How can Lisbon II be defeated.

[steady on now]

If Ireland was to vote yes to Lisbon, how can Ireland force constructive engagement with the European Union? If Lisbon II is voted in, the European Union may be able to do just whatever it wants to do in Ireland. Dermot Ahern is working to introduce blasphemy legislation that will see people fined 100,000 Euros for posting a factual youtube of the 9/11 attack on the Twin Towers NYC NY USA and adding the comment "Islam is most certainly not the religion of peace and there are aspects of Islam, which present a clear and danger to basic freedoms, such as the right to life." The fact that the present Government has not been forced out of office for attempting to introduce such a piece of legislation, is illustrative of the possibilities for the construction of a Naziesque terror state, by the legislative method. Whilst the threat that Dermot Ahern's blasphemy bill poses, is easily within the resources of democratic civil society in Ireland to counter, an out of control European Union once Lisbon II is signed up to, will not be.

Best and Warm Regards
Adrian Wainer

Thanks for the warm regards but where we differ is that I don't think you "force constructive engagement"
A yes vote will allow us to continue to engage constructively with the other nations of the EU. We have been successful in this over the years, we should be proud of this and should have confidence in our ability to continue to do the same.

[steady on now]

Steady on now, you are wrong. A no vote will mean the constitutional status quo. We will have retained our remaining sovereignty and the right to determine our own asylum and immigration, justice and home affairs, abortio energy, and taxation policies and the right to choose our Commissioner (under Lisbon we can only nominate him/her but they can be rejected). We already have a multispeed Europe anyway with respect to the euro and Schengen. The nations of Europe are too diverse to impose uniformity on with respect to European integration. We want a democratic Europe not what Barroso called an "empire".

You are right that a NO vote will continue the constitutional status quo, but the wider status quo includes the genuine view of 26 nation states that the EU faces challenges and needs reform. This will not go away with a NO vote. The UK government will become anti-Lisbon after their general election. Ireland and the UK will have to re-negotiate their relationship with the EU.

Again my point is a pro-EU but anti-Lisbon voter may find that a NO vote distances Ireland from the EU for a generation.

[FutureTaoiseach]

You are right that a NO vote will continue the constitutional status quo, but the wider status quo includes the genuine view of 26 nation states that the EU faces challenges and needs reform. This will not go away with a NO vote. The UK government will become anti-Lisbon after their general election. Ireland and the UK will have to re-negotiate their relationship with the EU.

Again my point is a pro-EU but anti-Lisbon voter may find that a NO vote distances Ireland from the EU for a generation.

The French and Dutch peoples voted no to the EU Constitution/Lisbon. The Czech president doesn't believe Lisbon is necessary. The British people don't either, judging by the 63% of them that voted in the euro elections for anti-Lisbon parties. The Polish president is refusing to sign. The German constitutional court is still considering the Treaty. It is far from being the 26-1 situation you describe. The elites are not "Europe". The elites are not "26 countries".

[steady on now]

The French and Dutch peoples voted no to the EU Constitution/Lisbon. The Czech president doesn't believe Lisbon is necessary. The British people don't either, judging by the 63% of them that voted in the euro elections for anti-Lisbon parties. The Polish president is refusing to sign. The German constitutional court is still considering the Treaty. It is far from being the 26-1 situation you describe. The elites are not "Europe". The elites are not "26 countries".

The British have a majority Eurosceptic view and will vote in a eurosceptic government in their next general election. The other countries you mention above have the right and ability to do the same if they so wish. Libertas failed in all the countries you mentioned above.

My point is that we must do what is best for ourselves and not second guess the desires of foreign electorates. We must also remember that Ireland will have to engage and deal with the leaders of the other countries not with their electorates.

After a NO vote Ireland will find itself caught up with the UK re-negotiating its' relationship with the EU. Ireland will find it has voted for a eurosceptic and anti-EU policy even though many are just anti-Lisbon.

[hiding behind a poster]

The French and Dutch peoples voted no to the EU Constitution/Lisbon. The Czech president doesn't believe Lisbon is necessary. The British people don't either, judging by the 63% of them that voted in the euro elections for anti-Lisbon parties.

So what percentage in Ireland voted for Pro-Lisbon parties, FT?

I know that in Dublin it was 66%. In East it was 82%. In South it was 72%, and in North-West it was 71%.

You wanna do the maths, or will I?

[FutureTaoiseach]

So what percentage in Ireland voted for Pro-Lisbon parties, FT?

I know that in Dublin it was 66%. In East it was 82%. In South it was 72%, and in North-West it was 71%.

You wanna do the maths, or will I?

Yes but they were voting on national issues, not EU issues. If they were voting primarily on European issues, the local election results would have differed considerably, and for the pro-Lisbon parties they didn't (except that the SF vote was higher in the euros). Party loyalites in this country are far more rigid than the rest of Europe and you know that well.

And the Irish context is different for another reason too. We are the only country in the EU where ratification of EU constitutional treaties have to be put to a referendum. Hence we can vote in parties we disagree with on EU issues because we know we have this emergency-break when they lose the run of themselves on Europe. I would contend that the absence of such an emergency-break in other countries helps explain why some of them voted for anti-Lisbon parties in much larger proportions than us.

[west'sawake]

Got this txt today with a slogan for the No side,

'Vote Yes or else!'

[Ah Well]

Got this txt today with a slogan for the No side,

'Vote Yes or else!'

Fine as long as you tie FF in there somewhere .. that'll really get folk worked up

How bout a BIG FF logo (as opposed to the teeny recent ones )

[hiding behind a poster]

Yes but they were voting on national issues, not EU issues. If they were voting primarily on European issues, the local election results would have differed considerably, and for the pro-Lisbon parties they didn't (except that the SF vote was higher in the euros). Party loyalites in this country are far more rigid than the rest of Europe and you know that well.

And the Irish context is different for another reason too. We are the only country in the EU where ratification of EU constitutional treaties have to be put to a referendum. Hence we can vote in parties we disagree with on EU issues because we know we have this emergency-break when they lose the run of themselves on Europe. I would contend that the absence of such an emergency-break in other countries helps explain why some of them voted for anti-Lisbon parties in much larger proportions than us.

That's a load of crap, and you know it. If the likes of McDonald, Ganley and Sinnott had been elected, you'd have been triumphantly shouting from the rooftops that the result was a glorious re-statement of the Irish people's opposition to the unelected bureaucrats, blah-dy blah-dy blah. Indeed pre-election, you were busy explaining to anyone who'd listen how the strong anti-Lisbon vote would supposedly see them home. But now, when they all lose, you decide that that's not what the Irish people were voting on.

You can't have it both ways. Either you were wrong then, or you're wrong now. Which is it?

[FutureTaoiseach]

That's a load of crap, and you know it. If the likes of McDonald, Ganley and Sinnott had been elected, you'd have been triumphantly shouting from the rooftops that the result was a glorious re-statement of the Irish people's opposition to the unelected bureaucrats, blah-dy blah-dy blah. Indeed pre-election, you were busy explaining to anyone who'd listen how the strong anti-Lisbon vote would supposedly see them home. But now, when they all lose, you decide that that's not what the Irish people were voting on.

You can't have it both ways. Either you were wrong then, or you're wrong now. Which is it?

A parallel might be drawn with Denmark when it used to put European issues to referenda. The pro-EU parties always won around 80% of the vote, but the Danes continued voting no from time to time. It's like that here too. The people regard EU issues as lying within the sphere of influence of the Irish Constitution, and therefore to be dealt with via referenda. That causes them to regard it as safe to vote for pro-Lisbon parties that they agree with on other issues. And I would further add that the results of the Euro elections were not proportional to how the electorate actually voted. In particular, SF won 12% of the vote compared to 14% for Labour, yet Labour won 3 seats to zero for SF. Furthermore, there was an anti-Lisbon seat between Ferris and Sinnott's 1st preferences had their vote not been split by their 2 candidacies. And the same is the case of NW if you add the SF and Ganley votes.