What the Mainlanders are saying

Guest

EvotingMachine0197 wrote:: Who was that headbanger looking for Charlie McCreevy's head on a plate ?

A German Social Democrat. They were a great workers party before WW1. Then they voted to take their members to war, climbed onto the gravy train and have been roosting there ever since.

Guest

cactus flower wrote:

EvotingMachine0197 wrote:: Who was that headbanger looking for Charlie McCreevy's head on a plate ?

A German Social Democrat. They were a great workers party before WW1. Then they voted to take their members to war, climbed onto the gravy train and have been roosting there ever since.

He is also the leader of one of the two dominant political groups in the EP, the body to which Lisbon would have given more power.

I am glad we have not given more power to a body under the control of people like Herr Schultz.

Guest

I think all this talk of Eurosceptics, the UKIP, the UK Conservative Party and the "right-wing" Czech Government is pure propaganda.
It is an effort to appeal to our instincts rather than our intellect.

It is just not good enough and it is an indictment of the people trying to move the EU "forward" that this is the way they think.

People weren't willing to buy into their vision designed over a period of years and the "No" voters in Ireland are not alone in this. The politicians ans civil servant (national and EU) cannot blame the people for their failures.

Guest

Zhou_Enlai wrote:: I think all this talk of Eurosceptics, the UKIP, the UK Conservative Party and the "right-wing" Czech Government is pure propaganda.
It is an effort to appeal to our instincts rather than our intellect.

It is just not good enough and it is an indictment of the people trying to move the EU "forward" that this is the way they think.

People weren't willing to buy into their vision designed over a period of years and the "No" voters in Ireland are not alone in this. The politicians ans civil servant (national and EU) cannot blame the people for their failures.

Seconded.

Guest

Helium Three wrote:

cactus flower wrote:

EvotingMachine0197 wrote:: Who was that headbanger looking for Charlie McCreevy's head on a plate ?

A German Social Democrat. They were a great workers party before WW1. Then they voted to take their members to war, climbed onto the gravy train and have been roosting there ever since.

He is also the leader of one of the two dominant political groups in the EP, the body to which Lisbon would have given more power.

I am glad we have not given more power to a body under the control of people like Herr Schultz.

You're glad that more power stayed with the Council of Ministers rather than moved to the elected Parliament?

Well, nothing surprises me at this stage.

Guest

Just adding a copy of an interesting P.ie post made today:

Quote :: Re: Ireland hasn't and will never have a veto in the EU
by pedro alemao Thu Jun 19, 2008 2:39 pm

..., but we have friends in Poland, Austria, Luxembourg and a few others. I hope the gov's first priority is to keep those friendships and not do anything rash like demanding all ratification processes to stop.

Yes, you have many friends here! Here is an Austrian opinion from a "dissenting" (i.e. non-governmental) legal expert that supports your view:

>>While Brussels would still like to bring the Treaty into force, Poland and the Czech Republic seem to be increasingly insecure players. They prefer the idea of a "two-speed" Europe, but even that is difficult to implement as the Treaty of Nice does not provide for anything like this. Legally speaking, as a consequence of abolition of the previous contractual basis (Wegfall der Geschäftsgrundlage) by the Irish NO, all previous votes on the Lisbon Treaty in the national parliaments have become void. For example, the Austrian Parliament has agreed to implement the Treaty, but the contract would only enter into force after all EU member states have ratified it. With the Irish NO the Treaty has practically evaporated into thin air, and as it appears of now, the Austrian chancellor and the Austrian foreign minister have signed a legal "nullum" in Lisbon. Any amendment to the mode of procedure, such as abandoning unanimity, would again need to be painstakingly negotiated and to be put to votes in the national parliaments, implying of course the risk that the veto of each single state might halt the new mode of procedure. What’s more, Austria would necessarily need to run a referendum on such an issue, as the plan to create a Federal State by majority decision of the EU member states would by no means be covered by the 1995 referendum (in which Austria decided to accede to the EU). – Reverse scenario: If the Council puts the Treaty into force on the basis of a majority decision by the member states, this would be simply illegal and would amount to a coup d’état. – And finally, the Irish NO means that Ireland has voted for a maintenance of the status quo; this means that there is no reason for them whatsoever to leave the EU.
From the first reactions it can already be seen what we would have had to expect if the Treaty had entered into force and Brussels would have received all the powers provided by it. Law and order would have degenerated into a lifeless shell!<<

(Translation, imperfect as it may be, is my own.)

Precisely my view

Guest

Zhou_Enlai wrote:: I think all this talk of Eurosceptics, the UKIP, the UK Conservative Party and the "right-wing" Czech Government is pure propaganda.
It is an effort to appeal to our instincts rather than our intellect.

And what are appeals to 'sovereignty' but appeals to emotion rather than reason? The No vote is being applauded by some mildly unsavoury people, however one reports it, and it's certainly being applauded by eurosceptics.

It can hardly change the vote at this stage!

Guest

Is it being applauded by anyone else or can we stick the labels "unsavory" or "eurosceptic" on them all?

Sure what is a "eurosceptic" at the end of the day anyway?

Guest

Yes its being applauded by every Tom Dick and Harriet commenting on every blog in Europe, and 'on the street'. Auditor has put some links to fora on the portal, or they can be googled.

The gap between ruled and rulers, well-off and badly-off that influenced the vote is being mirrored in the reaction to the vote.

Extreme right wing nationalists have their own thing going and the worry of voting the same way as them meant I had to think a lot longer, harder and more seriously about the vote. I almost didn't vote No and it is only now that I have seen the reaction of press and governments to the result that I am really happy with my vote and sure it was the right thing to do.

Guest

Zhou_Enlai wrote:: Is it being applauded by anyone else or can we stick the labels "unsavory" or "eurosceptic" on them all?

Sure what is a "eurosceptic" at the end of the day anyway?

That's a fair question, but the answer is that you don't know, and neither do I. One is certainly welcome to claim one is being supported by "ordinary people across Europe", which is undoubtedly true, but irrelevant, since there are millions of ordinary people across Europe who are eurosceptical - and millions who aren't. Only some of the latter will feel strongly enough about the EU, or be rude enough, to be critical or rude about the Irish vote, but they are undoubtedly there - and they would have provided congratulations in the event of a Yes (which wouldn't have been meaningful either).

The idea that one can reduce it to ordinary people in the red corner, and the euro-elites in the blue corner, comforting as it is, bears no relation to reality.

Guest

The sight of Kathy Sinnott sitting around with those scum bags in their green T-Shirts and Shamrocks deciding for the first time in 800 years that Paddy has rights makes me feel like - God forgive me - digging up Mengele to provide a little of the medical care she has been clamouring for.
I'd sooner listen to her (ex?) husband and Christy and Sweaty Balladeers have never been my cup of absinthe.

Guest

ibis wrote:

Zhou_Enlai wrote:: Is it being applauded by anyone else or can we stick the labels "unsavory" or "eurosceptic" on them all?

Sure what is a "eurosceptic" at the end of the day anyway?

That's a fair question, but the answer is that you don't know, and neither do I. One is certainly welcome to claim one is being supported by "ordinary people across Europe", which is undoubtedly true, but irrelevant, since there are millions of ordinary people across Europe who are eurosceptical - and millions who aren't. Only some of the latter will feel strongly enough about the EU, or be rude enough, to be critical or rude about the Irish vote, but they are undoubtedly there - and they would have provided congratulations in the event of a Yes (which wouldn't have been meaningful either).

The idea that one can reduce it to ordinary people in the red corner, and the euro-elites in the blue corner, comforting as it is, bears no relation to reality.

I suppose both of us need a few figures to back up our respective view points on this. Hopefully we will get some before too long.

Guest

ibis wrote:: The idea that one can reduce it to ordinary people in the red corner, and the euro-elites in the blue corner, comforting as it is, bears no relation to reality.

Agreed

Guest

Kev Bar wrote:: The sight of Kathy Sinnott sitting around with those scum bags in their green T-Shirts and Shamrocks deciding for the first time in 800 years that Paddy has rights makes me feel like - God forgive me - digging up Mengele to provide a little of the medical care she has been clamouring for.
I'd sooner listen to her (ex?) husband and Christy and Sweaty Balladeers have never been my cup of absinthe.

That's rotten Kev. God won't forgive you if you ask for forgiveness before you do the act - no repentance there. I felt sorry for Kathy Sinnott - she was used by those people.

Guest

Kev Bar wrote:: The sight of Kathy Sinnott sitting around with those scum bags in their green T-Shirts and Shamrocks deciding for the first time in 800 years that Paddy has rights makes me feel like - God forgive me - digging up Mengele to provide a little of the medical care she has been clamouring for.
I'd sooner listen to her (ex?) husband and Christy and Sweaty Balladeers have never been my cup of absinthe.

Well if there is a question mark about her marital status then that's me votin yes the next time.... Rolling Eyes

Guest

EvotingMachine0197 wrote:

ibis wrote:: ..
No, not really. They're certainly looking at a crisis, but I don't think they're 'covering' for anything.
..

Ah. I missed that word in AT's post. You homed in on 'covering', I was speaking more generally.

You didn't miss it, I never used it.

Guest

Given the text about the illegality of pursuing, I found the last declaration of Ms. Merkel vaguely oppressing.

Guest

I think people are missing the point that each country ratifies in their own way. If this is done by act of parliament then once that act has passed it may be a simple matter to amend the act to take account of minor changes to Lisbon such as only bringing parts into force (e.g. those parts which don't require referendum in Ireland) or leaving Ireland out. If you stop ratification altogether then you are starting from scratch again rather than tweaking what is on the statute book.

Guest

In the big picture the Eurocrats and the central countries government are becoming illegal, though. I think they threaten the EU more than those who voted No legally.

Guest

arnaudherve wrote:: In the big picture the Eurocrats and the central countries government are becoming illegal, though. I think they threaten the EU more than those who voted No legally.

How are they becoming illegal? They all acknowledge the Treaty cannot come into force until ratified by all. Should we not have had our referendum ahead of the UK ratifying the Treaty?

Guest

Zhou_Enlai wrote:: They all acknowledge the Treaty cannot come into force until ratified by all.

Do they?

Guest

arnaudherve wrote:

Zhou_Enlai wrote:: They all acknowledge the Treaty cannot come into force until ratified by all.

Do they?

I have not heard anyone say otherwise. The foreign ministers agreed that was the case and Merkel said it could only be done by unanimity. They all also felt it was appropriate to proceed with ratification in the various states in the meantime.

Guest

Zhou_Enlai wrote:

arnaudherve wrote:

Zhou_Enlai wrote:: They all acknowledge the Treaty cannot come into force until ratified by all.

Do they?

I have not heard anyone say otherwise. The foreign ministers agreed that was the case and Merkel said it could only be done by unanimity. They all also felt it was appropriate to proceed with ratification in the various states in the meantime.

Well apart from Zapatero, who is being bolshie.

here

(Edit: having another go at spelling)

Guest

MikeW wrote:

Zhou_Enlai wrote:

arnaudherve wrote:

Zhou_Enlai wrote:: They all acknowledge the Treaty cannot come into force until ratified by all.

Do they?

I have not heard anyone say otherwise. The foreign ministers agreed that was the case and Merkel said it could only be done by unanimity. They all also felt it was appropriate to proceed with ratification in the various states in the meantime.

Well apart from Zapatero, who is being bolshie.

here

(Edit: having another go at spelling)

Well, to be fair, he's representing the will of his people - they voted Yes at referendum to the EUC, by a margin of eight and a half million. He may be annoyed that that result has effectively been reversed by a hundred thousand Irish voters.

Guest

French conservative paper Le Figaro says today that it is important to ratify the treaty before the European elections, so that the French will have more MEPs in the European Parliament.

74 against 72 now. This is all becoming nonsense. The European Parliament was not supposed to be the place to represent national interests.

Ibis wrote:: Well, to be fair, he's representing the will of his people - they voted Yes at referendum to the EUC, by a margin of eight and a half million.

To be fair, what is illegal is illegal. It is states that ratify treaties. Accepting the numbers in population as a political justification may cause serious threats to the stability of the EU.