Has the no to Lisbon campaign in Ireland been terminally damaged?

[SilverLining]

With Libertas imploding across Europe and Mary Lou and Kathy Sinnott losing their seats, admittedly by tight margins, has the No to Lisbon camp been damaged beyond repair?

The establishment parties (FF, FG, Labour, ex PD, GP etc) are going to use of the result of SF and Libertas not electing any MEPs in Ireland as a bludgeon to get us to vote YES. However nothing has changed about Lisbon.

Just because one voted NO, doesn't mean one voted for Sinn Fein, Libertas, Socialist Party, Coir, PLC, UKIP, Conservative or BNP. People voted NO for many reasons and those reasons are still there.

The establishment are using the weapon of fear and the economic crisis to cajole, persuade and downright bully the people. Do they really under estimate us ?

NO is still NO.

[drkpower]

The "footnote" in question, directly quoted, is as follows:

3. The provisions of Article 2 of the Charter correspond to those of the above Articles of the
ECHR and its Protocol. They have the same meaning and the same scope, in accordance
with Article 52(3) of the Charter. Therefore, the "negative" definitions appearing in the
ECHR must be regarded as also forming part of the Charter:

(a) Article 2(2) of the ECHR:

"Deprivation of life shall not be regarded as inflicted in contravention of this article
when it results from the use of force which is no more than absolutely necessary:

(a) in defence of any person from unlawful violence;
(b) in order to effect a lawful arrest or to prevent the escape of a person lawfully
detained;
(c) in action lawfully taken for the purpose of quelling a riot or insurrection."

(b) Article 2 of Protocol No 6 to the ECHR:

"A State may make provision in its law for the death penalty in respect of acts
committed in time of war or of imminent threat of war; such penalty shall be applied
only in the instances laid down in the law and in accordance with its provisions…"

Thanks for that.

So the use of absolutely necessary lethal force is permissable in defence, to prevent the escape of a person lawfully detained and/or to quell a riot/insurrection. Nothing wrong with that - otherwise, you would be tying the arms behind the back of the military/law enforcement. Remember folks, it must be absolutley necessary so I dont want any cranks saying the Gardai can shoot a bunch of MayDay protestors....

And secondly, the death penalty can be legislated for in times of war; nothing wrong with that either; the Government must be given this option where the very State itself and the survival of the people is under threat.

You should also bear in mind that this provision allows the State to make this provision if it so chooses; it is not compulsory. And our own constitution prevents the use of the death penalty even in times of war (which I find unusual myself).

[Chuck de Mawl]

Most of the campaigners, never mind the general public haven't even studied the thing in enough detail. And the myths and scare tactics are not helpful (both pro-and anti)

We shouldn't concentrate on figureheads leading the campaign.
This country badly needs to realise that we can't keep abdicating our opinions and decisions to 'leaders'.
There is some necessity for it in representative democracy, but not wholesale, and certainly not where it's a referendum put to the people.
Do these people not get the idea behind it, and what a referendum is for?
It's specifically to take the decision out of the hands of parliamentarians and into the citizens at large... and yet they still obsess about what the talking head on the TV says.

I think that changing that, is key to breaking the mindset of so many people in this country who don't even realise they are on their knees in deference to undeserving 'leadership' and authority.

[drkpower]

It is written so, for the purpose of confusion. How there is even a remote possibility of this document been ratified, baffles me.
How can people enter into a "contract", when its not understood???!!??!!

Settle down with the indignation Chameleon. If you are telling me that you understand every provision of the contract you entered into when you bought your house, you are lying.

In fact, even your contract to buy a car or a holiday or a credit card has so many provisions and cross references to detailed legislation, that you do not understand that either.

[White Rose]

The question is simple. Do we want to be in Europe or on the periphery (metaphorically speaking)?
Most Irish people (finally) realise that the EU is good for Ireland and has been good for Ireland so we should be at the heart of it

Any claptrap about 'neo-liberal' agenda (what does that mean btw?) is irrelevant beside this central question of Ireland's place in Europe

[Chuck de Mawl]

The question is simple. Do we want to be in Europe or on the periphery (metaphorically speaking)?
Most Irish people (finally) realise that the EU is good for Ireland and has been good for Ireland so we should be at the heart of it

Any claptrap about 'neo-liberal' agenda (what does that mean btw?) is irrelevant beside this central question of Ireland's place in Europe

No, your 'simple question' is the red herring, a deliberate false argument.
This is not about being in the EU or out of it. It's a vote on a treaty, nothing else.

There is no mechanism to expel us from the EU or to have a two speed EU.
They still have to work with us, and while they may huff and puff to bully us into voting 'yes' the truth is they'll have to accept that we, as members of the EU have a right to have a say in what direction it goes in, and whether we like that decision or not.
They will have to accept that they won't get everything their way, and they will still have to work with us (the unity of the EU wouldn't last very long if they didn't treat a fellow member as an equal)

And if they want to paint us as some kind of humbug 'spoiling it' for the hundreds of millions of other EU citizens, let them all hold referenda on it. Cos I, for one would be interested in hearing what the citizens, rather than the eurocrats think.

[Chuck de Mawl]

true, however, other contracts you mention, have reference to similar ones, there is nothing to refer this treaty with. it is supremely more complex than the examples you mention, and imho, far more consequencial longterm.

Not to mention, that if there's an unfair clause in a commercial contract, you have much better options for redress than if your country ratifies an international treaty.

Accountability moves further and further away.

[Sam's Cross]

No, I said that 50:50 is disingenuous in portraying the No camp as being in some sense equally popular as the political parties in terms of public support.

FG needs to send George Lee on a national "Cop On" tour to drum up the Yes vote.

+1 re George Lee. FG need to run a separate campaign in favour of Lisbon, esp if Dick Roche is still Min for Europe. Every time he appears the No vote increases. By keeping him in position after his woeful performance on Lisbon I, Cowen further shows his inability to lead.

[drkpower]

true, however, other contracts you mention, have reference to similar ones, there is nothing to refer this treaty with. it is supremely more complex than the examples you mention, and imho, far more consequencial longterm.

Of course its complex........
Buying a house has a ridiculously complicated contract.
What do you expect a contract regulating an EU of 27+ nation States to be.....
If it wasnt extremely complex, there would be something wrong with the bloody thing.
And if it was more principled/aspirational like a Constitution, people would hammer it for being too vague, as allowing almost anything to happen if it was interpreted one way or another......

The point is that, with every complicated contract, the average Joe cannot be expected to understand it fully - they expect to be advised by their politicians, the media, experts of various hues. And then we make a call. Fair enough, if you think that all of the above are keen to lead us into the oblivion of a police state or neo-liberal Europe which will completely restrict our fundamental freedoms etc, fair enough, but that is complete rubbish.

In any case, as you now admit that most contracts we enter into are not understood, can you please withdraw the "How can people enter into a "contract", when its not understood???!!??!!" sensationalism you were spewing earlier?

[Adrian Wainer]

The only similarities these two states had was that they were dictatorships. Economically they were very different. Neither your nor Hugh have yet explained how the post-Lisbon gulag will be both a command econony _and_ a neo-liberal economy.

P.

The only similarities these two states had was that they were dictatorships.

Get off the stage would you. There are huge similarities between the USSR and Third Reich for example the huge numbers of innocent people they murdered, the elevation to almost God like status of Hitler and Stalin, etc, etc.

My essential argument is not specifically whether signing up to the Lisbon II treaty will produce a Stalinist State or a New Third Reich or some other specific thing. My essential argument is that the Lisbon II treaty erodes the powers of nation states and places that power within an organization which is accountable only to itself, not the people of Europe. There is no necessity for such a transfer of power and there is no democratic mandate for the transfer of that power. Once that power is transferred through Lisbon II, there may be no means of transferring it back through the sole actions of a national Government and it also may well be the case that once a country is part of an EU operating under Lisbon II, that country will require the permission of the European Union to leave the EU. It may also be the case that once the Lisbon II is ratified, that the Irish Constitution is placed as an inferior document to Lisbon II and any legislation effect contained with in the Lisbon II or any subsequently legislation introduced by the the EU after the ratification of Lisbon II, will automatically be superior to the Irish constitution.

Best and Warm Regards
Adrian Wainer