The Sunday Times - Libertas' Pravda ?

[Limerick Lad]

The "No" side used many of the same arguments during the the Nice Referendum they're using now against Lisbon, yet all they're dire predictions in relation to taxation, neutrality and abortion didn't happen.
They've cried wolf once too often to be believed this time

In fact the most prominent "No to Nice" predictions concerned large scale immigration from Eastern Europe. Of course these predictions were dismissed as xenophobia...... Nothing wolf about it - at it turns out.

It was xenophobia, without workers coming to Ireland from Eastern Europe most of the service industries in Ireland would have ground to a halt, most of those who were unemployed in Ireland during the boom were either unemployable or chose not to work at a time of virtual full employment.

[Bobb]

Limerick Lad is missing the point.

The point is that we were told by our politicians at the time of Nice that there would only be a trickle of immigration.
Either they were clueless or they were lying. Either way it don't look good

[sackville]

]

In fact the most prominent "No to Nice" predictions concerned large scale immigration from Eastern Europe. Of course these predictions were dismissed as xenophobia...... Nothing wolf about it - at it turns out.

It was xenophobia,

but it turned out true didn't it!

[Trampas]

[quote=Limerick Lad]

The "No" side used many of the same arguments during the the Nice Referendum they're using now against Lisbon, yet all they're dire predictions in relation to taxation, neutrality and abortion didn't happen.
They've cried wolf once too often to be believed this time

In fact the most prominent "No to Nice" predictions concerned large scale immigration from Eastern Europe. Of course these predictions were dismissed as xenophobia...... Nothing wolf about it - at it turns out.

It was xenophobia, without workers coming to Ireland from Eastern Europe most of the service industries in Ireland would have ground to a halt, most of those who were unemployed in Ireland during the boom were either unemployable or chose not to work at a time of virtual full employment.[/quote:3tt3g6ds]

You are missing the point here. The No to Nice prediction was entirely correct. The people who vilified them were 100% wrong.

[CookieMonster]

Limerick Lad is missing the point.

The point is that we were told by our politicians at the time of Nice that there would only be a trickle of immigration.
Either they were clueless or they were lying. Either way it don't look good

It was Dick Roche and Proinsias De Rossa who made statements on that regard, I'd go for clueless over liar.

[sackville]

[quote=Trampas]

The "No" side used many of the same arguments during the the Nice Referendum they're using now against Lisbon, yet all they're dire predictions in relation to taxation, neutrality and abortion didn't happen.
They've cried wolf once too often to be believed this time

In fact the most prominent "No to Nice" predictions concerned large scale immigration from Eastern Europe. Of course these predictions were dismissed as xenophobia...... Nothing wolf about it - at it turns out.

It was xenophobia, without workers coming to Ireland from Eastern Europe most of the service industries in Ireland would have ground to a halt, most of those who were unemployed in Ireland during the boom were either unemployable or chose not to work at a time of virtual full employment.

You are missing the point here. The No to Nice prediction was entirely correct. The people who vilified them were 100% wrong.[/quote:5xjlkayv]

But like LL, it hasn't stopped them vilifying either.

[Limerick Lad]

The "No" side portrayed people coming from Eastern Europe as leeches coming to drain our social welfare system whereas in fact they contributed to the wealth of our country contrary to the views expressed by the "No" side.

[ibis]

Limerick Lad is missing the point.

The point is that we were told by our politicians at the time of Nice that there would only be a trickle of immigration.
Either they were clueless or they were lying. Either way it don't look good

It was Dick Roche and Proinsias De Rossa who made statements on that regard, I'd go for clueless over liar.

Hmm. In the former case, I wouldn't. Quite a lot of what he said is quite cleverly phrased. In de Rossa's case I'd go for honest but wrong - it happens, even with politicians.

[Trampas]

Limerick Lad is missing the point.

The point is that we were told by our politicians at the time of Nice that there would only be a trickle of immigration.
Either they were clueless or they were lying. Either way it don't look good

It was Dick Roche and Proinsias De Rossa who made statements on that regard, I'd go for clueless over liar.

I wouldn't. I would go for reckless desperation and a total disinterest in what might happen after a YES vote.

[sackville]

The "No" side portrayed people coming from Eastern Europe as leeches coming to drain our social welfare system whereas in fact they contributed to the wealth of our country contrary to the views expressed by the "No" side.

In Britain's case a House Of Lord's commissioned report recently disagreed ( that there was any great gain economically). But there's a different law of gravity over here maybe?