualified majority voting. Some of those areas include decision-making on immigration, sport, culture, transport and the appointment of the European President and Foreign Minister.

Immigration is one of the key reasons for the introduction of chipped smart cards.

javaboy

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

The Lisbon Treaty Enshrines EU law as superior to Irish law

No provision of this Constitution invalidates laws enacted, acts done or measures adopted by the State that are necessitated by the obligations of membership of the European Union referred to in subsection 10° of this section, or prevents laws enacted, acts done or measures adopted by the said European Union or by institutions thereof, or by bodies competent under the treaties referred to in this section, from having the force of law in the State.”

The Treaty can be changed without another referendum

Article 48 of the Treaty enables changes to be made to it after ratification without the constitutional requirement for another referendum in Ireland. This is confirmed by the independent Referendum Commission on its website which states: there “may” be a requirement for a referendum to implement such changes.

Hands over power in 60 areas of decision making to Brussels

The Lisbon Treaty provides for more than 60 areas of decision making from unanimity at present to qualified majority voting. Some of those areas include decision-making on immigration, sport, culture, transport and the appointment of the European President and Foreign Minister.

Immigration is one of the key reasons for the introduction of chipped smart cards.

Well we're making progress anyway. I'm feeling generous so I'm not going to labour the point any more that there is no mention at all of the ID cards in those texts. I can accept that what you've quoted above might help facilitate the introduction of these cards in that it appears to give the EU some more control over Irish affairs.

Now for my other two questions that are still unanswered:

What piece of legislation is currently preventing the introduction of these cards?
What exactly is in the Lisbon treaty that will allow for these cards?
Will you admit you were wrong when you claimed that other card was the proposed Real ID card?

conceited

lol at the pic in the id, brilliant javaboy

Flamed Diving

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

From the website this picture is sourced from:

"If you are a member of the political establishment, God has sent me here to punish you... your life as you've known it is over." - Liz Michael in 1998 on her cable program "Lady Liberty"

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica]I do believe that the peoples of the United States of America constitute the modern day "Israel" of prophecy as the only nation on earth today comprising all twelve tribes of historical Israel.[/FONT]

http://www.lizmichael.com/biograph.htm

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

bonkey

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

The Lisbon Treaty Enshrines EU law as superior to Irish law

No provision of this Constitution invalidates laws enacted, acts done or measures adopted by the State that are necessitated by the obligations of membership of the European Union referred to in subsection 10° of this section, or prevents laws enacted, acts done or measures adopted by the said European Union or by institutions thereof, or by bodies competent under the treaties referred to in this section, from having the force of law in the State.”

The piece of text you quote does not match the heading you gave in bold. The Lisbon Treaty does not enshrine EU law as "superior" to Irish Law.

The Treaty can be changed without another referendum

Article 48 of the Treaty enables changes to be made to it after ratification without the constitutional requirement for another referendum in Ireland. This is confirmed by the independent Referendum Commission on its website which states: there “may” be a requirement for a referendum to implement such changes.

Half-true. There are situations where changes to the Treaty could have been performed without the need for another referendum. There are situations where changes to the Treaty required re-ratification, which - in Irish terms at least - meant another referendum.

The onus, therefore, would be on anyone making a claim that the treaty allowed X to be done without re-ratification, to show that X was covered by the "no re-ratification" clause.

Of course, given that you haven't read the Treaty, RTDH, its not terribly surprising to find that you're not representing it accurately. You've put your trust in a third party rather than doing your own research. Ironically, that third party has misled you, which is ironic when you consider your offered reasons for not reading the Treaty in the first place.

Hands over power in 60 areas of decision making to Brussels

The Lisbon Treaty provides for more than 60 areas of decision making from unanimity at present to qualified majority voting. Some of those areas include decision-making on immigration, sport, culture, transport and the appointment of the European President and Foreign Minister.

Immigration is one of the key reasons for the introduction of chipped smart cards.

This is again half-correct. Some aspects of immigration law were handled by the Treaty. The imposition of a national ID card is not an immigration issue.

bonkey

WhaLofShi and starn both infracted for their little spat.

Gents...civility isn't an option here.

Final warning to all participants, not just those infracted. No more personal attacks.

Gareth37

bonkey wrote: »

WhaLofShi and starn both infracted for their little spat.

Gents...civility isn't an option here.

Final warning to all participants, not just those infracted. No more personal attacks.

The New World Order is a fact.

Here is a solid conspiracy theories website

http://www.wiseupjournal.com/

humanji

I think you need to rethink your use of "fact" and maybe look up "credible sources" while you're at it.

Flamed Diving

humanji wrote: »

I think you need to rethink your use of "fact" and maybe look up "credible sources" while you're at it.

Blogs aren't credible sources?

Run_to_da_hills

On 20th Feb 2008 a caucus meeting was held at the German Parliament in Munich to discuss the Lisbon Treaty.

At this meeting a previously unmentioned paragraph was bought to light by Professor Schachtschneider, Humanities Faculty -University of Nuremberg.

Professor Schachtschneider, explained that the undisclosed paragraph means on ratification of the Lisbon Treaty the DEATH PENALTY will be reintroduced to Europe. The Death Penalty will be applicable for the crimes of RIOTING, CIVIL UPHEAVAL and DURING WAR. (When are we not at war and who will define riot and upheaval?)

Professor Schachtschneider made the point that this clause is particularly outrageous as it had been cleverly hidden in a footnote of a footnote and would not have been detected by anyone other than an exceptional expert reader.

http://thejournal.parker-joseph.co.uk/blog/_archives/2008/4/13/3636677.html

GhostInTheRuins

I don't believe that for a second.

Run_to_da_hills

GhostInTheRuins wrote: »

I don't believe that for a second.

Its currently a fresh topic in the EU Politics forum.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055507594

GhostInTheRuins

Cheers for the link, checking it out now

Run_to_da_hills

GhostInTheRuins wrote: »

Cheers for the link, checking it out now

Someone should post it in AH,

(I can't because ill be accused of scaremongering by the Yes party. :eek:)

meglome

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Someone should post it in AH,

(I can't because ill be accused of scaremongering by the Yes party. :eek:)

After reading that thread it seems that the Lisbon treaty does not allow for the death penalty. Any chance Run_to_da_hills that just once when you claim something in a thread it actually might turn out to be true. Sweet Jesus.

Veni Vedi Vici

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Someone should post it in AH,

(I can't because ill be accused of scaremongering by the Yes party. :eek:)

I haven't read the thread as meglome has. If you mean that by voting YES one is a scare mongerer then I would contest such opposition.

If its in reference to the death penalty then all I've heard is that its enclosed within the small print of a footnote of another footnote and is applicable only during times of civil unrest or riot. Just because thats what I've heard doesn't mean its true. More research on my part and perhaps yours is further required.

King Mob

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

I can't because ill be accused of scaremongering by the Yes party. :eek:

Hang on. The yes party is scaremongering?

But you say if we vote in the Lisbon treaty the death penalty will be reintroduced?

How is your statement not scaremongering?

Also, have you actually read the Lisbon Treaty yet?

Run_to_da_hills

King Mob wrote: »

But you say if we vote in the Lisbon treaty the death penalty will be reintroduced??

I'm not saying it, thats exactly what is stated in the link and also discussed in the EU Political forum.

King Mob wrote: »

Also, have you actually read the Lisbon Treaty yet?

No I haven't read the Lisbon Treaty either has most of our Yes campaigning politicians. :rolleyes:

What I have read is important extracts of this poisonous and deceiving document that need to be exposed just like the above.

meglome

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

I'm not saying it, thats exactly what is stated in the link and also discussed in the EU Political forum.

No I haven't read the Lisbon Treaty either has most of our Yes campaigning politicians. :rolleyes:

What I have read is important extracts of this poisonous and deceiving document that need to be exposed just like the above.

Correct me if I'm wrong here but the Lisbon treaty only potentially allows for the death penalty in a time of war. And this is only in countries that already have this provision built into the treaty as it's part of their national laws. Otherwise the treaty specifically forbids the death penalty. Am I missing something?

No offence Run_to_da_hills to the only one that appears to be spreading anything "poisonous and deceiving" is you.