October 2nd 2009 - Demoracy in Ireland R.I.P.

eamo127

Mario007 wrote: »

dude i just...i'm trying not to be rude here

Do you elect your judges? No you freaking dont!
Are these people at the ECHR politicians to be elected? No, once again not!
Who elects them? I thought you read up on it. it's nomination of judges from each state. ireland has 5 i think.
if the supreme court rules against you will you accept it's authority? obviously! why? because the most learned judges are there. this court is basically another court of appeal, where you are given the fairest trial, since the judges couldn't care less about your sex, orientation, race etc. they are not tied down to the society of the state they live. yet again i'd say visit the norris case.

and stop this nonsese of 'ooh but who elects them'? up until now everything was unelected and no one cared. now its indirectly elected and people whine over it.

I know - it's just this crazy idea I have about the politicians and judiciary being accountable to the great unwashed masses. I mean, what if some crazy guy gets elected (I know it hasn't happened for 70 years in europe and probably won't happen again, won't it?), it would be nice to have the power to remove him democratically. But if he's unelected, who's to say what power he cold derive himself.

Mario007

eamo127 wrote: »

I know - it's just this crazy idea I have about the politicians and judiciary being accountable to the great unwashed masses. I mean, what if some crazy guy gets elected (I know it hasn't happened for 70 years in europe and probably won't happen again, won't it?), it would be nice to have the power to remove him democratically. But if he's unelected, who's to say what power he cold derive himself.

if he gets into the commision? then the EP have the power to remove him
if he gets as the president of the council the yet again EP and the council if i'm correct
if he become the president of ireland though...no one can get rid off him...damn our constitution is undemocratic.

eamo127

well, I'm worn out with all the Yes folks here, but I'll post one more before bed.

Here's a small, but telling example of the undemocratic power of the eu. Remember the water bills for schools last year? Yeah, those eu-issued bills up to €10,000 the schools were required to pay.

Remermber Dermot Aherns reaction - "Nothing to do with me, this was an eu decision", before going on some diatribe about our 'obligations' to europe. He assured us he would never support such a directive, but it was 'out of his hands'.

Lisbon takes the accountablilty away from our politicians. they just like having their noses in the Molloy or O'Donnaghue though and never having to account for decisions made many miles away in a commission where we really have no influence. And in 5 years time, we'll get the 'eu is good for us' circus rolling in with Pat 'The Cope' assuring us that we are 'better in europe' before riding off to the brussles sunset again.

As I said in an earlier post, the yes folks here would do well to temper their celebrations. They ramroaded our democratic NO vote and forced us to vote again on the EXACT SAME document. But the yes side will have no right to complain if the tables are reversed in the future and it it their vote that is disinfranchised. How could they?

Mario007

eamo127 wrote: »

well, I'm worn out with all the Yes folks here, but I'll post one more before bed.

Here's a small, but telling example of the undemocratic power of the eu. Remember the water bills for schools last year? Yeah, those eu-issued bills up to €10,000 the schools were required to pay.

Remermber Dermot Aherns reaction - "Nothing to do with me, this was an eu decision", before going on some diatribe about our 'obligations' to europe. He assured us he would never support such a directive, but it was 'out of his hands'.

Lisbon takes the accountablilty away from our politicians. they just like having their noses in the Molloy or O'Donnaghue though and never having to account for decisions made many miles away in a commission where we really have no influence. And in 5 years time, we'll get the 'eu is good for us' circus rolling in with Pat 'The Cope' assuring us that we are 'better in europe' before riding off to the brussles sunset again.

As I said in an earlier post, the yes folks here would do well to temper their celebrations. They ramroaded our democratic NO vote and forced us to vote again on the EXACT SAME document. But the yes side will have no right to complain if the tables are reversed in the future and it it their vote that is disinfranchised. How could they?

nice to see you ignoring every argument thrown at you and rather heading off to bed. i expect, as is the usual trend, that you wont be back tomorrow so see ya!

and politicians love to say 'it was an eu decission' when they were the part of the machine that made it. thats why lisbon gives more accountabilty as the council meets in open so we know whether our ministers were for or against it.

WeeBushy

eamo127 wrote: »

As I said in an earlier post, the yes folks here would do well to temper their celebrations. They ramroaded our democratic NO vote and forced us to vote again on the EXACT SAME document. But the yes side will have no right to complain if the tables are reversed in the future and it it their vote that is disinfranchised. How could they?

Please tell me how you were forced to vote yes? Nobody was made vote either way - they were free to vote whichever way they pleased. And just because over 60% of our population don't agree with your view, doesn't make it undemocratic.

I suggest you stop throwing toys out of the pram...

passive

eamo127 wrote: »

Here's a small, but telling example of the undemocratic power of the eu. Remember the water bills for schools last year? Yeah, those eu-issued bills up to €10,000 the schools were required to pay.

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/mhojgbqleyql/

:pac:

K-9

eamo127 wrote: »

well, I'm worn out with all the Yes folks here, but I'll post one more before bed.

Here's a small, but telling example of the undemocratic power of the eu. Remember the water bills for schools last year? Yeah, those eu-issued bills up to €10,000 the schools were required to pay.

Remermber Dermot Aherns reaction - "Nothing to do with me, this was an eu decision", before going on some diatribe about our 'obligations' to europe. He assured us he would never support such a directive, but it was 'out of his hands'.

Lisbon takes the accountablilty away from our politicians. they just like having their noses in the Molloy or O'Donnaghue though and never having to account for decisions made many miles away in a commission where we really have no influence. And in 5 years time, we'll get the 'eu is good for us' circus rolling in with Pat 'The Cope' assuring us that we are 'better in europe' before riding off to the brussles sunset again.

As I said in an earlier post, the yes folks here would do well to temper their celebrations. They ramroaded our democratic NO vote and forced us to vote again on the EXACT SAME document. But the yes side will have no right to complain if the tables are reversed in the future and it it their vote that is disinfranchised. How could they?

Ah, that is actually one of the good changes.

The Dail will get copies of all directives and have 8 weeks to suggest changes. So, they can't say this anymore. If they play the EU card we can ask, "well what changes did you suggest?"

I do agree with your point. They blame the EU for hard decisions they will not make themselves.

You should read more into that decision and see what really happened and not accept FF blaming the EU.

K-9

passive wrote: »

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/mhojgbqleyql/

:pac:

Cheers. They'll have to answer about this now.

orourkeda

WeeBushy wrote: »

Please tell me how you were forced to vote yes? Nobody was made vote either way - they were free to vote whichever way they pleased. And just because over 60% of our population don't agree with your view, doesn't make it undemocratic.

I suggest you stop throwing toys out of the pram...

Did the yes side throw their toys out of the pram after the last referendum?

Didnt the majority vote against the treaty and disagree last time? What was so undemocratic about this decision that caused a re-run.

ei.sdraob

orourkeda wrote: »

Did the yes side throw their toys out of the pram after the last referendum?

Didnt the majority vote against the treaty and disagree last time? What was so undemocratic about this decision that caused a re-run.

im gonna keep linking to this until it sinks in

mousehound

mousehound original question:-What have the Irish people agreed to with this YES vote

ei.sdraob wrote: »

the Lisbon Treaty ?

But, what are the specifics of the treaty?

truthisfree wrote:- Yes, now you got the idea, vague and undefined is what the yes side have built their campaign on,
This vague and undefined campaign is what the yes side promoted because:- the treaty IS vague and undefined!
The clauses are "once agreed, become SELF amending" Meaning the commission can change the clauses WITHOUT scrutiny, veto or alteration from member state govenments.

This is akin to this scenario: A slave is given a document to sign agreement on by his master. It reads "on reviewing the slaves position the master has decided to free the slave with the slaves agreement. If the slave agrees to this he should sign below to give the master authority to carry this action out"
The slave is very happy and signs. Below the signature box there is a small line of text " the master can alter the text of this agreement at any time without discussion with the slave who, having agreed by signature, will be deemed to continuing agreement and be bound by any such alterations"
Two days later the master comes to the slave with a gun and shots him. The slaves family scream "why?" The master shows them the signed agreement which has free crossed out and execute written in, and states "he agreed to it"

If the treaty is ratified and gives such power to it's commission with Tony Blair as the president (a man who to the UK into two illegal wars showing he is willing to sacrifice his own people) I fear for the future.
Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.

WeeBushy

orourkeda wrote: »

Did the yes side throw their toys out of the pram after the last referendum?

No they didn't, they set about finding out what the reasons were for us voting no and then addressed them. Seems fairly level headed to me; a lot more mature than ranting and raving about a lack of democracy tbh.

orourkeda wrote: »

Didnt the majority vote against the treaty and disagree last time? What was so undemocratic about this decision that caused a re-run.

Yes, the majority did vote against it the first time, and there was nothing whatsoever undemocratic about that decision. I don't really understand why you've said that though.

WeeBushy

mousehound wrote: »

mousehound original question:-What have the Irish people agreed to with this YES vote


But, what are the specifics of the treaty?

truthisfree wrote:- Yes, now you got the idea, vague and undefined is what the yes side have built their campaign on,
This vague and undefined campaign is what the yes side promoted because:- the treaty IS vague and undefined!
The clauses are "once agreed, become SELF amending" Meaning the commission can change the clauses WITHOUT scrutiny, veto or alteration from member state govenments.

This is akin to this scenario: A slave is given a document to sign agreement on by his master. It reads "on reviewing the slaves position the master has decided to free the slave with the slaves agreement. If the slave agrees to this he should sign below to give the master authority to carry this action out"
The slave is very happy and signs. Below the signature box there is a small line of text " the master can alter the text of this agreement at any time without discussion with the slave who, having agreed by signature, will be deemed to continuing agreement and be bound by any such alterations"
Two days later the master comes to the slave with a gun and shots him. The slaves family scream "why?" The master shows them the signed agreement which has free crossed out and execute written in, and states "he agreed to it"

If the treaty is ratified and gives such power to it's commission with Tony Blair as the president (a man who to the UK into two illegal wars showing he is willing to sacrifice his own people) I fear for the future.
Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.

I'm so glad nonsense like this can just be ignored. It's hard to believe that people still believe such tripe.

Elba101

orourkeda wrote: »

Do you honestly that people are better informed that they were at the last referendum? I can't believe that for a second.

Well seeing as i knew nothing about it last year and fair amount this year, yes. Yes i do.

You see, i realised my own ignorance last time round and decided that it wasn't so blissful, and so i decided to become informed. And in doing so, i was able to pay it forward.

Anyway, its over now maybe its time we all moved on from Lisbon??

P. Breathnach

Elba101 wrote: »

... Anyway, its over now maybe its time we all moved on from Lisbon??

Think of the continuing discussions as therapy for the disappointed advocates of voting no.

eamo127

WeeBushy wrote: »

Please tell me how you were forced to vote yes?

Buy forcing another referendum on us on the same document - you cannot get away from that fact. Wouldn't you cry foul if some power in Brussels forced us to have another referendum and vote NO or face economic ruin? Imagine that scenario - that's exactly what the YES side did to the noes. Irrefutable fact that will forever blemish the idea of eu democracy.

Daftendirekt

mousehound wrote: »

mousehound original question:-What have the Irish people agreed to with this YES vote


But, what are the specifics of the treaty?

truthisfree wrote:- Yes, now you got the idea, vague and undefined is what the yes side have built their campaign on,
This vague and undefined campaign is what the yes side promoted because:- the treaty IS vague and undefined!
The clauses are "once agreed, become SELF amending" Meaning the commission can change the clauses WITHOUT scrutiny, veto or alteration from member state govenments.

This is akin to this scenario: A slave is given a document to sign agreement on by his master. It reads "on reviewing the slaves position the master has decided to free the slave with the slaves agreement. If the slave agrees to this he should sign below to give the master authority to carry this action out"
The slave is very happy and signs. Below the signature box there is a small line of text " the master can alter the text of this agreement at any time without discussion with the slave who, having agreed by signature, will be deemed to continuing agreement and be bound by any such alterations"
Two days later the master comes to the slave with a gun and shots him. The slaves family scream "why?" The master shows them the signed agreement which has free crossed out and execute written in, and states "he agreed to it"

If the treaty is ratified and gives such power to it's commission with Tony Blair as the president (a man who to the UK into two illegal wars showing he is willing to sacrifice his own people) I fear for the future.
Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.

There are so many things wrong with this post, I don't know if I should just leave it to go unnoticed.

Two of the most glaring errors however.

The master/slave analogy is just warped. Whether the master represents the EU or the Irish government, this is just wrong. Ireland is an equal partner with the 26 other member states, and the government work for the people, they don't rule them.

Secondly, there is nothing in Lisbon that says it can be changed at will. Nothing. Anything that required a referendum before Lisbon, will require one after Lisbon, and that's spelled out in black and white in our Constitution, in Article 48 of the TEU and in the Crotty Judgement.

Think I'll just leave it there.

bauderline

eamo127 wrote: »

Buy forcing another referendum on us on the same document - you cannot get away from that fact. Wouldn't you cry foul if some power in Brussels forced us to have another referendum and vote NO or face economic ruin? Imagine that scenario - that's exactly what the YES side did to the noes. Irrefutable fact that will forever blemish the idea of eu democracy.

I'll say this using small words and visual aids...

1. I was not forced to do anything.
2. I was given another opportunity to vote on the Lisbon treaty.
3. It was my choice whether to vote or not.
4. It was my choice whether I voted YES or NO.

So lets say this one more time...

NO ONE WAS FORCED TO DO ANYTHING !!!!

okay ?

scaredoflisbon

Fuhrer wrote: »

Heaven Forbid we get the kind of economic success that Blair brought about in Britian

Economic success????? they now have the largest budget deficit in the Western world. Bigger than ours even in percentage terms. And they are just thinking about raising taxes and reducing public services! Thats the kind of leadership we need here. Fortunately the UK can see the dangers of the doing the latter as it further depresses the economy?
You have to compare like with like. UK has a sixty million population we are only 4 million.
We are now the official 'yes men' of the EU. it is quite clear that the EU does not accept the word NO unless you are one of the bigger countries. To say we have an equal voice in Europe is a delusion. We will be forced in the 'nicest possible way' to toe the line on any major decisions. Saying 'No' is not an option. If you can't see that you are either blind or stupid.

OldJay

scaredoflisbon wrote: »

To say we have an equal voice in Europe is a delusion

We have proportional representation, the way it should be.

scaredoflisbon wrote: »

Saying 'No' is not an option. If you can't see that you are either blind or stupid.

Saying 'no' is an entirely actual entitlement and right hence the commissioner veto.
As I said, its proportional. Compared to the amount of structural funds received and next up, ECB aid to a bankrupt banking system, I'd say the Republic of Ireland is doing damn well out of its position within the EU.

Wanting everything for nothing doesn't come into this. Those days are gone, fella.

OldJay

eamo127 wrote: »

Buy forcing another referendum on us on the same document - you cannot get away from that fact. Wouldn't you cry foul if some power in Brussels forced us to have another referendum and vote NO or face economic ruin? Imagine that scenario - that's exactly what the YES side did to the noes. Irrefutable fact that will forever blemish the idea of eu democracy.

Crying foul should be aimed at the disgraceful emotional blackmailing on the electorate by the 'No' side last time around based on WHOPPING GREAT LIES concerning abortion, euthanasia, conscription, taxation, militarisation etc etc.

This time around the voting public has seen through the lies as decreed by the legal guarantees to the country and voted accordingly.
That is democracy.

namloc1980

mousehound wrote: »

mousehound original question:-What have the Irish people agreed to with this YES vote


But, what are the specifics of the treaty?

truthisfree wrote:- Yes, now you got the idea, vague and undefined is what the yes side have built their campaign on,
This vague and undefined campaign is what the yes side promoted because:- the treaty IS vague and undefined!
The clauses are "once agreed, become SELF amending" Meaning the commission can change the clauses WITHOUT scrutiny, veto or alteration from member state govenments.

This is akin to this scenario: A slave is given a document to sign agreement on by his master. It reads "on reviewing the slaves position the master has decided to free the slave with the slaves agreement. If the slave agrees to this he should sign below to give the master authority to carry this action out"
The slave is very happy and signs. Below the signature box there is a small line of text " the master can alter the text of this agreement at any time without discussion with the slave who, having agreed by signature, will be deemed to continuing agreement and be bound by any such alterations"
Two days later the master comes to the slave with a gun and shots him. The slaves family scream "why?" The master shows them the signed agreement which has free crossed out and execute written in, and states "he agreed to it"

If the treaty is ratified and gives such power to it's commission with Tony Blair as the president (a man who to the UK into two illegal wars showing he is willing to sacrifice his own people) I fear for the future.
Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Have you even read the Treaty or the new simplified revision procedure (the so called 'self-amending clause') contained within the Treaty?? Because based on what you've posted here you clearly have no idea what you are on about.

Please read The Treaty on European Union as amended by Lisbon. I have the link here. Article 48

Johnny Utah

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Thomas J. Clarke, Sean Mac Diarmada, Thomas MacDonagh, P. H. Pearse, Eamonn Ceannt, James Connolly, Joseph Plunkett are all turning in their graves at the outcome.

These were great men. They fought and died for their country. They were patriotic and they had principles, unlike the shower of morons we have representing us today. These lackeys led a campaign of fear of intimidation and fear, and before the count was even over, Lenihan has the audacity to say that "the posters never promised jobs". Unbelievable. Their arrogance knows no bounds. The 2nd of October will go down as a sad day for Ireland. For shame.

Galmay

I think many people were misinformed regarding the Lisbon treaty and did not know what they were voting for. Out of fear they of the unknown they voted no last time round. This was used as a reason to hold a second referendum. This time they voted yes out of fear. Round three please...

Johnny Utah

Galmay wrote: »

I think many people were misinformed regarding the Lisbon treaty and did not know what they were voting for. Out of fear they of the unknown they voted no last time round. This was used as a reason to hold a second referendum. This time they voted yes out of fear. Round three please...

Seems only fair to me!

OldJay

Johnny Utah wrote: »

These lackeys led a campaign of fear of intimidation and fear

This is as basic and simplistic a view I can make this for you.Jobs are affected by the health of an economy. The health of the economy here is heavily dependent on the EU. Lose EU clout and you damage your economy thus damaging your employment levels amongst other adverse effects. This isn't scaremongering. Its fact.

The LIES about abortion, euthanasia, conscription, the EU commissioner and veto, taxation power, military, minimum wage in order to dupe people already duped last year showed up the 'No' campaigns to be deliberately obtuse.

When a previously convicted PIRA gun-runner complains to an interviewer about his opposition running on scaremongering and fear, you've just got to laugh at the irony of it all.

People saw through the lies and emotional blackmailing this time.

namloc1980

Galmay wrote: »

I think many people were misinformed regarding the Lisbon treaty and did not know what they were voting for. Out of fear they of the unknown they voted no last time round. This was used as a reason to hold a second referendum. This time they voted yes out of fear. Round three please...

Get Sinn Féin and the Socialists elected to power and they should run it again. Our constitiution only allows the Dáil to initiate a constitutional amendment/referendum and given the the vast majority of the Dáil parties were in favour of a Yes vote, why exactly would they run it again??

Galmay

namloc1980 wrote: »

Get Sinn Féin and the Socialists elected to power and they should run it again. Our constitiution only allows the Dáil to initiate a constitutional amendment/referendum and given the the vast majority of the Dáil parties were in favour of a Yes vote

I think you may have missed the slightly sarcastic tone of my post

And as for

namloc1980 wrote: »

why exactly would they run it again??

rhetorical question?

Johnny Utah

Justind wrote: »

This is as basic and simplistic a view I can make this for you.Jobs are affected by the health of an economy. The health of the economy here is heavily dependent on the EU. Lose EU clout and you damage your economy thus damaging your employment levels amongst other adverse effects. This isn't scaremongering. Its fact.

The LIES about abortion, euthanasia, conscription, the EU commissioner and veto, taxation power, military, minimum wage in order to dupe people already duped last year showed up the 'No' campaigns to be deliberately obtuse.

When a previously convicted PIRA gun-runner complains to an interviewer about his opposition running on scaremongering and fear, you've just got to laugh at the irony of it all.

People saw through the lies and emotional blackmailing this time.

How can you possibly say the yes campaign wasn't involved in scaremongering?

People voted yes under the false prentense that a yes vote would create jobs and provide economic recovery. This was stated not just on campaign posters, but also by our politicians and vested interest groups every time the Lisbon treaty was being debated. It was even stated on Fianna Fail's website ffs. And, the scariest part was that they wheeled out Michael O'Leary to proffer the 'yes for jobs' argument. Michael O'Leary doesn't give a fiddlers about jobs in Ireland; all he's interested in is cheap labour and his takeover of Ryanair, yet the electorate couldn't see through this.

I can't see Ireland gaining anything from this Treaty. The EU is pushing ahead with enlargement, so in a few years any "EU clout" as you put it, will be watered down even further. Furthermore, any of our large multinationals will flock to these new States in search of cheap labour (for example, look at what happened already with Dell moving to Poland).

I admit that the posters from Coir were wrong and probably did more harm than good.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Wow, using the irish courts as the centre of your argument? That is kinda... well... very laughable...