Blatant Lies From Both Sides

Raskolnikov

Is there anyone else that's getting extremely irritated with the lies that are being peddled by individuals and groups on both sides of the debate?

Firstly we had the nonsensical claims by Coir and the minimum wage that have already been covered at length here. Yesterday, we then hear Brian Cowen coming out with the ludicrous notion that a No vote will cause a crisis of confidence in the Irish economy. Quite frankly, this is an amazing claim given that our banking system is already insolvent and on obligatory ECB life support.

During the last Lisbon vote, we already had a significant percentage of the population basing their votes on irrelevent issues, inaccuracies and blatant lies. It doesn't look like it's going to be any different this time.

Rb

I've yet to see one "Vote Yes" poster that isn't riddled with lies and veiled threats aimed at the (currently) most vulnerable voters in our country.

Indeed, Coir and other lunatics have put up stupid posters, but there's an immense difference between some small, religious group sticking them up apparently sparingly, and the two biggest policitcal parties in the country doing so. It infuriates me every time I see them and my thoughts are certainly wondering where my votes will go at the next General after this behaviour.

P. Breathnach

Rb wrote: »

I've yet to see one "Vote Yes" poster that isn't riddled with lies and veiled threats aimed at the (currently) most vulnerable voters in our country...

Examples?

Rb

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Examples?

"Vote Yes for Jobs"

Vote no and there'll be no jobs apparently Lol.

I'm sure they'd target the homeless if they thought they'd vote.

Furious-Dave

Rb wrote: »

I've yet to see one "Vote Yes" poster that isn't riddled with lies and veiled threats aimed at the (currently) most vulnerable voters in our country.

Indeed, Coir and other lunatics have put up stupid posters, but there's an immense difference between some small, religious group sticking them up apparently sparingly, and the two biggest policitcal parties in the country doing so. It infuriates me every time I see them and my thoughts are certainly wondering where my votes will go at the next General after this behaviour.

Misinformation and exaggerations perhaps, but not lies. Another No vote would probably create political uncertainty in Ireland, which might cause MNCs to reconsider setting up in Ireland, which would be a loss of potential jobs.

Plotician

I'm hoping a 'yes' or a 'no' will create political certainty. Otherwise we could be in for another rerun of it all over again.

Dinner

Rb wrote: »

I've yet to see one "Vote Yes" poster that isn't riddled with lies and veiled threats aimed at the (currently) most vulnerable voters in our country.

I've yet to see a yes poster contain an actual fact, rather than intangible stuff like yes for jobs.

I've yet to see a no poster that wasn't a lie. Targetting the most vulnerable voters in the country with shit about minimum wage being lowered, or workers rights been overridden.

Disgusting.

Mario007

Dinner wrote: »

I've yet to see a yes poster contain an actual fact, rather than intangible stuff like yes for jobs.

I've yet to see a no poster that wasn't a lie. Targetting the most vulnerable voters in the country with shit about minimum wage being lowered, or workers rights been overridden.

Disgusting.

i agree but it shows that the treaty itself is really uninteresting for the general public. the yes side could find some very good points from the treaty but making slogans out of the them would be extremely difficult. the only thing i can think off would be 'vote yes to keep our commissioner' or 'vote yes for european transparency' but even those two are quite technical and would not attract many people.

ei.sdraob

Mario007 wrote: »

i agree but it shows that the treaty itself is really uninteresting for the general public. the yes side could find some very good points from the treaty but making slogans out of the them would be extremely difficult. the only thing i can think off would be 'vote yes to keep our commissioner' or 'vote yes for european transparency' but even those two are quite technical and would not attract many people.

"Yes for a better Europe"

would make for a good poster me thinks

as the aim of Lisbon is to reform the EU and make it more transparent and democratic

hobochris

A good one for the no side is where they are highlighting the difference QMV will make to our voice in Europe, comparing Germany's voting weight to ours should Lisbon get a green light.

I'm yet to see any others that arn't creative with the truth to put it lightly.

My name is URL

"Ireland Needs Europe"

No it doesn't! I'm pretty sure Ireland will still be here no matter what happens.

Only those reliant on been hand-fed by Europe need Europe

meglome

Furious-Dave wrote: »

Misinformation and exaggerations perhaps, but not lies. Another No vote would probably create political uncertainty in Ireland, which might cause MNCs to reconsider setting up in Ireland, which would be a loss of potential jobs.

The Yes posters are poor but do contain things that could come to pass as you say. I personally don't like these posters and I think it wouldn't have been difficult to do a better job. That said every single No poster I've seen has been a lie or a complete misrepresentation. So although I'm very much for a Yes vote I'd bin the Yes posters. What gets me though, time and time again, is the righteous indignation of the No campaign when they been doing far worse.

My name is URL wrote: »

"Ireland Needs Europe"

No it doesn't! I'm pretty sure Ireland will still be here no matter what happens.

Only those reliant on been hand-fed by Europe need Europe

But I wonder what condition we'd be in without the EU? Yup let's leave it all to our own wonderful politicians, they'll do a great job on their own.

dlofnep

The yes posters give off the impression that if we don't vote yes, we will become secluded. My issue with the yes campaign is that instead of putting forward tangable points on the benefits of the treaty - specific benefits, they are using fear-monger tactics to make us believe that if we don't vote yes, we're going to be lost in Europe.

Tackle the issues, and not fear-monger voters.

As for Coir goes - That 1.84 nonsense is doing more damage to the no campaign than good. They can highlight their concerns of undercutting of wages in a different manner, than fearmongering.

P. Breathnach

Rb wrote: »

"Vote Yes for Jobs"

Vote no and there'll be no jobs apparently Lol.

I'm sure they'd target the homeless if they thought they'd vote.

That's not a lie or a threat. It's pretty standard advertising puff, trying to give people a positive feeling about voting yes. Not great, but definitely not malevolent.

P. Breathnach

My name is URL wrote: »

"Ireland Needs Europe"

No it doesn't! I'm pretty sure Ireland will still be here no matter what happens.

Only those reliant on been hand-fed by Europe need Europe

You have to remember that messages on posters are necessarily short. "Ireland needs Europe to help us out of the mess we made of things" is fairly true, but too many words for a poster.

Raskolnikov

Furious-Dave wrote: »

Misinformation and exaggerations perhaps, but not lies. Another No vote would probably create political uncertainty in Ireland, which might cause MNCs to reconsider setting up in Ireland, which would be a loss of potential jobs.

I'm sorry, but that is nonsense.

The effects of whether Lisbon is passed or rejected are completely overblown by both sides. Voting No will not result in migrant workers being forced into slave labour. Likewise, voting Yes will not somehow magically create jobs or bring investment into Ireland. The Phoenix magazine already did an article in which it disseminates the real reason why Intel has come behind the treaty (essentially, they're keeing the EU sweet on anti-competitive practice). Lisbon is exactly what it says it is; an attempt to try and simplify the workings of the EU and to bring about increased coordination between member states in a variety of areas. For me, Lisbon is a smaller step in even greater European integration.

The real debate should be whether Ireland wants to participate in this or not.

Red Sleeping Beauty

P. Breathnach wrote: »

You have to remember that messages on posters are necessarily short. "Ireland needs Europe to help us out of the mess we made of things" is fairly true, but too many words for a poster....

... and has nothing to do with the text of the treaty.

Ireland for Europe have said that if there's a "no" vote then the EU will move on without us in a two speed Europe*. This is an outright lie. When these kind of groups get their wish and have this treaty passed I can't wait for the government to do a survey poll to see what where the reasons the people voted for and upon finding out they voted for jobs, recovery and for fear that Ireland would be left behind/kicked out of the EU then there'll be another referendum based on these erroneous reasons for voting "yes" .

* this was on RTE's 9 o'clock news the night this crowd launched their campaign. This bogus claim is not on their website. Irish Times article here

P. Breathnach

Alan Rouge wrote: »

... and has nothing to do with the text of the treaty.

But everything to do with context. We are dependent on goodwill.

Raskolnikov

P. Breathnach wrote: »

But everything to do with context. We are dependent on goodwill.

Can you elaborate on the exact assistance that Ireland will receive as a result of voting Yes on Lisbon, please?

K-9

hobochris wrote: »

A good one for the no side is where they are highlighting the difference QMV will make to our voice in Europe, comparing Germany's voting weight to ours should Lisbon get a green light.

I'm yet to see any others that arn't creative with the truth to put it lightly.

They leave out a very important part of QMV so it is a lie.

If it isn't, they don't understand how QMV works, which probably is true!

Daftendirekt

I'm not talking about posters specifically here, but rather the campaigns in general. Both of which, are failures.

The job of the No campaigners is to highlight the drawbacks of the treaty, and anything that might not be in the best interest of the Irish people. In this, they have failed utterly, instead resorting to lies and threats, completely unrelated to the text of the treaty. I have yet to see a single factual point made by the No campaign that I found jarring.


The job of the Yes campaigners is to highlight the benefits of the treaty, and explain why the document as a whole is in the best interests of the Irish people. In this, they have also failed utterly, instead resorting to wishy-washy slogans and catchphrases about how great Europe is, completely unrelated to the text of the treaty. I'm still waiting to hear the government put forward the Citizens' Initiative as an advantage of voting Yes to Lisbon,

Personally, I find both campaigns almost equally distasteful. The No campaign for obvious reasons (its lies), and the Yes campaign for slightly different reasons: if, after doing your own research and reading, you find something in the text of the Lisbon treaty that you strongly oppose, with good reason, and that you genuinely believe not to be in best interests of Ireland, then it doesn't really matter how great the EU has been for Ireland. Of course you should oppose it.

I'd love to see most of the Yes/No posters gone, and replaced by posters with the simple slogan: Make up your own f*cking mind!

P. Breathnach

Raskolnikov wrote: »

Can you elaborate on the exact assistance that Ireland will receive as a result of voting Yes on Lisbon, please?

There are no bribes set up and ready to be paid, but there is a long-term record of the EU conferring great favour on Ireland, much of which might be attributed to goodwill.

ei.sdraob

Raskolnikov wrote: »

Can you elaborate on the exact assistance that Ireland will receive as a result of voting Yes on Lisbon, please?

ECB continuing to buy up Irish government bonds (and soon NAMA bonds) despite the country being clearly bankrupt

Rb

Furious-Dave wrote: »

Misinformation and exaggerations perhaps, but not lies. Another No vote would probably create political uncertainty in Ireland, which might cause MNCs to reconsider setting up in Ireland, which would be a loss of potential jobs.

Oh so false information isn't lies these days? They're CLEARLY lies. "Vote Yes for Recovery, Vote Yes for Europe" is absolute bullshit and has nothing to do with the treaty itself. Yet, it misleads those who can't pay their mortgages right now to believe that Europe is our only hope, when in reality it could be the very thing to cause even further job losses here.

Plotician wrote: »

I'm hoping a 'yes' or a 'no' will create political certainty. Otherwise we could be in for another rerun of it all over again.

If it is re-run after II, it could be time for public hangings of government representatives.

Dinner wrote: »

I've yet to see a yes poster contain an actual fact, rather than intangible stuff like yes for jobs.

I've yet to see a no poster that wasn't a lie. Targetting the most vulnerable voters in the country with shit about minimum wage being lowered, or workers rights been overridden.

Disgusting.

Yes but who are Coir and why should we pay attention to them?

Answer, they're nobody and if you listen to them then you're an idiot.

Who are Fianna Fail and Fine Gael and why should we listen to them? Well, I believe that's self explanatory.

If you can't see the difference between the two main political parties in this country telling blatant lies and scare-mongering on almost every lamppost I've passed recently, and a fringe group of nutcases, then I believe the point is lost.

meglome wrote: »

But I wonder what condition we'd be in without the EU? Yup let's leave it all to our own wonderful politicians, they'll do a great job on their own.

To be quite honest, and hopefully not to derail the thread, this government is one of the very reasons I will be voting No. Not because of the damage they've done to this country, that is a point in itself which will be reserved for the General, but because should we vote Yes, where do we draw the line?

If, for example, 6 months after it is passed the EU proposes to harmonise corporation tax in the member states and it is put to vote and we say No, will we just be made vote on it again?

I don't believe this current Government can represent us in Europe, to stand up for our country and its citizens whatsoever. Nice was one thing, here we are yet again with Lisbon and what will we have to deal with in the future? Who knows, but I don't like the direction the EU in itself is headed and consequently do not like the tasks that may be put before us in the not so distant future by the institution.

If voting Yes in the hope that it magically brings about the recovery of our Economy (where voting No wouldn't) is considered valid, then voting No in anticipation of nasty surprises from Europe is equally as valid imo.

P. Breathnach wrote: »

That's not a lie or a threat. It's pretty standard advertising puff, trying to give people a positive feeling about voting yes. Not great, but definitely not malevolent.

Raskolnikov wrote: »

For me, Lisbon is a smaller step in even greater European integration.

The real debate should be whether Ireland wants to participate in this or not.

Personally I'm against any further integration in the EU, and I'm sure many of our European counterparts feel the same.

Politically, hell no. Culturally, absolutely not.

Particularly when we've an (relatively) open doors policy and other countries merely told migrant workers to f**k off.

Also, absolutely against any further enlargement, especially in the case of Turkey.

So, enough of a reason I suppose.

nesf

Alan Rouge wrote: »

... and has nothing to do with the text of the treaty.

Ireland for Europe have said that if there's a "no" vote then the EU will move on without us in a two speed Europe*. This is an outright lie. When these kind of groups get their wish and have this treaty passed I can't wait for the government to do a survey poll to see what where the reasons the people voted for and upon finding out they voted for jobs, recovery and for fear that Ireland would be left behind/kicked out of the EU then there'll be another referendum based on these erroneous reasons for voting "yes" .

* this was on RTE's 9 o'clock news the night this crowd launched their campaign. This bogus claim is not on their website. Irish Times article here

Problematically it's not necessarily a lie. There is a precedent with the UK etc being left outside of the Eurozone. It's unfortunately entirely possible that a No here could lead us down a similar path eventually. I don't consider it likely, but it cannot be definitely ruled out because there is a precedent for something like this happening in the EU before now. Versus nonsense about the EU breaching protocols and similar for which there is no precedence.

Where was it on the 9 o'clock news though? I don't remember it being mentioned.

nesf

Rb wrote: »

Oh so false information isn't lies these days? They're CLEARLY lies. "Vote Yes for Recovery, Vote Yes for Europe" is absolute bullshit and has nothing to do with the treaty itself.

How the hell is Vote Yes for Europe a lie? Seriously, it's a bad slogan but that's it, just a slogan it makes no factual claims about anything! Vote Yes for Recovery is nonsense all right but you could patch together an argument to support it.

There is an enormous difference between nonsense like "Vote Yes for Recovery" and "Vote No for Freedom" type slogans which while a bit silly can be backed up by a semi-argument and something like the Cóir's pure lies about factual matters like the minimum wage. We cannot completely rule in or rule out Recovery being boosted by a Yes vote while we can completely rule out the minimum wage point that Cóir are making.


Edit: Also, this isn't about the text of the treaty but it is about the consequences of a No, which do exist, and being intangibles are very hard to pin down as complete fabrications. Similar to nonsense about a No vote having no consequences which is rolled out by the opposite side.

PopeBuckfastXVI

Alan Rouge wrote: »

... and has nothing to do with the text of the treaty.

Ireland for Europe have said that if there's a "no" vote then the EU will move on without us in a two speed Europe*. This is an outright lie. When these kind of groups get their wish and have this treaty passed I can't wait for the government to do a survey poll to see what where the reasons the people voted for and upon finding out they voted for jobs, recovery and for fear that Ireland would be left behind/kicked out of the EU then there'll be another referendum based on these erroneous reasons for voting "yes" .

* this was on RTE's 9 o'clock news the night this crowd launched their campaign. This bogus claim is not on their website. Irish Times article here

One of the most vocal 'No' advocates on boards.ie disagrees:

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.

Seems like he wants a 2 speed Europe, and seems to want Ireland firmly in the slow lane, seems like he thinks a 'No' vote is the way to achieve that...

utick

Furious-Dave wrote: »

might[/I] cause MNCs to reconsider setting up in Ireland, which would be a loss of potential jobs.

spain supports lisbon treaty, currently they have an unemployment rate of 18% which is expected to rise to 20% http://www.forbes.com/feeds/afx/2009/09/07/afx6855003.html ....bear in mind that 20% is an estimate so will probably be even higher. I fail to see any link whatsoever between lisbon and jobs

nesf

utick wrote: »

spain supports lisbon treaty, currently they have an unemployment rate of 18% which is expected to rise to 20% http://www.forbes.com/feeds/afx/2009/09/07/afx6855003.html ....bear in mind that 20% is an estimate so will probably be even higher. I fail to see any link whatsoever between lisbon and jobs

Which says nothing about the consequences for a No vote in Ireland (a dramatically different economy) for jobs.]#

The above is the equivalent to the following nonsensical (but completely factual) point:

The average EU country that supports Lisbon has a lower rate of employment than Ireland. Therefore, Lisbon support is linked to low unemployment!

PopeBuckfastXVI

utick wrote: »

spain supports lisbon treaty, currently they have an unemployment rate of 18% which is expected to rise to 20% http://www.forbes.com/feeds/afx/2009/09/07/afx6855003.html ....bear in mind that 20% is an estimate so will probably be even higher. I fail to see any link whatsoever between lisbon and jobs

France and Germany support the Lisbon treaty and their economies have moved into recovery.

What's your point.

You can't disprove a possible link between rejection of Lisbon and a deteriorating economy using those cases, that's just not how logic works. Sorry.

utick

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

France and Germany support the Lisbon treaty and their economies have moved into recovery.

What's your point.

You can't disprove a possible link between rejection of Lisbon and a deteriorating economy using those cases, that's just not how logic works. Sorry.

to be honest i would think the comparisons between ireland and spain are far more valid then the economies of france and germany. Then take a look at switzderland who arent even in the eu, they have unemployment of about 4%, what i am saying is if you run your economy recklesly there are prices to pay, lisbon wont change that one way or the other. On the other side if you do run your economy responsibly you will get through the tough times

K-9

utick wrote: »

I fail to see any link whatsoever between lisbon and jobs

Why do you think that is?

Rb

nesf wrote: »

How the hell is Vote Yes for Europe a lie? Seriously, it's a bad slogan but that's it, just a slogan it makes no factual claims about anything!

Because we're not voting for or against Europe? Although, the big parties would have us believe we are. It *might* backfire on them though considering the change in attitudes towards immigration and migrant workers of late though.

Nesf wrote:

Vote Yes for Recovery is nonsense all right but you could patch together an argument to support it

Absolute nonsense, although I think one would be harder pressed to patch together an argument to support the statement than not.

Nesf wrote:

There is an enormous difference between nonsense like "Vote Yes for Recovery" and "Vote No for Freedom" type slogans which while a bit silly can be backed up by a semi-argument and something like the Cóir's pure lies about factual matters like the minimum wage. We cannot completely rule in or rule out Recovery being boosted by a Yes vote while we can completely rule out the minimum wage point that Cóir are making.

Yes but again, Coir are a bunch of religious nutjobs who shouldn't be afforded the attention they seek. The same cannot be said about FF, FG and to a lesser extent Labour (I've yet to see their posters fwiw). How the Government and their main opposition parties treat the public should certainly be watched. If I were to base my vote in the next General purely on the behaviour we're witnessing now, and also over the past few months, from the bigger parties, I would most likely spoil my vote as I believe it to be disgraceful and completely unbecoming of parties who wish to be taken seriously, particularly in the stages of Europe.

Nesf wrote:

Edit: Also, this isn't about the text of the treaty but it is about the consequences of a No, which do exist, and being intangibles are very hard to pin down as complete fabrications. Similar to nonsense about a No vote having no consequences which is rolled out by the opposite side.

The worst thing about a No vote is that it leaves us in "unchartered territory", however if one is opposed to a further politically integrated union then a Yes to Lisbon itself will leave us in a form of "unchartered territory".

nesf

Rb wrote: »

Because we're not voting for or against Europe? Although, the big parties would have us believe we are. It *might* backfire on them though considering the change in attitudes towards immigration and migrant workers of late though.

The slogan does not say that we're voting for or against Europe, it could easily be read as "Vote Yes, it's the best choice for us and Europe" etc.

Rb wrote: »

Absolute nonsense, although I think one would be harder pressed to patch together an argument to support the statement than not.

Not really, you just need to show that a No vote might negatively affect Ireland's recovery, which isn't that hard to do.

Rb wrote: »

Yes but again, Coir are a bunch of religious nutjobs who shouldn't be afforded the attention they seek. The same cannot be said about FF, FG and to a lesser extent Labour (I've yet to see their posters fwiw). How the Government and their main opposition parties treat the public should certainly be watched. If I were to base my vote in the next General purely on the behaviour we're witnessing now, and also over the past few months, from the bigger parties, I would most likely spoil my vote as I believe it to be disgraceful and completely unbecoming of parties who wish to be taken seriously, particularly in the stages of Europe.

Yes but my point is that we're talking about factal lies with Cóir, not overreaching in slogans like with FF and FG. It's impossible to point to a book of law and show where FF or FG are lying, you can do that with Cóir.

Rb wrote: »

The worst thing about a No vote is that it leaves us in "unchartered territory", however if one is opposed to a further politically integrated union then a Yes to Lisbon itself will leave us in a form of "unchartered territory".

If you're opposed to further integrated union then you are willing to accept a two speed Europe where we along with Britain and a few others abstain while the others integrate further?

Rb

nesf wrote: »

The slogan does not say that we're voting for or against Europe, it could easily be read as "Vote Yes, it's the best choice for us and Europe" etc.

I believe most would take the statement literally. "Vote Yes for Europe". Come on, how can you claim that doesn't insinuate that voting yes = for Europe and voting no = against Europe.

nesf wrote:

Not really, you just need to show that a No vote might negatively affect Ireland's recovery, which isn't that hard to do.

"Patching together" a statement indeed. Although, I would be of the opinion that excuses shouldn't have to be dreamt up to cover widely published propaganda by the mainstream parties & opposition.

Nesf wrote:

Yes but my point is that we're talking about factal lies with Cóir, not overreaching in slogans like with FF and FG. It's impossible to point to a book of law and show where FF or FG are lying, you can do that with Cóir.

Well, isn't that convenient?

Nesf wrote:

If you're opposed to further integrated union then you are willing to accept a two speed Europe where we along with Britain and a few others abstain while the others integrate further?

Absolutely, if a "two speed" EU came with increased flexibility as to what we opt in/opt out of, such as Lisbon, Nice etc, then I can certainly see the benefits of being in such a system. It could even be optimal.

Indeed it may have its consequences, however I'm so vehemently opposed to such possibilities as Muslim member states that I'd certainly be willing to consider them.

nesf

Rb wrote: »

I believe most would take the statement literally. "Vote Yes for Europe". Come on, how can you claim that doesn't insinuate that voting yes = for Europe and voting no = against Europe.

Of course it insinuates it, it wouldn't be much use as a political slogan if it didn't paint the opposite side as bad now would it?

Rb wrote: »

Well, isn't that convenient?

Yeah, it's the difference between blatant lies and the normal political bull****.

P. Breathnach

Rb wrote: »

... Indeed it may have its consequences, however I'm so vehemently opposed to such possibilities as Muslim member states that I'd certainly be willing to consider them.

Is this today's line by the no campaign? "Let's frighten them with Turkey."

Rb

nesf wrote: »

Of course it insinuates it, it wouldn't be much use as a political slogan if it didn't paint the opposite side as bad now would it?

It's not really implying much else though, is it? Taken literally, I should say.

Vote Yes for No Rape would be an interesting one.

Nesf wrote:

Yeah, it's the difference between blatant lies and the normal political bull****.

Personally I see the whole lot as blatant lies. Lisbon will not directly aid Ireland's recovery from the economic downturn, so implying that voting Yes on it will is a lie as far as I'm concerned. Implied, indeed, but nevertheless present.

Rb

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Is this today's line by the no campaign? "Let's frighten them with Turkey."

:rolleyes:

meglome

Rb wrote: »

Who are Fianna Fail and Fine Gael and why should we listen to them? Well, I believe that's self explanatory.

If you can't see the difference between the two main political parties in this country telling blatant lies and scare-mongering on almost every lamppost I've passed recently, and a fringe group of nutcases, then I believe the point is lost.

We don't need to listen to them, we could listen to most of the unions (since you're so worried about workers rights), our labour organisations, our academics, our media, our business organisations, the church etc, remember all those people that are calling for a Yes vote. Or we could read the treaty and see for ourselves.

The Yes posters are not blatant lies, they may be rubbish slogans that don't explain why any of those things could happen. However those things they claim could happen. No don't get me wrong I don't like those posters either. One other thing to remember is we did elect our politicians as bad as they are but I don't recall anyone electing Cóir.

Rb wrote: »

To be quite honest, and hopefully not to derail the thread, this government is one of the very reasons I will be voting No. Not because of the damage they've done to this country, that is a point in itself which will be reserved for the General, but because should we vote Yes, where do we draw the line?

We draw the line whenever it goes further than we the Irish people are willing to go. We still need a referendum if our government or the EU wants to take things further. But if I get this right you want to vote No now because of a hypothetical issue which could arise in the future which we can vote No to then or just reject at the negotiation stages. I don't know what to say to that, but did you really think it through?

Rb wrote: »

If, for example, 6 months after it is passed the EU proposes to harmonise corporation tax in the member states and it is put to vote and we say No, will we just be made vote on it again?

The EU has no say over direct taxes like corporation tax or income tax. But if they wanted to we'd have to vote on a new treaty for that which we'd reject so your whole point is nonsense.

Rb wrote: »

I don't believe this current Government can represent us in Europe, to stand up for our country and its citizens whatsoever. Nice was one thing, here we are yet again with Lisbon and what will we have to deal with in the future? Who knows, but I don't like the direction the EU in itself is headed and consequently do not like the tasks that may be put before us in the not so distant future by the institution.

You or I have no idea what we'll have to deal with in the future. So what we should do is vote now based on the now and then vote in the future based on the situation then. It's pretty simple. Since we the Irish people have the power we don't need to fear.

I'm amused by your whole line as if we can be forced to do something, we can't it's as simple as that nor have the EU even tried.

Rb wrote: »

If voting Yes in the hope that it magically brings about the recovery of our Economy (where voting No wouldn't) is considered valid, then voting No in anticipation of nasty surprises from Europe is equally as valid imo.

Voting yes improves the running of the EU and the potential success of the EU which in turn benefits Ireland. And really your whole 'assume the sky is gonna fall' line is just rubbish.

Rb

meglome wrote: »

We don't need to listen to them, we could listen to most of the unions (since you're so worried about workers rights), our labour organisations, our academics, our media, our business organisations, the church etc, remember all those people that are calling for a Yes vote. Or we could read the treaty and see for ourselves.

You've missed my point entirely.

The Yes posters are not blatant lies, they may be rubbish slogans that don't explain why any of those things could happen. However those things they claim could happen. No don't get me wrong I don't like those posters either. One other thing to remember is we did elect our politicians as bad as they are but I don't recall anyone electing Cóir.

Yes but a lot of things could happen, I find it appalling that the main parties have to resort to threatening, albeit veiled threats, instead of selling the treaty in a positive manner.

We draw the line whenever it goes further than we the Irish people are willing to go. We still need a referendum if our government or the EU wants to take things further. But if I get this right you want to vote No now because of a hypothetical issue which could arise in the future which we can vote No to then or just reject at the negotiation stages. I don't know what to say to that, but did you really think it through?

The EU has no say over direct taxes like corporation tax or income tax. But if they wanted to we'd have to vote on a new treaty for that which we'd reject so your whole point is nonsense.

Oh, how easy it is to say that now. Yet, here we are again voting on a treaty that the Irish people have said no to, regardless or reasons for doing so. Not only that, but our own Government is filling our streets with non-issue, BS propaganda in an effort to force the damn thing through.

You or I have no idea what we'll have to deal with in the future. So what we should do is vote now based on the now and then vote in the future based on the situation then. It's pretty simple. Since we the Irish people have the power we don't need to fear.

We should be voting in the interests of now and the future, not merely for now.

I'm amused by your whole line as if we can be forced to do something, we can't it's as simple as that nor have the EU even tried.

Almost as soon as the results of the first referendum were published, EU leaders said "they'll have to vote again", before even considering the issues the voters had with the text.

Now we're back again to do so, only with more veiled threats this time as now it's not merely the No side doing so.

I'm more concerned that we more than likely do not currently have a party that can represent this country in the EU and stand up for it's citizen's.

Voting yes improves the running of the EU and the potential success of the EU which in turn benefits Ireland. And really your whole 'assume the sky is gonna fall' line is just rubbish.

Wow, congrats on absolutely not getting the point. Twice in the one post, I think I'll just avoid engaging in future to be quite honest. Good luck.

meglome

Rb it's like we're talking different languages. I really don't see your problem.

As I keep saying I don't like how the Yes campaign is being run, I really don't. But I can still see the difference between bad advertising slogans, that could happen and blatant unashamed lies. What is it with you No people, hardly any of you gave a damn about scaremongering or lies until you felt that the Yes side were doing it. Even though that's how the No campaign got the win the last time.

I'm sorry but most of what you're saying is rubbish.

Raskolnikov

ei.sdraob wrote: »

ECB continuing to buy up Irish government bonds (and soon NAMA bonds) despite the country being clearly bankrupt

THis has been agreed upon by the ECB and Ireland. A No vote will have no effect whatsoever on this plan.

Red Sleeping Beauty

Daftendirekt wrote: »

I'm not talking about posters specifically here, but rather the campaigns in general. Both of which, are failures.

The job of the No campaigners is to highlight the drawbacks of the treaty, and anything that might not be in the best interest of the Irish people. In this, they have failed utterly, instead resorting to lies and threats, completely unrelated to the text of the treaty. I have yet to see a single factual point made by the No campaign that I found jarring.


The job of the Yes campaigners is to highlight the benefits of the treaty, and explain why the document as a whole is in the best interests of the Irish people. In this, they have also failed utterly, instead resorting to wishy-washy slogans and catchphrases about how great Europe is, completely unrelated to the text of the treaty. I'm still waiting to hear the government put forward the Citizens' Initiative as an advantage of voting Yes to Lisbon,

Personally, I find both campaigns almost equally distasteful. The No campaign for obvious reasons (its lies), and the Yes campaign for slightly different reasons: if, after doing your own research and reading, you find something in the text of the Lisbon treaty that you strongly oppose, with good reason, and that you genuinely believe not to be in best interests of Ireland, then it doesn't really matter how great the EU has been for Ireland. Of course you should oppose it.

I'd love to see most of the Yes/No posters gone, and replaced by posters with the simple slogan: Make up your own f*cking mind!

What group or party or people are you talking about there with regards to the "no" campaigns ?

Joe Higgins, Patricia McKenna and Vincent Browne have all highlighted good reasons to vote no. It's Coir spinning lies and threats.

P. Breathnach wrote: »

There are no bribes set up and ready to be paid, but there is a long-term record of the EU conferring great favour on Ireland, much of which might be attributed to goodwill.

Are they going to take away their roundabouts (or whatever % of them they own) if we vote no again ? Come on really, this spreading of fear that there'll be sanctions against Ireland if this gets shot down again is just ludicrous.

nesf wrote: »

Where was it on the 9 o'clock news though? I don't remember it being mentioned.

It was on the 9 O'Clock news whatever night Ireland for Europe launched its campaign. It was 2nd story from the top if I remember correct. Don't think they archive their newscasts on the website though.

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

One of the most vocal 'No' advocates on boards.ie disagrees:

.

FutureTaoiseach doesn't speak for me on this. He/she has their own reasons and arguments on this.

nesf

Alan Rouge wrote: »

Don't think they archive their newscasts on the website though.

They do. About a week's worth I think.

P. Breathnach

Alan Rouge wrote: »

... Are they going to take away their roundabouts (or whatever % of them they own) if we vote no again ? Come on really, this spreading of fear that there'll be sanctions against Ireland if this gets shot down again is just ludicrous...

It's not in the least bit ludicrous to point out that the EU has treated Ireland well, and that goodwill has been involved. A loss of goodwill is not equivalent to the imposition of sanctions, and to suggest that I was was spreading such a fear is a gross distortion of what I said.

Remind me of the thread title.

Sam Vimes

Alan Rouge wrote: »

Joe Higgins, Patricia McKenna and Vincent Browne have all highlighted good reasons to vote no. It's Coir spinning lies and threats.

Do you mean when he took an article of the treaty, chopped half of it out to change its meaning to something negative and put it up on his website?

http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055677394

ei.sdraob

Joe Higgins

Im still searching the Treaty to find out what it has to do with Privatization or where its mentioned