the future of 495 million people in one man's hand

ei.sdraob

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/lisbon-treaty/all-eyes-now-turn-to-the-czech-president-1904209.html

i like the picture in the article

so the future of 495 million people depends on one man :eek:

and seems hes a communist? EUSSR ftw!

what do yee think? is he holding out for UK or is he trying to get some sort of a deal for his country?

oh and does the word "elite" come to mind

?

marco_polo

ei.sdraob wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/lisbon-treaty/all-eyes-now-turn-to-the-czech-president-1904209.html

i like the picture in the article

so the future of 495 million people depends on one man :eek:

and seems hes a communist? EUSSR ftw!

what do yee think? is he holding out for UK or is he trying to get some sort of a deal for his country?

oh and does the word "elite" come to mind

?

Not sure if he has a plan to be honest.

If there was any, it seemed to be wait until the Irish referendum and if it looks like a yes then refer a new consitiutional chellange to the courts and hope it drags out for 7-8 months.

The Czech court have already said that it should take no more than 3-4 weeks to consider, as the main parts of the treaty have already been covered last year in a previous judgement.

It is rumoured that further delaying in the event of the all clear from the court, will probably result in impeachment proceedings being brought against him.

RandomName2

Prague usually gives in relatively quickly. Just threaten mass bombing and I'm sure he'll sign. Well, the Irish only had to be threatened with economic isolation to 'change their minds'.

ei.sdraob

RandomName2 wrote: »

Prague usually gives in relatively quickly. Just threaten mass bombing and I'm sure he'll sign. Well, the Irish only had to be threatened with economic isolation to 'change their minds'.

spoken like a true neocon

Ganley's friend @ General Myers made a good job of Iraq alright....

its nice to see mr G scheming with Klaus now...

RandomName2

ei.sdraob wrote: »

spoken like a true neocon

Ganley's friend @ General Myers made a good job of Iraq alright....

its nice to see mr G scheming with Klaus now...

You are comparing Klaus to Saddam Husein?

Actually - you aren't doing anything; just a bit of an anti-US Foreign Policy rant. We'll I'm sure Ganley has friends in the ex-US administration. Besides, which, in terms of a 'good job' there is tenuous democracy in Iraq at the moment (although the cost was too high to create such an unstable set-up, without war having already been brought to America or her allies - as was the case with Afghanistan).

Sir Oxman

ei.sdraob wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/lisbon-treaty/all-eyes-now-turn-to-the-czech-president-1904209.html

i like the picture in the article

so the future of 495 million people depends on one man :eek:

and seems hes a communist? EUSSR ftw!

what do yee think? is he holding out for UK or is he trying to get some sort of a deal for his country?

oh and does the word "elite" come to mind

?

A lot of headbangers could have said the same about the Irish Govt being beholden to a pesky referendum.

As pointed out repeatedly on here during the "Yes to Jobs" campaign, it isn't correct to interfere in another country's political process.

ei.sdraob

gambiaman wrote: »

A lot of headbangers could have said the same about the Irish Govt being beholden to a pesky referendum.

As pointed out repeatedly on here during the "Yes to Jobs" campaign, it isn't correct to interfere in another country's political process.

i agree with you

hence why we and 495 million other people

can just sit back and watch what happens in their courts

ei.sdraob

RandomName2 wrote: »

You are comparing Klaus to Saddam Husein?

Actually - you aren't doing anything; just a bit of an anti-US Foreign Policy rant. We'll I'm sure Ganley has friends in the ex-US administration. Besides, which, in terms of a 'good job' there is tenuous democracy in Iraq at the moment (although the cost was too high to create such an unstable set-up, without war having already been brought to America or her allies - as was the case with Afghanistan).

not at all

im highlighting Ganley's links to a certain bunch of warmongering neocons

the flag in this picture speaks tons about Klaus, and his wikipedia page linked earlier is an interesting read



but its their country we can only sitback and watch with interest

Scofflaw

RandomName2 wrote: »

Prague usually gives in relatively quickly. Just threaten mass bombing and I'm sure he'll sign. Well, the Irish only had to be threatened with economic isolation to 'change their minds'.

Are you claiming that people didn't actually change their minds?

amused,
Scofflaw

passive

Scofflaw wrote: »

Are you claiming that people didn't actually change their minds?

amused,
Scofflaw

Are "you" claiming that "they" didn't?

Facetiously,
"Passive"

turgon

Really guys, the imitating of Scofflaws sign off got lame like a year and a half ago.

On topic, Klaus was just waiting to pass the buck to either the Irish or (now) UK electorate I imagine. He wont be willing to take responsibility for stopping the whole thing especially considering Parliament have ratified it. Its just a typical example of someone trying to cling to their ideals in the face of pragmatism.

Neamhshuntasach

Isn't the sign wit the hammer & sickle in the EU flag a protest about how this treaty is going to be like bringing communism back to the Czech Republic (Czechoslovakia)? That's what i gathered since Klaus isn't a communist.

ei.sdraob

Neamhshuntasach wrote: »

Isn't the sign wit the hammer & sickle in the EU flag a protest about how this treaty is going to be like bringing communism back to the Czech Republic (Czechoslovakia)? That's what i gathered since Klaus isn't a communist.

you should read his wikipedia page...

Martin 2

Slightly OT, but don't you think the hammer and sickle symbol is a little out of date, I think it should be the keyboard and mouse; if only I was good at graphics I could morph a keyboard and mouse into a hammer and sickle.

Sir Oxman

ei.sdraob wrote: »

you should read his wikipedia page...

I'm surprised you could read it considering the virtual forest of [citation needed]'s on it.

D.U.M.B

gambiaman wrote: »

I'm surprised you could read it considering the virtual forest of [citation needed]'s on it.

lol brilliant

Mario007

ei.sdraob wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/lisbon-treaty/all-eyes-now-turn-to-the-czech-president-1904209.html

i like the picture in the article

so the future of 495 million people depends on one man :eek:

and seems hes a communist? EUSSR ftw!

what do yee think? is he holding out for UK or is he trying to get some sort of a deal for his country?

oh and does the word "elite" come to mind

?

he can't actually sign the treaty till the court deals with the appeal. its in the constitution. if he doesn't sign it then, there are a few MPs willing to take him to court, as he's not working in his office with regards to the constitution. even the chair of the constitutional court said that the constitution can be interpreted in a way that the president must sign international treaties when they are approved by the contitutional court and both houses of the parliament

thebman

It will be funny to see the people that were harping on about democracy and the Irish voting twice, hoping that this one man can hold up the treaty for as long as possible.

Should reveal lots of hypocrites IMHO.

Sir Oxman

thebman wrote: »

It will be funny to see the people that were harping on about democracy and the Irish voting twice, hoping that this one man can hold up the treaty for as long as possible.

Should reveal lots of hypocrites IMHO.

No, it won't.

That man is the President of the Czech Republic - I suggest you look up the responsibilities he enjoys compared to our lame duck, hair-do'ed figurehead (and that covers Lipstick Bertie if a certain, ignorant clique in this rotten state ever have their way)

The Czech Republic is still (at this time and date) a sovereign state.

That's the difference.

ei.sdraob

gambiaman wrote: »

No, it won't.

That man is the President of the Czech Republic - I suggest you look up the responsibilities he enjoys compared to our lame duck, hair-do'ed figurehead (and that covers Lipstick Bertie if a certain, ignorant clique in this rotten state ever have their way)

The Czech Republic is still (at this time and date) a sovereign state.

That's the difference.

and were not a sovereign state :rolleyes:

jebus would you give it up

they are still scaremongering :mad:

marco_polo

The ironing-o-meter nearly explodes when you factor in that he is indirectly elected by the parliament, not directly by the people.

Sir Oxman

ei.sdraob wrote: »

and were not a sovereign state :rolleyes:

jebus would you give it up

they are still scaremongering :mad:

They
Scaremongering
Still

I think, like the Yes FOR Jobs campaign, you should wait and see.

Sir Oxman

marco_polo wrote: »

The ironing-o-meter nearly explodes when you factor in that he is indirectly elected by the parliament, not directly by the people.

Opinion polls suggest he has the highest regard amongst Czechs, way higher than any in their parliament. The trust factor in him is at least always 60%.

I don't know the man or pretend to know fully the workings of the Czech political system
I suggest you do the same.

Sir Oxman

ei.sdraob wrote: »

and were not a sovereign state :rolleyes:

jebus would you give it up

they are still scaremongering :mad:

Everything you ever say

[citation needed]

marco_polo

gambiaman wrote: »

Opinion polls suggest he has the highest regard amongst Czechs, way higher than any in their parliament. The trust factor in him is at least always 60%.

I don't know the man or pretend to know fully the workings of the Czech political system
I suggest you do the same.

http://aktualne.centrum.cz/czechnews/clanek.phtml?id=649298

Since we are playing statistical tennis support for the treaty was running at 64% in January. (I have a link too)

Furious-Dave

thebman wrote: »

It will be funny to see the people that were harping on about democracy and the Irish voting twice, hoping that this one man can hold up the treaty for as long as possible.

Should reveal lots of hypocrites IMHO.

Well it's like I said before...democracy = whatever some of the No side decide it is, and anything else is undemocratic :rolleyes:

Sir Oxman

marco_polo wrote: »

http://aktualne.centrum.cz/czechnews/clanek.phtml?id=649298

Since we are playing statistical tennis support for the treaty was running at 64% in January. (I have a link too)

No, that's 63 percent view EU membership favourably - 53% would vote YES.
That's now.

I voted No, I view EU membership favourably.
Stick that in Pat Cox's hole, I mean EUstat machine.

marco_polo

gambiaman wrote: »

No, that's 63 percent view EU membership favourably - 53% would vote YES.
That's now.

I voted No, I view EU membership favourably.
Stick that in Pat Cox's hole, I mean EUstat machine.

Indeed, still not exactly much of a mandate in any language for blocking the democratically elected parliament.

Amusing that you have a favourable view of an organisation you are convinced are out to take our democracy away.

Sir Oxman

With something of tremendous importance and change, I suggest he is doing the right thing by his people. The thing he's entrusted to do.

I don't understand your second sentence?

marco_polo

gambiaman wrote: »

With something of tremendous importance and change, I suggest he is doing the right thing by his people. The thing he's entrusted to do.

I don't understand your second sentence?

Since they have apparently stolen our sovereignty after many years of effort with Lisbon, it is a bit odd that you should have a positive view on EU membership.

thebman

gambiaman wrote: »

No, it won't.

That man is the President of the Czech Republic - I suggest you look up the responsibilities he enjoys compared to our lame duck, hair-do'ed figurehead (and that covers Lipstick Bertie if a certain, ignorant clique in this rotten state ever have their way)

The Czech Republic is still (at this time and date) a sovereign state.

That's the difference.

lol!

http://www.radio.cz/en/current/curraffrs

Civic Democrat leader Mirek Topolánek told Czech TV on Sunday that the president should ratify the treaty.

“The treaty was ratified by both chambers of Parliament. Although I’m not a lawyer, the way I understand it is that since we don’t have a presidential system in the Czech Republic, the president’s signature is a mere formality. However, I understand that others might see it differently, and argue that the president does not have to sign the treaty. That would get us in a very difficult position.

Not everyone agrees that the Czech president even has the power to not sign.

PS, here you are talking about the will of the people:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=62322017&postcount=136

I have to say, I'm finding it funny

Bob_Harris

thebman wrote: »

It will be funny to see the people that were harping on about democracy and the Irish voting twice, hoping that this one man can hold up the treaty for as long as possible.

Should reveal lots of hypocrites IMHO.

Is it not very un-democratic of the EU to want to rush this through as fast as possible so the British people can't get a say?

People want him to hold it up so the people can yet again say No.

Gordon Brown, a prime example of the failed concept of "elected representatives", promised the British people a vote on Lisbon, which he then went back on.

K-9

Bob_Harris wrote: »

Is it not very un-democratic of the EU to want to rush this through as fast as possible so the British people can't get a say?

People want him to hold it up so the people can yet again say No.

Gordon Brown, a prime example of the failed concept of "elected representatives", promised the British people a vote on Lisbon, which he then went back on.

A vote on Lisbon would be undemocratic.

A vote on the old EEC Membership or EEA membership would be more honest.

Lisbon isn't the issue in the UK as we found out when UKIP interfered here.

thebman

Bob_Harris wrote: »

Is it not very un-democratic of the EU to want to rush this through as fast as possible so the British people can't get a say?

People want him to hold it up so the people can yet again say No.

Gordon Brown, a prime example of the failed concept of "elected representatives", promised the British people a vote on Lisbon, which he then went back on.

Who says the EU wants to rush it through so the British don't get a vote?

I'd suggest they want the Lisbon treaty as soon as possible to gain the benefits it provides as soon as possible.

What people want him to hold it up? I don't. Any evidence that the majority of Czech people want him to hold it up?

He didn't promise them a vote on Lisbon, it was a vote on the constitution he promised as far as I remember.

Scofflaw

K-9 wrote: »

A vote on Lisbon would be undemocratic.

A vote on the old EEC Membership or EEA membership would be more honest.

Lisbon isn't the issue in the UK as we found out when UKIP interfered here.

That's very true - a UK vote on Lisbon would be a proxy vote on EU membership. Let them vote on that first - but no UK PM would do it.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Sir Oxman

thebman wrote: »

lol!

http://www.radio.cz/en/current/curraffrs



Not everyone agrees that the Czech president even has the power to not sign.

PS, here you are talking about the will of the people:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=62322017&postcount=136

I have to say, I'm finding it funny

I'm finding it hilarious that I live in a country whereby the will of the majority of the people is not respected and cast aside, IMO either last June or right now. And by right now, I mean the UNDENIABLE will of the people that this govt go.
It's bloody hilarious.

BTW, if Mr Klaus can be impeached, the Czech parliament will do so, it is not up to any link you provide.

I'd love if the Czech govt said they were holding a referendum to settle it once and for all...would you like that? I would, either Yes or No.

Sir Oxman

thebman wrote: »

Who says the EU wants to rush it through so the British don't get a vote?

I'd suggest they want the Lisbon treaty as soon as possible to gain the benefits it provides as soon as possible.

What people want him to hold it up? I don't. Any evidence that the majority of Czech people want him to hold it up?

He didn't promise them a vote on Lisbon, it was a vote on the constitution he promised as far as I remember.

Everybody with functioning senses. Including now, Cameron.

K-9

Scofflaw wrote: »

That's very true - a UK vote on Lisbon would be a proxy vote on EU membership. Let them vote on that first - but no UK PM would do it.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Lisbon is a side issue in the UK and we all know it, Yes and No side.

It isn't as if this has suddenly become an issue in the last couple of years. So, Nice isn't the issue.

God knows when it became an issue.

marco_polo

Bob_Harris wrote: »

Is it not very un-democratic of the EU to want to rush this through as fast as possible so the British people can't get a say?

People want him to hold it up so the people can yet again say No.

Gordon Brown, a prime example of the failed concept of "elected representatives", promised the British people a vote on Lisbon, which he then went back on.

The ulitmate goal of the Conservative party is as follows.

"We have also consistently made it clear that the restoration of our national control over social and employment legislation would be a major goal for a Conservative government."

Either way what is coming is a concerted effort by the Conservatives to pull back from even the current levels of EU legislation, since this is coming regardless of whether of not Lisbon comes into force, it is far better that the other 26 countries have a reform treaty that they are happy with (and that the current UK Labour government does as well). They can then negotiate a seperate treaty with the Conservative governement to pair back on their EU involvement if that is their wish.

The Lisbon treaty being in effect has no effect on the likelyhood of success of the Conservatives goals. Next May they will have their mandate to aim to achieve their real goal, and be under no illusions that that is even a Europe under Nice rules.

P. Breathnach

Bob_Harris wrote: »

Is it not very un-democratic of the EU to want to rush this through as fast as possible so the British people can't get a say? ...

The British have ratified the Lisbon Treaty and lodged formal notice with the EU.

thebman

gambiaman wrote: »

Everybody with functioning senses. Including now, Cameron.

So anyone that agrees with you. How meaningless.

Last I saw, Cameron wasn't in the Czech Republic, I don't think he should be trying to get another country to hold up ratification because he hopes to have power by then.

hopalong85

Scofflaw wrote: »

That's very true - a UK vote on Lisbon would be a proxy vote on EU membership. Let them vote on that first - but no UK PM would do it.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Why do you do it? The ridiculously smug and self important sign off I mean. What is the reasoning behind it?

As for the original poster, does he/she really frustrate anybody else?

Smugly,
hopalong85

Scofflaw

hopalong85 wrote: »

Why do you do it? The ridiculously smug and self important sign off I mean. What is the reasoning behind it?

As for the original poster, does he/she really frustrate anybody else?

Smugly,
hopalong85

I've been doing it since I joined. I do find that it irritates a certain type of poster, but that's just a bonus. In general, though, I am a cordial person - I see no reason not to reflect that online.

cordially,
Scofflaw

hopalong85

Scofflaw wrote: »

I've been doing it since I joined. I do find that it irritates a certain type of poster, but that's just a bonus. In general, though, I am a cordial person - I see no reason not to reflect that online.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Oh. Well thanks for clearing that up. As an avid lurker I've often wondered if you did it for the specific purpose of frustrating people. The fact that you consider it a bonus that it annoys some people has helped me to form my opinion. But that's off topic!

On topic, is the op seriously implying that the wiki article he/she linked to is a reputable source of information on the Czech President? Baffling if so.

meglome

gambiaman wrote: »

I'm finding it hilarious that I live in a country whereby the will of the majority of the people is not respected and cast aside, IMO either last June or right now. And by right now, I mean the UNDENIABLE will of the people that this govt go.
It's bloody hilarious.

dear god how many times can I say this without going mental. 28% of the electorate voted no in the first Lisbon vote. Now 39% of the electorate voted Yes - a 61.7% Yes. So the people have spoken in a democratic election, they changed their minds, as it their democratic right to do so. Please stop whining about it.

You also seem to have trouble working out how democracy functions. The people undeniably voted in Fianna Fail for 5 years.

Hydrosylator

thebman wrote: »

It will be funny to see the people that were harping on about democracy and the Irish voting twice, hoping that this one man can hold up the treaty for as long as possible.

Should reveal lots of hypocrites IMHO.

Not really, he's not allowed pass until it's been decided that it's constitutional, because Czech law can't be contravened in this matter.

Where's the hypocrisy?

P. Breathnach

Hydrosylator wrote: »

Not really, he's not allowed pass until it's been decided that it's constitutional, because Czech law can't be contravened in this matter.

Where's the hypocrisy?

Like most people here, I am not well-versed in Czech law. I wonder if their system includes the idea of "abuse of process", because it looks to me as if that is what is happening there.

Hydrosylator

It's a fact that he's barred from ratifying it until the court case is over, it's out of his hands until then.

Is Czech Rep. the only country where Lisbon ratification needs someone's signature? No. So your sensationalist,

so the future of 495 million people depends on one man

is redundant.

If you think that a politician meeting with millionaires who have private agendas which don't involve the welfare of the populace is a bad thing, I agree with you. It's all too common.

All that said, the lad's a prick. I don't think he'd refuse to sign off on Lisbon if it's deemed sound in Czech Law, though, and president who opposes their parliament like that would be out like a shot, I imagine.

Scofflaw

Hydrosylator wrote: »

Not really, he's not allowed pass until it's been decided that it's constitutional, because Czech law can't be contravened in this matter.

Where's the hypocrisy?

Having spent hours of my life writing posts pointing out that the constitutional processes of the other member states are to be respected even when they don't involve referendums to ratify treaties, the sudden respect of No proponents for the constitutional processes of the Czech Republic rings more than a little hollow.

By rights, pretty much everyone on the No side ought to be arguing that leaving the decision in the hands of elites like Klaus is undemocratic.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Hydrosylator

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Like most people here, I am not well-versed in Czech law. I wonder if their system includes the idea of "abuse of process", because it looks to me as if that is what is happening there.

I don't believe it is abuse of process, it's a case being brought a group of senators who question whether the guarantees given to us for Lisbon 2 constitute a separate Treaty. If they're wrong, it's business as usual, if they're right, they're vindicated.

I wouldn't be surprised if their issue is actually with Lisbon itself rather than the guarantees, but in democracy you use what tools are available. Let's not forget that it's a similarly finicky court case that gave us referendums on major changes to the EU. As such I don't consider it an abuse of process, if it is, then every referendum we have on the EU is open to similar claims, perhaps?

Hydrosylator

Scofflaw wrote: »

Having spent hours of my life writing posts pointing out that the constitutional processes of the other member states are to be respected even when they don't involve referendums to ratify treaties, the sudden respect of No proponents for the constitutional processes of the Czech Republic rings more than a little hollow.

By rights, pretty much everyone on the No side ought to be arguing that leaving the decision in the hands of elites like Klaus is undemocratic.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Unfortunately, it's been in the hands of elites in every member state that didn't have a referendum. And you have to realise, this isn't Vaclac's doing, it's a constitutional court case, which he is legally required to await the outcome of prior to ratification. You're blaming him for Czech law. That's silly.

That said, I do agree that leaving the decision in the hands of elites like Klaus is undemocratic, and that is why I believe that all member states should be made have a referendum on Lisbon.

If it's wrong for an elite to undemocratically stop a Treaty, it's equally wrong for an elite to undemocratically put a Treaty in place. QED.