Was the Lisbon treaty rigged?

K-9

Paddyo wrote: »

Maybe he was trying to rig it for the no vote - but the extent of the yes vote was too great

Not really, the Yes side side was about 15-20% ahead in all the opinion polls.

The only one that showed a No lead was one done by a group close to Coir. Interestingly it was within certain groups and areas. Groups that would tend towards a No anyway. If you did a poll on this board it would have probably showed a No too.

The opinion polls got it right last time too. The Yes side was ahead until the last week. They seemed to have got it right this time too.

Paddyo

K-9 wrote: »

Not really, the Yes side side was about 15-20% ahead in all the opinion polls.

The only one that showed a No lead was one done by a group close to Coir. Interestingly it was within certain groups and areas. Groups that would tend towards a No anyway. If you did a poll on this board it would have probably showed a No too.

The opinion polls got it right last time too. The Yes side was ahead until the last week. They seemed to have got it right this time too.

bg07

If some one took a box then they would have to have replaced that box with a similar box with the right box number and paper work attached and the right number of votes in side it. Otherwise the returning officers figures wouldn’t add up correctly. The amount of people who knew the number of votes inside that box at that stage wouldn’t be much more than 5.

Perhaps another theory is that a no campaign supporter staged removing a ballot box from the building with a random cardboard box painted black and with a bit of paper stuck to the side. He also had his accomplice on standby to video the event with a very bad camera so the box number or his face couldn’t be seen.

samson09

Why the Lisbon Treaty must NOT be ratified.

Sign the petition @ http://www.gopetition.com/online/31224/sign.html

Under Irish law, ballot boxes are required to be delivered by members of the Gardai to the polling stations at 7:00 am on the date the election takes place.

This legal requirement applies to ALL polling in Ireland, whether elections or referendums.

On this occasion, however, the ballot boxes were delivered to the private residences of the polling/Returning Officers, 48 hours prior to the Referendum.

A number of honest Returning Officers formally objected to this BREACH OF PROCEDURE, and to the concomitant prospective breach of security, let alone of the electoral legislation.

We understand that such objections were officially dismissed out of hand on the spurious and diversionary grounds that the ballot boxes possessed no commercial value, so it would be in nobody’s commercial interest to steal them.

The central issue – that since the Irish ballot boxes were delivered 48 hours early they could be ‘stuffed’ with YES votes by returning officers, as routinely happens in places like the former Soviet Republic of Georgia – was of course not addressed.

The Irish voters were given pencils to make their mark on the ballot, even though all Irish electoral ballots are supposed to be filled with black pen.

Almost nobody was asked for any form of ID or information at the polling stations.

The ballot boxes were left unattended and moved about by many people without question.

At least one box in Cork was removed from the count centre by an unknown individual as shown in the attached video.

Many foreign nationals and others who were not legally entitled to vote voted in this Referendum. Irish Times article “Gardai to investigate suspected vote fraud”, shows seven voters registered to an empty house.

It follows that, given that the local electoral law was flouted, THE OUTCOME OF THE IRISH REFERENDUM IS FRAUDULENT AND MUST IMMEDIATELY BE DECLARED NULL AND VOID.

II.

1) The intervention of the European Commission, entailing massive expenditure of money to influence Irish opinion towards a Yes, the running of a web-site and the issuing of statements that sought to counter No-side arguments, and the advocacy of a Yes vote by Commission President Barroso and other Commissioners and their staffs during visits to Ireland. This is unlawful under European law, as the Commission has no function in relation to the ratification of new Treaties, something that is exclusively a matter for the Member States under their own constitutional procedures;

2) The part funding of the posters and press advertising of most of Ireland’s Yes-side political parties by their sister parties in the European Parliament, even though it is illegal under Irish law to receive donations from sources outside the country in a referendum and even though, under European law, money provided by the European Parliament to cross-national political parties is supposed to be confined to informational-type material and to avoid partisan advocacy;

3) The Irish Government’s unlawful use of public funds in circulating to voters a postcard with details of the so-called “assurances” of the European Council, followed by a brochure some time later containing a tendentious summary of the provisions of the Lisbon Treaty, as well as other material - steps that were in breach of the 1995 Irish Supreme Court judgment in McKenna that it is unconstitutional of the Government to use public funds to seek to obtain a particular result in a referendum;

4) The failure of the country’s statutory Referendum Commission to carry out its function under the Referendum Act that established it of explaining to citizens how the proposed constitutional amendment and its text would affect the Irish Constitution. Instead the Commission’s Chairman, Judge Frank Clarke, turned the Commission into an arm of Government propaganda, while the judge indulged himself in various “solo-runs” on radio and in the newspapers, giving several erroneous explanations of provisions of the Lisbon Treaty, even though this was quite beyond his powers under the Act;

5) Huge expenditure of money by private companies such as Intel and Ryanair to advocate a Yes vote, without any statutory limit, in possible breach of Irish company and tax law, and undoubtedly constituting a major democratic abuse.

6) Breaches by the Irish broadcast media of their obligation under the Broadcasting Acts to be fair to all interests concerned in their coverage of issues of public controversy and debate. Newstalk 106, owned by Mr Denis O’Brien, a committed supporter of the Yes side, was quite shameless in its partisanship on its current affairs programmes.

---

humanji

Hmmm, you missed out the link to infowars with that cut and paste. Out of interest, if it had been a No vote, would you be calling for the result void?

major bill

paddyirishman85 wrote: »

Evidently they did, seeing as how most people expected a No vote the first time. Why go through all the trouble of having to hold a second referendum when they could have rigged the first one in order to be sure that there was a Yes vote? If this was all a big plot by the Masons/NWO/EU, why leave things like this to chance?

cockyness first time round maybe dont think they would have thought the irish would have voted no!!!

parsi

In my twenty-odd years of voting using a pencil I've never been asked for ID. Possibly because there isn't any national ID card.

Does this make every vote invalid ? Or does it only make selected votes invalid ?

parsi

samson09 wrote: »

Under Irish law, ballot boxes are required to be delivered by members of the Gardai to the polling stations at 7:00 am on the date the election takes place.

Do you have a link to this ? I couldn't find it in the 1992 Electoral Act

schween

We should get Declan Ganley to follow this up. Maybe there could be a recount and the Yes vote will turn out higher with his luck:D

CR 7

There's a simple explanation for most of this, usually I.D. is not required because the polling station's are relatively local, and knowing someone is probably proof enough of their identity. Tipp Ex is as widely used as erasers, so maybe we should only vote by pencil. Also, 67% of the country's votes were in that box stolen in Cork.

Arion24

Doesn't matter if it was. Nothing the public can do about it and not enough want to actually do anything.

Tyrant^

Arion24 wrote: »

Doesn't matter if it was. Nothing the public can do about it and not enough want to actually do anything.

True... this is sad
It is the case with allot of things and not just in Ireland.
People just seem to be happy to work 40 hours a week and sit in the living room watching tv and going out the odd weekend to get sloshed ! While we let all the important events that will shape our lives... just fly way way over our heads.

This makes me rage

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WPzJGltnCxU

....

rigged

Tyrant^

.... wrote: »

rigged

This.

Even the fact that we were made vote on it again is just ridiculous.
You dont see people in the states voting twice on presidential elections.

Why vote at all ? If you can be made vote again... or heck maybe even a third or fourth time. Even though I think thats "illegal" but sure they will just rename the treaty and give it to someone else.

Fook sakes. Why did I have to look into the lisbon treaty my mind was at peace for awhile ...

....

Tyrant^ wrote: »

This.

Even the fact that we were made vote on it again is just ridiculous.
You dont see people in the states voting twice on presidential elections.

Why vote at all ? If you can be made vote again... or heck maybe even a third or fourth time. Even though I think thats "illegal" but sure they will just rename the treaty and give it to someone else.

Fook sakes. Why did I have to look into the lisbon treaty my mind was at peace for awhile ...

exactly, absolutely ridiculous

force eleven

Nah, one ballot box disappearing into the night, does not a rigging make....

Actually, I only know 2 people who voted yes, but there you go. People believed the magic beans formula, and thats that.

meglome

Arion24 wrote: »

Doesn't matter if it was. Nothing the public can do about it and not enough want to actually do anything.

Tyrant^ wrote: »

True... this is sad
It is the case with allot of things and not just in Ireland.
People just seem to be happy to work 40 hours a week and sit in the living room watching tv and going out the odd weekend to get sloshed ! While we let all the important events that will shape our lives... just fly way way over our heads.

This makes me rage

Imagine in a representative democracy the people deciding what they want, how dare they. Just so we're clear people who disagree with you are not idiots or fools. I read the Lisbon treaty and was very happy to vote Yes.

Tyrant^ wrote: »

Even the fact that we were made vote on it again is just ridiculous.

I don't seem to recall anyone being forced to do anything. Did someone call round to your house? Was someone stopping you from voting No again?

Tyrant^ wrote: »

You dont see people in the states voting twice on presidential elections.

I don't believe we've ever voted twice on a general election either.

Tyrant^ wrote: »

Why vote at all ? If you can be made vote again... or heck maybe even a third or fourth time. Even though I think thats "illegal" but sure they will just rename the treaty and give it to someone else.

Again I don't seem to remember anyone being made do anything. How is having more democratic votes a problem? The people decide, if they want to vote No again they will, if they have changed their minds with the guarantees and the extra time then they will vote Yes, just like they did - by a large majority.

Tyrant^ wrote: »

Fook sakes. Why did I have to look into the lisbon treaty my mind was at peace for awhile ...

So did you read it or listen to the bull the No campaign were peddling?


Now for the real conspiracy.

Scofflaw wrote: »

A minor point to add to the debate here - is the level of the No vote in the second referendum credible? I would say yes - here's the proportion of the electorate that votes No, for each EU referendum:

Treaty|Year|Electorate|No vote|No as % of electorate
Accession|1973|1,783,604|211,891| 11.88%
SEA|1987|2,461,790|324,977| 13.2%
Maastricht|1992|2,542,840|448,655| 17.64%
Amsterdam|1998|2,747,088|578,070| 21.04%
Nice 1|2001|2,867,960|529,478| 18.46%
Nice 2|2002|2,923,918|534,887| 18.29%
Lisbon 1|2008|3,051,278|862,415| 28.26%
Lisbon 2|2009|3,078,132|594,606| 19.32%

What's historically unusual is not the second vote, but the first - the No side picked up a soft No half the size of the usual No brigade. The second referendum, on the other hand, represents simply the usual position - with a No vote of c. 20% of the electorate, and the result dependent almost entirely on how motivated the Yes vote is.

Another interesting point from that, by the way, is that the core No vote doesn't appear to have changed that much over the last 20 years - the initial rise in opposition took place around the end of the Eighties.

In case of confusion, note that the % given is the No vote as a percentage of the total electorate - that is, of everyone who was entitled to vote in the referendum, whether they voted or not.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Why was the No vote for the Lisbon 1 so much higher than normal. It must have been fixed, only explanation.

Arion24

meglome wrote: »

Why was the No vote for the Lisbon 1 so much higher than normal. It must have been fixed, only explanation.

Given how the goverment wanted the Yes vote more than they'd want to save a pensioner from an oncoming bus, I highly doubt that the first election, the legal one, was rigged.
Cowan wishes it was rigged in his favour.

Imagine in a representative democracy the people deciding what they want, how dare they. Just so we're clear people who disagree with you are not idiots or fools. I read the Lisbon treaty and was very happy to vote Yes.

Remember when we went a second time to Nice Treaty and said Yes instead? The recession here happened.

No one is stupid for having their own opinions, just in the case of recent european related electiosn, a lot are weak willed for not daring to question what Ireland really is in the grand scheme of things.

Black Uhlan

meglome wrote: »

Imagine in a representative democracy the people deciding what they want, how dare they.

That is essentially the attitude that gave us the second vote.

meglome wrote: »

Just so we're clear people who disagree with you are not idiots or fools. I read the Lisbon treaty and was very happy to vote Yes.

Fair play to you.

meglome wrote: »

I don't seem to recall anyone being forced to do anything. Did someone call round to your house? Was someone stopping you from voting No again?

Eh to be represented we were forced to vote again.

meglome wrote: »

I don't believe we've ever voted twice on a general election either.

Try as recent as 82'.

meglome wrote: »

Again I don't seem to remember anyone being made do anything. How is having more democratic votes a problem? The people decide, if they want to vote No again they will, if they have changed their minds with the guarantees and the extra time then they will vote Yes, just like they did - by a large majority.

Whatever about anything else I find it hard to believe you can defend the almost immediate re-run so flippantly. Tunnel vision?

meglome wrote: »

So did you read it or listen to the bull the No campaign were peddling?

"Yes for Jobs"?


Now for the real conspiracy.

meglome wrote: »

Why was the No vote for the Lisbon 1 so much higher than normal. It must have been fixed, only explanation.

Double standards. You preach how it is democratic to have the same vote a year later to obtain the will of the people while assuming that the will of the people has already been established so as to to follow a defined pattern.

meglome

Black Uhlan wrote: »

That is essentially the attitude that gave us the second vote.

No the government chose to have another referendum as is their legal right, the same government we elected. So had the public's view changed from the first vote to the second?

Black Uhlan wrote: »

Eh to be represented we were forced to vote again.

But how were you forced? You can vote any way you want or not at all, where's the problem?

Black Uhlan wrote: »

Try as recent as 82'.

Indeed. This was a completely separate election which happened to be the same year as the previous one.

Black Uhlan wrote: »

Whatever about anything else I find it hard to believe you can defend the almost immediate re-run so flippantly. Tunnel vision?

I'm not defending anything. I'm simply saying if things had changed then people would vote differently, which they did - by a large majority. Simple fact.

Black Uhlan wrote: »

"Yes for Jobs"?

And did you assume this was a promise of immediate jobs or the immediate end of the recession?

Black Uhlan wrote: »

Double standards. You preach how it is democratic to have the same vote a year later to obtain the will of the people while assuming that the will of the people has already been established so as to to follow a defined pattern.

Not at all. This thread is about the possibility the Lisbon 2 vote was rigged. But by showing the no votes over all the treaties it shows that the no vote in Lisbon 1 is outside the established norms. So if I use simple logic it's then way more likely that Lisbon 1 was rigged.

Black Uhlan

2009: Lisbon 2

meglome wrote: »

Again I don't seem to remember anyone being made do anything. How is having more democratic votes a problem? The people decide, if they want to vote No again they will, if they have changed their minds with the guarantees and the extra time then they will vote Yes, just like they did - by a large majority.

2002: Nice 2

meglome wrote: »

Well the Nice vote may be good for Europe and may or may not be good for Ireland depending on whom you talk to. But the way the whole thing has been run has not been good for democracy in this country. I hate to admit this but I almost agree with Typedef on many of his points on this topic. Inherently there has to be something wrong with rerunning a referendum within a year of a no vote just because the government doesn't like it. I appreciate that there were much weightier reasons this time but no one can tell me they wouldn't do it again over another issue.

Fianna Fail has lied to us, blatantly... and there is no justification for it. I’m not being naive here I know politicians lie a lot but they are not always caught out so badly.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=615852#post615852 - POST 3.

I respect your right to change your own opinion but that is a very puzzling 360 turn there. You could be debating yourself there...

meglome

Black Uhlan wrote: »

2009: Lisbon 2



2002: Nice 2

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=615852#post615852 - POST 3.

I respect your right to change your own opinion but that is a very puzzling 360 turn there. You could be debating yourself there...

I'm not seeing the 360. I don't think the Lisbon campaign has been good for democracy in this country either but I'd imagine for different reasons than you might assume. The amount of lying and misrepresentation that went on was terrible and was even worse than Nice. I think the No campaign stooped to new lows but no one comes out clean.

The main issue I'd have with the Lisbon campaign is the government did a piss poor job of running the campaign, just like like they did for the Nice campaign. And not so strangely Fianna Fail were involved both times (who keeps voting for these people?). Of course the second Lisbon vote was run after the government got the guarantees (mostly on non-issues anyway). Plus we had more time for the very large chunk of people who said they voted No as they didn't know what was in the treaty to find out. I think the government's response to the first No vote was very democratic indeed.

And to be honest I've learned a lot more about representative democracy since then. Things that I should have known but I didn't. I've learned a lot more about the agendas of people calling for a No vote, claiming to be pro-EU and calling for a No vote at every single treaty. I also read the Lisbon treaty which I didn't do with Nice. It's good to learn.

Of course none of this changes the fact the Lisbon 1 No vote was out of kilter with what we've come to expect on EU votes. So logically if there is shenanigans that would be the most likely place for it.

Treaty|Year|Electorate|No vote|No as % of electorate
Accession|1973|1,783,604|211,891| 11.88%
SEA|1987|2,461,790|324,977| 13.2%
Maastricht|1992|2,542,840|448,655| 17.64%
Amsterdam|1998|2,747,088|578,070| 21.04%
Nice 1|2001|2,867,960|529,478| 18.46%
Nice 2|2002|2,923,918|534,887| 18.29%
Lisbon 1|2008|3,051,278|862,415| 28.26%
Lisbon 2|2009|3,078,132|594,606| 19.32%

parsi

Any update on a link to the law that was supposedly broken ?

A little supporting evidence would be handy...

parsi

I suppose we can take the lack of a link to the supposedly broken law as evidence that this is all a lie.

samson09

parsi wrote: »

I suppose we can take the lack of a link to the supposedly broken law as evidence that this is all a lie.

You mean a statute/act right? If you REALLY have to know pm me just so I know you're serious. Then I'll do my best to find out for you because I'm honestly not sure myself what statute/act was broken but I know a man who might!;)

imme

a bit weird alright. why was someone videoing people outside City Hall anyway? It's pitch black in the film, at night? Counting was all over by 3pm at the latest. If this was in the morning ballot boxes are guarded by Gardai it would be tough for someone to get in there, let alone take a box away with them.

Diogenes

imme wrote: »

a bit weird alright. why was someone videoing people outside City Hall anyway? It's pitch black in the film, at night? Counting was all over by 3pm at the latest. If this was in the morning ballot boxes are guarded by Gardai it would be tough for someone to get in there, let alone take a box away with them.

You'd wonder why they didn't rig the vote the first time out.

parsi

samson09 wrote: »

You mean a statute/act right? If you REALLY have to know pm me just so I know you're serious. Then I'll do my best to find out for you because I'm honestly not sure myself what statute/act was broken but I know a man who might!;)

I'm new to this whole CT thing so bear with me - but why do I have to prove that I'm serious ?

There was a public posting and petition circulated which claimed that a law was broken in respect of the referendum on the Lisbon Treaty.

It seems that folk can't cite this law or will only cite it to folk who are "serious".

If I send a PM is the next step a meeting in a deserted carpark where there'll be someone with an orange-painted tinfoil-hat (instead of a red carnation) ?