Lisbon Treaty

[BohsPartisan]

Unless I remember wrong (and I'm sorry if I do) didn't you tell us in one of the socialism discussions that you'd be in favour of a socialist revolution even if the majority opposed it because most of us have had our opinions influenced by a capitalist media?

That is very similar to pete's comment that the uninformed shouldn't have a vote.

Hmmm... feel free to show me where I said that. Don't remember it. However a large minority can make a revolution as long as it institutes the fullest democracy afterwards.

[SMorgan]

I have an even bigger problem with the people (mypost you are included on this because you have done this on this very thread) who said that if you don't understand it you must Vote No. People like that, and the people who vote without understanding the issue, are what's wrong with democracy.....

And please include me as well.

A No vote is a default vote. Nobody should be signing up to any agreement they don't understand whether it be political or otherwise. Anybody that doesn't understand the agreement knows exactly what they are getting; no change. Those that vote yes without understanding the agreement don't know what they are getting.

I would also point out that Cowan and McCreevy admitted to not reading the agreement. In light of this I think the Yes side have a cheek to be talking about people voting on the agreement that don't appreciate its content.

As Ben Dunne said, "If you don't know, Vote No" A perfectly reasonable and fair position to take, in my opinion.

The lecture that the Yes supporters are handing out about democracy amounts to little more than nauseating hypocrisy. They are the one’s that won’t accept the democratic wishes of the Irish People, freely given.

[micls]

That is democracy, everybody has the right to vote, and can vote as they wish, for all sorts of reasons.

It must be pointed out, that there were several reasons why they voted, giving the impression they all did because they didn't understand it, is wrong.

Whre did I give the impression they did because they didnt understand it?

Of course everyone has the right to vote for whatever reasons they wish, who stated otherewisse? Again that doesnt make it right. You were the one that claimed no should be a default position.

And please include me as well.

A No vote is a default vote. Nobody should be signing up to any agreement they don't understand whether it be political or otherwise. Anybody that doesn't understand the agreement knows exactly what they are getting; no change. Those that vote yes without understanding the agreement don't know what they are getting.

I would also point out that Cowan and McCreevy admitted to not reading the agreement. In light of this I think the Yes side have a cheek to be talking about people voting on the agreement that don't appreciate its content.

As Ben Dunne said, "If you don't know, Vote No" A perfectly reasonable and fair position to take, in my opinion.

The lecture that the Yes supporters are handing out about democracy amounts to little more than nauseating hypocrisy. They are the one’s that won’t accept the democratic wishes of the Irish People, freely given.

You claim that no should be a default position, becuase if you vopte yes without understanding you dont kow what your getting. I would counter that if you vote no without understanding you dont know what your getting either. A no vote doesnt always mean nothing happens. Yes there will be no legislative changes but a No vote can have as wideranging affects as a yes vote. Sometimes, in circumstances, a change is very much needed(not specifically Lisbon) and to vote no while keeping the status quo can have very negative affects.

If you arent informed then either inform yourself or spoil your vote to make a point to those who should inform you.



The lecture that the Yes supporters are handing out about democracy amounts to little more than nauseating hypocrisy. They are the one’s that won’t accept the democratic wishes of the Irish People, freely given.

Would you like to show me somewhere where I havent accepted the vote?

Leaving lisbon aside, the right to vote comes with responsibility. I believe this regardless of what is being voted on and whether I am for or against. I wont vote if I havent taken the time to inform myself or if I simply cant understand, either yes or no. I think its an irresponsible thing to do as I clearly wouldnt understand the consequences of my vote.

While obviously theres no way to force others to do the same, I would hope that others would take the same stance. I would not like to cause a no vote(or yes) in a referendum when i do not know which is the best option.

[mypost]

A no vote doesnt always mean nothing happens. Yes there will be no legislative changes but a No vote can have as wideranging affects as a yes vote.

We are told that this vote is "vital" to make the EU run better. So, since our No vote, how has Europe been run. Bar the usual sulking from the TD's, the MEP's and the Commission, it's functioned well and continues to function well. That#s because the provisions under the Nice treaty allow it to happen.


the right to vote comes with responsibility. I believe this regardless of what is being voted on and whether I am for or against. I wont vote if I havent taken the time to inform myself or if I simply cant understand, either yes or no. I think its an irresponsible thing to do as I clearly wouldnt understand the consequences of my vote.

While obviously theres no way to force others to do the same, I would hope that others would take the same stance. I would not like to cause a no vote(or yes) in a referendum when i do not know which is the best option.

All very noble, but the reality is, there are deadlines in elections and referendums. You have until that time to make a judgement one way or the other. There are people in countries, who long for the right to vote that we have. It's important that you take advantage of the freedom to vote you have, and use it on the day, whatever your political leanings.

[jebus]

We are told that this vote is "vital" to make the EU run better. So, since our No vote, how has Europe been run. Bar the usual sulking from the TD's, the MEP's and the Commission, it's functioned well and continues to function well. That#s because the provisions under the Nice treaty allow it to happen.

Has any of us ever said the EU would come crashing down with the Lisbon Treaty?


All very noble, but the reality is, there are deadlines in elections and referendums. You have until that time to make a judgement one way or the other. There are people in countries, who long for the right to vote that we have. It's important that you take advantage of the freedom to vote you have, and use it on the day, whatever your political leanings.

This is true, but do you not also agree that part of having the right to vote involves informing yourself on what you are voting on? Otherwise people may as well go to a polling station and flip a coin

[micls]

We are told that this vote is "vital" to make the EU run better. So, since our No vote, how has Europe been run. Bar the usual sulking from the TD's, the MEP's and the Commission, it's functioned well and continues to function well. That#s because the provisions under the Nice treaty allow it to happen.


Eh, what has any of this got to do with the point I made? I dont remember claiming any of the above.



All very noble, but the reality is, there are deadlines in elections and referendums. You have until that time to make a judgement one way or the other. There are people in countries, who long for the right to vote that we have. It's important that you take advantage of the freedom to vote you have, and use it on the day, whatever your political leanings.

Rubbish. Havng a vote doesnt mean you have to use it despite not knowing what your voting about. its not like someone says, alright your voting in a hour make up your mind. There is plenty of time if you can be bothered. And if its simply too complex then you have the option of spoiling your vote to show this.

If anything id imagine the people that fought hard for the RIGHT to vote would be disgusted at people who couldnt be bothered informing themselves.

As Ive said before rights and responsibilities go hand in hand, you shouldnt use one and ignore the other.

[mypost]

This is true, but do you not also agree that part of having the right to vote involves informing yourself on what you are voting on? Otherwise people may as well go to a polling station and flip a coin

That's what some people did. Well maybe not literally, but there were reports of voters who went into the polling station in June, having not made up their mind until they received the ballot paper.

[micls]

That's what some people did. Well maybe not literally, but there were reports of voters who went into the polling station in June, having not made up their mind until they received the ballot paper.

I know, thats what Im complaining about

[mypost]

if its simply too complex then you have the option of spoiling your vote to show this.

As Ive said before rights and responsibilities go hand in hand, you shouldnt use one and ignore the other.

I don't believe in spoiled votes, and have never made one. It achieves nothing, but an anonymous statement on an anonymous ballot paper. The way to protest against the government at election time is to vote them out of office. The way to protest against them at referendums, is to tick the bottom box. That is more powerful than a spoiled vote.

[micls]

I don't believe in spoiled votes, and have never made one. It achieves nothing, but an anonymous statement on an anonymous ballot paper. The way to protest against the government at election time is to vote them out of office. The way to protest against them at referendums, is to tick the bottom box. That is more powerful than a spoiled vote.

A referendum is about more than teh government. Thats what local and national elections or for.

In a referendum your only concern should be making the right choice based on the options not making a point or protest against the government.

For example I thought the government ran an awful Lisbon campaign and in no way convinced me to vote yes. But having done some reading myself I thought voting yes was the best option regardless of the incompetence of our government. I dont see what benefit me voting no would have been simply to 'prove a point' when I believed in voting yes.

The contrary is also true for those who voted yes just because the main parties did.

[mypost]

But having done some reading myself I thought voting yes was the best option regardless of the incompetence of our government. I dont see what benefit me voting no would have been simply to 'prove a point' when I believed in voting yes.

Spoiled votes are protest votes. If you don't want to protest against the government, you either obey their orders i.e. tick the top box, or alternatively don't go to cast your ballot.

I am against any attempt to ignore the democratic will of the people. That's what happened in 26 countries. They were treated with ignorance and disdain by their own governments, especially in the UK. It was very easy therefore, for me to decide which way to vote.

[jebus]

That's what some people did. Well maybe not literally, but there were reports of voters who went into the polling station in June, having not made up their mind until they received the ballot paper.

I realise this, my preference would be to never allow these people a vote on anything ever again. If you're going to abuse the democratic process in this manner then you're not of the required intelligence to have a say on the running of the state. This goes for those that tossed a coin and voted Yes as well

[mypost]

Well, the fact is you can't deprive people their right to vote, just because you don't like why they did. It's a secret ballot, so noone knows the identity of who voted for what, who, and why.

1.6 million people voted in the referendum, the poll by IMS, was a very small fraction of that, and was a terrible waste of taxpayers' money.

[OneRedArmy]

Should have a general election, because the Government TD's incapable of explaining it.

I'd like to see the questions asked, because I know no one who thought conscription or abortion was an issue, yet these continue to be the focus of the Government when discussing the result. Was it a bit like Mock The Week's this is the answer what was the question...You're a thought leader Macy as one of the papers this weekend (Saturday's Times:confused:) had a piece recommending exactly this.

I think this is exactly whats required. Its a serious enough issue to require the Government to put themselves on the line. However with the national mood being so low as a result of the state of the economy, not to mention one of the coalition partners being in the final throes of death (anyone else enjoying this immensely? :D) you'd need to get a crowbar to loosen the FF grip on power as they know they might not be back for a while.

[mypost]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/ireland/article4749331.ece

[OneRedArmy]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/ireland/article4749331.eceHard to disagree with a lot of this (particularly the point that Yes and No voters didn't understand what they were voting for) except his suggestion that the obvious solution to people not understanding the Treaty is to change it.

Taking this argument to its natural conclusion, why don't we just get rid of all Acts and Statutory Instruments, as lets face it, the majority of the population would struggle to understand the legalese in them if forced to read them.

Fairly naive stuff from Cooper.

[pete]

Good article here (http://www.finfacts.ie/irishfinancenews/article_1013915.shtml) about the hypocrisy of ejecting the Lisbon Treaty.

With recession looming I think jobs would be number one topic of discussion in any new Referendum. Novelty items like neutrality won't seem very important as unemployment rises.

[John83]

...Novelty items like neutrality won't seem very important as unemployment rises.
Yes. We should elect a strong new leader who will bring full employment, make empty promises about peace, and restore national pride by invading Poland. It's our turn after all.

[mypost]

With recession looming I think jobs would be number one topic of discussion in any new Referendum. Novelty items like neutrality won't seem very important as unemployment rises.

Britain and Spain have signed the conjob document. It's obviously stemmed the tide of rising unemployment there too. :rolleyes:

Firms will cut jobs, regardless of which Treaty we're ruled by. They don't care about Treaties and Constitutions, they care about how cheap production and salaries will be, and where is the best location to do business. Ireland is excellently positioned geographically and still maintains a tax rate advantage, (thanks to the No vote) over our competitors.

[Reality Bites]

Britain and Spain have signed the conjob document. It's obviously stemmed the tide of rising unemployment there too. :rolleyes:

Firms will cut jobs, regardless of which Treaty we're ruled by. They don't care about Treaties and Constitutions, they care about how cheap production and salaries will be, and where is the best location to do business. Ireland is excellently positioned geographically and still maintains a tax rate advantage, (thanks to the No vote) over our competitors.


Doesn't matter - The treaty will be -re-run!! this time with a better campaign by Yes Vote with the proviso - one more strike and you are out of EU-The masses will defect from No Side and vote Yes this will enable ratification process for remainder of EU Countries and the Superstate will march on.. Its like reading history before it happens really!

[mypost]

"One more strike and you're out of the EU", which is classic dirty tactics from the federalists.

The bullying didn't work, the branding didn't work, so they'll try threatening next time. It's also 100% false, and the point will be highlighted to ease No voters concerns.

Whatever Merkel and Sarkosy say, Cowen won't be THAT stupid to force us into another referendum unless he's certain he'll win it. That will require a massive swing in the polls, which is unlikely anytime soon.

"One more strike and Cowen's no longer PM" is a favourable counter measure. :)

[pete]

Whether we are in Lisbon or outside of it the biggest decisions to affect the Irish economy will still be made by the EU - depends how much input we have.

As the article I linked to said "who exactly are we neutral from" given that we a small open economy almost completely dependent on foreign multinationals.

It would also be a shame if Ireland had to opt out of EU peace keeping missions & observation forces due to No vote.

[mypost]

Whether we are in Lisbon or outside of it the biggest decisions to affect the Irish economy will still be made by the EU.

What are these decisions?? :confused: The sovereignty of the state is more important than the economy. We've had 10 years of boom, yet many people in Ireland haven't seen many benefits of it.


As the article I linked to said "who exactly are we neutral from" given that we a small open economy almost completely dependent on foreign multinationals.

Switzerland is a small open economy, and neutral as well. Most of the biggest multinational corporations have bases there.

The neutrality aspect, is solely militarily based. It has little impact on firms investing here.

[mypost]

With the banks in meltdown, domestic job losses piling up, the economy in chaos, and the health service in it's latest crisis, Biffo is off to Paris today, to remind Napoleon just what No means.

Well, that's what leaders do. Our PM however is off to feed him the results of the investigation, aka "national survey" carried out at considerable expense during the summer, which 5 minutes research on the internet could have told anyone.

In the meantime, Croatian PM Sanodar is arriving here to meet Biffo next week, to enquire why his country should be excluded from the EU, on the orders of France and Germany, after the June result here.

The answer is quite simple. Ireland's referendum outcome does not affect other countries' applications to join the EU. The Nice Treaty caters for further EU enlargement. Stop panicking.

[OneRedArmy]

So the No side said Lisbon wasn't needed as Europe's decision making structure worked fine as it was, thanks very much.......

I think the last fortnight has completely debunked that notion.

The financial crisis has also knocked Declan Ganley's confused anwers on Libertas funding off the front pages. He's tied himself up in knots and its become clear that the "thousands of donors" may not actually exist.

[pete]

The financial crisis has also knocked Declan Ganley's confused anwers on Libertas funding off the front pages. He's tied himself up in knots and its become clear that the "thousands of donors" may not actually exist.

What is the limit for non-declared personal donations?

I really cannot see how he will be able to explain where his donations came from.

I saw bit of Late Late replay where I think he said he used 800k of which he loaned 200k himself. Maybe I wrong with those numbers. Pat Kenny tried to challenge those numbers without much success. Not sure why he was on the show but he did a good presentation of the Irish kid done good.

[Dodge]

Libertas will never get a UEFA license if that loan is to be repaid

[pete]

Libertas will never get a UEFA license if that loan is to be repaid

Did Ganley not sign a letter of guarantee?

So Libertas are really saying NO to the EUfa :eek:

[OneRedArmy]

The key issues seem to be that
1) Ganley at all times previously referred to the bulk of donations coming from "thousands of Irish individual donors", but under pressure now says a significant amount came from a loan from him
2) a loan, rather than a donation, is not subject to the same funding regulations as long as it is likely to be repaid. Ganley under pressure confirmed there had been no repayments as of yet, there was no schedule of repayments and he was extremely vague on how Libertas will pay him back.

If it was viewed as a donation, then I understand he would be liable for prosecution.

The unfortunate thing here is that this is, in large part, the doing of the larger parties on the Yes side as they have no interest in a more transparent funding regime because of their own questionable fund raising activities.

[mypost]

So the No side said Lisbon wasn't needed as Europe's decision making structure worked fine as it was, thanks very much.......

I think the last fortnight has completely debunked that notion.

:D:D

Only a couple of days ago, the Commissioners were busy poking their nose into the financial health of our independent sovreign state, questioning how we could solve our banking crisis, without their consultation.:rolleyes:


The financial crisis has also knocked Declan Ganley's confused anwers on Libertas funding off the front pages. He's tied himself up in knots and its become clear that the "thousands of donors" may not actually exist.

The Yes side are in no position to enquire into Ganley's campaign, given how they used the media and interest groups into backing, and the TD's using the full financial muscle of the state into funding their failed campaign.

[OneRedArmy]

:D:D

Only a couple of days ago, the Commissioners were busy poking their nose into the financial health of our independent sovreign state, questioning how we could solve our banking crisis, without their consultation.:rolleyes: Since we signed up, a long time ago, to European Competitions Directives, then its got nothing to do with "poking their noses in".

Europe failed to react to the banking crisis in a timely manner because of the fragmented, national interest-driven and pathetically slow nature of the current decision making framework.

I don't care how many times you try to work the word "sovereign" into your response (when all else fails, plead to our nationalist heart strings?), but your argument at the time of the vote was that the current structure works fine and now you look like a chump.



:
The Yes side are in no position to enquire into Ganley's campaign, given how they used the media and interest groups into backing, and the TD's using the full financial muscle of the state into funding their failed campaign.So one bad cancels out another. Fantastic rhetoric.

[mypost]

Since we signed up, a long time ago, to European Competitions Directives, then its got nothing to do with "poking their noses in".

Now, there's other countries doing it, including the Germans. Wonder what Merkel will tell any other countries that question her right to determine what's best for her country?


Europe failed to react to the banking crisis in a timely manner because of the...pathetically slow nature of the current decision making framework.

That's democracy. By it's nature, it is slow.


So one bad cancels out another. Fantastic rhetoric.

True, and makes the federalists look hypocrites for questioning Ganley's campaign at all, when they're just as crafty at funding campaigns.

[Student Mullet]

2) a loan, rather than a donation, is not subject to the same funding regulations as long as it is likely to be repaid. Ganley under pressure confirmed there had been no repayments as of yet, there was no schedule of repayments and he was extremely vague on how Libertas will pay him backDeclan Galney is the new Bertie.

[mypost]

The US was founded in a revolt against a distant and autocratic regime. In consequence, its polity developed according to what we might call Jeffersonian principles: the idea that power should be diffused and that government officials, wherever possible, should be elected.

Most European constitutions, by contrast, were drawn up after the second world war.

Their authors believed that democracy had led to fascism, and that the ballot box needed to be tempered by a class of sober functionaries who were invulnerable to public opinion.

The difference between the American and European approaches can be inferred from their foundational charters. The US Constitution, including all 27 amendments, is 7,600 words long, and is mainly preoccupied with the rights of the individual. The Lisbon Treaty contains 76,000 words and is chiefly concerned with the powers of the state. The American Constitution begins, 'We, the people. . . '; the Treaty of Rome begins, 'His Majesty the King of the Belgians. . . ' Americans pride themselves on having got away from titles and deference. American political culture produced The West Wing, predicated on the idea that even the politicians you disagree with are patriots. Britain's produced Yes, Minister and The Thick of It, predicated on the idea that all MPs are petty, jobbing crooks.

Congressmen would be every bit as stuck up as MEPs if they were protected by party lists. It's just that party lists are unthinkable in a system where everyone from the sanitation officer to the DA is elected, where power is localised, and where politicians are selected through open primaries.

Bagehot, Dicey and Erskine May agreed that, while foreigners might depend on written constitutions and supreme courts, we relied on ourselves: that is, we elected MPs to a sovereign body and trusted it to defend our birthright. The trouble is that that model has long since ceased to apply.

In The Plan: Twelve Months To Renew Britain, we set out a programme to restore purpose to the ballot, dignity to the legislature and liberty to the individual. Our proposals include local and national referendums; a transfer of the powers enjoyed by the Prime Minister under crown prerogative to parliament; open hearings to appoint heads of executive agencies, ambassadors and senior judges; withdrawal from the European Convention.

We want a wholesale transfer of power from appointed officials to elected representatives: from Brussels to Westminster, from Whitehall to councils, from the state to the citizen.

Does this amount to an Americanisation of British politics? Yes and no. It's true that many of the things we want exist across the Atlantic -- referendums, elected sheriffs, a local sales tax, open primaries. But the American revolutionaries took their inspiration from English political thought. They have preserved a model of representative democracy that the mother country has lost. The idea that lawmakers should be accountable to the rest of the country was perhaps Britain's greatest gift to mankind.

Brooding over our quango state is the mother quango, the unelected European Commission, which now generates an almost unbelievable 84 per cent of the legislation in the member nations. Britain cannot approach Jeffersonian democracy as long as it is subject to the will of an unaccountable apparat.

We cannot decentralise power within the UK while centralising it in the EU. We cannot take decisions more closely to the people if they are being taken in Brussels.

The only European country to approximate our model is Switzerland, where localism and direct democracy serve to keep the government small, the country rich and the people free. It is no coincidence that the Swiss keep rejecting the EU: they know that membership is incompatible with dispersed democracy.

Full Version here: http://www.istockanalyst.com/article/viewiStockNews+articleid_2656894.html

[pete]

The Yes side are in no position to enquire into Ganley's campaign, given how they used the media and interest groups into backing, and the TD's using the full financial muscle of the state into funding their failed campaign.

The state used the media? :confused:


Now, there's other countries doing it, including the Germans. Wonder what Merkel will tell any other countries that question her right to determine what's best for her country?
.

We are part of the European Monetary Union. (i.e Euro) Seems logical that solution should be done at European level.


The US Constitution, including all 27 amendments, is 7,600 words long, and is mainly preoccupied with the rights of the individual. The Lisbon Treaty contains 76,000 words and is chiefly concerned with the powers of the state.

The EU does not have a Constitution. It also has 27 "sovereign states" & more official languages than I can name.

[mypost]

We are part of the European Monetary Union. (i.e Euro) Seems logical that solution should be done at European level.

So what's the solution for those that aren't, if it's taken at EU level?


The EU does not have a Constitution.

Thanks to 800k+ brave voters here.

[mypost]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/ireland/article4926437.ece

[mypost]

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24497986-7583,00.html

[mypost]

"the EU will respect the country’s sovereignty and demands, while telling the Irish people how the other 495m Europeans are watching them and “will be really angry” if the answer is no again".

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/ireland/article4969353.ece

When Irish pubs and embassies across Europe, are boycotted/vandalised by the "really angry 495m Europeans", I'll believe it.

[dahamsta]

Gov.ie haven't a hope of pulling off another Nice after that budget, not in the short term anyway. It's the one good thing that came out of it. They'll have to stall a bit more.

adam

[mypost]

Sulking Eurocrats: :rolleyes:

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/politics/european-countries-tired-of-difficult-irish-says-eurocrat-14014197.html

[OneRedArmy]

Sulking Eurocrats: :rolleyes:

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/politics/european-countries-tired-of-difficult-irish-says-eurocrat-14014197.htmlWhat nationality was the "Eurocrat" in question who was quoted?

[mypost]

It wasn't just her at it.

[OneRedArmy]

It wasn't just her at it."At" what? What is wrong with what she said? She's Irish, so she can hardly be accused on being anti-Irish.

P.S. Whats a Eurocrat?
Does that make our civil servants Ireocrats, or possibly Eirocrats?
Sounds like a type of fruit to me...

[Student Mullet]

P.S. Whats a Eurocrat? I think it's a portmanteau of the words 'Europe' and 'bureaucrat'.

[mypost]

Sean Whelan reports more sulking:

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2008/1024/1224715116373.html

We want everything yesterday, but there are sometimes when you have to accept that certain policies aren't going to work. Our government have just discovered that with their sham budget.

If you're going to govern the people that you represent, you must do what they, not you, want. The Constitution has been rejected by 3 states, and would be rejected by many more. That should demonstrate that the conjob document is a bad deal for Europe, and must not make it past our electorate, whatever the consequences for this country.

[mypost]

"At" what? What is wrong with what she said? She's Irish, so she can hardly be accused on being anti-Irish.

This pretty much explains what's wrong with it.


WE should be very scared of the likes of Catherine Day, the Secretary-General of the European Commission.

While commenting on her view that other members of the EU view us as the "troublesome Irish", she assures us that the damage is not beyond repair so long as we can "ratify in a reasonable time" (Irish Independent, October 23).

No mention of the right to vote as we wish, no mention of any respect for the result of the vote, and just a dismissive implication that we are crazy if we think it is going to make a difference.

Does this woman have any understanding of democracy, apart from the EU concept that it is something they freely talk about but never allow to get in the way of their diktats?

She should be ashamed. Nothing less. Ashamed.

She should also know that the Irish people will not be cowed into submission by her brand of scaremongering. Her time would be much better spent in explaining why Ireland is the only EU member to have voted on Lisbon. And why the rejected Constitution was rehashed as the Treaty of Lisbon in the first place.

[mypost]

News from Prague:

http://aktualne.centrum.cz/czechnews/clanek.phtml?id=620860

[mypost]

Ciaran Cuffe is bored. :rolleyes:

http://www.rte.ie/news/2008/1111/klausv.html

[OneRedArmy]

Ciaran Cuffe is bored. :rolleyes:

http://www.rte.ie/news/2008/1111/klausv.htmlI see Declan Ganley was having dinner with yer man last night.

Surprised to see a self-professed "Pro-EU" person like Ganley dining with a noted Euro-sceptic.

Could draw the conclusion that Ganley is just a British Tory in disguise and we bought his guff hook, line and sinker....