Lisbon 2: prepare to bend over and recieve ur destiny!

An Fear Aniar

The powerful elites have decided to give the plebes another chance to come up with the right answer. I hope that on behalf of all the millions across Europe who have not been given a chance to vote that Ireland again rejects this arrogant power grab.


.

Dyr

humanji wrote: »

Ok people, I know this is going to fall on deaf ears, but 28% of the population voted no. And a portion of that admitted to not voting on what was actually in the treaty. How is following the will of an ill-informed minority democratic? Think about it. If nobody except for 2 people actually managed to vote last time, and they voted yes because they thought it was about ice-cream, would you honestly want to honour that vote?

Same ould ****e, we accept the democratic process warts and all until it's a result that we dont like, then they if's and buts come out. If there was something wrong with the last referendum take it to the high court or put up.



can we vote fianna fail out in october now that it turned out we were ill informed?

niceirishfella

thelordofcheese wrote: »

Stop making excuses for voter ignorance.
It's disgusting.

Ahhhhhhhhhh, the Lord of Cheezyness, the man(a tan) with soooo much opinion on the Irish Political Landscape from Blighty.
This is all we need.:rolleyes:

thelordofcheese

niceirishfella wrote: »

Ahhhhhhhhhh, the Lord of Cheezyness, the man(a tan) with soooo much opinion on the Irish Political Landscape from Blighty.
This is all we need.:rolleyes:

heh, nice to see you're still as staggeringly inept as normal.
Would you like to stop posting now, or am i going to have to suffer more of your innane bullshit?

humanji

You prefer the facist way where peoples right to vote is taken away from them? It's democracy that allows us to vote again. It's underhanded, but if you've a problem with that, get into politics, get people to vote you into power and then remove peoples right to vote. Simple.

skelliser

Remember the government line about "theres no alternative but to vote yes" i think that really pissed alot of people off.
Theres always an alternative, its re-run it again until you get the answer you want!

And then they harp on about "the irish vote has to be respected etc." Well ****ing respect it, we voted no.
NO MEANS NO FFS!!

Biggins

I love the way some are saying the equivelent of "lets jump into bed with them more. Its will help recover the economy."

Hell, the whole of Europe and America in a right economic state and mess! Does anyone really think that little Ireland stuck over in the west is going to be come a high priorty?
The ship called "Europe" is sinking in a financial mess, not one of the big boys on the life boat is going to be worried or care about us. They will (understandably) look after their own first. Europe is sinking financially, I don't think for one second that while each looks after their own, they are going to abandon their own and suddenly cry "All bail out the Irish".

Stop throwing this crap that the EU is going to save us - when they are in just a bigger mess as us for fraks sake!

ven0m

proof that the democratic will of the people doesn't exist.

We were asked once, we said no. Asking again is breeching our rights, & freedom to self-determine.

Asking us again is also proof that the EU is moving towards federalism, & a body that doesn't care about democracy, a-la USA.

Wagon

thelordofcheese wrote: »

Everybody shut up and listen to this, because it's the most sensible thing that will be said in this thread.

...Sarkozy....is that youuuu?

walshb

Humanji,, are you honestly telling me that most people in the YES side voted YES because they read the treaty. THE POXY GOVT BARELY READ THE TREATY AND ANY NORMAL SANE PERSON WOULDN'T BE BOTHERED READING THE TREATY.

Wasn't that the major problem. It was so damn extensive and complex and convoluted.

So, if we agree that the majority of VOTERS did not read the treaty, then surely how can
anyone VOTE yes to something they know nothing about??

I voted NO, because I didn't know the precise details. I am being honest; but if you are
telling me that the YES camp voted YES because they all understood the treaty, then that is being totally dishonest. The actual folks pressing for YES didn't know the treaty.

I will vote NO this time not because I do not know the details, but because I refuse
to be dictated to and even if I understood and agreed with the treaty, I will still
vote NO on principal. That's my whole point. For democracies sake and for respect, I believe this is the correct answer

Seriously, think about it. The YES camp voted yes more on the basis of what
they were being TOLD to vote on. I am willing to bet that of the TOTAL
number of people who voted YES, that about 5 percent read that bloody treaty.

Similar to the NO side.

thelordofcheese

Wagon wrote: »

...Sarkozy....is that youuuu?

If telling people to just read the damn thing and make up your own mind makes me a french politician, then a french politician i am.

niceirishfella

thelordofcheese wrote: »

heh, nice to see you're still as staggeringly inept as normal.
Would you like to stop posting now, or am i going to have to suffer more of your innane bullshit?

A quality post as per usual Mr. Fromage.:rolleyes:
Tell us all, Are you English, Irish or what?
And why do you have such interest in our discussions on this treaty debate from your UK base?

Tom65

A question for the No voters: what were you hoping for from the EU after the "no" vote?

Structures in the EU have to be changed, there's no way around that. With the second vote, they're giving assurances over certain issues and allowing every country to keep it's commissioner? Surely this is democracy at work? You've voted no, they changed it on the reasons for that rejection, and now they're asking again?

thelordofcheese

niceirishfella wrote: »

A quality post as per usual Mr. Fromage.:rolleyes:
Tell us all, Are you English, Irish or what?
And why do you have such interest in our discussions on this treaty debate from your UK base?

Heres a better question, does it fucking matter?

niceirishfella

thelordofcheese wrote: »

Heres a better question, does it fucking matter?

Yes it does, so kindly answer the question.:)

walshb

Tom65 wrote: »

A question for the No voters: what were you hoping for from the EU after the "no" vote?

Structures in the EU have to be changed, there's no way around that. With the second vote, they're giving assurances over certain issues and allowing every country to keep it's commissioner? Surely this is democracy at work? You've voted no, they changed it on the reasons for that rejection, and now they're asking again?

Why a question? The vote was NO, accept it. I always believed we were
living in a democracy. BTW, I have pointed out that the feeling in other
countries was that had they got the chance, they too would have voted NO!

thelordofcheese

niceirishfella wrote: »

Yes it does, so kindly answer the question.:)

Really, why?

ejmaztec

I wonder what the Punt would have been worth now if Ireland had not joined the Eurozone. I'd say 3.5 cent.

20goto10

skelliser wrote: »

The attitude that prevailed from sarkozy and his ilk since then and there complete contempt for us means i shall be voting NO.

What attitude are you talking about? The attitude that Libertas and all the socialist twats told us about? Or did you actually see some attitude for yourself?

Their reaction when they found out the reasons for voting no was completely understandable.

People talk about a 2nd vote being undemocratic. What is undemocratic is rejecting a treaty on the basis of ignorance.

Not understanding is not a reason to vote no.
Abortion is not a reason to vote no.
Neutrality is not a reason to vote no.
Losing a commissioner is not a reason to vote no. We already lost a commissioner in the Nice treaty.

People want the treaty changed to allay our concerns will be waiting a while. You can't change something that isn't there.

Now have some cop on and read the treaty. If you don't understand it get someone to explain it to you. If you still can't understand it stay at home and leave it to people who can.

niceirishfella

thelordofcheese wrote: »

Really, why?

Evasion of the question and your tone,agression and use of bad language speaks yards here.
Mods please note.

Wagon

thelordofcheese wrote: »

If telling people to just read the damn thing and make up your own mind makes me a french politician, then a french politician i am.

I did that the first time round.

If they looked closly at the reasons as to why we voted no the first time round and changed it so we could all reach a happy middle ground then why not? I'd be glad to reconsider.

But they won't, so why should i read the exact same bloody thing again only to reach the same result?

ven0m

Tom65 wrote: »

A question for the No voters: what were you hoping for from the EU after the "no" vote?

Structures in the EU have to be changed, there's no way around that. With the second vote, they're giving assurances over certain issues and allowing every country to keep it's commissioner? Surely this is democracy at work? You've voted no, they changed it on the reasons for that rejection, and now they're asking again?

Clearly you weren't paying attention.

We were told IF we voted NO, it was business as usual & nothing changed. So those of us who voted no were expecting nothing.

The fact it is being forced upon is again & will continue to be (despite government assurances we would NOT be asked again like last time) until we give them the answer they want (which is NOT democratic & frankly Mugabe is more honest in his politics than this form of politics).

Hope that clears it up for you :-)

walshb

20goto10 wrote: »

Not understanding is not a reason to vote no.

Am I reading this right??:rolleyes:

And not understanding is a reason to vote YES?
Because many many folks did vote YES even though they knew nothing!

Damn straight not understanding is a reason to vote NO.

If you didn't understand, like the majority on BOTH sides, would you vote YES?

I really am stumped with this attitude.
Vote YES, even if you know nothing
Never VOTE NO:rolleyes:

ven0m

20goto10 wrote: »

What is undemocratic is rejecting a treaty on the basis of ignorance.

Show us where on the voting forms it said:

"If no, please tick why you are voting 'no'"

Democratic voting is simple - a right to say 'yes' or 'no' for whatever reason you like without prejudice for that reason, or a right to question that reason. it is a simple mandate.

Methinks you need to climb down off that horse of yours there hoss.

Highsider

Hold on a minute. Did'nt we already put this to a vote and voted no or am i imagining things?

Doc

humanji wrote: »

Cheques in the post.

Or, you could read my post. People are crying out over democracy being ignored. But only 28% of people voted no. That means 72% didn't vote not. That's not to say they voted yes, or would vote yes, just that they didn't vote no. And of taht bunch many have admitted to not knowing what the treaty was about. I'm not talking about the yes voters, as they don't matter in that above statement.

A fully informed referendom is needed, not the half arsed attempt that was before. Plenty of people read the treaty and plenty understood it. But this amount of people were dwarfed by those who voted in ignorance (be it yes or no).

The best analogy that I read over in the politics forum was that the people were given two contracts ("yes" and "no")and asked to sign one. But too many people believed that they were given one contract and assumed that if they didn't sign it, everything would remain the same. That simple isn't right.

Could it not be that the 72% didn’t vote because they where the ones who did not consider themselves fully informed and so did not want to vote one way or the other? They all had a right to vote but chose not too exercise it.

The vote was No and was democratic even if 2 people only voted it would still be democratic as long as everyone else had the opportunity to vote.

Unless there are serious changes to the treaty then there should be no new vote.

Anyway how is it democratic to the other countries that we get concessions on a treaty that other they have already singed up to? Why should we get a better deal then them? Should they not get the same concessions?

It wasn't me!

niceirishfella wrote: »

Evasion of the question and your tone,agression and use of bad language speaks yards here.
Mods please note.

You're the one asking irrelevant personal questions of him without disclosing your motives, which is the only sneaky thing going on here.

For the record, I voted yes. I will vote yes again, because I believe it's the right thing to do. People didn't vote in an informed fashion the last time, and to allow uninformed voting to dictate to the rest of Europe is an ugly perversion of democracy. If we have an informed voter base, and still get a no result (and not through ignorance or spite) then I would be on your side, but when I heard every clown interviewed about it spouting on about how they're terrified of conscription and losing sovereignty and taxation and such, it was very hard to swallow the stupidity of the nation. If you don't understand the matter, inform yourself; it's your duty as a voter to be responsible for your vote and not treat it like a toy, which anyone who voted in ignorance did, in my opinion. I think anyone who did, or promoted that ridiculous notion that if you don't understand it, you should vote one way or the other (their way) should be absolutely ashamed of themselves for perverting the course of democracy, as should anyone who then voted in ignorance anyway. Sometimes I think the vast majority don't deserve the right to vote.

An Fear Aniar

Tom65 wrote: »

Structures in the EU have to be changed, there's no way around that. With the second vote, they're giving assurances over certain issues and allowing every country to keep it's commissioner? Surely this is democracy at work? ?

Tell that to the millions of people all over Europe who have never had a chance to vote on this. Democracy my arse.


.

thelordofcheese

niceirishfella wrote: »

Evasion of the question and your tone,agression and use of bad language speaks yards here.
Mods please note.

I see no point in your shitty question.

The only reason you could be possibly asking is you're hoping i'm not irish so you can use your pathetic "shure you're not irish" answer instead of a reasoned one.
The same reason you picking up on what it says under my current location and used it as a spring board for this poorly thought out crusade. It's easier for you to invent reasons not to listen to people than it is to actually think.

And if you actually havea problem, report my posts. Otherwise, go annoy someone else, i'm not entertaining your play school antics anymore.

Fratton Fred

topper75 wrote: »

No and double no.
We shall not be dictated to - neither by Empire nor by Union.

Should you not end that with "PS, we want to build a road, can we have a few million please"

Tom65 wrote: »

A question for the No voters: what were you hoping for from the EU after the "no" vote?

Structures in the EU have to be changed, there's no way around that. With the second vote, they're giving assurances over certain issues and allowing every country to keep it's commissioner? Surely this is democracy at work? You've voted no, they changed it on the reasons for that rejection, and now they're asking again?

+1

Is it that the government are asking you to vote until you give the answer they want. or that the people asked them to change it, they did and now they are back again with a new version.

niceirishfella wrote: »

Evasion of the question and your tone,agression and use of bad language speaks yards here.
Mods please note.

I think you have the wrong user name:rolleyes: