European Commission Barroso removes the main argument of Yes campaigners

tonycascarino

European Commission President José Manuel Barroso today removed one of the main arguments of Yes campaigners by saying that there will be no discrimination against Irish people if there is a second No vote on the Lisbon Treaty. In answer to a question from Sinn Féin MEP Bairbre de Brún in Brussels today as to whether the Commission will treat Ireland differently to other EU member states if Irish people again reject the Lisbon Treaty on 2 October, President Barroso said: “There will be no discrimination against Irish people if there is a No vote. You will not hear from me any threat to Ireland.”

Speaking after the meeting, MEP Bairbre de Brún said that “the Yes campaign should now stop scare-mongering about a No vote affecting Ireland's status and influence in the EU. Ireland's place in the EU is secure”.

http://www.sinnfein.ie/contents/17300

I guess that's that then. The Yes campaigns main argument is gone and it has been proven to be nothing more than good ol' scaremongering.

PopeBuckfastXVI

Hardly a main argument, especially when no-one is worried about the impartial commission, which drafts legislation, but instead worried about negotiations on the council which consists of the other governments.

I've never considered this to be an argument for a 'yes' however, just a consideration which should be made when voting 'no'.

meglome

Speaking after the meeting, MEP Bairbre de Brún said that “the Yes campaign should now stop scare-mongering about a No vote affecting Ireland's status and influence in the EU. Ireland's place in the EU is secure”.

You know it never stops being funny that a bunch of scaremongerers don't like even the suggestion it's being done right back at them. Coming from the same Sinn Fein that campaigned for Ireland to not even join the EU and has campaigned for a No ever since makes it even funnier.

tonycascarino

One of the main arguments of the Yes side has gone completely out the window & they can no longer try scare people into voting yes with such lies ie. that Ireland will be discriminated against if it votes No again.

PopeBuckfastXVI

tonycascarino wrote: »

One of the main arguments of the Yes side has gone completely out the window & they can no longer try scare people into voting yes with such lies ie. that Ireland will be discriminated against if it votes No again.

Didn't bother reading my post then eh? Just repeat, repeat, repeat...

tonycascarino

meglome wrote: »

You know it never stops being funny that a bunch of scaremongers don't like even the suggestion it's being done right back at them. Coming from the same Sinn Fein that campaigned for Ireland to not even join the EU and has campaigned for a No ever since makes it even funnier.

I find it even funnier that the Yes side have been caught out.

meglome

tonycascarino wrote: »

One of the main arguments of the Yes side has gone completely out the window & they can no longer try scare people into voting yes with such lies ie. that Ireland will be discriminated against if it votes No again.

I don't think it's one of the main arguments either, not for me anyway.

PopeBuckfastXVI

Out of curiosity, tony, would you change your vote to 'yes' if Mr. Barroso had come out and said he would discriminate against Ireland if we voted no?

tonycascarino

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

Out of curiosity, tony, would you change your vote to 'yes' if Mr. Barroso had come out and said he would discriminate against Ireland if we voted no?

Curiosity killed the cat.;)

is_that_so

tonycascarino wrote: »

One of the main arguments of the Yes side has gone completely out the window & they can no longer try scare people into voting yes with such lies ie. that Ireland will be discriminated against if it votes No again.

If a voter ,on the balance of the evidence, determines their vote is correct who am I to argue. If on the other hand it's a spurious notion like this, disenfranchising them for life is not a sufficient punishment and really suggests a lack of free will or reasoning power. As others have posted there are many many well-argued positions to take on Lisbon but this is not one of them.

PopeBuckfastXVI

tonycascarino wrote: »

Curiosity killed the cat.;)

I'll take that as a no...

tonycascarino

is_that_so wrote: »

If a voter ,on the balance of the evidence, determines their vote is correct who am I to argue. If on the other hand it's a spurious notion like this, disenfranchising them for life is not a sufficient punishment and really suggests a lack of free will or reasoning power. As others have posted there are many many well-argued positions to take on Lisbon but this is not one of them.

Try tell that to the Yes side :

''Ireland has had one serious attempt at committing suicide on this issue… "Happily, we survived... and we are back for another go. If we do it again, we probable deserve everything bad that ever happens to us." - Scaremongering from Fine Gael’s director of organisation, Frank Flannery - 22nd of July 2009

http://www.examiner.ie/ireland/rejecting-lisbon-will-lose-us-credibility-warns-expert-97112.html

''... one view is that the way will have been opened for an end to our membership of the European Union, probably resulting in membership of the European Economic Area, to which Norway and Iceland belong" - Brendan Halligan, Campaign Co-ordinator Director of Ireland for Europe and former MEP - 09/07/2009

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/letters/2009/0710/1224250386451.html


"I believe the first victim of an eventual no would be the Irish. They have benefitted more than others," – French Politician, Bernard Kouchner
http://euobserver.com/9/26299/?rk=1

"Ireland will be in the ''dog house'' if it says no for a second time.'' - Viscount Etienne Davignon, chairman of the Bilderberg group
http://www.tribune.ie/news/home-news/article/2008/oct/05/ireland-set-for-lisbon-dog-house/


I'm glad all these lies from the Yes side have been put to bed by President Barroso in the Article above.

PopeBuckfastXVI

tonycascarino wrote: »

''Ireland has had one serious attempt at committing suicide on this issue… "Happily, we survived... and we are back for another go. If we do it again, we probable deserve everything bad that ever happens to us." - Scaremongering from Fine Gael’s director of organisation, Frank Flannery - 22nd of July 2009

http://www.examiner.ie/ireland/rejecting-lisbon-will-lose-us-credibility-warns-expert-97112.html

''... one view is that the way will have been opened for an end to our membership of the European Union, probably resulting in membership of the European Economic Area, to which Norway and Iceland belong" - Brendan Halligan, Campaign Co-ordinator Director of Ireland for Europe and former MEP - 09/07/2009

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/letters/2009/0710/1224250386451.html


"I believe the first victim of an eventual no would be the Irish. They have benefitted more than others," – French Politician, Bernard Kouchner
http://euobserver.com/9/26299/?rk=1

"Ireland will be in the ''dog house'' if it says no for a second time.'' - Viscount Etienne Davignon, chairman of the Bilderberg group
http://www.tribune.ie/news/home-news/article/2008/oct/05/ireland-set-for-lisbon-dog-house/


I'm glad all these lies from the Yes side have been put to bed by President Barroso with this line :

“There will be no discrimination against Irish people if there is a No vote. You will not hear from me any threat to Ireland.”

Did you read my post above:

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

Hardly a main argument, especially when no-one is worried about the impartial commission, which drafts legislation, but instead worried about negotiations on the council which consists of the other governments.

I've never considered this to be an argument for a 'yes' however, just a consideration which should be made when voting 'no'.

It's the first reply in your thread, I'm sure you can't have missed it.

What do you think of it?

ei.sdraob

@tonycascarino


can you please tell us what are

* the job of the commission
* the job of the council


within EU

please do go ahead oh and PopeBuckfastXVI raised interesting questions, are you not interesting in debating? No? then why start a thread

PopeBuckfastXVI

ei.sdraob wrote: »

@tonycascarino


can you please tell us what are

* the job of the commission
* the job of the council


within EU

please do go ahead oh and PopeBuckfastXVI raised interesting questions, are you not interesting in debating? No? then why start a thread

It's a curious thing about parrots, they can repeat what they hear, but rarely can you engage them in discussion...

is_that_so

tonycascarino wrote: »

''Ireland has had one serious attempt at committing suicide on this issue… "Happily, we survived... and we are back for another go. If we do it again, we probable deserve everything bad that ever happens to us." - Scaremongering from Fine Gael’s director of organisation, Frank Flannery - 22nd of July 2009

http://www.examiner.ie/ireland/rejecting-lisbon-will-lose-us-credibility-warns-expert-97112.html

''... one view is that the way will have been opened for an end to our membership of the European Union, probably resulting in membership of the European Economic Area, to which Norway and Iceland belong" - Brendan Halligan, Campaign Co-ordinator Director of Ireland for Europe and former MEP - 09/07/2009

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/letters/2009/0710/1224250386451.html


"I believe the first victim of an eventual no would be the Irish. They have benefitted more than others," – French Politician, Bernard Kouchner
http://euobserver.com/9/26299/?rk=1

"Ireland will be in the ''dog house'' if it says no for a second time.'' - Viscount Etienne Davignon, chairman of the Bilderberg group
http://www.tribune.ie/news/home-news/article/2008/oct/05/ireland-set-for-lisbon-dog-house/


I'm glad all these lies from the Yes side have been put to bed by President Barroso with this line :

“There will be no discrimination against Irish people if there is a No vote. You will not hear from me any threat to Ireland.”

Aside from the lack of argument put forward here these links really don't prove anything. The argument such as it is, also seems to be based on the need to emphasise that the Yes side also tell lies.

If I choose to leave my job and I am advised by any number of experts that I could end up unemployed for a long time, that's just an assessment of possible consequences and something I will use to determine my decision. It's certainly not scaremongering and is no more going to prevent me from evaluating the situation than a long list of quotes will influence me for Lisbon.

Your perception quite obviously is that these links reflect that emotive word scaremongering whereas I would see them as a reflection on possible consequences. In the end I'll still look at the issues and vote accordingly, which is really what we should all be doing.

Dinner

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

It's a curious thing about parrots, they can repeat what they hear, but rarely can you engage them in discussion...

To be honest, I'm facinated to see him post. His usual MO is to thank people who include any variant of the phrase 'NO means NO'.

The next step is to engage in a debate...

sceptre

I wouldn't have considered that anywhere near one of the main arguments in favour but than again, as I've pointed out before, I'm making my decision on the actual treaty.

ei.sdraob

i would have been happy if the commission were to disappear completely or reduced as per original Lisbon

the whole commissioner "issue" is a terrible joke

these commissioners are nothing more than useless highly paid bureaucrat's who are not even "ours"

but sure "the people of Ireland have spoken" and all our tax money would continue to pay these people with or without lisbon

bleh sorry for ranting

more reading here for anyone interested since the OP is incapable of engaging in debate > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Commission

The Commission operates in the method of cabinet government, with 27 Commissioners. There is one Commissioner per member state, though Commissioners are bound to represent the interests of the EU as a whole rather than their home state. One of the 27 is the Commission President (currently José Manuel Durão Barroso) appointed by the European Council

My name is URL

sceptre wrote: »

I wouldn't have considered that anywhere near one of the main arguments in favour but than again, as I've pointed out before, I'm making my decision on the actual treaty.

Certainly a main argument for those undecided, or those that do not fully understand the treaty.

You cannot deny the fact that the fear of alienation is enough to cause some people to vote Yes.. and before you throw up the old "well they should read the treaty" argument, of course they should, and they would if this was a Utopian paradise, but it isn't. And every election and every referendum has a proportion of people that vote with their hearts rather than their heads.

PopeBuckfastXVI

Main argument or no, the point here is that the commission cannot display favouritism, or otherwise.

Negotiations where Ireland might lose goodwill are with the Council, i.e. the other EU governments who helped us draft the Lisbon treaty.

Mary-Lou's little question is nice and all, but utterly pointless.

sceptre

My name is URL wrote: »

Certainly a main argument for those undecided, or those that do not fully understand the treaty.

You cannot deny the fact that the fear of alienation is enough to cause some people to vote Yes.. and before you throw up the old "well they should read the treaty" argument, of course they should, and they would if this was a Utopian paradise, but it isn't. And every election and every referendum has a proportion of people that vote with their hearts rather than their heads.

Ah, I don't deny it at all. Unfortunately. As I've said before, it makes me quite sad that we have a population so unwilling to educate itself, despite receiving plenty of education (and that applies in a general way as much as it does about this specific proposal).

dresden8

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

, but instead worried about negotiations on the council which consists of the other governments.

With any luck they'll steal Cowen's lunch money and flush his head down the jacks.

Worth a No vote just for that.

thebman

Doesn't mean the other countries won't form a closer union without us though.

I'd rather be as closely integrated to Europe as possible TBH.

Just my opinion though.

FutureTaoiseach

thebman wrote: »

Doesn't mean the other countries won't form a closer union without us though.

I'd rather be as closely integrated to Europe as possible TBH.

Just my opinion though.

I find this talk that a 'two-speed Europe' strange given it already exists with respect to the Eurozone and Schengen. It's not realistic in an EU of 27, with differing histories and cultures, to strait-jacket everyone into going along with everything in terms of degrees of integration.

PopeBuckfastXVI

FutureTaoiseach wrote: »

I find this talk that a 'two-speed Europe' strange given it already exists with respect to the Eurozone and Schengen. It's not realistic in an EU of 27, with differing histories and cultures, to strait-jacket everyone into going along with everything in terms of degrees of integration.

Indeed, and we seem to be firmly declaring ourselves out out out, or at least we will be if we vote no.

Nice of you to acknowledge it.

My name is URL

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

Indeed, and we seem to be firmly declaring ourselves out out out, or at least we will be if we vote no.

Nice of you to acknowledge it.

Really.. so what you're basically implying is that fear is a driving force to vote Yes?

Fear... of an entity that you support so faithfully! Do you see the irony?

Maybe Machiavelli was right when he said that it's better to be feared than loved :rolleyes:

PopeBuckfastXVI

My name is URL wrote: »

Really.. so what you're basically implying is that fear is a driving force to vote Yes?

Fear... of an entity that you support so faithfully! Do you see the irony?

Maybe Machiavelli was right when he said that it's better to be feared than loved :rolleyes:

No.

Did you read the post I was replying to?

FT postulated a 2 tier Europe with Ireland in the second, less integrated, less central tier.

It's an honesty you rarely get from 'No' advocates.

Daftendirekt

tonycascarino wrote: »

I guess that's that then. The Yes campaigns main argument is gone and it has been proven to be nothing more than good ol' scaremongering.

Great. Now if you'll just take the time to refute the real arguments for a Yes vote, you'll have a few more No voters on your side.

My name is URL

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

No.

Did you read the post I was replying to?

FT postulated a 2 tier Europe with Ireland in the second, less integrated, less central tier.

It's an honesty you rarely get from 'No' advocates.

Yeah, but you said "or at least we will be if we vote no", I assumed you were serious with that.

I would like to know how many people are afraid of the EU deciding to kick Ireland out of the Union, and how many are voting based on that fear.

It's more philosophical than political I guess, but is it ok to champion a force that instills a fear of repercussions in those who oppose it? I'm sure it's easier to, that doesn't make it right though, imo

Martin 2

In answer to a question from Sinn Féin MEP Bairbre de Brún in Brussels today as to whether the Commission will treat Ireland differently to other EU member states if Irish people again reject the Lisbon Treaty on 2 October, President Barroso said: “There will be no discrimination against Irish people if there is a No vote. You will not hear from me any threat to Ireland.”

tonycascarino wrote: »

I guess that's that then. The Yes campaigns main argument is gone and it has been proven to be nothing more than good ol' scaremongering.

I have to admit I’ve mentioned isolation before but I was referring to self-imposed isolation rather than some active EU policy to isolate Ireland from the other 26 countries, the latter is contrary to the spirit and the letter of EU policy. I was thinking of Ireland being perceived as being on the margins of the EU after a No vote and the effect that would have on investment and especially the multinational sector. To paraphrase an Irish multinational executive, why are we are cutting ourselves adrift from the rest of the EU when the one of the main reasons for multinationals being here is that we are part of the EU.

FutureTaoiseach

Martin 2 wrote: »

I have to admit I’ve mentioned isolation before but I was referring to self-imposed isolation rather than some active EU policy to isolate Ireland from the other 26 countries, the latter is contrary to the spirit and the letter of EU policy. I was thinking of Ireland being perceived as being on the margins of the EU after a No vote and the effect that would have on investment and especially the multinational sector. To paraphrase an Irish multinational executive, why are we are cutting ourselves adrift from the rest of the EU when the one of the main reasons for multinationals being here is that we are part of the EU.

Martin, is that why American pharmaceuticals in Ireland increased production by 68.3% in the year after the no vote?

Irish exports have risen 5% in the year up to April, compared to a drop of 29% in Germany. In June, Irish exports also rose 5%. Irish industrial production rose 8.9% in the year up to July 2009 – rising to a huge 68.3% in the American pharmaceutical sector here. This evidence suggests strongly that the no vote has not impacted negatively on investor sentiment of Ireland. Intel and Ryanair have their own reasons for supporting Lisbon, relating to Intel’s appeal against the €1.06 billion fine, and Ryanair’s desire to takeover Aer Lingus which the Commission previously blocked. What is dragging the economy down has nothing do with Lisbon, but may partly be laid at the door of the ECB’s monetary policy, which has imposed Franco-German interest-rates on an economy at the perhipery of Europe, which had an overheating economy until 2008. A property-bubble and crash became inevitable as a consequence. If anything, events underline the dangers of too much centralisation of economic sovereignty in supranational institutions, which tend to be dominated by the Big States

thebman

yeah so there is a two tier Europe great but which do we want to be in?

I don't see the point of not being as closely integrated as possible with the rest of Europe.

It has done more good than bad so far IMO.

K-9

FutureTaoiseach wrote: »

Martin, is that why American pharmaceuticals in Ireland increased production by 68.3% in the year after the no vote?

Irish exports have risen 5% in the year up to April, compared to a drop of 29% in Germany. In June, Irish exports also rose 5%. Irish industrial production rose 8.9% in the year up to July 2009 – rising to a huge 68.3% in the American pharmaceutical sector here. This evidence suggests strongly that the no vote has not impacted negatively on investor sentiment of Ireland. Intel and Ryanair have their own reasons for supporting Lisbon, relating to Intel’s appeal against the €1.06 billion fine, and Ryanair’s desire to takeover Aer Lingus which the Commission previously blocked. What is dragging the economy down has nothing do with Lisbon, but may partly be laid at the door of the ECB’s monetary policy, which has imposed Franco-German interest-rates on an economy at the perhipery of Europe, which had an overheating economy until 2008. A property-bubble and crash became inevitable as a consequence. If anything, events underline the dangers of too much centralisation of economic sovereignty in supranational institutions, which tend to be dominated by the Big States

There's a huge market for viagra (Ahem!) and Prozac these days!

An overheating economy certainly was not an inevitably as you well know, though our obsession with property probably made it inevitable.

My name is URL

thebman wrote: »

yeah so there is a two tier Europe great but which do we want to be in?

People don't really have a choice when it's presented to them like that.

It's kind of like asking whether you'd prefer to live in your friends house or in their yard.

Martin 2

FutureTaoiseach wrote: »

Martin, is that why American pharmaceuticals in Ireland increased production by 68.3% in the year after the no vote?

Irish exports have risen 5% in the year up to April, compared to a drop of 29% in Germany. In June, Irish exports also rose 5%. Irish industrial production rose 8.9% in the year up to July 2009 – rising to a huge 68.3% in the American pharmaceutical sector here. This evidence suggests strongly that the no vote has not impacted negatively on investor sentiment of Ireland. Intel and Ryanair have their own reasons for supporting Lisbon, relating to Intel’s appeal against the €1.06 billion fine, and Ryanair’s desire to takeover Aer Lingus which the Commission previously blocked. What is dragging the economy down has nothing do with Lisbon, but may partly be laid at the door of the ECB’s monetary policy, which has imposed Franco-German interest-rates on an economy at the perhipery of Europe, which had an overheating economy until 2008. A property-bubble and crash became inevitable as a consequence. If anything, events underline the dangers of too much centralisation of economic sovereignty in supranational institutions, which tend to be dominated by the Big States

The effects of the first No were mitigated by the fact that we are having a second referendum and the expectation / hope in the MNC sector is that we’ll pass it the second time.
The main effects of No in terms of creating jobs or impacting investor sentiment will not be felt for at 4 to 5 years as that’s the typical lead time for the creation of an FDI job however the investment can be cancelled at any time in that period
You cannot say if the first No impacted negatively on investment, what would the figure have been if we had voted yes? Have any investments been pulled or put on hold as a result of the No vote?
A final No is likely to have a much more serious effect.
It’s not just Intel that is advocating a Yes; you mentioned the pharmaceutical industry, well Pfizer (major drug company) are supporting a Yes and as far as I know all the multinationals are supporting a Yes, I know of none that supports a No.
The main reason Intel Ireland is supporting a Yes is that it’s in the best interests of the company and its employees (see their press releases). There may be some patronage towards the EU in respect of the fine however that’s just speculation and doesn’t take away from their main reason for supporting a Yes

.

K-9

My name is URL wrote: »

People don't really have a choice when it's presented to them like that.

It's kind of like asking whether you'd prefer to live in your friends house or in their yard.

Except many No campaigners would prefer to live in the yard.

Future Taoiseach eg. would prefer if we had no Euro and we where back in the good old days, tied to Sterling.

Dinner

So the impartial commission is in fact impartial. Who'da thought it.

ghost_ie

My name is URL wrote: »

People don't really have a choice when it's presented to them like that.

It's kind of like asking whether you'd prefer to live in your friends house or in their yard.

So we're essentially being bullied into voting yes. I'd rather sleep in the yard than be bullied into voting yes to lisbon

FutureTaoiseach

Dinner wrote: »

So the impartial commission is in fact impartial. Who'da thought it.

I don't shared their unequivocal belief in the absoluteness of the 'legal guarantees' because they are not in an EU Treaty. I was also amazed this morning on Morning Ireland to hear Justice Frank Clarke claim the ECJ's powers won't be greatly increased under this Treaty - which contradicts the report of the National Forum on Europe which said its jurisdiction would be "significantly increased" by the Charter of Fundamental Rights. I will post the extracts of the Forum report from last year on this question.

Another dimension to this is that, whereas he correctly states that since membership began in the 1970's, the Irish Constitution has contained wording to the effect that EU law necessitated by EU membership would supersede Irish law and the Constitition, that it is also the case that the scope of EU law itself is increased by this Treaty. If EU law supersedes national law and the Constitution, then does it not follow that each time the scope of EU law is increased, the Irish Constitution becomes incrementally more superseded? I would contend that by enshrining the Charter of Fundamental Rights into EU law under the amended Article 6 TEU, which states that the Charter will have "the same legal value as the Treaties", that the jurisdiction of the ECJ is being massively increased to practically all areas of personal freedom. Jim Corr brought out a youtube video including his position on the Charter that is useful in this regard.

K-9

ghost_ie wrote: »

So we're essentially being bullied into voting yes. I'd rather sleep in the yard than be bullied into voting yes to lisbon

Nope, as FutureTaoiseach pointed out, if you are happy with Europe as it is, fair enough.

That does not mean we can keep voting No on every future Treaty and not expect the rest to move on.

The UK and Denmark are happy with that with regards to the Euro, so should we.

That does not mean they will move on ahead, just, all we are saying with a NO is: this is as far as we go.

FutureTaoiseach

K-9 wrote: »

Nope, as FutureTaoiseach pointed out, if you are happy with Europe as it is, fair enough.

That does not mean we can keep voting No on every future Treaty and not expect the rest to move on.

The UK and Denmark are happy with that with regards to the Euro, so should we.

That does not mean they will move on ahead, just, all we are saying with a NO is: this is as far as we go.

K9, do you not think that having been rejected in another form in 2 other countries, that Lisbon is a special case that needs to be rejected for being uniquely anti-democratic compared to the others. This has never happened before with an EU treaty. In the past, if a country voted no in a referendum, it would not come into force unless they reversed that decision by referendum. But what's happened here has disturbed me and I think a lot of other people. The spirit of the French/Dutch decisions were not respected and are not being respected. They brought back 95% of it and wouldn't ask their people directly again if they had changed their minds. They just forced it on them.

Now if you think that's okay - as opposed to merely legal - then you are entitled to that point of view. I am personally appalled that the EU has gone down this road. This has never happened before with another EU treaty. Never. That makes Lisbon a special case, where we can reject this without having to necessarily reject other treaties in future. Principle is at stake here, as well as national sovereignty.

K-9

FutureTaoiseach wrote: »

K9, do you not think that having been rejected in another form in 2 other countries, that Lisbon is a special case that needs to be rejected for being uniquely anti-democratic compared to the others. This has never happened before with an EU treaty. In the past, if a country voted no in a referendum, it would not come into force unless they reversed that decision by referendum. But what's happened here has disturbed me and I think a lot of other people. The spirit of the French/Dutch decisions were not respected and are not being respected. They brought back 95% of it and wouldn't ask their people directly again if they had changed their minds. They just forced it on them.

Now if you think that's okay - as opposed to merely legal - then you are entitled to that point of view. I am personally appalled that the EU has gone down this road. This has never happened before with another EU treaty. Never. That makes Lisbon a special case, where we can reject this without having to necessarily reject other treaties in future. Principle is at stake here, as well as national sovereignty.

I would respect other countries National sovereignty and Constitutions.

Even if 100% of No voters reject the Treaty for this very reason and the Treaty is rejected, it is none of our business.

I think you do know that.

We can point out what we find unacceptable, the French and Dutch need to point this out themselves.

Otherwise we are interfering in France and Holland. You, above many, should appreciate this point.

P. Breathnach

FutureTaoiseach wrote: »

... Jim Corr brought out a youtube video including his position on the Charter that is useful in this regard.

Let's see if I understand you, FT: you are ad idem with Jim Corr? That video is a wonderful summary of the lunatic positions taken by many proponents of the no vote. I particularly liked the text on screen when he spoke of Europe having an unelected president. And I love the idea of Tony Blair, President of Ireland!

The only good thing about Jim Corr is his sisters.

[The mods might not like a NWO discussion in this forum instead of its being in CT, where it belongs.]

K-9

P. Breathnach wrote: »

The only good thing about Jim Corr is his sisters.

I agree.
What do the sisters think?

FutureTaoiseach

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Let's see if I understand you, FT: you are ad idem with Jim Corr? That video is a wonderful summary of the lunatic positions taken by many proponents of the no vote. I particularly liked the text on screen when he spoke of Europe having an unelected president. And I love the idea of Tony Blair, President of Ireland!

The only good thing about Jim Corr is his sisters.

[The mods might not like a NWO discussion in this forum instead of its being in CT, where it belongs.]

I don't agree all his views e.g. 911 an inside job. But I thought the part where he mentioned the footnotes in the Charter e.g. exceptions where the death penalty can happen, were legitimate points.

K-9

FutureTaoiseach wrote: »

I don't agree all his views e.g. 911 an inside job. But I thought the part where he mentioned the footnotes in the Charter e.g. exceptions where the death penalty can happen, were legitimate points.

Yes, but what do the sisters think?

FutureTaoiseach

K-9 wrote: »

Yes, but what do the sisters think?

I have no idea.

thebman

ghost_ie wrote: »

So we're essentially being bullied into voting yes. I'd rather sleep in the yard than be bullied into voting yes to lisbon

Your not being bullied into anything. Its your choice if you want to sleep in the yard or not :rolleyes:

zenno

I see the yes camp are still spluttering out more garbage, does it ever end.

zenno

WOW and brian cowen say's on primetime if we vote yes it will get us out of this recession quicker LOL. whether we vote yes/no it will not get us out of this recession quicker more scaremongering in the face of the irish citizen. f uck him imo. i'm like a god damn leaf i'm starting to sway all over the place with this kind of c rap